Editorials
The Confusing Aftermath Of The Xbox One Reveal
Yesterday, Microsoft revealed the Xbox One, an all-in-one gaming, er, entertainment console that brings together television, sports, and Call of Duty. Once the announcements were made and the dust had settled, people started getting angry. Why would Microsoft court the enthusiast press — the people whose job it is to inform those who are most likely to be early adopters — for days prior to the event, then only barely mention video games in the reveal of a gaming console?
I’m sure Microsoft wanted to get the business stuff out of the way so they could save the exiciting video game reveals for E3, and I understand that, but their confusing presentation was a very public — and rather spectacular — stumble that’s going to be difficult to recover from.
When asked about the console’s online requirements or the ability to share games with friends, Microsoft’s been dodgy with their answers.
Will it require an Internet connection? Sort of.
From Wired: And what of the persistent rumors that Xbox One games will be “always online” – that is, that single-player games would require a constant online connection to function? As it turns out, those rumors were not unfounded, but the reality is not so draconian. Xbox One will give game developers the ability to create games that use Microsoft’s Azure cloud computing service, which means that they might be able to offload certain computing tasks to the cloud rather than process them on the Xbox One hardware itself. This would necessitate the game requiring a connection.
Are developers forced to create games that have these online features, and are thus not playable offline? They are not, Xbox exec Whitten said to Wired — but “I hope they do.” So the always-online future may come in incremental steps.”
So it’s essentially up to the developers whether they want their game to require an online connection.
What about blocking used games or sharing games with your friends?
Regarding the former, “We are designing Xbox One to enable customers to trade in and resell games. We’ll have more details to share later.” is all Microsoft has to say on the matter right now.
As for sharing games, we know a manual install is required, and once the game is installed you’ll be able to play that game even if the disc isn’t in the console. To keep people from buying a game and sharing it with all their friends, once you install a game it’s tied to your Xbox Live account.
From the same Wired report, “Microsoft did say that if a disc was used with a second account, that owner would be given the option to pay a fee and install the game from the disc, which would then mean that the new account would also own the game and could play it without the disc.”
Yes, you can share games, but not for free, unless you use your account. If you want to play your game on your friend’s console, you can do that, so long as your profile is on their console. Otherwise, you’ll have to lay down some money.
Yesterday, when the live stream of the Xbox One reveal had ended, I realized I had more questions than answers. I knew more about the console, but when it came to the things I, as a gamer, really cared about, I was left bewildered.
No backwards compatibility, a Kinect that’s now required for the console to function — that’s especially scary, seeing as it’s a camera that’s always on and connected to the Internet — the conflicting reports on what type of connection the console requires… it was a muddled, frustrating presentation. Looking at Sony’s reveal of the PS4, where they greeted developers big and small to create games on their platform, which they’ve made easier to develop for, I think Sony may have won this round.
Obviously, E3 is everything. Microsoft has fifteen exclusives they’ll reveal next month, including eight new IPs. Hopefully by then we’ll have solid answers for our lingering questions, too, because right now you can be sure Sony’s working on finding a way to benefit from this debacle.
Have a question? Feel free to ever-so-gently toss Adam an email, or follow him on Twitter and Bloody Disgusting.
Judging from the unprecedented box office success of Kane Parsons’ Backrooms adaptation, you’ve likely already seen the liminal horror hit that managed to make audiences afraid of empty hallways and bad wallpaper. And now that so many of us have already entered the yellow labyrinth (some of us more than once), the time has come to discuss the spoiler-filled details that make the movie so fascinating in the first place.
And if there’s one element here that makes the Backrooms movie stand out from any previous lore/mythology, it has to be the genius addition of the Still Life entities. Warped recreations of real people that somehow wandered into the Complex, these misremembered creatures are responsible for some of the most disturbing imagery of 2026 – as well as laugh-out-loud memes created by one of the film’s very own concept artists.
However, true to Parsons’ word that the movie would rely heavily on practical effects, each of these distorted monsters was brought to life by real actors under heavy layers of makeup and prosthetics (with the occasional splash of CGI enhancements). While Anora and If I Had Legs I’d Kick You actress Ivy Wolk wasn’t among these performers, despite what Letterboxd might have you believe, the creature cast did benefit from veteran players with plenty of genre experience.
For starters, Alien: Romulus alumni Robert Bobroczkyi (who previously brought that film’s horrific Offspring to life during its most memorable sequence) plays the flick’s main antagonist, the Still Life version of Captain Clark. And though there was some obvious CGI involved in making the character’s peg-leg and nightmarish face more believable, Bobroczkyi’s monstrous performance and his natural 7’7″ frame helped to make that final chase sequence a clear highlight among this year’s genre offerings.
The film’s Texas-Chain-Saw-inspired “dinner” scene also features a freaky collection of less-aggressive Still Life creatures in the form of the Bearded Man, the Red-Headed Woman and, strangest of them all, the cheekily named “Archibald Leland Sutter Still Life” (who earned this title among fans and crewmembers as a reference to his apparent affinity for lamps).
While this was the first major horror outing for both Patrick Baynham (The Bearded Man) and Dana Mahmood (Archibald), Rhiannon Roberts has worked as a stunt performer in everything from Yellowjackets to HBO’s The Last of Us adaptation – which is probably why The Red-Headed Woman is the most active out of Clark’s impromptu “family.” That being said, the Archibald Leland Sutter Still Life is my personal favorite of the bunch simply because his anachronistic outfit suggests that the Backrooms phenomenon might be a lot older than the Async Foundation. I also love how hard he tries to be helpful with that little light of his!
That might be it for the Still Life entities, but I think horror fans will also be pleased to hear that the film’s Found Footage prologue stars none other than Resident Evil: Welcome to Raccoon City star Avan Jogia as Naren Warne – and American Mary herself Katharine Isabelle also shows up in a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it cameo at Mary’s house party towards the middle of the story (though I have a feeling that she originally had a bigger part that was likely cut for time).
At the end of the day, Parsons’ Backrooms may have been an auteur-driven project motivated by the young director’s unique take on the classic creepypasta, but film has always been a collective artform, so it’s fun to see just how many talented performers it takes to bring this kind of supernatural nightmare to life in a way that connects with so many people.
You must be logged in to post a comment.