Support NeoGAF

[gamz]

statements that the XB1 doesn't work without the kinect were day 1 lies. Statements which may have later been untrue because a change in strategy is likely not. However it does undermine their statements. Anything they say may or may not be true very shortly after. It's been their weakness for a while now which greatly undermines their credibility.

They weren't lies. That was their business plan. Kinect without the XB1 was rather worthless to navigate.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

This is a weird thing to get hung up on. Business plans change. They responded to their customer base that didn't like the Kinect (most of the core gamers). Imagine if they still required it; they'd be in an even worse position with that expensive SKU. The launch was a mess that they pivoted away from too.

Also, Phil Harrison isn't even with Microsoft anymore. Probably for reasons like the above quote.

But Phil Spencer is, and he was an integral part of the original Xbox One vision. People forget (or choose to forget) that so easily.

Regarding the change of business plan...

Was that a lie or was that before they changed their plan?

What's the difference, functionally?

Whether or not Microsoft is "lying" about how they'll handle this transition from XBox One as a console to Xbox One as "yet another platform that plays Windows games" and they end up dropping out of consoles or screwing up the account system or doing something else that goes against their original roadmap, does it really matter of it's a lie or a change in business plan?

At the end of the day, it's still a change to what Microsoft promised, and I think people have every right to be concerned about it when you consider Microsoft's history, even just their recent history.

 

[vcc]

That wasn't a lie though because it was true at one time. They had to go in and patch it out after the uproar when people believed the Kinect would be spying on them.

They also dropped Kinect after several months because they had so much feedback asking them to.

The first one is directly a lie as others confirmed at that point the XB1 worked find with it disconnected. But he could have easily mispoke or didn't know the details.

 

[gamz]

Listening to consumers desires isn't lying.

There was a lot of negativity around the mandatory Kinect.

You can call them idiots for not paying attention to the negativity when rumors were circulating before the thing was announced, but that doesn't make them liars.

It just makes them idiots for going forward with a stupid plan.

Yes, this. It was just a piss poor business model is all.

If a business model doesn't work it's not a lie? It doesn't work and you use a different model and they did that.

 

[jelly]

I haven't seen anyone mentioning how game development would work in this enviroment.
Let me explain:
Going from one gen into another we are used to devs fully exploiting the power of new consoles with new games (+cross-gen titles). Stuff that couldn't be done a generation before. Though there are cross-gen games some games make it look rather like a clean cut from a technical perspective between gens.

So, let's say we are keeping the normal cycle and new consoles are going to be launched in late 2018/2019. Dev kits will be delivered to devs 1-2 years in advance so that devs can design new gaming experiences around new machines that are usually a lot more powerful that the gen before. Now, big AAA games which are not cookie-cutter yearly iterations of a series take 2-3 years to develop.

How will this work with upgrades every 2 years or so? Let's say MS comes up with a fixed schedule to release Xbox 2 in 2018 and Xbox2.1 in 2020 and Xbox2.2 in 2022. Devs will have to start working on games for Xbox2 launch window right now. Ok, this might actually work, but what then? Dev x&y has just released his first title for Xbox2 and immediately starts working on a new title or sequel to hit the Xbox2.1 launch window, but he has to keep in mind that this game has to run on the older machine. Still no problem. The problems start with the 3rd and 4th iteration of the console. According to the schedule, this is the point in time where we are usually seeing brand-new machines, but the devs working on new games in this period always have to keep the first iteration in mind. My biggest issue with this: we'll see even less technical innovation in games down the line . Everything will be focused on resolution and fps solely. No new advanced physics or AI innovations, because this won't work with this concept. Just as an example (control issues aside) a Total War Medieval 3 with 50.000 units might run on a Xbox iteration in 2018 but this kind of game won't run with console tech we are dealing with today. The whole AAA industry will be put into an even more tight corset, if all of this happens. The whole game-design philosophy will have to change and allign to this rhythm also and I don't see how games can become a selling point for the new upgrade. Let's say EA misses the launch window of Xbox 2.1 with a brand new AAA IP and releases the game exactly in the middle between Xbox2.1 and Xbox2.2.
This game then will neither work as a unique selling point for Xbox2.2 nor for Xbox2.1.

What innovations have you seen this generation with regards to AI and such?

Anything of worth is stagnant or damn hard to innovate on or just ignored.

It's just going to be performance, visual upgrades and big unique leaps like VR.

I think it will work like this

2013 - Xbox One
2017 - Xbox 1.5
2020 - Xbox Two 'Xbox One main dev support ended'
2024 - Xbox 2.5 'Xbox 1.5 main dev support ended'

I also believe we likely won't even have a consistent schedule. If features don't require a new console or hardware offerings are not cost effective or useful or not needed as they are happy with the performance of the console and consumer response, Microsoft will not bother releasing anything but a Slim console.

We have to wait and see. Nothing is set in stone. I personally think it would be ludicrous to have a new version every 1-2 years and I seriously doubt Microsoft would do that. Phil just mentioned phones as an example not a roadmap.

 

[gamz]

The first one is directly a lie as others confirmed at that point the XB1 worked find with it disconnected. But he could have easily mispoke or didn't know the details.

The whole OS was with Kinect in mind. They had to make changes for it to work without it.

 

[Markoman]

statements that the XB1 doesn't work without the kinect were day 1 lies. Statements which may have later been untrue because a change in strategy is likely not. However it does undermine their statements. Anything they say may or may not be true very shortly after. It's been their weakness for a while now which greatly undermines their credibility.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbPuDq0hvKI

Just to support your post....
Noooo, major companies won't ever lie. Ask Santa. hahahaha
It baffles me how fast the memories fade away. Shit was whack back in 2013. Shit is still whack in 2016.

 

[Sydle]

But Phil Spencer is, and he was an integral part of the original Xbox One vision. People forget (or choose to forget) that so easily.

Regarding the change of business plan...


What's the difference, functionally?

Whether Microsoft is "lying" about how they'll handle this transition from XBox One as a console to Xbox One as "yet another platform that plays Windows games" and they end up dropping out of consoles or screwing up the account system or doing something else that goes against their original roadmap, does it really matter of it's a lie or a change in business plan?

At the end of the day, it's still a change to what Microsoft promised, and I think people have every right to be concerned about it when you consider Microsoft's history, even just their recent history.

There's a big difference between misleading people and adjusting a product based on user feedback.

One thing I don't understand with the Xbox/Windows 10 'unification' is how its going to work with third party games. Firstly, existing games. How is an Xbox version of, say, Far Cry Primal ever going to work on any Windows 10 PC? This strongly implies that a backward compatible Xbox 1.5 or 2 CANNOT just be a Windows 10 PC after all.
And for future games, can MS really say to the likes of EA, hey, this Xbox version you are making, it has to be UWA but good news, it also runs on Windows 10! P.S. We get a 30% cut of all copies. No, they are going to want to keep making their own PC only versions to sell through Origin.

So how can they solve this one? Do they really intend to unify platforms, or just have all first party games be UWA for Xbox and Windows 10?

It's up to the third-party publisher on what devices they target, so they can't guarantee it.

 

[vcc]

They weren't lies. That was their business plan. Kinect without the XB1 was rather worthless to navigate.

Kind leads into my main point. Their statements aren't trust worthy. Lie or not everything they mention is subject to change in very short order. There is so much flux that their communication is unreliable so taking it for gospel is problematic.

They've had several years of this. And like I said it means everything they say is undermined by this.

 

[Garrett 2U]

Currently the PC is an open platform that allows you to install a wide variety of software that enables features aside from just making shit look better.

An argument posed earlier on and multiple times since is that these new boxes would not only include a graphics update, but also new features.

I specifically mentioned features, didn't I? I'm pretty sure I did. If I was only discussing graphics, maybe I would've mentioned it, like, once in that entire fucking post. Guess I can't assume people will not deliberately misconstrue my statements to shut down the discussion.

Forward compatibility does not imply that old devices will support the full feature set of newer devices.
It refers to the fact that the Xbox One supports the UWP standard.
In effect, any future UWA could scale itself accordingly and be supported by the Xbox One.

The reason being because there is now a decoupling between the hardware and the software.
Instead of developing a game according to an Xbox One API or an Xbox Two API or Win32, software is developed according to the UWA standard.

 

[Bitch Pudding]

Good point, what if they show MS the stinker and focus on Sony as a primary partner in the future? MS plan will force big pubs to spend more on development, if Sony doesn't follow this strategy they will be the cheaper alternative with an already bigger market-share. This will end up like Game of Thrones I guess.

Not to forget big players and retailers like Gamestop. Don't think they like the idea that you'll be forced to buy MS games in Win 10 store. Obviously that's not written in stone yet, but if MS decides to do so, they will be forced to look at other sales channels for their gaming hardware.

 

[gamz]

Kind leads into my main point. Their statements aren't trust worthy. Lie or not everything they mention is subject to change in very short order. There is so much flux that their communication is unreliable so taking it for gospel is problematic.

They've had several years of this. And like I said it means everything they say is undermined by this.

What are you talking about? They truly did believe in Kinect. People didn't like Kinect and they changed course. What are they supposed to do not change on the fly? Business's change based on user feedback all the time. It's a positive not a negative when they listen to their user base.

 

[RedSwirl]

I think the purpose of a console is to provide a complete package. Controller, hardware capabilities, the gaming philosophy of the company behind it, the talent of the first-party devs, the UI, etc all play a role.

If you're only concerned with the guts of the hardware itself, I agree that console exclusives are silly and don't make sense. Despite the power differences, Xbox One and PS4 are more alike than they are different when it comes to the "guts". Same manufacturer. Similar processors and architecture.

But it's the support of the console that matters, too. PS4 isn't just a 7-core, 8 GB RAM box that plugs into my TV. It's a system where Sony curated indie developers from around to world to make content on. It's the place where Sony's top games are delivered. It's a system with a camera and a controller (with a lightbar and touch-pad), and it's gonna have VR soon, too. It's a system where the UI was designed to sleep and quickly return you to your game, and to play certain apps without having to completely exit your game.

This thread is chock-full of people making comparisons to phones/tablets as if that justifies annual console upgrades. Well, I'd like to make another comparison. People don't buy an Apple phone because it has the most powerful CPU and the snappiest UI (it doesn't). People buy an Apple phone because they like the package. They like how Apple emphasizes high-fidelity screens and innovative touch controls and makes their stuff easy to use. They like the suite of apps exclusive to the platform.

How is it so hard to see that people may buy a console package for the very same reasons?

You're still thinking of that "package" as centered around one machine. That "package," or the platform, can grow to encompass more machines -- more options for people who want to buy into that platform.

PlayStation is indeed a place where Sony has curated developers and offered a gaming network with PlayStation Plus and tons of media, but that doesn't have to be locked down to one machine. Some of that is available on the Vita too. Sony could very well make a new machine that has all the same things the current PS4 has but with some other upgrades, and it'll be another option for people who want to buy into "PlayStation." Everyone shouldn't feel pressured to get that upgraded model, but some people might choose it.

People do buy iPhones for the screen and touch controls as well as the suite of apps, but those aren't exclusive to one phone. Apple started out with one iPhone, and then kept offering upgraded versions. What Spencer is suggesting is basically doing this for the Xbox going forward.

 

[Shin-Ra]

Right. I get that. As a console owner I feel the pain just about every generation.

But I trust Spencer going forward and he's proved it with Xbox and I trust he'll do the same with PC.

What's Sony plan for next generation? I seriously don't know? Do you get to keep your digital games?

What's Microsoft's console plan for six months from now? It keeps changing.

Exactly. That's why I love digital. Everything is more convenient.

Everything. Except when it isn't, and we keep getting reminded how fragile online services are.

By the way instead of trying to sell parts / new consoles every year or so why don't they just beef up the cloud every year?

Imagine that, play games with mindblowing graphics in 2033 with your 20 years old XB1!

Then you really are at the mercy of multiple service providers.

I seriously don't get how this is so hard for people to wrap their heads arounds, DirectX(whatever the hell it's called now) can take care of most of this "automagically"

Direct3D 12 certainly doesn't.

 

[feint_ruled]

It's up to the third-party publisher on what devices they target, so they can't guarantee it.

But not a unified platform, then. "This software is not compatible with any of your devices" or such like.
I just don't see where the PC part of the plan comes in. Third party games from the big pubs aren't going to want to be part of the Win 10 UWA ecosystem, especially ones that have their own storefronts.

I mean, when they say all this stuff, forward and backwards compatibility, identical platforms, buy once play anywhere - is it with the caveat that is for Microsoft's games ONLY? Because that is a hell of a caveat.

 

[Bitch Pudding]

There's a big difference between misleading people and adjusting a product based on user feedback.

.

Kinect resp. the lack of support was criticized right from the start. People asked MS why they don't offer a cheaper SKU without it and MS made it quite clear that this wasn't an option due to technical issues / necessities. It's funny that a strategic adjustment was able to fix that technical issue at once. There's a reason why some people take everything someone from MS says about gaming with a grain of salt, and it didn't even start with Kinect.

What are you talking about? They truly did believe in Kinect. People didn't like Kinect and they changed course. What are they supposed to do not change on the fly? Business's change based on user feedback all the time. It's a positive not a negative when they listen to their user base.

Bullshit, people didn't like Kinect because it had no gamez. If MS truly believed in Kinect they would have supported it with a steady flow of games.

 

[cakely]

???????????

a major corporation is going to straight up lie about their plans for a feature? seriously name a time that a publicly traded corporation has done that...

People DO understand that Microsoft has some of the smartest graphics programmers IN THE WORLD. We CREATED DirectX, the standard API’s that everyone programs against. So while people laude Sony for their HW skills, do you really think we don’t know how to build a system optimized for maximizing graphics for programmers? Seriously? There is no way we’re giving up a 30%+ advantage to Sony. And ANYONE who has seen both systems running could say there are great looking games on both systems. If there was really huge performance difference – it would be obvious.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=80168873&postcount=708

Two months before the Xbox One release.

 

[RedSwirl]

But not a unified platform, then. "This software is not compatible with any of your devices" or such like.
I just don't see where the PC part of the plan comes in. Third party games from the big pubs aren't going to want to be part of the Win 10 UWA ecosystem, especially ones that have their own storefronts.

Yeah, that is a big hurdle. Microsoft is going to have to seriously improve the Windows 10 PC ecosystem to make third party developers even think a bout supporting it. Right now it's probably worse than Steam and Origin were when they first got started in terms of gaming.

 

[gamz]

But not a unified platform, then. "This software is not compatible with any of your devices" or such like.
I just don't see where the PC part of the plan comes in. Third party games from the big pubs aren't going to want to be part of the Win 10 UWA ecosystem, especially ones that have their own storefronts.

Obviously they won't use MS store. They don't have to be.

 

[Helznicht]

And this is bad for any console, because you need those early adopters to gain sales momentum and a positive word-of-mouth starting day 1.

Bad for any new console based upon 5-7 year cycles. This new paradigm puts the console manufacturer in the late middle of the cycle, constantly. Who cares if the new console version is not flying off the shelves, its about how much software you sell, and you sell a lot more at a more consistent pace if you guarantee forward compatibility of your older console model. Taking away the roller-coaster ride that is new generation console release is good for MS, N and Sony.

 

[AmaterasuOni]

Kind leads into my main point. Their statements aren't trust worthy. Lie or not everything they mention is subject to change in very short order. There is so much flux that their communication is unreliable so taking it for gospel is problematic.

They've had several years of this. And like I said it means everything they say is undermined by this.

Also all the NPD spins. Microsoft have hired all the masters of illusions to their public relations team. It's really awesome to see that team find out new and unique ways to twist and spin the poor sales numbers. Every month a new illusion of words.

 

[wapplew]

One thing I don't understand with the Xbox/Windows 10 'unification' is how its going to work with third party games. Firstly, existing games. How is an Xbox version of, say, Far Cry Primal ever going to work on any Windows 10 PC? This strongly implies that a backward compatible Xbox 1.5 or 2 CANNOT just be a Windows 10 PC after all.
And for future games, can MS really say to the likes of EA, hey, this Xbox version you are making, it has to be UWA but good news, it also runs on Windows 10! P.S. We get a 30% cut of all copies. No, they are going to want to keep making their own PC only versions to sell through Origin.

So how can they solve this one? Do they really intend to unify platforms, or just have all first party games be UWA for Xbox and Windows 10?

That's where I have my doubt. Many poster here rely on what MS said about unify platform and UWA as argument.
I not a developer, so I ask, does it mean it could run on any Windows 10 devices as long as you package it as UWA?
Can Tomb Raider UWA on Windows store run on Xbox one?
Some poster keep saying unify Windows 10 and Xbox one means developer can target larger audience but how is that different from making a Xbox one and a PC port today?
I mean developer already targeted that large target for years by releasing PC port, how is "unify" making the target audience bigger than it is?

 

[vcc]

What are you talking about? They truly did believe in Kinect. People didn't like Kinect and they changed course. What are they supposed to do not change on the fly? Business's change based on user feedback all the time. It's a positive not a negative when they listen to their user base.

Companies often don't change that dramatically on the fly. Part of it is their partners need some predictability. All of the studios who made games for kinect likely feel burned by that move. some of the folks who bought the kinect version may also feel hard done by.

Kinect was more business that 'listening to customers'. Price was a huge albatross and the perceived value of the Kinect was lower than it's actual cost to put into the kit.

Right now they're promising not to leave the XB1 install base behind. But they're making it less special to own that thing. And purposely dropping future sales and using the XB1 momentum to push w10 store. They already burned the early adopters by dropping the vast majority of the kinect push. What's the rest of the base mean to them?

 

[Markoman]

What innovations have you seen this generation with regards to AI and such?

Anything of worth is stagnant or damn hard to innovate on or just ignored.

It's just going to be performance, visual upgrades and big unique leaps like VR.

I think it will work like this

2013 - Xbox One
2017 - Xbox 1.5
2020 - Xbox Two 'Xbox One main dev support ended'
2024 - Xbox 2.5 'Xbox 1.5 main dev support ended'

I also believe we likely won't even have a consistent schedule. If features don't require a new console or hardware offerings are not cost effective or useful or not needed as they are happy with the performance of the console and consumer response, Microsoft will not bother releasing anything but a Slim console.

We have to wait and see. Nothing is set in stone. I personally think it would be ludicrous to have a new version every 1-2 years and I seriously doubt Microsoft would do that. Phil just mentioned phones as an example not a roadmap.

See, that's the problem. You are basically supporting my argument. Consoles as unique technical devices become obsolete more and more. This development started last gen and in this gen they acclerated this trend by selling low-mid range PCs as consoles. I was one of those who was cheering when the PS4's launch price was announced. A year later I changed my mind. I would have paid 500-600€ for a console that at least pushes for 1080/60fps in nearly every game.
Funny thing is, my biggest wish is that Sony, Nintendo and MS all become gaming services on PC, but I have absolutely no problem with them releasing consoles as cheaper alternatives, too. I will then rather spend 1200$ on a single machine (PS) than buying 1-2 consoles plus upgrades every two years. Good times ahead, as I'm one of those who sometimes prefers less options from which to choose.

 

[slavesnyder]

Sometimes you don't need to lie. A well-set comma can do the job.

 

[vcc]

That's where I have my doubt. Many poster here rely on what MS said about unify platform and UWA as argument.
I not a developer, so I ask, does it mean it could run on any Windows 10 devices as long as you package it as UWA?
Can Tomb Raider UWA on Windows store run on Xbox one?
Some poster keep saying unify Windows 10 and Xbox one means developer can target larger audience but how is that different from making a Xbox one and a PC port today?
I mean developer already targeted that large target for years by releasing PC port, how is "unify" making the target audience bigger than it is?

 

[gamz]

Bullshit, people didn't like Kinect because it had no gamez. If MS truly believed in Kinect they would have supported it with a steady flow of games.

What? If user feedback was they loved it, they would still be supporting it. I mean what's your reasoning why they stopped supporting it?

 

[vcc]

What? If user feedback was they loved it, they would still be supporting it. I mean what's your reasoning why they stopped supporting it?

Key reasoning is they had to get the price point below the PS4 ASAP.

 

[Night Angel]

Forward compatibility does not imply that old devices will support the full feature set of newer devices.
It refers to the fact that the Xbox One supports the UWP standard.
In effect, any future UWA could scale itself accordingly and be supported by the Xbox One.

The reason being because there is now a decoupling between the hardware and the software.
Instead of developing a game according to an Xbox One API or an Xbox Two API or Win32, software is developed according to the UWA standard.

Which is exactly why I said what I did about forward compatability being limited in scope OR limiting the future offerings on the system. One of those WILL happen. Either a game will use the new feature and be incompatible with the old box, or games won't be able to use the new features.

FFS, did you even read my post before replying?

 

[slavesnyder]

What? If user feedback was they loved it, they would still be supporting it. I mean what's your reasoning why they stopped supporting it?

Did they even really start supporting it?
If you look at the Kinect releases for XboxOne you could really start to wonder what the thing was meant for.

 

[vcc]

Did they even really start supporting it?
If you look at the Kinect releases for XboxOne you could really start to wonder what the thing was meant for.

 

[gamz]

Companies often don't change that dramatically on the fly. Part of it is their partners need some predictability. All of the studios who made games for kinect likely feel burned by that move. some of the folks who bought the kinect version may also feel hard done by.

Kinect was more business that 'listening to customers'. Price was a huge albatross and the perceived value of the Kinect was lower than it's actual cost to put into the kit.

Right now they're promising not to leave the XB1 install base behind. But they're making it less special to own that thing. And purposely dropping future sales and using the XB1 momentum to push w10 store. They already burned the early adopters by dropping the vast majority of the kinect push. What's the rest of the base mean to them?

Ummmm....They do it all the time. Apple dropped Google maps for thier own maps software. Oops big mistake and within a couple of weeks Google maps was back. Windows 8 sucks. Oops Windows 10 was fast tracked. Google Glass is the future! Oops it gone! It literally happens all the time. You wouldn't be a good company without hearing feedback from your customers and make the changes.

 

[Sydle]

Kinect resp. the lack of support was criticized right from the start. People asked MS why they don't offer a cheaper SKU without it and MS made it quite clear that this wasn't an option due to technical issues / necessities. It's funny that a strategic adjustment was able to fix that technical issue at once. There's a reason why some people take everything someone from MS says about gaming with a grain of salt, and it didn't even start with Kinect.

IIRC, they did in fact build the OS with the expectation Kinect would always be there for login, voice commands, etc. That was the original intention and design.

I get that they have a significant enough miss rate that some people want to take the wait and see approach--perfectly understandable and justifiable--but accusing them of lying is something else entirely.

Kinect resp. the lack of support was criticized right from the start. People asked MS why they don't offer a cheaper SKU without it and MS made it quite clear that this wasn't an option due to technical issues / necessities. It's funny that a strategic adjustment was able to fix that technical issue at once. There's a reason why some people take everything someone from MS says about gaming with a grain of salt, and it didn't even start with Kinect.



Bullshit, people didn't like Kinect because it had no gamez. If MS truly believed in Kinect they would have supported it with a steady flow of games.

They believed in it enough to make it a standard pack-in and designed the OS around it. I believe their reasoning was that having it a standard part of the console would entice more developers to use it.

Again, that's not misleading but a major misread on the market and a misfire they had to resolve.

Nobody is arguing they don't have misfires. They have some things that work and some things that don't. Why can't we talk about both potential outcomes?

 

[gamz]

Key reasoning is they had to get the price point below the PS4 ASAP.

If people loved it and bought it, it would still be there. Period. Very few liked it and everyone said drop the kinect to lower the price. So they did.

Not sure why this is so confusing?

 

[gamz]

IIRC, they did in fact build the OS with the expectation Kinect would always be there for login, voice commands, etc. That was the original intention and design.

I get that they have a significant enough miss rate that some people want to take the wait and see approach--perfectly understandable and justifiable--but accusing them of lying is something else entirely.

Thank you. This is the reality of what happened. Business plans fail. Shit happens.

 

[Markoman]

Did they even really start supporting it?
If you look at the Kinect releases for XboxOne you could really start to wonder what the thing was meant for.

Here's my theory: Kinect was bulit for amateur porn. Somewhere in the world an old Bilderberg, Rothshild or Illuminati grandpa was fapping while you and your GF were playing the ole in-and-out game in the living room.

 

[Shin-Ra]

???????????

a major corporation is going to straight up lie about their plans for a feature? seriously name a time that a publicly traded corporation has done that...

Kinect was an essential part of the all-in-one Xbox experience once upon a time.

Funny looking back through some old threads.

Early adopters just got retroactively fucked though, which is pretty shitty.

Sony e3 pricecut incoming. Running scared.

:lol Camera support doesn't have to go away.

And once Kinect was dropped as standard, they later dropped motion tracking in the Windows 10 update!

 

[vcc]

Ummmm....They do it all the time. Apple dropped Google maps for thier own maps software. Oops big mistake and within a couple of weeks Google maps was back. Windows 8 sucks. Oops Windows 10 was fast tracked. Google Glass is the future! Oops it gone! It literally happens all the time. You wouldn't be a good company without hearing feedback from your customers and make the changes.

It's not reacting to customer feed back it's business conditions for all of those. Consumers give a great deal of feed back and often contradictory but when it lines up with major business problems then change comes faster.

Although it's one of the things I like about Nadella over Ballmer, the speed MS took to make changes was painfully slow under Ballmer but much quicker with Nadella. MS as a company will probably do better than the last 10 years. But this may not mean more to a Ms stock holder than the xb1 install base.

 

[vcc]

If people loved it and bought it, it would still be there. Period. Very few liked it and everyone said drop the kinect to lower the price. So they did.

Not sure why this is so confusing?

It's difference between:

Tim Hortons gave me a free drink via roll up the rim because they care about me as a person.

vs

Tim Hortons gave me a free drink because of a popular corporate promotion so I'd buy more of their drinks.

 

[Bitch Pudding]

Oh, I am well aware about their expectations. And their change of plans was without doubt a clever, necessary and fast move. That doesn't change the issue of telling people it's literally impossible to disconnect Kinect cause 'technical stuff'.

 

[Trup1aya]

I haven't seen anyone mentioning how game development would work in this enviroment.
Let me explain:
Going from one gen into another we are used to devs fully exploiting the power of new consoles with new games (+cross-gen titles). Stuff that couldn't be done a generation before. Though there are cross-gen games some games make it look rather like a clean cut from a technical perspective between gens.

So, let's say we are keeping the normal cycle and new consoles are going to be launched in late 2018/2019. Dev kits will be delivered to devs 1-2 years in advance so that devs can design new gaming experiences around new machines that are usually a lot more powerful that the gen before. Now, big AAA games which are not cookie-cutter yearly iterations of a series take 2-3 years to develop.

How will this work with upgrades every 2 years or so? Let's say MS comes up with a fixed schedule to release Xbox 2 in 2018 and Xbox2.1 in 2020 and Xbox2.2 in 2022. Devs will have to start working on games for Xbox2 launch window right now. Ok, this might actually work, but what then? Dev x&y has just released his first title for Xbox2 and immediately starts working on a new title or sequel to hit the Xbox2.1 launch window, but he has to keep in mind that this game has to run on the older machine. Still no problem. The problems start with the 3rd and 4th iteration of the console. According to the schedule, this is the point in time where we are usually seeing brand-new machines, but the devs working on new games in this period always have to keep the first iteration in mind. My biggest issue with this: we'll see even less technical innovation in games down the line . Everything will be focused on resolution and fps solely. No new advanced physics or AI innovations, because this won't work with this concept. Just as an example (control issues aside) a Total War Medieval 3 with 50.000 units might run on a Xbox iteration in 2018 but this kind of game won't run with console tech we are dealing with today. The whole AAA industry will be put into an even more tight corset, if all of this happens. The whole game-design philosophy will have to change and allign to this rhythm also and I don't see how games can become a selling point for the new upgrade. Let's say EA misses the launch window of Xbox 2.1 with a brand new AAA IP and releases the game exactly in the middle between Xbox2.1 and Xbox2.2.
This game then will neither work as a unique selling point for Xbox2.2 nor for Xbox2.1.

I've explained how it would likely work.

Your timetables are more rapid than technology improvements would allow. There would be 3-4 year minimum between hardware revisions.

You start with X.0 iteration. This box will be the target hardware for the entire generation. Developers code the game to support dynamic framerate,resolution etc, but cap them depending on hardware. A few years later X.5 releases. It's capable of running games that targeted X.0 but with fewer performance restrictions. So developers still optimize for X.0, but X.5 brute forces it's way to better looking games. A few years after that Y.0 is released to coincide with the new generation. This will be the target hardware for the generation. X.5 will be able to play Y.0 games, but with lower settings. X.0 will be obsolete.

Rinse and repeat.

.5 interations serve to brute force games into better performance. Hardware Traded-in for upgrades will provide a lower priced entry point into the current gen. They will also soften the population issue that occurs at the start of new generations.

.0 iterations will be the target hardware.

 

[Tesseract]

Welcome to PC gaming

Soon ps4

Then Gabe wins

 

[Graphics Horse]

Kinect was an essential part of the all-in-one Xbox experience once upon a time.

Funny looking back through some old threads.


And once Kinect was dropped as standard, they later dropped motion tracking in the Windows 10 update!

True. I still think it was daft to include it but I didn't expect the camera support to be removed. Did they ever add alternatives for voice input?

 

[Crayon]

So we all agree that you can't point to PR as a reliable sign of what's to come?

 

[Graphics Horse]

So we all agree that you can't point to PR as a reliable sign of what's to come?

Surreee but then what do we talk about?

 

[Bitch Pudding]

So we all agree that you can't point to PR as a reliable sign of what's to come?

Of course, although Philanthropies may disagree.

Surreee but then what do we talk about?

Also good point.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Oh, I am well aware about their expectations. And their change of plans was without doubt a clever, necessary and fast move. That doesn't change the issue of telling people it's literally impossible to disconnect Kinect cause 'technical stuff'.

Well at the time, to be fair, it was impossible to do, unless they reconfigured some components in the software. Disingenuous, yes. Purposeful misdirection, hoping people would be like, "good enough, we accept your answer", indeed so. But technically, at the time, not a lie in context.

 

[Sydle]

So we all agree that you can't point to PR as a reliable sign of what's to come?

It's a reliable sign of their intentions. As for how/when/if they adjust it, wait for more PR.

This is same for all companies.

 

[vcc]

Surreee but then what do we talk about?

We can speculate on how this announcement will effect the March NPD. I think a portion of it will cover post announcement time.

 

[Trup1aya]

So we all agree that you can't point to PR as a reliable sign of what's to come?

People on both sides of the argument are forecasting what is to come based on the exact same PR.

Whether or not you believe it will be fruitful, non of us have any reason to believe that what was said in this briefing isn't what there current plans are.