Support NeoGAF

[kotodama]

The best all digital future would be a GOG like one in which the consumer is free to back up and use there purchases as they see fit, whenever they see fit till the end of time. Steam works because of the nature of the PC, but GOG is better from a freedom perspective. Still I don't see why we can't have both a physical and digital distribution option. In music, LPs are alive and well.

 

[ant1532]

the economy for that type of system isn't set up completely. you'd think the biggest computer company of all time would realize that.

 

[SirNinja]

Of course people weren't ready for all digital on consoles because developers weren't ready to drop prices

Unless they are also the publishers, developers do not set the price.

 

[Tuck]

I've got no fucking clue. MS has collectively had its head up it's own ass for a while now. I want to critique this whole mess but frankly they've bungled this thing up so hard it's difficult to know where to start.

Albert, I know you read Gaf. You need to stop talking about this. Period. Full stop. No more. Shush.

Every time you or any other MS representative goes on the record to discuss the DRM policies you take an inherently anti consumer approach even if it's not your intent. Which at this point I'm going to assume it's your intent given the frequency with which you and your cohorts put this bungle on the consumer. You can't claim that consumers weren't ready for your vision of the future. We will never be ready for your vision of an all digital future because neither you nor anyone else at MS has never, not once, made it clear what exactly that vision is, or was, could be or will be.

Simply state that Microsoft misread the market. You operated in a vacuum under the assumption that your consumers wanted certain things that we didn't and now you're having to back track. That's fine. You guys made a mistake, it happens. It's time to reread your audience and try again. What you can't do is continue to allude to the fact that consumers weren't ready for your product. That's insulting, and it insinuates that you still have plans to fuck us over in the future. Consumers are naturally entitled. We have to be. We're paying large sums of cash, in this case a premium, for your product. We have certain expectations based on how you present that product and once that transaction is complete we're naturally entitled to complete ownership over that product. We also have expectations for your product based on competing products and services from other manufacturers. You do not operate within a vacuum and this relationship does not work in reverse. You are not entitled to my money.

The DRM strategy as we know it is beneficial to no one but Microsoft and its partners. This statement is true based on the information you have given us. You can claim that miscommunications and disorganization led to dissemination of inaccurate rumors, but the truth of the matter is that the only time you've detailed any consumer benefit was AFTER you shut the DRM down. We also had it on good insider authority that those claims regarding game sharing were complete bullshit and you're lying to us. All the "facts" you attempted to detail to consumers were completely contradictory during the period of time immediately following the initial announcement. Every further clarification only led to further confusion as your company continued to contradict itself. Repeatedly. These are not signs of miscommunications. These are signs of a critical lack of vision and fundamental misunderstanding of your target audience and it shows.

Right now Sony is assaulting you with precision strikes in the market that matters the most during launches, the core gamer audience. You need to buckle the fuck down and figure out what your product is, and who it's for. Right now I can't figure out who this product is for, or why anyone should want it. If it's for the hardcore gamer what are the benefits of paying for XBL over PSN+? You're entering a new generation and Sony is catching up significantly. Voice chat is no longer an appropriate answer. You've failed to clarify on the future of the Games With Gold promotion. At first it was temporary, now it's not? The offerings have been substandard when compared to PS+ over the period of time since it was first announced. Your product is no longer the preferred place to play multiplatform titles and you have virtually no first party resources to draw from. The last entry of your largest IP, halo, was not received well by it's audience and you've lost a chunk of your third party exclusive content over the past generation. As a consumer why should I believe that this won't happen again? Why should I, as a gamer, buy a Xbox One when judging by your track record you've nearly abandoned the 360 halfway through it's life and let a massive series like Mass Effect go multiplatform. It seems to me like this will probably happen again and most major titles I can just wait for.

Is this for the casual gamer? If so why aren't we seeing more kinect games? If so why is it the most expensive console on the market? Where is the content that's going to blow the casual market away? The original kinect was successful because it was a novel add on. A new way of interacting with a product you already had in your household. This is not the case for you any more. The original Wii took off because it was something entirely new, original, and extremely affordable. It was a novelty. This is also not the case for the Xbox One. The family/casual market, if there's much of one left, is going to Nintendo. They have the stronger family friendly IPs. You either need to focus on them or drop the kinect.

Is this a device for the mass market? Designed to integrate into television and media services? It can't be, once again it's the most expensive console no the market. It can't compete in price to something like the Apple TV, or even the Vita TV, a device that at least makes sense as a cheap complimentary purchase to a product a consumer will already own. If that's the case then why haven't we heard more about these television and film products? Where is the info on Remedy's new game that's supposedly blending video games and television entertainment? We know virtually nothing about how it plays, and we know virtually nothing about the television series. Are there other projects like that in the works? If it's designed to compliment a cable subscription why can't it function as a DVR? What benefit is there to a $500 black box that functions as little more than a glorified TV remote? Why aren't you partnering with cable providers? Why are the TV services so severely limited globally?

Microsoft, who is this product for? On the surface you seem to be approaching this device as a jack of all trades type of console. The problem is that the title of "jack of all trades" implies a level of competency in these services that is glaringly absent from your strategy. You lack vision. Period. Stop making excuses. Stop blaming the consumers.

Shut the fuck up, buckle the fuck down, figure out who you're targeting, and fix this.

/end rant

I know this was posted 2 weeks ago, but damn - perfect summation of what Microsoft has done wrong.

 

[Freshmaker]

Why people think MS would be so boneheaded to not follow the same flexible marketplace in terms of pricing as EVERY OTHER successful gaming DD solution out there.

Historical precedent.

 

[andromeduck]

Ditto on the kudos for Foxix. We're all thinking it, you just managed to put it into words, more eloquently and less assholish than I would have.

Microsoft's biggest problem, IMO, is that they don't understand the concept of what customer's actually want. Not just the details, but the actual concept that a customer might want a particular thing from a product. MS has gotten into the habit of simply releasing a product and effectively demanding that the customer want it. They're telling us what we want rather than asking us what we want. This also applies to the way they view their own products... they appear to actually believe everything that appears in their advertisements. Of course, all companies spin things in their advertising, but most of them are keenly aware of that spin practice, and make no allusions as to what the product actually is. Not so for MS. They actually seem to buy into their own bullshit.

The biggest example, I think, is Windows 8. They released it, touting, and truly believing, that it was the greatest operating system ever created by the hands of gods or men. And no one bought it. This quite literally baffled them... they actually couldn't understand why people didn't want it, and especially why they didn't want it shoved down their throats. The telltale part of this is the blame game they played, trying to put the problem on OEMs for not making enough PCs pre-loaded with it (while the OEMs, on the flip side, blamed Win8 for decreased sales). And, like Xbox, trying to blame the customer for not understanding their "vision" for the future of Windows. They blame everyone... except the people that actually made the product that no one wanted. Those guys got a million dollar bonus and a new summer house in Tahiti, and they're exceedingly proud of the wonder they created. I guess the world just wasn't "ready" for that, either.

The Xbox One is what it is. No amount of PR is going to change that, it's far too late. The box has to stand on its own now. And it will either succeed, or it will fail. MS isn't doing much to effectively change this, so now it's up to the customers... the ones who will buy the product. Or they won't.

lol same with bing and WP

can't wait to see the mental gymnastics post release

 

[murfi]

/dat epic rant
/end rant

 

[NotTheGuyYouKill]

I've got no fucking clue. MS has collectively had its head up it's own ass for a while now. I want to critique this whole mess but frankly they've bungled this thing up so hard it's difficult to know where to start.

Albert, I know you read Gaf. You need to stop talking about this. Period. Full stop. No more. Shush.

Every time you or any other MS representative goes on the record to discuss the DRM policies you take an inherently anti consumer approach even if it's not your intent. Which at this point I'm going to assume it's your intent given the frequency with which you and your cohorts put this bungle on the consumer. You can't claim that consumers weren't ready for your vision of the future. We will never be ready for your vision of an all digital future because neither you nor anyone else at MS has never, not once, made it clear what exactly that vision is, or was, could be or will be.

Simply state that Microsoft misread the market. You operated in a vacuum under the assumption that your consumers wanted certain things that we didn't and now you're having to back track. That's fine. You guys made a mistake, it happens. It's time to reread your audience and try again. What you can't do is continue to allude to the fact that consumers weren't ready for your product. That's insulting, and it insinuates that you still have plans to fuck us over in the future. Consumers are naturally entitled. We have to be. We're paying large sums of cash, in this case a premium, for your product. We have certain expectations based on how you present that product and once that transaction is complete we're naturally entitled to complete ownership over that product. We also have expectations for your product based on competing products and services from other manufacturers. You do not operate within a vacuum and this relationship does not work in reverse. You are not entitled to my money.

The DRM strategy as we know it is beneficial to no one but Microsoft and its partners. This statement is true based on the information you have given us. You can claim that miscommunications and disorganization led to dissemination of inaccurate rumors, but the truth of the matter is that the only time you've detailed any consumer benefit was AFTER you shut the DRM down. We also had it on good insider authority that those claims regarding game sharing were complete bullshit and you're lying to us. All the "facts" you attempted to detail to consumers were completely contradictory during the period of time immediately following the initial announcement. Every further clarification only led to further confusion as your company continued to contradict itself. Repeatedly. These are not signs of miscommunications. These are signs of a critical lack of vision and fundamental misunderstanding of your target audience and it shows.

Right now Sony is assaulting you with precision strikes in the market that matters the most during launches, the core gamer audience. You need to buckle the fuck down and figure out what your product is, and who it's for. Right now I can't figure out who this product is for, or why anyone should want it. If it's for the hardcore gamer what are the benefits of paying for XBL over PSN+? You're entering a new generation and Sony is catching up significantly. Voice chat is no longer an appropriate answer. You've failed to clarify on the future of the Games With Gold promotion. At first it was temporary, now it's not? The offerings have been substandard when compared to PS+ over the period of time since it was first announced. Your product is no longer the preferred place to play multiplatform titles and you have virtually no first party resources to draw from. The last entry of your largest IP, halo, was not received well by it's audience and you've lost a chunk of your third party exclusive content over the past generation. As a consumer why should I believe that this won't happen again? Why should I, as a gamer, buy a Xbox One when judging by your track record you've nearly abandoned the 360 halfway through it's life and let a massive series like Mass Effect go multiplatform. It seems to me like this will probably happen again and most major titles I can just wait for.

Is this for the casual gamer? If so why aren't we seeing more kinect games? If so why is it the most expensive console on the market? Where is the content that's going to blow the casual market away? The original kinect was successful because it was a novel add on. A new way of interacting with a product you already had in your household. This is not the case for you any more. The original Wii took off because it was something entirely new, original, and extremely affordable. It was a novelty. This is also not the case for the Xbox One. The family/casual market, if there's much of one left, is going to Nintendo. They have the stronger family friendly IPs. You either need to focus on them or drop the kinect.

Is this a device for the mass market? Designed to integrate into television and media services? It can't be, once again it's the most expensive console no the market. It can't compete in price to something like the Apple TV, or even the Vita TV, a device that at least makes sense as a cheap complimentary purchase to a product a consumer will already own. If that's the case then why haven't we heard more about these television and film products? Where is the info on Remedy's new game that's supposedly blending video games and television entertainment? We know virtually nothing about how it plays, and we know virtually nothing about the television series. Are there other projects like that in the works? If it's designed to compliment a cable subscription why can't it function as a DVR? What benefit is there to a $500 black box that functions as little more than a glorified TV remote? Why aren't you partnering with cable providers? Why are the TV services so severely limited globally?

Microsoft, who is this product for? On the surface you seem to be approaching this device as a jack of all trades type of console. The problem is that the title of "jack of all trades" implies a level of competency in these services that is glaringly absent from your strategy. You lack vision. Period. Stop making excuses. Stop blaming the consumers.

Shut the fuck up, buckle the fuck down, figure out who you're targeting, and fix this.

/end rant

 

[Jac_Solar]

Other retailers would've been able to sell digital games. That was kind of the whole point of the DRM in the first place. Someone would go to Amazon/Target/Wal-Mart/Toys R Us/etc. and buy the same digital game that is available on Xbox Live. The only difference is that they get a case and a disc with it. But functionally, the digital game was the same as the downloaded from Xbox Live version.

PC has GoG, GMG, Steam, Origin, Amazon. Xbox One would have had Amazon/Target/Wal-Mart/Toys R Us/etc. (of course, download only games would be the exception to this, similar to Steam-only games)

But now (similar to the past console generation), Microsoft is the only one that can sell you digital games on their console (just like every other console manufacturer). So MS/Sony/Nintendo is the only one that can set digital prices. The only way you can kind of get around this is through buying points/gift cards at retailers and then redeeming them on a console.

The "console digital game monopoly" everyone is supposedly afraid of has been happening for the past 8 years, and is continuing into next-gen.

Even if other stores could sell the game, it'd still have to be available on the Xbox network. They'd basically just be selling activation keys for the game, which means that Microsoft would be in full control, and could easily monopolize the entire market for Xbox games.

Of course, they'd allow the larger chains to sell their games to begin with to ensure sales, but once people realize that you can get the same thing on Xbox Live (And, probably, at a discount to begin with, then no discount when they are the only ones selling games.), and Microsoft controls the source, it seems very likely that Microsoft would want to be the only ones selling the games.

The problem was the forced every-24 hour internet activation. I'm pretty sure that the plan was to phase out the discs alltogether, and eventually make Xbox Live the only store offering games. No more reduced prices due to larger stores buying in bulk, or competing with other stores.

Consoles used to just be a tool to play the games - the console manufacturer wasn't necessarily involved with the games themselves. This line is blurring more and more. If the console manufacturer is the one that also controls the availability of the games, the price, and so forth, then the prices will most certainly increase, a lot.

If they were also responsible for actually selling the games to the people, they'd probably take a large chunk of money from that. Then publishers would complain, and increase prices, which Microsoft would be happy to do, etc.

Selling games on discs is good for the consumer - buying the discs, printing the discs, transporting the discs, storing the discs, and then, of course, selling the discs to stores as fast as possible (And, occasionally, they might sell them extra cheap to clear out stock.) -- the more discs a store buys, the cheaper the individual discs are. Stores might also compete with each other on the prices.

If all a publisher needed to do was to upload an .ISO file to Microsofts servers, games would most certainly increase in price due to the reasons listed -- and sales would probably be very rare.

 

[To Far Away Times]

I've got no fucking clue. MS has collectively had its head up it's own ass for a while now. I want to critique this whole mess but frankly they've bungled this thing up so hard it's difficult to know where to start.

Albert, I know you read Gaf. You need to stop talking about this. Period. Full stop. No more. Shush.

Every time you or any other MS representative goes on the record to discuss the DRM policies you take an inherently anti consumer approach even if it's not your intent. Which at this point I'm going to assume it's your intent given the frequency with which you and your cohorts put this bungle on the consumer. You can't claim that consumers weren't ready for your vision of the future. We will never be ready for your vision of an all digital future because neither you nor anyone else at MS has never, not once, made it clear what exactly that vision is, or was, could be or will be.

Simply state that Microsoft misread the market. You operated in a vacuum under the assumption that your consumers wanted certain things that we didn't and now you're having to back track. That's fine. You guys made a mistake, it happens. It's time to reread your audience and try again. What you can't do is continue to allude to the fact that consumers weren't ready for your product. That's insulting, and it insinuates that you still have plans to fuck us over in the future. Consumers are naturally entitled. We have to be. We're paying large sums of cash, in this case a premium, for your product. We have certain expectations based on how you present that product and once that transaction is complete we're naturally entitled to complete ownership over that product. We also have expectations for your product based on competing products and services from other manufacturers. You do not operate within a vacuum and this relationship does not work in reverse. You are not entitled to my money.

The DRM strategy as we know it is beneficial to no one but Microsoft and its partners. This statement is true based on the information you have given us. You can claim that miscommunications and disorganization led to dissemination of inaccurate rumors, but the truth of the matter is that the only time you've detailed any consumer benefit was AFTER you shut the DRM down. We also had it on good insider authority that those claims regarding game sharing were complete bullshit and you're lying to us. All the "facts" you attempted to detail to consumers were completely contradictory during the period of time immediately following the initial announcement. Every further clarification only led to further confusion as your company continued to contradict itself. Repeatedly. These are not signs of miscommunications. These are signs of a critical lack of vision and fundamental misunderstanding of your target audience and it shows.

Right now Sony is assaulting you with precision strikes in the market that matters the most during launches, the core gamer audience. You need to buckle the fuck down and figure out what your product is, and who it's for. Right now I can't figure out who this product is for, or why anyone should want it. If it's for the hardcore gamer what are the benefits of paying for XBL over PSN+? You're entering a new generation and Sony is catching up significantly. Voice chat is no longer an appropriate answer. You've failed to clarify on the future of the Games With Gold promotion. At first it was temporary, now it's not? The offerings have been substandard when compared to PS+ over the period of time since it was first announced. Your product is no longer the preferred place to play multiplatform titles and you have virtually no first party resources to draw from. The last entry of your largest IP, halo, was not received well by it's audience and you've lost a chunk of your third party exclusive content over the past generation. As a consumer why should I believe that this won't happen again? Why should I, as a gamer, buy a Xbox One when judging by your track record you've nearly abandoned the 360 halfway through it's life and let a massive series like Mass Effect go multiplatform. It seems to me like this will probably happen again and most major titles I can just wait for.

Is this for the casual gamer? If so why aren't we seeing more kinect games? If so why is it the most expensive console on the market? Where is the content that's going to blow the casual market away? The original kinect was successful because it was a novel add on. A new way of interacting with a product you already had in your household. This is not the case for you any more. The original Wii took off because it was something entirely new, original, and extremely affordable. It was a novelty. This is also not the case for the Xbox One. The family/casual market, if there's much of one left, is going to Nintendo. They have the stronger family friendly IPs. You either need to focus on them or drop the kinect.

Is this a device for the mass market? Designed to integrate into television and media services? It can't be, once again it's the most expensive console no the market. It can't compete in price to something like the Apple TV, or even the Vita TV, a device that at least makes sense as a cheap complimentary purchase to a product a consumer will already own. If that's the case then why haven't we heard more about these television and film products? Where is the info on Remedy's new game that's supposedly blending video games and television entertainment? We know virtually nothing about how it plays, and we know virtually nothing about the television series. Are there other projects like that in the works? If it's designed to compliment a cable subscription why can't it function as a DVR? What benefit is there to a $500 black box that functions as little more than a glorified TV remote? Why aren't you partnering with cable providers? Why are the TV services so severely limited globally?

Microsoft, who is this product for? On the surface you seem to be approaching this device as a jack of all trades type of console. The problem is that the title of "jack of all trades" implies a level of competency in these services that is glaringly absent from your strategy. You lack vision. Period. Stop making excuses. Stop blaming the consumers.

Shut the fuck up, buckle the fuck down, figure out who you're targeting, and fix this.

/end rant

That's a hell of a truth bomb.

 

[The_Reckoning]

Goddamn Foxix, that post(#657) was beautiful. Fucking surgical. We need answers. Gamers don't want a one horse race, it's just too easy to cheer for Sony atm, but gamers need the competition. When Sony is arrogant, Sony goes stupid, fast.

 

[wowlace]

Someone please quote that entire fucking post again.

 

[abstract alien]

Truth serum

Can we sticky this post? That's a valid request right?

 

[Game Guru]

Even if other stores could sell the game, it'd still have to be available on the Xbox network. They'd basically just be selling activation keys for the game, which means that Microsoft would be in full control, and could easily monopolize the entire market for Xbox games.

Of course, they'd allow the larger chains to sell their games to begin with to ensure sales, but once people realize that you can get the same thing on Xbox Live (And, probably, at a discount to begin with, then no discount when they are the only ones selling games.), and Microsoft controls the source, it seems very likely that Microsoft would want to be the only ones selling the games.

The problem was the forced every-24 hour internet activation. I'm pretty sure that the plan was to phase out the discs alltogether, and eventually make Xbox Live the only store offering games. No more reduced prices due to larger stores buying in bulk, or competing with other stores.

Consoles used to just be a tool to play the games - the console manufacturer wasn't necessarily involved with the games themselves. This line is blurring more and more. If the console manufacturer is the one that also controls the availability of the games, the price, and so forth, then the prices will most certainly increase, a lot.

If they were also responsible for actually selling the games to the people, they'd probably take a large chunk of money from that. Then publishers would complain, and increase prices, which Microsoft would be happy to do, etc.

Selling games on discs is good for the consumer - buying the discs, printing the discs, transporting the discs, storing the discs, and then, of course, selling the discs to stores as fast as possible (And, occasionally, they might sell them extra cheap to clear out stock.) -- the more discs a store buys, the cheaper the individual discs are. Stores might also compete with each other on the prices.

If all a publisher needed to do was to upload an .ISO file to Microsofts servers, games would most certainly increase in price due to the reasons listed -- and sales would probably be very rare.

I think the ultimate problem console gaming will have in regards to the digital future is that the very method of selling a console relies on retailers. The current model for console gaming has it so that the console itself and new games don't actually make the retailers any money. Instead, it is accessories and used games which make them money and just sell the console and new games to get them in the door. This is however not the model that is used for any other electronic device since manufacturers of hardware are generally not manufacturers of forms of media to use on said hardware with exception to Apple, whose model is to charge a premium price for a integrated hardware/software experience which retailers can easily made money off of. This is why the recent plethora of microconsoles and the Steam Machine intrigue me. They all seek to essentially answer what it means to be a video game console for an all digital age.

 

[molnizzle]

I've got no fucking clue. MS has collectively had its head up it's own ass for a while now. I want to critique this whole mess but frankly they've bungled this thing up so hard it's difficult to know where to start.

Albert, I know you read Gaf. You need to stop talking about this. Period. Full stop. No more. Shush.

Every time you or any other MS representative goes on the record to discuss the DRM policies you take an inherently anti consumer approach even if it's not your intent. Which at this point I'm going to assume it's your intent given the frequency with which you and your cohorts put this bungle on the consumer. You can't claim that consumers weren't ready for your vision of the future. We will never be ready for your vision of an all digital future because neither you nor anyone else at MS has never, not once, made it clear what exactly that vision is, or was, could be or will be.

Simply state that Microsoft misread the market. You operated in a vacuum under the assumption that your consumers wanted certain things that we didn't and now you're having to back track. That's fine. You guys made a mistake, it happens. It's time to reread your audience and try again. What you can't do is continue to allude to the fact that consumers weren't ready for your product. That's insulting, and it insinuates that you still have plans to fuck us over in the future. Consumers are naturally entitled. We have to be. We're paying large sums of cash, in this case a premium, for your product. We have certain expectations based on how you present that product and once that transaction is complete we're naturally entitled to complete ownership over that product. We also have expectations for your product based on competing products and services from other manufacturers. You do not operate within a vacuum and this relationship does not work in reverse. You are not entitled to my money.

The DRM strategy as we know it is beneficial to no one but Microsoft and its partners. This statement is true based on the information you have given us. You can claim that miscommunications and disorganization led to dissemination of inaccurate rumors, but the truth of the matter is that the only time you've detailed any consumer benefit was AFTER you shut the DRM down. We also had it on good insider authority that those claims regarding game sharing were complete bullshit and you're lying to us. All the "facts" you attempted to detail to consumers were completely contradictory during the period of time immediately following the initial announcement. Every further clarification only led to further confusion as your company continued to contradict itself. Repeatedly. These are not signs of miscommunications. These are signs of a critical lack of vision and fundamental misunderstanding of your target audience and it shows.

Right now Sony is assaulting you with precision strikes in the market that matters the most during launches, the core gamer audience. You need to buckle the fuck down and figure out what your product is, and who it's for. Right now I can't figure out who this product is for, or why anyone should want it. If it's for the hardcore gamer what are the benefits of paying for XBL over PSN+? You're entering a new generation and Sony is catching up significantly. Voice chat is no longer an appropriate answer. You've failed to clarify on the future of the Games With Gold promotion. At first it was temporary, now it's not? The offerings have been substandard when compared to PS+ over the period of time since it was first announced. Your product is no longer the preferred place to play multiplatform titles and you have virtually no first party resources to draw from. The last entry of your largest IP, halo, was not received well by it's audience and you've lost a chunk of your third party exclusive content over the past generation. As a consumer why should I believe that this won't happen again? Why should I, as a gamer, buy a Xbox One when judging by your track record you've nearly abandoned the 360 halfway through it's life and let a massive series like Mass Effect go multiplatform. It seems to me like this will probably happen again and most major titles I can just wait for.

Is this for the casual gamer? If so why aren't we seeing more kinect games? If so why is it the most expensive console on the market? Where is the content that's going to blow the casual market away? The original kinect was successful because it was a novel add on. A new way of interacting with a product you already had in your household. This is not the case for you any more. The original Wii took off because it was something entirely new, original, and extremely affordable. It was a novelty. This is also not the case for the Xbox One. The family/casual market, if there's much of one left, is going to Nintendo. They have the stronger family friendly IPs. You either need to focus on them or drop the kinect.

Is this a device for the mass market? Designed to integrate into television and media services? It can't be, once again it's the most expensive console no the market. It can't compete in price to something like the Apple TV, or even the Vita TV, a device that at least makes sense as a cheap complimentary purchase to a product a consumer will already own. If that's the case then why haven't we heard more about these television and film products? Where is the info on Remedy's new game that's supposedly blending video games and television entertainment? We know virtually nothing about how it plays, and we know virtually nothing about the television series. Are there other projects like that in the works? If it's designed to compliment a cable subscription why can't it function as a DVR? What benefit is there to a $500 black box that functions as little more than a glorified TV remote? Why aren't you partnering with cable providers? Why are the TV services so severely limited globally?

Microsoft, who is this product for? On the surface you seem to be approaching this device as a jack of all trades type of console. The problem is that the title of "jack of all trades" implies a level of competency in these services that is glaringly absent from your strategy. You lack vision. Period. Stop making excuses. Stop blaming the consumers.

Shut the fuck up, buckle the fuck down, figure out who you're targeting, and fix this.

/end rant

I want to put my dick in this post.

No, I want this post to put its dick in me.

 

[MrSpaM]

fix this.

/end rant

Possibly the best post I've seen about this whole mess since the reveal

+10 Internets

 

[Wolves Evolve]

I think the ultimate problem console gaming will have in regards to the digital future is that the very method of selling a console relies on retailers. The current model for console gaming has it so that the console itself and new games don't actually make the retailers any money. Instead, it is accessories and used games which make them money and just sell the console and new games to get them in the door. This is however not the model that is used for any other electronic device since manufacturers of hardware are generally not manufacturers of forms of media to use on said hardware with exception to Apple, whose model is to charge a premium price for a integrated hardware/software experience which retailers can easily made money off of. This is why the recent plethora of microconsoles and the Steam Machine intrigue me. They all seek to essentially answer what it means to be a video game console for an all digital age.

Many believe, and I agree with them, that for as broken and destined for destruction as the retail channels are in US, UK, Aus + NZ, Europe, there remains a mass market for whom large-scale and multi-gigabyte downloadable gaming has not happened and continues not to happen. That is, the all-digital question is one of market habit, not of technology or service.

Obviously both consoles are switching to digital, their storefronts tell us that, but by the time the next consoles appear, the landscape will be different. It is unlikely that game-specific stores will exist in their current form; but the mass market - the market that keeps consoles alive - will need a physical location.

I think we'll see each market and country respond differently but I doubt that Gamespot and so on will survive as they do now.

 

[RaikuHebi]

Many believe, and I agree with them, that for as broken and destined for destruction as the retail channels are in US, UK, Aus + NZ, Europe, there remains a mass market for whom large-scale and multi-gigabyte downloadable gaming has not happened and continues not to happen. That is, the all-digital question is one of market habit, not of technology or service.

Exactly. There are probably tons of people in the UK with fast enough internet to get games from PSN that will still be purchasing from stores because that's what they know.

 

[AHA-Lambda]

I've got no fucking clue. MS has collectively had its head up it's own ass for a while now. I want to critique this whole mess but frankly they've bungled this thing up so hard it's difficult to know where to start.

Albert, I know you read Gaf. You need to stop talking about this. Period. Full stop. No more. Shush.

Every time you or any other MS representative goes on the record to discuss the DRM policies you take an inherently anti consumer approach even if it's not your intent. Which at this point I'm going to assume it's your intent given the frequency with which you and your cohorts put this bungle on the consumer. You can't claim that consumers weren't ready for your vision of the future. We will never be ready for your vision of an all digital future because neither you nor anyone else at MS has never, not once, made it clear what exactly that vision is, or was, could be or will be.

Simply state that Microsoft misread the market. You operated in a vacuum under the assumption that your consumers wanted certain things that we didn't and now you're having to back track. That's fine. You guys made a mistake, it happens. It's time to reread your audience and try again. What you can't do is continue to allude to the fact that consumers weren't ready for your product. That's insulting, and it insinuates that you still have plans to fuck us over in the future. Consumers are naturally entitled. We have to be. We're paying large sums of cash, in this case a premium, for your product. We have certain expectations based on how you present that product and once that transaction is complete we're naturally entitled to complete ownership over that product. We also have expectations for your product based on competing products and services from other manufacturers. You do not operate within a vacuum and this relationship does not work in reverse. You are not entitled to my money.

The DRM strategy as we know it is beneficial to no one but Microsoft and its partners. This statement is true based on the information you have given us. You can claim that miscommunications and disorganization led to dissemination of inaccurate rumors, but the truth of the matter is that the only time you've detailed any consumer benefit was AFTER you shut the DRM down. We also had it on good insider authority that those claims regarding game sharing were complete bullshit and you're lying to us. All the "facts" you attempted to detail to consumers were completely contradictory during the period of time immediately following the initial announcement. Every further clarification only led to further confusion as your company continued to contradict itself. Repeatedly. These are not signs of miscommunications. These are signs of a critical lack of vision and fundamental misunderstanding of your target audience and it shows.

Right now Sony is assaulting you with precision strikes in the market that matters the most during launches, the core gamer audience. You need to buckle the fuck down and figure out what your product is, and who it's for. Right now I can't figure out who this product is for, or why anyone should want it. If it's for the hardcore gamer what are the benefits of paying for XBL over PSN+? You're entering a new generation and Sony is catching up significantly. Voice chat is no longer an appropriate answer. You've failed to clarify on the future of the Games With Gold promotion. At first it was temporary, now it's not? The offerings have been substandard when compared to PS+ over the period of time since it was first announced. Your product is no longer the preferred place to play multiplatform titles and you have virtually no first party resources to draw from. The last entry of your largest IP, halo, was not received well by it's audience and you've lost a chunk of your third party exclusive content over the past generation. As a consumer why should I believe that this won't happen again? Why should I, as a gamer, buy a Xbox One when judging by your track record you've nearly abandoned the 360 halfway through it's life and let a massive series like Mass Effect go multiplatform. It seems to me like this will probably happen again and most major titles I can just wait for.

Is this for the casual gamer? If so why aren't we seeing more kinect games? If so why is it the most expensive console on the market? Where is the content that's going to blow the casual market away? The original kinect was successful because it was a novel add on. A new way of interacting with a product you already had in your household. This is not the case for you any more. The original Wii took off because it was something entirely new, original, and extremely affordable. It was a novelty. This is also not the case for the Xbox One. The family/casual market, if there's much of one left, is going to Nintendo. They have the stronger family friendly IPs. You either need to focus on them or drop the kinect.

Is this a device for the mass market? Designed to integrate into television and media services? It can't be, once again it's the most expensive console no the market. It can't compete in price to something like the Apple TV, or even the Vita TV, a device that at least makes sense as a cheap complimentary purchase to a product a consumer will already own. If that's the case then why haven't we heard more about these television and film products? Where is the info on Remedy's new game that's supposedly blending video games and television entertainment? We know virtually nothing about how it plays, and we know virtually nothing about the television series. Are there other projects like that in the works? If it's designed to compliment a cable subscription why can't it function as a DVR? What benefit is there to a $500 black box that functions as little more than a glorified TV remote? Why aren't you partnering with cable providers? Why are the TV services so severely limited globally?

Microsoft, who is this product for? On the surface you seem to be approaching this device as a jack of all trades type of console. The problem is that the title of "jack of all trades" implies a level of competency in these services that is glaringly absent from your strategy. You lack vision. Period. Stop making excuses. Stop blaming the consumers.

Shut the fuck up, buckle the fuck down, figure out who you're targeting, and fix this.

/end rant

 

[MrSpaM]

Did any of these 'Till systems' they were producing for shops to sell second hand XBO game keys ever make it to stores? Or was the backlash from distributors also a factor in MS changing everything? Haven't heard much about this since the reveal so it'd be interesting to find out.

 

[Finalizer]

So no one else is gonna say it yet?

Guess it's gonna be me...

Does anyone else find this topic a bit more entertaining now in light of the recent news about Amazon's PSN store, and how they're apparently pursuing the ability to let others have their own digital Playstation storefronts?

 

[Ishan]

I've got no fucking clue. MS has collectively had its head up it's own ass for a while now. I want to critique this whole mess but frankly they've bungled this thing up so hard it's difficult to know where to start.

Albert, I know you read Gaf. You need to stop talking about this. Period. Full stop. No more. Shush.

Every time you or any other MS representative goes on the record to discuss the DRM policies you take an inherently anti consumer approach even if it's not your intent. Which at this point I'm going to assume it's your intent given the frequency with which you and your cohorts put this bungle on the consumer. You can't claim that consumers weren't ready for your vision of the future. We will never be ready for your vision of an all digital future because neither you nor anyone else at MS has never, not once, made it clear what exactly that vision is, or was, could be or will be.

Simply state that Microsoft misread the market. You operated in a vacuum under the assumption that your consumers wanted certain things that we didn't and now you're having to back track. That's fine. You guys made a mistake, it happens. It's time to reread your audience and try again. What you can't do is continue to allude to the fact that consumers weren't ready for your product. That's insulting, and it insinuates that you still have plans to fuck us over in the future. Consumers are naturally entitled. We have to be. We're paying large sums of cash, in this case a premium, for your product. We have certain expectations based on how you present that product and once that transaction is complete we're naturally entitled to complete ownership over that product. We also have expectations for your product based on competing products and services from other manufacturers. You do not operate within a vacuum and this relationship does not work in reverse. You are not entitled to my money.

The DRM strategy as we know it is beneficial to no one but Microsoft and its partners. This statement is true based on the information you have given us. You can claim that miscommunications and disorganization led to dissemination of inaccurate rumors, but the truth of the matter is that the only time you've detailed any consumer benefit was AFTER you shut the DRM down. We also had it on good insider authority that those claims regarding game sharing were complete bullshit and you're lying to us. All the "facts" you attempted to detail to consumers were completely contradictory during the period of time immediately following the initial announcement. Every further clarification only led to further confusion as your company continued to contradict itself. Repeatedly. These are not signs of miscommunications. These are signs of a critical lack of vision and fundamental misunderstanding of your target audience and it shows.

Right now Sony is assaulting you with precision strikes in the market that matters the most during launches, the core gamer audience. You need to buckle the fuck down and figure out what your product is, and who it's for. Right now I can't figure out who this product is for, or why anyone should want it. If it's for the hardcore gamer what are the benefits of paying for XBL over PSN+? You're entering a new generation and Sony is catching up significantly. Voice chat is no longer an appropriate answer. You've failed to clarify on the future of the Games With Gold promotion. At first it was temporary, now it's not? The offerings have been substandard when compared to PS+ over the period of time since it was first announced. Your product is no longer the preferred place to play multiplatform titles and you have virtually no first party resources to draw from. The last entry of your largest IP, halo, was not received well by it's audience and you've lost a chunk of your third party exclusive content over the past generation. As a consumer why should I believe that this won't happen again? Why should I, as a gamer, buy a Xbox One when judging by your track record you've nearly abandoned the 360 halfway through it's life and let a massive series like Mass Effect go multiplatform. It seems to me like this will probably happen again and most major titles I can just wait for.

Is this for the casual gamer? If so why aren't we seeing more kinect games? If so why is it the most expensive console on the market? Where is the content that's going to blow the casual market away? The original kinect was successful because it was a novel add on. A new way of interacting with a product you already had in your household. This is not the case for you any more. The original Wii took off because it was something entirely new, original, and extremely affordable. It was a novelty. This is also not the case for the Xbox One. The family/casual market, if there's much of one left, is going to Nintendo. They have the stronger family friendly IPs. You either need to focus on them or drop the kinect.

Is this a device for the mass market? Designed to integrate into television and media services? It can't be, once again it's the most expensive console no the market. It can't compete in price to something like the Apple TV, or even the Vita TV, a device that at least makes sense as a cheap complimentary purchase to a product a consumer will already own. If that's the case then why haven't we heard more about these television and film products? Where is the info on Remedy's new game that's supposedly blending video games and television entertainment? We know virtually nothing about how it plays, and we know virtually nothing about the television series. Are there other projects like that in the works? If it's designed to compliment a cable subscription why can't it function as a DVR? What benefit is there to a $500 black box that functions as little more than a glorified TV remote? Why aren't you partnering with cable providers? Why are the TV services so severely limited globally?

Microsoft, who is this product for? On the surface you seem to be approaching this device as a jack of all trades type of console. The problem is that the title of "jack of all trades" implies a level of competency in these services that is glaringly absent from your strategy. You lack vision. Period. Stop making excuses. Stop blaming the consumers.

Shut the fuck up, buckle the fuck down, figure out who you're targeting, and fix this.

/end rant

This and also compare to sony amazon psn initiative.

 

[StanTowers]

Put this rant in the archive and file it as Truthbomb #657.

 

[sphinx]

what does "ether" in the topic title mean??

 

[Froli]

I've got no fucking clue. MS has collectively had its head up it's own ass for a while now. I want to critique this whole mess but frankly they've bungled this thing up so hard it's difficult to know where to start.

Albert, I know you read Gaf. You need to stop talking about this. Period. Full stop. No more. Shush.

Every time you or any other MS representative goes on the record to discuss the DRM policies you take an inherently anti consumer approach even if it's not your intent. Which at this point I'm going to assume it's your intent given the frequency with which you and your cohorts put this bungle on the consumer. You can't claim that consumers weren't ready for your vision of the future. We will never be ready for your vision of an all digital future because neither you nor anyone else at MS has never, not once, made it clear what exactly that vision is, or was, could be or will be.

Simply state that Microsoft misread the market. You operated in a vacuum under the assumption that your consumers wanted certain things that we didn't and now you're having to back track. That's fine. You guys made a mistake, it happens. It's time to reread your audience and try again. What you can't do is continue to allude to the fact that consumers weren't ready for your product. That's insulting, and it insinuates that you still have plans to fuck us over in the future. Consumers are naturally entitled. We have to be. We're paying large sums of cash, in this case a premium, for your product. We have certain expectations based on how you present that product and once that transaction is complete we're naturally entitled to complete ownership over that product. We also have expectations for your product based on competing products and services from other manufacturers. You do not operate within a vacuum and this relationship does not work in reverse. You are not entitled to my money.

The DRM strategy as we know it is beneficial to no one but Microsoft and its partners. This statement is true based on the information you have given us. You can claim that miscommunications and disorganization led to dissemination of inaccurate rumors, but the truth of the matter is that the only time you've detailed any consumer benefit was AFTER you shut the DRM down. We also had it on good insider authority that those claims regarding game sharing were complete bullshit and you're lying to us. All the "facts" you attempted to detail to consumers were completely contradictory during the period of time immediately following the initial announcement. Every further clarification only led to further confusion as your company continued to contradict itself. Repeatedly. These are not signs of miscommunications. These are signs of a critical lack of vision and fundamental misunderstanding of your target audience and it shows.

Right now Sony is assaulting you with precision strikes in the market that matters the most during launches, the core gamer audience. You need to buckle the fuck down and figure out what your product is, and who it's for. Right now I can't figure out who this product is for, or why anyone should want it. If it's for the hardcore gamer what are the benefits of paying for XBL over PSN+? You're entering a new generation and Sony is catching up significantly. Voice chat is no longer an appropriate answer. You've failed to clarify on the future of the Games With Gold promotion. At first it was temporary, now it's not? The offerings have been substandard when compared to PS+ over the period of time since it was first announced. Your product is no longer the preferred place to play multiplatform titles and you have virtually no first party resources to draw from. The last entry of your largest IP, halo, was not received well by it's audience and you've lost a chunk of your third party exclusive content over the past generation. As a consumer why should I believe that this won't happen again? Why should I, as a gamer, buy a Xbox One when judging by your track record you've nearly abandoned the 360 halfway through it's life and let a massive series like Mass Effect go multiplatform. It seems to me like this will probably happen again and most major titles I can just wait for.

Is this for the casual gamer? If so why aren't we seeing more kinect games? If so why is it the most expensive console on the market? Where is the content that's going to blow the casual market away? The original kinect was successful because it was a novel add on. A new way of interacting with a product you already had in your household. This is not the case for you any more. The original Wii took off because it was something entirely new, original, and extremely affordable. It was a novelty. This is also not the case for the Xbox One. The family/casual market, if there's much of one left, is going to Nintendo. They have the stronger family friendly IPs. You either need to focus on them or drop the kinect.

Is this a device for the mass market? Designed to integrate into television and media services? It can't be, once again it's the most expensive console no the market. It can't compete in price to something like the Apple TV, or even the Vita TV, a device that at least makes sense as a cheap complimentary purchase to a product a consumer will already own. If that's the case then why haven't we heard more about these television and film products? Where is the info on Remedy's new game that's supposedly blending video games and television entertainment? We know virtually nothing about how it plays, and we know virtually nothing about the television series. Are there other projects like that in the works? If it's designed to compliment a cable subscription why can't it function as a DVR? What benefit is there to a $500 black box that functions as little more than a glorified TV remote? Why aren't you partnering with cable providers? Why are the TV services so severely limited globally?

Microsoft, who is this product for? On the surface you seem to be approaching this device as a jack of all trades type of console. The problem is that the title of "jack of all trades" implies a level of competency in these services that is glaringly absent from your strategy. You lack vision. Period. Stop making excuses. Stop blaming the consumers.

Shut the fuck up, buckle the fuck down, figure out who you're targeting, and fix this.

/end rant

This post should be stickied, if that is even possible lol. No wait, even for it's length.. this needs to have a Dramatic Reading.

 

[Mace Griffin]

Microsoft are so stupid. If they wanted to encourage digital all they had to do was leave physical media as it was before and sell digital content alongside it. Then price digital content more attractively and offer exclusive features such as family sharing for digital content only. That way everyone is happy and can purchase their preferred medium. Why they try to force things upon consumers is beyond me. Its just like the Windows 8 start menu debacle, again they could have implemented the new start screen while retaining the original start menu and giving consumers an option.

 

[swordfishtrombones]

what does "ether" in the topic title mean??

Shortly after Nas released the song, the word "ether" entered the hip hop lexicon as a slang expression synonymous with ruthlessness - meaning to harshly humiliate an opponent.

 

[JDSN]

This post should be stickied, if that is even possible lol. No wait, even for it's length.. this needs to have a Dramatic Reading.

By Patrick Stewart.

 

[SaucyJack]

I've got no fucking clue. MS has collectively had its head up it's own ass for a while now. I want to critique this whole mess but frankly they've bungled this thing up so hard it's difficult to know where to start.

Albert, I know you read Gaf. You need to stop talking about this. Period. Full stop. No more. Shush.

Every time you or any other MS representative goes on the record to discuss the DRM policies you take an inherently anti consumer approach even if it's not your intent. Which at this point I'm going to assume it's your intent given the frequency with which you and your cohorts put this bungle on the consumer. You can't claim that consumers weren't ready for your vision of the future. We will never be ready for your vision of an all digital future because neither you nor anyone else at MS has never, not once, made it clear what exactly that vision is, or was, could be or will be.

Simply state that Microsoft misread the market. You operated in a vacuum under the assumption that your consumers wanted certain things that we didn't and now you're having to back track. That's fine. You guys made a mistake, it happens. It's time to reread your audience and try again. What you can't do is continue to allude to the fact that consumers weren't ready for your product. That's insulting, and it insinuates that you still have plans to fuck us over in the future. Consumers are naturally entitled. We have to be. We're paying large sums of cash, in this case a premium, for your product. We have certain expectations based on how you present that product and once that transaction is complete we're naturally entitled to complete ownership over that product. We also have expectations for your product based on competing products and services from other manufacturers. You do not operate within a vacuum and this relationship does not work in reverse. You are not entitled to my money.

The DRM strategy as we know it is beneficial to no one but Microsoft and its partners. This statement is true based on the information you have given us. You can claim that miscommunications and disorganization led to dissemination of inaccurate rumors, but the truth of the matter is that the only time you've detailed any consumer benefit was AFTER you shut the DRM down. We also had it on good insider authority that those claims regarding game sharing were complete bullshit and you're lying to us. All the "facts" you attempted to detail to consumers were completely contradictory during the period of time immediately following the initial announcement. Every further clarification only led to further confusion as your company continued to contradict itself. Repeatedly. These are not signs of miscommunications. These are signs of a critical lack of vision and fundamental misunderstanding of your target audience and it shows.

Right now Sony is assaulting you with precision strikes in the market that matters the most during launches, the core gamer audience. You need to buckle the fuck down and figure out what your product is, and who it's for. Right now I can't figure out who this product is for, or why anyone should want it. If it's for the hardcore gamer what are the benefits of paying for XBL over PSN+? You're entering a new generation and Sony is catching up significantly. Voice chat is no longer an appropriate answer. You've failed to clarify on the future of the Games With Gold promotion. At first it was temporary, now it's not? The offerings have been substandard when compared to PS+ over the period of time since it was first announced. Your product is no longer the preferred place to play multiplatform titles and you have virtually no first party resources to draw from. The last entry of your largest IP, halo, was not received well by it's audience and you've lost a chunk of your third party exclusive content over the past generation. As a consumer why should I believe that this won't happen again? Why should I, as a gamer, buy a Xbox One when judging by your track record you've nearly abandoned the 360 halfway through it's life and let a massive series like Mass Effect go multiplatform. It seems to me like this will probably happen again and most major titles I can just wait for.

Is this for the casual gamer? If so why aren't we seeing more kinect games? If so why is it the most expensive console on the market? Where is the content that's going to blow the casual market away? The original kinect was successful because it was a novel add on. A new way of interacting with a product you already had in your household. This is not the case for you any more. The original Wii took off because it was something entirely new, original, and extremely affordable. It was a novelty. This is also not the case for the Xbox One. The family/casual market, if there's much of one left, is going to Nintendo. They have the stronger family friendly IPs. You either need to focus on them or drop the kinect.

Is this a device for the mass market? Designed to integrate into television and media services? It can't be, once again it's the most expensive console no the market. It can't compete in price to something like the Apple TV, or even the Vita TV, a device that at least makes sense as a cheap complimentary purchase to a product a consumer will already own. If that's the case then why haven't we heard more about these television and film products? Where is the info on Remedy's new game that's supposedly blending video games and television entertainment? We know virtually nothing about how it plays, and we know virtually nothing about the television series. Are there other projects like that in the works? If it's designed to compliment a cable subscription why can't it function as a DVR? What benefit is there to a $500 black box that functions as little more than a glorified TV remote? Why aren't you partnering with cable providers? Why are the TV services so severely limited globally?

Microsoft, who is this product for? On the surface you seem to be approaching this device as a jack of all trades type of console. The problem is that the title of "jack of all trades" implies a level of competency in these services that is glaringly absent from your strategy. You lack vision. Period. Stop making excuses. Stop blaming the consumers.

Shut the fuck up, buckle the fuck down, figure out who you're targeting, and fix this.

/end rant

Wow, superb rant.

Nail hit firmly on head :thumbsup:

 

[Game Guru]

Many believe, and I agree with them, that for as broken and destined for destruction as the retail channels are in US, UK, Aus + NZ, Europe, there remains a mass market for whom large-scale and multi-gigabyte downloadable gaming has not happened and continues not to happen. That is, the all-digital question is one of market habit, not of technology or service.

Obviously both consoles are switching to digital, their storefronts tell us that, but by the time the next consoles appear, the landscape will be different. It is unlikely that game-specific stores will exist in their current form; but the mass market - the market that keeps consoles alive - will need a physical location.

I think we'll see each market and country respond differently but I doubt that Gamespot and so on will survive as they do now.

I agree that multi-gigabyte downloadable gaming just isn't going to happen any time soon, but I don't think physical retail itself is needed. The future in regards to physical retail is getting your stuff shipped from online retailers like Amazon which have no physical stores but is able to ship items to users. I suppose stores like Walmart and the like will still exist, but mostly to get needed items quicker than they could be shipped. I do think the core market for any sort of media prefers physical over digital, and that includes gaming if the Xbox 180 is any indication. I do think it is less market habit and more technological and service limitations that prevent a mass adoption of high-end video gaming via digital though, the low-end of course being the mobile, indie, and smaller titles which are for the most part download only with few exceptions. At the very least, pricing and technology are what prevent me from adopting digital media completely in regards to my media purchases and I personally own tons of MP3s, ebooks, and digital games.