The engineer bases his argument on an assumption that is usually erroneous:
The price of a product is related to its cost.
This is a logical assumption, but almost always false. It is far more commonly true that the price of a product is dictated by what consumers are willing to pay. If the PS4 version of game X sells for $59.99, it is more than likely that the Xbox1 version will sell for the same price, because people will perceive both versions as having the same value and be willing to pay the same amount for them both.
What Valve does with Steam prices is something different. New releases still cost roughly the same as traditional DVD copies bought in stores. Bargains start to appear on titles once they reach an age where a lot of stores stop stocking them. It is true you can get heavily discounted games on Steam, but this is totally unrelated to the lack of a used-game market. Somebody simply realized that a) A title nobody is selling makes no money and b) gamers will spend money they wouldn't have otherwise if they think they're getting a deal. Put a and b together and you have a recipe for profit. This also eliminates demand for used games. Why buy a skeezy dog-chewed box when you can get a steam-download for the same price or lower?
Don't get me wrong. If MS builds a curated steam-style store for the Xbox it will undoubtedly be a great thing for many (although not all) gamers. However, lower prices on new titles will not be one of the benefits this move brings. This is really just a grab for dollars that currently go to the used market, and it will likely work.
Thing is that here in europe/sweden steam is always the most expensive choice sine must publishers equals 1 usd to 1 eur. So here the only sane reason is to wait until they have sales since then it is just expensive and not overly expensive.
"people will perceive both versions as having the same value and be willing to pay the same amount for them both."
If they can resell one game but not the other, they're not necessarily going to perceive them as being of the same value. If they use the money they get from reselling the PS4 game to buy more games, they're not only not going to be willing to pay the same for both, they won't be able (except for the segment of the population that is able to increase its total spending on games).
It's hard to make a comparison with Steam, because there is pretty much no used market for PC games, so necessarily the economics are going to be different.
Very good points. The ability for publishers to discount games on steam where they otherwise couldn't in physical retail markets is that they have just one place to set that price and distribute it.
MS by eliminating the used game market forces consumers to buy these older games in digital form where publishers can offer these sales. I don't know if that will make them any cheaper than if someone simply bought a used game from ebay. It certainly won't affect the price of new games.
What bothers me is the notion that these digital purchases could go away at the end of the XBox1 generation. Consoles notoriously aren't backwards compatible friendly. I'm fine with buying PC games digitally on steam as I know they'll work as long as whatever Windows version I have is still around. And I would wager Windows 7 will be supported much longer than the XBox1 will be the current generation.
The value of games on steam is very related to the used game market because there is no used game market on steam, but users still buy old games at used market prices. The difference now is that the money continues to flow to the publisher and not entities with no hand in creating the game.
The real misstep here is that Microsoft is still selling physical media.
Nobody (well, almost nobody) gets mad when they can't resell their iPhone games or mp3s or Kindle books; compare that to the outpouring of anger when a company puts limitations on used optical media games or CDs or books.
Humans are wired to see a physical item (disks, etc.) and think mine.
Humans are wired to see a physical item (disks, etc.) and think *mine.*
Well, yes, but you oversimplify. There is a long-established doctrine of first-sale in the US, and it's not just part of case law, it's part of the culture. The non-resaleability of Kindle books or anything else digital is still new to the popular mind, and carries with it a certain implicit devaluation.
Even though most people at least abstractly understand the non-resaleability of bits (whether due to the infinite duplicability of DRM-free media, or the practical inflexibility of DRM systems), a big reason they don't complain about iPhone apps or Steam games is likely the frequently low prices they pay.
A $60 game demands at least a bit of fungibility for most consumers. A $0.99 one doesn't, regardless of whether it came from a disc or an app store. If, as the supposed insider claims, XBO games can actually retail for half what a resale-friendly game would, then that offsets the implicit devaluation of non-resaleable media.
If Call of Duty 8 retails for $59.99 on the PS4 and $29.99 on the XBO, that suddenly makes the DRM a very appealing tradeoff. If they're both $59.99, Xbox is dead in the water.
I was a dev lead at xbox when they first implemented "Games on Demand" or direct purchase and digital download of full games. My team implemented the feature on xbox.com back in 2009 I think.
As I recall it, the main reason we didn't do a wholesale switch over to digital distribution was because that would have upset the retailers who sell games. We relied on these same retailers to sell our xbox consoles. We were afraid that if we took a way the game revenue they would stop selling xboxes. We thought it would be best to make the transition gradual. So we took the first step back in 2009. This appears to be another step.
OR I rarely pay more than $1 for a phone game, and get a lot more cynical when I'm forking out +$50 for something that often has less replay-ability to the $1 game...
And by mine you mean 'ours' right? because a huge issue being discussed here is people sharing games, its not a individual issue, its a community issue.
There's obviously that, good point. I also think we can't forget the price point.
I buy my iPhone games for $5 at most. Steam usually has a lot of promotions and discounts, so I get lots of games for under, say, 15 bucks. Physical media games are usually way above these prices.
Still selling physical discs is pretty important because broadband access in the US is still pretty dismal so if they went pure digital their market would be unnaturally limited by customer's ability to download games in reasonable times.
Online purchases would be great, now how about an ISP that sells me the bandwidth to do it at a reasonable price that isn't Comcast/Cox/Time Warner/At&t? There's a reason I buy physical media.
I'm wired to think that I'm the only one responsible of my games. I like to think that in 36 years we will still be able to play our games, like with an Atari 2600. Does I want to still be able to play iPhone games in 36 years? No. You could argue that Microsoft want that too but they have no control over that. They can go bankrupt or they could simply decide that the cost of the infrastructure is higher than the revenue (which will probably be $0 in 36 years because they will probably use a new architecture). Halo 2 is about 6 years old and they already shutdown the multiplayer servers.
Like in the pastebin, you can say it's the same for Steam and you would be right. However in 36 years, I will still have backups, or some competitors will still be in business (Amazon, GOG or any competitor) so I will always be able to find a way to buy it (or even download it on a website like http://www.myabandonware.com/ ).
Also when I buy a game, I always expect to be able to get at least the resell value on it, if needed. It's not possible on a digital market so when I buy it I expect it to cost less. Which is also not the case.
EDIT: Don't you love to be able to read books much older than you? Don't you would love to know that in 100 years, XboxOne game would still be playable?
I think the problem here is how important physical retailers are as partners in actually selling the console. You don't want to piss off Walmart/Best Buy/Game Stop too much or they might not stock your device.
Microsoft has always struck me as a company that makes some really cool technology, then tries to find a way to make it relevant to the rest of us. For them, it seems the consumer is an afterthought and the technology is key.
Windows 8 was an impressive attempt to merge mobile and desktop OSes so that mobile users are no longer second-class citizens and have access to everything desktop users do. The problem? Mobile needed fixing, not desktop. In the push for engineering parsimony, they made the desktop experience worse simply so that it could be shared with mobile.
Kinect is a wicked piece of tech. It's just seriously, seriously cool. But what does it do? How does Kinect make gaming better? Outside of that one boxing game, I just don't see it. It makes everything demonstrably worse, like QTEs that work as cinematic finishing moves for bosses in God of War, but are completely pointless in 95% of the games they're included in. Kinect has the same problem: it's a really cool solution in search of a problem.
Perhaps the best example of this is Clippy, where MS used Bayesian algos to analyze text and offer suggestions. Again, a really cool little bit of datamining/ML, in 1997, no less, and running on the computational equivalent of a potato. Clippy is a really cool program. But it was completely pointless. It solved a problem no one had in a way that pissed off everyone.
I am a Microsoft Engineer so take what I am about to say as gospel: There's no way to know when someone claims to be something on the internet that they are that thing unless the company itself corroborates it.
The pastebin was posted on 4chan... 4chan... And all of the information in it could have been gleaned from publicly available sources. We should at best discuss it like it is rumour, and much more realistically just ignore it as trolling.
PS - I am not a Microsoft Engineer, I was making a point.
Microsoft really did a terrible job at messaging on this. I'm even annoyed, and I don't play much, and everything I buy is digital download, not physical media, so the whole disc selling thing doesn't even affect me. Even so, it feels nasty. MS has basically said fuck you to gamers, without any justifiable reason.
Taking down Gamestop doesn't require anything but a better Gamestop replacement. This dev complains about how people dislike their new move, yet complain about Gamestop? Uh, this new move limits private sale by third parties. That's what's annoying.
The fact Xbox tosses ads in your face on every single home screen except settings is also extremely distasteful, and MS burned a lot of goodwill on that.
Comparing to Steam is nice, but MS's execution is yet to be seen. People I know with thousands of bucks into Steam don't love Steam. They are annoyed with the restrictions - but, it's just so easy (easier than pirating) that they tend not to care. Browsing and purchasing on the Xbox360 is such a PITA, so if the XB1 doesn't fix it, they have no hope of doing what Steam did.
The 24 hour thing is also retarded. It feels intrusive, and isn't necessary to prevent piracy. My guess is they'll probably "acquiesce" and move it to 3 days or a week - it was probably planned to spark outrage long before sales, so they can give in and ride the "see, MS isn't so bad" wave closer to launch.
> The fact Xbox tosses ads in your face on every single home screen except settings is also extremely distasteful, and MS burned a lot of goodwill on that.
This is the single biggest thing that puts a bad taste in my mouth from my Xbox. Am I a customer or a product? Companies should pick only one. If I pay money, I don't want to be sold.
Yeah, Microsoft really sucks at storytelling. All they had to say was something in the lines of...
"If you want to buy a disc, pay $59 for a game due to all non-digital crap the disc has to go through. And then do what you want with it. HOWEVER, if you download the game, it's like $29 (50% OFF!!!11), but then it's just yours, and yours alone, you can't sell or lend it - and we'd have to check every once in a while it's really you who's playing."
I wouldn't mind that at all since they'd be giving me a choice, and I'd gladly pay less, despite the 'lockdown'.
Dear Microsoft, all you have to do is ask your target audience what they think - you might be suprised.
He seems to be suggesting that Xbox One games will be cheaper because of the lack of used sales. I don't see what their economic incentive would be to lower the prices (at least to below prices for a similar PS4 game), usually if there is less competition in a market and demand stays constant the price goes up.
In the case of Steam , they have to be cheap because their competition is TPB which is the cheapest game store out there.
"Think about it, on steam you get a game for the true cost of the game, 5$-30$. On a console you have to pay for that PLUS any additional licenses for when you sell / trade / borrow / etc."
That's a neat theory, but if you listen to virtually any publisher or developer talk about used games and game pricing it is abundantly clear that they view $60 as the game price (and as far as they are concerned, you're getting a huge bargain), and used sales beyond that as virtually akin to theft. They absolutely do not view it from the angle of the game being worth $30 and the rest being money they're forced to charge to make up the losses.
On the PC with Steam the publishers are willing to drop the price to compete with piracy, but assuming the Xbox One is not cracked to the point of a Dreamcast, I can't imagine them ever allowing Steam-like prices.
AAA games are still full price on Steam. There is no discount because you can't sell your used copy. What makes him think that games would somehow be cheaper on Xbox1 after you eliminate the used market? They won't be. The savings are not getting passed on to the consumers.
"Some PS4 viral team made them all "U TOOK R DISCS" and they hiveminded."
I'm not sure how delusional you have to be to believe that the reason your customers hate your DRM is because your competitors had a "viral team" that persuaded them to be.
The amount of delusion necessary to create this massive of a failure is beyond comprehension:
- "Scratched discs" and my "little brother" messing with my games are two use cases I have never encountered in my entire gaming life. For those who have encountered those issues? Bummer! Life goes on. In fact, props to PS3 for using Blu-Ray, which has extra protection against scratches by design.
- How in the world is GameStop the enemy? Forget the War on Drugs -- this War on Trade-Ins is perhaps the most absurd thing I've ever heard. The fact that publishers, developers, etc. feel entitled to a cut of that $5 most people get for trade-ins says a lot about how up-their-own-asses this industry has become.
- I don't want Microsoft OWNING any part of my house, thank you very much.
- Any "savings" Microsoft will give customers for new games (which will never happen anyway) will be made up with the cost of XBox Live.
- The "phone home" model is shit. Absolute shit. Stop keeping tabs on me.
- Lack of indie dev access? How can a gaming system that's marketing itself as 'ahead of the curve' be so ridiculously out-of-touch with what's successful in the market?
- The ONLY TIME the 100% digital model works for me is when the convenience of information transfer outweighs the cost of the game itself. Steam is great because whenever I have to reinstall Windows, all of my games just automagically re-download. In iOS, I'm purchasing new devices (iPads, new iPhones, etc.) on an almost-yearly cycle. All I have to do is enter my credentials, and all of my apps and data are right there. Not too shabby considering most apps are $10 or less, not freaking $70!
Microsoft thought they had a dominant market position and tried to stretch a little. They miscalculated.
Sony were concerned they were heading towards irrelevance - they upped their game to win share back.
I'd say it was a perfectly efficient market - and then I remember we're talking about kids being able to swap games like I did in the 80s as if it's a revolution ... the boomers heading these companies right now should be ashamed of what they've created.
Did you read the link? Your post sounds like every other one discussing MS's strategy without taking into account anything the linked page said. I'm not saying it's true or that it'll succeed, but it doesn't describe MS trying to "stretch" at all.
The problem isn't that it's boomers heading these companies. It's that they're 1%'s who have either lost or never had the pressures that their customers are feeling.
Maybe Microsoft thought Sony would just follow their lead since there wasn't a DRM scheme that Sony didn't like or try (before).
This comparison to steam is a bit of a false equivocation. I can run Steam on a variety of hardware configurations, which I can buy from a variety of vendors. Steam is better not because the DRM system is different, but because it's hardware agnostic.
Once the XB1 lifecycle is over, I have no guarantee I will be able to play the games I bought. As far as I'm aware XB1 is not backwards compatible at all. Once my 360 dies, if I can't find another one in working condition, or XBL stops offering services for the 360, my 360 XBLA games are gone forever.
> Once the XB1 lifecycle is over, I have no guarantee I will be able to play the games I bought.
Sooner than that though, right? Weren't they shutting off Halo servers when new Halo games came out during the same console lifecycle?
Of course that is a problem you'll have with multiplayer on all the consoles I guess. Maybe gamers are okay with that. I would be bummed as hell if I couldn't play the occasional quake match anymore though.
My apologies if you're not particularly bothered by diction, but I believe you mean "false equivalence" rather than "false equivocation". Equivocation means "beating around the bush" or "refusing to give a straight answer".
All non-mathematical/non-logical/etc. equivocations are false if you're enough of a dick about it. The dude is trying to make a legitimate point about disc-based vs. cloud-based storage, and there's exactly one player in that area. Give him a freakin' break.
The comparison to Steam is false to begin with. PC gaming has NEVER been a trade with your friends (legally) culture. Console gaming has ALWAYS been a trade with your friends culture (legally). When was the last time you saw a used PC game store?
Second, there is no evidence that companies who's job is to maximize profit will have any incentive to lower their prices for disc-less games. For this, we CAN look at Steam (and other services). AAA titles are full retail when they are released. The price degrades over time, but the same thing happens with disc releases.
This is a one-sided win for Microsoft (and game publishers for XB1) and is yet another reason to avoid the XBox 1 like the plague. That is the market feedback that Microsoft should receive.
"If you want games cheaper than 59.99, you have to limit used games somehow."
Author thinks publishers will lower game prices to $39.99 since used games won't cut into their profits. Author clearly doesn't work at Microsoft nor in the game industry. Nor has a clear idea of how Capitalism or running a company works.
Facts: A Game that launches on all 3 platforms: Xbox 360 (disc based, allows used games), PS3 (disc based, allows used games), and Steam (digital DRM based, no used games) all launch at the SAME price. Despite Steam's DRM the PC version is NOT discounted. Publishers are not going to surrender extra income out of the "goodness of their hearts".
> Facts: A Game that launches on all 3 platforms: Xbox 360 (disc based, allows used games), PS3 (disc based, allows used games), and Steam (digital DRM based, no used games) all launch at the SAME price.
This is not the case in the EU. I also think this is bullshit for the US territory.
To be honest, the only thing that annoys me is the 24 hour check-in thing, and here's why...
On average I've moved house once a year for every year since I moved to London in 2007. There was one place I stayed in for 18 months, but everything else was 12 months. In all these moves except one I've had to wait 3-4 weeks (sometimes more) to get my broadband connected, so essentially for 1/13th of a year the only internet I have is through my mobile phone.
These 4 weeks a year are also the times when I get most of my single-player gaming done (I'm not saying I play hours of games every night, but for a couple of nights a week for a few weeks a year I'll settle down with a good RPG or similar).
The 24 hour check-in will make this impossible, thereby probably making me play less games overall (or I could just buy a PS4...).
I hate this phrase, "trying to own the living room."
We think people want living room devices, but really they just need a living room computer.
A few months ago I went this way. No overengineered media center, just a tower next to the HDTV. Full-sized wireless keyboard and mouse. High-DPI to read text.
The experience immediately killed the 10 foot interface for me. All the 10' UIs out there feel slow, clunky, hobbled when compared to "just use a computer from your couch."
I understand that people are trying to simplify the experience, like Apple did with mp3s. Maybe you don't need to simplify here, though, because people already know how to use computers, they just don't see them in other rooms.
They just need a little nudge, a little help to see that it doesn't mean tiny text and wires across the living room floor.
The colloquial naming will probably settle something like this:
2001 console: Xbox, Original Xbox
2005 console: Xbox 360, 360
2013 console: Xbox1, X-bone
You will probably hear "Xbox" referring to the 2013 console in casual speech, but hopefully semi-formal and formal speech, e.g. articles, will distinguish.
This guy is an awful writer. Even if I ignore that they don't know "its" from "it's", "then" from "than", this thing is hard to follow. Just an incoherent rant really, looks like it was written by a kid.
I thought the actual substance of what was said was pretty good, but I recognized the incorrect use of then/than and its it's as a possible signal for identifying the author, then again, it's possible they did this on purpose to make it harder to identify them. They were 100% consistent in never using than and never using its, which is interesting. They did misuse too/to once, but were not 100% consistent.
I like the option of selling my games and buying used games. If Microsoft makes my games less valuable to me by limiting my options then they should be cheaper. I've heard nothing alluding to this officially.
<rant>
>> Well, if you want the @#$@ing from Gamestop, go play PS4
Stop telling customers "take it or leave it". Tell them, "I'm sorry you can't do that", or "we've decided not to support X because Y". You keep telling us to go fuck off and buy a PS4, we might just do that.
Then you blame your half-assed approach on competitors (right after saying competition is good). You're Microsoft! King of anti-competitive practices. Why do you care what Target, Walmart, Gamestop, or Amazon think? If you wanted to build a Steam competitor, why didn't you build a Steam competitor? Why did you create a shitty Steam DRM system on top of physical media.
>> We want to own the living room.
Do consumers want you to? Every update to XBox 360 has made it worse.
- more ads on the landing page instead of instant access to recently used apps (e.g. hiding Netflix).
- the horrible decision to make subtitles the system default, then keep turning it back on (seems like every 2-3 weeks it forgets I don't like them)
Prediction: XB1 home screen will just be wall to wall ads with a tiny little "play game" thing in the corner 7 screens over. Every time I want to play a game, I will probably have to scroll by shitty music offerings, shitty game previews, shitty video offerings, etc.
>> You can turn it off tho, and turn the console like OFF off
I bet this will be obnoxious and tedious. Switch on the back? Inside a settings menu?
>> We basically made a huge cloud compute shit and made it free
Really?!? No more Live fee? Did I totally miss this? or by "free" do you mean for "for sale costing money on an ongoing basis for consumer, but free for publishers"?
>> If all you do is play games, and nothing else, PS4.
This is why we're pissed and you seem to have missed that. Xbox should be a game console first, and a media machine second. MS has said they've made a really awesome Tivo + Roku machine and it also plays games.
So yeah, that's why MS is getting flak. But the real issue is that no one at MS seems to understand that!
</rant>
[+] [-] beloch|12 years ago|reply
The price of a product is related to its cost.
This is a logical assumption, but almost always false. It is far more commonly true that the price of a product is dictated by what consumers are willing to pay. If the PS4 version of game X sells for $59.99, it is more than likely that the Xbox1 version will sell for the same price, because people will perceive both versions as having the same value and be willing to pay the same amount for them both.
What Valve does with Steam prices is something different. New releases still cost roughly the same as traditional DVD copies bought in stores. Bargains start to appear on titles once they reach an age where a lot of stores stop stocking them. It is true you can get heavily discounted games on Steam, but this is totally unrelated to the lack of a used-game market. Somebody simply realized that a) A title nobody is selling makes no money and b) gamers will spend money they wouldn't have otherwise if they think they're getting a deal. Put a and b together and you have a recipe for profit. This also eliminates demand for used games. Why buy a skeezy dog-chewed box when you can get a steam-download for the same price or lower?
Don't get me wrong. If MS builds a curated steam-style store for the Xbox it will undoubtedly be a great thing for many (although not all) gamers. However, lower prices on new titles will not be one of the benefits this move brings. This is really just a grab for dollars that currently go to the used market, and it will likely work.
[+] [-] Buzzzz|12 years ago|reply
//Anders
[+] [-] voyou|12 years ago|reply
If they can resell one game but not the other, they're not necessarily going to perceive them as being of the same value. If they use the money they get from reselling the PS4 game to buy more games, they're not only not going to be willing to pay the same for both, they won't be able (except for the segment of the population that is able to increase its total spending on games).
It's hard to make a comparison with Steam, because there is pretty much no used market for PC games, so necessarily the economics are going to be different.
[+] [-] kevdigital|12 years ago|reply
MS by eliminating the used game market forces consumers to buy these older games in digital form where publishers can offer these sales. I don't know if that will make them any cheaper than if someone simply bought a used game from ebay. It certainly won't affect the price of new games.
What bothers me is the notion that these digital purchases could go away at the end of the XBox1 generation. Consoles notoriously aren't backwards compatible friendly. I'm fine with buying PC games digitally on steam as I know they'll work as long as whatever Windows version I have is still around. And I would wager Windows 7 will be supported much longer than the XBox1 will be the current generation.
[+] [-] pyre|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pixie_|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] WalterSear|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nostromo|12 years ago|reply
Nobody (well, almost nobody) gets mad when they can't resell their iPhone games or mp3s or Kindle books; compare that to the outpouring of anger when a company puts limitations on used optical media games or CDs or books.
Humans are wired to see a physical item (disks, etc.) and think mine.
[+] [-] mortenjorck|12 years ago|reply
Even though most people at least abstractly understand the non-resaleability of bits (whether due to the infinite duplicability of DRM-free media, or the practical inflexibility of DRM systems), a big reason they don't complain about iPhone apps or Steam games is likely the frequently low prices they pay.
A $60 game demands at least a bit of fungibility for most consumers. A $0.99 one doesn't, regardless of whether it came from a disc or an app store. If, as the supposed insider claims, XBO games can actually retail for half what a resale-friendly game would, then that offsets the implicit devaluation of non-resaleable media.
If Call of Duty 8 retails for $59.99 on the PS4 and $29.99 on the XBO, that suddenly makes the DRM a very appealing tradeoff. If they're both $59.99, Xbox is dead in the water.
[+] [-] redms3|12 years ago|reply
As I recall it, the main reason we didn't do a wholesale switch over to digital distribution was because that would have upset the retailers who sell games. We relied on these same retailers to sell our xbox consoles. We were afraid that if we took a way the game revenue they would stop selling xboxes. We thought it would be best to make the transition gradual. So we took the first step back in 2009. This appears to be another step.
[+] [-] rjd|12 years ago|reply
And by mine you mean 'ours' right? because a huge issue being discussed here is people sharing games, its not a individual issue, its a community issue.
[+] [-] tedsanders|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chaostheory|12 years ago|reply
"Hey everyone $29.99 (or less) for release day games"
No one would be complaining about always-on DRM at that price. Sadly it's very unlikely since they are selling physical discs.
[+] [-] malvim|12 years ago|reply
I buy my iPhone games for $5 at most. Steam usually has a lot of promotions and discounts, so I get lots of games for under, say, 15 bucks. Physical media games are usually way above these prices.
[+] [-] rtkwe|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SourPatch|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dwild|12 years ago|reply
Like in the pastebin, you can say it's the same for Steam and you would be right. However in 36 years, I will still have backups, or some competitors will still be in business (Amazon, GOG or any competitor) so I will always be able to find a way to buy it (or even download it on a website like http://www.myabandonware.com/ ).
Also when I buy a game, I always expect to be able to get at least the resell value on it, if needed. It's not possible on a digital market so when I buy it I expect it to cost less. Which is also not the case.
EDIT: Don't you love to be able to read books much older than you? Don't you would love to know that in 100 years, XboxOne game would still be playable?
[+] [-] bigfrakkinghero|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] redthrowaway|12 years ago|reply
Windows 8 was an impressive attempt to merge mobile and desktop OSes so that mobile users are no longer second-class citizens and have access to everything desktop users do. The problem? Mobile needed fixing, not desktop. In the push for engineering parsimony, they made the desktop experience worse simply so that it could be shared with mobile.
Kinect is a wicked piece of tech. It's just seriously, seriously cool. But what does it do? How does Kinect make gaming better? Outside of that one boxing game, I just don't see it. It makes everything demonstrably worse, like QTEs that work as cinematic finishing moves for bosses in God of War, but are completely pointless in 95% of the games they're included in. Kinect has the same problem: it's a really cool solution in search of a problem.
Perhaps the best example of this is Clippy, where MS used Bayesian algos to analyze text and offer suggestions. Again, a really cool little bit of datamining/ML, in 1997, no less, and running on the computational equivalent of a potato. Clippy is a really cool program. But it was completely pointless. It solved a problem no one had in a way that pissed off everyone.
And really, that's Microsoft in a nutshell.
[+] [-] UnoriginalGuy|12 years ago|reply
The pastebin was posted on 4chan... 4chan... And all of the information in it could have been gleaned from publicly available sources. We should at best discuss it like it is rumour, and much more realistically just ignore it as trolling.
PS - I am not a Microsoft Engineer, I was making a point.
[+] [-] MichaelGG|12 years ago|reply
Taking down Gamestop doesn't require anything but a better Gamestop replacement. This dev complains about how people dislike their new move, yet complain about Gamestop? Uh, this new move limits private sale by third parties. That's what's annoying.
The fact Xbox tosses ads in your face on every single home screen except settings is also extremely distasteful, and MS burned a lot of goodwill on that.
Comparing to Steam is nice, but MS's execution is yet to be seen. People I know with thousands of bucks into Steam don't love Steam. They are annoyed with the restrictions - but, it's just so easy (easier than pirating) that they tend not to care. Browsing and purchasing on the Xbox360 is such a PITA, so if the XB1 doesn't fix it, they have no hope of doing what Steam did.
The 24 hour thing is also retarded. It feels intrusive, and isn't necessary to prevent piracy. My guess is they'll probably "acquiesce" and move it to 3 days or a week - it was probably planned to spark outrage long before sales, so they can give in and ride the "see, MS isn't so bad" wave closer to launch.
[+] [-] MiguelHudnandez|12 years ago|reply
This is the single biggest thing that puts a bad taste in my mouth from my Xbox. Am I a customer or a product? Companies should pick only one. If I pay money, I don't want to be sold.
[+] [-] cbhl|12 years ago|reply
I actually liked the ad for the Pizza Hut XBox app. I thought it was hilarious.
I think that if the ads were actually useful, and showed off products/services that I actually would buy, then it's perfectly fine to show ads there.
[+] [-] tzaman|12 years ago|reply
"If you want to buy a disc, pay $59 for a game due to all non-digital crap the disc has to go through. And then do what you want with it. HOWEVER, if you download the game, it's like $29 (50% OFF!!!11), but then it's just yours, and yours alone, you can't sell or lend it - and we'd have to check every once in a while it's really you who's playing."
I wouldn't mind that at all since they'd be giving me a choice, and I'd gladly pay less, despite the 'lockdown'.
Dear Microsoft, all you have to do is ask your target audience what they think - you might be suprised.
[+] [-] jiggy2011|12 years ago|reply
In the case of Steam , they have to be cheap because their competition is TPB which is the cheapest game store out there.
[+] [-] georgemcbay|12 years ago|reply
That's a neat theory, but if you listen to virtually any publisher or developer talk about used games and game pricing it is abundantly clear that they view $60 as the game price (and as far as they are concerned, you're getting a huge bargain), and used sales beyond that as virtually akin to theft. They absolutely do not view it from the angle of the game being worth $30 and the rest being money they're forced to charge to make up the losses.
On the PC with Steam the publishers are willing to drop the price to compete with piracy, but assuming the Xbox One is not cracked to the point of a Dreamcast, I can't imagine them ever allowing Steam-like prices.
[+] [-] socialist_coder|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] seldo|12 years ago|reply
I'm not sure how delusional you have to be to believe that the reason your customers hate your DRM is because your competitors had a "viral team" that persuaded them to be.
[+] [-] rmrfrmrf|12 years ago|reply
- "Scratched discs" and my "little brother" messing with my games are two use cases I have never encountered in my entire gaming life. For those who have encountered those issues? Bummer! Life goes on. In fact, props to PS3 for using Blu-Ray, which has extra protection against scratches by design.
- How in the world is GameStop the enemy? Forget the War on Drugs -- this War on Trade-Ins is perhaps the most absurd thing I've ever heard. The fact that publishers, developers, etc. feel entitled to a cut of that $5 most people get for trade-ins says a lot about how up-their-own-asses this industry has become.
- I don't want Microsoft OWNING any part of my house, thank you very much.
- Any "savings" Microsoft will give customers for new games (which will never happen anyway) will be made up with the cost of XBox Live.
- The "phone home" model is shit. Absolute shit. Stop keeping tabs on me.
- Lack of indie dev access? How can a gaming system that's marketing itself as 'ahead of the curve' be so ridiculously out-of-touch with what's successful in the market?
- The ONLY TIME the 100% digital model works for me is when the convenience of information transfer outweighs the cost of the game itself. Steam is great because whenever I have to reinstall Windows, all of my games just automagically re-download. In iOS, I'm purchasing new devices (iPads, new iPhones, etc.) on an almost-yearly cycle. All I have to do is enter my credentials, and all of my apps and data are right there. Not too shabby considering most apps are $10 or less, not freaking $70!
[+] [-] mtkd|12 years ago|reply
Sony were concerned they were heading towards irrelevance - they upped their game to win share back.
I'd say it was a perfectly efficient market - and then I remember we're talking about kids being able to swap games like I did in the 80s as if it's a revolution ... the boomers heading these companies right now should be ashamed of what they've created.
[+] [-] untog|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] r00fus|12 years ago|reply
Maybe Microsoft thought Sony would just follow their lead since there wasn't a DRM scheme that Sony didn't like or try (before).
[+] [-] zinkem|12 years ago|reply
Once the XB1 lifecycle is over, I have no guarantee I will be able to play the games I bought. As far as I'm aware XB1 is not backwards compatible at all. Once my 360 dies, if I can't find another one in working condition, or XBL stops offering services for the 360, my 360 XBLA games are gone forever.
[+] [-] jlgreco|12 years ago|reply
Sooner than that though, right? Weren't they shutting off Halo servers when new Halo games came out during the same console lifecycle?
Of course that is a problem you'll have with multiplayer on all the consoles I guess. Maybe gamers are okay with that. I would be bummed as hell if I couldn't play the occasional quake match anymore though.
[+] [-] wutbrodo|12 years ago|reply
http://mw4.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/equivocation
[+] [-] mtowle|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bitcrusher|12 years ago|reply
Second, there is no evidence that companies who's job is to maximize profit will have any incentive to lower their prices for disc-less games. For this, we CAN look at Steam (and other services). AAA titles are full retail when they are released. The price degrades over time, but the same thing happens with disc releases.
This is a one-sided win for Microsoft (and game publishers for XB1) and is yet another reason to avoid the XBox 1 like the plague. That is the market feedback that Microsoft should receive.
[+] [-] ChrisNorstrom|12 years ago|reply
"If you want games cheaper than 59.99, you have to limit used games somehow."
Author thinks publishers will lower game prices to $39.99 since used games won't cut into their profits. Author clearly doesn't work at Microsoft nor in the game industry. Nor has a clear idea of how Capitalism or running a company works.
Facts: A Game that launches on all 3 platforms: Xbox 360 (disc based, allows used games), PS3 (disc based, allows used games), and Steam (digital DRM based, no used games) all launch at the SAME price. Despite Steam's DRM the PC version is NOT discounted. Publishers are not going to surrender extra income out of the "goodness of their hearts".
[+] [-] _pmf_|12 years ago|reply
This is not the case in the EU. I also think this is bullshit for the US territory.
[+] [-] andrewingram|12 years ago|reply
On average I've moved house once a year for every year since I moved to London in 2007. There was one place I stayed in for 18 months, but everything else was 12 months. In all these moves except one I've had to wait 3-4 weeks (sometimes more) to get my broadband connected, so essentially for 1/13th of a year the only internet I have is through my mobile phone.
These 4 weeks a year are also the times when I get most of my single-player gaming done (I'm not saying I play hours of games every night, but for a couple of nights a week for a few weeks a year I'll settle down with a good RPG or similar).
The 24 hour check-in will make this impossible, thereby probably making me play less games overall (or I could just buy a PS4...).
[+] [-] brownbat|12 years ago|reply
We think people want living room devices, but really they just need a living room computer.
A few months ago I went this way. No overengineered media center, just a tower next to the HDTV. Full-sized wireless keyboard and mouse. High-DPI to read text.
The experience immediately killed the 10 foot interface for me. All the 10' UIs out there feel slow, clunky, hobbled when compared to "just use a computer from your couch."
I understand that people are trying to simplify the experience, like Apple did with mp3s. Maybe you don't need to simplify here, though, because people already know how to use computers, they just don't see them in other rooms.
They just need a little nudge, a little help to see that it doesn't mean tiny text and wires across the living room floor.
[+] [-] yk|12 years ago|reply
Why? I find it refreshingly honest. ( And I absolutely agree with the rest, next to my TV is also a desktop with a wireless keyboard. )
[+] [-] bluedino|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sliverstorm|12 years ago|reply
2001 console: Xbox, Original Xbox
2005 console: Xbox 360, 360
2013 console: Xbox1, X-bone
You will probably hear "Xbox" referring to the 2013 console in casual speech, but hopefully semi-formal and formal speech, e.g. articles, will distinguish.
[+] [-] scott_karana|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] asveikau|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jacobquick|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] codezero|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rome|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JOnAgain|12 years ago|reply
Then you blame your half-assed approach on competitors (right after saying competition is good). You're Microsoft! King of anti-competitive practices. Why do you care what Target, Walmart, Gamestop, or Amazon think? If you wanted to build a Steam competitor, why didn't you build a Steam competitor? Why did you create a shitty Steam DRM system on top of physical media.
>> We want to own the living room. Do consumers want you to? Every update to XBox 360 has made it worse. - more ads on the landing page instead of instant access to recently used apps (e.g. hiding Netflix). - the horrible decision to make subtitles the system default, then keep turning it back on (seems like every 2-3 weeks it forgets I don't like them)
Prediction: XB1 home screen will just be wall to wall ads with a tiny little "play game" thing in the corner 7 screens over. Every time I want to play a game, I will probably have to scroll by shitty music offerings, shitty game previews, shitty video offerings, etc.
>> You can turn it off tho, and turn the console like OFF off I bet this will be obnoxious and tedious. Switch on the back? Inside a settings menu?
>> We basically made a huge cloud compute shit and made it free Really?!? No more Live fee? Did I totally miss this? or by "free" do you mean for "for sale costing money on an ongoing basis for consumer, but free for publishers"?
>> If all you do is play games, and nothing else, PS4. This is why we're pissed and you seem to have missed that. Xbox should be a game console first, and a media machine second. MS has said they've made a really awesome Tivo + Roku machine and it also plays games.
So yeah, that's why MS is getting flak. But the real issue is that no one at MS seems to understand that! </rant>