Support NeoGAF

[Game Guru]

The difference between PS2 and the XB1 is that PS2 had all the third-party support by default, except for a few like Team Ninja, Bioware, and Bethesda who were exclusive to Xbox.

XB1 has to share most of its third-party support with a console that is the same price and more powerful, including Bioware, Bethesda, and likely Team Ninja which had been exclusive to the original Xbox.

 

[nomis]

WTF? No. PS2 wasn't being sold as a shitty XBox. XBox was being sold as a shitty PlayStation, in that it had no games, you had to pay for multiplayer, and it was approximately 72x the size of the PS2.

You've got everything all backwards. That's why your comparisons aren't making any sense. The XBone can't do well against the PS4 "just like the PS2 did well against the XBox" because Gen8 isn't anything like Gen6 in any way, shape, or form.

Ugggghhhh this is irrelevant and wasn't even related to the point I was trying to make. Great, I "had it backwards", I didn't spend more than two seconds deciding in which order I was going to phrase that sentence.

I know the Ps2 wasn't billed by Sony as an underpowered Xbox. But when it came to 3rd party multiplats, that's what it was to me just like the Xbox One is an underpowered Ps4 to me.

For the vast majority of it's lifespan, the Ps2 wasn't being primarily sold as one of the first affordable DVD players, it was being sold as a games machine>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<< that was kind of like an Xbox, but it was weaker.

 

[mrpeabody]

Consumers: YOUR ONLINE-ONLY DRM SYSTEM IS AWFUL, FIX IT!

MS: Ok, ok, you don't have to be online, you can buy used games.

Consumers: WE HATE THE KINECT, FIX IT!

MS: Well, it's part of our vision for the console, but...you're right, we'll get rid of it.

Consumers: CONSOLE COSTS TOO MUCH, FIX IT!

MS: Ok, we'll drop the price.

Consumers: ALL THIS TV GARBAGE SUCKS! GET RID OF THAT AND FOCUS ON GAMES!!

MS: You know what, you're right, from now on it's all games all the time.

Consumers: LOOK AT ALL THESE 180S!! MICROSOFT IS A LYING FAILURE MACHINE! XBONE SUCKS PS4 FOREVER

.

 

[Nanashrew]

It's simple.

It was built half media box with Kinect and half console. MS even shamelessly announced right before their 180 that Kinect is integral to the XB1 experience and couldn't be experienced properly without it.

So they drop Kinect and are now just trying to sell it as a 'powerful' games console, because there sure as hell isn't any noteworthy Kinect software to play on it even if you were still interested in that.

So when you have half the design philosophy dropped from the machine, for all intents and purposes, what you have left feels like a half-measure. A games machine that wasn't designed to be one 100% from the start. Somethings missing now. It offers a similar package to its rival but its weaker from a processing POV. There is a legacy for why that is in the design of the thing. Somethings missing. Why's it so big for a games console? Some functionality or need that was there before is gone now.

It all feels rather...half-baked.

I think I know what it is that it's missing. I think it's now missing an identity and there's no vision currently that will help it gain a new identity any time soon. Maybe later but definitely not right now. It's currently in a weird state that they created themselves by lying through their own teeth. It is weaker and MS looks weaker by their constant shifts in visions and 180s.

They really should have never even attempted what they even tried to do. They could have found other means without the terrible stuff they wanted to impose, but what could have been will never be because they still keep lying to you and me. I have no trust in them.

 

[Raist]

But when it came to 3rd party multiplats, that's what it was to me just like the Xbox One is an underpowered Ps4 to me.

PS2 had like a gazillion exclusives. 3rd party multiplats were the odd ones out, compared to the current of previous gens.

.

That's quite the revisionist history here.

 

[Guerrilla]

Well wasn't one of the last episode about EA saying sorry but not changing anything? And sorry not meaning shit since it's easy for companies to do?

And this episode is about changing not being enough since they are not saying sorry? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?

I still love you though, Jim...

 

[Hoo-doo]

.

Yes, this surely is an honest and unbiased summary of Microsoft's actions with the Xbox One.

Come on, son.

 

[bishoptl]

Well wasn't one of the last episode about EA saying sorry but not changing anything? And sorry not meaning shit since it's easy for companies to do?

And this episode is about changing not being enough since they are not saying sorry? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?

I still love you though, Jim...

whynotbothgirl.gif

 

[mocoworm]

Layoffs and moreso the Xbox original programming winding down.

My understanding is that the layoffs are nothing to do with XBOX , they are from NOKIA division.

 

[Raist]

whynotbothgirl.gif

Now you're just being greedy.

 

[Xando]

My understanding is that the layoffs are nothing to do with XBOX , they are from NOKIA division.

Not all layoffs are from Nokia but most of them.
They closed their Xbox entertainment studios and Xbox marketing for Europe,Africa and Middle East is rumored (confirmed?) to have 75% of their staff cut.

 

[Tommy DJ]

Well wasn't one of the last episode about EA saying sorry but not changing anything? And sorry not meaning shit since it's easy for companies to do?

And this episode is about changing not being enough since they are not saying sorry? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?

I still love you though, Jim...

His recent videos have generally been about gamer's lack of self-respect and backbone when it comes to expectations. I think what he's been saying for a while has been fair: if publishers implement then remove anti-consumer ineffectual bullshit, the gamers shouldn't be thankful since its things that shouldn't have been implemented at all. From what I can remember, his EA video was about the never-ending cycle of perpetration and apology that continues because gamers have short memories and have no self-respect.

This video is basically a continuation of this. Microsoft tried to pull off so much shit before they got, presumably, slaughtered by the PS4 in pre-orders. He's saying that gamers should have more respect for themselves and not applaud Microsoft's attempts to sweep everything under the rug with their rapid 180s and image rebranding by blaming everything on Don Mattrick; additionally, those who bought into Microsoft's vision have been sold a lie as none of the original vision for the Xbox One exists anymore.

 

[MrAndySchneider]

It's their fault for implementing the features in the first place. They should be punished for attempting to enforce their anti-consumer policies in the beginning.

I don't see their policies as anti-consumer. Sure, they couldn't have done a worse job communicating their choices. But even GAF is filled with comments that lament the loss of the original vision.

I currently own Forza 5 as my only disc based game, the rest is purely digital. And I rarely play it, because it's a hassle to dig out the disc for just one quick lap on the Ring.

In the original vision, I wouldn't need the disc to play.

Then there is the matter with pricing on digital purchases. You can find great deals for games out there, but then you're still stuck with the disc.

In the original vision, you'd be able to buy a physical game, and just use the digital license. You'd just skip the download by inserting the disc.

But you'd be stuck with your purchases, right? You wouldn't be able to trade your games! Wrong - you'd just have to "deregister" your game/license. It's unclear if you could do it on your own, granted, but it wouldn't be a hassle to sell your games in a Gamestop etc.

But if you don't want to deregister? What if you would just lend the game to a friend? Well, in the original vision (also like today), you'd just go over to your friends place and sign in, and you can both play. Or, not unreasonable to think of, your close friend would be listed as a family member, with complete access to you complete digital library (which, again, would've included your whole PHYSICAL library).

I struggle hard to find anything anti-consumer in this.

There's one problem, though. One caveat. People could just buy a disc, install the game, play the game without the disc and give the physical game to another person, who'd also just play the game without the disc, and so on. So you would NEED a mechanism in place to check if you actually do own the license for the game, or if the same license is in use by several systems at once. Therefore, you'd need some kind of 24h license check with XBL. And this is why there was this "always on" requirement. And me, personally, I don't see anything wrong with that.

But the internet, including GAF, cried havoc and thus this really forward thinking way of handling game licenses was discarded and reverted back to the way things were back in 2005. And thus I'm still stuck switching discs for this crappy game I only have in physical form. Sucks.

 

[p3tran]

Well wasn't one of the last episode about EA saying sorry but not changing anything? And sorry not meaning shit since it's easy for companies to do?

And this episode is about changing not being enough since they are not saying sorry? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?

I still love you though, Jim...

you gotta do what you gotta do in this business of game-related show.



about the subject, the biggest loss for microsoft in my eyes -as I have said again- is that they demolished what they had build for 12 years or so.
their first two consoles were very powerful consoles, not only against consoles but also against rigs of their time. they build a very good and strong precedent in my eyes.
and while I dont agree or care for the comparison to ps4 like its the end of the high-end line or something, truth is that both machines are underpowered compared to a gaming rig.

now, I dont know and I dont really care to know the reasons they went this way.
maybe they thought they can capture the slightly indifferent crowd which is bigger than the core. maybe they wanted a cheaper and more safe solution. as I said I dont care.
I think that in a couple of years it will be very difficult for a console game to have such a strong impact like it did previous generations. and while i'm enjoying my xbone and my ps4 right now, I'll make sure to let them both know with my wallet where I think they did wrong, in due time.


edit:
@MrAndySchneider
since your post is directly above mine, i read it, and i disagree!
if you are too bored to put the game disc in the drive (like you 've been doing since ti or atari 2600), then leave it inside the freaking drive.
its your only disc game anyway, right?

saying that because you are too bored to get a disc, all consumers must lose their rights to do whtever they want with their games, and even saying that those nefarious (aka cloudy) statements about how things could work in the future regarding the use of your property as an even solution, I find this not serious enough to be posted as an argument at all.

it was profit maximization for them (and loss for you) the drive behind this, and not their care for you not to get ...tired for reaching to grab a disc. and there's not a second way about it.

 

[jem0208]

I don't see their policies as anti-consumer. Sure, they couldn't have done a worse job communicating their choices. But even GAF is filled with comments that lament the loss of the original vision.

I currently own Forza 5 as my only disc based game, the rest is purely digital. And I rarely play it, because it's a hassle to dig out the disc for just one quick lap on the Ring.

In the original vision, I wouldn't need the disc to play.

Then there is the matter with pricing on digital purchases. You can find great deals for games out there, but then you're still stuck with the disc.

In the original vision, you'd be able to buy a physical game, and just use the digital license. You'd just skip the download by inserting the disc.

But you'd be stuck with your purchases, right? You wouldn't be able to trade your games! Wrong - you'd just have to "deregister" your game/license. It's unclear if you could do it on your own, granted, but it wouldn't be a hassle to sell your games in a Gamestop etc.

But if you don't want to deregister? What if you would just lend the game to a friend? Well, in the original vision (also like today), you'd just go over to your friends place and sign in, and you can both play. Or, not unreasonable to think of, your close friend would be listed as a family member, with complete access to you complete digital library (which, again, would've included your whole PHYSICAL library).

I struggle hard to find anything anti-consumer in this.

There's one problem, though. One caveat. People could just buy a disc, install the game, play the game without the disc and give the physical game to another person, who'd also just play the game without the disc, and so on. So you would NEED a mechanism in place to check if you actually do own the license for the game, or if the same license is in use by several systems at once. Therefore, you'd need some kind of 24h license check with XBL. And this is why there was this "always on" requirement. And me, personally, I don't see anything wrong with that.

But the internet, including GAF, cried havoc and thus this really forward thinking way of handling game licenses was discarded and reverted back to the way things were back in 2005. And thus I'm still stuck switching discs for this crappy game I only have in physical form. Sucks.

This is a massively unpopular opinion on Gaf but I agree. I'm always online, I don't buy used games. The positives of this system massively outweigh the negatives. I'm very happy with the console how it is currently but I don't think the policies were inherently anti consumer.

It was a digital system however the console consumer base is still rooted in physical. It's. Shame because I would have liked to see what the system would have been like in its original vision.

 

[Mullah88]

I don't see their policies as anti-consumer. Sure, they couldn't have done a worse job communicating their choices. But even GAF is filled with comments that lament the loss of the original vision.

I currently own Forza 5 as my only disc based game, the rest is purely digital. And I rarely play it, because it's a hassle to dig out the disc for just one quick lap on the Ring.

In the original vision, I wouldn't need the disc to play.

Then there is the matter with pricing on digital purchases. You can find great deals for games out there, but then you're still stuck with the disc.

In the original vision, you'd be able to buy a physical game, and just use the digital license. You'd just skip the download by inserting the disc.

But you'd be stuck with your purchases, right? You wouldn't be able to trade your games! Wrong - you'd just have to "deregister" your game/license. It's unclear if you could do it on your own, granted, but it wouldn't be a hassle to sell your games in a Gamestop etc.

But if you don't want to deregister? What if you would just lend the game to a friend? Well, in the original vision (also like today), you'd just go over to your friends place and sign in, and you can both play. Or, not unreasonable to think of, your close friend would be listed as a family member, with complete access to you complete digital library (which, again, would've included your whole PHYSICAL library).

I struggle hard to find anything anti-consumer in this.

There's one problem, though. One caveat. People could just buy a disc, install the game, play the game without the disc and give the physical game to another person, who'd also just play the game without the disc, and so on. So you would NEED a mechanism in place to check if you actually do own the license for the game, or if the same license is in use by several systems at once. Therefore, you'd need some kind of 24h license check with XBL. And this is why there was this "always on" requirement. And me, personally, I don't see anything wrong with that.

But the internet, including GAF, cried havoc and thus this really forward thinking way of handling game licenses was discarded and reverted back to the way things were back in 2005. And thus I'm still stuck switching discs for this crappy game I only have in physical form. Sucks.

If forza 5 is your only disc based game, why not just leave it inside the console?

 

[Zok310]

We all don't like being treated like shit. A few months ago people here in NY began realizing that ConED have been pretty much double charging people for their electricity. If there was a rival company a lot of people would have told con ed to shove it.

Now con ed is not MS but the point is you treat people like shit and if those people have a choice you might never be able to sell anything to them again.
Even after making 180's the media is still giving MS a hard time. Looking back at it MS pretty much lied about everything xBox one, and I mean everything, so I can understand why the media and gamers find it hard to give MS $400 for the xbone even after the changes.

There are a few companies out there that I would never give my money to any more. Doesn't not matter how much better their product is, if you take my money, then turn around and shit all over me you will never get a dime from me again.

MS had North America by the balls with the 360, easily the best console of the 7th gen. Then they got greedy and stupid, totally screwed themselves, I don't know what they were thinking.

 

[Abdiel]

I don't see their policies as anti-consumer. Sure, they couldn't have done a worse job communicating their choices. But even GAF is filled with comments that lament the loss of the original vision.

I currently own Forza 5 as my only disc based game, the rest is purely digital. And I rarely play it, because it's a hassle to dig out the disc for just one quick lap on the Ring.

In the original vision, I wouldn't need the disc to play.

Then there is the matter with pricing on digital purchases. You can find great deals for games out there, but then you're still stuck with the disc.

In the original vision, you'd be able to buy a physical game, and just use the digital license. You'd just skip the download by inserting the disc.

But you'd be stuck with your purchases, right? You wouldn't be able to trade your games! Wrong - you'd just have to "deregister" your game/license. It's unclear if you could do it on your own, granted, but it wouldn't be a hassle to sell your games in a Gamestop etc.

But if you don't want to deregister? What if you would just lend the game to a friend? Well, in the original vision (also like today), you'd just go over to your friends place and sign in, and you can both play. Or, not unreasonable to think of, your close friend would be listed as a family member, with complete access to you complete digital library (which, again, would've included your whole PHYSICAL library).

I struggle hard to find anything anti-consumer in this.

There's one problem, though. One caveat. People could just buy a disc, install the game, play the game without the disc and give the physical game to another person, who'd also just play the game without the disc, and so on. So you would NEED a mechanism in place to check if you actually do own the license for the game, or if the same license is in use by several systems at once. Therefore, you'd need some kind of 24h license check with XBL. And this is why there was this "always on" requirement. And me, personally, I don't see anything wrong with that.

But the internet, including GAF, cried havoc and thus this really forward thinking way of handling game licenses was discarded and reverted back to the way things were back in 2005. And thus I'm still stuck switching discs for this crappy game I only have in physical form. Sucks.

Talk about rose-tinted glasses.

I'm not sure if you're deliberately revising the actual progression of information we were given at the time, or if you don't realize it. When we had such marvelous quotes as "If you can't get a connection, we have a system for you. The Xbox 360." Or how if you wanted to lend a game to someone, you could do so once, and you'd remove the game from your own library, permanently? What if you couldn't go to there house to sign in? Or any of the other situations that make it amazingly impractical. I don't like having to switch games either, but the details of what they were trying to pull put all the gains on the corporate side, trying to mask it with convenience. Acting like GAF was over-exaggerating the outcry against those policies is BS. If you were in favor of it, well, great, but don't act like it would have had zero impact on people, let alone most customers who would have been otherwise interested.

 

[Duster]

I don't see their policies as anti-consumer.
But you'd be stuck with your purchases, right? You wouldn't be able to trade your games! Wrong - you'd just have to "deregister" your game/license. It's unclear if you could do it on your own, granted, but it wouldn't be a hassle to sell your games in a Gamestop etc.

...I struggle hard to find anything anti-consumer in this.

Your consumer rights give you the freedom to resell the physical products you buy as you see fit.
Microsoft wanted to limit those consumer rights by limiting who you could sell to.
Therefore what they wanted to do was anti-consumer.

You clearly don't have an issue with that which is your personal choice but others do and the law (at least in some countries?) definitely does.

Well wasn't one of the last episode about EA saying sorry but not changing anything? And sorry not meaning shit since it's easy for companies to do?

And this episode is about changing not being enough since they are not saying sorry? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?

I still love you though, Jim...

Eh... sort of.

It was more EA don't mean their apologies as they carry on doing their shady practices regardless of what say, it's in that context the word "sorry" means nothing.

Microsoft actually make changes and correct their mistakes but never apologise for making them in the first place, he doesn't see that as praiseworthy behaviour and thinks in that context the word "sorry" would make a big difference..

 

[Jobbs]

is anyone else really curious to know what would have happened if XB1 stayed firm on all of their original plans and not changed anything?

I mean, I think it's probably that they'd have been beaten, but at least we'd have an actual battle of ideas in the marketplace.

 

[Steroyd]

There's one problem, though. One caveat. People could just buy a disc, install the game, play the game without the disc and give the physical game to another person, who'd also just play the game without the disc, and so on. So you would NEED a mechanism in place to check if you actually do own the license for the game, or if the same license is in use by several systems at once. Therefore, you'd need some kind of 24h license check with XBL. And this is why there was this "always on" requirement. And me, personally, I don't see anything wrong with that.

But the internet, including GAF, cried havoc and thus this really forward thinking way of handling game licenses was discarded and reverted back to the way things were back in 2005. And thus I'm still stuck switching discs for this crappy game I only have in physical form. Sucks.

Whoa whoa WHOA!!

MS's way was not forward thinking in the slightest it was actually a step backwards particularly the 24h check, there's PC disc based software where you can install to multiple systems before the disc tells you to stop, no 24 hour check in needed at all, PSN allowed you to share digital content among other console's and you can play them offline forever unless it's Capcom, systems have already been in place where DRM of a kind has been accepted and Xbox One's original method was not it, it was because it was intrusive and not flexible considering multiple circumstances that it was panned near across the board.

 

[ProfessorMoran]

Not all layoffs are from Nokia but most of them.
They closed their Xbox entertainment studios and Xbox marketing for Europe,Africa and Middle East is rumored (confirmed?) to have 75% of their staff cut.

Are they hiring people back or are they just conceding Europe?

 

[Corleth the Fey]

I don't see their policies as anti-consumer. Sure, they couldn't have done a worse job communicating their choices. But even GAF is filled with comments that lament the loss of the original vision.

I currently own Forza 5 as my only disc based game, the rest is purely digital. And I rarely play it, because it's a hassle to dig out the disc for just one quick lap on the Ring.

In the original vision, I wouldn't need the disc to play.

Then there is the matter with pricing on digital purchases. You can find great deals for games out there, but then you're still stuck with the disc.

In the original vision, you'd be able to buy a physical game, and just use the digital license. You'd just skip the download by inserting the disc.

But you'd be stuck with your purchases, right? You wouldn't be able to trade your games! Wrong - you'd just have to "deregister" your game/license. It's unclear if you could do it on your own, granted, but it wouldn't be a hassle to sell your games in a Gamestop etc.

But if you don't want to deregister? What if you would just lend the game to a friend? Well, in the original vision (also like today), you'd just go over to your friends place and sign in, and you can both play. Or, not unreasonable to think of, your close friend would be listed as a family member, with complete access to you complete digital library (which, again, would've included your whole PHYSICAL library).

I struggle hard to find anything anti-consumer in this.

There's one problem, though. One caveat. People could just buy a disc, install the game, play the game without the disc and give the physical game to another person, who'd also just play the game without the disc, and so on. So you would NEED a mechanism in place to check if you actually do own the license for the game, or if the same license is in use by several systems at once. Therefore, you'd need some kind of 24h license check with XBL. And this is why there was this "always on" requirement. And me, personally, I don't see anything wrong with that.

But the internet, including GAF, cried havoc and thus this really forward thinking way of handling game licenses was discarded and reverted back to the way things were back in 2005. And thus I'm still stuck switching discs for this crappy game I only have in physical form. Sucks.

Unfortunately for you Microsoft were never able to prove that any of their preported innovations would have worked because they 180ed it all.

It's wonderful to believe that it was GAF moaning that got Microsoft to change their minds, but it wasn't. Microsoft needed Sony to jump in with them to make it work, but they didn't. Consumer mindshare then proved to lie with Sony - Microsoft had no choice but to back down.

And here's the rub - I reckon Microsoft were secretly happy about this, because their 'great plan' was just that a plan and was looking increasingly unworkable in reality. Most of the lost features that people like you decry, can be implemented now but Microsoft chooses not to. Ever wondered why?

 

[Xando]

Are they hiring people back or are they just conceding Europe?

Well the staff from Xbox marketing EMA is "allowed" to apply for the remaining 25% of the jobs left. Otherwise with Xbox UK having 10% of their jobs cut i dont think they will start hiring a lot of staff in the near future.

 

[0ptimusPayne]

I'm so glad they had a bullshit plan originally, because it forced them to change the new and even old policies. No more paywall for basic shit like Netflix, hulu, etc. games with gold is finally on par with PS+, like it always should've been. Deals with gold is a great opportunity to pick up titles digitally. MS was forced to bend at the will of the consumer, and it has humbled them in many ways. Overall I'm happy with the change, and glad I picked up an X1 after the suits nearly destroyed the damn console before release...

 

[0ptimusPayne]

If forza 5 is your only disc based game, why not just leave it inside the console?

.

 

[Banderdash]

Jim creeps me out... so I haven't watched it.
Does he offer suggestions on how they can fix things, or this just an exercise in stirring up the populace?

 

[Omnistalgic]

Yeah, I personally ignore just about everything related to Xbox since the start of the gen...The updates, the interviews, all of it just seems like hogwash now since EVERYTHING the console represented has gotten a face-lift. I'm just interested in getting it for cheap one day now for the exclusives.

Still, I don't really care anymore about all the 180 either at this point. They tried to do something, it failed, the hardcore community has already shown how pissed they are, but that's not who the bulk of consumers are anyway.

 

[TitusGroan]

While I think there's certainly plenty to discuss about the implications of Microsoft's original plans for the Xbone, I also think they've changed the system enough (before launch and after) to warrant a slightly less pathetically hyperbolic title than "A lying failure machine". That's not consumer advocacy, that's just diving headfirst into console warrior tribalism.

The original Xbone was controversial, and a shitty proposition for most gamers. The Xbone we have now isn't the original. Every controversial statement or position Microsoft originally made, they later went back on. The only way you can truly, truly be bitter about that is if you resent the idea of Microsoft deciding to refocus on making a games console first and foremost. Yeah, they changed their tune from the original 'vision'. Guess what? Corporations are made up of groups of people who come and go. Corporate messages change all the time based on which people are taking the reigns and when. The people running Xbox now are not the people running it a year or two ago. The direction they want to go in is different from what Mattrick wanted, and is a more pro-gaming direction. That doesn't show anything other than that a) new leadership means new decisions being made, and b) the current leadership are more willing to listen to the gaming community than the last lot. None of that is a bad thing.

If you want an example of how company direction can change: I remember when the Escapist focused solely on written in-depth articles about niche gaming subjects. Now, it focuses nearly all its efforts on more general 'geek videos' covering games, films and other assorted nerdorobilia, with gaming editorial and articles having taken a backseat. Oh look, a site went from focusing exclusively on gamers to focusing more on video content to appeal to a wider audience. The fucking irony...

The Xbone as it stands now is a decent enough console. It may not offer the same value proposition to a gamer as the PS4 (as reflected by sales), but it has its own line up of great looking exclusives, and Phil Spencer has done a good job of turning the ship around and showing that he wants to focus on the gaming side.It's a viable console on the market, and one that gamers should feel no guilt about buying if they so want. Anyone still bitter about this needs to accept that Microsoft made all the changes that were asked of them, and that the people in charge of Xbox now are not the people in charge when it was first revealed. They made their changes, they offloaded the people who made the original design for the console, they've scaled back focus on television and redoubled their efforts to focus on games.

Only the gaming community could take a company actively changing its policies and putting a renewed focus on gaming as a negative. If consoles were designed by a non-moving corporate entity that makes then changes decisions on a capricious whim, then perhaps there would be a point. But that's not the case. People designed the Xbone, then when that didn't provide successful, Microsoft got other people to take over the Xbone, and in doing so they brought a new direction. There is no corporate will or design ethos more complicated than that.

 

[scytherage]

Watching this, I'm thinking, do they really need to apologize? They're selling a product, they made changes----i think, more than an apology, at least they did something about it. It's not like they already took your money from you when they announced all those horrible DRM plans of theirs. Consumers still had a decision to make on whether to buy it or not, and the damage has already been done. An apology right now isn't going to help their bottom line; I think it will just hurt them PR wise, knowing how news gets interpreted and reinterpreted over and over as it cascades down. Doing something about it (which they did), I think, is sufficient.

I don't think they need to embarrass themselves further by putting more attention towards their mistakes; probably the thinking over at Redmond is that they want everyone to forget E3 2013 entirely, and 'apologizing' is just going to remind everyone and keep all the bad press coming.

I feel this video is just a bit of attention grabbing on Jim's part; he's saying a lot but it's kind of an issue that's pretty much over by this point.

 

[MrAndySchneider]

If forza 5 is your only disc based game, why not just leave it inside the console?

Because I also use the system to watch DVDs and Blu-Rays, and I don't play this particular game this often. Besides, having the Forza disc in the drive makes an annoying sound, even more than when I leave a movie in it. Pretty much the most annoying thing about my Xbox One, actually.

Talk about rose-tinted glasses.

I'm not sure if you're deliberately revising the actual progression of information we were given at the time, or if you don't realize it. When we had such marvelous quotes as "If you can't get a connection, we have a system for you. The Xbox 360." Or how if you wanted to lend a game to someone, you could do so once, and you'd remove the game from your own library, permanently? What if you couldn't go to there house to sign in? Or any of the other situations that make it amazingly impractical. I don't like having to switch games either, but the details of what they were trying to pull put all the gains on the corporate side, trying to mask it with convenience. Acting like GAF was over-exaggerating the outcry against those policies is BS. If you were in favor of it, well, great, but don't act like it would have had zero impact on people, let alone most customers who would have been otherwise interested.

You do have some valid points. And I agree, the progression of information (actually a nice expression for this!) lead to some conclusions where a customer outcry was necessary. But I do not see this as malicious, anti-customer intent, but as very poorly handled corporate communication.

Obviously the "If you can't get a connection, we have a system for you. The Xbox 360."-line was arrogant bullshit and deserved to be chastised. But in most cases, the internet seemed like to be on an anti-MS witchhunt, while the benefits of the system (which I think are immense) were overlooked.

And yes, you are right. This system came with some concessions. And I still strongly believe it would've been worth it.

I see your points, though, and respect your opinion. It just isn't a black and white situation.

 

[DeviantBoi]

I don't think that Microsoft's 180s were in response to the online shit storm that ensued after the reveal.

They were in response to the pre-order numbers.

And people were asking for a cheaper, Kinect-less bundle since the day the price was announced. Is the new price a response to what people asked for?

No, they responded to the sales numbers.

We can say all that we want. We can rage on NeoGAF, on Twitter, on Tumblr, Facebook, etc. It means shit to Microsoft.

They only respond to sales numbers.

 

[Novel Mike]

Because I also use the system to watch DVDs and Blu-Rays, and I don't play this particular game this often. Besides, having the Forza disc in the drive makes an annoying sound, even more than when I leave a movie in it. Pretty much the most annoying thing about my Xbox One, actually.



You do have some valid points. And I agree, the progression of information (actually a nice expression for this!) lead to some conclusions where a customer outcry was necessary. But I do not see this as malicious, anti-customer intent, but as very poorly handled corporate communication.

Obviously the "If you can't get a connection, we have a system for you. The Xbox 360."-line was arrogant bullshit and deserved to be chastised. But in most cases, the internet seemed like to be on an anti-MS witchhunt, while the benefits of the system (which I think are immense) were overlooked.

And yes, you are right. This system came with some concessions. And I still strongly believe it would've been worth it.

I see your points, though, and respect your opinion. It just isn't a black and white situation.

Like you said a lot of the problems seem to have been miscommunication... however that directly made everyone think they really didn't have any idea on how it was all going to work, if they could have detailed ANYTHING they originally announced it would be one thing but there were reports that at first you'd need to always be online then it was online every 3 or 4 hours for the check in and then they finally clarified it as a 24 hour check in, which still rightly pissed people off and I personally know a lot of people in the military who loved the 360 who felt like Microsoft was literally saying a giant FU to our service members with this choice.

They also never detailed anything else including the game sharing, the only confirmation we ever got was that there would be a way to sell your game or give a game to a friend... once, and then you wouldn't be able to do it again, they never explained how it would work who whom it would work with.

They talked about the family plan but nothing was ever detailed I herd rumors that like you said above that there would be a way to just share those games I purchase with a lot of other people... but then I also herd that the game sharing would only be 1 hour trials and then after that you wouldn't be able to play the game unless you purchased it for yourself. Again, those were rumors Microsoft never came out and explained anything so we can only guess how it actually was going to work.

But yes the original Xbox One vision was very anti consumer, the practice alone that you had to connect online once a day even for single player games is absolutely insane. Only around 50% of 360's sold ever actually connected to Xbox live, not only does that limit the market they could sell the system to but it also limits where they could sell it, many places in the US let alone in other countries don't have stable internet and the idea this thing would have to connect to the internet just to work is still completely silly to me. Then you've got the whole idea of selling a 'license' of a game for physical media, saying that if I'm buying a physical copy of a game I'm not actually owning a game, I'm buying a license to play the game. This is directly anti consumer because it takes away our rights as consumers to own things we pay for.

Honestly a lot of the hate is just from the #dealwithit guy too but I think its all rightly deserved, which in the end is Jim's point. They deserve the hate they get because of the BS they tried to force on us (also forcing things like those mentioned throughout this topic, is also anti-consumer) and despite what some fans of Microsoft and others are doing they should not be jumping at chance to praise Microsoft for its decisions when these decisions have mostly been lies to begin with.

 

[Into]

They should apologize to the people internally in the company that likely warned them of all these moves. I very much doubt everyone at Microsoft was in complete unison that the vision for XB1 was the right one. The gaming journalists for the most part failed to warn them, they just regurgitated MS own PR and treated it all with gloves. Yes-men are generally useless.

They are now paying for it, whatever mind share they had in NA and UK is gone. The trajectory and trends have been set, it will take something monumental to happen to change that.

The consumer has options and as seen by sales numbers across the world, they are exercising them. Which is what led to the 180s in the first place, and despite all the 180s they are still exercising those options (see latest NPD)

If you told this forum 2-3 years ago that we would be looking at a Halo release to nudge the next Xbox ahead of the next PS in North America in sales at least for a month, you would have gotten laughed out of these forums. Not a single poster would take your side and present that as a realistic scenario

And yet, here we are. No need for apologies for me personally, since they are paying heavily for their mistakes.

 

[Abdiel]

You do have some valid points. And I agree, the progression of information (actually a nice expression for this!) lead to some conclusions where a customer outcry was necessary. But I do not see this as malicious, anti-customer intent, but as very poorly handled corporate communication.

Obviously the "If you can't get a connection, we have a system for you. The Xbox 360."-line was arrogant bullshit and deserved to be chastised. But in most cases, the internet seemed like to be on an anti-MS witchhunt, while the benefits of the system (which I think are immense) were overlooked.

And yes, you are right. This system came with some concessions. And I still strongly believe it would've been worth it.

I see your points, though, and respect your opinion. It just isn't a black and white situation.

I really don't think it's fair to say the internet was on a witch hunt. We had rumors and speculation for months before the actual announcement, and during that point, people were already saying, no, we're not interested in that. We don't want to lose our freedom of control over our property. And when they still announced it that way, it served to solidify the pushback against it. What we saw was a games media that was largely downplaying the drm and other choices, but that sort of thing only serves to incense people. Things like telling angry Joe it wasn't just a switch to flip, things like that felt disrespectful to the consumer base.

While you may have seen tremendous benefit in the stated plans, what it comes down to is that it wasn't a plan that clicked with the world base of buyers, and they spoke out. Instead of telling us we just weren't ready and insulting out intelligence, they should have attempted to properly communicate, listening before the announcement to the rumbles of concern, to make sure they were clear. And even then, they seemed to contradict themselves at every turn. Different execs would make statements and create even more concern and confusion. So I am glad they've made the system more palatable to consumers, but they definitely did plenty of failure in terms of showing, communicating, and in the end, selling the vision they had in mind. That blame is with them. Not consumers for rightly demanding answers and action.

 

[jay23]

Watching this, I'm thinking, do they really need to apologize? They're selling a product, they made changes----i think, more than an apology, at least they did something about it. It's not like they already took your money from you when they announced all those horrible DRM plans of theirs. Consumers still had a decision to make on whether to buy it or not, and the damage has already been done. An apology right now isn't going to help their bottom line; I think it will just hurt them PR wise, knowing how news gets interpreted and reinterpreted over and over as it cascades down. Doing something about it (which they did), I think, is sufficient.

I don't think they need to embarrass themselves further by putting more attention towards their mistakes; probably the thinking over at Redmond is that they want everyone to forget E3 2013 entirely, and 'apologizing' is just going to remind everyone and keep all the bad press coming.

I feel this video is just a bit of attention grabbing on Jim's part; he's saying a lot but it's kind of an issue that's pretty much over by this point.

MS had a lot of bad news this week, so you knew this was coming. Everyone is gonna pile on for some views and clicks.

 

[jelly]

The need for an apology is based more on wanting confirmation it won't happen again down the line. A lack of trust. Can we say Microsoft won't revert to type as soon as things turn their way again. People are wary of that and there needs to be a fair amount of good times with Xbox One before that feeling goes away and that might not be enough. If you consistently pull the rug away people aren't going to sit on it.

Original Xbox - Killed early understandably, XBL turned off.
Xbox 360 - RROD, Kinect focus, limited IP cycles from mid gen.
Xbox One - Need we say more.

Some very good times among that and you could easily make lists for other consoles but there is a trend over a short time which isn't good for a brand that doesn't exactly excel around the world. Have people had enough ?

 

[hooijdonk17]

Microsoft have managed to warm me to consoles and sour me from them in the span of last three generations, and this Jimquisition sums up my feelings 100% accurately.

 

[Dremark]

I'll also stop purchasing Sony products, then (OtherOS turnaround, Driveclub plans changing, poor Vita support, Lik-Sang).

There were tons of people who claimed to boycott Sony over Others turnaround and Lik-Sang. Are you saying it was wrong for them to do that?

Anyway in this case these are things that the console launched with and influenced people's purchasing decisions. It's stuff that they should have been honest about and changed before the console launch (like they did give with the Drm).

People dropped cash down expecting this programming, expecting Kincaid to be a core part of the Xbone that couldn't be removed and I personally feel that anyone who did or dropped an extra $100 on the console for something they didn't want or won't end up using like they thought they would has every place to be pissed.

But on the other hand everyone else which is likely to be a majority is getting a better console out of it. I'm not too hot on getting an Xbone (I don't like the controller and it lost one of the two exclusives I wanted), but when it gets the games to justify it's cost I'll have no issue buying it as they fixed most of the issues I had with it.

 

[SmokedMeat]

My understanding is that the layoffs are nothing to do with XBOX , they are from NOKIA division.

A large chunk but not all.

 

[nssdigitalchumps]

Okay, Microsoft's crimes are more recent (Nintendo's are more... perpetual). But that doesn't mean that the others are in any way innocent, here. So it's a matter of judgement, on when you percieve that a given system is the system you wish to purchase. And I'm perfectly content to appraise any such thing in the new context of any changes without the information being obfuscated by past plans.

Microsoft's 'crimes' are the most recent, but this isn't the first time they've screwed over the consumer -- and I'm just talking the Xbox division.

Remember that 54.2% failure rate with their systems that went on for three years during the 360 days? They were forced via the court to make good with the consumers. They knew they had a problem with the system architecture, yet they kept producing systems that were going to eventually fail in a short amount of time without much care.

Not a company I would completely want to trust or get in bed with even once.

 

[DWinn7]

Microsoft's 'crimes' are the most recent, but this isn't the first time they've screwed over the consumer -- and I'm just talking the Xbox division.

Remember that 54.2% failure rate with their systems that went on for three years during the 360 days? They were forced via the court to make good with the consumers. They knew they had a problem with the system architecture, yet they kept producing systems that were going to eventually fail in a short amount of time without much care.

Not a company I would completely want to trust or get in bed with even once.

Dat 54.2% failure rate. I went through 3-4 360s back in the day. Smh...

People seem to forget so easily and crown MS for things they should've been doing in the first place. lol

 

[Novel Mike]

Microsoft's 'crimes' are the most recent, but this isn't the first time they've screwed over the consumer -- and I'm just talking the Xbox division.

Remember that 54.2% failure rate with their systems that went on for three years during the 360 days? They were forced via the court to make good with the consumers. They knew they had a problem with the system architecture, yet they kept producing systems that were going to eventually fail in a short amount of time without much care.

Not a company I would completely want to trust or get in bed with even once.

I'd say by now the failure rate is much much higher, I have yet to see more then a handful of original model 360's not break or RRod. They should have been forced to recall the damn things.

 

[hooijdonk17]

I'd say by now the failure rate is much much higher, I have yet to see more then a handful of original model 360's not break or RRod. They should have been forced to recall the damn things.

I still use my Xenon XBOX 360.. Granted, it has seen RROD repairs (from a third party) once, but has been rock solid ever since.

 

[Neuromancer]

I currently own Forza 5 as my only disc based game, the rest is purely digital. And I rarely play it, because it's a hassle to dig out the disc for just one quick lap on the Ring.

In the original vision, I wouldn't need the disc to play.

I'm sorry, that sounds awful. Why don't you sell the disc and buy the digital version?

is anyone else really curious to know what would have happened if XB1 stayed firm on all of their original plans and not changed anything?

I mean, I think it's probably that they'd have been beaten, but at least we'd have an actual battle of ideas in the marketplace.

It would have tanked worse than the Gizmondo.

 

[BigDug13]

Well wasn't one of the last episode about EA saying sorry but not changing anything? And sorry not meaning shit since it's easy for companies to do?

And this episode is about changing not being enough since they are not saying sorry? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?

I still love you though, Jim...

I thought it was about sorry not meaning shit because they don't actually change the offensive behavior that caused them to have to say "sorry". It's like a bully punching you in the arm over and over and saying "sorry" between each punch. Doesn't mean much when they keep punching. That's not what's happened here I hope. It's not like MS is going to 180 their 180's. At least not on this console.

 

[Percy]

I'd say by now the failure rate is much much higher, I have yet to see more then a handful of original model 360's not break or RRod. They should have been forced to recall the damn things.

Indeed, much like they had to do with the power cables on launch model OG Xbox units due to them being a fire hazard.

Those early 360s were unacceptably poorly made.

 

[W.S.]

All in on the Xbox One pony though, aren't ya?

Yes I am interested in the games they have to offer. What exactly are you fishing for here?

 

[Maxim726X]

He basically summarized why I will never buy the console, nor support any future attempt that this company makes as far as this industry is concerned.

Don't worry, Jim. We haven't forgotten.

 

[Dehnus]

This should be in the OP, because a lot of people are going to do kneejerk drive by posting without watching the video with a title like this.

I agree with these points, by the way.

First of all I don't care that much.
Second I rather read text than watch videos, I can do the former at my own leisure awhile the latter I need to concentrate and sit down hearing some person rant on.
Third, if those were his points he should have said that, but the title of the video is clearly to goat Xbox Fanboys into rage and PS Fanboys into schadenfreude.
You can say "Watch the video!" all you want but it doesn't take away from a rather clickbaitesque headline that sugest a whole different thing than what people say the video is supposedly about.

Outside of that, I couldn't care. Even if the Video was just a rant about the Xbox One being a failure and a machine that is terrible in all forms. What I do care about if a title is not matching up with a video, and people forcing me to see something I do not wish to see rather than giving me a written version of the same rant.