Eurogamer: Microsoft defends NUads (Kinect enabled ads on Xbox dashboard)
- Thread starter Neuromancer
- Start date
Beelzeboss
Member
I don't see the big deal. You aren't paying to access the front page you're paying to play games online. Most of the ads are gaming related like new games and sales anyway.
So until I see something like party invites brought to you by pizza hut I'm just gonna keep ignoring the ads
So until I see something like party invites brought to you by pizza hut I'm just gonna keep ignoring the ads
kneePat said:
No one is saying that buying Gold account isn't a choice - no one forces you to do so after all. The point is, if you're not paying for Gold account, you loose access to the content of the game you bought for 60$; and nowadays most games consist of short sp campaign + various mp modes. So the choice is either you're paying for Gold, or you can't fully play the game you paid for.
Equus Bellator Apex
Junior Member
Paco said:
DangerousDave
Member
surly said:
I couldn't care less about what people pay or don't pay. Is not like I could see the ads that appear in your TV, when you turn on your 360. But, you know what? They appear in my screen also when I turn my 360.
Is not that the ads will go out from my TV and kill me like the girl of The Ring. Is not even very annoying. But this a discussion forum and I think that Live, being the only gaming online service that requires a fee, shouldn't be also the only gaming online service that has ads (or, at least, non-gaming ads). Unless they can give proofs that the cost of their online service (their Live service, not the Kinect marketing campaigns or the CoD DLC exclusivity) is much greater than the money that they already get with fees. In the end, is punishing twice the user for something that, even if it's the best online service on console, is not something so marvelous that requires 60 each month, and ads.
GTP_Daverytimes
Member
fernoca said:
I think he meant per year.
Agent X
Member
TheOddOne said:
I don't think most people here are complaining about "more" ads, they're complaining that the ads shouldn't be present on a paid service in the first place. No other major online gaming service asks $60 a year and pipes in ads. That's my beef. Sure, this isn't the only online gaming service with ads, but it is the only one that serves up ads and still requires a subscription fee (for peer-to-peer gaming).
What pays for the service, the subscription fees or the ads? If the service was able to survive for several years without ads, then why aren't the ads now defraying the cost of the service on the consumer side? On the contrary, they actually went in the opposite direction and increased the cost of the service!
Strictly from a consumer perspective, how does the inclusion of ads measurably benefit you as the consumer when the service was previously capable of operating without the ads at a lower cost to the user?
TheOddOne said:
No, but I said that the defense is almost entirely based on system allegiance rather than "approving" the practice. You say that nobody is defending the ads. Thank you for supporting my point.
If people want to pay for the service, because it's on their preferred system and they have no other choice if they want to play games online, then that's acceptable. That isn't "fanboyism", that isn't "being an ignorant fool", that's reality. However, people defending that they're paying for peer-to-peer gaming in contrast to numerous free services...then continuing to defend the increased cost of subscription fees on that service...then defending that they've introduced ads along with the increased fees...that is worrying.
You say that you "support that people are outraged that it might become more in the future"...but where do you draw the line? It's the slippery slope effect. They're weaning their users to accept "a little bit more" here, "a little bit more" there, and now some of you are accepting increased user fees in addition to ads. Maybe in your heart you want to protest this turn of events, but publicly saying "it's no big deal" and continuing to pay the fee means that you're actively accepting it.
dragonelite
Member
NullPointer said:
Not sure about that for a lot of people.
My little brother hates cod but he always buys it just to play with his friend and talk in a party chat if you took party chat away he would never touch my 360 again.
i think the biggest ill of the feature bereft psn is that it somehow validates every mental gymnast who sees an opening to work features like party chat and twitter into their attempts to argue live as a value proposition.
psn is limp and free. xbl is obnoxious and expensive. they are both terrible ways to play games online.
psn is limp and free. xbl is obnoxious and expensive. they are both terrible ways to play games online.
It's not whether Live itself is profitable that matters. It is whether Microsoft's console business is profitable, and it isn't. They're the only company of the three that are in the red overall (their gaming business I mean), and they are still in the red for this generation. The idea of separating the service from the console is silly from a business sense when the console is sold at a loss and the Live service and ads are part of the revenue stream that contribute to recouping that loss. The cost of Live has only gone up if you pay monthly in the UK, which has always been the most expensive way to pay.Agent X said:
The service hasn't gone up for me, as I mentioned, but I have bought things directly because they're advertised on the dashboard, so there has been some benefit to me. People post up advertisements all the time on this forum - $100 off a PS3 at Amazon. $100 off Kinect + 360 at Best Buy. Check out these games on sale on Steam. Not only are people choosing to post up this info, they are getting thanked for advertising. The non-gaming ads I simply ignore, but I would rather they were not there.Agent X said:
I'm not paying more. There have been ads on the 360 dashboard from the day I bought it and connected it to Live. This thread isn't about ads appearing on the 360 dashboard for the first time. It's about interactivity being added to some existing ads. I'm not paying just for peer to peer gaming. I am paying for a more fully featured service than the other consoles offer. Would you say that the Wii's online service is as good as PSN? They're both just "peer to peer gaming" right? Yeah, exactly. That argument is bollocks.Agent X said:
No increased fees here. No extra ads. Just interactivity being added to existing ads for Kinect users. I do not own Kinect. If your argument is solely about ads on a paid for service, then you're several years too late with it and it's been done to death over and over again. This thread is about interactivity being added to adverts that have been on the 360 dashboard for a long time.Agent X said:
Tylahedras
Banned
We're not talking volumetrically more ads here we're talking ads that are either A) More meaningful for you. Or B) Better integrated into your experience.
An ad for a product you hate is a bad ad, it wastes your time and their money. An ad for a product that you have some interest in is more likely to keep you watching / interacting as well as potentially cause a purchase.
They have no interest in making you hate them.
If the ad is interfacing with you in a negative way it will harm both your experience, Microsoft's brand and it will cost the company who's ad is being placed money.
So again, bad interfacing sometimes happens when new things are introduced, such as pop ups on websites, but they abate once they realize that they don't have the desired impact.
There may be some growing pains here, but in the long run there is an incentive to both them and consumers for them to get it right. And hey if you don't like it, there will always be ways to play games without these ads, just don't buy a Kinect. (In which case it's harmed the MS brand)
An ad for a product you hate is a bad ad, it wastes your time and their money. An ad for a product that you have some interest in is more likely to keep you watching / interacting as well as potentially cause a purchase.
They have no interest in making you hate them.
If the ad is interfacing with you in a negative way it will harm both your experience, Microsoft's brand and it will cost the company who's ad is being placed money.
So again, bad interfacing sometimes happens when new things are introduced, such as pop ups on websites, but they abate once they realize that they don't have the desired impact.
There may be some growing pains here, but in the long run there is an incentive to both them and consumers for them to get it right. And hey if you don't like it, there will always be ways to play games without these ads, just don't buy a Kinect. (In which case it's harmed the MS brand)
Agent X
Member
surly said:
Well, I'm not sure that Xbox users should be "excited" about this interactivity, as the investment in the development of the ads could have been used elsewhere to improve the end user's experience in more meaningful ways.
But hey, let's discuss what interactive ads bring to the table. Here's a scenario that I initially mentioned in a joking manner, but after some thought I'm curious how this would be handled in real life.
Suppose someone saw an ad he liked, and wanted to send a message about it to his Twitter buddies. According to Microsoft's video presentation, the user could say "Xbox Tweet" and the system would tweet it.
Let's take it a step further now, and assume this user only had Xbox Live Silver, which normally doesn't permit access to Twitter (that's only available to Xbox Live Gold subscribers). What would Xbox Live do in this situation?
A. Would the system reject the tweet request on the grounds that he only has an unpaid Silver account?
or
B. Would it make an exception here, and allow the tweet to be processed, solely because it's related to advertising?
I believe this scenario highlights a few flaws in the Xbox Live system, particularly with regard to fencing off certain features (like Twitter access) which are available for free on virtually every major computer, game console, and mobile device on the market today.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
surly said:
I suspect most people don't count the free month you get when you create a gamertag as 'being a gold member'.
The service is also radically different now than it was at launch.
surly said:
You can easily check your uploads by creating a silver account and playing a singleplayer game.
If you aren't content sharing, what the hell ARE you uploading?
surly said:
And whatever topic that was (feel free to link) I'm sure I said 'my bad, Im not a gold subscriber' or equivalent.
surly said:
Or on competing services, a web browser.
surly said:
You seem to think that hosting demos is a massive cost to MS to host demos for games they want to sell to you, therefore justifying a subscription charge and advertising of non-gaming related products.
Most other digital distribution systems (PSN, WiiWare, Steam, Gamersgate, Direct2Drive, Impulse, et al) however do not seem to be required to do this to stay healthy and sell their product.
Funny that.
surly said:
No, not really.
It implies that hosting demos which help sell something through a service where the provider makes a cut of all sales is not a big onus upon them.
surly said:
Fine, I used the free month I had signing up a gamertag, a couple of 48 hour cards (which do not allow you to use any of the gold benefits you have listed above) and another free month when my 360 RRODed.
I don't think most people would call that 'being a gold subsciber'.
Well, MS's user data matrics of "[n]% gold subscribers!" probably do.
surly said:
It was widely reported at the time, but if you choose to believe that Xbox Live didn't use Segas existing online infrastructure, despite their close commercial ties at the time and half of the launch titles being made by Sega, or that it is impossible to use the same infrastructure for two consoles concurrently (for example an Xbox allowing people to play Halo 2 online at the same time as an Xbox 360 is allowing people to play Quake 4 online) then that's your prerogative.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
surly said:
That's not because their busioness model is unprofitable.
It's because they literally threw money at the Xbox so that it could enter the market as a competitor to Sony.
EDIT: I meant to edit this into post above rather than double post :|
Also, Gold doesn't get demo's "7 days earlier", Silver gets them 7 days later. That's not an advantage for you, it's a disadvantage to those who aren't subscribed.
Live has some strong points, at least compared to the competition, but I think it's value is often over inflated by all of the services that are only on there because it's more convenient than booting up your PC.
Live has some strong points, at least compared to the competition, but I think it's value is often over inflated by all of the services that are only on there because it's more convenient than booting up your PC.
Like a whole new dashboard design, "beacons" for finding friends to play certain online games with, cloud saving, YouTube, Bing voice search, UFC, Skype, IPTV, etc. that's coming in the next update? That sort of stuff?Agent X said:
Perhaps they will make the Twitter app available to Silver users? Perhaps the "Xbox Tweet" option will not come up if you're not a Gold user? Who knows? I don't really care about this stuff to be honest. If I wanted to Tweet about an ad, which I have never done before but maybe one day I might want to, I would go and type out the Tweet myself rather than let the Xbox auto-Tweet for me.Agent X said:
Can someone explain to me what exactly is so horrifying about game advertisements on a game console. I keep seeing these "oh wow, and they're paying for Gold too!" posts, and I just don't get it. They're little boxes, appropriately stylized for the interface, appearing on gaming or music channels to showcase games and music.
Saying that you've "never had Xbox Gold" is inaccurate if you've had it. You've never paid for it, but that doesn't mean you haven't had it. I have PSN+ right now, but I've never paid for it.MrNyarlathotep said:
So no actual proof then? I thought so.MrNyarlathotep said:
So?MrNyarlathotep said:
I think it costs them a fair bit of money, yes. You seem to think that the demos are distributed via hidden torrent clients that run on all 360s while people are playing single player games. You are unable to prove this though and Google brings up ZILCH.MrNyarlathotep said:
Yeah, and I see PC folks whining all the time that there's no demo, but there is on console. As for downloadable games such as XBLA, indie games etc. the 360 has demos of 100% of them. The other services do not.MrNyarlathotep said:
It's not a big onus on Sony or Nintendo or they would offer demos of all downloadable games like MS do.MrNyarlathotep said:
I have Googled it. There is no mention of MS buying SegaNET anywhere. If it was so widely reported, why can't you provide a single link to back up your claim? How much did MS pay for it? Provide links or fuck off, cos I think you're just trolling with bullshit and having looked at some of the threads you've posted in, when it comes to MS and the 360 it wouldn't be the first time.MrNyarlathotep said:
Uno Venova
Banned
They have a good amount of ads that aren't related to games at all, T-Mobile, HTC, and Coke is going to be in the NUads.Lyphen said:
All of them are currently in the "OLads".upJTboogie said:
NUads just adds Kinect-features to share them, get more info or vote in polls; when you click on them. Probably because in the new dashboard, the ads are smaller than in the current one:
Or as seen in a more recent revision, with the Coca Cola ad:
Maleficence said:
Explain how the current ads are a detriment to your experience? 90%+ of them are contextually relevant (music promotions on music channel, games on game channel) and they're out of the way.
Lyphen said:
I don't get the complaints either, the ads are non-intrusive in terms of navigation and they're helpful. I've bought so much stuff because of the spotlight channel discounts, or checked out a demo I didn't even know was out.
MrNyarlathotep said:
Microsoft did not buy or use SEGA's online infrastructure.
I hate the way ownership is slowly being peeled away from the consumer.
The console dashboard should be like my PC desktop in the sense that it is my space. When ads appear on it, I get the feeling as if I'm renting my own machine, despite having just paid $300 for it.
I hate it when Microsoft spills McDonald's coffee all over my lap.
The console dashboard should be like my PC desktop in the sense that it is my space. When ads appear on it, I get the feeling as if I'm renting my own machine, despite having just paid $300 for it.
I hate it when Microsoft spills McDonald's coffee all over my lap.
That's what it's like here in Australia. Sure we get the odd ad for the Transformers movie, but most of the ads are highlighting stuff that is on Xbox Live. And if Xbox Live isn't allowed to advertise it's own content I'd never know about specials and a lot of the new content.Dabanton said:
Debanton said:
So you find it helpful that they keep you up to date with Tron 2.0 and the new Zune updates? Really?
I guess I just don't understand how anyone could look at that and see something positive. Advertersing space is being sold on the dashboard of your console, and you find it informative? I don't see any information of value there.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
surly said:
I have never seen that. What XBLA titles when releasd on the PC don't have demos?
I have seen people complain about retail titles (like Bulletstorm) getting console demos, but that is entirely publisher / developer driven as a decision.
Or are you suggesting that every retail game gets a demo on the 360?
Because that is demonstratably false.
surly said:
If it wasn't part of MS Cert to have a demo, most games wouldn't bother.
If it was that big a deal to MS, it wouldn't be part of cert.
I don't know wtf you are attempting to argue about here :s
I can download every single demo off of XBLA / XBIG / retail games and never ever subscribe to gold.
If demos were a 'perk of ownership' and not a marketing tool that would not be the case.
I don't see how that is some wildly controversial statement.
surly said:
Sorry, having an opinion that you don't agree with isn't trolling, so you can fuck off.
I'm not going to trawl through variations of google search results from 10 years ago to prove a point, because frankly - I don't really give a shit about whether or not you believe that's the case, and although it was widely reported that MS based XBL on the SegaNet infrastructure, I doubt anyone has access to the financial bfreakdowns of the deal except Sega or MS themselves.
Absence of proof is not proof of absence, and if I'm incorrect, then I'm not the only one laboring under a misapprehension.
Also either please provide proof of my 'trolling in lots of threads about the 360 and Microsoft' or stop backseat modding and stfu.
EDIT: Shit, go wild, decry my 'trolling'.
Make sure you cherry pick some really juicy out of context stuff.
Paco said:
I see.
Since I have access to the internet, I prefer to use 3rd party sources for that kind of information. I have no problem keeping up with VG releases just by being an active GAF member. In a perfect world, we could have the option to tuck them away. Those of you that find advertisements cool and informative could keep them on, and the rest of us could do away with them.
People have repeatedly said that they find some of the information informative, so why do you have to keep asking the same questions? Would you not want to click on that sales and special offers tile ever? You never want to know what content is on sale? You never want to watch game trailers? If there's literally no information of value there for you, then press up once on the analogue stick and make it all disappear.Snuggler said:
Look at this thread for example: -
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=414596
Someone copy and pasted the games that are on offer on Live, in other words, they posted advertisements. Who was the first person to click on the thread and reply? You! Yet when that same info is on the dashboard, you "don't see any information of value".
surly said:
For starters, displaying current XBLA sales is much more forgivable than a Nike or Slim Jim ad. One of those is relevant to my interests, two of those are not. But as I said above, most of that information is redundant to me and I'd prefer to keep it off of my dashboard. XBLA sales and new releases are likely the only peice of information they display that has any value to me, but even then it should be displayed in the marketplace and not on the front end of the dashboard.
If I want that kind of information, I know where to find it. It doesn't need to be the first thing I see when I boot up.
SatelliteOfLove
Member
This is such a great generation of gaming.
You need to see this from Microsoft's perspective and understand that not everyone sits on forums and is up to date with the happenings of the industry. I do sit on the forums and half the time I'm not sure what this weeks XBLA game is or what new DLC is out this week. The fact of the matter is a majority of the gaming population does not do this. That is why Microsoft advertising their own products is important. Ads for other products fair enough are not relevant, but generally in Australia at least most of these ads give you a free theme or gamerpics for clicking on it so what's the big deal?Snuggler said:
I just did a search on Steam and it took me all of two searches to find one. Monday Night Combat. The first game I searched for was Braid, but that does have a demo even if it did come out a month after the game was available.MrNyarlathotep said:
I don't think you know what an opinion is.MrNyarlathotep said:
If you say "I don't like the dashboard ads", that is an opinion. If you say "MS bought SegaNET and turned it into Xbox Live" that is NOT an opinion. It's either true or it's false. The best evidence you have for it being true is a post from another member on here. You said that it was "widely reported" yet you haven't posted a single credible piece of evidence to back up your claim and I can't find a thing with Google. The same for your "the 360 acts as a torrent client" claim, which is something else that I highly suspect to be horse shit. You're an ill-informed troll. That I have seen evidence for.
So you say it's relevant to your interests and that XBLA sales and new releases are likely the only pieces of information that have any value to you, yet you're repeatedly asking other people why they can see value in any of that information? Why? Your own post explains why people might want to see information like that. Your issue is that it's displayed on the dashboard, while others don't care that it's there, or actually like it being there.Snuggler said:
jaundicejuice
Member
SatelliteOfLove said:
Great or greatest?
saunderez said:
The big deal is that it's a practice that we, the consumers, benefit from in no way. I keep "asking the same questions" as surly says because I still can't begin to wrap my mind around how someone could see dashboard ads as anything but a negative. And yes, as it is now, you can simply tap the home menu or flick your analog stick to escape the ads. You aren't being bludgeoned by them...yet. That's the bigger issue here, Microsauce are setting a troubling precedent and I can see it getting much worse in the future.
Snuggler said:
I too have access to the Internet. 0_o
Anywho, I'm on the other side of the fence, I haven't been to IGN, Gamespot, Gametrailers, or other third-party game info sites in years. I just browse a few ads every few days and I'm all caught up on what's available on my 360 -- I get user ratings, screenshots, trailers, demos, and more with a few clicks. For example, found Outland the other week because of dashboard ad...clicked it, browsed the screenshots, saw the good user rating, downloaded in a few minutes, liked it, and purchased it all without putting down my controller.
lol, I don't use GAF for any advice ever, not when there are people who defend games like FFXIII (biggest piece of shit ever). I'll just download a demo and form my own opinion.
I can't argue against having options. I think Gold subscribers should be given the choice to turn them off...you guys probably don't shop the content anyway.