Can Microsoft's U-turn stop the Xbox 360 becoming another XP? It's shaping up to be a summer of U-turns for Microsoft. In May Redmond revealed big changes to Windows 8 that increasingly look like a step-away from the all-or-nothing march into the Metro touch UI. Microsoft's now retreating on Xbox One as Don Mattrick, president of the company's interactive entertainment business, was …
Betteridge's Law of Headlines is broken in this case because the headline contains too many clauses and negatives to parse easily. If the reg had actual newspaper hacks writing the headlines, they would likely have simplified the headline to the point where Betteridge's Law would apply, so his law remains a good one I think.
I'm not a hack, but I would think something like the following would have been more likely for the Mail or the Sun:
Is XBox still on the Road to Vista?
So Fifa 14 isn't being released for the PS2 then? A brand new game on a 13 year old console which has a successor already released....
Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_14
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_2
and
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-06-10-fifa-14-confirmed-for-pc-ps2-wii-ios-android-everything-but-wii-u
Brazil, and or India do NOT, the First World make. And do less to propagate a Ten Year plan that was promised to the "First World"! I could care less about these Developing nations and more so about my own. This holds just as true above the Board be-it for Video Games, or Homelessness. Television and Popstars like to make a big to-do about whats going on 'round the World all the while not bothering to look further down their own Road.
So while the PS2 may ~just maybe~ enjoying life in some for off Tropical Paradise. ITS BEEN STONE COLD DEAD EVERYWHERE ELSE!
There was another Clown that mentioned FIFA14 by name, as an upcoming Title for the PlayStation2.
So I'll propose the same question to you, as I did him... Just where the Hell would One pick-up a FIFA14 for the PS2 when PS2 IS NO LONGER AVAILABLE AT RETAIL?
Does this mean I should pay the full price for a badly manhandled copy at Gamestop? Freakin' Conartists think they can pass such Crap off as new! Or do I wait a month for the Post do deliver it from Amazon?
Nice argument, but I'd rather assume not trust everything I read on a Wiki Page.
You can't compare Sony and MSFT, two totally different corporate cultures. Look at how quickly they pulled the plug on the original Xbox when X360 came out, while promising them backwards compatibility (that never came for the majority of games) while Sony kept putting out games for a couple of years.
With MSFT once the new one comes out that is it, you won't hear a peep about the previous product because as far as they are concerned it doesn't exist. How much do you hear from them about Win 7? Zune? Winphone 7? as far as MSFT is concerned they just don't matter. Japanese corporate culture isn't quite as "quarterly" focused as the US corporate culture so as long as people are willing to buy a product they are willing to sell.
I'm sure the OEMs stuck with all those copies of Win 8 would have liked MSFT to have a similar culture but alas it doesn't.
You knew this was coming when EA threw Microsoft under the bus (smartly as EA can't afford to burn the tiny amount of goodwill they have left with anyone). You just knew EA and Ubisoft were pushing Microsoft to do this and when the poop hit the fan they were like well we have no plans to use Microsoft's built in limitations and to limit customer choice in the future. LMAO.
"You knew this was coming when EA threw Microsoft under the bus .. You just knew EA and Ubisoft were pushing Microsoft to do this and when the poop hit the fan they were like well we have no plans to use Microsoft's built in limitations and to limit customer choice in the future. LMAO".
I don't understand:
Where does it say EA and Ubisoft were pushing Microsoft?
Why would EA and Ubisoft be pushing for this if they didn't have a post-poop plan?
What is your post-poop plan?
>Where does it say EA and Ubisoft were pushing Microsoft?
Those were the rumors going on behind the scenes. Microsoft looks even dumber if they were putting those restrictions in place without prompting from their 3rd party buddies.
>Why would EA and Ubisoft be pushing for this if they didn't have a post-poop plan?
Their post poop plan was to release a statement saying they didn't plan on restricting their games using Microsoft's DRM tools at this time (before U-turn) If Microsoft went ahead and took all the flack I am sure by release they would have been tightening the DRM on their titles as much as possible. They hate the resale market.
>What is your post-poop plan?
I am indifferent as hell to all the console makers. They are all going to be a big bag of hurt in their own ways.
The 360 cannot live like XP has as Microsoft control the flow of games onto the console and they can kill it by switching off the Live service if they wish.
Yes old games would still work but the flow of new titles would dry up and there would be no online capability.
Yes, they could do that. But if the problem were that people aren't just buying the XBone, that might just piss those 360 owners enough to send 'em to the PS4. Hell, maybe even used PS3s just to give MS the finger!
PS2 games were still being released years after the PS3 came out, and it is pretty possible they were being released because the PS2 had a larger install base than the new gen consoles for quite some time.
" their greed deserves punishing"
Even the most rabid of Sony shills - hi Barry! - couldn't possibly argue Xbox One's phonehome and limitations were about Microsoft's greed.
Nope, those were for Mr EA Games esquire and nobody else. It made no sense for MS - they want to sell consoles. It made all the sense for EA - they want to stop you from owning your games.
So called Mr EA could disable games even in the existing 360 / PS3 infrastructure e.g. by packing a registration code in the box which is needed to play the full game. This is precisely what the onerous "Project Ten Dollar" was about - screwing second hand disc owners for another $10 to unhobble the game they just bought, e.g. by unlocking multiplayer or to obtain the maps or expansions everyone else was playing.
The difference here was Microsoft were building the infrastructure to support that model - unique serial codes embedded onto the disc, some way of reading them, an infrastructure for validating the code, presumably a payment system to "reactivate" the disc and so on.
Maybe it was EA et al pushing this model but it's naive to think Microsoft were facilitating it from the goodness of their hearts. Somewhere along the line they'd be lining their wallets, skimming a % of the transaction required to reactivate the disk.
Anyway, just because they've backed down doesn't mean EA or Ubisoft or Activision have. It's quite likely they'll carry on doing what they did with the 360 and PS3 - selling reactivation codes. Of course if the XBox One and / or PS4 does embed serial # on the disc, it practically invites this practice regardless of the words coming out of each console maker's mouths. When it starts up again Sony and MS will say they were just referring to their own games, not other publishers.
Maybe it was EA et al pushing this model but it's naive to think Microsoft were facilitating it from the goodness of their hearts. Somewhere along the line they'd be lining their wallets, skimming a % of the transaction required to reactivate the disk.
More likely something along the lines of "if you lock down our games from those filthy gamers, we'll give you longer exclusives".
If MS were taking a commission it'd basically be becoming a digital Gamestation.
Quite.
Now, if they had the option of the online verification falling back to checking for physical disc (ie. if you have several games installed on HDD you wouldn't need to play disc roulette when switching between games if you had internet connectivity) in the absence of internet connectivity or because you had opted to do that in the settings they would have been able to get best of both worlds so to speak.
Bottom line is that for Microsoft as a hardware manufacturer the DRM makes no odds, in fact it is more of a hindrance to have to bother with it. For Microsoft as software/games publisher it is a different story, and I agree that it is more than likely that EA (and possibly some other publishers) had their influence in pushing it and will no doubt continue to do so and try to extract every last penny out of each product.
Even the most rabid of Sony shills - hi Barry! - couldn't possibly argue Xbox One's phonehome and limitations were about Microsoft's greed. ... sez the MS shill.
Ironically, EA are dropping their own retarded attempt at screwing the second-hand games market: Online Pass is being phased out. Yes, publishers probably had a hand on MS trying to pull off this, but for it to work it would have to be implemented on all platforms. Anyone who isn't stupid would know that DRMing the shit out of a console will send people fleeing to the competition unless they are also locked down. By the time MS went on to go full retarded offering their horrible games lockdown, Sony had already stated that the "NFC chip disc lockdown" FUD wasn't true and that there would be no secondhand games lockdown.
It would have been interesting though if the devs pushing for this DRM scheme were actually offering the X1 more exclusives. If it had gone through, those publishing houses would've had their exclusives crash & burn, as the thing would have not sold. Which is why I'm sad that MS did do a U-turn: all of those who pushed for this braindead, greedy scheme should have been punished by economic failure and bankruptcy. That would send a pretty strong message to anyone even trying to pull this off that its just not worth it.
I believe EA decided to drop the their program because the XBOne DRM system was coming. EA wanted some good PR to distance from all the bad PR over the last few years. Then comes XBOne with it's DRM, now that MS has pulled a u-turn it'll be interesting to see if EA doesn't pull one of their own.
all of those who pushed for this braindead, greedy scheme should have been punished by economic failure and bankruptcy. That would send a pretty strong message to anyone even trying to pull this off that its just not worth it.
I agree with everything you have said, except for this last bit. Having worked in the games industry in the past for a number of years, it's the devs and independent studios that would suffer here, not the directors in EA's boardroom.
Not to turn DRM on later when they have your money.
They obviously want it but they want launch sales more (this week, at least).
Don't forget they've already demonstrated where they want the XBOX Vista to be at, even if they've U-Turned for now to avoid completely handing their market to SONY with little umbrellas and a cherry.
This.. I was thinking the same thing.
Many people overlook something very nasty yet also very important with console gaming: stuff changes over time.
I think that's a very dangerous (and sometimes unwanted) development, but seems to happen all over the place. My best (but dated) example is a PS3 game called "Gran Turismo 5". Its a very cool racing game, but when I bought it most races had a grid start, I loved it. In the mean time someone apparently didn't agree and now almost every race has a rolling start, something I really do not enjoy at all. Of course this happened half a year or so after purchase, so even if I wanted to (I don't) I couldn't get a refund.
But the same thing happens on your consoles. Although it doesn't bother me at all the PS3 used to have an option which allowed people to install an "other" operating system. That functionality has been removed over time; even consoles can change.
So before anyone starts countering your argument I think they should keep this in mind as well; with consoles you can't be sure that the thing you bought will continue working as you expected it to.
@ge said: "So before anyone starts countering your argument I think they should keep this in mind as well; with consoles you can't be sure that the thing you bought will continue working as you expected it to."
When Microsoft 'upgraded' us to Windows Genuine Advantage, I turned off all auto-updates on my PC. I've never regretted it, and frequently congratulated myself on the horrors that have passed me by. On a console, alas, this is not an option.
Darth Vader said: "I am altering our deal. Pray I do not alter it any further."
Exactly, they'll get the sales first then next June-or-so they'll start to slowly implement each of those DRM features one-at-a-time over the next few years. They'll use the excuse it was X-game title that "required" this change, wait for any backlash to quiet off then pop out the next round of DRM.
Once MS has your money they'll turn on the DRM
Whilst I agree that turning back on is a distinct possibility I don't recall any (major) functionality having being removed from Xbox 360 during its lifetime.
Sony on the other hand does have proven track record of doing so and pretty much saying "f u we don't care" when people complained.
Considering games on PC are fair bit cheaper PC gaming is rather attractive option. Unless either console platform has an exclusive title that you feel you must have. In which case choice of console is kind of made based on that anyway.
Microsoft are acting far too much like pancakes with the current console
You always need to be online
No you don't
Yes you do
No you don't
Okay you have to connect once every 24 hours, and when you first install the game
No you don't
????
Same sequence of events elsewhere. PS4 may cut out a few features a few years down the line, but at least I know what's coming now.
That and I'm not paying an extra £80 for a peripheral I have no intention of using.
And lets face it, by the end of things, the two consoles have very similar hardware specs, with sony edging in front, very similar price points (if you buy move with your ps4) and pretty much the same architecture.
If memory serves me from the devs I spoke to, generally for multiplatform games they design / test their games / engines with the console which was either first / most powerful / easiest to code for.
However there's almost no difference between the two, PS4 edging ahead in power, ease of coding I can't comment but they're the same architecture so I'd imagine they're on similar ground here, and which one launches first which again, we don't have a definitive date for ps4. Q4 vs November, so who knows.
Basically what I'm getting at is there's going to be little to no difference on third party games, and I imagine outside of existing licenses there will be fewer third party devs making exclusives since there's almost no benefit anymore (with different architectures it's easier to make a better game for a single platform, when they're all the same the only real reason is if the first party is paying you for it)
The second deciding factor, online is also pretty level now. PS4 is a little cheaper, but we don't know what the quality will be like vs xOne.
They both have a 3d camera peripheral with motion detection. Microsoft forces you to have it, sony doesn't. So if you want this that could be a deciding factor for you
And of course the final point, first party titles. Which cnosole has the first party stuff you want to get the most? For me it's PS4, I love the look of beyond two souls, and kingdom hearts 3 (one of my fave game series) are PS4 exclusive, hence why it wins for me.
Personally I don't get the whole fanboy arguement of "your console is shit, mines better" then again I'll happily admit I'm a bit of a sony enthusiast, I use that word to differentiate between fanboys since the fanboys tend to rant and rave about how they're so much better.
Summary note, third party titles will be pretty much identical per system, ps3 is cheaper and a bit more powerful, but the same price when you include the camera, buy the console with the first party titles you want the most, perhaps the console most of your friends are buying so you can share games since, y'know, you can now.
Also sorry if this rambles from point to point, people keep talking to me.
Kingdom Hearts 3 is not a PS4 exclusive, Sony told a flat out lie on that one. Will be available for Xbox One as well.
I am with you on the first party titles line tho, as a petrolhead I really did enjoy Gran Turismo, I bought a PS2 just for it, but it became too much like work to play it and after trying Forza 3 I bought a 360. After seeing the woes my brother had with GT5 I don't think I will ever go back to it (Neither will he as we have built up a nice Forza club/clan)
But the DRM is a publishers choice, and MS have said all along their titles would not have been affected, it would be the publishers decision. Sony know this, yet they still make pronouncements that it will never happen on their system. I hope The Register will revisit all off this 6-12 months after launch to see the state of play, and if they do I am sure that they will find the PS4 users have been burned a lot more than the Xbox ones.
Namely, they are still region locking games.
There is nothing to stop them implemting this after launch and after they got my money.
The Kinect spying all the time is concerning.
The Kinect licensing content by the number of users watching is disgraceful
The Kinect scanning my room for logos to sent me adverts is also disgraceful.
It's also lower spec and more expensive than the PS4, and looks ugly as sin. I also have no faith in Microsoft making reliable hardware, and no faith they understand or even care about gamers anymore.
For those reasons - I'M out. Ordered my PS4 from Argos this morning.
"The Kinect licensing content by the number of users watching is disgraceful"
This new learning amazes me, what is it ?
Yeah, the hardware.. 20% fail rate on the '360 IIRC ?? That's massive and MS aren't a learning-from-mistakes kinda company as this latest U-turn amply demonstrates. Right second time isn't good enough.
MSFT filed for a patent last year to allow channels to charge by the user based on how many the Kinect can "see" in a room, which is what the other poster is talking about. will they do it? Well considering they have ignored their userbase when it comes to win 8 and probably would have with the XB1 if the PS4 preorders hadn't shot through the roof after their little "reveal" I'd say the odds are probably goo that they will at least try.
It won't even be a change in policy to start with. They'll just encourage the online play big hitters to continue with "online passes" with their software, until it becomes the norm. I note that Sony will also allow this.
To be honest, I've yet to see anyting about either new console that makes them a compelling purchase over the old consoles.
I'll likely buy a next gen console this Xmas though the only thing I know for sure if I get one at all is it's not going to be an XBOX Vista. Probably not a Nintendo.
Not even a PS4 if they don't release the fecker in time for Xmas - will have spent the money elsewhere by then - is it still the 31st Dec for that???
" There is nothing to stop them implemting this after launch and after they got my money. "
Unfortunately, the same applies to Sony, doesn't it? Sell you the unit, then change it to work the way they want it to afterwards.
That's why I'm waiting a couple of years to see who does what, before I buy, (The latest, hottest game ain't really a must-have for me.)
In the meantime, I'm settling for new desktop.
Could this be a deliberate attempt to stir up the media, get more people talking about the console, and thus get more people learning about XB1?
Switch the DRM off etc, and wow, some big barriers to the console are gone, and even MORE people are aware of the XB1...
or am I being too cynical?
Nintendo concentrate on what they always have done, making incredibly fun games with their established IPs and occasionally trying something different (which if successful becomes another franchise). They haven't played the "most powerful console" game since the N64 lost to the PS1.
The problem is really more to do with the "hardcore" gamers who just can't bring them selves to play something as cute looking as Mario even if it's a double-hard bastard in terms of actually gameplay.
I find the bigger issue with nintendo is the 3rd party developers seem to try and set them up to fail.
Lets look at the Wii U a good chunk of the 3rd party games are ones that were out on the PC(at $15), 360 or PS3 for months. Then developers go OHH THE GAME DIDN'T SELL SO THERE IS NO MARKET ON IT CAUSE PPL DIDN'T BUY IT FOR $60 ON THE WII U SO WERE NOT MAKING ANYTHING MORE
Or if the game comes out on all 3 at the same time the Wii U one seems buggier, and never gets a patch. Or the patches, and DLC comes months later after the 360/ps3's did.
Then there were a few 3rd party games I wanted to buy, but after reading player reviews which listed bugs they were encountering(some game breaking) with them, or how the games didn't even seem finished I wouldn't pay $10 for the half assed game let alone $60.
It almost makes me wonder if sony, and MS paid 3rd party companies to screw over Nintendo on 3rd party support by only releasing pure crap on it
Nintendo concentrate on what they always have done, making incredibly fun games with their established IPs and occasionally trying something different (which if successful becomes another franchise). They haven't played the "most powerful console" game since the N64 lost to the PS1.
The problem is really more to do with the "hardcore" gamers who just can't bring them selves to play something as cute looking as Mario even if it's a double-hard bastard in terms of actually gameplay.
Nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnope.
Nintendo keep re-hashing their established IPs and alienating anyone who doesn't like playing the same thing over and over. I owned every single Nintendo console up until the Wii U, and if it ever bothers to get a library, I'll eventually get one because I go where the games are. That said, I've had an increasing dislike of Ninty's approach since the Wii came out. It's a dreadful Gamecube mod, with terrible controllers, and the library of games is a cesspit at best. I bought one for the arcade ports, and beyond those I haven't seen the need to pick up and play anything else, except Mario Galaxy (because someone at Nintendo made a mistake and made a Mario game that was genuinely new and inventive).
Oh, incidentally, the newer SMB games are trash. Slower, clunkier, more boring versions of Super Mario World.
My PS3, on the other hand, continues to get love. And before you start on with your hardcore gamer stereotypes, I use it to play Okami (like Zelda, but about a thousand times superior), Tokyo Jungle, Child of Eden, Sly Cooper, etc. Sure, I also have Need For Speed installed, but that's the beauty of a system that doesn't identify with hipsters and the too-cool-for-school crowd; I can have both.
If I want to start up God of War and rip someone's testicles off, I can. But I can equally surf onto the store and download something like The Unfinished Swan, or Echochrome, or Rayman, or Ico, or Shadow of the Colossus, etc, etc, etc. Pretending that the other consoles do nothing but explosions and guns is fanboyism.
If being in the Nintendo camp means I have to be happy playing the same series of games again and again, then I'd rather hang out elsewhere, where I can get the full range of games, and play them on a console with superior controls and online services.
And my favourite platform for gaming? Still the PC, which I imagine will only get better now.
Agreed on the console as the culprit (the general story seems to be someone knocking their 360 over from the vertical position, and getting a nice set of deep circular scores as the whole laser assembly hits the disc), but BluRay discs are just as easily scratched outside of a console as DVDs - one of the reasons I've long given up on renting games/films by post is the amount I've sent back as unplayable.
Remember they have a device that can watch and hear you. They have a cloud which exists in the states (not that it matters much where it was).
PRISM anyone?
There was a criminal is the US that made the mistake of bringing his phone to a meeting.
The FBI turned the microphone on remotely even though the phone was off.
Now they back-track but their stripes have already been shown.
I am not so sure Microsoft where shotting themselves in the foot with the DRM and restrictions on playing second hand games. Ultimately We buy consoles because of the games they support, it does not matter if you have a great console but no games (PS Vita anyone).
With these restrictions Microsoft was courting the game developers by reducing the developers two great hates. Piracy and second hand sales. They massively improve the revenue stream for a developers by reducing the liklihood of illegal iusage and they extend the life of sales for the game where the revenue comes to them the producers. Currently games sales 3 months after a release are almost neglibile because most people will go buy it in the second hand shop. Now those people will have to go download it and pay the people the produced it.
PS4 would have none of these controls so it would have made it less attractive to develop for. I think longer term this has the ability to push more revenue to those people who build the games, which has to be a good thing as it will de-risk the whole process. instead of the same constant remakes of the same game we might start to see more original development as the developer has more opportunity to make the profits they need to survive. It is also good for long term support of games, better and more regular DLC.
I know the view will be that the companies will just make more profit. Maybe but I think the market will regulate itself. I have only so much to spend, currently I will pay £40 for one of the big budget games knowing I will sell or trade it 6 weeks later for £20, overall it will have cost £20. Now instead of getting it day 1, I might wait for a couple of months until it is has dropped to £20. Or even better with more of the revenue stream coming to them it will get released at £20 or £25 quid. Just look at stream and WoW on the PC. I bought CIV 5 Gold edition on Stream last week for less than a £10. That is alot of game for not much money.
I think MS was actually right, they problem is they did not communicate it properly and got alot of flack for the idiot fanbois and have paniced and backed down. They need to deveop a little more spine.
What planet are you on? £25 for a new game! They will be £45 at new and will be £45 at a year old, maybe a drop to £40 after that when the new respawn of the same game with new maps is released. With no second hand sales all console games are permanent AAA new titles.
I fully expect the games to go up with the next consoles, like they have with every console generation.
Are you ready for £60/£80 games as standard + day 1 DLC content.
I know the view will be that the companies will just make more profit. Maybe but I think the market will regulate itself. I have only so much to spend, currently I will pay £40 for one of the big budget games knowing I will sell or trade it 6 weeks later for £20, overall it will have cost £20. Now instead of getting it day 1, I might wait for a couple of months until it is has dropped to £20. Or even better with more of the revenue stream coming to them it will get released at £20 or £25 quid. Just look at stream and WoW on the PC. I bought CIV 5 Gold edition on Stream last week for less than a £10. That is alot of game for not much money.
You're ignoring the gigantic issue with that argument: Steam has competition on PC. When they didn't, the discounts didn't happen as often and weren't nearly as deep. These days, I must have accounts on at least a dozen different stores. There are game blogs and entire websites dedicated to comparing game prices for the system, and finding me the best deal.
On PS3/Xbox/Wii, you have one store, and nowhere else to go. You buy the games at the price they set, or piss off. There's no incentive whatsoever for the store to lower prices, so they won't. The DLC for Burnout Paradise, for example, has *never* come down in price, despite that game being pretty old at this point. New games are coming out on PSN 20-30 quid more than the stores are selling them for, and you think they'll reduce prices? I think not.
With these restrictions Microsoft was courting the game developers by reducing the developers two great hates. Piracy and second hand sales.
Piracy is understandable ... but that was far better covered with the PS3. Even here in Mexico, where piracy is widespread, the PS3 has been the one console where most games are acquired by actually buying them. The 360 is the one that's still chock full of pirated games.
And second hand sales is only a developer-side hate. As MS found out, gamers are far more pissed off at draconian attempts to kill second hand sales, and they're the ones who actually pay for games. Those who had wooed MS and made their games XBoned exclusive releases would have seen their games fare far worse than the usual second-hand-traded games they currently have. Game publishers will smell the blood and sometimes even remove the "exclusiveness" of certain games if they realize their "exclusive" platform is going down the drain. Remember Resident Evil Code Veronica?
I'm happy for Microsoft's reversal. When the PS3 was first released it had no concerns for the competition and came out with an overly expensive console while also experimenting with DRM and rootkits with its music CDs. Now they've released their lowest priced console to date, once figuring in the price of inflation, with a strong DRM free commitment.
Likewise with this release it seemed that Microsoft had no regard for its competition and I'm glad its taken this U-turn now; because frankly when the gaming industry doesn't have viable competition, the console makers become tyrants.
I don't mind the console makers being tyrants if it means they refuse to let poor quality stuff on their platform but that doesn't seem to be the case. (Hudson (The NEC Avenue arcade ports always played exactly like the machine they were copying) / Nintendo of old were like this and for me it was a good thing).
They should be providing the games on flash or ssd's in this day and age. They charge a premium price but don't provide a premium product at all.
I disagree on the tyrant stance being good. Nintendo didn't shave away "bad" games, they shaved away most competition in favor of their own content. That's why some of the big publishers started creating shell companies (Konami had ULTRA and others) to sidestep on their "5 games per year" restriction for third-party games. Adding to that, the draconian Nintendo Censorship board, which seemed to have censorship standards based on "what can an 8 year old play?". One of the few weird exceptions would be Monster Party during that era.
Hell, for many years I gravitated more on Mac/PC gaming because the games were much better. It took the Playstation to finally break away from the heavy censorship era, though by then Nintendo had stopped being so heavy-handed on the censorship (only that can explain DOOM on the SNES.)
The (maligned) Ribbon was a huge improvement in Office 2007. Sure it took a little getting used to, but once you said "pretend I know nothing" everything became so much more intuitive, and I discovered features that had long-existed in Office but which were buried behind three menu layers.
So, while they got it terribly wrong in Win8 Metro, and XBOne was clearly not paying attention to their core market...sometimes the "slam it down their throats" approach works.
"The (maligned) Ribbon was a huge improvement in Office 2007. Sure it took a little getting used to...."
Happy for you that you had the leisure time to explore it. In busy environments where I work, users want a built-in Toggle button to switch between menus and ribbon. Why? Because some users have 3rd party tools to hack-back the menus, while others are stuck on the ribbon. Its a pain that a universal solution isn't in place. When a user needs to login at another machine its a crapshoot as to whether their Office of choice is present. Of course, the reason a toggle button is not present is M$ lock-in. They don't want users to switch between them, they want every user, new and old buying the new Office suite. That's not helpful!
What a brain-dead argument. Once upon a time people moved from typewriters to computers and this took a lot of getting used to. The previous poster said sometimes something is worth having, even if it requires acclimatisation, and you pour scorn on that. With your attitude, your company would still be on typewriters because your poor staff can't cope.
The "slam it down their throats" approach to the ribbon resulted in people perceiving a free, open source office suite as being more like "Microsoft Office" than Microsoft Office itself is these days.
Yes, I have seen that mindset hundreds of times, with real users in my computer service business. I have taken considerable money out of Microsoft's (and other software vendors') mouth by showing people alternatives. Not just home users either. Most people hate that ribbon interface, just like they hate Windows 8 Metro (the original name for that "train wreck")
Gamers hate the Xbox One already and it doesn't even exist yet.
The Ribbon is only marginally useful in the OSX version ... mostly because the Office for Mac edition still has the menus and thus you can ignore the Ribbon (or use it for the few power features that actually show up there), and that the Ribbon doesn't waste as much screen real estate as its Windows counterpart.
At least you do agree that TIFKA Metro is a piece of shit that should be dragged to the woods and shot.
"Microsoft's got a Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde personality. On the one hand it can be intensely pragmatic and rational - Windows 7 - but when it's got a new idea between its teeth that's when the beast takes over and when common sense is jettisoned - Windows 8."
Or Vista, the most loathed thing since ME and before 8.
Which laid the foundation for 7.
Sometimes these polar opposite views come together in ways you don't predict.
"In May Redmond revealed big changes to Windows 8 that increasingly look like a step-away from the all-or-nothing march into the Metro touch UI."
No they didn't. Not-Metro is still there, they just put some more lipstick on the pig. More colours, animated backgrounds, a start button - that takes you to not-metro.
I expect this xbox story, once you get the fine print will just be another "start button".
1: There is no Win8 U-turn. They've fixed some very superficial design errors in the desktop UI while continuing at full speed with pushing Metro. They still think they can bludgeon it into success, that the users are the problem not the OS and Microsofts marketing plans.
2: Console users are quite happy to switch platform between console generations and any that defect to Sony this time are just as likely to come back at the next console generation. They aren't lost for life, lost for the life of this particular console - maybe. The lack of backward compatibility means a clean slate this time and you can discount brand loyalty almost completely because of it. That's why Microsoft had to override their natural instinct to blame the user and actually give the appearance of listening.
XBone and PS4 are damn near identical on the coding side. Expect fewer genuine platform exclusives and even less reason to stay loyal.
when it switched to the PC architecture, since not being able to provide backwards compatibility opened it up to a greater risk of losing customers to Sony. It no doubt figured it could counter this with a huge array of launch titles, and that probably would have worked, had they not initially stumbled at their pre-E3 reveal. A previous blunder by Adam Orth on Twitter had put people in a suspicious frame of mind, and Microsoft's concentration on TV, sports, Kinect etc. without adequately addressing unanswered questions about DRM didn't help.
By the time E3 arrived, DRM had evolved into a major issue - one that Microsoft singularly failed to dispel. The way was then open for Sony to apply the coup de gras by confirming that they would retain the same policies that they had for the PS3. A viral video on that subject was icing on the cake.
The resulting flood of pre-orders for the PS4 no doubt had Microsoft re-evaluating its tactics, if not its long term strategy. Currently, when directly asked, they have failed to confirm that the new policies are permanent. Make of that what you will.
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
Well you still have to run the NSA spy cam and mic. With no way to run the Spy Box without the Kinect plugged in and no way to be sure it is turned off you know that the NSA will be viewing and pervs will be recording and it will probably be NSA pervs doing the recording.
MS is still a hard fail to me. I don't want any information of any kind being fed back to MS for any fucking reason. I don't care if it is "To tailor your experience based on your profile" I don't want any fucking adds of any kind. I don't want any of my information being collected by MS as they have proven time and a again that they can't keep their shit secured. They can't keep their data secured (look at their cloud fiascoes) .
MS can just take the Spy Box as it is now and cram it WAY up. I'll get a Wii U and a PS4 and the cash that was going to a XBox will instead go to a Titan card for my PC.
And Metro would still make it horse shit anyways.
Dear Microsoft/Xbox One: Oh praise be to you great one for finally relenting after a hailstorm of protest since your unveiling for ALLOWING us mere mortals to continue to do with our video games what we've been able to do since 1985 (i.e. buying/selling/trading the games we bought and paid for as well as play our games offline for longer than 24hrs at a time) even though Sony was going to allow us to continue to do so from the start. Once again, thank you all powerful as MERCIFUL Microsoft/Xbox One for bestowing upon us our given rights that we've been utilizing since 1985! Praise be to you powerful one.... Eat crap.
Well, they each had their place:
Xbone was because Xbox One was clearly a boner (in the sense of a gaffe, or was boned by Sony, take your pick);
Xbox 180 is now the new name simply because it represents the giant U-Turn Microsoft have slowly rigged into action. I wonder if they've been taking cues from the UK's current government. Always doing 180s..
But yes, from now on, it should definitely be referred to as the Xbox 180..
It is XBoned, as in 'boned' by Sony.
At least if the XBox 180 moniker sticks, it will finally make that 360 joke accurate.
- Why is the XBox1 called the XBox 180?
- Because when you see it, you do a 180 and walk away!
(Though the original joke would work if you're moonwalking away.)
Hollywood Blockbusters
Are we moving into a golden era of gaming? The Xbox1 and the PS4 will have next-gen eye watering graphics, but there's huge pressure on the console makers to push big Hollywood blockbuster titles like COD or Halo. Both last releases had few fresh ideas in their multiplayer maps! I've 20 minutes to kill, what'll I play? Bioshock Infinite, Dishonored, Hitman Absolution or Far Cry 3? No, its back to the old reliables: Far Cry 2, Cod4 or Cod2 on PC! Why? Because there's no extra charges for online multiplayer! User maps extend the life of the game, the game engines still look and play good and they support mods.
Creativity:
Unfortunately many game studies folded in recent years. So while it looked like a boom time for gaming the financial grim reaper came calling and the net effect is there's less innovation occurring in the big-title studios. Take Forza Horizons for example. Compare it to Driver-SF or Forza 4 and Horizons is not progress! And Forza 5 allows the game to play by itself- WTF? Overall this pressure to push mega-releases ala Michael Bay like Transformers of the Caribbean sequels, means creativity will continue to fall off a cliff. Therefore innovation in gaming will suffer, and we the gamers will suffer. GTA V and Watch Dogs might herald new ideas, but I'm doubtful. For starters I can't understand why the GTA team didn't try a new theatre i.e. an Italian, French or Asian inspired open world, instead its west coast CA yet again!
Social Gaming
The demographic of this genre leans heavily towards the ladies i.e. the average Zynga user. The social ideas behind the games are clever. But Pinkus helped kill the genre and now he's turning it into a casino?
Mobile versus Monster
I'm a huge fan of monster-sized TV's for gaming. 100 inch TV's are almost here and wall sized are on the horizon. Unfortunately a lot of Indie developers are being forced to go small screen to stay in business, helped by the crushing Hollywood system. The small-screen kills my enthusiasm in gaming. I want detail.. scale... the latest graphics, not something my old C64 can do. But its easier to have Ad driven business models on mobile. Pity, as this creativity could be better applied to the large-screen. Perhaps Valve will bring a compromise, and PC gaming will come back in vogue should the consoles fail to deliver....
The Future
Cloud gaming. The big title makers are proposing organically evolving games part-rendered on server farms on the back-end. What that says to me is that every game could be a potential MMOG. Do I want that? In a non-everyone-has-fibre world- No I don't! Why pay the same cash and get a sub par game experience versus someone on fibre in South Korea... Moreover I'd rather pay for the latest graphics GPU and leverage that to play the game alone, so that even if I'm offline the gameplay is still outstanding. But there is this push to the Cloud, the market is pressing on, and the tide looks irresistible....
Overall this pressure to push mega-releases ala Michael Bay like Transformers of the Caribbean sequels, means creativity will continue to fall off a cliff.
You get a thumbs up just for that line alone as it almost made me need a new keyboard just from imagining what it would be like.
I would compare the Xbox 360 to Internet Explorer 6 more than WIndows XP.
The problem a number of Xbox 360 owners are facing now is that they've purchased many games through digital channels and these games have no resale value at all.
With previous generations once the machine was done with it could be traded, complete with games for a tidy sum to put towards the new system. With this generation because the games are all tied to an account all you can get for your 360 is maybe 30$ if you have no disc based software.
Customers therefore have a choice, they can either keep their 360 and digital games, or sell it as a plain box with no software, unless they want to give their account away at the same time. They're locked to the platform, and can't use it to generate the funds to buy a new one.
For customers who purchased mainly disc based games this isn't an issue, but for customers who bought into the whole digital thing early they're now seeing the true cost of it. A number of friends are now wondering what on this green earth they were thinking when they bought their games as downloads and will be doing everything they can to avoid making that mistake again and buy reliable disc based media in the future even if they have a higher initial cost.
Despite the U-turn the already existing digital lock-in on the 360 is going to be an issue for Microsoft, at least until the price of the unit drops significantly to the point where people can afford to buy it without trading in their old systems.
You can't blame Microsoft for the inability to run older games, the radical hardware changes ensure that isn't possible, you can blame the industry for pushing downloadable rights locked titles as the future and that problem still has no solution and significantly increases the initial cost of moving from a 360 to a newer platform
Since having the PS3 and 360, I have personally moved to computer gaming and Steam. Now, with computer games you definitely cannot purchase and play a used game as the product key is only usable once. And that's not considering pirating. So really that's nothing too new for me. But on PC's I like being able to do WHATEVER I WANT without paying Micro$oft for their poor Gold account that I never use. Last.fm, Netflix, hell just about everything requires a Gold account. RIDICULOUS! I can do all that AND online gaming for FREE on Steam/PC.
Why would anyone even want a console now? With all this bickering and trying to squeeze their customers any way they can. I can't remember any time Steam tried to screw me over. I'm rambling, but maybe that's what Microsoft is getting at. Trying to link games to your email as Steam does.
If Microsoft really wants to get ahead of the game with console gaming then this is what they need to do:
Invent and release a computer with modularized interchangeable parts.
What do I mean? Think the "expansion pack" as vRAM for the Nintendo 64, people were upgrading the memory in their n64 consoles without even realizing/comprehending it. Micro$oft needs to sell a computer with, say, an Intel Core i7 that plugs into the console like a lego block and is rebranded as the Xbox doohickey [processor model]. Same with the RAM and Video chip/card. Then let it begin.
Just as the N64 did, as time progresses people will need to upgrade their consoles to play newer games. "you need x model of [Vid, CPU, RAM] to play this game." At the same time have their own Steam style market, stop charging to do ANYTHING online, and they'll be set. Maybe charge for multiplayer and that's it (mainly geared towards the Call of Duty jugheads.)
This way they can start porting PC games interchangeably as well. Instead of having HIGHLY proprietary consoles with exclusive hardware to program for, the usage of common computer parts would help out the entire gaming community, as well as ease up the load on programmers and allow them to have a wider selection.
A computer gaming platform under the guise of a console, and people won't even realize the difference. Still proprietary, yet not as much as these poor consoles that were released at E3.
Basically if Sony and Micro$oft is competing to 'control the living room' then they should ideally have an uphill battle against the Home and Theater PC [HTPC] which can be equipped with voice recognition, gaming video cards, etc etc.
Just my .02
Microsft have missed an opportunity here. They could have backed themselves up and really presented an alternative option to the PS4. Instead we have more of the same, no real difference between the two and a distinct lack of innovation in these new consoles. Interesting read http://wjminnovate.wordpress.com/2013/06/21/microsofts-missed-opportunity/
Disagree. One of the key arguments from the story in your link, is that the M$ model would have meant more money flowing back to Developers and that would in-turn lead to fresh IP. But games have become so Hollywood Blockbuster sequel like, and so damn similar of late, that I think we'd just get more of the same. By that I mean more cut-scenes, bland FPS, QTE gameplay, on-a-rail spin-offs but few fresh ideas... The advocate of your argument will just ship us more 'Gears of War' sequels!
For instance the games that are most likely to be returned and sold in the second hand market are actually big-titles like Halo and Cod. Both last releases had few fresh ideas in their multiplayer maps! So more money going back to these developers will just mean more drudge, because there's huge pressure to push mega-releases ala Michael Bay like Transformers of the Caribbean sequels. This means creativity will continue to fall off a cliff. Sure, there may be some pretty titles but ultimately many will simply be on-a-rail Bioshock Infinite clones and other UDK kit-games.
Instead what we need and want is innovation and fresh ideas in gaming. I think we need to support more crowd-funded smaller game studios for that. But until we stop buying the Michael Bay sequels and insist on more innovative games, the bigger guys won't start to take notice. ..
Means they will be both garbage. (I have the 3DS Kingdom Hearts and I hate it more than any game I have paid full price for in a long time).
Final Fantasy the name is all that is left (And it is worthless now). The only good part of Square Enix only caters to Japan. The international part of it is an absolute waste of time. Think the good people from it are at an obscure Nintendo owned studio.
Dragon Quest is much better dunno about the MMO one.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
