News & Rumors: Xbox One (codename Durango)

[zupallinere]

They were even jumping through hoops to enable disc-lovers to operate business as usual given the constraints of forward looking system. Make no mistake, these DRM changes are DETRIMENTAL to consumers in the long run. Of course that doesn't fit the narrative.

Jumping through hoops ?? This is free PR. Neither Microsoft nor Sony is your friend. MS made the decisions it made STRICTLY to increase their profits, to give them leverage in any future dealings with publishers, competitors and consumers. That is the only thing that they are doing. Sony does the same thing and quite honestly as consumers we have a duty to understand that these companies don't "care" about us and we should not "care" about them. The only thing we need to "care" about is the value of a product and the competitive landscape to assure that value. They see us as merely account number with a positive cash flow behind it other than than we are worthless to them. Not that that's a bad thing

 

[dumbo11]

From my piont of view Microsoft could have done better explaining there plans.

No kidding.

Then Microsoft made there statement at E3 the facts where listed on there web site for all to pour over and ponder .
But no one did they just ran with the negative stunt Sony ran at there press confrence hours later at that point no one was interested in what Microsoft's policy was or was not.

To report on a product, the media needs a story. You either give them the story, or let them report their opinions.

For example:
- "the Haswell processor is a waste of time for desktop performance."
vs
- "the Haswell processor sets new benchmarks in x86 power efficiency."

It's the job of your PR department to make sure that the story reported is the most favourable story.

i.e. If you don't spin the story, then someone else will...

For the XB1 - prior to E3 the story was "XB1 sucks for gamers and takes their rights away". Left alone, that's the story the media would print. And they were left alone, and that's the story the media did print.

The argument that MS simply "forgot" the basic rules of media relationships is unthinkable. You don't accidentally forget to brief on the 'killer feature' of your system.

The truth is we where all let down by the gaming press they didn't not do there job which was to look at it from a neutral starting point then report the facts to there readers.

MS had separate 1-on-1 interviews with the main representatives of the media after E3 to sit down and give them the story - the media are normal people, they mix with publishers... they know that this is complicated, they may not have agreed but they would have reported the other side of the story. Those meetings were the opportunity to force home 'the story of the XB1'.

Microsoft cancelled most of those meetings, and seem to have spent the rest of the time discussing "the cloud" and showing off kinect2 .

I find it hard to blame the gaming press for this.

 

[brasnial]

Again not really the press made the story and set the tone of the story they set the tone before E3 based on leaks and here say .

In England we have had real problems with the press not playing by the rules ....we even had a inquiry into there bad behavior.
one paper the one most guilty of fact twisting......story inventing .....illegal phone tapping was shut down in a attempt to make the whole sordid affair go away .

There's a reason you have no free press in some countries and that's because the press is very powerful at influencing public opinion mostly for the good of the general public but sadly not always .

In my opinion this was a case of scare mongering based on no facts instead leaks and here say .
Just take a look at the press from Microsoft's may reveal all the way up to E3 it was very much scare stories designed to get hits to help there bottom line .....there's nothing like bad news to sell papers and on the internet bad news generates far more hits than good or positive news .

As a neutral gamer who has seem this all before with the wii release ....Sony's ps3 .Microsoft's Xbox 1 and 360 its easy to spot .

 

[french toast]

This had nothing to do with the press, please stop comparing soft gaming internet press to the criminal out of control british press of the last 20 years..no comparison at all.

Microsoft similar to sony with sony/ ps3 -over inflated their egos, thinking that xbox brand was apple like and so they could introduce apple like limitations and lock in to extract the maximum profits from their loyal customers.. (which I am)

I also would not be suprised if some of that business plan included selling on data collected from kinect- having a system where the box is always connected to the internet and the kinect camera is always calibrated and switched on was odd to say the least, it had nothing to do with enhancing the consumer experience. #freaky.

The used games was obviously another way to encourage punters to spend more cash on forking out new games and likely also to extract more money/better deals from publishers...essentially trying to have their cake and eat it.

Sony is certainly no saint..as with all cooperations..its in it for the profit. .but they certainly handle the situation much much better and are clearly on tune to what console gamers want.

 

[upnorthsox]

This had nothing to do with the press, please stop comparing soft gaming internet press to the criminal out of control british press of the last 20 years..no comparison at all.

Microsoft similar to sony with sony/ ps3 -over inflated their egos, thinking that xbox brand was apple like and so they could introduce apple like limitations and lock in to extract the maximum profits from their loyal customers.. (which I am)

I also would not be suprised if some of that business plan included selling on data collected from kinect- having a system where the box is always connected to the internet and the kinect camera is always calibrated and switched on was odd to say the least, it had nothing to do with enhancing the consumer experience. #freaky.

The used games was obviously another way to encourage punters to spend more cash on forking out new games and likely also to extract more money/better deals from publishers...essentially trying to have their cake and eat it.

Sony is certainly no saint..as with all cooperations..its in it for the profit. .but they certainly handle the situation much much better and are clearly on tune to what console gamers want.

Indeed, Sony is why we know and are easily able to identify bad PR jobs...........

 

[zupallinere]

Indeed, Sony is why we know and are easily able to identify bad PR jobs...........

Zactly, It's actually kind of bizarre of MS to fall into the same issues as sony did 7 years ago.

Both the PS3 and the XB1 have agendas that have nothing to do with gaming. Both pushed new features on a public that wasn't sold on the idea. Both come in at 100 bucks more than their competitor. I do not think that the XB1 will end up falling behind like the PS3 did however. MS isn't that stupid.

 

[dagamer]

June 6th, http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/license

I'm wondering why such important information was given out via a webpage instead of a promo video with nifty graphics on YouTube. Major Nelson explaining it doesn't cut it (that Angry Joe video floating around was not good PR). It's as if these people are stuck in 2005.

 

[James Car]

... I do not think that the XB1 will end up falling behind like the PS3 did however. MS isn't that stupid.

Again, let's not pretend MS hasn't seen failure. Especially outside of their OS division.

In fact, Xbox was one of the rare business units that was on a healthy growth trajectory.

But that division isn't run by the same people now that started it in the first place. It is now headed by individuals that are looking to "maximize profit" rather than letting profit come to them by offering a compelling device/service.

In short, the Xbox division of old "wasn't that stupid". The new one, it seems are in fact, "that stupid".

 

[blakjedi]

and are clearly on tune to what console gamers want.

Disagree. They are in tune with want gamers who identify with the Sony brand want. I don't identify with brands I identify with features.

PS4 has nothing remotely interesting or in tune with my desires as a gamer in their device. I'm only getting one for the exclusives I cant get on XB1.

They dont care if my desires are met; they will be happy with the sale just the same.

 

[blakjedi]

In fact, Xbox was one of the rare business units that was on a healthy growth trajectory.

This is an OT point and a way of arguing used by folks all over the net which is disingenuous as it has nothing to do with Xbox.

Sony as a company is doing a LOT less well than any of Micosofts non entertainment divisions.

The truth is that just this year both Azure and Office 365 have become new billion dollar businesses for MS.

Xbox one will probably take that entire division out of the red by its first birthday. Just stop.

 

[Cranky]

MS didn't, but members in this thread have said the sharing situation was extremely obvious with zero confusion, and only idiots and fanboys confused the situation. Hence my interest in finding out exactly what was communicated when to decided for myself if it was MS's poor communication or the public's misinterpretation.

By accounts, it wasn't until the 6th June that MS actually explained what their sharing policy was, to whoever happened to go and look it up, which means -1 point for MS for miscommunication.



Given three games in your shared library, X, Y, and Z, and three family members, A, B, C, if A is playing X, can B and C play Y and Z, or can only one game in total be shared from your library and B and C would have to wait their turn? The phrasing suggests the latter, which would be incorrect. A clearer statement would be:
The specific pronoun 'each' is very important in being clear.

From what I can see, MS's original communication was non-existent. During the May 21st reveal, they could have shown a little promo vid (similar to Sony's UI vid that was released a little while ago) that showcased the user experience and how game sharing was a big step forward. Failing that, they could have released a very simple, obvious PR statement like:



Obviously a trained copyrighter spending more time on it could spruce it up. But MS failed utterly to communicate this. The end result was a lot of guesswork and confusion for a couple of weeks, by which time the miscommunication had snowballed.

Although the Internet failed to re-evaluate their understanding as new information came out, I don't blame the situation on them as Joker et al do. This whole sorry mess is principally down to MS failing to communicate their vision. Considering shoe-string budget Kickstarter's are capable of creating really swish, informative promo videos (DSLRs for the win!), it's pretty shocking that MS can be so clumsy in this regard. They need to update their whole PR and Communication division to get with the programme!

See nothing ambiguous at all. See you parsed correctly and quickly. The intent was obvious. What was not obvious were details around time between online checks and that sort of thing.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

See nothing ambiguous at all. See you parsed correctly and quickly. The intent was obvious.

Perhaps not ambiguous then, but inaccurate given what bkilian has said. The description said only one friend at a time can access your library, where in reality it was all your friends, just one different game each. I will concede that what they wrote was clear enough (even if inaccurate), but leaving it to a text document that users had to go and look up was explaining it poorly. They revealed their DRM, didn't communicate anything about sharing, waited 2 weeks while the internet was saying what a ripoff XB1 was and how no-one had any interest in buying it, and then hoped all those people who had given on XB1 would go and look up a text document. If I was intersted in a new product, say a Sony Xperia phone, and then I watched a 2 hour reveal and was turned off it by Sony's description, am I really at fault for not then looking for further clarification two weeks later, especially when I now have my eye on a new Galaxy that I've been hearing good things about? I can't blame people for being irrational there. MS should have explained their sharing policy in simple terms, preferably with a lifestyle video, at the XB1 reveal event.

 

[James Car]

This is an OT point and a way of arguing used by folks all over the net which is disingenuous as it has nothing to do with Xbox...

I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion.

First of all, it has a lot to do with the xbox. It seems the new execs in charge are not cut from the same cloth, and are looking to maximize profit first and foremost. This is confirmed by an ex insider, and by my own two eyes/ears seeing where MS has taken the platform up to this point.

Everything from the hardware in the box, to the policies, to the pricetag.

I didn't say it was the "only" growth sector for MS, but it is a rarity. Many other attempts to branch out have been met with failure. So to see xbox not be met with the same demise that struck down Zune, Kin, WebTV, etc, was a nice surprise. Partly due to their ability to absorb losses to gain marketshare, and partly due to their vision for the platform and the hardware to draw in fans.

Now it seems MS is ready to "cash in their chips". IMO, this is a rather shortsighted move on their end which has a lot to do with the execs in charge there now, and where they viewed their business trajectory. They figured they could lean on that trajectory and fanbase to maximize short term profits which lead to a relatively underpowered box, a relatively high msrp, and relatively anti-consumer policies (which they have now backtracked ... at least temporarily).

Different people in charge might have led to more aggressive hardware and/or a more aggressive MSRP.

 

[dobwal]

Yes, MS dropped the ball. And did so, horribly.

MS should of devoted 20 minutes of both presentations to its sharing features. Its should of been the one thing that MS repeatedly touted as the most compelling feature of the XB1. Its probably the most attractive social feature ever discussed for a console.

Yet, it barely got any airtime while MS decided to drop its DRM plan onto the internet on the Friday before e3 in practically a memo form. They did this even though the internet's consternation over their DRM scheme was readily evident. They made it easy for Sony.

If Apple ever comes in and takes over the console and TV space, it will do so because both MS and Sony are relatively bad at handling negative press around their products and creating excitement with the general public. Apple encumbers their products with some of the most draconian DRM schemes known to man and has gotten away with it because of Apple's ability to focus consumers' attention to the features and benefits of its products while practically avoiding any discussion of its DRM implementation.

http://www.apple.com/ios/ios7/

If Apple can take this much time and effort for a free OS upgrade, you would think MS could of manage a better way to market their sharing feature for their brand new $500 product.

 

[Gubbi]

Yet, it barely got any airtime while MS decided to drop its DRM plan onto the internet on the Friday before e3 in practically a memo form. They did this even though the internet's consternation over their DRM scheme was readily evident. They made it easy for Sony.

They didn't give it enough thought, granted. Probably because the terms and usage wasn't new, it was exactly what family Live Gold enabled you to do, only with the sharing/DRM scheme extending to games on physical discs too.

Apparently people are free to make shit up if something hasn't been specified, or if it has and they just misunderstood it.

Cheers

 

[Scott_Arm]

People demanded a parade of games at E3, because they "wasted their time" talking about features at the reveal. So they showed games at E3, and now gamers are saying they should have spent more time talking about features. The gamers got it right the second time. I've never understood the point of parading a bunch of games on stage. EA can demo their games at their own show. I want to know how the system works, and the DRM talk should have been a part of that. The Apple reveal is the model that should be followed. Microsoft got it absolutely wrong. They counted on gamers reading small amounts of information from official sources, and on the reveal that was showing on Xbox 360 dashboard. You have to throw stuff in gamers faces. Gamers need to be spoon fed. That's been demonstrated to be absolutely true. Gamers will go straight to Reddit, GAF, Pastebin or whatever forum they read for information, where fact checking is just about nil. I'd be surprised if people in Xbox marketing weren't fired over this, but it could be that decisions on the software side were made so late that the marketing folks didn't have time to properly prepare.

 

[blakjedi]

I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion.

First of all, it has a lot to do with the xbox. It seems the new execs in charge are not cut from the same cloth, and are looking to maximize profit first and foremost. This is confirmed by an ex insider, and by my own two eyes/ears seeing where MS has taken the platform up to this point.

Everything from the hardware in the box, to the policies, to the pricetag.

I didn't say it was the "only" growth sector for MS, but it is a rarity. Many other attempts to branch out have been met with failure. So to see xbox not be met with the same demise that struck down Zune, Kin, WebTV, etc, was a nice surprise. Partly due to their ability to absorb losses to gain marketshare, and partly due to their vision for the platform and the hardware to draw in fans.

Now it seems MS is ready to "cash in their chips". IMO, this is a rather shortsighted move on their end which has a lot to do with the execs in charge there now, and where they viewed their business trajectory. They figured they could lean on that trajectory and fanbase to maximize short term profits which lead to a relatively underpowered box, a relatively high msrp, and relatively anti-consumer policies (which they have now backtracked ... at least temporarily).

Different people in charge might have led to more aggressive hardware and/or a more aggressive MSRP.

I just dont see what zune, kin or any of that adds to your argument. Your argument without those references is fine on its own. Trust that.

My hope is that MS gest very aggressive in the months leading up to launch. With the NFL starting up in August and the fall videogame season looming theres no need to hit the panic button now in June... In August they will have sorted out their message made some concrete plans and price structures and move forward.

I'm most interested in how the TV overlay actually works what restrictions there actually are on a provider by provider basis.

 

[patsu]

If Apple ever comes in and takes over the console and TV space, it will do so because both MS and Sony are relatively bad at handling negative press around their products and creating excitement with the general public. Apple encumbers their products with some of the most draconian DRM schemes known to man and has gotten away with it because of Apple's ability to focus consumers' attention to the features and benefits of its products while practically avoiding any discussion of its DRM implementation.

:-O

Which Apple DRM are you talking about ?

On iOS, there is no concept of physical media. You can share all purchases on multiple devices. My phone has apps from multiple people and I can still use their apps after they left. These apps are free or cheap to begin with. Shareware used to cost $10-$20 on PC/Mac. Commercial ware from $40-50 and up.

On Mac, the fruit company doesn't prevent used disc app sales. The Mac AppStore is there mostly for security and retail revenue. But you can buy direct fom any vendor. I bought Parallels from outside Apple's AppStore. I can transfer the license to my wife if I want to. That's dealing with Parallels directly. Apple didn't and still don't give a hoot.

Edit: Come to think of it, the Apple app ecosystem is not region coded too.

 

[french toast]

Disagree. They are in tune with want gamers who identify with the Sony brand want. I don't identify with brands I identify with features.

PS4 has nothing remotely interesting or in tune with my desires as a gamer in their device. I'm only getting one for the exclusives I cant get on XB1.

They dont care if my desires are met; they will be happy with the sale just the same.

No you have got it wrong
Sony clearly have made a game console first...with some additional social/tv/internet features tacked on..where as microsoft made a tv/internet/casual gamer box first that just happens to play reasonably high end games.

Sony have got the most powerfull no nonsense/most easily for development console (if vg leaks are to be believed. .I think there right)..they have bundled no gimmicks to keep the price down, one operating system that allows devs to code as close to the metal as possible, got the easy accessible no internet requirements, no camera needed, free to do what the hell you like with the game disks..unlocked region free games...the smaller/2 way stacking console.. (lighter? Better looking? ), more innovative controller (even if as an avid 360 fan microsoft mak the best controllers).

Oh and sony whilst not offering any backwards compatibility right out of the gate, at least has the promise of full backwards compat within the year via gakai.

Microsoft also has a horrible reputation its picked up the last couple of years of writing out fake reviews or its products.
Sony cocked up and choked on their own ego with the ps3...somehow they pulled it back round...now microsoft seems to hage made the same mistake. #arrogance.

The fact xbox one got royally panned in the media and had to yeild to match what the ps4 was offering right from the start tells you who was on the right side of the hardcore gamer.
And thats why I will be buying a ps4 right out of the gate, the fact microsoft reversed its george orwell policies means I may get another xbox in te future.

 

[bkilian]

Perhaps not ambiguous then, but inaccurate given what bkilian has said. The description said only one friend at a time can access your library, where in reality it was all your friends, just one different game each. I will concede that what they wrote was clear enough (even if inaccurate), but leaving it to a text document that users had to go and look up was explaining it poorly. They revealed their DRM, didn't communicate anything about sharing, waited 2 weeks while the internet was saying what a ripoff XB1 was and how no-one had any interest in buying it, and then hoped all those people who had given on XB1 would go and look up a text document. If I was intersted in a new product, say a Sony Xperia phone, and then I watched a 2 hour reveal and was turned off it by Sony's description, am I really at fault for not then looking for further clarification two weeks later, especially when I now have my eye on a new Galaxy that I've been hearing good things about? I can't blame people for being irrational there. MS should have explained their sharing policy in simple terms, preferably with a lifestyle video, at the XB1 reveal event.

It may not be inaccurate. We never talked about what multiple family members would do. It is entirely possible that the checkout for a game is essentially also a checkout for the entire library (for the family members). The text is pretty clear that you can always access your library, and any one of your friends can access your library at a time. The only other info that is not listed in that text is that only one person can be playing a particular game at a time.

The text is likely accurate, but I do agree it could have been a little clearer with regards to how games are shared.