So it's official, Microsoft have yet again revised their policies in regards to their next gen console the Xbox One, this time by removing the feature that makes the Kinect 2 a mandatory requirement for using the Xbox One console, something a great many gamers had issue with. With Microsoft now having done sufficient enough back peddling to power most of Europe for a year (Ba dum tish) I'm now left asking the question "Was it all necessary?" Just what was an intelligent, business minded company like Microsoft thinking when they knowingly went about dividing up their fanbase, and creating these unnecessary walls in the form of unfavourable business policies? only to later down the line revise almost all of their original Xbox One policies, seemingly solely due to the continued bad press and negative PR they have suffered since the Xbox One reveal and Microsoft E3 conference.
This all led me back to thoughts I had been having about Microsoft's inevitable next gen console. Months before the Xbox One was even hinted about being revealed, I was asking myself "what can we expect from Microsoft's next gen console?" would we see another Kinect even though the original failed to appeal to the core audience?, would Microsoft reach out for more 3rd party support and exclusivity?, and would they really have the nerve to continue charging their loyal customers through Xbox Live in order for us to play online?.
I eventually arrived at the conclusion that Microsoft's business model, and policies would see very little changes being made when moving into next gen territory, of course I expected some new features and new exclusives but nothing revolutionary. So then imagine my surprise when Microsoft finally did reveal the Xbox One along with what would shortly be dubbed as "draconian DRM" a mandatory Kinect 2, timed exclusives from 3rd party devs, always online functionality, and major changes to their policies in the form of used game restriction and 24 hour checkins, all while still having the nerve to charge a fee to play online.
I was taken back to say the least (like I'm sure many gamers were at the time) I thought to me myself that there is no way Microsoft can be serious, even after hearing from so many people who didn't at all mind the new policies, it was evident that those who apposed the DRM and other such policies were in the majority, and for good reason. The Xbox One DRM and other new policies had potentially damaging ramifications to gaming in general if they were to become the norm, then eventually the back peddling started and all the negative aspects of Xbox One became fewer and fewer, until finally earlier this month Microsoft announced that the Kinect 2 will no longer be mandatory in order to actually use the Xbox One. Finally! It seems like all the negatives surrounding Microsoft's new console are now gone, but then what does that mean now? Sure most of us have no reason not to get an Xbox One anymore, but other than the that fact most of the negative aspects like, used game restrictions, always online, and mandatory Kinect 2 are now gone, what exactly are Microsoft doing with the Xbox One that differentiates its from the previous generation? par a few new features that aren't at all relevant to "gaming" like watching TV and Skype. Personally the Xbox One just seems like a beefed-up Xbox 360 now right now, and the only reason I think I never noticed this before was because the negative policies were the few thing that actually seemed "next gen" or at the very least seemed to be more worthy of my attention. So then was this just a PR stunt? Could it be that all this negativity surrounding Microsoft's Xbox One was just used as a "Weapon of mass distraction" planed from the outset so that when all the back peddling was done, no matter how lacking in "next gen" appeal the Xbox One appeared to be when it comes to new features and functions (from a purely gaming related view point) it would be looked upon favourably purely because "Microsoft listened to their fans" and fixed everything we had a problem with? Well, I'll let you decide on that.
Now of course you could still argue that Kinect 2 is very much "next gen" and you'd be right in doing so, but it still stands true that the vast majority of gamers are uninterested in Kinect (or motion sensor gaming in general) or at the very least need proof that Kinect 2 can succeed in being relevant to core gaming, something its predecessor failed miserably at.
Cloud based gaming is worthy of mention in regards to "next gen" functions the Xbox One has, Microsoft has stated numerous times how "the power of the Cloud" can boost the power of the Xbox One's specs by the equivalent of three Xbox 360s, potentially making the graphics, processing and gameplay for games being played while the Xbox One is hooked up to the internet, superior to that of the competition. However even now we have yet to of seen any evidence that could validate these statement, with only certain individuals willing to state that it will "improve server quality" many others in the industry are saying Microsoft's overall vision for Cloud based gaming on the Xbox One is but a pipe dream.
Regardless of whether or not the Xbox One has any additional features relevant to gaming (I personally find the Xbox One controller's trigger feedback function to be very interesting) It should be mentioned that the Xbox One has some great exclusives and other equally great 3rd party titles coming its way, that reason alone is enough for most gamers to purchase the Xbox One, heck I myself will most likely be getting the Xbox One now that the Kinect 2 is no longer mandatory. But I'll always be wondering whether or not this whole PR stunt was manufactured to put the Xbox One in the lime light, even negative press is good press, or so they say.
So that's it I guess, maybe Microsoft did plan this whole PR back peddling extravaganza from the start, or maybe they really didn't see the consumer backlash coming due to their ambitious new policies. Either way we win, total victory guys congratulations!
Thanks for reading my blog, if you'd like to add anything or disagree with any of my points, please feel free to leave a comment.
Stellar Blade's creative director, Hyung Tae Kim, has also claimed that the game is deeply inspired by Nier: Automata.
I feel like Yoko is downgrading Automata because he has expressed multiple times he'd like to revisit the universe, but Squenix hasn't been keen about it. We know he loves 2B and would love to take her out for another spin, so maybe this is how he gets the company to think about it.
I get he's giving them some credit, but i strongly disagree based on the demo. I honestly don't think any aspect of it feels good, it's not bad, it's just kinda ok but definitely a little jank. Also the souls like formula it is adopting does not help it imo. I was looking forward to this for years, now im just kinda let down honestly 🫤
Man exputer can you stop putting words like that after someone's name, i read Yoko Taro Passes and just went blank
(From the demo) Stellar has better direction in terms of stage layout if you like that ninja gaiden type feel. Nier is more polished by far.
The Outerhaven writes: The Nintendo Switch has had plenty of big hits, but perhaps to help its successor, some of its "lesser hits" could get ported with some "upgrades."
Yea so the fanboys can pay 70 bucks for ports this time around. As if if wasn't bad enough with all the Wii U ports and 3DS ports that have taken up most of Ninty's releases these last few years. We should be pushing for backwards compatibility instead of giving them the idea that they can charge full price AGAIN for games already bought.
The likes of Pilotwings, 1080 Snowboarding, Stunt Race FX, F-Zero and Wave Race especially have all been canned by Nintendo. The Switch saw a number of Wii U ports, but not even Splatoon and Mario Maker made the cut, maybe a few others. Seems Nintendo likes to bang the same drum these days.
No more ports or remakes of recently released stuff. Enough is enough. Just make Switch 2 be backwards compatible with maybe some boosts on older games using the improved iGPU/cpu.
Review - Scott Whiskers in: the Search for Mr. Fumbleclaw very much puts the heart back into point and click.
Pre-orders were probably low. But I guess gamers did vote with their wallets this time.
We should be thanking Sony for pushing the competition.
Victory is sweet. The always on Kinect thing was really the last hang up that I had about the Xbox One so it's now a bit more buyable (though I was gonna get it anyway).
I don't think that the backlash was a PR stunt because I believe that they are just that inept. If they truly meant it as a stunt then they wouldn't have come out with all of that 'deal with it' crap after the announcement which certainly turned fans away.
I don't think this was a PR stunt... at least if it was, it back fired badly.
It is good that these policies have been reversed to bring it in line with sony as it would have been bad for both gamers and the industry.
These changes seemed to have started very soon after the new management came in. The previous bosses seem to be very disconnected saying things like deal with it when word broke out about the always on line. As well as the quick exit of other bosses shortly after the Xbox One announcement.
Now that they are rolling back all the bad stuff that they have done, only time will tell if they come up with any new ideas that will benefit the console. (hopefully not damage it further).
hopefully new features will have the customer (Gamer) in mind rather than business.
Two points of concern I have about this:
1) The console releases in a few months. Backpedaling means architecture and programing must be tweaked to accommodate for it. Is it going to be ready? Without problems? That is a very, very small window. You must figure that the actual X1s need be in production very soon. You can't undo architectural changes after production begins. This makes a launch X1 a gamble.
2) Creating a great game may take a few years. And launch titles or titles released near launch have been in development for over a year and a half. Developers that integrated Kinect features in their games (considering that it would be there and always be on) are now developing for a system that doesn't require it? So, now two months of coding Kinect features that were just made obsolete results in money and time wasted. Developers should be rightly angered by this.