280°
Submitted by PulpoTonto 310d ago | opinion piece

Microsoft Is Doing It Right With Xbox One

Before you go off guns blazing, read the article and see if it makes any valid points. If you don't think it does, feel free to lambast me in the comments!

Microsoft is certainly doing a lot of things wrong, but it's core concept behind the Xbox One is solid - here's why. (Microsoft, Xbox One)

Cam977   310d ago | Trolling | show | Replies(5)
komp  +   310d ago
Or they could look at this image from amazon poll

15:1 http://i.imgur.com/wFQZ0Q3....
moparful99  +   310d ago
Wow that's sad lol.. I wonder how much longer Mattrick will keep that cavalier attitude that they are making the right decisions.
wishingW3L  +   310d ago
less than a week since the announcement and I can't even find a single store online or off-line to pre-order a launch PS4!
Sitdown  +   310d ago
Be honest are you really looking? Best buy has stock, Walmart has stock, GameStop has bundles
friedricr  +   310d ago
where can i see that on the actually amazon site? or is that just photoshopped lol?
doctorstrange  +   310d ago
It's oh so real - http://www.playstationlifes...
TheEnigma313  +   310d ago
"Microsoft Is Doing It Right With Xbox One"

-Said no one ever
friedricr  +   310d ago
uhh fanboys .. man... but then again they don't count.
Baka-akaB  +   310d ago
"Before you go off guns blazing, read the article and see if it makes any valid points"

Learn to write a title without sensationalism in mind , and maybe one day i will read it . Meanwhile dont pretend you aint getting the effect you precisely want
#4 (Edited 310d ago ) | Agree(18) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
PulpoTonto  +   310d ago
If you read the article, it makes the point that what they are doing with the Xbox One is right, and will come to play out within it's 10 year life cycle.

It also says that the way Microsoft are treating the consumer and delivering information in an obtuse and confusing manner isn't right.
Baka-akaB  +   310d ago
But i wont . Made my point clear . Dont give a crap about what's inside . Same goes for pro nintendo or pro sony , flamebait crap titled articles .

When you bother , the content is rarely better anyway than the headline
#4.2 (Edited 310d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Moonman  +   310d ago
zzzzzzzzzzz.... :)
McScroggz  +   310d ago
Answer this:

You postulate that because the Xbox One has an internet requirement (a very odd 24 hour check in, but I digress) but what does the Xbox One offer from a fundamental level that the PS4 cannot? If a developer wants to create a game that requires an online connection so that it can offload computations to the cloud - which I'm extremely skeptical about - why can the PS4 not do that? Sony has come out and said developers could do the same thing with Sony's Gakai cloud without forcing a PR statement down our throats that's the infinite power of the cloud will increase the console's performance greatly.

With the original Xbox, we had NO CHOICE but to improve our internet. It was something that was happening gradually to our country regardless of gaming, but the Xbox made us change sooner. Having this odd 24 hour check in online requirement is purely restrictive without the ambitious goals of progressing the games industry forward.
nukeitall  +   309d ago
The fact you are comparing Gakai to regular cloud computing shows that you are confused about the subject.

Gakai is a game streaming service similar to Netflix, which is in no form similar to offloading computations to the cloud.

Certainly cloud computation is possible on PS4 assuming Sony is willing to invest in the infrastructure similar to how MS can invest into a Gakai like service.

However, the main question is really can Sony match Xbox One features, and the answer is a most definitely NO. MS is pioneering this similar to how PSN consistently is behind.

In addition, instant game switching with TV or apps, or even smart matchmaking running in the background is very difficult to do, because the PS4 wasn't designed with that in mind. This means resources and specs are cast in stone, similar to how PS3 was unable to get cross game chat, because there wasn't enough RAM allocated to the OS.

The 24-hour check-in requirement is to appease publishers that won't allow game installs without knowing there isn't going to be massive amount of people disconnecting and playing illegal copies of the game.

The digital only nature is required for the Xbox One to be able to instantly switch between games/apps. If you rely on a disc like PS4, it has to wait for you to insert said disc which is NOT so INSTANT anymore.

One benefit of Xbox One is that you can instantly share your entire library with 10 people. That means you can all buy different game and just share it, without bothering with a disc.

Just instant access!!!
#6.1 (Edited 309d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
McScroggz  +   309d ago
I'm not misinformed about the cloud computation possibility of the PS4, in fact I consider myself well informed. It actually wouldn't take a large investment from Sony, as it's purely software based. Plus, nearly everything I've read concerning cloud computing points to how little can actually be done. I consider it a moot point from a general perspective.

As for features, I suppose if you include things like Kinect voice navigation and snapping secondary applications like a sidebar then no, the PS4 won't have as many features. But when put into context, I sincerely doubt these features will result in any significant increase in sales. In fact, I consider this an actual negative because the overall performance of the console as a gaming platform has been handicapped - and this is something that cannot be debated.

I think the idea of Microsoft forcing consumers to have a working internet connect to attempt to prevent piracy is more PR spin than fact. Don't misunderstand me, I do think there is some merit to that notion, but I feel it's much more about enforcing DRM as a way to restrict games by using "the infinite power of the cloud" and forcing subscriptions to Xbox Live Gold membership for Microsoft.

As for the forced installs, you said two different things. The idea that it saves time by not needing to insert a disc somehow justifies, even slightly, the necessity to install a game doesn't hold up. Needing to install a disc isn't terrible, but I'd MUCH rather have the option to increase game performance by doing so rather than have no option. As for the instant switching, I don't believe that would actually make a difference as it's a background program but still running whether it's reading from a disc or from installed data. Plus, I don't know if you've seen what the switching and dual applications actually looks like, but it's surprisingly slow and very laggy. So even though I expect it to improve, it is very, very far from the instant switching Microsoft staged at the May 21st reveal.

As for the sharing of your entire library with 10 people, Microsoft has been surprisingly and purposefully ambiguous on this subject. Given everything surrounding the Xbox One you'd have to be an extremely optimistic person to believe Microsoft will allow such a forgiving system of sharing. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? No.
#6.1.1 (Edited 309d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report
Mikelarry  +   310d ago
love how the article says "Before you go off guns blazing, read the article and see if it makes any valid points. If you don't think it does, feel free to lambast me in the comments"

he knows ps fans are ready to finish him off. and before you disagree i am a ps fan
#7 (Edited 310d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Protagonist  +   310d ago
It is not even about being a PS fan. I said to myself (even though I love Playstation) if the PS4 had the same restrictions I would not buy one.
Death  +   310d ago
And if PS4 adopts a DRM policy similar what will we all do? Do you think we can all get refunds? Sony said they would not charge for online and now they do. Sony is great innovator at following others. Hey, we have motion controls too. We also do this camera thing. Sadly neither is really supported. I'm not a fan of Kinect, but I respect Microsoft's decision to support the product 100% instead of simply taking the me too approach.
kneon  +   310d ago
Sony were doing the motion control and camera before the Wii and kinect, and they have the patents to prove it. And they have already stated no 1st or 3rd party drm and no online passes
Death  +   310d ago
Patents mean nothing if the technology isn't being used. Online passes were dropped by third parties using them a couple months ago. Sony stated they have no plans of implimenting DRM, but it is up to third party publishers if they want to use them.

Here is the difference between Microsoft and Sony. Microsoft took the PR hit and announced the new Xbox will have the DRM console wide. This protects developers and publishers financially and keeps them from taking flak from the public. Sony took the easy way out and said they have no plans of using DRM, but specifically said it's up to third parties if they want to use it. Sony is letting their partners take the blame for this "mess". If I am EA, Ubisoft, or any publisher for that matter, I'm not going to be very happy with Sony right now.

Sony said the Cell was the future and then dropped it very quickly when it didn't catch on. They sold manufacturing to Toshiba and distanced themselves from the technology. Sony said Blu-ray would usher in the future of gaming and charged $100 more for it than the competitions dated DVD's. Gamers received a small handful of games that they didn't have to swap discs on as they played. Sony said they wouldn't charge for online when Microsoft took the heat for Live. Sony is now charging to play online. Sony says what the public wants to hear. The public embraces what they say, get burned, and don't even know it or blame someone else. If history proves anything, Sony will have DRM on their PS4 and Sony fans will blame Microsoft for it. Hey, Microsoft already gets the blame for PSN becoming a pay service. I guess this makes Microsoft the new industry leader. Maybe that is why so many Playstation fans are upset. Sony does what Microsoft forces them to do. Turns out they are a victim in all of this.
moparful99  +   309d ago
@Death Sony decided to move away from the cell because having of the costs associated with the manufacturing. They came out and stated this very candidly. They also let the developers design this console and the developers wanted a custom powerful pc architecture so development would be easier without sacrificing performance. Its funny seeing you defending Microsoft and downplaying Sony now considering how critical you were of the ps3 despite how well it has done... You try to play off this unbiased stance but you give yourself away with comments like this..
Death  +   309d ago
The PS3 did not do well. All three Playstations had custom archetectures that were a pain to develop for. Each generation Sony gave them a fancy name like "Emotion Engine" and "Cell". This was allegedly what made Sony better than the PC based offerings from Microsoft. Cell was a failure as Sony invisioned it. Cell wasn't even new. Apple had used the technology for years, but Sony made it their own and fans ate it up.

What did Sony create this gen?
1. PC based console for ease of development.
2. A paid unified subscription based online service to enhance the online experience.
3. XMB was ditched in order to provide a new "frictionless" interface.
4. Emphisis on downloadable games over disc based games as being the future.

Lets face it, they built a damn Xbox. The irony is Sony fans think this is revelutionary. Theprimary difference between the XboxOne and PS4 is the inclusion of Kinect, so it receives support and Microsofts DRM that insures developers and publishers regain lost revenue to create more games. Microsoft is attempting to move gaming forward and are being crusified for it. Sony is building an Xbox and being cheered on for it.
#8.2.1 (Edited 309d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report
moparful99  +   308d ago
The ps3 passed the 360 in lifetime sales and the ps2 is the best selling console of all time.. The very definition of sucess.. Sony ditched the cell because thats what devs wanted! Nobody thinks the ps4 is revolutionary, we just think its the best console of this new generation..8 gigs of gddr5 says hi.. speaking of follow the leader, funny how microsoft now includes a bluray drive.. Irony at its finest.. lastly sony has been on board with day one digital since before microsoft..Have fun with your $500 cable box that wont wont let you play games without an i ternet connection..
Der_Kommandant  +   310d ago
Im sorry I couldn't hear you over the 500 dollars you are asking for.
a_bro  +   310d ago
Did greenpowerzz write this for his Microsoft paycheck?
franko  +   310d ago
Where do i sign up to write this kind of s**t and get payed by ms? I really need money. To buy ps4.
Baka-akaB  +   310d ago
Freelance troll ? and writing for all 3 under different alias ? Now that's a cool job i could get behind
Millard  +   310d ago
A few points about this article.

Firstly, comparing going to the cinema to purchasing a video game is ridiculous. When you go to a movie you have no expectation of retaining that film or being able to watch it more than once, lend it to friends etc. Instead compare buying a game to buying a DVD and you will see that all the points made about only consuming a movie once are utterly false. When you buy a DVD you can pretty much watch it when, where, as often, and with whoever you want, why should Microsoft be allowed to take this freedom away purely for corporate greed? If game publishers aren't making a profit they need to start making better quality games, not blaming low sales for they're low quality shovelware.

Further to this, if game publishers want to sell more copies of their games then they should consider lowering the prices. The reason the second hand market is so active is because people just aren't willing to pay £50 for games that they feel probably aren't even worth £30. Just because DRM is put into place on the xbox one doesn't mean that all those people who buy second hand games for £20-£30 will start forking out £50 for every game released. Many of these people will simply stop purchasing games they would have picked up second hand completely and this has a strange knock on effect that will actually harm further sales. When you curb used game sales you stop the people who buy day-one from making any profit back from said games therefore giving them less disposable cash to then purchase more day-one games. Ultimately it will result in cash leaving the system even quicker than with used game sales allowed.

Secondly, steam is so popular because it offers huge discounts on games over other available methods of purchasing. If you could get the deals available on steam through your local game retailers then far more physical copies would be being sold. Whilst steam has very fair and enticing prices Microsoft is busy nickel and diming everyone for every penny they can get, the prices on XBL are far more expensive than local supermarkets/game stores/steam etc. With a forced move to digital by MS we will only be forced to pay these inflated prices.
retrofly  +   310d ago
Whats also interesting is how high street retailers are going to react. IMO what would be the point of pushing the Xbox one over the PS4. Used games make up large part of high street revenue, for every Xbox one customer thats one less person trading in games. The big retailers are going to be pushing the PS4 like mad IMO. Maybe even discounts on the PS4 to sway the people who aren't sure what to get.

Its what I'd do if I ran a Video Game store.

I currently own a PS3 and Xbox 360, even though I have always on high speed internet and buy day one purchases mostly I dislike microsofts attitude towards gamers with the Xbox one so will be puchasing the PS4 on release for sure. Its currently a no brainer.

Mircosoft won't just be losing customers with poor or no internet.
#13 (Edited 310d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
LightofDarkness  +   310d ago
The author is talking about a fundamental shift in the way we sell and consume games without realizing it. By equating the gaming experience to the "cinema" or "concert" experience as opposed to the "home video" or DVD experience, he is essentially describing the business model that is "Software as as Service". It is one of the largest segments of the cloud computing market, and it is meant to replace the software as a product mentality that has existed for so long.

The reason for this big push is actually greed and control. Software companies are not content anymore to create a one-off product; wherein you pay for it once and use it as you wish. They wish to have you continuously pay for the privilege to use their software and consume it like it's a service. The "cloud" is just the internet. That's all it means. They've created a new fancy buzzword for the internet so they can tack on all sorts of fancy machinations, suppositions and "dreams" to sell to their customers. The modern broadband infrastructure around the world is allowing them to accomplish this, wherein the overall aim is that the majority of the computing is accomplished "server" (e.g. MS) side, and not on the "client" (i.e. consumer) side.

The reality is that when someone is describing "cloud" computing as MS are, they're talking about getting everyone onto their big SaaS/PaaS initiative, and MS's offering is known as Windows Azure. Azure allows MS or people who pay MS to host virtual machines/computers (and thus applications, infrastructures or platforms) for them. They wish to become the world leader in software as a service and platform as a service technologies, and have been investing HEAVILY in this future since 2008. XBO is their attempt to extend SaaS to every living room in the USA, a trojan horse if you will.

The "cloud" movement is really just a means for people like MS to get you to pay for all of their products continuously, and also pay for the "privilege" of them storing and essentially owning your data. Resist it for as long as you can, folks. The days of the internet being the "hole in the sky" are coming to an end.
#14 (Edited 310d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Groo  +   309d ago
I hear what your sayin, I guess the buisness practices of knowing your market and trying to sell products that appeal to new customers for your market is out the window. Now we have companies trying to dictate how to use products they are trying to sell to customers.... its stupid. "privilege"? I understand the point you are trying to make but paying hard earned money on something just to be forced on how you use what you are paying for doesnt sound much like a "privilege" to me.. I dont pay a monthly subscription on my drivers license to keep that privilege. Im not going to get a loan to buy a new car just to have the bank turn around and tell me how, when, or where I should dive my car.. People aren't going to pay for a service to have the service provider boss them around and tell them how to use the service they are paying for....
greyhaven33  +   309d ago
Well said
@lightofdarkness
#14.2 (Edited 309d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
strigoi814  +   309d ago
First thing before i read any article i look at the name of the site...yup there is the problem
boldscot  +   309d ago
All this brand loyalty is making my head hurt.
2cents  +   309d ago
With the Xbox one, the whole idea is to have a single device that allows easy access to all your chosen media.
The fact that you can install your whole game library onto the console and switch between games on the fly (No disc swapping), have matchmaking running for a different title in the background while playing or viewing something else. You can wave your hands at it, talk to it, or use your controller, all while relaxing on your chair of choice is truly a stepping stone to the future of connectivity and interacting with your entertainment.
This is truly exciting for me, as I am possibly in the minority, but I will be utilising all of the demonstrated abilities that the xbox one has incorporated. I am totally sold on the accessibility of the console and its features. I’m surprised that there is so much hate for a company that is really trying to do something different. I love the idea of being able to interact with my media on so many different levels, controller, hand gestures and voice. Im a kid when it comes to gadgets, I love advancements in input devices and gaming tech, and the xbox one is a thing of the future.
But… alas the biggest downside to the proposition is the 24hr check-in. This sucks big time, I’m waiting for the ins and out of the requirements, especially for people who either have no internet or intermittent internet from crappy providers. Will there be a backup plan for people with prolonged outages, such as checking in via mobile internet via xbox.com or something like that (I don’t know) or increase the ckeckin time to once a fortnight or something.
The only way I can come to terms with this requirement is that I need to look at this new device as something completely different to what defines a traditional games console (PS4). A seriously capable internet based home entertainment system that feeds off the internet to provide content to the user. No internet, no fun. 
The only suggestion I could come up with for MS is that: give the gamer the ability to choose how they want to play their games. If they wish to remain offline or do not have an internet connection at all then why not allow the console to play games providing the disc is in the tray. Just like what we are all used to. Why oh why MS, surely if you have gone to such great lengths to create a forward thinking entertainment device, cater for everyone and not just the “always connected” generation.
How can you not see that, not allowing a gamer to play his/her games that he/she has spent a significant amount on because the internet has crapped out, is just plain wrong. All of the other bells and whistles I understand requiring a connection, but when I physically bought the console, bought the game on disc, AND the disc is in the machine, why exactly will it not work? No answer could justify your decision to not allow me to play. Sorry.
I really want to be excited about the xbox one and most of me is… really excited! But dudes… come on… please sort this out. Give me a games console when I don’t have internet, and then give me the future when im connected.
Its not asking for much… is it?
Groo  +   309d ago
"Microsoft’s Phil Spencer said “This isn’t a sprint.”

"It is a forward looking console. I’m not getting one at launch, I’ll be more than happy with my PS4. But I see no reason not to get one 4 years down the line when it’s cheaper, has a bedrock of quality exclusives and technology and internet connections have had more time to catch up to Microsoft’s vision.

It may not be a sprint Mr Phil but you have to at least make it out of the gate to have a race.. this is so retarded. People aren't gonna freakin pay hard earned money to wait for something good 4 years down the road. its just stupid, MS Needed something amazing out of the gate to attract customers and what they have shown so far and all this talk about waiting a few years, it will be better talk is bs.. I jumped of the MS boat a few years ago when I realised how shady the company is.. looks like I made the right choice with Sony
4logpc  +   309d ago
I am not defending one console or another, but this article sort of makes a point. Very poorly I might add.

Change needs to happen. When we have games like Tomb Raider that sell 3 million and are considered a failure, something is wrong. Maybe it is developers, maybe its publishers, maybe its used games. Doesnt matter which one it is, but change needs to happen.

Sony isn't doing anything to change, while Microsoft is trying something new to move the industry to a new place where maybe these issues can be fixed.

The problem is, Microsoft is doing a horrible job at telling the consumer why the change needs to happen.

There was a company called Valve that made some bold changes to the PC market, and it was called Steam. Sometimes change is for the better.
#19 (Edited 309d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
rainslacker  +   309d ago
I agree that change needs to happen, but the focus of that change, according to MS, is misdirected.

Currently, MS is asking the customer to change. The problems with say Tomb Raider, were not that it didn't sell well. In fact I imagine the 2nd hand market had very little to do with their projected targets not being met since they made that report about a month after release. The problem lies in the bloated budgets of the games themselves. So much money is wasted on non-essential things. So much money is wasted on meaningless advertising which fails to return on investment. So much money is wasted on corporate bureaucracy. If you ever watch the credits for a game, the production team and executives outnumbers the development by a margin of 2:1 or more.

At the same time, there is no real scale model for pricing games. Almost every game comes out at $60. Customers are now waiting to see if a game is worth it, and often times it's not. They either pass, or wait for a price drop. This needs to change.

People, in general, are only dropping money day one on the biggest and best known titles. New IP's often get overlooked because people are unwilling to take a chance at a higher price. This problem will be exasperated if the customer knows they have no recourse to trade in their game...or have a less than ideal way to do so.

It's not the customers that are giving problems to the industry, it's the industry itself. For the most part, customers just want good games. Competition makes it so companies make the most visually appealing and adrenaline prone games. We just want quality, because it's what we've come to expect. Unfortunately we've been conditioned to be more cautious now after the many disappointments this gen.
4logpc  +   309d ago
I agree with some parts of your statement, but I disagree with some as well.

THe whole marketing argument is kind of impossible to say is the cause, because we will never see how many more copies are/are not sold because of it. The marketing of Tomb Raider got two of my friends to buy the game that had no intention to at first. So that could really go either way.

I do agree with what I call "The $60 dollar jump." It is really hard to get people to jump into a new IP these days. But I truly believe that digital distribution can save new IP. If Microsoft making these changes means that companies with a new IP get a tossback when people trade in the game, then thats great. If Microsoft can release a new IP for cheaper because of the DRM, I am all for it.
#19.1.1 (Edited 309d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
rainslacker  +   309d ago
I wasn't implying that all marketing is bad. Some of the venues used to market are questionable though. Sony had online ads for the super-bowl for GOW:A. Not as expensive as say TV super-bowl, but I question the effectiveness based on cost since GOW:A sold about the same as the others. Tomb Raider and Uncharted 3 had commercials airing during prime time TV shows, sometimes with demographics that don't consumer video games like that. All advertising will likely to get at least one or two people to buy a game, I'm just saying there are more efficient ways to do it. Just looking at how Sony's marketing has gone viral for the PS4 shows that there are extremely effective ways to advertise, which cost little to produce, offering more in return. They obviously have other things in place, and seem to be doing it right, but I don't think most of it is full on expensive yet.

However I agree, it's hard to gauge the effectiveness of them, but I have to question a games value when the marketing budget is higher than the development budget.

For the time being, I think DD is still just an option. Retail will still be needed just to raise awareness of a new IP. Advertising among the retailers, and getting word of mouth out there is more important than anything. I mean seriously do we really need $70 million budgets for COD games, why not split that money up over other IP's in a companies portfolio and help to find the next 10+ million seller.
isarai  +   309d ago
I really hope this is just for hits, cause i really cannot see a single thing MS is "Doing right" over any of their competitors. Also as a consumer i just don't see how you can defend something that nickle and dimes you to shit

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
30°

Ys: Memories Of Celceta Review [Game Rumble]

48m ago - Game Rumble: Ys: Memories of Celceta is a remake of the 4th Ys game and counts as the 3rd remake... | PS Vita
10°

Diehard GameFAN: Final Fantasy X/X-2 HD Remaster Collector’s Edition Review

49m ago - DHGF: Final Fantasy X/X-2 HD Remaster brings together the International Editions of both of these... | PS3
30°

Mick Foley Won’t Be In WWE 2K15?

50m ago - There’s a chance Mick Foley might not be in WWE 2K15 this year since his current WWE contract has... | Xbox 360
30°

3GEM Review: Life Goes On

53m ago - Alex St-Amour from 3GEM writes: 'At the end of the day, I’m very happy that Life Goes On exists.... | PC
Ad

inFamous: Second Son (PS4) Review

Now - Ken abuses his powers in the latest entry in the inFamous series. | Promoted post
30°

Otaku Dome: The Wolf Among Us: “A Crooked Mile” Review

1h ago - Otaku Dome: Bigby and Snow White reaches a cold lead in their ongoing case, but things get hea... | PC