That was speculation on my part, but I would imagine it's like writing a desk top OS that uses a mouse, then being told actually there is no mouse, so can you please re-write the os, only they have less than 2 months to get it sorted.
Has the Xbox made it to FCC yet?
No it would be like writing a desk top OS that uses either a mouse or a camera and then been told the camera is no longer mandatory. No rewriting needed as the OS was already coded for the standard mouse (Or in this case the controller).
Vocal or not the vast majority did not want any DRM or always online. And honestly who wants Kinect if its not needed? And worse still who wants to pay for it if they don't want it or need it?
But they said by removing the DRM they would have to remove other functions as a result as they were built around the new policies.
Its true they said that but its not true that that is what they had to do. They could have kept region lock and allowed used game sales or they could have kept family sharing (if your console was online) but removed mandatory always on.
So if MS were tomorrow to include a second controller people would use that against MS too?
I think the U-Turns are positive for MS. But they are still U-Turns.
Vocal or not the vast majority did not want any DRM or always online. And honestly who wants Kinect if its not needed? And worse still who wants to pay it if they don't want it or need it?
The vast majority didn't understand the advantages of it (MS own fault) and just jumped up and down to join in with everyone else who was complaining about it.
And I want Kinect. I want to see every Xbox One owner have one with it connected so that developers can take advantage of it fully and come up with new and interesting uses for it.
People are afraid of progress on consoles. Look at Steam, people hated it and now some would say it saved PC Gaming.
Look, before this gets out of hand. The point I'm trying to get across is the majority of the changes have been because of negative public feedback.
The public didn't like a lot of what MS were trying, some would say it's too soon for some of the ideas. So they listened, they did something that not many companies do these days. They took that customer feedback and changed things.
Granted the MS PR team should be fired. But they are trying to make the customer happy in the long run. Yet every time MS change something for the better they just get slatted for it.
And the headset? Really come on?! People are classing them including one as a 180 change too?
Yes!
Because Microsoft made a massive deal about not needing one because "everybody will have a Kinect that's always connected and has omni-directional microphones and noise-cancelling technology......."
Cue Major Nelson's unboxing, "....next up we have, of course, the headset....."
The vast majority didn't understand the advantages of it (MS own fault) and just jumped up and down to join in with everyone else who was complaining about it.
And I want Kinect. I want to see every Xbox One owner have one with it connected so that developers can take advantage of it fully and come up with new and interesting uses for it.
People are afraid of progress on consoles. Look at Steam, people hated it and now some would say it saved PC Gaming.
Please tell me the advantage of DRM then.
I don't want Kinect when I play a game I want to sit down and relax.
People are not afraid of progress, don't compare Steam to console gaming, Steam have cheaper games, great deals and Steam users don't pay a yearly subscription. MS were not taking us down the Steam route, they were clearly taking us down the no second hand route.
I don't want Kinect when I play a game I want to sit down and relax.
People are not afraid of progress, don't compare Steam to console gaming, Steam have cheaper games, great deals and Steam users don't pay a yearly subscription. MS were not taking us down the Steam route, they were clearly taking us down the no second hand route.
Steam is the model MS were moving towards according to people within MS. There was a really good article up somewhere from an unnamed source within MS who explained that MS were trying to copy Steam's model. There would have been games sales, with huge reductions in prices. But I guess we will never know if it was true or not now.
DRM also allowed the whole family share idea where someone else can play your games on their own console without the disc. They can't do that now since they have removed DRM.
I'm not going to list all the advantages. Of course there were some down sides, the main ones being the 24-hour authenticate and 2nd hand games sales. But they could have adjusted that I guess.
As for Kinect, people always fall back on your excuse. "Oh I don't want to have to move around to play a game." You don't need to. It could be used to scan your face into a game, register your heartbeat so the game can adjust something within it based on your physical feedback. There is so much more to it than waving your arms around.
If someone says "I don't care for it being able to tell my heartbeat" then that is someone saying they don't want progress. Plain and simple. Just imagine a horror game which can tell if your scared or not and ramp things up even more to really freak you out. That's the type of ideas floating around that developers could build upon.
Edit - Seems I went off there. The original progress comment was regarding DRM, not Kinect You can probably ignore the last comment about people afraid of Kinect and progress.
Steam is the model MS were moving towards according to people within MS. There was a really good article up somewhere from an unnamed source within MS who explained that MS were trying to copy Steam's model. There would have been games sales, with huge reductions in prices. But I guess we will never know if it was true or not now.
DRM also allowed the whole family share idea where someone else can play your games on their own console without the disc. They can't do that now since they have removed DRM.
I'm not going to list all the advantages. Of course there were some down sides, the main ones being the 24-hour authenticate and 2nd hand games sales. But they could have adjusted that I guess.
As for Kinect, people always fall back on your excuse. "Oh I don't want to have to move around to play a game." You don't need to. It could be used to scan your face into a game, register your heartbeat so the game can adjust something within it based on your physical feedback. There is so much more to it than waving your arms around.
If someone says "I don't care for it being able to tell my heartbeat" then that is someone saying they don't want progress. Plain and simple. Just imagine a horror game which can tell if your scared or not and ramp things up even more to really freak you out. That's the type of ideas floating around that developers could build upon.
Edit - Seems I went off there. The original progress comment was regarding DRM, not Kinect You can probably ignore the last comment about people afraid of Kinect and progress.
1 - steam does not charge for access. MS do. The model was not like steam and never would be. It was a flawed idea
2 - Family share was never well explained. There were rumours that it only allowed friends to play a demo. That we shall never know!
3 - people do not want to be monitored while playing a game. Lets face it, your game monitoring your heart beat is just a little bit creepy and is it monitoring who walks into a room. And that does not mean I don't want progress, it means I don't consider monitoring my heat beat to be any sort of progress I want.
4 - your last comment is ignored so please ignore my last one
Steam is the model MS were moving towards according to people within MS. There was a really good article up somewhere from an unnamed source within MS who explained that MS were trying to copy Steam's model. There would have been games sales, with huge reductions in prices. But I guess we will never know if it was true or not now.
Well Angry Joe interviewed Major Nelson just after E3 and brought up the point of Steam sales. He specifically asked would there be Steam like sales. Sales with bundles and sales at Steam prices. He replied with well we have sales on Xbox right now. Joe pointed out they are nothing like Steam sales and Nelson then skirted around and wouldn't answer. Said you cant expect sales on Day 1. So yes there would have been Game sales. Would they be at Steams level? Well if there was it clearly wasn't discussed by MS. So make of it what you will, if there was going to be Steam like sales I'm certain they would have mentioned it. Even once.
DRM also allowed the whole family share idea where someone else can play your games on their own console without the disc. They can't do that now since they have removed DRM.
Wrong, their DRM would allow you to let a friend or family play a demo and only a demo of the game. This is your Microsoft game sharing.
As for Kinect, people always fall back on your excuse. "Oh I don't want to have to move around to play a game." You don't need to. It could be used to scan your face into a game, register your heartbeat so the game can adjust something within it based on your physical feedback. There is so much more to it than waving your arms around.
If someone says "I don't care for it being able to tell my heartbeat" then that is someone saying they don't want progress. Plain and simple. Just imagine a horror game which can tell if your scared or not and ramp things up even more to really freak you out. That's the type of ideas floating around that developers could build upon.
Ok fair enough no physical movement needed, but all that money to take a picture of my face? I can upload my face on FIFA and could have done for the last 2 FIFA's I think. All I need is a digital camera/phone etc.
As for the heartbeat thing, would it really make any difference? How would they incorporate that into a game?
I mean I would love progress. I just don't see anything MS were doing was progressive. Even if they could put me into a game where I was on the pitch or in the battlefield. How long do you think people will say ah **** it, I'm sitting down.
If true that's a really stupid move by Microsoft, either include Kinect and make it mandatory or don't include it and make it optional.
What will happen now is many people wont bother connecting it and support for it in games will drop probably leading in an Xbox One being sold without it at some point in 2014. In the end meaning that people have paid an extra £80 or so for a useless accessory.
No it would be like writing a desk top OS that uses either a mouse or a camera and then been told the camera is no longer mandatory. No rewriting needed as the OS was already coded for the standard mouse (Or in this case the controller).
Kinect was never the only way to control the OS.
If that's the case, why were we told the the Kinect was an integral part of the system and the system wouldn't function without it and it always had to be connected. Now they say actually it doesn't need to be connected, oh and by the way it's not integral at all..... someone's been telling "porkies"
If that's the case, why were we told the the Kinect was an integral part of the system and the system wouldn't function without it and it always had to be connected. Now they say actually it doesn't need to be connected, oh and by the way it's not integral at all..... someone's been telling "porkies"
The entire Xbox One launch has been nothing but uncertainties, never in my life (since the 80s ) have I seen such a mess being made of a console launch.
I think maybe they should do some market research in future rather than making stupid decisions and then doing U-Turns.
So why can't MS implement the same sharing that Sony are allowing. If I'm not logged onto my PS account a friend can use his/her machine and log on with my details and play my games, it seems MS went all sulky and took all their toys home with them, and are now just giving them back, when they realise their mistake
So why can't MS implement the same sharing that Sony are allowing. If I'm not logged onto my PS account a friend can use his/her machine and log on with my details and play my games,
Because your digital games go with you, you can also use and share digital games when you sign in to another console. And, if you happen to buy a digital game when you are signed in on your friend’s console, your game will also be available on your Home Xbox One console for anyone to use.
"if you happen to buy a digital game when you are signed in on your friend’s console, your game will also be available on your Home Xbox One console for anyone to use. "
If you bought the game on your friends 360 with your tag, you could only play it on your own 360 signed in as yourself. So that is a new feature. The thing is, is it available on your friends Xbox one when you are signed out as it is on the 360.
Well Angry Joe interviewed Major Nelson just after E3 and brought up the point of Steam sales. He specifically asked would there be Steam like sales. Sales with bundles and sales at Steam prices. He replied with well we have sales on Xbox right now. Joe pointed out they are nothing like Steam sales and Nelson then skirted around and wouldn't answer. Said you cant expect sales on Day 1. So yes there would have been Game sales. Would they be at Steams level? Well if there was it clearly wasn't discussed by MS. So make of it what you will, if there was going to be Steam like sales I'm certain they would have mentioned it. Even once.
They are hardly going to discuss if they will do Steam like sales at E3. It would be something that would have been announced later on. I mean it's like saying "Buy this game full price now, or wait a few months for it to appear in a sale." It would have put people off buying launch games.
As for the heartbeat thing, would it really make any difference? How would they incorporate that into a game?
That's not the point I was trying to make. The point was Kinect can do so much more, it just needs the developers to come up with the ideas. By not "forcing" all Xbox One owners to have a Kinect means the developers are less inclined to spend time coming up with ideas on how to use it.
As for me comparing to it to Steam, I didn't to begin with. I was meaning Steam had a lot of negative feedback around DRM but people then saw past it and now it's loved by most. I was trying to suggest the same could have applied to the things MS were trying if it were given a chance.
They are hardly going to discuss if they will do Steam like sales at E3. It would be something that would have been announced later on. I mean it's like saying "Buy this game full price now, or wait a few months for it to appear in a sale." It would have put people off buying launch games.
That's not the point I was trying to make. The point was Kinect can do so much more, it just needs the developers to come up with the ideas. By not "forcing" all Xbox One owners to have a Kinect means the developers are less inclined to spend time coming up with ideas on how to use it.
As for me comparing to it to Steam, I didn't to begin with. I was meaning Steam had a lot of negative feedback around DRM but people then saw past it and now it's loved by most. I was trying to suggest the same could have applied to the things MS were trying if it were given a chance.
Steam does not, never has and never will have charges to enable you to down load. That's why the MS version would never take off. MS themselves never gave it a chance.
I don't think DRM would of been such a "big thing" had MS and Sony said, "you can't re-sell games, but they are going to be priced in line with PC games, and the price will fall after so many months, again like PC games. The main reason console games are so expensive is the royalties publishers have to pay to the Console manufacturers, if these were dropped then prices would come down. Sony and MS still make money off console sales, so why they feel the need to be paid royalties as well I don't understand.
Steam does not, never has and never will have charges to enable you to down load. That's why the MS version would never take off. MS themselves never gave it a chance.
Who is talking about charges to download? You keep bring this point up. We all know MS charge for Live. The point I'm making is Steam was hated at first. I for example had to take my desktop home to my parents to enable Half Life 2 as Steam was blocked in the student halls. But people then saw it's advantages and got over this. Just like how it may have been similar for MS.
The point is DRM could have enabled MS to do different things, one of which that was suggested was sales. Good sales like Steam.
As Philip Wales points out, if MS just were clear from the start about how it could have been a good thing. That DRM would have enabled them to offer games at lower prices it might have worked.
They are hardly going to discuss if they will do Steam like sales at E3. It would be something that would have been announced later on. I mean it's like saying "Buy this game full price now, or wait a few months for it to appear in a sale." It would have put people off buying launch games.
To be fair Major Nelson could of easily cleared it up if the conversation went like this
Angry Joe: will you have steam like sales and discounts on X1?
Major Nelson: Yes but not at launch as all the games will be new, after 6-12 months we'll start to roll our some huge discounts on the most popular games
The fact he couldn't even just come out and say that their 'steam like model' would have steam like deals just makes this seem like another poor attempt at using buzz words and excepting people to just take them at face value
As for the Kinect, we already know by the time the X1 launches kinect won't be bundled, it would just be another 180 and not even a real shock, everything else that the 1 needed to function is already gone
Look at how popular PS+ is becoming it shows people don't mind buying £50 a year for a service, that includes "free" games every month. The best thing I like on PS+ is the auto up date feature, it's really nice to able to turn on the PS3 and play a game, without the dreaded "down load available" and the annoying 20min wait for the patch.
Who is talking about charges to download? You keep bring this point up. We all know MS charge for Live. The point I'm making is Steam was hated at first. I for example had to take my desktop home to my parents to enable Half Life 2 as Steam was blocked in the student halls. But people then saw it's advantages and got over this. Just like how it may have been similar for MS.
The point is DRM could have enabled MS to do different things, one of which that was suggested was sales. Good sales like Steam.
As Philip Wales points out, if MS just were clear from the start about how it could have been a good thing. That DRM would have enabled them to offer games at lower prices it might have worked.
That's all you need to know. MS charge its customers to pay to download games. The model is broken and thus can never compete with Steam. However much you try and ignore that fact will not make it go away :rolleyes:
Comments
Not everyone, just a very vocal group.
But they said by removing the DRM they would have to remove other functions as a result as they were built around the new policies.
So if MS were tomorrow to include a second controller people would use that against MS too?
No it would be like writing a desk top OS that uses either a mouse or a camera and then been told the camera is no longer mandatory. No rewriting needed as the OS was already coded for the standard mouse (Or in this case the controller).
Kinect was never the only way to control the OS.
Vocal or not the vast majority did not want any DRM or always online. And honestly who wants Kinect if its not needed? And worse still who wants to pay for it if they don't want it or need it?
I think the U-Turns are positive for MS. But they are still U-Turns.
The vast majority didn't understand the advantages of it (MS own fault) and just jumped up and down to join in with everyone else who was complaining about it.
And I want Kinect. I want to see every Xbox One owner have one with it connected so that developers can take advantage of it fully and come up with new and interesting uses for it.
People are afraid of progress on consoles. Look at Steam, people hated it and now some would say it saved PC Gaming.
The public didn't like a lot of what MS were trying, some would say it's too soon for some of the ideas. So they listened, they did something that not many companies do these days. They took that customer feedback and changed things.
Granted the MS PR team should be fired. But they are trying to make the customer happy in the long run. Yet every time MS change something for the better they just get slatted for it.
Yes!
Because Microsoft made a massive deal about not needing one because "everybody will have a Kinect that's always connected and has omni-directional microphones and noise-cancelling technology......."
Cue Major Nelson's unboxing, "....next up we have, of course, the headset....."
Please tell me the advantage of DRM then.
I don't want Kinect when I play a game I want to sit down and relax.
People are not afraid of progress, don't compare Steam to console gaming, Steam have cheaper games, great deals and Steam users don't pay a yearly subscription. MS were not taking us down the Steam route, they were clearly taking us down the no second hand route.
Steam is the model MS were moving towards according to people within MS. There was a really good article up somewhere from an unnamed source within MS who explained that MS were trying to copy Steam's model. There would have been games sales, with huge reductions in prices. But I guess we will never know if it was true or not now.
DRM also allowed the whole family share idea where someone else can play your games on their own console without the disc. They can't do that now since they have removed DRM.
I'm not going to list all the advantages. Of course there were some down sides, the main ones being the 24-hour authenticate and 2nd hand games sales. But they could have adjusted that I guess.
As for Kinect, people always fall back on your excuse. "Oh I don't want to have to move around to play a game." You don't need to. It could be used to scan your face into a game, register your heartbeat so the game can adjust something within it based on your physical feedback. There is so much more to it than waving your arms around.
If someone says "I don't care for it being able to tell my heartbeat" then that is someone saying they don't want progress. Plain and simple. Just imagine a horror game which can tell if your scared or not and ramp things up even more to really freak you out. That's the type of ideas floating around that developers could build upon.
Edit - Seems I went off there. The original progress comment was regarding DRM, not Kinect
1 - steam does not charge for access. MS do. The model was not like steam and never would be. It was a flawed idea
2 - Family share was never well explained. There were rumours that it only allowed friends to play a demo. That we shall never know!
3 - people do not want to be monitored while playing a game. Lets face it, your game monitoring your heart beat is just a little bit creepy and is it monitoring who walks into a room. And that does not mean I don't want progress, it means I don't consider monitoring my heat beat to be any sort of progress I want.
4 - your last comment is ignored so please ignore my last one
Well Angry Joe interviewed Major Nelson just after E3 and brought up the point of Steam sales. He specifically asked would there be Steam like sales. Sales with bundles and sales at Steam prices. He replied with well we have sales on Xbox right now. Joe pointed out they are nothing like Steam sales and Nelson then skirted around and wouldn't answer. Said you cant expect sales on Day 1. So yes there would have been Game sales. Would they be at Steams level? Well if there was it clearly wasn't discussed by MS. So make of it what you will, if there was going to be Steam like sales I'm certain they would have mentioned it. Even once.
Wrong, their DRM would allow you to let a friend or family play a demo and only a demo of the game. This is your Microsoft game sharing.
Ok fair enough no physical movement needed, but all that money to take a picture of my face? I can upload my face on FIFA and could have done for the last 2 FIFA's I think. All I need is a digital camera/phone etc.
As for the heartbeat thing, would it really make any difference? How would they incorporate that into a game?
I mean I would love progress. I just don't see anything MS were doing was progressive. Even if they could put me into a game where I was on the pitch or in the battlefield. How long do you think people will say ah **** it, I'm sitting down.
What will happen now is many people wont bother connecting it and support for it in games will drop probably leading in an Xbox One being sold without it at some point in 2014. In the end meaning that people have paid an extra £80 or so for a useless accessory.
If that's the case, why were we told the the Kinect was an integral part of the system and the system wouldn't function without it and it always had to be connected. Now they say actually it doesn't need to be connected, oh and by the way it's not integral at all..... someone's been telling "porkies"
The entire Xbox One launch has been nothing but uncertainties, never in my life (since the 80s ) have I seen such a mess being made of a console launch.
I think maybe they should do some market research in future rather than making stupid decisions and then doing U-Turns.
You can
http://majornelson.com/2013/08/09/xbox-one-sharing-digital-games-and-gold/
I can also do this right now on the 360
"if you happen to buy a digital game when you are signed in on your friend’s console, your game will also be available on your Home Xbox One console for anyone to use. "
If you bought the game on your friends 360 with your tag, you could only play it on your own 360 signed in as yourself. So that is a new feature. The thing is, is it available on your friends Xbox one when you are signed out as it is on the 360.
They are hardly going to discuss if they will do Steam like sales at E3. It would be something that would have been announced later on. I mean it's like saying "Buy this game full price now, or wait a few months for it to appear in a sale." It would have put people off buying launch games.
That's not the point I was trying to make. The point was Kinect can do so much more, it just needs the developers to come up with the ideas. By not "forcing" all Xbox One owners to have a Kinect means the developers are less inclined to spend time coming up with ideas on how to use it.
As for me comparing to it to Steam, I didn't to begin with. I was meaning Steam had a lot of negative feedback around DRM but people then saw past it and now it's loved by most. I was trying to suggest the same could have applied to the things MS were trying if it were given a chance.
Steam does not, never has and never will have charges to enable you to down load. That's why the MS version would never take off. MS themselves never gave it a chance.
Who is talking about charges to download? You keep bring this point up. We all know MS charge for Live. The point I'm making is Steam was hated at first. I for example had to take my desktop home to my parents to enable Half Life 2 as Steam was blocked in the student halls. But people then saw it's advantages and got over this. Just like how it may have been similar for MS.
The point is DRM could have enabled MS to do different things, one of which that was suggested was sales. Good sales like Steam.
As Philip Wales points out, if MS just were clear from the start about how it could have been a good thing. That DRM would have enabled them to offer games at lower prices it might have worked.
To be fair Major Nelson could of easily cleared it up if the conversation went like this
Angry Joe: will you have steam like sales and discounts on X1?
Major Nelson: Yes but not at launch as all the games will be new, after 6-12 months we'll start to roll our some huge discounts on the most popular games
The fact he couldn't even just come out and say that their 'steam like model' would have steam like deals just makes this seem like another poor attempt at using buzz words and excepting people to just take them at face value
As for the Kinect, we already know by the time the X1 launches kinect won't be bundled, it would just be another 180 and not even a real shock, everything else that the 1 needed to function is already gone