Support NeoGAF

[Night Angel]

It's a reliable sign of their intentions. As for how/when/if they adjust it, wait for more PR.

This is same for all companies.

But past performance proves that it isn't reliable. It's whatever the opposite of reliable is. Because if you gambled money on the opposite outcome of what they've claimed in recent months/years, you'd be up.

It's not a sign of anything exactly because they routinely "adjust" to where what they claimed earlier is, in its end result, a lie.

 

[Jotaka]

Ummmm....They do it all the time. Apple dropped Google maps for thier own maps software. Oops big mistake and within a couple of weeks Google maps was back. Windows 8 sucks. Oops Windows 10 was fast tracked. Google Glass is the future! Oops it gone! It literally happens all the time. You wouldn't be a good company without hearing feedback from your customers and make the changes.

None of these examples are close to video game development commitment. Game development take years and many times millions of dollars. Imagine the devs that invested into KINETIC game... They got fucked.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

There's a big difference between misleading people and adjusting a product based on user feedback.

What's the difference? That's my point. If Microsoft lies or "adjusts", the end result is that the original promise was not delivered upon. In the monumental fuck-up known as Xbox One's original plan, I can understand why they backpedaled.

And let's get something straight: a company can do ANYTHING in response to fan feedback. Microsoft could turn the Xbox One into an Always On machine tomorrow and there'd be some fans somewhere who cheer and Microsoft can say with full honesty that "this is due to fan feedback". It's a vague excuse that is occasionally right but is usually just an excuse. The financial loss is usually a much bigger concern.

If they're making this transition (they are. No user feedback is gonna turn this ship around) then what happens when those plans change? What happens when game ownership isn't as cut-and-dry as people assumed? What if the annual hardware versions are too frequent? What if the annual hardware versions bomb? What if Microsoft is doing this to quietly transition out of dedicated console hardware?

Thing is, it can all be hand waved away with "they decided to change their business plan. What's the big deal?"

That may be something you're comfortable with, but I am not.

 

[Crayon]

Guys I'm pretty sure Ms will say whatever works for them and do whatever works for them with little relation between the two.

 

[vcc]

What's the difference? That's my point. If Microsoft lies or "adjusts", the end result is that the original promise was not delivered upon. In the monumental fuck-up known as Xbox One's original plan, I can understand why they backpedaled.

And let's get something straight: a company can do ANYTHING in response to fan feedback. Microsoft could turn the Xbox One into an Always On machine tomorrow and there'd be some fans somewhere who cheer and Microsoft can say with full honesty that "this is due to fan feedback". It's a vague excuse that is occasionally right but is usually just an excuse. The financial loss is usually a much bigger concern.

If they're making this transition (they are. No user feedback is gonna turn this ship around) then what happens when those plans change? What happens when game ownership isn't as cut-and-dry as people assumed? What if the annual hardware versions are too frequent? What if the annual hardware versions bomb? What if Microsoft is doing this to quietly transition out of dedicated console hardware?

Thing is, it can all be hand waved away with "they decided to change their business plan. What's the big deal?"

That may be something you're comfortable with, but I am not.

The most immediate 'what if' is 'what if the w10 store doesn't take off'. Their plans count on it being viable so they can recoup the investment in their game studios. What if it's doesn't. Where does that leave Phil and the folks under him?

 

[Sydle]

But past performance proves that it isn't reliable. It's whatever the opposite of reliable is. Because if you gambled money on the opposite outcome of what they've claimed in recent months/years, you'd be up.

It's not a sign of anything exactly because they routinely "adjust" to where what they claimed earlier is, in its end result, a lie.

What's the difference? That's my point. If Microsoft lies or "adjusts", the end result is that the original promise was not delivered upon. In the monumental fuck-up known as Xbox One's original plan, I can understand why they backpedaled.

And let's get something straight: a company can do ANYTHING in response to fan feedback. Microsoft could turn the Xbox One into an Always On machine tomorrow and there'd be some fans somewhere who cheer and Microsoft can say with full honesty that "this is due to fan feedback". It's a vague excuse that is occasionally right but is usually just an excuse. The financial loss is usually a much bigger concern.

If they're making this transition (they are. No user feedback is gonna turn this ship around) then what happens when those plans change? What happens when game ownership isn't as cut-and-dry as people assumed? What if the annual hardware versions are too frequent? What if the annual hardware versions bomb? What if Microsoft is doing this to quietly transition out of dedicated console hardware?

Thing is, it can all be hand waved away with "they decided to change their business plan. What's the big deal?"

That may be something you're comfortable with, but I am not.

You don't understand the difference between lying and making an adjustment?

So when ND said they'll release Uncharted 4 in April and then they delayed it into May we're now saying they were lying all along? They were purposely misleading people into believing they would get the game in April when it was really May all along?

I don't mean to be rude, but let's not be that stupid.

 

[gamz]

None of these examples are close to video game development commitment. Game development take years and many times millions of dollars. Imagine the devs that invested into KINETIC game... They got fucked.

Yes. Again it was a terrible plan and heads rolled. Again, it wasn't a lie. Just terrible planning and exucution. Since Phil took over he's straighten out much, if not all of those issues. Companies fuck up. News at 11.

 

[Night Angel]

You don't understand the difference between lying and making an adjustment?

So when ND said they'll release Uncharted 4 in April and then they delayed it into May we're now saying they were lying all along? They were purposely misleading people into believing they would get the game in April when it was really May all along?

I don't mean to be rude, but let's not be that stupid.

How is it any difference in the end result for the user? Please answer that. It's a simple question, and he posed it rather clearly.

I don't mean to be rude, but missing the point he's repeatedly made is stupid.

 

[e-gamer]

Did anyone notice that Nintendo already did it with New 3DS?

 

[slavesnyder]

Here's my theory: Kinect was bulit for amateur porn. Somewhere in the world an old Bilderberg, Rothshild or Illuminati grandpa was fapping while you and your GF were playing the ole in-and-out game in the living room.

You are wrong. I was one of the Rothshilds.

 

[Shin-Ra]

Another Phil classic.

Phil Spencer via IGN: "I believe we will sell more Kinects in the long run"

Microsoft's head of Xbox, Phil Spencer, says that the company's new Kinect-less Xbox One will ultimately lead to more sales and a greater number of Kinects in gamers' homes.

"This might seem backwards, but I believe the decision we made to allow people to buy Xbox One without Kinect included, in the end, will actually lead to more Kinects in the market," he said, speaking with Polygon. "I believe that you've got to sell the console before you can sell Kinect."

The price drop to an "entry price" will attract more buyers, Spencer says. "We've got to be competitive with the Xbox One console, and then we're going to allow people to add Kinect later when they can. They can buy it standalone. If they want to buy it day one, I still think that's the best Xbox One experience over the long run, but giving them choice will let us grow the largest install base of Xbox One customers, and those who choose to, will actually add Kinect to it as well."

Backwards indeed. Pretty sure that was trying to reassure everyone Kinect would still be worth supporting.

 

[bishbosh]

I think this hardware update/upgrade is a great idea, especially if your games library is backward and forward compatible, you would never lose your games.

Assuming if Nintendo and Sony released new consoles keeping with the current business model you would know old software wouldn't be compatible and in a couple of years the MS would release a better spec box..

 

[gamz]

Guys I'm pretty sure Ms will say whatever works for them and do whatever works for them with little relation between the two.

If you don't see a difference in MS since Satya took over then I don't know what to tell you. The companies culture has changed since then. And again since Phil took over Xbox.

They started a preview program for Xbox and Windows 10 and kept it pretty transparent. They've reached out to their userbase more then I have ever seen them do so in the past. I trust in their current leadership until I dont.

 

[Sydle]

How is it any difference in the end result for the user? Please answer that. It's a simple question, and he posed it rather clearly.

A lie by definition is a deliberate intent to deceive. You are implying that every delay or adjustment from any company was an intentional deceit when in reality companies have to make unforeseen adjustments.

No plan ever survives first contact 100%. I will not accept some GAF bullshit for changing the definition or meaning of a word. Grow up.

 

[CosmicQueso]

Did anyone notice that Nintendo already did it with New 3DS?

And they removed the charging cable... which people applauded them for.

 

[Markoman]

You are wrong. I was one of the Rothshilds.

This knocks my tinfoil hat right off my head!

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

You don't understand the difference between lying and making an adjustment?

So when ND said they'll release Uncharted 4 in April and then they delayed it into May we're now saying they were lying all along? They were purposely misleading people into believing they would get the game in April when it was really May all along?

I don't mean to be rude, but let's not be that stupid.

People are so caught up on the "lying" accusation as if Microsoft needs its honor defended.

I don't care if they were "lying" or if they were "adjusting their business model" or "listening to their fans".

Microsoft made plans.
They made heavy alterations to those plans.
This directly affected the people counting on those plans.

Whether it's labelled as "lying" or an honest mistake, I really couldn't care any less.

What matters is that Microsoft is proposing a plan here. A really ambitious one. They're claiming that they can take a console's library multiplatform, and also introduce regular hardware updates during the normal console lifecycle, and they're saying it's a bright future and everything will be okay.

Heck, I'm not expecting them to say "this is being done because Xbox One didn't meet our expectations. Please be excited". I understand this is PR.

But in 5 years if this "plan" doesn't work out (again, who really fucking cares if they lied or changed plans or whatever) then joke's on those who trusted in it, isn't it? Joke's on the people who thought their Xbox One would still be supported when (theoretically) Microsoft was only using this as a ploy to exit the console market.

Since Microsoft has done this numerous times before (for the final time, who cares if it was a "lie" or a "change of plan"? The behavior and final result are the same) then is it unreasonable to doubt what Microsoft is saying this time around?

Sure, Naughty Dog "lied" or "changed business plans" or whatever. But guess what? It's one game. Only possible downside is maybe it sucks for people who pre-ordered and took that weekend off of work? I'm really stretching here. Delaying a game (which happens all the time) and changing the fundamentals of your console are a bit different.

 

[vcc]

If you don't see a difference in MS since Satya took over then I don't know what to tell you. The companies culture has changed since then. And again since Phil took over Xbox.

They started a preview program for Xbox and Windows 10 and kept it pretty transparent. They've reached out to their userbase more then I have ever seen them do so in the past. I trust in their current leadership until I dont.

They definitely make changes which are good for them faster but it may not be good for you. It's definitely good for a MS share holder. All over the place for a XB1 owner.

 

[e-gamer]

And they removed the charging cable... which people applauded them for.

Yes, but the fact is Nintendo already improved a hardware alongside the regular one.

 

[Graphics Horse]

We can speculate on how this announcement will effect the March NPD. I think a portion of it will cover post announcement time.

That's beginning to look tempting compared to this mess, but I can come back for that thread in April

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

Another Phil classic.

Phil Spencer via IGN: "I believe we will sell more Kinects in the long run"


Backwards indeed. Pretty sure that was trying to reassure everyone Kinect would still be worth supporting.

Harmonix am cry.

 

[gamz]

People are so caught up on the "lying" accusation as if Microsoft needs its honor defended.

I don't care if they were "lying" or if they were "adjusting their business model" or "listening to their fans".

Microsoft made plans.
They made heavy alterations to those plans.
This directly affected the people counting on those plans.

Whether it's labelled as "lying" or an honest mistake, I really couldn't care any less.

What matters is that Microsoft is proposing a plan here. A really ambitious one. They're claiming that they can take a console's library multiplatform, and also introduce regular hardware updates during the normal console lifecycle, and they're saying it's a bright future and everything will be okay.

Heck, I'm not expecting them to say "this is being done because Xbox One didn't meet our expectations. Please be excited". I understand this is PR.

But in 5 years if this "plan" doesn't work out (again, who really fucking cares if they lied or changed plans or whatever) then joke's on those who trusted in it, isn't it? Joke's on the people who thought their Xbox One would still be supported when (theoretically) Microsoft was only using this as a ploy to exit the console market.

Since Microsoft has done this numerous times before (for the final time, who cares if it was a "lie" or a "change of plan"? The behavior and final result are the same) then is it unreasonable to doubt what Microsoft is saying this time around?

Sure, Naughty Dog "lied" or "changed business plans" or whatever. But guess what? It's one game. Only possible downside is maybe it sucks for people who pre-ordered and took that weekend off of work? I'm really stretching here. Delaying a game (which happens all the time) and changing the fundamentals of your console are a bit different.

Phil said he could do BC at E3 and he did. If they could do BC with the 360 (which was never intended for it) then I see no reason to doubt him until he cant. Basically, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. If you don't that's cool. No harm, no foul. It's ambitious as hell and I see no reason why it can't be done....*shrugs* I doubted BC on Xbox One more.

 

[gamz]

They definitely make changes which are good for them faster but it may not be good for you. It's definitely good for a MS share holder. All over the place for a XB1 owner.

Not since Spencer took over. He's run a tight ambitious ship and so far has come through.

Hell, I wasn't even a MS fan until 2-3 years ago. I think they are doing some really cool innovative stuff.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

Phil said he could do BC at E3 and he did. If they could do BC with the 360 (which was never intended for it) then I see no reason to doubt him until he cant. Basically, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. If you don't that's cool. No harm, no foul. It's ambitious as hell and I see no reason why it can't be done....*shrugs* I doubted BC on Xbox One more.

You're welcome to trust whoever you want. Personally, I don't base trust on how much truth someone tells me but on how many lies (or, pardon me, "change in business plans") I am told.

 

[gamz]

You're welcome to trust whoever you want. Personally, I don't base trust on how much truth someone tells me but on how many lies (or, pardon me, "change in business plans") I am told.

Cheers!

 

[Night Angel]

A lie by definition is a deliberate intent to deceive. You are implying that every delay or adjustment from any company was an intentional deceit when in reality companies have to make unforeseen adjustments.

No plan ever survives first contact 100%. I will not accept some GAF bullshit for changing the definition or meaning of a word. Grow up.

Dude, you have to be deliberately missing the point. MS's intentions don't matter, all that matters is the end result. Whether they intended to mislead is a moot point. They said shit. It didn't happen.

Thus, when they say shit and people are cautious about the likelihood of said shit occurring, it makes NO SENSE AT ALL to turn around and say "bu- bu- but they never lied to us!" It doesn't matter one tiny bit. They have made it a habit to be wrong when predicting their future actions.

Maybe you should do some growing up if this needs to be explained to you (and you called him names for disagreeing, so mature).

 

[Trup1aya]

Guys I'm pretty sure Ms will say whatever works for them and do whatever works for them with little relation between the two.

So the entire basis of your argument is MS said it so the opposite must be true.

So MS saying that they are making more consoles signals that they are exiting the console business...

If they were to say "we're exiting the console business" would you be on here saying that they are signaling intentions to double down on the console market?

It's clear to me that people have a certain opinions on this matter that are based solely on personal sentiments of MS as a company. And folks are using that sentiment as a rationalization for projecting what WANT MS to do onto what MS is actually doing.

It seems PR is only untrustworthy if they are saying something other than what you want them to say.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

So the entire basis of your argument is MS said it so the opposite must be true.

So MS saying that they are making more consoles signals that they are exiting the console business...

If they were to say "we're exiting the console business" would you be on here saying that they are signaling intentions to double down on the console market?

It's clear to me that people have a certain opinions on this matter that are based solely on personal sentiments of MS as a company. And folks are using that sentiment as a rationalization for projecting what WANT MS to do onto what MS is actually doing.

It seems PR is only untrustworthy if they are saying something other than what you want them to say.

Funny, I feel the same way about people in this thread who think this is a good thing with no consequences and no risk of failure and no chance of being negative for current Xbox One owners nor for the XBox console brand as a whole.

I mean, you're right. The rest of us are only using our sentiment about past historical trends and Microsoft's own actions to guide our opinions. It's not like we're doing the right thing and taking their PR at face value and then making wild speculation on how this could work in the face of some glaring flaws.

 

[Helznicht]

But in 5 years if this "plan" doesn't work out (again, who really fucking cares if they lied or changed plans or whatever) then joke's on those who trusted in it, isn't it? Joke's on the people who thought their Xbox One would still be supported when (theoretically) Microsoft was only using this as a ploy to exit the console market.

* I bought a GTX, But Nvidia decides to stop driver support.

* I bought a Hybrid car but the battery supplier goes out of business, with no alternative.

* I bought a Kurig Coffee maker and they decide to change the Kcup to something not compatible.

* I have 75 steam games and Valve decides to close up the shop and concentrate their resources back to making games.

* Sony drops all 1st party development to concentrate on 3rd party deals.

What you outlined are decisions we make every day, putting faith into companies that we hope we will get the most value out of what we paid for.

You don't like or trust MS, that's clear. Me, 3 consoles that gave me everything they said they would, and several rock solid OS purchases that I would not consider trading for anything, and the best damn office software that I make a living with.

They doing ok by me.

 

[Sydle]

People are so caught up on the "lying" accusation as if Microsoft needs its honor defended.

I don't care if they were "lying" or if they were "adjusting their business model" or "listening to their fans".

Microsoft made plans.
They made heavy alterations to those plans.
This directly affected the people counting on those plans.

Whether it's labelled as "lying" or an honest mistake, I really couldn't care any less.

What matters is that Microsoft is proposing a plan here. A really ambitious one. They're claiming that they can take a console's library multiplatform, and also introduce regular hardware updates during the normal console lifecycle, and they're saying it's a bright future and everything will be okay.

Heck, I'm not expecting them to say "this is being done because Xbox One didn't meet our expectations. Please be excited". I understand this is PR.

But in 5 years if this "plan" doesn't work out (again, who really fucking cares if they lied or changed plans or whatever) then joke's on those who trusted in it, isn't it? Joke's on the people who thought their Xbox One would still be supported when (theoretically) Microsoft was only using this as a ploy to exit the console market.

Since Microsoft has done this numerous times before (for the final time, who cares if it was a "lie" or a "change of plan"? The behavior and final result are the same) then is it unreasonable to doubt what Microsoft is saying this time around?

Sure, Naughty Dog "lied" or "changed business plans" or whatever. But guess what? It's one game. Only possible downside is maybe it sucks for people who pre-ordered and took that weekend off of work? I'm really stretching here. Delaying a game (which happens all the time) and changing the fundamentals of your console are a bit different.

Let's aim to be clear using words by their original meaning. Not whatever. Agreed? Naughty Dog did not "lie," it was just an example to illustrate the misuse of the word. Be better than that.

First off, they have not communicated the intent to exit the console market, the space currently occupied by proprietary hardware meant to play games on your TV. They've stated we will see upgrades in generation, meaning they plan to still target the TV, so in effect they will still be competing in the console market. If you meant transitioning from the traditional console model then be explicit so as not to cause confusion.

Second, why don't you let people choose whether they want to buy into the vision, reject it, or wait? What's the point in trying to change peoples' minds on how they feel about it? Does it bother you some people don't share your opinion?

Lastly, if Microsoft had a 100% misfire rate then we could talk more confidently about a likely outcome of failure. They don't. And let's not pretend every company has a 100% success rate with every product. And let's definitely not pretend like GAF has all the answers. We should be able to discuss potential methods by which they achieve their proposed vision and the potential outcomes without the childish behavior.

Dude, you have to be deliberately missing the point. MS's intentions don't matter, all that matters is the end result. Whether they intended to mislead is a moot point. They said shit. It didn't happen.

Thus, when they say shit and people are cautious about the likelihood of said shit occurring, it makes NO SENSE AT ALL to turn around and say "bu- bu- but they never lied to us!" It doesn't matter one tiny bit. They have made it a habit to be wrong when predicting their future actions.

Maybe you should do some growing up if this needs to be explained to you (and you called him names for disagreeing, so mature).

Again, I'm not going to accept any change in the meaning of words. Use them as they were defined instead of using them to instigate.

 

[Crayon]

So the entire basis of your argument is MS said it so the opposite must be true.

Im saying what they say they are going to do is not necessarily what they are going to do.

What are you saying? More corporate nut hanger things? Yawn.

 

[Crayon]

Lest we forget, all this lying talk started from this post:
http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=197371532

Notice anything funny about that post?

 

[mikezilla2]

frankly it would be good if all the console makers took this idea on board and ran with it.

 

[Night Angel]

Again, I'm not going to accept any change in the meaning of words. Use them as they were defined instead of using them to instigate.

Ah, so you'd rather argue semantics so you can ignore the entirety of the point we've been making. That's a great strategy. I'm sure you win all of the arguments ever.

Did you even follow the chain of posts leading to the word you so vigorously abhor? Context is important, bro.

And I don't think anyone seriously claimed that MS has literally a 100% failure rate with their statements, but why do we need 100% certainty to draw conclusions? That's not how the world works. If they have been wrong often in the past, how is caution not warranted?

Are we only allowed to talk about the path to success and positives because you say so? Is being skeptical somehow more childish than eating this spoon-fed PR up unquestioningly?

 

[Dictator93]

Now that i think about it, Halo 5s performance goals and this news make a lot of sense. Five bucks says Halo 5 or its multiplayer is playable soon enough on something with more oomph without all those drawbacks @ 60 hz.

 

[Complicated]

Now that i think about it, Halo 5s performance goals and this news make a lot of sense. Five bucks says Halo 5 or its multiplayer is playable soon enough on something with more oomph without all those drawbacks @ 60 hz.

I would upgrade this year for that. I'd bet on an announcement this E3 with a release next Spring or Fall though.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Funny, I feel the same way about people in this thread who think this is a good thing with no consequences and no risk of failure and no chance of being negative for current Xbox One owners nor for the XBox console brand as a whole.

I mean, you're right. The rest of us are only using our sentiment about past historical trends and Microsoft's own actions to guide our opinions. It's not like we're doing the right thing and taking their PR at face value and then making wild speculation on how this could work in the face of some glaring flaws.

Well said.

We had these same discussions early last gen as well for another camp.

 

[Discusguy]

I'm liking the idea of having new upgraded console that's forward and backwards compatible. I'll be the first in line. I can't understand the people that treat their consoles as an investment. With this idea you no longer have to worry about that. Games will be there. Just up to you what configuration you can afford.

 

[etta]

A ploy to exit the market???

What the actual fuck, holy shit.
Microsoft's NPD spinning is rubbing off on you guys. What strange wishful thinking.

 

[Sydle]

Ah, so you'd rather argue semantics so you can ignore the entirety of the point we've been making. That's a great strategy. I'm sure you win all of the arguments ever.

Did you even follow the chain of posts leading to the word you so vigorously abhor? Context is important, bro.

And I don't think anyone seriously claimed that MS has literally a 100% failure rate with their statements, but why do we need 100% certainty to draw conclusions? That's not how the world works. If they have been wrong often in the past, how is caution not warranted?

Are we only allowed to talk about the path to success and positives because you say so? Is being skeptical somehow more childish than eating this spoon-fed PR up unquestioningly?

His point is that Microsoft says they plan to do things and sometimes (often?) they don't pan out. Replace Microsoft with any company name and it's still true.

He seems to be of the opinion this won't pan out for Microsoft based on how many times they've had to change their plans in the past. Some people agree with his outlook, some people don't, and others are just talking possibilities. He seems to be personally afflicted by anyone who wants to discuss how it could work out.

That about sum it up?

I didn't say we needed to talk in absolutes. In fact I said "We should be able to discuss potential methods by which they achieve their proposed vision and the potential outcomes without the childish behavior," which encompasses all potential outcomes.

 

[Neuromancer]

My concern with this plan is that devs will no longer be incentivized to code to the metal, which is an awesome term.

 

[EchoChamber]

I think I will be fine if I can play my non-digital games for free in my pc.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

* I bought a GTX, But Nvidia decides to stop driver support.

* I bought a Hybrid car but the battery supplier goes out of business, with no alternative.

* I bought a Kurig Coffee maker and they decide to change the Kcup to something not compatible.

* I have 75 steam games and Valve decides to close up the shop and concentrate their resources back to making games.

* Sony drops all 1st party development to concentrate on 3rd party deals.

What you outlined are decisions we make every day, putting faith into companies that we hope we will get the most value out of what we paid for.

You don't like or trust MS, that's clear. Me, 3 consoles that gave me everything they said they would, and several rock solid OS purchases that I would not consider trading for anything, and the best damn office software that I make a living with.

They doing ok by me.

Reducto ad absurdum won't fly here. This isn't a fundamental question of doubting anything and everything a company says. There's doubt because Microsoft has given us plenty of cause for doubt.

It's not "5 years later the battery for my hybrid stopped being manufactured, so why did I trust the automaker?"

It's "this hybrid manufacturer has abandoned battery design three times in their last three cars. Explain to me why I should buy their newest hybrid with Bigger Better Battery This Time We Pinkie Swear?"

 

[gamz]

Funny, I feel the same way about people in this thread who think this is a good thing with no consequences and no risk of failure and no chance of being negative for current Xbox One owners nor for the XBox console brand as a whole.

I mean, you're right. The rest of us are only using our sentiment about past historical trends and Microsoft's own actions to guide our opinions. It's not like we're doing the right thing and taking their PR at face value and then making wild speculation on how this could work in the face of some glaring flaws.

This is what I feel. I'd rather companies swing for the fences and be ambitious. I'm not going to hold a faluire against them if they do so. I'd rather see innovation. For every faluire their might be something good that comes out of it. Not everything succeeds but playing safe is a bore.

 

[Markoman]

My concern with this plan is that devs will no longer be incentivized to code to the metal, which is an awesome term.

yeah, makes me think about long haired guys with tons of hairspray, make-up, leather vests and tight jeans shouting 'code to the metal' while posing in front of bikini girls.

Edit: For those of you who lack imagination or have missed the 80s this will help

Can some insert 'code to the metal'

 

[Complicated]

My concern with this plan is that devs will no longer be incentivized to code to the metal, which is an awesome term.

I don't think this is the case. The cheapest iteration is still going to be the most popular and making games that don't run decently on it is going to lose a lot of sales.

 

[DeepEnigma]

yeah, makes me think about long haired guys with tons of hairspray, make-up, leather vests and tight jeans shouting 'code to the metal' while posing in front of bikini girls.

The make up wearing, hairspray ones were GlamRock. Metal heads, mainly thrash being most popular metal genre dispised them for calling themselves 'metal', lol.

But I love the visual, lol.

This is what I feel. I'd rather companies swing for the fences and be ambitious. I'm not going to hold a faluire against them if they do so. I'd rather see innovation. For every faluire their might be something good that comes out of it. Not everything succeeds but playing safe is a bore.

That "bore" is leading 2-1 worldwide, as well as 'innovation' should not restrict freedom from the end user. The consumers and market have been speaking.

 

[Markoman]

The make up wearing, hairspray ones were GlamRock.

But I love the visual, lol.



That "bore" is leading 2-1 worldwide, as well as 'innovation' should not restrict freedom from the end user. The consumers and market have been speaking.

Yes I know, I have changed my mind after posting. 'Code to the metal' sounds more like a typical Manowar anthem
BTW: the picture looks like it was taken straight from Conan the Bavarian Penetrator, LOL

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

Well said.

We had these same discussions early last gen as well for another camp.

<sigh> Even in light of the past generations, you still always have people who say "But this time is different". I dunno. Maybe I'm too jaded to care as much. I'm too enthralled with games that are instead of jumping onto the hype train of what might be.

 

[Helznicht]

Reducto ad absurdum won't fly here. This isn't a fundamental question of doubting anything and everything a company says. There's doubt because Microsoft has given us plenty of cause for doubt.

It's not "5 years later the battery for my hybrid stopped being manufactured, so why did I trust the automaker?"

It's "this hybrid manufacturer has abandoned battery design three times in their last three cars. Explain to me why I should buy their newest hybrid with Bigger Better Battery This Time We Pinkie Swear?"

Every MS product has delivered what I expected. What products did you buy from MS that makes you feel this way?