Support NeoGAF

[The Silver]

That Rubin guy doesn't sit well with me. Far too apologetic on all things Microsoft, too willing to downplay the myriad of ways Microsoft have fucked up with the Xbone since its reveal. He acknowledges that they made mistakes and that there have been problems, but then he's too eager wave off those off and say something along the lines "oh it's only a short-term issue, they'll figure it out."

I don't think it's going to be that easy for Microsoft this gen. Boy, you can tell as clear as day that this was recorded before the news got out of the PS4's day one sell-through in North America.

Well he's right, Sony came back from 599 US DOLLARS and NO GAMES while Microsoft came back from RROD. So many people kept saying Sony was finished when the PS3 was flopping and look at it now.

Microosft managed to change most of it's shit before the console has even launched, it's in a much better position than Sony was back in 06.

All this stuff early in the gen in all likelihood won't matter later on.

 

[Faddy]

If Microsoft engineers and devs don't want it to be called XBone they shouldn't have called it Xbox One. It took the internet less than 5 minutes to make Xbone the defacto name, Coupled with Xbox One Eighty the whole name is a generic disaster.

The problem I have with the Kinect is that Microsoft didn't account for it in the design of the console. There whole strategy of content running side by side looks lacklustre because they have no secondary chips to handle the workload. Sony have dedicated hardware for streaming and remote play and are marketing that as a big feature. MS are burdening the main hardware with all these optional and niche things that developers aren't able to access the full power of the console.

Microsoft needs better cable integration, they should start with TIVO and have fully searchable DVR and HDMI-CEC controls or at least networked controls since I can already control my TIVO from my iPad.

 

[Shahed]

These longer discussions are much better

 

[MercuryLS]

I absolutely love Pachter, so on the money with everything he said.

 

[walltowall]

Really, really great discussion. As a massive fan of the original two generations of the Xbox platform the video is making me a tad depressed. Microsoft /needs/ the old team back incredibly badly; they've fallen so far.

MS should be throwing buckets of money at Seamus Blackley and begging him to rejoin the team. The current Kinect crew have no idea what they're doing.

Please come back Seamus.

Nothing against the original team but Blackley had an open checkbook for the first Xbox. Allard had ideas great and grand and is remembered fondly by gamers because he left Xbox on a high note but he is also responsible for the Zune and the Kin, two pretty big failures for MS. Mattrick is the exec that, like him or not, has made the Xbox brand what it is today. The Xbox brand needs one clear leader that has an eye on the future and a finger on the pulse of what gamers want now and who has the clout to go to bat for the brand in the big boy meetings. They do not have that now. Blackley echoed a point that Jeff Gerstmann made in June and I think it's spot on. There must have been huge and heated debates about the direction of the console and the only way to truly settle things was to have it play out in public, which it did, but the cost of that was a damaged brand and an opening for Sony. It will be an interesting 2014!

 

[flkraven]

Maybe you haven't been caught up on the business side of things. Stockholders are being promised profit and better sales on day one. Even so many are actively pushing Microsoft to get rid of the division and focus on serviced.

Yes, but it doesn't change the fact that the majority of MS value is in things other than Xbox. Their stock may drop due to a massive Xbox collapse, but it wouldnt be anything scary. Like 1%.

 

[Slashlen]

Can someone explain to me why the cable companies would agree to this? I understand why MS would want to do it, but what is the reasoning for a cable company to subsidize some other company's product? They're practically monopolies, and it seems counterproductive to push a product whose (maybe still?) primary function is not something they profit from and whose excessive use may reduce the value of their services.

Maybe nobody wants to admit the cable companies told them to shove it.

 

[-Plasma Reus-]

This was a great episode. GT should get these people together more often. A lot of level-headedness.

 

[Croyles]

I'm getting sick and tired of "the messaging was wrong"!

No, your policies were.

Anyway, its all gone now so that's good.

 

[PaulExcellent]

Wait, is Xbone bad?
I thought it was just easier to say than Xbox One, especially when I actually play an Xbox 1 frequently. >.>

 

[Spectral Entity]

(no way would I pay the same amount as a PS4 for weaker hardware).

Why not? When OG Xbox launched in '01 at $299, the PS2 - the weaker system - was also $299.

 

[ascii42]

I'm getting sick and tired of "the messaging was wrong"!

No, your policies were.

Anyway, its all gone now so that's good.

In this case, I think he was referring to the messaging regarding TV integration and other non-gaming services, which I agree with. There's nothing wrong with having entertainment features. People have responded well to them since the PS2 could play DVD movies. Microsoft just shouldn't have opened the Xbox One introduction with that stuff.

 

[MoeB]

Why not? When OG Xbox launched in '01 at $299, the PS2 - the weaker of the two - was also $299.

You're assuming that he bought the PS2. Also the same argument can't be used in this case since these two consoles are launching within one weeks time from each other.

 

[B.O.O.M]

Since E3 Rubin has been sounding like MS PR

messaging messaging messagin

The issue was the message itself!

 

[Slashlen]

Wait, is Xbone bad?
I thought it was just easier to say than Xbox One, especially when I actually play an Xbox 1 frequently. >.>

It is considered a derogatory term. "Bone" has a number of alternate uses, none of them good.

 

[Alx]

The problem I have with the Kinect is that Microsoft didn't account for it in the design of the console. There whole strategy of content running side by side looks lacklustre because they have no secondary chips to handle the workload.

They did. There is dedicated hardware in the console to process the kinect commands, that's what allows the console to wait for "kinect on" even when on standby.

 

[Penguins&PolarBears]

There are actually people still pushing the cable subsidy idea even now? Amazing.

There are actually people still pushing them to remove Kinect even now? Amazing.


Funny to see this stupidity from Pachter on the day that news comes out Apple may be buying PrimeSense for $345M with the intention to use it in Apple TV.

Forest for trees.

Xbox established as standard on consoles ethernet/broadband, wireless controllers, hard drive, paid multiplayer service, video streaming services, a games market place, DLC, when many others didn't see the potential or importance. What's more likely that camera sensors will be established as a standard of game consoles or not? Xbox has a pretty solid track record of establishing standards and that PS4 camera seems to be selling really really well. This suggests huge interest across the board for the camera/mic sensor.

It's the same thing with Kinect. Right now the message is "You're gonna pay $100 extra dollars for this" rather than "Look at everything that $100 is buying you".

When you consider how many people are buying the PS4 camera (top 10 on Amazon currently) it isn't even a $100 difference for most people. It is a $40 difference for them. The goal shouldn't even be for MS to drop the price $100, it should be a $50 price drop while maintaining a superior lineup of games, services, and overall functionality. I love also how the HDMI-in is just dismissed as completely irrelevant. It is a huge advantage to MS to have a feature so huge be underestimated so completely.

MS needs to continue executing on their plan and working on getting the price down (basically the same stuff they have to do every generation). Winning over gamers is a given, if they continue to have the most attractive games and services. Winning over casual/non-gamers is a far trickier challenge, but things like Xbox Fitness, HBO, Kinect voice/gesture control go a long way.

 

[Mushroomer25]

I'm getting sick and tired of "the messaging was wrong"!

No, your policies were.

Anyway, its all gone now so that's good.

Regardless of your stance on the policies, Microsoft did a terrible job explaining why they were in place. They were taking away perceived customer value, without putting anything new in its' place. "No Used Games" became the prevailing message, rather than "You can now easily share game libraries with friends!". It was all negative, rather than postiive.

It's the same thing with Kinect. Right now the message is "You're gonna pay $100 extra dollars for this" rather than "Look at everything that $100 is buying you".

 

[walltowall]

Microsoft needs better cable integration, they should start with TIVO and have fully searchable DVR and HDMI-CEC controls or at least networked controls since I can already control my TIVO from my iPad.

They'll never do DVR, but their universal search on the 360 is top notch, it pulls in content from all the apps and presents contextualized results.

Can someone explain to me why the cable companies would agree to this? I understand why MS would want to do it, but what is the reasoning for a cable company to subsidize some other company's product? They're practically monopolies, and it seems counterproductive to push a product whose (maybe still?) primary function is not something they profit from and whose excessive use may reduce the value of their services.

Maybe nobody wants to admit the cable companies told them to shove it.

For the same reason we are seeing Netflix coming to the cable box. It's added revenue for both parties. MS or Sony would take advantage of that massive user base and the cable companies will have their offerings on the same box as the over the top services and not lose out on getting a cut even if you DON'T pick their content.

MS does it with Android, they could force everyone to work around their patents, but they rather get a cut of the more popular market.

 

[thewhitehawk]

I'm getting sick and tired of "the messaging was wrong"!

No, your policies were.

Anyway, its all gone now so that's good.

Are you suggesting that Microsoft's policies this generation were good?

Between the paid-for online service, even for basic internet functionality, the proprietary hard drive upgrades, the (lack of) reliability of their hardware and the way they treated the affected customers, the software update fees, the way some independent developers were treated (some felt completely alienated and have publicly vowed never to work with them again). Were Microsoft's policies really much better than what they presented in this generation, or were they just able to get away with it better because they had a more popular platform in some key markets?

I think if Microsoft had focused on its core audience first they would have gotten away with more of the policies that we rallied and complained against. Heck, we're in 2013 and Nintendo is still getting away some of their completely archaic and bullshit software licensing policies, but people who own their current consoles have never been happier with them thanks to the great games they've been bringing out.

I think it's unrealistic to assume we'd care the same for their old shitty policies had they, from the start, focused on showcasing their games and had a clearer gaming-centric message for consumers.

 

[jabuseika]

That was good actually, these guys know just how big of a mess up Microsoft got themselves into.

I laughed at Patcher referring to MS leadership as "3 headed monster".

His idea of 1 year of free Live Gold to make up for $100 difference is genius, if only Microsoft was as smart...

 

[Louis Cyphre]

Both systems will share most of the same games, specifically the games people want to play (aka third parties). MS not having price parity with Sony is going to be a huge disadvantage.

The PS3 compared to the XBox 360 also shared a lot of the same games and that was a $200 difference. Difference between then and now is bluray was appealing to videophiles and so far outside of the UI Kinect isn't that appealing.

I think this was a good show, I like Jason and Seamus. Michael not so much (sorry Michael).

 

[Kacho]

Good episode. I agreed with a lot of what they said. Additional adjustments will need to be made, but Microsoft has done well so far since the initial reveal.

 

[Faddy]

They did. There is dedicated hardware in the console to process the kinect commands, that's what allows the console to wait for "kinect on" even when on standby.

They half-assed it though. There is a portion of the GPU that is reserved for Kinect during gameplay. There should have been a dedicated chip that did everything encompassed by Kinect.

"Xbox One has a conservative 10 per cent time-sliced reservation on the GPU for system processing. This is used both for the GPGPU processing for Kinect and for the rendering of concurrent system content such as snap mode," Microsoft technical fellow Andrew Goossen told us.



"The current reservation provides strong isolation between the title and the system and simplifies game development - strong isolation means that the system workloads, which are variable, won't perturb the performance of the game rendering. In the future, we plan to open up more options to developers to access this GPU reservation time while maintaining full system functionality." MS Technical Fellow

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/d...unlock-more-gpu-power-for-xbox-one-developers

 

[QaaQer]

Yeah, Blackley had a lot of good things to say, he's a good guest on Bonus Round.
They all are really, but I like getting Blackley's insight and perspective.

I love it too because none of the guests are journos/PR, and GK is a good host.

 

[Raoul Duke]

I thought that the whole discussion was quite engrossing and refreshing and it was nice to see a talk like this take place between some notable individuals from the industry. I'm honestly quite surprised a discussion with this type of substance actually came from GT, I sincerely did not expect it. Also, it kinda had a Real Time vibe, with the f bombs and all lol...

I honestly haven't paid attention the the bonus round since around E3... they had some hacks (well one annoying guy in particular) defending DRM without any true substance, it was quite disgusting. Night and day between these two discussions. Glad to see they stepped it up here. Maybe with the consoles finally in the wild, the media will now report on the realities of the current market trends regarding these consoles, rather than manufactured hype from the console makers.

Now I only wish they had this discussion after the bombshell of 1 million PS4's sold. Really interested what they would have to say after that news, and what they think Microsoft must be feeling at this very moment. I would honestly really like to know how most everyone in the industry feels about this news... obviously I'm sure they are ecstatic, but besides that, how does this affect the future of these consoles, if at all.

 

[Slashlen]

For the same reason we are seeing Netflix coming to the cable box. It's added revenue for both parties. MS or Sony would take advantage of that massive user base and the cable companies will have their offerings on the same box as the over the top services and not lose out on getting a cut even if you DON'T pick their content.

MS does it with Android, they could force everyone to work around their patents, but they rather get a cut of the more popular market.

Netflix on the cable box makes sense for the cable companies because it's a dependency on the cable box. It keeps people using their cable box. If MS was licensing Kinect tech for cable boxes, that could make sense. If I'm the cable company, I want MY box under the TV, not someone else's. MS wants to hide the cable box. If I'm the cable company, that seems to be the last thing I want.

And what exactly is the revenue stream for the cable company? The only thing I've seen is maybe they can make it up in higher rates, but it's not like MS is giving them a cut of Gold fees or anything like that. And if that is the only thing, MS doesn't need them. Repeat the 360 experiment and get BestBuy or Amazon to do it.

 

[QaaQer]

Can someone explain to me why the cable companies would agree to this? I understand why MS would want to do it, but what is the reasoning for a cable company to subsidize some other company's product? They're practically monopolies, and it seems counterproductive to push a product whose (maybe still?) primary function is not something they profit from and whose excessive use may reduce the value of their services.

Maybe nobody wants to admit the cable companies told them to shove it.

Yeah, I have a hard time understanding whats in it for the cable companies.

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

I'm getting sick and tired of "the messaging was wrong"!

No, your policies were.

Anyway, its all gone now so that's good.

That's not what they were talking about in the least. They were only talking about the like 2 hour reveal that didn't even mention games. They were even showing clips from that presentation as they were talking about it...

 

[Alx]

They half-assed it though. There is a portion of the GPU that is reserved for Kinect during gameplay. There should have been a dedicated chip that did everything encompassed by Kinect.

What would it change if they had an additional chip instead of reserving part of the GPU ? It would either increase the total cost of the hardware, or they would have to choose an even weaker GPU to balance that cost. Dedicated chips are useful for specialized tasks (sound processing) or special conditions (low power mode), but for processing the output of a camera in full power mode, a GPU is a very appropriate solution. Those are designed for image processing after all.

 

[Hoo-doo]

Said it many times before -- MS will drop the price before they will drop kinect.

I'm expecting $400 Xbox One by Holiday 2014.

That would be waaaay too late. PS4 will have already established itself as the gaming device to get by then, and Sony could just as easily drop their price as a response.
They just need to cut their losses with the Kinect right now. Sell it on the side for sixty bucks, try and make some of the money back, but don't let it be the goddamn anchor around the Xbox One's neck while it's drowning.

The value simply is not there in the eyes of the general consumer. Pushing it down our throats only makes people dislike it even more.

The dream of the Xbone as a massively popular casual entertainment machine will just not ever happen with the current paywalls and hefty entry price. It's a fucking fantasy that they should snap out of, and turn the focus to the people willing to spend money. The gaming crowd.

 

[HokieJoe]

And yet, isn't PS3 still the most popular Netflix device? It doesn't really integrate multi-media better if it's locked behind a paywall that 77% of their userbase doesn't access.

And that is largely due to inclusion of an excellent Bluray player most likely. Without that, my guess is that a number of people wouldn't have bought a PS3. I know I wouldn't have.

 

[panda-zebra]

Can someone explain to me why the cable companies would agree to this? I understand why MS would want to do it, but what is the reasoning for a cable company to subsidize some other company's product? They're practically monopolies, and it seems counterproductive to push a product whose (maybe still?) primary function is not something they profit from and whose excessive use may reduce the value of their services.

Maybe nobody wants to admit the cable companies told them to shove it.

On the one hand they see their subscribers falling month on month so might be keen for an xbone-shaped prop, on the other, supporting a device that offers alternatives to their services as well as other methods of viewing (and paying for) premium content no doubt seems risky.

 

[SnakeEyes]

Seriously, these last two episodes of BR have been fantastic. I'm loving how frank Pachter and Seamus Blackley are being, and it's even making Jason Ruben look *a little* better than the way he's portrayed himself in the last few months too!

We need more BRs like this.

Spoiler

Also, LOL "Xbone!"

 

[Angelus Errare]

They're just a bunch of XBONERS

Holy shit man! Watch the words, jesus I can't believe that's not filtered. No cool man, not cool. D:

 

[LTWheels]

Well he's right, Sony came back from 599 US DOLLARS and NO GAMES while Microsoft came back from RROD. So many people kept saying Sony was finished when the PS3 was flopping and look at it now.

Microosft managed to change most of it's shit before the console has even launched, it's in a much better position than Sony was back in 06.

All this stuff early in the gen in all likelihood won't matter later on.

The only problem with that idea is that Sony has two territories that brought the PS3 regardless of the price difference: Japan, and Continental Europe.

Let's face it, these two territories are going to buy the PS4 regardless. They are already a right off for MS.

The UK and NA have shown to be the price sensitive territories that don't hold any allegiance and are willing to switch to the cheaper console. Depending on the extent they switch back from Xbox to Playstation will help to determine this generation.

I think MS's best bet is to expand rapidly into the larger developing middle class of the BRIC nations. Over the next 8-10 years these areas have the biggest potential of growth. MS have started some groundwork by manufacturing the console in Brazil and teaming up with a Chinese company to make a game console. These are the markets where I believe, if exploited properly, the generation can be won by MS as long as they remain competitive in NA and the UK.

 

[efeman]

Let's all just abandon this conversation for the next year and see what the state of everything is fall 2014!

...

..N..No? Okay... I'll see myself out.

 

[Mushroomer25]

When you consider how many people are buying the PS4 camera (top 10 on Amazon currently) it isn't even a $100 difference for most people. It is a $40 difference for them. The goal shouldn't even be for MS to drop the price $100, it should be a $50 price drop while maintaining a superior lineup of games, services, and overall functionality. I love also how the HDMI-in is just dismissed as completely irrelevant. It is a huge advantage to MS to have a feature so huge be underestimated so completely.

MS needs to continue executing on their plan and working on getting the price down (basically the same stuff they have to do every generation). Winning over gamers is a given, if they continue to have the most attractive games and services. Winning over casual/non-gamers is a far trickier challenge, but things like Xbox Fitness, HBO, Kinect voice/gesture control go a long way.

Still, I'd be willing to gamble that the attatch rate for the Playstation Camera never gets above 50% in the console's lifetime. Right now it's selling well because they're shit-all to buy for the machine, and the camera allows you to use The Playroom. There's a direct $100 difference between the machines this holiday, and that's going to make a serious difference if it sticks around.

And I'd personally disagree. I think winning over the core audience is more difficult than the mass audience. A great deal of the core audience right now holds a severe (arguably justified) grudge against Microsoft for the DRM policies. Great games will always move systems, but it's much harder to make a great game than a great media app. Microsoft is starting this generation with one foot in a grave dug by their own hands. Not to say they can't step out of it, but it's going to take time.

 

[walltowall]

Netflix on the cable box makes sense for the cable companies because it's a dependency on the cable box. It keeps people using their cable box. If MS was licensing Kinect tech for cable boxes, that could make sense. If I'm the cable company, I want MY box under the TV, not someone else's. MS wants to hide the cable box. If I'm the cable company, that seems to be the last thing I want.

And what exactly is the revenue stream for the cable company? The only thing I've seen is maybe they can make it up in higher rates, but it's not like MS is giving them a cut of Gold fees or anything like that. And if that is the only thing, MS doesn't need them. Repeat the 360 experiment and get BestBuy or Amazon to do it.

If I'm a cable company I want a cut of Xbox live fees, I want a cut of billing/processing, I want to sell my own movies along side the other VOD, and I want my TV app on the box that allows for commercial revenue. We are not far off right now, Fios already does live TV on 360. I have a feeling we'll see some announcements at CES.

 

[Faddy]

What would it change if they had an additional chip instead of reserving part of the GPU ? It would either increase the total cost of the hardware, or they would have to choose an even weaker GPU to balance that cost. Dedicated chips are useful for specialized tasks (sound processing) or special conditions (low power mode), but for processing the output of a camera in full power mode, a GPU is a very appropriate solution. Those are designed for image processing after all.

As I understood it the reason that Xbone GPU is weak is due to a lack of die space caused by the ESRAM, which itself was caused by the insistence of 8GB of system RAM. Then they weaken the GPU further by having Kinect specific overhead when that could have been put on a separate chip.

The whole design is compromise after compromise. The game streaming and video recording solution is also inferior to PS4 since again they don't have the dedicated hardware for a niche use case. Kinect is going to be used by a small subset of users but they cripple the whole console experience (and their price point due to the bundle) because of it. A dedicated chip would have made the console better and gave more benefit to having a non kinect bundle.

 

[Slashlen]

On the one hand they see their subscribers falling month on month so might be keen for an xbone-shaped prop, on the other, supporting a device that offers alternatives to their services as well as other methods of viewing (and paying for) premium content no doubt seems risky.

If they want a bump from including a popular item with a contract, there are better items to offer. They would only want to include it if it were popular enough that MS wouldn't need the extra sales. Right now they're probably better off with an iPad or some other tablet.

Also, that kind of move is the opposite of the kind of subsidizing they're talking about. Either the cable company would buy them at full price, or MS would subsidize them(volume discount). All of the talk on this seems to be more MS getting the cable company to eat some of the cost.

I don't believe it would sell cable subscriptions for them, and I don't see any additional revenue stream for them or anything that keeps consumers in their ecosystem. Why would they eat the cost then?

 

[HokieJoe]

I absolutely love Pachter, so on the money with everything he said.

Eh, Pachter has spouted off some really goofy shit over the years. I think Pachter made good sense on the Kinect, but something he's missing is that without Kinect some the multimedia integration disappears. Moreover, using a mobile or tablet device is the last fucking way that I want to control my experience. Anything that requires me to take my eyes off the TV and look down at another screen to change channels, etc is fundamentally flawed. At least with a button remote control (as much as they suck) I can feel my way around the physical buttons and control my experience. That ain't possible with a flatscreen device.

All that said, I'm not sure that Kinect should've been packed in. $100 is a considerable premium to pay for an unknown payoff for potential buyers.

 

[ElRenoRaven]

You know I really liked this Bonus round. So insane hearing Pachter and the others saying what we're thinking. It's like I stepped into the twilight zone. It was awesome seeing Sheamus Blackley again. I really do miss seeing him around.

 

[HokieJoe]

nfm

 

[ReturnOfTheRAT]

Smh at Jason Rubin saying turning round Xbox's indie problem was a 48 hour process.

Is he stupid?

The same Jason Rubin who went to THQ?

 

[Slashlen]

If I'm a cable company I want a cut of Xbox live fees, I want a cut of billing/processing, I want to sell my own movies along side the other VOD, and I want my TV app on the box that allows for commercial revenue. We are not far off right now, Fios already does live TV on 360. I have a feeling we'll see some announcements at CES.

If cable companies could actually get a cut of the fees/billing/processing, then I could see them going along, but I don't think MS would ever give any of that up. Gold is their money-printing machine.

And as far as VOD and the Fios on 360, that's an argument for integration. Cable companies are moving towards trying to get their content on more devices. My understanding is that last Time Warner fight with a network was over rights for that kind of thing. That's not the same thing as subsidizing. Netflix would like all devices to have access to Netflix, but they aren't going to subsidize the cost of such a device. They will just create apps for them so that wherever you are you can get your Netflix.

 

[QaaQer]

You know I really liked this Bonus round. So insane hearing Pachter and the others saying what we're thinking. It's like I stepped into the twilight zone. It was awesome seeing Sheamus Blackley again. I really do miss seeing him around.

so nice listening to people who's livelihoods don't depend on ad revenue from games companies...so good.

 

[KoopaTheCasual]

Why aren't people more floored that Seamus Blackley (one of the founding fathers of the Xbox brand) speaks so poorly of Xbox One's messaging and leadership? Yea, Patcher and Rubin were killing it, but the whole time I'm thinking Seamus is practically daddy Xbox shaking his head at what happened to brand. I mean really? He opens by requesting to call it "Xbone"? lol

Holy shit man! Watch the words, jesus I can't believe that's not filtered. No cool man, not cool. D:

Some people just don't understand there's a difference between saying Xbona's and Xboners. SMH.

 

[Croyles]

I get it they weren't talking about used games and online policies. I thought they were going to go into that being something that was just bad messaging but they didn't.

I talked too soon.

Great episode btw.

 

[Heavy's Sandvich]

Thank you for posting that, thought it was a sober, intelligent view into the issues.

To my discredit, I didn't know who Seamus was but he was quality.

Nice one.