Pennello: "People just weren't ready for all digital Xbox One". Post #657 = ether.

With all the bad press these past few months I doubt what they had in store for consumers would have made the Bone more appealing to those of us on the fence.

In fact so much shit slinging has gone down I forgot one of the major assets to "Always on", or rather what's up with the cloud these days?
 
"I do feel like we never got a chance to have a rational conversation about what we were trying to do," Penello told Engadget.
"We never got a chance to spin always-online and manipulate enough sheep into thinking it was good for them."
 
What they want is not nearly as important as what we, the consumers who line their pockets with the money we spend on their products, are willing to tolerate. Not to them, anyway. Hence the 180.

I think an apt analogy is to the transition from physical to digital media for music. Compare what we had 10 years ago to what we have today.

Then, we had digital audio. iTunes was in its infancy. The quality was (at least perceived) not as good as CD, because keeping the file size practical enough to download and listen to in a timely fashion meant using compression, which cost some fidelity. The most popular legal source of digital music was in a locked-down format, meaning you could only listen to your music on your computer, or on a really expensive, single-purpose device that probably wasn't compatible with your PC anyway. Not to mention the limited library.

As for physical media, you had a portable CD player which doubled as an FM radio. You had a CD player in your car. You had a stereo in your house. Almost all music worldwide
was being released on CD. All of these things were affordable and widespread. Basically, anywhere you wanted your music, you had it. You could make mix tapes, and so on. It was great.

Fast forward to today.

I have, right now, in my pocket, a small phone that I can plug into (or connect wirelessly to) damn near anything with a set of speakers. For the cost of 1 CD per month, I get unlimited access to a library breaking 20 million songs as of a year ago. I can plug it into my car and use the buttons on my steering wheel to skip through songs without taking my eyes off the road. I can create custom radio stations from playlists of songs that I like that will only play music that it thinks I will like, rather than whatever is popular for that genre. If I don't like a song, I don't ever have to hear it again. None of the songs take up any space on my phone unless I want to be able to listen to them when my phone doesn't have any reception; a thing I can generally prepare for as I need to.

In exchange for this, there are a few songs that I like that aren't on spotify (almost all of them are from overseas).

As for CDs...

They're prohibitively expensive. I have to have space for them. I can only listen to one at a time; if I wanna mix albums, I have to buy blank cds, rip my library, and make mixtapes, and then I can only listen to one mixtape at a time. I have to swap cds in and out unless I have a cd changer, and even that is still limiting. I have to walk around with a cd player if I want to listen on the go, and then I still have to store extra cds somewhere.

Ultimately, at some point, the value balance shifted wildly from physical to digital as our technology and high bandwidth penetration and availability went up. A lot of what makes digital music (and video) great today simply did not exist when it was first introduced, and that was a hard, technological limitation, not one by policy. A lot of what we didn't like about Xbone's pre-180 DRM was by policy alone. The very nature of the system was actively hostile towards the people who would be its direct supporters.

Change that, and then we can talk about the inevitability of the transition, but even that is still bottlenecked by technology.
Yep I agree with you. All three console makers have a lot of work to do before they can convince the market to go all digital. But they sure are going to try.
 
Really? So the reveal wasn't a chance to describe what you were trying to do? Maybe instead of wasting so much time talking about the NFL and TV shows, you could have instead shown why your original plans for gaming were so awesome.
Yeah. They could have started a proper conversation about it, but it seemed like they werent ready at all. And then they bailed quickly when instead they should have brought forth the awesome parts of their vision.
 
What the fuck is his problem?

1. The digital future is here, Albert. Everyone can already buy games online in digital form.

2. This has nothing whatsoever to do with arbitrarily forcing us to stay connected.

3. We understood your message. I repeat: this was NOT a messaging problem. Your policies were shit. Period.
 
As someone who was going to pick up an Xbox One in a month or two, reading shit like this and the potential selling off of Xbox make me want to turn to PS4. At least there I won't get screwed over, whether it be a Dreamcast scenario or DRM being out back in via update.

Please show me something credible with "them" saying they might get rid of the xbox division. I have not seen anything from MS saying anything of the sort.
It's not MS directly saying it, it's the new potential CEOs. 2 of the 5 have said they want to sell it since it makes very little money and isn't relevant to their goals with the company (they want to go mainly software and enterprise as they are the main sources of profit) The other 3 haven't really made any comments either way.
 
I don't get why Penello is even talking about this shit. Your console launches in 2 weeks, and you really want to bring up your bullshit policies that everyone was furious about and start another fervor? What's the strategy here?
I've got no fucking clue. MS has collectively had its head up it's own ass for a while now. I want to critique this whole mess but frankly they've bungled this thing up so hard it's difficult to know where to start.

Albert, I know you read Gaf. You need to stop talking about this. Period. Full stop. No more. Shush.

Every time you or any other MS representative goes on the record to discuss the DRM policies you take an inherently anti consumer approach even if it's not your intent. Which at this point I'm going to assume it's your intent given the frequency with which you and your cohorts put this bungle on the consumer. You can't claim that consumers weren't ready for your vision of the future. We will never be ready for your vision of an all digital future because neither you nor anyone else at MS has never, not once, made it clear what exactly that vision is, or was, could be or will be.

Simply state that Microsoft misread the market. You operated in a vacuum under the assumption that your consumers wanted certain things that we didn't and now you're having to back track. That's fine. You guys made a mistake, it happens. It's time to reread your audience and try again. What you can't do is continue to allude to the fact that consumers weren't ready for your product. That's insulting, and it insinuates that you still have plans to fuck us over in the future. Consumers are naturally entitled. We have to be. We're paying large sums of cash, in this case a premium, for your product. We have certain expectations based on how you present that product and once that transaction is complete we're naturally entitled to complete ownership over that product. We also have expectations for your product based on competing products and services from other manufacturers. You do not operate within a vacuum and this relationship does not work in reverse. You are not entitled to my money.

The DRM strategy as we know it is beneficial to no one but Microsoft and its partners. This statement is true based on the information you have given us. You can claim that miscommunications and disorganization led to dissemination of inaccurate rumors, but the truth of the matter is that the only time you've detailed any consumer benefit was AFTER you shut the DRM down. We also had it on good insider authority that those claims regarding game sharing were complete bullshit and you're lying to us. All the "facts" you attempted to detail to consumers were completely contradictory during the period of time immediately following the initial announcement. Every further clarification only led to further confusion as your company continued to contradict itself. Repeatedly. These are not signs of miscommunications. These are signs of a critical lack of vision and fundamental misunderstanding of your target audience and it shows.

Right now Sony is assaulting you with precision strikes in the market that matters the most during launches, the core gamer audience. You need to buckle the fuck down and figure out what your product is, and who it's for. Right now I can't figure out who this product is for, or why anyone should want it. If it's for the hardcore gamer what are the benefits of paying for XBL over PSN+? You're entering a new generation and Sony is catching up significantly. Voice chat is no longer an appropriate answer. You've failed to clarify on the future of the Games With Gold promotion. At first it was temporary, now it's not? The offerings have been substandard when compared to PS+ over the period of time since it was first announced. Your product is no longer the preferred place to play multiplatform titles and you have virtually no first party resources to draw from. The last entry of your largest IP, halo, was not received well by it's audience and you've lost a chunk of your third party exclusive content over the past generation. As a consumer why should I believe that this won't happen again? Why should I, as a gamer, buy a Xbox One when judging by your track record you've nearly abandoned the 360 halfway through it's life and let a massive series like Mass Effect go multiplatform. It seems to me like this will probably happen again and most major titles I can just wait for.

Is this for the casual gamer? If so why aren't we seeing more kinect games? If so why is it the most expensive console on the market? Where is the content that's going to blow the casual market away? The original kinect was successful because it was a novel add on. A new way of interacting with a product you already had in your household. This is not the case for you any more. The original Wii took off because it was something entirely new, original, and extremely affordable. It was a novelty. This is also not the case for the Xbox One. The family/casual market, if there's much of one left, is going to Nintendo. They have the stronger family friendly IPs. You either need to focus on them or drop the kinect.

Is this a device for the mass market? Designed to integrate into television and media services? It can't be, once again it's the most expensive console no the market. It can't compete in price to something like the Apple TV, or even the Vita TV, a device that at least makes sense as a cheap complimentary purchase to a product a consumer will already own. If that's the case then why haven't we heard more about these television and film products? Where is the info on Remedy's new game that's supposedly blending video games and television entertainment? We know virtually nothing about how it plays, and we know virtually nothing about the television series. Are there other projects like that in the works? If it's designed to compliment a cable subscription why can't it function as a DVR? What benefit is there to a $500 black box that functions as little more than a glorified TV remote? Why aren't you partnering with cable providers? Why are the TV services so severely limited globally?

Microsoft, who is this product for? On the surface you seem to be approaching this device as a jack of all trades type of console. The problem is that the title of "jack of all trades" implies a level of competency in these services that is glaringly absent from your strategy. You lack vision. Period. Stop making excuses. Stop blaming the consumers.

Shut the fuck up, buckle the fuck down, figure out who you're targeting, and fix this.

/end rant
 
Digital only console "could" be something i would embrace if 2 issues could be resolved.

1) Library of games need to be somehow accessable aside from what i have on the standard hd space (steam account tracks my games, itunes tracks my songs/apps)

2) Newer consoles could guarentee that they would run previous gen console games from my "library". (my newer desktops runs the same steam games i bought years ago, same with ipod songs to iphone)

Again, these are what "i'd" accept, but i definately don't speak for everyone, (i.e. my brothers refuse digital anything, they still buy CD's, physical copies of pc games)

Edit: Psp games being tracked on PSN and being able to load them on to my PS Vita is EXACTLY what i'd want from a digital only console.
 
I sometimes think that they just refuse to understand.

Yes, digital is the future.
No, you can't force people into it.

Consumers will gradually move on to digital content as they perceive it as cheaper and more convenient.

You achieve this by making it easily accessible, with the least possible restrictions, and selling it cheaper and under better terms.
You do not achieve this by perverting physical media and turning that into a crappy format just to make digital media look good.

Look at Sony and PS+. They have achieved more in that regard than the self-appointed Paladins of the Digital Future, Microsoft.

FFS
 
deadhorse.gif...................... Sorry but it starting to feel like if there isn't a 50 page bash Microsoft thread on the first page then some other snippet that has been absolutely beaten to death is quoted to rage up another 50 page thread.
Microsoft brought it on themselves by continuing to say stuff incredibly stupid to piss off consumers & gaming fans.

Maybe if they were to stop it with this shit, then there wouldn't be anymore threads about subjects like this.

Give this poster a medal. This post deserves a huge round of applause.
 
deadhorse.gif...................... Sorry but it starting to feel like if there isn't a 50 page bash Microsoft thread on the first page then some other snippet that has been absolutely beaten to death is quoted to rage up another 50 page thread.
Why not tell MS employees to stop beating the same dead horse? It's not like people are just randomly creating threads raising this issue. It's that they keep talking about it.

Of course your response is going to be "well why not just ignore it and don't post." Well if we did that, what's the point of GAF? The majority of threads are quotes from relevant people in the industry or news from video game news outlets that are posted here, at which point people respond and discuss. If you don't like that, GAF is probably not the forum for you.
 
Please show me something credible with "them" saying they might get rid of the xbox division. I have not seen anything from MS saying anything of the sort.
Microsoft CEO candidate Stephen Elop said to consider selling Xbox business, killing Bing

Microsoft is currently searching for a new CEO to replace Steve Ballmer who plans to retire within the next 10 months. Recent reports suggest the company has shortlisted Ford CEO Alan Mulally and former Nokia CEO Stephen Elop as external candidates. Mulally has stated he has no intentions to leave Ford, but a Bloomberg report claims that Elop has big plans if he’s made CEO. After a brief stint as the head of Microsoft’s business division, responsible for Office and other products, Elop’s return to Microsoft in the CEO position would reportedly involve a push for Office on Android and iOS.

Elop is reportedly considering a strategy shift away from Microsoft’s tradition of Office running primarily on Windows PCs. Bloomberg reports that Elop is formulating "some broad strategic outlines for Microsoft," in what is likely to be part of the interview process for the CEO position. Elop’s potential strategy is said to involve maximizing sales of Office instead of using it to push Windows PC and tablet sales. Microsoft’s Office and server software has been performing well in recent financial results, while Windows continues to struggle alongside a declining PC industry. Although Office has launched for iOS and Android, Microsoft could certainly do more to offer complete versions on those rival platforms.

Bloomberg also suggests that Elop is willing to shut down or sell some major Microsoft businesses. Elop would reportedly considering killing off the company’s Bing search engine, while contemplating selling the Xbox business. Some investors and analysts have previously called for the software giant to split off its Xbox business and give up on search. Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen appears to feel the same way. Allen’s $15 billion asset manager, Paul Ghaffari, revealed recently that Bing and Xbox have been distractions for Microsoft. "My view is there are some parts of that operation they should probably spin out, get rid of, to focus on the enterprise and focus on the cloud." Nomura analyst Rick Sherlund claims Microsoft’s financial earnings could be boosted by 40 percent in fiscal 2015 if the company sold its Bing and Xbox businesses.

Any sale of Bing or Xbox seems unlikely, despite continued suggestions over the years. Microsoft is moving to integrate its search engine experience directly into Windows 8.1 and Windows Phone, and the company is just weeks away from launching its next-generation Xbox One console. Bing also powers a number Xbox search and app features. Either way, Microsoft’s CEO search appears to be progressing with some suggesting the company may name a Ballmer successor by the end of the year.

They are suggesting this is a possibility.
 
Don't misunderstand my argument though. Microsoft tried to do something incredibly stupid that hardly anyone wanted. And it would have sucked.
Fair enough, but I still take issue with the whole "digital future is inevitable" argument because of the implication that, regardless of what consumers want, all-digital is going to come whether it's in an acceptable form or not. Smacks too much of that sort of corporate apologist, "stop whining and just accept it already/you can't do anything about it so stop whining" stance that was so common before E3.
 
He's right, the future is a digital one. It's just progress. I'm ready for it, but many aren't right now. It will come though, whether others like it or not. They'll just be left behind.
 
Remember how these boards were being spammed when the Xbone was announced by DRM supporters who turned out to be hired corporate shills? If they wanted to have a rational conversation about what they were trying to do, they should have thought up a better strategy for delivering their vision than paying people to shill for their anti-consumer DRM on internet message boards.
 
Oh poor Mr. Penello. Now they didn't a chance to explain their vision of the future. That implies it wasn't Microsoft fault that they didn't explain anything? It was us the consumers? It was our fault?

Of course, hiding from any explanation after the reveal debacle or cancelling every E3 interview has nothing to do with not having the chance to explain the glorious future that Microsoft foresaw.

But thank you Mr. Penello for reminding about the vision that Microsoft has to our future. A future where I have to report every 24 hour (and even that was not the original vision...) to the poli....Microsoft.

With statements like this I'm surely assured Microsoft will never try to pull a fast one in the middle of a console generation. Clearly they forgot about their vision. Clearly.
 
Oh fuck off with the persecution complex. It's like Iwata's "people jsut don't get the WiiU".

It was quite clear what you wanted to do, and a lot of people don't want it. Those who have no issue with going all digital can still do it. Right now. The two are not mutually exclusive. But many gamers would like to keep control of their physical property, thank you very much.
 
He's right, the future is a digital one. It's just progress. I'm ready for it, but many aren't right now. It will come though, whether others like it or not. They'll just be left behind.
No one is against buying games online in digital form. You can already do that. You can pretty much go all digital if you want to right now. But why in the world should I have to stay connected when I want to play a single-player game?

Is it because, you know, "benefits"? Oh those sweet, elusive "benefits."
 
I've got no fucking clue. MS has collectively had its head up it's own ass for a while now. I want to critique this whole mess but frankly they've bungled this thing up so hard it's difficult to know where to start.

Albert, I know you read Gaf. You need to stop talking about this. Period. Full stop. No more. Shush.

Every time you or any other MS representative goes on the record to discuss the DRM policies you take an inherently anti consumer approach even if it's not your intent. Which at this point I'm going to assume it's your intent given the frequency with which you and your cohorts put this bungle on the consumer. You can't claim that consumers weren't ready for your vision of the future. We will never be ready for your vision of an all digital future because neither you nor anyone else at MS has never, not once, made it clear what exactly that vision is, or was, could be or will be.

Simply state that Microsoft misread the market. You operated in a vacuum under the assumption that your consumers wanted certain things that we didn't and now you're having to back track. That's fine. You guys made a mistake, it happens. It's time to reread your audience and try again. What you can't do is continue to allude to the fact that consumers weren't ready for your product. That's insulting, and it insinuates that you still have plans to fuck us over in the future. Consumers are naturally entitled. We have to be. We're paying large sums of cash, in this case a premium, for your product. We have certain expectations based on how you present that product and once that transaction is complete we're naturally entitled to complete ownership over that product. We also have expectations for your product based on competing products and services from other manufacturers. You do not operate within a vacuum and this relationship does not work in reverse. You are not entitled to my money.

The DRM strategy as we know it is beneficial to no one but Microsoft and its partners. This statement is true based on the information you have given us. You can claim that miscommunications and disorganization led to dissemination of inaccurate rumors, but the truth of the matter is that the only time you've detailed any consumer benefit was AFTER you shut the DRM down. We also had it on good insider authority that those claims regarding game sharing were complete bullshit and you're lying to us. All the "facts" you attempted to detail to consumers were completely contradictory during the period time immediately following the initial announcement. Every further clarification only led to further confusion as your company continued to contradict itself. Repeatedly. These are not signs of miscommunications. These are signs of a critical lack of vision and fundamental misunderstanding of your target audience and it shows.

Right now Sony is assaulting you with precision strikes in the market that matters the most during launches, the core gamer audience. You need to buckle the fuck down and figure out what your product is, and who it's for. Right now I can't figure out who this product is for, or why anyone should want it. If it's for the hardcore gamer what are the benefits of paying for XBL over PSN+? You're entering a new generation and Sony is catching up significantly. Voice chat is no longer an appropriate answer. You've failed to clarify on the future of the Games With Gold promotion. At first it was temporary, now it's not? The offerings have been substandard when compared to PS+ over the period of time since it was first announced. Your product is no longer the preferred place to play multiplatform titles and you have virtually no first party resources to draw from. The last entry of your largest IP, halo, was not received well by it's audience and you've lost a chunk of your third party exclusive content over the past generation. As a consumer why should I believe that this won't happen again? Why should I, as a gamer, buy a Xbox One when judging by your track record you've nearly abandoned the 360 halfway through it's life and let a massive series like Mass Effect go multiplatform. It seems to me like this will probably happen again and most major titles I can just wait for.

Is this for the casual gamer? If so why aren't we seeing more kinect games? If so why is it the most expensive console on the market? Where is the content that's going to blow the casual market away? The original kinect was successful because it was a novel add on. A new way of interacting with a product you already had in your household. This is not the case for you any more. The original Wii took off because it was something entirely new, original, and extremely affordable. It was a novelty. This is also not the case for the Xbox One. The family/casual market, if there's much of one left, is going to Nintendo. They have the stronger family friendly IPs. You either need to focus on them or drop the kinect.

Is this a device for the mass market? Designed to integrate into television and media services? It can't be, once again it's the most expensive console no the market. It can't compete in price to something like the Apple TV, or even the Vita TV, a device that at least makes sense as a cheap complimentary purchase to a product a consumer will already own. If that's the case then why haven't we heard more about these television and film products? Where is the info on Remedy's new game that's supposedly blending video games and television entertainment? We know virtually nothing about how it plays, and we know virtually nothing about the television series. Are there other projects like that in the works? If it's designed to compliment a cable subscription why can't it function as a DVR? What benefit is there to a $500 black box that functions as little more than a glorified TV remote? Why aren't you partnering with cable providers? Why are the TV services so severely limited globally?

Mircrosoft, who is this product for? On the surface you seem to be approaching this device as a jack of all trades type of console. The problem is that the title of "jack of all trades" implies a level of competency in these services that is glaringly absent from your strategy. You lack vision. Period. Stop making excuses. Stop blaming the consumers.

Shut the fuck up, buckle the fuck down, figure out who you're targeting, and fix this.

/end rant
 
An always online console with digital only products is something I have no interest in. Now now, not ever. Regardless of the messaging, the policies are shit and Microsoft will never convince me otherwise.
 
He's right, the future is a digital one. It's just progress. I'm ready for it, but many aren't right now. It will come though, whether others like it or not. They'll just be left behind.
There's a good reason why people aren't ready for it, console marketplaces are closed systems and so far all we've seen from Sony/MS/Nintendo are high prices with no sign of competing with retailers (not even close). Nintendo can be ignored since they really don't appear to be in any rush for a digital future, however if MS/Sony want people to turn to digital they need to actively encourage it right now and build up to it. If their idea of encouraging it is pricing digital games almost twice as much as retail boxed games then it's never going to work.

That also completely ignores that game sizes are becoming huge, so much so that it's probably going to encourage more retail purchases in the future anyway.
 
What the fuck is his problem?

1. The digital future is here, Albert. Everyone can already buy games online in digital form.

2. This has nothing whatsoever to do with arbitrarily forcing us to stay connected.

3. We understood your message. I repeat: this was NOT a messaging problem. Your policies were shit. Period.
+1
 
He's right, the future is a digital one. It's just progress. I'm ready for it, but many aren't right now. It will come though, whether others like it or not. They'll just be left behind.
The future is Digital but MS (hopefully) won't be the ones leading customers to it. They have failed spectacularily at establishing themselves in every DD market they tried, be it PC, Phones or Music players

They had a reall good start with games on XBLA and pissed that away with dumb policies and completlely dropped the ball with the Xbox one unveil.

MS has one of the best infrasturctures possible to establish themselves as a major player for DD and they seem incapable of taking advantage of that.

Thank god.

If GWFL is any indication, i don't want MS to be successful with their Digital ambitions. Others will do it better.
 
He's right, the future is a digital one. It's just progress. I'm ready for it, but many aren't right now. It will come though, whether others like it or not. They'll just be left behind.
This shit right here. This is what I'm talking about. The folks who just spout this "just accept whatever comes because there's nothing you can do" drivel because they're too spineless to stand up in the face of bullshit, despite having glaring evidence, in the form of the Xbone DRM 180 earlier this year, that consumers can, in fact, dictate the course of the future with their actions.

A digital future is fine. But it doesn't have to be on MS', or Sony's, or EA's, or whoevers' terms. The sooner people realize this, the sooner we can stop repeating this tired, worn-out topic already.
 
Microsoft still being totally delusional isn't surprising at all but I don't get how they're so open about it.

They seriously need to put Penello and Major Nelson and all those other guys on lockdown until after the launch. I get that they're just doing their jobs but either they're incompetent or the company's ideas are so shitty that they shouldn't even bother talking about them.
 
Microsoft CEO candidate Stephen Elop said to consider selling Xbox business, killing Bing

Microsoft is currently searching for a new CEO to replace Steve Ballmer who plans to retire within the next 10 months. Recent reports suggest the company has shortlisted Ford CEO Alan Mulally and former Nokia CEO Stephen Elop as external candidates. Mulally has stated he has no intentions to leave Ford, but a Bloomberg report claims that Elop has big plans if he’s made CEO. After a brief stint as the head of Microsoft’s business division, responsible for Office and other products, Elop’s return to Microsoft in the CEO position would reportedly involve a push for Office on Android and iOS.

Elop is reportedly considering a strategy shift away from Microsoft’s tradition of Office running primarily on Windows PCs. Bloomberg reports that Elop is formulating "some broad strategic outlines for Microsoft," in what is likely to be part of the interview process for the CEO position. Elop’s potential strategy is said to involve maximizing sales of Office instead of using it to push Windows PC and tablet sales. Microsoft’s Office and server software has been performing well in recent financial results, while Windows continues to struggle alongside a declining PC industry. Although Office has launched for iOS and Android, Microsoft could certainly do more to offer complete versions on those rival platforms.

Bloomberg also suggests that Elop is willing to shut down or sell some major Microsoft businesses. Elop would reportedly considering killing off the company’s Bing search engine, while contemplating selling the Xbox business. Some investors and analysts have previously called for the software giant to split off its Xbox business and give up on search. Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen appears to feel the same way. Allen’s $15 billion asset manager, Paul Ghaffari, revealed recently that Bing and Xbox have been distractions for Microsoft. "My view is there are some parts of that operation they should probably spin out, get rid of, to focus on the enterprise and focus on the cloud." Nomura analyst Rick Sherlund claims Microsoft’s financial earnings could be boosted by 40 percent in fiscal 2015 if the company sold its Bing and Xbox businesses.

Any sale of Bing or Xbox seems unlikely, despite continued suggestions over the years. Microsoft is moving to integrate its search engine experience directly into Windows 8.1 and Windows Phone, and the company is just weeks away from launching its next-generation Xbox One console. Bing also powers a number Xbox search and app features. Either way, Microsoft’s CEO search appears to be progressing with some suggesting the company may name a Ballmer successor by the end of the year.

They are suggesting this is a possibility.
In the big picture, this is exactly what ms should do. I dont want to see the xbox go but his assessment is dead on.
 
I haven't read the entire thread, so apologies if my points were already made by someone else...

Consoles retaining the idea of having the software tied to a physical good that a consumer can buy/sell/trade/lend in a free market is one of the bigger advantages that consoles have over PC games. Why the hell would you gimp that and think it's a good idea? I haven't heard one good reason come from any consumer as to why this is desirable (and no, not getting up off of your couch to switch discs isn't a great reason to give up your consumer rights). Do people really think MS was going to start charging less than $59.99 for AAA games? Or that they would have insane Steam-ish sales?

Here's the real kicker: Microsoft could very easily implement the positive things they were trying (and failing) to get across, just tied exclusively to digital purchases. They could give you Family Sharing tied to digital purchases on XBL. They could implement a sell/trade/gifting system for digital purchases. But because you stood up for your consumer rights, they decided, pretty much out of spite, to take that all away from you. They said, "Fine, you don't want to be forced into going digital and dealing with our DRM and 24-hour check-ins? You don't get any of the good things either. Let's see how you like that!"

As far as what Albert P stated in that interview, it's a load of crap. It's blaming the consumers for sticking up for their rights. It's like the company line that's being towed is, "It's not OUR problem you guys weren't ready to have this conversation." No no no. Our ears were open, waiting for you to properly communicate your ideas and plans to us. The problem is, that never happened. You guys had 10 different people saying 10 different things to 10 different media outlets. Some things were never fully clarified or explained. When pressed for clarification, you either said that you internally needed more time to figure things out, or we were just simply misunderstanding what you were trying to do.

Funny how it's always the consumer that's the problem, and not you guys. We weren't misunderstanding your message at all. It's just that, your message was either A. bullshit or B. Not fully explained or clarified. You are the problem. Not us.
 
I've got no fucking clue. MS has collectively had its head up it's own ass for a while now. I want to critique this whole mess but frankly they've bungled this thing up so hard it's difficult to know where to start.

Albert, I know you read Gaf. You need to stop talking about this. Period. Full stop. No more. Shush.

Every time you or any other MS representative goes on the record to discuss the DRM policies you take an inherently anti consumer approach even if it's not your intent. Which at this point I'm going to assume it's your intent given the frequency with which you and your cohorts put this bungle on the consumer. You can't claim that consumers weren't ready for your vision of the future. We will never be ready for your vision of an all digital future because neither you nor anyone else at MS has never, not once, made it clear what exactly that vision is, or was, could be or will be.

Simply state that Microsoft misread the market. You operated in a vacuum under the assumption that your consumers wanted certain things that we didn't and now you're having to back track. That's fine. You guys made a mistake, it happens. It's time to reread your audience and try again. What you can't do is continue to allude to the fact that consumers weren't ready for your product. That's insulting, and it insinuates that you still have plans to fuck us over in the future. Consumers are naturally entitled. We have to be. We're paying large sums of cash, in this case a premium, for your product. We have certain expectations based on how you present that product and once that transaction is complete we're naturally entitled to complete ownership over that product. We also have expectations for your product based on competing products and services from other manufacturers. You do not operate within a vacuum and this relationship does not work in reverse. You are not entitled to my money.

The DRM strategy as we know it is beneficial to no one but Microsoft and its partners. This statement is true based on the information you have given us. You can claim that miscommunications and disorganization led to dissemination of inaccurate rumors, but the truth of the matter is that the only time you've detailed any consumer benefit was AFTER you shut the DRM down. We also had it on good insider authority that those claims regarding game sharing were complete bullshit and you're lying to us. All the "facts" you attempted to detail to consumers were completely contradictory during the period of time immediately following the initial announcement. Every further clarification only led to further confusion as your company continued to contradict itself. Repeatedly. These are not signs of miscommunications. These are signs of a critical lack of vision and fundamental misunderstanding of your target audience and it shows.

Right now Sony is assaulting you with precision strikes in the market that matters the most during launches, the core gamer audience. You need to buckle the fuck down and figure out what your product is, and who it's for. Right now I can't figure out who this product is for, or why anyone should want it. If it's for the hardcore gamer what are the benefits of paying for XBL over PSN+? You're entering a new generation and Sony is catching up significantly. Voice chat is no longer an appropriate answer. You've failed to clarify on the future of the Games With Gold promotion. At first it was temporary, now it's not? The offerings have been substandard when compared to PS+ over the period of time since it was first announced. Your product is no longer the preferred place to play multiplatform titles and you have virtually no first party resources to draw from. The last entry of your largest IP, halo, was not received well by it's audience and you've lost a chunk of your third party exclusive content over the past generation. As a consumer why should I believe that this won't happen again? Why should I, as a gamer, buy a Xbox One when judging by your track record you've nearly abandoned the 360 halfway through it's life and let a massive series like Mass Effect go multiplatform. It seems to me like this will probably happen again and most major titles I can just wait for.

Is this for the casual gamer? If so why aren't we seeing more kinect games? If so why is it the most expensive console on the market? Where is the content that's going to blow the casual market away? The original kinect was successful because it was a novel add on. A new way of interacting with a product you already had in your household. This is not the case for you any more. The original Wii took off because it was something entirely new, original, and extremely affordable. It was a novelty. This is also not the case for the Xbox One. The family/casual market, if there's much of one left, is going to Nintendo. They have the stronger family friendly IPs. You either need to focus on them or drop the kinect.

Is this a device for the mass market? Designed to integrate into television and media services? It can't be, once again it's the most expensive console no the market. It can't compete in price to something like the Apple TV, or even the Vita TV, a device that at least makes sense as a cheap complimentary purchase to a product a consumer will already own. If that's the case then why haven't we heard more about these television and film products? Where is the info on Remedy's new game that's supposedly blending video games and television entertainment? We know virtually nothing about how it plays, and we know virtually nothing about the television series. Are there other projects like that in the works? If it's designed to compliment a cable subscription why can't it function as a DVR? What benefit is there to a $500 black box that functions as little more than a glorified TV remote? Why aren't you partnering with cable providers? Why are the TV services so severely limited globally?

Mircrosoft, who is this product for? On the surface you seem to be approaching this device as a jack of all trades type of console. The problem is that the title of "jack of all trades" implies a level of competency in these services that is glaringly absent from your strategy. You lack vision. Period. Stop making excuses. Stop blaming the consumers.

Shut the fuck up, buckle the fuck down, figure out who you're targeting, and fix this.

/end rant
Damn, well said.
 
Games are already exceeding 50GB at launch. So pure digital is not possible for most people. Military and others are not able to connect every 24 hours so that is not possible for many people.

They would have to completely eliminate used games like Steam in order to provide an offline option while delivering the games to your console with a physical install disc.

Fuck mandatory Internet checkins. I'd rather lose used games to allow offline ala-Steam.
 
That's a really condescending way to admit your mistake.

It's not that people aren't ready for the idea, it's that people don't want to switch to something that offers them no tangible benefit.

Xbone'a digital future is "lose a lot, gain nothing." When we're gaining something, we'll be ready to jump in with both feet.
 
Albert, I know you read Gaf. You need to stop talking about this. Period. Full stop. No more. Shush.
Mircrosoft, who is this product for? On the surface you seem to be approaching this device as a jack of all trades type of console. The problem is that the title of "jack of all trades" implies a level of competency in these services that is glaringly absent from your strategy. You lack vision. Period. Stop making excuses. Stop blaming the consumers.

Shut the fuck up, buckle the fuck down, figure out who you're targeting, and fix this.
my thoughts right here. bolded for ether.


Personally, i cant even imagine how pissed some of them were behind closed doors when they originally found out about the investor/bod approach. People who design and build these things know their shit. Not to mention E3 and resulting policies shifts must have threw everything off course and into chaos.
 
They keep regurgitating crap like this, and it drives me crazy that people still buy into the "reversal" bull. They're not reversing jack shit. All they're doing is delaying their crap plans, or phasing them in, in a more deliberate and subtle manner.
 
THERE ISN'T A SINGLE GOOD REASON FOR THE 24-HOUR CHECK, NONE. THAT WAS JUST MS FUCKING THE CONSUMER. Everything else was sort of acceptable but the 24 hour check killed it.
 
Why not tell MS employees to stop beating the same dead horse? It's not like people are just randomly creating threads raising this issue. It's that they keep talking about it.

Of course your response is going to be "well why not just ignore it and don't post." Well if we did that, what's the point of GAF? The majority of threads are quotes from relevant people in the industry or news from video game news outlets that are posted here, at which point people respond and discuss. If you don't like that, GAF is probably not the forum for you.
Sorry but the statement has been made by Microsoft in the past and talked about at length on here previously. It has nothing to do with it being said again, and more to do with it being previously beaten to a pulp.
 
Microsoft CEO candidate Stephen Elop said to consider selling Xbox business, killing Bing

Microsoft is currently searching for a new CEO to replace Steve Ballmer who plans to retire within the next 10 months. Recent reports suggest the company has shortlisted Ford CEO Alan Mulally and former Nokia CEO Stephen Elop as external candidates. Mulally has stated he has no intentions to leave Ford, but a Bloomberg report claims that Elop has big plans if he’s made CEO. After a brief stint as the head of Microsoft’s business division, responsible for Office and other products, Elop’s return to Microsoft in the CEO position would reportedly involve a push for Office on Android and iOS.

Elop is reportedly considering a strategy shift away from Microsoft’s tradition of Office running primarily on Windows PCs. Bloomberg reports that Elop is formulating "some broad strategic outlines for Microsoft," in what is likely to be part of the interview process for the CEO position. Elop’s potential strategy is said to involve maximizing sales of Office instead of using it to push Windows PC and tablet sales. Microsoft’s Office and server software has been performing well in recent financial results, while Windows continues to struggle alongside a declining PC industry. Although Office has launched for iOS and Android, Microsoft could certainly do more to offer complete versions on those rival platforms.

Bloomberg also suggests that Elop is willing to shut down or sell some major Microsoft businesses. Elop would reportedly considering killing off the company’s Bing search engine, while contemplating selling the Xbox business. Some investors and analysts have previously called for the software giant to split off its Xbox business and give up on search. Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen appears to feel the same way. Allen’s $15 billion asset manager, Paul Ghaffari, revealed recently that Bing and Xbox have been distractions for Microsoft. "My view is there are some parts of that operation they should probably spin out, get rid of, to focus on the enterprise and focus on the cloud." Nomura analyst Rick Sherlund claims Microsoft’s financial earnings could be boosted by 40 percent in fiscal 2015 if the company sold its Bing and Xbox businesses.

Any sale of Bing or Xbox seems unlikely, despite continued suggestions over the years. Microsoft is moving to integrate its search engine experience directly into Windows 8.1 and Windows Phone, and the company is just weeks away from launching its next-generation Xbox One console. Bing also powers a number Xbox search and app features. Either way, Microsoft’s CEO search appears to be progressing with some suggesting the company may name a Ballmer successor by the end of the year.

They are suggesting this is a possibility.
This is exactly what frustrates me about this forum. There are way to many opinions based on conjecture. Killing off the Xbox brand goes way beyond the initial thoughts of an incoming CEO. By referring to "them" that is saying that MS is considering killing off the brand which is not true and encourages more conjecture based opinions. It would be nice if people start sticking to facts. I am not attacking or singling you out so I apologize if it comes off that way.