By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - In hindsight, what exactly was MS trying to achieve with their original Xbox One policies?

 

What was MS's plan?

Their plans were good for... 53 23.35%
 
They were pure evil tryin... 150 66.08%
 
Yo Mama 24 10.57%
 
Total:227
Eddie_Raja on 11 January 2015

It was obvious that they were going to release the X1 later than they were forced to. Sony was WAY more ready than they were and caught them with their pants down.



Prediction for console Lifetime sales:

Wii:100-120 million, PS3:80-110 million, 360:70-100 million

[Prediction Made 11/5/2009]

3DS: 65m, PSV: 22m, Wii U: 18-22m, PS4: 80-120m, X1: 35-55m

I gauruntee the PS5 comes out after only 5-6 years after the launch of the PS4.

[Prediction Made 6/18/2014]

Around the Network
mine on 11 January 2015

Its all about SETTOP-BOXES.

Expect the next-gen of settop-boxes to use next-gen technology which will run circles even around a PS4.

So for Microsoft XBox One is a poster child for their Windows OS running on settop-boxes.

I bet they are already in negotiations with Facebook for their Oculus Rift console (the true next gen AMD-x86 chip...).

they don't need to care anymore if PS4 is selling better - their Windows for Games will make up for this many times...



theprof00 on 12 January 2015

tv tv tv tv sports sports tv



PRrussiaGC on 12 January 2015

Why, For the Money of course.



oniyide on 12 January 2015
Sentient_Nebula said:
I think Microsoft thought these policies were already commonplace in PC gaming, and they're right to a certain extent. But they forgot that consoles aren't PCs.

They looked at data, but that data wasn't applicable to the console they were making.

Same mistake with the infamous TV/Movies focus at the reveal event. Microsoft saw from usage data that most Xbox 360s were simply used for things like Netflix. But they forgot that those people bought their console for games in the first place, and were simply watching Netflix during downtime between game releases (which the drought of releases towards the end of the 360's lifecycle could be to blame).

i disagree to a certain extent. Those people they mined for data most likely got 360 after it built up a decent library and most importantly went down to a more mainstream friendly price. No way is anyone really spending 500 just to watch Netflix and NFL. Thats where they really goofed.



Around the Network
oniyide on 12 January 2015

this might be the paranoia talking but i truly believe that EA was in MS ear like one of those little devil bastards on a person's shoulder leading them to the path of darkness. Its actually brilliant



binary solo on 12 January 2015

They were trying to appeal to greedy publishers who want to shut down used games, game rentals and game sharing, in order to secure all sorts of exclusivity from 3rd parties and hence total domination in the console market. A good strategy aside from the fact that consumers buy consoles not publishers, and most consumers know a buttf*ing when they see one. And other than those who actually enjoy being buttf*ed, every potential console buyer said no effing way thank you. So that then meant the cosying up to the publishers in order to become dominant in console strategy ended up being a complete dud, thus the 180, otherwise known as the "Oh we just realised the consumer is our customer, not publishers, and the customer is always right." revelation.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

Burek on 12 January 2015
UltimateUnknown said:

I think we all remember the fiasco that was the Xbox One reveal. The policies surrounding it were not received well to say the least, which included but not limited to:

-24 hour online check ins.

-Used game fees and trade ins only being limited to certain retailers.

-Allowing you to only be able to gift a friend a game once but no way to get it back. So no exchanging games.

-Cutting down on game rental services.

-Mandatory Kinect 2.0 which is always on and watching you (lol).

On the positive side of things they seemed to have some kind of family sharing program similar to the share play function that the PS4 has now where you could share your games with up to 10 people (or "family members" as they called it). But even this feature was never explained properly. In fact the reveal of the Xbox One was a PR disaster as MS failed to communicate their vision.

So now the question is, what exactly were MS trying to pull with all these policies? Were they genuinely trying to push the industry forward towards a bright (at least in their own mind) future, but communicated it poorly? Or was it all just an evil ploy to grab as much money from the consumer as possible in the expense of introducing many restrictions towards how we played? Was it all Don Mattick's plan? What do you guys think?

Originally, there was another restriction, region locking not only the console, but also XB Live by using IP authentication for the regular check-ins. This would have meant that the console was useless outside oficially supported countries.

That, along with the used game policy and TV emphasis made it obvious that MS had no ambitions outside US/UK markets. I really don't know why they thought it was a winning strategy.



Aeolus451 on 12 January 2015

They tried to make more money by dictating how we play games (no used games and eventual push to digital only) regardless of what it did to the consumers. They could of only done that if they controlled the market. For some strange reason they thought that they did. It was the ultimate fuck you to the consumer though.



bubblegamer on 12 January 2015

They were trying to help Africa with the extra income.