Microsoft Believes Xbox One And Kinect Are One And The Same

[Lightknight]

I've come to this thread several times trying to think of what to say. But this is all just not funny anymore. It's like Microsoft knows they were asses to us and knows that they lost this round. But instead of learning from it, their response is, "Yeah, you guys won out this round but we'll get you next time". I'm tired of feeling like the games division of Microsoft is being adversarial towards us (gamers). I get that they stand to make a lot of money if they can magically turn licenses into a consumable one-use object. I bet a lot of book companies would like to force that too. If they really want that, they have to make it worth our while by doing the sort of things steam has been doing. Make purchasing the game new seem reasonable and they will get to sell the same IP over and over again. Instead they're just trying to force it and they haven't even treated us to dinner yet.

This comment, that we got our way this time but their way is an inevitability? That means I have no confidence in creating a game library that is in their care. I wouldn't even be surprised if their next console fails to have a disk reader at all.

 

[Lunar Templar]

Just when I think they can't get any dumber, they go and get dumber.

Oh well, who wants pop corn? we can have a big ass party at launch and laugh when this thing does worse then the WiiU

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

Microsoft, how 'bout you stop spewing out this PR BS and actually listen to people again. Not many people want, can afford the extra $100 or can use the kinect even if it could work in a smaller room(We'll see how true this is when one is set up in a NY apartment.) You haven't listened to people complaining about that horrible interface in Windows 8. You just put another button to go back to it from the desktop in 8.1. This just like saying: "the kinect can now be unplugged; you're still buying it though, derp-de-derp." Both of those should have been options: the kinect should be an add on for an extra $100, and the start screen should rarely been by seen anyone who uses a mouse. Stop forcing these things on us consumers. Eventually, Apple Sony, Linux, Nintendo, or someone else will provide better options compared to your products(not services, though they can and already are doing that, too). You listened just enough not to commit market suicide. Please, listen a little more.

I not gonna buy an xbox 180 until I see how many more dirty tricks you're gonna do with it in the first few years. If I buy an xbox 180 someday, I'm still gonna trade in that stupid kinect, even if I only get enough cash to get a big gulp. The only way to change my mind is if someone released a pc hack for it that did something cool.

 

[shirkbot]

My cellular phone is not a service.

Well, technically it kinda is, actually. Unless you can use your phone perfectly fine without a payment plan, of course...

I know that it requires a service for data exchanges, but you can still turn it on and do many things without necessarily having to connect to anything. That said, it's not the best example.

My PC is not a service. My cellular phone is not a service. These are hardware, like consoles.

They might be hardware but you need licensed software to use them, i.e a service. Both Windows and Mac is a service. On cellphones you need multiple services to even use basic stuff, network plans with carriers and OS licenses with the manufacturer and the multitude of third party apps on all kinds of platforms.

tl;dr: You don't own nearly as much as you think you do.

Linux? I know that they're not perfect examples, even with Linux, but I feel the point is still valid. A service can allow hardware to do more (up to and including functioning at all) but hardware is not a service, and a service is not hardware, even if they are extensively interconnected. I like to keep divisions as clear as possible when it comes to purchasing models.

Also, I am sadly aware that I own virtually nothing I pay money for, especially as a PC gamer with a sizable Steam Library. It's kind of funny that piracy is increasingly the best means by with to actually own what you purchase.

 

[rob_simple]

So, if I'm getting this right, Microsoft have now admitted that all these recent policy reversals are only temporary until they have their claws in a solid consumer base?

And then they will roll out all their old plans, good and bad, and we'll once again be told to 'deal with it'?

Fucking called it.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

Many people don't want to pay a subscription fee for a console, they don't want it turned into a "service" that they don't own. They simply want to play their videogames on their console, and unfortunately the Xbox One has not been designed for that.

At the end of the day the console was supposed to be designed for the consumers. When you look at the disconnect between what the Xbox One delivers and what gamers wanted, that hasn't happened.

The success and growth of XBOX live would tend to disprove that assumption. And you are confusing "gamers" with consumers IMO. XBOX was a game console. XBOX 360 was an entertainment console. XBOX One is the next logical step.

This is exactly the issue. An entertainment console. What the hell is that? The Xbox One allows you to do nothing new that other devices don't already do for cheaper. Xbox 360 was still primarily for games, you could do a little extra like surf the web, but those were very much extra features that didn't harm the primary goal of gaming.
They have taken a games console the primary purpose of which was to play games, and turned it into an 'entertainment console' of which gaming is an afterthought that unfortunately still has a tonne of exclusive games that you cannot experience any other way than to buy this console with an extra $100 price tag and extra features you never asked for that at best do nothing and at worst compromise your privacy and get between you and your game.

And there is nothing in the specs that suggest Kinect "gimps" the system in any way. The original Kinect had no impact beyond how the consumer decided to use it.

The Xbox One uses 3 gigs of RAM out of 8 for it's operating system. That means the One's operating system uses 6 times more RAM than the 360 actually had. That's for all the extra crap like Kinect and TV etc. that will be running at the same time as your games, meaning your games console could potentially have been a lot more powerful without it.

And the whole thing about DRM is a ruse by ALL media companies. We DO NOT own any digital content. We never have and never will. We license the ability to listen to, watch, and play said content. The future of all media is a continuation of this trend, and ultimately it is consumer driven. Convenience, flexibility of use, that is why there is a such thing as an MP3, why your IPAD plays movies. Ask yourself, are you concerned about ownership or access? Because that is what this all really boils down to and seeing as you don't actually own your digital CONTENT, the point seems to be moot.

Ok, so technically we don't have ownership, but we absolutely should fight for the freedom of the license we currently enjoy when we buy a console. It's supposed to be a two way agreement, but currently the companies are making all the rules, pushing all the boundaries, and taking away all the liberties we used to get when we purchased a license to play our games.

For the music industry to survive we don't need to pay the artist a fee every single time we hear the song. Once is enough and we own a copy we can carry around and listen to whenever we want. For the movie industry to survive we don't need to pay the studio a fee every single time we want to watch a movie, buying a copy once is enough, for books the same holds true, and for videogames it has been exactly the same way since their creation.

We should fight so that our consoles remain a purchase-once-only affair, because that is what is best for us as consumers, and sure, if you want multiplayer aspects or whatever form of online connectivity, then pay a fee because you are relying on their servers and infrastructure to connect you with other consoles and their home servers, but that shouldn't be a requirement for the console to be continually used even when you don't use their services. It shouldn't brick up because E.T. failed to phone home within 24 hours and now your legally bought console cannot play your legally bought games because of an unrelated requirement that hasn't been met.

The deal that Microsoft wanted us to agree to use it was unacceptable to many gamers, especially since at the time we didn't know all the details and Microsoft's PR was crap. They wanted us to accept a DRM of 24 hours for all games, an always on Kinect that they had patented spying technology to mine the video and audio for brands and sell to advertisers, and to keep tabs of how many people were in the room so if too many were watching a game or movie it would freeze until you bought a fuller license. As well as paying an activation fee for used games.

The consumers didn't agree, and after outcry and poor sales Microsoft increased the freedom we would enjoy with our consoles, taking out the DRM, and stating that the Kinect could now be apparently turned off (in specific circumstances), and our data won't be mined for advertisers. That's a huge deal, one which pleased many gamers and will lead to lots of sales of this console. The idea that Microsoft would then turn around some months or years down the line and retroactively add these things in, that's not a good thing at all.

 

[Baresark]

I've come to this thread several times trying to think of what to say. But this is all just not funny anymore. It's like Microsoft knows they were asses to us and knows that they lost this round. But instead of learning from it, their response is, "Yeah, you guys won out this round but we'll get you next time". I'm tired of feeling like the games division of Microsoft is being adversarial towards us (gamers). I get that they stand to make a lot of money if they can magically turn licenses into a consumable one-use object. I bet a lot of book companies would like to force that too. If they really want that, they have to make it worth our while by doing the sort of things steam has been doing. Make purchasing the game new seem reasonable and they will get to sell the same IP over and over again. Instead they're just trying to force it and they haven't even treated us to dinner yet.

This comment, that we got our way this time but their way is an inevitability? That means I have no confidence in creating a game library that is in their care. I wouldn't even be surprised if their next console fails to have a disk reader at all.

I am in the same boat. Like, nothing said here fills me with any kind of confidence for the Xbox One. They gave into what the consumer wants, but they didn't want to. They said again and again, "this is good, you should be happy". But the overall consumer response was, "this is not a good step, so I don't know if I want to participate". They switched it to appeal to the consumers (a smart move by any stretch of the imagination), but now they are saying they will get there way because it's what they want. They still seem to want to "rule the living room". They are just really backwards with everything. If they decided that ruling the living room space was important circa 2000, they would have had something. But now they are technically behind the times and their only response is that they think everyone wants to wave their hands around to control the TV... which is honestly ridiculous. We live in a world with devices that tune your cable, record digitally, and steam internet and movies... and they don't cost $500. It make sense to be about videogames because they will be able to offer experiences that cannot be matched by cheaper devices. But they aren't concentrating on what they are good at or what consumers expect... they have this delusion they are going to jump into a market area where the offerings, as of right now, appear to be a lot better.

As a side note: I have done extensive reading about human perception and I have come to one startling conclusion (aided with the help from being a first adapter of the Leap Motion Controller as well as experiences with first generation Kinect and the Wiimote), interactions that use muscle control are hindered to a ridiculous extent by lack of tactile feedback. The Kinect is the a logical step in a direction that is a dead end. It's the same reason why traditional games don't work on touch screens (among other reasons, but this is the biggest in my opinion). Sure, touch screens have come a long way, but they don't provide any kind of tactile feedback. I tried using the Leap Motion for casual computer use and it's not effective at all.

If you are using a mouse, you have a multitude of senses that come together to so your brain and body knows exactly what is going on. Within minutes of getting on a computer, your body adjusts to how the mouse interacts with the screen (sensitivity level, DPI, etc.) and you don't need to watch the mouse pointer. You look at the screen, move your hand, and mouse pointer goes to where your eyes are. Your brain infers the motion speed, hand/mouse movement, and start and stop points for the pointer to get where it's going. It does all this automatically using your sense of sight, sense of touch and proprioception (which is figured from multitudes of cells of various types). All you have with no tactile feedback is your sense of vision, which basically makes you watch that pointer go where it's going. It's slow and not intuitive at all. Why you ask? I'll tell you why. It's because in the real world, there is no situation where you are only relying on a single sense like you do with the Kinect in that situation. I would even go so far as to say the Kinect is a step worse than the Wiimote and Move. The reason is that you still have an item you are manipulating which provides the absolute necessity of additional senses for it to become comfortable. No one can deny that these done well (which is extremely rare in both situation) provide a very engaging experience.

I'm rambling.

TL;DR - The lack of senses beyond vision for manipulating objects on a screen will never be comfortable. It's completely unnatural and offers absolutely no feedback, which the body relies on to assure it's movements and enable tactilely sensitive maneuvers.

 

[Baresark]

And you are confusing "gamers" with consumers IMO.

They are synonymous in this case. Gamers are the only people who give a damn about the XBox One. People who do not play video games are not as aware of the XBox One as we are lead to believe, or at least what some people would like to perceive.

And the whole thing about DRM is a ruse by ALL media companies. We DO NOT own any digital content. We never have and never will. We license the ability to listen to, watch, and play said content. The future of all media is a continuation of this trend, and ultimately it is consumer driven. Convenience, flexibility of use, that is why there is a such thing as an MP3, why your IPAD plays movies. Ask yourself, are you concerned about ownership or access? Because that is what this all really boils down to and seeing as you don't actually own your digital CONTENT, the point seems to be moot.

This is not actually a fact, as of right now, this is opinion. And that opinion is being turned away by people all over the world, even some governments (ie. necessity in some countries in Europe for the right to sell digital products, as in a right of ownership). You have simply bought into the idea that they want to spread. As I said, it's there opinion. Contracts can be voided (which is what those agreements you refer to are) by any court of law. They can be declared unlawful and in some places they already are. Whether you agree or not, you have to see the ridiculousness of selling something to you, taking your money, then you are hit with an EULA that in turn dictates how you are allowed and not allowed to use something. That doesn't happen in all areas that have been discussed, but it certainly happens with consoles. You don't see that until you turn it on for the first time and agree to it. Furthermore, a company that rights a contract does not hold the exclusive right to change it as they see fit, even though they think they do. This has also been thrown out in a court of law. We saw this with the whole debate about the entry in an EULA about not being allowed to file a class action lawsuit. They aren't allowed to take away consumer rights, that is a constant. And different societies have different opinions about this, but most people do not.

 

[Infernal Lawyer]

Spencer does believe in listening to customer feedback, which is why Microsoft now uses what he describes as "physical DRM" - the disc - as well as digital DRM.

Buh?
Discs, physical DRM?
Just... No. I'm sorry, you don't get to turn around your crappy DRM practices by trying to relate them to discs. Being able to play something right off the disc is about as anti-DRM as you can get, aside from direct download-and-play. I mean, come ON, this isn't fucking funny anymore. Stop insulting our intelligence already.

Secondly about, the Kinect... FUCKING PROVE IT ALREADY, YOU BLOODY IDIOTS.
You've been spouting on for fucking AGES about how wonderful the Kinect is, but other than a bunch of crappy tech demos, you haven't had the balls to put your money where your mouth is. Neither the Xbone fanboys nor the haters have any actually idea how wonderful/awful the thing is, but you know what? I'm going to be agreeing with the haters now, because it's becoming pretty damn obvious that you're just trying to create this amazing PR image about your console before you show VISUAL PROOF of how it works, and since you're taking so bloody long... I'd say you're trying to hide how crap it is for as long as possible.

 

[lunavixen]

Looks like I was right, they're going to gradually reverse the policy reversal, been saying that ever since microsoft backtracked on the DRM thing. I think I can safely feel smug about being right for an hour or so.

The thing is, motion controls themselves wouldn't be that bad if they could SUPPLEMENT a normal controller and if you could use it while seated (a bit like the stylus on the DS, not wholly necessary, but can be used with the buttons), and use it for some things, like spellcasting or moving small things aside, or shifting through menus, BUT, they would have to reduce the sensor delay and improve the motion detection.

All along this backtracking, there's been some crazies here and there claiming, "they're just saying this to get you to buy the system then they're going to do whatever they want!" I blew those people off as being a bit too paranoid. But they pretty much laid it all out there, that's true.

Not so crazy now are we?

 

[Dansrage]

Well, guess I'm not getting one after all.
I was gearing up to justify buying one when I read that they had reversed the 24 hour check-in, removed the digital DRM, responded to criticism, all that stuff. But I won't have a Kinect in my house, and I'm not willing to pay ?100 extra for a useless, worthless peripheral I don't want and will not use.
Kinect does not work.
It is a faulty product.
Kinect does not function as intended.
I shouldn't have to justify buying a product, that's what the marketing department is for, THEY should be selling ME this product, I shouldn't have to sit here and find reasons to buy something I should just be excited about.
Looks like I'll be getting a shiny new 7970 instead, I'll be able to play everything except Halo regardless.

 

[xPixelatedx]

But Spencer's clear on one thing: Microsoft wants to create the digital ecosystem that was announced at launch, and which will be coming to all customers eventually. So those of you who wanted to see the next generation console you thought Microsoft was selling will see it eventually. Just not right away.

So the internet turned on the lights to catch a scumbag lightly running a knife over the throats of sleeping children. Caught, M$ is trying to convince the world that they are in fact a "good guy". The most gullible people believed it outright, saying this is what we wanted all along, so we should be happy... Because that's how this kind of situation works right? When someone is caught about to do something really terrible, we should just forgive them if it was stopped preemptively. Yeah, that makes sense.

All the while M$ is still holding the same knife and grinning insanely, and now they outright admit to going through with using it. It is truly astounding how bad they want out of this console race, and I really hope they go through with their diabolical plans just so they will be out. There is no way this will work. If they flip that switch back on, they're done.

Good effing riddance, to.
Everything they and EA brought with them last gen has turned gaming into the cesspool it is now. Gaming would simply be better without them.

 

[Strazdas]

Im still not giving up on my theory that they couldnt fit everything inside the Xbox Box and they have an extra processor inside Kinect that will work as second GPU for gaming, making the machine faster, but forcing you to have it connected. Hence why they drag it teeth and nail together.

My cellular phone is not a service.

Well, technically it kinda is, actually. Unless you can use your phone perfectly fine without a payment plan, of course...

Wel, technically, it kinda isnt. you can use your phone without a payment plan. you cant call it. calling is a service. the phone itself is not.

My PC is not a service. My cellular phone is not a service. These are hardware, like consoles.

They might be hardware but you need licensed software to use them, i.e a service. Both Windows and Mac is a service. On cellphones you need multiple services to even use basic stuff, network plans with carriers and OS licenses with the manufacturer and the multitude of third party apps on all kinds of platforms.

tl;dr: You don't own nearly as much as you think you do.

Yes, software can be a service (windows is a product though, mac pretend to be a product at least. The OS for phones are freee and opensource, unless once again your using a OSX, which isnt. you dont need licesnses for that and not with the manufacturer. i dread to think what would happen if we had to license windows from Asus or something like that. but thats going sidewats. Network plans is a service for a call/internet, not for a phone. you can change providers and chose which one you want without any extra payment (unless your in a contract that says otherwise when you chose that service, but its not your phones fault).

It makes you think, I wish more devices would do this.

Absolutely no one with a working brain who's ever used the Kinect has said this ever.

Actually, the Kinect has some great possible applications. None of which are in gaming.

fixed it for you.

 

[shrekfan246]

Wel, technically, it kinda isnt. you can use your phone without a payment plan. you cant call it. calling is a service. the phone itself is not.

Okay, yes, you're right. You get a nice, sleek little useless brick to carry around in your pocket if you're not paying for the service.

Given the fact that that's what it sounds like Microsoft wants to turn the console market into, I hope you can understand my skepticism and worry about their system becoming successful.

 

[Lightknight]

As a side note: I have done extensive reading about human perception and I have come to one startling conclusion (aided with the help from being a first adapter of the Leap Motion Controller as well as experiences with first generation Kinect and the Wiimote), interactions that use muscle control are hindered to a ridiculous extent by lack of tactile feedback. The Kinect is the a logical step in a direction that is a dead end. It's the same reason why traditional games don't work on touch screens (among other reasons, but this is the biggest in my opinion). Sure, touch screens have come a long way, but they don't provide any kind of tactile feedback. I tried using the Leap Motion for casual computer use and it's not effective at all.

I disagree that it's a dead end. I think it has its place and purposes. I don't think it's perfect but motion capture is a good thing to have until future tech arrives to outdate it. I think the kinect is a natural step towards the future tech that does resolve a lot of those issues. We're a long way off from feedback suits or brain-input devices that make us feel tactile responses. Looks like the Occulus Rift has made major strides in VR where optics are concerned though.

As of now though, it is mostly a gimmick.

As for functionality, I think people do like to say things like Xbox Pause and have their movie pause. The Kinect currently doesn't do that very well away from the dashboard (anyone can feel free to tell me if there's a way to use it to pause DVDs and such), an upgrade in these features will make it better than fumbling for the controller that often isn't charged because 360 controllers suck (charge-wise) compared to ps3 ones.

 

[Strazdas]

Wel, technically, it kinda isnt. you can use your phone without a payment plan. you cant call it. calling is a service. the phone itself is not.

Okay, yes, you're right. You get a nice, sleek little useless brick to carry around in your pocket if you're not paying for the service.

Given the fact that that's what it sounds like Microsoft wants to turn the console market into, I hope you can understand my skepticism and worry about their system becoming successful.

phone is hardware. PC is hardware. console is hardware. That was the point. Now you can chose to use software, whichcan be both product and service, with thi hardware. you often can chose from many different software (windows and linux for example). that is up to you. Soetimes only one type of software exists for certain hardware, thus monepolizing market (xbox). or sometimes due to our fucked up laws hardware makers are allowed to ban competing software (PS3). but software is your choice and is not indistinguishible from hardware. you can take a phone, install your custom software (or heck, write it yourself for the sake of example) and use it to, say, take and edit pictures, as aportable photo camera andeditor in one. Since modern phones are more like pocket PCs and calling for many people stopped being their primary function, this is very much psosible. actually i know a guy that carries around a phone without a SIM and he uses it solely to play android games.

 

[ThunderCavalier]

Yeah...

I'm already not getting an Xbox One. I feel like the console is just kicking itself in the nuts and seeing how badly it can drive away fans and potential customers.

 

[Infernal Lawyer]

Spencer does believe in listening to customer feedback, which is why Microsoft now uses what he describes as "physical DRM" - the disc - as well as digital DRM.

Buh?
Discs, physical DRM?
Just... No. I'm sorry, you don't get to turn around your crappy DRM practices by trying to relate them to discs. Being able to play something right off the disc is about as anti-DRM as you can get, aside from direct download-and-play. I mean, come ON, this isn't fucking funny anymore. Stop insulting our intelligence already.

Actually Discs have been DRM for a very long time.

Being able to play from just a disk is quite nice, but when you have the option of installing a game from disk and then still requiring the disk after the install process is nothing but pure DRM. Disks have been part of the DRM scene since their inception.

Sorry to burst your bubble man, DRM is older then most of us and it is everywhere.

CD's, yes. Console disks? Hell no. We ARE talking about a console here, right? On the other hand, MS DID try to make people install their games onto their XBO...

Unless you're claiming that DRM is simply ANY restriction that comes with digital media (and you may be right: I've always thought computers used to demand disks to circumvent previous limitations, and that keeping check on who uses the software was a secondary concern, so...), I'm pretty sure that traditional disks, like cassettes before them, originated as a means to an end that people haven't completely abandoned in this new 'just download the whole thing' era.

Even then, some CD games let you do a full installation so you don't need the disk afterwards (thought that's really an exception of course), plus it's always been possible to just copy the non-install files onto your computer and run the program off that.

Again, by all means you may be right about COMPUTER disks... But console disks?

 

[theApoc]

And you are confusing "gamers" with consumers IMO.

They are synonymous in this case. Gamers are the only people who give a damn about the XBox One. People who do not play video games are not as aware of the XBox One as we are lead to believe, or at least what some people would like to perceive.

And the whole thing about DRM is a ruse by ALL media companies. We DO NOT own any digital content. We never have and never will. We license the ability to listen to, watch, and play said content. The future of all media is a continuation of this trend, and ultimately it is consumer driven. Convenience, flexibility of use, that is why there is a such thing as an MP3, why your IPAD plays movies. Ask yourself, are you concerned about ownership or access? Because that is what this all really boils down to and seeing as you don't actually own your digital CONTENT, the point seems to be moot.

This is not actually a fact, as of right now, this is opinion. And that opinion is being turned away by people all over the world, even some governments (ie. necessity in some countries in Europe for the right to sell digital products, as in a right of ownership). You have simply bought into the idea that they want to spread. As I said, it's there opinion. Contracts can be voided (which is what those agreements you refer to are) by any court of law. They can be declared unlawful and in some places they already are. Whether you agree or not, you have to see the ridiculousness of selling something to you, taking your money, then you are hit with an EULA that in turn dictates how you are allowed and not allowed to use something. That doesn't happen in all areas that have been discussed, but it certainly happens with consoles. You don't see that until you turn it on for the first time and agree to it. Furthermore, a company that rights a contract does not hold the exclusive right to change it as they see fit, even though they think they do. This has also been thrown out in a court of law. We saw this with the whole debate about the entry in an EULA about not being allowed to file a class action lawsuit. They aren't allowed to take away consumer rights, that is a constant. And different societies have different opinions about this, but most people do not.

No, "gamers" are the only ones who give a crap about what is coming out for what system. CONSUMERS care about how much it costs and what new features it will have that allow them more ENTERTAINMENT choices.

And you do not and never will OWN your digital content and more than you owned content on a physical disc. You licensed it then, and you are licensing it now. The ONLY difference was how you were able to transfer the license. That is it. As someone who produces digital content, trust me, you don't own my work, but feel free to enjoy it.

Nothing else that you said is relevant as you don't seem to know what you are talking about. consumer rights do not supersede the protection afforded to content publishers, not matter what you may think is "fair". And taking measures to ensure THEIR property is not stolen has nothing to do with the rights of the consumer.

XBOX One is an entertainment system, which means it does more than just play movies, or games, or music, or TV, or whatever. It was designed as such. It plays the next generation of games, because that is where the overall market has gone and from a business standpoint, doesn't make sense to update the 360 again, when your competitor is rolling out a new system as well.

 

[Atmos Duality]

"Consoles today are as much a service as they are an individual purchase."

No, they're proprietary computers that specialize in running video games. Otherwise they aren't game consoles.
Saying a console is a service is like saying my toaster is a service, which is absurd.

They can PROVIDE services as all modern consoles can, but they aren't services themselves.

"What we heard from gamers is that they enjoyed the physical DRM they had with the 360 ecosystem and they wanted to add that to Xbox One. So we added physical DRM to the digital DRM plan that we had."

Translation: "We added an additional layer of DRM to an existing DRM system that worked fine on its own, because we wanted more money without having to earn it."

Summarily, they tried to shoulder the consumer with the worst parts of both DRM models specifically to eliminate the benefits of either. Well, the benefits to the consumer.

Physical DRM allows for first sale and implicit game sharing.
With the addition of digital DRM, that right was to be withheld at the mercy of the publisher and their "participating partners".

One can make any sort of argument about "Legality" or "Fairness"; fact is, that change is a strict downgrade from the previous business model for the consumer. Don't expect me to take accept the new offer blindly, and don't treat me like an idiot when I question the offer.

"You'll be able to buy games as physical and digital goods, you'll be able to share games with everybody in your house, and other features that we talked about will definitely be coming down the line."

So one moment they're services, and now they're goods.
Oh, wait, no. Sorry, somehow, the CONSOLES were services, while the GAMES were goods.

Either Phil doesn't understand what he's saying, he thinks the readerbase is stupid, or we've entered the Twilight Zone.

"In many service-based games today, the gamers are creating as much of the content as the developers ? I think that is extremely compelling."

Right. That's why your company, along with every other console maker specifically restricts users to creating their own content with game-integral tools (which are extremely limited on consoles and few in number), and forbids mods and tools for actual user created content out of fear of copyright violation (with good reason, admittedly).

If he meant that users are creating content in terms of "experience", we've been doing that for decades.

Also, "Seamless" online/offline (refer to the interview for context) doesn't have to mandate an offline killswitch in its design. If the net goes down for reasons, well, online content obviously won't work, but that's no reason to kill the entire game.

Yet, that killswitch is exactly what companies like Microsoft and AAA publishers wanted with the Xbone, and no number of strawman arguments or buzzwords can change that.