Why did Microsoft Reverse their policies when the damage is already done?

[SecondPrize]

Because people will buy their console now that wouldn't have during the first year before they reverse them again and move forward with the plan.

 

[Lightknight]

Your argument assumes that I'm not getting a PS4 as well. Your argument, is invalid.

Well played. However, if the check in once every 24 hours would have dissuaded your purchase of it in the first place then my comments are incredibly apt. A likely future of always on when the XBO is specifically designed (weakened) with that in mind would be 100 times worse than a mere once daily check in. That's why Microsoft isn't marketing to people without the internet. That's why their CEO said people without the internet should buy a 360. Because future games will be unplayable on their system by design.

The kinect stuff is only an issue if that kind of thing bothers you. The problems caused with a significantly smaller number of gamers on the XBO is side stepped if you have a ps4 but would still be huge for a person with only one console. But that cloud computing looming over it is about to rain (in my household, we punch eachother for such puns, or should I say we punnnnch eachother for it ).

 

[Grivahri]

I think the whole idea that the damage is already done is ridiculous

 

[Altorin]

because the plan required Sony to go along with it.

without Sony going along with it, there is a huge disparity between the systems, to the point that it's kind of silly.

If Sony went along with it, no amount of griping would have changed it.. that would just be how consoles are now.

 

[spartandude]

I think the whole idea that the damage is already done is ridiculous

too an extent they are right, people got put off of it and then just lost all interest in it.

however when people say "we wont buy this cosole because of the drm" and when its removed they still say "we wont buy it because you would have used drm" is just rediculous, its as bad as when people say they will boycott and then dont because now they threatened to boycott unless it was removed and now still are boycotting.
If people are picking on it for other reasons fair enough, for example im not buying it until its gone down in price (and depending on the kinect as in my current situation i simply cant use it at all). but when people refuse to buy it because it used to have drm is ridiculous

 

[Thatguyky]

I find it funny that you say you haven't met anyone that is getting an Xbox One or heard about the U-turn it is doing. I went down to Gamestop two days after the change was announced, and the manager (who I'm good friends with) said there was only three consoles left to reserve. He told me that after Microsoft announced that change reservations came in mad fast.

And why change their policy? Damage control! After seeing how much better Sony did, Microsoft realized they had to do something to win more fans over and keep their old ones.

 

[Lightknight]

I think the whole idea that the damage is already done is ridiculous

That depends on what kind of return they get for the reversal. How many machines do they sell for reversing their decision? The damage that they thought was going to happen considered acceptable because it would have HUGELY increased developer, publisher, and Microsoft profits with every preowned game that would otherwise have gone through storefronts. We're talking about revenue from thin air. What ended up happening is they saw tremendous losses, far more than what they projected.

So yeah, if they got a legitimate number of people, every XBO game sold may average out to multiple games sold this past generation. It's possible that the damage would have been acceptable had the rate of bleeding market share to Sony not been so high a price.

And honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if they find another way to do this anyways half way through the generation.

 

[KOMega]

cut their losses, damage control, better late than never
These are phrases mentioned that I think correctly answer your question.

Also, sorry for being a caveman, but I still don't completely understand what the "brave new digital age" actually means. What is in the "brave new digital age"?
There are people who want that new family sharing thing.
Alright, fine. Why did it need the online-check-or-brick restriction?

I want answers and Microsoft is being stingy with them.
Which is alright I guess, since everytime they try to communicate and explain things they also forget which hole is their mouth and make situations worse.

I'm not much of an Xbox fan to begin with, but I can see someone who is get pissed off a bit.

The U-turn was redeemable to some.

 

[TheYellowCellPhone]

http://www.ibtimes.com/ps4-vs-xbox-one-80-gamers-would-still-prefer-ps4-if-xbox-one-cost-400-according-poll-photo-1336713

That's why. They'd essentially be releasing a console that would've been a flop. When a poll says that of every five consoles that are being bought, four of them are PS4s... Why would you stick to your guns?

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

I feel like I'm taking fucking crazy pills here. Honestly trying not to blow a gasket.

What exactly is "next-gen" about digital distribution? I've been buying games on PSN, XBL, and Steam for damn near a goddamn decade. Why is the removal of physical media as a viable option, the reduction of consumer choice for no good reason, seen as some kind of bold step into a brave new world? This sentiment makes ZERO sense. We've had this option for years now. Pretending MS suddenly invented it is beyond revisionist. It's insanity.

All of the "features" MS promised for your fully digital library? There is no reason they can't implement them for your partially digital library. If they do this down the road, good on them. If they never revisit them, there's an excellent chance it was all smoke-and-mirrors bullshit designed to quell the outrage over the loss of other consumer rights.

There was nothing "revolutionary" about Microsoft's policies and features for Xbone. Transitioning game ownership to a pure licensing model, with no guarantee of (or motivation for) reduced pricing, wasn't "moving gaming forward". It was moving MS's bottom line forward. That people could conflate this with actual advances in gaming is mind-boggling. Hell, the Kinect has infinitely more potential to "move gaming forward" than a LICENSING MODEL THAT HAS FUCK ALL TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL GAMES. At least Kinect is an alternative interface capable of delivering new gameplay experiences.

Seriously, I'm deeply confused. Calling the new Xbone "nothing but a 360 with better graphics" is 100% accurate, but this has NOTHING to do with the change to 24 hr check-ins and the license model. How you buy and access your games isn't an important part of the actual video game experience. It's the OBSTACLE between you and your games, forgotten the moment it's bypassed. The two things actually holding back gaming? Standardized user interfaces and risk-averse game development.

But no, let's pretend a LICENSING MODEL is the secret. Like we're talking about a series of questionable financial products versus a creative entertainment medium.

 

[Vale]

Because this way people will buy more consoles, and they can always re-reverse policies once the people already bought their stuff.
Just you watch.

 

[theuprising]

I know at least one person who is getting an Xbox One because the policies changed and I'll consider it now once the price comes down (I want the Kinect for other things anyway).

Kinect won't ever go away. It is there along with the recently removed online policy to ensure to developers all the players will have these things available so they can spend time developing for them. B/c the old Kinect only a handful of ppl had and they were basically all casual gamers, so guess what kind of games came out for the Kinect? Also the Kinect is one of the main ways to navigate the X1's OS and multimedia features.

 

[theuprising]

I know at least one person who is getting an Xbox One because the policies changed and I'll consider it now once the price comes down (I want the Kinect for other things anyway).

Kinect won't ever go away. It is there along with the recently removed online policy to ensure to developers all the players will have these things available so they can spend time developing for them. B/c the old Kinect only a handful of ppl had and they were basically all casual gamers, so guess what kind of games came out for the Kinect? Also the Kinect is one of the main ways to navigate the X1's OS and multimedia features.

I hope they do re-reverse this once ppl are like "oh the HUGe majority of ppl buying a next gen console in a first world country have access to the internet, durrr"

 

[theuprising]

There was really no point in the DRM. The family sharing plan could have still been implemented (MS hasn't said an outright no to it yet, they're just putting it on hold so they can make the Bone offline by launch). If they really wanted to combat pirates (really no point, since pirates aren't paying customers anyway), all you'd have to do is make it tougher to install torrent clients. And that's possible without DRM.

Can anyone please list off the "positives" of their 24 hour DRM that they tried showing off? The ones I can list off are doable without the check-in:
- Family sharing (have to be connected to download anyways, just stay connected until you're done with the feature)
- Extremely limited cloud gaming features ("Drivatar" Ha!)
- Share/sell a game once (have to be connected online to accept sharing/selling it, erase license from HD then)

None of those features need a 24 hour check-in since they need to be connected online to work in the first place.

And instead of any executives telling us the good things at E3, we get "Fuck you! Buy it anyways!"

All of those features need a 24 hour, or whatever hour check-in to stop piracy which would be REALLY EASY on a all digital console. Steam offline mode requires a check-in as well, but its once every 2 weeks. But Steam doesn't let you share or sell games.

 

[Lilani]

You know some ppl actually wanted those policies and were ready for a brave new digital age, but why did MS change course? I haven't heard ONE person say they are getting an XB1 and most don't even know XB1 did a Uturn. What was the point but alienate the ONLY ppl who were going to buy it in the first place? No no one is going to buy your console b/c all you did was make a console that was just a repeat of last gen. Like the PS4 but more expensive. Skipping this gen of consoles...

After they got the ire of big-name celebrities on national television, and when it was made so public that they so casually threw active-duty military personnel from their pool of customers, they really had nothing left to lose. It'll at least make a difference in that respect. It won't repair the damage that's been done, but it does level the playing field in a couple of areas. And it kept Sony from turning all of their ad campaigns between now and November into victory laps. They may not have completely healed the wound or made it as though it never happened, but at least they aren't bleeding out as quickly as they were. At least they have a shot at making it now.

 

[theuprising]

You know some ppl actually wanted those policies and were ready for a brave new digital age, but why did MS change course? I haven't heard ONE person say they are getting an XB1 and most don't even know XB1 did a Uturn. What was the point but alienate the ONLY ppl who were going to buy it in the first place? No no one is going to buy your console b/c all you did was make a console that was just a repeat of last gen. Like the PS4 but more expensive. Skipping this gen of consoles...

After they got the ire of big-name celebrities on national television, and when it was made so public that they so casually threw active-duty military personnel from their pool of customers, they really had nothing left to lose. It'll at least make a difference in that respect. It won't repair the damage that's been done, but it does level the playing field in a couple of areas. And it kept Sony from turning all of their ad campaigns between now and November into victory laps. They may not have completely healed the wound or made it as though it never happened, but at least they aren't bleeding out as quickly as they were. At least they have a shot at making it now.

The casual audience for this thing definitely has internet access... ppl willing to fork over 500 bucks for a gizmo to let them watch TV better and play Dance Central 13 on an HDTV in a first world country almost CERTAINLY have internet access. It would be like predicting the iphone would fail since the main way of getting it is by getting a data plan as well.

And active-duty personell STILL can't use it until they've patched it day one. And the thing was it was trashed in the mainstream, so the damage will be done, like 6 years from now ppl in the mainstream will still think the X1 has ridiculous DRM b/c they saw it on Jay Leno once or something.

 

[Lilani]

Kinect won't ever go away. It is there along with the recently removed online policy to ensure to developers all the players will have these things available so they can spend time developing for them. B/c the old Kinect only a handful of ppl had and they were basically all casual gamers, so guess what kind of games came out for the Kinect? Also the Kinect is one of the main ways to navigate the X1's OS and multimedia features.

Because that's how you market something--force it down the customer's throat until they thought it was their idea.

But really, they could have gotten the same effect simply by selling the Kinect with the console and allowing the player to hook it up whenever they see fit. Making it to where it always has to be hooked in is just ridiculous, and rather unfair to people who aren't blessed with lots of square footage (like college students, young people with small apartments, kids with small rooms, members of the military...you know, a few of their biggest demographics).

I hope they do re-reverse this once ppl are like "oh the HUGe majority of ppl buying a next gen console in a first world country have access to the internet, durrr"

Why? Also, you do realize the 24 hour check-in also completely eliminates the military as a customer base. Which Microsoft should be taking seriously, because games and consoles are a big market on military bases, and these days troops love to have consoles around to share and play on in their spare time while overseas. There is no way you can spin this positively, so please don't even try. Your entire argument revolves around the idea of, "It doesn't inconvenience too many people!"

Well that's great and all, but you know something that would reduce that number to zero? Not requiring the check-in at all.

All of those features need a 24 hour, or whatever hour check-in to stop piracy which would be REALLY EASY on a all digital console. Steam offline mode requires a check-in as well, but its once every 2 weeks. But Steam doesn't let you share or sell games.

Um...no they don't require a check-in. If the system is essentially transferring use of the license, then once the transfer is complete and logged in the system they shouldn't need to "check-in," just as the original owner of the license didn't need to "check-in" before. And I played Steam offline for a long-ass time while I my apartment had shitty Internet. Sometimes it would try to connect, but I can recall going easily 1 and a half to 2 months without it ever fully updating.

And I'll give you that Steam doesn't let you trade games, but when I buy stuff on Steam I'm never worried about selling them back. You can buy a fairly recent game used at a retailer for about $45 or $50, depending on the location and demand. And you can sell it back for like $10-$15 at most (again, depending on demand. If demand is low, don't count on more than $8). Even under ideal circumstances in which you buy it for $45 and sell it for $15, that's still $25 you spent on a game that you can never play again.

But if I buy a new game on Steam during the Steam Sales, I can get it for $15-$20 and I'll have it forever. And that price only gets sweeter as the game gets older, while older games in retail only depreciate in trade-in value. Unless the game is unpopular or going on a decade old, you'll never pay less than $20 for a used console game at retail. Within a couple of years, a game on Steam will be about $15, and you can pick them up for $2 or $5 during the summer and winter sales.

 

[Lilani]

The casual audience for this thing definitely has internet access... ppl willing to fork over 500 bucks for a gizmo to let them watch TV better and play Dance Central 13 on an HDTV in a first world country almost CERTAINLY have internet access. It would be like predicting the iphone would fail since the main way of getting it is by getting a data plan as well.

And active-duty personell STILL can't use it until they've patched it day one. And the thing was it was trashed in the mainstream, so the damage will be done, like 6 years from now ppl in the mainstream will still think the X1 has ridiculous DRM b/c they saw it on Jay Leno once or something.

Okay...so at what point did I mention the casual audience in that post? That has nothing to do with anything I was talking about.

And do you realize that what you said about active-duty personnel only loses you more points, right?

 

[LysanderNemoinis]

I, for one, wanted Microsoft to stick to their original plan. Not because I like the whole "check in every day" thing, or any of their other idiotic policies. I wanted them to stick to it, so they'd fail. But it's not because I love my PS3, but I thought that if MS got kicked so ruthlessly hard in the wallet (and the nuts) by the consumers they screwed, then with the following generation (if there hopefully is one), they'd be bending over backwards and forwards to please their customers and it would only cause Sony to try even harder. Because when the big two (don't really count Nintendo these days...sadly) are fighting for every buck, we win.

 

[theuprising]

The casual audience for this thing definitely has internet access... ppl willing to fork over 500 bucks for a gizmo to let them watch TV better and play Dance Central 13 on an HDTV in a first world country almost CERTAINLY have internet access. It would be like predicting the iphone would fail since the main way of getting it is by getting a data plan as well.

And active-duty personell STILL can't use it until they've patched it day one. And the thing was it was trashed in the mainstream, so the damage will be done, like 6 years from now ppl in the mainstream will still think the X1 has ridiculous DRM b/c they saw it on Jay Leno once or something.

Okay...so at what point did I mention the casual audience in that post? That has nothing to do with anything I was talking about.

And do you realize that what you said about active-duty personnel only loses you more points, right?

Points? Are you an active duty serviceman? Are you friends with one? If not why do you care? I only care about the X1 uturn b/c it affects me. You're telling me you want random products and companies to change their strategy and vision to appease an incredibly small percentage of their userbase? Should all HDTV's come with built in generators in case you are on duty and watching TV in an area with spotty electricity?