The X-box One is for Publishers, not You.
- Thread starter Trinab
- Start date
Recommended Videos
No... no you did not.Elijin said:
That's like thinking you've interrupting a panic about a rockslide by pointing out that a boulder fell off a cliff once.
Okay, first of all, publishers would be stupid to exclude half of their potential sales base (going off of PC/Xbox/PS3 multi-platform releases in the last seven years) just to be exclusive so they could try killing used sales. Publishers would also be incredibly stupid to try killing used sales, and I really only see EA as being desperate enough to do something like that.
Seriously, if publishers thought used games were actually such a massive threat to their profit margins, do you really think they'd cuddle up so closely to Gamestop?
If they do try, though, then I'm with Jim Sterling here and I can't wait until they realize that used games were just another false boogeyman they were propping up to strike down themselves in some misguided attempt to not admit they've got problems.
Seriously, if publishers thought used games were actually such a massive threat to their profit margins, do you really think they'd cuddle up so closely to Gamestop?
If they do try, though, then I'm with Jim Sterling here and I can't wait until they realize that used games were just another false boogeyman they were propping up to strike down themselves in some misguided attempt to not admit they've got problems.
While I do sort of agree with you in that Microsoft is probably going to get on the good sides of a few publishers thanks to its reinforcement of everything we hate publishers doing, exclusives won't be so ridiculously numerous as to squash the PS4 market. So far, what I see is the PS4 offending no-one particularly badly, and the Xbone actually converting 360 owners to other platforms. In the end, if no-one buys the Xbone, publishers are hardly going to pump out exclusives for it that no-one will play, especially considering they can pull much the same shit with the existing system (passes and DRM).
Hmmm ...
I don't know. Threatening your customers doesn't seem like a good business strategy most of the time.
In the end, you got to serve your customers if you want their money. You are after all living off their money.
It's all in the hands of consumers now. Will they allow big business to have their way and walk all over them? We shall soon see where the power truly lies. Who needs who more.
I don't know. Threatening your customers doesn't seem like a good business strategy most of the time.
In the end, you got to serve your customers if you want their money. You are after all living off their money.
It's all in the hands of consumers now. Will they allow big business to have their way and walk all over them? We shall soon see where the power truly lies. Who needs who more.
I would only like to object to all the accusations of spinelessness and weakness of will gamers have. Not every gamer visits sites like these. Not all of them read this news. The vast majority sees a game they want and buy the console it works on. I don't think it's worth it, but my brother is pretty enthusiastuc about it.
The problem with this is that Microsoft is doing what the comic book industry of the 90's did. Not exactly, of course, but in spirit. They got greedy and have their target demographic so keenly picked out that they will ignore everyone else. And the result of this will be the same crash effect that hit comics. The demographic will grow up, grow apart or drop xbox for the competitors. Meanwhile, they have no good faith and no easy starting platform to get new customers and as such, the system dies from lack of audience.
As I said before, I hope this is a spectacular, brilliant, epic failure from start to finish. Titanic sinking of the game's industry that makes people forget the jaguar and the virtual boy. I hope they put all their eggs in this basket and then the train crashes hard. As an industry, we would need that sort of cataclysmic disaster to shake the other DRM factories away from that habit. Even if only a little, something that large scale a failure would be a benefit in a stagnant triple A marketplace.
As I said before, I hope this is a spectacular, brilliant, epic failure from start to finish. Titanic sinking of the game's industry that makes people forget the jaguar and the virtual boy. I hope they put all their eggs in this basket and then the train crashes hard. As an industry, we would need that sort of cataclysmic disaster to shake the other DRM factories away from that habit. Even if only a little, something that large scale a failure would be a benefit in a stagnant triple A marketplace.
Yep PC will be the way to go unless the PS4 drops in price and has a good library. Good news is that there are now the 780 series of Nividia cards which means that we can have near titan level performances for 60% of the Titan price. This will definably enable many to play even the highest end games on cheaper setups.BFEL said:
That line of reasoning actually makes sense. Now the the big time publishers (EA and Activision) have a legitimate option to squish the used game market in regards to yearly releases (shit like FIFA, Madden etc.) and allow trade-ins of other games, which ponders to profits of big retailers.
Shit... that makes Xbone look very profitable for EA and Activision... And they are just greedy enough to abandon other platforms alltogether to make most of their products Xbone exclusive. Which means that future of gaming will be held hostage by 3 greediest scum-sucking corporations, and we wouldn't be able to do shit to stop it.
And the only thing Sony can do about it now is implement trade-in system for PS4, which also fucks us over.
Damn. I think in a couple of years I'll only be playing stuff from GOG.
Shit... that makes Xbone look very profitable for EA and Activision... And they are just greedy enough to abandon other platforms alltogether to make most of their products Xbone exclusive. Which means that future of gaming will be held hostage by 3 greediest scum-sucking corporations, and we wouldn't be able to do shit to stop it.
And the only thing Sony can do about it now is implement trade-in system for PS4, which also fucks us over.
Damn. I think in a couple of years I'll only be playing stuff from GOG.
I think I understand Microsoft's business thinking in regards to their new business plan. I am going to provide an example and acknowledge most numbers are pulled out of my ass, but still explains the reasoning. So I hope I don't bore most of you with my math.
Let's take a sample of 100,000 gamers playing on current generation consoles. Now lets say 50k only buy new games, 30k sometimes buy new and sometimes buy used, and 20k buy only used games. Now we say on average a gamer spends $300 per year on video games, then break it down to new and used game sales:
50k always new - $300 new / $0 used
30k 50/50 new/used - $150 new / $150 used
20k always used - $0 new / $300 new
So doing the math, there is a total sales of $19.5 million new games and $10.5 million. In the current market, Microsoft and publishers get absolutely nothing from used game sales.
Now here is where the incentive comes in. I am sure Microsoft acknowledges that they will lose customers with these more restrictive measures. Lets say only 10% (or 5000) gamers drop out from the "buy only new" category since it doesn't affect them much, 20% (or 6000) gamers from the 50/50 category, and 50% (or 10,000) from the "only used" category. Lets say gamers still spend $300 per year and Microsoft gets a 50% cut from used game sales. Let's look at the numbers:
45k always new - $300 new / $0 used ($0 MS cut)
24k 50/50 new/used - $150 new / $150 used ($75 MS cut)
10k always used - $0 new / $300 used ($150 MS cut)
Lets run the number for revenue that Microsoft receives. Keep in mind that they received $19.5 million from the previous sample. Math: 45k x (300) + 24k x (150 + 75) + 10k (150) = $20.4 million. Multiply that 100,000 gamer sample size and expand it to the global gaming population, and you make considerably more money. Granted there are so many other variables not taken into account such as development and distribution costs, but the logic remains the same.
I am sure Microsoft has run numbers similar to this and have accepted the risk. It just remains to be seen if their estimate for the percentage of customers that drop out is underestimated or not.
Let's take a sample of 100,000 gamers playing on current generation consoles. Now lets say 50k only buy new games, 30k sometimes buy new and sometimes buy used, and 20k buy only used games. Now we say on average a gamer spends $300 per year on video games, then break it down to new and used game sales:
50k always new - $300 new / $0 used
30k 50/50 new/used - $150 new / $150 used
20k always used - $0 new / $300 new
So doing the math, there is a total sales of $19.5 million new games and $10.5 million. In the current market, Microsoft and publishers get absolutely nothing from used game sales.
Now here is where the incentive comes in. I am sure Microsoft acknowledges that they will lose customers with these more restrictive measures. Lets say only 10% (or 5000) gamers drop out from the "buy only new" category since it doesn't affect them much, 20% (or 6000) gamers from the 50/50 category, and 50% (or 10,000) from the "only used" category. Lets say gamers still spend $300 per year and Microsoft gets a 50% cut from used game sales. Let's look at the numbers:
45k always new - $300 new / $0 used ($0 MS cut)
24k 50/50 new/used - $150 new / $150 used ($75 MS cut)
10k always used - $0 new / $300 used ($150 MS cut)
Lets run the number for revenue that Microsoft receives. Keep in mind that they received $19.5 million from the previous sample. Math: 45k x (300) + 24k x (150 + 75) + 10k (150) = $20.4 million. Multiply that 100,000 gamer sample size and expand it to the global gaming population, and you make considerably more money. Granted there are so many other variables not taken into account such as development and distribution costs, but the logic remains the same.
I am sure Microsoft has run numbers similar to this and have accepted the risk. It just remains to be seen if their estimate for the percentage of customers that drop out is underestimated or not.
Apparently Microsoft thinks that the Publishers will buy the console, not the gamers. I love how they think.
How are they going to sell these exclusive games? Oh right, they're going to sell them for the console everyone hates. The one that monitors you while you use it. The one that doesn't let you play used games without charging for it. The one that would rather be a set-top box than a console. Yeah, great plan Microsoft.Trinab said:
Basically, as long as we don't buy the xbone, we can punish them for the complete disrespect and contempt they've shown us.
I'm thinking of contacting my legislator, not just about the One, but all "Check-in" DRM (steam included)KarmaTheAlligator said:
After a few years or after a AAA title ceases to bring in 6 figures worth of gross revenue in a year, whichever is first, a publisher should cease _all_ regular check-ins.
I completely agree with Colt, but I want to make one thing clear to Doom. You don't need gold to get patches, you just need an online connection to receive automated patches. I figured I should clear that up. I don't see the comparison between server connection (an optional component to many games) and mandatory check-ins, but I guess you got a point on how Microsoft might have gotten that idea.Doom972 said:
If they think they'll sell 400,000,000 Xbones, they're fucking insane.Zeh Don said:
The 360, as of February 2013, has sold about 75 million units. [http://www.computerandvideogames.com/389080/xbox-360-life-to-date-sales-hit-759-million/]
Again, if they think they'll get 400,000,000, they're fucking insane.
Also, of those 75 million units sold, there's about 40 million xbox live accounts. Meaning that Microsoft is telling 25 million of its customers to go fuck themselves. So if we assume all 360 owners with xbox live ban Xbone, they won't but let's assume, then they're looking at a base of 50,000,000 consoles. Again, this assumes Xbone sales meet or break total 360 sales. It won't. MS is fucking insane. If they really think that fucking tv will make the xbone sell again, they're FUCKING INSANE!
They should, and on PC we kinda have that thanks to GoG and indie games, but I doubt they will. You're not going to play Halo 50 if you're still playing #4.QUINTIX said:
Thank goodness someone else sees this.
There's no doubt in my mind that it was the AAA Publishers who demanded this of Microsoft and there's no reason why they wouldn't have proposed the same thing to Sony.
This would also explain why both M$ and Sony have been curiously silent about the gaming aspects of their game consoles.
They've been weighing the consumer backlash against the publisher backlash.
I haven't clocked how long it takes Steam to punt you out of a session and demand a reconnect, but I do know that at least on Windows, Steam-Offline Mode is on a per-session basis. That is, if you turn your computer off, you cannot use Offline Mode until you log onto Steam again.
Which in practice, is much shorter than 24 hours.
EDIT: And yes, I am aware that this issue doesn't effect everyone who uses Steam.
When I first started using Steam, it didn't effect me either. But sometime in 2010, something changed, and I'm not sure what. Thinking back, there isn't really a common link between anything; not even the two separate computers I've used Steam on.
I am honestly at a loss for what the possible cause is; maybe security, maybe something on the account, but there's nothing in the Steam Account settings that I can find that would lend itself to this.
(the "don't save credentials on this computer" isn't checked, otherwise Offline Mode wouldn't work at all)
Also: Please consider what others have said before quoting this.
There's no doubt in my mind that it was the AAA Publishers who demanded this of Microsoft and there's no reason why they wouldn't have proposed the same thing to Sony.
This would also explain why both M$ and Sony have been curiously silent about the gaming aspects of their game consoles.
They've been weighing the consumer backlash against the publisher backlash.
Steam kinda does that unless you leave your computer running 24/7 (bad idea).KarmaTheAlligator said:
I haven't clocked how long it takes Steam to punt you out of a session and demand a reconnect, but I do know that at least on Windows, Steam-Offline Mode is on a per-session basis. That is, if you turn your computer off, you cannot use Offline Mode until you log onto Steam again.
Which in practice, is much shorter than 24 hours.
EDIT: And yes, I am aware that this issue doesn't effect everyone who uses Steam.
When I first started using Steam, it didn't effect me either. But sometime in 2010, something changed, and I'm not sure what. Thinking back, there isn't really a common link between anything; not even the two separate computers I've used Steam on.
I am honestly at a loss for what the possible cause is; maybe security, maybe something on the account, but there's nothing in the Steam Account settings that I can find that would lend itself to this.
(the "don't save credentials on this computer" isn't checked, otherwise Offline Mode wouldn't work at all)
Also: Please consider what others have said before quoting this.