"We suck at telling the story" Microsoft engineer telling us how it really is

[MPerce]

See, I can understand where Microsoft is trying to go with this and why it can be good, at least the way this anonymous guy is putting it. The family sharing is a good idea, and the philosophy as a whole is basically what Steam is already doing.

The problems are that their PR department has no idea what they're doing and that Microsoft hasn't shown why the always-online is a good thing for the customer.

Show us that the digital games will be cheaper, that there will be sales and stuff. Give us the option to buy the One without a Kinect, because not many of us are gonna use that thing. Right now, it just sounds like they think we're all pirating bastards.

If they can get their act together in the next few months, Microsoft may have a shot.

 

[faefrost]

The constant comparisons to Steam are disingenuous. And particularly troubling coming from an MS employee. The main issue s I fully own and control the PC. I may elect to use Steam as a source for software, provided I feel that the benefits outweigh any potential DRM issues. This is my choice. If the DRM bothers me I go elsewhere. I buy the disk, etc. I make the costs benefits analysis, and it is all made based on my needs, not the publishers. I am the consumer.

The XBone and MS stand this on its head. It's nt the same thing. It is a walled garden that has stripped out my choice and offers nothing in return. It is onerous. There is no choice. I no longer own the device. I have no alternative options. And quite frankly I don't believe for a minute that this will result in lower prices. It sure as hell hasn't for any other MS product in the history of the company. Just look at MS Office. They killed piracy of that years ago. We saw not dime one of savings as consumers. So no they have no record of trust here. There is nothing in this hat benefits me the consumer.

Oh and the hated GameStop rant. OMG if GameStop wasn't selling used games we could drop the prices. Here's a hint mr MS dipshit. GameStop thrives and succeeds with their used game sales because your prices are too high. Consumers are seeking to shift the perceived value of your product such hat they can justify the expense. If you eliminate used game sales all you will do is cut your own sales. Unless MS you are prepared to half the cost of AAA titles today? What say you? $29? If not then STFU you offer nothing. The root of the problem is not GameStop. The root of it is you, and using your customers ownership to attempt to buffer and not solve that problem will not be successful. Trying to educate us into your new world order is just offensive. Consumers are not stupid. That s why they are reacting with fear and loathing towards your product.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

If I wanted Steam I'd get a gaming PC.

I don't want Microsoft's pathetic attempt to emulate it, with none of the benefits and all of the downsides.

I'm curious. At this juncture, what benefits does steam offer save the always available store front (which, we're told at least, is going to be a thing on the Xbox) and cost efficiency if you're patient (which they could easily emulate)? Because, from where I stand, most of the downsides (save for the timeout window of course) exist on both platforms.

I have no alternative options. And quite frankly I don't believe for a minute that this will result in lower prices.

I think there is something of a fallacy in play here. Many people think of steam sales as a boon to consumers alone - and while, yes, we certainly benefit, the move's first priority is not a matter of engendering goodwill. Steam sales are done because it has been demonstrated that they make more money as a result of doing them. Getting a bunch of people to buy a game when it's 75% off is great in terms of base revenue but then you get a crowd of people who then talk about that game which generally results in a rise in sales at the game's usual price.

So, to put it bluntly, Microsoft is going to do what they believe makes them the most money. If they actually believe in the Steam model (and aren't just paying lip service to something roughly comparable), they would almost certainly follow suit when it comes to pricing.

All that said, I've yet to be convinced that I want an Xbox One. As it stands right now, they'd have to have a much more compelling argument in terms of a game library before I'd even consider the 500 USD investment.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

Ok, in efforts to be fair, I'm going to play both sides of the issue.

As an avid steam user, I have to point out a few things. If something happens to your password, your account, or it's closed... you lose your games. It's a problem. It's a horrible thing. Sometimes offline works, sometimes it doesn't. The first black out of 2011 here in the east coast, I found out the horrors of Steam. I couldn't sign on to sign offline. If someone in steam could fix that stupidity, it'll be great. I was stuck without entertainment. I couldn't tell you how mad I was with steam. I just thought it was the stupidest idea, and I'm sitting here looking at the programs on my c drive and realizing I'm shackled to steam's whims.

That's when I left my computer and popped oblivion in my 360 and picked flowers. And was entertained again.

Who were the masses of people who were complaining about doling out discs? Who are these whiny majority that I never heard of who threw themselves at the feet of Microsoft and begged them to solve this obviously huge dilemma I never even thought of? Am I the last person who sees a book shelf full of games and my respect for the owner goes up?

Also, a little bs. Steam does not give you great discounts IN THE BEGINNING. Something I complained about often. There's no reason why the legendary version of Skyrim should cost 60 dollars for a disc and 60 dollars in the steam store. I hate that so much. No one ever explained to me why am I still paying the printing fees and the distribution fees (physical logistic wise, not downloading).

So if steam doesn't do it, and Xbox One already came out and said games are going to cost 60 dollars... That's a whole lot of bs.

Except Steam has an offline mode, doesn't cost a penny to use, has a bustling community, and ridiculously good deals.

The cons of Steam(offline mode being shoddy or just not working for some people, can't trade in used games, Greenlight and its myriad issues) are heavily outweighed by its pros. The XB1's aren't.

Y'know, it doesn't cost a dime to have a gaming PC capable of playing decent games, right?

The issue is, I got my computer for work. Back when I was an autocad engineer. I bought it powerful to handle autocad, and lo and behold I could use it for other things. Like gaming. I can do more with my computer than any gaming console. And it's in my interest to upgrade it as time goes by, as I go back to school for electrical engineering. So I can do school work with it, and then use it for my new job. I get perks with owning it, such as being able to game, watch movies on netflix, and communicate with my friends and family.

Likewise to my joy, the ability to run games can either just be built into the distribution of the game in the case of DRM-free, or I can download a free software that I can use as a hub to make new friends and wrangle in my old ones for gaming. Also, I had to do nothing special to connect with the internet that I was already paying for. I just plugged in the cable and my computer said 'Hey, I found this whole internet thing for you. Wanna go?'

Xbox Live controls it's functionality. Yes, everything needs power to run, just like you and me, but ALL my computer needs is power. setting my steam to offline mode, I got my games. Admittedly I won't have netflix. But the core reason I bought my computer is still functional if I don't have a connection. The core reason I bought the Xbox One will be lost if I couldn't do that. And the pittance of 'you could still watch tv or blu-ray' isn't a bonus because I don't need the Xbox One to do any of that. My TV and my blu-ray works fine without the Xbox One saying "BUT I CAN DO IT TOO!"

Oh and the hated GameStop rant. OMG if GameStop wasn't selling used games we could drop the prices. Here's a hint mr MS dipshit. GameStop thrives and succeeds with their used game sales because your prices are too high. Consumers are seeking to shift the perceived value of your product such hat they can justify the expense. If you eliminate used game sales all you will do is cut your own sales. Unless MS you are prepared to half the cost of AAA titles today? What say you? $29? If not then STFU you offer nothing. The root of the problem is not GameStop. The root of it is you, and using your customers ownership to attempt to buffer and not solve that problem will not be successful. Trying to educate us into your new world order is just offensive. Consumers are not stupid. That s why they are reacting with fear and loathing towards your product.

I'm going to show a little of my age here.

Gamestop first opened it's doors in 1994. I distinctly remember going to a gaming store in 1993 and putting down 60 bucks for Secret of Mana. In fact, I remember 1992 being the time when games started to reach the 60 dollar mark. It was like 50 before then.

I guess game developers think we don't have a memory and hope we'll just follow their pointed finger instead of, you know... thinking.

And Game industry... just please decide. Huge Development Costs, Piracy, Gamestop and Used Games, Bad economy... just... just PICK one so you can have a shred of credibility.

 

[Lunar Templar]

yes ... it's all used games fault , and not the bloated out of control budgets, I'd call them idiots, but it did come from Microsoft, kinda goes with out saying at this point

 

[Colt47]

I'm sure people who get the Xbox One and have the infrastructure to run it will say it is a friendly user experience, but that is not what people have a problem with. The issue is the idea being forced to give up freedom for that convenience. On competing consoles, someone can either buy a game digitally and download it to the hard drive or buy a disk from a store. Furthermore, if the game is on disk, there is no install and the user is free to trade the game with someone or lend it to a friend at his leisure.

Microsoft on the other hand, is trying to allow installs on a console for a disc based game while trying to maintain the benefits of the above, and is pretty much showing why it doesn't work.

 

[Childe]

I think the only way Microsoft is going to be able to win back that mindshare is by releasing the Xbox One and letting people use it and see that it isn't really as bad as people assume it will be.

It's clear that their PR operation is completely ill-equipped to deal with this problem.

Ya I have to agree with this. Microsoft is digging itself into a hole with the PR. They really should just release all news all at once and hope that enough people buy the thing and give it credable positive reviews that the black mark against it goes away

 

[BrionJames]

"Seriously guys, we're just trying to improve the game market and move it to better heights. Don't hate us for trying to be awesome, while telling everyone who likes to play games but doesn't have the money or have access to high speed internet to go fuck off." This guy needs to take his head out of his ass and see what he's shoveling. I understand that the console gaming scene needs a revamp, but not like this. Taking ownership away from the consumer, essentially and placing it in the hands of publishers is the absolute wrong way to go with this. If publishers could they'd empty are wallets every time we bought one of their games (they sort of already do this with DLC and micro transactions). You ever wonder why a item or piece of character clothing or equipment costs 320 MS points, yet is only a measly few hundred KB's of data. It's because that shit is already on the disc, your just paying for something that should already be included in the game (I'm looking at you GOW: Judgement). Sony may not be the messiah, but at least they aren't trying to fuck us in the ass and then ask us to pay for it.

 

[Terramax]

Despite all the outrage, I call dibs that the X1 will still be fairly successful, and people will ended get over the DRM and carry on buying the thing.

I'm not happy about that, but people put up with just about anything.

 

[Zenn3k]

Quick question: Who here has actually had problems with scratched discs? This seems to be one of the big benefits they keep dropping about digital gaming, but despite owning well over three hundred disc-based games (going all the way back to PSX) I have never had an issue with scratched discs.

It's not even down to me being a hyper-protective, wrap-everything-in-cotton maniac, either, because about a hundred of those games are used, so unless I am the luckiest ************ on the planet, I think they're really grabbing at straws here.

My friends dog likes to eat his games, but I've also never even had a disk get damaged.

 

[Camaranth]

So this is you, supposed microsoft engineer guy, trying to tell the story better then? Guess what I still don't like it.

You were right about one thing though, "if all you want is to play games then PS4" well all I want my console to do is play games so I guess I'll go PS4.

 

[Agayek]

I'm curious. At this juncture, what benefits does steam offer save the always available store front (which, we're told at least, is going to be a thing on the Xbox) and cost efficiency if you're patient (which they could easily emulate)? Because, from where I stand, most of the downsides (save for the timeout window of course) exist on both platforms.

There's no real benefits that Steam offers that the Xbone does not also offer (in essence, community and digital distribution).

The problem is that Steam a) has a, well, phenomenally superior PR department, b) is significantly less restrictive, and c) has viable competition from other sources.

That last one is the most important. If you don't like the restrictions Steam imposes, there's a plethora of alternatives that you can use to get your game on without ever having to deal with it. On the Xbone, this is not the case. You must comply with whatever draconian, anti-consumer bullshit Microsoft feels the need to heap on the user. There's no options there like there is on the PC.

That's the primary reason it's being viewed as significantly worse than Steam. If they offered all this DRM shit as an option, most of their problems would go away. It's in trying to force it on a userbase that largely use consoles specifically so they don't have to worry about that kind of shit that their problems arise.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

The problem is that Steam a) has a, well, phenomenally superior PR department,

No argument on this point

b) is significantly less restrictive

Beyond the fact that, assuming one can sign in to steam to put it into offline mode, a mode that may or may not allow offline playing of a game, where is the reduction in restriction?

d c) has viable competition from other sources.

This point is wildly disingenuous. Some games can be purchased on other platforms, but lots of them are only available through steam. Hell, even games purchased through retail often rely on Steam - take for example, Dawn of War 2. The base game and the first expansion were available at stores around the world easily enough but the game still relies on steam just as surely as if I'd purchased it from the application directly.

To make this an important note to hang your hat on is foolish given just how ubiquitous the hooks of steam are on the PC. I wouldn't swear by it, but my perception is that any game from a major publisher other than EA released on PC relies on steam in some form. Just to name a few in recent memory, we have Skyrim, Dishonored, Fallout New Vegas, Dawn of War 2, Xcom, the two most recent Total War games, Rage. . . The list could go on for quite awhile, really.

 

[Agayek]

Beyond the fact that, assuming one can sign in to steam to put it into offline mode, a mode that may or may not allow offline playing of a game, where is the reduction in restriction?

For one, I've never, ever, had an issue with not being able to access offline mode, nor with being able to play a game in offline mode, in the last 6 years or so I've used Steam. And in that period, I've several times gone upwards of 3 weeks without internet access at a stretch. When I try to connect without internet, I always get a popup saying "No internet, want to use offline mode?" and it's always worked. Though I've heard plenty of horror stories about it not working, so I'll give you that /shrug.

Also, I'm not sure how, as it seems you are implying, 30 days of offline play is somehow not less restrictive than one. It's still annoying and restrictive sure, but when comparing two turds, you can't really use "they both smell like shit" as a handwave to dismiss one. In any case, it was what I was talking about.

Beyond that though, there's also a couple possible ways Steam could be less restrictive, but considering all we actually know about the way Xbox One behaves is "24 hour net-check DRM" and "account bound games", there's not much that can be said with any degree of certainty on it. It all depends on how the Xbone handles things. Steam could still prove to be even less restrictive if Xbone doesn't have options for cloud-based game saves, the ability to easily transfer game files (not saves, the actual game) so you don't need to re-download things, etc. I imagine all of those will be within the Xbone's feature set, but they haven't actually said it, or even hinted at it, so they may very well not be.

This point is wildly disingenuous. Some games can be purchased on other platforms, but lots of them are only available through steam. Hell, even games purchased through retail often rely on Steam - take for example, Dawn of War 2. The base game and the first expansion were available at stores around the world easily enough but the game still relies on steam just as surely as if I'd purchased it from the application directly.

To make this an important note to hang your hat on is foolish given just how ubiquitous the hooks of steam are on the PC. I wouldn't swear by it, but my perception is that any game from a major publisher other than EA released on PC relies on steam in some form. Just to name a few in recent memory, we have Skyrim, Dishonored, Fallout New Vegas, Dawn of War 2, Xcom, the two most recent Total War games, Rage. . . The list could go on for quite awhile, really.

True, but the thing is, there are alternatives to those games as well. My point was less about the use of Steam and more about the lack of options. On PC, you are wholly capable of playing many fantastic games without ever having to deal with Steam's restrictions. If the restrictions and limitations are a deal-breaker, you can still play games on PC without ever using Steam. Some games require Steam, and so the library is less complete if you want to avoid the shenanigans, I won't even begin to argue against that, but the vast majority do not. It is wholly possible to be a gamer and play fantastic games without even having a Steam account.

On Xbox One, there are no options. It's put up with their shenanigans, or you can't game. Period.

 

[Evil Smurf]

I expect better spelling from a spokesman. Sound professional so you don't insult the populus.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Honestly, if you care about anything other then pure games AT ALL. Xbox 1 > PS4. If all you do is play games, and nothing else, PS4.

I will get a PS4, thanks!

 

[Haakmed]

Lets see how the prices on the Xbone market place work. in the mean time STEAM SUMMER SALE SOON!!!!

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Well good on him for telling it like he thinks it is. Really, it's refreshing.

But I'm still not convinced used games are a detriment to the industry and haven't been proven otherwise, I doubt cloud computing is going to deliver what it claims in the way of performance and instead will just make it easier to have a game that is always-online, there's no reason discs and digital copies can't both be accomodated for (i.e. have the disc fucking work when the digital copy doesn't, I would have thought that made sense), but that aside there are very few cases where the effort of changing discs is great enough to forgo rights and convenience...etc.

And don't give me that lower prices made possible shit. Xbone games are apparently going to be $60. That's no cheaper than $60 and they HAVE restricted the used game market. So predictably, it's not for our benefit.