How could MS miss judge what people wanted so bad.?

  • 136 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#51 Posted by tormentos (16381 posts) -

PS4 looks boring to me.

I play games watch movies and my wife and kids love the old kinect. The only thing PS4 has going for it is the fact its a "hardcore" games console. Im not of the age or disposition were being a "hardcore" gamer even means anything to me any more. I dont want to be one, I dont even have time to be one. What I do want is a system in my living room that seamlessly switches between all of my entertainment something for my whole family. I can play games while my wife is elsewhere, then when she comes back in the room I can instantly switch back to watching Netflix.

I know Sony fanboys like to think this gen is going to be terribly one sided. Gotta remember us game forum dwellers are the minority, theres a whole world out there....and believe it or not "hardcore" gamers are a very small but very vocal sector of it. The performance gap between the consoles is so marginal that the only people who will care enough about it are the Hardcore sub sector. Id trade minor graphical performance for the benefits of the X1 any day. I already own a PS3 the PS4 is just an upgrade. Maybe they will return with something new and interesting with the PS5 an peak my interest again.

Really the PS4 also has netflix and guess what you don't have to pay a second fee to use it,and netflix on PS3 was actually superior quality wise to the xbox 360 version,and was free of a paywall.

Yeah that is why the PS4 is beating the xbox one in pre-orders because normal people can't make a good choice only forum dwellers can,what benefits.? weaker hardware more expensive everything locked away under a pay wall.?

If there is a console that should give all features free if the xbox one,is $100 more while been weaker,and live gold doesn't have games like PSN+ in any way,yet again it is the PS4 the one with all the features open,you can't even record your game if you don't pay for xbox live,i wonder if saving your game will also be behind a damn pay wall,MS outdated policies are a joke and is the reason why people complained.

#52 Edited by Malta_1980 (11122 posts) -

Many big companies make bad decisions...

Luckily for MS they really have deep pockets that compensate their failures which cost them billions of $$$

Being on top sometimes makes a company become arrogant and they loose sight of trends and fail to identify what consumers want..

However MS has a history of failing with various products like the few examples below..

Microsoft Windows mobile / OS

Zune

Microsoft Kin

MS Ultra mobile PC

Windows ME / VIsta (and other versions depending on personal opinions)

MS Mira

Smartwatch

and so on.. But in here we should mainly discuss gaming and Microsoft surely managed to expand their market share with the Xbox360 and surely will work hard to continue with the XB1..

#53 Edited by tormentos (16381 posts) -

They misjudged it so bad that preorders for the X1 are sold out and MS has had to refill them multiple times for multiple retailers just to keep up with the demand. They also expect to sell nearly 7 million X1s by June of 2014. They completely botched it, LOL!

Pre-orders selling out without actual number mean little,MS had yield issues with the units and for months it has been know that they will have way less supply than sony,sony will release in 32 countries this year,while MS only in 13 is not even close,so yeah they sold out those 500,000 xbox one,while sony is way over 1 million units already.

Without actual numbers it means nothing,MS could have 300K for launch and that been the reason for the sold out,in fact sony claimed more than 1 million pre-orders where is MS claiming the same or close.?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/2013/videogames

Best selling of 2013 so far...

Look at the PS4 it has 4 different bundle on the top 100 best,including number 8 which is actually ahead of the xbox one only bundle at number 11,so not only the PS4 has a better placed sku,it has 3 more sku on that same top 100,while only 1 sku of the xbox one is on the top 100.

Is not even close apparently sales wise.

#54 Posted by always_explicit (2619 posts) -

@always_explicit said:

PS4 looks boring to me.

I play games watch movies and my wife and kids love the old kinect. The only thing PS4 has going for it is the fact its a "hardcore" games console. Im not of the age or disposition were being a "hardcore" gamer even means anything to me any more. I dont want to be one, I dont even have time to be one. What I do want is a system in my living room that seamlessly switches between all of my entertainment something for my whole family. I can play games while my wife is elsewhere, then when she comes back in the room I can instantly switch back to watching Netflix.

I know Sony fanboys like to think this gen is going to be terribly one sided. Gotta remember us game forum dwellers are the minority, theres a whole world out there....and believe it or not "hardcore" gamers are a very small but very vocal sector of it. The performance gap between the consoles is so marginal that the only people who will care enough about it are the Hardcore sub sector. Id trade minor graphical performance for the benefits of the X1 any day. I already own a PS3 the PS4 is just an upgrade. Maybe they will return with something new and interesting with the PS5 an peak my interest again.

Really the PS4 also has netflix and guess what you don't have to pay a second fee to use it,and netflix on PS3 was actually superior quality wise to the xbox 360 version,and was free of a paywall.

Yeah that is why the PS4 is beating the xbox one in pre-orders because normal people can't make a good choice only forum dwellers can,what benefits.? weaker hardware more expensive everything locked away under a pay wall.?

If there is a console that should give all features free if the xbox one,is $100 more while been weaker,and live gold doesn't have games like PSN+ in any way,yet again it is the PS4 the one with all the features open,you can't even record your game if you don't pay for xbox live,i wonder if saving your game will also be behind a damn pay wall,MS outdated policies are a joke and is the reason why people complained.

1) I didnt say people on forums make bad decisions did I? 2) I never said the PS4 wasnt leading in pre orders (lol @preorder wars) You seem to be repeating a lot of your points...I think we all understand your not going to buy an X1 buddy, but its not to say that other people will not. I just explained my own personal reasons for not purchasing a PS4. Its not an attack on your or SONY.

For me its a choice between a dull and uninspired console with a slight edge in specification which may or may not be utilised (see teh cell).

Or a console which meets the needs of my entire family unit. You can throw all the specifications and pay walls you like at me but the fact remains that for my own personal needs MS have created the better product. I will happily pay extra £££ for the kinect. I also appreciate why you wouldnt want to if you dont use it. I dont know why you get so wound up about it. The fact remains that personal preference dictates which product to buy, no amount of you spewing anti MS venom is going to miraculously change people minds.

#55 Edited by freedomfreak (38127 posts) -

Miss Judge is a sassy gal.

#56 Posted by always_explicit (2619 posts) -

Miss Judge is a sassy gal.

Sassy, but always grammatically correct.

#57 Posted by tormentos (16381 posts) -


1) I didnt say people on forums make bad decisions did I? 2) I never said the PS4 wasnt leading in pre orders (lol @preorder wars) You seem to be repeating a lot of your points...I think we all understand your not going to buy an X1 buddy, but its not to say that other people will not. I just explained my own personal reasons for not purchasing a PS4. Its not an attack on your or SONY.

For me its a choice between a dull and uninspired console with a slight edge in specification which may or may not be utilised (see teh cell).

Or a console which meets the needs of my entire family unit. You can throw all the specifications and pay walls you like at me but the fact remains that for my own personal needs MS have created the better product. I will happily pay extra £££ for the kinect. I also appreciate why you wouldnt want to if you dont use it. I dont know why you get so wound up about it. The fact remains that personal preference dictates which product to buy, no amount of you spewing anti MS venom is going to miraculously change people minds.

Pre-orders wars.? Not really but pre-orders show intentions to buy something,far more on PS4 than on xbox one,so apparently that line up is not as dull and uninspired for many as you may think,or the xbox one look weak to some or basically they don't care about the xbox extra features like camera for $100 more.

Yeah that is probably why the PS4 is ahead more people prefer it over the xbox one,so maybe their choices are not very inline with yours..

I know mine aren't i don't plan to get an xbox one for a long time,there is no need to,the xbox 360 was powerful cheap,the xbox one is weak and over priced and to do anything you have to pay extra, no thanks.

#58 Edited by KungfuKitten (20657 posts) -

They were busy pleasing their closest circle of demanding people: shareholders, the government, marketing companies to sell information to, bosses. Customers are assumed to fall in line because they are not very demanding. It's the same type of reasoning as phone companies have. I don't think that 'what the people want' was even a part of the design process anymore.

#59 Posted by cainetao11 (15781 posts) -

@TheKingIAm:

A men, on Zune. Still love mine. Now unlike the others here, I don't believe any company cares about "its fans". The notion that companies have fans is effin stupid imo. They have customers. Some like Davekeeh thinks Sony cares about him, and well I hope SOMEONE does. I think MS really saw where console gaming is going to go. There already has been a market for downloadable games this past gen. I own over 40 digital titles between my PS3 and 360. But forcing it on the consumer base was a bad move. It will slowly happen, but that will be the consumers choice. As for how will it effect the X1 launch? The MS store is sold out, the walmart and gamestop stores are sold out here by Ft. Sill, so I think this console will sell. They wont match Sony's world wide numbers, and don't think they care.

#60 Posted by tormentos (16381 posts) -

@TheKingIAm:

A men, on Zune. Still love mine. Now unlike the others here, I don't believe any company cares about "its fans". The notion that companies have fans is effin stupid imo. They have customers. Some like Davekeeh thinks Sony cares about him, and well I hope SOMEONE does. I think MS really saw where console gaming is going to go. There already has been a market for downloadable games this past gen. I own over 40 digital titles between my PS3 and 360. But forcing it on the consumer base was a bad move. It will slowly happen, but that will be the consumers choice. As for how will it effect the X1 launch? The MS store is sold out, the walmart and gamestop stores are sold out here by Ft. Sill, so I think this console will sell. They wont match Sony's world wide numbers, and don't think they care.

If they did not care about sales the policies would still remain intact,and they would not be money hatting DF to make article about how an 1.18TF console is = to one with 1.84 TF based on out of this world theories and wishful thinking.

#61 Posted by cainetao11 (15781 posts) -

@WilliamRLBaker:

Let say they did how does that change the fact that sony was smart enough to change it way back and not facing a backlash for it.?

Dude that patent was summit on september 2012,and it was reveal on january 2013,the PS4 was reveal on February and not a single part of the reveal even hint DRM or block of used game,all you have to go for it a patent sony has,they have tons they don't use like dual GPU submit last year to.

How would Sony gain that smartness you speak of? Could it be from facing backlash for the $600 price of PS3? Or the DRE fiasco of PS2? You gotta fall down in order to learn and it was school's open for MS, where as Sony, being in this longer had the sense of experience. Better question: Who effin cares? Both consoles will have great games over the next few years and I'm playing them, not fanboy favorites. But, you go ahead and have at it.

#62 Posted by tormentos (16381 posts) -

@tormentos said:

@WilliamRLBaker:

Let say they did how does that change the fact that sony was smart enough to change it way back and not facing a backlash for it.?

Dude that patent was summit on september 2012,and it was reveal on january 2013,the PS4 was reveal on February and not a single part of the reveal even hint DRM or block of used game,all you have to go for it a patent sony has,they have tons they don't use like dual GPU submit last year to.

How would Sony gain that smartness you speak of? Could it be from facing backlash for the $600 price of PS3? Or the DRE fiasco of PS2? You gotta fall down in order to learn and it was school's open for MS, where as Sony, being in this longer had the sense of experience. Better question: Who effin cares? Both consoles will have great games over the next few years and I'm playing them, not fanboy favorites. But, you go ahead and have at it.

The PS3 was $600 while been a damn Blu-ray player,the xbox was cheap DVD and was $400,blu-ray alone on 206 was $1,000 stand alone,so yeah for $600 the PS3 was a console and blu-ray player that else where was $1,400 so yeah even that the PS3 was expensive it was hardware that worth the price.

And the original xbox also had DRE dude where in hell were you on the PS2 generation,in fact thompsom drives on the xbox were the worse ones several millions of those were made,but every optical drive suffer from DRE,from PC to DC to PS,to GC to xbox 360 and PS3,the PS2 was so common because the damn PS2 sold like no other console ever sold,even so it was small compare to RROD and how much it cost MS.

This is not about learning from pass mistakes has MS blocked used games before.?

Has MS make an online only console that need checks every 24 hours.?

No they don't have,this is about MS taking some measures that were totally anti consumer,hearing about people complain of those things and ignoring them.

Apparently allot of people do care if we go by pre-orders and polls out there.

#63 Edited by Bread_or_Decide (17073 posts) -

@tormentos: When you can dupe people into paying $60 a year just to access a feature on a disc they already paid for...you start to think they'll do whatever you say.

#64 Posted by BreadNMilk (37 posts) -

@casharmy said:

They didn't.

They tried to test the limits of what they could get away with based on the what former fans allowed them to get away with their former platforms.

Basically, they were not thinking of people wanted only what they wanted and were seeing if people were stupid enough to go along with their selfish and consumer robbing scheme.

THIS!! Anything else anyone says is false. MS is about making as much money as they think they can get away with.

#65 Posted by WilliamRLBaker (28308 posts) -

@casharmy said:

They didn't.

They tried to test the limits of what they could get away with based on the what former fans allowed them to get away with their former platforms.

Basically, they were not thinking of people wanted only what they wanted and were seeing if people were stupid enough to go along with their selfish and consumer robbing scheme.

THIS!! Anything else anyone says is false. MS is about making as much money as they think they can get away with.

hmmm you mean how sony is now charging for online?

#66 Posted by blackace (19697 posts) -

This is something that still strike me,how could MS get the idea that people wanted and always online console,that restrict its users from loaning games to each other,that force you into getting something that the majority of the user base did not support a gen before kinect,why did MS actually believe that people wanted a more TV box experience out of the console.?

And how well do you think that everything will fall down for them knowing that backtracking all this policies,and dropping several requirement basically force them to take a route they did not plan on.

Was it the console curse.? Or simple miss interpretation of what people wanted.? How about Greed would that play a big part MS actually wanting a more profitable xbox brand from go.?

I think there were many factors. For one, I think they thought Sony would follow suit as I'm sure 3rd party companies had approached Sony on this as well. I think M$ had everything already in place, whereas Sony had everything in the background waiting to see if the public would accept these new policies. Also Microsoft probably looked at STEAM, XBL, PSN and saw how much gamers embraced the DD world without much negative feedback and felt everyone would accept this. Where they failed was having physical retail games. If they wanted to go the DRM DD route, then needed to scrap physical disks completely, put a 2TB HDD in their system, and release ALL their DD games for $30 or less. I'm sure publishers and developers didn't want this, especially with a launch just before Black Friday and knowing everyone would be in retail stores and with no physcal XB1 games on shelves, that wouldn't be good. So M$ went with the compromise, which was good for publishers/developers, but completely terrible for consumers. They tired to have their cake and eat it too with ice cream and everyone revolted.

As long as M$ continues to churn out exclusive after exclusive AAA games for the XB1, all of these policies issues will be mostly forgotten within a year or two. Only people who will be bringing it up are bias fanboys.

#67 Posted by killjoi (9986 posts) -

Because they thought they could get away with something they wanted.

They were being arrogant like how Sony was with the PS3.

Pretty much this. Sony wanted to sell Blu Ray players and showcase the Cell processor and used the PS3 help fight HD-DVD. Had little to do with games.

#68 Posted by donalbane (16135 posts) -

If they had offered an offline mode and effectively conveyed how all-digital delivery results in rapid software price drops like the deals we see on Steam, things could have been really swell for Microsoft and Xbox One owners alike.

#69 Posted by k2theswiss (16598 posts) -

@tormentos:

TRUE

@k2theswiss said:

@tormentos:

1: they was trying keep part of the benefits of selling/trading games but also provide the benefits of digital. Only way do that was to have system where you had to check in once per day.

2: kinect has near 25 million sales~ clearly someone wants it. People need get it in their head that kinect is part of the xbox one not just a add on. That's what MS wants for their product

3: MS from day one of the 360 brand They called there system entertainment center/hub not a gaming console... That's why they was first to add apps, and they are still the first to add newer apps, They want the xbox be the main hub of entertainment center

No dude 3rd party had complete control over your games,they could decide if you could trade it or resell it,hell if you loaned a game to your friend the game become his and you loss it,unless he was sign in with your account on his system.

What do you think developers would have do.? Oh and MS blamed developers for it,when it latter came to light that is was MS plan all alone and developers had nothing to do with it.

Kinect has nearly 25 million units on a almost 80 million user base,that means the great majority of the xbox user base doesn't care about Kinect.

What.? the xbox 360 was brand as the console for games,in fact what was xbox 360 fans first defense against Blu-ray and the PS3.? The xbox 360 is a gaming console,MS since day 1 introduce the xbox 360 as a console is was all about games,not movies and crap like that,and the xbox 360 was app less basically,hell sony got youtube video upload before MS did,on PS3,the PS3 didn't need and app for Facebook,twitter or even Hulu,the PS3 had a browser in which all those worked,i watched a hell of allot of Hulu on my PS3 before it was block,and before MS even had an app for it,the same with facebook,twiter you tube and so on.

Trying to imply that the xbox 360 was not all about games is a joke,is the PS3 the one that got 7.1 sound and HD movies,not the xbox 360,the xbox one use to be about games,until MS ran out of those on 2010 and started a mary go round with Halo,Gears,and Forza.

1: true the publisher has the control. ms blame who? MS put in the system. up to them use it. IF they use it then ya blame the publishers...

2: sony has the same system in place. up to the publisher. SORRY... They even filed for a patent that a console can link a disc to only play on that console

3: kinect came out late 2010. just about 5 years after release. 25 million sales is huge for a add on! How many games even get that amount of sales? This time kinect is built around the xbox from day one

4: lol ha sony blocked you from hulu on web browser? lol

#70 Edited by edidili (3446 posts) -

The PS3 was $600 while been a damn Blu-ray player

Double standards much? You in this case justify the $600 which was for something that didn't have much to do with gaming. It was for TV, watching movies.

#71 Posted by GTSaiyanjin2 (5672 posts) -

They didnt miss judge anything... They are marketing the xbox for just about anyone, even non gamers. They dont care who they sell the xbox to, as long as they get it in people's homes.

#72 Posted by cainetao11 (15781 posts) -

@edidili said:

@tormentos said:

The PS3 was $600 while been a damn Blu-ray player

Double standards much? You in this case justify the $600 which was for something that didn't have much to do with gaming. It was for TV, watching movies.

And burn. Well said.

#73 Edited by COVAtheNOVA (173 posts) -

@tormentos:

@COVAtheNOVA said:

They misjudged it so bad that preorders for the X1 are sold out and MS has had to refill them multiple times for multiple retailers just to keep up with the demand. They also expect to sell nearly 7 million X1s by June of 2014. They completely botched it, LOL!

Pre-orders selling out without actual number mean little,MS had yield issues with the units and for months it has been know that they will have way less supply than sony,sony will release in 32 countries this year,while MS only in 13 is not even close,so yeah they sold out those 500,000 xbox one,while sony is way over 1 million units already.

Without actual numbers it means nothing,MS could have 300K for launch and that been the reason for the sold out,in fact sony claimed more than 1 million pre-orders where is MS claiming the same or close.?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/2013/videogames

Best selling of 2013 so far...

Look at the PS4 it has 4 different bundle on the top 100 best,including number 8 which is actually ahead of the xbox one only bundle at number 11,so not only the PS4 has a better placed sku,it has 3 more sku on that same top 100,while only 1 sku of the xbox one is on the top 100.

Is not even close apparently sales wise.

According to the report you are talking about, the XBOX ONE had around 800K preorders, while the PS4 had nearly 1.5 million. That was apparently a Gamestop report, that I believe was later denied by a GS rep. I do know that back in early July MS announced that the XBOX ONE had double the preorders of the XBOX360. The XBOX360 sold 1.5 million units in 2005 (a month and a week on the market and I believe half of those 1.5 million were preorders). This means the XBOX ONE back in July already had 1.5 million preorders and that was from the horses mouth so your 300K assumption makes me laugh. MS also announced that they expect to sell around 7 million units by end of June 2014 so I do believe MS has a little more knowledge about their own products than you.

There is no telling how many preorders the XBOX ONE has now. I would guesstimate that it has well over 3 million considering the amount of times MS has refilled their preorders (they just recently did it again for GS that lasted all of about 1 hour before it was sold out again).

I know this must be killing MS and XBOX ONE haters. A $500 system selling so well. Goes to show the little bubble gamers lives in is just that. Small and means little to nothing in the grand scheme of things. I fingered they would have learned that already with the Wii and how great in sold. Of course the XBOX ONE is catering to every one, not just the casual.

#74 Edited by Gue1 (9083 posts) -

@edidili said:

@tormentos said:

The PS3 was $600 while been a damn Blu-ray player

Double standards much? You in this case justify the $600 which was for something that didn't have much to do with gaming. It was for TV, watching movies.

maybe you don't know this but games were on blu-ray. PS3 doesn't has a single game on multiple discs nor it had games like Rage that suffered on the X360 due to so much texture compression. We enjoyed pre-rendered scenes at much higher quality than any Xbox game and way higher Audio quality too.

http://www.joystiq.com/2008/08/01/john-carmack-says-blu-ray-offers-better-graphics/

#75 Edited by tdkmillsy (1227 posts) -

Many big companies make bad decisions...

Luckily for MS they really have deep pockets that compensate their failures which cost them billions of $$$

Being on top sometimes makes a company become arrogant and they loose sight of trends and fail to identify what consumers want..

However MS has a history of failing with various products like the few examples below..

Microsoft Windows mobile / OS

Zune

Microsoft Kin

MS Ultra mobile PC

Windows ME / VIsta (and other versions depending on personal opinions)

MS Mira

Smartwatch

and so on.. But in here we should mainly discuss gaming and Microsoft surely managed to expand their market share with the Xbox360 and surely will work hard to continue with the XB1..

Every company has fail products, Microsoft being the biggest will have quite a few. You have listed some from ages ago. In the same period they have had plenty of success. Everyone gets it wrong at some point.

Xbox One was too far forward thinking with the original policies. The ability to share, trade and sell digital games online was awesome and had they done it properly would have been a game changer. The public wasnt ready, give it 5 years and everyone will be doing it and Disc's will be a thing of the past. They did the right thing and changed. arrogance would have been to carry on regardless.

#76 Posted by ActicEdge (24305 posts) -

They didn't misjudge anything. They just played their cards wrong because Sony was originally going to do the same thing. If they wanted this to go through they should have shut their mouths. That's basically all they screwed up on.

#77 Posted by BreadNMilk (37 posts) -

@WilliamRLBaker:

Only after 3 consoles without charging. MS has always charged. And that's nothing to the amount of crap MS has pulled on their consumers.

#78 Edited by Rocker6 (13358 posts) -

360 was a huge success for MS, Xbox got established as a powerful brand in the console world this gen, so they got arrogant.

Same thing as Sony after the PS2 success, really.

#79 Posted by bezza2011 (2193 posts) -

Seems like a very good console now. In many ways it is better then the PS4 such as features, online, games, cloud function and others.

In what ways is it better than the PS4 tho??? what features, as far as i can tell they both have the same, Online??? this cannot be judged as they haven't come out yet, Games well you ain't been around long enough to know microsoft have a small first party companies, and mostly buy dlc's and timed exclusives, sony beat microsoft hands down when it comes to games so thats not one. Cloud well they both have cloud gaming and non of it is proven yet. at least back up what your saying with facts

#80 Edited by BreadNMilk (37 posts) -

@WilliamRLBaker:

MS doing really well with the 360 has caused Sony to figure out ways to get people in America to buy their console more. MS being successful in America makes them arrogant and is bad for gaming. Sony will be forced to do similar crappy policies to gamers in order to be competitive if MS continues to dominate in America. Sony finally started to charge for online gaming with PS4 in order to compete.

MS winning in America = bad for gaming. Sony winning in America = good for gaming.

#81 Posted by SUD123456 (4341 posts) -

If you want to innovate you have to take risk. Giving people what they want is usually the absence of innovation, since 'the people' normally want version 1.1 of what they already have. Therein lies the risk, since your vision of innovation may not resonate with enough of 'the people'.

#82 Posted by II_Seraphim_II (20483 posts) -

They misjudged it so bad that preorders for the X1 are sold out and MS has had to refill them multiple times for multiple retailers just to keep up with the demand. They also expect to sell nearly 7 million X1s by June of 2014. They completely botched it, LOL!

Your comment is completely irrelevant because all these sales figures you are talking about are POST 180. MS pretty much changed all the major plans they had initially instated for their console, because of the major backlash, so yes, now they are on better terms but that doesn't change the fact that they some how made a major error (hence the 180s). Anyways, back to what the TC is saying, I don't think it was so much an issue of what people wanted, but a matter of arrogance and lack of communication. If MS had been more open and concise about their plan and let people understand their vision, they may have gotten a better reaction. Unfortunately all we got was a bunch of misinformation floating a round, and MS making it worse by different reps making contradictory statements without any form of clarification to be found. Then to top it off, MS got really unlucky when the entire NSA PRISM scheme was leaked. That pretty much made their always online, always connected, always watching Kinect a major NO NO.

#83 Edited by Crypt_mx (3927 posts) -

Yay and the people of the internet continue to act like their opinion is fact...

MS didn't miss judge what I wanted. The Xbox One is the console I'm getting.

I like:

-Exclusives

-Xbox Live Online service (Azure powered cloud/full dedicated servers)

-Controller

-Kinect

MS made me, and a large amount of people quite happy with the XB1.

#84 Posted by The_Last_Ride (68808 posts) -

This is something that still strike me,how could MS get the idea that people wanted and always online console,that restrict its users from loaning games to each other,that force you into getting something that the majority of the user base did not support a gen before kinect,why did MS actually believe that people wanted a more TV box experience out of the console.?

And how well do you think that everything will fall down for them knowing that backtracking all this policies,and dropping several requirement basically force them to take a route they did not plan on.

Was it the console curse.? Or simple miss interpretation of what people wanted.? How about Greed would that play a big part MS actually wanting a more profitable xbox brand from go.?

i just think they were totally out of touch with the user base and did not listen to anyone at all

#85 Edited by II_Seraphim_II (20483 posts) -

@SUD123456 said:

If you want to innovate you have to take risk. Giving people what they want is usually the absence of innovation, since 'the people' normally want version 1.1 of what they already have. Therein lies the risk, since your vision of innovation may not resonate with enough of 'the people'.

I agree that to innovate, one must take a risk, but I disagree with the notion that somehow what people want and innovation are mutually exclusive. Sure, you can innovate by making what people don't want and you'll end up being broke. A modern example of "innovation" would be the Steambox controller. People always asked for more precision in console gaming, so that's something that people wanted. The innovation comes in how Valve went about getting that result. Now will it be successful or not? That all depends on ease of use and functionality, but the new Steambox controller is a perfect example of taking a risk while striving towards a features that people have shown interest in. MS, on the other hand, went completely in the wrong direction. They tried to innovate by enforcing features people completely hate and want none of (DRM). That's stupid innovation and a sure fire way to crash and burn as MS realized, hence the 180s.

#86 Edited by jer_1 (7390 posts) -

They're a greedy douchebag corporation who care little for the people that fund them. They misjudged so horribly because they're only thinking of ways to make far more money than they did last gen. Luckily there are alternatives to their dickishness.

#87 Edited by rrjim1 (824 posts) -

@jer_1:

Still not as bad a the lying, backstabbing Sony.

#88 Posted by lamprey263 (22412 posts) -

actually the always online requirement came as a result of their damage control over the no used game thing, because gamers were to install on the HDD to make their experience discless with rights tied to a user account, just like a PC game, whereafter it could be played offline, there wasn't supposed to be a used game system, and games could be played remotely on other systems through the use of the owner XBL account (that would require always online, which pretty much is how it works now)

it's quite obvious that the always online requirement came about as a solution to allow for sale of games so that someone else couldn't play the game offline after the game had been sold to someone else

so, all that complaining about no used games is what drove always online, they took away always online but that means we have to constantly swap discs unless we go fully digital download next gen

#89 Edited by casharmy (6813 posts) -

@SUD123456 said:

If you want to innovate you have to take risk. Giving people what they want is usually the absence of innovation, since 'the people' normally want version 1.1 of what they already have. Therein lies the risk, since your vision of innovation may not resonate with enough of 'the people'.

when you "innovate" it needs to be something that people actually want and the things MS tried to call innovation with xbox 1 were not it.

#90 Edited by tormentos (16381 posts) -

@edidili said:

@tormentos said:

The PS3 was $600 while been a damn Blu-ray player

Double standards much? You in this case justify the $600 which was for something that didn't have much to do with gaming. It was for TV, watching movies.

Really doesn't the xbox 360 play movies.? Oh yeah you forgot about that,wait didn't the original xbox as well.?

How about HD-DVD $199 add on for the 360.? Wait so the 360 with the add on for movies was the same as the most expensive model of the PS3,but without..

60GB HDD

Wifi

Media card reader

Free online play

Rechargeable batteries on the controller.

HDMI port.

Hell Wifi on xbox 360 was $99 dollars on launch,HD-DVD $200,online $50..

The PS3 at $600 dollars was a steal,it was such a great deal it make the xbox one look like a damn arm robbery,even ignoring blu-ray Wifi,60GB hdd online free basically make for the difference and then some,a 20GB drive on xbox 360 was also $99 dollars.

So lets see sony give me for $600 what on the competition would cost.

$100 Wifi

$50 online play

$1,000 Blu-ray

$400 xbox 360

40 extra GB of which would cost $200 more on xbox 360.

That comes to $1750 you would need to spend to actually match what the PS3 gave you on 2006,and on 2007 you have to pay again another $50,value wise the PS3 destroyed the xbox 360.

Oh by the way Blu-ray was need it on 2006 MS had a game that spam, across 3 DVD,after that even FPS like rage can spam across 3 disc on xbox 360,not only that Blu-ray also gave the PS3 7.1 loss less uncompressed.

So yeah when you talk value the PS3 walked all over the xbox,mind you that the first model of the xbox 360 release did not even had HDMI if you wanted that you would have to wait like 3 years to get it.

Sony deliver since day 1 while many were stock with lag on gears on 2006,i was playing 20 vs 20 on Resistance smooth as butter,what is that servers for games what MS try now to say is great.

#91 Edited by SUD123456 (4341 posts) -

@casharmy said:

@SUD123456 said:

If you want to innovate you have to take risk. Giving people what they want is usually the absence of innovation, since 'the people' normally want version 1.1 of what they already have. Therein lies the risk, since your vision of innovation may not resonate with enough of 'the people'.

when you "innovate" it needs to be something that people actually want and the things MS tried to call innovation with xbox 1 were not it.

It's almost like you didn't read or didn't understand my post.

#92 Posted by jer_1 (7390 posts) -

@casharmy said:

@SUD123456 said:

If you want to innovate you have to take risk. Giving people what they want is usually the absence of innovation, since 'the people' normally want version 1.1 of what they already have. Therein lies the risk, since your vision of innovation may not resonate with enough of 'the people'.

when you "innovate" it needs to be something that people actually want and the things MS tried to call innovation with xbox 1 were not it.

It's almost like you didn't read or didn't understand my post.

Simply put microshafts idea of "innovation" are complete bullshit, I was not surprised in the least that damn near everyone and their grandmas hated their ideas..

#93 Posted by lundy86_4 (42618 posts) -

"miss judge..." loltormentos.

#94 Posted by SUD123456 (4341 posts) -

@SUD123456 said:

If you want to innovate you have to take risk. Giving people what they want is usually the absence of innovation, since 'the people' normally want version 1.1 of what they already have. Therein lies the risk, since your vision of innovation may not resonate with enough of 'the people'.

I agree that to innovate, one must take a risk, but I disagree with the notion that somehow what people want and innovation are mutually exclusive. Sure, you can innovate by making what people don't want and you'll end up being broke. A modern example of "innovation" would be the Steambox controller. People always asked for more precision in console gaming, so that's something that people wanted. The innovation comes in how Valve went about getting that result. Now will it be successful or not? That all depends on ease of use and functionality, but the new Steambox controller is a perfect example of taking a risk while striving towards a features that people have shown interest in. MS, on the other hand, went completely in the wrong direction. They tried to innovate by enforcing features people completely hate and want none of (DRM). That's stupid innovation and a sure fire way to crash and burn as MS realized, hence the 180s.

I never said what people want and innovation are mutually exclusive. I said usually. And it is usually because most people most of the time cannot and do not conceive of things much differently than what they are now. At best, people usually think of incremental improvements not really innovation, hence my comment about version 1.1

If you think about it this is an obvious truism. If we were all, or majority, or significant minority inclined towards innovation then we would all be innovators, inventors, etc. But how many people in your entire life have you met that are truly innovative?

The point is that you usually cannot poll or focus group your way to innovation because most people cannot really tell you anything useful. Indeed, most people cannot tell you whether they like the potential innovation until after they have actually tried it. Using your example, most people would not have been able to describe the steam box controller.

In any case, more attempts at innovation fail than succeed, which is evidenced by the way venture capitalism works. There are lots of reasons why MS has messed up which includes your points about DRM which is something people do not want. But that isn't the core of what they were trying to do; although I would agree that is a great example of poorly executing and shooting yourself.

#95 Posted by Master_Live (13591 posts) -

@GravityX said:

@remiks00 said:

@GravityX said:

They looked at the current technological landscape. Everyone is connected or wants to be connected. Social media also was a driving force. And gaming models such as gaming apps, Steam and others coming out with digital gaming models.

The reactions were also very angered. MS being a large company automatically gets branded as greedy, money grumbing sharks.

The ironic thing is everyone complaining is connected to the internet.

Yeah, but no one is "forced" to be connected to play a "single" player game. They really could have created a better method of handling that "always online" fiasco. Funny thing is, Microsoft sucked at explaining why their way was better. They really didn't have a clue of delivering better messaging to their fans. So yes, it came off as them being greedy since they gave no valid explanation of why it would've been better to have all of those restrictions except a"teh power of the cloud"...

give me a break..

And you can play offline you just have had to sign in within 24 hours.

No, period. Offline means offline, all the time. No check in, like we do now. The fact that you aren't bother by this doesn't speak well of you.

#96 Posted by Nonstop-Madness (9466 posts) -

I don't think they've misjudged people. They simply need to market their product better. What I think confused Microsoft was the fact that people used the 360 for many more things other than games but they fail to realize that what brought them their wasn't Xbox Music or Netflix but the damn games. Why would I need a $500 machine for Skype or ESPN or Cable? The Xbox One is jack of all trades yet a master of none. If Microsoft wants to sell me their all in "One", then they'll need to prove to me that being able to Skype while playing COD is worth a $500 purchase. For non-gamers, it's an even harder sell.

Sony is currently marketing the PS4 as a gaming console. Period. Sure they'll have entertainment services but their message to the consumer has been clear and consistent. Cough up $400 so you can get a next gen gaming experience. Why will Sony beat out Microsoft this holiday season? Because their selling gamers a gaming console at a lower price. The thing is, that'll only work at launch and the next few years but Microsoft is playing long ball. It'll be interesting to see how these companies challenge each other throughout this generation.

#97 Posted by Wickerman777 (1110 posts) -

Look at Windows 8. Ain't the first time.

#98 Posted by remiks00 (1528 posts) -
#99 Posted by BranKetra (47436 posts) -

I think all of the initial decisions for the Xbox One were made for a primary audience other than the gaming consumer. Otherwise, they would not have done so many things that were disliked. It was an odd set of decisions because it was abandoning the consumer base earned by the Xbox and Xbox 360's successes. For a big business to do such a thing, the profits must have been estimated to be worth the loss of that audience.

#100 Edited by SuperCowElitist (730 posts) -

Microsoft is a disgusting company who only thought about their best interest. Sony on the other hands; always had gamers in mind.