Revisiting the Xbox One Reveal
- Thread starter Andy
- Start date
- Status
So I guess the tight restrictions on used games were there and necessary to somehow magically achieve that goal. Especially since the majority of Xbox gamers were not connected to Live at all times back in the Xbox 360 era.
Last edited:
Yeah pretty much a perfect storm of a launch. MS brought everything to the table...
1) console to watch television on.
2) the NSA, Snowden, big brother box.
3) the higher price.
4) the lower performance.
5) the DRM debacle.
With all that, have you f$&@ers seen titanfall?
1) console to watch television on.
2) the NSA, Snowden, big brother box.
3) the higher price.
4) the lower performance.
5) the DRM debacle.
With all that, have you f$&@ers seen titanfall?
I thought this was a pretty interesting way of looking at it.
Unity Chief, John Riccitiello:
“The normally candid Riccitiello grew even more so when the topic of discussion turned to the battle between the Xbox One and PlayStation 4. [....] 'In the battle of big ideas … there was a clash of ideas that really separated Sony and Microsoft. They actually had very similar architecture that they were trying to bring to the table. But Microsoft focused … a lot on entertainment beyond gaming. Microsoft was trying to [compete against] Apple. They didn’t feel gaming was big enough to justify the pent-up desire … to have the recognition they wanted as an innovator.”
"Contrast that with what Riccitiello deemed a “gamer’s first” approach from Sony. The Unity CEO summed the entire console war as a shot of billiards."
“'Sony just said, ‘We’ve made the best f***ing game system we could’ … partly because they didn’t have the resources to do more about it,” said Riccitiello. 'Microsoft was focused on the shot after the one they needed to make, putting the 7-ball in the corner pocket, but they missed the first shot and didn’t get another shot after it. Sony focused on the shot they needed to make, which was win the hearts and minds of the gamer. The broader scope of entertainment might be a bigger idea, but not with an unfocused execution. A tight execution on the 50 million people that matter, which are the people currently lapping up consoles … Sony f***ing nailed it, and they deserve the victory.' ”
http://venturebeat.com/2015/05/06/u...**ing-nailed-it-and-they-deserve-the-victory/
Unity Chief, John Riccitiello:
“The normally candid Riccitiello grew even more so when the topic of discussion turned to the battle between the Xbox One and PlayStation 4. [....] 'In the battle of big ideas … there was a clash of ideas that really separated Sony and Microsoft. They actually had very similar architecture that they were trying to bring to the table. But Microsoft focused … a lot on entertainment beyond gaming. Microsoft was trying to [compete against] Apple. They didn’t feel gaming was big enough to justify the pent-up desire … to have the recognition they wanted as an innovator.”
"Contrast that with what Riccitiello deemed a “gamer’s first” approach from Sony. The Unity CEO summed the entire console war as a shot of billiards."
“'Sony just said, ‘We’ve made the best f***ing game system we could’ … partly because they didn’t have the resources to do more about it,” said Riccitiello. 'Microsoft was focused on the shot after the one they needed to make, putting the 7-ball in the corner pocket, but they missed the first shot and didn’t get another shot after it. Sony focused on the shot they needed to make, which was win the hearts and minds of the gamer. The broader scope of entertainment might be a bigger idea, but not with an unfocused execution. A tight execution on the 50 million people that matter, which are the people currently lapping up consoles … Sony f***ing nailed it, and they deserve the victory.' ”
http://venturebeat.com/2015/05/06/u...**ing-nailed-it-and-they-deserve-the-victory/
I have to agree with that. I own and like my XB1 but honestly that first reveal was awful. It was like someone brushed my teeth and then made me drink Orange Juice.
They showed plenty of games at their reveal, at least as much as Sony. The problem for MS was the whole DRM nightmare was still hanging over everyone and it was like blood in shark infested waters.
The X1 was and is a game console. It plays video games. I would love to know how many people have bought an X1 who don't play games on it. My guess would be almost none.
This whole myth started with the first Kinect and continues on. Is MS trying to expand the functionality of the traditional game console? Yep. Are they turning away from the device's primary function? Nope.
They spent tons of money on the controller design. The primary purpose of the cloud is gaming. Their online service is mostly centered around gaming. The fact that I can control my cable box now too doesn't change that.
I feel if they had dropped the DRM before anyone knew about it, things would have been much different. It was open season on MS and their lackluster marketing message not only fell flat but just added fuel to the fire.
The X1 was and is a game console. It plays video games. I would love to know how many people have bought an X1 who don't play games on it. My guess would be almost none.
This whole myth started with the first Kinect and continues on. Is MS trying to expand the functionality of the traditional game console? Yep. Are they turning away from the device's primary function? Nope.
They spent tons of money on the controller design. The primary purpose of the cloud is gaming. Their online service is mostly centered around gaming. The fact that I can control my cable box now too doesn't change that.
I feel if they had dropped the DRM before anyone knew about it, things would have been much different. It was open season on MS and their lackluster marketing message not only fell flat but just added fuel to the fire.
No, they showed plenty of games at E3. At the reveal, everything was TV/TV/TV/sports. Oh, and Call of Duty.
Games from the reveal.
FIFA 15
NBA Live 15
Madden 15
UFC
Forza 5
Quantum Break
Call of Duty Ghosts
FIFA 15
NBA Live 15
Madden 15
UFC
Forza 5
Quantum Break
Call of Duty Ghosts
So this was posted on Neogaf and I think it is really poignant and a precursor to what was to come with the reveal.
http://www.wsj.com/video/yusuf-mehd...dia/82951C3B-5BB9-4A7B-AACE-F97993244DD0.html
http://www.wsj.com/video/yusuf-mehd...dia/82951C3B-5BB9-4A7B-AACE-F97993244DD0.html
Pretty much what Andy was alluding to, they saw the stats and assumed that gamers want to consume media more than play games, and that they would love to pay $499 to do those things. Ignoring the fact the reason why 360 fans were doing those things in those numbers was partially because of how inexpensive the 360 was.
I don't hate myself enough to watch that whole reveal again, so I can't be sure, but if I remember right, they talked a bit about one of those sports games (can't remember which), but the rest (aside from CoD) were just brief mentions, not explored or discussed at any length. My impression, and I think most gamers' impressions, was that gaming was a secondary emphasis at best.
Yeah, pretty much what I said in my previous post.
They looked to heavily at stats from the last years of the 360 and the way people were using it without realizing that (hard)core gamers buy consoles during the first half of a gen.
As it was for Sony...because launch games are typically weak and underwhelming. I'm not watching it again either, but I definitely remember them hitting the EA sports stuff pretty hard. Not everyone's type of game of course so YMMV.
I still say MS's X1 games launch lineup was as good if not a little better than Sony's. Both were weak, as launch lineups always are.
Yeah, you can see the thinking pretty clearly there. They wanted to differentiate themselves as the "premium" all-in-one entertainment box. They thought people would pick a gaming console based primarily on its TV/cable features.
That's apples and oranges, though. Sony didn't do a reveal prior to E3, unless I'm forgetting something. If you want to talk E3, yeah, they were both roughly equivalent, although Sony stole the show with their gamer-centric policy announcements and price point, and because, by E3, the reveal had created a lot of backlash for MS.
I disagree. Sony stole the show with their little 1 minute video of how to trade a game with a friend. MS had DRM and Sony didn't. That was E3 that year. Nothing else mattered. Well... price too to some extent.
That DRM hurt em bad. Very true. Especially after Sony whipped up that one minute video showing how to trade games. I'm one of those rare people who actually enjoyed the initial reveal however. I figured games were still a major bullet point for the one, so I guess that makes me smarter than the others. Lol. I've also enjoyed nearly every feature that was shown during that reveal too, not to mention playing amazing games. Funny that...
You're minimizing what happened, if you think it was just about "their little 1-minute video." (It was 20 seconds, btw). It was a multiplicity of factors -- DRM and used games, fallout from the reveal, the requirement for online check-ins, the price difference, mandatory Kinect, and about a general perception that Sony was more interested in the core/hardcore gamer than MS was. You're also mixing up the chronology -- the ad was released after Sony had already won E3.
If they were counting on loyalty to the brand than yeah they didn't need to show off games.
Do you think Sony had better games at launch? I don't. Another example of perception vs reality. I bought a launch console, and honestly, the best games were pretty much multiplats anyway.
If price and/or performance is a big factor for someone, then by all means buy a PS4. Sorry though, to say that the X1 isn't focused on the hardcore gamer is just wrong. The DRM made it "cool" to hate MS again, and that's what people did. They saw what they wanted. It was right in the article you posted - MS has more resources and can do things like adding media functionality to the console without taking things away from gaming. However this myth lives on. Just look at the thread about streaming content to Win10 devices. So much hate over a free feature.
If I understand you correctly, you're saying 1) MS was always just as interested in the core/hardcore gamer as they ever were; 2) their emphasis on TV/media/app functionality in no way affected the machine's performance as a game-playing console; and 3) people hated on MS without reason, only because "it was cool."
My responses to that would be 1) the reveal showed that MS was clearly interested in positioning themselves as an entertainment hub first and foremost, with gaming a secondary emphasis, and they also made a series of policy announcements that hardly put gamers first; 2) MS's console has reduced power and poorer performance than its rival in playing games, so it seems reasonable to assume that some tradeoffs were made; and 3) I agree that, with the reveal, MS went rapidly from being "cool" to "uncool." There was a lot of angry momentum there, and some fanboys got very exaggerated in their rhetoric. However, I think that goes back to MS's decisions about the console, the policies, and how they handled the reveal, as well as the PR afterwards. If these are misperceptions, as you say, they are ones that MS is largely responsible for creating. I do agree that this is history, though, and people still b*tching about MS not focusing on the core gamer are being silly. They've changed their tune.
I think the hardware is very similar. One was always going to be more powerful regardless.
I think the end goal for both companies is also similar. Both want to own the living room and they both have entertainment content outside of games.
It's just that Sony presented it much better.
It's almost like politics in a way. Tell people want they want to hear and that you're different from the other candidates. When in reality you're really basically the same.
I think the end goal for both companies is also similar. Both want to own the living room and they both have entertainment content outside of games.
It's just that Sony presented it much better.
It's almost like politics in a way. Tell people want they want to hear and that you're different from the other candidates. When in reality you're really basically the same.
That's true, a lot of it was about presentation or marketing, and these consoles, in the end, are more alike that different. Otoh, there were some significant differences, apart from the presentation/pitch itself -- e.g., policies affecting used games, mandatory online check- ins, mandatory Kinect, hardware differences, and $100 price difference.
I don't think we can make that assumption. MS is a huge company with basically unlimited resources. For as well as the PS4 sells, we all know Sony is in much rougher shape as a company.
I don't assume that the reason a few (and really it is just a few) games run at 900p instead of 1080 is because they wanted to add media functionality.
Also:
-If price was such a huge factor, why did X1 sales not improve significantly after the price cut? All the "gamer unfriendly" policies are long gone, and the price is lower than PS4, yet Sony still dominates sales.
Well, it's a reasonable assumption and one a lot of people have made. I'm fine if you want to make a different assumption. We'll probably just have to agree to disagree here, because neither of us were sitting in on the planning meetings or privvy to those details.
I'm not saying price is "a huge factor;" just that it was one differentiating factor. I'd also say price drops have certainly helped X1 sell more (big reason for the Nov/Dec rally, for instance). They'd be in a much worse position, had they stayed at $500.
- Status