What's interesting about this whole fiasco is just how Draconian their approach to DRM was, to the point that they not only lost any potential new customers but a lot of existing customers as well.
Our shop currently has about 40 Xbox 360's and the same amount of Wiis and about 8 PS3s and 8 Wiius. Next generation consoles we plan on flipping that number and relying on the PS4 specifically because of the drm crap that they tried to pull.
As I researched this a bit further you're probably right. I can't find an official announcement that Avie Tevanian and Jon Rubenstien were leaving the company - just that the executive bios page was updated after they left promoting Ive, Fadell and Serlet. From what I can tell, Serlet was the only one Apple did a press release on but no comments from Steve or Tim thanking him for anything. Guess that's the Apple way. The official press release on last years executive changes didn't thank Scott Forstall for anything either.
EDIT: I forgot about Bob Mansfield...when his retirement was announced last year he got a warm send off from Tim. Which makes me think if any one of the current execs left on good terms they'd probably get a decent send off too.
Good point about Bob Ballmer, eh, Mansfield. To be fair, Cook seems like the type who enjoys waxing poetic when given a chance. In his era, Mansfield, Forstall and Browbeat are the 3 (nearly) departing examples. So it appears you're right - Cook errs on the side if terseness when he has nothing good to say.
Microsoft is did a HUGE sell on its Games On Demand yesterday. I think it was one day only, but there were several full Xbox360 games available for $10 or less. Max Payne 3 and Far Cry 3 were among them, so not only games 4 years old.
I don't know if Sony is doing similar things on PS3 as I don't own one, but with deals like the ones I saw, I think Steam is starting to have an impact on consoles.
What's interesting about this whole fiasco is just how Draconian their approach to DRM was, to the point that they not only lost any potential new customers but a lot of existing customers as well.
I think this is why Don is no longer going to be with Microsoft. Publishers want this sort of DRM, and Microsoft was giving it to them. When this was first announced, most of the gaming press was convinced Sony would announce something similar. It became a disaster when it was clear Microsoft had opted for the DRM path and was not forced. I recall seeing a writer at a gaming blog tweet that he had never been happier to be wrong when Sony announced their plans.
The reason for giving publishers DRM was likely for ensure exclusives and some sort of shared revenue deal for digital downloads. Maybe they were also convinced Sony was going to do digital downloads, but clearly Microsoft always had the option to maintain the status quo and just keep putting games on discs.
It was a huge mistake but it was probably the level of DRM the publishers wanted for digital only game downloads. Microsoft's mistake was choosing that route when they didn't have to.
In the end this might be very good thing though. I am sure publishers have been planning to spring this DRM trap when games went digital-only for years. Now that publishers have seen how console gamers reacted, they might think long and hard about the approach.
If they had just named the Xbox 360 simply Xbox I'd agree but they went with a different naming scheme so following that path makes more sense than going backwards. Of course they could've also called it 'the new Xbox'
Curious - I don't see anyone from Forrester or IDC research making claims of "damaged" reputations for the Microsoft XBOX One. Pretty much all the hardcore XBOX gamers have said "I'll probably buy one". Of course then again, who cares about the fact that media entertainment has surpassed gaming on the XBOX.
Some of you guys are missing the point of the XBOX. It's a helluva lot more than a gaming console. And if they finish nailing down the TV aspect - Tivo might as well declare bankruptcy now.
You guys need to put down the "I hate Microsoft" hat for a few moments and take a look at the entire technology and entertainment landscape.
As far as the MSFT guy jumping ship to Zynga. Sure it seems nuts but... would you rather be president of a company or CEO of another?
Xbox targets a wider audience with things like Kinect. PS4 on the other hand looks strictly like a console for male teenagers and young adults.
The PS4 has the same kind of camera as the XBox, it's just an optional extra:
[VIDEO]
Both have Blu-Ray for movies. The XBox has more of a media focus but it's also horizontal so not easy to fit into an already cluttered media center. I wouldn't say either one has a wider demographic than their gaming audience. The XBox is $500, that's not replacing a $100 TiVo box or media center just for the media capability.
PS4 also may have more power, but is it going to lead to better graphics? PS3 has more power than Xbox 360 but the games available for both are sometimes better on the 360 and other times not really any different.
The visuals won't improve beyond the PC. The last-gen did have issues keeping up in some games like LA Noire:
[VIDEO]
The consoles there run at 720p, turn down the anti-aliasing, capped at 30FPS and still stutter at times. This extra power will just get rid of those issues. They'll be able to keep anti-aliasing up, turn on things like ambient occlusion for more accurate shadows, run at 1080p and stay above 30FPS, maybe even stay at 60FPS. The extra power just to stick at 1080p is about 2.5x. Add in the anti-aliasing and lighting extras and it can easily be another 2x, then double the FPS and that sucks up the 10x extra power the new consoles offer. The extra memory they have will mainly just help draw distances so fewer objects popping into view.
Here you can see the difference with the console and a PC:
[VIDEO]
It's mainly just a bit sharper on the PC side but you'd get roughly the same experience. I think there was a need to go to this next generation of consoles but not beyond and I think the smarter route is going to be with mobile hardware. The next iOS devices should be pretty amazing for gaming.
At some point I also think the serious gamers that Sony are targeting might question the value of a PS4. As more computers have HDMI ports, Windows 8 boots in seconds and it's big button start screen is reasonable TV friendly, why not just connect your PC to a TV? After all the PS4 hardware is now just a PC, and the games are cheaper on Steam.
The main reason I'd say is the exclusives. Steam is fine but games get pulled from the store like Battlefield 3 and tied into other stores and you have to wait on games pretty much all the time now. Consoles are first priority. Remedy is a good developer and they've gone XBox exclusive with Quantum Break:
[VIDEO]
The price is also compelling. People say you can build a better gaming PC than a console but they'd struggle at $399 and people aren't all that interested in doing that. Intel's more powerful Haswell graphics will change things a bit because the minimum quality keeps going up but I don't think many average parents are all that aware of the controller options and Steam. The consoles will just be that easy hands-off buy to keep their kids happy. PC games are cheaper but typically only after a while and used games on consoles are cheaper than new PC games.
Consoles never sell in large volumes anyway. 70-100 million in 7 years. Apple will ship roughly that many iPads this year alone. Just plug an iPad or iPhone into a TV, use the controllers and that's the console. The UI should be pretty easy to navigate using a controller - even the multi-tasking panel, where you can move the stick up to close an app.
The PS4 has the same kind of camera as the XBox, it's just an optional extra:
Both have Blu-Ray for movies. The XBox has more of a media focus but it's also horizontal so not easy to fit into an already cluttered media center. I wouldn't say either one has a wider demographic than their gaming audience. The XBox is $500, that's not replacing a $100 TiVo box or media center just for the media capability.
The tech for PS4's version on Kinect isn't anywhere near as good, it isn't even as good as the original Kinect, which is possibly a second reason they decided not to put it in the box. The fact it also isn't in the box also means there won't be as many games and the games that use it won't be as good. It's been the same story throughout console history, that if it's an add on, it will lack games.
PS4 does also do Blu-Ray and probably does movie / tv rentals to but to me the reason to use your games console (xbox) over some of the other options is it's voice controls. Without that your back to using a game controller which isn't great.
Aside from what PS4 does and doesn't do though, the general message they are sending out is they is that the PS4 is for serous gamers everything else is secondary. Microsoft on the other hand are trying to send out a message that it's mostly about games, but they've also adding in some other great stuff. However the problem with that is, by talking about something else you take away from the perception of how good it is for games. Irrespective of how good it is or isn't.
Aside from what PS4 does and doesn't do though, the general message they are sending out is they is that the PS4 is for serous gamers everything else is secondary. Microsoft on the other hand are trying to send out a message that it's mostly about games, but they've also adding in some other great stuff. However the problem with that is, by talking about something else you take away from the perception of how good it is for games. Irrespective of how good it is or isn't.
Yes, but Microsoft has a potentially a broader market. I won't disagree that if you want a dedicated gaming machine, PS4 is your best choice. The fact is though, how many people want to pay $400-500 for something that just plays games? I don't claim to have an answer, but that is definitely the question. The PS4 has some media capabilities, but Microsoft has more options that make it attractive for more than just gaming. Whether that helps or hurts is anyone's guess.
I am convinced we are seeing why Microsoft started making game consoles. They believed console makers were missing opportunities. What is clear is that the strategies of Microsoft and Sony are diverging more and more (Nintendo is already trying to make its own way). That means I doubt PS4 and Xbox One sales will be as close at the end of the next generation as they were this time around.
I am confident Sony will take an early lead as the DRM fiasco has taken its toll on early adopters, but I think Microsoft will enter 2014 much stronger than people expect. What happens in 2014 and beyond is anyone's guess and really depends on if the media capabilities of Xbox One are attractive enough to win people over. The people willing to wait a year or two before they upgrade will be the ones that decide this battle, not the people that buy their consoles this holiday season. Typically those people are looking for value so I think price will have a greater impact than anything. If Sony can keep their price $100 lower than the Xbox One, they are probably in decent shape to win it all. If Microsoft finds a way to narrow the price gap to $50 or less, the media benefits will likely become more of a factor.
All of this is all pure speculation and a good promotion or sale over the holidays from either Sony, Microsoft, or even Nintendo could dramatically shake things up. Just imagine if Sony did a $500 PS4/Vita bundle? Or if Microsoft allowed in 2-4 digital downloads with purchase?
If they had just named the Xbox 360 simply Xbox I'd agree but they went with a different naming scheme so following that path makes more sense than going backwards. Of course they could've also called it 'the new Xbox'
Microsoft is using the name Xbox all over the place now. We now have Xbox Music. You even have see "Xbox Games for Windows" in Windows 8.
Xbox is now a popular brand and Microsoft is milking it.
Xbox is the brand and One is the name of the new gaming console. That doesn't make "Xbox One" a good name, but just "Xbox" would have never happened. Even Apple started calling the original iPod the "iPod Classic" once iPod became more of a brand than a product.
Personally, I preferred the rumored name "Xbox Infinity", but perhaps it was too cliche. Still, it seems like a step up from "Xbox One", which is just confusing. I'd rather have a cliched name than a confusing one if I worked for a marketing department.
Comments
Xbox 5.
So? What was the name of the first iMac?
Good point about Bob Ballmer, eh, Mansfield. To be fair, Cook seems like the type who enjoys waxing poetic when given a chance. In his era, Mansfield, Forstall and Browbeat are the 3 (nearly) departing examples. So it appears you're right - Cook errs on the side if terseness when he has nothing good to say.
Bondi Blue iMac?
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84
...and the games are cheaper on Steam.
Microsoft is did a HUGE sell on its Games On Demand yesterday. I think it was one day only, but there were several full Xbox360 games available for $10 or less. Max Payne 3 and Far Cry 3 were among them, so not only games 4 years old.
I don't know if Sony is doing similar things on PS3 as I don't own one, but with deals like the ones I saw, I think Steam is starting to have an impact on consoles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldenclaw
What's interesting about this whole fiasco is just how Draconian their approach to DRM was, to the point that they not only lost any potential new customers but a lot of existing customers as well.
I think this is why Don is no longer going to be with Microsoft. Publishers want this sort of DRM, and Microsoft was giving it to them. When this was first announced, most of the gaming press was convinced Sony would announce something similar. It became a disaster when it was clear Microsoft had opted for the DRM path and was not forced. I recall seeing a writer at a gaming blog tweet that he had never been happier to be wrong when Sony announced their plans.
The reason for giving publishers DRM was likely for ensure exclusives and some sort of shared revenue deal for digital downloads. Maybe they were also convinced Sony was going to do digital downloads, but clearly Microsoft always had the option to maintain the status quo and just keep putting games on discs.
It was a huge mistake but it was probably the level of DRM the publishers wanted for digital only game downloads. Microsoft's mistake was choosing that route when they didn't have to.
In the end this might be very good thing though. I am sure publishers have been planning to spring this DRM trap when games went digital-only for years. Now that publishers have seen how console gamers reacted, they might think long and hard about the approach.
If they had just named the Xbox 360 simply Xbox I'd agree but they went with a different naming scheme so following that path makes more sense than going backwards. Of course they could've also called it 'the new Xbox'
Some of you guys are missing the point of the XBOX. It's a helluva lot more than a gaming console. And if they finish nailing down the TV aspect - Tivo might as well declare bankruptcy now.
You guys need to put down the "I hate Microsoft" hat for a few moments and take a look at the entire technology and entertainment landscape.
As far as the MSFT guy jumping ship to Zynga. Sure it seems nuts but... would you rather be president of a company or CEO of another?
The PS4 has the same kind of camera as the XBox, it's just an optional extra:
[VIDEO]
Both have Blu-Ray for movies. The XBox has more of a media focus but it's also horizontal so not easy to fit into an already cluttered media center. I wouldn't say either one has a wider demographic than their gaming audience. The XBox is $500, that's not replacing a $100 TiVo box or media center just for the media capability.
The visuals won't improve beyond the PC. The last-gen did have issues keeping up in some games like LA Noire:
[VIDEO]
The consoles there run at 720p, turn down the anti-aliasing, capped at 30FPS and still stutter at times. This extra power will just get rid of those issues. They'll be able to keep anti-aliasing up, turn on things like ambient occlusion for more accurate shadows, run at 1080p and stay above 30FPS, maybe even stay at 60FPS. The extra power just to stick at 1080p is about 2.5x. Add in the anti-aliasing and lighting extras and it can easily be another 2x, then double the FPS and that sucks up the 10x extra power the new consoles offer. The extra memory they have will mainly just help draw distances so fewer objects popping into view.
Here you can see the difference with the console and a PC:
[VIDEO]
It's mainly just a bit sharper on the PC side but you'd get roughly the same experience. I think there was a need to go to this next generation of consoles but not beyond and I think the smarter route is going to be with mobile hardware. The next iOS devices should be pretty amazing for gaming.
The main reason I'd say is the exclusives. Steam is fine but games get pulled from the store like Battlefield 3 and tied into other stores and you have to wait on games pretty much all the time now. Consoles are first priority. Remedy is a good developer and they've gone XBox exclusive with Quantum Break:
[VIDEO]
The price is also compelling. People say you can build a better gaming PC than a console but they'd struggle at $399 and people aren't all that interested in doing that. Intel's more powerful Haswell graphics will change things a bit because the minimum quality keeps going up but I don't think many average parents are all that aware of the controller options and Steam. The consoles will just be that easy hands-off buy to keep their kids happy. PC games are cheaper but typically only after a while and used games on consoles are cheaper than new PC games.
Consoles never sell in large volumes anyway. 70-100 million in 7 years. Apple will ship roughly that many iPads this year alone. Just plug an iPad or iPhone into a TV, use the controllers and that's the console. The UI should be pretty easy to navigate using a controller - even the multi-tasking panel, where you can move the stick up to close an app.
Well, what do you know.
Bet that would apply to products from other companies, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
The PS4 has the same kind of camera as the XBox, it's just an optional extra:
Both have Blu-Ray for movies. The XBox has more of a media focus but it's also horizontal so not easy to fit into an already cluttered media center. I wouldn't say either one has a wider demographic than their gaming audience. The XBox is $500, that's not replacing a $100 TiVo box or media center just for the media capability.
The tech for PS4's version on Kinect isn't anywhere near as good, it isn't even as good as the original Kinect, which is possibly a second reason they decided not to put it in the box. The fact it also isn't in the box also means there won't be as many games and the games that use it won't be as good. It's been the same story throughout console history, that if it's an add on, it will lack games.
PS4 does also do Blu-Ray and probably does movie / tv rentals to but to me the reason to use your games console (xbox) over some of the other options is it's voice controls. Without that your back to using a game controller which isn't great.
Aside from what PS4 does and doesn't do though, the general message they are sending out is they is that the PS4 is for serous gamers everything else is secondary. Microsoft on the other hand are trying to send out a message that it's mostly about games, but they've also adding in some other great stuff. However the problem with that is, by talking about something else you take away from the perception of how good it is for games. Irrespective of how good it is or isn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84
Aside from what PS4 does and doesn't do though, the general message they are sending out is they is that the PS4 is for serous gamers everything else is secondary. Microsoft on the other hand are trying to send out a message that it's mostly about games, but they've also adding in some other great stuff. However the problem with that is, by talking about something else you take away from the perception of how good it is for games. Irrespective of how good it is or isn't.
Yes, but Microsoft has a potentially a broader market. I won't disagree that if you want a dedicated gaming machine, PS4 is your best choice. The fact is though, how many people want to pay $400-500 for something that just plays games? I don't claim to have an answer, but that is definitely the question. The PS4 has some media capabilities, but Microsoft has more options that make it attractive for more than just gaming. Whether that helps or hurts is anyone's guess.
I am convinced we are seeing why Microsoft started making game consoles. They believed console makers were missing opportunities. What is clear is that the strategies of Microsoft and Sony are diverging more and more (Nintendo is already trying to make its own way). That means I doubt PS4 and Xbox One sales will be as close at the end of the next generation as they were this time around.
I am confident Sony will take an early lead as the DRM fiasco has taken its toll on early adopters, but I think Microsoft will enter 2014 much stronger than people expect. What happens in 2014 and beyond is anyone's guess and really depends on if the media capabilities of Xbox One are attractive enough to win people over. The people willing to wait a year or two before they upgrade will be the ones that decide this battle, not the people that buy their consoles this holiday season. Typically those people are looking for value so I think price will have a greater impact than anything. If Sony can keep their price $100 lower than the Xbox One, they are probably in decent shape to win it all. If Microsoft finds a way to narrow the price gap to $50 or less, the media benefits will likely become more of a factor.
All of this is all pure speculation and a good promotion or sale over the holidays from either Sony, Microsoft, or even Nintendo could dramatically shake things up. Just imagine if Sony did a $500 PS4/Vita bundle? Or if Microsoft allowed in 2-4 digital downloads with purchase?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soloman
If they had just named the Xbox 360 simply Xbox I'd agree but they went with a different naming scheme so following that path makes more sense than going backwards. Of course they could've also called it 'the new Xbox'
Microsoft is using the name Xbox all over the place now. We now have Xbox Music. You even have see "Xbox Games for Windows" in Windows 8.
Xbox is now a popular brand and Microsoft is milking it.
Xbox is the brand and One is the name of the new gaming console. That doesn't make "Xbox One" a good name, but just "Xbox" would have never happened. Even Apple started calling the original iPod the "iPod Classic" once iPod became more of a brand than a product.
Personally, I preferred the rumored name "Xbox Infinity", but perhaps it was too cliche. Still, it seems like a step up from "Xbox One", which is just confusing. I'd rather have a cliched name than a confusing one if I worked for a marketing department.