This guy must be mad, he was never gonna get the sack if Bullmer can survive what he has done to the company. Microsoft have a lot of money to throw at stuff so I wouldn't have left a "stuck in the 90s" company with loads of money to join a sinking ship like Zynga.
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.
The report suggested that Mattrick's departure was not related to a recent consumer uproar over Microsoft's initial plans to include aggressive digital rights management restrictions on the Xbox One.
Hmmm, title suggests he departs because of used games even though not saying it directly, article content suggests not. Well, I read the title first and it's way up there at the top so I guess I'll go with that version of events.
in a rare public reversal last month, Mattrick himself penned an open letter to consumers explaining that Microsoft had changed its stance on Xbox One DRM. When the console ships this fall, it will no longer require a persistent online connection, and the Redmond, Wash., company will not restrict sharing or trading of disc-based games.
The DRM was to try and make the XBox like Steam on the PC. Steam got away with it because of Half-Life 2 and there was much bitterness but people got accustomed to it. Plus there really weren't any other major digital stores around. It's a risky move when there's another company in such direct competition.
They can still make it work so long as the digital versions are priced lower than retail versions. They should have made it clearer there would be benefits from the new setup because without those guarantees, people just focus on the negatives. There's no easy way to guarantee 3rd party titles would be cheaper than the usual retail model of course but they could have applied it to the launch titles / exclusives.
The message they put out was their focus wasn't games and they wanted to clamp down on gamers getting good deals on used games. Not great for a console meant for gaming. They should have put games first and TV should have been a short mention and they should have backed the DRM setup with something and tried to divert attention as much away from it being DRM. Steam is DRM but hardly anybody thinks about it that way any more.
Err... isn't Zynga in a trouble of their own? Its stock has drop from $10 at IPO to $3 a couple days back. Why leave a behemoth with at least some life left for a startup with almost no life left?
Because he did crappy job with X1 and was probably kindly asked to explore other options.
When person in his position says something like "Some of the advantages that you get, of having, a box that is designed to use an online state, so, that, uh, to me is the future-proof choice, and I think people, could've arguably gone the other way if we didn't do it and fortunately we have a product for people who aren't able to get some form of connectivity, it's called Xbox 360" and week later MS drops pretty everything he was trying to sell - that usually doesn't bode well for such person.
In addition to his lack of diplomacy, he really missed on setting targets for X1 - my humble opinion. He ended up with console that is more expensive, less powerful, unnecessarily complex (3 OSes running together) and with lot of focus on technology that was not accepted by more dedicated gamers (Kinect) and non-gaming related services that, to my knowledge, will not even work outside of US. And if they do - how many Asians or Australians are crazy about NBA and such?
True, US is prime market for X1, but. If it flops in rest of the world and doesn't reach critical mass as soon as possible, 3rd party multiplatform games will start being delayed or completely missing, and those made will be natively developed for other platforms and ported to X1. Even with similar architecture, PS4 is faster, with more powerful graphics and more RAM available to games, which will - maybe not initially, but at some point - result in X1 versions of such games being inferior - running on lower res, or lower FPS, or reduced visuals - or all above.
There are a number of reasons why you might want to make a move like this. For one there may have been serious disagreement at MS over which way the XBox should go. If you are one to think the management staff just doesn't get it you may find yourself continuously at odds with that staff. I wouldn't be one bit surprised to find this is the case.
Beyond that Zynga is screwed up. Some people would see putting that show back on track as a challenge. Believe it of not for many excutives it isn't simply about the money, many of these guys are driven to realize their dreams. Think about how Apple got to where it is today.
As for imploding what do you think is happening at Microsoft. It certainly isn't a dramatic implosion but restructuring of any size is never fun. The bit problem MS will have with its restructuring is keeping the crap from floating to the top. In a literal sense they risk loosing their most important and talented personnel. If MS isn't careful they could easily end up with the wrong people in the top positions.
For the last two years anyone who acts as spokesman for a new MS hardware device is duck-marched out the back door soon after. There will be no face of Microsoft other then Uncle Fester. Mattrick had the good foresight to shop his resume around before he went on stage.
For anyone who may have missed it, There was a short interview with Mattrick after the introduction of the new Xbox and he kept shaking his head "no" while his mouth was saying yes, yes, yes. Funniest interview ever.
Apple's not interested in the console game market. It's a shrinking niche market. What Apple does have to offer is an easy access to one's TV without dealing with a Windows OS... or any OS for that matter.,, and that includes games, but not games foremost.
255 million Wii, PS3 and X360 sold since 2006. Not counting accessories. Which in my case - and I'm not even a "hard-core" gamer - are:
2nd dual-shock controller
Wireless 7.1 headset
Wireless BT headset
Playstation Eye camera
Sony BT keyboard
PS Move controller
2nd PS Move controller
PS Move navigator
Charger for dual-shock controllers
Charger for Move controllers
Pistol attachment for Move
Rifle attachment for Move
3x HDMI cable
Save for dual-shock charger, everything else is Sony made. There is probably close to 2x PS3 value in these accessories.
And of course, there are 60+ games for PS3 purchased since we got it. I got them new, preowned, Platinum (discounted price). On average, I'd say I have spent at least NZ$50 per game.
Put that all together, I have wasted solid NZ$4,500 on my PS3 since I've got it, console itself being only 10% of it.
Now... I am one of 80,000,000 PS3 owners. Some spent much less than me, some probably more. Yes PS2 did sell much more consoles, but it was also cheaper and with less accessories on average.
Add to that other consoles and their accessories - Kinect, Wii controllers, steering wheels... AND games... AND Xbox Live/PSN+ subscriptions... AND all older consoles people still play and buy games for. Niche market? I think not.
But ruthlessly competitive market? Yes. Which, I think, is major reason why Apple is not looking seriously at this right now. Regardless of it's premium status, Apple brand does not hold much value for gamers on that level. In addition, I would not be surprised if Apple actually does not want to be associated with such customers, considering stereotype of a gamer as overweight, pimple-riddled basement dweller with no real life, job, girlfriend - considering Apple's current premium status, such association could damage the brand without generating enough income to counter that.
Reading Ballmer's all employee email announcing the departure of Don Mattrick (and one similar he did when Steven Sinofsky left) got me thinking about Tim Cook'a email announcing Apple's re-org last year. Scott Forstall got one sentence and that was it. Did he really piss people off at Apple that badly?
Reading Ballmer's all employee email announcing the departure of Don Mattrick (and one similar he did when Steven Sinofsky left) got me thinking about Tim Cook'a email announcing Apple's re-org last year. Scott Forstall got one sentence and that was it. Did he really piss people off at Apple that badly?
He did ... some people. To be accurate, he got two sentences.
But don't read too much into that. Every company has a different practice. Browett got one sentence less than Forstall. Papermaster got less.
I still don't get their new naming convention, "Xbox One"? Why not Xbox X1? Or Xbox 1080?
Their explanation is that this is the "one" box you go to for all your entertainment. I agree that it's confusing. Having said that, 1080 could be considered a dead end. What would you call the next version? Perhaps that catalyzed a discussion on changing the naming scheme, leading to One.
He did ... some people. To be accurate, he got two sentences.
But don't read too much into that. Every company has a different practice. Browett got one sentence less than Forstall. Papermaster got less.
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.
Their explanation is that this is the "one" box you go to for all your entertainment. I agree that it's confusing. Having said that, 1080 could be considered a dead end. What would you call the next version? Perhaps that catalyzed a discussion on changing the naming scheme, leading to One.
Their explanation is that this is the "one" box you go to for all your entertainment. I agree that it's confusing. Having said that, 1080 could be considered a dead end. What would you call the next version? Perhaps that catalyzed a discussion on changing the naming scheme, leading to One.
So, in ten years they'll call the next iteration the Xbox One Revision2?...or maybe just the Xbox Two? Yech. It was a thoughtless choice on their part. At least with a numbering scheme they could've avoided the problems of localization... "Xbox 1" would've been fine for the whole world, not just the English speaking nations.
So, Mattrick got promoted from being Fester's butt-wipe to manure-barista at Farmville? One day he will show up at Oprah to promote his biography "Live Stinks" (replacing "Been down so long it looks like up to me" as the number one biography-drama of all time). Well done!
But seriously, reading a lot of discussions on this topic, I came away with the impression that opinions among Xbox fans are quite mixed. Would it be so difficult to offer games in two versions (one locked, usable without media and requiring an Internet connection, one tied to the BD, resalable and not requiring the Internet)? Should not be that hard. I mean, they can make 15 versions of one OS, or?
Err... isn't Zynga in a trouble of their own? Its stock has drop from $10 at IPO to $3 a couple days back. Why leave a behemoth with at least some life left for a startup with almost no life left?
Zynga is the most unethical developer I've ever seen... so his appointment is a good thing right?
It was a sad day when they acquired Drop7 and forced me to delete it from my phone.
Most people will see an Xbox One and a PS4 this holiday season for the first time and pick one or the other based on what is, not what might have been.
It will be interesting to see what happens, but I think the only thing nearly assured is that Microsoft will have an uphill battle going into 2014. I do believe Sony will have an early lead at the end of 2013, but I don't expect it will be the huge lead many people expect. (And I reserve the right to be wrong)
I think 2014 will be tough for Xbox but after that I think things will improve. Once the prices start to come down a bit the 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.
Microsoft also look like they have a strategy for Apps by including some form of Windows in the console. I doubt it will be there for launch, devs are going to want people to own the consoles and actually have one to test on before investing to much time in development.
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.
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.
Comments
Hmmm, title suggests he departs because of used games even though not saying it directly, article content suggests not. Well, I read the title first and it's way up there at the top so I guess I'll go with that version of events.
Even more interesting than the letter here:
http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/update
is the notes apparently from XBox people:
http://pastebin.com/uCmdh9jB
http://pastebin.com/TE1MWES2
The DRM was to try and make the XBox like Steam on the PC. Steam got away with it because of Half-Life 2 and there was much bitterness but people got accustomed to it. Plus there really weren't any other major digital stores around. It's a risky move when there's another company in such direct competition.
They can still make it work so long as the digital versions are priced lower than retail versions. They should have made it clearer there would be benefits from the new setup because without those guarantees, people just focus on the negatives. There's no easy way to guarantee 3rd party titles would be cheaper than the usual retail model of course but they could have applied it to the launch titles / exclusives.
The message they put out was their focus wasn't games and they wanted to clamp down on gamers getting good deals on used games. Not great for a console meant for gaming. They should have put games first and TV should have been a short mention and they should have backed the DRM setup with something and tried to divert attention as much away from it being DRM. Steam is DRM but hardly anybody thinks about it that way any more.
Probably just needs some new wallpaper.
He's confirmed as CEO:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/01/us-microsoft-zynga-idUSBRE9600XJ20130701
Because he did crappy job with X1 and was probably kindly asked to explore other options.
When person in his position says something like "Some of the advantages that you get, of having, a box that is designed to use an online state, so, that, uh, to me is the future-proof choice, and I think people, could've arguably gone the other way if we didn't do it and fortunately we have a product for people who aren't able to get some form of connectivity, it's called Xbox 360" and week later MS drops pretty everything he was trying to sell - that usually doesn't bode well for such person.
In addition to his lack of diplomacy, he really missed on setting targets for X1 - my humble opinion. He ended up with console that is more expensive, less powerful, unnecessarily complex (3 OSes running together) and with lot of focus on technology that was not accepted by more dedicated gamers (Kinect) and non-gaming related services that, to my knowledge, will not even work outside of US. And if they do - how many Asians or Australians are crazy about NBA and such?
True, US is prime market for X1, but. If it flops in rest of the world and doesn't reach critical mass as soon as possible, 3rd party multiplatform games will start being delayed or completely missing, and those made will be natively developed for other platforms and ported to X1. Even with similar architecture, PS4 is faster, with more powerful graphics and more RAM available to games, which will - maybe not initially, but at some point - result in X1 versions of such games being inferior - running on lower res, or lower FPS, or reduced visuals - or all above.
Beyond that Zynga is screwed up. Some people would see putting that show back on track as a challenge. Believe it of not for many excutives it isn't simply about the money, many of these guys are driven to realize their dreams. Think about how Apple got to where it is today.
As for imploding what do you think is happening at Microsoft. It certainly isn't a dramatic implosion but restructuring of any size is never fun. The bit problem MS will have with its restructuring is keeping the crap from floating to the top. In a literal sense they risk loosing their most important and talented personnel. If MS isn't careful they could easily end up with the wrong people in the top positions.
255 million Wii, PS3 and X360 sold since 2006. Not counting accessories. Which in my case - and I'm not even a "hard-core" gamer - are:
2nd dual-shock controller
Wireless 7.1 headset
Wireless BT headset
Playstation Eye camera
Sony BT keyboard
PS Move controller
2nd PS Move controller
PS Move navigator
Charger for dual-shock controllers
Charger for Move controllers
Pistol attachment for Move
Rifle attachment for Move
3x HDMI cable
Save for dual-shock charger, everything else is Sony made. There is probably close to 2x PS3 value in these accessories.
And of course, there are 60+ games for PS3 purchased since we got it. I got them new, preowned, Platinum (discounted price). On average, I'd say I have spent at least NZ$50 per game.
Put that all together, I have wasted solid NZ$4,500 on my PS3 since I've got it, console itself being only 10% of it.
Now... I am one of 80,000,000 PS3 owners. Some spent much less than me, some probably more. Yes PS2 did sell much more consoles, but it was also cheaper and with less accessories on average.
Add to that other consoles and their accessories - Kinect, Wii controllers, steering wheels... AND games... AND Xbox Live/PSN+ subscriptions... AND all older consoles people still play and buy games for. Niche market? I think not.
But ruthlessly competitive market? Yes. Which, I think, is major reason why Apple is not looking seriously at this right now. Regardless of it's premium status, Apple brand does not hold much value for gamers on that level. In addition, I would not be surprised if Apple actually does not want to be associated with such customers, considering stereotype of a gamer as overweight, pimple-riddled basement dweller with no real life, job, girlfriend - considering Apple's current premium status, such association could damage the brand without generating enough income to counter that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Reading Ballmer's all employee email announcing the departure of Don Mattrick (and one similar he did when Steven Sinofsky left) got me thinking about Tim Cook'a email announcing Apple's re-org last year. Scott Forstall got one sentence and that was it. Did he really piss people off at Apple that badly?
He did ... some people. To be accurate, he got two sentences.
But don't read too much into that. Every company has a different practice. Browett got one sentence less than Forstall. Papermaster got less.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
I still don't get their new naming convention, "Xbox One"? Why not Xbox X1? Or Xbox 1080?
Their explanation is that this is the "one" box you go to for all your entertainment. I agree that it's confusing. Having said that, 1080 could be considered a dead end. What would you call the next version? Perhaps that catalyzed a discussion on changing the naming scheme, leading to One.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent
Their explanation is that this is the "one" box you go to for all your entertainment. I agree that it's confusing. Having said that, 1080 could be considered a dead end. What would you call the next version? Perhaps that catalyzed a discussion on changing the naming scheme, leading to One.
So, in ten years they'll call the next iteration the Xbox One Revision2?...or maybe just the Xbox Two? Yech. It was a thoughtless choice on their part. At least with a numbering scheme they could've avoided the problems of localization... "Xbox 1" would've been fine for the whole world, not just the English speaking nations.
Xbox 361 was the logical choice.
But seriously, reading a lot of discussions on this topic, I came away with the impression that opinions among Xbox fans are quite mixed. Would it be so difficult to offer games in two versions (one locked, usable without media and requiring an Internet connection, one tied to the BD, resalable and not requiring the Internet)? Should not be that hard. I mean, they can make 15 versions of one OS, or?
Because that's the name of the first one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoffdino
Err... isn't Zynga in a trouble of their own? Its stock has drop from $10 at IPO to $3 a couple days back. Why leave a behemoth with at least some life left for a startup with almost no life left?
Zynga is the most unethical developer I've ever seen... so his appointment is a good thing right?
It was a sad day when they acquired Drop7 and forced me to delete it from my phone.
Things are festering at Microsoft. THIS is the month they "reorganize" and play musical chairs in the lunchroom.
Only one job is not in danger... Monkey Boy's. "Let the games begin!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by rednival
Most people will see an Xbox One and a PS4 this holiday season for the first time and pick one or the other based on what is, not what might have been.
It will be interesting to see what happens, but I think the only thing nearly assured is that Microsoft will have an uphill battle going into 2014. I do believe Sony will have an early lead at the end of 2013, but I don't expect it will be the huge lead many people expect. (And I reserve the right to be wrong)
I think 2014 will be tough for Xbox but after that I think things will improve. Once the prices start to come down a bit the 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.
Microsoft also look like they have a strategy for Apps by including some form of Windows in the console. I doubt it will be there for launch, devs are going to want people to own the consoles and actually have one to test on before investing to much time in development.
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.
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.