Yeah, there's been too much positivity around Xbox the last few weeks. Let's have a thread where we can change that, lol.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Jesus, this old Major Nelson interview is all you need to see how far MS has come this generation
- Thread starter MrMatt555
- Start date
Still Xbox One is a far cry from original xbox and first half of 360 lifespan for me. My One is collecting dust after finishing Gears. I pretty much forgot about it. I should play Sunset Overdrive though, I only played it for 2 hours. And maybe Forza Horizon 3 but I pretty much lost interest in racing games :(
I consider myself an Xbox fan, but even I sold my Xbox One a year ago. Haven't missed a single game. Dunno... Kinda sad that they got the console on track but the software is nonexistent.
User was warned for console warrior behavior.
All those cool features but no good games to buy is a shame
He just tells people about xbox stuff.
The only way he could "scream arrogant MS" to you is if you have some innate aversion to hearing about Xbox stuff.
They changed a lot of things around for the Xbox brand and point in the right direction this gen. However, I still don't want an Xbox console again. They lost me after all the mess ups they made and frankly I just don't trust them anymore.
I see the Xbox now and it's certainly in a better position when it launched. But now what? There's still many reasons I don't want one such as lack of any good exclusives that appeal to me. I don't want to play another Halo or Gears or Forza. Sea of Thieves isn't a game I'm excited for in the slightest. They've released a powerful new refresh yet where are the games and exclusives (that aren't Halo or Gears or Forza)? This just baffles me.
I don't want a console that mostly has multiplayer forcused exclusives on it. I don't want a console with next to no Japanese support either. The brand has never really appealed to me. I only really enjoyed playing on it around 2005-2008 but it got worse after that for me personally. It wasn't just the XBO that did this.
I see the Xbox now and it's certainly in a better position when it launched. But now what? There's still many reasons I don't want one such as lack of any good exclusives that appeal to me. I don't want to play another Halo or Gears or Forza. Sea of Thieves isn't a game I'm excited for in the slightest. They've released a powerful new refresh yet where are the games and exclusives (that aren't Halo or Gears or Forza)? This just baffles me.
I don't want a console that mostly has multiplayer forcused exclusives on it. I don't want a console with next to no Japanese support either. The brand has never really appealed to me. I only really enjoyed playing on it around 2005-2008 but it got worse after that for me personally. It wasn't just the XBO that did this.
I dont think they really changed on the inside. On the pr side? Of course but when u have Nelson talking more about old games, patches and different colored pads instead of a healthy plan for their first party development, no still is ms
What did Spencer turn around exactly? There are fewer exclusives, everything is now GaaS lootboxes, the USP of Kinect is gone. Microsoft turned it around by introducing a new console after three years? Yay?
In hindsight re-watching that old interview gives me odd feelings.
On one hand the MESS that MS did at the presentation and afterwise is under everybody's eyes. The silly way how they handled the aftermath of that, preposterous, and it's the fruit of MS having no long-term plans and changing directions (and directors) so often.
And also fucking with their user base as well, because we all remember how they handled the end of Xbox's support and then repeated history with Xbox360.
We all know how they tried to attract users offering thing X or Y, and then decided to point in another direction afterwars, leaving those users very confused.
Is that how you build a faithful and loyal user base? I don't think so.
But that's beyond the point, let's go back to the start.
I'm getting strange feelings because on one hand it reminds me of what I wrote above, ON THE OTHER HAND we can clearly see Major Nelson's words with very different eyes NOWADAYS.
I can say MS guessed the direction the market would've moved to right.
DRM and a lot of other things would've been perceived way differently if Xbox One was a console introduced to the public today.
Still, I think it's lack of long-term plans and lack of true will to aim for a specific target and do their best to please it that ultimately decided MS's fate this generation.
Seeing how bad they started I'm honestly surprised they managed to do this much on this generation. In terms of numbers I would've expected a far worse disaster than what really came out of it.
I'm still bitter that the Blake's 7 reboot that was mooted to be an Xbox live TV show never happened.
Still I'm over it now.
Quietly sobs.....
Still I'm over it now.
Quietly sobs.....
I think you have to make sure that your "core" userbase is happy from the first to the last day of your console generation.
Sony and Nintendo get this. MS sadly fumbled araound.
I really don't get whats complicated about this.
1. Please your "core" group throughout the generation. Give them a reason to buy your next console in blind faith(because you've done a wonderful job with the exclusive games they care about).
2. Word of mouth and new games(some exclusive every year)in the first years of your new console helps growing your customer base.
3. At some point the mainstream will look which console to buy and will turn to their friends and other "trusted" sources to make this decision.
4. Now comes the point where the Fifas, CoDs, etc. are making your console big money and help your console growing even further.
5. Don't forget your "core" base. Keep them happy so that they'll be there for you and your new shiny console the next time around.
6. Repeat.
The Mainstream gives nothing about the games the "core" loves to death. So in a sense it's true that at some point in a console lifecicle "exclusive games" aren't as needed to make bank. But you don't get to this point without them and the "core" userbase will not support you and won't help you to get to the point where your new console doesn't need them (for a few years).
I don't understand why MS has such a problem grasping this. A new console has to start somewhere and it surely doesn't start with the mainstream.
Sony and Nintendo get this. MS sadly fumbled araound.
I really don't get whats complicated about this.
1. Please your "core" group throughout the generation. Give them a reason to buy your next console in blind faith(because you've done a wonderful job with the exclusive games they care about).
2. Word of mouth and new games(some exclusive every year)in the first years of your new console helps growing your customer base.
3. At some point the mainstream will look which console to buy and will turn to their friends and other "trusted" sources to make this decision.
4. Now comes the point where the Fifas, CoDs, etc. are making your console big money and help your console growing even further.
5. Don't forget your "core" base. Keep them happy so that they'll be there for you and your new shiny console the next time around.
6. Repeat.
The Mainstream gives nothing about the games the "core" loves to death. So in a sense it's true that at some point in a console lifecicle "exclusive games" aren't as needed to make bank. But you don't get to this point without them and the "core" userbase will not support you and won't help you to get to the point where your new console doesn't need them (for a few years).
I don't understand why MS has such a problem grasping this. A new console has to start somewhere and it surely doesn't start with the mainstream.
It's painful to watch/read the old comments from Aaron Greenberg and Major Nelson and contrast that with their new direction. The contradictions they make, daily are hilarious. I have more faith in Phil Spencer and Shannon L.
They are marketing people. What on earth do you want them to do? Their job is to promote the brand, with whatever messaging they are given.
Some people really think games exist in a different world to everything else. The marketing people at Pepsi might drink Coca Cola at home, but they sure as hell don't say that as part of their job.
Seriously though, while Spencer has definitely turned the ship around I don't think Major Nelson is arrogant. He's put himself in this community role for so many years now, and clearly enjoys that community outreach (for the most part =P) It has been good to see the Xbox brand turning around so strongly over the past few years, though I think they still have a long way to go and a lot to prove when it comes to first party support.
Thats simply him being professional and not wasting time pointing out blame. The fact is he had to answer to Don Mattrick and Don Mattrick had other plans for the Xbox brand!
Quoted for absolute truth! The Xbox division had alot of rebuilding to do after Mattrick left it in a state of chaos and confusion. Phil Spencer did alot of work to rebuild it and set it back on the right track! new 1st Party IPs/studios are the final piece of the puzzle now
Last edited:
I am squarely in the target demo for MS, I want a multimedia box, I prefer singleplayer games and experiences.
I have a family who all use that multimedia box and I want to be able to control what they play, how long and when.
I think that the advances they have made have been entirely for the better, but from the day they released the xbox I knew what they were doing. I think that they are getting better at messaging, but it feels like they are building the platform before going out and attacking the market.
I think they had to fundamentally get the base platform and services right, work with the community , understand what people want from the base service and be less bombastic. Which they have done.
Additionally when people say "I have a PC, I don't need an Xbox", cool, but you are still an MS customer. I think they have done a great job of getting the platform and services sorted, with BC, EA Access etc it is a great platform and has great services.
I have a family who all use that multimedia box and I want to be able to control what they play, how long and when.
I think that the advances they have made have been entirely for the better, but from the day they released the xbox I knew what they were doing. I think that they are getting better at messaging, but it feels like they are building the platform before going out and attacking the market.
I think they had to fundamentally get the base platform and services right, work with the community , understand what people want from the base service and be less bombastic. Which they have done.
Additionally when people say "I have a PC, I don't need an Xbox", cool, but you are still an MS customer. I think they have done a great job of getting the platform and services sorted, with BC, EA Access etc it is a great platform and has great services.
Oh come on now. Spencer himself admits that he shares some of the responsibility for the troubled XB1 launch, but you apparently know better?
You can believe otherwise if you wish, but I don't think Mattrick himself is 100% to blame and even Spencer admits to that.
He can't say anything else. If he said "hey, nothing to do with me" it would cause a storm of headlines of "Spencer blames Mattrick" and "Spencer dodges blame".
Its clear that people within Xbox were uncomfortable with the direction of the XB1, but that is what happens. People get uncomfortable but are convinced otherwise. They exist in a bubble where there is genuine excitement and get swept up in it. Doesn't mean if theyw ere making the initial decisions they would have made the same ones.
Something i find quite interesting about the dreaded "online only" thing that was Microsoft's original intention is that in this one aspect they actually had the right idea about where the gaming industry was heading. Of course, they fucked it up in that Mattrick way (24 hours is way too strict as check-in policies go) but let's have a look at the state of where we are now:
We have gaming publishers that without fail release day 1 patches that fix huge amounts of bugs. I feel bad for any offline player who has to deal with games like Assassins Creed Unity in their unpatched state. The vast majority of games have extensive DLC plans, some of which release in an extremely basic barebones state without said DLC (hello Splatoon). Some of the most popular games are online only. Look at Overwatch/PUBG/LoL.
If we're really honest with ourselves then we should admit that the dreaded online only gaming future has been here for a while, and we are all fine with it. Microsoft's crime is that they jumped the gun a bit. Obviously this is not the only problem with the original vision for XB1 (TV TV TV, Kinect, Power of Cloud, the trading games in debacle etc etc) but the thing they were arguably most maligned for turned out to be right on the money. Perhaps the ideas they had around digital game sharing were worth exploring before they were swiftly abandoned
We have gaming publishers that without fail release day 1 patches that fix huge amounts of bugs. I feel bad for any offline player who has to deal with games like Assassins Creed Unity in their unpatched state. The vast majority of games have extensive DLC plans, some of which release in an extremely basic barebones state without said DLC (hello Splatoon). Some of the most popular games are online only. Look at Overwatch/PUBG/LoL.
If we're really honest with ourselves then we should admit that the dreaded online only gaming future has been here for a while, and we are all fine with it. Microsoft's crime is that they jumped the gun a bit. Obviously this is not the only problem with the original vision for XB1 (TV TV TV, Kinect, Power of Cloud, the trading games in debacle etc etc) but the thing they were arguably most maligned for turned out to be right on the money. Perhaps the ideas they had around digital game sharing were worth exploring before they were swiftly abandoned
Sure, but it also doesn't prove that he is blame free either. I guess I'm assuming he was involved (even somewhat) in the decision making behind the scenes, and you're assuming he wasn't.
On that note, I remember recently the rage over (Crackdown 3 I think it was?) being delayed and so many people on the net were calling for Shannon Loftis to resign as a result. I saw hardly anyone putting any blame towards Spencer. It's like this guy knows how to say what his audience wants to hear and as a result is now seen as some sort of faultless saviour by the fans.
I really don't get this. If Xbox One had no third party support, sure. But it does, and with X it now has the superior version of those titles. So unless you have some kind of strange boycott in place against all third party games, this isn't the case at all. Yes, Microsoft needs to invest massively in their first party lineup, but it's simply not true to say the Xbox One doesn't have any games.
So here's the thing: they were working on that, but it was tied in with the 'install games from disc without needing the disc' feature and a bunch of other stuff. These platforms need DRM, or you run into cases of people installing the software, passing it to a friend, and that getting passed on. People can duplicate and cheat the system, and it's reasonable to want to avoid that. So, in games, you either have account-based DRM (like Steam), or disc-based DRM (like consoles). Microsoft wanted to go the Steam route, but most gamers weren't ready for that kind of thing, being used to doing things like game trades, so they protested a shitload and called it anti-consumer. It wasn't so much anti-consumer as swapping out one set of benefits (from disc-based DRM) with another set of benefits (account-based DRM).
It was happening. They were working on it. Backwards compatibility was another feature they were originally going to have, weren't able to do, finally figured out how to do, and brought back. You can game share right now, actually, but it's pretty limited. It works better than Steam, but only barely. Steam lets you do up to 5 accounts and you can't play games simultaneously, and it forgets your account info constantly. Microsoft only lets you do 1 account, but you can have two people playing the same game on two xboxes simultaneously, which means you can co-op, which is pretty cool.
Basically: Microsoft had cool ideas, and they were actually working on 'em, but the realities of disc-based DRM vs account-based DRM hit 'em hard and they weren't able to deliver what they wanted to. The console wasn't ready to go, and Sony's less-innovative, super-boring PS4 (it's just like every other console before it!) took the wind out of its sales (get it?) in a big way.
Well he was head of first party, not sure how much say he had in the design of the console. Also within organisations you don't always have the influence you expect. Depends upon circumstances. Seem like Phil has Nadella's ear right now for example.
As for the rest, anyone who wants someone to resign because they announce a game delay is ridiculous. Let's face it though, Phil isn't involved in day to day running of studios. He greenlights major decisions but that is as far as it goes.
They really just needed to let this organically happen. As we have seen, it already is. Just let people see the value in digital ownership.
One thing that would have helped a lot is more clear ability for people to rent a game and install it in the case of bandwidth caps, but then purchase it online for use without the disk. (I don't know if you can do this on Xbox. I'm pretty sure you can't on PS4).
As it stands they just wanted digital games with physical delivery which is...mostly pointless other than bandwidth caps being an issue. Letting it happen organically has already been far, far better received. Removing the option for used games was not the solution.
Don't punish your user for doing something they want to do. Entice them with features (no disk, game sharing, etc.) for something you want them to do. Positive reinforcement.
Game sharing didn't mean used physical games needed to go, and that's why people were mad. Give us a reason to want your solution, not remove our ability to go back if we think it isn't worth it. Because honestly for some games it isn't imo.
Yep, to me Xbox is the far more attractive system. They have excellent hardware and online services, they've done incredible work on the BC side and is just a more open platform now. All they need is games now.
Major Nelson always came across as a nice bloke. I enjoyed listening to his podcast back in the day.
Sony sought input from their WW studios when designing the PS4. I don't think it a stretch to speculate Spencer would have got to have his say too when the XB1 was in R&D stages.
Edit: You'll no doubt reply that he didn't. I'm assuming one thing, you're assuming another. I guess I'll leave it there.
here is a video of MS saying graphics and power dont matter and that the XO had a smart design..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLjQXYsyZ4s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLjQXYsyZ4s
It's still weird seeing the same damn console set up and displayed in the video, yet it would have been very different to what we got.
To be fair the only positive I saw this generation coming from Microsoft has been their backward compatibility policy on Xbox One (especially the OG Xbox emulation) and their Pro controller.
Their Windows Store for games should have never existed in the first place, they cancelled a lot of 1st parties, their output has been a lot lower than during 360 era and they've been far less agressive on the market.
Their Windows Store for games should have never existed in the first place, they cancelled a lot of 1st parties, their output has been a lot lower than during 360 era and they've been far less agressive on the market.
This is what has me interested in getting one. I have a 50+ OG Xbox games, a few of which I'd like to play again haha
Microsoft would have been in a way better position if they did the following.
Release the Xbox One without Kinect for the sake price as PS4 on launch. And not get into the DRM shenanigans which got them bad press.
Let Bungie create whatever they want. They could have had Destiny as a exclusive game which would have been huge for them.
Let Lionhead make a proper game. Either a proper Fable 4 or a new IP that has the scale of a open world WRPG.
Let Black Tusk create a new IP as they intended to do before they took over Gears.
Continue to invest in first party studios.
I still think Xbox One would be in the lead as PlayStation is just a much more popular brand world wide than Xbox regardless as the PS3 overtook 360. But atleast they wouldn't have been so far behind PS4.
Meanwhile Sony they continue to invest in new IP. Horizon is a massive new IP with GotY nominees and the IP has a huge future ahead. Then we have Dreams, Beyond Human, Days Gone which are all upcoming games that are new IP. Then we have big exclusives like Spiderman also to look forward to and God of War while a old IP it's had a big enough break and they have changed things up.
Release the Xbox One without Kinect for the sake price as PS4 on launch. And not get into the DRM shenanigans which got them bad press.
Let Bungie create whatever they want. They could have had Destiny as a exclusive game which would have been huge for them.
Let Lionhead make a proper game. Either a proper Fable 4 or a new IP that has the scale of a open world WRPG.
Let Black Tusk create a new IP as they intended to do before they took over Gears.
Continue to invest in first party studios.
I still think Xbox One would be in the lead as PlayStation is just a much more popular brand world wide than Xbox regardless as the PS3 overtook 360. But atleast they wouldn't have been so far behind PS4.
Meanwhile Sony they continue to invest in new IP. Horizon is a massive new IP with GotY nominees and the IP has a huge future ahead. Then we have Dreams, Beyond Human, Days Gone which are all upcoming games that are new IP. Then we have big exclusives like Spiderman also to look forward to and God of War while a old IP it's had a big enough break and they have changed things up.
Native 1080p improvement framerate on OG titles at no charge. Some 1st parties should take lessons.
Joe was great then. :D
"YOU'VE DONE FUCKED IT UP, AND YOU DID NOTHING TO UN-FUCK IT!"
I feel sorry for those early Xbox One owners who fell for the Kinect hype and were all excited for the Kinect future. Microsoft dropped that shit in a instance leaving those owners with a voice control device for menu operations and Kinect Sports.
To be fair I was burnt by Sony with the promise of Vita having a future and remember reading a old interview where they say consistent games output is important only for Sony to drop Vita as soon as they realised it's a flop.
This made me more caution on jumping into buying hardware unless I'm certain the hardware has a bright future. I've avoided buying a Wii U and buying a PlayStation VR and I'm glad I did.
To be fair I was burnt by Sony with the promise of Vita having a future and remember reading a old interview where they say consistent games output is important only for Sony to drop Vita as soon as they realised it's a flop.
This made me more caution on jumping into buying hardware unless I'm certain the hardware has a bright future. I've avoided buying a Wii U and buying a PlayStation VR and I'm glad I did.
And Sony said rumble was a last-gen feature at PS3 launch. Execs have to do what they have to do.
He wouldn't still be doing it if he didn't enjoy it
Seriously though, while Spencer has definitely turned the ship around I don't think Major Nelson is arrogant. He's put himself in this community role for so many years now, and clearly enjoys that community outreach (for the most part =P) It has been good to see the Xbox brand turning around so strongly over the past few years, though I think they still have a long way to go and a lot to prove when it comes to first party support.
Indeed. What about the tweets and re-tweets from Sony execs saying 1080p was the be all and end all. Yoshida re-tweeted something about 1080p improving performance in MP games.....
Companies play on what their strengths are at the time.
He may have had a say and said "make it the most powerful box you can" and was ignored. I'm not saying he did or didn't. Just that its a bit of a stretch to say he was responsible in some way. He may have been. But best to judge him on his actions since he actually definitively was responsible for the design of the console.
Was that the one where Joe apolagized to Major Nelson because Angry Joe apparently claimed he didn't believe Major was a gamer at all etc?
The PS4 when launched was received well, but in reality it was a fairly constrained budget machine. Nothing like the power the 360 had for it's time, and not as exotic and expensive as the PS3 was for it's time. They seemed determined to be conservative, use commodity parts, and not lose money on hardware right from the start. Also the launch lineup, and even first year or so of games was weak.
It just looked good because the Xbox One was so bad in comparison. More expensive, less powerful, big ugly box and even then has separate power brick when the PS4 did not, Kinect bundling, focus on TV and TV guides for some reason, the whole DRM quagmire. Sony probably couldn't believe their luck.
Note, on the whole DRM quagmire, I think MS were 100% right on trying to kill disc-as-DRM, it's outdated crap that's bad for the industry on so many levels. But their bad marketing, ie packaging the DRM proposal with the rest of the bad news, ultimately killed off any thought of it happening for a while.
It just looked good because the Xbox One was so bad in comparison. More expensive, less powerful, big ugly box and even then has separate power brick when the PS4 did not, Kinect bundling, focus on TV and TV guides for some reason, the whole DRM quagmire. Sony probably couldn't believe their luck.
Note, on the whole DRM quagmire, I think MS were 100% right on trying to kill disc-as-DRM, it's outdated crap that's bad for the industry on so many levels. But their bad marketing, ie packaging the DRM proposal with the rest of the bad news, ultimately killed off any thought of it happening for a while.
Last edited: