-
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.
Microsoft has made a number of pro consumer moves since the start of the generation
- Thread starter Montresor
- Start date
The most pro consumer move they should make is dropping Gold for online. I still hate MS for coming up with that shit - even fucking Nintendo is starting to do it now.
i hate to be a cynical bastard but Sony did the same during the middle of the PS360 gen what with their pro-cross play stance, PS Plus Instant Games collection program, and heck..they managed to even get Lord Gaben on their E3 stage and have the PS3 version of Valve games connected with Steam...
Like many have stated, competition is great. Those that want a unified one system/console only generation are bonkers. If there's only one system/console, we will all be back to the NES 8bit days (read up on how dictatorial Nintendo used to be when they were the only dog in town...with their high license cost and the whatnot).
Like many have stated, competition is great. Those that want a unified one system/console only generation are bonkers. If there's only one system/console, we will all be back to the NES 8bit days (read up on how dictatorial Nintendo used to be when they were the only dog in town...with their high license cost and the whatnot).
I'd be full on for these two!
They really do need to drop the requirement for gold on F2P games, and getting the ultimate editions of their games on GP would be epic.
"-Microsoft shows they won't hold back a BC title just because it has a remaster, i.e. Halo games are BC even though MCC exists, Gears 1 is BC even though the Gears Ultimate remaster exists, etc..."
This is mostly true. You can't play the original Grand Theft Auto games (or at least San Andreas). You only get the Android/iOS version of the game unless they fixed that?
This is mostly true. You can't play the original Grand Theft Auto games (or at least San Andreas). You only get the Android/iOS version of the game unless they fixed that?
BC is up to the publisher of the game. Take-Two has not made the games available in the BC program so they're not.
I'm glad there was such an outrcry when MS tried to roll out their ridiculous anti-consumer plan for the XB1. I like their games-first, backward compatibility-friendly direction now and I consider the XB1 my primary console.
That's not what he said though...
But allowing for easy battery replacement that doesn't void a warranty is pretty good for consumers.
Microsoft's work with BC really can't be commended enough. They're setting a gold standard and one that I hope the industry at large pushes towards.
I understand why Sony and Nintendo can't exactly match them due to various legacy circumstances regardling emulation, interface, media, etc, but both could be doing so much more than they currently are.
I understand why Sony and Nintendo can't exactly match them due to various legacy circumstances regardling emulation, interface, media, etc, but both could be doing so much more than they currently are.
I wonder why some people are apparently uncapable of liking Playstation and at the same time saying "Yes, it's true, Xbox is being pro-consumer"
It's fine people, Sony won't stop being your friend.
I don't even own an Xbox but yes, what they are doing is amazing. I kinda want an One just for 360 BC tbh.
It's fine people, Sony won't stop being your friend.
I don't even own an Xbox but yes, what they are doing is amazing. I kinda want an One just for 360 BC tbh.
LOL chill don't be offended that ppl don't like Xbox as much as you , but I agree tho they did some good still tho, gotta wait to next Gen to see if they actually do more new ups that I'd personally be interested in but as of now they are doing good
But going forward they could. If the PS5 moves away from x86 and they don't allow BC with PS4 while the next Xbox will have four generations of games playable on day 1 it'll be a mistake. Likewise Nintendo is in a good position with the Switch since Nvidia is always improving on that line of hardware.
Why are you projecting? His posts dont insinuate he is offended at all.
This part right here
Very condescending remark
again tho I agree they really stepped up since that shit show reveal honestly I probably would have got an Xbox one for scale bound and with bc I probably could have gotten a chance to play blue dragon only game Xbox had that I always wanted to play cryingjordan.gif
Edit I lied also I wanted crackdown 1 too
What am I projecting exactly?
In the case of PS3 BC I completely understand why it's borderline impossible atm. PS2 and PS1 I find their approach distasteful. I have some old PS2 games sitting in my closet i'd love to revisit, but Sony charges for classics on the PSN store rather than allowing me to play the game I already own. I really hope they move towards Xbox style BC next gen.
I literally do not understand how that means I'm offended, but whatever floats your boat lol. As I said, I don't even own an Xbox One.
Going forward both need to. There's more to BC than just retaining ISA and chip vendors though, it's still a lot of work and there's no easy fix outside directly including legacy hardware.
My issue is more backwards looking though. Like for example if Sony offered PS/PS2 Classics BC and PSP/VitaTV digital BC, and Nintendo offered Wii/3DS/Wii U VC BC, then a lot of people would look more favorably on this issue. The hard reset, even for viable BC platforms, doesn't inspire confidence imo.
PS5 isn't moving away from x86. There's literally no reason to not have BC in PS5. If it doesn't, it would be down to reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with hardware.
One way I could see them not including BC is if they wanted to attract even more consumers to the PS4 while compensating for it by providing more new exclusives for the PS5. It would be a shitty thing to do, but it could potentially increase the overall number of sales for both consoles. Besides, they're likely to do something like this going by what they've been doing this gen.
Sony views things from the typical console hardware paradigm of "BC stops sales of all currently retail-available previous-gen SKUs so no BC means we clear out remaining stock naturally. I mean, Sony had PS3 BC at launch, but then pulled it because, according to the asshats at Sony, removing it might push people to buy PS3 software instead of PS2 software, so people will be buying PS3 software for a PS3 and PS2 software for a PS2. Also, they wanted to be able to sell people things they already owned.
Microsoft views things from the typical PC upgrade paradigm, and they're trying to fully embrace that in their console business going forward in a way they haven't managed to in previous generations. They would like people to be able to play the old stuff on new hardware as that constitutes a larger ecosystem lock-in, so they might not care as much if they have to take a bath on currently-shipped hardware that will see sales plummet due to a newer available SKU.
And Nintendo? They, uh...still get a lot of mileage out of the office fax machine.
X86 isn't a magic bullet. There will be hardware issues that need solving moving from Jaguar to Ryzen, plus fixing PS4's security loopholes if they offer BC. Unless Sony literally include the PS4 SoC in PS5 there will be hardware roadblocks to BC, just not as insurmountable as moving from PS3 to PS4 was.
This is true.
It's far more likely to help provide BC but it's not just so simple as running the exact same software onto the new system and it will still cost something to create that.
IMO the cost I would guess is well worth it, and I do want the feature, so I sincerely hope Cerny chooses to do so.
While lack of BC hasn't hurt in the past, I do believe going from this gen to next whoever doesn't have BC is going to get blasted hardcore. People are too invested into their digital ecosystem to be asked to start at square one again. We already know Xbox will have it so if Playstation does not it's going to be a huge deal.
Very much agree. I think it can be used as a launchpad especially to start next gen and that will definitely affect the makeup of the rest of the gen having a lead early
Who was in charge of MS in 2010-2013 when the final XB1 plans would have been getting locked down? Who has been in charge since 2014? The Microsoft you see now is a completely different beast to back then. There has been almost a complete paradigm shift within the company towards embracing the wants/needs of he consumer across the board as their way of getting people to use their products. This is evident across almost every product, from office to windows to Xbox.
This is just straight up wrong, no other way of putting it. BC was being made long before their first party titles started being outshone, it was going to be a launch feature. This is 100% proven by the fact that the hardware has special tech in it for the BC. Also calling it a "relatively simple first party emulator" is one of the biggest downplays I've ever seen on a gaming forum. Most people thought it was impossible to have 360 emulation on the XB1.
Also there has been a promise from their highest level that BC is here to stay going forward.
"Charging gamers an incredible amount for online play".... I'm sorry but in no world is USD$60 a year an incredible amount. It's actually an incredibly low amount. How many worldwide server farms and network infrastructures do you own and maintain? You know the costs? Their servers use billions of dollars worth of electricity every year. $60 a year wouldn't even cover the costs of a single virtual server for a year, let alone a physical one that runs a number of virtual ones.
That has nothing to do with Microsoft "holding back" anything. MS make games BC when a publisher asks/let's them. It's not an android version, it's a 360 port of the android version, and not one that's in MS's control. 1000000% wrong here.
If I paid $60 per person per year for my Minecraft server I'd be getting ripped off. $5 a month gets you a 2GB Ram Minecraft server these days which is more than enough for 30+ people logged in at any one time, that's 60 dollars a year to cater to 30 people logged in, 24/7. And that's for me to do it, to say that Microsoft who run one of the largest server businesses on the planet in Azure don't have economies of scale that utterly minimise those costs is ludicrous. You only have to look at the rates AWS charges to get an idea of how cheap hosting cloud computing is becoming.
Servers do not cost that much money, players have been hosting their own servers for video games since the 1990s and whilst a Quake 3 server and such does cost a moderate amount a year, $60 per person would be an absurd amount, especially when you have a small percentage of the overall Xbox Live subscribers playing at any one time.
Because most people are not software engineers and wouldn't have a clue about basic software development.
It was always perfectly possible to do emulation of the XB360, and Microsoft have the advantage of possessing the entire source code and documentation for the Xbox 360 and far more technical expertise than the fans behind Dolphin, who reverse engineered an emulator for console also using the PowerPC architecture without documentation.
The issue was always willingness, never ability.
Being doable doesn't mean that it's easy.
It's a rather common joke we use in my field (you know, software engineering) "everything is possible, it's just a matter of effort".
360 games running on an X1 CPU is pure fucking magic (which actually involves some custom dedicated parts, because yeah it's far from easy to run code designed for Xenon on a Jaguar with comparable performance).
But you're not paying $60 to play one game for a year, you're paying $60 for servers for potentially dozens of different games, all with 24/7 uptime, with unlimited cloud storage space for saves and clips, for R&D of new features, for far more than you're giving them credit for. One VM that I run in azure costs more than $60 per month. Hell one app service that I run in azure costs more than that per month.
Like I said, in no world is $60 a year expensive for what you get. Most people would spend that on coffees or softdrink in probably any given 2 week period.
And no, getting a 360 emulator running wasn't just "willingness". That is so incredibly disrespectful to the people that made it and continue to refine and improve it. It's such an incredible engineering feat that it was literally thought to be impossible by most people that even do know what they're doing.
Last edited:
For me the best pro consummer move a gaming company can do is providing me games. At the end of the day I think I don't care that much about what MS is doing service wise.
But more power to them if people choose their brand for the services they provide.
But more power to them if people choose their brand for the services they provide.
And they've won customers back doing so.
I had no intention of adding an Xbox to my collection of PS4, PC and Switch but with great X support and the Backwards Compatible library they sold me and I'm loving the EA and Gamepass subscriptions.
All initial missteps aside, they've done about as well as one could to get back on track.
I had no intention of adding an Xbox to my collection of PS4, PC and Switch but with great X support and the Backwards Compatible library they sold me and I'm loving the EA and Gamepass subscriptions.
All initial missteps aside, they've done about as well as one could to get back on track.
Yes, they have...But they also had the worst anti-consumer strategy at the beginning of the generation. So I see it more as them making up for what they did than anything.
But yes. They have done a lot of good things since then.
But yes. They have done a lot of good things since then.
For sure. If we start getting some strong, new first-party series, I'll probably jump back in. Additional backwards compatibility for some specific games I'm interested in could bring me back as well; notably MGS2 and MGS3 HD. The list is extensive and impressive, and the more I look, the closer I am to returning to Xbox.
Spencer has surely the talent to make believe his customers audience that they are sharholders.
Last edited:
People shouldn't have to find reasons.
All im waiting on are games that I like the look of They have one so far with So but when they add more I'll probably just get them on pc anyway just so I don't have to unhook my dreamcast.
I mean yes that's fair, but my original point was that this was merely a rational decision by Microsoft that has a far lower overall cost than buying an entire extra studio to develop first party games. Although I didn't know about the whole XMA audio format issue or the history of backward compatibility as a launch feature, there's been a number of PowerPC emulators operate over the years and it seemed like a fairly achievable project overall before I read about that little part where they were seriously bottle-necked by software decoding codecs. And in the end they implemented it with a team of ~20 people, far fewer than a AAA game.
And how much did your app service cost to run with the same specs you have now in Azure 3-5 years ago? I guarantee the price has come down in that period.
That's the whole thing about Xbox Live, the cost of hosting on servers has decreased massively since its launch 15+ years ago, and yet they actually hiked the price for it in 2010, not passing the cost savings onto the consumers.
So much of the profit margin for the entire Xbox division is built into that bloody $60 a year service it's ridiculous, the margins are insane. It absolutely costs Microsoft far less to provide Xbox Live per customer per year than 60 dollars, yes there are a lot of servers to maintain but across the entire cloud computing business model it averages out.
If you actually drill down it's one of the principle profit drivers of the entire gaming division, which is why Microsoft happily trumpets the fact it has 59 million Xbox live Gold subscribers compared to Playstation's 34 million, with the caveat that on Playstation you can play Fortnite multiplayer without PS+, unlike on Xbox, lowering the overall uptake. That's the entire point of console gaming, lower the headline cost with cheap consoles and then make money off the tariff on each $60 boxed game sale, the 30% margin on the digital storefront, and the river of gold that is Xbox Live.
The gross margin on the gaming divisions for both Sony and Microsoft are actually fairly large, there's a reason the gaming division is seen as the holy grail for Sony when so many of its segments are underperforming.
That's why I find these threads incredibly annoying. Phil Spencer getting on stage is good public relations for Microsoft, but at the end of the day it's still a for profit company.
Currently it's competing with Sony by offering a lot of low level helpful features, like cross play and backward compatibility for games instead of "best of" remasters at retail prices, that don't cost Microsoft very much compared to an Xbox Live price cut which would chomp into revenue and lower the total cost of ownership for their console by far.
It's not doing those things out of the kindness of its heart, it's doing these things to make money, not because it's suddenly a company filled with a lot of people who are nicer than Sony and is being more pro consumer. At the end of the day both companies are trying to make a buck and you can only choose between their closed ecosystems on their features, don't get blinded by PR.
My general view on MS is that on balance they've been rather negative to console gaming but AA batteries in controllers is a great move by them for the very reason you mention.
You literally have no idea how much it costs MS for 1 persons Xbox live services for a year. $60 is such a tiny, insignificant amount of money for an entire year that it's hard to see how it covers costs.
Also MS don't have or say they have 59 million Gold subscribers, just Xbox live subscribers.