Chavo Chastises: The Xbox Reputation

Xbox_One_logo.png
In the Year 2013, Microsoft announced a successor to the largely successful gaming system, Xbox 360. Their announcement consisted of a funnily named console, a focus on non-gaming related material, and some policy’s that rocked the sweaty, meaty heads of gamers across the world.

That conference has since become the infamy of the now nearly 2 year old console, the Xbox One. A console that faces the ridicule of being egregiously overshadowed by its competitor, the Playstation 4, and mocked by anyone else that has never had a hands on experience with it.

Today, I wanted to take a look at this reputation Xbox has garnered for itself. A simple look into the overall drama that Xbox seemed to generate for itself years ago, and apply it to the reasoning people seem to hold against it today.

Today, I want to talk about the mindset that we, as gamers, seem to keep and hold against companies for their mistakes, and our ability to let things overshadow our way of thinking, and our overall mindset towards Microsoft’s gaming platform.

So first, let's get started with where it all began.

icons_1.gif

In 2013, Microsoft unveiled the Xbox One, the, “All in One home media entertainment system.” The Xbox One was designed to make everything easily accessible in all forms of media, from Gaming, to music, to movies, and television.

However, we also received a lot of information that made our hair stand up on the back of our necks, caused our bowels to boil, and made our sweaty hands clench together as if to strangle Don Mattrick by the neck.

We were told we would have to check in to the internet once every 24 hours to ensure DRM policies. Ouch. We were told the Kinect, (or spybox as so many endearing internet users would have you believe,) would be bundled with every system, and we would never have a console without one. We were told used games would no longer function on our consoles. We had media and other forms of entertainment shoved in our faces as if we were supposed to be more excited over these aspects, than the gaming itself!

And of course, we all can agree. The thing looks like a VCR. Haha, how funny, that’s great, because all our other consoles looked like fine and dandy futuristic pieces of technological future boxes, but I digress.

18ofnvqs4us72jpg.jpg

These announcements didn’t sit well with gamers across the nation, and for good, justified reason too. Microsoft had their head in the wrong place, and attempted to change the industry in so many ways, people were shocked. They were appalled, they were frightened and refused to acknowledge the ways of gaming would ever be forced to transition to methods like these.

And you would think Microsoft would maybe learn from this initial unveiling, and attempt to do some damage control right? Well…

At E3 2013, the hole only dug itself into a meteor sized crater. Policies weren’t changing, media was focused on even more than gaming, and the price point was scary. $500 was the entry level for the Xbox One, versus the $400 price point of the Playstation 4. Not to mention, Sony managed to get in some good punches with the snarky, (yet ultimately hilarious,) videos of lending games to your friends, taking shots at the used games policies.

What we were left with after E3, was worldwide ridicule over the Xbox One’s horrific marketing, shoddy policies, and overall negative treatment to the dedicated gamers that had interest in it. Gifs sprouted everywhere of Mattrick screaming TV in people’s faces, or of Sony and Nintendo beating the console into the dirt. The Xbox One had officially become, the joke of the internet.

You really can’t blame people for it either. The policies sucked, there was little, to no defense for them, and people realized that. The thing people didn’t seem to realize however, is Xbox inevitably realized it too.
bOGdIFW.gif
After plenty of hazing, plenty of ridicule, Xbox announced that it was reversing most of its’ initial policies. The internet check in was abolished, the used game lockout system was dropped, and the company attempted severe damage control… a little while after the fact.

Was it enough to sway people? Well, the system did manage to sell 1 million units in the first 24 hours of release, much like its competition, the Playstation 4. The going was slow, the uptake was shaky, but people still bought the system.

Now we reach 2014. The system was doing okay… while simultaneously being obliterated by its competition. People still continued to mock the Xbox for all its mistakes, its price point, and the continued forced nature of the Kinect and focus on media. And it didn’t seem like Microsoft was going to budge on these propositions either. People continued to bash the system, and the joke legacy seemed like it would never fade.

At E3 2014, things started to change a little more. While the Call of Duty’s and Halo’s were still present, there was a 900% increase in focus on games. TV went unmentioned, there were no scary, ominous remarks on future policies, and they finally announced a kinectless system for the world.

xbox399.png

The reaction? Lackluster at best. While people didn’t have as much to joke about, they instead used the show as fodder to talk about how this is as it should have been in the first place. And once again… they have a point. And yet, there’s something people tend to neglect to pay attention to.

It’s the fact that Microsoft responded to feedback. They changed their heavy handed policies, in response to the passionate, dedicated ravings of the internet. No company has to do that. No company is forced to listen to the ravings of an angry keyboard pounder at any point in time. And you can argue that they did it to save their skin, and continue to make money, and obviously that point is going to be true. But it doesn’t change the fact that they responded, and have now opened themselves up to all forms of feedback in a much more accepting manner.

Let’s take a look at what happened after the initial reveal again, but on the company’s side some more. Microsoft created the Xbox Preview program to allow users to try out certain updates and give expansive feedback in order to garner user experience, and further tweak the system and service to better serve the users.

Xbox continued to listen and adjust to feedback in policy, user experience, and in their overall business outlook. Soon the Xbox One would see a price cut, multiple user centered updates, and a larger focus on games over the initial media claims.

While most of it when generally unnoticed by the average internet user, the Xbox continued to attempt to improve and re-establish ground as a competent gaming platform.

Fast forward to present day, and that remains true. Microsoft has promised more user enhanced experience through a new dashboard, connectivity between the Xbox live and Windows 10 platform, backwards compatibility, new IP, new games, user generated mods on consoles, introduction of Hololens, and a better Xbox experience.

2884825-2639320673-CHjkw.png

In less than a year and half, Microsoft has continued to listen and improve what was initially, a relatively poor concept for a gaming platform. The internet doesn’t forget, but the internet should also learn to open up to change and dedication. Microsoft did not have to conform to fan feedback, and could have stuck to their guns, angering and alienating gamers everywhere. Instead, they chose to step back, improve, and listen to what people want.

The platform may not have what you want to play, and there isn’t anything wrong with that. You have the choice to play on something that has the games you want to play. And you have the right to judge any book by its cover. But you can at least pay attention to the edits the author makes, and acknowledge where they attempt to improve. You may not like it based on fan favoritism, and that’s nothing to sneeze at either.

Obviously, people may dislike the console for a variety of other reasons. An excess of shooters, a bro-gaming stereotyped community, and a focus on sports games. It seems to almost alienate the fans of JRPG's, and other genre's in general. It isn't the platform for everyone, yet also takes flak for appealing to a target demographic.

Xbox’s reputation has been rocky ever since that infamous reveal of 2013. Is it right for people to continue to judge it based on mistakes it has remedied, and continues to try to remedy, today? And is it right to judge the entire platform based on the fact that it creates content for people that enjoy, said content?

Once again fellow gamers. That choice, is up to you.
 

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,828
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,859
Country
Poland
That's my point. If MS had received positive reception, Sony likely would've done the same thing. Considering the fact that Sony did the "me too" thing as far as putting online play behind a paywall(fuck you), it's not like they're any better than MS morally. The people running these companies are all greedy, amoral(at least when it comes to business) empty suits.
Multiplayer on consoles does not work via a direct TCP/IP connection between two consoles, all traffic comes and goes to a server and those servers don't run themselves - there's maintenance costs and utility bills involved. It's not about being greedy, it's about providing a certain service.
 

Hungry Friend

It was my destiny to be here; in the box.
Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2015
Messages
431
Trophies
0
XP
552
Country
United States
Then make PS+ good enough to convince a bunch of people to subscribe instead of putting online play behind a paywall. Do you have any evidence that Sony NEEDS to charge for online play, because I'm of the belief that they saw the massive bank MS made/is making with XBL and copied their model. It's a scam and people already have to pay for their internet connections. It may be cheap but it's still a slimy, underhanded business practice that imo can't be defended morally.
 

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,828
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,859
Country
Poland
Then make PS+ good enough to convince a bunch of people to subscribe instead of putting online play behind a paywall. Do you have any evidence that Sony NEEDS to charge for online play, because I'm of the belief that they saw the massive bank MS made/is making with XBL and copied their model. It's a scam and people already have to pay for their internet connections. It may be cheap but it's still a slimy, underhanded business practice that imo can't be defended morally.
Of course I see evidence - they're in a tight financial spot and can no longer afford charity like free access to servers. They're already making the service desirable with Instant Game Collection and store discounts, I was on Plus before the PS4 even came along so this "pay wall" meant nothing to me, and since Plus adoption rate is about 95%, I'm not the only one thinking that way. What's immoral about providing a service for money? Again, servers aren't free.
 

CathyRina

Digimon Tamer
Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2014
Messages
1,702
Trophies
1
Location
File City
XP
2,043
Country
Germany
Then make PS+ good enough to convince a bunch of people to subscribe instead of putting online play behind a paywall. Do you have any evidence that Sony NEEDS to charge for online play, because I'm of the belief that they saw the massive bank MS made/is making with XBL and copied their model. It's a scam and people already have to pay for their internet connections. It may be cheap but it's still a slimy, underhanded business practice that imo can't be defended morally.
I would agree if that was the only benefit you're getting from PS+.
However, PS+ is a service that gives you free rental games, access to quality features like Share Play and Cloud saving for example, additional discounts on Playstation Store and even getting free access to the Powers Series that you would otherwise had to pay for. There is also more stuff that you get for being a PS+ member like the PS+ edition of Driveclub, access to Battlefield Hardline Multiplayer Beta, extra items for Warframe and War Thunder and some extra Avatars and Backgrounds for PS3.
In the end PS+ (and Xbox Live gold for that matter) is a service. Same way as Pokemon Bank is a service that you have to pay 5€ a year for. Of course they're asking more money than reuired to run these servers but you know, that's how business works. You want to earn money and grow as a company to provide a even better service. And let me tell that Nintendo's servers so far could really use a little better budget.

I got PS+ even though I only have a PS3 and PS vita right now. I don't care about the online Multiplayer portion of this service.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WiiCube_2013

Steena

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
647
Trophies
0
XP
763
Country
Italy
Multiplayer on consoles does not work via a direct TCP/IP connection between two consoles, all traffic comes and goes to a server and those servers don't run themselves - there's maintenance costs and utility bills involved. It's not about being greedy, it's about providing a certain service.
That is news to me. I always assumed differently. Is that back and forth server traffic not just the consequence of the service's DRM itself? I can't see the point to a genre like fighting games being server-based ever, for example. I mean a PC can easily p2p connect to another, why wouldn't a console, if not for the manufactuer's own choice?
 

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,828
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,859
Country
Poland
That is news to me. I always assumed differently. Is that back and forth server traffic not just the consequence of the service's DRM itself? I can't see the point to a genre like fighting games being server-based ever, for example. I mean a PC can easily p2p connect to another, why wouldn't a console, if not for the manufactuer's own choice?
Leaderboards and match making, for starters. If there was no main server, how would you find other players to fight with? They're all in the same ecosystem which allows you to search by gamer tag or region, that's the point of the service.
 

Steena

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
647
Trophies
0
XP
763
Country
Italy
Leaderboards and match making, for starters. If there was no main server, how would you find other players to fight with? They're all in the same ecosystem which allows you to search by gamer tag or region, that's the point of the service.
If we're talking just about that, that is hardly worth 1% of the fee they ask, per-player, I'm certain. It's basically a database, and the cost is shared between millions of people too. They should just make the online fee variable depending on what games you play. Me paying the 4 dollars tax when I just play fighters is bullshit cause I have to absorb the costs of the guy playing some 32men dedicated-server shooters. It's pretty damn generalizing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Azel

Mystic Shadow

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2015
Messages
143
Trophies
0
XP
848
Country
United States
Honestly I don't care for the Xbox one. Harldy any exclusives and worst my jrpgs. And honestly if I wanna play a ps1-2-3 I'll bring out my full BC PS3. Also ps4 has better HW. When I play a game I want the best (I know PC is better) I give too shits less about online. Most of the time it ruins the game. But ps4 has more games running at 1080p than Xbox and for the age of 4k that's really pathetic for both systems . But honestly to each his own. I was a BIG 360 gamer all through highschool and 5 consoles redringing. After that E3 2013 I was like fuckk no so I got the ps4. When ms does a revision maybe ill think about it but for now I'll stick with jstars lol.
 

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,828
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,859
Country
Poland
If we're talking just about that, that is hardly worth 1% of the fee they ask, per-player, I'm certain. It's basically a database, and the cost is shared between millions of people too. They should just make the online fee variable depending on what games you play. Me paying the 4 dollars tax when I just play fighters is bullshit cause I have to absorb the costs of the guy playing some 32men dedicated-server shooters. It's pretty damn generalizing.
You don't pay for access to the servers for your games, you pay for access to *all* games and features of the system. $4 is the equivalent of buying a burger, aren't you being a bit overdramatic here?
 

Lestworth

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 16, 2013
Messages
129
Trophies
1
Age
38
XP
299
Country
United States
Yes

Listen when the PS3 was shown with that massive price point everyone and their mothers bashed the crap out of it. It did not recover from that until late game when they caught up to the xbox360, and ultimately passed them.

A typical human will hold a grudge against someone who they feel wronged them, and this is the case for both instances. I think Microsoft will recover much like the ps3 did, it will just take a long time to do so. So far they have done an excellent job in listening and giving its users what they want. They did a complete 180 in its policies but what scared people was that they even thought that those policies would appeal to anyone in the first place, and what would stop them from actually doing them in the future.

But at this time, much like the ps3, it is the joke console on the internet, even though i would argue the Wii U should hold that title.
 

Taleweaver

Storywriter
Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
8,690
Trophies
2
Age
43
Location
Belgium
XP
8,095
Country
Belgium
Okay, okay, I voted 'no'. The console went from the following...

-unneeded kinect-thing
-more expensive
-less powerful than PS4
-ridiculous name
-retarded used games policy
-games being somewhat of an afterthought

to the following:
-less powerful than PS4
-ridiculous name

So the shit it got earlier mostly doesn't apply anymore. That, and that it has some potential trumps (cross-connectivity with windows 10, backward compatibility). But I have to stress these are POTENTIAL aces up their sleeves. Saying that BC "isn't quite there yet" is the least you can say.

Still...thus far, I've not really come across a reason to get one over a PS4. Or to get either, for that matter (PC's don't get the games as fast or bug-free as they used to, but at least they'll GET them at one point).
 

Hungry Friend

It was my destiny to be here; in the box.
Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2015
Messages
431
Trophies
0
XP
552
Country
United States
If PS+ is so good, have the confidence as a company to let people play online for free; it's a step backwards from the PS3. If, hypothetically(haven't researched it) Sony NEEDS to put online play behind a paywall, then their business model sucks ass. I'd rather have slightly shittier online than have to pay an extra fee for online pay, even if it's a very small one. Face it; Sony saw the massive amount of cash MS was making with LIVE and copied their model. Really, it's the lack of games(so far, though E3 made some waves) that has prevented me from buying a PS4, and I almost never play online anyway so I don't plan on using PS+ if I buy a PS4.

edit: The XB1's main issue now is that it's less powerful than the PS4, and for myself personally it will get much less support from Japanese companies so I'm not interested. Morally speaking though I'd put Sony and MS on the same level, even though MS deserved the initial shitstorm.
 

CathyRina

Digimon Tamer
Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2014
Messages
1,702
Trophies
1
Location
File City
XP
2,043
Country
Germany
Face it; Sony saw the massive amount of cash MS was making with LIVE and copied their model.
The thing is, Xbox Live originally gave you just access to online multiplayer. Then Sony Made PS+ with their "Instant Game Collection" and that was not required for Online Multiplayer but gave you a bunch of games instead.
It was then that Microsoft decided to make "Games with Gold" So if they were copying Microsoft's service then why did they not copy it?
Sony doesn't need to put Multiplayer behind a "paywall" because their service sucks. They need to put it behind a "paywall" to get out of their poor financial situation. It's no secret, really.
I agree that this is a bad and lazy way of making the PS+ service "attractive" but at the same time I couldn't care less. Sony over the years went out of their way to make PS+ legitimately attractive.
If all people had so much issue with that as you, the PS4 wouldn't be the fastest growing Console in sales.

The XB1's main issue now is that it's less powerful than the PS4
Same can be told with the 360 and that didn't stop that console from being successful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chavosaur

Steena

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
647
Trophies
0
XP
763
Country
Italy
You don't pay for access to the servers for your games, you pay for access to *all* games and features of the system. $4 is the equivalent of buying a burger, aren't you being a bit overdramatic here?
I don't feel I'm overdramatic; the inherent problem at this point is that there is only a single payment plan, which incidentally happens to be massively in favor of the manufacturer in question and poor for the consumer. Would you like it if there was just a single payment plan for every ISP? Worst of it, if that one plan was all-including (including completely inane bullshit like "online game boost", "internet TV", and the likes, of course)?
 

mightymuffy

fatbaldpieeater
Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2002
Messages
1,983
Trophies
3
Age
48
Location
Land o't pies
XP
3,279
Country
United Kingdom
Great article chav! Owned all Xboxes here:

First 'un: Hated it! You can moan about the style of the One but at least it 'fits' under the living room TV: the first one was the biggest, most f;ugly pos going! Some good exclusives though, and multiplats were better!

360: What a machine! Best console since the PS1 in my opinion, and mostly better multiplats too!

One: Like you say, it's most definitely getting there! Bought it on launch and frankly it was a disaster - in fact I was that unimpressed it spent that launch Christmas in my youngests room! Also bought a PS4 a few months after launch, and that definitely got the thumbs up over XO.... HOWEVER, major leaps and strides made to the machine since launch, and whilst Sony's machine has the lion's share of better multiplats this time, it's since become my preferred console of the 2, such are the improvements it's made... Certainly it feels more like the PS3 of the 2 (with the PS4 currently feeling more like the 360), but after the very shaky start I'm loving the thing!
It's still fukk ugly though! :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: chavosaur

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,828
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,859
Country
Poland
I don't feel I'm overdramatic; the inherent problem at this point is that there is only a single payment plan, which incidentally happens to be massively in favor of the manufacturer in question and poor for the consumer. Would you like it if there was just a single payment plan for every ISP? Worst of it, if that one plan was all-including (including completely inane bullshit like "online game boost", "internet TV", and the likes, of course)?
So what you're saying is that if you go to an ISP, you order a plan to access Google and Youtube because that's the only two websites you use, right? Wrong - you get access to the entirety of the Internet, net neutrality and all. You're confusing duration (bandwidth limits) with scope of the service - the exact same limitations apply to PSN and XBL, since you only pay for access for a certain amount of time. The Internet isn't cable, you don't get to pick and nobody picks for you, thank God we haven't lost that war yet. You don't choose which websites you have access to - you get access to them all and visit the ones you want.
 

Hungry Friend

It was my destiny to be here; in the box.
Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2015
Messages
431
Trophies
0
XP
552
Country
United States
Sony's poor financial situation is not my problem and I'm not paying extra cash for online play because it's a scam. They need a better business model, period, and it IS an anti-consumer practice to put online MP behind a paywall. I'm conceding nothing.
 

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,828
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,859
Country
Poland
Sony's poor financial situation is not my problem and I'm not paying extra cash for online play because it's a scam. They need a better business model, period, and it IS an anti-consumer practice to put online MP behind a paywall. I'm conceding nothing.
You don't have to pay for Plus, just don't. Nobody forces you to if you think the service isn't worth it.
 

Hungry Friend

It was my destiny to be here; in the box.
Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2015
Messages
431
Trophies
0
XP
552
Country
United States
I stated earlier that if I do get a PS4, I don't plan on paying for Plus, but it's still a lame thing to do to put online play behind a paywall. It's not my fault Sony has themselves in a financial bind and there is no way to morally defend charging for online play imo. It's not like they're fucking murdering people or something but it's still a sleazy practice.
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    SylverReZ @ SylverReZ: @E1ite007, I just found this randomly.