• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Microsoft Studios' creative director has some choice words about always-online

kaching

"GAF's biggest wanker"
Right there with ya.

To go on a tangent: Part of the reason I don't want co-op in Elder Scrolls games is that when I'm playing solo I can go at my own pace, which sometimes is extremely slow and purposeful, as befits my stealthy thief. I can stop to read through some of the books I come across, ponder my map, or spend 20 minutes brewing potions, fiddling with my equipment or haggling with various merchants. When you add co-op you'd only end up ditching so many of my favorite gaming moments, and making everything a faster paced, run-through experience.

I love co-op, but the more I play it and versus multiplayer, the more I appreciate choosing my own pace in a solid single player campaign. And the more I appreciate that, the less I have need for my PC or console to have an active connection.
You're living in the past, man! The future is all about 3 minutes of fun, as long as you maintain a constant network connection.
 
i dont think they care,we are the minority.

Probably but just think about the holiday season, when in Christmas day a lot of people think that their new xbox is "damaged" because it can't work without internet. Don't know if this can happen but i was thinking about that in the morning.
 
Don't you guys go to a park or beach or something when your internet connection goes down? Who'd want to play games in that situation?
Considering what I play 95% of the time (rough estimate) are single player games why would an internet outage affect me?

I'm all for going for walks and being active, but when I decide to sit down and play a single player video game, I should be able to. Whether my internet/Xbox Live/etc are up, or not.
 

Petrae

Member
Maybe personal twiiter accounts should be considered personal. and a corporation shouldn't be able to fire you based on what you said on it.

We've seen enough cases where we know this simply isn't reality. You're representing yourself-- and, indirectly, your employer-- in front of potentially tens of thousands of people. That's what social media is.

Had Orth-- or any of the people who have been separated from their jobs as a result of irresponsible use of social media-- not shared info about his employer publicly, it would be the opinion of one guy in a sea of thousands. Instead, his opinion was picked up on by others, tied to his employer as a potential position, and cost his employer in terms of damaged public image and potential damage to the Xbox brand.

It's unfortunate, but justified. This is how social media works. It's why more and more companies are setting up rules about it.
 

Pennywise

Member
We've seen enough cases where we know this simply isn't reality. You're representing yourself-- and, indirectly, your employer-- in front of potentially tens of thousands of people. That's what social media is.

Had Orth-- or any of the people who have been separated from their jobs as a result of irresponsible use of social media-- not shared info about his employer publicly, it would be the opinion of one guy in a sea of thousands. Instead, his opinion was picked up on by others, tied to his employer as a potential position, and cost his employer in terms of damaged public image and potential damage to the Xbox brand.

It's unfortunate, but justified. This is how social media works. It's why more and more companies are setting up rules about it.

Besides there are so many ways to avoid it.
If you want to fool around you can send private messages.
He could have set his account to private, or even set up an account without personal information.
Nobody would have known it was him, if he would called himself Sweet Billy...
 
Would be hilarious (and dumb) if MS still went ahead and made it always-online even after all this.

Do you really think that they would change all his strategy for this internet blowout??

I'm pretty sure that they calculated all these things when the first concepts were presented, at least, two years ago. And MS decided to go forward with the always online.

I don't see MS (or Sony) making any major changes at this time...
 

Reiko

Banned
Do you really think that they would change all his strategy for this internet blowout??

I'm pretty sure that they calculated all this things when the first concepts were presented, at least, two years ago. And MS decided to go forward with the always online.

I don't see MS (or Sony) making any major changes at this time...

Going balls in [Ballmer] like Windows 8 proved disastrous. Let's see how being ignorant to backlash will do for something that's supposed to stick around longer than Windows 8.
 
GameFAQs did a poll today that's relevant to this.

43% say they will not buy a console with always-on requirements. An additional 25% say probably not unless it's REALLY low priced.

So roughly 60% of potential owners in that poll would not buy a always-on console (though a few only if it's really low priced), MS has to be insane if they think a majority of people would stand for it after the backlash and polls saying flat-out NO.

This is the same MS that thought people would not only stand for forcing a touch interface down the throats of desktop and laptop PC users, they would embrace and come to love having it. We all know how Windows 8 has fared on the market, the question is if MS will learn any lessons from that or not.
 
How has Windows 8 fared on the market? Over 10% of Steam users are running Windows 8 already. They're selling 20 million licenses every month of Win8 which is exactly the same rate they've been selling with Windows 7. They have over 60,000 apps published in their app store already. It's gaining about .5% market share a month worldwide which means it will be at about 8% share by the end of the year (making it the 3rd most popular OS in the world after XP/7).

Microsoft basically views the desktop PC business as dying. They can't say that openly because so much of their financials is still dependent on that business. So they built an OS that lays the groundwork for the next decade of transitioning away from the PC to mobile devices. It's a competent OS, no major bugs, it's fast and maintains compatibility. It doesn't have any of the problems that Windows ME or Vista had. There are useability issues, but that is normal of any version 1.0 release. They've moved to an annual update cycle for Windows like Mac OS. All of these things are smart moves in the grand scheme even if the transition frustrates some consumers.
 

Flatline

Banned
Do you really think that they would change all his strategy for this internet blowout??


I do. I really, really do.


Going balls in [Ballmer] like Windows 8 proved disastrous. Let's see how being ignorant to backlash will do for something that's supposed to stick around longer than Windows 8.


Exactly. Windows 8 is a fine example of Microsoft ignoring early complaints that bit them in the ass. They'd have to be fucking stupid to do the same mistake again in such short time.
 
Exactly. Windows 8 is a fine example of Microsoft ignoring early complaints that bit them in the ass. They'd have to be fucking stupid to do the same mistake again in such short time.

How has it bit them in the ass? Have people stopped buying Windows computers? Is everyone running Linux now? Did Microsoft report a bad quarter?
 

Truespeed

Member
How has Windows 8 fared on the market? Over 10% of Steam users are running Windows 8 already. They're selling 20 million licenses every month of Win8 which is exactly the same rate they've been selling with Windows 7. They have over 60,000 apps published in their app store already. It's gaining about .5% market share a month worldwide which means it will be at about 8% share by the end of the year (making it the 3rd most popular OS in the world after XP/7).

Microsoft basically views the desktop PC business as dying. They can't say that openly because so much of their financials is still dependent on that business. So they built an OS that lays the groundwork for the next decade of transitioning away from the PC to mobile devices. It's a competent OS, no major bugs, it's fast and maintains compatibility. It doesn't have any of the problems that Windows ME or Vista had. There are useability issues, but that is normal of any version 1.0 release. They've moved to an annual update cycle for Windows like Mac OS. All of these things are smart moves in the grand scheme even if the transition frustrates some consumers.

20 million licences? I wonder what percentage are to OEM's that are having so much difficulty selling the OS? It's not often the major OEM's come out and just blame their poor PC sales on a OS. Also, how are those surface sales doing? Have they officially announced their sales numbers? They try so hard to be like Apple, but they don't seem to realize that they're not Apple.
 

troushers

Member
How has Windows 8 fared on the market? Over 10% of Steam users are running Windows 8 already. They're selling 20 million licenses every month of Win8 which is exactly the same rate they've been selling with Windows 7. They have over 60,000 apps published in their app store already. It's gaining about .5% market share a month worldwide which means it will be at about 8% share by the end of the year (making it the 3rd most popular OS in the world after XP/7).

Is that licenses / month an average of total licenses / months on market? Or did they actually sell 20m last month? Because the closing-down-sale discount encouraged anyone with the slightest interest in upgrading to upgrade early so... it's only downhill from here. Also it's only April, so assuming a consistant rate of market share increase is fraught with potential inaccuracy. I assume you want to avoid that and give the clearest picture of Win8 sales and its future that you can.
 
While those are all interesting questions the bottom line is that the OEMs are buying the same number of Windows licenses each month and the company is getting paid the same amount. If the product wasn't selling they wouldn't continue ordering the same number of licenses. PC sales are declining because of tablets. OEMs can blame the OS, but then how do they explain Mac sales declining 22% last quarter?

Most consumers do not pay to upgrade their PC. They just buy a new PC. OEM's don't want you to upgrade they want you to buy a new PC. How many PCs in the store are running anything other than Windows 8? With Haswell coming this year consumers are going to have a big incentive to upgrade.

The only metric you can really point to where Microsoft needs to be concerned is the drop in PC sales to mobile devices. The decline wasn't too bad at about 6% last quarter, but that's actually good compared to Mac which was down 22% for the quarter. Tablets are eating into laptop sales and so it makes sense for them to redesign their OS the way they did. Accepting the fact that it is impossible to retain their monopoly is a healthy thing. Their focus should be to transition as many of their PC customers to mobile devices before the entire market is gone.
 
20 million licences? I wonder what percentage are to OEM's that are having so much difficulty selling the OS? It's not often the major OEM's come out and just blame their poor PC sales on a OS. Also, how are those surface sales doing? Have they officially announced their sales numbers? They try so hard to be like Apple, but they don't seem to realize that they're not Apple.

The initial launch period for Windows 8 was marked by deals where just about everybody could buy it for $15 (if they bought a PC in 2012) or $40 (almost everyone else).

However, after all the launch promotions ended:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9237252/Windows_8_uptake_slows_for_third_straight_month

Windows 8 is now falling further and further behind Windows Vista in adoption rate, and it's now easily the least successful version of Windows since Windows Me.
 
While those are all interesting questions the bottom line is that the OEMs are buying the same number of Windows licenses each month and the company is getting paid the same amount. If the product wasn't selling they wouldn't continue ordering the same number of licenses. PC sales are declining because of tablets. OEMs can blame the OS, but then how do they explain Mac sales declining 22% last quarter?

Most consumers do not pay to upgrade their PC. They just buy a new PC. OEM's don't want you to upgrade they want you to buy a new PC. How many PCs in the store are running anything other than Windows 8?

The only metric you can really point to where Microsoft needs to be concerned is the drop in PC sales to mobile devices. It wasn't too bad about 6% last quarter, but that's actually good compared to Mac which was down 22% for the quarter. Tablets are eating into laptop sales and so it makes sense for them to redesign their OS the way they did.

You are the biggest corporate apologist I have ever had the pleasure to have been introduce to on this board.
 

Truespeed

Member
The initial launch period for Windows 8 was marked by deals where just about everybody could buy it for $15 (if they bought a PC in 2012) or $40 (almost everyone else).

However, after all the launch promotions ended:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9237252/Windows_8_uptake_slows_for_third_straight_month

Windows 8 is now falling further and further behind Windows Vista in adoption rate, and it's now easily the least successful version of Windows since Windows Me.

I bought mine for $15 and I still haven't installed it. I probably never will unless they come to their senses and give you the option to jettison that 'modern' UI. I wonder how many consumers are silly enough to pay $100 for it now.
 
You are the biggest corporate apologist I have ever had the pleasure to have been introduce to on this board.

I like his posts. They provide entertainment that no one else could possible think of posting. lol

I bought mine for $15 and I still haven't installed it. I probably never will unless they come to their senses and give you the option to jettison that 'modern' UI. I wonder how many consumers are silly enough to pay $100 for it now.

I'll buy that copy from you, my good man. lol
 

Dead Man

Member
Adam-Orth-Always-Online-Memes.jpg

I know this is a few pages back now, but the vacuum ones are perfect. So good.
 
Windows 8 is now falling further and further behind Windows Vista in adoption rate, and it's now easily the least successful version of Windows since Windows Me.

The market is much bigger now for annual sales of PCs than it was during Vista era. 10% of 350M is better than 12% of 200M.

I'm using the same Netapplications numbers. We have new numbers for the month of March. The market share growth rate is holding steady at about .52% last month. That's incredibly fast growth for any OS. They're going to pass by Mac OS lifetime market share within months.

Also Windows XP support is ending in 2014 which means enterprise are going to be forced into upgrades. A lot of them may downgrade to Windows 7, but like I said a sale is a sale. Microsoft's business isn't negatively impacted by any of this and they're preparing their customers for the mobile device transition.

I bought mine for $15 and I still haven't installed it. I probably never will unless they come to their senses and give you the option to jettison that 'modern' UI. I wonder how many consumers are silly enough to pay $100 for it now.

Most of their sales come from volume licensing and OEMs. How many people pay $100-$200 for an upgrade copy of Windows 8 isn't that important to their bottom line. The average consumer is just going to buy a new PC for school or work or for the family and it's going to have Windows 8.1 installed.

The idea that MS execs think they've screwed up badly and they have to reverse course on Metro; it's just not happening. MS can't change the reality that consumers are moving to mobile devices. All they can try to do is build a competent platform for mobile and get their app store in front of as many eye balls as possible.
 

Truespeed

Member
Most of their sales come from volume licensing and OEMs. How many people pay $100-$200 for an upgrade copy of Windows 8 isn't that important to their bottom line. The average consumer is just going to buy a new PC for school or work or for the family and it's going to have Windows 8.1 installed.

I'm aware of their reliance on OEM's, but it's telling that the 100's of millions of PC's out there running Windows 7 or less aren't "that important" to them.
 
Windows 8 is a fine example of Microsoft ignoring early complaints that bit them in the ass. They'd have to be fucking stupid to do the same mistake again in such short time.
The next Windows leak (codename Windows Blue) doesn't bring back the start menu, so probably not.

Whatever is going into Durango has been planned for years. If they already gave up on offline gaming, this recent reaction would be no surprise to them.
 
Don't you guys go to a park or beach or something when your internet connection goes down? Who'd want to play games in that situation?
I live in minnesota. In the winter time (when most internet/satellite outages hit due to snow storms or whatever), night falls at 5pm. Not much fun to be had outside, it's a nightmare just driving.
 

Chev

Member
Don't you guys go to a park or beach or something when your internet connection goes down? Who'd want to play games in that situation?

Litterally all the games I play work fine without internet. If the connection is gone while I'm playing I won't even notice until I'm finished with the game.
 

MasLegio

Banned
The market is much bigger now for annual sales of PCs than it was during Vista era. 10% of 350M is better than 12% of 200M.

I'm using the same Netapplications numbers. We have new numbers for the month of March. The market share growth rate is holding steady at about .52% last month. That's incredibly fast growth for any OS. They're going to pass by Mac OS lifetime market share within months.

Also Windows XP support is ending in 2014 which means enterprise are going to be forced into upgrades. A lot of them may downgrade to Windows 7, but like I said a sale is a sale. Microsoft's business isn't negatively impacted by any of this and they're preparing their customers for the mobile device transition.



Most of their sales come from volume licensing and OEMs. How many people pay $100-$200 for an upgrade copy of Windows 8 isn't that important to their bottom line. The average consumer is just going to buy a new PC for school or work or for the family and it's going to have Windows 8.1 installed.

The idea that MS execs think they've screwed up badly and they have to reverse course on Metro; it's just not happening. MS can't change the reality that consumers are moving to mobile devices. All they can try to do is build a competent platform for mobile and get their app store in front of as many eye balls as possible.

We as in We working at Microsoft?
 
Litterally all the games I play work fine without internet. If the connection is gone while I'm playing I won't even notice until I'm finished with the game.
.

But you aren't thinking about MS. They noticed and just want to help you troubleshoot your internet as fast as possible. That 's service!
 
You are the biggest corporate apologist I have ever had the pleasure to have been introduce to on this board.

Yeah but he's not wrong, win 8 is only a failure in the eyes of those who want it to be, commercial reality is totally different,

He's no worse than the tons of corporate cheerleaders to be honest. Sadly gaming is rife with it.
 
Top Bottom