So...
in a flash of blatant common sense Microsoft has had a complete reversal on the Xbox One DRM. Given the thrashing
the Xbox One was getting from gamers, and from games journalists, getting rid
of the DRM is just so purely logical it’s almost Zen like.
In
my post 'E3 2013 - A PC Gamers Perspective'
I fell on the side of the PS4 (kind of), stating that if I was to buy either
system at launch it would be the Sony console. Has my opinion changed? Read on
dear viewer!
But
first the DRM reversal itself...
Microsoft..... Complete Idiots? Yes.
To
be perfectly honest this whole incident really speaks to how much Microsoft
really sucks at understanding gamers and the target market.
Just about
everything about the Xbox One launch has been botched. The reveal event which
tried to sell the console as a TV device to a core gamer audience. The middle finger to submariners
and other military personnel. And an E3 press conference which said almost
nothing about the console itself, the DRM, family sharing of games, indie
titles, the cloud processing. Not to mention running the games on show at E3 on high end PCs rather than equivalent Xbox One hardware, and giving the impression that we may have another Aliens: Colonial Marines situation upcoming (Aliens Colonial Marines E3 2012 preview vs the 2013 released product).
Microsoft
did the same thing with Windows 8. And again they have had to come out with an
apology in the form of the Windows 8.1 service pack which will reintroduce the
start button and ability to boot directly to desktop.
It's
almost like Microsoft's marketing and development teams are in a world of their
own. Completely disconnected from reality, and without even a little bit of
understanding of how the market works or how to communicate to the target audience.
High end Windows 7 PCs masquerading and Xbox One dev kits. Complete with Nvida GTX video cards rather the Xbox One equivalent AMD 7790 (Images from Blended Gaming). |
This
DRM situation was yet another example of Microsoft completely not getting the point.
I get the need for these sorts of DRM systems, especially moving into a
completely online distribution system as Microsoft is clearly trying to do. And
I also think that systems that see developers continue to earn an income from
their titles after the initial release period should be explored. But in my
post on video game piracy I raised
the issue that it is very easy to conceptually devalue a product by taking away
features or otherwise negativity impacting the experience. If you take something
away then you must give something back if you want the product to retain the
same value in the eyes of customers.
This
is where Microsoft fucked up. Being able to lend games to your mates, having
access to cheap pre-owned games, being able to on sell your games, and not
being tied to the internet are features that console gamers very much value. By
taking these away Microsoft devalued their product to the point that no one
wanted to buy it.
But
the thing is Microsoft could have kept the DRM if it had just spent more time
explaining the other ways that they would add value back to the system. Being
able to access your Xbox Live library from any Xbox system. Being able to share
your library with up to 10 people. Cloud processing. Trading digital games.
Better indie support. All of these could have given the Xbox huge advantages in
the eyes of gamers, and could have blunted the loss of features and freedoms through
DRM. But instead Microsoft provided next to no information about how these
features were going to work, what the restrictions would be, or what exact
benefits they would provide.
Instead
from the point of view of gamers what we saw were the removal of freedoms that
console gamers had enjoyed for decades. And fuck all of anything else.
To
be clear I am very happy with Microsoft dropping the online check in
requirement. These systems just aren't ready for prime time yet. Error 37, the
Sim City debacle, even Steam is not exactly 100% reliable. If you can't
guarantee that your servers will never be down, don't make your console reliant
on them. And that's without even getting into the problems faced by people who
simply don't have consistent access to the net.
But
the status quo is not exactly the greatest answer either. The status quo is
games releasing at NZ$120. It's on disk DLC. It's micro transactions. It's
generic 6 hour first person shooters. What Microsoft should have done is used
this issue to identify and address why pre-owned games are so popular in the
first place. Or why piracy exists. And then suggesting solutions. Yes removing
the DRM is great from the consumers point of view. But it doesn't do anything
to move the industry forward. It doesn't fix the underlying problems. It isn't
exciting. Wouldn't it have been great if Microsoft could have kept the DRM, and
also have kept all the other features that the DRM allowed, but also have
address the issues of overpriced games, and increasingly poor production
values? Actually have made gaming better to compensate for the inclusion of
DRM.
But
then that would require a certain amount of competence the Microsoft just didn't
seem to have.....
Personally
I would have been fine with the loss of pre-owned games if Microsoft had
announced that new titles would release at half the current price simply
because of the extra revenue produced by every single person needing to buy them.
Or that pricing would now reflect the length/quality of the game. Likewise
having to be online to check in with Microsoft every 24 hours may not have been
such a massive deal if it was shown how cloud processing actually provides a
massive benefit to gaming. And actually showing us how indie titles were going
to benefit from the new self publish systems could have made me at least take a
notice.
So, would I buy one?
I
own a PS3. I like my PS3. But there are some things that I prefer about Xbox consoles.
The controller for example – I have big white man hands. The PS3 controller
seems to be made for a Japanese school girl. Long gaming sessions
on my PS3 often end up in crampy hands.
Sony also tends to focus on Japanese styled games (for lack of a better
term), JRPGs, anime graphics, emo kids, etc...
which I’m just not into. I also own an original Xbox (an Xbox 1.... ?)
and a PS2. The Xbox was easily my favourite console of that generation. Really
the deciding factor in me getting a PS3 was the blue ray support - that machine
is a kick ass blue ray player.
About 40% of my original Xbox Collection. |
But
both consoles are still very expensive considering that most of the non-gaming
content is not available in NZ – and possibly never will be - and the games are
about 20-30% more expensive than the same titles on PC at launch.
So
you could say that for me the PS4 and the Xbox one are now on a closer to equal
footing. Not that that is really a good thing for either manufacturer. Both Sony and Microsoft have yet to provide any compelling arguments for why I, as PC
gamer, should buy a console at launch. The Xbox is now just slightly less shit.
PC
gaming is still the best option for me, and I’m more than happy to sit back for
6 – 12 months after launch to see how Sony and Microsoft play things out.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.