This is the new (console) shit!

[Justin Leego]

Spot on.

[Thrik]

We're talking about Steve Balmer here, the guy who threw a chair across his office and swore to "fucking kill Google" when a member of his staff left for Google. You know,

.

Hahaha. Splendid.

[melmer]

That vid is ridonkulous

This guy

http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2012/05/12/oops-5-ceos-that-should-have-already-been-fired-cisco-ge-walmart-sears-microsoft/3/

[Roderick]

Steve Ballmer is a Video Gaming Treasure.

[SiN]

The only other explanation I have is wanting the format to die, so they could try and muscle in on its replacement.

By ... doing nothing? Did Microsoft's actions reflect this at all? If they wanted to muscle in, they would have done something. I don't think Microsoft's grand plan was to leave money on the table in the hope that Blu-ray would ... I don't even know, wither and die independently, despite having all the studios backing? I just don't think this makes sense is all.

We're talking about Steve Balmer here, the guy who threw a chair across his office and swore to "fucking kill Google" when a member of his staff left for Google. You know,

.

Ah, the good ol' "Steve Balmer is a crazy fellow" argument.

So, yeah, it doesn't seem all that surprising that they'd pig-headedly refuse to adopt the industry standard, using whatever leverage they could to try and kill it, in favour of something that they did control -- Although I admit you could be absolutely right, and it was simply a cost-benefit analysis that I don't understand (e.g. "Unit A will cost X to manufacturer and will likely only sell Y amount"). That seems extremely short-sighted of a big company like MS to me, though.

As above, I don't think Microsoft's actions reflected this. Why were their actions short sighted? If anything, it was really forward-looking. MS went big on services, an area with *much* bigger margins, and ditched the typically low-margin hardware side of things.

And Blu-ray drives would have been very low-margin. Back then, the Blu-ray drive was actually the most expensive component in the PS3. Comparatively, an MPEG2 DAC and an embedded CPU (the bits that you argue they would leverage from the Xbox) are fairly cheap.

[ThunderPeel2001]

By ... doing nothing? Did Microsoft's actions reflect this at all? If they wanted to muscle in, they would have done something. I don't think Microsoft's grand plan was to leave money on the table in the hope that Blu-ray would ... I don't even know, wither and die independently, despite having all the studios backing? I just don't think this makes sense is all.

It makes perfect business sense. They didn't do "nothing", they didn't support the format and then tried to grow their own online video marketplace -- and created the second biggest distributor of online TV and Movies after iTunes. Their plan to dominate online is still apparent. Having lost the studios, their only option was to go after consumers... and that's exactly what they did.

I've no idea what you mean about "muscle in" on Blu-ray. How exactly would they do that?

As for "short-sighted" -- simply not supporting BD, with no eye on any sort of larger strategy, is extremely short-sighted for a huge company like MS. You really don't think they have a long-term strategy?

[JonCole]

You guys are verging on vehement agreement. It seems like you're both saying that Microsoft bet on online after HD-DVD failed in lieu of blu-ray and were largely successful doing so. The only difference is that one of you thinks that the success of Microsoft's services paid off and the other thinks that it's only a half-victory without the blu-ray half of the equation.

I only have to ask, is "[creating] the second biggest distributor of online TV and Movies after iTunes" really a glass half empty achievement in lieu of a physical format victory? Or in other words, do you think Sony is happier to be the top dog on blu-ray or Apple is happier being the top dog on digital movie distribution? I would personally have to guess Apple feels a little more pretty in their position, but that's just my perspective.

[SiN]

Indeed, we are coming dangerously close to an agreement. Jon's first paragraph seem to ring true. (thanks for that! )

As for "short-sighted" -- simply not supporting BD, with no eye on any sort of larger strategy, is extremely short-sighted for a huge company like MS. You really don't think they have a long-term strategy?

I guess this is where I see things differently. Online *is* their long term strategy. They ditch the low margin hardware, low margin physical discs, and replace it with high margin annual subscriptions and online purchases. Their service works on a much larger variety of devices (smartphones, tablets, etc) and therefore has the potential to reach a much larger audience. And unlike games, streaming movies is by-and-large a solved problem (it's also a much easier problem) that many customers are already comfortable doing, and that number is growing.

So the long term outlook for digital is bigger audiences, bigger margins, and an alignment with Microsoft's "three screens" strategy. Sounds pretty good to me.

Or in other words, do you think Sony is happier to be the top dog on blu-ray or Apple is happier being the top dog on digital movie distribution? I would personally have to guess Apple feels a little more pretty in their position, but that's just my perspective.

Sony is top dog in Blu-ray and is scrambling to develop its digital distribution (SEN). Apple is top dog in digital distribution and seems to be in no hurry whatsoever to support Blu-ray or any physical format at all. I think the facts speak for themselves.

[BigJKO]

I don't like where this is heading.. Agreement? Sounds like a made up word. Stop this immediately.

[melmer]

They should release digital copies 2-3 months before retail copies. Ooosh I've just saved the industry.

Called it!

Persona 4 Golden releasing on PSN in Europe two days before it hits retail

future innit

[Frenetic Pony]

Called it!

Persona 4 Golden releasing on PSN in Europe two days before it hits retail

future innit

Fuck yeah that's what I'm talking about! Screw you retail! Why even have it? Everyone that matters makes less money and it takes less time to release games. If you damnable people with slow internet and caps can't download games then you should move to a better country! Obviously a good internet connection alone is worth it, as you burn your old countrie's flag and chant "death to caps, death to low bandwidth!"

[melmer]

DEATH TO THE DEMONESS ALLEGRA GELLER

[ThunderPeel2001]

I guess this is where I see things differently. Online *is* their long term strategy. They ditch the low margin hardware, low margin physical discs, and replace it with high margin annual subscriptions and online purchases. Their service works on a much larger variety of devices (smartphones, tablets, etc) and therefore has the potential to reach a much larger audience. And unlike games, streaming movies is by-and-large a solved problem (it's also a much easier problem) that many customers are already comfortable doing, and that number is growing.

So the long term outlook for digital is bigger audiences, bigger margins, and an alignment with Microsoft's "three screens" strategy. Sounds pretty good to me.

Right, which I believe is why they didn't invest in releasing a Blu-ray add on in 2008 -- something you seem to feel is controversial?

[SiN]

Right, which I believe is why they didn't invest in releasing a Blu-ray add on in 2008 -- something you seem to feel is controversial?

So when you opened with:

Bluray drive..? Really? Why don't they release a BD add-on for the 360 then?

You really meant to add "That's a rhetorical question guys, it's because hardware is low margin, and their long-term strategy was online"?

I, uhhh, think we see eye to eye on this one, but we characterize it differently: Microsoft's online strategy wasn't some kind of power-move. It wasn't them "wanting the format to die, so they could try and muscle in on its replacement", or "pig-headedly refuse to adopt the industry standard, using whatever leverage they could to try and kill it". They just saw where the industry was heading, thought it wasn't profitable for them, and went another way. Ignoring Blu-ray was just apathy.

But I guess some would see that as two sides of the same coin.

Oh, I also mentioned this, regarding why they're introducing Blu-ray now:

So why introduce it in Durango? Microsoft need to build the most powerful, future-proof platform they can. Part of that is high capacity discs. Price and margins are a lower priority.

I definitely think Blu-ray for Durango is more about high capacity. Movies are just a bonus.

[Sno]

The 360 has been hitting against the DVD storage limits pretty hard, a lot of games have been shipping on multiple discs.

Rage, Dead Space 2, Halo 4, Forza 3 and 4, PGR4, Witcher 2, Mass Effect 2 and 3, those are all two disc games.

LA Noire and FF13 shipped on three discs, Lost Odyssey was four.

I'm sure there are more examples.

[tegan]

The two that I'll always remember from working at Blockbuster are LA Noire and Final Fantasy XIII, because there was no practical way to store those two in rental cases.

[Sno]

You can't even expect the publishers to always figure it out, the retail case for Lost Odyssey is awful. It's one of those cases that stacks the discs such that they're sure to scratch the hell out of eachother. To add insult to injury, the post only fits three discs and the fourth is just loose in the case in a little paper sleeve.

[JonCole]

And forget it when it comes to automated rental machines. Redbox just stocked the first disc of Max Payne 3 for 360. For other multi-disc games, they wouldn't even stock them and instead double down on PS3 versions. No idea why they did that shameful shit with MP3, maybe because it was just a popular enough game to warrant it.

[Niyeaux]

It's kind of amusing how we've regressed in terms of multi-disc storing methods. In the PS1 era, there was lots of games that had 3+ discs, and they had those thick jewel cases with the middle layer. Those things worked great. Now we're starting to see multi-disc games again, and no one has bothered making a DVD-style case that can actually hold three or more discs gracefully.

[ThunderPeel2001]

So when you opened with:

You really meant to add "That's a rhetorical question guys, it's because hardware is low margin, and their long-term strategy was online"?

I already answered this ages ago: http://www.idlethumb...140#entry220348 (and again for Thrik).

I, uhhh, think we see eye to eye on this one, but we characterize it differently: Microsoft's online strategy wasn't some kind of power-move. It wasn't them "wanting the format to die, so they could try and muscle in on its replacement", or "pig-headedly refuse to adopt the industry standard, using whatever leverage they could to try and kill it". They just saw where the industry was heading, thought it wasn't profitable for them, and went another way. Ignoring Blu-ray was just apathy.

Yep, this is where we definitely disagree. Everything I've posted supports the notion that MS were trying to strong arm the industry into adopting VC-1 (via HD-DVD) as part of a larger strategy to capitalize on the inevitable online market. (I.E., "Imagine if we could go back in time and patent the MP3 or JPG algorithms -- we'd have made a fortune! Maybe we can do it for the next iteration of online...?")

Secondly, MS have a long history of trying to use one market to control another. Using the 360 to do this seems like a no-brainer to me. (Wouldn't you try and do it, in their shoes?) Creating an online marketplace for content is a way of trying to leap-frog Blu-ray, and get an early jump in the Online movie/TV distribution market. (You still haven't explained how you think MS could force their way into BD, btw.)

Not creating a Blu-ray add-on for the 360 in 2008 seems like an obvious attempt to doing this: All their customers can watch movies/TV over their network, encoded using their standards -- and most importantly, in HD. It's like MS saying, "No need to worry about that Blu-ray stuff, we've got everything you want right here!". Again, this just seems like common sense to me.

MS have such a poor history of playing nice with others that I'm actually kind of surprised that Durango (if the leak is real) doesn't support their own format for high-capacity games. They have the HD-DVD format to fall back on, after all. I'm surprised they didn't just rebrand that technology as "XBOX FILE FORMAT", or something like that, and insist that it was better for consumers in some way. Again, wouldn't this be better for MS? (You yourself seem to agree that high-capacity is the most important thing, and movies are secondary, after all.)

[Niyeaux]

(You still haven't explained how you think MS could force their way into BD, btw.)

Microsoft couldn't force their way into the Bluray market, after they already committed to HD-DVD and it failed. That's why they didn't release a Bluray add-on for the 360. Now that next-gen is coming around, they're including Bluray so they can have big games without having them come on a million DVDs.

That's it. That's all there is to it. You guys are being silly.

[ThunderPeel2001]

Microsoft couldn't force their way into the Bluray market, after they already committed to HD-DVD and it failed. That's why they didn't release a Bluray add-on for the 360. Now that next-gen is coming around, they're including Bluray so they can have big games without having them come on a million DVDs.

So you might say they're reluctantly adding Blu-ray support?

[Sno]

DEATH TO THE DEMONESS ALLEGRA GELLER

You are my favorite person.

[melmer]

Just seen this on gaf, worth a read

http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=510076

That's bummed me out about the next xbox and actually about the whole next console generation if its going to drag down all the multi platform games. Boooooooo

[ThunderPeel2001]

That's bummed me out about the next xbox

I shall hereforth refer to the next-generation XBox as the... Next-Box.