The New Xbox One?

I'm with Joe here. Microsoft is just making me feel good for deciding to stick to PC gaming only for now on (I haven't seen the PS4 reveal trailer yet, so maybe that's also why). What's your opinion?

In case you don't keep up to date with gaming stuff, the last of the next gen consoles was revealed this week. Microsoft (strategically?) revealed theirs last, and its name is XBox One. I'm not going to stick on the name too much, because at the moment it's secondary, they could call it Obi-wan for all I care now. Yeah, there is the issue that, this isn't the first Xbox to be called One, that's just confusing, but it's basically meant to say that this combines all of your entertainment stuff in one, to realize microsoft's life long dream that one day you won't be able to flush your toilet without kinect support and them being informed.

Let's go through things that happened.
First, Kinect needs to be constantly on, that's how your Xbox works.
http://kotaku.com/xbox-one-requires-kinect-to-function-509112572
Because, you know, kinect was a smashing success so the gamers want more of it. Now on a couple things that this means. Get ready to clap, wave and talk to your xbox, because that's how you use it. Many may have gotten accustomed to this already, it's not weird, and it feels so sci-fi so it's fine. The question many others may have though is, why that obsession with getting physical with your gaming console, instead of just pressing buttons, which respond far better, are simpler and take much less energy out of you to use?
The other issue is that there is a camera and a microphone mandatorily operational at your living room at all times, on a machine that needs to connect to the internet. Inevitably people will accept this, just like people used their real names on facebook eventually, just like they are fine with one iphone, one social networking account, one whatever something gathering all their personal information from all sources to make things simpler and to create a personalized universal profile to help ad bots deal with them better. So don't take much advice from me who does not use his real name on facebook, avoids using similar information across all acounts and does not have a habbit of sharing photos, chalk this up to persecution mania, but just take one piece of advice. Please don't watch your porn on the same tv you connected your Xbox One to (or in the same room for that matter). Unless you are into that kind of stuff, some people are.

Second, one Xbox One per game copy. Once you get your game you install it with your personalized code, and no one else can use it unless they pay an extra fee to microsoft (fee stated to be same price as buying the game, according to Microsoft vice president).
http://kotaku.com/you-will-be-able-to-trade-xbox-one-games-online-micros-509140825
Basically, what happens is that you don't play the game with the disk, it installs on the Xbox One hard drive instead (500GB) using the one time activation code. According to Microsoft, the fee is there so that this system won't be abused, and there is a way to sell used games and trade online, although details are not disclosed. Also, you can play a game on a different Xbox One so long as you use your account only. That means you can take it to a friend's (install it anew) and use it for as long as you are there.
What this means. You do not buy the game disk. What you buy, as Microsoft puts it, is the right to play the game. You cannot lend games to friends/borrow from friends anymore (unless you give them your account too, but then you wouldn't be able to use Xbox One while they play), it cannot be used on a different account (unless it's on the same console) without buying the game again.
The other thing it means, is that Microsoft fully controls who plays what, and can therefore control the used games market. The amount of the fee that will be going to microsoft is unknown, and it is also unlikely that used games will ever again be cheap, unless there is no demand at all for them.
By the way, from the article I particularly liked this statement

Quote :

Other users on the console will be able to play that game as well, Harrison said. So you don't need to buy multiple games per family. "With the built-in parental controls of the system it is shared amog the users of the device," he said.

So they will let multiple people play the game on the same machine, in the same house? Oh, gee, they are too nice. Just for this I am considering it may not be so bad after all.

Third, Xbox One requires an internet connection.
http://kotaku.com/xbox-one-does-require-internet-connection-cant-play-o-509164109
You needs to log into the internet at least once a day, or you cannot use Xbox One. This is probably the biggest thing that was announced. It could be that over at microsoft it is believed that the majority of the 1st world is iPeople, people who have a perfect connection at all times, have all the latest tech in technology, whenever outside of home are constantly on a windows phone or similar device (they are also in denial about competition, so iphone is not a thing for them), and their only problem at home is that their cable, gaming console and music player are not all a single machine controlled by voice. Not every gamer has a stable internet connection. I only got mine when I was 17, and even today when I go to visit my parents (who aren't particularly old people, my father especially was always into technology), I either don't have an internet connection at all or it's very unstable. Even here, where the connection is great, sometimes there are issues. A while ago, after a thunderstorm, our servers went down during the weekend and stayed down for 3 days or so. It happens. As I know that some of you have times when you do not have access to the internet for an extended period of time, because either parents decided to cut it for a bit, because of temporary financial issues, because you are moving, because the ISP has issues, because you are using crappy internet with dl limit and the limit was reached, because a thunderstorm messed something up.
At those times, you have power, you have a functional tv, you have a functional console and you have games, those were bought, those are being paid for, but you can't use said games. If I was an Xbox One user and our servers went down and I had to be for 3 days without internet, and at that time I was not able to use my console because Microsoft are control freaks, I'd be pretty pissed.
Also, when you put together that kinect needs to be recording something at all times, and that your Xbox One has to report in online once a day, I get really creeped out.
But again, like the kinect thing, people may in the end get used to it. I probably have a different idea of an immersive experience. I need to be able to game with a hurricane raging on outside, in a room with every shutter closed tight, on a console and tv powered by a petrol powered generator because power is down too; What I mean to say is, I don't know how it is for you, but when I play a good single player game, I don't want to be connected, I want to be detached.

After much pointless rambling, let's take a step back and look at things again from the beginning. Why next gen? What makes you buy a next generation console? Back during the time of ps1 and N64 (now that's a proper use of one, see?), the shift to next gen, and mostly ps2 at the time, was a necessity. Coming to the end of its cycle, that generation just could not handle the games. Indeed, take any game from that generation and compare it to FFX for example. You will know there is a difference, a massive difference. And even with the graphics they were demonstrating at the time, the ps1 was pushed so hard that some games required 4 disks. Obviously at the time next gen was needed.
The generation of PS2, Xbox and GC, was great, but during the latter part of its cycle, it was showing its age. Graphics were obviously bad in comparison to what the pc had to offer at the time, and again the disks were at their limit. GTA: SA had its content literally squeezed. Games ranging from god of war 2 to yakuza 2 and rogue galaxy had to switch to a dual layer format, which older ps2 models did not actually support, while others again resorted to multiple disks. Time was up for both graphics and storage, so there was a shift to the next generation.
But what about now? Undoubtedly there are some bad developers out there who still make bad looking or laggy games on this generation, but when done right, do the visuals of a game of this generation leave that much to be desired for the PS3 and Xbox 360? Is storage pushed to its limit yet?
Upon looking at a proper AA title for the PS3 or Xbox360, the first thought that comes to mind is not "these graphics are so old", or "there's so much lag" (I'm not talking about online multiplayer, the issue there is connection, servers, and the very fact you are connecting to distant machines, not the console's capabilities) that's just being picky at this point. A difference is certainly there between this generation and the next, but the point is, it's not substantial. Sure, the Dog of Xbox looks great and so detailed and so awesome when really up close, and if I was going to kiss the dog, I'm sure that would matter, but unfortunately, I only kissed cute animals as a kid and haven't done so in years, I am kinda uncomfortable with German shepherds ever since one tried to bite my throat off, and even if I wanted to do it, I'm sure Call of Duty: Ghosts would not include that option for me.
Now what I'm getting at here is, it's better, the graphics have improved, certainly. But the question is, is it worth it? I mean, Wii certainly needed a power-up, but for the rest, would you say you need a new console to play new games and no longer use your old one, because it got old? Ultimately, is it worth the money, and even if it is, is it worth the trouble that Xbox One brings? Personally, I wanted to get in on the current generation. Unfortunately, I was not able to get one during their life cycle, and I'm certainly not getting one now. But what about the next generation? Honestly, I see no reason to get in it, the difference isn't that appealing or amazing to me, unless I make a habbit of scoping in on people's faces to admire the detail. If I was going to get into the next gen, I would only go for the Wii U because I know that eventually it will deliver interesting games, while for the rest I can make life easy on myself and just use my pc. Thankfully, I've had a gaming pc for years, and at less the price it would take for me to get a next gen console, I can just upgrade my pc, and get most of the games with none of the trouble. Currently, the difference in games between the generations I'd say is developers just trying to be as flashy as possible wherever they can, instead of focusing on things to better the gaming experience, because they know increasing firepower doesn't really mean that much anymore.

And to close it up, a couple of other bad news. I'm sure there were good ones (like the dog? And something about american football and EA, but I avoid both). Indie developers won't be able to self-publish anymore apparently (in contrast to how it is for the ps4) so the Xbox One is much less attractive to indie developers, meaning that some good indie games probably won't be making it onto the xbox. Additionally, due the difference in architecture apparently, there is no backwards compatibility
http://kotaku.com/indie-developers-won-t-be-able-to-self-publish-on-xbox-509271999
http://kotaku.com/xbox-one-is-not-backward-compatible-509088037

But hey, you can use kinect for your cable, so if you are not a gamer and want to watch tv, you should buy this gaming console. What do you mean you are not in the U.S. ?

Because we are discussing about the gaming industry, we do have to remember that it is an industry, which means business strategy. Let's face it, XBOX ONE is a terrible business attempt to the current competition. As Al said in his post, decent internet connection is a rare thing to come by. Microsoft made a HUGE mistake by making the assumption that all of their customers have decent internet connections. Let's face it as well, the BIG 3 needed to find a way to compete with Steam/PC as well as winning over the smartphone users.

Let's talk about phones. Its now known that a smartphone has gaming capability. The iOS and Android markets offer short amounts of fun with the gaming apps they offer for mostly free-of-charge. The PC has been doing this for a longer amount of time as well, and is doing a better job at it as well. We can discuss PC vs Smartphones later, but all I will say about that is that both the PC and Smartphones beat consoles in terms of convenience (as for the PC, it beats the consoles in graphics quality still).

Knowing that we are surrounded by social media services, industries all around the globe are largely forced to adapt to these services to gain any advantage in their particular industry (for the most part). The gaming industry faces the same problem and they're all on the losing side.

Not to say that social media is a bad thing, it is a great thing! One of the problems with the gaming industry is that the industry is focusing on the wrong things. Innovation goes along with productivity and both go hand-in-hand with the actual marketing of the product. I will again agree with Al on their emphasis on the Kinect. They should not be focusing their efforts on a motion-sensored camera. They need to focus on their customer's needs instead of making rash assumptions. Efficiency can be based on trade-offs the company has to make, it can also be measured by time and effort by the customers. I would also like to say that convenience for the customer should be factored with the producer's efficiency. The business of the industry is just...bad... DOWN THE DRAIN!

EDIT: I'm so glad I stopped playing on consoles before this. Reviewing the whole "trading/used game fee" policies, that is really f*cked up.

article goes in second post... stupid random merging...

Anyways, I'd say microsoft's target group is not the kid that plays video games, and to an extend, it's not the gamer himself. It's that iPeople that were described, who want to gadget out their life as much as possible, have a great paying job etc. It's the people who are willing to spend 500$ just to be able to say "Xbox, HBO" while they approach their couch to watch tv, exactly because they can afford it and that's actually what they are looking for. The target group is those people who want to do all that all to one stuff, and it's reasonable because they buy a lot, they spend money consistently, they are a good source of income.

Now there are other people, there are people who want to play video games at their convenience, there are people who want to not bother with internet fees, just buy some games and play for their entertainment, and do their social stuff in the actual real world, and maybe gather some friends at home and play (yes, there are people who socialize outside of facebook and play multiplayer with people who are in the same room as them!!!!), there are people without a steady internet connection, and yes, there are many, a large number of those people that I know, are people I met online, and that says something of how unreliable a thing an internet connection can be, there are people who can't dominate the entire house with their console, because they are living with people who don't enjoy having video games on their tv when they want to watch tv, there are kids who live with their parents, as the kotaku article mentions, there are people who live in military bases (or other restricted live-in forms of employment) and have video games as a great source of entertainment in a limited enviroment, and besides, it's a wide world outside of the U.S. and there are all sorts of internet situations in the 1st world (not that the U.S. does not have its issues with internet at parts, but I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft was blind to that), and I'll tell you from experience, that when the internet is shitting on you, you turn to consoles, so those areas are actually a big console market.

These people are irrelevant, microsoft wants those people mentioned before because that's their good steady income and they are content with that. As for the rest, it's not like microsoft doesn't want them, it's more like "Oh, you wanna play and you have an issue? Figure it out.", because there are many people who will still buy the console even if it contradicts with their circumstances, and thankfully for them, the ps vs xbox console war has generated a lot of passionate fans who evolved through that argument into blind fanatics (commonly referred to as Xbots, and of course it applies for both sides) who will overlook these issues and still follow it and still defend the console whether they believe it or not. And microsoft won't have to lift a finger for them, if they have an issue, they'll "figure it out", they'll go out of their way to change whatever needs changing so that they adapt to what they buy, instead of the other way around. That's what a loyal consumer is.

Consoles competed with the PC before. It may seem weird, I mean in the current generation, it should have been at close the same cost to build as good a gaming pc, you were getting better quality within the games themselves, and you were getting so many more things out of your pc, and even more games (you just weren't getting the few good console exclusives, but there is such a thing as a pc gaming world to explore as well).
The reason it competed well is, that the consoles did one thing. They played games, you popped in your disc/cartiage (good ol' N64) and could start gaming. No installation, small boot time, no configurations, no chance your game would act up, it would always run smooth. Let's say you just buy a console, you just take the box out, connect the controller, connect power, connect scart/av cables to your tv, pop a game disk in, grab your controller, play. That's the entire process from unboxing a brand new console to playing a video game. Especially when people weren't too tech savvy, that simplicity was THE system seller. And it's still like that, there's a console sitting below your tv and if you feel like it, you give it a game and you play, that's console gaming for ya.

Now the people who benefit from that, are gamers. You lose on the very casual side, because as digi said, iphones are more convenient, dl a game, the phone does the work for you and you just play. Of course it's not convenient at all for the actual gamer, it's useless, because you are not popping far cry 3 in your smart phone, and even if you get the magical smart phone from 2030 that can do that, the tiny controls and tiny screen will annoy you to no end. To begin with, what are you doing playing Far Cry 3 on the move? Play it at your couch, it's a good game, you'll enjoy it better. Still, consoles lose out in this situation. The casual consumer will say, I don't want to play at a big console, I want to cut the rope while facebook'ing about it during class. The regular gamer now gets more tech savvy as time passes by, on one hand he will say, pc gives me more if I just do tech stuff, which I enjoy because I feel like a certified nerd anyways, and really I don't need more graphics from next gen, so why bother with more consoles.

Then where is the console market, and if it's nowhere, where does it go? Microsoft decided to turn towards the casual in this case who is looking to make his life convenient by gadgeting it out, so they are saying "We'd make the xbox a phone, but you already have a phone, so we'll make it a TV instead. You like TV, right?", and then combine it with the creepy strategy I am seeing from both microsoft and google lately to try and learn everything about you from your favourite video game to your preferred brand of underwear, and combine all activity from you into one place, keep it organized and make your iLife "simple".

Problem is, why would the person that wants all that in his life, buy a gaming console? A gamer would buy a gaming console, he would buy it to play video games. And that's where the focus should always be, by my old-man's opinion, interesting video games and making gaming interesting. Tessellating the dog's ear wax, does not make a game more interesting. "What is?" ?
I don't know, it's their job to find out how to make interesting video games that beat out the pc, because that's what the consoles are supposed to do in the first place, be a specialized machine for one specific purpose, playing video games, and thus do it better than others.

So, bottom line is, Xbox One is targeted towards normalfags, not gamers.

As I think about it in a macro-perspective...Microsoft has generalized itself so much that its facing a 3 front war in the entire tech world. They're competing with Google, Facebook, Samsung and Apple, not to mention their competitors in the good ol' stock market world. Im feeling lazy to elaborate, but I really think if Microsoft wants to succeed, they need to start specializing to cater to the rich. My question is: "What is their best bet if they pretty much threw the towel in the console war?"

Simple and short: This Xbox isn't a gaming console.

Requirement to pay a fee to play a used game.

Golly gee, Microsoft. Does that mean we won't be able to trade games anymore? Does that mean we won't be able to bring our games for a gaming night? Yep. Bravo, Microsoft. Oh, and here's the funny part: After doing a little reading, I found out that the fee is the price of the actual game itself! Sounds fun, huh?

No! You are basically putting shops that rent discs out of business. Oh, but they rent DVDs and movies too, but who even rents those when everything is for free on the internet nowadays? Not only that, but you probably aren't going to sell many games outside of Europe or the US, countries where games are overpriced with no insurance on them included. I mean, back here shops only started buying Xbox 360 systems in bulk a long time ago after it was launched because very few could afford credit cards before that, and during that time, because we had to pay for Xbox LIVE while PSN was for free.

Hell, you've even killed all gamer habbits. We trade games and do little get-togethers all the time. It helps us socialize, as gamers and as friends, because the enjoyment is being able to have fun together with a game, but it looks like that won't be an option with Microsoft anymore.

Congratulations, Microsoft. Now only the filthy rich will bother buying your crap.

Requirement to log in at least every day to play games.

Are you sure you want to go there? There are thousands of places around the globe where people suffer from internet inconsistency. At least we do in Egypt, all the freaking time. It also happens in the US and in Europe too. Why would you limit the people who buy your products? You are basically punishing them for doing so instead of encouraging them when they try to give your console a damn.

If this is your answer to piracy, then it is obviously a stupid answer. Like with some DRMs from other video-games, you are also hurting your potential customers BADLY! HORRIBLY! ABOMINABLY! BLUNDERINGLY! Do you get it now, or should I say even more synonyms for you to understand?!

You are hurting them in which they have to log in all day. What if the internet was down for the day, they'll be deprived from playing on a console they have the right to play since they bought it.

I don't know whether you are trying to push people to getting better broadband connection or not (and even so, that's just ridiculous to say the least), it won't work.

No backward compability

To be honest, Sony's PS4 is guilty of this point as well. Now I have to either stick to my PS3 or Xbox 360, which some gamers won't have in the near future. Point for the Wii U I suppose.

Didn't even talk about games

Okay, so you talked about Football, you talked about the mobile-integrated apps, you talked about TV, but what about the actual beef of the console? The games, the whole point of buying an Xbox One? ZERO!

Absolutely NOTHING was said about the video-games themselves. What are you even doing? Are you sure that's a console? Cause it looks like the freak child of an iPhone and TV cable, not the descendant of the Xbox 360.

Everything that made the Xbox 360 likable, aside form the controller, is gone! No more being centric around the games, no more being released earlier than Sony's own new-gen console, no more. Oh, and why the frick is the Xbox One the only controller to not include a touch screen?

Kinect

God-damnit! Drop that son of a peach already! It doesn't freaking work. It never worked for the Xbox 360, even with the most recent of games, and it won't work here. The worst of the worst Xbox 360 titles were all on Kinect, and yet you still keep up with it, WHY?!?!

Well, at least you didn't integrate it into the system itself.

Oh, and may I remind you that I can take pictures of myself while doing other stuff already with a phone? Noooooooo! You make it sound like it's a technological breakthrough when in fact, it isn't. A dashboard that works with voice and pictures? Well, good luck with your colorblind and mute gamers, Microsoft.

Long-Story Short

Now it just seems that you're willing to hurt your consumer rather than reward them. You've made the Xbox One exclusive to the filthy rich only, people who buy stuff just to look cool. I don't think many publishers will even want to work with you, at least the ones who are still in their right minds. Heck, no indie developer will want to work with you at this rate either.

This new Xbox One can't be called a console, not from what we've seen. PS4 is going to win in its console league without a doubt, with the Wii U playing a completely different one at that. Soon, The Xbox One will go from the name of the console to the number of sales made.

I doubt the Xbox One even deserves to be called a console. Thank you, Microsoft. You basically helped us all by telling us not to buy your product.

Looks more like a all-in-one home entertainment box, which makes me realize how much they're alienating markets Microsoft already struggles in... this is a big middle finger to pretty much most Asian countries. If Sony follows suit with this silly crap, it reminds me on how I read an article that said, "first one to be successful in Japan is the one that gets the next Idolmaster." So view true. I can't imagine any of this stuff being appealing anywhere but the US. Heck, most people in the US don't even have a for certain internet connection, god knows my internet goes out at least once a week between the times of 2am and 6am. Screw you Time Warner.

Not sure what game console makers are thinking nowadays. Think I'll stick to PC gaming and getting to my retro game catalog which I have practically hundreds of games collected in but haven't had time to actually play... lol. Almost want to get a WiiU just to actually support the company that still knows what a game console is, even if they're having their own mishaps... because I'll be honest, I have little faith in Sony.

Joe here made a new video confirming that everything which could have been a rumor has been confirmed here by Microsoft, with even a couple more restrictions to make things worse.

-24 hour DRM. (Console checks in once every 24 hours online)
-1 hour DRM if not using home console.
-Mandatory Kinect.
-No renting, no loaning. No private sales (unless selling to someone who has been on your friends list for 30 days)
-Internet connection required.
-Trade-ins are up to the publisher and only at "participating" retailers.
+You can give a game to a friend only if they have been on your friends list for 30 days, and then only ONCE.
+Up to 10 family members can play your games from any console at any time? You & one other at a time.

The whole reveal was pretty much Microsoft saying that they are giving up on the gaming console war and are focusing on providing an "Entertainment" console. The estimated price of this is said to be between $800-$1000 on release and pretty they want to give something to people that is going to be used to replace the set top boxes, dvd & blue-ray players, Tivo boxes and every other box you may have connected to your TV. While the idea sounds good the fact is that Microsoft doesnt excel or have much of an influence in those areas, they are known for computer and having a gaming console.

To me Microsoft has essentially shot itself in the foot with this reveal. Sony has shown that with the PS4 that are using their console to focus on the next generation of gaming while allowing the console to still be used for things like watching DVDs and blue-rays.

I agree with everything Angry Joe said and while I have always been a loyal Xbox customer I am seriously contemplating buying a PS4 over the Xbow ONE-That-went-wrong.

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/update
Well, boys and girls, looks like we can pat ourselves on the back for a job well-done (Nah, kidding, we did nothing, other gamers did). However, this isn't the end; there are still some features which we do not wish to see in the new Xbox One which haven't been mentioned, and for that, we can't rest assured that Microsoft is finally on the right track. Even with offline mode enabled, nothing about how the Kinect will work nor about how many family or friend members are allowed to play specific video-games you own were mentioned. We have to put in mind that Microsoft has announced little-to-nothing interesting in video-games which we may purchase later, maybe except for Halo 5 and Titan Fall and that other game which I keep forgetting about.

They had done themselves such big damage these days, it was looking like they were actually trying to make things worse with every new piece of news or interview (for example, Don Mattrick basically saying "if you don't like it, get a 360"), that the console war was decided unless they fixed their shit. Pre-sales was probably their wake up call, since sony was at least 8 up-ing them, even though they had the earlier and announced release date, because that's actual money I guess.

There was never a need for an actual online check in, for no kind of technology. It can be dynamic requesting a connection for services which require it, when needed. The online check in was simply to monitor what you were doing with your xbox (piracy the first example, with talk going as far as PRISM).

Btw, still 21 countries, since you need to connect the first time to set up your xbox one. Unless of course you move out of the country for the setup process, or there are services of pre-set up before shipping, which is possible and likely.

Finally, Xbox One is getting their shit together. I'm still not getting one, because I'm a Playstation guy, but I still want their to be competition. Hopefully this won't be a one sided match anymore.

So....little something Kimo found. Legitimacy is not confirmed, but daaaaaamn, that's a nice jacket there Don Mattrick.

http://www.dorkly.com/article/52521/don-mattricks-first-draft-of-the-xbox-one-update-announcement

I looked at it again. The poster said that he made it himself while attempting to channel what he believes Don Mattrick is thinking.

So, there's this thing for the Xbot campaign that want the previous policies returned in case you didn't know. I've thought a bit about it, and figured this is another smashing PR success by microsoft. First of all, Xbots are a thing (their sony equivalent are a thing too, but that's it, there are supporters of nintendo and PC, but it's those two that are acting like football fans or your local equivlent), they would support microsoft no matter what, because they can't have possibly picked the side that made a wrong decision, so even if the Xbox One required anal probes to function, you know there would be Xbots who would support even that.

When they actually tried to market it positivelly (to the extend that they could, they both suck at PR and you can only do so much for such a thing), you had people support it, you had people who would constantly meet the criteria so they felt they were elite when you consider the opposition, and were supporting it either because they did like it or supported it regardless of what they thought to reaffirm their status, there were people that weren't all cool with it, but said everyone should accept it whether they like it or not because this is the future (which is an utter bs arguement, this is an entertainment system, not an economic policy or anything that has something to do with responsibilities whatsoever, meaning you only get it if you like it, making something people won't like for any reason is either the creator being retarted or thinking they can trick people into believing this is something necessary), and then there were good ol xbots, where for many it was irrelevant whether they liked it or not, their gang said it's good, so it's good, stfu sony fanboys, we kill you, we kill you all.

You could say that their first mistake was bringing out something bad and then marketing it like they did. From there you would have casualties. But it was still salvagable, you could still please everyone. That could possibly be the case unless the universally acclaimed single greatest PR genius of our time, Don Mattrick, didn't release the statement about policy changes in the way he did, and MS didn't push for the notion it presented on the PR department afterwards. Basically, the subtle message behind the statement was "Yes, we are changing. Now you get nothing. Now you don't get the future. Now you lose customer, you lose everything, and it's all your fault, because we were listening to you.", and that notion of "maybe microsoft was right, maybe the customers were wrong" was pushed heavily in the internet media right after that if you remember, in order to prove microsoft was right, for some god forsaken reason.

So we then had the inner microsoft gang war, with one side not caring because they got what they wanted, but the other blaming the former, saying "bring the policies back microsoft, we want to be treated as criminals with your DRM, we want the future, we don't want to lose microsoft, screw the other whiners, it's their fault". The result of all that is, they have their customer base divided in two, and both passionatelly wanting two opposite things, so PR-wise, microsoft is screwed either way, because, you know, blaming your customers, always an amazing idea.

Thankfully for them, it doesn't hurt them as much in sales, because most of the side that does want to be monitored by microsoft are such xbots they would pre-order 5 of them either way, so it's fine to displease them. As proof, Xbox one still has sold out of pre-orders (that being said, pre-orders are beyond me, that weird consumer culture is crazy, so many people buying something that doesn't exist yet...), so no problem there. As a sidenote, there's no such thing as a person who is neutral about being monitored. If they tell you they don't mind it, that translates into them wanting it. It's a normal thing for humans, there's a small part of a person (depends) where the fact someone might be watching makes you think someone cares for you. It's a tv star effect,
person is watched on tv often = person is great <=> someone watches me = I am great
in a way. Anyways.

Pretty sure any non-MS-employee who actually wants the DRM back was either very much unaffected by the DRM policies and/or felt that it was the way of the future in a Steamy sort of way or whatever (which it could be or couldn't be; hey, it's the future, we don't know) or, for the majority, just want the family sharing feature back.

Also, that Marc Whitten guy who got interviewed by IGN actually knows his shit and how to market. He needs to do all Microsoft's talking for the XBOne from now on, especially with #1 PR Genius Mattrick out of the fold.