Sections

Xbox One reveal: Microsoft was like ‘elephant in a china shop’, says Chimielarz

Tuesday, 25th June 2013 08:47 GMT By Dave Cook

Xbox One’s reveal was poorly communicated, and the fact that Microsoft has still not concretely explained the intended purpose of its 24-hour online authentication likened it to an ‘elephant in a china shop’, founder of the Astronauts Adrian Chmielarz has said.

You may remember that yesterday, Chmielarz penned a blog for Edge where he stated that the $60 retail price-point for boxed code and the used market should both die, and that Microsoft’s since-repealed decision to try and curb second-hand sales was a positive step before it was nuked.

In the same piece Chmielarz has backed up the notion of a digital-only landscape, and saw Microsoft’s policies a step towards that future. However, he has stated that the company went about it all wrong.

“So, a company named Microsoft had this really great idea: let’s accelerate the death of the box. The box is a mortally wounded animal in the need of the mercy kill, and Microsoft seemed to be ready to pull the trigger.

“But, as we all know, Microsoft went about it like an elephant in a china shop. Never able to explain what that ‘once per 24 hours’ check is for. Never able to explain how the used game sales work. Never able to communicate with clarity and brutal honesty.

“There was a great vision hidden somewhere behind it all, but all that people remembered was that waving your hands or speaking loud would change a TV channel.”

Chmielarz’s quotes come after Microsoft u-turned on its 24-hour authentication, DRM and anti-used policies, but the developer fears that the decision will prove hurtful to the industry, given the money lost through second-hand sales at retail giants like GameStop.

What do you make of the above? Was Microsoft on the right track in some parts, or was it out-right incorrect in its actions? Let us know below.

Thanks Polygon.

Breaking news

14 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. KineticCalvaria

    Surely he means a bull? Elephants just silly, it wouldn’t fit through the door.

    #1 1 year ago
  2. Dave Cook

    @1 Brilliant :D

    #2 1 year ago
  3. Ireland Michael

    “The fact that Microsoft has still not concretely explained the intended purpose of its 24-hour online authentication”

    Greed was the intended purpose. Obviously not the kind of thing they’d state outright, of course.

    #3 1 year ago
  4. dravenkaze

    They was like hey lets take all the money but then everyone was like no thank you so bill gates had to step in etc ….sony ftw

    #4 1 year ago
  5. ps3fanboy

    …and now it is like a ostrich with it’s head buried in the sand, LOL!. these microsofts guys are a totally joke!

    #5 1 year ago
  6. Llewelyn_MT

    @1: In Poland we build china shops around elephants to prove our point, not bulls. ;-)

    #6 1 year ago
  7. benmessie1981

    Haha this guy is completely off his dish!! The box is a mortally wounded animal??? What absolute rubbish! There’s a good 10 years left in the blueray game, probably even longer if consumers keep kicking up a fuss like this, the reason idiots like this keep bumming the digial sales is because it is a great thing for the manufacturers but terrible for the consumers and the retail industry. He’s probably been paid to say that, we’ll I hope he has or he really needs to find a new profession, a one preferably that he knows something about, idiot

    #7 1 year ago
  8. For Blood

    Doesn’t he know the industry would not survive if it went all digital. That would cut out a hell of alot of customers and not to mention whole countries.

    #8 1 year ago
  9. superjay779

    Why are we posting what this clown says. I liken his thoughts on next gen to that of a 2 year old trying to get a college degree.

    #9 1 year ago
  10. wildBoar

    Once they’ve gotten their consoles out on the market, Microsoft and Sony should just make a deal where they price digital 20$ cheaper. Then watch Gamestop burn. It’s that simple gais.

    #10 1 year ago
  11. MCTJim

    @10 That would be the best thing to do. Price Digital downloads cheaper…20 bucks a game would essentially kill all used games that GS gave us crap for on the trade ins. Older games is the only thing I can see being an issue.

    #11 1 year ago
  12. karma

    Personally, I don’t believe the future is all digital. I think putting all your eggs in one basket like that is a mistake, and would have a negative impact on the entire industry, because not everybody wants to buy games in the same way. Ultimately there would be a good chunk of the gaming audience that would just stop playing if they couldnt game in the traditional way. The many reasons are unimportant, only that there is a consumer demand for both digital AND retail. Trying to force people down a path they don’t want to go, will only see more resistance, its human nature.

    The only way to effectively promote digital is to make it more attractive to the consumer. Cheaper more easily accessible games without DRM would be more attractive. But then your still gonna miss out on impulse buys, and the benefits of used games.

    And those CEO’s of the large gaming companies really need to stop thinking of a used game sale as a lost sale. Just because someone is willing to take the risk of buying a secondhand title for £10 doesn’t mean they would buy the same title for £50. If the choice was taken away from them, that person just wouldn’t buy at all.

    And then you lose the benefits of used games in the way that they promote your brand awareness and encourage gaming culture. And gaming culture is essential to keeping people interested in video games. Add to that, the selling of old, outdated games is a good way to fund a brand new purchase.

    I agree it sucks that new games can sometimes be traded in within the first couple weeks and then yes that does hurt sales of that game. But if people are trading that game in so early, then it means they don’t particularly like the game, or that it didn’t have lasting appeal.

    As Shigeru Miyamoto once said, “In fact, from our perspective you want to create a game that people will want to keep and keep playing for a long time. That’s the approach that we always take and that’s the best way to avoid used games.”

    I think these guys in support of MS old xb1 policy are the developers that haven’t worked that out yet. They don’t know how to design games that have lasting appeal, only games that have instant gratification, but short lived appeal. But rather than try to solve the problem from their end, they want to force the consumer to change their habits.

    Sorry to say, but that will never happen.

    #12 1 year ago
  13. salarta

    Sounds like this guy is trying to force his personal values into being the only option.

    Digital sales may be rising, but that’s only because they’re a lot cheaper and for some people faster to receive than a physical copy. Here’s the thing, digital copies of video games is a rapidly rising phenomenon for INDIE games. As in, games where they’re coming from untested sources. As in, it’s a risk to buy a $60 box for a game from someone you don’t know compared to getting it from someone you do know. Not to mention that in many cases, indie games are only available digitally to begin with, so it’s not like there’s a comparable retail sales source to judge.

    I looked at the site for Astronauts quickly, and what I see are mostly indie games, games only available on PC. Frankly, they’re the kind of games that, whether they’re good or bad, I’m certain most people would have skipped if they had to buy it on the shelves. That’s not an attack on his company, it’s just noting that when it comes to “digital is better and the box needs to die,” the kind of games his company appears to put out are ones more suited to digital than physical release, and therefore his judgment may be biased by where his company’s offerings are receiving the most backing.

    #13 1 year ago
  14. OrbitMonkey

    When I watched the reveal I was reminded of my cat who’d gift me with dead animals & stand their with this smug look in his eye.

    #14 1 year ago