MSI shows off new gaming monitors, graphics card, motherboard and two upgraded gaming desktops in Vegas.
The move away from written coverage of games is a problem for journalists and for the games industry.
What we need is a more honest games media. I'm sorry but if you're an outlet in bed with a publisher or getting goodies to attend preview/ review events then you can't be trusted to be objective. Very similar to the need for getting money out of politics.
Basically this. We've seen how the game media turned for the worse after the acceptance of advertising dollars during the 360 era from one particular company. How many websites were willing to sell out for Mountain Dew and Doritos. Accepting $800 Halo Swag bags and expensive Windows laptops to do blogging.
Video sites like game trailers that was willing to lie about PS3 graphics and sometimes, still had the wrong controller image at the bottom on the video. And, turned off comments it deleted them to keep the truth from being told.
That same company twisted certain gamers to a new level of fanboyism. This website was full of them when I arrived. Lying through their noses again and again. Then, that very company started lying or withholding information that showed the truth. That their competitors were selling more worldwide and had better graphics overall. But the damage to the media and a certain group of gamers was done. And, continues to this day. Even after hearing the truth that that company they serve is very destructive to the industry, developers and gamers.
The whole Gamespot/Kane & Lynch thing is one of the best examples and that was 16 years ago.
Most game journalists are pariahs and low level marketing drones. They got too greedy and cannibalized their respect and trust. Something they learned not to do in their journalism schools. This is why we might as well watch gameplay critics on You Tube. Don't get me wrong, I love reading, but for every genuine article there is a thousand game journalist trying to gloss over monetization schemes so they can sell the game to gamers in order to get free games to do their jobs. It gets old. Even this piece doesn't address the problem.
We need better media in all aspects of society, period. Everything from the gaming press, to MSM is all fueled by clickbait headlines, half truths and buzzword topics that don't give much meat or meaning for the reader to benefit from.
"Nordic Game has revealed the winners of this year’s Nordic Game Awards, which took place on Thursday, May 23, during NG24 Spring and streamed live from Slagthuset in Malmö, Sweden." - Nordic Game.
The Xbox brand has done a lot of good over the years, but their various blunders are pretty wild to look back on in their magnitude.
Ironically number 9 can save them at this point (releasing games on multiple platforms)
By “save them” you mean make more profit for Microsoft. Xbox will still be a dying hardware platform.
You could add the naming scheme for the consoles, it just confuses customers. I know they wanted to avoid traditional numbering bc it would always be lower than their competitor, but this whole 360 then One then Series thing is confusing af. Imagine a Soccer Mom trying to figure this stuff out. I still mistakenly call the Series X the One from time to time on accident.
Don't forget about the Xbox One, Xbox One X and Xbox Series X! Good luck to Soccer moms around the world.
They did that on purpose to confuse and direct attention away from the generational numbering.
MS doesn’t like reminding people that they joined the industry after others had already been involved in gaming.
For instance, they called the xbox “360” to combat PlayStation “3” because they wanted to seem like “more” than “3”, so instead of xbox 2, they opted for xbox 360. Also this had the additional benefit of selling consoles to uninformed parents who might purchase a “360” instead of a “3” by mistake, or because they thought 360 was more than 3. Kind of a disingenuous move.
They have been continuing with their confusing naming patterns for pretty much the same reasons. Frankly, it fits with who and what they are as a brand.
I can understand their reasoning, but whoever came up with that naming scheme should be fired, bad naming schemes have killed consoles (I'm pretty sure it was the major reason for the downfall of the WiiU). They should have had unqiue names like Nintendo and Sega have had for their consoles, far less confusing for the consumer.
Phil Spencer is the worst that has happened to Xbox.
They built a respectable brand up to Xbox one. Then this guy took over and things became a joke
I didn't like either person, both people damaged their respective brands and produced worse outcomes, but Phil did save the Xbox brand from being retired by Microsoft. Although in hindsight, he should have just let it die, rather than languish in limbo like it is now.
Phil Spencer was also on the team back when 360 was around, alongside Shane Kim, Peter Moore etc. I think the damage that did the most harm was the Don Mattrick "Always Online" console (ahead of its time basically). They handed Sony and Nintendo a free-pass when that was revealed. It went downhill from there. Then the corporate machine went into full swing to try and recover. They have to a degree as a games company for the masses, and less so for the core gamer. Outside USA, the Xbox brand does not sell as well as Japanese based consoles (citation needed).
Want a decision maker. The always online and TV plans was a disaster yes, but they caught up by announcing 1st party games that gamers actually kept the hype going.. until this moron took over and introduced the PC day one release.. e all know where that ended..
I dont think they were ever a respectable brand, not since the beginning, when their goal was never to be involved and share in the gaming space. I think the OG xbox was an exception because MS as a brand was still getting its foot in and so the people behind that were people of the gaming industry.
The 360 was the brand in its prime though, everything went downhill towards the end of that generation. Its staple games like Halo, Forza and Gears are what kept the console relevant and afloat for so long.
Really good video.
I remember the days with RRoD was big news on here, N4G.
Microsoft had it turbulence number of years.
Looking at the success of Sea of Thieves despite being 6 years old, time to release Halo, Forza horizon 4 & 5 on PS5. It'll help their revenue
2 of the 4 games they did already sold really well. So it's definitely going down. Idk about halo or forza but I feel those studios they've bought in the last 5 years, their coming
I found this video painful to watch. Can someone list them out?
Top 10 for me from are:
1. 2013 reveal presentation
2. Bundling Kinect 2 with Xbox One
3. RRoD or why rushing to market with hardware is always a bad idea.
4. Buying studios only to close them.
5. Ads on the Home Screen
6. Letting Halo die.
7. Letting Geard of War die.
8. Every console name
9. Charging for Xbox Live on Xbox 360 when Sony let PS3 players play online for free.
10. Cancelling release of OG Xbox games after the Xbox 360 launched.
Whats the latest word on HDR for PCs these days?