Microsoft gets into the gambling business
-
With Microsoft Jackpot, the hot new <not really new but whatever> game from Microsoft Studios!
http://wscont1.apps.microsoft.com/winstore/1x/ad5c9443-6aac-4adb-84d7-08a849842216/Screenshot.356964.1000000.jpgUnlike most other games, Microsoft Jackpot requires no skills at all, as the outcome is always entirely random. Indeed, it actually has an "Autoplay" checkbox so you can just sit back and watch your money go up or down (mostly down).
And if you ever run out of fake money, you can buy more for these low low prices (notice how 5€ don't even get you ads disabled).
It's just like playing on a real jackpot machine, except you don't even have the chance to win real money!
That's not to say it's poorly made. It has nice graphics, several "stages", random events, achievements and objectives. It's the ultimate modern game: all gamification, no gameplay.
-
-
So, there's like 47,043 mobile games like this. None of them get called-out?
Actually this one's a lot better than most, because at least it's not pretending there's actual game play.
-
This is expected from 47,043 shady bottom feeders in app stores. We should expect better from Microsoft.
-
-
Why?
How about reputation?
A lot of us here trust a lot of our business, personal information and livelihood to Microsoft. Seeing them doing this bottom feeder crap is... disconcerting.
Imagine seeing your banker in a soup kitchen line. You'd be at least a bit worried about your life savings.
-
-
How about reputation?
They've been making games like this for years and years and years. Remember MSN Games? It had slot machines. Pretty sure it also had the ability to buy virtual money with real life dollars. That was founded in, what, 1999? It hasn't seem to hurt their reputation yet.
Demonstrably it doesn't matter to you, because despite MSN Games you've "trusted your business, personal information, and livelihood" to them. You've had decades to move away and haven't done it. Actions > Words.
A lot of us here trust a lot of our business, personal information and livelihood to Microsoft. Seeing them doing this bottom feeder crap is... disconcerting.
Microsoft is a highly silo-ed company with something like 75,000 employees. They can do both simultaneously.
EXERCISE: Do you think a guy whose business relies on (say) Sony projectors gets all pissy when there's a casual pay-to-win game on the Vita? Yes or no? Show your work.
Imagine seeing your banker in a soup kitchen line. You'd be at least a bit worried about your life savings.
Which side of the counter is he on?
Because they're capable of making stuff that's actually worth a damn?
As far as pay-to-win gambling games go, I bet that one's top class.
-
OK, sure. I can take the good stuff a company does and ignore the bad. This goes equally for Microsoft, Sony... whoever.
But then, I end up not having much loyalty to any of them. Every time they make something, they have to win me over again. Convince me their latest thing isn't shit like this game. They can call me a customer, but never a fan.
As a counter-example, let's take Apple. Like them or not, they try very hard to maintain an image of a company that makes quality products. They would NEVER put their name on crap like this. Do they make crap sometimes? Sure. But even when they do, THEY think it's a good product. Nobody in Microsoft thinks this game is a good product.
So what are the consequences of a policy like that? Apple has to let some easy pocket change slip away, but when they put out a product, TONS of people rush in to buy it. Just because it's Apple and they expect Apple products to be great.
Now, I personally don't think this is a healthy attitude to have towards any company. But from the company's perspective, it's sure nice to have that kind of customers. I bet Microsoft and Sony would love to have customers like that. But that would mean not jumping at every opportunity to make a buck and whoring your brand out on crap like this.
I guess my point is that Microsoft might be "penny wise, pound foolish" in this regard. On the other hand, their number crunchers might disagree, so... *shrugs*
-
They would NEVER put their name on crap like this. Do they make crap sometimes? Sure. But even when they do, THEY think it's a good product. Nobody in Microsoft thinks this game is a good product.
I'd imagine more Microsoft people would be proud of this game than anyone who worked on Itunes Ping.
-
Oh come on, I fucking destroyed you with that MSN Games argument. Admit it. You can't just ignore that shit man.
-
But I remain the moral victor.
-
I only even found this game while browsing games by Microsoft Studios on the Windows Store, because most of them are good (Pinball FX2, Treasure Hunt). I don't really browse other sections of any app store because 98% of what's there is shit..
-
They've been making games like this for years and years and years. Remember MSN Games? It had slot machines. Pretty sure it also had the ability to buy virtual money with real life dollars. That was founded in, what, 1999? It hasn't seem to hurt their reputation yet.
Well it was 1999 or so, when Microsoft, and the computing world in general, still had a full-fledged boner for that whole new "multimedia" thing. Good times, good times.
It probably doesn't irk me as much as @cartman82, but I think a name of "Microsoft Jackpot" kinda doesn't fit the 47,044th bottom feeding mobile game-thingy. I mean, there's Microsoft Windows, Microsoft Office, Microsoft Visual Studio, Microsoft Dynamics, Microsoft Bob... okay, maybe not that last one. All serious, almost luxurious solutions, kinda having that ivory-tower feel to them Apple has.
And then there's "Microsoft Jackpot", a crappy tablet game. Hell, even Microsoft Hearts had some more dignity to it.
-
Microsoft Windows, Microsoft Office, Microsoft Visual Studio, Microsoft Dynamics, Microsoft Bob
Don't forget Microsoft Sam!
Filed under:
you have selected Microsoft Sam as the computer's default voice
-
Piece of crap. Can't even pronounce
crotch.
-
But can pronounce Spitfire takeoff and machinegun salve.
-
I guess this is slightly too obscure of an easter egg to call for a woosh... Try putting
crotchin Microsoft Sam on XP.
Filed under: Unless I just wooshed
-
-
it actually has an "Autoplay" checkbox so you can just sit back and watch your money go up or down
I spent a year working for an outfit that manufactured the blinky flashy horror consoles that have subsequently invaded every pub in the country, and part of QA testing after hardware assembly was to run them for a few hours with a simulated user.
The simulated user was a lump of wood wedged between the top of the console and the "take score" button.
-
OK, sure. I can take the good stuff a company does and ignore the bad.
Their bad stuff helps keep me employed...biting [hard] the hand that feeds you is not recommended.
-
If it's stupid but it works, it's not stupid. (But the players might very well be stupid)
-
Try putting
crotchin Microsoft, SamMi
crotchsoft. There, that wasn't too hard.Filed under: Shave my nipples and call me Sam!
-
Since I feel the woosh is strong in this one...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiftjISJyEQ
You can ignore the stupid after the
crotchbit.
-
!LikeBot likethat
I enjoy Poe's Law.
-
The simulated user was a lump of wood wedged between the top of the console and the "take score" button.
They knew their users…
-
We did indeed.
Still had to design against the possibility of being gamed by the clueful, though. But I was young and dumb and was actually quite put out when the regulator objected to my 24-bit LFSR PRNG.
-
But I was young and dumb and was actually quite put out when the regulator objected to my 24-bit LFSR PRNG.
oooh this deserves more info!
why did the regulator object?
-
Because a 24-bit LFSR PRNG is not very strong.
-
ah.
i was rather hoping that it was because it didn't stack the odds in favour of the house strongly enough (or perhaps that it did) that could have made for an interesting story.
:-D
-
Stacking the odds in favour of the house is built deep into all those machines.
The ones I was working on were the first ones the company had ever made that achieved that aim by careful choice of the payoffs displayed to the customer, relying on statistics and genuine randomness to achieve the required payout ratio.
Before that, they'd done it by straight-up cheating: the software equivalent of deck stacking. That kind of behaviour was completely unacceptable to the NSW Liquor Licensing Board. Hell, the LLB even prohibited the use of the traditional thumbwheel that the pub owners could use to pick their own payout ratio, insisting instead that it be fixed at (IIRC) 87%.
-
Stacking the odds in favour of the house is built deep into all those machines.
the house always wins man. the house always wins. :-D
-
Not at blackjack. But you have to make sure they don't see you coming.
-
Not at blackjack. But you have to make sure they don't see you coming.
true, but then a lot of them have started reshuffling the deck every round (they have a shuffler at the table and two decks.) that helps even the odds a lot.
no the real one you can win at is poker. that's because you are playing against other people and not the house.
-
Because they're capable of making stuff that's actually worth a damn?
I'm not so sure about that
-
I have a WinPhone I'm quite happy with
-
that's because you are playing against other people and not the house.
House still wins but.
-
touche
-
-
Treasure of the Ancients
Volvo Pls.
