<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: XBox Live Arcade: Digital Distribution, but without the Benefits	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/2008/05/31/xbox-live-arcade-digital-distribution-but-without-the-benefits/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/2008/05/31/xbox-live-arcade-digital-distribution-but-without-the-benefits/</link>
	<description>My name is Jesper Juul, and I am a Ludologist [researcher of the design, meaning, culture, and politics of games]. This is my blog on game research and other important things.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 00:24:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: bob		</title>
		<link>https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/2008/05/31/xbox-live-arcade-digital-distribution-but-without-the-benefits/comment-page-1/#comment-52990</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[bob]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 00:24:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/?p=458#comment-52990</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I don&#039;t own an xbox and have never used live, but am curious about the reasoning behind this.

Is this a way to filter content? The article also suggests server issues, perhaps from hosting too much stuff? 

My understanding from this post is that games appear in a giant list of some sort? 

For filtering, normally similar services (amazon, youtube etc), use four main methods to filter content:

1. search
2. related lists
3. featured content
4. external links

Are these not available to live users? I suppose I can see them not having 1 for lack of keyboard, 2 for lack of content, and 4 for lack of web integration. If 3 is not available that would be surprising... but usually 3 is the least useful anyways. 

youtube for example would be completely irrelevant if it didn&#039;t have 1, 2 or 4. 1 and 4 are pretty much the only reason the web works at all.

I guess I&#039;m just kind of shocked that they would just only use a giant list, if that really is all that they&#039;re using.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t own an xbox and have never used live, but am curious about the reasoning behind this.</p>
<p>Is this a way to filter content? The article also suggests server issues, perhaps from hosting too much stuff? </p>
<p>My understanding from this post is that games appear in a giant list of some sort? </p>
<p>For filtering, normally similar services (amazon, youtube etc), use four main methods to filter content:</p>
<p>1. search<br />
2. related lists<br />
3. featured content<br />
4. external links</p>
<p>Are these not available to live users? I suppose I can see them not having 1 for lack of keyboard, 2 for lack of content, and 4 for lack of web integration. If 3 is not available that would be surprising&#8230; but usually 3 is the least useful anyways. </p>
<p>youtube for example would be completely irrelevant if it didn&#8217;t have 1, 2 or 4. 1 and 4 are pretty much the only reason the web works at all.</p>
<p>I guess I&#8217;m just kind of shocked that they would just only use a giant list, if that really is all that they&#8217;re using.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: sean		</title>
		<link>https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/2008/05/31/xbox-live-arcade-digital-distribution-but-without-the-benefits/comment-page-1/#comment-52989</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[sean]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2008 12:44:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/?p=458#comment-52989</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The opposing point of view - namely, that artificial scarcity a: increases profitability; b: helps users find the good games and skip the chaff - can be found articulated here:

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=18692

note that the Xbox Live announcement post-dates that opinion piece.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The opposing point of view &#8211; namely, that artificial scarcity a: increases profitability; b: helps users find the good games and skip the chaff &#8211; can be found articulated here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=18692" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=18692</a></p>
<p>note that the Xbox Live announcement post-dates that opinion piece.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Dominic		</title>
		<link>https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/2008/05/31/xbox-live-arcade-digital-distribution-but-without-the-benefits/comment-page-1/#comment-52985</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dominic]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 May 2008 17:40:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/?p=458#comment-52985</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Very strange indeed. It would even come before Aarseth, which is somewhat of a feat in itself. 

It seems to me like Microsoft is trying to avoid what happened to Atari (and to a greater extent the whole industry in 1983). It looks like they&#039;re trying to push away the weak titles to make sure consumers do not become wary or dismissive of the whole XBLA thing because of a number of rotten apples. Which is a half-baked way of going about &quot;quality assurance&quot; without setting up teams to evaluate the products, thereby reducing costs. As you said, I&#039;m not sure where&#039;s the advantage now.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very strange indeed. It would even come before Aarseth, which is somewhat of a feat in itself. </p>
<p>It seems to me like Microsoft is trying to avoid what happened to Atari (and to a greater extent the whole industry in 1983). It looks like they&#8217;re trying to push away the weak titles to make sure consumers do not become wary or dismissive of the whole XBLA thing because of a number of rotten apples. Which is a half-baked way of going about &#8220;quality assurance&#8221; without setting up teams to evaluate the products, thereby reducing costs. As you said, I&#8217;m not sure where&#8217;s the advantage now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
