We heard the rumors, here is some more:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/04/04/more-details-on-always-online-xbox-revealed

Id love to know the number of connected xbox's verses unconnected, PARTICULARLY with the youngster, pre-teen set they worked hard to bring into the fold with Kinect.

It's interesting; the people complaining the most (hardcore gamers) it will affect the LEAST, lol.

However casuals, etc...big fucking problem. USA's internet universally sucks.

as much as i am a fan of 360, I dont know if i would spend that much money on a system that limits me so much.

>Id love to know the number of connected xbox's verses
>unconnected

I cant find a link but i remember reading that about 20% of 360 users have never gone online AND are playing on standard def TVs. LOL. I wonder what the fuck they're doing

>>Id love to know the number of connected xbox's verses
>>unconnected
>
>I cant find a link but i remember reading that about 20% of
>360 users have never gone online AND are playing on standard
>def TVs. LOL. I wonder what the fuck they're doing

if you're on SD still, i doubt you're upgrading to a next gen console

but i plan to buy an HD TV within the year and i'll cop the next gen system once it drops.


i'd imagine many others will make a similar move.

>I wonder what the fuck they're doing

Not everyone has constant access to the Internet. At this point I'm almost entirely all in on PS4, and I need to see something big from MS to convince me to stay with the Xbox platform.

>Not everyone has constant access to the Internet. At this
>point I'm almost entirely all in on PS4, and I need to see
>something big from MS to convince me to stay with the Xbox
>platform.

My bitchass ISP throttles my connection everytime i downloadd more than 1kb of data. I could understand a system that might check your connection every hour but a 3 minute deadline makes this a dealbreaker for me

...it's really no big deal i mean, ..how often does anyone use their other devices, laptops or desktop machines "offline" ????

a router box gets fried in a storm, whatever, a sinkhole affects some cabling.

suddenly your console is just not usable? That's a pretty bold statement. Or even just your customers in the college market who maybe let their internet bill lapse for a few days 'cause they spent too much money on beer the weekend before pay day.

~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." © Jay Bilas
"I don't read pages of rap lyrics, I listen to rap music." © Bombastic
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

...i just don't play ...but i pretty much only play COD and NBA2k online ...i could see it being a problem for some people i guess, but its just one of those things people will get used to

but let's say something like Grand Theft Auto comes out, the online is cool for a minute but not the big deal to me. If I had to be online just to play Grand Theft Auto, maybe the first or second game I've bought all year that isn't an NBA 2K/Madden/Call of Duty/insert that one iterative game you buy every year pre-order...do I want to risk that if the Playstation's not threatening it, especially given the free (or free-er) online services?


~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." © Jay Bilas
"I don't read pages of rap lyrics, I listen to rap music." © Bombastic
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

Some Microsoft douchebag is making them look worse. If you ask me, not denying is the same as confirming. At least we got a good meme out of this:

https://securecdn.disqus.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/467/3651/original.jpg


http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/04/05/microsoft-creative-director-on-always-online-deal-with-it

Microsoft Creative Director on Always Online: 'Deal With It'

Microsoft Studios' creative director has spoken out on Twitter about negative reactions to always-online.

by Keza MacDonald APRIL 5, 2013

Update: Xbox Live's Major Nelson has posted the following official Microsoft statement regarding Orth's comments:

"We apologize for the inappropriate comments made by an employee on Twitter yesterday. This person is not a spokesperson for Microsoft, and his personal views do not reflect the customer centric approach we take to our products or how we would communicate directly with our loyal consumers. We are very sorry if this offended anyone, however we have not made any announcements about our product roadmap, and have no further comment on this matter."

In the wake of new purported details about the next Xbox's always-online requirement, Microsoft Studios' creative director has spoken out on Twitter about negative reactions to the prospect.

Adam Orth's tweets are now protected, but a poster on NeoGAF saved them for posterity:

http://oyster.ignimgs.com/wordpress/stg.ign.com/2013/04/jF1Mjq5MZmVHd.png

Orth also got into a minor spat with BioWare employee Manheer Heir. "Sorry, I don't get the drama around having an 'always-on' console," he said. "Every device is now 'always-on'. #dealwithit"

http://oyster.ignimgs.com/wordpress/stg.ign.com/2013/04/dealwithit.jpg

Orth has been with Microsoft for just over a year, working on an unannounced project (which can be safely assumed to be a Nextbox title). Previously he has been Creative Lead/Creative Director at LucasArts and a Senior Designer at PopCap.

Naturally this is Orth's personal opinion and shouldn't be taken as proof that the next Xbox definitely has an always-online requirement, but the evidence is mounting. IGN's Xbox 720 wiki has everything that's currently known about the next Microsoft console.

its liek they put the word "out there" that it was actually happening in order to scout how bad the reaction would be. SO they dont look liek chumps if they do something as idiotic as this.

>its liek they put the word "out there" that it was actually
>happening in order to scout how bad the reaction would be. SO
>they dont look liek chumps if they do something as idiotic as
>this.

There's no way Microsoft is that prescient. If that were true why would they have him hide his tweets? They're clearly in damage control

I know people without the internet and love their XBOX. They will be mad but this isn't a deal breaker for me.

Well like I mentioned above, some of us have bitch ass ISPs that throttle your connection, but you do have a good point. It seems like internet-having hardcore gamers are more pissed off about this than people that don't actually have internet, but then again, if they don't have internet there's no way for them to read about this.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

you think they won't be tempted to shut down LIVE for Durango? They already shut down LIVE for the OG Xbox.

This basically guarantees that you are renting your console for one console generation. 3 or 4 years after the generation's over, you can bet that your Durango will no longer work. 10 years after the generation, it's a near certainty.

The question is - in exchange for the fact that I am merely renting the console, what added benefits does online-only offer me as the consumer? IMO, virtually none (if any).

I have my OG xbox I bought ten years ago sitting on my table hooked up to a TV. it'snice that it still works.

I. never. play. it.

Ever.

(that's a lie, I played Rallisport 2, the best racing game of its generation, for like 20 minutes last year)

see: saturn, dreamcast, genesis.

This is not a relevant issue.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

people are obsessed with the idea that it's useless offline, which is bizarre, because in 2013 ALL LAPTOPS ARE USELESS OFFLINE.

like five people work while not on the internet.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

We gone see a new post everytime a new batch of unconfirmed rumors come out?

i'm out.
_____________________
"WHOLESALE REUSABLE GROCERY BAGS!!"
@etfp

about something they know nothing about.

if it's revealed and you don't like it, fine./ whine or whatever you want to do and especially, don't buy it.

but fuck, the bitching about stuff that hasn't been announced and is at least 99% unknown is so tiresome

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

This isn't some new, untested "feature". When a company says something has "always on" it means "always on". There's not a lot of interpretation that accompanies it.

I agree with you that the devil's in the details with regards to waiting until a feature releases before evaluating it... but with respect to this particular element, "always on" has *not* had a good track record with the reception.

super simple.

if the rumor were that microsoft was going to change the xbox people already own, yo -- flip couches.

but a rumor about a product that you haven't spent any cash on shouldn't suddenly incite rage.

but that's the internet.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

>super simple.

Completely agree.

>if the rumor were that microsoft was going to change the xbox
>people already own, yo -- flip couches.
>

Completely agree.


>but a rumor about a product that you haven't spent any cash on
>shouldn't suddenly incite rage.
>
>but that's the internet.

I don't disagree, but like I said.... "always on" means always on. They even outlined a situation where your access to a game could get cut. Immensely popular single player games like Bioshock Infinite and XCom show that players still want to play solo (to say nothing of the backlash from games like Sim City and Diablo 3). It's safe to assume that "always on" would be a major detriment to people that prefer single player experiences but don't always have consistent access.

"Always on" is an element that gamers are already intimately familiar with. And we all know that consistent (and universal) broadband access, at the very least in the US, is not currently a reality. So while in general it's prudent to reserve judgement until something gets released, at this time I don't think it's premature to slam MS for this specific decision either.

ah, the kotaku source. eh.

I don't believe anything about anything that comes from an unnamed source, even if I was the one reporting it I'd be skeptical. even if you believe you're getting facts, you never know how much of the truth it represents.



http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

But even if the "unnamed source" is wrong about the 3 minute disconnection, the creative director's comments seem to indicate that "always on" is true, regardless of how it's implemented.

My main point still remains that "always on" for a console is a mistake (at this point in time), in whatever form it takes.

Of course, if the console ends up not having it (or if MS comes out and explicitly denies it) , then great, good on them for not doing it. Until then though, "always on" is not a good business decision.

it's what developers want, and no one cares about customers who don't have internet connections.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

>it's what developers want, and no one cares about customers
>who don't have internet connections.

I agree that no one should cry for niggas wit no internet. It's 2013. Half of most games these days take place online and if you play FPS then MOST of the game takes place online. However America's broadband infrastructure is appallingly bad and I highly doubt that it, or Microsoft's for that matter, will withstand millions of niggas using up that many gigabytes per second without considerable lag. And then there's niggas like me with bitch ass ISPs who throttle connections.

even full game streaming doesn't use that much bandwidth, and it seems unlikely that's what they're doing.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

>even full game streaming doesn't use that much bandwidth, and
>it seems unlikely that's what they're doing.

I know what the fuck I'm talking about, nigga. The internet is a series of tubes and if there's too shit passing through them they get congested.

Seriously, though, I'd put 3 to 1 odds on Xbox Live having a Simcity-style meltdown during the week of the 720s release.

and then again every january


and whenever a new halo launches.


every time

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

but we can agree to disagree there.

I don't recall any developers clamoring for "always on" consoles either. "Always on" for a game is one thing, but "always on" for a *console* is on another level.

As for "customers who don't have internet access"... I figured Bioshock Infinite and XCOM are worthy examples of developers targeting all types of gamers, regardless of whether or not they have internet access.

Time will tell on the implementation and reception of both the Xbox and PS4's approaches this generation. One thing's for sure... I would predict that these decisions will end up having far more impact than the Cell/HD-DVD/Blu-Ray/XBL wars from last generation.

>but we can agree to disagree there.
>
>I don't recall any developers clamoring for "always on"
>consoles either. "Always on" for a game is one thing, but
>"always on" for a *console* is on another level.


developers are clamoring to get paid for their work and not get fired while millions of pirated copies of their games get downloaded.

they won't say it publicly b/c of backlash, but that's how people work. they like to get paid for what they do.

everyone is this way.

this game/console distinction is uselsssince no one actually knowswhat we're talking about, and it's a result of supposed leaks.
>
>As for "customers who don't have internet access"... I figured
>Bioshock Infinite and XCOM are worthy examples of developers
>targeting all types of gamers, regardless of whether or not
>they have internet access.


no.

>
>Time will tell on the implementation and reception of both the
>Xbox and PS4's approaches this generation. One thing's for
>sure... I would predict that these decisions will end up
>having far more impact than the Cell/HD-DVD/Blu-Ray/XBL wars
>from last generation.

....what? kinect and wii motion control had the most impact last generation. network connected gaming will likely not be the most important thing this gen. most people have the internet now.


http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

>developers are clamoring to get paid for their work and not
>get fired while millions of pirated copies of their games get
>downloaded.
>
>they won't say it publicly b/c of backlash, but that's how
>people work. they like to get paid for what they do.
>
>everyone is this way.

I don't disagree with you, but if you had said that the used games industry is a problem then you would have had a stronger argument. Pirates are going to exist regardless; always on DRM is not that solution, despite the numerous attempts from publishers in the past. Hackers will always find a way around it, and I doubt this will be an exception.

What you're missing is that always on DRM is not a good business decision. Not a single time has a gamer thought "hey, always on DRM. This is a great idea and will compel me to buy this product".

So what's a good way to combat piracy and the used game market? Giving people more options with which to spend their money, not impose restrictions on their consumption. Sony is doing this through innovative sharing options and innovative game distribution. Allowing shared game states and video sharing options is something that gamers would enjoy. Distributing free games under the premium online membership tier is something gamers would enjoy. Digitally distributing heavily discounted older games is something gamers would enjoy. These are options that Sony is implementing to strategically position themselves for the future while simultaneously combating both piracy and the used game market.

For a example, look at the change in the music market that companies like Pandora, Spotify and Rdio are pushing. Giving consumers legal, easily distributable, cost effective options are the business plans of the future. These are options that both combat piracy and put money in the hands of the content creators. DRM failed with CD's and it's not the way to go with games (games are much more complex media than music so I don't think DRM will ever go away completely for video games, but handicapping an entire platform with it is not the way to go).

Here's a great (older) article with quotes from real developers on how innovative business solutions (not restrictive DRM) is the way to get paid for their work:

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/174587/Steam_sales_How_deep_discounts_really_affect_your_games.php


"But according to a number of developers that took part in this year's Steam Summer Sale, that doesn't seem to be the case. The teams who've discounted their games during this or previous Steam sales have found that the promotions not only attract more sales, but also generate more revenue and breathe new life into aging products."

"Runic Games CEO Max Schaefer, for instance, tells us that while it's been almost three years since his studio launched Torchlight, Valve's Steam promotions have helped the game maintain healthy sales to this very day.

"We find that we get several thousand percent increases in units and revenue on the days of the Steam sales, and unit sales are usually about double the normal for a few weeks after the sales are over," he says."

"A lot of times we judge the success of a game -- and predict its sales -- by looking at its launch day numbers. Steam sales have made that delightfully impossible. Our launch day , which we viewed as very strong, is only our fifth best day of sales ever on Steam due to the power of the promotions we've had the opportunity to participate in," Rao says. "



>this game/console distinction is uselsssince no one actually
>knowswhat we're talking about, and it's a result of supposed
>leaks.

I agree that implementation is still up in the air and that leaks are unreliable. But "always on" is "always on"... you haven't addressed my point to that yet. We've experienced almost a decade of DRM measures in several different formats with several different ways... not a single one has been well received and hackers have always found a way to circumvent it.

What makes that different for Xbox?

>>As for "customers who don't have internet access"... I
>figured
>>Bioshock Infinite and XCOM are worthy examples of developers
>>targeting all types of gamers, regardless of whether or not
>>they have internet access.
>
>
>no.

No, because.... ?



>
>....what? kinect and wii motion control had the most impact
>last generation. network connected gaming will likely not be
>the most important thing this gen. most people have the
>internet now.

I was speaking about the launch. I agree that motion controls changed the game, but outside of that Nintendo is, and (judging from the Wii U) will always be a distant third. The Kinect wasn't a launch feature but I do agree that it's potential will be massive.

With that said, everything always comes back to the games. Simplifying the argument to "everyone has the internet now" is undervaluing the importance of the **distribution**, which has always been my main point. (And you're mistaken in thinking that most people have the internet now, which is simply not true).

There are ways to put more games in the hands of more gamers, and that way is NOT by restricting their options. It's giving people more options with which to access and engage the games that they already want.

Edit: And as for the internet distribution, here's an opinion piece that just came out yesterday on why it doesn't make sense to do this at this point in time (if ever):

http://www.polygon.com/2013/4/8/4197056/opinion-the-mistakes-of-an-online-required-xbox

because it's making lots of people lots of money.

irl, it's not making anyone any money, and so they don't like it. on the other hand, netflix is making the video industry tons of money because they'll pay for old content, so they love it.

Steam uses DRM too -- I don't want to hear about innovative business models unless the person saying it is offering a game for download entirely DRM free. then I'll listen to what they're saying, I may not agree, but I will listen.

"What makes that different for Xbox?"

what makes something I know absolutely zero things about different?
the only way I would try to discuss something like this is if I were whoring for clicks -- more about that later


Bioshock Infinite isn't about targeting any different type of gamer. It's a single player game, that's not new. I haven't thought about XCOM in 20 years so I don't know or care why that's relevant here.

"As for the internet distribution, here's an opinion piece that just came out yesterday on why it doesn't make sense to do this at this point in time (if ever):"

As for the internet distribution, here's an opinion piece that just came out yesterday about things that no one knows for sure and speculates wildly then argues based on that speculation so people will click on it.

I don't say that because of the source, I say that because I am philosophically opposed to having opinion based on things you don't know anything about.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

>because it's making lots of people lots of money.
>
>irl, it's not making anyone any money, and so they don't like
>it.

Spotify is currently trying to renegotiate their licensing fees with the publishers because they currently don't have a sustainable business model themselves.

What you're ignoring is the fact that it combats piracy in a LEGAL fashion. How those funds get distributed to the artists is a whole 'nother discussion and is more of an indictment on the record labels and the industry as a whole. But fact is that Pandora and Spotify still funnel money towards the content creators, despite the fact that the actual slice is miniscule.

on the other hand, netflix is making the video industry
>tons of money because they'll pay for old content, so they
>love it.

Not a proper analogy since it takes waaaaaay more to make a TV show or movie than it does to distribute music or make a game. The music industry is a closer approximation because all you need to distribute music is a computer and an internet connection... you can't make Netflix content with just that.

The growth of the indie game industry shows that it's far closer to the music model than it is the TV/movie models.

>Steam uses DRM too -- I don't want to hear about innovative
>business models unless the person saying it is offering a game
>for download entirely DRM free. then I'll listen to what
>they're saying, I may not agree, but I will listen.

Yeah, and people hated Steam when it first came around because of that DRM. I alluded to this with my comment earlier about how games are much more complex media so some form of DRM will likely always be a reality. What makes Steam different then? Distribution. All those Steam Sales. CONSTANT sales. I notice you didn't address the link I provided above with actual quotes from actual developers. People turned around on Steam because they gave gamers a cheap, legal way to access games that they already wanted. And developers LOVE this. If you had read the article (I don't think you did) you would have read a quote that stated that Steam's sales give life to games YEARS after they're released. And that full price sales of games still continue after those sales. And that getting cheap games in the hands of gamers that would never have bought them at full price means that their future games will have a much wider userbase.

THIS is the difference.

As for Microsoft? Everything they've been doing recently has been missteps. PS+ has been giving away free games now, while XBL has been giving, what, exactly to gamers? Only recently did they attempt sales on digitally distributed games. And there is NO reason... NONE, whatsoever, that free apps like Netflix and HBO Go should be behind a paywall on XBL Gold. Zero. Zip. Nada. If a shitty free Android phone can access Netflix for free, why does Microsoft insist on keeping it behind Gold? On top of that, it's been well documented how shitty they treat indie game developers. Here's yet another timely piece (with real quotes from real developers) on the difference between Microsoft and Sony:

http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2013/04/sony-indies/?cid=6974614

A recent survey showed that 53 percent of developers self-identify as independent, and Sony is angling to get as many of them on PlayStation devices as possible. And to hear the developers tell it, the reason they’re flocking to PlayStation is due as much to what Sony does right as to what Xbox maker Microsoft is doing wrong.

“Microsoft treats independent developers very badly,” said Jonathon Blow, creator of the breakout indie success Braid. Blow appeared at Sony’s recent PlayStation 4 announcement event to show his new game The Witness. He said in an email that Microsoft’s stance on relations with independent developers is to “put you through as much pain as you will endure in order to extract whatever feel like this week.”




>
>"What makes that different for Xbox?"
>
>what makes something I know absolutely zero things about
>different?
>the only way I would try to discuss something like this is if
>I were whoring for clicks -- more about that later

You know zero things about always on DRM? Is this the position you're taking? "Always on" DRM has been around in many different forms for almost a DECADE. I refuse to believe that you know nothing about DRM so please name me one single time when it was received well.

Because you can't.


>Bioshock Infinite isn't about targeting any different type of
>gamer. It's a single player game, that's not new. I haven't
>thought about XCOM in 20 years so I don't know or care why
>that's relevant here.

Oh, so just because you don't know about it, it's not relevant? My point in bringing up those games is because those are two massively well received, single player focused games that released with great sales figures. XCOM was basically a standard pack-in with all digitally distributed Bioshock games. This is the distribution method of the future, giving gamers what they want.... GAMES. You haven't said a single word about this MAJOR point of mine. You're starting to dodge me again.


>As for the internet distribution, here's an opinion piece that
>just came out yesterday about things that no one knows for
>sure and speculates wildly then argues based on that
>speculation so people will click on it.
>
>I don't say that because of the source, I say that because I
>am philosophically opposed to having opinion based on things
>you don't know anything about.

Oh, so it's nothing I know about? Did you read the piece?

(Note: Every single passage I quote here has NOTHING to do with the Xbox itself, but solely on the inconsistency of broadband internet DISTRIBUTION)

"Looking strictly at North America, which I believe to be Microsoft's biggest market, there are serious, systemic problems with our broadband infrastructure. And that's ignoring monopolies belonging to companies like NBC/Comcast and AT&T."


"Just to make this clear, I'm not talking about the middle of nowhere here. There are large parts of New York City that don't have reliable internet connections, whether we're talking about uptime or dependable speeds. As you move further away from urban areas that should theoretically have well developed internet infrastructures that don't, you get to suburban and then exurban areas that don't even have that excuse. The lack of a competitive broadband environment in the United States has resulted in a woefully underdeveloped system that struggles to provide basic internet functionality, at prices that make broadband a monthly luxury item in most parts of the country."

"This lack of competition has also slowed even basic broadband penetration to "remote" locations in the United States — assuming you think an hour north of Fresno, California is remote, that is. In these areas, satellite internet coverage is presented as a valid alternative by people who have in all likelihood not been forced to rely on it. Coverage is spotty in good weather, problematic in poor weather, and quality of service varies wildly. Government definitions of broadband availability are skewed towards an appearance of access that doesn't pass the smell test — and while this does impact the poor more severely, it is as much a geographic consideration as an economic one."

"There is no meaningful, dedicated effort to aggressively develop that network infrastructure outside of limited pilot programs being undertaken by companies like Google, which will take years to build out. Put more simply, it will be years before the majority of the United States is ready for an always-online future. Even if the infrastructure was there for this scenario, the economic realities of broadband internet access are still deeply problematic."

"In the past, I've defended the right of publishers and developers to offer online-only platforms, and I still think that there's nothing inherently wrong with games that require permanent internet connections. But a game is not a console. "

"Moving beyond players in the continental U.S., both Sony and Microsoft have tens of thousands of fans on active duty in the military serving tours in areas without internet access. Just looking at Canada, another huge market for Microsoft, there are enormous parts of the country that have no reliable broadband internet solution. "

also, digital distribution > brick + mortar
also, regardless of what game manufacturers say publicly, each and every one is interested in getting a cut of the $2B/yr in business Gamestop does in used sales
also, like rjcc says this is all pointless speculation at this point -- I mean you're really saying an online only console would feature no digital sales simply because MS hasn't done it until recently? okay, player, never mind the mountains of precedence we have that digital distribution leads to the ability to have more dynamic price points...

and one of the big reasons digital distribution on XBL has not been dynamically priced is because they didn't want to court the ire of Gamestop, who wouldn't like digital distribution sales undercutting their price. but it appears that Microsoft sees a future without Gamestop at this point, so it's less of a concern putting Games on Demand on sale for less than what brick + mortar retailers are charging.

but seriously, rjcc couldn't be more correct that having strong opinions on this one way or the other is just silly in the total vacuum of concrete details about the product.

I'll decide how I feel about it....when I know what it is.

doing sales of digital content isn't a steam-exclusive feature.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

>RE: dude, pretty sure X-COM sold okay via DRM heavy Steam...

I directly addressed DRM heavy Steam; people HATED it in the beginning until they offered services and a platform with features that people actually wanted. I also mentioned how DRM is likely to exist in some form for games forever, since it's a much more complex media.

Now, I never said that MS would never be able to do the same thing. But forcing it upon the **console** in an environment that doesn't fully support it (uneven) broadband penetration in the U.S. is a poor **business** decision. This is exacerbated by MS' poor handling with XBL in general; why is it that it offers next to nothing compared to PS+? Why do they still hide free apps like Netflix behind a paywall?

>also, digital distribution > brick + mortar

Yeah, of course. I've been all over this board extolling the virtues of the affordability of PC gaming, in large part due to the savvy pricing that Steam's been pushing for years now (that Gamefly, Amazon, GreenMan, Origin, etc. have all jumped on board with).

My whole point in talking about digital distribution is that it's a viable alternative to combat both piracy AND the used game market... WITHOUT requiring always on DRM.


>also, regardless of what game manufacturers say publicly, each
>and every one is interested in getting a cut of the $2B/yr in
>business Gamestop does in used sales

Absolutely. Like in the links I posted above with developers quotes, an aggressive pricing strategy is the proper way to combat both piracy AND the used game market, NOT always on DRM (which will absolutely get hacked anyways).



>also, like rjcc says this is all pointless speculation at this
>point -- I mean you're really saying an online only console
>would feature no digital sales simply because MS hasn't done
>it until recently? okay, player, never mind the mountains of
>precedence we have that digital distribution leads to the
>ability to have more dynamic price points...

You misread me; that's not what I said at all. Again, proper digital distribution is the way to combat both piracy and the used game market without requiring restrictive DRM.

Absolutely an always on console will feature digital sales... the thing is, you can feature digital sales WITHOUT an always on console (which is what Sony already confirmed with PS4).

The problem with "always on" is that not everyone is always on (which was the point of the Polygon link that rjcc dismissed without reading). Weather, outages, regional monopolies, etc. all affect consistent broadband access. By cutting out those people without consistent broadband access, that's potentially missing out on sales. Again, bad business decision.

Let me put it another way... when has "always on" DRM ever been a ***benefit*** for the consumer? I honestly can't think of a SINGLE instance where it's been warmly received.

If a game has online features, great, it'll benefit those people who can get online. If a game is single player focused, great, it'll benefit those people who cannot get online. But if there's a single player focused game with "always on DRM", you're automatically cutting out those consumers who don't have a consistent connection. Just look at the backlash from recent games like Diablo 3 and Sim City (and note that Diablo 3 for PS4 will NOT require players to be always on).



>
>and one of the big reasons digital distribution on XBL has not
>been dynamically priced is because they didn't want to court
>the ire of Gamestop, who wouldn't like digital distribution
>sales undercutting their price. but it appears that Microsoft
>sees a future without Gamestop at this point, so it's less of
>a concern putting Games on Demand on sale for less than what
>brick + mortar retailers are charging.

Why would they care about Gamestop specifically? This hasn't stopped Sony from giving away free games, so why would Microsoft care?

>
>but seriously, rjcc couldn't be more correct that having
>strong opinions on this one way or the other is just silly in
>the total vacuum of concrete details about the product.

Right, and I've acknowledged this several times in our exchange already. Just like my (positive) opinion on PS4's great online features can change if their execution or implementation is shitty, why can't my (negative) opinion on Xbox's DRM change if their execution or implementation is great?

This is a message board where people discuss future news all the time, whether or not it's substantiated. Why am I getting blasted for having an opinion on some future news on this one product but not for others?

no one is blasting your dumb ass. your opinion isn't hated, it's irrelevant and unimportant.

there's a difference.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

Because it directly counters all your arguments.

Oh, and I still haven't seen a single reason on why "always on" DRM is a *good* business decision yet.

I'm not reading all of that because it's dumb and you're wrong.

you can be dumb, wrong or longwinded

you cannot be all three.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

You're back to your old tricks. Avoidance, unsubstantiated positions and needless insulting.

Haven't we gone over this already?

and only want to talk about things you don't know about. there's nothing to discuss with you. if you were concise and wrong, we could talk. I'm not answering a deranged eight page diatribe, I have stuff to do.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

Unsubstantiated position, check.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

*rolls eyes*

Ok, so name one thing where I was off base... let's debate that point.

there's nothing to debate with someone who does not understand the conversation they're having.

I'd much rather talk politics with one of my nieces, they'd at least bring fresh ideas to the table.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

You've mentioned piracy (which I addressed), and internet distribution (which I addressed) and the fact that things may change once they released (which I addressed).

So you can keep making up nonsensical arguments to "prove" your point (like politics with your niece and claims of "bizarro" world) or you can actually debate the points like a normal person (which you're increasingly moving away from).

We were having a civil, reasonable discussion for a while there until I shut all your arguments down, and then claimed you were too lazy to read all my counterarguments (for a writer, that's just sad).

You want concise though? Here's concise:

- There are better ways to combat piracy and the used game market than always on DRM (giving gamers features they want, like cheap and legal GAMES, not restricting their options)

- Game developers do deserve more money from gamers (not through always on DRM, which has been universally hated, but through creative pricing and better legal distribution)

- Always on DRM is a rumor, not confirmed (yes, people can change their opinions once new information comes out)

- Always on DRM would not be a good business decision, because it cuts consumers from the userbase. You still have not given a real ***business*** reason as to why it's a GOOD business decision.

The majority of people complain about the higher-ups, and react to rumors that may or may not be true, and get irritated, etc. And the reason for it is because they feel powerless and stepped on, and that's how they deal with those feelings.

But they're still gonna go to work and clock in and work and leave.

So the real weird shit to me is that people act like this because they feel like they HAVE to buy that next box like they HAVE to work a job they don't like. So they feel stepped on, and like they have no power.

Like a video game console purchase is inevitable, and they are at the manufacturer's mercy.

That's weird.

not hearing alot of enticing xbox rumors
oh and i've literally never played a xbox game online
and maybe only played 2-3 PS3 games online (fight night)
everyone is not logging hours playing FPS all night or chatting with friends over xbox
matter fact i had an issue with my internet connectivity friday night
was too lazy to trouble shoot it at the moment so went into the living room ......and fired up the xbox for the night and play some of my 2K season
it happens, forced connectivity might not be the primary determining factor but fuck it's going be considered like shit. especially since i get limited value from online gaming

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

it's just the reality of the situation right now
the only thing we know about the new xbox has to be defended with "well it's not that big a deal"
meanwhile the PS4 has pretty much blown everyone's socks off with what's been announced/revealed
of course all this has to be implemented and M$ might have some next level shit up it's sleeve
but right today.....i'm anticipating that PS4

only thing you choose to highlight, and believe as a rumor

you didn't take enough Ls last gen?

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

lol @ u being on preemptive save a console steeze already
mad as fuck

just let it go.

live in reality, not console warz land.

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

This might mean users have to be logged on to Microsoft's services. This isn't a terrible look.

This just puts more pressure on them IMHO. I expect the star after all. Expect now I want built-in Skype, Kinect sharing and Windows 8 integration for FREE.

Seriously, Microsoft needs to squash this rumor ASAP.

Sony showed it's cards, plans and no box. we saw a camera and a controller. No console. Microsoft is being very quiet. Maybe they have nothing worthwhile to show until the trade shows.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/4/10/4208970/next-xbox-tv-entertainment-plans

"Multiple sources familiar with the company's Xbox plans have revealed to The Verge that Microsoft will introduce a feature that lets its next-generation console take over a TV and set-top box in a similar way to Google TV. We understand that the next Xbox will require an online connection to use the entertainment services, allowing them to be always-on for streaming and access to TV signals.

Very similar to Google TV, but with Xbox gaming
The functionality will work by taking a cable box signal and passing it through to the Xbox via HDMI, allowing Microsoft's console to overlay a UI and features on top of an existing TV channel or set-top box. We're told that this is a key part of the next-generation Xbox and that it will go a step further than Google's TV implementation thanks to Microsoft's partnerships with content providers."

This actually makes alot of sense. I assume that you can just use your internet modem and not have to use a cable box since not everyone has cable anymore, but I dont think you would have to have a cable box in order to use xbox

you know most people do....have cable right?

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/rjcc.png

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

Oops.

http://www.polygon.com/2013/4/10/4209912/microsoft-creative-director-that-sparked-always-on-controversy-no

Adam Orth, the Microsoft Studios creative director whose tweet about always-on technology launched a wave of anti-Microsoft sentiment last week, is no longer with Microsoft, Polygon has learned.

Reached for comment this afternoon, Microsoft declined to comment, but two sources have confirmed the departure to Polygon.

"We do not comment on private personnel matters," the Microsoft spokesperson told Polygon.

"Sorry, I don't get the drama around having an 'always on' console," Orth tweeted after a new report that Microsoft's next-generation console will require an internet connection to play games. "Every device now is 'always on.' That's the world we live in." Orth ended the tweet with a #dealwithit hashtag.

The tweet led to a tirade of angry comments, tweets, posts and a slew of news stories on blogs and in newspapers about the reaction. Microsoft later issued an apology.

"We are aware of the comments made by an employee on Twitter. This person is not a spokesperson for Microsoft, and his personal views are not reflective of those of the company."

This morning The Verge reported that the rumored next Xbox would serve in many ways like a cable box and require an online connection to use the entertainment services.

What was that, back in 2002? Should be an interesting summer.

http://i.imgur.com/5g9qoJF.gif

http://www.gamesradar.com/rumor-xbox-720-always-online-false-backwards-compatible/

Reports of a totalitarian Xbox locked down by required internet connection and limited-to-no backwards compatibility have been greatly exaggerated, if an anonymous source who claims to be close to Durango's development is correct. The mini-manifest shoots down frenzied speculation of an always-on future:

"You are not required to be connected to the internet in order to play Durango games and were NEVER considering doing such a thing," it states.

The report goes on to back up recent reports of the system's specs, but adds one important detail: Durango will include an Xbox 360 system-on-a-chip, which makes for both 100 percent backwards compatibility with 360 games and some additional processing power for other tasks.

While Sony and Nintendo have made significant strides to court indie developers, the report claims that the next Xbox will best PlayStation 4 and Wii U's developer accessibility through one simple stroke: Durango will run Windows 8.

Not the PC version, more like the desktop-free Windows RT which some Microsoft Surface tablets use. This means developers could push any controller-enabled games onto the marketplace with a single inexpensive license, turning the publishing proposition into one more like the iOS App Store than the difficult and costly approval process of yore.

Durango's controller will sport an improved directional pad, and is otherwise similar to the 360's design, the report states. It also claims Microsoft will roll out its own $100 Apple TV set-top-box competitor complete with 360 support. Space and cost concerns mean it will not include a disc drive, so its game lineup will be limited to Games on Demand and Xbox Live Arcade.

This report is certainly more uplifting than those which were floating around before, but wherever your console proclivities lie, please remember that these are rumors from an anonymous (albeit seemingly well-informed) source.

We reached out to Microsoft for comment, but it has not gotten back to us at this time. Hopefully we'll know more in May.

Always on DRM for a console is bullshit, and would have been a terrible business decision.

It would mean that feedback from unsubstantiated rumors does have an effect.

Although, to be honest, no gamer in the history of gamers has ever once said "hey always on DRM, this is a feature I support and would enjoy spending my money on"... so the feedback from this rumor was pretty predictable.