What are your thoughts on an "always online" requirement for the new Xbox?

17 replies [Last post]

Comments

Bill Loguidice
Bill Loguidice's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Not necessarily

BitWraith wrote:
Deal breaker for me. I have an always online, stable connection and I still wouldn't buy it. The reason is because I don't like the idea that Microsoft can effectively brick my system at any time by shutting down the service. Once the next X-Box comes out after the 720 and it is no longer profitable, you better believe they will.

Again, that's not necessarily the case. The only present scenario where you're screwed is with the Wii U, since Nintendo bizarrely ties all digital purchases to a specific console rather than a specific user account. I have a feeling that's going to change, though. It has to, because it just doesn't make sense. The reason why you won't have access to Xbox 360 games on the Next Xbox is the difference in architecture. I'm sure all other types of digital purchases (video, music, etc.) that are tied to a specific account and don't rely on a specific architecture to function will continue to work in the future (on future systems) as long as Microsoft remains in business. You may say that's a downside, but again, if Valve ever went out of business, we'd be screwed with our Steam stuff, if Origin ever got shut down by EA, we'd be screwed there, with Blizzard and Diablo III, Apple and iOS stuff, Google and Google Play, etc. I'm not saying it's ideal and for sure there are and will continue to be growing pains, but at the same time, we do have certain advantages in these scenarios.

n/a
Bill Loguidice
Bill Loguidice's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
Digital ownership - it's the bits

Mark Vasier wrote:

For now perishable games don't fulfill a basic need and I am not willing to invest in them. On a philosophical note 'everything is perishable' in the end but I think you catch my drift right?

I'm of two minds on this one. I used to purchase VHS tapes, DVDs, HD-DVDs, and Blu-Rays, but found I rarely went back to watch what I purchased a second time. I think something like a Netflix is satisfying to me, even if not everything is there. As the catalog grows (and other services get better, like Amazon's VOD), it will be ever more satisfying. Under that scenario I really don't lament the lost of the physical goods that take up space disproportionate to their use.

If the rumors with Sony and the PS4 are true, that they'll offer some type of subscription option to give you unlimited access to a back catalog of games on demand, then that to me is the first step towards videogames having that same type of promise that Netflix offers. We're only now bumping into the darkside of digital ownership, and yes, there are some big issues with it, but I think ultimately we all knew that going in. If Steam, Xbox LIVE, PSN, OnLIVE, etc., goes away, we're out of luck with huge quantities of games. I'm not going to fault the overall idea though because of those growing pains in light of the other benefits. I may not "forever" own something, but there will probably be ways to access this stuff in the future. Regardless, I'm willing to participate in the coming videogame generation as these things are worked out. We've been through difficult transitions before with technology. This is just the latest and for me, it's best to keep an open mind and try to work with the system. If there were no benefits or no potential light at the end of the tunnel, I might not be so accommodating.

n/a
BitWraith
BitWraith's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/11/2012
Deal breaker for me. I have

Deal breaker for me. I have an always online, stable connection and I still wouldn't buy it.

The reason is because I don't like the idea that Microsoft can effectively brick my system at any time by shutting down the service. Once the next X-Box comes out after the 720 and it is no longer profitable, you better believe they will.

clok1966
Offline
Joined: 01/21/2009
Several devs who are

Several devs who are programming for the "new" MS box have all stated in forums always on is bad (when the MS guy got fired for basically confirming it), none said it was a requirement (NDA AND ALL), but all said it sucked.. why would they have even said that if it wasn't something they had to deal with.. In a topic about the new xbox having 'always on DRM"? I cant see um speculating, they where saying it sucked.. if you read the comments.. not it would suck, but it sucked.. Sure its always possible the dev kits do say "its up to you" but again, if its an option you can skip, why complain about using it?

that is why I say MS is back pedaling now, and if they are, GOOD SHOW, listening to the public, if they do make it optional.. I have no problem with it.. There are many many discussions about it all over the web. One point brought up in a devs open forum ( i love to read these cuz they let little stuff slip (or are trolling people like me into thinking that) they mention MS was doing the always on DRM to stop piracy cold, which would draw anybody who values money (wouldn't that be all publishers?) to that system as the others do not have it.. Even i can Understand it.. always on DRM is about as good of anti Piracy as you get. Huge upside for publishers.. My feelings is the 360 was basically hack free if it was kept ONLINE, but if you didn't use it online it could be hacked to heck... MS wants it 100% hack free (very understandable) hence the always on thing was devised.

In the end Even i must admit 99% of the time it wont be an issue for me.. but that is not the point.. having a full cavity search when boarding a plane is really no big deal if you have nothing to hide (well... ) but i don't want it. that is how i see the always on DRM.. its the BEST 'stop piracy" thing... much like a complete scans and body searches are.. but the person who just wants a plane ride is suffering because of some asshole.. the always on DRM so i cant take to a lake cabin, to a friends who dont have internet, to my folks small town (with no net, there are alot of those, far more then you think) because some assholes pirate.. more of the PUNISH ME for what somebody else did.

I just feel once i buy a game, a one time "check" is fine.. anything after that on my console is not good.

So now MS says its up to the publisher (and I would honestly bet money if there was a way to prove it, this has changed since the dev kits where sent) that not a single launch game will not have the 'always on" DRM or almost all will.. the small time guys might have a change of heart and remove it. So right now if i understand it and its a real quote from MS.. it inst always on.. So i have to change my stance on buying one.. if the games are all sold with an always on only form I wont buy one.. if the launch is 50/50 or something like that.. Then I'm IN!!!!

11 days to we know more..

more food for thought there are a few of the rumor sites (koroku and some others) mention MS has canceled about 1/3rd of its lunch titles. the PS4 announcement was actually a surprise to MS it sounds like and they are way behind.. They suspected a PS4 launch in fall 14, so they have canceled some as they are not turning out, but some are getting canned so they can rush others. they are stating the new xbox will most likely at the earliest lunch 9-12 months after the PS4 (if the PS4 does launch end of year , something i think will be hard for SONY to pull off, i don't want RROD issues from rushed Hardware.. everybody should have learned from that ). has also been some comments from EX Bungie people saying "now you know why Bungie jumped ship"

the backwards compatibility deal.. that was one ace in the Hole MS had.. I'm sorry to see it go even if I did not use it much. Very sorry SONY didnt keep also.. Consoles are growing in size, and stuff like Kinect make having the old and new console sitting in a my shelves along with a few other systems very hard.. I hope the kinect is something like the Wii bar.. small and easy to place. I know i can just keep the old ones on the shelf.. but as I say, a PS3 a 360 Kinect, a PS2 (yes i still do play some built up RPG's from that system, and its a slim so its small too) my Wii (that can go , but set upright its the size of a book on edge, not going to gain much).. my rack is full. Something will have to go.. when the next system comes out..

Mark Vergeer
Mark Vergeer's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/16/2006
If left to the publisher

if it is left to the individual publishers I simply will not get the games that for some reason have to dial home to function or activate as they will be useless in the future and can only be enjoyed in the here and now and possibly not the future.

There should be a clear label on the games stating this fact and a warning that they will become void and useless once support is cancelled. That way people can make a choice. Perhaps even have two versions, a downloadable always on version and version that is capable of autonomous functioning.

If it is a system wide implementation I probably won't end up buying the system. I have had it with games that dial home. Recently I have gotten back into PC gaming a little on steam just to see what my experiences are. Out of 62 games two newer ones refuse to work properly while my system is more than adequately equipped to the task. Support is minimal to nil without a satisfactory outcome. Money back can't be done so returning a faulty game is out of the question - but for other goods a basic consumer right.

To me videogames with DRM and restrictions on usage are becoming more and more like money pits. I like to re read a good book years later, same goes for a movie and it should be the same for a good game. It isn't and its a paradigm shift. Games are becoming perishable goods, I put up with perishable goods in daily life as they often take a part if fulfilling my basic needs.

For now perishable games don't fulfill a basic need and I am not willing to invest in them. On a philosophical note 'everything is perishable' in the end but I think you catch my drift right?

Game publishers can't expect people to pay the same price for those types of goods compared to the lasting kind but perhaps they do and count on people just being dumb? They are hollowing out their own product and only people who are focusing their attention in the here and now - not planning and thinking ahead too much - will probably fall for it. It is a choice and it may work well for these people. I say let it be a choice.

n/a
Narcogen
Narcogen's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/20/2009
Unstable

That's not really a stable situation, though.

What technical methods prevent a publisher from launching without the requirement, then adding it later?

This might even be done on a per-territory basis, in territories where the new TOS disallows class action lawsuits.

I honestly don't care if they mandate it system-wide or leave it up to publishers. If that capability is in there on a system-wide basis, I'm not buying the system. My internet is way too unreliable.

Bill Loguidice
Bill Loguidice's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/1969
It's not going to happen.

It's not going to happen. Again, at worst, it will be left up to the individual publisher. It's just not necessary at this point. We'll see, though, as I've been wrong before...

n/a

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.