Xbox's "Always On"fiasco.

[Skyblade]

C'mon folks, anyone with a brain stem can see that this is a marketing disaster and totally reprehensible

I thought we were talking about Microsoft...

[Unbreakable Will]

Touche

[Aulayna]

It wasn't done to make it safer, it was done to ensure Blizzard got a cut of the profits.

Well, considering this topic is about the next XBOX I'll refrain from sidetracking it further.

[Bolivar]

That's what it is though. DRM is almost definitely(*) the primary function, and it disconveniences the little guy, so why should the little guy not stand up against the big bad company?

Because the big bad company has more competitors than ever. Surrounded by a host of different experiences, why blast the one that doesn't conform to your tastes?

The way Microsoft differentiates itself from the competition this generation will yet again be the online features they offer, some of which probably won't be possible without an online connection. That's what the original article that leaked this information suggested. Of course it would be easy for them to just make these features optional, but again, that's their vision of the unfied experience their users will share and no one's entitled to demand they compromise. And I know DRM is the first thing you think of when you hear "internet connection required," but I don't see them forsaking Gamestop.

Anyway, I'd like to believe after such an overwhelmingly negative public reaction Microsoft would go back on this, but EA just laid the foundation for game companies stubbornly marching on.

[Mirage]

Yeah, so they should offer those online services. I never said they shouldn't. I am pretty sure they can offer almost all of those online services without forcibly shutting down your game because of a connection issue.

In either case, you're right. They have a competitor that have confirmed that they won't be doing this, so it doesn't matter if they do it or not to me, I'll just buy a PS4 instead.

And yeah, maybe I just don't like it out of principle, but that's fine with me. Gotta have some principles, after all.

[LocoColt04]

Here's my issue with the potential of an "always-on" console:

We're not ready. In the Americas, in much of Europe, and especially Australia, we are not ready for something that requires us to be online at all times. Until much of the world is wired in the same manner as South Korea, we aren't ready for this. The infrastructure simply does not exist for this sort of thing. The unfortunate alienation of a larger portion of the userbase than anticipated will be Microsoft's result if they follow through. Will this HURT them? No. Will it stop most people from buying their system? No. Will it turn 360 players away from the Xbox? Some, absolutely.

Give it one more console generation before you rely so heavily on the digital age.

[edczxcvbnm]

I am not a fan but I have been moving more towards the PC over the past few years anyway. I really dislike all of the console interfaces now (I liked the previous XBox interface). The XBox is now geared towards everything but gaming and services and more towards their different store fronts. The PS3 has not changed and has always been trout. The Wii and I have not seeing the WiiU yet. Probably not much different (could be very wrong).

Always online is kind of stupid. If it works like steam where you just need to sign in once every 7 days (I think) then it isn't so bad. If it is like SimCity or Blizzard then it is pretty bad. Microsoft already handles millions of players signing in all of the time so I don't think there would be a service disaster. But also not everyone has or wants high speed internet.

I will just buy stuff for the PC and play it on my TV with my 360 controller. Fine by me.

[Mirage]

I know I've said this before, but now I have an example in live action right here.

I am currently browsing the internet on my PC without any issues on my 40/40 fiber internet. 10 minutes ago, I started my PS3 to play some Tekken before going to bed. During this time, my PS3 has been unable to connect to PSN at all. I don't have a lot of time to play games on weekdays nowadays, and I probably only play on my PS3 a couple of times a week if I exclude weekends. If this had been a console that required an internet connection constantly in order to let me play games, I wouldn't have been able to play Tekken (or any other game) at all today, even if I have an internet connection that is probably in the 98th percentile on a global basis.

Before anyone tells me "but maybe it's your router", or "but maybe it's your switch" or "maybe it's my network cable" (yes, I use a wired connection for my PS3 because it is a lot more stable), yeah, maybe it is. At the same time, so what if it is? I'm probably able to troubleshoot this problem and fix it if I really want to, but I have 30 minutes before I have to go to bed, and I'd prefer to spend these 30 minutes playing, not troubleshoot my home network. Also, I'm technically minded and actually have the skills required to sort these things out, but a lot of people are not, and could potentially have to jump through a lot more hoops to make their things work than I have to, such as calling a techy family member and have them come over to fix it for you.

In reality though, it is probably a temporary routing issue between my ISP and Sony's servers, an issue that is mostly out of Sony's hands, unless they feel like adding authentication servers directly in the backbone network of every ISP in the world. The issue could be gone by the time I am done typing this, but it also might not be. Who knows? I'm glad it doesn't matter, though. I can just go right back and play regardless of my network status.

Tell me again why I should feel completely all right with always-on as a requirement for any game mode in any game.

[Freya]

So adam orth the guy who started this whole drama online got fired over it. OOPS. That's PR for you. Can't post stuff and not represent a company when you're talking about said company and work for it.

[Quindiana Jones]

Haha, that is mighty unfortunate.

[Pike]

So adam orth the guy who started this whole drama online got fired over it. OOPS. That's PR for you. Can't post stuff and not represent a company when you're talking about said company and work for it.

That's what happens when you post stuff like "DEAL WITH IT NERDS" on Twitter

[Slothy]

Haha, that is mighty unfortunate.

I'd say it's quite the opposite. Act like an idiot in public and cause a PR nightmare for your employer? Getting fired is pretty much exactly what you deserve.

[Bolivar]

He should've had more tact but it's sad to watch someone publicly execute their own career.

[Freya]

He was too cocky apparently. Him, and the developers that work with him have had a reputation of being cocky assholes. So it's good he got what's coming to him on that front. Act like a cocky douche and you get fired!

[Skyblade]

He should've had more tact but it's sad to watch someone publicly execute their own career.

Isn't that what Twitter's for?