|
On June 12 2013 02:04 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 02:01 Stratos_speAr wrote:On June 12 2013 01:55 xDaunt wrote:Whatever. People need to relax. This isn't just some private conversation or an extremely small, niche market event. This is one of the biggest and most covered video game events of the year. So yea, when you have a dialog that furthers stereotypes and mimics scenarios of sexual abuse, people are going to be justified in being upset. I can't even imagine how far people must have broomsticks shoved up their asses to have perceived the conversation that way in real time. It's like their trying to find politically incorrect things to complain about.
Like i said before, Sony marketing employees.
Some people lap it up.
|
On June 12 2013 01:55 xDaunt wrote:Whatever. People need to relax.
Yeah people really need to grow some thicker skin. It didn't even cross my mind that was a "rape joke", it just seemed like some good hearted trash talking.
|
On June 12 2013 02:09 Fruscainte wrote:Yeah people really need to grow some thicker skin. It didn't even cross my mind that was a "rape joke", it just seemed like some good hearted trash talking.
My annoyance is kinda more the guy posted it just to continue shitting on Microsoft here.. I didn't really get the rape references here, but it's really annoying that it's just continuous shitting on Microsoft day in and out.. if you don't like their product then don't buy or support the company/product, but don't look for and try to even make up things to shit on the company with. o.0
|
Overall though, Microsoft got destroyed by Sony at the conference.
DRM/Used game policy really put a nail in the coffin there at the XBONE.
Of course it won't crash and burn.
But it won't sold well except at maybe in the US now.
Even your average people will pick PS4 over XBONE now.
Simply because it is cheaper now and DRM/Used Game issue.
|
On June 12 2013 02:09 Fruscainte wrote:Yeah people really need to grow some thicker skin. It didn't even cross my mind that was a "rape joke", it just seemed like some good hearted trash talking.
More like awkwardly set up trash talking. But I agree, it was hardly anything remotely close to upsetting.
|
On June 12 2013 02:12 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 02:09 Fruscainte wrote:On June 12 2013 01:55 xDaunt wrote:Whatever. People need to relax. Yeah people really need to grow some thicker skin. It didn't even cross my mind that was a "rape joke", it just seemed like some good hearted trash talking. My annoyance is kinda more the guy posted it just to continue shitting on Microsoft here.. I didn't really get the rape references here, but it's really annoying that it's just continuous shitting on Microsoft day in and out.. if you don't like their product then don't buy or support the company/product, but don't look for and try to even make up things to shit on the company with. o.0
The issue here is that M$ not only deserves it, but they brought it entirely on themselves. People are just speaking their mind about it to let M$ know that it's not okay, and that they don't want it to happen again in the future. And since M$ isn't listening, people continue to speak their mind.
|
On June 12 2013 00:49 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 00:34 Stratos_speAr wrote:On June 12 2013 00:24 takingbackoj wrote:On June 12 2013 00:20 Kurr wrote:On June 12 2013 00:13 takingbackoj wrote:
Despite what the over dramatic gamer crowd wants to believe, the truth is, Xbox will be fine. PS4 did a much better job of focusing on the gamer crowd, but Xbox one's target isn't the people who watched E3. They have focused on people who will see the applications of Xbox outside of gaming and say "man, those features are pretty cool and I can play some games on it." They have decided, it seems, to play the middle ground between PS4 and WiiU and trying to attract a broader audience while unlike Nintendo, also still putting out quality games and intergrating their extra features into the everyday entertainment of most people.
It will most likely work and all of this Xbone lost the war stuff will look even more dumb after release. Again, neither will die, they will both do fine. Yeah, consoles never flop, especially when popular companies release them... OH WAIT : Dreamcast Vita Virtual Boy Jaguar Atari 5200/7800 CD-i N-Gage Sega 32X And other smaller ones Nope, never happened to any big companies. Big companies? Haha, none of those companies are even remotely comparable to MS. And you should go find out why exactly those systems flopped. I'll give you a hint, it had nothing to to with any of the issues Xbox One has. Really bad analogy. Sega was very well-known in the console community back in the day. MS's clout comes from its OS dominance, especially since the XBox has consistently flopped outside of the U.S. Even if the issues are the same, those examples show that big companies are hardly invincible, and mindless faith in the XBox thriving is pretty naive. It's not mindless faith in the XBox thriving, it's that the Xbox isn't going to crash and burn like most people keep talking about. If I were buying the Xbox, I'm not buying it because the PS4 blows it out of the water. I'm buying it because it has some cool stuff with the Kinect that I would want to try out because it's neat (like the Wii kinda put out there), and it has a lot of newer games that look interesting to me. I have absolutely no care what used game stuff it has because I never buy or play used games. I don't care what always-on DRM it has because I'm honestly never offline at home. I don't really care about your "what-if" scenarios because they don't apply to me. Like, I get that you guys think it's a bad business practice to have these online-always shenanigans because it does limit the number of people who can use it, but in reality if you're on TeamLiquid or Reddit debating it already it's rarely going to affect you. I would even go so far as to say only 0.001% of the users would ever notice the lack of online-ness, unless people actively try to shit on the system like with the Simcity launch because our first world societies today are basically always online, and if you are ever offline you bitch at your ISP for its failure. In the future, we will think of the Internet like how we think of our power grid today, and that's the kind of thing that MS is trying to say with shit like this. Okay, you're completely shitting on countries that don't have stable Internet systems, but that is pretty much the case for every online game on your computer. You can't really play LoL without Internet, so it really shouldn't be a problem not to expect generic AAA title on the Xbox to only be played with the Internet. It's just that there's this stigma attached to consoles where it should be a separate thing from a PC and be usable without the Internet, but this is the direction MS thinks the future will be like. Take a look at the mobile space and you see the same thing right? Farmville is unusable without Internet. I have a few MS games on my phone that aren't usable without Internet. If you've seen some tech-y movies, a lot of things require a stable upstream somewhere in order to work. No Internet, no dice. It's that kind of future MS is trying to push towards, which is understandable. And it's pretty shitty for a lot of consumers now, but at least you can see what they're trying to do and what they're doing wrong instead of shitting all over the company for things that they're intentionally doing in order to achieve the vision they seem to have set out.
I agree.
Firstly, I think I'm fairly objective on this Microsoft vs Sony issue, as I don't own or plan to buy any of these consoles.
People should really get over the Xbox One online requirement (which isn't even always online). There are many benefits to requiring always online:
-Having one unified community (compare everyone playing SC2 using B.net with SC1 where some played via pirate servers, some played via LAN, some played via Hamachi, some played single player, some played on B,net, etc.).
-Achievements.
-Being easily able to chat with other people, quicker updates.
-Access to game library anywhere with internet and automatically with synchronized saves.
-And in the future, some of the calculations needed for games or to render graphics can be shifted from the computer/console onto a supercomputer on the cloud.
-More data about play patterns helps developers design games (many changes in WoW are based on data, e.g. when to nerf raid bosses can sometimes depend on success rates).
-If you look at the demonstration here, Kinect could be used to detect when exactly people are getting frustrated with the game. This can lead to better game design or patches.
After what happened today, Microsoft is screwed because Sony has jumped on the outraged gamers bandwagon. Indeed, Sony's used game policy seems completely based on the Microsoft backlash. Before this press conference, they said it was up to developers (basically the same as Xbox One). Now they're suddenly fully embracing used games. But the problem is Sony is wrong and Microsoft is right. Like PC or Steam, restricting used games and requiring online is a good thing, not a bad thing. In fact, restricting resale will lower costs for developers or increase revenues, and this I think should lead to lower prices due to competition. I don't think the monopoly excuse works, because Microsoft doesn't set the price, developers do. And no developer has a monopoly. Developers will have to compete with each other.
Sony made a big deal of embracing "disc based games". That term was used over and over in their conference. It was epitomized in their hilarious used game demonstration video. But that's the problem. Disc's are last decades technology. I don't think I've physically seen a disc in the last 3 years of my life--that's how obsolete discs are. Xbox One uses a centralized account where all games and saves are on the cloud, discs aren't required. Since Sony haven't announced that all games will be available digitally from release day, unlike Microsoft, Sony is stuck in the past with its use of discs. And it's all just to appeal to the misguided and wrongheaded outrage over Microsoft restricting used games.
Still, Microsoft is screwed. It has only 2 options to turn this around:
1. Better exclusive games.
2. Cheaper games and cheaper costs.
They can easily do the second due to their "DRM" features and the potential for ads.
Here's what I would get Microsoft to do if I were in charge: They should announce no game resale (not even once), no physical distribution of games ever (i.e. no game discs. OK, maybe a box with a code on a piece of paper would be acceptable), and always online.
Then they should announce always online will allow the use of cloud computing to produce better framerates and gameplay. Moreover, using the money they saved from these features, they should announce that games will sell for between $10 to $50 and prices will reduce as games get older, much cheaper than the usual and unchanging $60 which Sony will almost surely charge.
In short, Microsoft now has the ability to easily undercut Sony on game prices and the capacity to make better games and better graphics with the use of cloud computing. They should make this clear.
Another way that Microsoft could reduce costs to consumers is to have an ads and no ads version (like Kindle). You could have the option to either buy a cheaper console or perhaps a cheaper subscription with ads.
The ads version could significantly reduce costs to the consumer if it used the Kinect to record information to target ads. Moreover, Microsoft could sell anonymous information for money, hence further reducing the cost for the people who optionally choose to use the ads version.
The fact is that the Kinect is a gold mine for advertisers. And ads reduce costs. Hell, in the case of TV, ads reduce costs to $0.
|
On June 12 2013 02:14 FakeDeath wrote:
Overall though, Microsoft got destroyed by Sony at the conference.
DRM/Used game policy really put a nail in the coffin there at the XBONE.
Of course it won't crash and burn.
But it won't sold well except at maybe in the US now.
Even your average people will pick PS4 over XBONE now.
Simply because it is cheaper now and DRM/Used Game issue.
Quite bluntly, Sony leaves the DRM stuff to the publishers. I think that we'll be seeing a lot more variation's on EA's online pass in the future. Sure you'll be able to buy second hand games, but if you want to take them online (or activate the single player), you'll have to pay extra.
Publishers would really like nothing more than to see the current second hand market model for console games utterly destroyed. One of the main reasons steam is as popular as it is, is the fact that every game is tied to an account and you cannot resell it.
|
United States22883 Posts
On June 12 2013 02:26 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 00:49 Blisse wrote:On June 12 2013 00:34 Stratos_speAr wrote:On June 12 2013 00:24 takingbackoj wrote:On June 12 2013 00:20 Kurr wrote:On June 12 2013 00:13 takingbackoj wrote:
Despite what the over dramatic gamer crowd wants to believe, the truth is, Xbox will be fine. PS4 did a much better job of focusing on the gamer crowd, but Xbox one's target isn't the people who watched E3. They have focused on people who will see the applications of Xbox outside of gaming and say "man, those features are pretty cool and I can play some games on it." They have decided, it seems, to play the middle ground between PS4 and WiiU and trying to attract a broader audience while unlike Nintendo, also still putting out quality games and intergrating their extra features into the everyday entertainment of most people.
It will most likely work and all of this Xbone lost the war stuff will look even more dumb after release. Again, neither will die, they will both do fine. Yeah, consoles never flop, especially when popular companies release them... OH WAIT : Dreamcast Vita Virtual Boy Jaguar Atari 5200/7800 CD-i N-Gage Sega 32X And other smaller ones Nope, never happened to any big companies. Big companies? Haha, none of those companies are even remotely comparable to MS. And you should go find out why exactly those systems flopped. I'll give you a hint, it had nothing to to with any of the issues Xbox One has. Really bad analogy. Sega was very well-known in the console community back in the day. MS's clout comes from its OS dominance, especially since the XBox has consistently flopped outside of the U.S. Even if the issues are the same, those examples show that big companies are hardly invincible, and mindless faith in the XBox thriving is pretty naive. It's not mindless faith in the XBox thriving, it's that the Xbox isn't going to crash and burn like most people keep talking about. If I were buying the Xbox, I'm not buying it because the PS4 blows it out of the water. I'm buying it because it has some cool stuff with the Kinect that I would want to try out because it's neat (like the Wii kinda put out there), and it has a lot of newer games that look interesting to me. I have absolutely no care what used game stuff it has because I never buy or play used games. I don't care what always-on DRM it has because I'm honestly never offline at home. I don't really care about your "what-if" scenarios because they don't apply to me. Like, I get that you guys think it's a bad business practice to have these online-always shenanigans because it does limit the number of people who can use it, but in reality if you're on TeamLiquid or Reddit debating it already it's rarely going to affect you. I would even go so far as to say only 0.001% of the users would ever notice the lack of online-ness, unless people actively try to shit on the system like with the Simcity launch because our first world societies today are basically always online, and if you are ever offline you bitch at your ISP for its failure. In the future, we will think of the Internet like how we think of our power grid today, and that's the kind of thing that MS is trying to say with shit like this. Okay, you're completely shitting on countries that don't have stable Internet systems, but that is pretty much the case for every online game on your computer. You can't really play LoL without Internet, so it really shouldn't be a problem not to expect generic AAA title on the Xbox to only be played with the Internet. It's just that there's this stigma attached to consoles where it should be a separate thing from a PC and be usable without the Internet, but this is the direction MS thinks the future will be like. Take a look at the mobile space and you see the same thing right? Farmville is unusable without Internet. I have a few MS games on my phone that aren't usable without Internet. If you've seen some tech-y movies, a lot of things require a stable upstream somewhere in order to work. No Internet, no dice. It's that kind of future MS is trying to push towards, which is understandable. And it's pretty shitty for a lot of consumers now, but at least you can see what they're trying to do and what they're doing wrong instead of shitting all over the company for things that they're intentionally doing in order to achieve the vision they seem to have set out. I agree. People should really get over the online requirement (which isn't even always online). There are many benefits to requiring always online: -Having one unified community (compare everyone playing SC2 using B.net, with SC1 where some played via pirate servers, some played via LAN, some played via Hamachi, some played single player, some played on B,net, etc.). -Achievements -Being easily able to chat with other people, quicker updates. -Access to game library anywhere with internet and automatically with synchronized saves. -And in the future, some of the calculations needed for games or to render graphics can be shifted from the computer/console onto a supercomputer on the cloud. -More data about play patterns helps developers design games (many changes in WoW are based on data, e.g. when to nerf raid bosses can sometimes depend on success rates). -If you look at the demonstration here, Kinect could be used to detect when exactly people are getting frustrated with the game. This can lead to better game design or patches. After what happened today, Microsoft is fucked because Sony has jumped on the outraged gamers bandwagon. Indeed, Sony's used game policy seems completely based on the Microsoft backlash. Before this press conference, they said it was up to developers (basically the same as Xbox One). Now they're suddenly fully embracing used games. But problem is Sony is wrong and Microsoft is right. Like PC or Steam, restricting used games and requiring online is a good thing, not a bad thing. In fact, restricting resale will lower costs for developer or increase revenues, and this I think should probably lead to lower prices due to competition. And no, the monopoly excuse doesn't work, because Microsoft doesn't set the price, developers do. And no developer has a monopoly. Sony made a big deal of embracing "disc based games". That term was used over and over in their conference. It was epitomized in their hilarious used game demonstration video. But that's the problem. Disc's are last decades technology. I don't think I've physically seen a disc in the last 3 years of my life--that's how obsolete discs are. Xbox One uses a centralized account where all games and saves are on the cloud, discs aren't required. And Sony haven't announced that all games will be available digital from release day, like Microsoft has. Sony is stuck in the past with it's use of discs, all the appeals the misguided and wrongheaded outrage over Microsoft restricting used games. Still Microsoft is fucked. It has only 2 options to turn this around: 1. Better exclusive games. 2. Cheaper games and cheaper costs. They can easily do the second due to their "DRM" features and the potential for ads. Here's what I would get Microsoft to do if I were in charge: They should announce no game resale (not even once), no physical distribution of games ever (i.e. no game discs. OK, maybe a box with a code on a piece of paper would be acceptable), and always online. Then they should announce always online will allow the use of cloud computing to produce better framerates and gameplay. Moreover, using the money they saved from these features, they should announce that games will sell for between $10 to $50 and prices will reduce as games get older, much cheaper than the usual and unchanging $60 which Sony will almost surely charge. In short Microsoft now has the ability to easily undercut Sony on game prices and the capacity to make better games and better graphics with the use of cloud computing. They should make this clear, if not for the sake of shutting up the annoying fanboys and haters, then for the sake of their bottom line. Another way that Microsoft could reduce costs to consumers is to have an ads and no ads version (like Kindle). You could have the option to either buy a cheaper console or perhaps a cheaper subscription with ads. The ads version could significantly reduce costs to the consumer if it used the Kinect to record information to target ads. Moreover, Microsoft could sell anonymous information for money, hence further reducing the cost for the people who optionally choose to use the ads version. The fact is that the Kinect is a gold mine for advertisers. And ads reduce costs. Hell, in the case of TV, ads reduce costs to $0. None of what you listed is actually a benefit of Online DRM, it's just a benefit of being online.
You just flew off the rails for data mining.
|
On June 12 2013 02:26 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 00:49 Blisse wrote:On June 12 2013 00:34 Stratos_speAr wrote:On June 12 2013 00:24 takingbackoj wrote:On June 12 2013 00:20 Kurr wrote:On June 12 2013 00:13 takingbackoj wrote:
Despite what the over dramatic gamer crowd wants to believe, the truth is, Xbox will be fine. PS4 did a much better job of focusing on the gamer crowd, but Xbox one's target isn't the people who watched E3. They have focused on people who will see the applications of Xbox outside of gaming and say "man, those features are pretty cool and I can play some games on it." They have decided, it seems, to play the middle ground between PS4 and WiiU and trying to attract a broader audience while unlike Nintendo, also still putting out quality games and intergrating their extra features into the everyday entertainment of most people.
It will most likely work and all of this Xbone lost the war stuff will look even more dumb after release. Again, neither will die, they will both do fine. Yeah, consoles never flop, especially when popular companies release them... OH WAIT : Dreamcast Vita Virtual Boy Jaguar Atari 5200/7800 CD-i N-Gage Sega 32X And other smaller ones Nope, never happened to any big companies. Big companies? Haha, none of those companies are even remotely comparable to MS. And you should go find out why exactly those systems flopped. I'll give you a hint, it had nothing to to with any of the issues Xbox One has. Really bad analogy. Sega was very well-known in the console community back in the day. MS's clout comes from its OS dominance, especially since the XBox has consistently flopped outside of the U.S. Even if the issues are the same, those examples show that big companies are hardly invincible, and mindless faith in the XBox thriving is pretty naive. It's not mindless faith in the XBox thriving, it's that the Xbox isn't going to crash and burn like most people keep talking about. If I were buying the Xbox, I'm not buying it because the PS4 blows it out of the water. I'm buying it because it has some cool stuff with the Kinect that I would want to try out because it's neat (like the Wii kinda put out there), and it has a lot of newer games that look interesting to me. I have absolutely no care what used game stuff it has because I never buy or play used games. I don't care what always-on DRM it has because I'm honestly never offline at home. I don't really care about your "what-if" scenarios because they don't apply to me. Like, I get that you guys think it's a bad business practice to have these online-always shenanigans because it does limit the number of people who can use it, but in reality if you're on TeamLiquid or Reddit debating it already it's rarely going to affect you. I would even go so far as to say only 0.001% of the users would ever notice the lack of online-ness, unless people actively try to shit on the system like with the Simcity launch because our first world societies today are basically always online, and if you are ever offline you bitch at your ISP for its failure. In the future, we will think of the Internet like how we think of our power grid today, and that's the kind of thing that MS is trying to say with shit like this. Okay, you're completely shitting on countries that don't have stable Internet systems, but that is pretty much the case for every online game on your computer. You can't really play LoL without Internet, so it really shouldn't be a problem not to expect generic AAA title on the Xbox to only be played with the Internet. It's just that there's this stigma attached to consoles where it should be a separate thing from a PC and be usable without the Internet, but this is the direction MS thinks the future will be like. Take a look at the mobile space and you see the same thing right? Farmville is unusable without Internet. I have a few MS games on my phone that aren't usable without Internet. If you've seen some tech-y movies, a lot of things require a stable upstream somewhere in order to work. No Internet, no dice. It's that kind of future MS is trying to push towards, which is understandable. And it's pretty shitty for a lot of consumers now, but at least you can see what they're trying to do and what they're doing wrong instead of shitting all over the company for things that they're intentionally doing in order to achieve the vision they seem to have set out. I agree. Firstly, I think I'm fairly objective on this Microsoft vs Sony issue, as I don't own or plan to buy any of these consoles. People should really get over the Xbox One online requirement (which isn't even always online). There are many benefits to requiring always online: -Having one unified community (compare everyone playing SC2 using B.net with SC1 where some played via pirate servers, some played via LAN, some played via Hamachi, some played single player, some played on B,net, etc.). -Achievements -Being easily able to chat with other people, quicker updates. -Access to game library anywhere with internet and automatically with synchronized saves. -And in the future, some of the calculations needed for games or to render graphics can be shifted from the computer/console onto a supercomputer on the cloud. -More data about play patterns helps developers design games (many changes in WoW are based on data, e.g. when to nerf raid bosses can sometimes depend on success rates). -If you look at the demonstration here, Kinect could be used to detect when exactly people are getting frustrated with the game. This can lead to better game design or patches. After what happened today, Microsoft is screwed because Sony has jumped on the outraged gamers bandwagon. Indeed, Sony's used game policy seems completely based on the Microsoft backlash. Before this press conference, they said it was up to developers (basically the same as Xbox One). Now they're suddenly fully embracing used games. But the problem is Sony is wrong and Microsoft is right. Like PC or Steam, restricting used games and requiring online is a good thing, not a bad thing. In fact, restricting resale will lower costs for developers or increase revenues, and this I think should lead to lower prices due to competition. I don't think the monopoly excuse works, because Microsoft doesn't set the price, developers do. And no developer has a monopoly. They will compete with each other. Sony made a big deal of embracing "disc based games". That term was used over and over in their conference. It was epitomized in their hilarious used game demonstration video. But that's the problem. Disc's are last decades technology. I don't think I've physically seen a disc in the last 3 years of my life--that's how obsolete discs are. Xbox One uses a centralized account where all games and saves are on the cloud, discs aren't required. Since Sony haven't announced that all games will be available digitally from release day, unlike Microsoft, Sony is stuck in the past with its use of discs. And it's all just to appeals to the misguided and wrongheaded outrage over Microsoft restricting used games. Still, Microsoft is screwed. It has only 2 options to turn this around: 1. Better exclusive games. 2. Cheaper games and cheaper costs. They can easily do the second due to their "DRM" features and the potential for ads. Here's what I would get Microsoft to do if I were in charge: They should announce no game resale (not even once), no physical distribution of games ever (i.e. no game discs. OK, maybe a box with a code on a piece of paper would be acceptable), and always online.Then they should announce always online will allow the use of cloud computing to produce better framerates and gameplay. Moreover, using the money they saved from these features, they should announce that games will sell for between $10 to $50 and prices will reduce as games get older, much cheaper than the usual and unchanging $60 which Sony will almost surely charge. In short, Microsoft now has the ability to easily undercut Sony on game prices and the capacity to make better games and better graphics with the use of cloud computing. They should make this clear, if not for the sake of shutting up the annoying fanboys and haters, then for the sake of their bottom line. Another way that Microsoft could reduce costs to consumers is to have an ads and no ads version (like Kindle). You could have the option to either buy a cheaper console or perhaps a cheaper subscription with ads. The ads version could significantly reduce costs to the consumer if it used the Kinect to record information to target ads. Moreover, Microsoft could sell anonymous information for money, hence further reducing the cost for the people who optionally choose to use the ads version. The fact is that the Kinect is a gold mine for advertisers. And ads reduce costs. Hell, in the case of TV, ads reduce costs to $0.
Yea announce that, and xbox one is dead. Sony is being smart, nobody wants restrictions on their discs. If i want to let my friends borrow the game I should be able to.
Always online or whatever you call it isn't a big deal for me, but for many people in the US, it is.
|
On June 12 2013 02:28 maartendq wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 02:14 FakeDeath wrote:
Overall though, Microsoft got destroyed by Sony at the conference.
DRM/Used game policy really put a nail in the coffin there at the XBONE.
Of course it won't crash and burn.
But it won't sold well except at maybe in the US now.
Even your average people will pick PS4 over XBONE now.
Simply because it is cheaper now and DRM/Used Game issue.
Quite bluntly, Sony leaves the DRM stuff to the publishers. I think that we'll be seeing a lot more variation's on EA's online pass in the future. Sure you'll be able to buy second hand games, but if you want to take them online (or activate the single player), you'll have to pay extra. Publishers would really like nothing more than to see the current second hand market model for console games utterly destroyed. One of the main reasons steam is as popular as it is, is the fact that every game is tied to an account and you cannot resell it.
Eh no, it's not popular because it's tied to an account and because you can't resell it. That's a consequence of the buisness model, not the reason why people like it. Unless you talk about popularity for publishers?
|
On June 12 2013 02:32 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 02:26 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 00:49 Blisse wrote:On June 12 2013 00:34 Stratos_speAr wrote:On June 12 2013 00:24 takingbackoj wrote:On June 12 2013 00:20 Kurr wrote:On June 12 2013 00:13 takingbackoj wrote:
Despite what the over dramatic gamer crowd wants to believe, the truth is, Xbox will be fine. PS4 did a much better job of focusing on the gamer crowd, but Xbox one's target isn't the people who watched E3. They have focused on people who will see the applications of Xbox outside of gaming and say "man, those features are pretty cool and I can play some games on it." They have decided, it seems, to play the middle ground between PS4 and WiiU and trying to attract a broader audience while unlike Nintendo, also still putting out quality games and intergrating their extra features into the everyday entertainment of most people.
It will most likely work and all of this Xbone lost the war stuff will look even more dumb after release. Again, neither will die, they will both do fine. Yeah, consoles never flop, especially when popular companies release them... OH WAIT : Dreamcast Vita Virtual Boy Jaguar Atari 5200/7800 CD-i N-Gage Sega 32X And other smaller ones Nope, never happened to any big companies. Big companies? Haha, none of those companies are even remotely comparable to MS. And you should go find out why exactly those systems flopped. I'll give you a hint, it had nothing to to with any of the issues Xbox One has. Really bad analogy. Sega was very well-known in the console community back in the day. MS's clout comes from its OS dominance, especially since the XBox has consistently flopped outside of the U.S. Even if the issues are the same, those examples show that big companies are hardly invincible, and mindless faith in the XBox thriving is pretty naive. It's not mindless faith in the XBox thriving, it's that the Xbox isn't going to crash and burn like most people keep talking about. If I were buying the Xbox, I'm not buying it because the PS4 blows it out of the water. I'm buying it because it has some cool stuff with the Kinect that I would want to try out because it's neat (like the Wii kinda put out there), and it has a lot of newer games that look interesting to me. I have absolutely no care what used game stuff it has because I never buy or play used games. I don't care what always-on DRM it has because I'm honestly never offline at home. I don't really care about your "what-if" scenarios because they don't apply to me. Like, I get that you guys think it's a bad business practice to have these online-always shenanigans because it does limit the number of people who can use it, but in reality if you're on TeamLiquid or Reddit debating it already it's rarely going to affect you. I would even go so far as to say only 0.001% of the users would ever notice the lack of online-ness, unless people actively try to shit on the system like with the Simcity launch because our first world societies today are basically always online, and if you are ever offline you bitch at your ISP for its failure. In the future, we will think of the Internet like how we think of our power grid today, and that's the kind of thing that MS is trying to say with shit like this. Okay, you're completely shitting on countries that don't have stable Internet systems, but that is pretty much the case for every online game on your computer. You can't really play LoL without Internet, so it really shouldn't be a problem not to expect generic AAA title on the Xbox to only be played with the Internet. It's just that there's this stigma attached to consoles where it should be a separate thing from a PC and be usable without the Internet, but this is the direction MS thinks the future will be like. Take a look at the mobile space and you see the same thing right? Farmville is unusable without Internet. I have a few MS games on my phone that aren't usable without Internet. If you've seen some tech-y movies, a lot of things require a stable upstream somewhere in order to work. No Internet, no dice. It's that kind of future MS is trying to push towards, which is understandable. And it's pretty shitty for a lot of consumers now, but at least you can see what they're trying to do and what they're doing wrong instead of shitting all over the company for things that they're intentionally doing in order to achieve the vision they seem to have set out. I agree. People should really get over the online requirement (which isn't even always online). There are many benefits to requiring always online: -Having one unified community (compare everyone playing SC2 using B.net, with SC1 where some played via pirate servers, some played via LAN, some played via Hamachi, some played single player, some played on B,net, etc.). -Achievements -Being easily able to chat with other people, quicker updates. -Access to game library anywhere with internet and automatically with synchronized saves. -And in the future, some of the calculations needed for games or to render graphics can be shifted from the computer/console onto a supercomputer on the cloud. -More data about play patterns helps developers design games (many changes in WoW are based on data, e.g. when to nerf raid bosses can sometimes depend on success rates). -If you look at the demonstration here, Kinect could be used to detect when exactly people are getting frustrated with the game. This can lead to better game design or patches. After what happened today, Microsoft is fucked because Sony has jumped on the outraged gamers bandwagon. Indeed, Sony's used game policy seems completely based on the Microsoft backlash. Before this press conference, they said it was up to developers (basically the same as Xbox One). Now they're suddenly fully embracing used games. But problem is Sony is wrong and Microsoft is right. Like PC or Steam, restricting used games and requiring online is a good thing, not a bad thing. In fact, restricting resale will lower costs for developer or increase revenues, and this I think should probably lead to lower prices due to competition. And no, the monopoly excuse doesn't work, because Microsoft doesn't set the price, developers do. And no developer has a monopoly. Sony made a big deal of embracing "disc based games". That term was used over and over in their conference. It was epitomized in their hilarious used game demonstration video. But that's the problem. Disc's are last decades technology. I don't think I've physically seen a disc in the last 3 years of my life--that's how obsolete discs are. Xbox One uses a centralized account where all games and saves are on the cloud, discs aren't required. And Sony haven't announced that all games will be available digital from release day, like Microsoft has. Sony is stuck in the past with it's use of discs, all the appeals the misguided and wrongheaded outrage over Microsoft restricting used games. Still Microsoft is fucked. It has only 2 options to turn this around: 1. Better exclusive games. 2. Cheaper games and cheaper costs. They can easily do the second due to their "DRM" features and the potential for ads. Here's what I would get Microsoft to do if I were in charge: They should announce no game resale (not even once), no physical distribution of games ever (i.e. no game discs. OK, maybe a box with a code on a piece of paper would be acceptable), and always online. Then they should announce always online will allow the use of cloud computing to produce better framerates and gameplay. Moreover, using the money they saved from these features, they should announce that games will sell for between $10 to $50 and prices will reduce as games get older, much cheaper than the usual and unchanging $60 which Sony will almost surely charge. In short Microsoft now has the ability to easily undercut Sony on game prices and the capacity to make better games and better graphics with the use of cloud computing. They should make this clear, if not for the sake of shutting up the annoying fanboys and haters, then for the sake of their bottom line. Another way that Microsoft could reduce costs to consumers is to have an ads and no ads version (like Kindle). You could have the option to either buy a cheaper console or perhaps a cheaper subscription with ads. The ads version could significantly reduce costs to the consumer if it used the Kinect to record information to target ads. Moreover, Microsoft could sell anonymous information for money, hence further reducing the cost for the people who optionally choose to use the ads version. The fact is that the Kinect is a gold mine for advertisers. And ads reduce costs. Hell, in the case of TV, ads reduce costs to $0. None of what you listed is actually a benefit of Online DRM, it's just a benefit of being online. You just flew off the rails for data mining.
Not only that, but everything that person mentioned could be or is already done on the Xbox 360, with the exception that the 360 does not turn into a brick should you go over 24 hours without connecting to the internet.
|
On June 12 2013 02:36 nihlon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 02:28 maartendq wrote:On June 12 2013 02:14 FakeDeath wrote:
Overall though, Microsoft got destroyed by Sony at the conference.
DRM/Used game policy really put a nail in the coffin there at the XBONE.
Of course it won't crash and burn.
But it won't sold well except at maybe in the US now.
Even your average people will pick PS4 over XBONE now.
Simply because it is cheaper now and DRM/Used Game issue.
Quite bluntly, Sony leaves the DRM stuff to the publishers. I think that we'll be seeing a lot more variation's on EA's online pass in the future. Sure you'll be able to buy second hand games, but if you want to take them online (or activate the single player), you'll have to pay extra. Publishers would really like nothing more than to see the current second hand market model for console games utterly destroyed. One of the main reasons steam is as popular as it is, is the fact that every game is tied to an account and you cannot resell it. Eh no, it's not popular because it's tied to an account and because you can't resell it. That's a consequence of the buisness model, not the reason why people like it. Unless you talk about popularity for publishers?
I was talking about Steam's popularity with publishers. The fact that the games are tied to one account is rather annoying.
|
Actually I wouldn't be surprised at all if this was Microsoft's gameplan:
Put all these restrictive features on the xbone to make sony think its okay for them to do it too. Once they do it too on the PS4, undercut them by 'listening to the fans' and removing all the features, making Sony look like assholes and making the xbone look awesome. Then Sony is left playing catch up with their image ruined. No one remembers who did it second, only who did it first. But the problem is that Sony went straight for microsoft's throat. I feel as though microsoft will eventually remove these features to stay comeptetive, but their image has been tarnished for good. Unless Sony does something stupid or microsoft pulls out something amazing, the future of the X-box is looking weak.
|
On June 12 2013 02:32 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 02:26 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 00:49 Blisse wrote:On June 12 2013 00:34 Stratos_speAr wrote:On June 12 2013 00:24 takingbackoj wrote:On June 12 2013 00:20 Kurr wrote:On June 12 2013 00:13 takingbackoj wrote:
Despite what the over dramatic gamer crowd wants to believe, the truth is, Xbox will be fine. PS4 did a much better job of focusing on the gamer crowd, but Xbox one's target isn't the people who watched E3. They have focused on people who will see the applications of Xbox outside of gaming and say "man, those features are pretty cool and I can play some games on it." They have decided, it seems, to play the middle ground between PS4 and WiiU and trying to attract a broader audience while unlike Nintendo, also still putting out quality games and intergrating their extra features into the everyday entertainment of most people.
It will most likely work and all of this Xbone lost the war stuff will look even more dumb after release. Again, neither will die, they will both do fine. Yeah, consoles never flop, especially when popular companies release them... OH WAIT : Dreamcast Vita Virtual Boy Jaguar Atari 5200/7800 CD-i N-Gage Sega 32X And other smaller ones Nope, never happened to any big companies. Big companies? Haha, none of those companies are even remotely comparable to MS. And you should go find out why exactly those systems flopped. I'll give you a hint, it had nothing to to with any of the issues Xbox One has. Really bad analogy. Sega was very well-known in the console community back in the day. MS's clout comes from its OS dominance, especially since the XBox has consistently flopped outside of the U.S. Even if the issues are the same, those examples show that big companies are hardly invincible, and mindless faith in the XBox thriving is pretty naive. It's not mindless faith in the XBox thriving, it's that the Xbox isn't going to crash and burn like most people keep talking about. If I were buying the Xbox, I'm not buying it because the PS4 blows it out of the water. I'm buying it because it has some cool stuff with the Kinect that I would want to try out because it's neat (like the Wii kinda put out there), and it has a lot of newer games that look interesting to me. I have absolutely no care what used game stuff it has because I never buy or play used games. I don't care what always-on DRM it has because I'm honestly never offline at home. I don't really care about your "what-if" scenarios because they don't apply to me. Like, I get that you guys think it's a bad business practice to have these online-always shenanigans because it does limit the number of people who can use it, but in reality if you're on TeamLiquid or Reddit debating it already it's rarely going to affect you. I would even go so far as to say only 0.001% of the users would ever notice the lack of online-ness, unless people actively try to shit on the system like with the Simcity launch because our first world societies today are basically always online, and if you are ever offline you bitch at your ISP for its failure. In the future, we will think of the Internet like how we think of our power grid today, and that's the kind of thing that MS is trying to say with shit like this. Okay, you're completely shitting on countries that don't have stable Internet systems, but that is pretty much the case for every online game on your computer. You can't really play LoL without Internet, so it really shouldn't be a problem not to expect generic AAA title on the Xbox to only be played with the Internet. It's just that there's this stigma attached to consoles where it should be a separate thing from a PC and be usable without the Internet, but this is the direction MS thinks the future will be like. Take a look at the mobile space and you see the same thing right? Farmville is unusable without Internet. I have a few MS games on my phone that aren't usable without Internet. If you've seen some tech-y movies, a lot of things require a stable upstream somewhere in order to work. No Internet, no dice. It's that kind of future MS is trying to push towards, which is understandable. And it's pretty shitty for a lot of consumers now, but at least you can see what they're trying to do and what they're doing wrong instead of shitting all over the company for things that they're intentionally doing in order to achieve the vision they seem to have set out. I agree. People should really get over the online requirement (which isn't even always online). There are many benefits to requiring always online: -Having one unified community (compare everyone playing SC2 using B.net, with SC1 where some played via pirate servers, some played via LAN, some played via Hamachi, some played single player, some played on B,net, etc.). -Achievements -Being easily able to chat with other people, quicker updates. -Access to game library anywhere with internet and automatically with synchronized saves. -And in the future, some of the calculations needed for games or to render graphics can be shifted from the computer/console onto a supercomputer on the cloud. -More data about play patterns helps developers design games (many changes in WoW are based on data, e.g. when to nerf raid bosses can sometimes depend on success rates). -If you look at the demonstration here, Kinect could be used to detect when exactly people are getting frustrated with the game. This can lead to better game design or patches. After what happened today, Microsoft is fucked because Sony has jumped on the outraged gamers bandwagon. Indeed, Sony's used game policy seems completely based on the Microsoft backlash. Before this press conference, they said it was up to developers (basically the same as Xbox One). Now they're suddenly fully embracing used games. But problem is Sony is wrong and Microsoft is right. Like PC or Steam, restricting used games and requiring online is a good thing, not a bad thing. In fact, restricting resale will lower costs for developer or increase revenues, and this I think should probably lead to lower prices due to competition. And no, the monopoly excuse doesn't work, because Microsoft doesn't set the price, developers do. And no developer has a monopoly. Sony made a big deal of embracing "disc based games". That term was used over and over in their conference. It was epitomized in their hilarious used game demonstration video. But that's the problem. Disc's are last decades technology. I don't think I've physically seen a disc in the last 3 years of my life--that's how obsolete discs are. Xbox One uses a centralized account where all games and saves are on the cloud, discs aren't required. And Sony haven't announced that all games will be available digital from release day, like Microsoft has. Sony is stuck in the past with it's use of discs, all the appeals the misguided and wrongheaded outrage over Microsoft restricting used games. Still Microsoft is fucked. It has only 2 options to turn this around: 1. Better exclusive games. 2. Cheaper games and cheaper costs. They can easily do the second due to their "DRM" features and the potential for ads. Here's what I would get Microsoft to do if I were in charge: They should announce no game resale (not even once), no physical distribution of games ever (i.e. no game discs. OK, maybe a box with a code on a piece of paper would be acceptable), and always online. Then they should announce always online will allow the use of cloud computing to produce better framerates and gameplay. Moreover, using the money they saved from these features, they should announce that games will sell for between $10 to $50 and prices will reduce as games get older, much cheaper than the usual and unchanging $60 which Sony will almost surely charge. In short Microsoft now has the ability to easily undercut Sony on game prices and the capacity to make better games and better graphics with the use of cloud computing. They should make this clear, if not for the sake of shutting up the annoying fanboys and haters, then for the sake of their bottom line. Another way that Microsoft could reduce costs to consumers is to have an ads and no ads version (like Kindle). You could have the option to either buy a cheaper console or perhaps a cheaper subscription with ads. The ads version could significantly reduce costs to the consumer if it used the Kinect to record information to target ads. Moreover, Microsoft could sell anonymous information for money, hence further reducing the cost for the people who optionally choose to use the ads version. The fact is that the Kinect is a gold mine for advertisers. And ads reduce costs. Hell, in the case of TV, ads reduce costs to $0. None of what you listed is actually a benefit of Online DRM, it's just a benefit of being online. You just flew off the rails for data mining.
Out of my pro online requirement list, not having always online would make the following not possible or far less effective: one unified community through a single online system, gathering data to improve game design.
Also, there's nothing wrong with data mining to improve games. On data mining to target ads, I said that should be optional, but it's a good way to allow consumers to save money and to make money for Microsoft.
|
On June 12 2013 02:37 Masheyoon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 02:32 Jibba wrote:On June 12 2013 02:26 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 00:49 Blisse wrote:On June 12 2013 00:34 Stratos_speAr wrote:On June 12 2013 00:24 takingbackoj wrote:On June 12 2013 00:20 Kurr wrote:On June 12 2013 00:13 takingbackoj wrote:
Despite what the over dramatic gamer crowd wants to believe, the truth is, Xbox will be fine. PS4 did a much better job of focusing on the gamer crowd, but Xbox one's target isn't the people who watched E3. They have focused on people who will see the applications of Xbox outside of gaming and say "man, those features are pretty cool and I can play some games on it." They have decided, it seems, to play the middle ground between PS4 and WiiU and trying to attract a broader audience while unlike Nintendo, also still putting out quality games and intergrating their extra features into the everyday entertainment of most people.
It will most likely work and all of this Xbone lost the war stuff will look even more dumb after release. Again, neither will die, they will both do fine. Yeah, consoles never flop, especially when popular companies release them... OH WAIT : Dreamcast Vita Virtual Boy Jaguar Atari 5200/7800 CD-i N-Gage Sega 32X And other smaller ones Nope, never happened to any big companies. Big companies? Haha, none of those companies are even remotely comparable to MS. And you should go find out why exactly those systems flopped. I'll give you a hint, it had nothing to to with any of the issues Xbox One has. Really bad analogy. Sega was very well-known in the console community back in the day. MS's clout comes from its OS dominance, especially since the XBox has consistently flopped outside of the U.S. Even if the issues are the same, those examples show that big companies are hardly invincible, and mindless faith in the XBox thriving is pretty naive. It's not mindless faith in the XBox thriving, it's that the Xbox isn't going to crash and burn like most people keep talking about. If I were buying the Xbox, I'm not buying it because the PS4 blows it out of the water. I'm buying it because it has some cool stuff with the Kinect that I would want to try out because it's neat (like the Wii kinda put out there), and it has a lot of newer games that look interesting to me. I have absolutely no care what used game stuff it has because I never buy or play used games. I don't care what always-on DRM it has because I'm honestly never offline at home. I don't really care about your "what-if" scenarios because they don't apply to me. Like, I get that you guys think it's a bad business practice to have these online-always shenanigans because it does limit the number of people who can use it, but in reality if you're on TeamLiquid or Reddit debating it already it's rarely going to affect you. I would even go so far as to say only 0.001% of the users would ever notice the lack of online-ness, unless people actively try to shit on the system like with the Simcity launch because our first world societies today are basically always online, and if you are ever offline you bitch at your ISP for its failure. In the future, we will think of the Internet like how we think of our power grid today, and that's the kind of thing that MS is trying to say with shit like this. Okay, you're completely shitting on countries that don't have stable Internet systems, but that is pretty much the case for every online game on your computer. You can't really play LoL without Internet, so it really shouldn't be a problem not to expect generic AAA title on the Xbox to only be played with the Internet. It's just that there's this stigma attached to consoles where it should be a separate thing from a PC and be usable without the Internet, but this is the direction MS thinks the future will be like. Take a look at the mobile space and you see the same thing right? Farmville is unusable without Internet. I have a few MS games on my phone that aren't usable without Internet. If you've seen some tech-y movies, a lot of things require a stable upstream somewhere in order to work. No Internet, no dice. It's that kind of future MS is trying to push towards, which is understandable. And it's pretty shitty for a lot of consumers now, but at least you can see what they're trying to do and what they're doing wrong instead of shitting all over the company for things that they're intentionally doing in order to achieve the vision they seem to have set out. I agree. People should really get over the online requirement (which isn't even always online). There are many benefits to requiring always online: -Having one unified community (compare everyone playing SC2 using B.net, with SC1 where some played via pirate servers, some played via LAN, some played via Hamachi, some played single player, some played on B,net, etc.). -Achievements -Being easily able to chat with other people, quicker updates. -Access to game library anywhere with internet and automatically with synchronized saves. -And in the future, some of the calculations needed for games or to render graphics can be shifted from the computer/console onto a supercomputer on the cloud. -More data about play patterns helps developers design games (many changes in WoW are based on data, e.g. when to nerf raid bosses can sometimes depend on success rates). -If you look at the demonstration here, Kinect could be used to detect when exactly people are getting frustrated with the game. This can lead to better game design or patches. After what happened today, Microsoft is fucked because Sony has jumped on the outraged gamers bandwagon. Indeed, Sony's used game policy seems completely based on the Microsoft backlash. Before this press conference, they said it was up to developers (basically the same as Xbox One). Now they're suddenly fully embracing used games. But problem is Sony is wrong and Microsoft is right. Like PC or Steam, restricting used games and requiring online is a good thing, not a bad thing. In fact, restricting resale will lower costs for developer or increase revenues, and this I think should probably lead to lower prices due to competition. And no, the monopoly excuse doesn't work, because Microsoft doesn't set the price, developers do. And no developer has a monopoly. Sony made a big deal of embracing "disc based games". That term was used over and over in their conference. It was epitomized in their hilarious used game demonstration video. But that's the problem. Disc's are last decades technology. I don't think I've physically seen a disc in the last 3 years of my life--that's how obsolete discs are. Xbox One uses a centralized account where all games and saves are on the cloud, discs aren't required. And Sony haven't announced that all games will be available digital from release day, like Microsoft has. Sony is stuck in the past with it's use of discs, all the appeals the misguided and wrongheaded outrage over Microsoft restricting used games. Still Microsoft is fucked. It has only 2 options to turn this around: 1. Better exclusive games. 2. Cheaper games and cheaper costs. They can easily do the second due to their "DRM" features and the potential for ads. Here's what I would get Microsoft to do if I were in charge: They should announce no game resale (not even once), no physical distribution of games ever (i.e. no game discs. OK, maybe a box with a code on a piece of paper would be acceptable), and always online. Then they should announce always online will allow the use of cloud computing to produce better framerates and gameplay. Moreover, using the money they saved from these features, they should announce that games will sell for between $10 to $50 and prices will reduce as games get older, much cheaper than the usual and unchanging $60 which Sony will almost surely charge. In short Microsoft now has the ability to easily undercut Sony on game prices and the capacity to make better games and better graphics with the use of cloud computing. They should make this clear, if not for the sake of shutting up the annoying fanboys and haters, then for the sake of their bottom line. Another way that Microsoft could reduce costs to consumers is to have an ads and no ads version (like Kindle). You could have the option to either buy a cheaper console or perhaps a cheaper subscription with ads. The ads version could significantly reduce costs to the consumer if it used the Kinect to record information to target ads. Moreover, Microsoft could sell anonymous information for money, hence further reducing the cost for the people who optionally choose to use the ads version. The fact is that the Kinect is a gold mine for advertisers. And ads reduce costs. Hell, in the case of TV, ads reduce costs to $0. None of what you listed is actually a benefit of Online DRM, it's just a benefit of being online. You just flew off the rails for data mining. Not only that, but everything that person mentioned could be or is already done on the Xbox 360, with the exception that the 360 does not turn into a brick should you go over 24 hours without connecting to the internet.
The 24 hours requirement is DRM. I've said so here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=409554¤tpage=61#1210
I think it's related to the ability to have another person logon to your Xbox One to play their games. Without it, they could logon, download their games to your Xbox One, then you can play those games offline forever, without having bought the games. (Note: the above post was made before this was announced by Microsoft a few days ago.)
But I would have no problem if it was always online instead of this 24 hours check-in thing.
|
On June 12 2013 02:43 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 02:32 Jibba wrote:On June 12 2013 02:26 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 00:49 Blisse wrote:On June 12 2013 00:34 Stratos_speAr wrote:On June 12 2013 00:24 takingbackoj wrote:On June 12 2013 00:20 Kurr wrote:On June 12 2013 00:13 takingbackoj wrote:
Despite what the over dramatic gamer crowd wants to believe, the truth is, Xbox will be fine. PS4 did a much better job of focusing on the gamer crowd, but Xbox one's target isn't the people who watched E3. They have focused on people who will see the applications of Xbox outside of gaming and say "man, those features are pretty cool and I can play some games on it." They have decided, it seems, to play the middle ground between PS4 and WiiU and trying to attract a broader audience while unlike Nintendo, also still putting out quality games and intergrating their extra features into the everyday entertainment of most people.
It will most likely work and all of this Xbone lost the war stuff will look even more dumb after release. Again, neither will die, they will both do fine. Yeah, consoles never flop, especially when popular companies release them... OH WAIT : Dreamcast Vita Virtual Boy Jaguar Atari 5200/7800 CD-i N-Gage Sega 32X And other smaller ones Nope, never happened to any big companies. Big companies? Haha, none of those companies are even remotely comparable to MS. And you should go find out why exactly those systems flopped. I'll give you a hint, it had nothing to to with any of the issues Xbox One has. Really bad analogy. Sega was very well-known in the console community back in the day. MS's clout comes from its OS dominance, especially since the XBox has consistently flopped outside of the U.S. Even if the issues are the same, those examples show that big companies are hardly invincible, and mindless faith in the XBox thriving is pretty naive. It's not mindless faith in the XBox thriving, it's that the Xbox isn't going to crash and burn like most people keep talking about. If I were buying the Xbox, I'm not buying it because the PS4 blows it out of the water. I'm buying it because it has some cool stuff with the Kinect that I would want to try out because it's neat (like the Wii kinda put out there), and it has a lot of newer games that look interesting to me. I have absolutely no care what used game stuff it has because I never buy or play used games. I don't care what always-on DRM it has because I'm honestly never offline at home. I don't really care about your "what-if" scenarios because they don't apply to me. Like, I get that you guys think it's a bad business practice to have these online-always shenanigans because it does limit the number of people who can use it, but in reality if you're on TeamLiquid or Reddit debating it already it's rarely going to affect you. I would even go so far as to say only 0.001% of the users would ever notice the lack of online-ness, unless people actively try to shit on the system like with the Simcity launch because our first world societies today are basically always online, and if you are ever offline you bitch at your ISP for its failure. In the future, we will think of the Internet like how we think of our power grid today, and that's the kind of thing that MS is trying to say with shit like this. Okay, you're completely shitting on countries that don't have stable Internet systems, but that is pretty much the case for every online game on your computer. You can't really play LoL without Internet, so it really shouldn't be a problem not to expect generic AAA title on the Xbox to only be played with the Internet. It's just that there's this stigma attached to consoles where it should be a separate thing from a PC and be usable without the Internet, but this is the direction MS thinks the future will be like. Take a look at the mobile space and you see the same thing right? Farmville is unusable without Internet. I have a few MS games on my phone that aren't usable without Internet. If you've seen some tech-y movies, a lot of things require a stable upstream somewhere in order to work. No Internet, no dice. It's that kind of future MS is trying to push towards, which is understandable. And it's pretty shitty for a lot of consumers now, but at least you can see what they're trying to do and what they're doing wrong instead of shitting all over the company for things that they're intentionally doing in order to achieve the vision they seem to have set out. I agree. People should really get over the online requirement (which isn't even always online). There are many benefits to requiring always online: -Having one unified community (compare everyone playing SC2 using B.net, with SC1 where some played via pirate servers, some played via LAN, some played via Hamachi, some played single player, some played on B,net, etc.). -Achievements -Being easily able to chat with other people, quicker updates. -Access to game library anywhere with internet and automatically with synchronized saves. -And in the future, some of the calculations needed for games or to render graphics can be shifted from the computer/console onto a supercomputer on the cloud. -More data about play patterns helps developers design games (many changes in WoW are based on data, e.g. when to nerf raid bosses can sometimes depend on success rates). -If you look at the demonstration here, Kinect could be used to detect when exactly people are getting frustrated with the game. This can lead to better game design or patches. After what happened today, Microsoft is fucked because Sony has jumped on the outraged gamers bandwagon. Indeed, Sony's used game policy seems completely based on the Microsoft backlash. Before this press conference, they said it was up to developers (basically the same as Xbox One). Now they're suddenly fully embracing used games. But problem is Sony is wrong and Microsoft is right. Like PC or Steam, restricting used games and requiring online is a good thing, not a bad thing. In fact, restricting resale will lower costs for developer or increase revenues, and this I think should probably lead to lower prices due to competition. And no, the monopoly excuse doesn't work, because Microsoft doesn't set the price, developers do. And no developer has a monopoly. Sony made a big deal of embracing "disc based games". That term was used over and over in their conference. It was epitomized in their hilarious used game demonstration video. But that's the problem. Disc's are last decades technology. I don't think I've physically seen a disc in the last 3 years of my life--that's how obsolete discs are. Xbox One uses a centralized account where all games and saves are on the cloud, discs aren't required. And Sony haven't announced that all games will be available digital from release day, like Microsoft has. Sony is stuck in the past with it's use of discs, all the appeals the misguided and wrongheaded outrage over Microsoft restricting used games. Still Microsoft is fucked. It has only 2 options to turn this around: 1. Better exclusive games. 2. Cheaper games and cheaper costs. They can easily do the second due to their "DRM" features and the potential for ads. Here's what I would get Microsoft to do if I were in charge: They should announce no game resale (not even once), no physical distribution of games ever (i.e. no game discs. OK, maybe a box with a code on a piece of paper would be acceptable), and always online. Then they should announce always online will allow the use of cloud computing to produce better framerates and gameplay. Moreover, using the money they saved from these features, they should announce that games will sell for between $10 to $50 and prices will reduce as games get older, much cheaper than the usual and unchanging $60 which Sony will almost surely charge. In short Microsoft now has the ability to easily undercut Sony on game prices and the capacity to make better games and better graphics with the use of cloud computing. They should make this clear, if not for the sake of shutting up the annoying fanboys and haters, then for the sake of their bottom line. Another way that Microsoft could reduce costs to consumers is to have an ads and no ads version (like Kindle). You could have the option to either buy a cheaper console or perhaps a cheaper subscription with ads. The ads version could significantly reduce costs to the consumer if it used the Kinect to record information to target ads. Moreover, Microsoft could sell anonymous information for money, hence further reducing the cost for the people who optionally choose to use the ads version. The fact is that the Kinect is a gold mine for advertisers. And ads reduce costs. Hell, in the case of TV, ads reduce costs to $0. None of what you listed is actually a benefit of Online DRM, it's just a benefit of being online. You just flew off the rails for data mining. Out of my pro online requirement list, not having always online would make the following not possible or far less effective: one unified community through a single online system, gathering data to improve game design. Also, there's nothing wrong with data mining to improve games. On data mining to target ads, I said that should be optional, but it's a good way to allow consumers to save money and to make money for Microsoft.
I don't see how being always online is relevant to the things you brought up.
-Having one unified community (compare everyone playing SC2 using B.net, with SC1 where some played via pirate
servers, some played via LAN, some played via Hamachi, some played single player, some played on B,net, etc.).
This is on a game to game basis. Nothing here requires the console to be always online.
-Achievements
You don't need the console to be always online for this to work.
-Being easily able to chat with other people, quicker updates.
Once again, you don't need an always online console for this.
-Access to game library anywhere with internet and automatically with synchronized saves.
You don't need always online. I can put steam in offline mode and it will synchronize when I connect to the internet the next time.
-And in the future, some of the calculations needed for games or to render graphics can be shifted from the computer/console onto a supercomputer on the cloud.
Why do you need the console to be always online for this?
-More data about play patterns helps developers design games (many changes in WoW are based on data, e.g. when to nerf raid bosses can sometimes depend on success rates).
Ok. But why do you have to do this in real time and make it obligatory for everyone?
-If you look at the demonstration here, Kinect could be used to detect when exactly people are getting frustrated with the game. This can lead to better game design or patches.
There's very little reason to make a console be ALWAYS online other than for drm.
|
On June 12 2013 02:39 maartendq wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 02:36 nihlon wrote:On June 12 2013 02:28 maartendq wrote:On June 12 2013 02:14 FakeDeath wrote:
Overall though, Microsoft got destroyed by Sony at the conference.
DRM/Used game policy really put a nail in the coffin there at the XBONE.
Of course it won't crash and burn.
But it won't sold well except at maybe in the US now.
Even your average people will pick PS4 over XBONE now.
Simply because it is cheaper now and DRM/Used Game issue.
Quite bluntly, Sony leaves the DRM stuff to the publishers. I think that we'll be seeing a lot more variation's on EA's online pass in the future. Sure you'll be able to buy second hand games, but if you want to take them online (or activate the single player), you'll have to pay extra. Publishers would really like nothing more than to see the current second hand market model for console games utterly destroyed. One of the main reasons steam is as popular as it is, is the fact that every game is tied to an account and you cannot resell it. Eh no, it's not popular because it's tied to an account and because you can't resell it. That's a consequence of the buisness model, not the reason why people like it. Unless you talk about popularity for publishers? I was talking about Steam's popularity with publishers. The fact that the games are tied to one account is rather annoying.
Yet no one complains.
|
I think Microsofts problem is they are trying to make the xbox one be too much, people want to play games everything else is just not needed, i dont want to check facebook on my xbox ... thats why i have a phone and pcs for.
|
On June 12 2013 02:14 FakeDeath wrote:
Overall though, Microsoft got destroyed by Sony at the conference.
DRM/Used game policy really put a nail in the coffin there at the XBONE.
Of course it won't crash and burn.
But it won't sold well except at maybe in the US now.
Even your average people will pick PS4 over XBONE now.
Simply because it is cheaper now and DRM/Used Game issue.
Pretty much this.
Sony Slaughtered Microsoft at the conference
ps4 is 99% likely to outsell Xbox one
That being said, Xbox will still do just fine, they have more then enough die hard fans + their new media features will attract enough people that can put up with the other bull shit to do okay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
