|
On June 12 2013 23:31 nam nam wrote:
I don't understand why people think it's good for the console to have an always on Internet connection when you can just leave it to the individual games. Naturally you need Internet for an mmo, and you can have a cloud system in place without a complete restriction on the console itself. But some people seem to like drm...
You don't have to be always online, you have to check in online every 24 hours.
|
On June 12 2013 22:39 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 22:35 PassiveAce wrote:On June 12 2013 22:31 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 22:18 17Sphynx17 wrote:
In terms of arguments, I found it funny that one mentions that digital only is not ok for consoles but ok for pc. And the main argument that is argued for non digital is when the servers shut down or when the hardware breaks? That isnt an argument
For one, if it works as an option for pc games, it can work for consoles. The only issue is really the always connected requirement just to play. Take that out and thats one less major demerit against xbone.
arguing about the hardware breaking and not being able to use it on the new one seems stupid. Isnt it tied to your account? Therefore if you sign in on the new hardware, it should run.
The main push I can see for going all digital is the scenario that ps is seemingly building. The same ps plus account cross platform. Imagine a future where backwards compatibility and porting over to the next gen is not an issue since you did buy it already. Wouldnt that be awesome?
About the servers shuttung down, same dilemma with those using steam but the for that risk, the upside is the more competitive prices. Plus, since it hasnt happened yet, who is there wont be a patch to resolve the server requirement before it does shutdown for non multiplayer games.
It wouldnt be unfathomable to me.
The only real issue I have with xbone is the checkin requirement. I would like to see how their online digital marketplace shapes up. I agree. I also don't much like the check-in requirement. I believe it's needed to restrict other people installing games that you don't own when they play on your console. But I wonder why it's not needed for Steam. I've never had someone login to their Steam on my computer, so I don't know how Steam handles this. Does anyone know? For example, if my friend logs on with his Steam account on my computer to play Bioshock Infinite (but I don't have this game), then the game will be downloaded and installed to my computer. What stops me from playing Bioshock Infinite offline on my computer after he leaves and logs out? Valve has a "handshake" online requirement similar to what microsoft is rolling out but it lasts for a month instead of 24 hours. Other then that you can play your friends copy to your hearts content. Really? Then why don't more people do this? E.g. 1 person buys a game on Steam (this would only work for single player games). Then he shares the account password with 100 friends. Each person logs in to the account once to download the game. Then all 100 friends can play and finish the game within the month. And all of this was enabled from 1 original copy of the game. My main point is trying to figure out why Steam doesn't need a 24 hour check-in but Xbox One does.
Because games on steam are so discounted it's not worth it to game the system. Maybe you'd do it for a AAA release but most of the time games are on sale for like...%60 off. When you only paid $10 for a game, you're not gonna take the time to share accounts, you just tell your cheap ass friend to buy it himself.
|
On June 12 2013 23:35 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 22:39 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 22:35 PassiveAce wrote:On June 12 2013 22:31 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 22:18 17Sphynx17 wrote:
In terms of arguments, I found it funny that one mentions that digital only is not ok for consoles but ok for pc. And the main argument that is argued for non digital is when the servers shut down or when the hardware breaks? That isnt an argument
For one, if it works as an option for pc games, it can work for consoles. The only issue is really the always connected requirement just to play. Take that out and thats one less major demerit against xbone.
arguing about the hardware breaking and not being able to use it on the new one seems stupid. Isnt it tied to your account? Therefore if you sign in on the new hardware, it should run.
The main push I can see for going all digital is the scenario that ps is seemingly building. The same ps plus account cross platform. Imagine a future where backwards compatibility and porting over to the next gen is not an issue since you did buy it already. Wouldnt that be awesome?
About the servers shuttung down, same dilemma with those using steam but the for that risk, the upside is the more competitive prices. Plus, since it hasnt happened yet, who is there wont be a patch to resolve the server requirement before it does shutdown for non multiplayer games.
It wouldnt be unfathomable to me.
The only real issue I have with xbone is the checkin requirement. I would like to see how their online digital marketplace shapes up. I agree. I also don't much like the check-in requirement. I believe it's needed to restrict other people installing games that you don't own when they play on your console. But I wonder why it's not needed for Steam. I've never had someone login to their Steam on my computer, so I don't know how Steam handles this. Does anyone know? For example, if my friend logs on with his Steam account on my computer to play Bioshock Infinite (but I don't have this game), then the game will be downloaded and installed to my computer. What stops me from playing Bioshock Infinite offline on my computer after he leaves and logs out? Valve has a "handshake" online requirement similar to what microsoft is rolling out but it lasts for a month instead of 24 hours. Other then that you can play your friends copy to your hearts content. Really? Then why don't more people do this? E.g. 1 person buys a game on Steam (this would only work for single player games). Then he shares the account password with 100 friends. Each person logs in to the account once to download the game. Then all 100 friends can play and finish the game within the month. And all of this was enabled from 1 original copy of the game. My main point is trying to figure out why Steam doesn't need a 24 hour check-in but Xbox One does. Because games on steam are so discounted it's not worth it to game the system. Maybe you'd do it for a AAA release but most of the time games are on sale for like...%60 off. When you only paid $10 for a game, you're not gonna take the time to share accounts, you just tell your cheap ass friend to buy it himself.
I don't see how sales matter since you can do this for AAA titles right after launch, titles that won't be on sale for maybe a year, like Bioshock Infinite. You won't even need to persistently share an account. You only need to share it once for the 1 hour it takes to download the game to your computer.
|
On June 12 2013 23:38 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 23:35 Klondikebar wrote:On June 12 2013 22:39 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 22:35 PassiveAce wrote:On June 12 2013 22:31 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 22:18 17Sphynx17 wrote:
In terms of arguments, I found it funny that one mentions that digital only is not ok for consoles but ok for pc. And the main argument that is argued for non digital is when the servers shut down or when the hardware breaks? That isnt an argument
For one, if it works as an option for pc games, it can work for consoles. The only issue is really the always connected requirement just to play. Take that out and thats one less major demerit against xbone.
arguing about the hardware breaking and not being able to use it on the new one seems stupid. Isnt it tied to your account? Therefore if you sign in on the new hardware, it should run.
The main push I can see for going all digital is the scenario that ps is seemingly building. The same ps plus account cross platform. Imagine a future where backwards compatibility and porting over to the next gen is not an issue since you did buy it already. Wouldnt that be awesome?
About the servers shuttung down, same dilemma with those using steam but the for that risk, the upside is the more competitive prices. Plus, since it hasnt happened yet, who is there wont be a patch to resolve the server requirement before it does shutdown for non multiplayer games.
It wouldnt be unfathomable to me.
The only real issue I have with xbone is the checkin requirement. I would like to see how their online digital marketplace shapes up. I agree. I also don't much like the check-in requirement. I believe it's needed to restrict other people installing games that you don't own when they play on your console. But I wonder why it's not needed for Steam. I've never had someone login to their Steam on my computer, so I don't know how Steam handles this. Does anyone know? For example, if my friend logs on with his Steam account on my computer to play Bioshock Infinite (but I don't have this game), then the game will be downloaded and installed to my computer. What stops me from playing Bioshock Infinite offline on my computer after he leaves and logs out? Valve has a "handshake" online requirement similar to what microsoft is rolling out but it lasts for a month instead of 24 hours. Other then that you can play your friends copy to your hearts content. Really? Then why don't more people do this? E.g. 1 person buys a game on Steam (this would only work for single player games). Then he shares the account password with 100 friends. Each person logs in to the account once to download the game. Then all 100 friends can play and finish the game within the month. And all of this was enabled from 1 original copy of the game. My main point is trying to figure out why Steam doesn't need a 24 hour check-in but Xbox One does. Because games on steam are so discounted it's not worth it to game the system. Maybe you'd do it for a AAA release but most of the time games are on sale for like...%60 off. When you only paid $10 for a game, you're not gonna take the time to share accounts, you just tell your cheap ass friend to buy it himself. I don't see how sales matter since you can do this for AAA titles right after launch, titles that won't be on sale for maybe a year, like Bioshock Infinite. You won't even need to persistently share an account. You only need to share it once for the 1 hour it takes to download the game to your computer.
Well. If you want to do it you do it. I think the loss from this is way below the loss they would have from alienating their customer base with constant DRM.
|
On June 12 2013 23:38 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 23:35 Klondikebar wrote:On June 12 2013 22:39 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 22:35 PassiveAce wrote:On June 12 2013 22:31 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 22:18 17Sphynx17 wrote:
In terms of arguments, I found it funny that one mentions that digital only is not ok for consoles but ok for pc. And the main argument that is argued for non digital is when the servers shut down or when the hardware breaks? That isnt an argument
For one, if it works as an option for pc games, it can work for consoles. The only issue is really the always connected requirement just to play. Take that out and thats one less major demerit against xbone.
arguing about the hardware breaking and not being able to use it on the new one seems stupid. Isnt it tied to your account? Therefore if you sign in on the new hardware, it should run.
The main push I can see for going all digital is the scenario that ps is seemingly building. The same ps plus account cross platform. Imagine a future where backwards compatibility and porting over to the next gen is not an issue since you did buy it already. Wouldnt that be awesome?
About the servers shuttung down, same dilemma with those using steam but the for that risk, the upside is the more competitive prices. Plus, since it hasnt happened yet, who is there wont be a patch to resolve the server requirement before it does shutdown for non multiplayer games.
It wouldnt be unfathomable to me.
The only real issue I have with xbone is the checkin requirement. I would like to see how their online digital marketplace shapes up. I agree. I also don't much like the check-in requirement. I believe it's needed to restrict other people installing games that you don't own when they play on your console. But I wonder why it's not needed for Steam. I've never had someone login to their Steam on my computer, so I don't know how Steam handles this. Does anyone know? For example, if my friend logs on with his Steam account on my computer to play Bioshock Infinite (but I don't have this game), then the game will be downloaded and installed to my computer. What stops me from playing Bioshock Infinite offline on my computer after he leaves and logs out? Valve has a "handshake" online requirement similar to what microsoft is rolling out but it lasts for a month instead of 24 hours. Other then that you can play your friends copy to your hearts content. Really? Then why don't more people do this? E.g. 1 person buys a game on Steam (this would only work for single player games). Then he shares the account password with 100 friends. Each person logs in to the account once to download the game. Then all 100 friends can play and finish the game within the month. And all of this was enabled from 1 original copy of the game. My main point is trying to figure out why Steam doesn't need a 24 hour check-in but Xbox One does. Because games on steam are so discounted it's not worth it to game the system. Maybe you'd do it for a AAA release but most of the time games are on sale for like...%60 off. When you only paid $10 for a game, you're not gonna take the time to share accounts, you just tell your cheap ass friend to buy it himself. I don't see how sales matter since you can do this for AAA titles right after launch, titles that won't be on sale for maybe a year, like Bioshock Infinite. You won't even need to persistently share an account. You only need to share it once for the 1 hour it takes to download the game to your computer.
Steam puts new releases on sales within weeks, not a year. They even offer a sale if you buy the game on release day. If you're account sharing with Steam you really are just cheap. They've made it incredibly easy to afford whatever games you want.
|
On June 12 2013 21:54 FakeDeath wrote:
Imagine if your XBONE damaged/broken.
What happened to your game library?
All of your games will just go poofed.
And what if MS decided to shut down their XBOX live servers after 10 years or so.
Guess what?
Your game library also go poofed.
Going digital doesn't mean better.
Physical content(disk games example).
Means you can keep it FOREVER and still play it.
Like PS2 after 10 years of so.
I still take out my old-schooled MGS3 games to play.
There are pros and cons to both physical and digital( convenient).
1. Pretty naive for you to say console gamers who are stuck in the past.
People want to have options.
PS4 give you online but IT IS OPTIONAL.
And the PS eye is also OPTIONAL.
Not everyone wants to be forced down under their throats with DRM/Used game issues and also having a Kinect forced into it.
Funny thing is that at the press conference.
None of the games display at MS conference actually utilize the Kinect except for voice-detecting.
Which is kind of a joke.
If your XBox is damaged/broken or whatever, you download all of your games for free.
MS have transitioned to an OS that makes backwards-compatibility basically free for all future versions of the XBox, so I would assume that you'll be able to play your games for the forseeable future (I would hope but not expect for PC emulation to also be something that could happen in the future, it is technically feasible). This is somewhat of a gamble of course, but if MS shut down their servers in 10 years (unlikely as that may be seeing as they are still adding features to XBox Live many years down the track), I would hope they would release some sort of patch that removes the requirement for the XBox One to be connected to the internet.
Several of the games MS demoed used kinect for much more than voice detecting, at least try to know what you are talking about before spouting off (it's not like MS haters don't have enough ammo already).
|
On June 12 2013 23:41 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 23:38 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 23:35 Klondikebar wrote:On June 12 2013 22:39 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 22:35 PassiveAce wrote:On June 12 2013 22:31 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 22:18 17Sphynx17 wrote:
In terms of arguments, I found it funny that one mentions that digital only is not ok for consoles but ok for pc. And the main argument that is argued for non digital is when the servers shut down or when the hardware breaks? That isnt an argument
For one, if it works as an option for pc games, it can work for consoles. The only issue is really the always connected requirement just to play. Take that out and thats one less major demerit against xbone.
arguing about the hardware breaking and not being able to use it on the new one seems stupid. Isnt it tied to your account? Therefore if you sign in on the new hardware, it should run.
The main push I can see for going all digital is the scenario that ps is seemingly building. The same ps plus account cross platform. Imagine a future where backwards compatibility and porting over to the next gen is not an issue since you did buy it already. Wouldnt that be awesome?
About the servers shuttung down, same dilemma with those using steam but the for that risk, the upside is the more competitive prices. Plus, since it hasnt happened yet, who is there wont be a patch to resolve the server requirement before it does shutdown for non multiplayer games.
It wouldnt be unfathomable to me.
The only real issue I have with xbone is the checkin requirement. I would like to see how their online digital marketplace shapes up. I agree. I also don't much like the check-in requirement. I believe it's needed to restrict other people installing games that you don't own when they play on your console. But I wonder why it's not needed for Steam. I've never had someone login to their Steam on my computer, so I don't know how Steam handles this. Does anyone know? For example, if my friend logs on with his Steam account on my computer to play Bioshock Infinite (but I don't have this game), then the game will be downloaded and installed to my computer. What stops me from playing Bioshock Infinite offline on my computer after he leaves and logs out? Valve has a "handshake" online requirement similar to what microsoft is rolling out but it lasts for a month instead of 24 hours. Other then that you can play your friends copy to your hearts content. Really? Then why don't more people do this? E.g. 1 person buys a game on Steam (this would only work for single player games). Then he shares the account password with 100 friends. Each person logs in to the account once to download the game. Then all 100 friends can play and finish the game within the month. And all of this was enabled from 1 original copy of the game. My main point is trying to figure out why Steam doesn't need a 24 hour check-in but Xbox One does. Because games on steam are so discounted it's not worth it to game the system. Maybe you'd do it for a AAA release but most of the time games are on sale for like...%60 off. When you only paid $10 for a game, you're not gonna take the time to share accounts, you just tell your cheap ass friend to buy it himself. I don't see how sales matter since you can do this for AAA titles right after launch, titles that won't be on sale for maybe a year, like Bioshock Infinite. You won't even need to persistently share an account. You only need to share it once for the 1 hour it takes to download the game to your computer. Steam puts new releases on sales within weeks, not a year. They even offer a sale if you buy the game on release day. If you're account sharing with Steam you really are just cheap. They've made it incredibly easy to afford whatever games you want.
I'm even cheaper: I buy every game I buy at launch in a retail store, which is sometimes up to 15 EUR cheaper than steam.
|
On June 13 2013 00:13 maartendq wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 23:41 Klondikebar wrote:On June 12 2013 23:38 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 23:35 Klondikebar wrote:On June 12 2013 22:39 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 22:35 PassiveAce wrote:On June 12 2013 22:31 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 12 2013 22:18 17Sphynx17 wrote:
In terms of arguments, I found it funny that one mentions that digital only is not ok for consoles but ok for pc. And the main argument that is argued for non digital is when the servers shut down or when the hardware breaks? That isnt an argument
For one, if it works as an option for pc games, it can work for consoles. The only issue is really the always connected requirement just to play. Take that out and thats one less major demerit against xbone.
arguing about the hardware breaking and not being able to use it on the new one seems stupid. Isnt it tied to your account? Therefore if you sign in on the new hardware, it should run.
The main push I can see for going all digital is the scenario that ps is seemingly building. The same ps plus account cross platform. Imagine a future where backwards compatibility and porting over to the next gen is not an issue since you did buy it already. Wouldnt that be awesome?
About the servers shuttung down, same dilemma with those using steam but the for that risk, the upside is the more competitive prices. Plus, since it hasnt happened yet, who is there wont be a patch to resolve the server requirement before it does shutdown for non multiplayer games.
It wouldnt be unfathomable to me.
The only real issue I have with xbone is the checkin requirement. I would like to see how their online digital marketplace shapes up. I agree. I also don't much like the check-in requirement. I believe it's needed to restrict other people installing games that you don't own when they play on your console. But I wonder why it's not needed for Steam. I've never had someone login to their Steam on my computer, so I don't know how Steam handles this. Does anyone know? For example, if my friend logs on with his Steam account on my computer to play Bioshock Infinite (but I don't have this game), then the game will be downloaded and installed to my computer. What stops me from playing Bioshock Infinite offline on my computer after he leaves and logs out? Valve has a "handshake" online requirement similar to what microsoft is rolling out but it lasts for a month instead of 24 hours. Other then that you can play your friends copy to your hearts content. Really? Then why don't more people do this? E.g. 1 person buys a game on Steam (this would only work for single player games). Then he shares the account password with 100 friends. Each person logs in to the account once to download the game. Then all 100 friends can play and finish the game within the month. And all of this was enabled from 1 original copy of the game. My main point is trying to figure out why Steam doesn't need a 24 hour check-in but Xbox One does. Because games on steam are so discounted it's not worth it to game the system. Maybe you'd do it for a AAA release but most of the time games are on sale for like...%60 off. When you only paid $10 for a game, you're not gonna take the time to share accounts, you just tell your cheap ass friend to buy it himself. I don't see how sales matter since you can do this for AAA titles right after launch, titles that won't be on sale for maybe a year, like Bioshock Infinite. You won't even need to persistently share an account. You only need to share it once for the 1 hour it takes to download the game to your computer. Steam puts new releases on sales within weeks, not a year. They even offer a sale if you buy the game on release day. If you're account sharing with Steam you really are just cheap. They've made it incredibly easy to afford whatever games you want. I'm even cheaper: I buy every game I buy at launch in a retail store, which is sometimes up to 15 EUR cheaper than steam.
Belgium, come for the french fries and mayonnaise, stay for the cheap video games.
|
Most of the things new that MS ( and Sony ) brings with the new system aren't bad ( well besides the stupid used games stuff thats just overly complicated ) IF they were optional. Whats the reason you don't even give people the option to opt out of some of the things . Be it Kinect , be it digalized of everything , be it having to hook up to the internet , be it cloud service or whatever. If i don't agree with one or two of those things are for whatever reason can't use any of those for a while i shouldn't be completely shut out.
MS have transitioned to an OS that makes backwards-compatibility basically free for all future versions of the XBox, so I would assume that you'll be able to play your games for the forseeable future
And this doesn't work with on current Xbox-live titles and digital purchases on Xbox360 to Xbox-one because ? I'll tell you why because games for consoles are tailored to specific system specs of the console they are designed for. Unless you build in an emulator into the hardware ( expensive like the first PS3's ) or make it run through a server and stream to your system it just won't really run.
|
On June 12 2013 23:33 maartendq wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2013 23:31 nam nam wrote:
I don't understand why people think it's good for the console to have an always on Internet connection when you can just leave it to the individual games. Naturally you need Internet for an mmo, and you can have a cloud system in place without a complete restriction on the console itself. But some people seem to like drm... You don't have to be always online, you have to check in online every 24 hours.
That sounds like you are a criminal on probation that has to check in at the police all the time.
Way to go to criminalize every xbox user. Sharing games is a crime!
|
This just gives people more reason to find a way to crack this console and play pirated games. When piracy is not only convenient but appropriate too, why do anything else?
|
Is the DRM thing the only difference between these 2 consoles? (sorry can't really understand why they put DRM in the first place). But how about the graphics? Any idea which one would be giving more "EyeGasms"? Heard they will be both relying on AMD to design their next graphics processors.
And how do they compare from the emerging smartphone market? Which will produce the next-generation visuals for the consoles?
just getting some feedback, I know most of you guys been tuning E3, will be needing some input for my esports site.
Thanks in advance!
|
On June 12 2013 21:57 Kupon3ss wrote:
"exclusive" was also more frequent in previous generations where the architecture differences between platforms meant that was often costly to port games to other platforms and often resulted in subpar quality. In the next generation, PC, XOne, and PS4 will have nearly identical architecture, which makes "exclusives" not really make sense.
Not quite true, Xbox is the "DirectX box" The Playstation 3 uses "opengl" really just an opengl emulation layer or at least the ps3 was something most developers hated it was this ugly. PS3 uses libGCM which isn't bad alot of games use it but it's because of the emulation layer on top of it which is why the PS3 wasn't getting as much developers because it's hard and obtuse to use. Just because they are now using nearly identical architecture for their cpu and gpu doesn't mean their programming is the same in fact it's very different. And then API used for the PS4 will not be the same as the WII again this is all proprietary. Even the DirectX on the xbox's they are different from the directx on pc's same as ps3 or wii they don't use the same opengl they all use versions for embedded systems.
Even with the best practices into making your code agnostic as possible it still cost money to port a game between system now it's not a ton of money but it's a good amount and it can delay a game's launch unless you stagger it release it for each system when it becomes ready. For AAA titles it's def worth the cost to port over games for niche titles maybe not so much.
|
On June 13 2013 01:36 EsportsMonkey wrote:
Is the DRM thing the only difference between these 2 consoles? (sorry can't really understand why they put DRM in the first place). But how about the graphics? Any idea which one would be giving more "EyeGasms"? Heard they will be both relying on AMD to design their next graphics processors.
And how do they compare from the emerging smartphone market? Which will produce the next-generation visuals for the consoles?
just getting some feedback, I know most of you guys been tuning E3, will be needing some input for my esports site.
Thanks in advance!
The PS4 has significantly better hardware. Xbox One is hoping to make up the gap with "cloud rendering" but no one has actually been able to explain to me how this technology is any less bullshit than Sim City's "cloud computing." But neither console is going to show significant graphical differences until later in the generation. Developers take a while to start really pushing hardware.
|
On June 13 2013 01:36 EsportsMonkey wrote:
Is the DRM thing the only difference between these 2 consoles? (sorry can't really understand why they put DRM in the first place). But how about the graphics? Any idea which one would be giving more "EyeGasms"? Heard they will be both relying on AMD to design their next graphics processors.
And how do they compare from the emerging smartphone market? Which will produce the next-generation visuals for the consoles?
just getting some feedback, I know most of you guys been tuning E3, will be needing some input for my esports site.
Thanks in advance!
People are talking about DRM because online DRM on PC is awful and has ruined alot of games( Simcity 5 and Heroes VI come to mind).
The graphic will not be much difference even PS4 has more powerful hardware but beside some exclusives games for PS4, I dont think third parties games will have any difference at all between the 2 consoles since devs today are lazy and publishers are pushing for more and more FPSs other than actual games with good story and gameplay.
About smartphone market, the things is most people that had bought a console before are now playing games on Tablet/phone but I don't see much of them abandon consoles just to play Tablet/phone games. While people that are only playing games on Tablet/phones might venture into consoles/PC gaming 'cos they are the people that probably don't even like gaming before but after experience it on Tablet/phone, they might want more.
With that said, consoles gaming will still be enormous for the next decade, thats why MS, Sony and Nintendo all put a tons of money on R&D for their new systems.
|
So what happens if i don't have net for 24 hours and can't check in?
|
On June 13 2013 02:20 karpotoss wrote:
So what happens if i don't have net for 24 hours and can't check in?
Sounds like it becomes an XBrick until you do. :D
|
On June 13 2013 02:20 karpotoss wrote:
So what happens if i don't have net for 24 hours and can't check in?
Game service shuts down apparently and you can only watch TV or DVD/Bluerays whatever with your System.
|
On June 13 2013 02:21 s3rp wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2013 02:20 karpotoss wrote:
So what happens if i don't have net for 24 hours and can't check in? Game service shuts down apparently and you can only watch TV or DVD/Bluerays whatever with your System.
Thx for the answer but then what? Do you go to some microsoft place to rewive it or what?
|
On June 13 2013 02:23 karpotoss wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2013 02:21 s3rp wrote:On June 13 2013 02:20 karpotoss wrote:
So what happens if i don't have net for 24 hours and can't check in? Game service shuts down apparently and you can only watch TV or DVD/Bluerays whatever with your System. Thx for the answer but then what? Do you go to some microsoft place to rewive it or what?
You just need to check in to the servers again. So once you get internet connectivity back, you can go back to playing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
