On June 12 2013 03:45 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 12 2013 02:26 paralleluniverse wrote:
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:
So right off the bat you argue that xbone isnt always online, then you proceed to list benefits of always online. So basically, none of the following are relevant to the once/day connection issue.
-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.).
You cant have private servers on a console, everything is automatically unified for online play.
-Achievements.
Achievements can be done offline too. You dont need always on for them.
-Being easily able to chat with other people, quicker updates.
Always on isnt required for this, just having a connection possible allows this.
-Access to game library anywhere with internet and automatically with synchronized saves.
This is true, but you have to remember that wherever you go, you have to download the game. This could take anywhere from 30 minutes to several hours depending on your internet speed and the size of the game. Sony looks to be working around this by allowing you to play games early on (like Blizzard does with their games)
-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.
VERY few game related calculations are possible with cloud computing. Also, relying on the cloud is not good because the cloud can be overloaded. When you have 100 different games being programmed to use "the power of the cloud" and 20 million people utilizing "the power of the cloud" you WILL overload very quickly. Blizzard had to use 20k servers for WoW, and no rendering was done by them and very very few calculations. It was mostly just location data and character data.
Think of it this way. MS claims to be using 300k servers for their cloud. This means 300k calculations can be done at any one time. What if you have 20 million people that need a calculation? If it takes a quarter of a second for a render calculation before it goes on to the next that is some 10 and 2/3 seconds delay before it reaches the 20 millionth person. Obviously I don't know the specifics of their setup, but this is a possibility and why it wont be relied upon for pretty much anything graphical.
-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).
This is true, but it shouldn't be necessary for a console game. Player raids are a different beast than anything I have seen on a console so far.
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.
I thought they said it was up to developers for requiring internet connection to play, not used games.
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.
If you havent seen a disc, you havent played a console. Discs are still nice to have. If your internet is down you can still play games, they are quicker to install, if you have slow internet digital is a nightmare.
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.
Earlier you said that MS doesnt set the prices, but now you are saying that they both set the prices "I don't think the monopoly excuse works, because Microsoft doesn't set the price, developers do." Which is it?
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.
They can make the claim, but people WILL demand examples. They can probably provide some when there arent millions of people using the live service, but that has to hold up when millions are using it.