|
On June 18 2013 09:00 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 08:37 sc4k wrote:
But xbox 360 was the cheaper choice and now xbox one is the expensive choice, don't underestimate that.
But I do agree, definitely best to let the dust settle before buying. The real chumps are the people who buy either console on launch. That's quite right but we need chumps like that to get burned else we wont know unless we do it ourselves. Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 08:41 jinorazi wrote:On June 18 2013 07:53 Nilrem wrote:To me I do wonder at times how many people will be effected by Microsoft's new policy. I mean just in terms of numbers, Microsoft has 40 million xbox live members and 70 million xbox 360's sold (so a difference of 30 million). Now can take into account various things like multiple ones getting purchased and such and can even be quite liberal and say only half of the 30 million are single standard purchases. That still leaves 15 million without xbox live. Question is, how many of the 15 million will end up getting screwed over? Oh and side note--when the whole online bit popped up during the debate, one thing did always come to mind. PS3 for SoldierGranted it is not really an argument but hen I first saw this video, I was actually quite happy. Props to this guy for helping them out. And then I began realizing, how many will not not have access to xbox one. I guess they will just have to do as Don Mattrick said, just buy a 360 then. i'm sure of those millions, millions will just buy the new xbox because its a new xbox and be confused when they take it overseas or dont have internet at their cabin or something. i hope microsoft's "futuristic" model dies a horrible death. i'm fine with digital content, steam seems to do it well, so is sony...but microsoft wants to do their own thing when others use a similar method that makes more sense. Who goes overseas to a cabin and brings their game console with them? What sort of weird imma go travel to the woods and stay at a cabin to play video games... There are legit problems if people actually move from one country to another, but we already know the markets listed for XB1 release are not all the markets they plan to have XB1 services, it's just those are the country available at launch. Obviously japan and other countries will come at a later time.
you know, i know, many internet active people knows the situation with religion lock and drm.
there will be just as many or a good portion of buyers that dont know.
|
On June 18 2013 09:15 Nilrem wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 09:00 semantics wrote:
Who goes overseas to a cabin and brings their game console with them? What sort of weird imma go travel to the woods and stay at a cabin to play video games...
There are legit problems if people actually move from one country to another, but we already know the markets listed for XB1 release are not all the markets they plan to have XB1 services, it's just those are the country available at launch. Obviously japan and other countries will come at a later time. I am guessing you do not often because it happens quite often. I have a cabin in Colorado (which in many areas has horrendous reception and borderline nonexistent internet access) but there is a TV so during the nights, one can watch movies or even play video games. Not sure if people are living a very sheltered life or what but the internet infrastructure within the States is actually pretty bad. essentially what I am seeing is the mentality by many that, "since this does not effect me, it is just fine so why complain".
I go to a cabin in the mountains with no Internet i got there go be there not to play video games there, but to fish, hike etc. I find it completely odd that someone would go out in nature and just want to play video games why leave home if that's what you want to do.
|
On June 18 2013 10:08 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 09:15 Nilrem wrote:On June 18 2013 09:00 semantics wrote:
Who goes overseas to a cabin and brings their game console with them? What sort of weird imma go travel to the woods and stay at a cabin to play video games...
There are legit problems if people actually move from one country to another, but we already know the markets listed for XB1 release are not all the markets they plan to have XB1 services, it's just those are the country available at launch. Obviously japan and other countries will come at a later time. I am guessing you do not often because it happens quite often. I have a cabin in Colorado (which in many areas has horrendous reception and borderline nonexistent internet access) but there is a TV so during the nights, one can watch movies or even play video games. Not sure if people are living a very sheltered life or what but the internet infrastructure within the States is actually pretty bad. essentially what I am seeing is the mentality by many that, "since this does not effect me, it is just fine so why complain". I go to a cabin in the mountains with no Internet i got there go be there not to play video games there, but to fish, hike etc. I find it completely odd that someone would go out in nature and just want to play video games why leave home if that's what you want to do.
No offense but did you bother reading what I actually said because it seems like you just skimmed read it or something. If you noticed, I specifically said, "during the nights" which leaves quite a few hours of day time to do various other tasks. Oh and why did you even bring up this, "I find it completely odd that someone would go out in nature and just want to play video games..." that was not even hinted to or mentioned in what I said. If that was at all addressed toward me then you should refrain from putting words in my mouth.
|
On June 18 2013 10:08 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 09:15 Nilrem wrote:On June 18 2013 09:00 semantics wrote:
Who goes overseas to a cabin and brings their game console with them? What sort of weird imma go travel to the woods and stay at a cabin to play video games...
There are legit problems if people actually move from one country to another, but we already know the markets listed for XB1 release are not all the markets they plan to have XB1 services, it's just those are the country available at launch. Obviously japan and other countries will come at a later time. I am guessing you do not often because it happens quite often. I have a cabin in Colorado (which in many areas has horrendous reception and borderline nonexistent internet access) but there is a TV so during the nights, one can watch movies or even play video games. Not sure if people are living a very sheltered life or what but the internet infrastructure within the States is actually pretty bad. essentially what I am seeing is the mentality by many that, "since this does not effect me, it is just fine so why complain". I go to a cabin in the mountains with no Internet i got there go be there not to play video games there, but to fish, hike etc. I find it completely odd that someone would go out in nature and just want to play video games why leave home if that's what you want to do.
Nature has limited amounts of natural light at night. Also if your staying for an extended period of time, hiking every day can get exhausting, relaxing is good too.
You could also just not like the outdoors, some people don't. Getting up to the cabin is for your significant other or family to go do outdoor stuff, and you might just want to play some video games. Maybe you work really hard and this is your one break from work or something.
|
On June 18 2013 10:24 BlueBird. wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 10:08 semantics wrote:On June 18 2013 09:15 Nilrem wrote:On June 18 2013 09:00 semantics wrote:
Who goes overseas to a cabin and brings their game console with them? What sort of weird imma go travel to the woods and stay at a cabin to play video games...
There are legit problems if people actually move from one country to another, but we already know the markets listed for XB1 release are not all the markets they plan to have XB1 services, it's just those are the country available at launch. Obviously japan and other countries will come at a later time. I am guessing you do not often because it happens quite often. I have a cabin in Colorado (which in many areas has horrendous reception and borderline nonexistent internet access) but there is a TV so during the nights, one can watch movies or even play video games. Not sure if people are living a very sheltered life or what but the internet infrastructure within the States is actually pretty bad. essentially what I am seeing is the mentality by many that, "since this does not effect me, it is just fine so why complain". I go to a cabin in the mountains with no Internet i got there go be there not to play video games there, but to fish, hike etc. I find it completely odd that someone would go out in nature and just want to play video games why leave home if that's what you want to do. Nature has limited amounts of natural light at night. Also if your staying for an extended period of time, hiking every day can get exhausting, relaxing is good too. You could also just not like the outdoors, some people don't. Getting up to the cabin is for your significant other or family to go do outdoor stuff, and you might just want to play some video games. Maybe you work really hard and this is your one break from work or something.
Exactly--I myself when I go hiking, I prefer to do it during the day which leaves night time often quite open. So after cooking up a meal, one can read, watch a movie, or who knows, maybe play a relaxing game on Playstation 4. Hell, bringing the Playstation 4 would be useful too since can be used to watch blu-ray movies.
In the end it is a matter of choice and with the Box, one loses out on choices (other than the choice to simply not get the console).
|
You know, people keep asking us for these highly specific examples of when we would need to play our console in an offline mode. Yet curiously, not a single one of these people asking for these examples are providing their own reasoning as to why we need always online in the first place. If we are losing this availability to play games offline, what are we, the consumers, getting out of this? We are trading away options, what are we getting in return?
|
On June 18 2013 10:33 Fruscainte wrote:
You know, people keep asking us for these highly specific examples of when we would need to play our console in an offline mode. Yet curiously, not a single one of these people asking for these examples are providing their own reasoning as to why we need always online in the first place. If we are losing this availability to play games offline, what are we, the consumers, getting out of this? We are trading away options, what are we getting in return?
Microsoft's excellent services?
Nah lol, they really shot themselves in the foot with this one.
|
So Don Mattrick is out trying to clean up their mess. During an interview on BloombergTV:
It's a lower number than some of the analysts had forecasted," he said. "We're over-delivering value against other choices I think consumers can get. Any modern product these days, you look at it [and] $499 isn't a ridiculous price point. We're delivering thousands of dollars of value to people, so I think they're going to love it when they use it.
I found this quote to be quite entertaining since at least for myself, all the predictions I read up from analyst depicted a less expensive price. For example, from Wedbush Morgan, it was a predicted of a pricing for the xbox one for $349.99 and for the Playstation 4, $399.99. Then I saw other variations of pricing for the Xbox one at $399 since the market prices putt he specs at $325.
It is actually surprising he said that since to my knowledge, I did not see one prediction from an analyst that was actually higher than what was given. Very curious to know who it was that forecasted an above pricing of $499.99 for the Xbox One.
Oh and let us not forget the second point; we are getting 'thousands' of dollars worth of value. It is a shame that Microsoft has done such a piss job of actually explaining why it is worth $500 price-tag. They have tried to do it after E3 but for the most part, it has been utter fail.
Oh and side note, I really dislike Don Mattrick. Everything he says on the topic makes me dislike the Xbox one even more.
|
So who's pumped for Killer Instinct 3? I wasn't very excited about the new generation and decided that I wasn't going to get another console but then they announced a sequel to my childhood and they immediately caught my attention. This was huge news to me, I had given up all hope for a Killer Instinct sequel due to the fact that Rare was now a Microsoft company and all the games were previously made for Nintendo systems, and all the legal problems that come with that. Also the 17 year wait didn't help.
I am lucky enough to still have Killer Instinct for my Super Nintendo and Killer Instinct Gold for N64 so I've been playing these a lot lately. I really hope they put Cinder and Kim Wu into the game, I have been playing them since I was five years old after all.
A lot of people are saying the game looks terrible but I guess I'm a product of a different age, I couldn't care less about how bad the graphics are. A game is good because it's a good game, good graphics will never make a bad game good, and bad graphics will never make a good game bad. And I know the game company has a bad history but as far as I can tell, they're asking for pro player's help, as well as having some old school third strike players on their development team (As well as ST, I believe).
Anyways, I'm pumped. I haven't been excited for a game like this in years!
|
On June 18 2013 13:57 Fiercegore wrote:
So who's pumped for Killer Instinct 3? I wasn't very excited about the new generation and decided that I wasn't going to get another console but then they announced a sequel to my childhood and they immediately caught my attention. This was huge news to me, I had given up all hope for a Killer Instinct sequel due to the fact that Rare was now a Microsoft company and all the games were previously made for Nintendo systems, and all the legal problems that come with that. Also the 17 year wait didn't help.
I am lucky enough to still have Killer Instinct for my Super Nintendo and Killer Instinct Gold for N64 so I've been playing these a lot lately. I really hope they put Cinder and Kim Wu into the game, I have been playing them since I was five years old after all.
A lot of people are saying the game looks terrible but I guess I'm a product of a different age, I couldn't care less about how bad the graphics are. A game is good because it's a good game, good graphics will never make a bad game good, and bad graphics will never make a good game bad. And I know the game company has a bad history but as far as I can tell, they're asking for pro player's help, as well as having some old school third strike players on their development team (As well as ST, I believe).
Anyways, I'm pumped. I haven't been excited for a game like this in years!
I am not having any hopes for that. It cant be overstated how shit Double Helix Games have been, if anyone can fuck this up big it is them. If they really are doing the major part of development the I will put down money on the game being terrible.
Im also really sad that Dead Rising 3 looks like such a generic zombie game now, I loved the first two :[ I guess I will pick it up when it eventually gets ported to PC.
|
On June 18 2013 14:05 Hypemeup wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 13:57 Fiercegore wrote:
So who's pumped for Killer Instinct 3? I wasn't very excited about the new generation and decided that I wasn't going to get another console but then they announced a sequel to my childhood and they immediately caught my attention. This was huge news to me, I had given up all hope for a Killer Instinct sequel due to the fact that Rare was now a Microsoft company and all the games were previously made for Nintendo systems, and all the legal problems that come with that. Also the 17 year wait didn't help.
I am lucky enough to still have Killer Instinct for my Super Nintendo and Killer Instinct Gold for N64 so I've been playing these a lot lately. I really hope they put Cinder and Kim Wu into the game, I have been playing them since I was five years old after all.
A lot of people are saying the game looks terrible but I guess I'm a product of a different age, I couldn't care less about how bad the graphics are. A game is good because it's a good game, good graphics will never make a bad game good, and bad graphics will never make a good game bad. And I know the game company has a bad history but as far as I can tell, they're asking for pro player's help, as well as having some old school third strike players on their development team (As well as ST, I believe).
Anyways, I'm pumped. I haven't been excited for a game like this in years! I am not having any hopes for that. It cant be overstated how shit Double Helix Games have been, if anyone can fuck this up big it is them. If they really are doing the major part of development the I will put down money on the game being terrible. Im also really sad that Dead Rising 3 looks like such a generic zombie game now, I loved the first two :[ I guess I will pick it up when it eventually gets ported to PC.
Yeah I am not sure how I feel about Killer Instinct. I mean, I use to play that game to death back in the day and loved the combos but they are going about this in such a weird way. I mean, the game being free but only have character is available and all others are essentially DLC.
Oh and as for DR3, I agree, The game just does not look or come off as a Dead Rising game. I think if it was just another game (with its name changed), it would have been fine as a typical (but nice looking) zombie game. But it seems like they killed the comedic aspect. You can craft items cool, but just does not seem the same.
|
On June 18 2013 10:33 Fruscainte wrote:
You know, people keep asking us for these highly specific examples of when we would need to play our console in an offline mode. Yet curiously, not a single one of these people asking for these examples are providing their own reasoning as to why we need always online in the first place. If we are losing this availability to play games offline, what are we, the consumers, getting out of this? We are trading away options, what are we getting in return?
Highly specific reasoning?
I sometime visit our summer cottage with my family. It has electricity but no internet, it's quite far from everywhere. It would be nice to have a gaming console there because 2 weeks can be quite long otherwise.
Don't most people have similiar conditions?
|
On June 18 2013 02:05 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 01:53 sc4k wrote:On June 17 2013 12:28 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 17 2013 08:38 sc4k wrote:The instant I picked up 'internship at Microsoft' in my cursory scan of the text I knew what to expect. Funnily enough, this piece perfectly explains why Microsoft have managed to simultaneously alienate users of services like Steam and users of physical discs. Just a horrible, poorly thought out and hollow attempt at changing the lanscape of gaming to their economic advantage under the guise of a badly constructed excuse of taking gaming forwards. An attempted ruse which looks set to fail drastically. How has Microsoft alienated Steam users? As a Steam user, I'm glad that Microsoft is moving towards a more Steam-like system? In fact, my main problem is that they haven't gone far enough by killing resale completely and killing the disc. I would think that supporters of Steam (I have many gripes about Steam, although not with their game library system) would be supportive of what Microsoft is trying to do. 2 thing: a) the fact that they require 24 hours online checks. Steam is far more liberal with that shit. b) The fact that xbox is part of a series, and when the Xbox One servers go down, because they will when it's time to move onto the next console (and xbox isn't known for backwards compatibility), your downloaded games will be worthless. The beauty of Steam is that it's not tied to any specific console period - it will theoretically be useful forever...hence alienated Steam users. As much as I hate the XBONE and plan on getting a PS4, I have a hard time believing that all Xbox ONE games will become worthless once they shut down the servers for the console. By that time, as this generation of consoles is coming to an end, won't it be possible for Xbox to turn off the DRM for it's older games? It has nothing to lose by doing so, since they only way they will generate additional revenue once the servers are off is by turning off the DRM and allowing people to play the games without the check-in or Xbox live services. Regardless, that bridge is years from being crossed anyways. I think there are many valid criticisms and concerns with the console, but I'm not sure the "In 10 years my games might be worthless!" argument holds as much water. It is win-win for both Microsoft and the consumer for them to allow people to continue playing XBONE games after the online servers are no longer supported, assuming that makes sense for the game in question.
No, it is better for MS to kill old games, and force people to buy they new console, and more new games then to allow customers to play old ones.
|
On June 18 2013 13:32 Nilrem wrote:So Don Mattrick is out trying to clean up their mess. During an interview on BloombergTV: Show nested quote +It's a lower number than some of the analysts had forecasted," he said. "We're over-delivering value against other choices I think consumers can get. Any modern product these days, you look at it [and] $499 isn't a ridiculous price point. We're delivering thousands of dollars of value to people, so I think they're going to love it when they use it. I found this quote to be quite entertaining since at least for myself, all the predictions I read up from analyst depicted a less expensive price. For example, from Wedbush Morgan, it was a predicted of a pricing for the xbox one for $349.99 and for the Playstation 4, $399.99. Then I saw other variations of pricing for the Xbox one at $399 since the market prices putt he specs at $325. It is actually surprising he said that since to my knowledge, I did not see one prediction from an analyst that was actually higher than what was given. Very curious to know who it was that forecasted an above pricing of $499.99 for the Xbox One. Oh and let us not forget the second point; we are getting 'thousands' of dollars worth of value. It is a shame that Microsoft has done such a piss job of actually explaining why it is worth $500 price-tag. They have tried to do it after E3 but for the most part, it has been utter fail. Oh and side note, I really dislike Don Mattrick. Everything he says on the topic makes me dislike the Xbox one even more.
Don Mattrick
It's a lower number than some of the analysts had forecasted," he said. "We're over-delivering value against other choices I think consumers can get. Any modern product these days, you look at it [and] $499 isn't a ridiculous price point. We're delivering thousands of dollars of value to people, so I think they're going to love it when they use it.
When he said that the XBONE is over delivering value.
And right after that he said thousands of dollars of value to people.
Does he really think people are that ignorant?
Oh boy.
Keep digging that hole for yourself MS.
|
On June 18 2013 10:33 Fruscainte wrote:
You know, people keep asking us for these highly specific examples of when we would need to play our console in an offline mode. Yet curiously, not a single one of these people asking for these examples are providing their own reasoning as to why we need always online in the first place. If we are losing this availability to play games offline, what are we, the consumers, getting out of this? We are trading away options, what are we getting in return?
I live in Poland on borders of big city. My internet connection sux whenever there is thunderstorm, huge amount of rain water, huge amount of snow, too high temeratures, too low temperatures... Sometimes I have feeling that their servers and routers are placed in the middle of glade without roof. I don't have option to switch to another ISP, they are just non-existent in my neighbourhood. Neighter I can increase my internet speed above 2mb/s >.<
So, I will not invest in something that forces me to be online all the time to play. That's just stupid. It's even more stupid, when you take into account that I am using console to play single player games 95% of the time - why should I have internet connection for that?
|
The irony is, let's say XboxOne will delivers those value that Don Mattrick was talking about, PS4 will deliver the same value without restriction. Until now I've seen nothing XboxOne can do that PS4 can't, even the cloud gaming.
So I look Gaikai up, they are actually very legit and has been developing cloud computing from games since 2008, before Sony bought Gaikai, they was chosen by many industry big names to be their cloud services parters such as SamSung, EA, Ubisoft as well as Intel, Autodesk etc...
Sony was not bluffing when they talked about Gaikai, its legit while MS is very vague about their cloud services, all they got are comments from Titan devs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaikai
http://www.gaikai.com/
|
On June 18 2013 16:22 Polis wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 02:05 ZasZ. wrote:On June 18 2013 01:53 sc4k wrote:On June 17 2013 12:28 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 17 2013 08:38 sc4k wrote:The instant I picked up 'internship at Microsoft' in my cursory scan of the text I knew what to expect. Funnily enough, this piece perfectly explains why Microsoft have managed to simultaneously alienate users of services like Steam and users of physical discs. Just a horrible, poorly thought out and hollow attempt at changing the lanscape of gaming to their economic advantage under the guise of a badly constructed excuse of taking gaming forwards. An attempted ruse which looks set to fail drastically. How has Microsoft alienated Steam users? As a Steam user, I'm glad that Microsoft is moving towards a more Steam-like system? In fact, my main problem is that they haven't gone far enough by killing resale completely and killing the disc. I would think that supporters of Steam (I have many gripes about Steam, although not with their game library system) would be supportive of what Microsoft is trying to do. 2 thing: a) the fact that they require 24 hours online checks. Steam is far more liberal with that shit. b) The fact that xbox is part of a series, and when the Xbox One servers go down, because they will when it's time to move onto the next console (and xbox isn't known for backwards compatibility), your downloaded games will be worthless. The beauty of Steam is that it's not tied to any specific console period - it will theoretically be useful forever...hence alienated Steam users. As much as I hate the XBONE and plan on getting a PS4, I have a hard time believing that all Xbox ONE games will become worthless once they shut down the servers for the console. By that time, as this generation of consoles is coming to an end, won't it be possible for Xbox to turn off the DRM for it's older games? It has nothing to lose by doing so, since they only way they will generate additional revenue once the servers are off is by turning off the DRM and allowing people to play the games without the check-in or Xbox live services. Regardless, that bridge is years from being crossed anyways. I think there are many valid criticisms and concerns with the console, but I'm not sure the "In 10 years my games might be worthless!" argument holds as much water. It is win-win for both Microsoft and the consumer for them to allow people to continue playing XBONE games after the online servers are no longer supported, assuming that makes sense for the game in question. No, it is better for MS to kill old games, and force people to buy they new console, and more new games then to allow customers to play old ones.
Microsoft will definitly patch it if their server goes offline. People bringing up this point is ridiculous. (I'm not defending Xbox one, it's still terrible, but this is a dumb argument against this online thing)
|
On June 18 2013 17:55 roym899 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 16:22 Polis wrote:On June 18 2013 02:05 ZasZ. wrote:On June 18 2013 01:53 sc4k wrote:On June 17 2013 12:28 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 17 2013 08:38 sc4k wrote:The instant I picked up 'internship at Microsoft' in my cursory scan of the text I knew what to expect. Funnily enough, this piece perfectly explains why Microsoft have managed to simultaneously alienate users of services like Steam and users of physical discs. Just a horrible, poorly thought out and hollow attempt at changing the lanscape of gaming to their economic advantage under the guise of a badly constructed excuse of taking gaming forwards. An attempted ruse which looks set to fail drastically. How has Microsoft alienated Steam users? As a Steam user, I'm glad that Microsoft is moving towards a more Steam-like system? In fact, my main problem is that they haven't gone far enough by killing resale completely and killing the disc. I would think that supporters of Steam (I have many gripes about Steam, although not with their game library system) would be supportive of what Microsoft is trying to do. 2 thing: a) the fact that they require 24 hours online checks. Steam is far more liberal with that shit. b) The fact that xbox is part of a series, and when the Xbox One servers go down, because they will when it's time to move onto the next console (and xbox isn't known for backwards compatibility), your downloaded games will be worthless. The beauty of Steam is that it's not tied to any specific console period - it will theoretically be useful forever...hence alienated Steam users. As much as I hate the XBONE and plan on getting a PS4, I have a hard time believing that all Xbox ONE games will become worthless once they shut down the servers for the console. By that time, as this generation of consoles is coming to an end, won't it be possible for Xbox to turn off the DRM for it's older games? It has nothing to lose by doing so, since they only way they will generate additional revenue once the servers are off is by turning off the DRM and allowing people to play the games without the check-in or Xbox live services. Regardless, that bridge is years from being crossed anyways. I think there are many valid criticisms and concerns with the console, but I'm not sure the "In 10 years my games might be worthless!" argument holds as much water. It is win-win for both Microsoft and the consumer for them to allow people to continue playing XBONE games after the online servers are no longer supported, assuming that makes sense for the game in question. No, it is better for MS to kill old games, and force people to buy they new console, and more new games then to allow customers to play old ones. Microsoft will definitly patch it if their server goes offline. People bringing up this point is ridiculous. (I'm not defending Xbox one, it's still terrible, but this is a dumb argument against this online thing)
Yep, I am sure they will. Its very easy to do and MS is not dumb nor want to waste money to support products that bring no longer bring them income.
|
On June 18 2013 17:44 DnameIN wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 10:33 Fruscainte wrote:
You know, people keep asking us for these highly specific examples of when we would need to play our console in an offline mode. Yet curiously, not a single one of these people asking for these examples are providing their own reasoning as to why we need always online in the first place. If we are losing this availability to play games offline, what are we, the consumers, getting out of this? We are trading away options, what are we getting in return? I live in Poland on borders of big city. My internet connection sux whenever there is thunderstorm, huge amount of rain water, huge amount of snow, too high temeratures, too low temperatures... Sometimes I have feeling that their servers and routers are placed in the middle of glade without roof. I don't have option to switch to another ISP, they are just non-existent in my neighbourhood. Neighter I can increase my internet speed above 2mb/s >.< So, I will not invest in something that forces me to be online all the time to play. That's just stupid. It's even more stupid, when you take into account that I am using console to play single player games 95% of the time - why should I have internet connection for that?
It forces you to check in once every 24 hours else you can't play games on it.
On June 18 2013 17:55 roym899 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 16:22 Polis wrote:On June 18 2013 02:05 ZasZ. wrote:On June 18 2013 01:53 sc4k wrote:On June 17 2013 12:28 paralleluniverse wrote:On June 17 2013 08:38 sc4k wrote:The instant I picked up 'internship at Microsoft' in my cursory scan of the text I knew what to expect. Funnily enough, this piece perfectly explains why Microsoft have managed to simultaneously alienate users of services like Steam and users of physical discs. Just a horrible, poorly thought out and hollow attempt at changing the lanscape of gaming to their economic advantage under the guise of a badly constructed excuse of taking gaming forwards. An attempted ruse which looks set to fail drastically. How has Microsoft alienated Steam users? As a Steam user, I'm glad that Microsoft is moving towards a more Steam-like system? In fact, my main problem is that they haven't gone far enough by killing resale completely and killing the disc. I would think that supporters of Steam (I have many gripes about Steam, although not with their game library system) would be supportive of what Microsoft is trying to do. 2 thing: a) the fact that they require 24 hours online checks. Steam is far more liberal with that shit. b) The fact that xbox is part of a series, and when the Xbox One servers go down, because they will when it's time to move onto the next console (and xbox isn't known for backwards compatibility), your downloaded games will be worthless. The beauty of Steam is that it's not tied to any specific console period - it will theoretically be useful forever...hence alienated Steam users. As much as I hate the XBONE and plan on getting a PS4, I have a hard time believing that all Xbox ONE games will become worthless once they shut down the servers for the console. By that time, as this generation of consoles is coming to an end, won't it be possible for Xbox to turn off the DRM for it's older games? It has nothing to lose by doing so, since they only way they will generate additional revenue once the servers are off is by turning off the DRM and allowing people to play the games without the check-in or Xbox live services. Regardless, that bridge is years from being crossed anyways. I think there are many valid criticisms and concerns with the console, but I'm not sure the "In 10 years my games might be worthless!" argument holds as much water. It is win-win for both Microsoft and the consumer for them to allow people to continue playing XBONE games after the online servers are no longer supported, assuming that makes sense for the game in question. No, it is better for MS to kill old games, and force people to buy they new console, and more new games then to allow customers to play old ones. Microsoft will definitly patch it if their server goes offline. People bringing up this point is ridiculous. (I'm not defending Xbox one, it's still terrible, but this is a dumb argument against this online thing) Also unless microsoft goes defunct it's hard to see them shutting down their xbox live servers for a long time. Hell it wasn't until 2010 that xbox live turned off it's support of the original xbox. Outside of that it's just a update to the console to remove the once every 24 hour check which then would render the console just like anyother.
|
On June 18 2013 17:44 DnameIN wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 10:33 Fruscainte wrote:
You know, people keep asking us for these highly specific examples of when we would need to play our console in an offline mode. Yet curiously, not a single one of these people asking for these examples are providing their own reasoning as to why we need always online in the first place. If we are losing this availability to play games offline, what are we, the consumers, getting out of this? We are trading away options, what are we getting in return? I live in Poland on borders of big city. My internet connection sux whenever there is thunderstorm, huge amount of rain water, huge amount of snow, too high temeratures, too low temperatures... Sometimes I have feeling that their servers and routers are placed in the middle of glade without roof. I don't have option to switch to another ISP, they are just non-existent in my neighbourhood. Neighter I can increase my internet speed above 2mb/s >.< So, I will not invest in something that forces me to be online all the time to play. That's just stupid. It's even more stupid, when you take into account that I am using console to play single player games 95% of the time - why should I have internet connection for that?
Don't worry: the quality of your internet connection in Poland doesn't matter, since no one in Poland will be allowed to play Xbox One games at launch anyway 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
