|
Good move by MS. I didn't think they would stick to this after Sony undercut them at E3. There has been damage done but I think the majority of folks were going to make decisions closer to launch date as to which consoles to buy regardless...
|
On June 20 2013 07:03 TheRabidDeer wrote:
I feel bad for anybody that was defending the DRM (both in this thread and the people that work for MS). It is a good move, now they have to handle the backlash of "wait, so the check-in wasn't required in the first place? All of these amazing features didn't rely on it? You LIED?"
What? They deserve their humiliation.
Gizmodo - You Don’t Hate the Xbox One, You’re Just Jealous
Cliff Bleszinski: "AAA games and used market can't co-exist"
Microsoft: PS4 won't make us change "anything" with Xbox One
Don Mattrick: "Fortunately" consumers without a connection can buy Xbox 360
Major Nelson - *Grabs microphone away from interviewer* Do you? Are you on the development team?
(in response to the comment that it's very easy to simply remove the online check in feature)
They deserve all the ether they are receiving for the misdeeds made in the past 2 months
|
On June 20 2013 07:18 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Now everyone is calling it the Xbox 180 there is no way they can't be mocked.
H8ers gonna h8?
Really it's to be expected fanboys are always looking for excuses to put others down. It's kind of pathetic when people shout crap like you're ignoring consumers etc, and microsoft listens and makes the changes people want and still get criticized.
|
On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices.
its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it).
always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up.
there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity).
|
On June 20 2013 07:32 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:18 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Now everyone is calling it the Xbox 180 there is no way they can't be mocked. H8ers gonna h8? Really it's to be expected fanboys are always looking for excuses to put others down. It's kind of pathetic when people shout crap like you're ignoring consumers etc, and microsoft listens and makes the changes people want and still get criticized.
Because their initial vision was shit. Nobody believes this is what MS actually wants. You'd have to be stupid to think that. THey're only doing it for the money. You don't just change your heart for a company because they listened to you, they still have their core beliefs that these things were right.
|
On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity).
The 24hr checks were clearly for the family sharing and discless play since both of those are now gone.
|
On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity).
simcity did well though for EA though something like 2 mil copies in the 3 month period after release(the high selling period) which is pretty dam good for a PC only game.
On June 20 2013 07:33 Infernal_dream wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:32 semantics wrote:On June 20 2013 07:18 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Now everyone is calling it the Xbox 180 there is no way they can't be mocked. H8ers gonna h8? Really it's to be expected fanboys are always looking for excuses to put others down. It's kind of pathetic when people shout crap like you're ignoring consumers etc, and microsoft listens and makes the changes people want and still get criticized. Because their initial vision was shit. Nobody believes this is what MS actually wants. You'd have to be stupid to think that. THey're only doing it for the money. You don't just change your heart for a company because they listened to you, they still have their core beliefs that these things were right. A large multinational company does things for the money? OH SHIT when did this become the norm...(mega-sarcasm).
Like Sony who is desperate for money didn't play the ps4 very safe because they really can't take risks.
The point still stands, people complained microsoft listened and adjusted people still mock them it's kind of sad if that's how people show gratitude, unless everyone on the Internet is a teenage girl and microsoft is the boy who just can't figure out how to make her happy because in reality the girl doesn't even know what she wants.
|
United States5162 Posts
On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices.
There's no reason why single players games should have to always be online. Until cloud processing is an actual thing and not what we have now with a fancier name, always online gives me no additional benefits compared to going online when I choose. And even when everyone has awesome connections that work all the time, there will still be times when the internet is out for a few days due to a storm, accident, or something else. It's a relatively small number of people affected at any given time, but it's just another downside to always online when it provides no additional benefits imo.
|
On June 20 2013 07:30 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. The thing is, XB1 wasn't always online. It didn't merit always online. If in the future some company rolls out with something that IS always online, it has to have features that merit it being always online. MMO's have been always online since forever, and you don't see people complain about that because it has a purpose for being always online. There was zero purpose for the XB1 check-in, it just took MS months to finally realize it and say it.
Yeah, that's a good point and I don't really have a counter-point to that except a bunch of maybes. Maybe allowing developers to assume that you're always online has lots of potential benefits for both parties that we don't know of. Maybe always online forces assumptions that would save time/costs/effort for some party. Maybe the always online was only made so that Microsoft was spying on us. ((I can't say cloud computing because everyone here already knows that it's bullshit and I can't prove otherwise))
However, my assumption is really, the company has a purpose and an hopefully benevolent vision for the choices they make, and as a consumer just because I'm not aware of those doesn't mean there aren't any. True, the communication of those could clearer, and maybe they should just say those things plain and simple, but it's not always that way. So to me, in the end they had a plan with the always online that they can't execute anymore because consumers revolted to an extreme and almost product destroying amount. This is also why I assume that most of the time consumers are dumb.
Of course there are dumb products trying to make a quick buck off of you. I just don't see that this is one of them. I just don't believe that Microsoft did the online stuff only to steal our information, or "for no reason at all".
|
On June 20 2013 07:35 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity). simcity did well though for EA though something like 2 mil copies in the 3 month period after release(the high selling period) which is pretty dam good for a PC only game.
How can you use "SimCity" and "did well" and "EA" in the same sentence. I can now discredit everything you say lol.
|
On June 20 2013 07:39 Zooper31 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:35 semantics wrote:On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity). simcity did well though for EA though something like 2 mil copies in the 3 month period after release(the high selling period) which is pretty dam good for a PC only game. How can you use "SimCity" and "did well" and "EA" in the same sentence. I can now discredit everything you say lol. In terms of money yes it did well. And money is at the end of the day that enforces decisions made by companies.
If you don't think 2 mil copies at 50-70 dollars in 3 months on PC only is good then very very few games on PC do well for companies.
|
On June 20 2013 07:35 Jophess wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity). The 24hr checks were clearly for the family sharing and discless play since both of those are now gone.
Family sharing maybe, but discless play is still possible if you buy the digital copies.
|
On June 20 2013 07:40 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:39 Zooper31 wrote:On June 20 2013 07:35 semantics wrote:On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity). simcity did well though for EA though something like 2 mil copies in the 3 month period after release(the high selling period) which is pretty dam good for a PC only game. How can you use "SimCity" and "did well" and "EA" in the same sentence. I can now discredit everything you say lol. In terms of money yes it did well. And money is at the end of the day that enforces decisions made by companies. If you don't think 2 mil copies at 50-70 dollars in 3 months on PC only is good then very very few games on PC do well for companies.
Resident Evil 6 sold more than that and was considered a failure.
|
On June 20 2013 07:40 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:35 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity). The 24hr checks were clearly for the family sharing and discless play since both of those are now gone. Family sharing maybe, but discless play is still possible if you buy the digital copies.
Right, but not anymore when you buy the disc. Being able to buy a disc, install it, and forget about it would be awesome, and it would let you avoid downloading 15gb+ for every game you buy.
|
On June 20 2013 07:35 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity). simcity did well though for EA though something like 2 mil copies in the 3 month period after release(the high selling period) which is pretty dam good for a PC only game. Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:33 Infernal_dream wrote:On June 20 2013 07:32 semantics wrote:On June 20 2013 07:18 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Now everyone is calling it the Xbox 180 there is no way they can't be mocked. H8ers gonna h8? Really it's to be expected fanboys are always looking for excuses to put others down. It's kind of pathetic when people shout crap like you're ignoring consumers etc, and microsoft listens and makes the changes people want and still get criticized. Because their initial vision was shit. Nobody believes this is what MS actually wants. You'd have to be stupid to think that. THey're only doing it for the money. You don't just change your heart for a company because they listened to you, they still have their core beliefs that these things were right. A large multinational company does things for the money? OH SHIT when did this become the norm...(mega-sarcasm). Like Sony who is desperate for money didn't play the ps4 very safe because they really can't take risks. The point still stands, people complained microsoft listened and adjusted people still mock them it's kind of sad if that's how people show gratitude, unless everyone on the Internet is a teenage girl and microsoft is the boy who just can't figure out how to make her happy because in reality the girl doesn't even know what she wants.
They're mocking them because MS said that these things would not change. They said Sony's vision and pricing would not change things. They said that this was the future and they were going to keep it. Please re-read the past few pages of this thread. There's a post with quite a few quotes explaining this. And now they're going back on what they were just saying. They're getting rid of 'the future' as it was called by them. They deserve to be mocked when they defended this shit for three weeks tooth and nail saying that we would understand and it would help us. We saw through their shit and called them out, they're still full of shit. A liar is a liar and a scammer is a scammer even if he helps you once. They deserve everything they get.
|
On June 20 2013 07:44 Jophess wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:40 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:35 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity). The 24hr checks were clearly for the family sharing and discless play since both of those are now gone. Family sharing maybe, but discless play is still possible if you buy the digital copies. Right, but not anymore when you buy the disc. Being able to buy a disc, install it, and forget about it would be awesome, and it would let you avoid downloading 15gb+ for every game you buy.
They could still do that if they remove the ability to sell used games. Actually, depending on how they had it set up it might still be possible with some tweaks... at least I can't think of a reason that it wouldn't... or I am struggling to come up with an idea of why it isn't possible anymore.
|
On June 20 2013 07:40 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:39 Zooper31 wrote:On June 20 2013 07:35 semantics wrote:On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity). simcity did well though for EA though something like 2 mil copies in the 3 month period after release(the high selling period) which is pretty dam good for a PC only game. How can you use "SimCity" and "did well" and "EA" in the same sentence. I can now discredit everything you say lol. In terms of money yes it did well. And money is at the end of the day that enforces decisions made by companies. If you don't think 2 mil copies at 50-70 dollars in 3 months on PC only is good then very very few games on PC do well for companies.
Obviously I'm not talking in terms of money. The servers, game and everything about it sucked beyond belief. The only reason it sold well was because it was riding off the back of the awesome reputation of past SimCity games. Now that reputation is ruined and if they ever decide to make another it will fail horribly, in terms of money this time.
That game is one of the sole reason why EA is such a hated company. They deserve praise for tricking so many people into actually believing that game was buyable. Nothing more.
|
Welp this doesn't change much for me because I didn't care about DRM in the first place. The only thing this changes is less blockbuster titles which I was kind of looking forward too. I guess the world wasn't ready for always online but this is good news for PC gamers and mobile users at least.
|
On June 20 2013 07:49 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:44 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:40 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:35 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity). The 24hr checks were clearly for the family sharing and discless play since both of those are now gone. Family sharing maybe, but discless play is still possible if you buy the digital copies. Right, but not anymore when you buy the disc. Being able to buy a disc, install it, and forget about it would be awesome, and it would let you avoid downloading 15gb+ for every game you buy. They could still do that if they remove the ability to sell used games. Actually, depending on how they had it set up it might still be possible with some tweaks... at least I can't think of a reason that it wouldn't... or I am struggling to come up with an idea of why it isn't possible anymore.
They can't allow it now without changing something because I could install my disc, then give it to somebody else so they could install it, etc. Before, the disc was basically a serial key for the digital version, which proved that you owned the game. The 24hr checks made sure you haven't given the game away or sold it back to an authorized retailer.
|
I just find it hillarious how MS and other various spokemans people have over and over again sworn that these systems were built from the ground, and couldn't just be removed or changed like that. I really hate PR and bullshit marketing like that, just deny/lie for the best of it..
All in all, it's a good thing, just for the wrong reasons. Curious to see where it goes from here, obviously this is a huge blow for MS, as they obviously planned around being in control from the start.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
