Xbox? Done.
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Well, if it is true that the concept of ownership is being turned from product to service with permission, then gamers are screwed since Microsoft is probably going to have cloud issues and take out everyone's games.
Pretty much this, Izanagi. This, the fact that the Wii U's Amazon sales have skyrocketed, UK polls showing that the Xbone has been given a very frigid reception, and the fact that my one industry buddy is now considering jumping ship as a consumer, from consoles to a desktop PC - all of that shows me that Microsoft and Sony are probably trying to bite more than they can chew.
I don't doubt that all the platforms will eventually have the same amount of evangelists and fanboys, but I wouldn't be surprised if initial sales for the new Xbox end up disappointing market researchers.
That is, assuming the community has a good long-term memory. Which it doesn't always have.
I don't doubt that all the platforms will eventually have the same amount of evangelists and fanboys, but I wouldn't be surprised if initial sales for the new Xbox end up disappointing market researchers.
That is, assuming the community has a good long-term memory. Which it doesn't always have.
I completely agree with you.
The only thing you didn?t go into was the Kinect and the data they can have on us. And even if they wouldn't misuse them (Who?s goanna believe that). What happens when hackers get them?
And in the end when you look at the Kinect and know what they doing. It feels very creepy.
The only thing you didn?t go into was the Kinect and the data they can have on us. And even if they wouldn't misuse them (Who?s goanna believe that). What happens when hackers get them?
And in the end when you look at the Kinect and know what they doing. It feels very creepy.
I jumped ship in the middle of the 360 life cycle. Shifted to PC gaming and am thoroughly content with it. I have not looked back ever since and I implore others to vote with your wallet. If you don't want this then don't buy it. Eventually they will realize when their quarterly returns are lower than expected.
In all the furor over the XBone, no-one has yet to comment on a similar service that already exists, one that ties your games to the console manufacturer's continued existence. Namely, Playstation Network Plus. If you subscribe to that, you get a myriad of premium features (why auto-updating firmware is a premium feature, I don't know, that should be standard), but to get back to the topic, they either discounted certain games or give them to you for free. However, those games can only be played as long as you are a paid subscriber. Should your subscription end, or the Sony server datacenter is bombed out of existence, you lose the ability to play them, just like what the XBone is threatening to do. Suddenly, subscribing to PSN+ isn't so that you, the customer, can access great features like uploading saves to the cloud and whatnot - it's so you can continue to play the games that are sitting on the hard drive.
Just think, about a year ago I was hopeful about a new console generation. I was thinking that games would look better, feel better, and more effectively immerse the player in their worlds. But apparently no one thinks about the games any more.
Anyway, my laptop's getting a bit old. Maybe it's time to invest in a gaming PC.
Anyway, my laptop's getting a bit old. Maybe it's time to invest in a gaming PC.
I too envision a world where the burrito trees grow lush and spicy.
OT: I'm okay with the cloud as a concept and many of the other futurist things that the Xbone half-assedly represents (since HDCP is more of a medieval concept) but it's the fact that it's been set up completely at the corporations whims that grates me more. I'm glad to see that the market seems to agree that the Xbone is a bridge not just too far, but a bridge on Mars. Sad thing is the 360 almost tempted me back into console gaming but, if MS insists, PC gaming master race for me it is.
OT: I'm okay with the cloud as a concept and many of the other futurist things that the Xbone half-assedly represents (since HDCP is more of a medieval concept) but it's the fact that it's been set up completely at the corporations whims that grates me more. I'm glad to see that the market seems to agree that the Xbone is a bridge not just too far, but a bridge on Mars. Sad thing is the 360 almost tempted me back into console gaming but, if MS insists, PC gaming master race for me it is.
I'm not familiar with PSN+, but going by your description, I think the big difference would be that PSN+ is optional. You get a lot of bonuses for paying for it, but it's not the only way to play PS3 games. (I'm guessing that the discounts they offer are for games also available through normal channels? Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on that.) Even with a lapsed subscription, a gamer can go buy games on disc and still play them. With the new Xbox, that option disappears. Even the purchased games are tied to the online service. And that's a scary thought.RikuoAmero said:
The "no developer money on resales" argument is a valid one, I think. And developers desperately need to get the money they rightfully deserve for the products they create. My concern, though, is just like Bob said: this is redefining the concept of "ownership". And what I'm not certain on is why videogames, especially, are the product for which centuries of ownership and resale concepts need to be thrown out. Used cars have been resold since they were invented; houses too, for as long as humans have been building them. I'm not clear why certain forms of computer software are so drastically different that the whole system needs to be rebuilt. After all, as long as we've had commercial software available for purchase, they've been resold. I'm not sure why we have to change now.
I'm not sure what to think about someone complaining about entertainment being turned from a product into a service. The very notion of video-entertainment being a product (something you can buy and keep forever) is only about 30 years old. Plays, movies, and television were scheduled events that you planned around and savored. Books and records have existed for a while, but those are still much cheaper to produce (especially now) than a video performance.
Those action figures he talked about were valuable precisely because kids COULDN'T purchase the entertainment on an ongoing basis. If you can buy the DVD set and watch it over and over, why would you need an action figure or doll that you have to move yourself. Professional TV writers obviously have much better imaginations than kids so we should be happy to pay for the enhanced experience .
From an archival perspective, sure, it's risky having the continued existence of a work be dependent on the solvency of its creators (even though that work will certainly be sold on as an asset in bankruptcy). But having those works be continually available to everyone cheapens them. Whether "cheapens" means "horay! more people can see this great and worthy thing" or "this will take up space on your shelf for years even though you got bored and quit in the first hour" is a question I'll let the media (social and otherwise) sort out for me.
Those action figures he talked about were valuable precisely because kids COULDN'T purchase the entertainment on an ongoing basis. If you can buy the DVD set and watch it over and over, why would you need an action figure or doll that you have to move yourself. Professional TV writers obviously have much better imaginations than kids so we should be happy to pay for the enhanced experience .
From an archival perspective, sure, it's risky having the continued existence of a work be dependent on the solvency of its creators (even though that work will certainly be sold on as an asset in bankruptcy). But having those works be continually available to everyone cheapens them. Whether "cheapens" means "horay! more people can see this great and worthy thing" or "this will take up space on your shelf for years even though you got bored and quit in the first hour" is a question I'll let the media (social and otherwise) sort out for me.
It doesn't help that the new Kinect looks like Hal9000. "I can't let you do that Dave, you haven't connected me to the console."Chaos999 said:
Xbox really have lost the next console war before it's even started. Now it's just a matter of waiting to see what the PS4 is like. And it's a safe bet that the WiiU will get some more games as a result of this.
Yes, the games on PSN+ can be obtained elsewhere and yes, PSN+ is optional, but I consider it to be the prototype as it were for the XBone's system. Someone who signs up for + will be all gleeful to see all the new things they can do...but wait until six months down the line, a year. They boot up their console, browse to the game, and a big error message is plastered all over the screen. A comparison to Steam can sorta be made, but one doesn't need to pay for a subscription to Steam to still be able to play games they were given for free. I got the original Portal for free when Valve offered it for free a while back. With PSN+, I'm basically obligated to continue paying, not because it adds any value or I get something great in return, but so that my games aren't being held hostage.Sabrestar said:
And then along comes the XBone, which is even worse. It's not optional, and I resent the fact that Microsoft thinks it deserves a cut of the second hand market, despite doing nothing at all to earn it. If Microsoft ran some sort of Ebay-esque system on the XBone, one that is optional but far easier to use than having to get in the car, waste gas and go to a physical store to trade in your games, then fine, that would be great. But no. Microsoft is lord and master. Hell, this to me smacks of illegal price-fixing, since I've heard they're going to set a minimum and maximum price for second hand games.
The thing that resonates with me most about this is the fact that while I like streaming services and the like, I too have not stopped collecting physical media. Even still, physical media is becoming more restrictive, too.
Which is pretty much the underlying point.Izanagi009 said:
Screw this, I'm not going to stand for Microsoft's business practices! I'm going to get a gaming PC! *buys a Windows PC* This was their plan all along.
Everything I recieved from PSN+ (for the 3 months I recieved it for free) I still have full access to. So I guess I can't really comment on it being like the new XBox fiasco.
But my biggest concern is even though Microsoft seems to be doing everything wrong, I just know once the next Halo (or insert whatever other big title here) comes out the system itself will be selling well. Most buyers don't care about "facts" and are only concerned with getting their "fix."
But my biggest concern is even though Microsoft seems to be doing everything wrong, I just know once the next Halo (or insert whatever other big title here) comes out the system itself will be selling well. Most buyers don't care about "facts" and are only concerned with getting their "fix."
Honestly, I look at PS+ as sort of a rental system. I get to try out a bunch of games I wouldn't otherwise have tried. If I like it and want it after my free year ends, I'll probably just buy it. But in the meanwhile, I've learned about a few games I like and a lot I thought I'd like but don't. Plus, I get discounted titles that don't go away because I purchased them.RikuoAmero said:
I'd also go so far as to speculate that a lot of people won't be playing these games in a year or two anyways. Games are disposable to a large portion of the population, so fifty bucks for a bunch of free titles with a limited shelf life probably isn't that big a problem.
Now, is PS+ a prototype for XBone? I'd say Gold was the prototype for both, and at worst Plus is a mid-stage. XBone also seems to borrow from Steam, but in no positive way I can glean. There's a lot that has nothing to do with Plus here, and most of that seems to be the worst elements. Cancer may develop from once-healthy cells, but that doesn't make the host a cancer.
For all the outrage on Xbox One games being "services, not products", there is very little when it comes to Steam, a retailer that has been selling "services" that exist only at the whim of a single company for the past few years. Most will say that the reason Steam gets very little backlash is because games on Steam are often put on sale for a fraction of their MSRPs.
Which means that the issue really has less to do with "services vs products" but rather price. It seems that consumers don't mind buying games whose functionality are tied to a single company so long as the price is right. But who's to say that the pricing model of the next generation will follow that of the current generation (in which nearly every retail game is $60, and every digital game is $10-20)?
Which means that the issue really has less to do with "services vs products" but rather price. It seems that consumers don't mind buying games whose functionality are tied to a single company so long as the price is right. But who's to say that the pricing model of the next generation will follow that of the current generation (in which nearly every retail game is $60, and every digital game is $10-20)?