Handling the closure of this generation of Consoles

Baron_BJ

Tired. Cold. Bored.
Nov 13, 2009
499
0
11
I was just looking at my collection of what I consider MY classic games (from this generation since there in lies the problem) that I always intend to have, some of the games among them are; Bioshock, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Alan Wake, Alpha Protocol, Red Dead Redemption, Dead Rising 2, Left 4 Dead and a few others. Then it dawned upon me: What will happen to my games when the next console generation comes out? This was a question that previous generations never had to deal with aside from "There won't be any new games and I will probably need a new system".

Some may say that this would still apply in the next generation, but there's the fact that the current iterations of Xbox Live and the Playstation Network WILL be turned off. Don't get me wrong, they'll be kept alive, updated and changed for their new games, but your PS3 and Xbox 360 won't be able do anything with them. This leads to an ungodly amount of problems.

This generation of consoles has shown that not only do they not care for backwards compatibility and that they would rather block this route off and force you to buy your games again, this can be seen easily in that the Xbox 360 does not play a fair few Xbox games because it would have taken too much effort to program and then there's Playstation robbing people of their backward compatibility after the fact, only to recently opt to begin selling them again. Look at the few games that all systems are actually reselling and compare that to the unbelievably vast catalogue of games that the PS2 alone had.

Previous generations of games never had online capabilities until the last one and even then it was very rarely used because the internet it was not nearly wide spread enough at a strong enough level for it to be a very good idea, meaning almost all games were the same at release as they are right now, all tests and fixes were done on base and no new content came out. Now, because it's easier, a great deal of game fixes are done post-release, meaning people need to download fixes, some being minor irritations to a select few being complete game breakers.

The previous point leads to DLC and DRM that locks out your shit. This content will be lost, probably forever. You won't be able to enter a code to download it if by some miracle you found an unopened copy after all those years, you won't be able to buy the content because there is no longer a store. It is gone. Even the shit that is already on the disk because EA are fuck puppets.

Until this generation ends all a person has to do if they wanted to play an old game is have the system and the game in question. If someone felt that they wanted to see what made FFVII a "classic" then they could buy an old Playstation (or Playstation 2) and the game and they would have the full experience that everyone else did, the game is still there. If 10 years from now, on a forum just like these a person heard ravings about the Classic that is Red Dead Redemption and they decided that they must try it then there's a problem: They can't. Unless they somehow got their hands on someone elses Xbox 360/PS3 that had the game on the hard drive, all the patches, and the ungodly amount of DLC, then there is no way they can experience the game in its full (ignoring the fact that there is a GOTY version of this particular game with all the DLC) form.

When their online capabilities are gone from the consoles, our current generation of games will die. Sure, we can find used copies and play the majority of them, but unlike previous generations these games will not be their true versions, they will have been gutted simply due to the fact that it's how the industry works and there will not be any way of paying $5 to have this problem fixed. There are almost no games that have physical copies of their DLC (and a lot of those only work for a single install), leaving so many games as nothing but memories.

My question is this: What do we do? and moreover, Could it even be changed at this point?


NOTE: I couldn't put every problem I wanted in here, I could not find the right words.
 

FlashHero

New member
Apr 3, 2010
382
0
0
I'm sure someone will have a torrent up for it. I'm against piracy when the devs get money but in this case there is a good reason. One, is it's the only way to experience it. Two, is that the devs won't get any money from any copies you manage to find and buy. Three, the devs made an experience that they want people to enjoy and if 50 years from now pirating is the only way I'm sure not many of them will care. The publishers might if there still around but even EA has made the first two C&C games free and rockstar has made GTA1&2 free, so both of them can be legitly downloaded as an example of what could happen. I'm not talking about doing this right after we get an xbox 720 or PS4 either. I'm talking about 20-Infinty years from now.
 

Baron_BJ

Tired. Cold. Bored.
Nov 13, 2009
499
0
11
Arontala said:
What, have you never heard of emulators?
The site went down earlier and I had a whole section on that written, totally forgot to add it when I redid this thing.

Emulators, with few exceptions, tend to work very poorly.

Emulators themselves are also a legal grey area (leaning heavily toward being illegal), though as has already been mentioned SOME companies might not care.

Not to mention that not everything can be emulated, though this is an extremely shitty example, try getting a modern system to run a DOS game or god forbid something that was programmed for Windows 3.1.

I'd sacrifice a sack of kittens to get my old post back with all my points, but saying that does no good.

FlashHero said:
I'm sure someone will have a torrent up for it. I'm against piracy when the devs get money but in this case there is a good reason. One, is it's the only way to experience it. Two, is that the devs won't get any money from any copies you manage to find and buy. Three, the devs made an experience that they want people to enjoy and if 50 years from now pirating is the only way I'm sure not many of them will care. The publishers might if there still around but even EA has made the first two C&C games free and rockstar has made GTA1&2 free, so both of them can be legitly downloaded as an example of what could happen. I'm not talking about doing this right after we get an xbox 720 or PS4 either. I'm talking about 20-Infinty years from now.
An almost laughably small amount of games have actually recieved such a treatment. It would be nice if a more games got this treatment, but the fact is that it is highly unlikely.
 

Awexsome

Were it so easy
Mar 25, 2009
1,549
0
0
Yeah I'm most worried about backwards compatibility. As for the PSN or Xbox LIVE dropping support like Microsoft did for old original Xbox games (sleep well Halo 2... that was a fun going away party...) it'll happen eventually... but they won't go offline the day of the new console release.

They will have to go offline eventually but it probably won't be for a very long time.

But like I said the backwards compatibility is the biggest concern for me too. Still hang on to my old PS2 and N64 because I know there'll be a time where I'll feel like an old game. Nothing to do though but try to convince the companies that keeping the backwards compatibility is worth the time, effort, and money to keep supporting.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
I'm pretty sure the PS4 and Xbox 965047295423 will have backwards compatability in one shape or forum. In the last decade plus, BC has become a strong point of adoption of a new console.

I expect that it's also something we'll eventually "lose," like Sony's already doing with the PS3. And I suspect Microsoft may do the same half-assed BC, which will suck more than for the last gen, because the 360 is a successful console with a strong library now. The three games I wanted on Xbox were all on the list, but I doubt my dozens of games will all make it. And online, will be a mess.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Satsuki666 said:
Here is where I disagree with you the most. I dont think the Playstation Network or Xbox Live will be turned off. They will simply be tweaked to work with the next generation of consoles. That pretty much removes any concerns you had.
You mean like they did with the Original XBox service?

I'm not sure Microsoft thought far enough ahead with the 360 service, either. PSN seems more like it's here to stay, with the Vita plugged in and all, but I would be SHOCKED if Microsoft is ready for a progressive Live system.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Satsuki666 said:
They are already in the progress of doing that. Them merging your xbox live account with your windows live one is a pretty good signal that they plan on keeping it around. I dont think they would have done that this late in the game unless they planned on keeping it around.
Except they abandoned prior attempts of doing similar things.

What's that, Lucy? A football for me to kick?
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
And thus lies a major problem I have with the industry. Almost everybody is only focused on short-term gain that they don't see what their actions will bring. It might be all well and good now, but soon... it'll fail. Especially the DRM. It'll be shut off, and I highly doubt many will care to release a patch to remove it.

Shamus Young wrote a bit about that. And I think I'll copy/paste, because he raises some very good points.

The conversation usually starts with the prospective customer asking if the company will even be around in ten years. The response is something like this:

1. That?s pretty far-fetched. We?re solvent. We?re not going anywhere.

Yes, I?m sure you?re every bit as healthy and solvent as Trilobyte, MicroProse, Interplay, Black Isle, Brøderbund, and Looking Glass were back in their heyday. Sadly, being nice people and making good games is not enough to stay in business.

The idea of your company being gone in ten years is not far fetched. The way this business works ? and in fact the way most businesses work ? is that the far-fetched scenario is the one where your company still exists in its current form a decade from now. It is very likely that in the next ten years you will change ownership, go under, or get absorbed by something much larger. To think otherwise is hubris.

2. If we go out of business or take down the servers, we?ll release a patch to disable the check.

The sentiment is not unappreciated, and I?m sure the offer is made in earnest, but the truth is that the deed is not nearly as trivial as you imagine. Sure, right now it?s simple to recompile the thing without the DRM and put it up on your server. But in ten years?

Assuming you?re old enough, think back to the projects you were working on ten years ago. Do you know where the source is? What development tools were used to compile it? Do you still have those tools? Do you still have all the old versions of the libraries you were using?

Odds are that even if someone remembers how to make the change and how the development environment was set up, they are probably employed elsewhere. So you have a big heap of unfamiliar source code. Someone is going to have to figure out how to compile it, get the software required to do so, find the related bit of code to change, and then make a new version of the software.

Oh, and they have to do this for every platform, for every game the company ever released that uses this DRM scheme. In the case of Hothead, they are planning on putting out four episodes a year, for Mac, PC, and Linux. (XBox as well, but it doesn?t have this problem so we don?t need to worry about that version.)

In just five years they?ll have twenty games on three platforms. That?s sixty executables to un-archive, alter, re-compile, and (one hopes) test to make sure it works.

It?s trivial now, but in ten years it will be a major undertaking.

3. We?ll document all of that so it won?t be a problem. Really. We?ll put up a patch.

Put it up? Where? You?ve been bought up or are going out of business. You?ve come in on Friday morning to find you?ve been pink-slipped and the servers are going down.

Maybe you?re lucky and you got to keep your job and you?re now employed by the company that just bought your former employer. Do you have FTP access to their servers? Can you even imagine having the audacity to call them up and ask for some server space so you can put up a patch for a game that nobody remembers and which stopped making money nine years ago? Hey, you?re one of the lucky ones who got to keep his job. Don?t push it.

4. Really, I?ll do it. If I don?t have a server, I?ll put the thing on a Torrent and the community can handle it.

Legal is going to want to talk to you first. This is intellectual property owned by your employer, and you are not authorized to go around putting out new versions of it. Your new boss is going to want to know if this is going to generate a bunch of support traffic. (That is, cost them money.) How are you going to perform QA on this thing? Maybe they want to re-bundle the game into some sort of ?classics collection?, and don?t want you releasing ?new versions? in the meantime.

This is assuming you were bought out. If you went out of business, then the games belong to your creditors, and there is no force in the universe that could make them care about a promise you made in the forums a decade ago. They are trying to recover the large sums of money owed to them, and will be more than happy to drag you (personally) into court if it looks like you?re doing something that interferes with that process.

You most certainly will not be releasing a patch if you get bought out or put under. At least, I wouldn?t put money on it. Which is what you?re asking me to do when you try to sell me your game.

Original post is here, if anyone cares [http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=1680]

And then there's DLC, and all the patches. If your on the PC, there's still a chance that you can find the patches somewhere. But on a console that no longer has online support? Yeah, your screwed if that game has quite a bit of bugs. Which is a worrying amount these days.

And the DLC, which many developers say "make the experience complete", well in 10 years time, all people will have is an incomplete experience.

I really don't know how they'll sort all this out for the future. And to be honest, I highly doubt they'll care enough to even try.
 

Epona

Elite Member
Jun 24, 2011
4,221
0
41
Country
United States
Satsuki666 said:
Zachary Amaranth said:
You mean like they did with the Original XBox service?

I'm not sure Microsoft thought far enough ahead with the 360 service, either. PSN seems more like it's here to stay, with the Vita plugged in and all, but I would be SHOCKED if Microsoft is ready for a progressive Live system.
They are already in the progress of doing that. Them merging your xbox live account with your windows live one is a pretty good signal that they plan on keeping it around. I dont think they would have done that this late in the game unless they planned on keeping it around.
XBOX Live will be around in the future but it may not support 360 titles in the future. Just like you can't play XBOX titles on Live anymore, I am unsure if you can download patches for them though but eventually you won't be able to do that.

That's the concern here. Let's say Halo Reach had a game breaking bug and needed a day one patch, what happens when that patch is no longer available? What happens when your XBOX 360 can't even connect to the current iteration of XBOX Live and Halo Reach doesn't work on the NextBox.
 

Epona

Elite Member
Jun 24, 2011
4,221
0
41
Country
United States
Satsuki666 said:
Crono1973 said:
XBOX Live will be around in the future but it may not support 360 titles in the future. Just like you can't play XBOX titles on Live anymore, I am unsure if you can download patches for them though but eventually you won't be able to do that.

That's the concern here. Let's say Halo Reach had a game breaking bug and needed a day one patch, what happens when that patch is no longer available? What happens when your XBOX 360 can't even connect to the current iteration of XBOX Live and Halo Reach doesn't work on the NextBox.
The exact same thing you did when a ps1 or ps2 game was horribly buggy. The only difference here is there is still a chance you could patch it. You can always download the patch on your computer and then install it. Im honestly not sure if you can do that with the 360 but that is what I normally do with the ps3.

Besides I dont really see what the issue is here. You can still play the game as you bought it. I have yet to encounter a game that is unplayable without a patch so it really does not concern me.
Ok, let's have an example of game breaking bugs on the PS1 and PS2?

Back then they knew they couldn't patch the game so they tested it enough to ensure there were no game breaking bugs.
 

NerfedFalcon

Level i Flare!
Mar 23, 2011
7,065
779
118
Gender
Male
Yeah...It sucks to be a gamer these days, doesn't it? Still, there's always emulators for the people really focused on finding out why Red Dead was awesome, although multiplayer-focused games might be a little harder...

Then again, in 90% of multiplayer-based games (which make up 90% of the current market), play one and you've played them all. Modern, 'realistic' war setting, not many colours, 'realistic' blood splatter and regenerating health, iron sights (not bad, except for looking badass)...
 

bobajob

New member
Jun 24, 2011
90
0
0
While we're on the subject, why the shitting fuck should us paying customers have to put up with game-breaking bugs in the current generation? WE PAID FOR THE DAMN THING ALREADY!
I'm looking at you, gears of war (PC), Bulletstorm, Rage.... WTF? Seriously?
I won't even start with this Xbox exclusive crap MS is pulling now.
 

numbersix1979

New member
Jun 14, 2010
169
0
0
I guess I never really thought about all this stuff before. The only comfort I can offer is that Microsoft established that they intended the 360 to survive at least x2 as long as a regular console generation (I don't know about Sony, and I hardly think there's been enough consoles to established a 'regulation' console generation, but whatever). Maybe they'll just keep adding on. I mean, it's getting less and less feasible to improve upon the graphics of a game (see Rage's three discs, or the PS3's massive use of hard-drive space), so maybe they'll just stick with existing tech after the new Unreal engine is widely spread.

Then again, there's always the chance they'll use disc / drive space to make for a compelling story or improved nuances to gameplay. Personally, I'd rather choose between paying for a new console and getting actually innovation or paying for a new console or being left with a sub-minimum gaming experience.
 

Epona

Elite Member
Jun 24, 2011
4,221
0
41
Country
United States
numbersix1979 said:
I guess I never really thought about all this stuff before. The only comfort I can offer is that Microsoft established that they intended the 360 to survive at least x2 as long as a regular console generation (I don't know about Sony, and I hardly think there's been enough consoles to established a 'regulation' console generation, but whatever). Maybe they'll just keep adding on. I mean, it's getting less and less feasible to improve upon the graphics of a game (see Rage's three discs, or the PS3's massive use of hard-drive space), so maybe they'll just stick with existing tech after the new Unreal engine is widely spread.

Then again, there's always the chance they'll use disc / drive space to make for a compelling story or improved nuances to gameplay. Personally, I'd rather choose between paying for a new console and getting actually innovation or paying for a new console or being left with a sub-minimum gaming experience.
So you think that there won't be another console generation until 2016 (10 year console cycle)? No, it's just around the corner?

I think it was Sony who established that they intended the PS3 to last 10 years first.
 

skywolfblue

New member
Jul 17, 2011
1,514
0
0
A very excellent point.

Given that DLC has played such a large role in the current generation, simply turning that service off would probably have a pretty drastic effect. There's still sales to be made on old content and consoles, so I hope that they're not so quick to turn it off this time around, otherwise they'll lose a pretty sizable chunk of cash.
 

numbersix1979

New member
Jun 14, 2010
169
0
0
Crono1973 said:
numbersix1979 said:
I guess I never really thought about all this stuff before. The only comfort I can offer is that Microsoft established that they intended the 360 to survive at least x2 as long as a regular console generation (I don't know about Sony, and I hardly think there's been enough consoles to established a 'regulation' console generation, but whatever). Maybe they'll just keep adding on. I mean, it's getting less and less feasible to improve upon the graphics of a game (see Rage's three discs, or the PS3's massive use of hard-drive space), so maybe they'll just stick with existing tech after the new Unreal engine is widely spread.

Then again, there's always the chance they'll use disc / drive space to make for a compelling story or improved nuances to gameplay. Personally, I'd rather choose between paying for a new console and getting actually innovation or paying for a new console or being left with a sub-minimum gaming experience.
So you think that there won't be another console generation until 2016 (10 year console cycle)? No, it's just around the corner?

I think it was Sony who established that they intended the PS3 to last 10 years first.
I really have no idea, it seems as though it would be more cost-effective to add on to an existing console then manufacture a new one but it also seems as though manufacturers would do it if they thought they could make a profit by doing so; whether or not the fanbase gets a fair shake in the matter. And you're probably right, I honestly don't remember who it was xp