Jimquisition: Why An Always-On DRM Console Would Be Dumb Dumb Dumb

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Why An Always-On DRM Console Would Be Dumb Dumb Dumb

Just talking about an "always-on" Xbox is a really dumb idea.

Watch Video
 

Uratoh

New member
Jun 10, 2011
419
0
0
How long until there's a shiny new jim sterling 'deal with it' gif? XD
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Uratoh said:
How long until there's a shiny new jim sterling 'deal with it' gif? XD
NOT SOON ENOUUUGGGH!!

Someone make it NOW!!!!

OT: Good episode. Anyone else worried about what would happen to games released on an always-on console when they were ported to other formats? Would an XBOX 720 title ported to PC, WiiU and PS4 affect people playing on these platforms simply because the original game had always-online DRM? Food for thought....
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Are you referring to the same mobile market that EA will be converting to once it's finished squeezing Bioware dry? The bubble has already burst.
Uratoh said:
How long until there's a shiny new jim sterling 'deal with it' gif? XD
gimme a minute :D
 

lord pickle

New member
Apr 9, 2009
22
0
0
I bought the Xbox when it first came out and I am on my third Xbox 360. If microsoft pulls this always on DRM shit I won't be buying their new console. I will go to the indies or the mobile market and tell microsoft to both deal with it and suck it.
 

Proverbial Jon

Not evil, just mildly malevolent
Nov 10, 2009
2,093
0
0
Agreed. On every level.

I have a pretty poor internet connection where I am and I'm not exactly in the middle of nowhere, I'm in the south of England, not much more than 70 miles from London itself. Yet my internet probably wouldn't sustain a strong connection all the time. It drops considerably low between 5pm and midnight, which is my normal gaming time.

Needless to say, PS3 updates take FOREVER and most times I'll avoid using that particular console simply for that reason. If there's an always on DRM console released, you can be sure I won't buy it based simply on those grounds.
 

Invadergray

New member
Oct 17, 2011
93
0
0
When will the publishers learn, if you make quality products, we will GIVE you our money. You don't have to keep trying to TAKE it from us! If you make worthwhile consoles and games to keep console gaming alive, you will ensure profits for years to comes. If you make restrictive consoles to wring the last pennies out of console gaming's pension fund before it croaks, YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!
 

Legion

Were it so easy
Oct 2, 2008
7,190
0
0
I think the reason they have that kind of attitude is because they are banking on sales from the kind of people who will buy the console because it's all shiny and new rather than for any other reason. There are some people who have to have the current generation, regardless of how good or bad it is.

I can't see why else they could have such a dismissive attitude towards their customers, especially considering that selling 3 million copies of a game is considered "below expectations". If games were still being made cheap, then perhaps they could get away with that kind of attitude, but considering how much money they are losing, even when games are selling well, you'd think trying to please people would be a much better idea than trying to siphon money off of them any way that you can.

As for the always online. I honestly cannot see the logic behind it. We are not yet in a world where reliable fast broadband is widespread enough for this kind of usage. In five to ten years, I'd imagine this idea could work, but right now we simply are not ready for it. So why are they so insistent? I cannot see the advantage for them.
 

ZZoMBiE13

Ate My Neighbors
Oct 10, 2007
1,908
0
0
You know, I am a big fan of the Xbox. And I like Microsoft (or I guess, I have liked Microsoft). But if this comes to pass, I can not support it. I like playing Halo, but I don't like playing it that much. Forcing their Windows 8 based dashboard at me was bad enough. Going an online only route would be a nail in the coffin.

I honestly hope that when the next Xbox is announced that they show some foresight. And hopefully some self awareness that LIVE GOLD is no longer the value it once was. Staying the course isn't even the right way to go for the next Xbox, and taking it farther into stormy waters, to continue the metaphor, will likely sink that ship. And it's a ship I'd rather not see go down all things considered.

Hopefully these are just rumors and it'll turn out to be a silly internet conspiracy theory. Hopefully.
 

MrBaskerville

New member
Mar 15, 2011
871
0
0
WaitWHAT said:
Uratoh said:
How long until there's a shiny new jim sterling 'deal with it' gif? XD
NOT SOON ENOUUUGGGH!!

Someone make it NOW!!!!

OT: Good episode. Anyone else worried about what would happen to games released on an always-on console when they were ported to other formats? Would an XBOX 720 title ported to PC, WiiU and PS4 affect people playing on these platforms simply because the original game had always-online DRM? Food for thought....
If they make it so that you can´t login on your xbox profile, and therefore can´t acces the menues, when you are offline, then it wouldn´t affect the games.

I´m wondering what the benefits would be, what about this idea is supposed to make the consumers go: "That sounds great!". I have a nagging feeling that they just want to make everything worse for everybody, just so they can get even more control... If it happens, i´m not buying, just as i never buy any other game that requires an online connection. The thing is, if they did this, at some point there would be problems, there will always be problems with always online, but there won´t be any benefits... So why do it?

Personally i would prefer a conosle that was only capable of accesing a store online, the rest should be offline. I don´t want all kinds of silly social features in my gaming.
 

geizr

New member
Oct 9, 2008
850
0
0
If the rumor is true, Microsoft, I'm not buying your console. Deal with it.
 

templar1138a

New member
Dec 1, 2010
894
0
0
I think I speak for all of us when I say,


Now we just need to learn to be proactive with our money. Right now.
 

mrblakemiller

New member
Aug 13, 2010
319
0
0
That last minute was immaculate. The conceit we're being shown is unconscionable. I'm almost looking forward to some big crash (I'm getting too old for hardcore gaming anyways), and seeing what rises from the ashes.
 

QUINTIX

New member
May 16, 2008
153
0
0
I'll disagree with Kevin Dent here too https://kevin-dent.squarespace.com/blog/2013/4/5/in-the-world-2929
however, I will agree with him & Manveer Heir that the Orth is not deserving the bile he's receiving.

From my bigoted perspective, this vitriol filled reaction to perceived threats (especially anti-feminist ones) is to be expected from our latchkey generation with many of its "young men" staying teenage boys into perpetuity.
 

keitarobg

New member
Jan 19, 2009
48
0
0
It's about time to start suing developers for imposing always-on DRM and failing to sustain the conditions for it. It's an obvious breach of contract, because the obligee (ze publisher) is denying a service, for which the customer has paid. Imagine buying milk from the store, paying for it and getting just the plastic jug without milk in it, because the cows aren't able to produce milk right now. It's exactly the same.

What I'm trying to say is that it's a legal issue. This is not a debate. People need to turn to court otherwise this bullshit will continue in the future.
 

Scrustle

New member
Apr 30, 2011
2,031
0
0
MS needs to realise that it produces a luxury item. As much as gamers are willing to put up with shit to play their favourite games, we all realise that we don't really need to play them. These are things we fill our time with to entertain us. Comparing it to things like phones and vacuum cleaners is ridiculous. Those things are necessary items. We put up with problems with them because the need for them will not go away. If the electricity goes out or the mobile network doesn't cover wherever we happen to be, we wait until those services return and attempt again.

If crappy servers go down just that one time too many, we won't wait any more. We'll go buy a PS4 instead. Or maybe we'll get a PC, or even watch a movie or read a book. Whatever example you can think of. But if your luxury product doesn't work exactly when it is convenient for us, then don't expect our patience to last very long. You can't demand that we "deal with it", you need to deal with us. If you're not fulfilling our requirements, then we're not going to give you our money. Simple as that. You need to work around our demands, not the other way around.

The stupidest thing about all this is that our demands aren't even that complicated. We don't really care about all this fancy gimmicky shit. We just want a machines which has sufficient power to run games, and for those games to be fun. Maybe a few online features as well, like online play and download services. We'll gladly give you money for that. Instead you'd rather overcomplicate everything, treat us like criminals right from the word go, and try to squeeze as much money out of us at every single possible opportunity.
 

GonzoGamer

New member
Apr 9, 2008
7,063
0
0
I do find it very hard to believe MS would cut out so much of their current users but then again, how much do they really make off gamers who just buy the console and never pay for the online service? If they were going to be total looters, they might not care about losing those customers.
The only question is are they overestimating how much their hardcore fans will put up with? These fans already have put up with a defective console, pay for online that went up in price, and loads of advertising to go with that. It's all these factors that have kept me from buying a 360 this whole gen and honestly it really shouldn't have sold as well as it did.
 

The White Hunter

Basment Abomination
Oct 19, 2011
3,888
0
0
Yeah I'm feeling more and more that PC is the way to go, particularly as open source things gain more steam(pun intended) and microsoft slowly loses it's grip on the operating system market.

I really hope we can see linux distributions start to spread more effectively and become more universally compatible and user friendly. It is reaching a point where windows is only really around because people need office...

It's all about control for companies like microsoft but they dont realise that the harder they grip, the farther their market slips away.
 

Cameron Everett

New member
Apr 2, 2010
13
0
0
And this is why I'm pretty much done with the Console market, what games I do want to play are 99% of the time out on PC or for my Tablet, I don't care about the Madden X Year games or the FPS CODBFOMGWFTBBQ that's released every year. The 3 most anticipated games for me coming out within the next year and a half are all games I backed on Kickstarter. Also, I'd rather spend 500.00 on a middle range Mobo/CPU/RAM then I would on a console, because chances are that will be as powerful as the next gen console, case in point Nov 2011 I have to replace my mobo/cpu/ram and it cost me just over 500.00 and I can run pretty much any game at high/very high graphics settings, as it is my PS3 is basically a media streaming box.

So TL;DR I agree Consoles are dying and indie/mobile-tablet/computer are still going strong, and I couldn't be happier.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,760
0
0
I'm glad Jim's brought up the Gamestop point I've been making for like four years now. Maybe people will actually stop fighting it around these parts.

Not to mention the point about the infrastructure in the US.

In fact...Jim, are you stalking me?

Captcha: I love you.

Yes, I do, but I suspect we will never be more than just friends.
 

Azriel Nightshade

New member
Jun 9, 2008
123
0
0
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?

I'm not asking this to be contrarian or witty, I'm generally curious. Mainly because the only two PC games I play are WoW and LoL, both on an 5 year old iMac. So I'm a bit out of the loop.
 

linkmastr001

New member
May 22, 2009
141
0
0
I agree. I know for the past month and a half I haven't been able to fully enjoy my always online games since my ISP has been having issues outside of my control (and perhaps theirs, IDK), but it has been severely hampering my experience.

I can tell you if they do make an always online console, I won't touch it. Most of the games I play now that require it have valid reasons, but if a console were too... screw that...
 

kajinking

New member
Aug 12, 2009
896
0
0
I still remember I had my console for two years before I finally got it online, I wouldn't have ever bought it if I couldn't play Fallout 3 offline.

The reason I played with the console offline for so long was because online play was considered a secondary feature to me and as long as I could rent and play my games why bother?

I truly enjoyed Halo 3 singleplayer and never even touched gears of war 2's multiplayer.

So Microsoft what about me?
 

Gene O

New member
Jul 9, 2008
130
0
0
This is why I don't worry about my refusal to buy anything with always on drm. AAA gaming may be collapsing (I honestly have no idea) but my options have never been better. I could spend years playing catch up with all of the games from this console generation I haven't gotten to yet. And, as Jim points out, mobile gaming will always have something for me and GOG.com has attached a slow drip tap to my wallet which ensures that I won't run out of games that I know my computer can run.

I remember the video game crash of the 80's. Simlarly, consoles (Atari, Intellivision, Colecovision, etc.) were having a hard time of it. Historically, it's treated as a huge catastrophy but between arcades and computer games I never had a lack of video games to play at the time. The AAA game industry has told me time and time again that they don't care about me or what I think to which I say, "Same to you."
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
Great and timely video. The rumors, while hopefully false, are a scary thing indeed.

I really hope these companies get their act together. The consoles failing mean even good development companies get screwed out of deserved profit.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
TheSteeleStrap said:
This is exactly the episode I was hoping to see today.
you and me both. it was an interesting episode.

i loved the thoughtful image of jim at the start. future propaganda poster of our great leader?
 

GAunderrated

New member
Jul 9, 2012
998
0
0
Nicely done video Jim.

I almost find it sad that I enjoy watching these companies not to spiral down to a horrible crash equally as much as I enjoy playing their products. If that isn't a sign of You're doing it wrong I don't know what is.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Scrustle said:
MS needs to realise that it produces a luxury item. As much as gamers are willing to put up with shit to play their favourite games, we all realise that we don't really need to play them. These are things we fill our time with to entertain us. Comparing it to things like phones and vacuum cleaners is ridiculous. Those things are necessary items. We put up with problems with them because the need for them will not go away. If the electricity goes out or the mobile network doesn't cover wherever we happen to be, we wait until those services return and attempt again.

If crappy servers go down just that one time too many, we won't wait any more. We'll go buy a PS4 instead. Or maybe we'll get a PC, or even watch a movie or read a book. Whatever example you can think of. But if your luxury product doesn't work exactly when it is convenient for us, then don't expect our patience to last very long. You can't demand that we "deal with it", you need to deal with us. If you're not fulfilling our requirements, then we're not going to give you our money. Simple as that. You need to work around our demands, not the other way around.

The stupidest thing about all this is that our demands aren't even that complicated. We don't really care about all this fancy gimmicky shit. We just want a machines which has sufficient power to run games, and for those games to be fun. Maybe a few online features as well, like online play and download services. We'll gladly give you money for that. Instead you'd rather overcomplicate everything, treat us like criminals right from the word go, and try to squeeze as much money out of us at every single possible opportunity.
Wow. That was brilliantly put actually. Top marks, good sir!

 

linkmastr001

New member
May 22, 2009
141
0
0
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?

I'm not asking this to be contrarian or witty, I'm generally curious. Mainly because the only two PC games I play are WoW and LoL, both on an 5 year old iMac. So I'm a bit out of the loop.
Steam has an offline mode, which usually works (I know I've had issues with it on occasion) and lets you play your games without the connection. If it didn't, I don't think people would be happy with it at all.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,760
0
0
Legion said:
I think the reason they have that kind of attitude is because they are banking on sales from the kind of people who will buy the console because it's all shiny and new rather than for any other reason.
If you're talking about douchetagdealwithit, I think it's more the fact that people don't understand the repercussions of social media. As Nash said, there will come a time where we are intimately familiar with the size, shape and colour of our President's genitals (because they tweeted them 30 years ago).

Then again, the gaming industry seems to be behind the ball on a lot of things, too.
 

Latinidiot

New member
Feb 19, 2009
2,216
0
0
BOOM! And that was the big picture.

It was, though. Very informed, very interesting, and most of all, completely logical. I have no desire to buy any console that requires me to be online constantly, even though I have pretty damn good internet.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
the antithesis said:
And that's how the Ouya will outsell the next Xbox. Deal with it.
Except it won't. At all. The Ouya is already failing as is with the few consoles that have been released due to its horrendous menu system and constant pop-ups telling you to pay for something.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,760
0
0
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?

I'm not asking this to be contrarian or witty, I'm generally curious. Mainly because the only two PC games I play are WoW and LoL, both on an 5 year old iMac. So I'm a bit out of the loop.
Because, loathe as I am to defend Steam, it's not actually "always online."

When my internet was cut about a month ago (because Comcast is stupid and can't process checks on time for some reason), I was still able to access and play my games. It didn't kick me out of Magic 2013 when my internet went down and it didn't stop me from launching other titles for the two days it took me to get my internet back.

The rumours here are that it'll kick you for three minutes of inactivity.

Do you honestly feel those two are comparable scenarios?
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,760
0
0
Capitano Segnaposto said:
the antithesis said:
And that's how the Ouya will outsell the next Xbox. Deal with it.
Except it won't. At all. The Ouya is already failing as is with the few consoles that have been released due to its horrendous menu system and constant pop-ups telling you to pay for something.
It's also going to be annual, isn't it? I'm pretty sure that a new Ouya every year will be a problem.
 

Slash2x

New member
Dec 7, 2009
503
0
0
Proverbial Jon said:
Agreed. On every level.

I have a pretty poor internet connection where I am and I'm not exactly in the middle of nowhere, I'm in the south of England, not much more than 70 miles from London itself. Yet my internet probably wouldn't sustain a strong connection all the time. It drops considerably low between 5pm and midnight, which is my normal gaming time.

Needless to say, PS3 updates take FOREVER and most times I'll avoid using that particular console simply for that reason. If there's an always on DRM console released, you can be sure I won't buy it based simply on those grounds.
^ I have two kinds of internet from the same provider. "WOW THIS IS FAST AND GREAT!" Or I get "DEAR LORD IN HEAVEN WHY DOES IT KEEP BOOTING ME OFF EVERY 5 MINUTES!!!!??!?!?!"


Also Jim
by Peter Moore, EA chief operating officer [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/123116-EA-Really-Doesnt-Want-to-be-The-Worst-Company-In-America?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=news]
Many continue to claim the Always-On function in SimCity is a DRM scheme. It's not. People still want to argue about it. We can't be any clearer - it's not. Period.
That was an order not a request we need to listen to his commands lest he smite us and take away our Origin games.
 

Legion

Were it so easy
Oct 2, 2008
7,190
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
Legion said:
I think the reason they have that kind of attitude is because they are banking on sales from the kind of people who will buy the console because it's all shiny and new rather than for any other reason.
If you're talking about douchetagdealwithit, I think it's more the fact that people don't understand the repercussions of social media. As Nash said, there will come a time where we are intimately familiar with the size, shape and colour of our President's genitals (because they tweeted them 30 years ago).

Then again, the gaming industry seems to be behind the ball on a lot of things, too.
I mean the "Who gives a crap what the customers think?" attitude. Most places such as shops and restaurants will go too far to please their customers, apologising and offering refunds/replacements even when it isn't their fault.

The games industry seems more like our banks, water, gas and electricity suppliers. Constantly screwing us over because they know they can get away with it. They show very little desire to actually keep us happy as consumers.

Obviously I don't mean all companies, it also seems to be more common among the publishers than the developers.

Almost the only people who are not affected by this kind of attitude are the kind who don't spend a lot of time discussing games like we do. People who will see it advertised on the television and "have to get the latest thing", and will buy it without looking at the problems.
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
16,863
837
118
Scrustle said:
MS needs to realise that it produces a luxury item. As much as gamers are willing to put up with shit to play their favourite games, we all realise that we don't really need to play them. These are things we fill our time with to entertain us. Comparing it to things like phones and vacuum cleaners is ridiculous. Those things are necessary items. We put up with problems with them because the need for them will not go away. If the electricity goes out or the mobile network doesn't cover wherever we happen to be, we wait until those services return and attempt again.
It's not just a luxery item, it's one luxery item among many others that don't require a constant online connection and that provide more or less the same kind of entertainment.

If Microsoft is putting DRM on their console they're not just shooting themselves in the foot, they're blowing their own legs clean off. And the fact that we haven't heard anyone from their side dismissing these rumors is only making them more concrete.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
DVS BSTrD said:
Got it done as soon as could, I might have a higher quality version up later.

*wipes away tear*

That was beautiful....just.....beautiful....

Come here and hug me, bro.
 

DRTJR

New member
Aug 7, 2009
651
0
0
Nintendo is the only one I see that will still be around if there is another crash.
 

Mojo

New member
Jun 2, 2011
325
0
0
Scrustle said:
MS needs to realise that it produces a luxury item. As much as gamers are willing to put up with shit to play their favourite games, we all realise that we don't really need to play them. These are things we fill our time with to entertain us. Comparing it to things like phones and vacuum cleaners is ridiculous. Those things are necessary items. We put up with problems with them because the need for them will not go away. If the electricity goes out or the mobile network doesn't cover wherever we happen to be, we wait until those services return and attempt again.

If crappy servers go down just that one time too many, we won't wait any more. We'll go buy a PS4 instead. Or maybe we'll get a PC, or even watch a movie or read a book. Whatever example you can think of. But if your luxury product doesn't work exactly when it is convenient for us, then don't expect our patience to last very long. You can't demand that we "deal with it", you need to deal with us. If you're not fulfilling our requirements, then we're not going to give you our money. Simple as that. You need to work around our demands, not the other way around.

The stupidest thing about all this is that our demands aren't even that complicated. We don't really care about all this fancy gimmicky shit. We just want a machines which has sufficient power to run games, and for those games to be fun. Maybe a few online features as well, like online play and download services. We'll gladly give you money for that. Instead you'd rather overcomplicate everything, treat us like criminals right from the word go, and try to squeeze as much money out of us at every single possible opportunity.
Not to mention that a vacuum cleaner and a mobile phone NEED electricity or a network to function. That is the biggest flaw in that argument imo. There is now way to create a device with the same functionality and efficiency without using electricity or a satellite network. Diablo 3 doesn't need a constant internet connection if you're playing alone. Yet we are still forced to have one for no reason other then to stop piracy. D3 could easily function without it though. A vacuum cleaner could not function at all without electricity. Besides, power outages don't really occur that often (at least in Western Europe and the US) and the mobile network still continues to function even under very high load such as during new years. The servers for D3 or SimCity? Not so much. No one complains that League of Legends is always on. The reason being that you NEED an internet connection for that game to work. Its build around multiplayer. Unless it only supports non split-screen multiplayer games the next gen consoles wont NEED a constant internet connection to function.
 

Staskala

New member
Sep 28, 2010
537
0
0
Capitano Segnaposto said:
the antithesis said:
And that's how the Ouya will outsell the next Xbox. Deal with it.
Except it won't. At all. The Ouya is already failing as is with the few consoles that have been released due to its horrendous menu system and constant pop-ups telling you to pay for something.
Let's wait until the console actually launches, yeah? The software isn't supposed to be finalized until launch, so that's a pointless criticism at this point in time. Right now only backers have access to what is essentially a beta version, if even that.
Although suggesting that it will outsell the Xbox is still ludicrous, it won't even put a dent into mainstream console sales.
 

Andy Shandy

Fucked if I know
Jun 7, 2010
4,797
0
0
DVS BSTrD said:
Uratoh said:
How long until there's a shiny new jim sterling 'deal with it' gif? XD
Sir Thomas Sean Connery said:
I need this immediately.
WaitWHAT said:
NOT SOON ENOUUUGGGH!!

Someone make it NOW!!!!
Got it done as soon as could, I might have a higher quality version up later.
Mine's is better, DVS! =P



OT: Anyway, I couldn't agree more, Jim. Hell, I actually get a decent internet most of the time, and my Xbox 360 can still be extremely pissy with it. So if the always online thing is true, I won't be picking up a 720/Durango/whatever it is, that's for sure.
 

Ohlookit'sMatty

New member
Sep 11, 2008
951
0
0
You never disappoint Jim // I have a cast in point about always on DRM from consoles // On Friday we hooked up a new modem for the hose as the old was was getting on in years and would bug out from time to time // So we set it up, password and all and everything was working fine, computer's set up, phone works on the wifi but wait, my 360 could not connect // Maybe it's the password, nope, maybe its connection, nope. . . oh wait, it's that the 360 doesn't like the drivers of that modem so I've been jumping through hoops to get it working // It's Monday and I still can't connect // Now this is not a big deal as I don't play any games on my 360 that needs an online connection, what's what I have a pc and phone for, but imagine if this DRM was in effect now?! Firstly with my old modem I'd never be able to play any games as it would bug out a lot and now I can't even connect to my new modem because of reason

I don't even see myself buying any of the next gen consoles for money reasons and I'm quite happy with the ones I have now so I won't need too

-M
 

rembrandtqeinstein

New member
Sep 4, 2009
2,173
0
0
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?

I'm not asking this to be contrarian or witty, I'm generally curious. Mainly because the only two PC games I play are WoW and LoL, both on an 5 year old iMac. So I'm a bit out of the loop.
Steam has gotten a lot of money from me over the years despite being a DRM system. And the only reason it has is because I'm secure in the knowledge that if Steam ever fails on me I can go to gamecopyworld or piratebay or even shadier corners of the internet and find cracks for all of the games I purchased to remove the Steam authentication.

In other words Valve doesn't have control over whether or not I can play the games I bought, they only have control over whether or not I have access to their network. It is a gentleman's agreement that either party can walk away from at any time without losing anything.
 

PunkRex

New member
Feb 19, 2010
2,533
0
0
Its cool if Microsoft wanna go and make the next Xbox always online, ive been looking for an excuse to buy an Alienware laptop and unlike the Xbox this things designed to go online and I can watch Jim rant about shit whilst playing old games that I missed out on and can't play no more because you arn't backwards compatable!

I WANNA PLAY 'STRANGERS WRATH', IT LOOKS REALLY FUN!!!
 

Azriel Nightshade

New member
Jun 9, 2008
123
0
0
linkmastr001 said:
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?

I'm not asking this to be contrarian or witty, I'm generally curious. Mainly because the only two PC games I play are WoW and LoL, both on an 5 year old iMac. So I'm a bit out of the loop.
Steam has an offline mode, which usually works (I know I've had issues with it on occasion) and lets you play your games without the connection. If it didn't, I don't think people would be happy with it at all.
Fair enough.

Zachary Amaranth said:
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?

I'm not asking this to be contrarian or witty, I'm generally curious. Mainly because the only two PC games I play are WoW and LoL, both on an 5 year old iMac. So I'm a bit out of the loop.
Because, loathe as I am to defend Steam, it's not actually "always online."

When my internet was cut about a month ago (because Comcast is stupid and can't process checks on time for some reason), I was still able to access and play my games. It didn't kick me out of Magic 2013 when my internet went down and it didn't stop me from launching other titles for the two days it took me to get my internet back.

The rumours here are that it'll kick you for three minutes of inactivity.

Do you honestly feel those two are comparable scenarios?
As a 1-1 comparison, no. Unless I run into Linkmastr001's issue where Steam's offline mode is not working in my favor. Still, I want to see how Microsoft will handel this potential issue when it has examples of other types of DRM to learn from.

I personally don't care if the new Xbox is always online. The part that interests me is the how.

rembrandtqeinstein said:
Steam has gotten a lot of money from me over the years despite being a DRM system. And the only reason it has is because I'm secure in the knowledge that if Steam ever fails on me I can go to gamecopyworld or piratebay or even shadier corners of the internet and find cracks for all of the games I purchased to remove the Steam authentication.

In other words Valve doesn't have control over whether or not I can play the games I bought, they only have control over whether or not I have access to their network. It is a gentleman's agreement that either party can walk away from at any time without losing anything.
Let's pretend Microsoft offered you refunds for games you. A) Didn't want anymore or B) found not to your liking.

In this senario you received credit to a new game. How would you feel about always online then?

(I would have said "full money back refund", but that would have been too hypothetical.
 
Apr 5, 2012
100
0
0
I live in one of those "joke" areas where them internets is just a dream within and dream and we marry out sisters...or not. But really, my internet connection is awful and so are most of the people that live near me. I have to go to my Uni's MU to use high speed internet. Always online is a bad idea!
 

MetalDooley

Cwipes!!!
May 27, 2020
2,054
0
1
Country
Ireland
As Jim mentioned the number of people who don't have their consoles connected to the net is substantial.Xbox Live has something like 46 million users.Given that MS have sold over 75 million 360s that means almost half of 360 owners either can't or have no interest in hooking their console up to the internet.Would MS really be so stupid as to alienate almost half their current market?

ZZoMBiE13 said:
And hopefully some self awareness that LIVE GOLD is no longer the value it once was.
When was Live Gold ever good value?Paying an extra fee on top of the cost of a game so you're not locked out of stuff you've already paid for is pretty much the opposite of good value I would say
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Andy Shandy said:
DVS BSTrD said:
Uratoh said:
How long until there's a shiny new jim sterling 'deal with it' gif? XD
Sir Thomas Sean Connery said:
I need this immediately.
WaitWHAT said:
NOT SOON ENOUUUGGGH!!

Someone make it NOW!!!!
Got it done as soon as could, I might have a higher quality version up later.
Mine's is better, DVS! =P

Your claim is instantly invalidated by the fact that mine has more Sterling in it.

WaitWHAT said:

*wipes away tear*

That was beautiful....just.....beautiful....

Come here and hug me, bro.
I happen to have a giff 4 that 2.
 

knight steel

New member
Jul 6, 2009
1,794
0
0
For any company/publisher I just have to say this:
And I don't want you and I don't need you
Don't bother to resist, or I'll beat you
It's not your fault that you're always wrong
The weak ones are there to justify the strong

The beautiful people, the beautiful people
It's all relative to the size of your steeple
You can't see the forest for the trees
You can't smell your own shit on your knees

There's no time to discriminate,
Hate every ************
That's in your way

[Chorus:]
Hey you, what do you see?
Something beautiful, something free?
Hey you, are you trying to be mean?
If you live with apes man, it's hard to be clean

The worms will live in every host
It's hard to pick which one they eat most

The horrible people, the horrible people
It's as anatomic as the size of your steeple
Capitalism has made it this way,
Old-fashioned fascism will take it away

[Chorus]

There's no time to discriminate,
Hate every ************
That's in your way

The beautiful people
The beautiful people (aahh) [x4]

[Chorus x2]

The beautiful people [x8]
*sigh* why do song lyrics make the best responses,seriously that song is just perfect,for those who want to hear what it sounds like here:
 

AlwaysPractical

New member
Oct 7, 2011
209
0
0
the antithesis said:
And that's how the Ouya will outsell the next Xbox. Deal with it.
I am so looking forward to the day when that happens. If all these rumours turn out to be true, it's looking very likely it'll go that way. The Shield will outsell it too and even the friggin $1.5k Razer Edge might outsell it.
 

Ashoten

New member
Aug 29, 2010
251
0
0
Jim....you made me fist pump in the air and shout FUCK YEAH! at the end there.

An always on console model might be able to work if the consoles were little more then a bare-bones cable box that connects users to the game servers where all the computing power goes on. This would serve the multiplayer FPS market as it would cut down on the potential for cheating at the consumer level. However the only way this system would have an advantage over just getting a computer is if it was a portable device with build in WiFi. I do not know if this business model could be made profitable accept that a smaller device with less computing power would be cheaper to produce and sell. Nintendo figured this out a while ago.
 

GamemasterAnthony

New member
Dec 5, 2010
1,009
0
0
I actually do kind of see the mobile market outselling the consoles...kind of in the same way when MovieBob mentioned that PC gaming was now dead because the PC as we know it is dying. In this case, console gaming is dying because now the mobile devices are becoming like consoles. So...I suspect the whole DRM debacle will slowly go away because no one will want to buy a traditional console anymore because of this drek.

Huh...maybe we will get the retinal eyeball gaming MovieBob mentioned soon enough. Possibly evolving from a Google Glass app.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
DVS BSTrD said:
WaitWHAT said:

*wipes away tear*

That was beautiful....just.....beautiful....

Come here and hug me, bro.
I happen to have a giff 4 that 2.
D'aaawww....

(Better avoid low content. Uhhhmmm.....)

Would anyone out there actually but this console? I mean, like, what would it take to convince you to put up with always-online? I mean, Simcity and Diablo 3 still sold, didn't they? How much of a problem do you think this would cause?
 

Lever

New member
Jun 30, 2011
23
0
0
excellent episode, yet again Jim. I'm just glad I built a PC when I did XD

Also, I find it rather amusing that Adam Orth's twitter account has been protected (is that the right word?)/ made private.
 

Falcon123

New member
Aug 9, 2009
314
0
0
Capitano Segnaposto said:
the antithesis said:
And that's how the Ouya will outsell the next Xbox. Deal with it.
Except it won't. At all. The Ouya is already failing as is with the few consoles that have been released due to its horrendous menu system and constant pop-ups telling you to pay for something.
Yes, let's start criticizing the Ouya months before it's been released. Please ignore the fact that it's not even in an official Beta yet with its UI system and is already moving to fix it, and that those reviews are unfair at best as a result. Otherwise, we might be giving an ambitious up and coming console with the potential to do something great for indie developers its fair due. *eye roll*

The Ouya will probably never outsell the NeXtbox or whatever the hell they inevitably call it, but it's not designed to, and that's not for what the Ouya is aiming. It's a more niche market sold at a reasonable price for those who want it. We'll know months from now what the system is, and years from now what the system can be (remember, it's been announced for less than a year, and most games have a development cycle much longer than that).

That said, Jim is right on the money here. Always online is a horrible policy that simply cannot work in today's world. The infrastructure isn't there, the developers and publishers can't be trusted to make it work, and it detracts from what people actually want from a system: fun simple games that just work . So... yeah, don't be that dumb, Microsoft. Please.
 

EXos

New member
Nov 24, 2009
168
0
0
I agree with Jim that the consoles are dying. (not just because I'm a PC gamer).

But their main advantage (pop a game in and go) is gone. And with always the always online prerequisites it's only going to accelerate it...
 

Realitycrash

New member
Dec 12, 2010
2,779
0
0
Haven't even bought a console THIS generation. I doubt I will the next either. I'm sticking to my PC (without being smug and looking down on those that do not).
 

Norrdicus

New member
Feb 27, 2012
458
0
0
Not one of Jim's best episodes, he's basically repeating the arguments that every other gamer has figured out, from the same angle no less.

What about mentioning how combining Always Online with mandatory Kinect would turn things into an Orwellian nightmare?

Or how about if Microsoft made the Xbox 720 Always Online while at the same time demand a subscription fee for next-gen Xbox LIVE? Subscription ran out? I hope you enjoy having your expensive game collection turn into coasters!

Always Online is a bad practice on its own, but if we look at the other practices Microsoft has used during this gen, it becomes all the more frightening
 

karamazovnew

New member
Apr 4, 2011
263
0
0
Spot on, Jim.

One thing that is worth underlining is that while before we were dealing with multi-platform game developers such as EA, now we're talking about one CONSOLE. Can you imagine a game dev, that is already knee deep in shait, failing to survive while selling millions of copies, taking the time to make games for the new XBOX? Can you imagine any good AAA XBOX-only title? HA!!!! Devs will avoid the XBOX like a plague and run to the warm embrace of Steam, Sony and Nintendo. XBOX will crash faster than a Hindenburg made of bricks. If that's so clearly apparent to us, I doubt that Microsoft would be that stupid to actually do it. Maybe this is just a marketing trick to make us breathe a sigh of relief. On the other hand... looking at Windows 8 and its monumentally stupid Start Menu... who knows?

Norrdicus said:
In that case, NOBODY would buy it. Simple. As things stand right now, Microsoft simply expects the same "booooo... but I'll still buy it" attitude that EA got away with so far. But nobody would go THAT far.
 

Arkham

Esoteric Cultist
Apr 4, 2020
120
0
0
WaitWHAT said:
Would anyone out there actually but this console? I mean, like, what would it take to convince you to put up with always-online? I mean, Simcity and Diablo 3 still sold, didn't they? How much of a problem do you think this would cause?
I reluctantly tolerated D3's online requirement. Blizzard is at least consistent with maintenance downtime and server restarts. Microsoft would have to show a similar level of consistency before I would consider it. Even then I wouldn't buy it because my ISP is so unreliable and there are no alternatives in my area.
 

Sheo_Dagana

New member
Aug 12, 2009
966
0
0
*sigh* I will miss Halo... I really will. But it would seem that MS may chose to take a path which I cannot follow.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-04-08-next-xbox-reveal-due-21st-may-costs-usd500-or-usd300-with-a-subscription-reports-suggest

In this article, Paul Thurrot hints that 'always online' was in the notes he received about the system a while back, but he does nothing to confirm if it's true or not. It's staggering to hear, however, because I imagine that if 'always online' were merely a rumor, he would have dismissed it.

For me, there is not a SINGLE advantage to being always online. Outside of Xbox Live, which I only use for a few games, my 360 provides me with nothing that I cannot currently do on my computer, tablet, or laptop. And guess what; I can connect my PC to my television quite easily if I want to put Netflix up on the big screen. It's laughable that Microsoft still thinks that we want to get an Xbox for Hulu, ESPN, Twitter, Skype, or Last FM. Even for people outside of my living room arrangement, smart TVs are providing all of these services through the TV. I can see Smart TVs becoming the mainstream television, and then, what will the justification for 'always online' be?

The fact of the matter is that there is no justification for an always online console, save one - for Microsoft to exert control over their consumers.

Also, I'm glad you brought up GameStop. The company is like a lightening rod for hate on the internet, but I'd guess that more than 3/4 of the people that ***** about them online still shop there. I mean... they make tons of money and publishers are always doing marketing deals with them. Someone has to be shopping there.
 

Jedi-Hunter4

New member
Mar 20, 2012
195
0
0
keitarobg said:
It's about time to start suing developers for imposing always-on DRM and failing to sustain the conditions for it. It's an obvious breach of contract
You can't sue them for that for the same reason you can't sue them if they decide to shut down the servers after a year, which has happened before. In the manual or what ever it will state that they reserve the right to shut it down at any point and that the service is available at their convenience etc etc

That's why I'm so astounded why people buy these always online games, or think in the long run buying a massive music catalogue on itunes or all their games off steam is a good idea. The only way you can guarante you will always be able to play that game is if the only think it relies on is a hard disk and a power connection going into what ever box you choose to play on.

I hope these are just rumors and bids for free publicity so every one will be UBER :) happy if their not true. Won't be buying a console that has to have an internet connection to work, it's a joke. Even if you have a very good internet connection it's going to cause issue if for instance you live with any body else or if you want to be doing anything else with the internt. Ie for work I have processes running on my computer that I leave working away and at times it takes up so much of the connection spotify lags out. What if I want to play my console? Already have the best net connection I can get, without paying insane money to get fiber optic installed.
 

Pebkio

The Purple Mage
Nov 9, 2009
780
0
0
Guys, why are we complaining about always-online... DRM? I fully support always-online... DRM. You should all fully support always-online... DRM. We should be calling for always-online...DRM... on the PS4. This is all a joke Microsoft, we actually love your dumb dumb dumb idea. C'mon, you can do it, become the one true tool as destiny has foretold. I believe in you.

Because it will kill consoles which will crash the AAA gaming market and that shit needs to die.

We've weathered a crash before. It's happened guys, no need to fear the reaper. 2010's reasons are just as valid as 1980's reasons. After the inferno caused by massive cheap game knock-off advertisements, the gaming companies rose better than ever. But they're become bloated and rotting and need to be burned to ashes... again. Don't worry, it took them a few decades to get this bad and after they come back from disaster, it'll probably take them another few decades before we have to burn them to ash again. Y'know... "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty" kind of deal but with "good gaming" instead of "liberty".

Gaming won't die forever, there's still money to be made, but things would suck for about five years. Besides, the indy market will still exist, just not big market games. Can you really not put up with only indy games for 5 years? Can you do it for the band?

For the band?

FOR THE BAND?
 

MonkeyPunch

New member
Feb 20, 2008
589
0
0
For some reason I love that first "ugh!" in the outro music of these videos.
It sort of puts the full stop after Jim's final line x]
 

DTWolfwood

Better than Vash!
Oct 20, 2009
3,716
0
0
Microsoft please do make your console require constant internet connection.

I'd love to see what happens.
 

superline51

New member
Nov 18, 2009
179
0
0
If the console industry does go tits up, I'm not entirely sure what I will do, considering I DESPISE gaming with M&K.
 

Mahoshonen

New member
Jul 28, 2008
358
0
0
Given the massive backlog of games I still need to play this generation, I doubt I'll be buying a new one when it comes out, Always Online or not.

superline51 said:
If the console industry does go tits up, I'm not entirely sure what I will do, considering I DESPISE gaming with M&K.
You can get a console controller for your PC, you know
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?

I'm not asking this to be contrarian or witty, I'm generally curious. Mainly because the only two PC games I play are WoW and LoL, both on an 5 year old iMac. So I'm a bit out of the loop.
The thing is, Steam actually has an offline capability, for most games really. Also for the most part all steam games are playable offline except those that require online (.e. Team FOrtress 2, COunter Strike, etc)

Steam is also an example of always on DRM done right! It's mostly unobtrusive. You don't need to have Steam running all the time when you're not gaming, and it tends to make up for itself by occasionally notifying you of games that you like or may like going on sale. Steam is also independent of the retailers to a point and only serves as a quick verification. It does this quite simply; it keeps a record of the titles you have purchased or been gifted and your account, if it sees a game being run on an account with no record of the game eing purchased or transferred,, Bam it's shut down. Once the check is passed it butts out and lets you get on with your gaming fun. See unlike D3 or SimShity, all Steam does is verify that your steam game was acquired through one of 3 legal channels, Steam itself is more like the bouncer checking id at the nightclub door. D3 on the other hand has the real elephant in the room question? What happens to the game and all your paid for items and dlc, when the company decides to shut the servers down?
 

Elyxard

New member
Dec 12, 2010
137
0
0
The only reason I can think of that they would go through with this is to sell more ad space. It's been creeping up more and more into all of their products, and they must have gambled that the loss of sales won't trump the amount they'll receive in ad revenue.

And that's the problem with most every (rumored) feature of the NextBox. Every one of them only serves themselves, the publishers, or the retailers; not the consumers. It's coming across as a very cold and calculated business device, and not a device to enjoy games on.

We can only hope that this is all wrong but.. I don't have much faith in MS to do the right thing. There are too many hands in the kitchen and no one to guide then into sync.
 

Adam Jensen_v1legacy

I never asked for this
Sep 8, 2011
6,652
0
0
superline51 said:
If the console industry does go tits up, I'm not entirely sure what I will do, considering I DESPISE gaming with M&K.
Use your controller?

Maerx said:
MS = MacroSuicide.

Let's hope this is just rumors.
Then why don't they just come out and say so? Everything about "Durango" is bad news for everyone. They could use some plus points right now.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
keitarobg said:
It's about time to start suing developers for imposing always-on DRM and failing to sustain the conditions for it. It's an obvious breach of contract, because the obligee (ze publisher) is denying a service, for which the customer has paid. Imagine buying milk from the store, paying for it and getting just the plastic jug without milk in it, because the cows aren't able to produce milk right now. It's exactly the same.

What I'm trying to say is that it's a legal issue. This is not a debate. People need to turn to court otherwise this bullshit will continue in the future.
Except every publisher who has been pushing Always-Online revokes your right to class-action-suits and shunts the case into arbitration (which is so hilariously one-sided against the customer that it is pointless).

The sick truth of the matter is that they want to push for more and more service-centric business because games, by their very nature, fall under the "natural monopoly" area of goods.

And when you combine "monopoly" with "service"...that's just a license to print money for many many long years.
Just look at the US telecoms-ISP industry.
 

uguito-93

This space for rent
Jul 16, 2009
359
0
0
I live in Perth, Australia. Our internet is capped, as is almost everyone else's in the country, as well as the fact that it runs piggy-backed on phone lines not designed to handle it. It's limited and drops out for a few seconds every once in a while, which will mean getting booted every time it happens. I cannot imagine an always online console being viable here. If the rumors are true then how the hell would anyone ignore the fact that there are a metric fuckton of people out there who would not be capable of running one, even in urban areas?
 

Living Contradiction

Clearly obfusticated
Nov 8, 2009
337
0
0
WaitWHAT said:
*Snip snippity snip until...*
Would anyone out there actually buy this console? I mean, like, what would it take to convince you to put up with always-online? I mean, Simcity and Diablo 3 still sold, didn't they? How much of a problem do you think this would cause?
I'll take the first part last, if I may.

Yes, Sim City and Diablo 3 sold well, but you have to bear in mind that once the cash register stops ringing and the screaming from people being unable to play goes quiet, there aren't that many people on the servers. Diablo 3 came out in May of last year and sold three and a half million copies. By June, just over two thousand were playing at 5pm on a weekday. Sim City sold just over a million copies in its first two weeks (no mean feat since Amazon pulled the plug), over half of which were digital. How many are using it now? I imagine you could probably knock two or three zeroes off the sales numbers.

That's a mountain of cash that was made on the front-end followed by minimal server load on the back. Why did the outrage happen? Because the publishers figured out that they didn't need to sink piles of money into servers; they just needed to wait for the screamers to go away and their current servers would be sufficient. They'd already been paid. They didn't care. $60 ($80 for those who embraced the purple shaft and bought the deluxe edition) times million is quite a nice payoff for a little bad PR.

If someone were to sell an always-on console, there'd be a flood of sales at the start, a massive public outcry, the ensuing debacle of "we weren't ready/didn't think it would break/are working to solve the problem/are drinking our celebratory champagne so please fuck off", and then the thing would work because over nine-tenths of the people who bought the stupid thing would put it in a closet or take it back to the store (for a fifteen-percent loss. Gotta love margin cushions). Assuming, of course, that none of the consoles broke (always a danger with new tech) or was broken by irate players. The company would have its money and then cast about for a new shiny to offer the magpie public.

I won't put up with always-online unless, as has been argued by others before me, the game I'm playing actually needs it. Multiplayer requires online, at least if there's real-time interaction. Otherwise, I'll be content with clicking on a link and watching my browser refresh or posting a move and waiting for my opponent to respond. Those are the only reasons I can see for needing an online connection for a game. In all other instances, my gaming is a solitary experience and dammit, I want to be left alone! I don't want someone tapping my shoulder when I play, stealing my kills or interrupting my narrative with "CAN GIVE SOJJJ?"

Would I buy such a console? Yes, yes I would. At a pawn shop, about a year after it released. For ten bucks. So I could show future generations an example of what hubris looks like when it takes physical shape.

On Topic: Mr. Sterling, if you could hear me, I'd applaud. If I could reach you, I'd shake your hand. As it stands, I thank you and sincerely hope you'll continue to call people on their arrogance, their ignorance, and their failings.
 

Jewky

New member
Feb 19, 2011
14
0
0
Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if they would pull through with this. Always-online DRM would, as Jim said, most likely cripple the used-game industry, hence likely driving more (albeit not as many were going to the used-game retailers) consumers towards them (AAA-industry guys). They're essentially getting rid of some competition and diverting revenues first earned by used-game towards AAA-industry and once they've actually gotten rid of them, they'll be able to raise prices some more, hence increasing their own welfare and reducing consumers', since now several people will no longer get to enjoy such games and the AAA-industry gets a couple more trucks with money.
We see an efficient form of production (used-game industry) being replaced by a less efficient (oligopolistic-form) industry and I seriously doubt that people would refrain from using always-online DRM products out of general principle and so on, since they can already afford it and simply want to enjoy the product. So the only thing I see that could fix this, is that some sort of regulations are established competitive-wise, since there's more to be gained for everyone as a whole (and more evenly distributed among industry and consumers) than when we move to the crippling of the used-game industry.
 

Ken_J

New member
Jun 4, 2009
891
0
0
This is kind of why I'm loving my Wii U. Sure it has it's own bullshit but It doesn't look nearly as bad as this
 

Lunar Templar

New member
Sep 20, 2009
8,225
0
0
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?

I'm not asking this to be contrarian or witty, I'm generally curious. Mainly because the only two PC games I play are WoW and LoL, both on an 5 year old iMac. So I'm a bit out of the loop.
o.0 why do people keep thinking steam needs to be 'always online', it doesn't.

it has an offline mode, which I'm using the hell out of right now because an error is preventing my PC from actually connecting to the net, again. (posting from some moms laptop)

there's been no message telling me to connect, to verify anything, it just can't find a connection and switches to offline mode, and I get to keep playing the games I downloaded before the error hit me again. (I have recently discovered Torchlight 2, so I'm not hurting for things to do. I <3 my Embermage and 'construction' tree Engineer btw)
 

Catrixa

New member
May 21, 2011
209
0
0
There was a two week period where my husband and I had just moved into a new place and didn't want to pay Comcast a zillion dollars for two weeks of tubes, since we'd have to pay for installation (see: Comcast guy flipping a switch for $50. Our place already had the damn box), then two weeks (which they would probably just charge a month for, then make us jump through hoops to get rid of the bill entirely. Not a horrible deal, but an annoyance on top of a horrible deal), just to have internet until the FiOS guys could get there. So, I had no internet. And I watched Blu-Rays and DVDs, while playing Torchlight II on Steam (which was totally fine offline).

I've also had moments where I've thought "bring game console to fancy hotel for some convention, so an overstuffed room of people can play games all night? Hells yes!" If I had to then pay exorbitant ($20 for one hour of tubes is kinda a little batshit insane) fees just to access the games, I wouldn't bother. Really, always online is extremely narrow minded. I want to play with this toy all the time! Where I want to! When I want to! I want to take it places and show all my friends! Always-online says, "You will play this console in your living room, after work, like a normal person. You will have the exact experience we tell you to have. If this doesn't work out for you, we're sorry, but we don't really care."

Although, I've gotta say, I'm not sure if the Sim City/Diablo III issues would be equivalent to an always-on console. People aren't usually buying consoles like they buy long-anticipated AAA titles. Consoles normally need good launch titles as well as extreme interest in order to get that kind of launch. Plus, it's always easier to download a game than it is to assemble enough consoles for a launch. Companies should have greater control over consoles sold. (This said, this does not preclude them from cocking it up royally, it should just be harder for them to do so.)
 

Killclaw Kilrathi

Crocuta Crocuta
Dec 28, 2010
263
0
0
mrblakemiller said:
That last minute was immaculate. The conceit we're being shown is unconscionable. I'm almost looking forward to some big crash (I'm getting too old for hardcore gaming anyways), and seeing what rises from the ashes.
Probably the new indie console market. You've got consoles like the Ouya not only letting people make games for it practically for free, but they're actively encouraging their user base to take it apart and mod it however they like. Not saying that this particular console will necessarily be a success, but it and the other independent/open source consoles might pave the way for how the industry will operate once the big three implode from alienating all their customers.
 

molly31

New member
Mar 18, 2013
12
0
0
Microsoft really is the leader of entertainment. If they go through with this I will be getting maximum entertainment with no risk to me or my wallet. So, how can we "support" this?!
 

piclemaniscool

New member
Dec 19, 2008
79
0
0
I'm glad that idiot is getting media attention. Surely "deal with it" is a presentable catch-all reaction to disgruntled fans and will only promote the next console.

Next week I hope Jim can bring to light the fact that EA is twisting consumer complaints into an anti-LGBT movement. Please Jim, tear them a new one. Do it for the little guys.
 

DataSnake

New member
Aug 5, 2009
467
0
0
Another issue: planned obsolescence. If the xBox 720 requires always-on verification, what happens when those servers are shut down in an attempt to force users to upgrade to the next next-gen console? In addition to the console becoming worthless, with no backward compatibility (a very real possibility if the PS4 is any indication), that would also make any game you bought on the 720 impossible to replay years down the line.

EDIT: that'll show me for commenting before the video ends, Jim actually addressed that point.
 

Nghtgnt

New member
May 30, 2010
124
0
0
Scrustle said:
MS needs to realise that it produces a luxury item. As much as gamers are willing to put up with shit to play their favourite games, we all realise that we don't really need to play them. These are things we fill our time with to entertain us. Comparing it to things like phones and vacuum cleaners is ridiculous. Those things are necessary items. We put up with problems with them because the need for them will not go away. If the electricity goes out or the mobile network doesn't cover wherever we happen to be, we wait until those services return and attempt again.

If crappy servers go down just that one time too many, we won't wait any more. We'll go buy a PS4 instead. Or maybe we'll get a PC, or even watch a movie or read a book. Whatever example you can think of. But if your luxury product doesn't work exactly when it is convenient for us, then don't expect our patience to last very long. You can't demand that we "deal with it", you need to deal with us. If you're not fulfilling our requirements, then we're not going to give you our money. Simple as that. You need to work around our demands, not the other way around.

The stupidest thing about all this is that our demands aren't even that complicated. We don't really care about all this fancy gimmicky shit. We just want a machines which has sufficient power to run games, and for those games to be fun. Maybe a few online features as well, like online play and download services. We'll gladly give you money for that. Instead you'd rather overcomplicate everything, treat us like criminals right from the word go, and try to squeeze as much money out of us at every single possible opportunity.
Well said. One thing I'd add is the difference between an "option" and a "requirement" - consumers will like something as an "option", but dislike it when something is a "requirement". Hopefully someone with a degree in business can phrase that better then I, but I think that would be a stronger argument because given enough time the connectivity argument will be rendered moot by the slow march of progress in infrastructure, or by that being a small enough population to not impact the company's profits significantly enough.
 

gorfias

Unrealistic but happy
Legacy
Apr 6, 2020
4,750
375
88
Country
USA
the antithesis said:
And that's how the Ouya will outsell the next Xbox. Deal with it.
My buddy's is on the way. He payed into Kickstarter.

I think it is a little behind the curb, but at $100, if it can be replaced by a Tegra 5 in a couple of years, I don't think that will even be an issue. $100 is a throw away item.

I've lost a couple of really good games because a company stopped having a server work. I didn't know when I paid Walmart $10 for a newly anti aliased copy of the original Halflife, I was only renting it and it would stop working from no fault of my own.

ITMT, enjoy:

 

RodSk8Dude

New member
Nov 10, 2012
10
0
0
Scrustle said:
[...] phones [...] are necessary items. We put up with problems with them because the need for them will not go away. If [...] the mobile network doesn't cover wherever we happen to be, we wait until those services return and attempt again.[...]
The funny thing is, I can still use my cellphone without internet or reception, to listen to songs, play games and a few other stuff.

Also, I live in Brazil. Games are popular here. But the minimum wage converts to around 300 US dollars, consoles and games, because of taxes, are 500 and 100 US dollars, respectively. It's already hard to have these, just recently me (20) and my brother (29) were able to start buying original products, and I will happily buy original games if they're not full of this kind of bullshit.
And the internet? It's also very expensive. I have a fast internet, but I share it with my brother, so I can't rely on it too much, and although I have a very big family, I don't know ANYONE who has a fast internet, so always online would be really stupid here. And the market really has a lot to expand around here. I mean, the country has around 200 million people, even if most don't have conditions, imagine the part of it that DOES, it still would be a considerable market, wouldn't it?
 

triggrhappy94

New member
Apr 24, 2010
3,376
0
0
So, Google tried to give everyone in San Francisco free Wifi every where. Something consoles could take advantage of. Microsoft sued Google--Google was making a play on the OS market by doing this--to keep them from doing it.
Now, Microsoft demands that everyone be online all the time.
What, does Microsoft think its a Republican Senator now? They think they get to break things than ***** about how the tings they just broke are broken?
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/jon-stewart-knocks-senate-banking-committe
 

Dead Seerius

New member
Feb 4, 2012
865
0
0
Just the episode I was expecting!

You know, it's funny; two years ago I would see 'PC gaming is dying!' being proclaimed all over the internet while people couldn't wait to see what the next generation of gaming consoles would offer. Seems like a bit of a role reversal now.

Anyway, consoles will die if they end up pushing this bullshit DRM. It's revolting how little such DRM supporters think of us consumers. It's insulting. I'm still hopeful that MS isn't stupid enough to include always-online DRM in the Nextbox, but if they do... adios.

I predict "deal with it" will become the rallying cry of the public as they boycott MS if all this turns out to be true.
 

Kenjitsuka

New member
Sep 10, 2009
3,051
0
0
So true. And so, so sad.

Here's to hoping it's just rumors.
Oh, but don't think you're SAFE once it's release without always on requirement!
Ever hear of "System update required to play this title"?
Boom! Now you're always on required after you bought it!

Remember PS3's removal of Linux support?
 
Aug 1, 2010
2,768
0
0
DVS BSTrD said:
Uratoh said:
How long until there's a shiny new jim sterling 'deal with it' gif? XD
Sir Thomas Sean Connery said:
I need this immediately.
WaitWHAT said:
NOT SOON ENOUUUGGGH!!

Someone make it NOW!!!!
Got it done as soon as could, I might have a higher quality version up later.
[image/]http://th642.photobucket.com/albums/uu145/bliat/th_brilliantmoot.jpg[/IMG]

Simply fantastic work.

I'll be using this frequently.
 

VoEC

New member
Dec 10, 2010
39
0
0
Great episode as always. But I have one question:

Does anyone know where to get/listen to the new background music? It's awesome (and I think it's by Danny B.?)
 

Sean951

New member
Mar 30, 2011
650
0
0
And so Nintendo will once again save the industry. I can already imagine how a conversation about Always Online would go:

"Extra features? Psh, we're a game console. You play games on us. Why the hell would we add features and drive up costs to add something that other products already provide?"

And so they will continue to just be Nintendo. Making Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Kirby, and Pokemon games that just print money.
 

DrOswald

New member
Apr 22, 2011
1,443
0
0
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?

I'm not asking this to be contrarian or witty, I'm generally curious. Mainly because the only two PC games I play are WoW and LoL, both on an 5 year old iMac. So I'm a bit out of the loop.
First, I need to define two terms:

True requirement: A requirement that is essential to the function of a thing. The thing could not possibly work without it.

Artificial requirement: A requirement that is unneeded but is forced on the user by the seller.

Any requirement, true or artificial, comes at a cost to the consumer. If I want to play an internet multiplayer game I have to have a stable and fast internet connection. That comes at a cost to myself beyond the base cost of the game. To put a number on that cost, I recently moved. My old wired solution was no longer going to work. I had to purchase a wireless range extender, a wireless card, and some other equipment. This cost me about $150 to establish this kind of stable internet.

Now, I don't hold it against Riot that I needed to spend $150 to continue playing their game, because it is a true requirement.

Next, steam. Steam does not actually require always online. Once you connect to your stream account once you are good for several weeks and you only need dial up speed and reliability to do that. The rest of the required connection is all a true requirement. You cannot download a game without a connection, you cannot chat with friends without a connection. The vast majority of required steam connectivity is a true requirement, the service could not possibly work without it. The core functionality of steam itself requires a connection, and the artificial requirement that I connect once every few weeks is very minor.

In addition, Steam offers a great service. With incredible sales and very easy management of my games I have seen a huge personal benefit using Steam. The tiny cost of connecting to the internet once every couple weeks is easily compensated for by the excellent service rendered. Had I not cared about having a reliable, fast connection I could have never spent that $150 and I would be no worse off using my previously purchased steam games.

On the other hand, the core function of a console does not require an internet connection. An always on console is a purely artificial requirement, a potentially significant cost to me for which I gain absolutely nothing. For many this is an insurmountable obstacle. And the only reason the next Microsoft console would have such a requirement is because Microsoft wants control.

They are, essentially, making us pay for their toy and offering nothing in return. When we say that we don't like this the closest thing we have gotten to a response is "We don't see the problem. Deal with it you whiny drama queens."

I don't personally care about the rumored always online requirement directly. My problem is the blatant anti consumer attitude. I do not want to do business with these people. They are rude to me and this is just one incident in a long history of annoyances. Owning the next Xbox is not worth dealing with their shit.
 

proghead

New member
Apr 17, 2010
118
0
0
It's been said before: when your internet connection goes down, wouldn't that be a great opportunity to play some games on your console? How's that for always-on MS? This is such a bad case of head in the clouds, it's not funny anymore. Every programmer will tell you that you can't rely on any network connection. You just can't.
 

Azaraxzealot

New member
Dec 1, 2009
2,403
0
0
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?

I'm not asking this to be contrarian or witty, I'm generally curious. Mainly because the only two PC games I play are WoW and LoL, both on an 5 year old iMac. So I'm a bit out of the loop.
I think it's because Steam has an offline mode. And there are many ways to get games you bought working when trying to play offline because on PC there's almost always a solution to every problem.

It's most likely going to take a long time to use most of them but in the end they give you more control over how you game than an always-online console ever would.

OT:
I always wonder why some executive with decision-making power hasn't seen shows or opinions like this or why they never seem to be aware they exist. All we as the common folk can ever do is speculate on how they feel, and whenever they DO speak out they say something that makes them seem like they're living in some sort of hypothetical reality where everything always works and there is an unlimited amount of money for everyone.

The games industry REALLY needs to make an effort to be more transparent with their decision-making process and have more open lines of communication with their consumers to allow them to see and hear these kinds of opinions presented on the Jimquisition and other very thoughtful video game journalists.

Because when they do things it always seems so.... out of touch. And I wonder what happens to a human being along the line of their life to make them start making decisions like the really shitty ones we always see today in the industry...
 

conanthegamer

New member
Sep 19, 2008
50
0
0
I live in a rural area outside of San Angelo, TX and my internet is mostly reliable. I often visit friends and family in San Antonio, TX. One friend I stay with has no internet. My relative I stay with has internet but no router. I still take my Xbox down there and play it. But if Microsoft does this the only thing I would be doing is transporting a brick. I wonder Microsoft's end game is to get away from consoles period. Between Steam and Mechwarrior online, I am slowly moving that way.
 

Xman490

Doctorate in Danger
May 29, 2010
1,186
0
0
When you said "congratulate Nintendo," I had no idea what you were talking about. When you mentioned "having the best exclusive," Lego City Undercover came to mind. When you joked about the WiiU not getting Colonial Marines, I sighed.

With surprisingly well-animated and acted characters and addicting piece collecting, that Lego game sounds really good.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Honestly jim i noticed you tried to lump sony in with xbox in an effort to sound open minded.

But that's just it. Sony isn't going that way. We (the sony fans) wether you like it or not own you ^^. Hate drm? Come on down to sony land jimmy.

I'm proud to see I've long since preferred sony over x box and if there ever was a full on time for fan boy gloating,
it's now baby ^^.

but yeah great episode but lets be honest this is xbox shit bomb. no one elses.
 
Sep 24, 2008
2,461
0
0
keitarobg said:
It's about time to start suing developers for imposing always-on DRM and failing to sustain the conditions for it. It's an obvious breach of contract, because the obligee (ze publisher) is denying a service, for which the customer has paid. Imagine buying milk from the store, paying for it and getting just the plastic jug without milk in it, because the cows aren't able to produce milk right now. It's exactly the same.

What I'm trying to say is that it's a legal issue. This is not a debate. People need to turn to court otherwise this bullshit will continue in the future.
the breach of contract would only work if their contracts were not written to allow the exact same thing we all hate. If they mark it as a service, they by all economic means take all our rights away.

I.e.

Hence the rise of ultra long EULAs that we just want to click through to play our games. People do not read how steadily every bit of 'ownership' has been stripped away from us. Basically, by being dismayed by what we're playing and planning to protest, we are the ones breaching contract. As long as games change nomenclature to a 'service'.
 

Naqel

New member
Nov 21, 2009
345
0
0
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?
Last time I checked, Steam runs ALL my games with offline modes in them perfectly fine when my internet is down.

It's even kind enough to let me chose if I'd like to update whenever possible, or if I'd rather it not mess with my modded copy of X-Com or another game.
 

gamegod25

New member
Jul 10, 2008
863
0
0
Legion said:
I can't see why else they could have such a dismissive attitude towards their customers, especially considering that selling 3 million copies of a game is considered "below expectations". If games were still being made cheap, then perhaps they could get away with that kind of attitude, but considering how much money they are losing, even when games are selling well, you'd think trying to please people would be a much better idea than trying to siphon money off of them any way that you can.

As for the always online. I honestly cannot see the logic behind it. We are not yet in a world where reliable fast broadband is widespread enough for this kind of usage. In five to ten years, I'd imagine this idea could work, but right now we simply are not ready for it. So why are they so insistent? I cannot see the advantage for them.
That's something that I feel gets overshadowed amid all the other shit, that EA and other big companies are hemorrhaging money because they are just plain poorly run companies. They are spending far more than they can reasonably expect to make, making their products less desirable in a vain attempt to squeeze out a few more pennies, and showing outright contempt for their customers.

It's no wonder CEO's are being forced to step down and the market is crashing when they refuse to learn from even recent mistakes, either too proud or stupid to consider any alternatives despite almost certain failure. It's become an industry so nearsighted and sure of itself that it can't (or won't) see the giant pit just down the road.

And as for being always on, clearly anyone who thinks it is a good idea has never lived in an area with poor connection and just takes for granted that not everyone can be online all the time. As many have pointed out willingly excluding a fairly large percentage of potential customers (I believe the number of non-online 360's was like 20-30%) is just stupid and strikes me as cutting off your nose to spite your face.
 

Rad Party God

Party like it's 2010!
Feb 23, 2010
3,560
0
0
My internet connection is fine most of the time and that's the key word, most of the time, it always baffled me why would I want a freaking console to be "always online", I mean, I love MMOs and I love online gaming in general, but there are times where I'm not in the mood to play with strangers or friends and I just want to play some good ol' fashioned single player goodness, heck, there are times when I'm in the mood to use the Wii (!).

I mean, it's neat that consoles can be connected to the internet and it's definitely neat to use my Wii for YouTube and Netflix (the most use the little fella is having right now), but it's not a freaking requirement, it's not necessary to play, say, Mario Galaxy or Okami.

Heck, not even Steam itself uses my internet connection constantly, I can perfectly live by connecting it once every few weeks and keep playing anything I want offline.

If these rumors are true, I can see a big rope haging from the ceiling with Microsoft's name on it.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
It's funny; I just disassembled my vacuum cleaner, and, you know what? The thing doesn't need electricity at all. It turns out it just connects to the power outlet so the power company can give Hoover information about how I use their vacuum cleaner, how often I use my vacuum cleaner, and whether enough time has passed that Hoover can send an electrical pulse up the line and cause my vacuum cleaner to self-destruct so I'll be forced to buy a new one. And I guess there's some kind of widget that prevents my vacuum cleaner from using generic or reconditioned parts, and that requires electricity too.

Jim? Amen.

Microsoft? Zune, Windows 8/Mobile, Games For Windows Live- you're running out of breathing room for allowable fuck-ups. Don't do it.
 

cheetahguy

New member
May 19, 2012
10
0
0
actually this has been confirmed and Microsoft is making the new Xbox with DRM, they even gave the prices and said "if your internet connection goes out for 3 minutes you Xbox will shut down" what an epic fail.
 

Adventurer2626

New member
Jan 21, 2010
713
0
0
Lawl! Lawl! *snarf* Great job, Jim :) Would be nice for the AAA pubs to realize the issues they're causing but maybe the empty wallet teaches best.
 

FoolKiller

New member
Feb 8, 2008
2,409
0
0
2 things...

1. I can't wait to see the nightmare of parents returning these because they didn't realize that they needed high speed internet for a game console. And let's face it, no matter what Microsoft are aiming for, its a game console first and foremost.

2. My biggest concern that Jim pointed out that not many have is what happens when the gen is over. I still regularly play my NES through my PS2 and Xbox. I can't see buying a toy that has a total life of maybe 10 years tops as I still like playing new and old alike.
 

Defeated Detective

New member
Sep 30, 2012
194
0
0
This episode pretty much confirms the same opinion Yahtzee has in his Extra Punctuation column in which Triple A gaming is indeed dying, as to Yahtzee's words, the act of SimCity's always online DRM on a game that was essentially a single player game was "from the wild thrashing of a dying beast that we see such illogical decisions as trying to make SimCity multiplayer focused.".

Honestly, the death knell for EA, Blizzard or any other publisher that uses Orwellian DRM tactics is when opposing, open-minded publishers start selling their products as DRM-free and available offline, It's already used as an incentive in numerous Kickstarter projects(it was an incentive for FTL where Kickstarters would get a DRM free version on release) and CDProjekt Red even preaches about that on any copy of TW2 you get from GOG.com or Amazon.

Remarkably though, my 2nd paragraph can count as an attack on Steam, but it isn't, despite Steam being a DRM on itself, Steam's safe due to its business practice and ultimately you can run Steam offline if the games you've bought can run offline.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Jimothy Sterling said:
Why An Always-On DRM Console Would Be Dumb Dumb Dumb

Just talking about an "always-on" Xbox is a really dumb idea.

Watch Video
4:38 Not to mention I need a stable connection just to play Doom and Destiny. 5:42 Please explain to me as to WHY we, the consumers, have to spell it out for the sellers, the alleged peddlers, as to why screwing over your customers is a bad idea. 6:20 Yeah, you?re not gonna take advantage of my cash, you grubby Microsoft punks. 7:00 They?re bluffing when they SHOULD be afraid. Of us. We don?t like how they?re treating us? We?ll give our money to the competition ,then. 7:24 When your castle has crumbled, there?s no one around, and your left with but a name, we?ll ask you this: ?Where?s your crown, King Nothing??
 

DigitalAtlas

New member
Mar 31, 2011
836
0
0
Very powerful words Jim, especially in your final act. Well done. I haven't posted here in forever and a half, but I just had to let you know how much I respect this video and will, in fact, thank god every time someone in the industry watches it.

Job well done, sport.
 
Jan 27, 2011
3,741
0
0
gamegod25 said:
It's no wonder CEO's are being forced to step down and the market is crashing when they refuse to learn from even recent mistakes, either too proud or stupid to consider any alternatives despite almost certain failure. It's become an industry so nearsighted and sure of itself that it can't (or won't) see the giant pit just down the road.
That, my friend, is the MAGIC of shareholders! :D

You see, they don't give a shit about your product. They just give you money and ask you to grow in order to get that money back + growth! So they want you to grow more and more and faster and faster and they don't give a rat's ass what you have to do to make your profits go up so theirs go up.

They basically hijack your company and force it to make more and more and more profits, regardless of your wishes for your product, and there will be hell to pay if you can't make your stock value go up by at least a quarter of its previous value by year end...

This is what's causing companies to go evil, be anti consumer, use sweatshops in china that employ kids, and crash themselves. I'm convinced that the only reason Valve is doing as well as they are is because they aren't publicly traded, meaning that they don't NEED to chase maximum growth, and thus be massive douches about it.
 

pillywiggins

New member
Apr 8, 2013
12
0
0
What I don't get is how a company like microsoft could actually believe this would be good for business, surely you would want as many people as possible to buy your console and the demographic of "people with good internet connections + the people without them" is bigger than "just the people with good internet connections and who happen not to mind having to jump through arbitrarily mandated hoops".
 

Valanthe

New member
Sep 24, 2009
655
0
0
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?

I'm not asking this to be contrarian or witty, I'm generally curious. Mainly because the only two PC games I play are WoW and LoL, both on an 5 year old iMac. So I'm a bit out of the loop.
There's probably a hundred answers to that question, but I'll drop my own two cents in. Steam gives people a reason to -want- the always online service, from ludicrous deals on games and software, to a robust social ui that for me, has replaced any other chat and social media programs I used to use. It is the same thing, Steam is a DRM program, the difference is in the customer service, Steam makes an effort to make their customers feel valued, and in return is rewarded by getting a pretty loyal customer base, who (at least in my case) spend a lot more than they otherwise would on games because they feel like they're getting a bargain. Whereas other programs, Origin comes to mind, make the customer feel like they are being forced to deal with this program, with no benefit provided to them for it.
 

CrazyCapnMorgan

Is not insane, just crazy >:)
Jan 5, 2011
2,742
0
0
Ken_J said:
This is kind of why I'm loving my Wii U. Sure it has it's own bullshit but It doesn't look nearly as bad as this
Also why I like my pink 3DS XL. And Pokemon Black/White 2. And the upcoming X&Y generation. See, to my way of thinking, Pokemon is probably one of the best examples at how to do a good game right. It is, at its roots, a single player turn based strategy game. Sure, there's the always prevalent motto of Pokemon, "Gotta catch 'em all!", but that's not REQUIRED of you to complete the game. And speaking of what's available on the game, but not required for the game's completion, here's a short list of things that I can think of at this moment in time:

- Trading Pokemon from other generations
- Battling other people via Nintendo Wi-Fi or Infrared connection
- Side quests (i.e. Gen 5's Subway Battles, Gen 2's Apricorns into Poke Balls, Gen 4's Underground, Gen 5's Pokemon World Tournament, etc.)
- Downloadable Content (Pokemon Dream Radar comes to mind; and it's free, might I add)
- Catching Legendaries...although let's be honest, who WOULDN'T want to catch legendary Pokemon?
- Shiny Pokemon

All of these things that I've mentioned have their own benefits if they are utilized...but they are not required whatsoever to complete the main storyline of ANY Pokemon game. The games may introduce them to the player during their first romp through the game, but completing them is purely optional. But perhaps the best feature overall for the Pokemon games, and one that fits the current atmosphere of discussion here...

THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT TO HAVE ONLINE CAPABILITIES FOR PLAYING THE GAME.

Say what you want about Pokemon, it is my belief that this is a game whose formula is consistently beneficial not only for the companies involved (Game Freak and Nintendo, mainly) but for the customers who pay for the games. It's a good, basic game, it's not "always on-line", though it has it's failings it's strengths more than make up for it...

 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
you are a scholar jim. A scholar.
I know I'll simply but which ever console does not have a DRM requirement.
 

rasputin0009

New member
Feb 12, 2013
560
0
0
keitarobg said:
It's about time to start suing developers for imposing always-on DRM and failing to sustain the conditions for it. It's an obvious breach of contract, because the obligee (ze publisher) is denying a service, for which the customer has paid. Imagine buying milk from the store, paying for it and getting just the plastic jug without milk in it, because the cows aren't able to produce milk right now. It's exactly the same.

What I'm trying to say is that it's a legal issue. This is not a debate. People need to turn to court otherwise this bullshit will continue in the future.
Because the little guys always win in court? Man, I wish 'Merica was just like a movie, too.

Their guarantee only goes so far just like most products and services. I can't sue my power company if too many people overload the system. All they would have to prove against my case is that they tried or even planned to fix the problem as soon as they knew about it. Which isnt hard at all. What would be harder to do is prove the opposite.
 

mjc0961

YOU'RE a pie chart.
Nov 30, 2009
3,847
0
0
The sad part is that not even most gamers are talking about how we can't trust the publishers to hold up there end of the deal. Most of the posts I've seen discussing an always on console are defending the idea, asking people how often their 360s aren't connected to the internet and throwing out the phrase "get better internet" without realizing that not everyone can, and of course not realizing that it doesn't matter how good your connection is when you can't trust publishers to hold up their end of the bargain.

Seriously, why is any other argument put forward? The only thing we need to say is that publishers can't do always online properly and thus they shouldn't do it at all. Xbox Live goes down completely or has bad connection problems every year at Christmas, why the fuck should anyone trust Microsoft to magically make those issues go away if the new console is always online? We shouldn't.

In fact, that's just a big problem with gamers in general, it seems. Too many are far too willing to defend any terrible thing a publisher does with some of the weakest excuses I've ever heard. Why? We don't owe these companies our blind love and devotion just because they put out games for us to play. Our love and devotion should be reserved for those companies that go that extra mile to do right by us, like Rockstar or Valve. And speaking of Valve...

Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?
Because Steam isn't always online.

Honestly, what did you think the answer was? What made you think we'd all hate Ubisoft, Blizzard, EA, and potentially Microsoft for doing it, but give Valve a free pass? I'm not asking this to be contrarian or witty, I'm generally curious.

And don't say "because everyone loves Valve", because that's not a logical answer. It's a stupid one. People love Valve because they don't try to screw us at every turn like Blizzard or EA. If Valve did try to screw us over at every turn, we wouldn't love them anymore.
 

mjc0961

YOU'RE a pie chart.
Nov 30, 2009
3,847
0
0
Valanthe said:
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?

I'm not asking this to be contrarian or witty, I'm generally curious. Mainly because the only two PC games I play are WoW and LoL, both on an 5 year old iMac. So I'm a bit out of the loop.
There's probably a hundred answers to that question, but I'll drop my own two cents in. Steam gives people a reason to -want- the always online service
Uhm, no. Steam doesn't give people a reason to want that service. Steam doesn't need to give people a reason to want it because Steam doesn't have it.

Don't speak unless you know what the hell you're talking about. Thanks.
 

Amaror

New member
Apr 15, 2011
1,509
0
0
lord pickle said:
I bought the Xbox when it first came out and I am on my third Xbox 360.
Just a little question. You say you're at your third xbox 360. What's wrong with that thing? I keep hearing people talk about how many 360's they bought, while i still have my old xbox 1, which is still working perfectly without any problems whatsoever.

Great show as always, jim.
 

gamegod25

New member
Jul 10, 2008
863
0
0
aegix drakan said:
gamegod25 said:
It's no wonder CEO's are being forced to step down and the market is crashing when they refuse to learn from even recent mistakes, either too proud or stupid to consider any alternatives despite almost certain failure. It's become an industry so nearsighted and sure of itself that it can't (or won't) see the giant pit just down the road.
That, my friend, is the MAGIC of shareholders! :D

You see, they don't give a shit about your product. They just give you money and ask you to grow in order to get that money back + growth! So they want you to grow more and more and faster and faster and they don't give a rat's ass what you have to do to make your profits go up so theirs go up.

They basically hijack your company and force it to make more and more and more profits, regardless of your wishes for your product, and there will be hell to pay if you can't make your stock value go up by at least a quarter of its previous value by year end...

This is what's causing companies to go evil, be anti consumer, use sweatshops in china that employ kids, and crash themselves. I'm convinced that the only reason Valve is doing as well as they are is because they aren't publicly traded, meaning that they don't NEED to chase maximum growth, and thus be massive douches about it.
That is probly part of the problem too but I think it's bad decisions and lack of understanding of an evolving industry that is the big issue.
 

drednoahl

New member
Nov 23, 2011
120
0
0
Broadband is something I pay for and I refuse point blank to accept that any company can use my bandwidth for their own purposes without my consent. Pay for my broadband and you can have a say on what I consume.

When the metro UI was introduced, that was enough for me to say goodbye to my 360 and I've zero intention of getting windows 8 for my PC. So Microsoft, it really doesn't matter what you do now; our business is concluded.
 

rofltehcat

New member
Jul 24, 2009
635
0
0
Amaror said:
Just a little question. You say you're at your third xbox 360. What's wrong with that thing? I keep hearing people talk about how many 360's they bought, while i still have my old xbox 1, which is still working perfectly without any problems whatsoever.
Can be a lot of problems ranging from cheap solder used to other stuff:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_technical_problems#Causes
Though I think this article is far from complete, at points there is mention of simply baffling failure rates. I also think the page is focusing too much on the extremely old disc scratches... possibly because the investigations into this offer much more reliable data than "inofficial" research.

I still can't grasp why people keep buying those things when their old ones break. I understand people not wanting their gaming libraries to be inaccessible but somewhen people should realize that they are basically being shafted just so MS can save 5 cents per console for solder.
And chances are that BS like this will get even worse next gen, as they don't seem to have to fear real consequences and people will just buy a new one if their system fails.
 

Ebonrul

New member
Apr 4, 2013
35
0
0
I concur Mr. Sterling.

Being an old-head, I'm reminded of the first crash of the video game industry, when arcade operators found themselves operating empty rooms filled with dusty old machines. In the US anyway, they were enjoying the rising popularity of a new digital passtime and were making money hand-over-fist. People were lining up to shove quarters endlessly into their noisy new box, surely it was a trend that would never end.

Right up until Mario.

We're living in the aftermath of that miscalculation. The idea of only being able to play games in a building with regular business hours is laughably prehistoric. Similar to how a "personal computer" isn't a big stack of boxes with blinking lights skulking in a corner of the household anymore, and how people don't really need to own a console to enjoy their favorite games anymore.

Then again, the idea was pretty stupid back in the early eighties but too much easy money makes common sense notably less common. People were still shoving half their wallets into these newfangled boxes, one quarter at a time. People still make microtransactions, why should they ever stop?

If we've learned anything from history, it's only that we haven't learned anything from history.
 

grey_space

Magnetic Mutant
Apr 16, 2012
455
0
0
cheetahguy said:
actually this has been confirmed and Microsoft is making the new Xbox with DRM, they even gave the prices and said "if your internet connection goes out for 3 minutes you Xbox will shut down" what an epic fail.
where has it been confirmed? Thought it was just unsubstantiated rumours at this point
 

Dire Sloth

Filthy Casual
Jun 23, 2012
150
0
0
I have glorified dial up at BEST. Always online will suck out here in the boonies.
 

MopBox

New member
Sep 7, 2012
127
0
0
I almost wish MS would make the nextbox always online/DRM so I can look forward to not buying it and hasten the long predicted console crash.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
ObsidianJones said:
Hence the rise of ultra long EULAs that we just want to click through to play our games. People do not read how steadily every bit of 'ownership' has been stripped away from us. Basically, by being dismayed by what we're playing and planning to protest, we are the ones breaching contract. As long as games change nomenclature to a 'service'.
The scary thing about game service contracts, is that the provider must only "attempt" to provide the service advertised; they don't actually have to deliver (as so many SimCity and Diablo 3 players discovered).

A game distributed through such an online service (like Steam) results in something similar (in function) to a regular good:

"Yes, I received the game and it works"
vs
"No, I did not receive the game."

But combining the two (digital + service) to create "always online", results in the worst parts of both models.
"I received the game, but can only play it on my end as long as their end functions."
It is a good being held hostage at the whim of service.

Those ultra-long EULAs make all manner of legal demands of the user, but no assurances that they will uphold their end of the bargain beyond a legal "maybe".

But perhaps the scariest part of all: Some people go out of their way to rationalize a defense for such a model.
 

yankeefan19

New member
Mar 20, 2009
663
0
0
If it's true that Microsoft is making the next X-Box online only, It will be enough for me to switch to PC gaming. I used to buy the X-Box because I was a huge Halo fanboy, but this is enough to make me drop it. I even have a good internet connection where I live, but I am willing to not buy the next X-Box on principle alone if it is always online. If Microsoft is smart, they are scrambling to remove the always online feature. If not, they have lost many customers.
 

Jeremytroid

New member
Jul 10, 2011
25
0
0
I forgot to mention last week, but the new logo looks really nice!
More on topic, an example that has really affected me was the deactivation of online leaderboards in Mirror's Edge. Once you've done the best you can against yourself in time trials, the only content left is against other players, so they effectively killed their own game's replayability. It's not like their isn't an audience either. I really don't see how it was necessary, other than the actual time and ghost data there's very little that needs to be stored on their servers. You don't play on the servers either, ghost data is downloaded and used locally. Anyway, enough ranting from me >.>
 

Little Duck

Diving Space Muffin
Oct 22, 2009
860
0
0
the antithesis said:
And that's how the Ouya will outsell the next Xbox. Deal with it.
I don't see the ouya selling well. It's an awesome concept and I love the idea of it, but it doesn't have the horsepower. I do see this as this is how Steam box will outsell the the everything.

Side note, I love how Jim has gone from being massively hated in his first few episodes to actually having a gif made with him telling others to deal with it.
 

Darken12

New member
Apr 16, 2011
1,061
0
0
I was alone, in my flat, and I still stood up and clapped loudly for a full minute after you said that infamous catchphrase.

It was that. fucking. good.

Thank god for you, Jim.
 

Nazulu

They will not take our Fluids
Jun 5, 2008
6,242
0
0
Holy Shit Jim! That was amazing. You summed it all up perfectly. You even brought up great arguments I haven't heard from anyone here yet. With all you've mentioned I really doubt they'd go in that direction now, that's assuming their brains are in their skulls.

Thank God for you indeed. This is easily my favourite episode.
 

dyre

New member
Mar 30, 2011
2,178
0
0
Good arguments as usual, but also an amazingly executed finale. I could tell from the last minute that it was going to end in an awesome way!
 

Darks63

New member
Mar 8, 2010
1,562
0
0
You know the way the industry acts they must really buy into the argument that video gaming is addictive since there is no other explanation for the way they act about what is a luxury item.

The ending of the vid was true brilliance Jim keep up the good work.
 

Barciad

New member
Apr 23, 2008
447
0
0
What I am getting here is an attitude indicative of much of our latter day elite. 'Deal with it' has been not just a phrase thrown at consumers, but voters too. You don't like the stuff that we are doing to you and your loved ones? Deal with it.
It represents just what our modern day lords and masters actually think of us. They are so arrogant, so smug, so safe in the invulnerability of their positions, that they feel they can get away with anything. Alas, in this post 1789 world, things aren't quite so simple. As Jim Sterling explained, if you screw up in business, if you become too complacent and take your customers for granted. Then, you exulted position will not last for very long.
The notions of hubris and nemesis have been around for as long as recorded history. Watching it happen in real life does tend to bring a smile to ones face. Nothing keeps you and your fellow man honest than watching those with too much pride crash and burn.
 

JoshuaMadoc

New member
Sep 3, 2008
165
0
0
Hey Jim! Great news! People are still whiteknighting in defense of Microsoft's decision!

You know who I want to fucking murder right now? (not you, Jim)
 

Voulan

New member
Jul 18, 2011
1,258
0
0
I'm still expecting Microsoft to pull a "LOL, just kidding!" campaign and say they were joking the whole time, and the NextBox won't have any of these DRM practices. If that is the case, they are not going to get the attention and reaction they're hoping for.

I mean, surely to christ they're not that stupid. Surely. The whole stupidity of doing this makes me find it really hard to believe, but lately I've seen some really stupid things in this industry.

I'm actually looking forward to their announcement, to watch as all the gamers boo them loudly off the stage, with maybe a little violence and blood shed. It will be a sight to behold.
 

Tarkand

New member
Dec 15, 2009
468
0
0
The last 40 second of this video are flat out epic.

You have the written transcript of this episode somewhere Jim? :)
 

brazuca

New member
Jun 11, 2008
275
0
0
This is for me a PR stunt by Microsoft. Think about! Their hardware is already inferior to the PS4, stated by AMD representative, which is the company behind Microsoft new Xbox. The new thing does not have a name other than Xbox 720. They don't want another debacle like three red ring of malfunction.

There is no such thing as bad publicity, there is however no publicity at all.
 

Arcane Azmadi

New member
Jan 23, 2009
1,232
0
0
Nailed it, Jim. That dumb **** at Microsoft (I'm allowed to say "****", I live in Australia, I get the same exception as Yahtzee) is telling us to "deal with it" in the sense of "shut up and buy it". But if that's how he's going to be, we're going to "deal with it" by simply not buying the fucking console.

This is why major companies need to screen their representatives Twitters to make sure they're not retards before letting them do anything.
 

Nowhere Man

New member
Mar 10, 2013
422
0
0
"A man chooses. A slave tweets his support for every choice". Those are beautiful words Jim :.) Thank God for you!
 

Fiairflair

Polymath
Oct 16, 2012
94
0
0
QUINTIX said:
I'll disagree with Kevin Dent here too https://kevin-dent.squarespace.com/blog/2013/4/5/in-the-world-2929
however, I will agree with him & Manveer Heir that the Orth is not deserving the bile he's receiving.

From my bigoted perspective, this vitriol filled reaction to perceived threats (especially anti-feminist ones) is to be expected from our latchkey generation with many of its "young men" staying teenage boys into perpetuity.
The internet gives a voice to people of many ages who want to express threats of violence and hatred. It is presumptuous to single out Generation X (the latchkey generation) for its vitriol given that the entire concept of generations (as a sociological phenomenon) deliberately generalises those people that it describes.
 

dbenoy

New member
Jul 7, 2011
82
0
0
I've always been annoyed by DRM schemes but it wasn't until recently that I took games that I was extremely excited to play and refused them, because of the DRM.

First was Crysis with its SecuROM fiasco, and more recently Diablo 3 and SimCity.

I wonder if the publishers realize just how much effort it takes to make a massive game fan like me turn down an exciting new title. I've gladly spent hundreds on elaborate collector's editions in the past, and even my dedication can not withstand these nonsense DRM schemes.

Now that I've started to train myself to turn down games based on their publishers, and look to the indie scene for fun (at great effort) I'm not going to forget it soon. The (bad) habit of consuming only well known AAA games isn't something that can be un-broken once it's gone.

And this is from a huge game enthusiast here! For lesser fans of the medium, this boat sailed long ago. The mass exodus is underway.
 

MB202

New member
Sep 14, 2008
1,157
0
0
Yes, yes, and double yes! Always online DRM is probably THE reason why I'm not getting the next Xbox, if it really turns out that way.
 

Adon Cabre

New member
Jun 14, 2012
223
0
0
[HEADING=1]the future is always on-line![/HEADING]

Microsoft is preparing for the future. Everything will be online within the next 5 years. With the turning out of more powerful phones -- and that, as we speak, already have the capacity to enable Wifi hotspots -- we will see so much more online software saturating the market. We live and breathe our world through an online connection. Every service is promoted for being faster! Carriers constantly battle it out over network coverage and speed; and people choose the carriers not only out of pricing, but because they believe (or hear from others) that its a consistent, solid bars network.

My brother, a Marine at Pensacola (Florida), Skypes with me whenever he is on. If I wasn't always online, I would not know when he is calling to Skype.


I know people who work exclusively with Google Documents -- it's their word processor, and that they can access from anywhere.

[HEADING=3]It's always dangerous to underestimate the future.[/HEADING]
 

Tono Makt

New member
Mar 24, 2012
537
0
0
Out of curiosity, does anyone know just how much bandwidth the XBox 360 uses when you're logged into an XBox Live-attached account, but the game you're playing isn't online? As an example - Skyrim?

Captcha: "think hard". Telepathic captchas can't be legal, can they?
 

DarkhoIlow

New member
Dec 31, 2009
2,531
0
0
Great episode Jim and I fully agree with your points.

Having an always on DRM for a console is by far the most stupid thing I've ever heard in my life.

Haven't these people been watching anything that has happened in the past years at all? When was this a good idea? Are they trying to bury themselves into the ground by alienating the customers that do not have either a good internet connection or any at all, which they are a lot of. (all rethorical questions by the way since we all know the answers to that).

I'll stick to my PC where I can play my games offline in case my internet fails me. I also have some non steam games off GoG as a backup in case this happens.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
Very well thought out, explained, and articulated.

The thing is though that I think the gaming industry as a whole is banking on the increasing rise of gamers who have never known anything but being exploited sheep. They pretty much rode the storm out, ignoring the complaints of gamers whom they realized would be coming back for their products no matter what they did... much like a Junkie does with an abusive dealer when there is nobody else to get their fix from. The big comment made by the publishers nowadays seems to be that there are a number of young 20-something gamers, starting to make their own money in substantial enough quantities to be a marketing force, who have never known anything but exploitation. It's easy for them to look at their angry elders, mostly 30 to 40 something Gen Xers, and be dismissive because for them this is how things always were, and they happen to be used to it. What's more for "Generation Y" there is a relatively bright future ahead as they are coming into their own when the Baby Boomers are retiring. The recession and sociological realities that decimated Generation X aren't as big a deal for them, and they generally don't worry too much about the cost of luxuries, especially in the future. Case in point in bebopping around a few MMOs nowadays it seems that the "hip" thing for
some people to do is tell anyone who complains about being nickeled and dimed, or aren't excited about the next big MMO or viewing it's suspected way of making money with alarm, that they are "pissed because they won't be able to afford it" complete with LOLs and other disparaging comments. In short it's a lot like what's being reported on twitter.

I think the gaming industry as a whole is pretty much looking towards this generation and that attitude as it's big salvation, and truthfully I am beginning to think that predictions of a crash might be premature simply because most of them are based on consumers from "our" generation getting fed up with this and how we're starting to wise up and turn our back on the practices. That doesn't consider what happens when a conditioned Generation Y hits the market and props it right back up. Like any new generation they outnumber us, and truthfully the industry doesn't care at that point if they lose our business or how loyal we were, or how integral to their development or becoming a big business like this.

I could be wrong about that, and hopefully I am, it's a fairly recent way of thinking for me, but it's something I can't entirely ignore. "Always On DRM" might have caused some problems with companies, but I think they are sticking with it, due to the benefits like how it lets them spy, limit used games, and just generally gives them intrudive power they can use for marketing if nothing else, but I think they stick with it for a reason, and I seem to remember they more or less saying as much during the Simcity debacle.

As far as big wigs in the gaming industry losing their jobs, I suspect it's because a lot of those people made promises about being able to succeed with the market as it is now, and failed. Their careers being a blip in the overall plan.

I will hopefully be proven wrong however.

That said, I'm personally against the entire "always on" idea, as well as the concept of DRM in general. With consoles I consider it paticularly terrifying, largely because it seems like an attempt to pretty much make premium gaming services nessicary. In order to have a console your going to have to pay an internet provider, probably top dollar for a very fast "gaming quality" connection, and then doubtlessly have to pay the console company money in addition to fully use that connection for their games. Normally it would sound insane, but just think of how many people pay membership fees to "X-Box Live", it didn't exactly die. To be honest while Sony never did go fully in the same direction (their premium online service mostly just giving extras) I think it would be foolish to assume that a company as greedy as Sony isn't looking at the success of XBL and making plans to charge for basic functionality.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,760
0
0
Adon Cabre said:
I know people who work exclusively with Google Documents
And if they lose their connection for any reason, they're screwed. Since we're not close to that point of technology, not number of claims of DA FYOCHOOR!!! changes matters on shred.
 

UM536

New member
Dec 9, 2010
18
0
0
What we need to demand as consumers is legislation that the EULA for any product is presented to the purchaser before they hand over there money. As far as I can see it, the truly criminal act is that we are asked to purchase the product, install it, get to right at that playable state, so close you can taste it, then we are asked to sign away our rights to complain or return it. If we imposed a law that before any product requiring an End User Licence Agreement which specifies that purposes for which the product can be used and the retained rights of the manufacturer must be presented before purchase and the customer must demonstrate there understanding of these rights before a sale can be made then the whole situation would likely turn itself around. We could make you pass a quiz to see if you understood the EULA.

Any game with a long and confusing EULA would automatically lose sales because people couldn't understand it. Any game with anti-consumer stipulations in it's EULA would have to be knowingly accepted before money had been put down. This would encourage people to make games which are cheep knock-off of the AAA games which don't have the baggage associated with the top tier titles which would be good for the industry, it shows when budgets have gone out of control.

The more I think on it the more it sickens me, bundling services with physical products, selling the product in a free-and-clear manner and pretending that the essential service is a different sale. If i go and buy an iPhone and then don't agree to the EULA on the device did i just buy a 300$ paperweight? NO! I purchased the product with the expectation of service and if the product is sold before the terms of service for the necessary services of operation are agreed upon, i am owed compensation or satisfaction.

Most stores don't like to take back opened products but if the only way to figure out i did not like the terms of service was to install the product what recourse do I have to decline?
 

ResonanceSD

Guild Warrior
Legacy
Apr 11, 2020
4,535
3
43
Country
Australia
daxterx2005 said:
Someone make a gif of jim deal with it.



It's pretty awesome. And like, the second comment on the facebook link.
 

LordLundar

New member
Apr 6, 2004
962
0
0
Jim touched on this, but I'm going to go a bit further.

The core cause of the current big publisher collapse that we're seeing in slow motion occurring right now is that publishers aren't scared of the consumers. That's right, I said it. In the past, publishers were worried about sales not making profit due to not getting the word out well enough. They were scared of us so they did their damdest to make sure that they were looking to earn customer loyalty because they could not afford to do so.

Today though? Not happening. Publishers not only aren't worried about earning customer loyalty, they expect it and demand it by essentially threatening us. They put review embargoes up, institute always on DRM, threaten to cancel accounts for consumer exercising legal rights, hack up required game content to sell piece meal, etc. because they think they hold the power. Publishers used to serve the role of providing marketing and promotion for developers and their products, now they actively hinder those efforts because they think people will buy the crap anyways. They think customer loyalty and income is some unlimited resource that they can constantly pull more out of with no recourse to feed their bloated business model.

Let's be blunt: NO. IT'S. NOT.


It's going to happen soon as indie markets start getting more refined and crowdfunding holds steady, putting out quality games for far cheaper and earn that loyalty that big publishers realize they don't hold the power that they think. It's time to make the big ticket publishers afraid of us again. It's time they earn that loyalty instead of expecting it. And if they can't? Screw em. Despite what the US Congress thinks, no business is too big to fail. The funeral pyre of the burning shreds of their business will be lovely during a clear, starry night.
 

harryhenry

New member
Jun 28, 2012
36
0
0
Adon Cabre said:
[HEADING=1]the future is always on-line![/HEADING]

Microsoft is preparing for the future. Everything will be online within the next 5 years. With the turning out of more powerful phones -- and that, as we speak, already have the capacity to enable Wifi hotspots -- we will see so much more online software saturating the market. We live and breathe our world through an online connection. Every service is promoted for being faster! Carriers constantly battle it out over network coverage and speed; and people choose the carriers not only out of pricing, but because they believe (or hear from others) that its a consistent, solid bars network.

My brother, a Marine at Pensacola (Florida), Skypes with me whenever he is on. If I wasn't always online, I would not know when he is calling to Skype.


I know people who work exclusively with Google Documents -- it's their word processor, and that they can access from anywhere.

[HEADING=3]It's always dangerous to underestimate the future.[/HEADING]
What about data caps? not eveyone has a fast connection, you know. alot of people have internet that goes down all the time. for instance, i live in new zealand, and down in new zealand, we have very slow internet when compared to everyone else in places like europe and america.
 

Xukog

New member
May 21, 2011
126
0
0
Christ, I need to save up and find out how to get a good PC built,every thing I have been hearing lately makes me reconsider buying a console at all.
 

WTG_Nightbringer

New member
Apr 4, 2013
2
0
0
I don't often find myself agreeing with the entirety of a Jimquisition, until now.

Beyond the fact that I already pretty much abandoned my xbox in favor of my PC simply due to the ability to play any game it has plus every old computer game I got kicking around. To not be backwards compatible is insane, and with always online DRM there is a real risk of the server just being turned off in future. Even look at diablo 3. I love the diablo series, and picked up diablo 3 right at midnight on the launch. The damn server issues were so frustrating to me, I said screw the whole thing and am happily playing diablo 2 again.

That's even before getting into the internet connection issues. I live in Canada, and there is enough rural space out here that I don't always have a solid broadband connection, and Im lucky if I get any connection at all. I specifically bought an xbox for my cousin because he doesn't have an internet connection, and could play call of duty and the like with his brothers. Certainly not something I could do if online DRM was required.

I think the main problem with the whole DRM/online debate is that the most affected people won't have their voice heard by the AAA gaming lords. The people that have no internet aren't able to spam them with twitter or email. Its silly that the people who have no internet and therefore play offline, have no way to really communicate effectively back that they dont want online only. Its not like phone companies say "If you have a problem with not being able to call people and want to let us know, be sure to call us". Its just silly.
 

Adon Cabre

New member
Jun 14, 2012
223
0
0
harryhenry said:
Adon Cabre said:
What about data caps? not eveyone has a fast connection, you know. alot of people have internet that goes down all the time. for instance, i live in new zealand, and down in new zealand, we have very slow internet when compared to everyone else in places like europe and america.
My Grandparents immigrated from Mexico because they wanted to provide a better life for their children and grandchildren (like me). Today, I live in California, a state that is thriving in viticulture (Napa Valley), technology (Silicon Valley), sea ports (Los Angeles); and it possesses one of the greatest national parks in the world, Yosemite. All this, and we're about to hit a major recession because of our unbelievable state debt.

I've often thought about moving, but from where I live -- and which is an hour from Sacramento (our capital), two hours from the Pacific, and two hours from Yosemite -- I can visit San Francisco on a Friday, go snowboarding on Saturday, and then protest our state congress that Sunday while watching an American Football Game on my Samsung Galaxy S.

I'm sorry, what I mean to say is: Location, location, location.
 

Adon Cabre

New member
Jun 14, 2012
223
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
Adon Cabre said:
I know people who work exclusively with Google Documents
And if they lose their connection for any reason, they're screwed. Since we're not close to that point of technology, not number of claims of DA FYOCHOOR!!! changes matters on shred.
It's very hard to lose a connection in California, because the internet carrier suffers the most when you decide to move onto another. I had fast internet at work, college and at home; and not to mention my cell phone.
 

Vosgy

New member
Sep 4, 2012
12
0
0
I love it, I started thinking about the console games that I've played in the last 12 months.
Tales of Symphonia - GC
Resident Evil 4 - GC
Resident Evil 0 - GC
Grandia 2 - PS2
Grandia - SPS
Parasite Eve 2- SPS

I really don't even want a new console, they all suck atm anyway, I'll stick to my old games :D
 

Reyold

New member
Jun 18, 2012
353
0
0
Man, like I didn't have enough reasons to skip out on this gen already.

The last console I bought was a PS3. At the rate the AAA industry is going, it'll probably be the last console I buy ever, or at least for a long time. Looks like the PC camp has a new member.
 

Kael Arawn

New member
Mar 4, 2012
86
0
0
Instead of writing a brand new response to the option?s Mr Sterling raised in his fine video today I have simply collated my posts I made in another thread here at the escapist discussing the same thing so I apologize if there a bit disjointed.

Also Jim would have been spot on if the NEXT was a simply ?gaming consoles? and its not so it seems he?s missed the point completely.

Right of the bat people have to stop thinking as Microsoft as a game company, I also think referring to the xbox as part of Microsoft's gaming division or saying Microsoft even has a gaming divisions as a whole is oxymoronic as Microsoft has a MEDIA ENTERTAINMENT division and that's a completely different thing.

Ever since the first Xbox was released it has been Microsoft's intent to provide a content distribution system that is accepted as a standard device in a living room simply because pcs never really have been and the end goal of this strategy has always been to become a MAJOR PLAYER in the digital distribution market with each console offering more and more functions besides gaming.

The issue is that Apple bet them to the punch with iTunes and the explosion of the popularity of the idevice, ever since then they have been scrambling to regain a market share that they felt they lost before they even had there foot properly in the door.

So let's apply this paradigm to the NEXT box, let's say the NEXT box comes out and 90% of its sub functions are locked behind an online gate and said functions that they have locked away are aimed at digital distribution of movies, music, streaming tv, etc. Then add into the equation the fact that a very large portion of common society still doesn't have a damn clue what they're doing when it comes to digital distribution, it would be highly advantageous for Microsoft to start marketing there next console as always online as it would alleviate all the BS that comes from a customer not understanding why half the functions there device offers are not functional as if they have to "connected to the net to have it work from the start" so most of the extra crap would function out of the box.

I totally agree that the fact that being online would be a deterrent to at least a third of their potential customer base but if those customer are only using the machine to play games which Microsoft get a much smaller cut from them profit wise vs say a digital music sale on a unit by unit basis why would they expend resources/effort trying to keep them.

So focusing on those people who do buy it and use it online as a digital distribution machine would more than make up for the lost customer basis and thus the concept of dead commercial weight is applicable i.e. where keeping existing customer happy far outweighs the benefits of focusing on bringing in new customers after a different more cost effective service.

I also agree that most modern smart tvs have all the functions that a xbox offers built in but as I have stated previously most common users don't even understand this stuff let alone set it up or use it and Microsoft have MASSIVE brand recognition with the Xbox as a media extending online thingy already and people are used to comfort and convenience so if they are used to the Xbox name as well as the functionality already for that type of stuff they will stick with it, which brings me to my next point.

Do you have any clue how excited most media company would be by the concept of a locked down media distribution system for home use with even a portion of the xboxs current market share? I guarantee you there's a lot of music executives getting rather excited by the prospect right now as it offers drm control ON ALL stuff sold via the network, and Microsoft would be looking to please the people who own IP rights on this type of stuff now more than ever as making fat stacks of cash for selling other peoples product on your own digital distribution networks is a very lucrative industry practice just ask valve.

Look at what Microsoft did with window's 8 a large portion of its new functionality is expressly designed to make it easier for the customers to buy crap from them and with brand named services like skype that they are building into the console as a base function I can see how there marketing push for the thing will have VERY little to do with gaming (it will be a afterthought).

This is also self-evident if you look at their actual game output as a company, they used to fund more game development BEFORE the advent of the xbox and there actual game division has only got smaller over time (Ensemble I shall for ever morn ye!).

I also wouldn't be surprised if they severely decrease the cost of live with the NEXT or even make it free outside of paying for your actual subscriptions to services (netflix) or for multiplayer gaming, and I would be very surprised if they don't have some type of limited offline mode for games as all games will be force installed to a hard drive anyway according to other news on the console and I expect them to start trying to push the zune/window's phone/window's 8 shared infrastructure a lot more through marketing/sales and those work on an account locked offline model so why wouldn't the NEXT.

I think we simply have to accept that all the mega bucks in the gaming/personal entertainment field are in selling and marketing to the majority and we (dedicated gamers) are NO LONGER THE MAJORITY OF A CONSOLES SALES MARKET!

I also probably won?t buy one for myself. Well in till there are some universally cool mods available for it, at which stage since it force installs all game to a hard drive im expecting "the scene" to mod in NoCd.xex support which will lead to a FLOOD of piracy kinda like pc (.xex is the xbox executable extension).

But i will be selling them if a customer asks for one and i expect there to be descent demand for them, as opposed to the WiiU which i have only sold 13 of since release (and i haven't bought one for myself yet either).

The main point is that dedicated gamers are being deluded if they think there (our) numbers matter in the long run.

Also has anyone stopped to think that Microsoft might be simply getting ahead of the curb on this one, even Sony thinks that by the time the PS5 roles around game streaming services like on live will dominate the gaming scene and Microsoft might be aiming for the NEXT to be the last console they ever make as by the time the PS5 arrives they can simply start using the grunt of the NEXT to stream games from a dedicated server and that means once again our short term hatred for the thing is meaningless in the long term.

Also its pretty much confirmed that BLURAY will be the last form of physical media advancement we ever get outside of SSD's and it has a BLURAY drive.

Remember its already confirmed the thing will work with any old usb device as storage and its rumoured that it will have 2.5' sata bay as well which will just lead more credence to the concept that its designed to be around for quite a while and is aimed at digital distribution of entertainment first and foremost.

The real solutions to everyone woes, GET A DECENT SHUTTLE PC with a ps3 or 360 control and bind them to it and install steam.

And if it?s to "pcey" for you pay a nerd to customize the ass out of it so its user friendly.

Seriously EVERYTHING you all want is perennially available on a pc (universal backwards compatibility, offline mode etc) and i bet you can get one for less than a new console at launch and there open ended architecture, so you can swap out cards when its underpowered instead of buying a brand new console every 5 years.

So pc, less expensive, offers more for much less, plus 1 billion other reasons, and everyone seems to hate where newer consoles are going, so why are ppls still obsessed with gaming on them (consoles that is)?

Also the fact that so many people are bitching about the lock out of pre-owned games from the system are also missing the point. The modern paradigm is to sell a game digitally for less than it would cost to buy a game pre-owned and if you can?t afford to buy a brand new game at launch for $30 then you can?t afford gaming which is a luxury pastime.

Case point I can name at least 6 different sites that have steam cdkeys for bioshock infinite right now for only $30 and at such a low sales marker for brand new product WTF is a pre-owned market even needed?

But then I liked deus ex invisible war so all my options should be seen as those of a ranting mad man :)
 

harryhenry

New member
Jun 28, 2012
36
0
0
Adon Cabre said:
harryhenry said:
Adon Cabre said:
What about data caps? not eveyone has a fast connection, you know. alot of people have internet that goes down all the time. for instance, i live in new zealand, and down in new zealand, we have very slow internet when compared to everyone else in places like europe and america.
My Grandparents immigrated from Mexico because they wanted to provide a better life for their children and grandchildren (like me). Today, I live in California, a state that is thriving in viticulture (Napa Valley), technology (Silicon Valley), sea ports (Los Angeles); and it possesses one of the greatest national parks in the world, Yosemite. All this, and we're about to hit a major recession because of our unbelievable state debt.

I've often thought about moving, but from where I live -- and which is an hour from Sacramento (our capital), two hours from the Pacific, and two hours from Yosemite -- I can visit San Francisco on a Friday, go snowboarding on Saturday, and then protest our state congress that Sunday while watching an American Football Game on my Samsung Galaxy S.

I'm sorry, what I mean to say is: Location, location, location.
so basically, "MOVE TO A BETTER PLACE, NEANDERTALS, BECAUSE THE FUTURE, *****!" is what you're saying?
edit: also, yosemite has a giant supervolcano underneath, and in san fransisco, a giant earthquake can destroy an entire city, and that earthquake has a 99% chane oof happening within the next 20 years.
 

Eve Charm

New member
Aug 10, 2011
760
0
0
I wouldn't be surprised if the guy gets fired soon for the tweeter comments.

I'm always online 99% of the time, but god forbid when I'm knee deep in a game my modem resets itself or on their end the server resets it self and I lose progress in my game and can do nothing but sit on my butt till it comes back.

I'm waiting for the next kicker " we make you be online all the time with our console, but you still have to pay 60 a year if you want to be online and play and chat with anyone.

I just know I'll be staying away from anything that requires it online all the time.
 

Adon Cabre

New member
Jun 14, 2012
223
0
0
harryhenry said:
Adon Cabre said:
harryhenry said:
Adon Cabre said:
snip
so basically, "MOVE TO A BETTER PLACE, NEANDERTALS, BECAUSE THE FUTURE, *****!" is what you're saying?
edit: also, yosemite has a giant supervolcano underneath, and in san fransisco, a giant earthquake can destroy an entire city, and that earthquake has a 99% chane oof happening within the next 20 years.
That's some funny stuff! but basically... yeah. Spot on. Just move, or wait until Australia catches up. I, however, have no idea how anything goes on down there. Oh well.
 

lastjustice

New member
Jun 29, 2004
132
0
0
Anyone who thinks making a always online gaming Consule in order for it to function is a good idea should be grounds to cleanse them from this world. They're either too stupid or morally bankrupt to continue contributing anything to society. This does not need to ever happen and defeats the things good about consules. Sometimes the internet goes out due all kinds of stuff. There's endless things that can and will go wrong. Horrible idea, no matter how much developers think they d get to keep from gamestop or other sources from getting on the used market, this is the epitome of diminshing returns.
 

Kael Arawn

New member
Mar 4, 2012
86
0
0
Your Gaffer said:
Jim is against an always online console? Who wouldda thunk it?
Lol well put. It's like the sky being blue, it's a forgone conclusion.

It seems Jim is just afraid of one of the possible futures for consoles as most other people on these forums.

Ppls wake up and smell the coffee, eventually the majority (if not all) of your electronic entertainment devices will be always on in one way or another and you really are being pissed with Microsoft for simply being the first to adopt a inevitability of the future in practice.

Its also criminal how Jim tends to only focus on one side of the proverbial coin in relation to issues he covers and said side is always aligned with his personal opinion.

Wheres his rant on the benefits of the modern digital paradigm and how much it has reduced the cost of sales at launch vs the loss of pre-owned gaming? (As it truly is one or the other, the industry cant sustain both).

Or a rant about the fact that consoles are used for ALOT more then gaming these days and that the audience for a device like the NEXT is infinitely bigger because of it and most of those function require a internet connection?

I would even go as far as to say hes slightly bigoted towards the subject.
 

Your Gaffer

New member
Oct 10, 2012
179
0
0
Kael Arawn said:
Your Gaffer said:
Jim is against an always online console? Who wouldda thunk it?
Lol well put. It's like the sky being blue, it's a forgone conclusion.

It seems Jim is just afraid of one of the possible futures for consoles as most other people on these forums.

Ppls wake up and smell the coffee, eventually the majority (if not all) of your electronic entertainment devices will be always on in one way or another and you really are being pissed with Microsoft for simply being the first to adopt a inevitability of the future in practice.
I actually have to disagree with you here. You seem to assume that people are mad that there is supposedly going to an online requirement. I don't think that is the case. I think people are upset that it will have to ALWAYS be online.

Steam is online. I am almost always logged into Steam. BUT, if I want to I can go into offline mode. If I do it deliberately I never have to go back online unless I want to activate new products or install updates.

If I lose my internet connection unexpectedly I have 3 MONTHS to play my games before I have to connect again. Microsoft's next xbox will supposedly let you play for 3 MINUTES. That is pretty terrible and places a major inconvenience on a large portion of the next xbox's market.

You say everything will be online, I think you are correct there. I don't think you are necessarily right in your assumption that everything will have to online all the time. I think there will be enough push back that the most successful platforms, like Steam, will have offline modes that are more flexible for consumers.
 

Kael Arawn

New member
Mar 4, 2012
86
0
0
Your Gaffer said:
Kael Arawn said:
Your Gaffer said:
Jim is against an always online console? Who wouldda thunk it?
Lol well put. It's like the sky being blue, it's a forgone conclusion.

It seems Jim is just afraid of one of the possible futures for consoles as most other people on these forums.

Ppls wake up and smell the coffee, eventually the majority (if not all) of your electronic entertainment devices will be always on in one way or another and you really are being pissed with Microsoft for simply being the first to adopt a inevitability of the future in practice.
I actually have to disagree with you here. You seem to assume that people are mad that there is supposedly going to an online requirement. I don't think that is the case. I think people are upset that it will have to ALWAYS be online.

Steam is online. I am almost always logged into Steam. BUT, if I want to I can go into offline mode. If I do it deliberately I never have to go back online unless I want to activate new products or install updates.

If I lose my internet connection unexpectedly I have 3 MONTHS to play my games before I have to connect again. Microsoft's next xbox will supposedly let you play for 3 MINUTES. That is pretty terrible and places a major inconvenience on a large portion of the next xbox's market.

You say everything will be online, I think you are correct there. I don't think you are necessarily right in your assumption that everything will have to online all the time. I think there will be enough push back that the most successful platforms, like Steam, will have offline modes that are more flexible for consumers.
If we where its core market i would agree but i ardently believe where not, also there hasn't been any real announcement on how there offline game system will work (or if the NEXT will even have one).

In previous posts I compared what i presume Microsoft will do with what they have already done with windows 8 and that's have a system that requires internet connectivity to "initialize" a account and any content attached to it.

But windows 8 doesn't stop letting you listen to music if your net connection drops out so why would the NEXT?

I actually think the REAL application of the always online concept will be a system that automatically powers it self onto low powered mode and does a but load of stuff autonomously without the user agreeing (updates etc) via the net and automatically reconnects if disconnected etc JUST LIKE WINDOWS 8 (in till you turn of all the crap that is).

But none of this changes the fact that EVERYONE is commenting from the point of view about how it will work for them personally as opposed to a industry concept and that's what it is.

I live in a small country town in Australia and the best I can do internet wise here is a 8 meg ADSL 1 connection but that doesn't stop people in my town using there consoles as NETFLIX machines and they don't complain to Microsoft when the nets down and they cant watch media they simply accept that it is.

And in Australia we need to run our xboxs through a proxy to even get netfix, whih just shows how dedicated some users are to using there xbox for stuff besides gaming.

I also wont be buying one as its not viable for me as a product as it doesn't match my needs from a entertainment device (my pc does though) but simply because i don't see it as viable for me doesn't mean i cant understand that there's a market for the thing and the benefits it offers to Microsoft and the industry.

EDIT

And even if it does require a always online net connection to play and stops you from playing when the connection not there it would only be a issue to a person who owns it and if the concept annoys anyone so much that there not willing to buy it then there not a portion of the NEXT boxs potential market share and thusly it doesn't place a inconvenience on them.
 

Jezzascmezza

New member
Aug 18, 2009
2,500
0
0
I'm sorry, but has anyone else ever questioned the significance of the images of shrimps?
I've seen most episodes of the Jimquisition, and had kind of accepted the random shrimps until now- now I really need to know why they're there.
 

Bindal

New member
May 14, 2012
1,320
0
0
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?
Well, primarily because Steam is NOT "Always on". In fact, after installing a game and starting it for the first time, you never need to be online with Steam again.
The only things you need to be online for with Steam are:
1) Downloading and installing games/updates (obviously)
2) Using of Steamcloud (optional anyway) and Achievements (which are optional, too)
3) To play Multiplayer games using Steamworks (in which case you need to be online, anyway even if Steam wouldn't be part of the whole deal)
 

Kael Arawn

New member
Mar 4, 2012
86
0
0
Bindal said:
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?
Well, primarily because Steam is NOT "Always on". In fact, after installing a game and starting it for the first time, you never need to be online with Steam again.
The only things you need to be online for with Steam are:
1) Downloading and installing games/updates (obviously)
2) Using of Steamcloud (optional anyway) and Achievements (which are optional, too)
3) To play Multiplayer games using Steamworks (in which case you need to be online, anyway even if Steam wouldn't be part of the whole deal)
Bingo! But to start the process of even activating a game you need to have steam connected to the net to begin with and that's completely different to how the xbox 360 works so if Microsoft where to launch the NEXT with a account system that requires all games to be activated via a online account system and then offers offline play just like steam wouldn't it be easier to explain it to the generalized public as always on as its such a huge paradigm change after what most users got used to with the XBOX 360 and it does indeed require a internet connection at least once during the activation process?
 

008Zulu_v1legacy

New member
Sep 6, 2009
6,019
0
0
That was glorious. "Deal With it." What a beautiful phrase, I imagine we will enjoy saying it to them when the time comes more than we should.
 

blackrave

New member
Mar 7, 2012
2,020
0
0
Why stop here M$?
Get together with Sony and make PlayBox
Always on-line+Console locked discs+Useless gimmicks+Questionable software+Crappy hardware+Price it at $1k=perfect console
That would be instant hit.
 

Kael Arawn

New member
Mar 4, 2012
86
0
0
blackrave said:
Why stop here M$?
Get together with Sony and make PlayBox
Always on-line+Console locked discs+Useless gimmicks+Questionable software+Crappy hardware+Price it at $1k=perfect console
That would be instant hit.
I prefer X-Station myself :)

And the sad thing is it would probably sell like hotcakes even if they did that.
 

endplanets

New member
Mar 18, 2011
104
0
0
Dear Jim: I sincerely hope that there is a second part to this because (even after this good vid) there is still so much that was left out.

* Hackers can shut down Microsoft servers and delete/steal player's data. Like when the PSN network got hacked, only way, way worse.
* Some parents are so dumb they can't install a NES, and now they have to plug in and log in. This is another hurdle that will shun away new users.
* Microsoft will constantly be spying on you.
* No really. Microsoft will be literally watching you while you play. Rumors say that in addition to Always Online the Kinect must be able to watch you play. And lets say you have a few friends over to watch a movie on your Next Xbox. The Kinect will turn the console off unless you pay it extra money for the new viewers.

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/139706-microsofts-new-kinect-patent-goes-big-brother-will-spy-on-you-for-the-mpaa
 

Norix596

New member
Nov 2, 2010
442
0
0
The potential conflict with Gamestop had not occurred to me. It probably won't come to this but it would be a fairly interesting scenario if Gamestop threatened to not shelve any Durango games for the duration of the cycle if Microsoft is set on always-online.

As with others, if these rumors turn out to be true and if the always online requirement isn't scrapped I will be making the transition to PC gaming for the next cycle. I've always been a console gamer but there are just too many advantages to PC gaming not limited to more frequent patches and fixes than the ones that get past Microsoft approval and the much cheaper game opportunities available through Steam.

The things that consoles have going for them, namely the lack of a need to worry if your hardware is powerful enough to run a game and familiarity with a controller, have been barely enough to keep me in the fold - if the Durango launches with always-online, it will put me over the edge to PC gaming. Steam is already cheaper even with the presence of the used game market for physical discs - image the price differential if list price is the only price.
 

Samantha Burt

New member
Jan 30, 2012
314
0
0
Adon Cabre said:
harryhenry said:
Adon Cabre said:
harryhenry said:
Adon Cabre said:
snip
so basically, "MOVE TO A BETTER PLACE, NEANDERTALS, BECAUSE THE FUTURE, *****!" is what you're saying?
edit: also, yosemite has a giant supervolcano underneath, and in san fransisco, a giant earthquake can destroy an entire city, and that earthquake has a 99% chane oof happening within the next 20 years.
That's some funny stuff! but basically... yeah. Spot on. Just move, or wait until Australia catches up. I, however, have no idea how anything goes on down there. Oh well.
Holy crap, Adam Orth has an account on the Escapist?

OT: Honestly, that last 45 seconds or so was magnificent. So well done; I loved it~
 

Dascylus

New member
May 22, 2010
255
0
0
I am a gamer, I love my games.
But I am fickle and have other things I could do.
If I want to play a game and the server keeps fucking up I will get frustrated and keep trying.
If the server is persistently unreliable I'll find something else to do.

There are 4 people in the house, 3 gamers, 3 gaming PCs, 2 Xboxes, 3 Playstations, a metric ton of movies and tv series, mates living just down the road and the best bar in town 15 minutes away.
I have a girlfriend in stockholm and 2 kids in Göteborg.

Your server reliability has to be easy enough to distract me from that.
Peggle was genius, so was Portal because they were easy to grab when I have some time to play.
I like games like Skyrim and Fallout because I am alone in my world anytime I want.
If you take away my immersion you will lose me as a customer and I'm sure I am not a unique snowflake in this.
 

Soak

New member
Sep 21, 2010
139
0
0
Tehe, that one was almost to easy looking at the current circumstances and that you kinda already dealt with the topic in your episode about SimShitty.

However, at the end of SimShitty you suggested we should stay calm... so, how about a good riot now? C'mon, i wanna go all wild in the streets raging about the (game)industry and seize the upper floors of game-publishers and maybe some studios too, kicking out the greedy marketing and whatnot head-figures. Eh, eh, how about it?
Let's bring em the next game-console "crisis" and then we can all stand before them, shades on and say "deal with it"!
Sounds good i think.
 

ThunderCavalier

New member
Nov 21, 2009
1,475
0
0
I've said it many times before, but I think one more time is good.

Your servers have a tendency to crash and the Internet connection is still too unreliable to make an always-on console more of a benefit than a liability to me.

I guess I won't be buying your new Xbox.

#dealwithit
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
ThunderCavalier said:
I've said it many times before, but I think one more time is good.

Your servers have a tendency to crash and the Internet connection is still too unreliable to make an always-on console more of a benefit than a liability to me.

I guess I won't be buying your new Xbox.

#dealwithit
I understand your post is in the negative but I want to address one potential grey area in your post that people may not get. The point where you say that because two things aren't reliable it is a liability instead of a benefit. This implies that if fixed, they can eventually become a benefit. Always on will NEVER be a benefit to you. Why would it be? Games that are online when they're supposed to be but can be played offline when not necessary are what benefit you. Can you tell me a reason why being unable to play your system offline would help you EVEN if their servers are reliable and the internet connection is perfect? Don't get me wrong, the ability to connect with friends like what the ps4 allows is nice, but being unable to go offline at all only hurts us. It's the inability part. There's no reason why we wouldn't want to be able to do both where possible.

As I said in another thread, 720 may have always online but 1080 will try to push for a constant stream of blood and stool data. Hopefully we'll draw a line with the system that demands a rectal probe be inserted during gameplay. I don't know if I'm being too subtle here but what I'm saying is that they're being invasive. The funny (stupid) thing is, I don't know that biometric data is entirely off the table in the future if they could do it affordably. Not the stuff I jokingly said, but finger print scanners, heart beat trackers that learn patterns of the typical user, face tracking and recognition (already available with the kinect). Imagine a day where systems could potentially prevent two people in the same house from playing the same copy of the game without paying some bogus fee. While hopefully unlikely, I'm not too sure they wouldn't try to do it at some point. Interestingly enough, this stuff would be great to discourage theft of your machine.

This is only their attempt at DRM and perhaps a few other things. This is not a decision for a console to make. This is a decision for individual IPs to make and for consumers to be able to decide not to buy them because of it. This is a foolish and invasive method that assumes a criminal of all of us. The thing about a console forcing it is that I could not illegally download the 720, I had to obtain the physical machine to use it. So while I might cringe at software for doing it, I understand their desire to DRM it with always online even though I (and I'm sure a few other gamers) won't buy their stuff whenever we find out that they've done that. But it makes no sense to DRM hardware. Not unless you specifically want to piss off consumers and treat them like thieves. I'll also point out that piracy of console games is a heck of a lot harder than pc's and pc's will always work offline even if the software doesn't. So if their goal is to make us go to their competitors then so be it.
 

veloper

New member
Jan 20, 2009
4,597
0
0
Wishful thinking. The industry has already managed to do this on PC and so they will succeed on the consoles aswell.

Not all PC games have always-online DRM either and it all started with just a couple AAA games like ME and Spore. None of the early boycots gained much support and PC gamers are supposed to be the fanatical and savvy crowd. M$ and Sony can follow exactly the same path on consoles, as this slow boil has succeeded before.

So you make a new xbox and you add just a chip and some firmware to facilitate DRM schemes and then you gradually, over the course of several years, lock down more new releases with always-online DRM.
Us old hands will still complain, but the new blood won't see it and that's all that matters. They already bought the console; the first generation of games worked fine and now they want the latest, top rated AAA games for their consoles even if it's a hassle to make it work.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
veloper said:
Wishful thinking. The industry has already managed to do this on PC and so they will succeed on the consoles aswell.

Not all PC games have always-online DRM either and it all started with just a couple AAA games like ME and Spore. None of the early boycots gained much support and PC gamers are supposed to be the fanatical and savvy crowd. M$ and Sony can follow exactly the same path on consoles, as this slow boil has succeeded before.

So you make a new xbox and you add just a chip and some firmware to facilitate DRM schemes and then you gradually, over the course of several years, lock down more new releases with always-online DRM.
Us old hands will still complain, but the new blood won't see it and that's all that matters. They already bought the console; the first generation of games worked fine and now they want the latest, top rated AAA games for their consoles even if it's a hassle to make it work.
Software-level always on DRM is completely different from hardware-level always on DRM. Think of all the complaints Jim has about just software-level always on DRM and then multiply it by EVERY game. Imagine being unable to play a movie because your internet is down.

One makes us unable to play certain games offline, the other renders a machine we've purchased unusable offline. PC's cannot be made to do that unless some vital hardware component of PCs is suddenly monopolized and forced to require it. Unlikely since any competing hardware company that refuses to do it would suddenly get all the business.
 

Alar

The Stormbringer
Dec 1, 2009
1,356
0
0
Hot damn, Jim! You were seriously channeling some badass mojo towards the end there. Very nice.
 

TheSteeleStrap

New member
May 7, 2008
721
0
0
Azriel Nightshade said:
Why is always on-line for consols detrimental, but always online via Steam exempt from scrutiny?

I'm not asking this to be contrarian or witty, I'm generally curious. Mainly because the only two PC games I play are WoW and LoL, both on an 5 year old iMac. So I'm a bit out of the loop.
While you do need an online connection to obtain your games on Steam, it will still function if you lose that connection, that's the difference.
 

Jman1236

New member
Jul 29, 2008
528
0
0
The more people keep talking about DRM on the next xbox, the more I don't want it and the more I'm willing to pay in full for a ps4.
 

Waddles

New member
Mar 16, 2010
134
0
0
Me likey. Australian internet sucks. While the current government is implementing a high speed broadband network, if they lose the upcoming election it get put on the backburner. The majority of aussies wouldn't be able to play consoles if they were always online.
 

DrOswald

New member
Apr 22, 2011
1,443
0
0
Kael Arawn said:
Your Gaffer said:
Jim is against an always online console? Who wouldda thunk it?
Lol well put. It's like the sky being blue, it's a forgone conclusion.

It seems Jim is just afraid of one of the possible futures for consoles as most other people on these forums.

Ppls wake up and smell the coffee, eventually the majority (if not all) of your electronic entertainment devices will be always on in one way or another and you really are being pissed with Microsoft for simply being the first to adopt a inevitability of the future in practice.
It is possible, almost certain really, that eventually all our electronics will essentially always be online. But that day is not yet here. The required infrastructure has not been created. Just because it will eventually be true does not make it a good assumption for the now.

Besides, just because it is likely that in the future all devices will be connected to the internet does not mean they will all require a constant connection. Microsoft is not an early adopter of a inevitable future practice. They are creating an artificial barrier to the use of their product based on the assumption that right now everyone has access to a stable internet connection, an assumption that we know to be false.

Its also criminal how Jim tends to only focus on one side of the proverbial coin in relation to issues he covers and said side is always aligned with his personal opinion.

Wheres his rant on the benefits of the modern digital paradigm and how much it has reduced the cost of sales at launch vs the loss of pre-owned gaming? (As it truly is one or the other, the industry cant sustain both).
Are you saying that digital sales have reduced the cost of launch day games and therefore we just don't need used games? Because that one is just wrong. Digital copies cost the same as physical copies. There has been no reduction in price at launch. In fact, Jim did an episode dedicated to this fact and how stupid it is for everyone involved: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/5684-Dont-Charge-Retail-Prices-For-Digital-Games

Besides, there is no evidence that the game industry cannot sustain both. You are just pulling that assumption out of your ass to support a point you have no actual evidence for.

Or a rant about the fact that consoles are used for ALOT more then gaming these days and that the audience for a device like the NEXT is infinitely bigger because of it and most of those function require a internet connection?
But the fact remains that the core function of the console, playing games, does not require a connection. My tablet does a lot of cool things if it is connected to the internet. But that does not mean that when I am on the subway and have no connection it should kick me off of Angry Birds. Sure, streaming a video requires a connection but that does not mean that playing Mass Effect should too.

I would even go as far as to say hes slightly bigoted towards the subject.
Jim offered a large and detailed list of reasons why always online for the next Xbox is a bad idea from the view of both the consumer and the producer. You have offered nothing but vague assertions and questionable assumptions. A bigot is one who is intolerantly devoted to their opinion and ignores sound evidence and reasoning against their opinion. Given the circumstances, I am going to recommend against you calling others bigoted.
 

Spyre2k

New member
Apr 9, 2013
52
0
0
I think the problem is most of these executives likely either get their information from "focus" groups that mainly consist of well to do kids or parents of said kids who don't realize, or care, that high speed internet connections are not the norm. Or the groups consist of non-technical people who don't realize that they might not meet those bandwidth requirements because they think think any internet connection is enough. So when asked if they would be fine with an always online system they just say "Sure sounds fine"

Also some of the links provided in other post that go to sites defending the "Always Online" end up showing just how ignorant the proponents of this are. One link had a guy saying every FPS you've ever played was always online. That is a huge face palm right there because I've played FPS for years and rarely do I play them multiplayer because I lack a good connection. It's hard to hit something when one minute it's right in front of you and the next it's behind you.




On the topic of Steam it seems people forget their history and are subjected to large amounts of disinformation. I've seen lots of people who argue the always online DRM is fine try to point at Steam and say that it is the same thing. Then claim that since so many people accept Steam they will accept these other DRM setups.

Besides being a complete misrepresentation of how Steam works, as others in this thread have already pointed out, it also fails to take into account Steams origins. Steam was not rolled out as a DRM service, it slowly migrated into that role over time.

Steam was originally rolled out as a match making service for Valve games, with auto-updating (because when new patches rolled out people had issues with not everyone having the same version), instant messaging service, and anti-cheating measure. Plus it was completely OPTIONAL on their games, so if you didn't want it you didn't have to use it.

It's only over time as they added more features and made deals with other developers and publishers to become a digital distribution network for other companies as well that it has shifted to a requirement. And likely that is more of a contractual obligation as the other publishers likely want proof users own the games before allowing them to download them.

But even then the most important fact remains that steam allows you to play offline. It's more like a verify on install connection requirement, similar to Windows OS does these days. And needing to reconnect for a quick verification every few weeks is easy enough to do.

The other thing with steam though is they have ridiculous sales all the time. I've got over 50 games on steam, most of which I bought for 50-75% off. This includes triple A titles which I have picked up for $10-$20 along with lots of smaller indy games for around $5.

Best time for good deals is during Summer and Winter sales when most publishers have the vast majority of their catalogs at 33-50% off. Last holiday sale I got 5 games for a total of about $25.

If I bought all those games from normal retail stores I'd easily have paid well over $1k. But as is I've probably only paid $300-$400 for all those games. And that's over the course of the last 4 years since I started heavily using Steam. Steam is often cheaper then the "used" games at Gamestop during their sales.
 

Nurb

Cynical bastard
Dec 9, 2008
3,078
0
0
Give 'em hell, Jim!

I want to so those publishers that care so little about the experience of paying customers crumble and fail. There will always be tools and people to make games, they don't NEED to be owned by publishers.

Let the industry crash! We will watch it burn! BURRRRN!
 

kmg90

New member
Jan 21, 2009
78
0
0
Adam Jensen said:
superline51 said:
If the console industry does go tits up, I'm not entirely sure what I will do, considering I DESPISE gaming with M&K.
Use your controller?

Maerx said:
MS = MacroSuicide.

Let's hope this is just rumors.
Then why don't they just come out and say so? Everything about "Durango" is bad news for everyone. They could use some plus points right now.
This is what I don't get, Microsoft easily could avoid any bad press by just having a "Playstation meeting" style press conference and just clear the air so all of the bad news surrounding the rumored system.
 
Mar 26, 2008
3,429
0
0
Great work Jim. Maybe you should box up your final "Deal With It" ready for replay when the big three eventually fall in a screaming heap through their own negligence of their fan base.
 

Shodanbot

New member
Apr 7, 2013
36
0
0
Sorry, ages old comment, but I couldn't ignore it... I switched round the paragraphs because the second paragraph buggers up your first paragraph,(it lingers more than the first, mostly because of it's irrelevance.) so I'll get that out of the way first. anyway:

QUINTIX said:
From my bigoted perspective, this vitriol filled reaction to perceived threats (especially anti-feminist ones) is to be expected from our latchkey generation with many of its "young men" staying teenage boys into perpetuity.
Wow, wow, wow... This is not about gender issues or the immaturity of men. This is a different human issue: commerce, trade and business.

QUINTIX said:
I'll disagree with Kevin Dent here too https://kevin-dent.squarespace.com/blog/2013/4/5/in-the-world-2929
however, I will agree with him & Manveer Heir that the Orth is not deserving the bile he's receiving.
Orth is more or less getting the response you can expect when he tells established or potential customers that if they "don't like it? Deal with it!". It's insulting to openly say that. Never mind suggest it.

However, funny thing about contemporary commerce is that you, I or anyone else can just respond: "We don't have to..."

Hardly an immature reaction, just a human one.
 

null_pointer

New member
Mar 14, 2013
16
0
0
First of all, excellent episode, Jim. In my opinion, this is among your best, and thank god for you.

Now, to the issue:

As the owner of an IT business, I've dealt with many people who are unable to get their internet working properly in their home. I've seen all kinds of causes; hardware malfunctions, incorrect network configurations, bad cabling, and pretty much everything else that CAN go wrong with basic home networks. In most cases, these issues are fairly minute to the trained eye; (DHCP is the duct tape of the networking world) but far beyond the scope of knowledge that the average internet user would obtain. The other thing is, while I work, I observe what people are doing. And in about 80% of the houses that I visit that don't have a current internet connection, SOMEONE IS PLAYING A GAME on a current-gen console.

So, from my point of view, gamers not only enjoy games WHEN the internet is down, gamers enjoy games BECAUSE the internet is down. Not to mention the fallibility of the US's infrastructure (ranked 33 in the world at the time of this post http://www.netindex.com/download/allcountries/ ) and shitty server programming paradigms. This example may be purely anecdotal, but I feel that my experience represents a majority of gamers out there.
 

veloper

New member
Jan 20, 2009
4,597
0
0
Lightknight said:
veloper said:
Wishful thinking. The industry has already managed to do this on PC and so they will succeed on the consoles aswell.

Not all PC games have always-online DRM either and it all started with just a couple AAA games like ME and Spore. None of the early boycots gained much support and PC gamers are supposed to be the fanatical and savvy crowd. M$ and Sony can follow exactly the same path on consoles, as this slow boil has succeeded before.

So you make a new xbox and you add just a chip and some firmware to facilitate DRM schemes and then you gradually, over the course of several years, lock down more new releases with always-online DRM.
Us old hands will still complain, but the new blood won't see it and that's all that matters. They already bought the console; the first generation of games worked fine and now they want the latest, top rated AAA games for their consoles even if it's a hassle to make it work.
Software-level always on DRM is completely different from hardware-level always on DRM. Think of all the complaints Jim has about just software-level always on DRM and then multiply it by EVERY game. Imagine being unable to play a movie because your internet is down.

One makes us unable to play certain games offline, the other renders a machine we've purchased unusable offline. PC's cannot be made to do that unless some vital hardware component of PCs is suddenly monopolized and forced to require it. Unlikely since any competing hardware company that refuses to do it would suddenly get all the business.
The new blood won't know about the difference and moreover I doubt they will care. M$ isn't stupid. They won't lose their biggest audience and they will have done their research. Escapists may like to think so, but our minority opinions make no difference. We don't matter; we're 70% PC gamers here and our console gamers are atypical.
My bet is that M$ will prepare the hardware, but won't go full nazi immediately, but rather gradually. Whatever they do, M$ will succeed. Time and time again our collective willingness to make a stand for consumer rights has proven to be very low.