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

[Sheo_Dagana]

*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]

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.

 

[Undomesticated Equine]

Steam works OK and has been working OK since i installed it in 2007.

 

[Pebkio]

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]

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]

Microsoft please do make your console require constant internet connection.

I'd love to see what happens.

 

[Maerx]

MS = MacroSuicide.

Let's hope this is just rumors.

 

[superline51]

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]

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.

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

 

[Elyxard]

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]

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?

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]

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]

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]

*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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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?!