Gaming severely lacking self-awareness? >.>Adon Cabre said:
Sorry, the irony of Watchdogs gets me every time.
Jimquisition: Why An Always-On DRM Console Would Be Dumb Dumb Dumb
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Sorry, the irony of Watchdogs gets me every time.
Dear Jim Sterling, I am your number one fan, but why have you switched to this unpleasant fascist layout? The only thing you have advocated genocide on is bad practices in the games industry, you don't need to associate(dirty) yourself with those guys.
-your number one fan
-your number one fan
It was actually revealed on escapist news now, its a pretty new video so when Jim made this it was before they said "yes its DRM confirmed" though Microsoft may pull out and make it offline accessible, but I really don't think they would do something that smart last minute.grey_space said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUDtLeRGSr4&list=PLAbMhAYRuCUiwLRJCOE-Oen0Dfqd1TLrB&index=41
p.s the video is about an interview with the new Xbox's pricing but its revealed near the end that the new Xbox will have DRM.
Oh I don't think so. EA may try and act like they are doing well but lets face it, EA is scared of all the things they say their not. (here's and example) No matter what EA says they are scared that Steam is going to do better than Origin and if you want to know why its because if EA says "Origin is doing so much better than steam" then why did EA (this is true!) want to buy steam at 1 million dollars, yeah that's right EA offered steam 1 million for the rights, so when EA says their not scared of steam then it begs the question "if your so quick to insult steam on how small it is, then why were you begging and pleading and go so far as to offer 1 million just to own steam".TomWiley said:
EA just likes to pretend that they are unmatched but in reality they are the type of company that's "to big to fail" but is also "to oblivious to survive"
As well as their games might be selling, they're still posting weak profits when they do, and significant losses when they aren't. Why? Staggering production and marketing costs.TomWiley said:
So it's more like EA is playing a dangerous game.
If consumer confidence and good will backlashes even a little (by accident or realization) it hurts them a lot more.
Can I play devil's advocate here for a second?
Diablo 3 and SimCity's launches failed because of volume that the servers couldn't handle. If a console always had to be online and connected to a server, then publishers would be able to see how many people are online at any given moment and better prepare for games with always-online connections since they would have to be linked to a server.
... Having said that, this one not-quite-braindead idea does not negate anything you said about the poor internet service many areas have, alienating gamestop, the lack of a need for it anyway for many games, etc etc.
Diablo 3 and SimCity's launches failed because of volume that the servers couldn't handle. If a console always had to be online and connected to a server, then publishers would be able to see how many people are online at any given moment and better prepare for games with always-online connections since they would have to be linked to a server.
... Having said that, this one not-quite-braindead idea does not negate anything you said about the poor internet service many areas have, alienating gamestop, the lack of a need for it anyway for many games, etc etc.
Oh, and one other thing that I don't think Jim brought up: Orth said in one of his tweets that "we live in an always-online world". The difference, Mr.Orth, is that when I download something off of iTunes, I don't need to stay connected once it's been downloaded. I can listen to Ghost Love Score on an airplane or watch doctor who in a dead zone. I can play Dark Crusade while my LAN is down and wait for it to come back up. Those devices are not always online (not in the way we're talking about here) because they still work without the online connection.
And as to the vacuum argument... Actually, never mind, I don't think I need to explain why that's dumb.
And as to the vacuum argument... Actually, never mind, I don't think I need to explain why that's dumb.
What if the focus on copyright is just a way to distract customers? Misdirection. If they wanted to, it would be easy to upset the community an manipulate what it is they are speaking about. In cases where you couldn't control that in a positive way, you could always limit it by starting on a focused point.
The rather large copyright issue would be a perfect way to take the focus off media content itself. In cases where the uncontrolled community would effect sales negatively. It seems simple to me that they would want to guide the conversation to topics that don't effect sales as much or at all.
I think you have already lost if you care about this stuff at all. You're a gamer, an your goal is to play games. How much if any of this has anything to do with that? In many cases our behavior as gamers is counter productive to our actual goal. I could be playing games, instead I'm trolling about them.
how sad,
xGSx
The rather large copyright issue would be a perfect way to take the focus off media content itself. In cases where the uncontrolled community would effect sales negatively. It seems simple to me that they would want to guide the conversation to topics that don't effect sales as much or at all.
I think you have already lost if you care about this stuff at all. You're a gamer, an your goal is to play games. How much if any of this has anything to do with that? In many cases our behavior as gamers is counter productive to our actual goal. I could be playing games, instead I'm trolling about them.
how sad,
xGSx
Is it something specific, though? Because the current system has DRM, too.cheetahguy said:
If you're a console gamer, the question should be "so what?" Unless there's a radical change.
This actually dovetails with the reason I came back into this thread, so I'll quote it.HalfTangible said:
I get the DA position, but companies always play it conservatively with servers, and that's part of the problem here. Microsoft ran like 3 years straight having trouble keeping XBlox Live up over the holidays. That wasn't as big a deal to me when I got started out, because I didn't even have gold and so my online connection was more or less a trivial thing. But at a time when huge MP titles were coming out, it meant that a lot of online players couldn't play the games they had just bought.
Now, picture a service-wide outage because of this. Where not only are Halo 7 fans impacted, but also anyone who bought a game months before. Hell, Kive was having serious problems for almost half of the Double XP weekend for Black Ops 2 this week, and I'd be surprised if the two weren't related.
If Always-online games become common, so will outages.
How would that be different? The console has to be online to begin and logging automatically connects you with the server. I mean that's how computers work, I don't think publishers seeing how many "potential users who might log-in" changes the how well they are going to handle those users.HalfTangible said:
You are either be prepared or you're not.
I mean even if this scenario were the case, if I have a single-player game I would have to connect online?
The idea is that if every console was online, then one could more easily tell how many servers they need for a new game release while simultaneously stress-testing the servers. Moreover, they would be able to reuse servers for the same game, since the console is what's always online instead of the game.Lovely Mixture said:
This is bullcrap, of course, (especially since they'd ALSO be making the games always-on and doesn't really negate the problems with internet connections brought up here) but I did say I was playing devil's advocate.
Ok I see, that makes a little more sense. I wish I could try to go Devil's Advocate for this, but it's something I cannot reason. So I commend your volunteering.HalfTangible said:
There is radical change, if your not connected to the internet for 2-3 minutes your console will shut down and won't let you use it until you can log back on. So you cant play any offline games or acess anythig without being connected, not even the dashboard.Zachary Amaranth said:
But did they specifically confirm this as you implied? Even the rumours are moving away from that, so I'm betting the BLOGGER in the youtube video has, as well. But the point remains, these are nothing more than rumours and the source you're quoting cites a blogger, not anyone in a real position to confirm it. Not to mention the fact that a hundred dollar subscription based XBox 3600 already exists, adding to the questionable journalism here (How anyone could say that the pricing model included here is expensive for a new console and hold any credibility is beyond me).cheetahguy said:
No, it wasn't really "revealed" at the end. Paul Thurrot, a blogger who has a spotty record on such claims, claimed that it would be, based upon the same information that claimed (for example) that the new XBox would have been revealed this month.
So it's not a radical change until actually confirmed to exist. Remember, the PS4 was going to be always online and stop used games (and the PS3 was going to stop used games and rely on online DRM), and this was "confirmed" by dubious blogging sources as well. I am not saying that it won't have this horrible DRM, but I will not accept it as fact until we have some actual basis on which to do so.
And given that the rumour mongers are shying away from the always-online claims now, I'm betting we won't. But I don't know for sure, because (encore une fois) we don't have the information necessary.
eh, either way i'm not exited for any of the new consoles that are coming out.Zachary Amaranth said:
Nor am I, though I'll wait for Microsoft to underwhelm me themselves, rather than buying into some blogger's BS.cheetahguy said:
By the way, said blogger? His new "confirmed" rumours undercut these ones. So...Yeah.