Rumor: Next-Gen Xbox Will Cost $300-$500, Be Always-Online

geizr

New member
Oct 9, 2008
850
0
0
IF this rumor is true, then my response is the following:

1. Too expensive (not going to buy it).
2. Always-online has been shown to be a bad idea (not going to buy it).
3. Creating a subscription model in addition to the upfront cost smacks of a scam to weasel more money out of customers than the worth of the device or service (not going to buy it).
4. The corporate heads of the game industry have conclusively proven they are incapable of learning (not going to buy it).

I think I may be skipping this upcoming generation entirely. I'm not liking what I'm seeing. About the only system so far that doesn't seem to be trying to dick customers over is the Wii U.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
DarthSka said:
Looks like I'll be going with the Wii U/PS4 combo this generation. This just seems too stupid to be true, but these rumors are just one right after the other and all saying the same thing. Plus you know, that twitter fiasco.
Yeah, after the ps3's mistakes I would never have guessed that Sony would get things right this generation and microsoft (who has done amazingly with their two generations except for the HD-DVD/Bluray decision) would do something that is currently winning EA the worst company of the year award.

TKretts3 said:
However, in all seriousness, I simply cannot fathom how anyone at Microsoft would think that this could be a good idea. If they use the internet there, they would know how long a loss of connection would typically last. If they had people who could listen, they would hear customer backlash and argument. If they paid attention, they could see what happened to SimCity.
Something scary to consider, there is a reason.

Always on = DRM. An almost complete reduction of the chance of piracy. This is also why EA did it. Additionally, research does show that social involvement in games does encourage long term use of games though the studies fail to grasp correlation and causality. This is also why EA forced the always on for the single player experience. In case the user ever gets tempted to use the social features they'd always be there.

So, from a business perspective it makes sense on the surface level. But it fails to understand its target audience and so they end up pulling an EA move of hubris and greed. I guess every console just has to shoot themselves in the foot. At this point in the game, why would people by the 720 over the ps4? Even if one console is slightly weaker than the other games will still be made to fit on both systems (because developers like making a profit and porting makes sense). I think Microsoft thinks they're big enough of a console name to do this and not get hurt. I'm afraid of the idea that they could be right...

But hey, this is all too early so we'll see what actually happens. But the fact that high-level client-facing representatives have confessed not understanding what our complaint about always on riles us so much is extremely concerning that this is a valid rumor. The fact that it upsets us so much should be all that matters since we are the consumers. I mean, there are situations that the customer can be wrong, but it's bullheaded to make a choice if you don't understand why we don't like it.

There are a number of reasons:
1. Consoles require a significant degree of technical knowledge to hack to the point that you can pirate games. Console specific titles also take more work and more specialized knowledge to rip than pc games do. So there's already a specific drop in the possibility of piracy so Always on as DRM is even less acceptable.
2. Reliance on the internet assumes that we have constant internet connection. Am I seriously the only person who has taken my console to a party so that we can play on it? Requiring internet connection for all of the machines we have hooked up would be stupid. Likewise, reliance on ISP's for a single player experience can be a nightmare. I also have friends in more rural areas who have weeks without internet on a weekly basis. Other countries can have it worse as well.
3. Reliance on Microsoft's network is an additional concern. Any update or network failure means we can't use the machine or games that we've purchased.
4. We only barely tolerate gaming as a service. It's getting close to reaching a head but we don't think of movies or other IPs as services. There are many of us who don't buy games that require always on and having a system the requires it means EVERY game and movie and anything else suddenly requires something we don't want.
5. At the end of the day, we want to own what we purchase. We don't want to rent it. Always on means we never actually own the license because the day the game stops being supported online is the day we lose our IP.
6. There is NO benefit to this requirement for the user. None. This only hurts us. We will hate you for it.
 

Comocat

New member
May 24, 2012
382
0
0
I think having a subscription model would be a great idea. The odds of me plopping down $600 bucks like I did for my 360 are pretty much zero, so if they had a $100 dollar buy in with $10 bucks on month or something service, that would be a pretty nice deal. The price points need some work, but the idea is solid.

On the other hand, I haven't been sold on always online. Internet stability aside, what does always online need to be on a console? I can count the number of times I've used my 360 online on one hand, so why I would buy a product that is always online makes no sense. If I want to go online I use my PC.
 

Terminate421

New member
Jul 21, 2010
5,773
0
0
What I love is that all the rumors are bad.

Seriously, this combined with Microsoft not confirming is definitely enough to raise a few eye brows and make people realize that "maybe it's not this"
 

Jackeno

New member
Feb 6, 2013
13
0
0
Can we for a second forget about the user side of the always on internet otherwise the console shutsdown.
This means that microsofts servers will have to be online always too surely? What happens during maintenance? Do we get to not play at all during that time?
Also I have a feeling that the OS will be like windows 8. Really shite! (also sorry if it currently looks this way, I gave my 360 to my nephew about a year ago, after not using it since halo reach came out)
 

gezodiac

New member
Apr 8, 2013
10
0
0
Britisheagle said:
And so begin the "I need a PC" messages. Steam requires you to be always online, it does work offline, yes, but barely. My internet went down last week and I thought Shogun would be a good game to play during this down time and it wouldn't launch as I had not updated it when I installed it because I wanted to go on something else.

Also, you can't get preowned games on PC, at least some console games allow split screen to differ to this.

So cheaper games? Yes that would work. An always online console would be welcome if we could have always online prices, that would get a purchase from me. If not, PS4 it is.

I would also like to say I am a PC gamer as well as Xbox and I love my PC far more than my console. I am just stating that it does have it's moments, such as Steam servers going down mid way through a ranked match and getting a loss, no preowned market and games that you pay money that then don't work for whatever reason (and receiving no help what-so-ever from Steam and having to spend time on forums looking for player support instead). Overall it is a far superior platform, however, and if Microsoft believe that they can match, if not better, this system then I would like to see them try.
I am pc gamer for more than the reasons listed: shiny pixels.

But I have to agree and disagree with your take on no "used games" on steam. While yes there are no "used" games, there is something that happens often enough and close enough to releases to take note. Sales, Steam loves em and the whole idea of used is get the game for cheaper and it works just like console used games, as in the closer to the actual release date the sale occurs the lesser the % off the buying price. The only time I see this actually being beneficial to the console side is a very poor game with large amounts of trade ins close to the release date, making the price fall because everyone now knows it is bad and the store is sitting on a backlog of used games and still got a lot of new copies.
 

Scribblesense

New member
Jan 30, 2013
169
0
0
The problem with "Always Online" isn't my internet connection, as that's up 99% of the time.

The same cannot be said of Microsoft's servers.

When my connection craps out, fine. Stuff breaks. Sometimes the roads are closed blah blah blah. What I have a problem with is Microsoft determining what games I can and cannot play. They might not have DRM or block used games, but if I have to rely on hardware thousands of miles away that could go out for hours at a time to say that I can play a single-player game, we have a problem.

And then it's likely that the servers won't be functioning in ten years and my entire game library will be garbage.

In short, even if my hardware is fully functioning, there is no guarantee that at any point in time I will be able to play a game I payed for. That is utter bullshit.
 

carpathic

New member
Oct 5, 2009
1,287
0
0
Well, I know one thing.

If they make it always online required I won't be buying an xbox.

Even less likely if they make me pay extra for the service.

Not even a new elderscrolls would be enough to get me to buy into that level of BS
 

Genocidicles

New member
Sep 13, 2012
1,747
0
0
Teoes said:
Re: possible mandatory Kinect..

Sorry if this has been discussed already, but for those who count this as a big negative towards the console through the thought of being spied on - has anyone considered draping a blanket over it or leave it facing the corner with a dunce's cap on when it's not in use? I'm not being facetious, I wonder about this being a legitimate way around that particular unsavoury (possible) aspect.
It's a downside whether or not it spies on you. It means devs will be putting more shoddy motion controls in their games.
 

Birdfalcon

New member
Jul 29, 2011
98
0
0
Hmm has anyone stopped to think this might be all part of a plan by Mircosoft to finally get rid of thier console divsion. It's been stated before that the Xbox is like the red headed step-child. So whats to stay they are saying all this stuff knowing gamers will hate it and they can finally say "See the Xbox isnt making us money....let's go back to making computers"
 

lachlan4567

New member
Sep 21, 2011
63
0
0
Aka $600 to $1000 down here in Australia.
Sigh our money is on equal with the US now yet everything is almost double the price.
It just makes me feel punished for living somewhere other than the US.
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
20,158
4,924
118
Zachary Amaranth said:
Ronack said:
Hey look, it's the Titanic 360
That's unfair. The Titanic actually had to hit somethign to sink.

*rimshot*
Yeah, it's not like the Titanic had an iceberg built into the actual hull.

OT: It's odd that despite the clunky touchscreen controller of the WiiU, it feels like it has less bullshit than Sony and Microsoft's next console.
 

Primero Holodon

New member
Oct 18, 2011
23
0
0
Trilliandi said:
...Well, this just made my morning if it turns out to be true. I have never liked X-Box, it never had any games that made me want it, it's online community scared me to no end, and I want nothing to do with it's controller. So having said that, awful nice of Microsoft to do themselves in like this if it's true.
so basically you're saying "This product doesn't appeal to my specific interests, Therefore it deserves to fail"
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Casual Shinji said:
*rimshot*
Yeah, it's not like the Titanic had an iceberg built into the actual hull. [/quote]

Or tried to tell people that an iceberg in the hull was a feature.

#dealwithit
 

Steambroom

New member
Aug 8, 2009
165
0
0
So if this were to be true, would you be able to play it via LAN with your friends?
Since you're not technically connected to the internet, because it is in this situation simply not needed.
 

Soviet Steve

New member
May 23, 2009
1,511
0
0
I'd heard that the 720 would start at $1200. I'm still not sure whether this is better or worse than that.
 

Whitbane

Apathetic...
Mar 7, 2012
266
0
0
I wish I was this god damn stupid, because that's apparently the way to rise in the gaming industry.
 

duchaked

New member
Dec 25, 2008
4,451
0
0
at this rate, it looks like the "next gen" for me is a lot less gaming in my life lol...
don't get me wrong I love me some games, but life is starting to kick off and I can't be dealing with this nonsense anymore sigh