Boss Man
Member
What if you forgot to keep your router plugged in though?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
After all the fun, what do people think MS will actually do about online on NextBox?
- Thread starter Dead Man
- Start date
Interesting. I think that would be very difficult to manage in non-US markets in terms of rights management. International media distribution rights are an absolute clusterfuck.
Yeah, there are certainly a lot of ways to implement a requirement for an internet connection, but none of them seem to offer and real advantage for consumers given it would still be a closed system.
Fair point, I regularly disconnect my router in the middle of a game, I mean when else am I gonna do it?
Boss Man
Member
I'm not really sure, did it come with a manual? Maybe you should consult it. Or try the troubleshooter.
On a serious note, the always online is bad...but what's worse is that microsoft will be watching you with kinect 24/7 always online.
infiniteheteroskdasticity
Member
True ... but in their (by far) most important markets (NA and the UK) this would be a cinch. They'd still have the current retail model for markets where the new model would take some time to get right.
Mmm troubleshooter says to try another DNS. I don't know what a DNS is. I guess I'll just turn my router off and see if that fixes things.
At first I thought it would always be online, but I really don't see the point. DRM? Piracy isn't that big of a problem on consoles is it? Cutting out used games, but couldn't you just do some code activation stuff like with PC games and current trends w/ map packs and the rest?
I just don't see what Microsoft stands to gain by this. (obviously the consumer is basically fucked either way) Especially when most people leave their consoles connected anyways, so stuff like ads—Microsoft already has gamers by the balls with that. Why go the extra step and make it mandatory?
But having said that, this seems pretty likely at this point.
I just don't see what Microsoft stands to gain by this. (obviously the consumer is basically fucked either way) Especially when most people leave their consoles connected anyways, so stuff like ads—Microsoft already has gamers by the balls with that. Why go the extra step and make it mandatory?
But having said that, this seems pretty likely at this point.
The only possible advantage I see is a variable pricing model like Steam but I don't see why a console would have to be always online to implement something like that so it's still kind of bullshit.
Boss Man
Member
All I can think is that maybe they're getting some exclusive third parties on board, or that it might have something to do with data collection for ads and the like. I think we're not seeing the whole picture though, because you're right it doesn't really make sense for them to do it on the system level. There's also the whole TV thing and applications focus that we've heard is a thing but have no idea about. It could have something to do with those things too.
They'll do what they always do. Spend a few million to sponsor Tweeters, Bloggers, dine the press, distribute their talking points to forumers etc. Before long there will be what longs like a genuine debate. In a few months you'll get the impression that "you hear from many people" that always-online is not so bad. By the end of the year you'll get the impression that "many people" might even find it to be a good thing.
http://www.microsoft.com/investor/reports/ar12/financial-review/income-statements/index.html
Microsoft is a 14 Billion $ marketing operation. Pitching their terrible decisions as something acceptable, maybe even good, is Microsoft's core business.
In the last 12 months, they spent >2$ for every person living on earth on marketing alone. And they do this every year. Where do you seriously think this money ends up, newspaper ads?
http://www.microsoft.com/investor/reports/ar12/financial-review/income-statements/index.html
Microsoft is a 14 Billion $ marketing operation. Pitching their terrible decisions as something acceptable, maybe even good, is Microsoft's core business.
In the last 12 months, they spent >2$ for every person living on earth on marketing alone. And they do this every year. Where do you seriously think this money ends up, newspaper ads?
mentalfloss
Banned
Actually, it kinda does.
I think this is probably the case too, but they've no right to be arrogant with the incompetent shit they've been pulling the past few years.
Mikey Jr.
Member
My honest opinion?
The Next Xbox will always be connected. Meaning that as long as you have an internet connection, it'll constantly check for patches for your game in real-time, it'll update your status on your game in a feed type system, screen shots you take will automatically be uploaded and shared if desired, you'll get updates from friends in real-time, etc etc.
You will NOT need an internet connection to play a game.
The Next Xbox will always be connected. Meaning that as long as you have an internet connection, it'll constantly check for patches for your game in real-time, it'll update your status on your game in a feed type system, screen shots you take will automatically be uploaded and shared if desired, you'll get updates from friends in real-time, etc etc.
You will NOT need an internet connection to play a game.
Impeccable
Member
Way too much smoke for no fire.
Either way, let's see this unveil itself.
Either way, let's see this unveil itself.
SpinningBirdKick
Banned
MS have never done anything in the interests of the consumer.
That's why they have become the behemoth that they are.
If it's always online in any capacity then I don't care how stringent it is because I will not be purchasing the system.
It really is that simple.
That's why they have become the behemoth that they are.
If it's always online in any capacity then I don't care how stringent it is because I will not be purchasing the system.
It really is that simple.
Voice of Reason
Banned
Which is why I corrected what I meant in my following post. You can have internet, but it will almost never be reliable, unless you live in an urban area of course.
michaelius
Banned
They are pulling a WII this generation and kinect crowd won't care whatever they do.
It's fair enough to speculate and what have you, but I can't believe that there are so many closed-minded people on this forum.
MS have not said a word about Durango. Not a thing. Yet they have become as arrogant as Sony, will do what they want, and Durango will fail?
Alx
Member
I have no real opinion whether MS will or will not have that "always online" feature (we'll know soon enough), but I'm sure they're thinking about it, and they're not the only ones.
It's an interesting scenario, considering the way technology and society evolves. To get into more details about the problems linked to such systems :
- internet availability : it's true not everybody has access to internet today, but it's becoming an exception, especially with mobile phones being closest to 100% penetration. Assuming people have access to internet is not a big gamble today, even a smaller one than MS did with broadband requirements in 2000.
- internet reliability (on the user's side) : I don't think it's a big problem either. I think most people have a stable enough connection, and it will only get better with time. Of course there are times when your provider is down, but it's something that should be rare. Maybe a few hours downtime a year (most online services use 0.1% downtime as reference).
- server reliability (on MS's side) : that's the more sensitive problem. It's also one that depends a lot on how MS designed their network. XBL has been overwhelmed from time to time by access peaks, but it was also sized for a specific use. If "always online" is a feature on all consoles, MS will need to set up a network that can handle a permanent load with all users connected. It could even be a separate network than that for multiplayer or content distribution, so there wouldn't be many peaks of activity like for big game releases. There will be important moments though, like during Christmas seasons when the number of connected users will see a step up.
It's an interesting scenario, considering the way technology and society evolves. To get into more details about the problems linked to such systems :
- internet availability : it's true not everybody has access to internet today, but it's becoming an exception, especially with mobile phones being closest to 100% penetration. Assuming people have access to internet is not a big gamble today, even a smaller one than MS did with broadband requirements in 2000.
- internet reliability (on the user's side) : I don't think it's a big problem either. I think most people have a stable enough connection, and it will only get better with time. Of course there are times when your provider is down, but it's something that should be rare. Maybe a few hours downtime a year (most online services use 0.1% downtime as reference).
- server reliability (on MS's side) : that's the more sensitive problem. It's also one that depends a lot on how MS designed their network. XBL has been overwhelmed from time to time by access peaks, but it was also sized for a specific use. If "always online" is a feature on all consoles, MS will need to set up a network that can handle a permanent load with all users connected. It could even be a separate network than that for multiplayer or content distribution, so there wouldn't be many peaks of activity like for big game releases. There will be important moments though, like during Christmas seasons when the number of connected users will see a step up.
Voice of Reason
Banned
Alx
Member
That people have a stable enough connection (for always on features) : because you don't need high bandwidth or low ping for that. Even a dial-up should be enough to send your authentication and receive an answer within 3 minutes.
That it will get better with time : because that's how technology evolves. Half of the US population has a smarphone today. And I suppose that close to 100% of potential buyers of a next gen console have one.
codswallop
Member
Even crazy-expensive networked software like the AutoCAD family has the ability to work offline, and it costs many times what a new Xbox and library of games will cost.
I'm sure most of Microsoft's profits are in enterprise licensing. I just can't see them being dumb enough to do this... at least not yet.
Even if used games didn't work (they'll work, surely), screw them if they think I'm going to support an online-only console.
I'm sure most of Microsoft's profits are in enterprise licensing. I just can't see them being dumb enough to do this... at least not yet.
Even if used games didn't work (they'll work, surely), screw them if they think I'm going to support an online-only console.
Voice of Reason
Banned
I know for a fact that here in Australia, if you're on DSL things are getting worse on a daily basis because of copper degradation. If our new fibre network isn't completed (and it looks like it won't be) things are going to get worse over the next 10 years, not better. So yeah I'm totally agreeing with you.
Voice of Reason
Banned
You're putting too much faith in it, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Yeah, people think of the internet and how abundant it is and think that is no problem really. They never think about some ISPs, unlike theirs perhaps, that provide a shitty service and can drastically change their experience compared to yours
I personally don't give a crap about lower specs but if the always online rumor turns out true then I'm not spending a single euro on Durango even if it has the most crazy exclusives and features, am I willing to miss on amazing games? I'm saying yes with certainty...I'm not gonna support such BS with my money, plain and simple.
Some guys are saying the MS can't be THAT stupid, I can see why they're saying this but this rumor just refuses to die and that's getting really really worrying so let's hope Durango won't turn an anti-consumerist piece of turd and it will actually be a competent product, after all competition is good for us.
mentalfloss
Banned
Which is why all the complaints coming from GAF are near sighted.
MS is positioning the console for the future when networks will be more reliable and widespread.
In 3-4 years this will be commonplace for all games on PC, 720 and PS4 whether people here like it or not.
Welcome to next gen.
WrenchNinja
Member
That's what was said 3-4 years ago.
mentalfloss
Banned
And the fact that the biggest publishers continue to push forward with the idea, despite the network failures like SimCity, just further proves it's an inevitability.
someguyinahat
Member
I'd be mighty surprised if they back down from always-online. Sure some people may complain about it now, and even be driven away, but MS is thinking long-term. Just think of all the kids out there who might have this as their first system - they'll see always-online as the norm, and MS can proceed from there as an anti-consumer starting point. Add to that the guys who will just buy their system as a CoD machine and they'll be always online anyway. And of course, the guys who complain about always-online but then buy the system anyway, possibly to buy EA games they complain about.
I'm by no means in favour of always online systems, but I have little faith that they'll be more pro-consumer.
I'm by no means in favour of always online systems, but I have little faith that they'll be more pro-consumer.
The wealth of rumours, and their refusal yesterday to deny it, have given me a sinking feeling that they might carry it out.
If that does happen, no PGR5 or Alan Wake 2 will convince me to buy it.
That said, I really hope they aren't carrying it out and the rumours are wrong. One can hope.
If that does happen, no PGR5 or Alan Wake 2 will convince me to buy it.
That said, I really hope they aren't carrying it out and the rumours are wrong. One can hope.
Voice of Reason
Banned
Once again, how can you be so sure? How will networks, in America nonetheless, be more reliable in 3 years?
if that was actually happening in 3-4 years, which it isnt, they would need to be launching the console in 3-4 years, which they arent and would need to be system wide on ps4/pc, which it isnt
Voice of Reason
Banned
"But you don't get it, Microsoft is the one that will innovate the entire industry!"
EDIT: Btw, I still think they're not gonna do it.
Kill Your Masters
Member
It's gonna be at least 'up to the publishers' which is almost as bad, that's what Sony is gonna do anyway and MS will have at least the same mechanism in place. As if they didn't already sat down with big publishers to talk about this stuff...
So you will only have 1st party studios (in case of MS maybe not even those) and some sane 3rd parties (again, in worst case for MS not even those) giving you offline play capabilities. That's the sad future as they have to appeal to EA and the likes to get their games published so consoles get sold.
And all this nicely wrapped up in the now widespread lie of 'for social stuff'
I doubt it, they stuck to their guns with Windows 8, despite the constant bitching and the fact that the OS isn't selling that great.
If MS has an agenda with the next Xbox, they're going to stick to their guns on it.
I hope they actually block used games. Then I can be absolutely sure the Next Box will be an unmitigated disaster. Always online is going to suck but I don't think it would deter people from buying it.
No used games though? Hooooboy.
BlazingDarkness
Member
Surely they'd change the Silver/Gold subscription types if it were an 'only online' system?
They couldn't possibly charge for online multi-player (thus locking it away from Silver members) on a system that will only work when online?
MS: 'Silver members must be connected to the internet at all times, if a connection is dropped, after 3 minutes the troubleshooter will launch. However, to play your game online you must pay for Gold membership.'
This basically serves no benefit at all, not to mention the current method of locking apps behind Gold as well. It makes me think they'll drop the distinction between memberships and introduce something completely new, but the question is, will they charge for it?
They couldn't possibly charge for online multi-player (thus locking it away from Silver members) on a system that will only work when online?
MS: 'Silver members must be connected to the internet at all times, if a connection is dropped, after 3 minutes the troubleshooter will launch. However, to play your game online you must pay for Gold membership.'
This basically serves no benefit at all, not to mention the current method of locking apps behind Gold as well. It makes me think they'll drop the distinction between memberships and introduce something completely new, but the question is, will they charge for it?
I believe where there is smoke, there is a fire. EDGE was right on every point bar the PS3 ram, and many developers were even surprised that Sony bumped that 4 gig to 8 gig. They are also one of, if not the most trustworthy gaming publications out there and they were certain of their sources. Others have also said the same thing
Other major western publishers have all gone online only or will do so in the future, Acti Blizzard did it with Diablo 3, EA did it with Sim City and Ubisoft has said they will do with AC4 and Watch Dogs. The benefits to keeping your games online only are too advantageous to the publisher to not attempt it, despite not offering anything to the consumer, and in infact making it a worse experience on them as seen by the Diablo 3 and Sim City debacles that did nothing but harm the experience for the consumer.
EA seems hell bent on this and for that reason i do believe that perhaps them and MS are in bed together, they both share the same ideas surrounding this.
I do not believe Sony will follow suit, not because Sony is some company that treats their customers better or anything (they are all the same, Nintendo, Sony and MS) but Sony will not entertain this idea simply because of Japan, where the infrastructure is not there for this, nor do they dare try to attack the used game market which is massive in Japan.
Always online, if you disconnect you are out. You might be allowed to watch DVD movies with a Xbox 720 offline or some very basic things, but games, services and everything else will be tied to their servers.
And i do not believe that MS expects the 720 to sell 75+ million consoles, i am fully confident they know this will not appeal to everyone and many will reject a always online console, if nothing else out of necessity but i bet they rather want 40 million always online consumers watching ads and buying DLC than 80 million who are all over the place. They have surely calculated this and made up their minds
And i do not believe it will work out as well as they think it will, this is perhaps the biggest mistake any console maker has made, right up there with 599, carts and Sega Saturns sudden launch. They already had no chance in Japan with such a console they literally should not even launch there, waste of money. Europe will lean heavily to Sony and US is a giant question mark, even with exclusive dlc to CoD or whatever, the infrastructure in the US is just not there to make this work for everyone.
Basically this gen Sony messed up and the other 2 benefited, this gen Nintendo seems half asleep while adding bloom to a Wind Waker remake and MS is trying to one-up the 599 mistake Sony made, so as long as they do not screw up they should have WW with relative ease.
If MS does this, they will not end up with the largest marketshare WW, only if they are lucky they may get it in the US but even that is a giant ???.
They did something crazy before, when they added a subscription to their online service, this was (and still is) considered absolute nuts. But it worked, mainly because their Live service was light years ahead of everyone else on consoles: they had something nobody else had and thus it worked
This time around i do not believe they have anything to justify forcing people always-online, thus it will fail spectacularly
I hope they do not go with this, as i do want to buy their next Xbox as i have enjoyed OG Xbox and my 360 quite a lot
Other major western publishers have all gone online only or will do so in the future, Acti Blizzard did it with Diablo 3, EA did it with Sim City and Ubisoft has said they will do with AC4 and Watch Dogs. The benefits to keeping your games online only are too advantageous to the publisher to not attempt it, despite not offering anything to the consumer, and in infact making it a worse experience on them as seen by the Diablo 3 and Sim City debacles that did nothing but harm the experience for the consumer.
EA seems hell bent on this and for that reason i do believe that perhaps them and MS are in bed together, they both share the same ideas surrounding this.
I do not believe Sony will follow suit, not because Sony is some company that treats their customers better or anything (they are all the same, Nintendo, Sony and MS) but Sony will not entertain this idea simply because of Japan, where the infrastructure is not there for this, nor do they dare try to attack the used game market which is massive in Japan.
Always online, if you disconnect you are out. You might be allowed to watch DVD movies with a Xbox 720 offline or some very basic things, but games, services and everything else will be tied to their servers.
And i do not believe that MS expects the 720 to sell 75+ million consoles, i am fully confident they know this will not appeal to everyone and many will reject a always online console, if nothing else out of necessity but i bet they rather want 40 million always online consumers watching ads and buying DLC than 80 million who are all over the place. They have surely calculated this and made up their minds
And i do not believe it will work out as well as they think it will, this is perhaps the biggest mistake any console maker has made, right up there with 599, carts and Sega Saturns sudden launch. They already had no chance in Japan with such a console they literally should not even launch there, waste of money. Europe will lean heavily to Sony and US is a giant question mark, even with exclusive dlc to CoD or whatever, the infrastructure in the US is just not there to make this work for everyone.
Basically this gen Sony messed up and the other 2 benefited, this gen Nintendo seems half asleep while adding bloom to a Wind Waker remake and MS is trying to one-up the 599 mistake Sony made, so as long as they do not screw up they should have WW with relative ease.
If MS does this, they will not end up with the largest marketshare WW, only if they are lucky they may get it in the US but even that is a giant ???.
They did something crazy before, when they added a subscription to their online service, this was (and still is) considered absolute nuts. But it worked, mainly because their Live service was light years ahead of everyone else on consoles: they had something nobody else had and thus it worked
This time around i do not believe they have anything to justify forcing people always-online, thus it will fail spectacularly
I hope they do not go with this, as i do want to buy their next Xbox as i have enjoyed OG Xbox and my 360 quite a lot
Diddy Kong
Banned
this