-
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.
Engadget: Was Microsoft right in 2013 about the Xbox one and always online?
- Thread starter IbizaPocholo
- Start date
David Ricardo
Member
Nope, It was wrong.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
No, it was wrong. 100%
If my memory serves me correctly, the only good feature that might have existed from that was the ability to digitally trade/sell games you were done playing with other users.
We have already made strides in that direction, but we should NEVER be forced to have to be online to play single player games.
If my memory serves me correctly, the only good feature that might have existed from that was the ability to digitally trade/sell games you were done playing with other users.
We have already made strides in that direction, but we should NEVER be forced to have to be online to play single player games.
Last edited:
pr0cs
Member
They might not have been wrong, I don't recall the last game disk I bought, everything digital now like it has been for steam. If some of the rumors around sharing digital games or the ability to sell back game licenses were true it probably would have been pretty well received.
The problem is that their messaging sucked, and was lead by a corporate suit that was totally out of the touch with what gamers wanted, on an underpowered system that was not only more money but had a TV focus when clearly tech was headed towards streaming (going against their idea of a digital future)
The og xbone was a masterclass in shitty messaging and hopefully a lesson for Microsoft to actually listen to their core audience.
The problem is that their messaging sucked, and was lead by a corporate suit that was totally out of the touch with what gamers wanted, on an underpowered system that was not only more money but had a TV focus when clearly tech was headed towards streaming (going against their idea of a digital future)
The og xbone was a masterclass in shitty messaging and hopefully a lesson for Microsoft to actually listen to their core audience.
Insane Metal
Member
The future is digital, there's no coming back from that.
But XBox's problems were a lot deeper than the always on thing.
But XBox's problems were a lot deeper than the always on thing.
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
They weren't wrong, just too early.
Their outlook was not wrong but they tried to force feed us the always online and digital content when most gamers weren't ready. Their vision is coming true but in a much slower and organic way.
DunDunDunpachi
Patient MembeR
It's really weird to see this narrative pop up 5 years later in this form.
No, just because lots of technologies are "always on" does not mean the original Xbone was the right idea. The system was holding your content hostage unless you had an online connection.
We're fully aware that services like YouTube or Facebook require an internet connection. A $60 videogame disc that I put into my system's tray and install is hardly a "service". Even a digital copy of a game where my credit card or bank is charged in exchanged for a license should not require an internet connection beyond the initial download, no more than buying and downloading an album from iTunes (I mean.... who does this anymore? Lol) would prevent you from listening to it offline. The only exception would be an ongoing streaming service. Heck, even a subscription service shouldn't require always online and somehow -- magically! -- games from PS+ and XBL Gold and Game Pass and EA Whatever and Ubisoft Whatever don't require an online check-in when you boot up the games, do they?
That's precisely what Microsoft wanted to turn gaming into then, and that's precisely what Microsoft wants to turn gaming into now. It is why I don't trust them nor will I buy their services.
To me, gaming is not a service. It is a product that I can own, like a movie.
No, just because lots of technologies are "always on" does not mean the original Xbone was the right idea. The system was holding your content hostage unless you had an online connection.
We're fully aware that services like YouTube or Facebook require an internet connection. A $60 videogame disc that I put into my system's tray and install is hardly a "service". Even a digital copy of a game where my credit card or bank is charged in exchanged for a license should not require an internet connection beyond the initial download, no more than buying and downloading an album from iTunes (I mean.... who does this anymore? Lol) would prevent you from listening to it offline. The only exception would be an ongoing streaming service. Heck, even a subscription service shouldn't require always online and somehow -- magically! -- games from PS+ and XBL Gold and Game Pass and EA Whatever and Ubisoft Whatever don't require an online check-in when you boot up the games, do they?
That's precisely what Microsoft wanted to turn gaming into then, and that's precisely what Microsoft wants to turn gaming into now. It is why I don't trust them nor will I buy their services.
To me, gaming is not a service. It is a product that I can own, like a movie.
Last edited:
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
The messaging was so bad and incompetent that it enabled Sony to get away with charging for online.
Son_of_Zardoz
Banned
The message was right but the delivery was terrible. Mattrick was rightfully fired after that but the overreactions around here were hilarious. It's not like our phones, tablets, computers, speakers, outlets, etc weren't already doing it but oh the outrage for a console to follow suit. Glad we at least got a little bit of game sharing out of the wreckage.
DynamiteCop!
Banned
These consoles including the PlayStation 4 are absolutely worthless without an internet connection so yes they were 100% right. Sure their execution and messaging was poorly conceived but they accurately saw the direction things were going and were compensating for it.
Xbox 2013 is still alive and well but they actually figured out the implementation method to not freak people out, Play Anywhere incentivizes digital adoption, GamePass prepares people for subscription based games and Backward Compatibility straight up requires downloads.
These things require baby steps, you have to make digital more appealing than physical and the last step in that equation is properly scaling pricing like Steam with big seasonal sales.
Xbox 2013 is still alive and well but they actually figured out the implementation method to not freak people out, Play Anywhere incentivizes digital adoption, GamePass prepares people for subscription based games and Backward Compatibility straight up requires downloads.
These things require baby steps, you have to make digital more appealing than physical and the last step in that equation is properly scaling pricing like Steam with big seasonal sales.
DunDunDunpachi
Patient MembeR
Incorrect. How familiar are you with these technologies?
Phones and tablets -- even modern smartphones -- can still access most of their apps without an internet connection, assuming the app is designed to do so. Let's set aside the fact that the phone's most basic function is to be connected via a wireless signal. Therefore, any "always on" implementation is somewhat realistic since the device requires a wireless signal to function. Let's not pretend like the iOS store didn't exist prior to the Xbox One. Digital content was not "always online" prior to the Xbone and digital content is still not "always online". The only time it is "always online" is if you are streaming data from the source servers.
Computers were not "always online" then and they aren't now. Every function of the computer can be performed without a constant internet connection, unless the software is specifically designed to go online and grab some data (or play with some friends). Steam's online check-ins have been widely criticized for years.
Speakers? Outlets? Unsure what you're referring to here unless it's Alexa or wifi-enabled outlets. Not only are these fringe/optional technologies, but they are designed to function with an internet connection and without. Your wifi-enabled outlet doesn't cease to function when the internet goes out. The plug still works. Alexa requires the internet. You'll perhaps notice that Alexa isn't a sequel to an offline-capable videogame console. It is a new product with the specific limitations of always-online in mind. This nuance was not a part of the Xbone's original design. The Xbone was attempting to have the capabilities of both a physical medium system and a digital system and a DRM system.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
You'd think so but the numbers tell a different story.
Weird I just played trackmania and trials with two pieces of plastic I rented for $4 with three friends this weekend and had a blast. As I usually do I unplugged the Ethernet cord before I fired it up to see what’s on the plastic. Great fun 4-player gaming and drinking was had.
I got a lot of worth out of it personally and I’ll buy a PS5 over any Xbox if Microsoft continues to require an internet connection for initial setup. I wish them luck but don’t need them.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Savage take down.
The only way his argument MIGHT have merit is if MS (or Sony) started requiring all developers to have their games only function online.
Good luck with that.
DynamiteCop!
Banned
It's the mindshare ripple effect, people in the know telling those not in the know why they should get a PlayStation and not an Xbox etc, generally it's hyperbolic reasoning but it does effect those that are not first hand aware of those things.
That's great and all but it doesn't negate my point, if you actually want to use these consoles in any form of a competent fashion while getting new games, you need to have it connected to the internet. Game updates are an almost straight up requirement, and for the refresh systems like the Pro and Xbox One X they 100% are.
Mr Hyde
Member
Yes, they were clearly wrong since PS4 is outselling the XO in like 3 to 1. Maybe even more. But today, consoles are pretty much "always online" and it seems as Microsoft is gearing up for such a future with Game Pass and Play Anywhere. Also, I thought the biggest mistake with the XO-reveal was MS focus on TV instead of games, not the "always online"-message. Sure, Don Mattrick and Adam Orth fucked up big time with those infamous remarks on how we should stick with the 360 and always online-crap, but other than that it seemed like the downfall for Xbox One was TV, TV, TV and not enough games.
Son_of_Zardoz
Banned
Sigh. Not going to have the same tired arguments again. How many people here don't have an internet connection at home or smart phone? A small, kb sized check in every week or so is fine with me and I would have had no issue with it at all for the benefits it provided. I know that doesn't line up with the broad spanning outrage about such things around here but whatever.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
No they were just wrong. You gotta remember that the fan base of video games goes beyond America and other 1st world nations.
DunDunDunpachi
Patient MembeR
Downloading/patching and "always on" are two completely different content-delivery systems.
A closer comparison would Netflix. And what's funny is that Netlifx -- like all the countless other examples used to defend Microsoft -- is merely a service. It is not a box plugged beneath your TV that can also play physical media. No intelligent person would blame Netflix if their internet was out and their PS4 couldn't load up Netflix. However, no intelligent person would tolerate if their internet was out and their PS4 wouldn't even load beyond the "please connect to the internet" error message. A Roku or TiVo or .... (I don't actually use these program-and-record machines) can play back the shows that have been scheduled for recording, even if the content itself was accessed using a cable or internet connection.
If the complaints were something silly like "geee, why can't I play Xbox Live online without an internet connection?" then perhaps the Xbone defense would have some strength. But people weren't complaining about that. The complaint was that a physical system with physical media and licensed digital content would still -- for no technical reason whatsoever, which I have already explained -- require an always-on connection. It reeked of corporate Big Brother. The complaints were justified yet Microsoft has merely shifted their strategy.
If you don't want to have "the same tired arguments again", then don't use the same faulty ignorant-of-how-technology-actually-works corporate shilling that was used 5 years ago. Easy peasy.
Even your example of "a small, kb-sized check in every week or so is fine" would have been more lenient than Xbox One's original vision. Every 24 hours, remember? I certainly do.
Last edited:
Son_of_Zardoz
Banned
I can understand not liking "always-on" but not buying one because of the initial setup requiring internet access is mind numbingly stupid. Do you ever update the firmware on any of your devices?
Not really. There's just so much feigned outrage around here about consoles being connected to the internet it's amazing.
Well, according to GAF it's an America only system so why should they care?
I don't remember it exactly nor do I care if it was 24 hours. Everybody on this site has internet access but can't spare a few kb a day, got it.
Last edited:
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Is it "outrage"? Or are people just disagreeing with the concept? Calling it outrage is you trying to run from the real conversation. If you really want to have a discussion about this.....try to stop treating people that disagree with you as people that are psycho and crazy.
Son_of_Zardoz
Banned
Who have I called psycho or crazy? I said it was dumb not to buy something because it needs to be connected to the internet for it's initial setup. Disagree with the concept all you want, that's fine but it wasn't going to be the end of the world.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
It's implied when people say things like "feigned outrage". Just because someone disagrees with something and doesn't like it, doesn't make their statements "feigned outrage". It's as if you don't want to deal with what the people like myself didn't like about that future of a console. It's very dismissive to say if that makes sense.
GoldenEye98
posts news as their odd job
There is some weird mental gymnastics that goes on with console gaming specifically where everybody turns into a luddite.
Petrae
Member
The messaging was fucked, not the idea. Despite the assertion that you don’t *need* an online connection for consoles, it’s virtually a requirement. Many games function poorly without Day One updates. Some content is forever inaccessible without the ability to download it. Firmware updates can add features to the hardware that aren’t included when they ship.
The “no internet” bogeyman is getting weaker as time goes on, and there’s going to come a time when those without internet are going to be left behind— especially as the industry comes to rely more and more on perpetual revenue streams, which can’t be a thing without... you guessed it... internet access.
The trick is figuring out how to get the message across the right way, instead of Mattricking it.
The “no internet” bogeyman is getting weaker as time goes on, and there’s going to come a time when those without internet are going to be left behind— especially as the industry comes to rely more and more on perpetual revenue streams, which can’t be a thing without... you guessed it... internet access.
The trick is figuring out how to get the message across the right way, instead of Mattricking it.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
So now you're saying the words "initial setup." Very few have a problem with a console requiring an internet connection for it's initial setup, but requiring a 24-hour check in and if rumors were to be believed, that would drop to a few hours.
Two very different things.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Needing the internet to update a game is not the same as not being able to game without an internet connection.
Son_of_Zardoz
Banned
No, I was responding to being accused of calling people "psycho" and said that the only thing I said was dumb was not buying something because the initial setup requires internet access. Reading comprehension.
I'm talking about in general, were you not around here during that e3?
Exactly.
Whitecrow
Banned
Of course they were wrong, are, and will be.
They cant assume you will always have internet connection 100% of the time, and I wont pay 400/500$ to have a useless box because of things I cannot control.
Let alone the fact that you cant bring it with you to your holidays place.
All that a console should require is a TV. Period.
You cant 'ban' a console behind a connection wall. Thats a totally fucked up idea.
They cant assume you will always have internet connection 100% of the time, and I wont pay 400/500$ to have a useless box because of things I cannot control.
Let alone the fact that you cant bring it with you to your holidays place.
All that a console should require is a TV. Period.
You cant 'ban' a console behind a connection wall. Thats a totally fucked up idea.
WaterAstro
Member
According to US Department of Commerce in Nov 2017, 35% of America are still on dial up. Why engage in online only if the majority of your biggest market isn't even "always online".
Petrae
Member
A) How is 35% a majority?
B) Who is this 35%? Are they senior citizens? Poor families? Do they even own a video game console? The data you provide is inconclusive.
GoldenEye98
posts news as their odd job
How many of those on dial up in 2017 are even gamers? Not many I'm guessing.
Last edited:
Trogdor1123
Member
Ummm... I actually still buy discs when I can. I guess I'm way behind the times now according to Engadget
ljubomir
Member
To add something to discussion - I very much dislike requiring online connection for initial setup. It's not only delaying the setup, as it'll no doubt force newest firmware updates (nothing better than spending Sunday morning watching updates download), but it is simply not guaranteed to work in the future. Both Wii and original Xbox have their online services shut down. How would I set up any of them today had they required connection to operate? Imagine not being able to play NES games other than rebuying them. That is crazy.
WaterAstro
Member
Wait I have to correct myself on that. It's 35% of Rural Americans.
It's still business lost no matter how you push it. There's no benefit to online only for the consumer, and having no online only just includes anyone without a good internet connection.
Son_of_Zardoz
Banned
Not sure what point you are trying to make when dialup can still easily handle a kb size check in.
InterMusketeer
Member
My system turning into a useless hunk of junk the minute my internet connection goes down, didn't sound very appealing to me then, and it still doesn't now, nor will it in the future.
Trogdor1123
Member
Also, what if ms shut down their servers? Instant paper weight. How could anyone ever think that's ok?
Petrae
Member
I see where you’re coming from— and thank you kindly for the clarification, by the way. My counter would be that, at some point, the industry may consider acceptable losses. 35% in rural areas is undoubtedly a significant number, but we also don’t know how many of these folks have (or had) a video game console. Are they still potential consumers, internet or not? It’s hard to say either way.
That said, I’m happy to have learned a new statistic today. That’s pretty neat.
ljubomir
Member
Which they did, for the original Xbox https://www.gamespot.com/g00/articl...Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLnJzLw==&i10c.ua=1&i10c.dv=14
I agree with this completely. The always online was controversial, but the thing that blew my mind was their attachment to cable TV. It was clear even then that cable TV was on the decline and streaming is on the rise. I still cannot understand why they thought it was a good idea to have such a big focus on tv.
rokkerkory
Member
Always online? Nope that isn't right.
Digital future? Likely...
Digital future? Likely...
xXRedxSlugXx
Member
I guess I'd like somebody to tell me how requiring people to be always online is a good thing. Why should the system need to check if you are online? What possibly needs to be checked? You can have all the online functionality you want but why the check? Doesn't matter the size, it doesn't make sense. People need to realize that the benefit is all in the companies hands with something like that.
DunDunDunpachi
Patient MembeR
I guess you genuinely don't grasp the difference between "internet access" and "always on". Got it.
Lemme pose a scenario: even if it was "a few kb a day" or even once every week... what occurs when you happen to be offline when that check is required?
I can tell you exactly what happens because it happened on Steam every so often and actually drove me to quit the platform: you will receive a notification when trying to boot up a game stating that you need to go online. When you are unable to do so, you won't be able to play your game. Doesn't matter if the check-in is every minute, every day, or every week. The moment the check-in is required and you can't connect, bye-bye to your library.
That is unreasonable. What's even more unreasonable is the notion that I should have to prove my purchase every few hours or days or whatever. If I bought it, why does the corporation need to look over my shoulder to check if it's mine? Name a single other product that operates this way and I assure you it is seen as a hassle and not a feature like Microsoft was claiming. If I have to keep checking in with the corporation, then my videogame purchase is no longer a transaction. It is a service. I do not accept that. I do not wish to spend my money or support companies that wish to turn gaming into such a service.
In light of the data breaches and the selling of your personal data to advertisers (something Microsoft is actively engaged in and has been engaged in for the last 15 years), why would you openly accept such a proposal from that company?