Microsoft Studios' creative director has some choice words about always-online

Feb 13, 2005
15,793
0
0
Windows 8 offers nearly zero reasons for consumers to upgrade from Windows 7. It is the weakest OS transition in a long time in terms of feature set and sales.
If windows teaches us anything about Microsoft its that every couple generations they produce a overly crap filled subpar product that forces them to re-evaluate and bring their egos a bit down to earth.

Xbox is seemingly months away from experiencing their first taste full on taste of this.
 

Hawkian

The Cryptarch's Bane
Jun 28, 2009
44,620
0
0
If windows teaches us anything about Microsoft its that every couple generations they produce a overly crap filled subpar product that forces them to re-evaluate and bring their egos a bit down to earth.

Xbox is seemingly months away from experiencing their first taste full on taste of this.
Ouch. When you put it like that it seems almost unavoidable that they take the backseat this generation.
 
Oct 19, 2011
1,728
2
0
Wait, what? I heard the DWM in Win8 was a little lighter and it could translate to a modest FPS boost in optimized games. All wrong?

edit: Full disclosure, there is very little that appeals to me about it as an "upgrade OS" and I will not be moving from 7.
I'd heard that as well.

I also will not be upgrading from 7 (and I had the option to do so for a mere 10$), because in place of the performance boost some other aspects of how I use my computer are made more annoying by system and UI decisions
 
Oct 24, 2012
1,167
0
350
I haven't followed Windows 8 AT ALL, so would anyone enlighten me on what shitty practices MS is doing with Windows 8.
The start menu is more efficient (takes less or the same # of steps to do things), contains more features for accessing, organizing, and managing shortcuts, and doesn't cover up the entire screen when you want to launch something.
 

I'm an expert

Formerly worldrevolution. The only reason I am nice to anyone else is to avoid being banned.
Nov 26, 2008
13,783
4
800
The start menu is more efficient (takes less or the same # of steps to do things), contains more features for accessing, organizing, and managing shortcuts, and doesn't cover up the entire screen when you want to launch something.
I see what you did there!!!!!

Seriously, Win8 is fuckin fine, people just don't like change... like always on consoles!
 
Jan 23, 2010
9,267
11
0
Seems like GAF isn't in the minority. (Game Informer poll)

Umm people who read Gameinformer or participate in their polls are also in the minority. Hardcore gamers like us are the minority, no matter how much we would like to believe otherwise. How else do people think the Wii sold as much as it did? How else do some of the biggest releases for these platforms only manage something like 15 million at their peak, but usually around the 4-5 mill mark?

How else do people think Kinect rose the 360's sales so much? And the irony of this whole thing is that the PS4 is probably "always on," which is what makes this entire thing funnier. It just doesn't require an internet connection, but it's likely always on in the same way peoples cable or satellite receivers are, or the way Apple TV is, or in the way that I'm pretty certain the next xbox is as well.
 
Jan 13, 2009
61,814
2
900
Baltimore, MD
twitter.com
There was a good writeup in Tycho's post on Penny Arcade today (sorry if its already been posted):

Everybody who reads a site like Penny Arcade probably knows about the Microsoft dude showing his “Twitter ass” re: Always On Consoles. His butt and the surrounding environs were no doubt hurt by this ambiguously sourced Kotaku piece, one which contradicts its entire thrust within the body of the article itself, and he decided to start peeing in consumer’s mouths when the actual solution was to stop reading Kotaku.

I don’t actually know what “always on” means. The first Xbox was “always on,” because it offered a perpetual connection and the creature comforts that come from a unified service. I’ve asked about what it means this time around, of course, and gotten “responses” moated deep in quotation marks. But you talk to me the way this Adam Orth character did at your fucking peril. He’s been muzzled now, of course; brought to heel. When others told me what he tried to say, they emphasized just how connected everything is now. They aren’t wrong, certainly: World of Warcraft is typically the object lesson for things like this, but that’s a single game. Steam is much more apt, as a container service which is more or less my computer’s primary operating system. Google Docs, as a kind of Cloud Elemental, is also a solid point of comparison. Both of those feature offline modes that let you “own” your stuff to a large extent independent of the silver cord.

I could nod gravely in the direction of Electronic Arts and Ubisoft’s attempts to corral piracy to the detriment of legitimate customers, but those grisly tales need no reference. What’s being suggested slash pilloried - a console which must constantly speak to the Internet or be rendered inert - could not possibly work as a global entertainment appliance. That’s why I don’t actually believe it’s the case. But we saw this with the PS3, also: a glutted victor gesturing with a ham hock, making a host of slurred decrees. And that’s where the worry begins to creep in at the edges.
 
Sep 9, 2012
1,764
0
420
Spain
I see what you did there!!!!!

Seriously, Win8 is fuckin fine, people just don't like change... like always on consoles!
No, Win 8 it's just not fine. I'm ok to using the same kernel for all their releases, but using a touching interface on laptops or desktop computers it's a real mess. I like every other addition to Win 8, but they are trying to shove down our throws a common UI that only works great in a few devices.
 
Jan 9, 2008
69,543
0
0
Polls are worthless, you can't gauge the intent of the voter. They might think saying no is more likely to affect the decision MS makes. People will buy an always online console, apparently MS knows that.
 

Alx

Member
Jan 22, 2007
17,926
262
985
Polls are worthless, you can't gauge the intent of the voter. They might think saying no is more likely to affect the decision MS makes.
You can also answer honestly to a poll, and still act differently in the end. I'm sure that similar polls were made in the 2000s asking "would you pay for online multiplayer ?" with a huge majority of "No", and we know how it turned out.
 
Apr 14, 2007
3,393
0
0
Umm people who read Gameinformer or participate in their polls are also in the minority. Hardcore gamers like us are the minority, no matter how much we would like to believe otherwise. How else do people think the Wii sold as much as it did? How else do some of the biggest releases for these platforms only manage something like 15 million at their peak, but usually around the 4-5 mill mark?

How else do people think Kinect rose the 360's sales so much? And the irony of this whole thing is that the PS4 is probably "always on," which is what makes this entire thing funnier. It just doesn't require an internet connection, but it's likely always on in the same way peoples cable or satellite receivers are, or the way Apple TV is, or in the way that I'm pretty certain the next xbox is as well.
This is an excellent point. If Sony leaves it up to devs, as they said they will, then most devs will want to make this a requirement. If it's mandatory for Xbox, they'll want to build it the same way for PS4 (for the most part).

That's my guess, anyway.
 

Elrina

Neo Member
Oct 27, 2011
180
0
0
This is an excellent point. If Sony leaves it up to devs, as they said they will, then most devs will want to make this a requirement. If it's mandatory for Xbox, they'll want to build it the same way for PS4 (for the most part).

That's my guess, anyway.
I actually don't see that as happening. They've had the option for a long time with PC ports, and even with 360/PS3 games. Yet, the only major releases that actually have in recent memory (short of MMOs, which require the connection by nature) are Diablo III and Sim City. Both releases were a fiasco that only reminded and cemented in people's minds how terrible of an idea it was.

If Durango requires the connection, then that's the system itself requiring it. There is no other option. The PS4 will not require it. Which means if it ever happens (and I'm sure it will happen, eventually, to some game or another that shouldn't need it), it can be patched out when it negatively impacts sales.

One clear example of differences in restriction between consoles is what Jorma posted earlier.

Third party games that are region locked on 360 are not region locked on the PS3. Just sayin'. All publishers will not want to take the heat you get for always on-drm.
And the "always on" vs "always-online" stuff has been brought up several times, and apparently does need more clarification. Because the consoles always being "on" isn't an issue. Nor even being online most of the time. The problem only comes in when it requires an active internet connection in order to function, regardless of content.

While we are the vocal minority, posting online and voting in polls, I can't imagine that everyone else doesn't care. They may not be as vocal, but I'm quite sure that many have heard the news (especially after all the news the other day), and will continue to after it is (if it is) confirmed, and I'm quite sure that it will affect many of their decisions on which console to purchase as well.
 
Jul 7, 2010
5,612
0
0
Florida
This is an excellent point. If Sony leaves it up to devs, as they said they will, then most devs will want to make this a requirement. If it's mandatory for Xbox, they'll want to build it the same way for PS4 (for the most part).

That's my guess, anyway.
Sony already leaves it up to devs. Using that logic the PS3 and/or the Vita would already be always online.


They aren't. So that breaks that theory.
 
Seems like GAF isn't in the minority. (Game Informer poll)

Never thought it would be. I don't know why anyone out there (or in here) think this is some kind of GAF opinion. Anyone who has kept up with recent news and anyone who would just sit and think it through for a few minutes would see why always-online for a gaming console is a bad idea.

I bet many people who voted 'Yes' don't even know what always-on means.
Sadly, you're probably right.
 
Sep 9, 2012
1,764
0
420
Spain
Sure, sure, that solves it all.

Installed Start8, haven't seen the Metro UI in months, get faster boot times with a classic Windows look and feel. Shoving down throats? Nah. Easy to get past the UI.
I've using enough years Windows (since 3.1) to know that third party solutions only bring in the long run problems. It was as easy as detecting during installation if your system had a touching screen or not.
 
Apr 21, 2011
2,528
0
0
All things considering, an always-on console is fine really. My Atari 2600 is always-on as well and Atari has never remotely shut-down my console, at all. I can still play Pac-Man Jr and Kangaroo on it.

It won't be that bad.
 
Apr 16, 2012
28,442
2
0
I guess I am don't see an issue with this until I know the whole story with the next Xbox.

It's like saying that a recipe calls for tofu and you instantly pissing on it because you hate the very idea of tofu even though you don't know what else is in the dish and why it calls for tofu.

Maybe people should withhold judgment until the Xbox is presented. Microsoft is moving towards a software as a service company and we are viewing this through the traditional lens of $60 game discs. Maybe that isn't what they have in mind.
I just had to comment on this.

It's more like being allergic to nuts and finding out a dish has a bunch of nuts in it. Depending on the strength of your allergy, it may be between a considerable annoyance — enough to ruin your meal — or a death sentence. No matter what, it's going to suck.

This dish also could be made without nuts, so of course you're going to want it without them.
 
Oct 27, 2004
103,739
3
0
34
Nowhere, PA
There was a good writeup in Tycho's post on Penny Arcade today (sorry if its already been posted):
I hope he's right.

He's right conceptually, there is a big difference between a system that can perpetually be online (and download stuff when the console is off, for example) and a system that uses always on in terms of being DRM, piracy protection, where the game literally won't work if the system is not on the internet.

As long as you can do the systems core features offline (which INCLUDES playing games, and it must be -completely- offline... that is if I disconnected the wifi and just played it raw dog), then the problem won't exist to most people.

I am sure everyone is fearful that it's always-on in the same way Sim City is always on, and that if the system network is down for maintenance, for example, we're shit out of luck until they're done.

Still, if that was the only problem with all the pre-system reveal rumours we'd probably be in a better place... instead since every single shred of pre-reveal rumours has been essentially negative, I'm still looking for a place to grasp onto for defense. My only hope is that Microsoft has been engineering all the negative press so that when the system is actually revealed it surprises everyone by not being the complete suckitude that every rumour suggests.
 

Osiris

I permanently banned my 6 year old daughter from using the PS4 for mistakenly sending grief reports as it's too hard to watch or talk to her
Jul 23, 2010
4,186
0
0
Feb 20, 2013
3,819
0
0
Tacoma, WA
twitter.com
... And the irony of this whole thing is that the PS4 is probably "always on," which is what makes this entire thing funnier. It just doesn't require an internet connection, but it's likely always on in the same way peoples cable or satellite receivers are, or the way Apple TV is, or in the way that I'm pretty certain the next xbox is as well.
I really wish people would stop saying this. There's a difference between publishers making an internet connection mandatory, and a CONSOLE MAKER doing the same thing...