The silly thing is that many people also gave Microsoft a second chance.
As opposed to the people who have given Sony a second third and forth chance?
Do people just forget that they KNEW about a security flaw in the PSN and did nothing about it until it was hacked and millions of credit card data and other information was stolen?
Do they forget that they then didn't tell people for 2 weeks after it happened giving criminals time to use that information instead of giving the victims time to protect themselves?
Do they forget that right as the announcement about the PSN hack came out Sony got hacked again with more information stolen?
Maybe in a discussion of Xbox vs Playstation second chances aren't the best topic to make Playstation look better.
Arent companies supossed to get better?, if they make stupid mistakes then learn from them? i hope Sony learned from that crap that got them hacked, but that doesnt mean i have to fall again from another crap now brought by Microsoft. I know ill get my ps4 and IF i decide to stay with xbox live it will be on my current 360 aside from my ps4 of course. If you and I are competing and you make a horrible mistake, i will not make a horrible mistake just because your fans gave you a second chance and my fans might do it too.
My point is in a thread where people are saying that the PS4 is a better choice, using one of those reasons as Microsoft made a mistake and therefore shouldn't be given another one is a crazy remark because Sony has made far worse mistakes and people are suggesting giving them another shot.
Also companies are supposed to get better, that is why it was so shocking that Sony left vulnerabilities in their other sites after the PSN hack suggesting that they clearly didn't care enough about any of their users' information to learn from their mistakes.
As I said in an earlier post, I don't like Microsoft that much and find some of their policies to be ridiculous. However, being logged in to use stuff is where the entire software industry is headed and a big reason for that is piracy. Blame the people who continue to steal software/movies/music as to why you will continue to face tougher restrictions.
Most people truly will never care about the always logged in style of the Xbox. This has already been proven with Steam continuing to do well as it implements the same policies. It is where the future of stuff is headed. We're also headed toward a future where people don't buy software, but instead rent it (which also requires people to be logged in to show they have a valid account) which you can see with Adobe and Microsoft products (among other companies). The few people who really care will try to fight it but eventually have to accept it as the majority is ok with it happening.
I highly dislike F2P MMO gaming. I can protest and shout from the hills if I want, but so many people are for it that it is happening and will continue to happen just like logged in to use software.
You do not need to always be on to play steam games. Any single player game can be played offline. Please learn how steam works before you use it as an example.
Please learn that there are games on steam that require a connection to play even when playing single player. Steam still offers to sell these games and makes plenty of money in doing so. Make sure you've looked at everything before insisting that you, and only you, know everything in this world. Thank you.
If you'd like another example that you can't wave off with your "I know everything" wand. SimCity 5 sold over 1.1 million copies in the first two weeks with the game having a requirement to be logged into the internet to play even in single player mode. Clearly requiring people to always be logged in isn't scaring the majority of people away from buying products even when on top of that the product has a terrible launch that blocks most people from even playing during that same period of time that they sold over 1.1 million copies.
if you dont have internet access then you are living on north pole
ohh wait they have internet access there
If you dont' have internet acces then you are 40 to 55 percent of the country. What we do is not what everyone else does.
40-55% of what country ?
you can get internet access almost everywhere, tho not having it becouse some reasons is another thing
and no im not a fanboy
Many areas do not have broadband and are stuck with options that are not capable for gaming or streaming. Not to mention limited bandwidth usage, fanboy or not you have rather limited knowledge of the state of the internet for many in the US.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Originally posted by CaldrinWhat if someone had internet access.. but then for whatever reason got cut off.. maybe the lines to their street melted, they could not afford it or whatever..The xbox one would become useless if they didnt have access to the net after 30 days. I dont care too much as I dont play games on colnsoles but its utterly wrong for them to put this kind of system in place..Saying that I am sure it wont be long before someone hacks the system
As said in this topic it's 24 hours......regardless
If losing connection to the internet for what ever reason I am not able to still continue my Steam/UPlay/Origins singleplayer games for atleast 24hours.
So I have no idea what the hell some are complaining about?
TheYear1500: could you educate me how to play my singeplayer Steam games offline. I couldn't find how to. Hopefully you can.
Nevermind.
** ** **
The 'always on' isn't really a big deal. It has indeed been demonstrated that most people really don't care. The problem is Microsoft's @sshole response and the repeated responses where Microsoft doesn't understand or doesn't care about the complaints that people have.
The always on is a big deal to people that have to go places where they don't get internet connections. Mostly armed forces and people in business that have to travel a lot.
I was going to buy the Xbox One until i read into the details and until Sony announced the PS3 was cheaper, did not require a internet connection and you can play used games on it....None of the above are possible with the Xbox one.
I mean say your in a rural area and your Internet goes down, that means you cant use your Xbox one? Waste of money and marketed by morons, ill pass.
The only people who don't think the 24 hour check in is a big deal are people who live in major cities with top notch internet options and no data limits/fees.People being selfish by nature don't see past there own needs.To anyone else say people living in rural communities and small towns/cities,frequent travelers and military personnel this is a huge deal.
It's easy to see what has happened here xbox is considered he winner of the current gen of consoles(though that is debatable in the last couple years) and are relying on brand loyalty so has listen to publishers on what they want to see implemented because they believe they have a captive audience.
Sony saw the reaction to what M$ has done and decided instead to listen to what consumers want because they realize that you won't get publishers backing your console in the end if consumers aren't buying your console.
A smarter route for publishers is not to force online drm on people but give consumers compelling reasons to want to be online while they play.Sure you can play offline but if being online enhances both your single player experience and gives you multiplayer options then people will choose to be online and you can check the legitimacy of people all you want and they won't care for the most part.Games like Destiny,The Division and a lot of racing games seem to be going this route.
Originally posted by Arakazi They'll have to do a u-turn or at least a compromise. The press they are getting is too bad, they can't keep getting knocked around by Sony, round after round.
I can't be the only Xbox owner thinking: "Okay Microsoft, I'll keep my Xbox 360 and buy a PS4"
Originally posted by CaldrinWhat if someone had internet access.. but then for whatever reason got cut off.. maybe the lines to their street melted, they could not afford it or whatever..The xbox one would become useless if they didnt have access to the net after 30 days. I dont care too much as I dont play games on colnsoles but its utterly wrong for them to put this kind of system in place..Saying that I am sure it wont be long before someone hacks the system
As said in this topic it's 24 hours......regardless
If losing connection to the internet for what ever reason I am not able to still continue my Steam/UPlay/Origins singleplayer games for atleast 24hours.
So I have no idea what the hell some are complaining about?
TheYear1500: could you educate me how to play my singeplayer Steam games offline. I couldn't find how to. Hopefully you can.
Nevermind.
** ** **
The 'always on' isn't really a big deal. It has indeed been demonstrated that most people really don't care. The problem is Microsoft's @sshole response and the repeated responses where Microsoft doesn't understand or doesn't care about the complaints that people have.
The always on is a big deal to people that have to go places where they don't get internet connections. Mostly armed forces and people in business that have to travel a lot.
It's not only that but a large number of places have bandwidth caps in place, some even get charged by how much bandwidth they use. Xbox One's always online is going to become a hindrance in some places and something many simply can't afford in others.
Originally posted by Xzen Originally posted by lizardbonesOriginally posted by ReklawOriginally posted by CaldrinWhat if someone had internet access.. but then for whatever reason got cut off.. maybe the lines to their street melted, they could not afford it or whatever..The xbox one would become useless if they didnt have access to the net after 30 days. I dont care too much as I dont play games on colnsoles but its utterly wrong for them to put this kind of system in place..Saying that I am sure it wont be long before someone hacks the system
As said in this topic it's 24 hours......regardlessIf losing connection to the internet for what ever reason I am not able to still continue my Steam/UPlay/Origins singleplayer games for atleast 24hours.So I have no idea what the hell some are complaining about?TheYear1500: could you educate me how to play my singeplayer Steam games offline. I couldn't find how to. Hopefully you can. Nevermind. ** ** ** The 'always on' isn't really a big deal. It has indeed been demonstrated that most people really don't care. The problem is Microsoft's @sshole response and the repeated responses where Microsoft doesn't understand or doesn't care about the complaints that people have. The always on is a big deal to people that have to go places where they don't get internet connections. Mostly armed forces and people in business that have to travel a lot.
Most people who would consider buying an Xbone are going to have a stable internet connection. This, by itself isn't a big deal to Microsoft and isn't going to affect their bottom line. It's their response to people who won't have a stable internet connection that makes them @ssholes. "Buy an Xbox 360". Good grief. I expect those people will buy a PS4.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by SnarlingWolf Originally posted by TheYear1500Originally posted by SnarlingWolfOriginally posted by rojo6934Originally posted by SnarlingWolfOriginally posted by CalmOceansThe silly thing is that many people also gave Microsoft a second chance.
As opposed to the people who have given Sony a second third and forth chance?Do people just forget that they KNEW about a security flaw in the PSN and did nothing about it until it was hacked and millions of credit card data and other information was stolen?Do they forget that they then didn't tell people for 2 weeks after it happened giving criminals time to use that information instead of giving the victims time to protect themselves?Do they forget that right as the announcement about the PSN hack came out Sony got hacked again with more information stolen?Maybe in a discussion of Xbox vs Playstation second chances aren't the best topic to make Playstation look better.Arent companies supossed to get better?, if they make stupid mistakes then learn from them? i hope Sony learned from that crap that got them hacked, but that doesnt mean i have to fall again from another crap now brought by Microsoft. I know ill get my ps4 and IF i decide to stay with xbox live it will be on my current 360 aside from my ps4 of course. If you and I are competing and you make a horrible mistake, i will not make a horrible mistake just because your fans gave you a second chance and my fans might do it too.My point is in a thread where people are saying that the PS4 is a better choice, using one of those reasons as Microsoft made a mistake and therefore shouldn't be given another one is a crazy remark because Sony has made far worse mistakes and people are suggesting giving them another shot.Also companies are supposed to get better, that is why it was so shocking that Sony left vulnerabilities in their other sites after the PSN hack suggesting that they clearly didn't care enough about any of their users' information to learn from their mistakes.As I said in an earlier post, I don't like Microsoft that much and find some of their policies to be ridiculous. However, being logged in to use stuff is where the entire software industry is headed and a big reason for that is piracy. Blame the people who continue to steal software/movies/music as to why you will continue to face tougher restrictions. Most people truly will never care about the always logged in style of the Xbox. This has already been proven with Steam continuing to do well as it implements the same policies. It is where the future of stuff is headed. We're also headed toward a future where people don't buy software, but instead rent it (which also requires people to be logged in to show they have a valid account) which you can see with Adobe and Microsoft products (among other companies). The few people who really care will try to fight it but eventually have to accept it as the majority is ok with it happening. I highly dislike F2P MMO gaming. I can protest and shout from the hills if I want, but so many people are for it that it is happening and will continue to happen just like logged in to use software.You do not need to always be on to play steam games. Any single player game can be played offline. Please learn how steam works before you use it as an example. Please learn that there are games on steam that require a connection to play even when playing single player. Steam still offers to sell these games and makes plenty of money in doing so. Make sure you've looked at everything before insisting that you, and only you, know everything in this world. Thank you.
If you'd like another example that you can't wave off with your "I know everything" wand. SimCity 5 sold over 1.1 million copies in the first two weeks with the game having a requirement to be logged into the internet to play even in single player mode. Clearly requiring people to always be logged in isn't scaring the majority of people away from buying products even when on top of that the product has a terrible launch that blocks most people from even playing during that same period of time that they sold over 1.1 million copies.
There's a difference between Microsoft imposing an always online requirement for every game, and developers imposing online requirements for the games they develop. Steam is not imposing an artificial restriction to increase their own revenues. Microsoft is imposing an artificial restriction to increase their own revenues.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
if you dont have internet access then you are living on north pole
ohh wait they have internet access there
If you dont' have internet acces then you are 40 to 55 percent of the country. What we do is not what everyone else does.
Here i did some research for yous since you clearly didn't http://bit.ly/11z8ZXg its only 20% of america that doesn't have internet. Frankly designing to 80% of the market is not a bad idea. There was a good quote from the conference yesterday that there are 220million games in america which is just over 70% so its entirely possible if not likely that almost all of those fall into the 70% category. In most places if you have a cable tv you have internet access.
In 2007 15% of internet users still had dial-up were you all complaining about how rediculous it was that xbox live wouldnt support dial-up? I am quoting loosely from the article below but still the point is the same learn to keep up with the times people. The world is changing and games are requiring new levels of connectivity. Games will eventualy be all digital its only a matter of time so why is it so wrong for a company to embrace and push this.
Their not actualy designing to 80 percent of the market. You would have a valid point in that case. However it takes them no extra design effort to allow the Xbox to be played without an internet connection. They are purposefully designing (e.g. an extran development effort to enforce that the system connects to thier servers) to EXCLUDE 20 percent of the market.
Additionaly they are excluding those potential customers, such as myself, who DO have internet access on a regular basis but still want to be able to utilize thier product on those occasions when they don't or prefer not to do so such as....
- Traveling or Going on Vacation to places which don't have internet installed (e.g. vacation cabin in the mountains/beach).
- Internet outages
- Not taking away bandwidth from others in the household using it for more important tasks
- Allowing children to play unsupervised without risk of them finding thier way online.
......or any number of other potential scenarios.
In short they've created a design feature which makes thier product inferior to the competition by PURPOSEFULLY limiting the choice of how thier customers might utilize thier product.
It's thier perogative to do so....but to say it's a bone-headed decision that serves no real purpose (those who want to be online full time are not harmed by the existance of an option for others not to do so) is an understatement
The on-line outrage is a little over the top. Sure it may cause some sort of brief inconvenience 0.001% of the time. But for the most part, it's a non-issue. If you live in an area with no internet, then it's an issue. If you have internet...non-issue. If you go on vacation...bring something besides your Xbox One (OMG The Horror).
Doesn't mean I'll buy an Xbox One, but the "outrage" just seems silly.
This looks like an anti-piracy move more then anything else , although I see shades of what EA was trying to do with Origin in this also. This was obviously done with the Devs blessings and support. I suspect Sony will be on this also . If there's profit to be made from these action neither company will pass up the opportunity. This is going to become the new reality of gaming .
Thank you, all those who've made Consoles the number one gaming system. You've empowered 2 companies to monopolize the industry and our entertainment. Congratulations. PC's = independence , that's now being crushed. These 2 companies will institute their own version of PRISM along with the main Dev companies.
On the DRM front, working in the Tech industry, those devlopers who have thier products pirated have my sympathy. However the industry as a whole has been addressing this issue in an entirely bone-headed manner.
- The industry PERCIEVES that it's loosing billions in proffits to piracy. However there is little empirical evidence to suggest that a significant percentage of the individuals who purchase pirated products WOULD purchase legitimate copies of the same products at the prices currently charged IF the pirated copies were not availble. The few studies that have been done, which I am aware of have suggested the opposite.
- There IS, however, plenty of emperical evidence that the industry has thrown BILLIONS of dollars at expensive and often awkward DRM solutions in an attempt to combat piracy. At the same time, we can see historicaly that almost without fail every major release of a product that was of significant interest to pirates has had it's DRM defeated by pirates....often before the product is even released onto the open market. I'm sure the new Xbox will be no exception to that rule.
So what the publishers are effectively doing, in many cases, with thier current DRM schema is making thier products inferior to those offered by the pirates in both price AND FEATURES.
They end up paying alot of money to build a system which history tells us will be compromised anyway, won't result in many of the people who usualy frequent pirates to buy legitimate copies and will result in some percentage of legitimate customers turning to pirates instead to get the features they want while simply driving others away from the product entirely (and possibly into the arms of competitors who offer a less onerous and intrusive DRM schema).....brilliant! Michael Scott from the Office couldn't have thought up a better way for dealing with the situation.
if you dont have internet access then you are living on north pole
ohh wait they have internet access there
If you dont' have internet acces then you are 40 to 55 percent of the country. What we do is not what everyone else does.
Here i did some research for yous since you clearly didn't http://bit.ly/11z8ZXg its only 20% of america that doesn't have internet. Frankly designing to 80% of the market is not a bad idea. There was a good quote from the conference yesterday that there are 220million games in america which is just over 70% so its entirely possible if not likely that almost all of those fall into the 70% category. In most places if you have a cable tv you have internet access.
In 2007 15% of internet users still had dial-up were you all complaining about how rediculous it was that xbox live wouldnt support dial-up? I am quoting loosely from the article below but still the point is the same learn to keep up with the times people. The world is changing and games are requiring new levels of connectivity. Games will eventualy be all digital its only a matter of time so why is it so wrong for a company to embrace and push this.
PROTIP: Not everyone who has the internet is going to put up with this crap, as proven by the responses here. I would wager that they are only selling to about 30% of their market at this point with a draconian DRM system that no one like when it hit just the game. Now you're gonna just build it into your system? Good luck with that. Have fun losing most of your market share to the PS4 that doesn't brand you as a criminal from day one.
What happens when there is a storm and ur sitting at home and ur internet is going on an off? Or some little hiccup from the router and bumps u for a few seconds . Do you lose all your progress?
Or just sit and stare at your xbox home while the storm laughs at u
Originally posted by proxy42086 What happens when there is a storm and ur sitting at home and ur internet is going on an off? Or some little hiccup from the router and bumps u for a few seconds . Do you lose all your progress?
I don't know if it requires you to be online to save anything for most games. It probably has a local save for almost all games. I believe you only have to be online at least once every 24 hours and then you can play whatever in offline mode for those 24 hours.
Microsoft is just jealous of the NSA. They want to check every day to see what games you played, how long you played them, and who you played them with...but it's just that info, they don't get any personal information or what you did in game....although they could just look it up in their directory...just like someone at the NSA could just pick up a phone book XD Gimme a break.
Edit: I'm not being tracked by the government...Hi guys!
What I want to know is... since the Kinect is always on and starts profiling crap... is it uploading any of that when it connects to their servers once every 24 hours? Since microsofts EULA says that if they see any illegal activity with the kinect if I'm sitting at my table rolling my cigarettes (Much cheaper than buying a pack of malboro) do I have to worry about the police banging on my door thinking I was rolling a joint?
Do I have to worry about some creep at Microsoft getting a video of me and the wife fooling around because I forgot to throw a sheet over my kinect?
Am I the only one that is a bit creeped out by the always on kinect and online requirements combined with Microsofts policies?
Comments
i dont reward stupid, buying an xbone is rewarding stupid.
i dont pirate game, i usually prefer online games to single player BUT
i own single player games (yes even on steam!) that require no internet check in.. and that makes me happy.
i OWN my games (with that weird mmo exception that relies on active servers)
i tend to buy new, but i do on occasion buy an iffy title when its on sale used...
i gave diablow 3 a chance with their DRM for a glorified single player game. it was terrible compared to the optional battlenet of D2.
far to many "what ifs" and treating me the consumer like a criminal for me to support the system
Please learn that there are games on steam that require a connection to play even when playing single player. Steam still offers to sell these games and makes plenty of money in doing so. Make sure you've looked at everything before insisting that you, and only you, know everything in this world. Thank you.
If you'd like another example that you can't wave off with your "I know everything" wand. SimCity 5 sold over 1.1 million copies in the first two weeks with the game having a requirement to be logged into the internet to play even in single player mode. Clearly requiring people to always be logged in isn't scaring the majority of people away from buying products even when on top of that the product has a terrible launch that blocks most people from even playing during that same period of time that they sold over 1.1 million copies.
Many areas do not have broadband and are stuck with options that are not capable for gaming or streaming. Not to mention limited bandwidth usage, fanboy or not you have rather limited knowledge of the state of the internet for many in the US.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/7405-Damn-Fine-Coffee
The always on is a big deal to people that have to go places where they don't get internet connections. Mostly armed forces and people in business that have to travel a lot.
My theme song.
You can leave at any time you know.
Also, learn what the term "third world country" means FFS...
Their stupidity is amazing!
I was going to buy the Xbox One until i read into the details and until Sony announced the PS3 was cheaper, did not require a internet connection and you can play used games on it....None of the above are possible with the Xbox one.
I mean say your in a rural area and your Internet goes down, that means you cant use your Xbox one? Waste of money and marketed by morons, ill pass.
The only people who don't think the 24 hour check in is a big deal are people who live in major cities with top notch internet options and no data limits/fees.People being selfish by nature don't see past there own needs.To anyone else say people living in rural communities and small towns/cities,frequent travelers and military personnel this is a huge deal.
It's easy to see what has happened here xbox is considered he winner of the current gen of consoles(though that is debatable in the last couple years) and are relying on brand loyalty so has listen to publishers on what they want to see implemented because they believe they have a captive audience.
Sony saw the reaction to what M$ has done and decided instead to listen to what consumers want because they realize that you won't get publishers backing your console in the end if consumers aren't buying your console.
A smarter route for publishers is not to force online drm on people but give consumers compelling reasons to want to be online while they play.Sure you can play offline but if being online enhances both your single player experience and gives you multiplayer options then people will choose to be online and you can check the legitimacy of people all you want and they won't care for the most part.Games like Destiny,The Division and a lot of racing games seem to be going this route.
+1
It's not only that but a large number of places have bandwidth caps in place, some even get charged by how much bandwidth they use. Xbox One's always online is going to become a hindrance in some places and something many simply can't afford in others.
Nevermind. ** ** ** The 'always on' isn't really a big deal. It has indeed been demonstrated that most people really don't care. The problem is Microsoft's @sshole response and the repeated responses where Microsoft doesn't understand or doesn't care about the complaints that people have.
The always on is a big deal to people that have to go places where they don't get internet connections. Mostly armed forces and people in business that have to travel a lot.
Most people who would consider buying an Xbone are going to have a stable internet connection. This, by itself isn't a big deal to Microsoft and isn't going to affect their bottom line. It's their response to people who won't have a stable internet connection that makes them @ssholes. "Buy an Xbox 360". Good grief. I expect those people will buy a PS4.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Arent companies supossed to get better?, if they make stupid mistakes then learn from them? i hope Sony learned from that crap that got them hacked, but that doesnt mean i have to fall again from another crap now brought by Microsoft. I know ill get my ps4 and IF i decide to stay with xbox live it will be on my current 360 aside from my ps4 of course. If you and I are competing and you make a horrible mistake, i will not make a horrible mistake just because your fans gave you a second chance and my fans might do it too.
My point is in a thread where people are saying that the PS4 is a better choice, using one of those reasons as Microsoft made a mistake and therefore shouldn't be given another one is a crazy remark because Sony has made far worse mistakes and people are suggesting giving them another shot. Also companies are supposed to get better, that is why it was so shocking that Sony left vulnerabilities in their other sites after the PSN hack suggesting that they clearly didn't care enough about any of their users' information to learn from their mistakes. As I said in an earlier post, I don't like Microsoft that much and find some of their policies to be ridiculous. However, being logged in to use stuff is where the entire software industry is headed and a big reason for that is piracy. Blame the people who continue to steal software/movies/music as to why you will continue to face tougher restrictions. Most people truly will never care about the always logged in style of the Xbox. This has already been proven with Steam continuing to do well as it implements the same policies. It is where the future of stuff is headed. We're also headed toward a future where people don't buy software, but instead rent it (which also requires people to be logged in to show they have a valid account) which you can see with Adobe and Microsoft products (among other companies). The few people who really care will try to fight it but eventually have to accept it as the majority is ok with it happening. I highly dislike F2P MMO gaming. I can protest and shout from the hills if I want, but so many people are for it that it is happening and will continue to happen just like logged in to use software.
You do not need to always be on to play steam games. Any single player game can be played offline. Please learn how steam works before you use it as an example.
Please learn that there are games on steam that require a connection to play even when playing single player. Steam still offers to sell these games and makes plenty of money in doing so. Make sure you've looked at everything before insisting that you, and only you, know everything in this world. Thank you.
If you'd like another example that you can't wave off with your "I know everything" wand. SimCity 5 sold over 1.1 million copies in the first two weeks with the game having a requirement to be logged into the internet to play even in single player mode. Clearly requiring people to always be logged in isn't scaring the majority of people away from buying products even when on top of that the product has a terrible launch that blocks most people from even playing during that same period of time that they sold over 1.1 million copies.
There's a difference between Microsoft imposing an always online requirement for every game, and developers imposing online requirements for the games they develop. Steam is not imposing an artificial restriction to increase their own revenues. Microsoft is imposing an artificial restriction to increase their own revenues.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Their not actualy designing to 80 percent of the market. You would have a valid point in that case. However it takes them no extra design effort to allow the Xbox to be played without an internet connection. They are purposefully designing (e.g. an extran development effort to enforce that the system connects to thier servers) to EXCLUDE 20 percent of the market.
Additionaly they are excluding those potential customers, such as myself, who DO have internet access on a regular basis but still want to be able to utilize thier product on those occasions when they don't or prefer not to do so such as....
- Traveling or Going on Vacation to places which don't have internet installed (e.g. vacation cabin in the mountains/beach).
- Internet outages
- Not taking away bandwidth from others in the household using it for more important tasks
- Allowing children to play unsupervised without risk of them finding thier way online.
......or any number of other potential scenarios.
In short they've created a design feature which makes thier product inferior to the competition by PURPOSEFULLY limiting the choice of how thier customers might utilize thier product.
It's thier perogative to do so....but to say it's a bone-headed decision that serves no real purpose (those who want to be online full time are not harmed by the existance of an option for others not to do so) is an understatement
The on-line outrage is a little over the top. Sure it may cause some sort of brief inconvenience 0.001% of the time. But for the most part, it's a non-issue. If you live in an area with no internet, then it's an issue. If you have internet...non-issue. If you go on vacation...bring something besides your Xbox One (OMG The Horror).
Doesn't mean I'll buy an Xbox One, but the "outrage" just seems silly.
This looks like an anti-piracy move more then anything else , although I see shades of what EA was trying to do with Origin in this also. This was obviously done with the Devs blessings and support. I suspect Sony will be on this also . If there's profit to be made from these action neither company will pass up the opportunity. This is going to become the new reality of gaming .
Thank you, all those who've made Consoles the number one gaming system. You've empowered 2 companies to monopolize the industry and our entertainment. Congratulations. PC's = independence , that's now being crushed. These 2 companies will institute their own version of PRISM along with the main Dev companies.
On the DRM front, working in the Tech industry, those devlopers who have thier products pirated have my sympathy. However the industry as a whole has been addressing this issue in an entirely bone-headed manner.
- The industry PERCIEVES that it's loosing billions in proffits to piracy. However there is little empirical evidence to suggest that a significant percentage of the individuals who purchase pirated products WOULD purchase legitimate copies of the same products at the prices currently charged IF the pirated copies were not availble. The few studies that have been done, which I am aware of have suggested the opposite.
- There IS, however, plenty of emperical evidence that the industry has thrown BILLIONS of dollars at expensive and often awkward DRM solutions in an attempt to combat piracy. At the same time, we can see historicaly that almost without fail every major release of a product that was of significant interest to pirates has had it's DRM defeated by pirates....often before the product is even released onto the open market. I'm sure the new Xbox will be no exception to that rule.
So what the publishers are effectively doing, in many cases, with thier current DRM schema is making thier products inferior to those offered by the pirates in both price AND FEATURES.
They end up paying alot of money to build a system which history tells us will be compromised anyway, won't result in many of the people who usualy frequent pirates to buy legitimate copies and will result in some percentage of legitimate customers turning to pirates instead to get the features they want while simply driving others away from the product entirely (and possibly into the arms of competitors who offer a less onerous and intrusive DRM schema).....brilliant! Michael Scott from the Office couldn't have thought up a better way for dealing with the situation.
To add to these, seems to be neverending, failings of Xbox One:
Xbox One Will Only Support LIVE in Certain Countries At Launch
http://www.gamefront.com/xbox-one-will-only-support-live-in-certain-countries-at-launch/
NEW IDEAS that can refresh the STALE state of MMORPGs
They simple will lose a lot of customers because of their poor tactics.
PROTIP: Not everyone who has the internet is going to put up with this crap, as proven by the responses here. I would wager that they are only selling to about 30% of their market at this point with a draconian DRM system that no one like when it hit just the game. Now you're gonna just build it into your system? Good luck with that. Have fun losing most of your market share to the PS4 that doesn't brand you as a criminal from day one.
What happens when there is a storm and ur sitting at home and ur internet is going on an off? Or some little hiccup from the router and bumps u for a few seconds . Do you lose all your progress?
Or just sit and stare at your xbox home while the storm laughs at u
I don't know if it requires you to be online to save anything for most games. It probably has a local save for almost all games. I believe you only have to be online at least once every 24 hours and then you can play whatever in offline mode for those 24 hours.
Microsoft is just jealous of the NSA. They want to check every day to see what games you played, how long you played them, and who you played them with...but it's just that info, they don't get any personal information or what you did in game....although they could just look it up in their directory...just like someone at the NSA could just pick up a phone book XD Gimme a break.
Edit: I'm not being tracked by the government...Hi guys!
What I want to know is... since the Kinect is always on and starts profiling crap... is it uploading any of that when it connects to their servers once every 24 hours? Since microsofts EULA says that if they see any illegal activity with the kinect if I'm sitting at my table rolling my cigarettes (Much cheaper than buying a pack of malboro) do I have to worry about the police banging on my door thinking I was rolling a joint?
Do I have to worry about some creep at Microsoft getting a video of me and the wife fooling around because I forgot to throw a sheet over my kinect?
Am I the only one that is a bit creeped out by the always on kinect and online requirements combined with Microsofts policies?
Sony has a console for people without internet too, it is called PS4 and it will be new and improved :P
So why would people even bother with Xbox One if that's Microsoft's attitude? lol.
This ain't Windows. People DON'T HAVE TO play consoles. I don't think they realises that because they've been in the OS business for too long.