Informed =! Condescending
It doesn't take much (certainly not eight years) to know that requiring online-status to play single player games is going to be a hassle for some avid gamers and impossible for others, especially considering previous issues with online-required DRMs like Sim City and Assassin's Creed 2.
Microsoft's Next-Gen Sets Itself Back
|
Microsoft's Next-Gen Sets Itself Back
Bismarck.Dracondria said: » What you don't seem to understand is that by doing this they'll lose a lot of customers who have ***internet or no internet because it's not available where they live. All they want to do is play a game offline but because of this they can't, meaning microsoft will likely lose a lot of customers. People who can't play with always-on and people who won't support a company that *** over their customers this way. There are more of them than you think. If technology from 10 years ago is too new or scary, don't worry, you'll still have a life time of games to play! Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » Shiva.Gib said: » ok, so you're taking the route of "I don't like something that doesn't effect me, so everyone else sucks that doesn't think like me. I have my fingers in my ears I can't hearrrrr yooouuuu" Gotcha Tell me, whats the advantage as a customer for the manufacturer to have complete control overva product I purchased? In that case why not stop selling consoles and lease them out in 2-4 year contracts? If you havent noticed the strings that have been attached to the cellphone market quickly have been giving way to no frills, freedom centric business models. Why should consoles be going retrograde? The deal is when I buy a console, i do so to play games without being ropeadoped into having internet. If the manufacturer wants to offer perks like an online shop, subs or whatever other boohs come with being online - fine. But dont hand me you must be online or your console is a 400 dollar brick. PC gaming and tablets have already eaten into consoles and this just goes further into heavyhanded control masked under the guise of stopping piracy. Protip: It wont. you know what the funny thing is, since like PS2 days have you actually read the EULA? I doubt you have, did you know that you don't actually 'Own' the console? and you don't actually "Own" the software that you buy? when you buy a disc, you're actually not buying a disc, you're purchasing a license to be able to play the game pretty much the same thing with the console, you're buying a license to run software, that is why it's illegal to jailbreak a phone or mod consoles. All this really is, is actually enforcing something thats actually been around for like 15 years. Gavlin said: » Artemicion you seem very well educated. So my logic may be a little to low brow for youself. As I am simply a blue-collared working father of two. All I am saying is everyone seems so quick to judge or deem this unnecessary when we have yet to see what it even is or can do. Or even why they are doing it in the first place. I support new idea's there have been alot of things over the years that have been deemed unnecessary that have changed the world for the better. That is why I dont feel I have the right to judge a device or even idea before it has been produced. My rights fall like yours within my wallet. I hope that helps you see were at least I am coming from. They already explained what this is for: control. Control over your console (so you cant mod consoles), so you cant buy used games (if you do, it wont run it), so your console can be killed remotely (for whatever reason), to advertise to you (which is a boon for advertisers), to force updates on you (to keep an eye on you) and for developers to have greater control over the media you play. Of course there will perks too, there always is but from top managements point of view having an iron fisted control over what youndo in the console sandbox is a dream.
[+]
Bismarck.Dracondria said: » What you don't seem to understand is that by doing this they'll lose a lot of customers who have ***internet or no internet because it's not available where they live. All they want to do is play a game offline but because of this they can't, meaning microsoft will likely lose a lot of customers. People who can't play with always-on and people who won't support a company that *** over their customers this way. There are more of them than you think. Well we dont know what always on really even is at this point or what it means to the consumer. If your correct in you guess that you would not be able to play a single player game without a internet conection. Then you right those people would not purchase a new console. Why would they lose them as a customer tho would they then go out and burn there 360's? The Iphone 5 requires new connections for charging, docking etc... when it first came out I did not go trash my 4s due to this. I am jsut saying lets wait and see and not be so quick to judge. Losing them as a customer when it comes to the 720. Obviously.
Artemicion said: » I understand where you're coming from Gav, but I don't see any real compromise in this proposal of an always-on mandate. I'd be a bit more understanding and apologetic if this feature were necessary to reduce system costs and thus affecting the price tag in the end, much like PS3's lack of backwards compatibility did. However, I see no such silver lining with this. This ultimately serves no purpose or benefit to the user other than enabling Microsoft to alienate legitimate players and help assure they're not making Linux boxes like people did with their initial Xbox.
[+]
Jetackuu said: » Artemicion said: » I understand where you're coming from Gav, but I don't see any real compromise in this proposal of an always-on mandate. I'd be a bit more understanding and apologetic if this feature were necessary to reduce system costs and thus affecting the price tag in the end, much like PS3's lack of backwards compatibility did. However, I see no such silver lining with this. This ultimately serves no purpose or benefit to the user other than enabling Microsoft to alienate legitimate players and help assure they're not making Linux boxes like people did with their initial Xbox. Aye, not to mention it was very spotty and inconsistent. I laughed at how poorly it worked on my friend's 80 gig PS3. A EULA can say anything it likes but that doesnt mean it will hold up in court.
[+]
Jetackuu said: » Artemicion said: » I understand where you're coming from Gav, but I don't see any real compromise in this proposal of an always-on mandate. I'd be a bit more understanding and apologetic if this feature were necessary to reduce system costs and thus affecting the price tag in the end, much like PS3's lack of backwards compatibility did. However, I see no such silver lining with this. This ultimately serves no purpose or benefit to the user other than enabling Microsoft to alienate legitimate players and help assure they're not making Linux boxes like people did with their initial Xbox. but seriously, even if Sony made a 20 dollar 'Backwards compatibility pack' on PSN, i'd buy the damn thing, cause it's freaking software. I don't understand what Sony is thinking, especially now that they have fully discontinued PS2... Viva La PCSX2! Shiva.Gib said: » also about OS's here is the thing, with Vista, it wasn't 'bad' it was just poorly optimized. So I'm sure that 95% of the time when you hear about terrible performance, i'm sure the person was using a low end computer, or a laptop. Not defending it, but if you didn't cheap out on a machine, chances are you didn't have problems. Also Windows 8... I wish more people would use the damn thing other then see picture of Metro and freak out. Point is besides the start bar looking all wacky. Windows 8 is the cleanest and leanest OS they have ever put out, and for gaming it actually outperforms Windows 7 and has native DX11 support. but of course this is the internet, and it's easier to *** about something then actually take the 5-10 mins to learn the new shortcuts/use the search feature in Windows 8 lol, you lose all credibility with this, I don't even need to go into the bad joke that 8 is. Shiva.Gib said: » Bismarck.Dracondria said: » The point is it shouldn't be required for a game that isn't even played online. For an online game it's fine. It makes absolutely no sense for an offline singleplayer game to force you to have an internet connection in order to play it. And guess what, looking at games like Diablo 3, which have sold millions of copies and still yet CANNOT be pirated is showing companies that there is value in always on DRM. lol they've had pirated working copies of Diablo 3 within a week of it's release, you're delusional or misinformed. Dont worry, they're working to kill all those emulators and roms!
[+]
Shiva.Gib said: » Jetackuu said: » Artemicion said: » I understand where you're coming from Gav, but I don't see any real compromise in this proposal of an always-on mandate. I'd be a bit more understanding and apologetic if this feature were necessary to reduce system costs and thus affecting the price tag in the end, much like PS3's lack of backwards compatibility did. However, I see no such silver lining with this. This ultimately serves no purpose or benefit to the user other than enabling Microsoft to alienate legitimate players and help assure they're not making Linux boxes like people did with their initial Xbox. but seriously, even if Sony made a 20 dollar 'Backwards compatibility pack' on PSN, i'd buy the damn thing, cause it's freaking software. I don't understand what Sony is thinking, especially now that they have fully discontinued PS2... Viva La PCSX2! something something not being a *** to customers something something. Shiva.Gib said: » Jetackuu said: » Artemicion said: » I understand where you're coming from Gav, but I don't see any real compromise in this proposal of an always-on mandate. I'd be a bit more understanding and apologetic if this feature were necessary to reduce system costs and thus affecting the price tag in the end, much like PS3's lack of backwards compatibility did. However, I see no such silver lining with this. This ultimately serves no purpose or benefit to the user other than enabling Microsoft to alienate legitimate players and help assure they're not making Linux boxes like people did with their initial Xbox. but seriously, even if Sony made a 20 dollar 'Backwards compatibility pack' on PSN, i'd buy the damn thing, cause it's freaking software. I don't understand what Sony is thinking, especially now that they have fully discontinued PS2... Viva La PCSX2! There was insinuation in the past that PS2 titles (at least major titles) would eventually appear for availability on the PSN, but I'm not going to hold my breath on that one. Also it doesn't mean a thing for those with more obscure cult classic titles. Artemicion said: » Jetackuu said: » Artemicion said: » I understand where you're coming from Gav, but I don't see any real compromise in this proposal of an always-on mandate. I'd be a bit more understanding and apologetic if this feature were necessary to reduce system costs and thus affecting the price tag in the end, much like PS3's lack of backwards compatibility did. However, I see no such silver lining with this. This ultimately serves no purpose or benefit to the user other than enabling Microsoft to alienate legitimate players and help assure they're not making Linux boxes like people did with their initial Xbox. Aye, not to mention it was very spotty and inconsistent. I laughed at how poorly it worked on my friend's 80 gig PS3. Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » A EULA can say anything it likes but that doesnt mean it will hold up in court. Indeed, I find it hilarious when people say they're breaking the law when violating a ToS. Granted it could loosely fall under the "unauthorized access to a computer system" ambiguous as *** clause. Jetackuu said: » lol, you lose all credibility with this, I don't even need to go into the bad joke that 8 is. lol they've had pirated working copies of Diablo 3 within a week of it's release, you're delusional or misinformed. knowing your track record I highly HIGHLY doubt you have used Windows 8 past a store kiosk, and I used Vista for 2 years never had a problem with it, but again, I didn't cheap out on hardware. I also said it wasn't well optimized, I wasn't defending it. It's just people treat it like it was the anti-christ of computer software, it wasn't. and I know they had a "pirated" version of Diablo 3, and I know it also didn't have AI scripts and didn't drop gear, cause those were server side on blizzard. So no, I'm informed, don't worry @ first i was like.. (why would anybody think breaking a ToS would be breaking the law?? O.o) but then i remembered the cellphone contract thread -.-;
people. lol.
[+]
Artemicion said: » Shiva.Gib said: » Jetackuu said: » Artemicion said: » I understand where you're coming from Gav, but I don't see any real compromise in this proposal of an always-on mandate. I'd be a bit more understanding and apologetic if this feature were necessary to reduce system costs and thus affecting the price tag in the end, much like PS3's lack of backwards compatibility did. However, I see no such silver lining with this. This ultimately serves no purpose or benefit to the user other than enabling Microsoft to alienate legitimate players and help assure they're not making Linux boxes like people did with their initial Xbox. but seriously, even if Sony made a 20 dollar 'Backwards compatibility pack' on PSN, i'd buy the damn thing, cause it's freaking software. I don't understand what Sony is thinking, especially now that they have fully discontinued PS2... Viva La PCSX2! There was insinuation in the past that PS2 titles (at least major titles) would eventually appear for availability on the PSN, but I'm not going to hold my breath on that one. Also it doesn't mean a thing for those with more obscure cult classic titles. OH AND I CAN REBUY THEM!? WHY GOLLY GEE, THANKS SONY! and if I buy them now, I have to Re-Rebuy them for the PS4!?! AWESOMER! Shiva.Gib said: » Artemicion said: » Shiva.Gib said: » Jetackuu said: » Artemicion said: » I understand where you're coming from Gav, but I don't see any real compromise in this proposal of an always-on mandate. I'd be a bit more understanding and apologetic if this feature were necessary to reduce system costs and thus affecting the price tag in the end, much like PS3's lack of backwards compatibility did. However, I see no such silver lining with this. This ultimately serves no purpose or benefit to the user other than enabling Microsoft to alienate legitimate players and help assure they're not making Linux boxes like people did with their initial Xbox. but seriously, even if Sony made a 20 dollar 'Backwards compatibility pack' on PSN, i'd buy the damn thing, cause it's freaking software. I don't understand what Sony is thinking, especially now that they have fully discontinued PS2... Viva La PCSX2! There was insinuation in the past that PS2 titles (at least major titles) would eventually appear for availability on the PSN, but I'm not going to hold my breath on that one. Also it doesn't mean a thing for those with more obscure cult classic titles. OH AND I CAN REBUY THEM!? WHY GOLLY GEE, THANKS SONY! Some rumors were circulating that sony will have backwards compatibility in the form of streaming games from their recently purchased gakai network. (for what it's worth it works pretty decently) but some think they will offer a netflix style monthly fee / game streaming service with different tiers/pricing plans. Fairy.Ghaleon said: » Some rumors were circulating that sony will have backwards compatibility in the form of streaming games from their recently purchased gakai network. (for what it's worth it works pretty decently) but some think they will offer a netflix style monthly fee / game streaming service with different tiers/pricing plans. /DUNDUNDUNNNNNNN just pointing that out just incase anyone for a second thought Sony wouldn't also be partaking in always on XD Wii-U keeps looking better eh? Fairy.Ghaleon said: » Some rumors were circulating that sony will have backwards compatibility in the form of streaming games from their recently purchased gakai network. (for what it's worth it works pretty decently) but some think they will offer a netflix style monthly fee / game streaming service with different tiers/pricing plans. That'd still *** over anyone that had the preference of physical copies over online purchases. God forbid their PS3 bites the dust after support and print for it drop. Shiva.Gib said: » Fairy.Ghaleon said: » Some rumors were circulating that sony will have backwards compatibility in the form of streaming games from their recently purchased gakai network. (for what it's worth it works pretty decently) but some think they will offer a netflix style monthly fee / game streaming service with different tiers/pricing plans. /DUNDUNDUNNNNNNN only for that Opt In service. sure. Fairy.Ghaleon said: » Shiva.Gib said: » Fairy.Ghaleon said: » Some rumors were circulating that sony will have backwards compatibility in the form of streaming games from their recently purchased gakai network. (for what it's worth it works pretty decently) but some think they will offer a netflix style monthly fee / game streaming service with different tiers/pricing plans. /DUNDUNDUNNNNNNN only for that Opt In service. sure. Artemicion said: » Fairy.Ghaleon said: » Some rumors were circulating that sony will have backwards compatibility in the form of streaming games from their recently purchased gakai network. (for what it's worth it works pretty decently) but some think they will offer a netflix style monthly fee / game streaming service with different tiers/pricing plans. That'd still *** over anyone that had the preference of physical copies over online purchases. God forbid their PS3 bites the dust after support and print for it drop. unfortunately the game disc is going the way of the buffalo like it or not. the next next gen will not have physical media at all if they can help it. I'm pretty sad about it as well, but we all knew it would happen eventually. one point about physical media for ps2/ps3 games on the ps4. since it's not backwards compatible in the first place, a streaming service techinically isn't hurting people who prefer physical media since it would not take it anyways. inb4 "why not backwards compatibility from the start", in which i would 90% agree with you. but then there's the point about paying 600$ for a console etc. Well ultimatly I will not have a console on day 1 anyways as I dont plain to wait in any lines or camp out anyplace. I also have no plains to buy one off Ebay for 3x the price + so my decision will come after launch.
I have never modded my old console's to be honest the only reason I thought people did that was to play downloaded or pirated games and that just seems to hurt the companies really as it would hurt there sales. I want them to do well so that they can keep producing more games. So I would not do that anyways. So the only thing that would bother me is not being able to play used games and I searched and searched microsoft's release note they have so far and I cant find them saying it cant anyplace. I only find that in rumors from other party's. Shiva.Gib said: » Fairy.Ghaleon said: » Shiva.Gib said: » Fairy.Ghaleon said: » Some rumors were circulating that sony will have backwards compatibility in the form of streaming games from their recently purchased gakai network. (for what it's worth it works pretty decently) but some think they will offer a netflix style monthly fee / game streaming service with different tiers/pricing plans. /DUNDUNDUNNNNNNN only for that Opt In service. sure. It's for ps4 only, and this arguement is invald; says so by my 2 RRoD xbox's that i've owned. Fairy.Ghaleon said: » Shiva.Gib said: » Fairy.Ghaleon said: » Shiva.Gib said: » Fairy.Ghaleon said: » Some rumors were circulating that sony will have backwards compatibility in the form of streaming games from their recently purchased gakai network. (for what it's worth it works pretty decently) but some think they will offer a netflix style monthly fee / game streaming service with different tiers/pricing plans. /DUNDUNDUNNNNNNN only for that Opt In service. sure. It's for ps4 only, and this arguement is invald; says so by my 2 RRoD xbox's that i've owned. I'll raise you your RRoD XBox with my YLoD PS3 yeah, they can break, ain't that something. Fairy.Ghaleon said: » Artemicion said: » Fairy.Ghaleon said: » Some rumors were circulating that sony will have backwards compatibility in the form of streaming games from their recently purchased gakai network. (for what it's worth it works pretty decently) but some think they will offer a netflix style monthly fee / game streaming service with different tiers/pricing plans. That'd still *** over anyone that had the preference of physical copies over online purchases. God forbid their PS3 bites the dust after support and print for it drop. unfortunately the game disc is going the way of the buffalo like it or not. the next next gen will not have physical media at all if they can help it. I'm pretty sad about it as well, but we all knew it would happen eventually. one point about physical media for ps2/ps3 games on the ps4. since it's not backwards compatible in the first place, a streaming service techinically isn't hurting people who prefer physical media since it would not take it anyways. inb4 "why not backwards compatibility from the start", in which i would 90% agree with you. but then there's the point about paying 600$ for a console etc. While the need for physical copies is diminishing with the introduction of games purchasable through downloadable mediums, I would say they are a far cry from dying off entirely until every console maker enables localized storage devices. MS is still too greedy and makes their devices and formats proprietary. |
All FFXIV and FFXI content and images © 2002-2026 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD.
FINAL FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.