Kotaku: Next Xbox will require online connection to start games

Fuck, 10 years after release they can just turn off all Durangos forever (if this is true).

It was insanity to charge for multi on original Xbox. And yet...

Nah. That's totally different. Online play on consoles was shiny and new and they had by far the best implementation of it. They could get away with that.
 
Well, I have Time Warner Cable, so it looks like if this is true, then I won't be able to play from 5 to 9 pm Monday through Friday due to my connection constantly dropping.
 
I'm already not buying this console, regardless of what insane limitations it has. That said, I cannot imagine them doing this. It's so obviously bad.
 
I don't think I know anyone who doesn't have an Internet connection. Nor do any places I've vacationed or visited in the last 5 years lack Wi-Fi.

Even most airlines have Wi-Fi now.

You have to be visiting some pretty remote places on the globe to be avoiding Internet access. In which case your new Xbox is more likely to die from the extreme elements before it even attempts to connect to the net. Microsoft isn't building a mobile device here. This is like complaining that your cable box needs to be connected to coax to be used.
See below. It's happened. I've heard about it happening to others. Granted, you're correct in that most vacation spots have guest wifi, but there are places that don't.

And no, mobile would be playing it in the car... wait! People do that too... so if this rumor is true, then people who have consoles in their cars (I know quite a few and they aren't rappers, they're families with kids), are fucked.

That actually happened to me three summers back...and I couldn't play my arcade games because of a lack of connection. We did other things, but it was still sort of annoying.
 
Nah. That's totally different. Online play on consoles was shiny and new and they had by far the best implementation of it. They could get away with that.

Fair enough. They can get away with this too. I think.

Also remember that, even though MS has lots of cash, the Entertainment division is kind of up against the wall to really turn a profit. This might be their last kick at that. So they need to do something bold.
 
I see it the opposite. People arguing in favor of optical discs and offline consoles are holding back progress and potential for advancements.

By eliminating people with 56k dial-up ISPs from Xbox Live, they made the experience better for everyone with broadband and Xbox. It made Xbox Live better to exclude people without broadband. It enabled them to build a better service and better games. It also encouraged people without broadband to wake up and move into the modern era and drop AOL era services for something better.

There are a lot of advancements you can make with an always on console that you couldn't do with an optional online console. And I mean beyond the cynical justifications of ad serving and DRM protection. Cloud computing and connection have enormous potential to advance consoles and game design.

Not sure I agree with you on the holding back progress part. Perhaps to an extent the single player experience can be enhanced with a online connection such as dynamic worlds, AI, social features ect... but that should really be dependent on the game and should ideally not be a required thing for every game. But overall... I don't mind the always online part. And optical media is a great thing. It's what allows me to get games with huge worlds, large high-res textures, and lossless PCM audio. Oh and high bitrate video. All of these things are important to me and lots of other people.
 
I'm having a hard time not quoting your avatar with your silly post here.
Eh, I wouldn't read much into that. It isn't a silly point either. All of those are examples of MS saying "You'll buy it from us even if it is a crappy deal". I'm not saying they're the only ones to pull stuff like that, but they sure do it more often. It all comes off as arrogant. I bought a 360 in 2006 and I got sick of the rip offs. After my second red ring, MS expected me to pay, so I just junked the system and kept my PS3 and PC. They haven't done much to change my view of them yet.
 
I think MS thinks its consumers will put up with anything. Look what they've put up with so far.

$100 20 GB HDD
$100 Wifi receiver
Confusing point scale to make things seem cheaper
4 years of a defective console
8 years of a console that scratches games
8 years of paying for an online P2P service
Being sold services free elsewhere
Being sold that a week early demo is a feature when they just delay Silver
Barely bothering to release first party games for 3 years.

At this point, I think MS thinks they can do whatever they want and their consumer base will eat it with a smile.
Well, they've gotten away with it so far.

It could come back to bite them in the ass if they think they can carry it over into another generation though.
 
I really need to see where the 40% coming from though, and how old the data is. And I assume it's calculating on 360 owners and not a survey.

A lot of casuals own 360 and a lot of casuals only play single player, hell some 'hardcore gamers' prefer single player games.
 
personally, I'm looking forward to these anti-consumer 'features' because it will be interesting to see how the talented guerrilla marketers spin it in places like gaf.
 
While this rumor could be entirely false, always-online for the nextbox is something I could easily believe.

I'm actually kinda glad that Halo 4 disappointed me. I can take or leave the Halo series now and MS doesn't have anything else I am attached to.

Though I didn't hate Halo 4, that series alone isn't enough to keep me wanting the next xbox if this is true. However I am bothered because I do have faith that they'll produce at least new IPs I may be interested in, which will suck missing out on.

Eh, I wouldn't read much into that. It isn't a silly point either. All of those are examples of MS saying "You'll buy it from us even if it is a crappy deal". I'm not saying they're the only ones to pull stuff like that, but they sure do it more often. It all comes off as arrogant. I bought a 360 in 2006 and I got sick of the rip offs. After my second red ring, MS expected me to pay, so I just junked the system and kept my PS3 and PC. They haven't done much to change my view of them yet.

No it is a silly post because it looks like you're looking for any and every excuse to slam them when some of those were just options while others (like 8 years of scratching games) are just untrue.
 
Let's say they intended to do it and are now making a u-turn (no online-requirement, no used games block): How would this affect their launch schedules? Would it be irrelevant or would it push the console several months further?
Honest questions, btw.
 
Still waiting on an official announcement. If true, then I'm going PS4 only and this from a guy who was there on day one for both Xbox and the 360.
 
I don't know how else to explain it.

Some customers spend more than others. Sometimes a lot more. If they are connected, they can pay for Live, music streaming, video rentals, be served ads, buy digital games and DLC. If they're not, they can't.

What's so hard to understand? total number of players is not total profit.
Because it disagrees with basic, fundamental business sense?

So say you have 10 customers with broadband and XBL, you'd get about 10 bucks a month out of there. You have 5 who don't have live or broadband but they'll buy a nextbox and games and controllers or what not to play with friends locally, you get about $6 from there a month.

From a max profitability standpoint, what sense does it make at all to leave that extra $30 on the table or possibly to Sony and limit yourself to that $50.

You or anybody else have failed to explain that....
 
I suspect it's true..

...I also won't be surprised if they require a monthly subscription as standard (but they'll sell the hardware for cheap as the hook).
 
Let's say they intended to do it and are now making a u-turn (no online-requirement, no used games block): How would this affect their launch schedules? Would it be irrelevant or would it push the console several months further?
Honest questions, btw.

Why would it effect the launch, its probably a simple software update to change this if it was even true in the first place.
 
Jesus dude, does your internet never go out for a few minutes/hours at a time?

Mine does. It rarely happens but when it does it lasts for hours

Some of the rumours about Durango are quite bizarre to say the least, pretty much every rumour with Durango is something that would go on a 'Do Not Want' list for next gen lol.

Rumor or not MS silence is quite discouraging
 
Because it disagrees with basic, fundamental business sense?

So say you have 10 customers with broadband and XBL, you'd get about 10 bucks a month out of there. You have 5 who don't have live or broadband but they'll buy a nextbox and games and controllers or what not to play with friends locally, you get about $6 from there a month.

From a max profitability standpoint, what sense does it make at all to leave that extra $30 on the table or possibly to Sony and limit yourself to that $50.

You or anybody else have failed to explain that....
It only makes sense if they want to introduce a new business model that requires online connection and would out-profit those that are disconnected. Something like no used games?
 
I can't wait for this rumor to either be confirmed or squashed, the amount of discussion and discourse for whenever this rumor pops up is some of the most tedious discussion I've seen.

Tons of people telling everyone they aren't getting a unannounced console, a few people that defend the always online requirement for some reason, a few people who use the thread to tell everyone that Microsoft is the gaming equivalent of Satan.
 
The lack of empathy displayed by a number of gaffers in this thread is really depressing.

We've really become so individualistic and self-centered that we don't give 2 shits about our fellow gamer and their situations. It's all about the self, wether I can get access to the latest and greatest shit from the companies and damned if the others can't get it, so long as I get my fix. Even If we do have the bestest ISP and internet connection in the world with 99.99999% uptime and no drops to the server side, can we at least spare a thought and understand that not everyone is as blessed or as fortunate as we are? Or how about the dangerous precedent this (if it is true) could potentially set for the future of console gaming?

The bigger picture folks. Spare a thought.

Quoted for fucking truth. Some of the disconnected (pun intended) responses are really ridiculous.
 
The world is not ready for DD. The infrastructure is not there yet, ISP caps are a hindrance, connection speeds are a hindrance, retailers, etc.
Europe still buys plenty of disc based PC games IIRC.

DD is the future, but you have to make a smart transition to that future.

It's not going to be DD only. The rumor was that all games require installation, but you can install from a disc.
 
Also in addition to "holding back progress": just allow developers to make games that require an online connection, or market a key game that requires this (help with Destiny?), if it's a game that really benefits like Demon's Souls on steroids then we can have those games get made and take off along with single player games with no use for servers, and at the same time open the door for games that just want to focus on multiplayer like some of the popular recent PC games like DayZ, Chivalry, and Natural Selection II. There's not much need to do this on a hardware level, and it's certainly not as big of a deal as cutting 56k out of the loop for the sake of universal guaranteed voice chat and lower latency online play.
 
It only makes sense if they want to introduce a new business model that requires online connection and would out-profit those that are disconnected. Something like no used games?

How would that even profit Microsoft? They don't even make that many first party games. Would publishers just toss them piles of exclusives for trying to kill used games or something?
 
They could still be connected playing singleplayer games on 360. Like I do.

I played through Tomb Raider and Bioshock Infinite with my 360 not connected to the internet. I wouldn't have been able to do that on Durango if these rumors are true. That is fucked.
 
What market?
Netflix thought they could tell their disc service customers to guy buy a separate service from streaming. Even that was a huge mistake.
Netflix stock has soared since then. Sometimes people just don't care when companies are abusing them or making dumb decisions.

A lot of larger implications are getting overlooked here though. GameStop owns Game Informer. Gamefly owns Shack News. Microsoft would be asking for trouble by cutting these companies out of the loop. I find a situation in which you need XBL Gold to play games that don't have an activation code entered to be more logical. Microsoft makes money through subscriptions from people who frequently rent or buy used games, and it doesn't kick the hornets nest as far as those other companies go.

Then again, pissing partners off hasn't stopped the forward march of Surface or Windows RT.
 
If this is officially confirmed then I have one less console to buy.

Right? Yeah, I am going to buy a console that requires me to be connected all the time to play offline games. I learned how well that worked with SimCity.

Plus if my i7 / GTX 670 is as powerful then pffft, I'll just do PC next-gen. (This coming from someone who's main form of gaming this gen was a 360)
 
Thats nothing to do with progress, thats choice and many people prefer optical media and always will which is why we are many years away from a DD only future (even Sony said that themselves).



if by "many years" you mean the generation after this coming one, then yes, you are correct.
 
Because it disagrees with basic, fundamental business sense?

So say you have 10 customers with broadband and XBL, you'd get about 10 bucks a month out of there. You have 5 who don't have live or broadband but they'll buy a nextbox and games and controllers or what not to play with friends locally, you get about $6 from there a month.

From a max profitability standpoint, what sense does it make at all to leave that extra $30 on the table or possibly to Sony and limit yourself to that $50.

You or anybody else have failed to explain that....

Apple's profit over their lower marketshare explains it. Their really are better customers and focusing on them can be a smart move. Also see: the wii and their casual blue ocean "customers" and how they just stopped caring.
 
I can't wait for this rumor to either be confirmed or squashed, the amount of discussion and discourse for whenever this rumor pops up is some of the most tedious discussion I've seen.

Tons of people telling everyone they aren't getting a unannounced console, a few people that defend the always online requirement for some reason, a few people who use the thread to tell everyone that Microsoft is the gaming equivalent of Satan.

Its all hype though isn't it, its all discusion about the new consoles, its all generating talk and hype all over the web whether its good or bad.

There is no such thing as bad news as the saying goes and i wouldn't be suprised if Microsoft and Sony themselves leak this shite to get us all talking, they generate hype then come out looking good when it turns out that it was all bullshit.
 
Kage, it is still a trade off. Options for the sake of options are pro consumer so they are in a way anti profit (or less profit). Take Gold for example. You are isolating people who want to play online but not for a price. Yet it exists because it makes them billions.
 
Seems fine to me as I never play single player offline at all.

Surprised no new online game purchasing/rental models have been announced along with a new resale towards purchases scheme.
 
if by "many years" you mean the generation after this coming one, then yes, you are correct.
You are incredibly optimistic if you think broadband in the US is going to improve so much in that period of time that publishers would be willing to forsake the brick and mortar crowd.
 
By the way I lived through Hurricane Sandy without power or heat for 15 days, so people crying to me about their router going out for an hour are hysterical to me. If you can't deal with being cut off from modern appliances for a couple of hours every now and then, then you have serious problems.
That's not a good comparison.

All of our previous consoles could work offline. An expectation has been set.

.

What a lame argument. Right and before Kindle there was an expectation that you could go to a retail store, browse the shelves and buy books then resell or share those books.

This line of thinking stands in the way of progress. Expectations change as technology progresses. Internet is becoming an expected utility of modern devices like electricity. Optical discs and physical media are disappearing from devices too. Just because things were one way once doesn't mean they will be constrained to those parameters forever. Technology changes expectations fast.

We are not still playing with the children's toys of the 80's. These are the center of our living room entertainment. When electricity/internet goes out these things are dead and we pick up our smartphones. Maybe the answer is to eventually put in a cellular radio like the Kindle, but for now I think we can deal with the occasional downtime of electricity/Internet. More people use their Xbox for watching Netflix, HBO, YouTube than playing games. These services already require an always on Internet connection and yet they are all extremely successful. Video games can survive the transition to always connected just as online videos do.
 
Why would it effect the launch, its probably a simple software update to change this if it was even true in the first place.

It isn't only a technical issue, it would also affect relationships with third parties, PR strategy, the (invented) ecosystem etc.
Dunno, perhaps it's really a non-issue, but if they made a heavy bet on this strategy, it would quite difficult to rearranged all the things involved, methinks.
 
Top Bottom