Kotaku: Next Xbox will require online connection to start games

Penguins&PolarBears said:
Do people say I'm not using my iPhone and pay $100 a month for service anymore because it drops calls so frequently? I'm going to go back to using pay phones because it's more reliable and cheaper. No at worst they switch to Verizon or AT&T.
Click to expand...

To be clear, I understand where your reasoning is coming from and why you feel that way. But Once again, cell phone service is a horrible basis for comparison. If you're switching from GSM to CDMA bands, you're not using the same device again. You're buying a different iPhone or Samsung Galaxy, even it looks exactly the same to you. There isn't some second version of Xbox that Microsoft is going to be selling to people who get pissed off at being locked out of games.

Also the idea of accepting the notion of being without entertainment because your internet connection is down is whacky. Locally stored content prevents that being a problem. All of the books on my Kindle can still be read when my ISP craps out. All of the .mp4 files on my PC or Nexus 7 can still be watched.

I don't see why people would accept that kind of headache from any of the companies currently involved in the console business. Why buy 25 GB+ of content on a disc just to have to rely on so many potential points of failure to be able to use it?
 
RetroStu said:
I don't agree, i mean Microsoft definately give you that sense but no matter what services they give to an 'Xbox', the reason why pretty much anyone will buy an Xbox is for games and games first and foremost.
If they don't want a games machine then they should of made a none Xbox box for all this stuff and called it something else.

EDIT: Also gaming is bigger than the movie industry, its the 'biggest' entertainment industry there is.
Click to expand...

I know of a few people that bought an arcade or second hand xbox just to use Netflix.

Microsoft have stated that over 50% of users time online is spent on entertainment apps instead of gaming.

I think my Rewards stats page showed I had more time using Netflix than games, and Ive always considered myself more of a gamer than using the console for apps etc.
 
I always play my online-capable consoles connected to the network, so this won't bother me. It will be interesting to see if this ends up being similar to XBL 1.0 where there was a decision to skip dial-up users which led to very vocal consternation and even doomsaying in GAF threads. I don't expect most online-playing GAF users will be affected, but it will be interesting to see just how it affects their sales.
 
Whilst I know this could hurt many out there (many haven't ever connected their 360s online) when I used my 360 I always played while connected to live, and I've never even purchased a Gold account! I just did it so I wouldn't miss out on updates and I heard that if you weren't connected when you got an achievement then it doesn't get dated, so I didn't want to have an achievement without a date of when I got it.
 
MightyHedgehog said:
I always play my online-capable consoles connected to the network, so this won't bother me. It will be interesting to see if this ends up being similar to XBL 1.0 where there was a decision to skip dial-up users which led to very vocal consternation and even doomsaying in GAF threads. I don't expect most online-playing GAF users will be affected, but it will be interesting to see just how it affects their sales.
Click to expand...

And you have never had the "You have been disconnected from Xbox Live" message while playing a game?
 
This is more annoying to me for what it means for future anti-consumer practices.

If they make it so my legal disc-based games don't work or suppress features illogically if not connected online, that's going to be terrible. I get that I can't play multiplayer if not online...but if I couldn't say, use a character in a game I bought as DLC because I'm not online, that's bullshit. I am only disappointed in the "always online" stuff, because I know that things like this are PRECISELY why they're doing this. There's no consumer benefit or convenience in doing it.
 
The internet in a lot of countries outside of good ole `MURCIA is crappy and spotty at best, this is a giant mistake if Microsoft cares about over all sales.
 
I was already going to ignore Microsoft's next console as I find their business philosophy and general decision-making in the gaming field particularly to be, at best, horribly repulsive.

This just makes it even easier.
 
xxracerxx said:
And you have never had the "You have been disconnected from Xbox Live" message while playing a game?
Click to expand...

Of course I have. Never affected my game when I was playing 'offline', even with multiple Gamertags/accounts signed-in on a local game. I'm not for an online-always console, since I do know plenty of people who choose not to log into the network or stay offline with their box. For me, this change simply wouldn't stop me from owning the new box.
 
MightyHedgehog said:
I always play my online-capable consoles connected to the network, so this won't bother me. It will be interesting to see if this ends up being similar to XBL 1.0 where there was a decision to skip dial-up users which led to very vocal consternation and even doomsaying in GAF threads. I don't expect most online-playing GAF users will be affected, but it will be interesting to see just how it affects their sales.
Click to expand...

Like all those people who always have their PC's online weren't affected by the server problems of Sim City or Diablo III?

No see, there is a difference. If you are playing a single player game on your 360 and your internet goes out or some corporate servers go down, it won't stop your game 3 minutes later.

MightyHedgehog said:
Of course I have. Never affected my game when I was playing 'offline', even with multiple Gamertags/accounts signed-in on a local game.
Click to expand...

Talk about missing the point.

With the 720, that message WILL affect your game.
 
While I do think this is a dumb idea on MS' part because I don't see the huge benefit, the people preaching about how they are shooting themselves in the foot or how this will spell their downfall seem really out of touch. The more I think about it, the more I don't think this will deter very many people. Consumers have been conditioned to be "always online" over the last few years. Yes, your phone or tablet doesn't have an "always online requirement" and you are free to use apps you have already downloaded, but if the internet goes out, how many people really sit down to use their iPad? Hell if the intenet is out my MacBook Air is pretty worthless. Between cloud saves, google docs, email, apps, social networks...almost everything we do is connected. The idea that "your internet will go out and you can't play your games" won't be a major turn-off to most consumers, I honestly believe. And yes, there are areas with shoddy, horrible connections but I think MS is willing to give up that small and shrinking market to get people that are always connected, always subject to be bombarded with dashboard ads, more likely to buy music/movies/games/DLC online and more likely to be XBL subscribers, which is a huge revenue stream for MS. Sadly the "But how will I bust my Durango out of the closet to play my old games 20 years from now" audience doesn't matter to them.
 
I don't know why everyone is so upset. It's clear that their servers will be taking some of the computing load from your 720. The only way these games can function is online.
 
MrNyarlathotep said:
Again; if I have just bought a game for $60 and want to play it, but my internet has gone down; it is reasonable that I should not be permitted to?
Click to expand...

As long as you know what you're buying why not? If I pay $60 for an MMO today or spend tons of money on a Facebook game I can't honestly complain that the money I've spent is momentarily worthless because my Internet is down. If I'm angry in that instance it is at the ISP.


MrNyarlathotep said:
"Service interruptions are a part of modern life."

Which is why there is no need to force a services restriction onto a product that does not require that service.
Click to expand...


But you are the one who decided that the Internet connection is not necessary. The vision for gaming that MS has for their console may be one that is deeply seeded in social and community features that require online service. So because your vision of what video games should be is limited to what has existed in the past means that they're not allowed to build something more forward thinking?

When someone builds a Facebook game they build it with the certainty that the people who are playing it will be connected to the Internet. Perhaps Microsoft wants the same freedom for their developers.



MrNyarlathotep said:
That's like saying if my Internet goes down I shouldn't be allowed to drive my car.
Click to expand...

I expect a future eventually where your car is dependent upon a network in order to function. Increasingly cars are becoming automated, reliant on navigation software and relying on sharing data with one another. Eventually you may not even be the one driving and the car driving itself will be dependent upon being able to communicate with the network to function. The benefits of a network like this far outweigh the negatives. You will have a robot chauffeur that drops you off and picks up you and family members, maybe never even need to purchase a car because it is a service that can be shared, and accidents will go way down by enabling network communication between cars. Are you seriously going to say that society would turn down this hypothetical innovation out of fear of service interruptions?

There are frequent service interruptions in travel (air, bus, rail, auto). I can spend several hundred on a first class flight and my plane still gets delayed. When there is very bad weather or a major accident you cannot drive. Cars break down all the time for one reason or another. The Internet would just be another element that can break down. It's not going to stop people from integrating the network technology in cars because the benefits outweigh the negatives. You can route cars so much more efficiently and safely if they are communicating with one another than you can with the current methods we use for travel. Driver error is the biggest impediment to efficient and safe travel. Connecting cars to a shared network makes sense.
 
MightyHedgehog said:
Of course I have. Never affected my game when I was playing 'offline', even with multiple Gamertags/accounts signed-in on a local game..
Click to expand...

Whoosh.

That is the sound of my point flying over your head.

gzBsCDU.gif
 
Ninja Scooter said:
While I do think this is a dumb idea on MS' part because I don't see the huge benefit, the people preaching about how they are shooting themselves in the foot or how this will spell their downfall seem really out of touch. The more I think about it, the more I don't think this will deter very many people. Consumers have been conditioned to be "always online" over the last few years. Yes, your phone or tablet doesn't have an "always online requirement" and you are free to use apps you have already downloaded, but if the internet goes out, how many people really sit down to use their iPad? Hell if the intenet is out my MacBook Air is pretty worthless. Between cloud saves, google docs, email, apps, social networks...almost everything we do is connected. The idea that "your internet will go out and you can't play your games" won't be a major turn-off to most consumers, I honestly believe. And yes, there are areas with shoddy, horrible connections but I think MS is willing to give up that small and shrinking market to get people that are always connected, always subject to be bombarded with dashboard ads, more likely to buy music/movies/games/DLC online and more likely to be XBL subscribers, which is a huge revenue stream for MS. Sadly the "But how will I bust my Durango out of the closet to play my old games 20 years from now" audience doesn't matter to them.
Click to expand...

You under estimate the amount of people with shitty internet, hell the internet can slow to a crawl at my house when it rains.
 
ThisWreckage said:
You can blame the morons that bought three, four, or even five 360s because of the red ring. Or the people that still paid for Live even though they raised the price. Or the people that shelled out ridiculous amounts of money for things like WiFi adapters and hard drives. Or the people that love a paywall. This is the fault of stupid, uneducated consumers that have no problem shelling out cash for anti-consumer business practices. This has made Microsoft arrogant as hell.
Click to expand...

Thanks Baconsammy and Walkman!!
 
Vane_MagicCity said:
Like all those people who always have their PC's online weren't affected by the server problems of Sim City or Diablo III?

No see, there is a difference. If you are playing a single player game on your 360 and your internet goes out or some corporate servers go down, it won't stop your game 3 minutes later.



Talk about missing the point.

With the 720, that message WILL affect your game.
Click to expand...

If what they say is true, maybe. I haven't had more than a few days of interrupted broadband service in the last thirteen years, so it never registered as an issue for myself. Could be pretty bad if it's as hardcore as they make it sound. Until then, I will save my anger for that rainy day when they announce it for real and it turns out to be every bit as ridiculous as it sounds.
 
MAX PAYMENT said:
This won't affect me.

My PC, Xbox, and ps3 haven't been without interned for years.
Click to expand...

It isn't just about having your device connected to your network. Your internet never goes out? You never get disconnected from Live while playing a single player game?
 
Many don't understand. When servers go down, your games that you purchased will stop working as well if they need to connect before playing. DRM like this plain sucks. Count me out, hopefully SONY doesn't go same route.
 
KidBeta said:
You under estimate the amount of people with shitty internet, hell the internet can slow to a crawl at my house when it rains.
Click to expand...

I think you overestimate how much consumers care. Look at RROD, YLOD, antenna gate, consumers don't seem to care...most people have decent internet access. If they didn't things like iPads wouldn't be flying off the shelf. Yes there are pockets of the country with horrible online that would make it impossible for them to use online devices like tablets and always-online game consoles, but I just don't think MS cares to lose that segment, as they probably figure they are small enough minority and will only shrink over the next 5 years.
 
xxracerxx said:
It isn't just about having your device connected to your network. Your internet never goes out? You never get disconnected from Live while playing a single player game?
Click to expand...
I think the last time I had Internet connectivity issues preventing me from gaming was when my router died. It really has been a non-issue for me. It's 2013 and I live in the U.S.


Almost every device I own would be completely useless without Internet.
 
MightyHedgehog said:
I always play my online-capable consoles connected to the network, so this won't bother me. It will be interesting to see if this ends up being similar to XBL 1.0 where there was a decision to skip dial-up users which led to very vocal consternation and even doomsaying in GAF threads. I don't expect most online-playing GAF users will be affected, but it will be interesting to see just how it affects their sales.
Click to expand...
This is pretty much the same argument as one that people make in defense of online DRM. Whether or not it affects your personal case, it's an unnecessary hurdle that are placed in front of end users just so that companies have a lazy way of protecting their business or enhancing their business at the cost of the end user. I staunchly believe that once a transaction for a purchase of a product has been made, the product's functionality should be dissociated from the provider as much possible and be as close to the end user's needs as possible. Otherwise, the less control you have over the things you own, consumers are opening themselves up to be screwed over in additional costs -- support, other fees, planned obsolescence, etc.
 
Penguins&PolarBears said:
This Internet going down thing is a nonsense argument. This is not going to scare people away. How many people won't subscribe to cable or satellite because there are occasionally service interruptions? Do these people say I'm cancelling Comcast/DirecTV and going back to rabbit ears antenna and watching TV shows on DVD?

No the bottom line is that the content that people want access to are exclusive to the connected experience so they deal with limited service interruptions. If the service interruptions are so frequent or severe then they will change providers.

Do people say I'm not using my iPhone and pay $100 a month for service anymore because it drops calls so frequently? I'm going to go back to using pay phones because it's more reliable and cheaper. No at worst they switch to Verizon or AT&T.

Service interruptions are a part of modern life. We deal with it, complain about it, and come back because we are addicted. When my Internet connection goes down essentially everything I rely on for entertainment or information is down. My PC is a useless paper weight as is my Xbox. It's no different than losing electricity. I'm already living in this reality. I would never turn on my PC or Xbox if the Internet wasn't present. I've been living in that reality for most of the last generation.

And BTW the concept of "stickiness" is not just a buzz word. It has real meaning to publishers. You guys are all really high on Bioshock right now, but in a few months nobody here is going to be still talking about that game or playing it. The game has nothing in it to keep it in heavy rotation for a long time. It is a shortlived experience, in otherwords it's not sticky. You play it for a week and then trade it in at Gamestop. It may be a great single player game, but it's not going to end up being a long lasting money generating hit like many social games are.
Click to expand...
jF1Mjq5MZmVHd.png


You and Microsoft are like kindred spirits, it seems.
 
MAX PAYMENT said:
Almost every device I own would be completely useless without Internet.
Click to expand...

How so?

besides, even if your phone is "less useful" without the internet, doesnt mean you literally cant use it without the internet. Big difference IMO.


Honestly, I wont be buying the console if true. On principle alone, never mind the actual pain in the ass this could potentially be.
 
Ninja Scooter said:
I think you overestimate how much consumers care. Look at RROD, YLOD, antenna gate, consumers don't seem to care...most people have decent internet access. If they didn't things like iPads wouldn't be flying off the shelf. Yes there are pockets of the country with horrible online that would make it impossible for them to use online devices like tablets and always-online game consoles, but I just don't think MS cares to lose that segment, as they probably figure they are small enough minority and will only shrink over the next 5 years.
Click to expand...

Right. If you don't have decent broadband, you probably were never even considering the XBOX console at this point since it's been so intertwined for so long (a decade now) with online gaming and features via XBL. If MS goes this way, it'll be them signalling that they're all-in with online services. Still, these rumors feel a bit harder edge than I can imagine the reality.
 
You people just don't get it. When the SERVERS GO DOWN and they WILL eventually go down, you will NOT be able to play your games anymore..
 
Penguins&PolarBears said:
As long as you know what you're buying why not? If I pay $60 for an MMO today or spend tons of money on a Facebook game I can't honestly complain that the money I've spent is momentarily worthless because my Internet is down. If I'm angry in that instance it is at the ISP.
Click to expand...

You are conflating a single piece of media that 'works best' online with the medium itself only working online.

If Facebook goes down for an hour it doesn't prevent you accessing any other application on your phone / tablet / pc / laptop / netbook / whatever.

That is a huge difference.

EDIT:
And yes, society would turn down cars that drive themselves but that require a persistent network connection, because nobody wants to be run over by a robot because it went through a service blackspot
 
QP3 said:
How so?

besides, even if your phone is "less useful" without the internet, doesnt mean you literally cant use it without the internet. Big difference IMO.
Click to expand...

Even if it's not literally impossible to use your phone with no signal or internet, how useful do you think people's phones are without it. Honestly, think about your friends, coworkers, family, if their cell phone signal was dead for an hour, would they honestly use their phones? If their wifi signal went out, would they use their iPads? Granted there is a difference between "requiring" a connection, but people are conditioned to this kind of behavior already. MS is banking on this it seems. Most consumers are not as principled about their buying choices, especially when it comes to consumer electronics, as you guys make it seem. People with shitty internet connections (or NO internet connections) are probably not itching to spend $500 on a Durango or PS4 to begin with.
 
KidBeta said:
You under estimate the amount of people with shitty internet, hell the internet can slow to a crawl at my house when it rains.
Click to expand...

Right, but even by this rumor they're not being dumb about it. They've already got a 3 minute buffer working according to this rumor. Their instant on Xbox Video streaming service works pretty darn well dealing with poor internet connections. I think Microsoft is familiar with how well the Internet works and understands what they'd need to build to create a good experience for most people.
 
x3r0123 said:
it looks as though some people live in the ocean and have internet connection :o
Click to expand...

Notsureifserious.jpg


islands

Even if it's not literally impossible to use your phone with no signal or internet, how useful do you think people's phones are without it. Honestly, think about your friends, coworkers, family, if their cell phone signal was dead for an hour, would they honestly use their phones? If their wifi signal went out, would they use their iPads? Granted there is a difference between "requiring" a connection, but people are conditioned to this kind of behavior already. MS is banking on this it seems. Most consumers are not as principled about their buying choices, especially when it comes to consumer electronics, as you guys make it seem.
Click to expand...

Honestly I was thinking no internet, not no 3G/4G. But either way, I could still play my games, write my papers, study notes, etc.

Anyways, that is beside the point. It is the principle that I don't agree with. THe fact that there could (will) be a time and place when I rightfully own everything and will NOT be allowed to play.
 
Even if you were guaranteed that your internet is always working, 100% of the time, I'm not sure why "always on" would be a benefit.

I mean, being able to assume that most of your customers are online--delivering background updates on a frequent basis, making games where multiplayer modes are the selling point or the only point, etc... that's all good... but that's the status quo. So always online by definition doesn't add anything to that. It only takes away in the case of a downtime event.

If a company released a system where the operating assumption was that the vast majority of players were online the vast majority of the time, I think that'd bring some benefits. But releasing a system where all players have to be online all the time doesn't add to that.
 
rpmurphy said:
This is pretty much the same argument as one that people make in defense of online DRM. Whether or not it affects your personal case, it's an unnecessary hurdle that are placed in front of end users just so that companies have a lazy way of protecting their business or enhancing their business at the cost of the end user. I staunchly believe that once a transaction for a purchase of a product has been made, the product's functionality should be dissociated from the provider as much possible and be as close to the end user's needs as possible. Otherwise, consumers are opening themselves up to be screwed over in additional costs -- support, other fees, planned obsolescence, etc.
Click to expand...

I'm not defending anything but my own self interest in gaming. I'm not in favor of intrusive DRM. Never have been. Though I do buy and use products that employ some form of it, I'm more interested in the end result rather than depriving myself of my entertainment on very consumer principle alone. The way I see it, I accept that there will be some peeling off of users, but I don't think it will be significant and that is why they would go ahead with it. Whatever your beliefs about offline/online, the reality of modern games and software is that they're increasingly tied into the internet. That's not just a movement from corporations looking to sell you more, mine more data about you, and protect their interests to an offensive degree, that's something that enough consumers want based on what they buy. Whether this negatively affects me or you or MS is up in the air right at this moment, since this is still a rumor and one with little information and context.
 
Sony forum? No, it's a bitch about asshole companies practices forum. I could give 2 shits about Sony, but hey, they're not trying to screw me as hard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

will games start to require windows 11 soon ?
2
340
IAmRei replied
Switch 2 will require an internet connection / system update to use an SD card
2
53
4K
DenchDeckard replied
Assassin's Creed Shadows needs an online connection to install on PS5
2 3
101
5K
Fortress of Regrets replied
Qualcomm Job Posting Suggest the next Xbox will be based on ARM
2 3
122
1K
simpatico replied
‘We stand ready’: Nightdive says it wants to start remastering Xbox 360 and PS3 era games
Game Dev  2 3
107
5K
fastest finger replied
Top Bottom