Support NeoGAF

[mavs]

That aside, Steam instantly updates your games when your PC is offline? Steam only pushes updates if it's online.

You may have missed the huge shitstorm that's been going on, but when the OP said "always online" that means a console that stops working when it's not online. That kind of console also only pushes updates if it's online.

By the definition you seem to be using the PS4 is also always online, by the OP's definition it is not.

 

[Eusis]

I think cloud processing was a legit one. Maybe?

All of the others are things that can be done with a system that can stay online but doesn't have to.

Doubt it, for gaming purposes I'm sure processors are more than good enough for anything that a game would need, and anything that can be buffed wouldn't be able to be satisfactorily done through cloud computing. We'd have to have infrastructure from 10 years into the future pared with home computing technology for the 80s, maybe 90s for THAT to be a valid point I'd think.

 

[RedSwirl]

Uhh... developers might have less incentive to jam multiplayer into every damn game since they know you can't trade them in?

 

[ElectricKaibutsu]

There's no answer I can make that isn't incredibly sarcastic.

 

[Osiris]

You think DDoSing websites is fun, wait until you piss off some leet guy in CoD and get DDoS'd off your console entirely, no COD, no single player games nothing. oh that will be fun, and if the old win-nuke epidemic in the 90's taught us anything, it taught us that this will happen, to someone, somewhere.

 

[Woo-Fu]

Always online = more revenue = more games.

Kind of interesting how some people want this industry to keep making great games but don't want them to change their business model(s) in response to a changing world.

 

[onQ123]

The same advantages that Paying to play online brought:

delusional fans who tell themselves that it's better that way.

 

[rudieboy77]

Back in the early 90's I sure wished there was a way to always be logged into the internet and not tie up my phone line.

 

[crazy monkey]

piracy probably is the closest answer plus sleep updates.

 

[vg260]

Buying from the web store and having the game downloaded and ready to play when you get home from work?

That's a good one, but I think it should still be optional.

 

[velociraptor]

I can't think of any other than cloud saves.

 

[onQ123]

Buying from the web store and having the game downloaded and ready to play when you get home from work?

That's a good one, but I think it should still be optional.

That doesn't require that you to have to be online to play a game.

 

[Raticus79]

This doesn't apply in every case, but for some games - integrity and meaning. For Diablo III, items will be essentially worthless on consoles, not even any third party trade, because people can just hack their saves and create them.

 

[Opiate]

Buying from the web store and having the game downloaded and ready to play when you get home from work?

That's a good one, but I think it should still be optional.

You can do that right now on PC and it is not an online-required platform.

 

[Toppot]

You may have missed the huge shitstorm that's been going on, but when the OP said "always online" that means a console that stops working when it's not online. That kind of console also only pushes updates if it's online.

By the definition you seem to be using the PS4 is also always online, by the OP's definition it is not.

I am aware of the current 'shit storm', I was answering question in the op that was advantages of an always online console vs one that is online/offline.

Advantages of an always online required console vs an unrequired always online console, is a different question with different answers.

 

[vg260]

You can do that right now on PC and it is not an online-required platform.

Not sure what you mean, does steam have a feature like that?

 

[Penguins&PolarBears]

Demonstration of next generation speech technology and comparison of offline vs. online streaming results:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iY4S5BQWTMA&t=2m35s


If the NextBox is supposed to be your voice controlled home entertainement center there is going to be a dramatic difference in quality of offline vs. online performance.


Virtually all of Microsoft's major investments in technology are on the backend data centers. If their customers are not connected to the web then almost all of the innovations that Microsoft is working on are worthless.

 

[onQ123]

Better Voice Command & maybe better AI in games if there is a big database in the cloud.

 

[onQ123]

Demonstration of next generation speech technology and comparison of offline vs. online results:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iY4S5BQWTMA&t=2m35s


If the NextBox is supposed to be your voice controlled home entertainement center there is going to be a dramatic difference in quality of offline vs. online performance.


Virtually all of Microsoft's major investments in technology are on the backend data centers. If their customers are not connected to the web then almost all of the innovations that Microsoft is working on are worthless.

damn we posted about the same thing at about the same time lol.

 

[mavs]

I am aware of the current 'shit storm', I was answering question in the op that was advantages of an always online console vs one that is online/offline.

Advantages of an always online required console vs an unrequired always online console, is a different question with different answers.

Well actually it's the question the OP was asking. So far we've got one semi-legit answer that I saw: it enables new features because developers can assume an internet connection is available.

 

[zer0blivion]

Not sure what you mean, does steam have a feature like that?

They added that functionality last year.
http://store.steampowered.com/news/7971/

 

[AcceptableGhost]

the advantage is that you get to let corporate greed jeopardize the history of video games going forward

at least put it on PC so -someone- out there can make it future proof even if you don't give a shit

 

[Yagharek]

The only advantage I can think of is the money saved by not buying always online devices.

 

[Eusis]

Not sure what you mean, does steam have a feature like that?

So do iOS and Android devices. They don't become useless slabs of silicone and glass if the internet isn't visible either.

 

[vg260]

They added that functionality last year.
http://store.steampowered.com/news/7971/

Whoa. I never knew that.

 

[Klocker]

again sorry for the cross posting but this thread is asking for this response

from bkilian on B3D I found interesting (*HE is NOT confirming nor denying existence of this feature*)

he is commenting on the state of an always online environment and it's implication beyond OMG DMR!!!:

"What benefit does the consumer see?"

-----------------------
bkilian:
Playing the game without the disc in the drive. If the amount of whining we see every time a 2 or more disc game gets released is any indication, this is a _huge_ benefit. Heck, as I recall, there was months of whining because you couldn't eject the disc tray remotely.

But let's get serious here for a second. They don't need always-online for DRM. The Steam model uses online activation, and doesn't require always online. So let's get it straight: always-online is not a DRM thing. You can lock down piracy perfectly well with one-time codes and online activation, which only requires a connection the first time you start a game. In fact, that would even work for not requiring the disc in the drive.

Always online is a feature that developers can rely on being there, something they cannot do with a current console, or even PC. Like the hard drive in the PS3, or analog triggers on the controller. Requiring always-online is telling the developer: "Don't be afraid to incorporate features that rely on an internet connection, we will guarantee it is there". Things like a RTS game that uses google maps as it's terrain engine, or persistent online worlds, or integrating an ARG into the gameplay. Consider Ubisoft's Watch_Dogs with a modification of the game phoning your actual phone and interacting with you as if you're in the game world.

It's the next logical step in gaming. We can quibble about whether now is too soon, but it's going to happen regardless, if not this coming generation, the next one.

the reasoning is if you do not make it available absolutely across all users, devs will never invest the resources necessary to do it (or rarely)

the theory is, the only way to advance the use of the technology is to make it ubiquitous like PS3's HDD or any peripheral (as they are with Kinect2)

Having it 100% across the user base will offer devs security to experiment

 

[Nafai1123]

Always online = more revenue = more games.

Kind of interesting how some people want this industry to keep making great games but don't want them to change their business model(s) in response to a changing world.

So all that MS ad revenue goes to publishers?

The console needs mandatory online for MS to get ad revenue? What about all those ads that they are already getting revenue from now on the 360?

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

he is commenting on the state of an always online environment and it's implication beyond OMG DMR!!!:

Why are those features mutually exclusive to a console that has a Wii24 type connection but that allows playing games when the internet is down?

 

[Dibbz]

I said 'The advantage of being always online is that the console and everything on it are always up to date.'

You said 'PS3 already does that.'

I showed how it doesn't and then you say thats software/hardware fault. You lied, by your own admission the PS3 does not automatically keep everything up to date.

Your argument was vidzone and crap doesn't update. That is a software limitation. The PS3 could look for an update if they wanted it to. Having a constant online connection would do nothing if the software wasn't told to go look for updates.

That aside, Steam instantly updates your games when your PC is offline? Steam only pushes updates if it's online.

Lets say Steam releases an update for TF2 at 10pm and my computer is off. The next day at 2 pm I want to play TF2, I turn on my PC, Steam logs in and I then have to wait for the update to download and install. If the PC was 'always on' it would download at 10pm the day before and be ready as soon as I wanted to play.

This is an advantage of an always online console.

No that is an advantage of a console supporting a low powered state which it is able to go look for updates. The online connection does not need to be always online, it can work with the offline/online setup we have right now.

For example, I leave my PC on all night, Steam will update all my games.

 

[Klocker]

Why are those features mutually exclusive to a console that has a Wii24 type connection but that allows playing games when the internet is down?

I guess we won't know until we see what Devs can come up with across the cloud and how it impacts offline gameplay.. I am not FOR the no offline game play... I do not agree with it, I do think there are some reasons as to why they may go in this direction, in fact there has to be, that we don't understand yet otherwise it makes no sense. (this is just one theory of why they would)

 

[DR2K]

It allows the publisher to control consumers that want to be controlled. Great for guys and gals with daddy fetishes.

 

[Dibbz]

again sorry for the cross posting but this thread is asking for this response

from bkilian on B3D I found interesting (*HE is NOT confirming nor denying existence of this feature*)

he is commenting on the state of an always online environment and it's implication beyond OMG DMR!!!:



the reasoning is if you do not make it available absolutely across all users, devs will never invest the resources necessary to do it (or rarely)

the theory is, the only way to advance the use of the technology is to make it ubiquitous like PS3's HDD or any peripheral (as they are with Kinect2)

Having it 100% across the user base will offer devs security to experiment

Sorry but this is not really a valid point. You can have a multiplayer only game without forcing "Always Online" at the console level.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

I am not FOR the no offline game play... I do not agree with it, I do think there are some reasons as to why they may go in this direction, in fact there has to be, that we don't understand yet otherwise it makes no sense.

So everything you posted is pretty much irrelevant.

You can't think of any reasons other than DRM to require a mandatory online connection at a system level to play any games regardless of their individual need to be online.

Nobody in this topic can.

That's the point of this topic.

 

[Dibbz]

I do think there are some reasons as to why they may go in this direction, in fact there has to be, that we don't understand yet otherwise it makes no sense. (this is just one theory of why they would)

I guess you never heard about Diablo 3 or SimCity. Companies do shit that makes no sense all the time.

 

[Klocker]

So everything you posted is pretty much irrelevant.

You can't think of any reasons other than DRM to require a mandatory online connection at a system level to play any games regardless of their individual need to be online.

Nobody in this topic can.

That's the point of this topic.

what? :lol

Give me one advantage "always online" brings

I am presenting an example of an advantage of how it would be used since Ms has not told us yet if, how, or why... don't know how you came to your conclusion

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

what? :lol



I am presenting an example of an advantage of how it would be used since Ms has not told us yet if, how, or why... don't know how you came to your conclusion

I used the words you wrote in a quotation.

Here they are again:

I am not FOR the no offline game play... I do not agree with it, I do think there are some reasons as to why they may go in this direction, in fact there has to be, that we don't understand yet otherwise it makes no sense.

 

[Toppot]

Well actually it's the question the OP was asking. So far we've got one semi-legit answer that I saw: it enables new features because developers can assume an internet connection is available.

Give me one advantage "always online" brings, what can be done that cannot currently be done with the online/offline solution?

That definitely sounds very close to the first question I posted, rather than the second one...

But ok to answer Advantages of an always online required console vs an unrequired always online console.

As you say yes it allows developers to put in features that need always online such as ones that use real world live data, like how many people are playing a Vita game at a certain postcode/zip code right now, ARG like.

Reduced risk of piracy, unable to properly copy games with their encryption and requiring always online to play means you must have a legitimate copy.

A guaranteed better experience when they are using the console. (Lame reason but true)

Also much better compensation to be expected when the server does fail as the console would become very useless (Though we don't know if not being online would simply stop games and other online services or whether it would stop some dvd/bluray/video playback to.


This is of course not to say there are obvious disadvantages to, like not being able to play a purely single player, no internet actually required game.

 

[Klocker]

I used the words you wrote in a quotation.

ok

I do think there are some reasons as to why they may go in this direction, in fact there has to be, that we don't understand yet otherwise it makes no sense. (this is just one theory of why they would)

Advantages:

1: See above initial post in this thread about cloud processing adding and embellishing gameplay

2: we do not know yet exactly why MS would do it but there must be reasons, otherwise common sense based on what we know dictates they would not do it

3: nobody KNOWS exactly why yet because they haven't told us yet, hence the point of this thread... so we can guess and express reasons what advantages they must see if they do it

 

[Toppot]

Your argument was vidzone and crap doesn't update. That is a software limitation. The PS3 could look for an update if they wanted it to. Having a constant online connection would do nothing if the software wasn't told to go look for updates.

I thought we were dealing with realities where possible, sure the PS3 could look for updates if they programmed it that way, the ps2 could to if it was programmed to.

No that is an advantage of a console supporting a low powered state which it is able to go look for updates. The online connection does not need to be always online, it can work with the offline/online setup we have right now.

For example, I leave my PC on all night, Steam will update all my games.

A console could be in a high power state and do the same thing, the advantage of a lower power state is that it uses less power, there is no additional features to being in low power, there are less features.

It might not need to always be online but it certainly has an advantage, as per my example, which is the point, you wanted advantages.

 

[mclem]

Sorry but this is not really a valid point. You can have a multiplayer only game without forcing "Always Online" at the console level.

You could have Wii Sports with the Wii Remote being sold as a GC peripheral, too. It wouldn't have been as successful. There's a significant factor in being able to guarantee the existence of a hardware component rather than have it be optional.

The belief - possibly incorrect, but we'll see - is that forcing always-online will help the system from a business perspective. Possibly from the form of DRM, possibly in the form of microtransactions, possibly in the form of ads, possibly from giving the multiplayer-only games the opportunity to compete on the same playing field as other ones.

Now, none of those are of much benefit to the consumer directly, I accept that. Do you accept that always-online may stand to benefit the *publisher*? The decision must benefit *someone*, logically.


Now here's the thing: It very easy to write off a benefit to publishers as helping them be greedy; I understand that. It's important to bear in mind, though, that the interaction between third party publishers and consumers goes both ways.

If Durango is more profitable than other systems, it is possible - by no means guaranteed, but possible - that it'll in turn get preferential treatment by publishers. If it leads to more support for the platform... that's an advantage.


I'm not presenting this as 'correct'. It's a cynical business decision. But the thing about cynical business decisions is that they're often effective. We'll see, ultimately, if this one is.

 

[dragonflys545]

ADS!

 

[sibarraz]

Your achievements/trophies will sync instantly?

 

[Penguins&PolarBears]

I guess we won't know until we see what Devs can come up with across the cloud and how it impacts offline gameplay.. I am not FOR the no offline game play... I do not agree with it, I do think there are some reasons as to why they may go in this direction, in fact there has to be, that we don't understand yet otherwise it makes no sense. (this is just one theory of why they would)

The bottom line is that Microsoft Research has put all of it's investments into building out data centers and "deep neural networks" that process data faster than any local machine could. Now you cut off all of your customers from those data centers by removing online and suddenly all the computational power and available databases are cut. The difference in capabilities of performance and functionality that Microsoft can provide when you are connected to their data centers vs. when you are not is already dramatic and will only increase as the generation progresses.

It's the difference of having a voice controlled system that is a frustrating primitive joke of no value vs. having a natural language system with instantaneous and almost 100% accuracy across the globe by the end of this decade.

The voluntary opt-in data they capture via kinect 3D video and audio would help them create a searcheable database that would make processing video and images incredibly fast and accurate. The question is whether we want to be limited for the next decade to the primitive processing abilities of this 8-core joke of a CPU with miniscule data storage that they are putting in PS4/720.

The conflict we're facing is MS Research has a 2020 vision of a game console and most gamers today still have an N64-era idea of how a game system should work (just add more RAM to make it better). It's a sad state of affairs.

 

[Dibbz]

As you say yes it allows developers to put in features that need always online such as ones that use real world live data, like how many people are playing a Vita game at a certain postcode/zip code right now, ARG like.

Why can that not be done now if you are online? Your friendslist already tells you what games they are playing, and Vita is able to search the local area for players that have Vita's and tells you what they have been playing. Neither require always online.

Reduced risk of piracy, unable to properly copy games with their encryption and requiring always online to play means you must have a legitimate copy.

So security for games is worth more than freedom for consumers to play offline? Sony were able to combat piracy to an extent this gen with the PS3 without needing to resort to crazy Always Online, need to report back to the mothership systems.

A guaranteed better experience when they are using the console. (Lame reason but true)

How?

Also much better compensation to be expected when the server does fail as the console would become very useless (Though we don't know if not being online would simply stop games and other online services or whether it would stop some dvd/bluray/video playback to.

How about the ability to play games when the servers are down and not need to give out compensation at all.

 

[rohlfinator]

You could have Wii Sports with the Wii Remote being sold as a GC peripheral, too. It wouldn't have been as successful. There's a significant factor in being able to guarantee the existence of a hardware component rather than have it be optional.

The existence of the hardware component is already guaranteed.

Forcing people to use it all the time does nothing to help give multiplayer games a bigger potential base.

The bottom line is that Microsoft Research has put all of it's investments into building out data centers and "deep neural networks" that process data faster than any local machine could. Now you cut off all of your customers from those data centers by removing online and suddenly all the computational power and available databases are cut. The difference in capabilities of performance and functionality that Microsoft can provide when you are connected to their data centers vs. when you are not is already dramatic and will only increase as the generation progresses.

It's the difference of having a voice controlled system that is a frustrating primitive joke of no value vs. having a natural language system with instantaneous and almost 100% accuracy across the globe by the end of this decade.

The voluntary opt-in data they capture via kinect 3D video and audio would help them create a searcheable database that would make processing video and images incredibly fast and accurate. The question is whether we want to be limited for the next decade to the primitive processing abilities of this 8-core joke of a CPU with miniscule data storage that they are putting in PS4/720.

The conflict we're facing is MS Research has a 2020 vision of a game console and most gamers today still have an N64-era idea of how a game system should work (just add more RAM to make it better). It's a sad state of affairs.

None of this shit (assuming this is even the actual direction of Durango) requires the system to be mandatory online. Individual games might need it, but the vast majority of games will not.

 

[mclem]

The existence of the hardware component is already guaranteed.

Forcing people to use it all the time does nothing to help give multiplayer games a bigger potential base.

That bit was largely guesswork as to the broad reasons for always online. The crux of the post was the rest of it, the conclusion of the intended result being 'pubs make more money'. Why do you think Microsoft are adding always-online, does it ultimately lead to third-party publishers making more money, and if so, do you acknowledge the final points?

 

[Dibbz]

It might not need to always be online but it certainly has an advantage, as per my example, which is the point, you wanted advantages.

Where is the advantage? I'll use the example I already mentioned in the last post.

If I leave my PC on Steam will update all my games without me needing an Always Online system.

 

[rohlfinator]

That bit was largely guesswork. The crux of the post was the rest of it. Why do you think Microsoft are adding always-online, does it ultimately lead to third-party publishers making more money, and if so, do you acknowledge the final points?

There is no pro-consumer reason. If Microsoft is doing it, it's either for DRM reasons or to guarantee an ad feed to all Xbox owners.

As for whether it benefits publishers... I have no idea. Developers and gamers seem really pleased with Sony right now, so I think it's going to take something pretty huge for publishers to ditch the PS4 entirely and give Durango exclusive support.

 

[Penguins&PolarBears]

None of this shit (assuming this is even the actual direction of Durango) requires the system to be mandatory online. Individual games might need it, but the vast majority of games will not.

Supposedly the system requires Kinect microphone and camera to be connected for the system to function (according to rumors) in order to control every aspect of the console from games to TV and video to Internet searches to potentially the lights in your home. The systems ability to accurately understand your voice and gestures in every single element of the system are directly connected to their data centers making this data crunching and matching possible. If you are disconnected from their data centers then nothing would work well. Voice recognition will be much slower and less accurate, gesture and image recognition would be much slower and less accurate in every single game and every single function of the machine.

With respect to games if designers are being encouraged to create games that make use of Kinect voice and gesture and Kinect needs Microsoft data centers in order to work well then developers no longer have the confidence to build Kinect voice/gesture features into their games.

Cutting off the internet connection is cutting off the system at the knees. The computational power of the next Xbox is on the server side, that is the "special sauce," that is the "wizard jizz." The box in your living room is not the computational power house. The data centers of boxes on Microsoft's end are where the computational power resides and will enable them to produce functionality on the console that their competitors can't match.

 

[SneakyStephan]

You can't play whenever your internet craps out or when they inevitably shut down their drm servers, which causes you to go outside and exercise (maybe?) so you'll live longer.

EA and MS: the non-gamer's best friend, looking out for your health.