Support NeoGAF

[Fuz]

Pros:
No piracy
Everyone is one the same game version

Why the fuck do you care?

Those are not pros at all.

 

[FunkMiller]

Any time an always on requirement has existed with a single player game, there is ALWAYS fuckery to be had, usually involving attempts to fleece gamers of more money, in one way or another.

Also, when I buy a game I want to know I can play it until I decide to stop... not when the fucking publishers do.

 

[Satansblade]

What console are you playing through a power outage?

Where do you take your console to? How often does that happen?

Whichever one I want. I have a 20k watt diesel generator as well as a full Solar roof with enough stored power for 48 hours. And a wood stove.
I live in the North. Our internet is shockingly excellent here, but our power grid is not.

 

[Satansblade]

I am trying to be 100% physical on ps5 aside from Some good deals on psn.
And yeah, I have hundreds of games on gog and steam but it is what it is. Steam game on pc you have some control over. Not like you do on consoles

While I fully and completely support people wanting physical games, I haven't bought a physical game in almost a decade. Longer than that on PC. In fact, even when I know physical is cheaper, I'll buy digital. I hate clutter, I hate plastic cases, I hate physical media anywhere except my retro consoles, and I hate swapping disks.

I also hate the majority of online gaming outside of RTS's and Diablo/Diablo Clones, so I don't much worry about servers. I'm an old man. By the time online gaming came around, it was just meaningless to me.

 

[Roni]

It seems to me like people in the gaming community love to make hay over the most random of things, but before I call this random, I really want to better understand it.

My consoles are connected to via ethernet cables... they're always online. This is absolutely not a big deal to me. My PC is similarly always online (ethernet). My Macbook is always online (ethernet/wifi). There is nothing internet connected in my house that isn't always connected.

Which makes me wonder, what is with the vitriol towards things requiring an internet connection? Is there a legitimate concern here or is this just one more thing to get angry over?

*antagonism

This just came off as privileged, honestly.

 

[ResilientBanana]

I love the disc vs download agreement as if it matters.

 

[Calling 911 Melts Beams]

as the main character of this video game we all call life im the protagonist of always online

 

[Teletraan1]

My internet is fine. The company that requires me to connect to them is the one that always has issues, especially at launch of a product. Then you have to factor in why did they require me to connect? For some sort of anti piracy shit or for an actual reason that enhances the game. 9 times out of 10 it is for anti piracy shit with almost zero benefit in the game. All that is doing is punishing the people who actually bought the product with a lesser product. Also these game companies are awful money grubbing whores who will shut down a game server in a few years because they already got paid upfront. I like to play old games and a lot of these games that have a shitload of hooks to online elements that are just fluff are going to be unplayable without a patch from the company or from the fandom.

 

[KungFucius]

Jesus Christ, it is not just the fucking connection. If they put it in as a requirement it is because the game design and their monetization scheme makes use of it. Always online games are designed to feed you crappy, repetitive content and to hock MTX shit. I don't want that shit in my games because it usually means less fun. I am thinking of games like Fallout 76. That game could have had an offline mode for single players with MP once you get familiar enough with the game, but instead they made it online all the time and tweaked the gameplay to match the new model. This made the game worse than FO4.

 

[LRKD]

More important than anything else preservation. The ability to not just play it tomorrow, but in 5, 10, 100 years from now. And also the ability to play it how it launched. You want to play Destiny 2? You can still do that today sure. But you want to play Destiny 2's base game, and first 2½ DLCs? Literally impossible. They 'updated' it right out of the game. Anyone who doesn't get this is must have suffered some intense brain rot.

It's like movies, people want to be able to rewatch classic movies, like say Star Wars. And people also want to be able to rewatch Star Wars, without insane Disney/George Lucas revisions and retcons ruining a classic movie. Literally no different for video games, people want to be able to replay it, and enjoy it the same way it was when they enjoyed it before. Always online makes this impossible if devs decide to update the game, or close the servers.

 

[supernova8]

I'm explicitly irritated by single player games being always online.
It's jut not necessary. It doesn't add anything to the experience for me as a consumer so why would I be happy about it?

The other problem is that if a game needs to be connected to the game server at all times to be played at all, what happens when the company decides to take the server offline? You may say "oh but you're not even going to play it by the time they turn off the servers" - two responses: 1) fuck off because I expect to be able to play the games I buy as frequently or infrequently as I choose because I bought them and 2) if a game doesn't do well commercially but I happened to like said game, and they turn off the servers prematurely, even bloody worse.

Two scenarios:
1) the game no longer works at all and my purchase has lost its remaining value. It's literally just a disc in a box (or a digital purchase with no use).
or
2) the developers patch the game so that it works without needing to be connected.... great but that only serves to prove that there was no real reason for the game to require an internet connection beyond DRM, and perhaps to push microtransactions.

I understand that game companies want to avoid DRM but I mean.... sorry but that's not my problem. I'm not obliged to give a shit about them. I'm the customer. I'm the one paying the money, not the other way around.

OP's argument sounds like the same bollocks used to justify the move toward a police state - "Well if you have nothing to hide what's the problem?"

 

[ironmang]

What benefit is there to always online? To the consumer.

 

[Rykan]

Did you play Outriders on release? No, because no one did, because the servers were fucked. I'd like to play Anthem again for a little bit because the gameplay was kinda fun, but microsoft has locked my account and my game is now worthless.

I don't like being beaten over the head with mtx ads on the start screen. I don't like the start up taking longer because the game has to log me in every time I start it up. I don't like the fact that the game will become literally unplayable in a few years when the servers shut down.

Also they're harvesting all your data and stuff. And if your house has spotty wifi you're fucked. Also you're forced to download every update even if sometimes they break the game.

A load of people who played FO76 on release had their personal details leaked.

There's tonnes of other reasons it's shit but I can't be bothered to type them out.

All the games you mentioned are online multiplayer games or at the very least games that depend on character progression being shared for both single player and multiplayer. I understand frustration and opposition to mandatory online connection for single player games, but requiring an online connection for games which are designed foremost to be played online is completely reasonable.

 

[kvltus lvlzvs]

Whichever one I want. I have a 20k watt diesel generator as well as a full Solar roof with enough stored power for 48 hours. And a wood stove.
I live in the North. Our internet is shockingly excellent here, but our power grid is not.

Absolutely, totally, 100% badass. Good job, mate, I hope to get to that point someday.

 

[nkarafo]

OP:

MY consoles are connected
MY PC is always online
MY Macbook is always online
MY House is always connected
MY internet is fast and stable

Also OP:

Why are other people concerned?

Is there a legitimate concern here

Yes. There is NO REASON why a single player game should be always online. It doesn't add anything to the game or benefit it in any way imaginable. You can argue as much as you want that it doesn't affect you or you don't care but it doesn't change the fact that there's no reason to have TWO extra dependencies for single player games to work (both your ISP's internet connection and the publisher's servers need to function), other than maybe publishers having more control over our libraries, which isn't something that benefits you or me, just them.

 

[nkarafo]

How long until you expect GT7s servers to go down? Enough to get your money's worth?

I think Sony just recently shutdown some PS3 servers... that's more than enough time in my mind, but maybe others expect those servers to be available for life.

So OP, you said you game since the 80s, do you still enjoy games from that era?

Do you have a collection of retro games at all? Are these games working?

Now ask yourself the same question. How many of those old games would still be functioning today, if the internet existed back then and all these games needed a functional server to be able to even work?

 

[NickFire]

I don't usually care, but when it becomes a problem for me its always at the worst time. Either near launch (when you really want to play your new game) or around holidays (when you don't have to work and can sit home and play).

 

[nkarafo]

It doesn't matter, the big majority would move on, you can still find people who play kof 98, but they aren't representative of regular behaviour, the rest has moved on to kof15.

It's the behaviour specifically I'm talking about, let's not act like people still booting up their entire library of 20 year old games is anything other than outlier behaviour. I'm one of those outliers, heck even on a niche enthousiast forum like gaf, I doubt the majority still has their 20+ year old systems hooked up like I have.

It's about having a relative perspective, gaf might scream bloody murder about a game having always online, but I reckon the vast majority of the entire gamer demographic doesn't give a shit, or even affects them at all since there's an entire generation now that grew up being always connected.

Retro gaming market is huge right now. There's a reason publishers re-release older games all the time in their services. Wanting to play an older game over a newer one is not even a niche behavior.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

OP:

MY consoles are connected
MY PC is always online
MY Macbook is always online
MY House is always connected
MY internet is fast and stable

Also OP:

Why are other people concerned?




Yes. There is NO REASON why a single player game should be always online. It doesn't add anything to the game or benefit it in any way imaginable. You can argue as much as you want that it doesn't affect you or you don't care but it doesn't change the fact that there's no reason to have an extra dependency for single player games to work, other than maybe publishers having more control over our libraries, which isn't something that benefits you or me, just them.

Everything is a trade off in life.

If publishers can reduce piracy rather than increase prices, does always online benefit the everyday gamer who now doesn't need to pay as high a price for publishers to make their margin?

The idea that there is no benefit to the end user is pretty short-sighted.

Publishers price games to sell as many units as possible with the highest margin as possible, but they do account for stuff like piracy, just like stores account for shrinkage. It's money that goes back into

 

[Mibu no ookami]

So OP, you said you game since the 80s, do you still enjoy games from that era?

Do you have a collection of retro games at all? Are these games working?

Now ask yourself the same question. How many of those old games would still be functioning today, if the internet existed back then and all these games needed a functional server to be able to even work?

I still enjoy games from that era.

I have a retro collection of games, but all digital, so yes, they work.

I think the era of gaming from like the early 2000s to mid 2000s is kind of a wash. I don't think these games have retro value at all and as I mentioned before most of these games end up getting patched when servers get taken down.

I don't have my original game gear or my original SNES or NES, but when there is a will there is a way.

 

[Spaceman292]

Someone doesn't have an argument and decides to casually discriminate against millions of people. Like clockwork.

My argument is the first reply in the thread. Also I'm not discriminating against people who naturally say y'all out loud, I've just noticed that there's a weird correlation between people who feel the need to type it out and people who have bad takes.

 

[KungFucius]

Another problem I have with always online is forced updates. If they auto updater doesn't work or hasn't finished downloading the update, I can't play. That is bullshit. I only have a few hours here and there when I can game, telling me I can't play my game because you updated something is total shit. Fuck you. I'll install your fucking update later, I want to play now.

 

[nkarafo]

If publishers can reduce piracy rather than increase prices, does always online benefit the everyday gamer who now doesn't need to pay as high a price for publishers to make their margin?

The idea that there is no benefit to the end user is pretty short-sighted.

Publishers price games to sell as many units as possible with the highest margin as possible, but they do account for stuff like piracy, just like stores account for shrinkage. It's money that goes back into

Keep believing they do this to reduce piracy. Keep ignoring all the posts in this thread about the matter.

And if you really believe that if they managed to beat piracy once and for all they wouldn't increase prices for you and me then i don't know in what universe you live in.

I still enjoy games from that era.

I have a retro collection of games, but all digital, so yes, they work.

I think the era of gaming from like the early 2000s to mid 2000s is kind of a wash. I don't think these games have retro value at all and as I mentioned before most of these games end up getting patched when servers get taken down.

I don't have my original game gear or my original SNES or NES, but when there is a will there is a way.

Thing is i do have my original SNES and N64, PS2, etc and i can choose to play those versions instead of re-buying them on a modern service.

Also, keep in mind that only a small portion of the games are ported to those services. Now imagine if all those games needed a functional server. The vast majority of old games would be dead by now. How's that for preservation?

 

[Reizo Ryuu]

Wanting to play an older game over a newer one is not even a niche behavior.

Depends how much older, the people pining to play some 15 year old game are definitely in an extreme minority.

 

[nkarafo]

Depends how much older, the people pining to play some 15 year old game are definitely in an extreme minority.

I disagree. A lot of people are willing to play a lot older games than that. How many people you think played the Goldeneye re-release? And that's a 25 year old game.

 

[Reizo Ryuu]

I disagree. A lot of people are willing to play a lot older games than that. How many people you think played the Goldeneye re-release? And that's a 25 year old game.

Disagree all you want, it's the new game that sells 5-10 million copies in the first month, not some re-release of [insert nostalgia] game.

 

[Spaceman292]

Everything is a trade off in life.

If publishers can reduce piracy rather than increase prices, does always online benefit the everyday gamer who now doesn't need to pay as high a price for publishers to make their margin?

The idea that there is no benefit to the end user is pretty short-sighted.

Publishers price games to sell as many units as possible with the highest margin as possible, but they do account for stuff like piracy, just like stores account for shrinkage. It's money that goes back into

They don't raise prices because of piracy you dongle. They raise them because they want more money. That's also the only reason they pull this always online shit. To think anything else is just hilarious.

 

[HercRaato]

Hurricanes and losing power for an extended period of time is a reality I deal with consistently. I can fire up a generator to have some power, but the internet may be out for days.

Oh great let me sit here and be completely miserable for week since I can't play single players games without an internet. I own it I should be able to play it offline.

 

[G-Bus]

I agree with you OP until I don't have internet randomly and than I fucking hate this always online bullshit.

If I'm paying $80+ for a game that's not solely a multiplayer game then I should be allowed to enjoy that whether I have an internet connection or not.

 

[phant0m]

i honestly don't care about it other than when it breaks or prevents my ability to play. i game at home with a fast connection that's always up, but for me that's not the problem.

when i can't play Diablo, Outriders, etc by myself on launch day because the servers are getting melted -- that's the problem.
when i can't play a game 10 years from now because the servers or company are gone -- that's the problem.

power outages are an overblown issue, you can go outside or read a book for a few days.

i know others also have slower/unreliable internet, and that also sucks.

 

[nkarafo]

Disagree all you want, it's the new game that sells 5-10 million copies in the first month, not some re-release of [insert nostalgia] game.

Okay? What's your point? You defend always online in single player games because.... A lot of people only want to play the next AAA game and move on? I mean, i get it, mainstream gaming sucks and all but why defend it so fiercely?

My point is, even if only a few people play old games, there's still no reason for them to not be able to. There's no reason to have this dependency on single player games. But it's not "just a few people" anyway, retro gaming is a huge market, almost an industry by itself.

 

[Tiago Rodrigues]

This so called antagonism makes total sense.

If i buy a product, i don't want it to be treated as a service that will one day stop existing.

If i pay a fully priced game i want it to always work. It's not rocket science.

If you want your always online game releases, then charge what's appropriate for them. Or turn them into a F2P experience with the usual microtransations.

Every time i turn GT7 on i always wonder if i'll be able to play it in a decade from now tbh. Hopefully it gets a final update so i can play it offline.

 

[Reizo Ryuu]

Okay? What's your point? You defend always online in single player games because.... A lot of people only want to play the next AAA game and move on? I mean, i get it, mainstream gaming sucks and all but why defend it so fiercely?

I think you've been reading someone else's posts, I never "defended" anything, I even said it's definitely a problem if you have bad internet.

 

[Fuz]

If publishers can reduce piracy rather than increase prices

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH​

 

[nkarafo]

I think you've been reading someone else's posts, I never "defended" anything, I even said it's definitely a problem if you have bad internet.

My bad, just got that vibe from your posts.

 

[Fuz]

I think you've been reading someone else's posts, I never "defended" anything, I even said it's definitely a problem

FTFY

 

[jroc74]

Trying to force something that was happening naturally was probably the biggest issue.

Games that were PSN and XBL only was a thing during the PS360 days. As in no physical media was available, they were digital only.

And sometimes, there were licence issues which meant no internet no way to play.

Making bigger, AAA games online only was inevitable. There was no need to force some type of DRM.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

They don't raise prices because of piracy you dongle. They raise them because they want more money. That's also the only reason they pull this always online shit. To think anything else is just hilarious.

Why not increase them to 80 dollars or 90 or 100?

Go on you dongle.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Keep believing they do this to reduce piracy. Keep ignoring all the posts in this thread about the matter.

And if you really believe that if they managed to beat piracy once and for all they wouldn't increase prices for you and me then i don't know in what universe you live in.




Thing is i do have my original SNES and N64, PS2, etc and i can choose to play those versions instead of re-buying them on a modern service.

Also, keep in mind that only a small portion of the games are ported to those services. Now imagine if all those games needed a functional server. The vast majority of old games would be dead by now. How's that for preservation?

Who said they would never increase prices just because they defeat piracy.

Is piracy the only factor in lower margins?

I swear, some of you are clueless.

Preservation is on consumers not companies.

 

[nkarafo]

Who said they would never increase prices just because they defeat piracy.

You did.

Preservation is on consumers not companies.

Nobody asks from companies to actively fight for preservation. Just to not try to actually prevent it by making it an impossibility.

 

[Nickolaidas]

It seems to me like people in the gaming community love to make hay over the most random of things, but before I call this random, I really want to better understand it.

My consoles are connected to via ethernet cables... they're always online. This is absolutely not a big deal to me. My PC is similarly always online (ethernet). My Macbook is always online (ethernet/wifi). There is nothing internet connected in my house that isn't always connected.

Which makes me wonder, what is with the vitriol towards things requiring an internet connection? Is there a legitimate concern here or is this just one more thing to get angry over?

*antagonism

If, for whatever reason, (forfeited rights issues, bad sales, etc.) the company decides to shut down the servers of the game, you can't play it again. Ever. Doesn't matter if you paid 5 bucks on a sale, or 70$ when it came out and decided to shelve it until (much) later, or you got an itch to play it after ten years.

You can't play the game again. Ever.

This immediately makes me want to invest time on the game even though I do not currently want to invest in said game due to backlog, RL issues or whatever, because for all I know - especially if the game did shitty sales - the game may be dead in 4-6 months.

So yeah, if the Single Player component is tied to always online, it's a problem for me.

 

[01011001]

If, for whatever reason, (forfeited rights issues, bad sales, etc.) the company decides to shut down the servers of the game, you can't play it again. Ever. Doesn't matter if you paid 5 bucks on a sale, or 70$ when it came out and decided to shelve it until (much) later, or you got an itch to play it after ten years.

You can't play the game again. Ever.

This immediately makes me want to invest time on the game even though I do not currently want to invest in said game due to backlog, RL issues or whatever, because for all I know - especially if the game did shitty sales - the game may be dead in 4-6 months.

So yeah, if the Single Player component is tied to always online, it's a problem for me.

it doesn't even need to go offline for it to become unplayable.

the original story campaign of Destiny 2 is gone... completely wiped from existence.
I actually wanted to replay it in coop with a friend who hasn't played Destiny 2 but did play the first one, only to find out that the game I payed full price for at launch is basically wiped from existence.

 

[spons]

An anal sex scene in the middle of Redfall wouldn't add much to the overall experience yet they most certainly won't add that. If something doesn't provide tangible value to a game, don't weasel it in. Fuck always online.

 

[SportsFan581]

I think it's an unfortunate thing for the long-term preservation of single player games, but other than that I really couldn't care less about it. I don't see myself gaming on a device without an internet connection at this point anyway.

Though, if you are going to force a connection make sure that the connection is reliably available. No one likes to get kicked from a single player game because the connection to the remote server was lost. No room for SimCity level connection problems.

 

[ZoukGalaxy]

"Hey, everyone should be like me in my perfect life, I don't see a problem" or "It's not a problem until it is" or "Let's forget the past and repeat every mistakes" or "Let's trust corporates, they care about us" or "I don't understand why you're poor, if you don't have money, just buy it".

Take you pick.

Yeah, you are the old man for this one "I achieved my confort, I don't care about anything else".

People are incredibly selfish and narrowed.

Hint: always online only benefit to corporates.

/tired

 

[01011001]

I think it's an unfortunate thing for the long-term preservation of single player games, but other than that I really couldn't care less about it. I don't see myself gaming on a device without an internet connection at this point anyway.

may every game you like be always online and have severe server issues every other day,
I wish this upon everyone who thinks this way tbh.

 

[systemr123]

It seems to me like people in the gaming community love to make hay over the most random of things, but before I call this random, I really want to better understand it.

My consoles are connected to via ethernet cables... they're always online. This is absolutely not a big deal to me. My PC is similarly always online (ethernet). My Macbook is always online (ethernet/wifi). There is nothing internet connected in my house that isn't always connected.

Which makes me wonder, what is with the vitriol towards things requiring an internet connection? Is there a legitimate concern here or is this just one more thing to get angry over?

*antagonism

Online games should be always online. Single player games have no reason to having to be always online. In history all game publishers shown to remove their servers after a few years. How will you play your always online single player game now?

 

[SportsFan581]

may every game you like be always online and have severe server issues every other day,
I wish this upon everyone who thinks this way tbh.

Well, that's why I included that they better keep the damn servers online.

 

[01011001]

Well, that's why I included that they better keep the damn servers online.

yeah, well, historically speaking the percentage of always online games that were unplaybe or barely playable for multiple days due to server issues is high

 

[Beechos]

Its all about control. Companies want to control their shit and as the consumer we want to control our shit.