EA'd done enough other crap IE abstaining from Dreamcast and forcing Microsoft to kill their own franchise to get Madden online on Xbox (with EA still running the servers anyway!) that it doesn't really matter that the NFL would've gotten an exclusive one way or the other. Most likely in that imagined scenario Sega curbstomped Madden they wouldn't have gone budget priced, and would've taken the license themselves anyway.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
EDGE: The next Xbox: Always online, no second-hand games, 50GB Blu-ray and new kinect
- Thread starter Hanmik
- Start date
Raonak
Banned
That was then, this is now, the days of the PS2 style success is over, and multiplatform games are the norm.
It'll be even simplier next generation, look at how damn close the specs of the durango and orbis are. they're using the exact same CPU setup. Porting should be even simplier and cheaper than this gen.
They'd be loosing money NOT making multiplatform games.
Baconsammy
Banned
There won't be a confirmation of any feature by anyone qualified to speak to it until Microsoft acknowledges there's even a console.
Yes. Read the OP for one confirmation!
They'll just mandate every future 360 game come with a code and stay online to play anything after the next firmware update.
Now that is plain evil.
Uh, no shit? I'm failing to see your point here.
Well, there is a console, so I doubt we are all waiting with baited breath on that one.
And this is the third "confirmation" as it is. Something is up, and its pointing to this online/anti used games stuff
Fucking hell. If both MSony go this route then good bye console gaming for at least a few years. Handheld it is for me.
God I hope this is not true. Sony don't you fucking dare
It makes no sense....I mean Sony relies a LOT on smaller markets in the world to sell their hardware over time. This is one of the reasons PS2 kept on selling so well well in to the current gen. Measures like anti used would fuck them over in those markets and not to mention in Japan itself. The Japanese used games market is huge afaik, and unlike for MS, it's a very important market for Sony
Do we have anyone here going to the event on the 20th? I would love it if some media personnel can ask them this up front. Has anyone asked Shuhei yet on twitter!?
God I hope this is not true. Sony don't you fucking dare
It makes no sense....I mean Sony relies a LOT on smaller markets in the world to sell their hardware over time. This is one of the reasons PS2 kept on selling so well well in to the current gen. Measures like anti used would fuck them over in those markets and not to mention in Japan itself. The Japanese used games market is huge afaik, and unlike for MS, it's a very important market for Sony
Do we have anyone here going to the event on the 20th? I would love it if some media personnel can ask them this up front. Has anyone asked Shuhei yet on twitter!?
w1ck3dn1nj4
Member
And this open system you speak of will be disappearing too if MS can help it. Theres a reason why they are so keen on shoving Metro in the face of PC users now. Windows 8 is just the start of many measures to slowly condition the market into accepting this controlled environment as the new windows standard going forwards (where they can dictate how big a slice of the cake they want to eat). The Xbox live model coming to a PC near you :-D
Petrae
Member
And this is the third "confirmation" as it is. Something is up, and its pointing to this online/anti used games stuff
This is the trend that I point to when starting to believe that things happen as advertised. There's a lot of similarity going on here. Similar themes. We've been hearing rumblings regarding some sort of anti-used mechanism for quite some time now. Then a pretty reputable magazine reports it. Then a pretty credible source here confirms it.
This isn't a normal rumor. There's consistency. There's traction.
I'm not selling out 100% on the validity of the story here just yet... but I'm seeing enough with trends to start believing a bit more. It's a realistic possibility at this point to me, and I'll be very interested to see where it goes once Microsoft officially comes forward.
If this somehow comes to fruition for one or both upcoming consoles, how do they announce this? (Specifically about used games, I can see them somehow managing to spin the always-on thing in a positive way).
Do they say straight up that used games are done? I can't see that happening during an unveiling like the 20th, or at an E3 press conference.
Does this info come out from an interview sometime before huge launch. "Oh by the way..."
Do first parties say nothing until game journalists try some things with the new consoles and find out this is true?
Do they say straight up that used games are done? I can't see that happening during an unveiling like the 20th, or at an E3 press conference.
Does this info come out from an interview sometime before huge launch. "Oh by the way..."
Do first parties say nothing until game journalists try some things with the new consoles and find out this is true?
Saint Gregory
Member
But when will they be losing out? Both consoles start out at zero, if publishers decide to support one and not the other at the start which one will gamers buy? I see a lot of people making this gen out to be the new norm but this gen played out the way it did exactly because nothing played out the way publishers planned. Had the PS3 repeated the success of the PS2 then support, especially from japanese publishers, would have followed the trend of the PS2 generation.
A single dominant console is a much more attractive option to 3rd parties than having all three consoles be successful as most don't have the resources to give equal support. Look at what happened to the 3DS, the Vita and now the Wii U. The reason they're not getting tons of western support isn't that these are terrible, unsupportable platforms, it's more that western publishers don't have enough teams to make games for them and the PS360 and the upcoming platforms.
MaulerX
Member
What if both consoles come with the tech built in, only they won't activate or start using it until a few years into the generation? That would be a way of easing people into it and would avoid a launch backslash. It would still suck but by then (after owning the consoles for a few years) people would be more willing to accept the change.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Publishers don't want used games, so either console which prevents them from existing would likely get support.
Either neither does it, or both do.
Either neither does it, or both do.
I woouldn't be so confident of that. EA has publicly stated they are not against used games, as it frees up liquidity for consumers to purchase more games.
Duxxy3
Member
I don't think activision is against it either because they make a boatload from DLC, even with used games. Also, people trade in their old call of duty towards the new one every fall.
If anything it's the mid level publishers that are pushing for this. The ones that aren't heavily invested in an annual line up of games with DLC on top of that.
Saint Gregory
Member
Have any publishers publicly said the opposite? I would imagine there would be backlash against any publisher that supported anti-consumer practices.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
I always had the impression it was publishers that pushed for this. What do hardware makers lose with used games? It brings more people on their online "platform".
Ugh, so dumb either way.
Ugh, so dumb either way.
Unknown One
Member
It has to be one of the big publishers (EA, Ubisoft, Activision) that is advocating for Anti-used games. EA is advocating for always online DRM. If I were to take a guess it'll be Ubisoft. They have the more single player games.
It seems to be mainly developers having a cry about used games. Publishers haven't really said much at all from what I've seen.
I don't think anyone is pressuring MS to do this. With no used games they get to enjoy a piracy proof console with total control over pricing, which in turn boosts their digital offerings since those prices aren't undercut by used games.
Saint Gregory
Member
That would make sense, developers have a lot to lose if it appears that their games aren't selling well when meanwhile used games and piracy are eating into the potential.
Damn, that would be crazy if this is what's really going on. If that's the case then I take back what I said about thinking we have anything to fear about Sony losing support.
Unknown One
Member
I wouldn't say it's piracy proof. I don't think anything is. You might be onto something though. Always online DRM is implemented to put a halt to put a halt to piracy and if the Blu-ray disc microsoft use require a special burner, perhaps it's to prevent piracy as well.
I know nothing on technology though.
Publishers typically have the most to lose because they fronted the development costs. If a game bombs the studio has already been paid for the actual work and the publisher isn't going to recoup a cent. Honestly I expected EA to complain about it prior to the latest article.
If their new optical drive gets reverse engineered they're not going to prevent piracy at all. That's what has happened to the 360 and the PS3, the specifics of how the optical drive works have been figured out so precisely they can be emulated and as of now it's basically undetectable. Not to mention the fact both the 360 and the PS3 have glaring security holes which have been exploited to run unsigned code. This could all happen again next generation if they're not careful.
phosphor112
Banned
I have a hunch (just a hunch) that Sony won't go the same route. Even if the publishers like MS's always on or no used games DRM, the "core" market would likely prefer Sony's device, creating a larger market share. Not only that, but Online passes still exist.
Hell, if publishers really were so upset about used game sales, Sony can have opt for something like 20 dollar passes instead of 10. Increasing the entry point is always a bad thing, and that's what no used games will do. Even if it drops to 50 (which I 100% doubt it would) it's still more expensive than someone buying a game used for 15, and then paying an online pass for 20.
Hell, if publishers really were so upset about used game sales, Sony can have opt for something like 20 dollar passes instead of 10. Increasing the entry point is always a bad thing, and that's what no used games will do. Even if it drops to 50 (which I 100% doubt it would) it's still more expensive than someone buying a game used for 15, and then paying an online pass for 20.
Never in there have I implied an order of magnitude, so I'm not sure what your insinuating or why. More sources have corroborated the Durango having always online and locking out used games than PS4, are you trying to argue fact otherwise?
This is a pretty baseless right here. Yeah I prefer MS' IPs, but that has nothing to do with the argument I'm making, so I'm not sure why you'd bring that up. It doesn't make a difference whether Sony or MS does it first, the only difference is Sony has much more to lose financially because of the state of the company as a whole if they don't go along with what whatever MS is doing with used games. The exact same situation exists if you flip the companies; why wouldn't MS also concede to locking out used games if Sony does so as well? They get more money for each game sold, and on top of that both companies prosper as well from controlling the market and eliminating used games altogether from the next gen race.
What is their alternative choice if put in that position? Even if publishers still release on both consoles, they will show favouritism, more easily give exclusives, possibly even allocate more resources to whatever company is scratching their back more. And, console sales and userbase is a function of developer support, so you could say to some degree sales could theoretically be recouped by players switching consoles anyways to whichever one has the most clear support. Of course this is a gross oversimplification, but a factor that should not be ignored.
That's what is bullshit about all of this. The online pass system, I think, is fair. You buy a game new it's in the box, you buy second hand and you either but it online or don't buy it at all. To me there's nothing wrong with the current system, I cannot understand why they would want to alienate a huge part of their consumer base. Hell, Kinect's supposedly mandatory, how about making the online pass a QR code that comes in the box? My SmartTV uses QR codes to pair with Youtube on my phone, it works great. Would save typing in codes at least. Same with Sony and their Dual-cam if they pack it in. There's better solutions than this anti-consumer nonsense that is going to bite them in the ass.
Yep, if one party doesn't do it it means they stand a chance to get a bigger market share. This means 'imo' the publishers won't ignore either side. On one hand they will have higher margins and on the other hand they will have a bigger market
AstroNut325
Member
None of this matters. MS will offer the 540 for $250-300 on contract and it will sell like hotcakes. The general consumer doesn't know or care about this sort of stuff... especially if the price is right.
Well, there's also talk that the Orbis will be effectively more powerful too, so if Microsoft does super locked down console that's also just weaker for games, and is likely more expensive by requiring Kinect... yeah, I really could see things going pretty badly unless their marketing is amazing. And I think for the multimedia hub angle Sony's still significantly more cachet, even if they aren't exactly THE name they were in the 90s or before.
So you are arguing that Sony will have to make their console more anti-consumer in order to attract consumers?
Sony knows they need to differentiate their console from MS. If they offer the exact same stuff as ms, both good and bad, they've lost because MS will just moneyhat their way to dominance.
So how can Sony differentiate themselves? Selling a console that allows used games, doesn't require an always online connection, focuses on games, doesnt have forced bigbrother kinect2, and is more powerful would be a good start.
Yes, I'm sure there will be publishers who will grant MS timed exclusives and other things. And I'm sure that many people will choose the Moneyhat720 because they need GTAVHD day one.
But there will be a substantial number of people who will prefer what Sony is offering because it is not the same thing as MS. What that number is is unknown by everyone here. It would be an epic battle.
But like I said, if Sony offered exactly the same thing as MS, they will lose big time because why would anyone buy the console that gets all the games late, if at all, when the other console is exactly the same?
Yeah MS, apologize for the thing you haven't even announced!
Deadly Joker
Member
On the system you haven't even announced!
You left out the part of you being a master of Western Game Development.
alexandros
Banned
No. I'm saying you are downplaying the sources and emphasizing the fanboyism. 'Ignorance is bliss' we can get into discussions about whether a lack of evidence constitutes evidence of absence but right now there is only one reality. Microsoft's decision has more concrete evidence than Sony's. Sure, it might be wishful thinking to believe Sony won't follow, but to say that all those who have not yet accepted the reality and the possible detrimental outcomes from publishers is some anti-consumer defeatist drivel.
No. I'm saying you (like myself) are not above your own biases. Your previous post is already justifying such decisions -- rationalizing Microsoft's choices so they then become palpable and acceptable and allow for you to continue your investment in that ecosystem without having to acknowledge how anti-consumer this is. 'They don't really have any other choice I think' -- I think they do have a choice. As naive as it may be, I'm not ready to roll over and let MS have their way.
There is plenty of debate to be had about the consequences of no used games sales. I'm sure each respective party has done analysis and reached a conclusion. That doesn't mean the crux of the argument should be about and how and who should give into this model -- it should be about whether or not this model benefits us. Sony is vulnerable -- they couldn't afford implementing this design if it backfires.
The disparity would have to be insurmountable in order for a third-party publisher to 'give exclusives.' You aren't going to see unfettered favoritism when your development budget is $100 million dollars and you want to make all of that back. And, again, the technology behind these machines is incredibly similar. You're telling me EA wouldn't throw Sony a port because they aren't blocking second hand sales?
Edit: SP
Baconsammy
Banned
Well, there is a console, so I doubt we are all waiting with baited breath on that one.
And this is the third "confirmation" as it is. Something is up, and its pointing to this online/anti used games stuff
Neither will bother me, but I will adjust my spending habits. Now I buy and then resell quite a few games. I'll either rent more or buy less. Depending on the options. Always online is a complete non-issue since in the past 8 years with 360-PS3, I've never once played my games offline. Other than when PSN crapped the bed.
I doubt you'll be able to rent if they go this route. So you'll just be buying less. Everyone loses!
I can't believe we've got confirmations of always being online. That's just too stupid. Launch periods are always characterised by some problems. What if there are severe problems? People would be unable to play games AT ALL. That's another RROD-Level bad PR Trainwreck incoming. :lol
There is no way Ubisoft will abandon Sony. AC3 sold 12 million copies in one quarter, 6 on x360 and 6 on PS3.
Black Republican
Member
Why were people against Microsoft using Blu-Ray for their new console, because they lost the format war? who cares, you expect them to stick with DVD's for ever? Really?
That meme always finds one or two victims.
R10Neymarfan
Member
Seriously DVDs are the reason why some developers are constrained this gen. I mean some games now have to have 2-4 discs to even play. You guys want that for the next 8 years?
Microsoft backed HD DVD to be a thorn in Sony's side. The format they really cared about was digital download.
swordsman720
Banned
MS should implement a double sword things. The Switch to be able to switch it off when (ROUTE for) block for used games failed.
I totally against it. In my past I have bought used games for my consoles now and then.
MS should think carefully with the mandatory things. If they cause lots of troublesomes for the consumers, your product will be no touched by them.
Don't be stupid MS, I am still your big fan>>do not let me down.
Impliment block used game to gain time exclusive for some particular games is not worth to allinate lots of potential buyers of your consoles.
I totally against it. In my past I have bought used games for my consoles now and then.
MS should think carefully with the mandatory things. If they cause lots of troublesomes for the consumers, your product will be no touched by them.
Don't be stupid MS, I am still your big fan>>do not let me down.
Impliment block used game to gain time exclusive for some particular games is not worth to allinate lots of potential buyers of your consoles.