It was insanity to charge for multi on original Xbox. And yet...
Does Microsoft not want us to get Durango?
See below. It's happened. I've heard about it happening to others. Granted, you're correct in that most vacation spots have guest wifi, but there are places that don't.I don't think I know anyone who doesn't have an Internet connection. Nor do any places I've vacationed or visited in the last 5 years lack Wi-Fi.
Even most airlines have Wi-Fi now.
You have to be visiting some pretty remote places on the globe to be avoiding Internet access. In which case your new Xbox is more likely to die from the extreme elements before it even attempts to connect to the net. Microsoft isn't building a mobile device here. This is like complaining that your cable box needs to be connected to coax to be used.
That actually happened to me three summers back...and I couldn't play my arcade games because of a lack of connection. We did other things, but it was still sort of annoying.
.3rd console curse is a real thing
Nah. That's totally different. Online play on consoles was shiny and new and they had by far the best implementation of it. They could get away with that.
I see it the opposite. People arguing in favor of optical discs and offline consoles are holding back progress and potential for advancements.
By eliminating people with 56k dial-up ISPs from Xbox Live, they made the experience better for everyone with broadband and Xbox. It made Xbox Live better to exclude people without broadband. It enabled them to build a better service and better games. It also encouraged people without broadband to wake up and move into the modern era and drop AOL era services for something better.
There are a lot of advancements you can make with an always on console that you couldn't do with an optional online console. And I mean beyond the cynical justifications of ad serving and DRM protection. Cloud computing and connection have enormous potential to advance consoles and game design.
Eh, I wouldn't read much into that. It isn't a silly point either. All of those are examples of MS saying "You'll buy it from us even if it is a crappy deal". I'm not saying they're the only ones to pull stuff like that, but they sure do it more often. It all comes off as arrogant. I bought a 360 in 2006 and I got sick of the rip offs. After my second red ring, MS expected me to pay, so I just junked the system and kept my PS3 and PC. They haven't done much to change my view of them yet.I'm having a hard time not quoting your avatar with your silly post here.
Well, they've gotten away with it so far.I think MS thinks its consumers will put up with anything. Look what they've put up with so far.
$100 20 GB HDD
$100 Wifi receiver
Confusing point scale to make things seem cheaper
4 years of a defective console
8 years of a console that scratches games
8 years of paying for an online P2P service
Being sold services free elsewhere
Being sold that a week early demo is a feature when they just delay Silver
Barely bothering to release first party games for 3 years.
At this point, I think MS thinks they can do whatever they want and their consumer base will eat it with a smile.
I really need to see where the 40% coming from though, and how old the data is. And I assume it's calculating on 360 owners and not a survey.
Well, I have Time Warner Cable, so it looks like if this is true, then I won't be able to play from 5 to 9 pm Monday through Friday due to my connection constantly dropping.
While this rumor could be entirely false, always-online for the nextbox is something I could easily believe.
I'm actually kinda glad that Halo 4 disappointed me. I can take or leave the Halo series now and MS doesn't have anything else I am attached to.
Eh, I wouldn't read much into that. It isn't a silly point either. All of those are examples of MS saying "You'll buy it from us even if it is a crappy deal". I'm not saying they're the only ones to pull stuff like that, but they sure do it more often. It all comes off as arrogant. I bought a 360 in 2006 and I got sick of the rip offs. After my second red ring, MS expected me to pay, so I just junked the system and kept my PS3 and PC. They haven't done much to change my view of them yet.
Because it disagrees with basic, fundamental business sense?I don't know how else to explain it.
Some customers spend more than others. Sometimes a lot more. If they are connected, they can pay for Live, music streaming, video rentals, be served ads, buy digital games and DLC. If they're not, they can't.
What's so hard to understand? total number of players is not total profit.
They could still be connected playing singleplayer games on 360. Like I do.A lot of casuals own 360 and a lot of casuals only play single player, hell some 'hardcore gamers' prefer single player games.
Let's say they intended to do it and are now making a u-turn (no online-requirement, no used games block): How would this affect their launch schedules? Would it be irrelevant or would it push the console several months further?
Honest questions, btw.
Jesus dude, does your internet never go out for a few minutes/hours at a time?
Some of the rumours about Durango are quite bizarre to say the least, pretty much every rumour with Durango is something that would go on a 'Do Not Want' list for next gen lol.
It only makes sense if they want to introduce a new business model that requires online connection and would out-profit those that are disconnected. Something like no used games?Because it disagrees with basic, fundamental business sense?
So say you have 10 customers with broadband and XBL, you'd get about 10 bucks a month out of there. You have 5 who don't have live or broadband but they'll buy a nextbox and games and controllers or what not to play with friends locally, you get about $6 from there a month.
From a max profitability standpoint, what sense does it make at all to leave that extra $30 on the table or possibly to Sony and limit yourself to that $50.
You or anybody else have failed to explain that....
Lol... Wow.They could still be connected playing singleplayer games on 360. Like I do.
The lack of empathy displayed by a number of gaffers in this thread is really depressing.
We've really become so individualistic and self-centered that we don't give 2 shits about our fellow gamer and their situations. It's all about the self, wether I can get access to the latest and greatest shit from the companies and damned if the others can't get it, so long as I get my fix. Even If we do have the bestest ISP and internet connection in the world with 99.99999% uptime and no drops to the server side, can we at least spare a thought and understand that not everyone is as blessed or as fortunate as we are? Or how about the dangerous precedent this (if it is true) could potentially set for the future of console gaming?
The bigger picture folks. Spare a thought.
The world is not ready for DD. The infrastructure is not there yet, ISP caps are a hindrance, connection speeds are a hindrance, retailers, etc.
Europe still buys plenty of disc based PC games IIRC.
DD is the future, but you have to make a smart transition to that future.
It only makes sense if they want to introduce a new business model that requires online connection and would out-profit those that are disconnected. Something like no used games?
They could still be connected playing singleplayer games on 360. Like I do.
Netflix stock has soared since then. Sometimes people just don't care when companies are abusing them or making dumb decisions.What market?
Netflix thought they could tell their disc service customers to guy buy a separate service from streaming. Even that was a huge mistake.
If this is officially confirmed then I have one less console to buy.
Thats nothing to do with progress, thats choice and many people prefer optical media and always will which is why we are many years away from a DD only future (even Sony said that themselves).
Because it disagrees with basic, fundamental business sense?
So say you have 10 customers with broadband and XBL, you'd get about 10 bucks a month out of there. You have 5 who don't have live or broadband but they'll buy a nextbox and games and controllers or what not to play with friends locally, you get about $6 from there a month.
From a max profitability standpoint, what sense does it make at all to leave that extra $30 on the table or possibly to Sony and limit yourself to that $50.
You or anybody else have failed to explain that....
I can't wait for this rumor to either be confirmed or squashed, the amount of discussion and discourse for whenever this rumor pops up is some of the most tedious discussion I've seen.
Tons of people telling everyone they aren't getting a unannounced console, a few people that defend the always online requirement for some reason, a few people who use the thread to tell everyone that Microsoft is the gaming equivalent of Satan.
You are incredibly optimistic if you think broadband in the US is going to improve so much in that period of time that publishers would be willing to forsake the brick and mortar crowd.if by "many years" you mean the generation after this coming one, then yes, you are correct.
That's not a good comparison.
All of our previous consoles could work offline. An expectation has been set.
.
Why would it effect the launch, its probably a simple software update to change this if it was even true in the first place.
So you you believe in 6 years, that blu-ray will go the way of the dodo when even in 2013 CDs/DVDs still have huge presence in the market place?if by "many years" you mean the generation after this coming one, then yes, you are correct.
Seems fine to me as I never play single player offline at all.
if by "many years" you mean the generation after this coming one, then yes, you are correct.