I'm sorry, explain to me what you would be losing? The promise of future unannouced games that may or may not be what you want? From your own description MS has provided you years of enjoyment with the 360 and what you are angry about is that someone may be doing that better next year?
Frustration is a sad excuse to justify personal attacks on someone(especially some of the more explicit ones) who is paid to give his opinion over nothing more than video games.
I don't think anyone should be making personal attacks on anyone. And I haven't. So if you're mostly annoyed at anyone telling him to die in a fire or something, I agree.
But if you don't think it's obtusely dismissive for a
video game critic to say "so what" to the idea of a major console manufacturer / game publisher / game developer going always online for its next console, regardless of there being a competitive alternative, I don't know what to say.
Maybe always-online ends up being a fabulously successful idea, because enough people ignore it, don't know, or don't care, and it inevitably becomes the norm, even though it has no real benefit for consumers. That is bad.
Maybe always-online ends up being an unmitigated disaster, and Microsoft hemorrhages so much money on a dead Durango that they bail out of the console business. That is ALSO bad.
Maybe enough discussion and blowback occurs before the fact and MS reconsiders their plans.
These all seem like things a writer for a video game site might be marginally interested in talking about. And it seems like legitimate fodder for forum discussion. Video games are inherently "small potatoes". They're fucking video games. But if we're going to bother talking about them at all, this is exactly the kind of thing "worth" talking about.