Next Xbox May or May Not Require Online/Allow Used Games (Update 4/25/13)

He is also acting which is part of his job, at least in the first video.

People are still over reacting to RUMORS. Wait till MS shows something themselves. If people think this outrage is bad wait a few years (whether It's 10,15, or 20+) when Sony takes down content server side that you can't re-download (or the 360 for that matter if the 720 isn't backwards). it's just another reason I'm glad Steam is around and that the digital content for consoles isn't looking hot at all.
 
[quote name='hufferstl']It's a rumor people. Please get mad after any announcements/explanation of their motive. And if you don't want whatever it is after the announcement then enjoy your PS4.[/QUOTE]
Usually rumors are dispelled after a while and not have people who work for you confirm them.
 
[quote name='whoknows']Always online is needed due to pirates.

I don't know why people are getting mad over it. If you guys want to get mad at someone, get mad at the people who pirate games.[/QUOTE]

Always online doesn't stop pirates. They will find a way to pirate things no matter how many hurdles you throw at them.

It's why the makers of Witcher basically went DRM free and said "Go ahead, pirate if you want to.".
 
[quote name='GUNNM']Usually rumors are dispelled after a while and not have people who work for you confirm them.[/QUOTE]

The entire system is a rumor right now.

From what I read, that guys said "always on", not "always online". Those are different things.

I just think that people need to react to fact and not rumor. People are acting buthurt about a product that doesn't even have a name yet.
 
[quote name='hufferstl']The entire system is a rumor right now.

From what I read, that guys said "always on", not "always online". Those are different things.

I just think that people need to react to fact and not rumor. People are acting buthurt about a product that doesn't even have a name yet.[/QUOTE]

The full rumor is that the system will require an internet connection to start games. Can't change that through wordplay.

Better to react early to rumors while there's still a chance, however small, that they could realize it would be a bad idea.
 
I don't think this will happen, for now at least
If always online is implemented on consoles I'll go back to my pc
No used games wouldn't really impact me since I pretty much always buy new, but I have a right to be able to resell anything I paid for, I can do it with pretty much anything else; lets see phone and TV manufacturers implement "one owner, no used merchandise" (I know it's not the same but just to go to the hyperbole)
Used game restrictions could also impact those of us who don't really buy used games... would it be linked to the system? to my live account?
As for always online on PC, sooner or later every single game with that features as been cracked by the community to allow offline play.
Worst case scenario, I'll still be able to play what's on pc EVEN if I have to pirate the games.
I sometimes feel that little by little they are pushing the boundaries of what we consider acceptable, online passes, first DLC, or DLC thats actually already on the disc but you have to pay to unlock it are terrible unjustified anti-consumer ideas that we have all learned to live with, its only a matter of time until they figure what else can they shove down our collective throats
 
[quote name='hufferstl']I just think that people need to react to fact and not rumor. People are acting buthurt about a product that doesn't even have a name yet.[/QUOTE]
I don't see any logical reason to wait in this case. Care to explain? Good luck.
 
[quote name='ShockandAww']I don't see any logical reason to wait in this case. Care to explain? Good luck.[/QUOTE]

Again, until this feature is announced and explained, I don't see the point in adding fuel to the fire when nothing is concrete yet. It all seems like a waste of energy.
 
[quote name='hufferstl']Again, until this feature is announced and explained, I don't see the point in adding fuel to the fire when nothing is concrete yet. It all seems like a waste of energy.[/QUOTE]

This is the internet, it's all about wasting energy; it's not like we're curing cancer here or solving world hunger...
 
[quote name='hufferstl']Again, until this feature is announced and explained, I don't see the point in adding fuel to the fire when nothing is concrete yet. It all seems like a waste of energy.[/QUOTE]

Hypothetically let's say that people complaining now does end up making Microsoft change their minds about requiring always online. Would that be a waste of energy? Personally I think it'd be well worth the "effort". It'd help both consumers and MS in the long run imo.

Now the other possibilities would be that 1) they don't listen and include it anyway or 2) They were never going to do this to begin with.

If 1, then good luck to them I suppose. I won't support it and hopefully others won't or if 2) You may be right and it may be a waste of energy, but to me it makes no sense not to take that "risk" in case they are in fact planning to include always online.
 
You know what would make Microsoft change their mind even faster - If no one bought it. Hopefully soon, Microsoft announces their plans and we can put this issue to bed.
 
[quote name='Monsta Mack']Glad to see the guy was fired. Hope he enjoys unemployment.[/QUOTE]

Fired? Where did you read that?
 
[quote name='Monsta Mack']He is also acting which is part of his job, at least in the first video.

People are still over reacting to RUMORS. Wait till MS shows something themselves. If people think this outrage is bad wait a few years (whether It's 10,15, or 20+) when Sony takes down content server side that you can't re-download (or the 360 for that matter if the 720 isn't backwards). it's just another reason I'm glad Steam is around and that the digital content for consoles isn't looking hot at all.[/QUOTE]
Well, this isn't all about the digital content expiring. It's the possibly of blocked used games, not being able to play in rural areas, and being charged gold memberships to play a single player game, etc. etc.
 
[quote name='hufferstl']You know what would make Microsoft change their mind even faster - If no one bought it. Hopefully soon, Microsoft announces their plans and we can put this issue to bed.[/QUOTE]
Everybody will still buy it, they know that, that's why they have the balls to do it.
Everybody was up in arms about EA doing microtransactions on $60 games, but still they made plenty of profit off of this "new" idea.
 
There are people that are willing to get Nextbox knowing they have to pay for live so they can have their achievement/friend list/gametag. Also very little impact on their core user base, people who mainly use it for COD/Halo/Madden online.
 
I do think MS takes a hit though. I do most of my gaming on the 360 and I won't buy an "always on" box that limits used games. I will stick with what I have currently and as long as the PS4 remains what they have advertised I will eventually get that. It is just a bad idea to shut an entire device down if it loses an internet connection. Why would I want any device that stops working the minute I am disconnected. Hell my old iPhone still works as an ipod and itouch even though I do not get phone service through it. Imagine if Apple made it so the entire device was useless without cell service. Just a bad bad idea.
 
[quote name='whoknows']Always online is needed due to pirates.

I don't know why people are getting mad over it. If you guys want to get mad at someone, get mad at the people who pirate games.[/QUOTE]

I disagree. Pirating 360 games is not an issue, imo. Why should I get mad at a pirate? They got to play SimCity and Diablo III on Day 1 release, good for them. Get mad at the publisher for doing this shit. DRM hurts paying (full price paying, even) customers. Your "always online" iPad, iPhone, etc, that that dumb guy mentioned on twitter, still plays games when not online, *shocked*.

They want always online for 2 other reasons imo:

1. The $10 used game pass. It's an extension of the $10($15 in some cases) online pass that you all (gaming community) gave in to, good job. "We need it to pay for the servers, boo hoo" Ya ok then why am I paying for GOLD? To watch Netflix? Hahahahahaha, TV/other does it for free. Oh, and Arkham City was a single player game, good one.

2. Advertisements. They want those ads to be updated every second and littered all over your dashboard.
 
[quote name='TooPoor']Well, this isn't all about the digital content expiring. It's the possibly of blocked used games, not being able to play in rural areas, and being charged gold memberships to play a single player game, etc. etc.[/QUOTE]

1) Gamestop is "excited" for the next xbox. Seems like used games will still work, or Gamestop is getting money somehow.

2) Rural area? DEAL WITH IT /meme

3) Gold memberships to play single player... what?
 
[quote name='TooPoor']Everybody will still buy it, they know that, that's why they have the balls to do it.[/QUOTE]
Yep I'm scared that the people thinking this way are right, but hoping they're wrong.

We've allowed for the most part the season passes and the on disc DLC and the online passes and the shoe horned multiplayer and whatever other garbage we got this gen, but I think always online or no used games will be the straw/s that break the camels back. I just don't think people are going to accept either one if one console does it and the other doesn't.

Who knows. It's going to end up being a good test for my faith in humanity I think :)
 
[quote name='Monsta Mack']Always online doesn't stop pirates. They will find a way to pirate things no matter how many hurdles you throw at them.

It's why the makers of Witcher basically went DRM free and said "Go ahead, pirate if you want to.".[/QUOTE]

The harder it is, the less likely people are to do it.

The only ones who still would are losers and people who couldn't afford the game anyways.
 
the truth is ppl are still going to get it, even if the rumor is true. I mean alot of ppl, especially the xbox fanbase. Yes, they might lose some sales, due to the always online feature. Look at the simcity issue with EA, tons of the simcity fanbase stuck by it, especially after EA throw them some bones,with the freebie games.
 
[quote name='cancerman1120']I do think MS takes a hit though. I do most of my gaming on the 360 and I won't buy an "always on" box that limits used games. I will stick with what I have currently and as long as the PS4 remains what they have advertised I will eventually get that. It is just a bad idea to shut an entire device down if it loses an internet connection. Why would I want any device that stops working the minute I am disconnected. Hell my old iPhone still works as an ipod and itouch even though I do not get phone service through it. Imagine if Apple made it so the entire device was useless without cell service. Just a bad bad idea.[/QUOTE]

Totally agree. I think they'll absolutely take a hit IF this all turns out to be true.

Still, I wouldn't be surprised if all these "reports" aren't MS piping websites with rumors to gauge a public reaction. It could be these are indeed features of the next Xbox -- or they could remove them at the last minute because of the public outcry, show up at E3 and look like heroes for saying "the rumors aren't true, it plays used games just like the PS4," etc. Until we see the official specs, I wouldn't rule anything out.
 
[quote name='YBX87']the truth is ppl are still going to get it, even if the rumor is true. I mean alot of ppl, especially the xbox fanbase. Yes, they might lose some sales, due to the always online feature. Look at the simcity issue with EA, tons of the simcity fanbase stuck by it, especially after EA throw them some bones,with the freebie games.[/QUOTE]

I honestly think MS is trying to see how far they can push their customers. I mean, think about it... it was only a few years ago that the 360 had rampant hardware issues but continued to sell well. And it was only a few years ago that MS was charging $100+ for a wi-fi adapter and 120GB HDD.

I think what they're hoping for is a migration of all the 360 owners moving on to the next Xbox regardless of any rumored negative aspects of the system... and it'll probably happen.
 
All I know is I got to read some enjoyable comments the last few days, and that's made it fun in itself. In reality though, I'll probably buy the new Xbox either way, I'd prefer if it didn't have an always online function and could play used games, but my system is never not connected online as it is and I know that I'll get the new Halo game day one, and put enough time into that alone to make the purchase worth it, but it's still understandable why people are upset.
 
[quote name='Vinny']I honestly think MS is trying to see how far they can push their customers. I mean, think about it... it was only a few years ago that the 360 had rampant hardware issues but continued to sell well. And it was only a few years ago that MS was charging $100+ for a wi-fi adapter and 120GB HDD.

I think what they're hoping for is a migration of all the 360 owners moving on to the next Xbox regardless of any rumored negative aspects of the system... and it'll probably happen.[/QUOTE]

i mean just look at some of the comments on this thread. Ppl are still saying they will get the next gen xbox, even if the rumors turns out to be true, but they might just wait till it gets cheaper. I know those who said are it are in the minority. It does not change the fact, a large amount of consumers do not care. THey are the same ppl paying $60 msrp for games.
 
[quote name='YBX87']i mean just look at some of the comments on this thread. Ppl are still saying they will get the next gen xbox, even if the rumors turns out to be true, but they might just wait till it gets cheaper. I know those who said are it are in the minority. It does not change the fact, a large amount of consumers do not care. THey are the same ppl paying $60 msrp for games.[/QUOTE]

The people who buy $60 games are the people whose opinions they actually care about. Game sales are so frontloaded that after about 3 months, they've already made a vast majority of their profit (not counting DLC). Since CAG's are so likely to wait for much longer than that, our purchases are like nothing to them. If they lose our business, I don't think they'll cry themselves to sleep.
 
[quote name='Salamando3000']The people who buy $60 games are the people whose opinions they actually care about. Game sales are so frontloaded that after about 3 months, they've already made a vast majority of their profit (not counting DLC). Since CAG's are so likely to wait for much longer than that, our purchases are like nothing to them. If they lose our business, I don't think they'll cry themselves to sleep.[/QUOTE]

I agree, but reading comments/posts on this forum, you would think otherwise.
 
[quote name='YBX87']I agree, but reading comments/posts on this forum, you would think otherwise.[/QUOTE]

What? I came here looking for a good debate, not agreement. *sigh*

Really though, as long as Microsoft can keep its servers in order and there's no massive downtime due to too many users (see: Diablo 3 launch, Sim City launch, World of Warcraft launch), most users probably won't even notice. That's a mighty big "if".
 
[quote name='Salamando3000']What? I came here looking for a good debate, not agreement. *sigh*

Really though, as long as Microsoft can keep its servers in order and there's no massive downtime due to too many users (see: Diablo 3 launch, Sim City launch, World of Warcraft launch), most users probably won't even notice. That's a mighty big "if".[/QUOTE]

lol, if all else fails, just throw the customers some freebie games to make up for their mistake.
 
[quote name='YBX87']lol, if all else fails, just throw the customers some freebie games to make up for their mistake.[/QUOTE]

Or if things get really really bad, just patch it out. Really doubt any of this stuff will do heavy server-side calculation. Microsoft's not gonna risk losing an entire console generation if things go to hell.
 
I don't much care if it's always online or not. It's bad PR and it does push your consumers' buttons, but if it's only a slight inconvenience, I don't think this will sink the new Xbox.
 
The best reason to add fuel to the fire now is to make Microsoft rethink its strategy if "always online" is its strategy. Why wait to tell them we don't want "always on" if there is even the smallest possibility that it's true?

A defeaning NO now may get them discussing it and, hopefully, shelving the idea.
 
[quote name='panzerfaust']I don't much care if it's always online or not. It's bad PR and it does push your consumers' buttons, but if it's only a slight inconvenience, I don't think this will sink the new Xbox.[/QUOTE]

Always online isn't an instant deal breaker for me, although it docks a load of points. The deal breaker for me is the "no used games" aspect. As a consumer, if I'm paying full price for a game, I should have the right to sell the game and recoup some of my costs, especially if I didn't like it.

This is the very reason I am very picky when it comes to digital purchases. The last two Xbox Live Arcade games I paid full price for are Minecraft and The Simpsons Arcade, which were games I was already familiar with and knew that I liked. Everything else digital I've bought in the past two years was on sale at a price I felt okay gambling on.
 
Anyone that can afford the new Xbox already has high speed internet, so who cares? MS is right to make fun of and/or ignore the whiners. They can't afford one anyways.

Not unless MS creates a welfare plan for it like they did with the 360 that is.
 
[quote name='whoknows']Anyone that can afford the new Xbox already has high speed internet, so who cares? MS is right to make fun of and/or ignore the whiners. They can't afford one anyways.

Not unless MS creates a welfare plan for it like they did with the 360 that is.[/QUOTE]

you talking about the xbox live $99 plan? i think ppl should worry more about having the RRod issues similar to the previous xbox 360, than all this always online.
 
[quote name='Kylearan']The best reason to add fuel to the fire now is to make Microsoft rethink its strategy if "always online" is its strategy. Why wait to tell them we don't want "always on" if there is even the smallest possibility that it's true?

A defeaning NO now may get them discussing it and, hopefully, shelving the idea.[/QUOTE]

MS doesn't make a decision based on what CAG or Neogaf think. They spent money on focus groups who probably told them they are okay with that.
 
[quote name='62t']More rumors

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=536163

Price will be $500 or $300 with contract.
No BC
Xbox 360 will drop to $99[/QUOTE]

Did they ever released numbers for how the "contracted" Xbox 360 did? For an old console, I can't imagine it being a good idea... but with a new console that a lot of people are (probably) going to want, it would likely be a more tempting offer.
 
[quote name='62t']MS doesn't make a decision based on what CAG or Neogaf think. They spent money on focus groups who probably told them they are okay with that.[/QUOTE]

The discussion is hardly confined to CAG or Neogaf.
 
[quote name='Kylearan']The discussion is hardly confined to CAG or Neogaf.[/QUOTE]

Doesn't matter, they are not going to gaming website for opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Kylearan']The discussion is hardly confined to CAG or Neogaf.[/QUOTE]

Still, people tend to vastly overestimate the value of 'popular' opinion. That guy in the twitter argument brought up Diablo 3 as a failed example of always online, namely because the requirement had sparked a massive internet backlash. Now, people like you and me browse message boards and news sites for our dose of gaming community culture, but in reality, that only represents an extreme minority of actual consumers. And while we raged on forums, Diablo 3 was breaking sales records.
 
[quote name='panzerfaust']Still, people tend to vastly overestimate the value of 'popular' opinion. That guy in the twitter argument brought up Diablo 3 as a failed example of always online, namely because the requirement had sparked a massive internet backlash. Now, people like you and me browse message boards and news sites for our dose of gaming community culture, but in reality, that only represents an extreme minority of actual consumers. And while we raged on forums, Diablo 3 was breaking sales records.[/QUOTE]
And of course, a lot of the people who raged were part of those sales records.

6NKZ608.png


Impotent rage is the best rage.
 
Always online isn't an instant deal breaker for me, although it docks a load of points. The deal breaker for me is the "no used games" aspect. As a consumer, if I'm paying full price for a game, I should have the right to sell the game and recoup some of my costs, especially if I didn't like it.
Click to expand...

That's the whole deal for me also. Maybe I'm in a minority, but I will absolutely not buy as many games for $50-$60 if it means there's no way to recoup some of my initial cost. They will be hit hard by a certain group of consumers if they go the way of no used games -- not to mention, Sony will be picking up some of the fanbase on top of it.

I agree that's a bigger deal than the always-online as well. If they go down that road when Sony and Nintendo aren't going to, the next Xbox will be taking a hit in some capacity. MS might be thinking they can't do any wrong, but they're going to be in for a cold, hard reality check if they go through with the rumored specs of this system.
 
Think the RROD was a clusterfuck? Imagine the first Live outtage where 100% of 720s are turned into bricks all at the same exact moment.

Forget your quality of BB, as mentioned in one of the vids above, this "always on" feature is as anti-consumer as it gets. There isn't one positive you can point to and say "oh, I get it" but many, many cons. Consumers shouldn't support such a practice/product.

[quote name='whoknows']Anyone that can afford the new Xbox already has high speed internet, so who cares? MS is right to make fun of and/or ignore the whiners. They can't afford one anyways.[/QUOTE]

Because you are 100% at the mercy of MS's servers which over 8 years haven't been consistently reliable. This puts all the power in MS's corner and you are now just playing their game. This system might as well be OnLive. You are essentially renting a game(since there's no resale) and are at the mercy of their servers. It gives you the illusion of owning a product without you actually owning a product. Once next gen comes out and MS kills all the servers for the PS4/720 gen, where does that leave the consumer? A fancy paperweight?

I can more than afford one but why should I support such an anti-consumer friendly device?
 
[quote name='MoCiWe']All I know is I got to read some enjoyable comments the last few days, and that's made it fun in itself. In reality though, I'll probably buy the new Xbox either way, I'd prefer if it didn't have an always online function and could play used games, but my system is never not connected online as it is and I know that I'll get the new Halo game day one, and put enough time into that alone to make the purchase worth it, but it's still understandable why people are upset.[/QUOTE]
My response isn't directed at you personally. But loyal customers like you are what fuels those actions. Once a company know that you rely on their products, they have total control over you and your money, hence they can keep pushing this, to perhaps $70 games with a bare bones design, continuous charge for online play, crammed advertisements not only on your home screen but also while you play, $10 to unlock content that is already on disc, and $40 DLC and map packs. Still want to play Halo 5 after Halo 6 comes out? Sorry, servers are shutting down.

Doesn't this make you, the consumer, feel ever so powerless?

[quote name='sp00ge']Always online isn't an instant deal breaker for me, although it docks a load of points. The deal breaker for me is the "no used games" aspect. As a consumer, if I'm paying full price for a game, I should have the right to sell the game and recoup some of my costs, especially if I didn't like it.

This is the very reason I am very picky when it comes to digital purchases. The last two Xbox Live Arcade games I paid full price for are Minecraft and The Simpsons Arcade, which were games I was already familiar with and knew that I liked. Everything else digital I've bought in the past two years was on sale at a price I felt okay gambling on.[/QUOTE]
If always on comes into the picture, second hand blocking would be right around the corner. Why lay down this infrastructure if not exploit this for its most "beneficial" feature?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top