So, with Microsoft saying that next gen will be on-line only is this the End for future retro?

[PROTOTYPE]

This is really to stop piracy but it could really be the end of collecting too. What's your take?:(

[RP2A03]

Microsoft has yet to make an official statement on the matter. Please stop spreading rumors.

[Bojay1997]

Microsoft has yet to make an official statement on the matter. Please stop spreading rumors.

Agreed. Sony also used the phrase "always on" during their presentation, but later clarified that an Internet connection was not required. Certainly to use all the features Sony touted, you would have to be connected as games will allegedly pre-load and the various sharing features can't be done unless you're connected. I suspect Microsoft will take a similar approach.

[ProjectCamaro]

Microsoft has yet to make an official statement on the matter. Please stop spreading rumors.

The company may not have said anything officially yet but their employees who work in the games division has said exactly that so he's not just making up rumors.


It's simple for me, if they do that I won't by any Microsoft gaming products ever again.

[Polygon]

Neither Sony nor Microsoft have made official statements one way or the other. That being said, let's get this straight. It is NOT about piracy. It's about control. It about you not owning the content and about them being able to take away your right to play it at any time they deem necessary. I can tell you right now that if they do take that route they've lost my money. I'll be done with gaming the instant it goes completely online. I know that's where it's going because people are stupid sheep and will allow it to happen to them. I'll just enjoy my physical media how I want, when I want, and where I want.

[Bojay1997]

The company may not have said anything officially yet but their employees who work in the games division has said exactly that so he's not just making up rumors.


It's simple for me, if they do that I won't by any Microsoft gaming products ever again.

Incorrect. One employee made some statements on Twitter that Microsoft later disclaimed. As such, it is a rumor.

[PROTOTYPE]

Incorrect. One employee made some statements on Twitter that Microsoft later disclaimed. As such, it is a rumor. Show me where they did this?

[Kitsune Sniper]

Show me where they did this?

http://neogaf.net/forum/showthread.php?t=534951

This guy is a complete and total idiot.

Ack, the post was updated with new info. Oh boy.

Edit: My god, that thread got 9200+ replies IN A DAY.

[PROTOTYPE]

Also, the a rumor about ps4 not being backward compatible became true. ..And this was no average Microsoft employee either.

[ProjectCamaro]

Incorrect. One employee made some statements on Twitter that Microsoft later disclaimed. As such, it is a rumor.

Incorrect. Here is Microsoft's response, they never stated it wasn't true they instead stated they don't agree with his attitude.


'We apologize for the inappropriate comments made by an employee on Twitter yesterday. This person is not a spokesperson for Microsoft, and his personal views do not reflect the customer centric approach we take to our products or how we would communicate directly with our loyal consumers. We are very sorry if this offended anyone, however we have not made any announcements about our product roadmap, and have no further comment on this matter.'"

[Satoshi_Matrix]

Also, the a rumor about ps4 not being backward compatible became true.

That's because the architecture of the PS4 is gong to be completely different than the PS3's. For developers, the Cell Processor was hell ad the PS4 promises to be a trillion times more friendly. I have a sizable PS3 collection and no intention of ever selling my PS3. Even so, lack of backwards compatibility hurts - but in the long run I'd rather them say it won't happen at all rather than do it the half assed emulation route the Xbox 360 did with original Xbox games.

If at all possible Sony should release two skews for the PS4 - one that's standard and one that's more expensive that contains a Cell Processor for 100% PS3 compatibility. Even if Sony tries to sell it again for $599 USD because it's two systems in one (built in PS1 and PS2 support would also be nice, but I think I'm dreaming) I would strongly consider buying that version. At least it would ensure my PS4 always has something I want to play even if most PS4 games come out that don't appeal to me.

[SOL BADGUY]

Hope for the best, and expect the worst, is what I do a lot of times in life.

I think Microsoft really wants to make DRM a big thing with the 720, theyve filed patents to make the Kinect detect when other people walk into the room and make you pay extra for them viewing illegal or legal video on your xbox browser. So, using Kinect dance games at Anime conventions is out the window, and so is youtube or netflix viewing if you have a big household.

How it affects games will be seen, emulation for this next generation will probably take decades to perfect, N64 emulation isnt even great. This kills retro stores in 20 years if all consoles from here on out does this.

Even Sony filed really shady patents.



If at all possible Sony should release two skews for the PS4 - one that's standard and one that's more expensive that contains a Cell Processor for 100% PS3 compatibility. Even if Sony tries to sell it again for $599 USD because it's two systems in one (built in PS1 and PS2 support would also be nice, but I think I'm dreaming) I would strongly consider buying that version. At least it would ensure my PS4 always has something I want to play even if most PS4 games come out that don't appeal to me.

http://www.screwattack.com/shows/partners/game-overthinker/game-overthinker-overbytes-playstation-4

[ProjectCamaro]

Now this definitely is just a rumor at this point.

I placed what I feel is the important part in bold on this comment.


Update: 1:40pm

Sources are telling 4Player that Adam Orth is no longer working for Microsoft. Currently tracking this down further...

...we've confirmed this with one reliable source but not two, and Orth's linkedin has currently shown no movement. We're considering this a high possibility but it currently lacks enough verification for us to confirm at this time."

http://4playernetwork.com/blog/2013/04/adam-orth-article/

[Bojay1997]

Incorrect. Here is Microsoft's response, they never stated it wasn't true they instead stated they don't agree with his attitude.

It's clear you neither understand the definition of the words "incorrect" nor "disclaimed". They never stated the rumor was true, nor did they state it was false. As such, it remains a rumor and Microsoft's statement does nothing to either support or contradict the rumor.

[Ed Oscuro]

Ahh, this isn't the first time Adam Orth fell in the $#1p. Sources. (http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.php?p=897803#p897803)

I think you guys trying to dismiss this story (I hope we can) are missing the other pieces of evidence:

"Pay your ISP bills" (http://www.gamechup.com/developer-on-xbox-720-always-online-all-i-can-say-is-be-sure-to-pay-your-isp-bills/)
"Durango consumer units must have an active internet connection to be used." (http://kotaku.com/the-next-xbox-will-require-an-internet-connection-to-st-470062456)

Nobody really believes EA that it wouldn't be possible to implement an offline-only mode for Sim City (for example), since somebody has already hacked the game to provide it - however you lose a number of features. It's not unreasonable to think that the 720 has a number of games being developed that make use of always-online features. Sure, they could always change the system so that it itself isn't required to be online, but it becomes more difficult to change course once you've started operating under that assumption.

Of course, it costs me nothing to wait and see, but saying the always-online "rumors are just that" seems to me to be ignoring what's happening.

[wiggyx]

That's because the architecture of the PS4 is gong to be completely different than the PS3's. For developers, the Cell Processor was hell ad the PS4 promises to be a trillion times more friendly. I have a sizable PS3 collection and no intention of ever selling my PS3. Even so, lack of backwards compatibility hurts - but in the long run I'd rather them say it won't happen at all rather than do it the half assed emulation route the Xbox 360 did with original Xbox games.

If at all possible Sony should release two skews for the PS4 - one that's standard and one that's more expensive that contains a Cell Processor for 100% PS3 compatibility. Even if Sony tries to sell it again for $599 USD because it's two systems in one (built in PS1 and PS2 support would also be nice, but I think I'm dreaming) I would strongly consider buying that version. At least it would ensure my PS4 always has something I want to play even if most PS4 games come out that don't appeal to me.

I never got why people like us (i.e. "serious/hardcore" gamers) give a shit about BC like it's some sort of deal breaker? I couldn't care less if any of my consoles are BC. The only one that I like it for is the Wii since I can play GCN games in progressive scan without having to buy a $100+ cable :)

[Ed Oscuro]

The only one that I like it for is the Wii since I can play GCN games in progressive scan without having to buy a $100+ cable :)
Well, there you go. Some of the older consoles require some fancy equipment to play 'em on a modern TV (the right way), too. Some people just don't have room for tons of consoles, either. Personally I like using the original systems in many cases, and right now it's a non-issue for last-gen 'cuz playing 360 games on a 720 (for example) will provide no power savings or performance advantages over playing on a 360...I'll get the last model if I want a relatively quiet unit.

[Bojay1997]

Ahh, this isn't the first time Adam Orth fell in the $#1p. Sources. (http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.php?p=897803#p897803)

I think you guys trying to dismiss this story (I hope we can) are missing the other pieces of evidence:

"Pay your ISP bills" (http://www.gamechup.com/developer-on-xbox-720-always-online-all-i-can-say-is-be-sure-to-pay-your-isp-bills/)
"Durango consumer units must have an active internet connection to be used." (http://kotaku.com/the-next-xbox-will-require-an-internet-connection-to-st-470062456)

Nobody really believes EA that it wouldn't be possible to implement an offline-only mode for Sim City (for example), since somebody has already hacked the game to provide it - however you lose a number of features. It's not unreasonable to think that the 720 has a number of games being developed that make use of always-online features. Sure, they could always change the system so that it itself isn't required to be online, but it becomes more difficult to change course once you've started operating under that assumption.

Of course, it costs me nothing to wait and see, but saying the always-online "rumors are just that" seems to me to be ignoring what's happening.

Nothing you said changes the fact that it's still a rumor. There are already games on both the PS3 and the Xbox 360 that require a constant Internet connection to play. There will be similar games on both the PS4 and Durango. Will Durango require a constant Internet connection? Maybe, but until Microsoft announces it, it's just a rumor no different than when Sony obtained that patent last year and everyone assumed they would be eliminating used games. That didn't happen. I personally think it's unlikely to happen and that Microsoft is just playing games with Sony to throw them off and that the Durango will be almost identical to the PS4 in every way. If I'm wrong, I simply won't buy a Durango at launch. Like you said, it costs nothing to wait and see.

[Ed Oscuro]

I really don't understand what beating the "IT'S JUST A RUMOR" drum is supposed to achieve. So, we should just bury our heads in the sand about this issue until Microsoft announces one way or another? I think that keeping the pressure on is a better way to get the direction changed - unless, of course, you do want always-online.

I also don't understand how posting information from what Kotaku and others say are credible sources is posting "rumors." Just because we don't know the names doesn't mean these are rumors.

I personally think it's unlikely to happen and that Microsoft is just playing games with Sony to throw them off and that the Durango will be almost identical to the PS4 in every way.
This has all been unofficial, and Orth got fired for his Twitter feeds. I'm sure Sony is hearing things directly from developers; as a disinformation campaign the always online talk doesn't make sense and it isn't pointed at the right targets.

[ProjectCamaro]

I really don't understand what beating the "IT'S JUST A RUMOR" drum is supposed to achieve. So, we should just bury our heads in the sand about this issue until Microsoft announces one way or another? I think that keeping the pressure on is a better way to get the direction changed - unless, of course, you do want always-online.

Agreed, if we let Microsoft know now exactly how we feel it can change their product for the better. It happens all the time and if the consumer receives the product how they like it everyone wins. Microsoft makes millions more and we get exactly what we want. For all we know Microsoft is planning on creating an always on type of gameplay but may now considered eliminating it due to the public outcry.

[Bojay1997]

I really don't understand what beating the "IT'S JUST A RUMOR" drum is supposed to achieve. So, we should just bury our heads in the sand about this issue until Microsoft announces one way or another? I think that keeping the pressure on is a better way to get the direction changed - unless, of course, you do want always-online.

I also don't understand how posting information from what Kotaku and others say are credible sources is posting "rumors." Just because we don't know the names doesn't mean these are rumors.

This has all been unofficial, and Orth got fired for his Twitter feeds. I'm sure Sony is hearing things directly from developers; as a disinformation campaign the always online talk doesn't make sense and it isn't pointed at the right targets.

I consider this to be a pretty intelligent discussion forum and therefore, I think the "it's a rumor drum" is more than appropriate here. If people want to wildly speculate and engage in fanboy debates, that's cool too, but it doesn't belong here, it belongs elsewhere like Gamefaqs. "Credible sources" also cited by Kotaku and others were wrong about several key features of the PS4. All I'm saying is that the people that traffic in rumors of this type don't have a great track record and I don't think much is accomplished by giving rumors credibility other than to stir up worthless arguments about how X company should be boycotted or doesn't care about gamers, etc....

[PsychedelicShaman]

If the rumor turns out to be true, then this generation may be the last I collect for. Of course, when it's hacked and you can play every game 15 years later, I may change my mind:D

[Ed Oscuro]

Well, I want to say a few things here: First, I appreciate your pushing back on whether this has been validated.

There is nothing anti-intellectual about making one's stance known about possible developments. People not liking "always online" and talking about it has nothing to do with a rumor, regardless of whether the 720 is designed to be always online or not; that's just a reasonable discussion to have, and I'm sure that if somebody wrote "would it have been good if the N64 DD was released here" nobody would resent the discussion.

About the reasons for believing the 720 is designed to be always online: There are credible sources giving us good reasons for thinking so. Adam Orth was a Creative Director at Microsoft Studios, and the other two sources I give have apparently been vetted as well, and one of these is very explicit that Durango is currently designed to be always online. Your explanation that it is disinformation seems very weak (if it is disinformation, Sony hasn't capitalized on it one way or another; surely they know what's actually happening from developer leaks). Any potential benefit of confusing Sony is miniscule compared to the fact that Microsoft has already explicitly distanced themselves from the most visible source of this "disinformation" to start with! Being able to point to specific hints being given by reputable sources who aren't anonymous (at least to the reputable online sources publishing them - Kotaku isn't the devil after all) has nothing to do with "wild rumors." You can use whatever adjectives you want, but that doesn't make it wild or a rumor.

How about the case that the 720 isn't going to be "always online?" Nobody says this. Microsoft hasn't made an official statement confirming this is always online, but at the same time they refuse to reveal their "product roadmap." Is the fact that Durango is being developed itself just a "wild rumor" just because Microsoft refuses to reveal information about its "product roadmap?" Or is it not a "wild rumor" just because there are more sources pointing to its existence than towards always-online, even though all of these non-official sources have exactly the same character as the always-online information sources?

As this site states (http://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2013/04/05/microsoft-apologizes-for-employees-xbox-durango-always-online-tweets-claims-customer-centric-approach/):

As you can see, Orth never publicly acknowledged or referred to the Durango nor the Xbox, but he did say “console” and it was quite clear what rumors he was referring to. Reports of the upcoming gaming system having the supposed limitations have been circulating for months, with the most detailed ones coming from Kotaku and The Verge.
Yup, it is indeed just hearsay that a new console is being developed by Microsoft. But we aren't trying to prove exact statements in court, and these "rumors" are actually the bread and butter of tech journalism.

I don't think much is accomplished by giving rumors credibility other than to stir up worthless arguments about how X company should be boycotted or doesn't care about gamers, etc....
Yeah, that's such an inaccurate, judgmental, and loaded statement I don't even want to touch it, but here goes: You've definitely tried to sidestep my point that it's OK to make one's preferences known. If that is part of a massive wave of consumer assertiveness against "always online," I don't think that will be "worthless" at all. As to the other loaded statements, nobody is saying that Microsoft should be boycotted or doesn't care about gamers - but if they go with always online, it would look like they don't understand gamers and people should be able to vote with their wallets. EA already proved they don't care about what a vast number of gamers want with their always-on Sim City. This was going to happen sometime. Do you care? If you don't, that's OK, but some of us do and you don't need to interfere.

The guy smashing his 360 with an axe just to protest the possibility? Yeah, I wouldn't do that. But he's entered into the realm of politics, and sometimes political stunts work. Nobody's forcing you to take part, though.

[Griking]

http://neogaf.net/forum/showthread.php?t=534951

This guy is a complete and total idiot.



I don't understand why everyone seems to feel this way. So he baited a few trolls and did some trolling of his own. Big deal.

Apparently employees aren't allowed to have opinions in today's world.

[Ed Oscuro]

I for one want a PR staff composed entirely of people who provoke firebombings at our headquarters, who disrespect the friendly attitude of their coworkers who want to have a friendly working relationship with the clientele, and undo years of a trusting relationship. In fact, I want people who are NOT PR staff doing PR, too. Nothing less is acceptable.

[Polygon]

I never got why people like us (i.e. "serious/hardcore" gamers) give a shit about BC like it's some sort of deal breaker? I couldn't care less if any of my consoles are BC. The only one that I like it for is the Wii since I can play GCN games in progressive scan without having to buy a $100+ cable :)

Exactly. Backwards compatibility doesn't mean crap to me. However, a slightly more interesting rumor about the PS4 is that your DLC from the PS3 will not be able to be transferred to the PS4.

[Ed Oscuro]

Backwards compatibility doesn't matter...so then what is PS3 DLC on PS4? @_@

[JSoup]

Apparently employees aren't allowed to have opinions in today's world.

Today's....world? It's always been that way, it's nothing new. If it isn't your job to talk and spread opinions, you keep your mouth shut and do whatever is that you're paid to do.

[Tupin]

If it isn't your job to talk and spread opinions, you keep your mouth shut and do whatever is that you're paid to do.

This.

All sides in this drama are acting like children.

[Polygon]

Backwards compatibility doesn't matter...so then what is PS3 DLC on PS4? @_@

I'm not talking necessarily about content for games. I'm talking about downloaded games, like independant games and games that were never release on consoles like X-Men arcade, for example.

[The 1 2 P]

Apparently employees aren't allowed to have opinions in today's world.

Sure they are....as long as they keep them to themselves. As has already been mentioned, it's been this way forever. For instance, if you don't like (pick any other controversial topic) you are of course entitled to your opinion. But be aware of where you state that opinion, especially if you work for a large company like Microsoft. Hell, even if you worked for a small company your opinion can still get you fired because people will associate your opinion with the company you work with, regardless if your company actually shares your views or not.

Back on topic, I'm still in wait-and-see mode. The system will definitely be capable of always-online gaming but there are still going to be single player games released and there within lies the need for offline play. I hope Microsoft doesn't go shooting themselves in the foot again.

[wiggyx]

Well, there you go. Some of the older consoles require some fancy equipment to play 'em on a modern TV (the right way), too. Some people just don't have room for tons of consoles, either. Personally I like using the original systems in many cases, and right now it's a non-issue for last-gen 'cuz playing 360 games on a 720 (for example) will provide no power savings or performance advantages over playing on a 360...I'll get the last model if I want a relatively quiet unit.

What I'm driving at is why there seem to be a lot of people that feel its a deal breaker of at least a major concern (I know I've encountered quite a few who are really put off by lack of BC). I totally understand the lack of space issues and whatnot, but as far as modern TV compatibility goes, we're not talking about booking up a 7800 to a new plasma. We're taking last gen consoles that are already HD friendly.

I do like that I can play GCN via component on my Wii, but it's not super important to me. If I had to, I could spend the money on a GCN component cable. It's a nice bonus is all ;)

It's just hard for me to understand why it sometimes seems to be such a BIG concern for so many people is all. Seems like there are far more significant things to worry about, like this whole full-time web connection BS. Man, if that happens, Microsoft can kiss my money goodby.

[Kitsune Sniper]

(...) However, a slightly more interesting rumor about the PS4 is that your DLC from the PS3 will not be able to be transferred to the PS4.

Rumor? I thought that was almost confirmed? I mean, downloadable PS3 games won't work on the PS4, because they're PS3 games (they use different hardware, so no BC, like someone mentioned earlier.) If there's a title update that allows you to play them on your PS4, then cool, but many devs probably won't do that since it costs money to port stuff, and testing, and so on. And they can charge you twice. :P

[SOL BADGUY]

If the PS4 were backwards compatible Id buy it to play most of the great PS3 games that are out this year. My favorite console is the PS2 because I can play PS1 games on it too. Some people may not care, but I think most people would want to buy a PS4 if they could play PS3, PS2 and PS1 game disks on it. It probably cost $800, but itd be the best expensive purchase Ive made in a long time.

[The Dord]

http://neogaf.net/forum/showthread.php?t=534951

This guy is a complete and total idiot.

Ack, the post was updated with new info. Oh boy.

Edit: My god, that thread got 9200+ replies IN A DAY.

That link won't let me log into neogaf, it recognizes my username/pw but never logs me in. :(

[Ed Oscuro]

I'm not talking necessarily about content for games. I'm talking about downloaded games, like independant games and games that were never release on consoles like X-Men arcade, for example.
Others have said it, but since you missed it when I made the point: Reflect upon what BC is.

@ Wiggyx (and Polygon): Actually, I just thought of a totally different reason than the ones we've been thinking about - developer reasons. I'm sure many developers will be in a position to port their 360 XBLAhs to Durandal or whatever, but they will probably not appreciate it very much. Yet, again, I don't think this was anything that was realistic to expect happening for this generation moving up to the next generation.

I think what they should do is keep producing and revising (although I actually don't know how good the latest gen is, I do know even late '09 units still seem really bad) 360 hardware for a while, and keep at least basic game-related services running so that people have a fighting chance of having a working unit. But, companies being staffed idiots, they might also just throw over all their capacity towards the 720 and not have any production lines left worth dedicating just to the 360. There may be apparently sound logic behind this, of course; if all their current 360 lines will be capable of 720 production, and these lines will represent wasted opportunities for 720 production, or the 360 isn't making money anymore, it would represent a waste of money to keep churning out the old product. This said, although I don't think most of us really noticed it Nintendo kept a few of their classic systems in production years after the withdrawl of those systems from the market - possibly to help with service needs and so on. Beyond that, though, those older systems are a hell of a lot easier to service than the new ones, and they break relatively rarely (still enough to concern me, just not enough to hurt fans). Hell, who am I kidding - they don't care about the history of media. They're probably salivating over the idea of remaking Halo yet again for the 720, and again for the system after that. Those obscure games you enjoyed that don't run on PC or 720? Ha, tough luck if you don't find a system. Pretty soon 360 games will be seen as "competition" for 720 games, as if the 360 was Internet Explorer 6 or something. If the developer won't port them, Microsoft isn't making money off them, so why should they care?

[Kitsune Sniper]

That link won't let me log into neogaf, it recognizes my username/pw but never logs me in. :(

In other words, your account was never activated. And it probably never will be. They're awful at that. You can still read their posts though.

[PROTOTYPE]

Backwards compatibility doesn't matter?? So, all my ps3 games only work a ps3 console.So, I need to buy... what like 3 of then to make sure they will last? AND who the heck wants to do this? Same for 360..always on line bull is the same or worst. and why buy games at all? Just download when cheap and then only buy the very best ones, Why collect games too. All of this is to kill the used game market and them some. I really love this hobby, but at this rate the future of retro will die out, then for a game collector it will be game over..:( There will always be people who just play them and then forget about it and move on, and Money to burn..Isn't this site about collecting or just playing for today?

[wiggyx]

Backwards compatibility doesn't matter?? So, all my ps3 games only work a ps3 console.So, I need to buy... what like 3 of then to make sure they will last? AND who the heck wants to do this? Same for 360..always on line bull is the same or worst. and why buy games at all? Just download when cheap and then only buy the very best ones, Why collect games too. All of this is to kill the used game market and them some. I really love this hobby, but at this rate the future of retro will die out, then for a game collector it will be game over..:( There will always be people who just play them and then forget about it and move on, and Money to burn..Isn't this site about collecting or just playing for today?

My SNES games only work on my SNES, Genesis games on my Genesis, TG-16 games on my TG, etc.

When you think about it, we've really only had 3 fully BC consoles in the last two gens; Wii, PS2, PS3.


In other words, your account was never activated. And it probably never will be. They're awful at that. You can still read their posts though.

Argh, fuggin' NeoGaf! Been trying to register for YEARS! :(

[Bojay1997]

Backwards compatibility doesn't matter?? So, all my ps3 games only work a ps3 console.So, I need to buy... what like 3 of then to make sure they will last? AND who the heck wants to do this? Same for 360..always on line bull is the same or worst. and why buy games at all? Just download when cheap and then only buy the very best ones, Why collect games too. All of this is to kill the used game market and them some. I really love this hobby, but at this rate the future of retro will die out, then for a game collector it will be game over..:( There will always be people who just play them and then forget about it and move on, and Money to burn..Isn't this site about collecting or just playing for today?

The problem is that your complaints are already too late. There are many games this generation that require day one patches and are incomplete without DLC that require on-line access to even play. Sure, there are still some games that are complete on disc that you can collect, but the reality is that being a collector today means owning a lot of digital content on hard drives and other impermanent formats.

[postulio]

The company may not have said anything officially yet but their employees who work in the games division has said exactly that so he's not just making up rumors.


It's simple for me, if they do that I won't by any Microsoft gaming products ever again.

Thats a bit harsh, no?

I mean youre really only hurting yourself. Each gen has amazing games, and there will most certainly be some in that one. Amazing games you will miss out on if you just exclude yourself from it. You're not gonna stop games from going online/digital distribution only...




Honestly, this is the future anyway. It's all headed there at one point , in one way or another. If not this upcoming gen then maybe in the next one. I can't see physical games (or any software, really) still being around in 10-20 years... its wasteful and unnecessary, not to mention it increases costs.

I'm ready for an all digital existence. I dont want stacks of books, movies, games, music cluttering my home gather dust. I hate feeling like a hoarder just because I have a wide range of taste of intense love of media. As long as functionality remains the same, I think digital/online content is so much easier to us. I have lovingly embraced Steam as my sole source of PC games of the last couple years and honestly havent looked back (I thought I would miss the boxes and dvds, I dont).

Only reason I havent embraced digital distribution for movies is because theres nothing out there than can match the fidelity of a Blu-ray. UV, netflix, Amazon On Demand, Hulu, etc nothing is as great looking as BD.

[postulio]

My SNES games only work on my SNES, Genesis games on my Genesis, TG-16 games on my TG, etc.

When you think about it, we've really only had 3 fully BC consoles in the last two gens; Wii, PS2, PS3.



Actually the PS3 only had two fully BC models, the original released 20 & 60GB models at launch. None of the proceeding models had the PS2 graphics chip and BC slowly diminished. New PS3 consoles only play PS1 games.

Also dont forget the gameboys, and DS with GBA.

[wiggyx]

Yeah, I know. Same goes for the Wii. Nothing really to do with my point though. Point is that BC isn't some given that we've had going on since the inception of gaming and now it's an atrocity that's it's being stripped away. We had it for a handful of home consoles over the last 2 generations, and it really only serves to add cost to new consoles. Take that hardware out from the getgo and charge less. I don't want to pay for a PS2 in a PS3 or a PS3 in a PS4 or whatever.


Portables are their own thing. I don't put them in the same pot as home consoles.

[ProjectCamaro]

Thats a bit harsh, no?

I mean youre really only hurting yourself. Each gen has amazing games, and there will most certainly be some in that one. Amazing games you will miss out on if you just exclude yourself from it. You're not gonna stop games from going online/digital distribution only...




Honestly, this is the future anyway. It's all headed there at one point , in one way or another. If not this upcoming gen then maybe in the next one. I can't see physical games (or any software, really) still being around in 10-20 years... its wasteful and unnecessary, not to mention it increases costs.

I'm ready for an all digital existence. I dont want stacks of books, movies, games, music cluttering my home gather dust. I hate feeling like a hoarder just because I have a wide range of taste of intense love of media. As long as functionality remains the same, I think digital/online content is so much easier to us. I have lovingly embraced Steam as my sole source of PC games of the last couple years and honestly havent looked back (I thought I would miss the boxes and dvds, I dont).

Only reason I havent embraced digital distribution for movies is because theres nothing out there than can match the fidelity of a Blu-ray. UV, netflix, Amazon On Demand, Hulu, etc nothing is as great looking as BD.

All digital and forcing you to be online to play single player games are two separate issues. I completely agree that we are moving to an all digital format. Look at movies, I don't know about other people but I cannot remember the last time I actually purchased a movie, if I want to watch a movie I use Netflix, buy it online, or so forth.

What I don't like is having to be connected to play single player games, while I do have broadband internet it does go down from time to time, Sims should have taught us that companies will mess it up, plus when a server is no longer supported as a game becomes older we will be out of luck even though we paid for the game in full, we will instead be renting games. I do love throwing in an NES game and playing it from time to time but if we are forced to be online to play and the servers are no longer supported this won't be possible as the current gen games become retro games.

I hope that clarifies where I stand.

[FayeC86]

Actually the PS3 only had two fully BC models, the original released 20 & 60GB models at launch. None of the proceeding models had the PS2 graphics chip and BC slowly diminished. New PS3 consoles only play PS1 games.

Also dont forget the gameboys, and DS with GBA.

Don't forget the 7800 being BC with the 2600, and the Sega sponsored adapters for playing Master System games on the Genesis and the Game Gear.

[postulio]

Don't forget the 7800 being BC with the 2600, and the Sega sponsored adapters for playing Master System games on the Genesis and the Game Gear.

Right! Forgot about those. interesting that Atari had the foresight so long ago.


All digital and forcing you to be online to play single player games are two separate issues. I completely agree that we are moving to an all digital format. Look at movies, I don't know about other people but I cannot remember the last time I actually purchased a movie, if I want to watch a movie I use Netflix, buy it online, or so forth.

What I don't like is having to be connected to play single player games, while I do have broadband internet it does go down from time to time, Sims should have taught us that companies will mess it up, plus when a server is no longer supported as a game becomes older we will be out of luck even though we paid for the game in full, we will instead be renting games. I do love throwing in an NES game and playing it from time to time but if we are forced to be online to play and the servers are no longer supported this won't be possible as the current gen games become retro games.

I hope that clarifies where I stand.

Gotcha, I guess I misunderstood a bit. Although with MS you dont have to worry about online server bugs.


Yeah, I know. Same goes for the Wii. Nothing really to do with my point though. Point is that BC isn't some given that we've had going on since the inception of gaming and now it's an atrocity that's it's being stripped away. We had it for a handful of home consoles over the last 2 generations, and it really only serves to add cost to new consoles. Take that hardware out from the getgo and charge less. I don't want to pay for a PS2 in a PS3 or a PS3 in a PS4 or whatever.


Portables are their own thing. I don't put them in the same pot as home consoles.

I think the Wii is perhaps the most backwards compatible console ever. Not only does it play all of its predecessor's games, it also accepts all controllers and memory cards.

I agree with you about not caring or wanting to pay extra for PS3 compatibility in a PS4... its not very necessary.

However I do appreciate the Wii and PS3 playing their predecessor's games since these new consoles have HD connections whereas the others did not.

[wiggyx]

Newer Wii systems are not BC, and neither is the Canada only Wii mini.

There were component video options for both the GCN and PS2. Not all games supported progressive scan, but there was the option for those that did. Obviously neither had HDMI though.

[FayeC86]

I think we are still leaving out the fact that digital only eventually leads to a lack of compatibility. Look at 360 patches. Those are only available digitally, and the system will only allow so many to be stored at a given time. 10 years from now, when XBL has been discontinued on the 360 you wont be able to play the final version of Skyrim or Gears complete with bug fixes, you'll have to play the launch version that is on the disc. How bad (or even good) that is depends on the difference the patches made, but it wont be the comparable to Mario 3 or Final Fantasy X working the same across all hardware.

[Atarileaf]

When you think about it, we've really only had 3 fully BC consoles in the last two gens; Wii, PS2, PS3.




With some minor exceptions, my Atari 7800 plays all my Atari 2600 games.

[Tanooki]

I may write off games if being online is required as that just crosses the lines into being a spying and intrusive roadblock to using what you paid for. I'm nearly equally disgusted by being digital only because those bastards as history can show, could just up and remove something you paid for and the licensing agreements we blindly click on allow them to do so freely at will, so it's no purchase a long term digital rental in essence.

My brother who works in the industry when I've argued about this stuff with him before called me immature and stupid for not wanting a physical copy of a game and also has ripped on me for not liking the lack of manuals in games too. They cry poor, but they don't look back at their own bad business practices and budgeting on games as a source. Forcing online isn't going to help either, hackers will hack and just gut that out too as they do with PC versions of games with such mindless garbage like Assassins Creed had on PC. The one thing that's a sure bet in all of it is the digital. It would be here NOW if it wasn't for this countries infrastructure and politicians screwing stuff up as usual. Overseas in Japan they have as a standard gigabit lines, here we barely have national full coverage with megabit connections and still rural areas are stuck on 56K hell or satellite tower internet garbage too being way out in the sticks, few have gigabit lines. That's the only reason why we haven't been screwed yet on physical media, because they keep making the games bigger and bigger and to download a 4-5GB game or more on a megabit connection takes way too long for your vast majority of casual to standard gamers as they want to just buy and play, not come back the next day to do it. The way it will end up rolling out is that you'll get a generation with games at stores and co-offered online to download, this will happen per console cycle until faster internet here is standard like it is in Japan. In that era you'll see probably a cold turkey approach of ust no discs at all and that's it, game over. I'd imagine in 10~ (2 cycles) years we'll see discs vanish.

[Ed Oscuro]

Paul Thurrott's discussion of the trend:
http://winsupersite.com/xbox/xbox-vnext-and-always-online

This is way beyond a rumor at this time. He also echoes a belief I made earlier:

Frankly I think we’re too far along in the development process of the next Xbox, codenamed Durango, to make such a change.
He goes further:

More to the point, I think that an always-on Xbox is directly in keeping with Microsoft’s strategy for all next-generation platforms, including Windows Phone (all versions) and Windows 8/RT, which are designed to work as if you are simply connected all the time. Yes, they do work offline, of course. But the apps platform on these systems—which will be replicated on the Windows 8-based next Xbox—assumes a connection. Microsoft’s new platforms are integrated conduits for online services.
This is missing the point, of course, because "strategy" doesn't dictate what people are willing to put up with. Nor do people expect (the online component of) online services to work offline. But they do expect that services which are helpful offline will work offline.

[Ed Oscuro]

Paul Thurrott's discussion of the trend:
http://winsupersite.com/xbox/xbox-vnext-and-always-online

This is way beyond a rumor at this time. He also echoes a belief I made earlier:

Frankly I think we’re too far along in the development process of the next Xbox, codenamed Durango, to make such a change.
He goes further:

More to the point, I think that an always-on Xbox is directly in keeping with Microsoft’s strategy for all next-generation platforms, including Windows Phone (all versions) and Windows 8/RT, which are designed to work as if you are simply connected all the time. Yes, they do work offline, of course. But the apps platform on these systems—which will be replicated on the Windows 8-based next Xbox—assumes a connection. Microsoft’s new platforms are integrated conduits for online services.
This is missing the point, of course, because "strategy" doesn't dictate what people are willing to put up with. Nor do people expect (the online component of) online services to work offline. But they do expect that services which are helpful offline will work offline.

He also writes this further down the page:

A very trusted source told me this in January. So two points to that:

1) Yep, this is what Microsoft is planning to do, or at least was at the time he told me. That is a fact.

2) Things change.

[Bojay1997]

Paul Thurrott's discussion of the trend:
http://winsupersite.com/xbox/xbox-vnext-and-always-online

This is way beyond a rumor at this time. He also echoes a belief I made earlier:

He goes further:

This is missing the point, of course, because "strategy" doesn't dictate what people are willing to put up with. Nor do people expect (the online component of) online services to work offline. But they do expect that services which are helpful offline will work offline.

He also writes this further down the page:

His source material is the same as everyone else's, so I don't see how this is any more or less a rumor as a result. I think one of the commenters to the piece provided what I think is a more likely scenario given Microsoft's direction with its other products -

"My take on this is that Xbox 720 is being built on the same OS kernal as Win8, WP8, and Win RT. That means the same networking and security are likely going to be included. Xbox already requires a Microsoft Account ID for Xbox Live. I think Xbox will assume that it will have an internet connection always available, but will let you perform non-internet entertainment options (games on disk or downloaded) for periods of time without an internet connection using cached credentials. If this were a Google product, it probably wouldn't let you do anything without logging in (kind of like what Chrome is suppose to be like).
I don't see much changing from in this regard from Xbox 360 to Xbox 720."

If the above turns out to be accurate, and there is no limitation of used software, I can't see most gamers complaining much about it as it's how virtually every Internet enabled device works currently. It does raise interesting questions about collecting as at some point if you have no Internet connection, your security credentials will expire and you'd have a box that couldn't play anything and a collection of coasters that you bought for $60 each.

[The Dord]

In other words, your account was never activated. And it probably never will be. They're awful at that. You can still read their posts though.

Excuse me? I do have an activated account.

Proof (http://www.neogaf.com/forum/member.php?u=126697). It's just the .net address doesn't work but the .com one does.

[Greg2600]

Ain't Windows 8 already dead?

[Ed Oscuro]

His source material is the same as everyone else's
Okay, that's actually reasonable to point out (although I can't believe you're still harping on this as if the sources are all rubbish). However, recognize that as a "Microsoft insider" his ability to get information is carefully controlled; if he starts looking like a dangerous leak to Microsoft they could cut him out of the loop altogether. That would be Bad for Business. In any case, with what he's attempting to do in that post, he doesn't have to even allude to whatever sources he might have.

On the other hand: I haven't watched it yet, but according to this (http://www.gamespot.com/news/subscription-based-xbox-720-priced-at-300-with-500-standard-model-6406544) he has some basis for making some very specific claims about upcoming product releases. In any case, we don't have terribly much longer to wait to see if the leaks are on the right track: May 21 should reveal some new information about the console (but after this fiasco, I wouldn't be surprised if they just focus entirely on the happy, fun, fun aspects of the console, and leave the "always on" aspect to the journalists and shrinkwrap license readers to discover at the last minute).

You know, Thurrott has people reading his site religiously because he's been right on the money year after year. It's not an outrageous or unjustifiable risk to go with that information. It's the same in other industries and markets, too (although the video game grapevine is a bit more reliable and timely than others, because of the nature of developing games for a launch as opposed to developing a small device which only the developer and a few testers need to know about).

[Satoshi_Matrix]

too good NOT to post:

http://i.minus.com/iZ4Xc7uzxvJUA.gif

[Rickstilwell1]

I think we are still leaving out the fact that digital only eventually leads to a lack of compatibility. Look at 360 patches. Those are only available digitally, and the system will only allow so many to be stored at a given time. 10 years from now, when XBL has been discontinued on the 360 you wont be able to play the final version of Skyrim or Gears complete with bug fixes, you'll have to play the launch version that is on the disc. How bad (or even good) that is depends on the difference the patches made, but it wont be the comparable to Mario 3 or Final Fantasy X working the same across all hardware.

Digital only is also very dangerous depending on how or where you store your stuff. I just accidentally killed my 3TB media hard drive that contained a good chunk of my favorite music cds, lots of game manual scans I've been working on ALL FREAKING YEAR and ALMOST ALL OF MY GAMEPLAY FOOTAGE!!!!!!!!!! ARGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

And what a waste of time all that work was. All because I couldn't afford a backup hard drive. And I just had to bring something to do with me to work didn't I?

So that's the difference. Drop 1 game disc, 1 game gets scratched. Drop a whole hard drive or system and you lose EVERYTHING. Not good. Not good at all.

At least most of the stuff I lost is re-obtainable. It is just going to take years to get it all back again without breaking the bank.

[Ed Oscuro]

Haha, indeed. I accidentally nuked a bunch of good photos recently. Well, they're still there; I just need to find some software that can tell the difference between TIF and CR2 (which includes a mini-TIF in the file as a preview, apparently).

In your case you should be good with calling up a recovery service to try to get the photos back. If you haven't done anything to the partitions (and the boot sector) the files should still mostly be recoverable. How the drive crashed can make a difference. A dead controller or other component on the PCB is easy to recover. A head crash, on the other hand, might damage the actual files, but probably not all of them.

Anyway, how I see this at issue is that the gaming companies want to get the most money from us for "services," but not agree to provide anything long term. They want their cash cows for perpetual re-release in the future and they also want to be able to drop any platform the moment it is suitable to their business plan. The rights of consumers and the protection of digital heritage does not map onto these plans at all. In decades, we are going to be dependent on leaks from original developer media, fan-made ports, and a rapidly diminishing base of surviving hardware with strange hacks to even be able to see many of these programs running, let alone try to back them up to any kind of media (and in some cases the law has been all too happy to get in the way of this necessary consumer measure). The only systems that are worse off than the current consoles are cell phones. We always thought it was the old systems and the things covered in MAME we would have to worry about, but it turns out it's the new stuff that's most at-risk.

[SOL BADGUY]

Itll be interesting how many 720s are bought by people who dont know any better about this. I completely believe theyll go with always online for their games. Hopefully the thing will die quick and all the companies who want it to succeed get a grim awakening.

[Mr Mort]

...May 21 should reveal some new information about the console (but after this fiasco, I wouldn't be surprised if they just focus entirely on the happy, fun, fun aspects of the console, and leave the "always on" aspect to the journalists and shrinkwrap license readers to discover at the last minute)...

People are getting so worked up about rumours, but this quote right here is what people aren't realizing.

We aren't going to know the actual nuts & bolts of how DRM will be implemented, license/usage restrictions, online pricing & infrastructure, etc, are going to work on these new consoles until they're actually released and in people's hands. Neither Sony nor Microsoft are going to spell out any limitations of these ecosystems voluntarily, and why would they? No one advertises a product by pointing out its limitations.

As far as I'm concerned, it's all speculation until the consoles are both released and people get a real understanding for themselves how all this shit works out first hand.

[Bojay1997]

People are getting so worked up about rumours, but this quote right here is what people aren't realizing.

We aren't going to know the actual nuts & bolts of how DRM will be implemented, license/usage restrictions, online pricing & infrastructure, etc, are going to work on these new consoles until they're actually released and in people's hands. Neither Sony nor Microsoft are going to spell out any limitations of these ecosystems voluntarily, and why would they? No one advertises a product by pointing out its limitations.

As far as I'm concerned, it's all speculation until the consoles are both released and people get a real understanding for themselves how all this shit works out first hand.

Agreed. For what it's worth, Michael Pachter did an interview with Adam Sessler a few days ago and basically said he doesn't buy the always on-line rumors and no used games rumors for a variety of reasons, not the least of which are consumer and retail reaction. Only time will tell, but I suspect this has been a lot of getting worked up over nothing.

[Ed Oscuro]

The same Michael Pachter who believes having a built-in TV tuner and a Skype app (http://www.digitalspy.com/gaming/news/a464716/new-xbox-to-win-against-playstation-4-says-analyst-michael-pachter.html) (and where did he get that information? Must be rumors) are "killer apps" for the next Xbox? He's already out there with pricing estimates and stuff, yet somehow he missed the inside information - which is really outside information (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/03/leak-points-to-always-on-net-connection-one-time-installs-for-next-xbox/) by this point. Adam Sessler? That guy's opinion is worth more than people actually working on upcoming games? He makes documentaries right now; there's no reason to suspect he knows. Now, from the standpoint of being reasonably consumer friendly - what they say makes every bit of sense. Unfortunately there's no evidence that Microsoft agrees. This is just cherry-picking sources and ignoring the growing body of evidence that Microsoft isn't ready to move. These aren't semi-official rebuttals; they may well be wishful thinking.

[Bojay1997]

The same Michael Pachter who believes having a built-in TV tuner and a Skype app (http://www.digitalspy.com/gaming/news/a464716/new-xbox-to-win-against-playstation-4-says-analyst-michael-pachter.html) (and where did he get that information? Must be rumors) are "killer apps" for the next Xbox? He's already out there with pricing estimates and stuff, yet somehow he missed the inside information - which is really outside information (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/03/leak-points-to-always-on-net-connection-one-time-installs-for-next-xbox/) by this point. Adam Sessler? That guy's opinion is worth more than people actually working on upcoming games? He makes documentaries right now; there's no reason to suspect he knows. Now, from the standpoint of being reasonably consumer friendly - what they say makes every bit of sense. Unfortunately there's no evidence that Microsoft agrees. This is just cherry-picking sources and ignoring the growing body of evidence that Microsoft isn't ready to move. These aren't semi-official rebuttals; they may well be wishful thinking.

Maybe you should actually watch the entire Pachter interview before you attack him as out of touch or wrong. I thought he made some very compelling points. Essentially, he says that if Microsoft can partner with major cable companies like Comcast and Time Warner and allow them to sell their programming in markets where they currently don't have dedicated infrastructure, they can essentially afford to sell the Durango for next to nothing because the cable companies will happily subsidize the box in exchange for grabbing new customers. That's exactly what the cell phone providers did early on by subsidizing devices and renting tower capacity and it's why in virtually every market in the country, you have all four majors and some minors competing head to head. There's no reason to think that same model won't apply to the Durango, since many gamers also pay for cable service anyway and would be happy to have a cheap or no-cost high end gaming box that doubles as a cable box.

Indeed, Microsoft has already made significant moves in this direction and has provided IPTV technology to phone companies through its Mediaroom initiative. Microsoft just sold Mediaroom and announced that it is going to replace that initiative with an Xbox based solution. They also just established a content studio in Los Angeles that is developing actual scripted programming rather than just glorified YouTube stuff. That sure doesn't sound like speculation to me, it's stuff that has already happened.

As for the Skype thing, his point was that Microsoft owns Skype and when a child is trying to convince a parent to buy the Durango, it's a much easier argument to make if you can say that it's a perfect Skype box for calling relatives. Frankly, I made lots of similar arguments as a kid to get my first computer (my Apple II+ was going to be used for word processing and homework) and later multimedia devices when the truth is that all I cared about was gaming.

I'm really not sure why you want to keep arguing this same stupid point. It's still a rumor, albeit one that is getting repeated and echoed a lot. Maybe it will turn out to be true or maybe the truth is a little more grey than you are willing to admit. In any event, there is nothing to rebut as Microsoft hasn't announced anything yet and repeating the same rumor over and over and over again doesn't make it any more or less likely to be true.

[Ed Oscuro]

The elephant in the room here is that Microsoft has FAILED to do what would be obvious: Neutralize any malignant and dangerous "rumor" immediately with a statement supporting the gamers, so they aren't blamed for something they don't plan to implement. That they haven't done so and that is telling, as are the reams of anecdotal and, yes, documentary and journalistic evidence that all point toward the same thing - that the console is currently designed to always be on. And, by the off chance a public company's caffeinated PR specialists are conscientious of the public's ability to remember what has been said before, they are at least not ruling out that they might implement it in the future. Again, I don't see why discussing our disapproval of such a topic is forbidden.

I'm not on a computer which I'd want to watch videos (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mfe2oMTSd70) on right now, but I guess I'll waste a few minutes anyway.

The part you want is at 3:00. Pachter calls it "odd," but "possible." "Maybe they'll do it, we're hearing those rumors."

His job is based on taking all that public information and trying to reverse-engineer a viable business strategy from it; as he says, "everything I know is based on what I've observed." Sidebar: I don't know what kinds of rules he has to abide by, but traditionally folks involved with investing are very shy about seeking out insider information, because in some cases it will land you in jail for a very long time. Don't know if that applies here, but consider what he says will affect markets and can be blamed for movement in stock prices, that may well be so. End sidebar. About that business strategy he figures out from what he's observed: He's looking for a sane business plan, first, which he then changes as necessary to meet the facts. For example, he says Sony's failure to bundle Move with every console is a strategic failure, but there you go - they didn't do it, despite his assertion that it's dooming the peripheral to a niche. Aside from the possibility he influences Microsoft's strategy he's really not calling the shots from his perch, either. He can create a good argument and advocate for it, but in all likelihood he's not getting a direct line from the inside - and when they do tell him things in a business call, they only say what they want. As he reminds us early on, the 'console superpowers' do have an interest in waiting out each others' launches and keeping some surprises in reserve. Simply, he doesn't know. It's obvious from how he's wording his statements here.

Still feeling a lot of cognitive dissonance between your insistence that any evidence hinting at always-online is dastardly and ignoble rumormongering, and your turn to Pachter and Sessler who aren't in any position to know what's actually going on and are basically just saying "I think this is a good or bad idea." I'll grant you it's interesting and even useful information - I should be more polite about Pachter (nevermind that the second autocomplete entry in Google for Pachter fills in "is an idiot," referring to years of an adversarial relationship with some tech and gamer circles). That doesn't refute anything factual. It might refute a theoretical argument, but it really has no bearing on the probable leaks and what's actually happening. That's all this is, on my part at least - just an attempt to get ahead of the situation. The always-online, remotely-played DRM box that works like TV before the days of videotape has always been the holy grail of game publishing, and companies have always wanted to achieve it, and it wouldn't be terribly surprising if Microsoft made a big departure from the current status quo in order to get there. I think your argument that people commenting on rumors and making their stance known not only ignores that this is exactly what Pachter is doing, but it serves no good to gamers to be split over whether it's OK to be assertive about their digital content rights. If it doesn't pass, it doesn't pass - but getting ready for the possibility Microsoft is going to push this terrible anti-consumer measure forward is certainly within bounds.

It's also really odd that you accuse me of pushing an agenda for trying to gently push back against your criticism of people that had the gall to discuss, oh my goodness, RUMORS! and the ethics of video games. On a video game site. Horrors. Surely the end of the empire is just around the corner. I don't want to know what kinds of mail you're sending the reputable game journalists that are publishing information from undercover sources. Ever hear of Deep Throat? Same thing.

[SOL BADGUY]

Theres been at least one game maker who said publicly they wished consoles wouldnt play used games, and EA seems to really like making big name titles always on line, so I dont blame Microsoft for being quite on things, they have to juggle things that customers dont. Your job as a console maker is make sure theres a lot of game developers who will make games on your console, so if some will tell you behind closed doors they want their games to be online only, then theres no way youd go to the public and say you wont have any DRM like that on your console.

What cant be taken as rumor are the patents that are filed by companies, and Microsoft has published a scary one.

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-11/07/microsoft-patent-snooping

[Bojay1997]

The elephant in the room here is that Microsoft has FAILED to do what would be obvious: Neutralize any malignant and dangerous "rumor" immediately with a statement supporting the gamers, so they aren't blamed for something they don't plan to implement. That they haven't done so and that is telling, as are the reams of anecdotal and, yes, documentary and journalistic evidence that all point toward the same thing - that the console is currently designed to always be on. And, by the off chance a public company's caffeinated PR specialists are conscientious of the public's ability to remember what has been said before, they are at least not ruling out that they might implement it in the future. Again, I don't see why discussing our disapproval of such a topic is forbidden.

I'm not on a computer which I'd want to watch videos (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mfe2oMTSd70) on right now, but I guess I'll waste a few minutes anyway.

The part you want is at 3:00. Pachter calls it "odd," but "possible." "Maybe they'll do it, we're hearing those rumors."

His job is based on taking all that public information and trying to reverse-engineer a viable business strategy from it; as he says, "everything I know is based on what I've observed." Sidebar: I don't know what kinds of rules he has to abide by, but traditionally folks involved with investing are very shy about seeking out insider information, because in some cases it will land you in jail for a very long time. Don't know if that applies here, but consider what he says will affect markets and can be blamed for movement in stock prices, that may well be so. End sidebar. About that business strategy he figures out from what he's observed: He's looking for a sane business plan, first, which he then changes as necessary to meet the facts. For example, he says Sony's failure to bundle Move with every console is a strategic failure, but there you go - they didn't do it, despite his assertion that it's dooming the peripheral to a niche. Aside from the possibility he influences Microsoft's strategy he's really not calling the shots from his perch, either. He can create a good argument and advocate for it, but in all likelihood he's not getting a direct line from the inside - and when they do tell him things in a business call, they only say what they want. As he reminds us early on, the 'console superpowers' do have an interest in waiting out each others' launches and keeping some surprises in reserve. Simply, he doesn't know. It's obvious from how he's wording his statements here.

Still feeling a lot of cognitive dissonance between your insistence that any evidence hinting at always-online is dastardly and ignoble rumormongering, and your turn to Pachter and Sessler who aren't in any position to know what's actually going on and are basically just saying "I think this is a good or bad idea." I'll grant you it's interesting and even useful information - I should be more polite about Pachter (nevermind that the second autocomplete entry in Google for Pachter fills in "is an idiot," referring to years of an adversarial relationship with some tech and gamer circles). That doesn't refute anything factual. It might refute a theoretical argument, but it really has no bearing on the probable leaks and what's actually happening. That's all this is, on my part at least - just an attempt to get ahead of the situation. The always-online, remotely-played DRM box that works like TV before the days of videotape has always been the holy grail of game publishing, and companies have always wanted to achieve it, and it wouldn't be terribly surprising if Microsoft made a big departure from the current status quo in order to get there. I think your argument that people commenting on rumors and making their stance known not only ignores that this is exactly what Pachter is doing, but it serves no good to gamers to be split over whether it's OK to be assertive about their digital content rights. If it doesn't pass, it doesn't pass - but getting ready for the possibility Microsoft is going to push this terrible anti-consumer measure forward is certainly within bounds.

It's also really odd that you accuse me of pushing an agenda for trying to gently push back against your criticism of people that had the gall to discuss, oh my goodness, RUMORS! and the ethics of video games. On a video game site. Horrors. Surely the end of the empire is just around the corner. I don't want to know what kinds of mail you're sending the reputable game journalists that are publishing information from undercover sources. Ever hear of Deep Throat? Same thing.

So you're equating an investigation that brought down the President of the United States which was carefully and meticulously pursued by a legitimate journalist using a variety of sources with rumors posted about a video game console? I'm sorry, but I see no parallels at all.

In any event, I have no issue with people discussing rumors. My major issue with this thread is that the title is simply wrong and that people are attempting to claim that simply because a rumor has been repeated or echoed that it somehow has more credibility. Microsoft hasn't said anything and all that is being discussed are the same rumors that have been out there for many months now which were simply reignited by an employee having a ridiculous argument on Twitter.

My real question is why do you feel the need to "get ready" for anything Microsoft is doing? Is there some discount if you preorder the console now rather than waiting for Microsoft to announce its capabilities? Is Microsoft waiting to see what you personally think before it moves forward with anything?

Consumers will vote with their wallets when and if the day comes that Microsoft releases an on-line only console and bans used games. Some people might actually prefer those things in a console, especially if the box itself is heavily subsidized and it means more great games. As a gamer and collector myself, I would probably not buy an on-line only console which won't play used games, but most gamers are not collectors, so my opinion isn't necessarily going to carry the day and isn't really something Microsoft should care too much about because I wouldn't be their target market anyway.

[TonyTheTiger]

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-11/07/microsoft-patent-snooping

The system would use the Kinect camera to check the number of viewers in any room and then prompt the consumer to purchase the appropriate license based on that number. This would mean that you would pay more, for example, for a family of six than if you were watching a piece of content on your own.

I can't be the only person amused at the thought of a family of six trying to find the most effective way to out-ninja the sensor.

[Bojay1997]

Another day, another rumor. According to this, always on will not be a requirement for local games and used games will still play. Sounds identical to the PS4 but we won't know for sure until Microsoft makes an official announcement.

http://www.vgleaks.com/microsoft-xbox-roadmap-2013/

[wiggyx]

Jesus, it got super, SUPER serious in here!

[Ed Oscuro]

So you're equating an investigation that brought down the President of the United States which was carefully and meticulously pursued by a legitimate journalist using a variety of sources with rumors posted about a video game console?
Of course not. However you trip yourself up when you go on to say this:

I'm sorry, but I see no parallels at all.
Really? In both cases you have journalists (yes, legitimate journalists) quoting people who cannot speak on the record. That's a parallel; you can admit it.

I'm in total agreement that we won't know for sure what happens until the day Microsoft announces the console - or until people start reading the fine print of the released system, in the case they try to pull a fast one. It's easy to imagine that Microsoft is trying out some rumors to gauge the public reaction, or that things have been quietly but quickly changed after the furor.

The current rumor isn't necessarily an improvement, from the consumer standpoint, over the old one, except that it's now being said that always online won't interfere with playing local content (which I take to mean, and had better mean, that the console won't have a three-minute timer until shutting down when playing single player without a connection).

According to another recent rumor, Microsoft would rerelease the 360 for $99, which system obviously includes a disc drive.
In the latest rumor, they would release an Xbox Mini with no disc drive, targeting $149. A fast connection to the 720's disc drive, allowing 360 backwards compatibility, shouldn't make up an extra $50 in pricing. It may just be that they've decided that they can soak people a bit for backwards compatibility.

If Durango is $499, total cost of a machine with functionality on par with PS3 is well above the famous FIVE NINETY NINE.

[Bojay1997]

Of course not. However you trip yourself up when you go on to say this:

Really? In both cases you have journalists (yes, legitimate journalists) quoting people who cannot speak on the record. That's a parallel; you can admit it.

I'm in total agreement that we won't know for sure what happens until the day Microsoft announces the console - or until people start reading the fine print of the released system, in the case they try to pull a fast one. It's easy to imagine that Microsoft is trying out some rumors to gauge the public reaction, or that things have been quietly but quickly changed after the furor.

The current rumor isn't necessarily an improvement, from the consumer standpoint, over the old one, except that it's now being said that always online won't interfere with playing local content (which I take to mean, and had better mean, that the console won't have a three-minute timer until shutting down when playing single player without a connection).

According to another recent rumor, Microsoft would rerelease the 360 for $99, which system obviously includes a disc drive.
In the latest rumor, they would release an Xbox Mini with no disc drive, targeting $149. A fast connection to the 720's disc drive, allowing 360 backwards compatibility, shouldn't make up an extra $50 in pricing. It may just be that they've decided that they can soak people a bit for backwards compatibility.

If Durango is $499, total cost of a machine with functionality on par with PS3 is well above the famous FIVE NINETY NINE.

I really don't see the parallel. Nobody from the gaming press has taken any time to uncover the credible sources or evidence that Bob Woodward and his team did. All they are doing is reporting the same rumor over and over and over again with nothing of real substance to add.

The latest rumor as I understand it is that the Durango will function just like the 360 does now. If you want video content or on-line multiplayer, you need to be connected via wireless or LAN cable to the Internet (i.e. always on). If you want to use the Durango as a cable box, you similarly need to be connected. If all you want to do is play local games and used games, you don't need a connection at all. That's how the 360 works and it's how the PS4 will work. The mini rumor is interesting because it further supports the idea of Microsoft pursuing the cable route while also providing people who prefer on-line and digital only solutions (i.e. people who have large XBL arcade libraries or use their 360 as a Netflix box) with a low cost alternative to replacing their Xbox 360 once it dies. $149 is $50 less than the cheapest Xbox 360 right now and a full $150 less than the 250 GB model. You're right though that if they also release a $99 Xbox 360, that would make the math unfavorable. I would note that Sony hasn't released any details about their solution for backwards compatibility, but it appears as of now your only option is to keep your PS3 and replace it with a new system at whatever price they drop to (probably $199 at E3) if your PS3 dies in the future.

[Skritche]

I don't believe that to be necessarily true. Sure, Xboxes won't be manufactured, but Nintendo and Sony are still at it, and for all we know Atari could miraculously come back and create a new game system and it'll become a hit.

[PROTOTYPE]

Soooooooooooooooooooo it is true!

[offthechartsvideogames]

Neither Sony nor Microsoft have made official statements one way or the other. That being said, let's get this straight. It is NOT about piracy. It's about control. It about you not owning the content and about them being able to take away your right to play it at any time they deem necessary. I can tell you right now that if they do take that route they've lost my money. I'll be done with gaming the instant it goes completely online. I know that's where it's going because people are stupid sheep and will allow it to happen to them. I'll just enjoy my physical media how I want, when I want, and where I want.

I completely agree, and I don't even understand why they would think gamers, or anyone for that matter, would accept that approach.