Unless Microsoft is seeing 95%+ of purchased 360's online, it loses them too many potential customers.
I can imagine publishers would like it (assuming it's then used to block used games), but from a hardware provider's perspective it just seems so nonsensical.
Storytime.
This week, my company saw our first Office 2013 deploy for a customer. We did as we always do: Buy the PC from our reseller, prep it to clean off all the bloatware, uninstall Office 2010 because it obviously can't be used to install Office 2013... Then we hit a roadblock. See, all Office 2013 comes with is an activation key and a link to download it. Or, at least, the version we were installing did - our client wasn't buying in volume and didn't need full-on office PRo Plus, so there was no reason to go with Office 365 or Open Value licensing.
No biggie, right? Download, install, hand off to customer. Only it wasn't that simple. See, to download Office 2013, you need a Microsoft account. Those of you around here might know it better as a Microsoft Gaming Zone account... wait, no? Okay, howabout .NET Passport? Still too old? Well howabout Xbox Live account? There we go... Only they didn't call it that lately. They just called it a Live, and now as of 6 months ago a Microsoft account. It's just like a google account - ties into their store, tracks purchases, tracks gamertag and points in Xbox, tracks Zune stuff, incorporates Skype (now that Messenger is dead and they are moving Hotmail people to Outlook.com)... Oh, and this is the same service that was hacked by the FIFA break-ins, is running on archaic software, and won't let you change your e-mail address after you sign up for the account. (Side note, my Microsoft certifications are also tied to this account. Luckily I've got a personal Live ID, a Professional Live ID, and a work Live ID, and none of them are linked.)
So yeah.. To download and install Office 2013, you need to register your copy of Office 2013 to your Microsoft account. This makes sense from Microsoft's point of view. After all, the whole idea is that you have access to your account anywhere and can install Office 2013 on all your equipment! So your Surface, your desktop, your work PC.. all sharing the same account.
Except you need to link your Microsoft account to your Domain name in an enterprise environment. And what about the fact that this particular piece of software was purchased by the business, and shouldn't be linked to an individual user? What if we had to deploy more than 1 copy, but had, say, 10 to deploy? Oh.. that's right. You can't have more than 5 copies of Office linked to any given Microsoft account. And there are moral, ethical, and legal issues with linking it to any of our businesses e-mail addresses. So suddenly we are faced with a scenario where our best option is to make up fake e-mail accounts, register extra Microsoft accounts, and keep those passwords on file from now until the end of life of the PC or Office 2013. And we haven't even looked deep into Open Licensing and if it requires the same linked account (although that should let us pre-deploy Office on it, at least).
We've naturally been in touch with our Microsoft partners about this. You know what's the answer we've gotten back? No one at Microsoft or our reseller ever once saw an issue with this model of reselling, and they are now scrambling to let us know how best to proceed. Not once did they stop and consider just what it meant for pre-deployments, which are our bread and butter. They only considered the home user and the enterprise user. So we're stuck here trying to figure out what is best for our customer, only delaying getting their PC into their hands.
So where am I going with this?
Simple. Microsoft has enormous blind spots. Like.. blind spots you could hide a small moon in. They have been pushing so hard for the integrated, connected living room (all running Microsoft software, of course) that they are not considering the long-term ramifications.. Like what it means when anyone can sign up a Microsoft account for free and hijacking other users out of their accounts, or the aforementioned hacks. It wouldn't surprise me one bit that Microsoft sees the massive benefits of an always-on, always connected, always Kinect enabled living room and said "I want that." Of course the publishers will back them, as they've been dying for games to "phone home" for a long time now for a variety of reasons. So if anyone is going to jump out on this limb, it is going to be Microsoft's think tanks (without looking at the world around them), and it'll be too late to dial it back once it is out there. And my bet is that as soon as Microsoft announces it, Sony will follow - they've been burned by people breaking their hashes in both the DVD and PSN spaces, and getting a way to track and regulate that is right up their alley.
Mark my words. Microsoft will make at least one variety of their next system Always-on.
Screw always on, with the kind of markups they charge on expandable media, that install everything clause is not going to fly next gen.
If it does streaming AKA what Sony is promising with downloaded installs, then it should be fine. Unless they do something stupid like an SSD hard drive or something.
Considering how people have defended EA and what they have done I could see the Always On thing more or less happening with a fairly big fuss at first only to die down given time even with issues and troubles popping up more often than not (see RROD). Why? Because the consumer has sadly gotten use to being bent over and taking it up the rump. People actively start making excuses for them and saying "It's how things are". Basically the same thing that happened with DLC and horse armor.
Screw always on, with the kind of markups they charge on expandable media, that install everything clause is not going to fly next gen.
If it does streaming AKA what Sony is promising with downloaded installs, then it should be fine. Unless they do something stupid like an SSD hard drive or something.
I'm confused, is this more about the gakai thing, or steaming from the disc while it's still installing?
0
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
Rumor from VGLeaks has it that FFXIII Versus is being renamed FFXIV and being codeveloped by Sony. Jesus, that game has a troubled development history. It is in competition with the Last Guardian.
...um, wow. Wouldn't have guessed that happening.
If Squeenix really is reaching out to Sony for help they really must feel they've fucked over Final Fantasy beyond internal repair.
I really thought this was already debunked. Edit: here we go. It was a typo by a clothing manufacturer, supposedly.
Screw always on, with the kind of markups they charge on expandable media, that install everything clause is not going to fly next gen.
If it does streaming AKA what Sony is promising with downloaded installs, then it should be fine. Unless they do something stupid like an SSD hard drive or something.
I'm confused, is this more about the gakai thing, or steaming from the disc while it's still installing?
Both, the way Sony sold it. The idea is that you stream the game to your hard drive and can play it while it is downloading. That can be accomplished one of two ways: Gaikai providing the experience while the game downloads, or optimized download/streaming that lets you play the game as assets are loaded in the background. The way the dedicated I/O chip was described, the system is capable of both.
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
It seems like Sony and Microsoft are going to hand the next gen competition over to Nintendo. How funny would that be if the Wii U's sales skyrocket as a result of outrage against "Always Online."
0
Options
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
It seems like Sony and Microsoft are going to hand the next gen competition over to Nintendo. How funny would that be if the Wii U's sales skyrocket as a result of outrage against "Always Online."
Nintendo's been saying for years that they have been seeing a storm coming, that the gaming industry was heading down a path they didn't want to follow. It's one of the reasons they deliberately do not sell their gear as "multimedia devices," even with both the 3DS and Wii U supporting a hell of a lot of media functionality (for free *ahemMicrosoftahem*). While I don't think it is going to be some master stroke, I do feel that Microsoft and Sony are making more than a few missteps. The sad part is that they may take down console-based AAA gaming with them.
It seems like Sony and Microsoft are going to hand the next gen competition over to Nintendo. How funny would that be if the Wii U's sales skyrocket as a result of outrage against "Always Online."
I don't see it happening. Game support for the Wii U will remain lackluster true to Nintendo fashion. Meanwhile Sony and MS will pump out the newest hottest thing with all the flash that tends to make people drool. Plus you know, they'll have the CoD's, Maddens, etc.
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I was just discussing with some people (based on @Athenor's post above, which is excellent by the way) that the industry is doing itself in because of the desire to create digital platforms. Which isn't bad in and of itself, it makes sense - a digital platform / service provides continuity and makes the leaps from hardware to hardware easier. Or, that's how it should work.
Steam changed the video game industry, and it should have been for the better. We're seeing this gross mutation, this masturbatory version of Steam being reflected in the PSN, Live, Origin... They've all completely missed the point and are building up control platforms rather than things open-ended.
You know, I'm just wondering... with the way things are going with Origin lately, with this flash sale they're doing and with all the Sim City woes and etc... do you think EA is trying to sabotage their own platform so they have a reason to reintegrate with Steam? Maybe they have realized that Origin is a failure and this is a way of saving face (hah!) by not needing to admit that Origin is terrible?
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
You know, I'm just wondering... with the way things are going with Origin lately, with this flash sale they're doing and with all the Sim City woes and etc... do you think EA is trying to sabotage their own platform so they have a reason to reintegrate with Steam? Maybe they have realized that Origin is a failure and this is a way of saving face (hah!) by not needing to admit that Origin is terrible?
I was just discussing with some people (based on @Athenor's post above, which is excellent by the way) that the industry is doing itself in because of the desire to create digital platforms. Which isn't bad in and of itself, it makes sense - a digital platform / service provides continuity and makes the leaps from hardware to hardware easier. Or, that's how it should work.
Steam changed the video game industry, and it should have been for the better. We're seeing this gross mutation, this masturbatory version of Steam being reflected in the PSN, Live, Origin... They've all completely missed the point and are building up control platforms rather than things open-ended.
You mean like IOS staggering failure? Because that's the problem there is a much more walled garden approach that is horridly successful as well.
Philippe about the tactical deployment of german Kradschützen during the battle of Kursk:
"I think I can comment on this because I used to live above the Baby Doll Lounge, a topless bar that was once frequented by bikers in lower Manhattan."
You know, I'm just wondering... with the way things are going with Origin lately, with this flash sale they're doing and with all the Sim City woes and etc... do you think EA is trying to sabotage their own platform so they have a reason to reintegrate with Steam? Maybe they have realized that Origin is a failure and this is a way of saving face (hah!) by not needing to admit that Origin is terrible?
...so they're trying to save face by making Origin an even worse service? O_o
You know, I'm just wondering... with the way things are going with Origin lately, with this flash sale they're doing and with all the Sim City woes and etc... do you think EA is trying to sabotage their own platform so they have a reason to reintegrate with Steam? Maybe they have realized that Origin is a failure and this is a way of saving face (hah!) by not needing to admit that Origin is terrible?
No.
I think it's about Control for EA.
They don't want to hand said control over to Valve.
Remember, this is the company that forced MS to let them control the servers, so they could shut them down, instead of letting Xbox Live handle that forever.
This is something I don't see them back paddling on. Ever.
EA has enough hubris that they can't just come back to The Newell and say "We were wrong to create Origin, and we would like to sell our AAA titles on your glorious digital platform again." That won't happen. But if they torpedo their own platform, that gives them a legitimate reason to come crawling back.
[quote="Lucascraft;26163715"]EA has enough hubris that they can't just come back to The Newell and say "We were wrong to create Origin, and we would like to sell our AAA titles on your glorious digital platform again." That won't happen. But if they torpedo their own platform, that gives them a legitimate reason to come crawling back.
(Yes, I know this is an unlikely scenario)[/quote]
No, I get what you're saying. But even if I did think they are displeased with Origin and see it as nothing but a disaster, which I don't, I still don't believe that they would be willing to give up that control and hand it over to another party.
Commodore75 on
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I was just discussing with some people (based on @Athenor's post above, which is excellent by the way) that the industry is doing itself in because of the desire to create digital platforms. Which isn't bad in and of itself, it makes sense - a digital platform / service provides continuity and makes the leaps from hardware to hardware easier. Or, that's how it should work.
Steam changed the video game industry, and it should have been for the better. We're seeing this gross mutation, this masturbatory version of Steam being reflected in the PSN, Live, Origin... They've all completely missed the point and are building up control platforms rather than things open-ended.
You mean like IOS staggering failure? Because that's the problem there is a much more walled garden approach that is horridly successful as well.
EA has enough hubris that they can't just come back to The Newell and say "We were wrong to create Origin, and we would like to sell our AAA titles on your glorious digital platform again." That won't happen. But if they torpedo their own platform, that gives them a legitimate reason to come crawling back.
(Yes, I know this is an unlikely scenario)
No company will admit they are in the wrong. They might admit to doing something that didn't work out, but they won't admit they were in the wrong.
Plus more competition is a good thing, Steam should not be the only digital service out there. Hell I'd like to see someone absolutely rival Steam, it might make The Newell to actually get some damn support for it. In the end competition, true competition would only benefit us.
Cade on
+3
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I agreed one post, and awesomed another, both for the same reason.
All of this is based on a rumor. As far as I know, Microsoft has been silent on their system, and the PS4 hasn't said one way or another about always online. It's simply speculation. What I see here is people not only talking as if this is happening, but getting worked up over it as well.
No I don't.
+1
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
EA has enough hubris that they can't just come back to The Newell and say "We were wrong to create Origin, and we would like to sell our AAA titles on your glorious digital platform again." That won't happen. But if they torpedo their own platform, that gives them a legitimate reason to come crawling back.
(Yes, I know this is an unlikely scenario)
No company will admit they are in the wrong. They might admit to doing something that didn't work out, but they won't admit they were in the wrong.
Plus more competition is a good thing, Steam should not be the only digital service out there. Hell I'd like to see someone absolutely rival Steam, it might make The Newell to actually get some damn support for it. In the end competition, true competition would only benefit us.
I agree that Steam shouldn't be the only digital platform, but the problem with something like Origin is that it is walled-off and brand specific. Good Old Games is the kind of competition we need - open ended, all inclusive. Platforms like Origin aren't competition, it's clubhouse, exclusivity building. But it also comes with the caveat of control, the kinds of control you won't see in the open ended platforms.
+3
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I agreed one post, and awesomed another, both for the same reason.
All of this is based on a rumor. As far as I know, Microsoft has been silent on their system, and the PS4 hasn't said one way or another about always online. It's simply speculation. What I see here is people not only talking as if this is happening, but getting worked up over it as well.
There's nothing wrong with conjecture and the discussion of what it could mean.
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
I'm standing by my long-standing and well documented stance that the gaming industry, as it stands right now, is inherently unhealthy. What's worse, no one is recognizing that and trying to fix it - or if they are, they are getting shat upon by the other companies so interested in short term profits that they are willing to tank any chance of long-term survivability...
Oh fuck, I just described Wall Street Circa 2007, didn't I? Silly me.
I agreed one post, and awesomed another, both for the same reason.
All of this is based on a rumor. As far as I know, Microsoft has been silent on their system, and the PS4 hasn't said one way or another about always online. It's simply speculation. What I see here is people not only talking as if this is happening, but getting worked up over it as well.
There's nothing wrong with conjecture and the discussion of what it could mean.
Yeah, I just wouldn't get too worked up about it until it gets announced. These rumors are just as likely to be people "betting against the other guy" as insider information.
So in a stunning display of PR ineptitude, a Vita game was stealth launched today. Atelier Totori Plus - an enhanced port of a pretty good PS3 RPG - just showed up on the PSN. The thing is, the game had never been announced for US release & as far as I can tell, there are no press releases about its launch. Makes me wonder if Tecmo-Koei was contractually obligated to release it overseas but is doing the bare minimum to ensure that the game bombs hard and gets out of having to release US versions of the sequel.
So in a stunning display of PR ineptitude, a Vita game was stealth launched today. Atelier Totori Plus - an enhanced port of a pretty good PS3 RPG - just showed up on the PSN. The thing is, the game had never been announced for US release & as far as I can tell, there are no press releases about its launch. Makes me wonder if Tecmo-Koei was contractually obligated to release it overseas but is doing the bare minimum to ensure that the game bombs hard and gets out of having to release US versions of the sequel.
The launch plans were probably set in stone prior to the price drop announcement. Like a sort of "vote of no confidence" type thing.
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I'm still surprised that EA and Ubisoft have their own Steam variants, but Activision does not.
Battle.net. I mean, technically speaking. It's really Blizzard's baby and they're handling it alright. But now I've contradicted my view that walled-off, self-serving platforms are a bad thing.
Yeah I don't see anything in that leaked memo that reads as "online required". It says the console will always be connected to the network and that's fine by me because ALL my shit is always connected to a network. There is nothing specific that says if it goes offline your wife is raped by Afghani tribesmen or worse, you lose your progress in Gears of War 4.
I'd honestly be more peeved at the "Kinect will be required for the system to operate". That is a bold and definitive statement.
Also wakkawa told us to chill out and I'm guessing he's been hands-on with both dev kits by now.
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Yeah I don't see anything in that leaked memo that reads as "online required". It says the console will always be connected to the network and that's fine by me because ALL my shit is always connected to a network. There is nothing specific that says if it goes offline your wife is raped by Afghani tribesmen or worse, you lose your progress in Gears of War 4.
I'd honestly be more peeved at the "Kinect will be required for the system to operate". That is a bold and definitive statement.
Also wakkawa told us to chill out and I'm guessing he's been hands-on with both dev kits by now.
Doesn't it also come with the Kinect though? How are you inconvenienced?
I'm honestly kind of excited to see what a new Kinect that has had a few years worth of tweaks and fixes can pull off. I personally think the Kinect enables some cool stuff in the few instances where it works.
I'm really, REALLY hoping the always online thing and the forced install thing are due to limitations of the dev units. Always on for security and tracking, install because the software and hardware haven't been optimized yet.
But after Sony refusing to rule out some sort of used game block and EA arbitrarily making SimCity always online, I can't rule out that either Sony or Microsoft or both really will be that stupid. Sony and Nintendo have both done idiotic things when they got popular and complacent. What if Microsoft does the same now, only with the technology to do even more damage to their customer happiness?
The iOS example's a good one... I could see them taking all the wrong lessons from it and trying to replicate Apple's elegant walled garden, only without the elegant part. Sony's first attempt to ape the iPhone was the PSP Go, after all.
Posts
The 3DS route.
My 3DS is always on, always connected. It's pretty nifty. But if I ever happen to lose that connection, I'm not cockblocked from playing Fire Emblem.
This is the only sane way to do it. Anything else... see above.
Storytime.
This week, my company saw our first Office 2013 deploy for a customer. We did as we always do: Buy the PC from our reseller, prep it to clean off all the bloatware, uninstall Office 2010 because it obviously can't be used to install Office 2013... Then we hit a roadblock. See, all Office 2013 comes with is an activation key and a link to download it. Or, at least, the version we were installing did - our client wasn't buying in volume and didn't need full-on office PRo Plus, so there was no reason to go with Office 365 or Open Value licensing.
No biggie, right? Download, install, hand off to customer. Only it wasn't that simple. See, to download Office 2013, you need a Microsoft account. Those of you around here might know it better as a Microsoft Gaming Zone account... wait, no? Okay, howabout .NET Passport? Still too old? Well howabout Xbox Live account? There we go... Only they didn't call it that lately. They just called it a Live, and now as of 6 months ago a Microsoft account. It's just like a google account - ties into their store, tracks purchases, tracks gamertag and points in Xbox, tracks Zune stuff, incorporates Skype (now that Messenger is dead and they are moving Hotmail people to Outlook.com)... Oh, and this is the same service that was hacked by the FIFA break-ins, is running on archaic software, and won't let you change your e-mail address after you sign up for the account. (Side note, my Microsoft certifications are also tied to this account. Luckily I've got a personal Live ID, a Professional Live ID, and a work Live ID, and none of them are linked.)
So yeah.. To download and install Office 2013, you need to register your copy of Office 2013 to your Microsoft account. This makes sense from Microsoft's point of view. After all, the whole idea is that you have access to your account anywhere and can install Office 2013 on all your equipment! So your Surface, your desktop, your work PC.. all sharing the same account.
Except you need to link your Microsoft account to your Domain name in an enterprise environment. And what about the fact that this particular piece of software was purchased by the business, and shouldn't be linked to an individual user? What if we had to deploy more than 1 copy, but had, say, 10 to deploy? Oh.. that's right. You can't have more than 5 copies of Office linked to any given Microsoft account. And there are moral, ethical, and legal issues with linking it to any of our businesses e-mail addresses. So suddenly we are faced with a scenario where our best option is to make up fake e-mail accounts, register extra Microsoft accounts, and keep those passwords on file from now until the end of life of the PC or Office 2013. And we haven't even looked deep into Open Licensing and if it requires the same linked account (although that should let us pre-deploy Office on it, at least).
We've naturally been in touch with our Microsoft partners about this. You know what's the answer we've gotten back? No one at Microsoft or our reseller ever once saw an issue with this model of reselling, and they are now scrambling to let us know how best to proceed. Not once did they stop and consider just what it meant for pre-deployments, which are our bread and butter. They only considered the home user and the enterprise user. So we're stuck here trying to figure out what is best for our customer, only delaying getting their PC into their hands.
So where am I going with this?
Simple. Microsoft has enormous blind spots. Like.. blind spots you could hide a small moon in. They have been pushing so hard for the integrated, connected living room (all running Microsoft software, of course) that they are not considering the long-term ramifications.. Like what it means when anyone can sign up a Microsoft account for free and hijacking other users out of their accounts, or the aforementioned hacks. It wouldn't surprise me one bit that Microsoft sees the massive benefits of an always-on, always connected, always Kinect enabled living room and said "I want that." Of course the publishers will back them, as they've been dying for games to "phone home" for a long time now for a variety of reasons. So if anyone is going to jump out on this limb, it is going to be Microsoft's think tanks (without looking at the world around them), and it'll be too late to dial it back once it is out there. And my bet is that as soon as Microsoft announces it, Sony will follow - they've been burned by people breaking their hashes in both the DVD and PSN spaces, and getting a way to track and regulate that is right up their alley.
Mark my words. Microsoft will make at least one variety of their next system Always-on.
If it does streaming AKA what Sony is promising with downloaded installs, then it should be fine. Unless they do something stupid like an SSD hard drive or something.
I really thought this was already debunked. Edit: here we go. It was a typo by a clothing manufacturer, supposedly.
Both, the way Sony sold it. The idea is that you stream the game to your hard drive and can play it while it is downloading. That can be accomplished one of two ways: Gaikai providing the experience while the game downloads, or optimized download/streaming that lets you play the game as assets are loaded in the background. The way the dedicated I/O chip was described, the system is capable of both.
Nintendo's been saying for years that they have been seeing a storm coming, that the gaming industry was heading down a path they didn't want to follow. It's one of the reasons they deliberately do not sell their gear as "multimedia devices," even with both the 3DS and Wii U supporting a hell of a lot of media functionality (for free *ahemMicrosoftahem*). While I don't think it is going to be some master stroke, I do feel that Microsoft and Sony are making more than a few missteps. The sad part is that they may take down console-based AAA gaming with them.
I don't see it happening. Game support for the Wii U will remain lackluster true to Nintendo fashion. Meanwhile Sony and MS will pump out the newest hottest thing with all the flash that tends to make people drool. Plus you know, they'll have the CoD's, Maddens, etc.
Steam changed the video game industry, and it should have been for the better. We're seeing this gross mutation, this masturbatory version of Steam being reflected in the PSN, Live, Origin... They've all completely missed the point and are building up control platforms rather than things open-ended.
Absolutely 100% not the case at all.
You mean like IOS staggering failure? Because that's the problem there is a much more walled garden approach that is horridly successful as well.
"I think I can comment on this because I used to live above the Baby Doll Lounge, a topless bar that was once frequented by bikers in lower Manhattan."
...so they're trying to save face by making Origin an even worse service? O_o
No.
I think it's about Control for EA.
They don't want to hand said control over to Valve.
Remember, this is the company that forced MS to let them control the servers, so they could shut them down, instead of letting Xbox Live handle that forever.
This is something I don't see them back paddling on. Ever.
(Yes, I know this is an unlikely scenario)
(Yes, I know this is an unlikely scenario)[/quote]
No, I get what you're saying.
But even if I did think they are displeased with Origin and see it as nothing but a disaster, which I don't, I still don't believe that they would be willing to give up that control and hand it over to another party.
Damn, I didn't even consider iOS in this.
No company will admit they are in the wrong. They might admit to doing something that didn't work out, but they won't admit they were in the wrong.
Plus more competition is a good thing, Steam should not be the only digital service out there. Hell I'd like to see someone absolutely rival Steam, it might make The Newell to actually get some damn support for it. In the end competition, true competition would only benefit us.
That's a very flippant and dismissive way to say, "I disagree with your guys' observations."
All of this is based on a rumor. As far as I know, Microsoft has been silent on their system, and the PS4 hasn't said one way or another about always online. It's simply speculation. What I see here is people not only talking as if this is happening, but getting worked up over it as well.
I agree that Steam shouldn't be the only digital platform, but the problem with something like Origin is that it is walled-off and brand specific. Good Old Games is the kind of competition we need - open ended, all inclusive. Platforms like Origin aren't competition, it's clubhouse, exclusivity building. But it also comes with the caveat of control, the kinds of control you won't see in the open ended platforms.
There's nothing wrong with conjecture and the discussion of what it could mean.
Oh fuck, I just described Wall Street Circa 2007, didn't I? Silly me.
Yeah, I just wouldn't get too worked up about it until it gets announced. These rumors are just as likely to be people "betting against the other guy" as insider information.
Zeboyd Games Development Blog
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire, Facebook : Zeboyd Games
The launch plans were probably set in stone prior to the price drop announcement. Like a sort of "vote of no confidence" type thing.
Battle.net. I mean, technically speaking. It's really Blizzard's baby and they're handling it alright. But now I've contradicted my view that walled-off, self-serving platforms are a bad thing.
Fuck me.
I'd honestly be more peeved at the "Kinect will be required for the system to operate". That is a bold and definitive statement.
Also wakkawa told us to chill out and I'm guessing he's been hands-on with both dev kits by now.
Doesn't it also come with the Kinect though? How are you inconvenienced?
But after Sony refusing to rule out some sort of used game block and EA arbitrarily making SimCity always online, I can't rule out that either Sony or Microsoft or both really will be that stupid. Sony and Nintendo have both done idiotic things when they got popular and complacent. What if Microsoft does the same now, only with the technology to do even more damage to their customer happiness?
The iOS example's a good one... I could see them taking all the wrong lessons from it and trying to replicate Apple's elegant walled garden, only without the elegant part. Sony's first attempt to ape the iPhone was the PSP Go, after all.