Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 5th Apr 2013 10:47 UTC
Games More and more evidence is pointing towards the next Xbox requiring an always-on internet connection in order to play any games - i.e., once you lose your connection, you can't play any game at all. Three minutes after losing your connection, "your" game will suspend itself and stop playing. Microsoft's Adam Orth took to Twitter to defend this anti-consumer practice, but he did so in the most ungraceful of ways.
Thread beginning with comment 557701
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Fri 5th Apr 2013 11:07 UTC
MOS6510
Member since:
2011-05-12

He's right we're always on-line anyway and I wouldn't be playing games if I wasn't as fixing the Internet connection would be much more important.

But...

Why does a game console need to be on-line in order to play a game if you're not playing other players on-line?

For nearly 40 years we've been playing with game consoles at home and that always worked fine without Internet access. Does an XBox run on PoI (Power over Internet)? Does it explode if it can't ping home?

Reply Score: 6

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by shotsman on Fri 5th Apr 2013 11:15 in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

Not everyone is online all the time. Some of us still like to go 'off network' in order to get stuff done.

Personally, if you think you need to be online all the time, you are suffering from internet addiction and should get some medical help for that. If you can't face say a 10hr flight without being online then... well isn't it a tiny bit obvious that you need help?

Then there is the cost. Many Mobile/Cell companies are reducing their data limits just at a time when more people are using them. When it is cheaper to spend an hour on the phone to someone on the other side of the world than it is to load up a few web pages while roaming off your home network something is very wrong.

If MS go ahead with this then I know a good number of parents who will simply not bother to upgrade. Another wonderful MS marketing decision... (like TIFKAM?)

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Fri 5th Apr 2013 11:33 in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

I'm not always on-line, but my Internet connection is.

An increasing number of people, at least here in The Netherlands, use the Internet also for VoIP and television. I personally have my email server at home. We were planning to get television over Internet today.

So if our Internet connection goes down I would immediately try to fix it. It doesn't happen often and when it does it's often a glitch at the provider's end, but it may very well not be. If I leave it down for hours only to find out the problem is worse than imaged a lot of time is already lost.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by Laurence on Fri 5th Apr 2013 17:35 in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Not everyone is online all the time. Some of us still like to go 'off network' in order to get stuff done.

Personally, if you think you need to be online all the time, you are suffering from internet addiction and should get some medical help for that. If you can't face say a 10hr flight without being online then... well isn't it a tiny bit obvious that you need help?

We're talking home internet connection, not personally doing stuff online constantly while at home; let alone the need to be online while away from the house. (if you're not at home then you're not going to be playing on your XBox anyway, who even cares?)

What's more, the "internet addition" remark is just a personal attack and completely unnecessary.

Why is it some people must insist on posting the most over the top counter arguments? As I would normally be in complete agreement with you on this topic but those comments above are just ridiculous.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by bassbeast on Mon 8th Apr 2013 00:30 in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

You know how many people can't get consistent high speed in the USA? A LOT, we are talking millions, probably tens of millions because of cherry picking and the way ISPs care more about handing out CEO bonuses than they do actually growing the company. AT&T hasn't done squat as far as new DSL in years, most of the cablecos aren't spending jack on new lines, even verizon put the brakes on new FIOS rollouts.

I think everyone though is playing small ball and not looking at the big picture which is thus...The history of MSFT can be summed up with "And then the other guy did something REALLY stupid" because you name a MSFT success, from the OS to the browser, Office suites to the game console it can ALL be summed up with that phrase. Even the 360, which got a free shot because the PS3 was priced at $600 USD which was twice what the market would bear.

What we are seeing now is what happens when MSFT doesn't have morons for competition which from the looks of it what we get is "And then MSFT did something REALLY stupid" because honestly they ran off all the good engineers and guys with vision for more marketing drones like Ballmer. From the Frankenstein mess that is Windows 8, Games For Windows Live or as I like to call it "Attack of the bad UI" since you can be on a PC and looking for specifically PC games and get 9 pages of 360 titles, to pricing their stupid tablet waaay more than the market will bear and to add to the stupid trying to force DirectX into mobile which just added a $50K porting cost for most apps which most companies will not spend, to trying to force Windows to be all about "ZOMG we got teh touch just like Apple LOL!" when the OEMs have already said the touchscreen X86 units are going NOWHERE, like the Ultrabook they have warehouses full of the things,hell I could go on all day.

What can we take from this? Well if MSFT doesn't have a competitor that shoots itself in the face MSFT's true colors shine through, which is literally like something out of Dilbert. Copying fads that have come and gone, aping other companies but poorly and without any thought or innovation, its a trainwreck folks. This is from someone that has been selling and servicing MSFT products for nearly a quarter of a century but even I can see this move is to please Wall Street and not the consumer which is pretty much indicative of MSFT under Ballmer, a bunch of PHBs reading the financial times and grabbing whatever buzzwords they see there instead of making products that consumers want and it shows. Win 8 is a flop, WinTab will join the playbook and touchpad, and the OEMs all have Google on the other line talking about Chromebooks...its a mess folks and when the X720 bombs because consumers see its more about Wall Street metrics than making them happy (not to mention Sony learned from their mistake and the PS4 will have a sane price at launch) any of us that has been watching the suicidal stupidity of MSFT these past 5 years really will not be surprised.

And I apologize for the length but some concepts just can't be wrapped up in a soundbyte and this is something I feel strongly about as should anybody that depends on anything made by MSFT to do their jobs. The company is flying off the rails and this move is just one in a loooong string of failures to listen to the public that is really killing the company.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by anda_skoa on Fri 5th Apr 2013 11:20 in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
anda_skoa Member since:
2005-07-07

Why does a game console need to be on-line in order to play a game if you're not playing other players on-line?


Well, you have been around long enough to know that this is a rethorical question, but for the fun of it: control!

All and every measure to artifically limit what you can do, how you do it or where you do it is solely about control.
Whether it is always-on, DRM, "exclusive" targets or channels, etc., it is alway about producers staying in control of the market, getting out or above the dreaded supply-and-demand scheme.

The proponents of control will usually have some scapegoat or dooms-day scenario to point to and unfortunately are usually able to make a large portion of the population believe it.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Fri 5th Apr 2013 11:36 in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

My guess is it probably is DRM related, but we've had DRM for some time without an active Internet connection. If it's required to start the game I can imagine why the need a connection, but once the game is validated and allowed to start why is the connection still needed?

It gives me the feeling that while you are playing some bloke in uniform is standing behind you and the moment you do something against the rules he's going to shoot you in the head.

My point is that this requirement seems like a vote of total distrust of the player.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by twitterfire on Fri 5th Apr 2013 15:54 in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11

Does it explode if it can't ping home?


We must fight software piracy and terrorism, so trying to use a device that is not always on might make some folks think that you're either a pirate or a terrorist or both. ;)

Probably, the next gen devices will require us not only to be always on and have a gps built in, but to have a camera always on, too.

Edited 2013-04-05 15:56 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by Soulbender on Fri 5th Apr 2013 16:15 in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

He's right we're always on-line anyway


No "we" are not. In fact, most people on this planet probably aren't.

Why does a game console need to be on-line in order to play a game if you're not playing other players on-line?


One word: control.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Fri 5th Apr 2013 16:30 in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Most can't afford an XBox anyway.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by ze_jerkface on Fri 5th Apr 2013 17:31 in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

He's right we're always on-line


No we are not always online.

The economics still don't make sense to connect every U.S. household with broadband.

And just because you have a phone line does not mean you can get DSL.

Maybe you and Orthy should get together and start digging ditches out to farms. In the meantime Sony will make extra money by using a game plan that is based on reality and customer feedback.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Fri 5th Apr 2013 18:02 in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

If it's true the new XBox requires an always-on Internet connection I assume they did a study and know how many do and how many don't have this.

For the record I think it's bad idea, but if Microsoft goes ahead they probably figure they can do without the farmers.

Reply Parent Score: 4