Critical Hit | The Perils and Potential of Always Online Consoles and Xbox 720/Durango

Always online hardware is a disaster in the making. All you have to do is look at something like Sim City to see how well that goes over.

Can you imagine server side downtime at Microsoft, every week and 6 in the morning on Monday? Sorry, early birds. You can't play your games for 2 hours.

What about server crashes? What about hackings? How about in 10 years when Microsoft doesn't feel like keeping their servers up anymore?

Any and every gamer should be concerned about an online only console.

( Edited 12.04.2013 04:25 by jres80 )

I'm already unhappy with my Xbox 360 experience (which is a whole rant) and there have been several great releases PS3 releases lately that makes me wish I owned one, so it was already unlikely that I would not be buying the next Xbox. Requiring an always-online connection is an absolute deal breaker for me

I'm interested in the PS4, but if it were to require a constant internet connection, I'll pass. I refuse to buy games with a constant internet connection, too. I hate it.

The only game system that should require a constant internet connection is some like OnLive or Gaikai -- services where you can stream games. A constant internet connection is just how those things work.

The problem is that no one is really differentiating between "always online" (which pretty much every system is - Wii, Wii U, 360, PS3, 3DS) and "required to be always online".

I don't believe Adam Orth ever mentioned that the next Xbox would require a constant internet connection, just that it would be always online. He did say "Every device now is always on." That is basically true, but nearly all of them operate offline. Applied to the next Xbox and you have a system that gets most of its functionality from being online, but can still be used to play (most) games offline.

( Edited 12.04.2013 14:40 by Sonic_13 )

Sonic_13 said:
The problem is that no one is really differentiating between "always online" (which pretty much every system is - Wii, Wii U, 360, PS3, 3DS) and "required to be always online".

I don't believe Adam Orth ever mentioned that the next Xbox would require a constant internet connection, just that it would be always online. He did say "Every device now is always on." That is basically true, but nearly all of them operate offline. Applied to the next Xbox and you have a system that gets most of its functionality from being online, but can still be used to play (most) games offline.

Yeah, it's all these mixed messages and unconfirmed speculation that's leading people to believe the worst, i.e. you need a connection to play your games. That is what we are all dead against. I really would be surprised if MS does make you require a connection just to play games, since I just think they're really alienating a huge portion of consumers and turning so many people away. Why would you even do that? Surely after this feedback they may even have gone back on it all and ease people's fears, if that was their original idea with the next Xbox. I have no problem with consoles having a huge online focus as long as it means you can still play your games offline, and I really favour always-online games, too. But not for games that could be played offline on another console.

Sonic_13 said:
The problem is that no one is really differentiating between "always online" (which pretty much every system is - Wii, Wii U, 360, PS3, 3DS) and "required to be always online".

I don't believe Adam Orth ever mentioned that the next Xbox would require a constant internet connection, just that it would be always online. He did say "Every device now is always on." That is basically true, but nearly all of them operate offline. Applied to the next Xbox and you have a system that gets most of its functionality from being online, but can still be used to play (most) games offline.

While you bring up a valid point, this rumor of a required always on console didn't start appearing until recently.  By the line of logic you are using to explain away this potential blunder, they could have just as easily been making the same rumors about the Wii, Wii U, PS3, X-box 360, and original X-box.

Those rumors didn't exist, which leads me to think that there may be some serious discussion down at Microsoft HQ about the feasibility of requiring the console to be always on.  These may well just be rumors, and could even be Microsoft's way of testing the waters by gauging gamer reaction.

You do know that some bean counter is down at Microsoft right now crunching the numbers of potential consumers minus backlash as equal to or greater than pirated and used games as a means of justifying this shift.