Back to the real world...
Yep, this will be the most interesting console battle since the early 90's.
Xbox One Discussion
Débuté par
Eternal Napalm
, mai 22 2013 03:48
Retour en haut
#3477
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 08:01
AresKeith
-
- Members
- 34 128 messages
ShepnTali wrote...
Back to the real world...
Yep, this will be the most interesting console battle since the early 90's.
Nothing can beat the Nintendo vs Sega era
Unless Sony uses those Tumblr pics we found
#3478
Guest_Puddi III_*
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 08:03
Guest_Puddi III_*
Guest_Puddi III_*
-
- Guests
If they were really exclusive to the Xbox, ie not on Steam, they'd more likely be crapping combustible lemons and burning Valve's house down.EntropicAngel wrote...
HiddenInWar wrote...
How MS can solve this:
Partner up with valve and release Half Life 3, L4D3, and Portal 3 in an X1 exclusive trilogy pack.
The Valve-suckers wouldn't just crap bricks, they'd crap a house.
Modifié par Filament, 20 juin 2013 - 08:04 .
#3479
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 08:04
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
-
- Guests
Cyonan wrote...
Or we would just make angry internet posts about it and the rest of the world would go on not caring.
One of the two.
Yup, just like everything else in video games.
#3481
Guest_Puddi III_*
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 08:05
Guest_Puddi III_*
Guest_Puddi III_*
-
- Guests
You mean like that time xbox tried to release console with draconian new features and nobody cared?EntropicAngel wrote...
Cyonan wrote...
Or we would just make angry internet posts about it and the rest of the world would go on not caring.
One of the two.
Yup, just like everything else in video games.
#3482
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 08:09
Ryzaki
-
- Members
- 34 425 messages
Cyonan wrote...
MegaSovereign wrote...
Battlebloodmage wrote...
It seems like Microsoft can never catch a break. At first, people complain about the online features, and now that they take them away, people want it back.
Those aren't "online features." They're DRM policies.
I'm pretty sure the Xbox One would have been the next Dreamcast if they kept those DRM policies.
Being able to share my games with somebody half way across the world without mailing them the disc is a feature.
Having to phone home every 24 hours is DRM.
The old X1 system had both.
Wasn't their region locking? You could share your games cross country sure but lawl.
I mean you can share your games in the same country but wouldn't the DD version be region locked depending on where you bought it?
#3483
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 08:15
Cyonan
-
- Members
- 19 373 messages
Ryzaki wrote...
Wasn't their region locking? You could share your games cross country sure but lawl.
I mean you can share your games in the same country but wouldn't the DD version be region locked depending on where you bought it?
Microsoft was actually quite terrible at clarifying how anything was going to work so I don't think anybody fully knows. The whole digital sharing thing was a feature, though.
The fact that they were so elusive at clarifying how the system worked was probably not a good sign, honestly.
#3484
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 08:18
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
-
- Guests
Filament wrote...
You mean like that time xbox tried to release console with draconian new features and nobody cared?
Nobody in the real world who actually gets things done cared.
#3485
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 08:23
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
-
- Guests
Indeed. Sony employee of the month tbhbilly the squid wrote...
Blooddrunk1004 wrote...
I'm still buying the PS4.
Microsoft showed their true colors, also Don Mattrick should get fired!
No way! He did an amazing job for Sony's marketing!
#3486
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 08:54
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
-
- Guests
The more I think about it, the more I realize that there were a few important things lost with these changes.
- Carrying a digital library everywhere.
- Being able to share a game with friends outside of town.
- Giving publishers more profit, and thus more power to drop prices.
- The ability to actually make a decent amount of money on game trade-ins.
The plan they had wasn't inherently bad, I think.
- Carrying a digital library everywhere.
- Being able to share a game with friends outside of town.
- Giving publishers more profit, and thus more power to drop prices.
- The ability to actually make a decent amount of money on game trade-ins.
The plan they had wasn't inherently bad, I think.
#3487
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 09:05
MerinTB
-
- Members
- 4 688 messages
EntropicAngel wrote...
Filament wrote...
You mean like that time xbox tried to release console with draconian new features and nobody cared?
Nobody in the real world who actually gets things done cared.
Made it to CNN, The Guardian, and Jimmy Kimmel.
Of course none of those try to get anything done, and certainly don't live in the real world.
...
Seriously, for someone hanging out on a gaming forum, EA, I'm often surprised at your attempts to appear superior (as in - "I am interested in greater, more lofty things!")
#3488
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 09:15
billy the squid
-
- Members
- 4 669 messages
The Mad Hanar wrote...
The more I think about it, the more I realize that there were a few important things lost with these changes.
- Carrying a digital library everywhere.
- Being able to share a game with friends outside of town.
- Giving publishers more profit, and thus more power to drop prices.
- The ability to actually make a decent amount of money on game trade-ins.
The plan they had wasn't inherently bad, I think.
1) Yeah that'd be nice, but it wasn't going to make me buy an X1
2) Whoa. Haha. You do realise we actually know nothing about this? There were absolutely no details from MS, which makes me think that they hade some vague idea, but didn't have anything planned.
3) Most importantly, this will happen when hell freezes over. There is no indication that they would do that, quite the contrary, the indication is that they'd do the opposite. So lets all drop that fantasy right now.
4) You can't use Amazon? You can't use E-bay? You can't trade via any myriad of various small stores? You have to use Gamestop? And who said by the way that MS or any publisher would not give you just as raw a deal as Gamestop? We are talking about the publishers who charge £15 for a MP map pack in CoD, Microtransaction everything, stuck online passes in every game, try to shovel out the same mediocre rubbish year on year and refuse to let prices devalue on Origin and Xbox live. Are we really going to believe that they would have paid a DECENT amount?
The plan wasn't bad, for them at least. Sucked for everyone else on the recieving end though.
Modifié par billy the squid, 20 juin 2013 - 09:18 .
#3489
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 09:34
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
-
- Guests
I believe that companies resort to tactics such as Microtransactions, Day one-DLC, and DLC prices that add up to full retail for new games because of the current environment gaming is at. Can you honestly sit there and tell me that any smart owner of a company would be happy to know that a substantial amount of people using your product aren't paying for it? A product that you've invested millions of dollars into and are most likely seeing profit margins get thinner and thinner as people have less and less money to pour into your product. Your stuck in a position where people will either give you no money or they expect you to sell your product have 1/2 or even 1/3 of what your product typically runs for. Can you honestly sit there and tell me that the current system is good for both developers and gamers? The system that would have you spend anywhere from $20-60 so the seller will get 100% of the profits and you will be lucky to even get 15% of that if YOU want to sell it? Amazon charges the same amount for games as GameStop does. So does other gaming stores.
Also, we knew as much about the sharing as we did with all of the issues we had with the console, but at least we had statements from Microsoft employees that would reasonably lead us to those conclusions.
Also, we knew as much about the sharing as we did with all of the issues we had with the console, but at least we had statements from Microsoft employees that would reasonably lead us to those conclusions.
#3490
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 09:47
Ravensword
-
- Members
- 6 185 messages
The Mad Hanar wrote...
I believe that companies resort to tactics such as Microtransactions, Day one-DLC, and DLC prices that add up to full retail for new games because of the current environment gaming is at. Can you honestly sit there and tell me that any smart owner of a company would be happy to know that a substantial amount of people using your product aren't paying for it? A product that you've invested millions of dollars into and are most likely seeing profit margins get thinner and thinner as people have less and less money to pour into your product. Your stuck in a position where people will either give you no money or they expect you to sell your product have 1/2 or even 1/3 of what your product typically runs for. Can you honestly sit there and tell me that the current system is good for both developers and gamers? The system that would have you spend anywhere from $20-60 so the seller will get 100% of the profits and you will be lucky to even get 15% of that if YOU want to sell it? Amazon charges the same amount for games as GameStop does. So does other gaming stores.
Also, we knew as much about the sharing as we did with all of the issues we had with the console, but at least we had statements from Microsoft employees that would reasonably lead us to those conclusions.
Profit margins are getting thinner and thinner b/c of the same ****ty games they put out year in, year out. These are companies trying to defend their tired business practices by nickel and diming their customers and an attempt to diminish the rights of consumers. I can honestly sit here and tell you that these policies are good for developers and bad for consumers.
I would gladly welcome the crash of this industry not only for the vast amount of ****ty games that get made, but for their anticonsumer policies.
#3491
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 09:48
SlottsMachine
-
- Members
- 5 543 messages
billy the squid wrote...
3) Most importantly, this will happen when hell freezes over. There is no indication that they would do that, quite the contrary, the indication is that they'd do the opposite. So lets all drop that fantasy right now.
Yeah. You would think that if the plan was to basically create the steambox, they would have said as much.
#3492
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 09:51
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
-
- Guests
What are these rights as customers? Because it seems to me that our only right is to pay for something, and then use it. It also seems that you're upset that companies are more interested in staying afloat in an economy where developer after developer is going under, rather than catering to every whim that gamers have.
Modifié par The Mad Hanar, 20 juin 2013 - 09:54 .
#3493
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 09:59
Ravensword
-
- Members
- 6 185 messages
The Mad Hanar wrote...
What are these rights as customers? Because it seems to me that our only right is to pay for something, and then use it. It also seems that you're upset that companies are more interested in staying afloat in an economy where developer after developer is going under, rather than catering to every whim that gamers have.
How about the price to exercise choice within a marketplace w/o corporations trying to rig the market in their favor?
Yeah, I like cheap, well made games on a whim, something the current industry doesn't seem to care about.
If the industry continues to pull crap like the Xbone, then it deserves to go under.
#3494
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 10:01
billy the squid
-
- Members
- 4 669 messages
The Mad Hanar wrote...
I believe that companies resort to tactics such as Microtransactions, Day one-DLC, and DLC prices that add up to full retail for new games because of the current environment gaming is at. Can you honestly sit there and tell me that any smart owner of a company would be happy to know that a substantial amount of people using your product aren't paying for it? A product that you've invested millions of dollars into and are most likely seeing profit margins get thinner and thinner as people have less and less money to pour into your product. Your stuck in a position where people will either give you no money or they expect you to sell your product have 1/2 or even 1/3 of what your product typically runs for. Can you honestly sit there and tell me that the current system is good for both developers and gamers? The system that would have you spend anywhere from $20-60 so the seller will get 100% of the profits and you will be lucky to even get 15% of that if YOU want to sell it? Amazon charges the same amount for games as GameStop does. So does other gaming stores.
Also, we knew as much about the sharing as we did with all of the issues we had with the console, but at least we had statements from Microsoft employees that would reasonably lead us to those conclusions.
How is that my concern?
Here's a thought. If you cannot support your business without sabotaging the Copyright laws which protect consumers, then that business doesn't deserve to survive. That's the essence of capitalism, you don't get all the benefits and then get to avoid the inevitable caveats which comes with it.
If the publishers are collapsing under the weight of their own innertia, because their budgets have become so bloated and inefficient and they exhausted their market and oversaturated it, then they will fail like every other companies in a quasi socio capitalist country. Businesses fail. The game industry is no different, and they're not exempt.
I. don't. care.
No we didn't, at no point was anything about "family" sharing stated. No one said anything about sharing full games, no one said with who, or how many, if it was a one off, etc. And what was said, was contradictory.
Edit:
While with Amazon I can sell it myself, I just have to pay Amazon a fee for using their site, E-Bay, minor stores? Yeah If you wan't to go to Gamestop, then fine, that's up to you, but you know you're going to get a raw deal so that's your fault. And it has no bearing on what MS and Publishers would do, and their track record is horrible.
Modifié par billy the squid, 20 juin 2013 - 10:08 .
#3495
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 10:01
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
-
- Guests
Bringing this genius back cause relevancy:
"I especially have a hard time having any sympathy because so many of the industry's problems are of its own making. They chose to focus on shaderific HD graphics over long-lasting appeal and gameplay; they chose to focus on linear scripted cinematic B-movie imitations that were only good for one playthrough instead of replayability and open-ended design; they chose to pour so much money and marketing into military porn and fetishized violent shootbang Press A to Awesome titles, exactly the kinds of games that hardcore gamers, the most likely gamers to trade in games quickly were prone to buying and reselling; and perhaps most galling, they chose to give Gamestop loads of exclusive pre-order bonuses while they knew exactly what Gamestop would say to those customers once in the store. They kept making insanely lavish and nonsensical displays of spectacular whizz-bang, despite that being exactly the kind of game most susceptible to trading after one week because there was nothing left to do with it. And now they're discovering that putting so many insanely expensive eggs into one fragile and easily breakable basket is maybe not the most sustainable business model ever.
So forgive me if I find myself not caring one bit when the industry complains that it's just so hard to sell six million copies of Gears of Medal of Battle of Uncharted Angry Dudes VII in the first week and that's why they need to take away used sales for the entire platform. No, the problem isn't at this end."
"I especially have a hard time having any sympathy because so many of the industry's problems are of its own making. They chose to focus on shaderific HD graphics over long-lasting appeal and gameplay; they chose to focus on linear scripted cinematic B-movie imitations that were only good for one playthrough instead of replayability and open-ended design; they chose to pour so much money and marketing into military porn and fetishized violent shootbang Press A to Awesome titles, exactly the kinds of games that hardcore gamers, the most likely gamers to trade in games quickly were prone to buying and reselling; and perhaps most galling, they chose to give Gamestop loads of exclusive pre-order bonuses while they knew exactly what Gamestop would say to those customers once in the store. They kept making insanely lavish and nonsensical displays of spectacular whizz-bang, despite that being exactly the kind of game most susceptible to trading after one week because there was nothing left to do with it. And now they're discovering that putting so many insanely expensive eggs into one fragile and easily breakable basket is maybe not the most sustainable business model ever.
So forgive me if I find myself not caring one bit when the industry complains that it's just so hard to sell six million copies of Gears of Medal of Battle of Uncharted Angry Dudes VII in the first week and that's why they need to take away used sales for the entire platform. No, the problem isn't at this end."
#3496
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 10:03
billy the squid
-
- Members
- 4 669 messages
The Mad Hanar wrote...
What are these rights as customers? Because it seems to me that our only right is to pay for something, and then use it. It also seems that you're upset that companies are more interested in staying afloat in an economy where developer after developer is going under, rather than catering to every whim that gamers have.
Copyright Law, Sale of Goods Act, Warranties Act, Rights of Exhaustion. Look it up.
#3497
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 10:14
GreyLycanTrope
-
- Members
- 12 709 messages
Interesting if true. If anything it makes me glad the share system wasn't implemented. Sorry to crush your dreams alleged Microsoft guy.
#3498
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 10:20
billy the squid
-
- Members
- 4 669 messages
Yep, I've seen that. I doubt it's actually credible, I mean it's pastebin. But, think about it logically. They were attempting to lock down the used games market, but they're going to let you share games with 10 of your "family" from your library?
It's entirely counter productive. It also highlights, that MS didn't really say anything about the Share system. Other than games can be shared from one's game library, there was absolutely no detail as to what that actually entailed.
It's entirely counter productive. It also highlights, that MS didn't really say anything about the Share system. Other than games can be shared from one's game library, there was absolutely no detail as to what that actually entailed.
#3499
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 10:20
Ravensword
-
- Members
- 6 185 messages
Allow me to shed a single manly crocodile tear for Microsoft's "dream" not coming into fruition.
Modifié par Ravensword, 20 juin 2013 - 10:21 .
#3500
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
Posté 20 juin 2013 - 10:21
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
Guest_The Mad Hanar_*
-
- Guests
I'm not saying that you have to care about the studios that release games. I'm not even trying to say that I dislike gamers having power. What I'm saying is that the current system is set up in a way that prevents as much money from going into the hands of developers as possible. We are in a system that demands the mechanics and graphics that were mentioned in Rezzy's post. One of the biggest reasons why people wanted new consoles was because they felt that the graphics and other capabilities of muliplatform games were being held back, especially for the PC versions of them. Graphics are the first impression of a game that people will get to see before they get to play the beta or demo. So naturally graphics are important. The market is demanding better graphics. The market is supporting "dumbed down" games, just look at COD. That calls for higher production values, and if a substainal amount of people are playing their games without paying them after they've put that much investment into them, of course they're going to feel ripped off. Used games are one of the biggest reasons why this "Us vs. Them" mentality exists in the first place.
Now, what my original point in my original post was is that their new system presented a lot of interesting possibilities. I tried to weigh the good with the bad, and those were the good aspects lost. Granted, the third point is moot whether a person is arguing for or against it because we have no idea how publishers would price their games. It seems more likely to me that if people were buying more new copies and making them a bigger profit then they would be more willing to lower their prices because they don't *need* to keep them at the same price that they have them at now. The used game market, as it stands now, forces publishers and developers to use these nickel and diming tactics because a portion of their fan base is not giving them money. People will always demand better graphics and cheaper prices, but the reality remains that it's not financially responsible to provide both. Something has to give.
Now, what my original point in my original post was is that their new system presented a lot of interesting possibilities. I tried to weigh the good with the bad, and those were the good aspects lost. Granted, the third point is moot whether a person is arguing for or against it because we have no idea how publishers would price their games. It seems more likely to me that if people were buying more new copies and making them a bigger profit then they would be more willing to lower their prices because they don't *need* to keep them at the same price that they have them at now. The used game market, as it stands now, forces publishers and developers to use these nickel and diming tactics because a portion of their fan base is not giving them money. People will always demand better graphics and cheaper prices, but the reality remains that it's not financially responsible to provide both. Something has to give.
