- Status
What I get is that you don't understand what "real" is/means.
The leaks are highly likely to be real, and MSFT last word on the matter could be that they gave up on those policies but doesn't make the leaks less real.
What you are waiting for is for MSFT to make its final decision on the matter public, wording is quiet important or we all end up speaking of different things or of the same thing without being able to tell one or the other apart .
But leaks and rumors are not the same (from my own point of view), the vgleaks info and the 2010 documents are leaks, we have some kind of proof, but the Edge info is only rumor.
I trust leaks (but I take it as something not set in stone), rumors are rumors. You can trust Edge, but don't expect that I trust in rumors.
I don't think there are only edge info, I loosely keep track off things but multiple sources and even real world action of MSFT make the whole thing extremely believable.
For the early Yukon platform, from MSFT (failed) efforts to sell the 360 as router/set top box, their try at the subscription model with the 360, the multiple talks about disks free playing, etc.
At this point I think the real question is "will they have the ball to ultimately go for it or not?" more than to question leaks and rumors all pointing in the same direction.
And discussing what "always connected" means is worth than the disbelief about wii and wiiu specs imo.
I mean I've no insider info on the topic (or any) so believe what you will, but for a company to have gone this far as mentioning "always connected" in the quiet late devs documentations and looking at their late efforts and overall their goals for the xbox, I would put the odds well above 50% for them to stick to what seems to be the plan.
They have clever people they have though about it enough and you find trace of what could be their last word on the matter in pretty late documents. I don't think they did not consider the points people here and there are raising against that model/those policies.
Still a ballsy decision to take (Sony seems happy to let them shoot first on the matter) so there are still odds that they just gave up, but I don't believe those odds are high at all. They did no wait for some random guys on the internet like you or me finally getting their hands on some leaks to consider the implication of such a decision.
Let say I'm not bullish on them changing their pov (even though they never purposefully made it public till now).
To provide any functionality? I can't think of any. To provide their most valuable functionality? Smartphones.
At some point, it will take more energy to build a device that doesn't assume it won't be connected to the Internet at all times, whether it's now, 10 or 100 years from now, it will happen.
That's a dangerous connection for anyone to make, as far as Microsoft or any company that claims they offer a service instead of a product.
Utilities are much more heavily scrutinized, and outages come with onerous reporting and possibly restitution or fines.
They'd much rather take the money as if they're selling a product, say the customer can't own a service, control the user like they're on a service, and have the accountability and uptime requirements as if there wasn't a connection at all.
Utilities are much more heavily scrutinized, and outages come with onerous reporting and possibly restitution or fines.
They'd much rather take the money as if they're selling a product, say the customer can't own a service, control the user like they're on a service, and have the accountability and uptime requirements as if there wasn't a connection at all.
I think you'll find a lot of games are moving in the "online only" direction made recently famous by Sim City. I hope to see offline single-player games as well, but if a developer can rely on always having the cloud available, they'll find ways to integrate it into the game experience, even for single player.so if it is true that offline gameplay is impossible, yes I'd be surprised and disappointed unless the reason behind it and subsequent overall scheme was well worth the loss of some of those users. Would have to be a hell of a payoff though.
I don't think so. I'd be very surprised if both companies don't go this direction. In which case it comes down to how easy to use and reliable your cloud APIs are. Sony does not have a lot of experience in this area, but their Gaikai purchase indicates they want to get that experience. Wouldn't take much to extend the current Gaikai model to a generic cloud computing infrastructure.
But smartphones are totally functionally when offline, except cloud based apps (as Skydrive or Evernote) I can use most apps.
Except (I guess) IPTV based, I can't think on any product that requires internet to work.
I guess on what you mean by functionality. Like for example, a car can work if it has a battery and no gas, but that's not what it's used for. Similarly, most apps today need some kind of internet connection otherwise you are dealing with stale data.
Or put it this way, I think most people could get away with only having intermittent internet access (compared to when they'd want to use it). Almost no one can get away with zero.
thanks for reply
so it's possible then that it could also be on a per-game basis and left up to publishers/devs? That model would also make sense in Sony's response to the question last month regarding blocking used games that "the infrastructure is there but would be up to the publisher" (paraphrase).
Technically, SimCity's cloud infrastructure is generally available, since it's on Amazon's service.
The service outages, disabled functionality, and data loss that have prompted EA to give away software in compensation are likely due to problems in the software and platform infrastructure they have running in the cloud instances.
SimCity seems to show that not every developer knows how to function as a form of MMO company, even with the much, much, more lax requirements server-side for SimCity.
Neither the game design, gameplay, game balance, or system functionality appear to have been vetted the way a properly online service should have been.
Right. The trouble with Simcity was underestimating the load requirements. Easy enough to do when you're rolling your own. Anything offered by the console companies would be a lot more managed I'd think. You can probably still roll your own, but they'd want to make it as easy as possible to integrate cloud features into your game, just like Kinect features, PS eye features, gaikai features.
Apps in my smartphone:
- Contacts
- SMS
- Calls
- Whatsapp *
- Music player
- Nokia Drive
- Office
- Skydrive *
- Calendar
- Bluetooth share
- Mail *
- Evernote *
- Games
Only (*) need internet, as you can see, my smartphone can work offline, the main functions (calls) can works without an internet connection.
Im asking for a device that can not work at all without internet access, basically, what Edge said next Xbox will be.
Last edited by a moderator:
There may be more fundamental problems than just misjudged load. If that was all there was, then spinning up more cloud instances is what Amazon's service is all about.
There appear to be fundamental elements to the architecture EA/Maxis is telling Amazon's EC servers to run that are not scalable, hence the wierd server setup and the inability to play a save on a different server despite the fact that all the servers in the server selection screen are in the exact same location.
There are also signs of problems in the validation logic and client update code, given the raft of rollback errors and glitched regions at this point.
Putting basic functionality like save files in the cloud has opened up a whole universe of timing and integrity problems that are physically almost impossible if done locally, or at least users would have had the ability to save multiple files and avoid losing so much progress.
Given the weaksauce beta, they either knew this was a problem, or were negligent in not finding out. If this were a proper service and not just "we take your money and you take what we give", there would be much more automatic clawback.
I don't think playing a DVD will require Internet, or streaming music from your computer to the Xbox. I cannot imagine a device sold TODAY that, without Internet access, has zero usability, except maybe a Skype phone.
(((interference)))
Veteran
So it's a pretty good chance that the next Xbox will carry that logo and show it on booting up etc.
Unless MS decided to design two new Xbox logos in the space of a year.
You're right, and this is my point, the Edge article said next Xbox will not work if an internet connection is not present, "online is mandatory", and I think it is really weird for an electronic device as a game console, even if some games require internet connection to work.
(((interference)))
Veteran
Guys, a hint - if bkilian is saying your misinterpreting the data, then i'd listen to him.
From what I'm hearing, 'always online/connected' definitely means just that (as bkilian explicated) and games are not playable when offline.
If they've changed it recently then great, but it represents a significant reversals of their plans for the machine.
agreed but don't parse this either.
so as some of us have been speculating, it could be a game by game situation and it could be true in both camps in some format
just as the Sony executive I mentioned who said the protocols are in place on PS4 but up to publishers to block used games.
so it could just be the future of next gen.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky