*spin-off* Always on/connected... stuff

[astrograd]

What if a meteor took down Microsoft's servers?

I don't like the always on aspect of it because it not only depends on something that I can remotely control, but it also relies on Microsoft being 365/24/7 up.
Now mind you, Microsoft and Sony haven't been able to maintain a spotless record of doing that. (nor do I expect them to)

Do ppl honestly believe MS's mechanism for making sure your console is connected would be tied to something that can be down for scheduled maintenance? Come on now. They lead the way in this area of console gaming pretty strongly. Ppl are just assuming the worst that their imaginations can dream up with regard to the always online stuff imho.



LightHeaven, that is correct, they only count 'active' Silver/Gold members.

Their 'XBL members' total has exactly doubled in the past 3 yrs btw (23mil in Feb 2010). As a comparison, they shipped 37mil consoles in that same period of time so if you look at that coarse grained poc there that's ~62% from 2010 onward. Then again, this includes pre-Kinect units. They shipped 26mil units across 2011/2012. In that same period, they added 16mil new 'XBL members'. Again, a ~62% ration there. This was with only 8 weeks or so of Kinect influence though...so let's look at the following year. From 2011 through year end 2012, they shipped 10mil units while also adding 6mil 'XBL members'.

So evidently since early 2010 it looks like the trend is around 60%, which just so happens to be essentially what the overall picture looks like too (46mil/76mil).

Their logic might also include considerations that pretty much every single tech product today that comes out has most of its marketed features based on being online. Sony will too, as will smart tv's. So anyone looking to buy new tech at a few hundred bucks in 2013 and onward isn't going to shy away just because they have to be connected to the internet. Honestly if you look at the feature set they plan to use for appealing to each demographic, gamers/casuals/mediaphiles, most or all of those features require an internet connection as it is. For a while XBLA required a connection (maybe still does?). This really isn't a plausible issue.

I really think they are going to try and mimic Steam's approach to gaming here in many ways and the concerns will quickly disappear for most come E3.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Required is the issue. If I cannot play the games I own because my isp is down or EA's or Blizzard or whoever's service is not functional that is an annoyance I'd rather avoid. I'm not saying it's a make or break deal for me, but it's not a positive for the product.

I have a smart TV with online features, they suck hard so I do not have it connected to the internet. Often devices have features that people do not care about, but they are packed in with other quality improvements. If you want the best picture quality TV, you'll be buying one with smart features and 3D there really isn't an option to get the quality display without the features.. If the TVs actually required internet to perform its primary function people might have issues with them.

 

[Tap In]

"required" for most features could still be the official description

 

[Strange]

Do ppl honestly believe MS's mechanism for making sure your console is connected would be tied to something that can be down for scheduled maintenance? Come on now. They lead the way in this area of console gaming pretty strongly. Ppl are just assuming the worst that their imaginations can dream up with regard to the always online stuff imho.



LightHeaven, that is correct, they only count 'active' Silver/Gold members.

Their 'XBL members' total has exactly doubled in the past 3 yrs btw (23mil in Feb 2010). As a comparison, they shipped 37mil consoles in that same period of time so if you look at that coarse grained poc there that's ~62% from 2010 onward. Then again, this includes pre-Kinect units. They shipped 26mil units across 2011/2012. In that same period, they added 16mil new 'XBL members'. Again, a ~62% ration there. This was with only 8 weeks or so of Kinect influence though...so let's look at the following year. From 2011 through year end 2012, they shipped 10mil units while also adding 6mil 'XBL members'.

So evidently since early 2010 it looks like the trend is around 60%, which just so happens to be essentially what the overall picture looks like too (46mil/76mil).

Their logic might also include considerations that pretty much every single tech product today that comes out has most of its marketed features based on being online. Sony will too, as will smart tv's. So anyone looking to buy new tech at a few hundred bucks in 2013 and onward isn't going to shy away just because they have to be connected to the internet. Honestly if you look at the feature set they plan to use for appealing to each demographic, gamers/casuals/mediaphiles, most or all of those features require an internet connection as it is. For a while XBLA required a connection (maybe still does?). This really isn't a plausible issue.

I really think they are going to try and mimic Steam's approach to gaming here in many ways and the concerns will quickly disappear for most come E3.

Shit happens. I can think of numerous "improbable" scenarios that can cause Microsoft servers to come down. Not for scheduled maintenance, but accidents, incidents, attacks, you name it.
Problem is that when ANY one of them happens, it's the consumer being on the short end of the stick when you HAVE to be online and HAVE to be authenticated by Microsoft.
I understand that cloud services must be connected to the internet, but I also understand that playing single player campaigns that provide a solely single player experience and have absolutely zero effect on any other player (which rules out Diablo 3 due to trading) requires zero communication to their servers and should be kept as such.

This isn't a simple issue of "I require internet connection to do certain stuff." It's an issue of "I can only play what I buy if and only if the provider still works as intended, and I also manage to get everything straight."
In essence the consumer is yielding control to these businesses and that usually doesn't end well.

We even have a case study recently, which is Company of Heroes and then THQ went bankrupt. Stuff like this happens and when they hold the key to you being able to use their products, you better hope they can keep their service up.

 

[astrograd]

Required is the issue. If I cannot play the games I own because my isp is down or EA's or Blizzard or whoever's service is not functional that is an annoyance I'd rather avoid. I'm not saying it's a make or break deal for me, but it's not a positive for the product.

Similar logic was initially employed at the inception of XBL and its requiring of a broadband connection. And whatever the DRM may be it will be tied to MS, not individual publishers most likely. MS doens't want any moving parts outside of their control.

I have a smart TV with online features, they suck hard so I do not have it connected to the internet. Often devices have features that people do not care about, but they are packed in with other quality improvements. If you want the best picture quality TV, you'll be buying one with smart features and 3D there really isn't an option to get the quality display without the features.. If the TVs actually required internet to perform its primary function people might have issues with them.

You misunderstand...even in that scenario (use a standard tv if you like instead of smart tv's for argument's sake)...your tv is STILL connected to something in order to operate. You don't get channels just by plugging it in; you need to have a cable subscription of some sort and be linked up to what is being broadcast. Unless you use an old school antenna, in which case that is your connection.

This is a set top box we are talking about in Durango. The vast majority of its features leverage the internet connection. Nearly all of them actually, by the sound of it at least. I can't imagine many consumers being appauled by this move or finding it even remotely bothersome, nor some sort of meaningful barrier to entry. They will plug it in when they open the box and never think about it again.

Let's say this is a worst case scenario and this is ONLY for executing some anti-used game DRM agenda (highly unlikely imho that this is what happens, but that's fine). Even in that scenario the odds of them putting the DRM security check hosted on anything even remotely fragile from a networking pov is slim to none. So even in the extremely rare scenarios where XBL proper is down, you will most likely still be able to play your games.

 

[Averagejoe]

not for MS it's not.


as mentioned it's not like they would make decisions like this without analyzing this (extensive, detailed) data a thousand times over from we could do here. so...yea, I'm sure they will back up their plan should they choose to go through with it.

No for them no the problem is they will not share that info with the consumer it doesn't serve their best interest.

Sony analyzed Blu-ray and went for it,did they calculate that not even brand name of the biggest console ever would make people jump into a $600 dollar console.?

There is no such thing sure bet,look at the Wii U,and PS3 after coming from successful consoles.

 

[astrograd]

Shit happens. I can think of numerous "improbable" scenarios that can cause Microsoft servers to come down. Not for scheduled maintenance, but accidents, incidents, attacks, you name it.
Problem is that when ANY one of them happens, it's the consumer being on the short end of the stick when you HAVE to be online and HAVE to be authenticated by Microsoft.

This assumes that whatever DRM mechanism we are presuming is in place to let you play the game is as fragile as you expect XBL to be. I'm not saying it's gonna be impossible that this mechanism gets shut down...but I am telling that whatever arguments or concerns you can dream up are going to be thoroughly discussed with highly vetted solutions on MS's end.

I understand that cloud services must be connected to the internet, but I also understand that playing single player campaigns that provide a solely single player experience and have absolutely zero effect on any other player (which rules out Diablo 3 due to trading) requires zero communication to their servers and should be kept as such.

That's not a given this coming gen. Devs are looking to broaden their design ideas to include fully connected experiences that most would have expected t otherwise be pure old fashioned SP (see: watch_dogs). They can also leverage various cloud storage databases potentially for really interesting gameplay scenarios (that was the plan with Milo's AI tech, which was extremely impressive even with a tiny database). So there could be SP or pseudo-SP payoffs to this too that simply aren't possible at all without always being connected.

 

[Averagejoe]

I remember reading some years ago that MS only accounted for silver accounts on Live figures if the account had logged in at least once in 6 months... Don't have any link now, nor have any idea if that's still the case, though XD

Yeah i read something like that to,but i think they drop that and are probably accounting all silver and gold,if you ask me they have never been honest on the real numbers and always have mix them.

 

[expletive]

If STEAM servers have an issue, are you able to easily go into offline mode or does it require a final sync with the Valve mothership before you're allowed to do so?

 

[AlphaWolf]

You misunderstand...even in that scenario (use a standard tv if you like instead of smart tv's for argument's sake)...your tv is STILL connected to something in order to operate. You don't get channels just by plugging it in; you need to have a cable subscription of some sort and be linked up to what is being broadcast. Unless you use an old school antenna, in which case that is your connection.

This is a set top box we are talking about in Durango. The vast majority of its features leverage the internet connection. Nearly all of them actually, by the sound of it at least. I can't imagine many consumers being appauled by this move or finding it even remotely bothersome, nor some sort of meaningful barrier to entry. They will plug it in when they open the box and never think about it again.

Let's say this is a worst case scenario and this is ONLY for executing some anti-used game DRM agenda (highly unlikely imho that this is what happens, but that's fine). Even in that scenario the odds of them putting the DRM security check hosted on anything even remotely fragile from a networking pov is slim to none. So even in the extremely rare scenarios where XBL proper is down, you will most likely still be able to play your games.

Look. The point is that from a user perspective it is an unnecessary inconvenience offering no benefit. There is no real upside for the user. The long term negative of the service eventually ending is another big issue. If I purchase something it should work until I break it, not until they deem it not worth their trouble. Polish up this turd all you want, it's still a turd. People will most certainly think about it when it fails to function and they're jamming the service lines.

And I can watch a dvd on my tv if my cable is down (or play my xbox360). Although I can tell you my isp is down about 100x as often as my cable even though it is the same provider. And it's not only my isp that will be the issue.

 

[Tap In]

Yeah i read something like that to,but i think they drop that and are probably accounting all silver and gold,if you ask me they have never been honest on the real numbers and always have mix them.

They don't owe us any numbers... those are internal and serve no purpose except to spout off once in a while when it suits their needs.

to downplay the success of Xbox live in this new generation carrying forward (which it sounds like you are trying) would be simplistic and short-sighted into tomorrows tech/success of their online plans...It is ALL about LIVE IMO going forward.

So why not go for it and let everybody else catch up to the always connected world.

 

[astrograd]

Look. The point is that from a user perspective it is an unnecessary inconvenience offering no benefit.

Making assumptions out of thin air isn't helpful to the discussion. Speculation is fine, but straight up asserting crap like this when you clearly ignored points I've already made on exactly this issue where I noted benefits of always online console is disruptive to intelligent conversation.

If I purchase something it should work until I break it, not until they deem it not worth their trouble.

This logic doesn't actually apply to hardly anyone, especially in the core gamer demographic. Hardly anybody really complains much when various online games are shut down because the tiny number of ppl still playing are precisely the motivation for shutting them down in the first place. Odds are good MS would aim to have a lot of that stuff just carry over to future platforms anyhow.

People will most certainly think about it when it fails to function and they're jamming the service lines.

If that happens...again, we dunno how this might be set up yet. If someone's isp goes down ppl tend to blame the isp for failing to allow them a required access to features in their modern devices, not the device manufacturers.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Making assumptions out of thin air isn't helpful to the discussion. Speculation is fine, but straight up asserting crap like this when you clearly ignored points I've already made on exactly this issue where I noted benefits of always online console is disruptive to intelligent conversation.

You haven't made one good point for how I benefit from being connected for my enjoyment of a purely single player game. You claim benefits you don't even know exist yet.

This logic doesn't actually apply to hardly anyone, especially in the core gamer demographic. Hardly anybody really complains much when various online games are shut down because the tiny number of ppl still playing are precisely the motivation for shutting them down in the first place. Odds are good MS would aim to have a lot of that stuff just carry over to future platforms anyhow.

Ignoring the complaints doesn't mean they don't exist. The gamers have little recourse so the noise usually goes away.

If that happens...again, we dunno how this might be set up yet. If someone's isp goes down ppl tend to blame the isp for failing to allow them a required access to features in their modern devices, not the device manufacturers.

Not if, when. Every system has outages, Live isn't bulletproof. It hasn't been in the past, it won't be in the future. And the average person tends to blame the thing that doesn't work, its not obvious to an end user that a switch in timbucktoo has overloaded. It won't just be the users isp is down causing failures here.

I'll say it again as you seem to thick to get it. It's not a deal breaker for me, but it's not a positive. They might try to sell it as one, but I'm unsure how that will play out.

 

[Tap In]

I'm going to assume 99% is a pretty good rate of being UP, reasonable, acceptable and possible.


I still say there is no way that they will not have a mechanism in place to play games offline if you have the disc or some other form of confirmation even if it is a temporary solution (like 24 hours of "downtime" to play or confirming ownership via a mobile phone security code etc )

 

[astrograd]

You haven't made one good point for how I benefit from being connected for my enjoyment of a purely single player game. You claim benefits you don't even know exist yet.

First you tell me I didn't note any benefits then you say I did but we have to ignore them because they may not exist yet? Make up your mind. The fact is that there is a lot of potential for persistently changing worlds even in SP games that aren't feasible without always being online. There are lots of interesting possibilities in terms of leveraging cloud databases and Kinect voice stuff for SP gaming too. Lots. Same goes for various elements of AI. This kinda stuff simply isn't possible without always online devices.

YOU asserted there exist zero benefits. YOU are the one assuming none of this stuff is possible. I'm just noting that we don't know that is the case yet as we dunno what their plans are as a platform holder, publisher, or what their 1st/3rd parties are exploring concept-wise. So don't whine to me when all I am doing is showing YOUR assumptions are wrong. There ARE some really interesting possibilities. Whether they come to fruition or not is a totally different argument.

Ignoring the complaints doesn't mean they don't exist. The gamers have little recourse so the noise usually goes away.

Ignoring what complaints? There is no reason to think MS will shut down 720 as a whole. Even when a future platform shows up from them. This is nothing like a publisher shutting down an individual game. We are talking about an entire ecosystem of revenue you are suggesting they would instantly kill prematurely. Not likely.

Not if, when. Every system has outages, Live isn't bulletproof. It hasn't been in the past, it won't be in the future.

We most likely aren't talking about XBL. We are talking about whatever mechanism they have for DRM in the context of your argument. That prolly won't be 'the entirety of XBL'. I explained this already.

And the average person tends to blame the thing that doesn't work, its not obvious to an end user that a switch in timbucktoo has overloaded. It won't just be the users isp is down causing failures here.

The thing that doesn't work is the isp in that scenario. Nobody starts screaming at their lightbulbs when the power goes out.

I'll say it again as you seem to thick to get it. It's not a deal breaker for me, but it's not a positive. They might try to sell it as one, but I'm unsure how that will play out.

You don't know enough to make this judgment because you've absolutely no clue how they aim to implement this. It's not difficult to imagine all sorts of innovative things that can only be done with a setup like this that really do add a lot to core gaming. Just because you are 'too thick' to grasp that your blind and cynical assumptions don't represent reality (at least not yet) doesn't mean the general populace will likewise feign offense.

Stop asserting your assumptions/expectations as if they are facts. They aren't.

 

[astrograd]

I'm going to assume 99% is a pretty good rate of being UP, reasonable, acceptable and possible.


I still say there is no way that they will not have a mechanism in place to play games offline if you have the disc or some other form of confirmation even if it is a temporary solution (like 24 hours of "downtime" to play or confirming ownership via a mobile phone security code etc )

Shhh....clearly we are expected to assume MS just wants to screw with us and keep consumers from spending money on their network and as such didn't bother thinking through any of these scenarios. Duh!

 

[Betanumerical]

We most likely aren't talking about XBL. We are talking about whatever mechanism they have for DRM in the context of your argument. That prolly won't be 'the entirety of XBL'. I explained this already.

He was using Live as a example of a system that has a had downtime. There is no doubt that whatever authentication service Microsoft/Sony use will require downtime, and I expect they will have trouble keeping 5 9's uptime as it is nearly impossible.

 

[dobwal]

He was using Live as a example of a system that has a had downtime. There is no doubt that whatever authentication service Microsoft/Sony use will require downtime, and I expect they will have trouble keeping 5 9's uptime as it is nearly impossible.

If MS builds authentication system that requires planned downtime then its basically amateur hour. Tying such a mechanic to basic console functionality, should encourage MS to build in enough redundancy that planned downtime shouldn't be a necessity. Downtime due to a failure in the system is expected as no system is perfect. But having console consumers lose basic functionality by design is a such big no no that even MS should recognize the need to avoid it.

The authentication system should operate independently of Live as primary functionality shouldn't be dictated by the failures or upgrades of secondary functions of a console. Being inconvenience measured in minutes downloading upgrades is one thing, losing the the ability to play a game for hours to days is another.

 

[AlphaWolf]

First you tell me I didn't note any benefits then you say I did but we have to ignore them because they may not exist yet? Make up your mind. The fact is that there is a lot of potential for persistently changing worlds even in SP games that aren't feasible without always being online. There are lots of interesting possibilities in terms of leveraging cloud databases and Kinect voice stuff for SP gaming too. Lots. Same goes for various elements of AI. This kinda stuff simply isn't possible without always online devices.

You're mostly talking multiplayer crap. Why should championship pac-man fail to work without being online. If a game doesn't require those features It shouldn't require online.

YOU asserted there exist zero benefits. YOU are the one assuming none of this stuff is possible. I'm just noting that we don't know that is the case yet as we dunno what their plans are as a platform holder, publisher, or what their 1st/3rd parties are exploring concept-wise. So don't whine to me when all I am doing is showing YOUR assumptions are wrong. There ARE some really interesting possibilities. Whether they come to fruition or not is a totally different argument.

I don't put much faith in hopes. You go right ahead the world needs dreamers. Those things could all be used without online being forced, I can play me3 without going online, if I want to play multiplayer that requirement is expected.

Ignoring what complaints? There is no reason to think MS will shut down 720 as a whole. Even when a future platform shows up from them. This is nothing like a publisher shutting down an individual game. We are talking about an entire ecosystem of revenue you are suggesting they would instantly kill prematurely. Not likely.

The complaints of other systems that required online and have been shut down. With online authentication they can shut down any game at any time, there is no profit in them keeping it running beyond a few years. I'm not saying they will, but that possibility exists.

We most likely aren't talking about XBL. We are talking about whatever mechanism they have for DRM in the context of your argument. That prolly won't be 'the entirety of XBL'. I explained this already.

Yes, or the authentication could require you to be logged into live. You explained your guess. That DRM system will still fail at some point, as all online systems have in the past.

The thing that doesn't work is the isp in that scenario. Nobody starts screaming at their lightbulbs when the power goes out.

Um if a light goes out, first thing you're likely to blame is the lightbulb. If the power goes out you will probably still verify it isn't just the lightbulb.

You don't know enough to make this judgment because you've absolutely no clue how they aim to implement this. It's not difficult to imagine all sorts of innovative things that can only be done with a setup like this that really do add a lot to core gaming. Just because you are 'too thick' to grasp that your blind and cynical assumptions don't represent reality (at least not yet) doesn't mean the general populace will likewise feign offense.

Stop asserting your assumptions/expectations as if they are facts. They aren't.

You have no idea how it's going to be implemented, I have every right to voice concerns over the possible negative impact. If you don't want to read it, DON'T.

 

[Jwm]

No, as others pointed out, my suggestion really just means "whoever has the disc can always play the game". If you do not have the disc, but no one else has put the disc in a different console, you can play the game. Otherwise, you get a demo. It's essentially the old idea of a dongle, in the same way the current XBox uses the actual game disc as a dongle, but with the added ability to play the game without the disc in the drive, powered by the ability to check online if anyone else has used the disc.

The system neatly solves disc rental, in that as soon as the disc in rented out again, you get "demoed". Of course, you could scratch or break the disk before you return it, but then the rental place should just charge you full price, and log it as a game sale.

I was thinking the console would be always online, but I like your solution better. If you can't contact the license check server, just require the disc in the console. Very neat solution.

IMO I just don't see this working yet for all markets, while I am ok with it and have done this across all devices that had an internet connection anyway. I just have issues here, and again it breaks keeping things simple for all consumers. Would be complicated to do correctly across all markets, and you severly limit sales of the console.

For example, let's use the haircut place we take my son, it has each console inside a box for them to play, they are naturally all offline. So as a console maker, do I ingnore this type of situation, or would I handle it by providing them with a special unit that is preloaded with demo games? Maybe across the US this is only 5,000 locations, but each location in my case has three 360 units. (oddly no Wii, just GameCubes )

So my point is, there are special cases where "forced always online" is just not going to work, additionally many markets where it is not possible. At this point in history, you are going to limit your userbase, confuse your potential users who do not read the box correctly, gifts by grandparents, etc.

I have to think we are going to see "optional always online" with benefits to those of us who do this anyway (no disc in tray, background updates, etc). Offline users will/should not be punished or required to get internet to their farm just so their kids can play lego games.

I could see the PR nightmare of going forced online, and little Johnny gets it as a gift from Grandma and then can't play. Unless they name the device "Xbox Internets Required 8", box branding gets ignored, customer service by store associates fails, just too many issues overall with this idea. If they do, I expect backlash and poor sales, automatic Sony win. If MS can make it work, I will gladly eat crow on Ustream live!

For now I am sticking to the idea of "Xbox - better with the Internet"