120°

Why Microsoft’s Creative Director Adam Orth Was Wrong For Defending Always-On Consoles

An eGamer journalist comments on the Microsoft Creative Director (Adam Orth)situation, talks about the implications of always-on for a console and explains why Orth was in the wrong.

Read Full Story >>
egamer.co.za
caseh4052d ago

I think he just related his experience with PCs and mobile phones to consoles in general. I can see where he was coming from, my PS3 has been hooked up to my router for the past 5 years since the day I bought it and effictively its always-on.

With the exception of PSN outages. :D

RNTody4052d ago (Edited 4052d ago )

I can understand that viewpoint, I mean my PS3 is also permanently connected at my home, but the thing is it's different for everyone and there are many scenarios where you won't have access to an internet connection at all or even just a reliable one depending on your situation. For instance:

- You could be using wireless
- You may want to take your console on the road
- You may be moving and finding yourself without internet for a while
- Your service provider may have a problem
- Microsoft could have technical faults
- The area you live in could be unreliable for good and stable internet
- You may just not have regular access
- You have may limited usage

Those are just some scenarios. Now while these above reasons can exclude you from playing multiplayer, it's completely unfair and insane to have these prevent you from playing a single-player game. Diablo III, SimCity, Assassin's Creed II, they all suffered greatly trying to enforce always-on.

sikbeta4052d ago

There is nothing to defend, this gen games were made to be played online + added features to be used online, social became important and that's online aswell, nextgen what would you expect is to go further than that, so logical step would be always on...

GiggMan4052d ago

Also things happen in life where other bills can take precedence to having your high speed internet always on. I know I pay right at $65 a month and if something was to happen that would be the first expense I'd have to cut.

Trust me I've been there... That would mean no Xbox for me :-(

Crazy Larry4052d ago (Edited 4052d ago )

I get that it's "different for everyone," but truth be told, I personally don't care about everyone (pardon me for being selfish). Both my PS3 and 360 have been "always on" for 6 years. I'll get a PS4, and I plan on keeping it always on, and assuming MS won't do anything too crazy during their announcement, I plan on getting a 720 too, since each will have great titles the other won't have. If somebody out their is still rockin' PS3 and 360 firmware ver 1.0 because they have no internet, I feel bad for them, but for nearly everybody on this site, we'll all be fine with always on. I'M NOT DEFENDING IT, but if I HAVE to have a 720 connected, it will be no different for what 90% of current PS3 and Xbox owners have been doing the last 6-7 years.

EDIT: Oh, and paying for internet is an awful excuse to bash always on. I KNOW the economy is tough but if you can't afford a $40 internet bill, you have NO business buying a $400-$500 console and $60 games. Priorities are food and shelter, so if things are really that tough, you need to be cutting out games entirely until this economy gets better for you.

Baka-akaB4052d ago (Edited 4052d ago )

Used to having it online or not , there is no defense worthwhile here .

People forget something that should be asked first . Does switching to a perpetually online system even benefits you ? If it doesnt and is just a used game deterrent screw them .

I dont even fathom state of mind making anyone rush to a corporation's defense , when they havent told you yet if there is even something to gain from it .

The only always online feature we know so far are auto logging stuff , wich can be done in alternative fashion .

And no .. social crap features , facebook or otherwise , and rankings arent worth that

GiggMan4052d ago

@Crazy Larry. The keyword is IF. If something was to happen or if I was to lose my job and things get tight the internet expense would have to be the first to go. Might as well get rid of the console also (for about a quarter of the price you paid for it) because without the internet it's useless.

This is all hypothetical debate anyway. Let's just wait and see what happens.

rainslacker4052d ago (Edited 4052d ago )

@sik

Plenty of games were made this gen that didn't require any online. Even if they included a multiplayer component, there was almost always a single player component.

Multiplayer took off this gen, no doubt. But that doesn't mean everyone, or even the majority want to play online. There are many people who don't care one bit to play online. I'm one such person, and I see no reason for there to be a required always on connection outside of trying to control the consumer.

Logical step is to keep it the way it is now. Make it optional for the people that want it, but don't restrict those that don't care to be always on, or just don't always have the means.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4052d ago
admiralvic4052d ago

While I can certainly understand people not seeing the problem with this (I am always online myself), I think too many people can't see past their own situation. Personally the biggest issue I have with "always on" is how easy it's to have a problem with it.

I don't know about anyone else, but every now and then someone will pull the internet power cord to plug something in or accidentally removed it (it's pretty bulky after all). Obviously this is a harmless action and terrible if I am playing online, but I don't need to instantly stop everything to resolve it. Thats the main problem with always online as a concept... it has too many situations where things are useless. At the VERY LEAST they should offer something to make up for this short coming, though I can see that not happening.

Boody-Bandit4052d ago (Edited 4052d ago )

Always on is a horrible idea. All the rhetorical spin can't justify it. If MS does indeed go this route it will hurt them. I honestly don't understand what the R&D team is thinking. MS needs to fire them and 86 this idea.

This is as bad as Sony not going all out for a full online infrastructure right out of the gate. Does everyone remember Phil Harrison complaining that Sony (Japan) wasn't focusing on online features and options for the PS3 before it was released? These companies need to learn from each others mistakes and not create new ones.

Ashlen4052d ago (Edited 4052d ago )

It's not about always on, people are missing the point entirely. Always on is a DRM.

The always on function is to authenticate games to keep you from playing used games.

That's the only reason always online is needed.

Boody-Bandit4052d ago

"The always on function is to authenticate games to keep you from playing used games."

I don't see many missing this point. Not being able to play used games or rentals would be the kiss of death for me with MS. 80% of the games I play are either from GF or purchased used.

If MS does in fact go this route it will save me space on my entertainment cabinet. I didn't get a Wii U and I will pass on the "Next Box" if these rumors turn into facts. I might purchase one just for the Forza series but my gaming library will be anorexic. I want resale value.

The only way this (Always On - No used games or rentals) would be viable for me is if MS sold their games 25 to 35% cheaper than their opposition.

I can't see Ms going this route. Think about it. Sony offers near identical services as you with equal or possibly more power. The same games, more developers, not always on, used and rentals will work (AKA resale value on your titles) and possibly still have the option to game online for free. <- If this is the case Sony will run away with the next generation.

RNTody4052d ago

The other major issue with your argument, Ashlen, is that always-on doesn't really benefit us. The example you used helps us in no way whatsoever as gamers and consumers. In fact, it's a restriction on us, and because of the problems with always-on, poses many possible inconveniences.

Always-online isn't needed. It's something enforced for control reasons.

cleft54052d ago (Edited 4052d ago )

You mentioned the PSN outages, well Microsoft also went down during Christmas for like 2 weeks and it happened again following that consecutive year.

Now imagine the console is always online. Are you okay with not being able to play games that you paid $60 for, assuming you didn't buy a collector's edition for $100? The problem here isn't just the network experience on the side of the consumer, but that major gaming companies like Microsoft, Sony, EA, and Activision Blizzard don't have a stable enough network architecture to maintain an always online service smoothly.

If Microsoft wants to use always online drm, than they need to be able to guarantee customers that their network infrastructure is solid enough for them to be able to deal with the server demands of having a mass amount of people constantly connecting, no matter what time of year it is.

The reality is that there is no way for them to do this and this is why always online drm is a terrible idea and why I will not buy a nextbox if it does have always online drm. Once the network infrastructure exist for them to be able to do this type of drm reliably, than and only than, should they consider it.

CalvinKlein4052d ago (Edited 4052d ago )

they really didnt go out at all back then. Xmas 2007 it had connection problems because so many people were overloading the servers at once. I was playing COD 4 every day for a few weeks before xmas and xmas day I couldnt connect. I thought it was my Internet but it worked fine later that night when less people were on.

I hear people mention this live outage all the time, but it was working. I know because I actually experienced this so called "outage" and the PSN one too, big difference.

I will probably not buy the next xbox for a while and maybe not ever if it is always on. I enjoyed diablo 3 even though it wasnt as good as diablo 2. Lots of people hate on it but I think it was pretty good besides the stupid RMAH and the worst, always online. Lag, even in SP and servers that go down at least 1 time a week and they were down alot when the game launched.

3-4-54052d ago

Yea but when your internet connection goes out or is crappy that day, your not locked out of gaming.

You can still use your PC without the internet. Full functional.

X720 EX: Playing a game and internet acts up in middle of game...it just stops working or shuts down or exits out...

What if that was a cutscene or a Boss battle or important dialog and now it's just ripped you right out of that experience.

^ That situation is going to happen to people. Not all but enough that it will piss people off.

EX: I just bought this $60 game can't wait to play it.....wait the local internet is in the area fixing something and the internet will be iffy for today and maybe tomorrow ? Now I can't play my game ????

^ How doesn't Microsoft Comprehend this ?

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4052d ago
Z5014052d ago

"You may want to take your console on the road" BINGO!

Robotronfiend4052d ago

Or you are military and get orders to move.

Godmars2904052d ago

I think by now, with a blocked Twitter and removed Link-in account, he has some idea.

Question is does MS realize how bad an idea it is. Enough so that they'll continue it.

jmac534052d ago

I have Comcast and they are so big that they don't care that they are an unreliable ISP. Troubleshooting your Internet for a couple of hours after work when you only want to relax and play a couple of games is enough to make me avoid an always connected console like the plague.

rainslacker4052d ago

Time Warner was much the same for me. When it was working, which was a lot, they were very solid. However, not a week would go by where they wouldn't go down for an hour or two, and sometimes for a whole night.

I'm currently using AT&T U-Verse, and it's connection is up about 99% of the time, but a few days ago it went down for the whole night. Usually when it does go down it's for about an hour or so.

It's also worth pointing out that even the smaller companies which may care about service still use the larger providers networks to deliver their feeds, so your still at the mercy of the bigger infrastructure.

Show all comments (28)
290°

More Job Losses At Xbox, “There’s More To Come”: Paul Thurrott

Paul Thurrott in a recent episode commented on the on-going Microsoft fiasco hinting at more job losses and that "there's more to come".

Read Full Story >>
spieltimes.com
Sonic18812d ago (Edited 2d ago )

There won't be no more acquiring game publishers from Microsoft in the future . Xbox has to pay Microsoft back. It might take two decades to do that.

sagapo1d 21h ago (Edited 1d 21h ago )

I don’t understand what you’re saying. Xbox IS microsoft so there’s no “paying back “.
And MS gross profit in 2023 was over 140 billion dollars so forget your 2 decades.

Unless you mean the money MS invested in Xbox (acquisitions included) and the time it will take for xbox as a brand to gain that money back on it’s own, then yeah, that could take a while.

romulus231d 15h ago

The better term to use might be return on investment, xbox is simply a division of Microsoft one that MS can easily do away with if profit margins are not met. So in that regard he's right, if xbox isn't showing the expected return on investment the higher ups are expecting than it's unlikely Microsoft will acquire any other studios any time soon, especially if they are spending billions buying developers just to shut them down in the end.

MrBaskerville1d 7h ago (Edited 1d 7h ago )

Xbox is a division that they discussed shutting down but doubled down on after Gamepass was pitched.

It needs to make money at some point. Big money.

KwietStorm_BLM1d 7h ago

So you do understand it or..?

rokos1d 5h ago

According to Statista the net income of Microsoft is about $72.4 billion dollars which is a bit lower than last year profit. That is almost as much as Activision's acquisition but I assume that would be a one off since it costs so much plus I see how their focus has been shifted to AI, thus any major future investments will probably be in that area.

Markusb331d 4h ago

i think you are really missing the point

VariantAEC19h ago

@romulus23
That is not why MS buys studios. They might continue to buy because it's about taking that sweet sweet IP out of the corporate husks of their acquisitions.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 19h ago
SonyStyled1d 20h ago

“There won't be no more acquiring game publishers from Microsoft in the future”

No bro, there do be is for Microsoft not acquiring for what is now if not what it be is 😂

1d 18h ago Replies(2)
ChasterMies1d 8h ago

Xbox isn’t a separate company from Microsoft. It’s all Microsoft.

Abear211d 3h ago (Edited 1d 3h ago )

Let’s be real, this is the media spinning all the acquisitions and liquidations of said developers and spinning it to make M$ the villain.

This was bound to happen, a bigger slice of pie and cut costs, when the games come they stand to make more and that’s their agenda—it was the writing on the wall when the sales went through and legally all those who approved the sale and mergers knew this would happen.

Snowflakes need to realize business is ugly and you can cry all you want but this is how capitalism works. And it works.

That said, M$ needs to steer the narrative and grab hold of all this, make their plans known, hype the hell out of all those dead IP’s they plan to revive, and be honest about the timeline. This is likely to involve mobile and IP on other consoles, and most people realize that.

The problem is this company is incapable of being transparent and seems to often want to dissuade and confuse is customer base. The lack of E3 has hurt Microsoft and I don’t think they know how to properly or effectively market their brand anymore.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 19h ago
jwillj2k42d ago

There really needs to be a class action lawsuit here. You buy these companies just to put people out of jobs. And it’s not like something happened to derail their plans this WAS the plan. Microsoft has no business in this space at all.

franwex1d 23h ago (Edited 1d 23h ago )

Microsoft has been doing this for years. They simply want the IPs. Look at Nokia. Look at Skype. This time it simply expanded to games. Gaming is not as important to Microsoft’s executives as it was to the founders too. Bill Gates was willing to sell the og Xbox at a loss. Steve Balmer approved the red ring of death fiasco. This CEO isn’t really a gamer.

-Foxtrot1d 23h ago

Maybe it's time though to put a stop to it and use a big giant like Microsoft as a huge example to the rest of these big companies.

There has to be a line drawn somewhere.

People like the FTC and the like went against Microsoft yet their Actvision deal was still allowed to go through yet look what's happened...it's not even Acitivisions studios aswell, it's Bethesdas.

VariantAEC19h ago

Years?

Try several decades, and in the gaming space 2.3 decades.

Jon615861d 4h ago

You do realize this happens in ALL industries? Or are you just saying this because it is Microsoft? In any case I feel for those that are being let go but the trch industry is suffering right now.

jwillj2k423h ago(Edited 23h ago)

This absolutely does NOT happen all the time. Let me know the last time 1 company with a terrible product track record spent 100 billion onto acquire MULTIPLE successful companies in under a year only to shut them down and stop making their products regardless of how successful they were. Not merge them, completely shut them down.

And you can’t use Microsoft in your example.

Notellin23h ago(Edited 23h ago)

Class action lawsuit? The law is on their side and protects them at all costs. There are no rules to protect the people at the bottom.

jwillj2k423h ago

Not true when it comes to mass layoff do your research.

RNTody1d 23h ago

Ninja Theory, Perfect Dark, Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, Wolfenstein 3, Dishonored, Prey, Doom, Quake... something tells me that bad things are going to happen to these entities under Microsoft.

MrDead1d 13h ago

ID software, the makers of Doom and Wolfenstein that have been with us since 1991 could be gone and MS will keep the IPs.

I hope some of these studios can buy their freedom from MS otherwise this is going to be even more devastating for the industry and gamers.

Yui_Suzumiya1d 10h ago (Edited 1d 10h ago )

That's exactly what I'm worried about. I've been a fan of id since Wolfenstein 3D and I'm honestly afraid.

lodossrage1d 6h ago

Toys for Bob saw the writing on the wall and bought themselves out.

Wouldn't be the first time a company did that under MS either. Bungie and Twisted Pixel did the same. Considering what just happened, I can see some other devs trying to buy themselves out too.

anast1d 23h ago

Good thing the bosses of all those small studios made their money.

glenn19791d 22h ago

they cant do it right now they will get burned

XiNatsuDragnel1d 14h ago

Phil and his team need to be gone

lodossrage1d 6h ago (Edited 1d 6h ago )

Won't make a difference.

The whole structure needs to be overhauled. Anyone that replaces Phil will be no different than him, Mattrick, or anyone else.

Until the company changes how they go about business, nothing will change

glenn19791d 3h ago

I just don't have any idea what they would do , they have done sooo much damage on their xbox brand, they have a show at July or June I think, but will it even matter even they show amazing games, idkn

lodossrage1d 6h ago

True,

But they may as well get it over with. Whether it happens now or later, the burning is going to hit the same.

Reality is the ONE move that can alleviate a lot of this is the one move they can't make. Remove day 1 from gamepass.

Show all comments (68)
90°

Microsoft Opening Xbox Mobile Game Store in July

The Xbox brand is expanding, as an Xbox mobile game store is opening this coming July where Microsoft will brings its "first-party portfolio."

Jin_Sakai3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

“Bond adds that they will start on the web”

This will go nowhere.

Nice knowing you Xbox. This is what happens when the house never gets cleaned.

MrDead3d ago

The only this MS is expanding is the amount of feculence it sprays on everyone who just want to enjoy gaming and make games.

The best thing MS can do for the gaming industry is leave and never return.

XiNatsuDragnel3d ago

Good luck with this even it might not succeed.

Show all comments (7)
210°

Microsoft once tried to nab LittleBigPlanet from Sony after a few drinks

It turns out that many moons ago, Microsoft once had its eye on the Sony published LittleBigPlanet series.

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
XiNatsuDragnel4d ago

Microsoft had a good idea but fumbled it again.

Cacabunga3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Project Spark idea was decent but they quickly gave up ..
LBP was wonderful

ApocalypseShadow3d ago

Microsoft in a nutshell. Always tried to poach Sony employees, games, 3rd party games and devices like the depth camera that was turned into Kinect but was running on PS2 before Xbox 360. Wouldn't be surprised they wanted LBP. Just like they worked behind the scenes pushing the MLB to bring Sony's baseball game to Xbox instead of making their own.
https://www.playstationlife...

They didn't spend years trying to develop their own baseball game. They wanted Sony's game.

They're scum.

Zachmo1823d ago

Microsoft didn't force MLB on Xbox. MLB gave Sony 2 options either go multiplat or risk losing the license.

Rynxie2d ago

And why do you think MLB said that? I believe Ms approached MLB.

ApocalypseShadow2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Totally ridiculous comment.

The only exclusivity Sony had was to their own creation of The Show. Microsoft could have paid the MLB for the license just like Sony did and made their own baseball game.

Microsoft instead, groomed MLB for years in trying to poach Sony's game and bring it to Xbox. They're worth 3 TRILLION dollars. You think that's not enough money to make their own baseball game? Don't be delusional.

Microsoft spun it like they always do and told the media that they had to trust Sony with their hardware. After they put Sony in that position of not having a choice. Either go multiplatform or stop making one of their successful games. That's a no win scenario.

And what did Microsoft do? They didn't try to sell the game to the Xbox community. They put it on game pass to hurt Sony. Pushing the idea of why buy games that are $70 when you can play them in their cheap service for $10. It was a dirty tactic.

You fell for the Kool aid drink Microsoft served you instead of spitting it out. Hope it tasted good because you were fooled by Phil and the gang.

2d ago
Hereandthere2d ago

Xbox executive Sara Bond has told Axios that Microsoft spent a number of years trying to get MLB The Show onto Xbox consoles. And when it finally succeeded in breaking off PlayStation’s long-held exclusivity, the company had to “trust” Sony with pre-release Xbox Series X/S consoles.

Bond revealed that MLB The Show “always came up” in conversations between Microsoft and the Major League Baseball organization. “We always said, ‘We love this game. It would be a huge opportunity to bring it to Xbox.'” she recalled. However, when Microsoft’s efforts materialized, it put the company in an awkward situation where it had to send in pre-release consoles to a rival company.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2d ago
Notellin2d ago

"Microsoft instead, groomed MLB for years in trying to poach Sony's game and bring it to Xbox."

Take a nap, conspiracies are rotting your brain.

2d ago
Hereandthere2d ago

Xbox executive Sara Bond has told Axios that Microsoft spent a number of years trying to get MLB The Show onto Xbox consoles. And when it finally succeeded in breaking off PlayStation’s long-held exclusivity, the company had to “trust” Sony with pre-release Xbox Series X/S consoles.

ApocalypseShadow1d 15h ago

Lying to yourself is unbecoming.

Article link tells you all you need to know in Sarah Bond's own words.

Hereandthere2d ago

They were too cheap/inept/lazy to develop their own mlb game, so they port begged for years and bribed the mlb to make the show multiplatform. Like i said many times, xbox brought nothing to the table their 24 years, ZERO.

ApocalypseShadow1d 15h ago

At least you and others get it. Note drank the Kool aid and asked for seconds thinking it was refreshing.

Most don't even know how it all played out but it's there in black and white for all to see. Microsoft brought it up for years until the MLB forced Sony's hand. It was a win win for Microsoft. Kill one reason to buy a PlayStation or kill the game by dropping it in a cheap service to kill Sony's sales numbers on PlayStation.

OtterX3d ago

"However, Healey said Media Molecule wouldn't have felt right doing that, adding it would have been "morally corrupt"."

Major kudos to Media Molecule for being an upright studio with principles.

Cockney1d 10h ago

They chose well, Sony gave them the backing to pursue their dreams with no restrictions even tho their games especially dreams have very niche appeal. Media molecule and Sony deserve respect for this in an age of risk averse publishing.

RNTody3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Great, more stories like this please. Show the last of the zombies holding the line what we've been saying for years: Microsoft is anti competition, anti industry and has no interest in making games at all.

But hey, at least there's an Xbox Games Showcase to look forward to, right?

Inverno3d ago

Well considering SONY just killed the series, LBP would've been dead by now either way. Though MM probably wouldn't exist by now either, so I'm glad they stayed with SONY, hopefully they don't get shut down any time soon or ever honestly.

Inverno3d ago

They shut down the servers, that's millions of user created levels gone. That and dead are pretty much the same, it's also been years since 3 and they cancelled HUB soooo.

2d ago
fsfsxii2d ago

They shutdown the servers because no one was playing, no one in the community cared about the user created levels so why keep them up? Wtf you guys would never succeed in running a business.

Inverno2d ago

Yea dood no one was playing so they shut off the servers. Cause people with enough common sense can't just Google why they were actually shut of, right?

Show all comments (29)