Cliff Bleszinski On Always-Online: "Deal With It"

Veteran games developer Cliff Bleszinski reacts to the recent firing of Microsoft employee Adam Orth over comments he made concerning the next Xbox being always connected.

According to Bleszinski, the future is inevitable, and we should simply, "deal with it".

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Snookies121950d ago

Why is it that every time that guy talks, I get annoyed? I used to love the dude back in the day, even played him in UT2K4 once. Now he just comes off as full of himself. :\

Septic1950d ago

You played him in UT2k4 once? Do tell!

I don't know, I like the guy. He's always frank about what he thinks and I respect him for his achievements. But most of all, I agree with a lot of what he says.

I disagree with the fervour in which he supports always-online however but agree regarding his points about early adopters most likely being always online anyway.

He's a nice chap. Its just the internet that makes him come off as obnoxious to some (or many, I don't know).

Snookies121950d ago (Edited 1950d ago )

Yeah, I versed him a LONG time ago, so honestly I don't remember a whole lot of details on it other than the fact that we were playing on the Facing Worlds map. He was really freaking good though. I mean, I played that game religiously, and I got owned lol. (Got a few kills in though, which made me happy.)

Anyway, I do suppose the internet plays a part in making him sound bad, and I know he's not a bad dude in general. I just think he should tone it down a little in some cases. Don't want him being one of those guys that are always referred to in a negative light, (Pachter, Molyneux, etc.) types. (No offense to them either, just pointing out that they're usually perceived in a bad light.)

Septic1950d ago


Ha that's crazy. You lucky guy. I once played the former Quake 3 world champion in his peak; man it was brutal. His skills were crazy but he did play 10x more than me and did say that I should go pro. I will always remember that :D (I did a crazy rocket jump+railgun combo and his jaw dropped haha).

Yeah I agree that he might have to tone it down, especially in this case. Always on is a very controlversial topic and he does seem to railroad the issue with his opinion. Unlike Patcher and to a lesser extent, Molyneux, he does have legs to stand on I guess.

Also, its nice to meet someone who has played a PROPER hardcore MP FPS :D

sam1mur1949d ago

You can really notice the derogation of this site with the fact that your completely reasonable comment has 16 disagrees...

You agree with the reality of DRM. Which is the truth. If anyone is shelling out $600 for a console on launch day, they are going to play it online. People aren't discontinuing their internet connection to afford a brand new system, and people who do not have internet are not going to buy a brand new console on launch day.

Also, a true but harsh reality is, people really don't care about single player games anymore. People barely even play the campaigns for most games. Those who actually enjoy the single player experience, myself included, are in the minority. Most of Microsoft's clientele is already always online whenever they use their console. It's s rational conclusion for Microsoft to allow DRM, losing a few customers, yet avoiding pirated games.

In the end of the day those who actually care about single player are slim, and those who actually care about drm are in the few. A majority of people who buy video games are not the fanatics and fanboys on gamer websites. A majority of people buying systems are the general public. And most of the general public don't know about DRM, or really don't care. Xbox fans are still going to get the '720'.

Finally, people need to recognize that these are BUSINESSES we are talking about. Microsoft nor Sony have any concern for their clientele besides the fact that if they are content the companies stay afloat. No company is going to give up a business model that fits them just to appease some whining fanboys on a website. Gamers have to recognize they are entitled to nothing when it comes to company decisions.

Microsoft picked DRM because most of their clientele are already always online, and the few who leave the console due to this are balanced by the lack of pirated games.

Sony picked no DRM because they're focus has never been online, and Sony has a much larger single player base. Also, it helps them to get the few microsoft customers that leave the console.

These are all rational business decisions. Everyone has to stop acting like the Emperor is running Microsoft and Sony is run by Mama Teresa.

Can't wait to be down-voted to hell for writing the truth :p.

fr0sty1949d ago

Why MS doesn't just do what Sony did when people were going nuts about that used game prevention patent for PS4, and say "Our console will support offline play/used games.", is beyond me. They're letting all this negative hype spin up, not only from internal sources but now from the developer community as well. This is only hurting them, and they're sitting around doing nothing as if it were true.

Highlife1949d ago

I say take it a step further and not allow people to play online games if there internet is freaking slow.

Ilovetheps41949d ago

Sam1mur, here is the issue with your statement. There are somewhere around 75 million 360s that have been sold so far. That number might be off a little, but it's close enough. Well, there are about 45 million gold subscribers. Again, that number might be off a little bit. Well, that means about 60% of 360 owners are actually using the online features of the 360. If they were to make the next xbox online only, they would basically be abandoning around 40% of their userbase. That just doesn't sound good to me. I highly doubt it would sound good to Microsoft.

Honestly, I would be shocked if Microsoft made the next Xbox online only. I just cannot see them doing it. I see all these rumors running around, but I just can't see it being feasible for a company to make that decision.

And also, there are a lot more people than you think that want a single player experience over a multiplayer experience. Majority of my friends don't even touch the online components of games. They just want a great single player game with a great storyline.

sam1mur1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

To Ilovetheps4:

If the case is in fact that 75 million xboxes were sold, and 45 million are online, then that pretty much supports my point.

Its been 8 years since the xbox 360 came out. Since then, millions of xboxes have been broken, thrown in the closet, or exchanged to gamestops.

Add up every single broken xbox, every single used xbox in a gamestop, and every single xbox that is merely not being operated, and subtract that from the 75 million. I would personally bet that that number comes to atleast 10 million.

Also correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain that the 75 million number counts new consoles that have been yet to be sold from stores. And there's millions of new xboxes out there.

So, Microsoft has at least 2/3drds of its clientele online, 8 YEARS after the console launched. That's a big deal. 8 years is a long time, and alot of people stopped caring about even playing xbox. 75 million sold, does not equate to 75 million being played...

Finally, about you're single player comment, I can guarantee I am not wrong. Do you consider yourself and your friend group 'gamers'? If so, the single player drive makes sense. But if not, then your friend group is surely in the minority. I unfortunately am one of few 'gamers' in my friend group, and none of them care about single player. Also, besides personal experience, it is pretty much a general consensus that single player is dying, it is not just my opinion.

sikbeta1949d ago


I don't know why you get annoyed, but maybe we should respect the opinion of the guy who created one of the most successful Third Party Games from current gen, I mean, he's not a rookie and maybe knows what the future of gaming will be...


Ilovetheps41949d ago

Sam, let's look at one of the highest rated games so far this year and one of the top selling games so far this year, Bioshock Infinite. That game has no multiplayer yet it had tons of hype and sold decently. Another game that got tons of sales is Tomb Raider. If you tell me that people bought the game for the multiplayer, you are wrong. The multiplayer was sub-par. They bought it for the campaign.

Now, I'm not sure where you live, but I live in an area where the internet is not great. We have few options. I chose the best internet around here yet the internet is constantly going out. Right now, I don't care because I play single player games. But, if internet was required to play a single player game, I can no longer play that game. Why should internet affect my solo gaming?

Again, I'd be shocked if Microsoft went down this road.

crxss1949d ago

sorry cliffyb but I completely disagree. "Always online" might come out once, twice, or heaven forbid more times, but each time it won't take off. I can't even imagine being unable to play a single player game, a movie, or listen to music without an Internet connection. I am baffled by anyone who thinks this is a good thing

Dee_911949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

@ sam1mur Thanks for talking for millions of people you dont even know.I now have insight on reality /S.You should prob know that by jan 2010 360 had 39million units sold worldwide and of those units only 20million had Live.If you cant do math that 19 MILLION people without LIVE at the time.
Even with free online on the PS3 theres a chance people dont even have PSNs yet.I personally know a handful.I know alot more people without Live.Microsoft wont be loosing a "few" costumers.They will loose alot more whilst loosing alot more money than they would off those pirated games.Theres absolutely nothing rational about having an always on console.Yea its rational when your eyeballs are made of green dollar signs.

Wow... Il just quote a few things here.
" Sim City, with all of its’ troubles on launch, seems to be selling briskly. Diablo 3, the poster child of a messy launch, is estimated to be at 12 million units"

Okay so judging from sells this means always on DRM is okay?How many of those Sims city sells are from people who couldnt get a refund after they found out exactly what DRM is? How many of the people who bought these will buy another game with DRM now that they know what DRM is?
Point being,you cant judge rather a feature this new is a success or not.It will take time and a decrease or increase in sells over time will be a TRUE indication.

" My Ipad is always connected because I love browsing Reddit, Twitter, and Facebook"

Do your ipad require internet to work?No? So is there any rational reason your comparing your Ipad to a device that REQUIRES always on.
As a matter of fact I dont know ANY device that require an internet to work... besides Magic Jack & Vonage.

Once again I see no point in having a device that requires internet to work.

However theres a little glimmer of light with this latest rumor.
Hopefully its not just a rumor.

"Add up every single broken xbox, every single used xbox in a gamestop, and every single xbox that is merely not being operated, and subtract that from the 75 million. I would personally bet that that number comes to atleast 10 million. "

Okay so not only are we talking for millions of people we are just pulling numbers from out of thin air,LOL

"it is pretty much a general consensus that single player is dying, it is not just my opinion."

Its not general consensus.Its an opinion that a few people and have stated publicly.Doesnt make it a true statement.

sam1mur1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

Bioshock and Tomb Raider have big followings. Sure single player is dying, but its not like people are giving up allegiances to old franchises.

Who are you to say they aren't bought for multiplayer? I know a few people that bought GoW3 for multiplayer, and that was pretty raunchy.

Tomb Raider, God of War 3, Dead Space 3, etc, having multiplayer just proves even moreso that single player is dying. If it wasn't, there would be NO NEED to tack on a sub-par multiplayer. As more IPs come out, they become more online focused, because the single player is merely an afterthought these days. Look at God of War. People are still going to buy it because it is a franchise that has been around since Single Player was the predominant mover of games. But.... they had to tack on a terrible online portion. Why you ask? Because the focus is on MULTIPLAYER in this day and age.

Name me one new top selling IP in the past few years that is single player, and is not Dishonored.

Also, one must focus on Microsoft's market... The United States. Its an undisputed fact that Microsoft depends on America more than any other country...

Top game sales this year in the USA...

Black ops
Gears of War
God of War
Halo 4
Starcraft 3
Dead Space 3

Tomb Raider was number 11, and I skipped Luigi's Mansion because handhelds are irrelevant in my opinion.

No one is buying Black Ops for single player, everyone is buying it for multiplayer.

Same for Gears, whether its Co-op, Horde, or Competetive.

God of War was undoubtedly bolstered by the fact that it added online. Nevertheless it would score high, but thats like providing Mario as an example, God of war is going to sell whether single player is on the verge of extinction or not

Same thing goes for Bioshock Infinite.

Halo 4 = online

Starcraft = online

Dead Space resorted to focusing the entire game around online co-op. Why? Single player is dying.....

An interesting tidbit from my Vgchartz research that supports Microsoft's dominance of online gaming and their focus on it, is the sales of Call of Duty Black Ops 2

#1 Black Ops 2 (360)~ 680,000
#9 Black Ops 2 (Ps3)~ 391,000

Almost double the amount of games sold. Online games are driving microsoft, so its reasonable for them to install DRM.

I'm truly am sorry about the fact that you have poor internet. But want to know who isn't sorry? Microsoft. Because its a corporation. Every major release on the xbox has been the top download on Pirate bay weeks before launch. They'd rather risk having the minority of their clients who have spotty connections, then losing those game sales.

Look at it from Microsoft's point of view.

Why should I risk my PRODUCTS being illegally downloaded because people don't want to be always online?(in a day and age where mostly everyone is connected for a majority of the day).

Why should I risk new game sales to used games because people want to play single player and not be online?

Seriously. Even though it may not be 'fair' its a sound business decision. No pirated games(until they get around it, but even then it would be much more difficult), and no used games. That's big plus for Microsoft. Also, they'd most likely receive a bonus from third parties, due to them outlawing used games in their favor. So if they lose a majority of their client base(which wouldn't happen) if they only sell 30 million Xbox720's. They're making money off of all new games and no pirated games (fuels the sales of the games).

Boody-Bandit1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

" the guy who created one of the most successful Third Party Games"

Cliffy B. "helped" with the "development" of Gears of War. He didn't create it. Even if he did that is no reason to act as if his opinion must be respected. I love the Gears series but IMHO Cliffy suffers from what I call LMS. Kind of like Napoleon did.

Personally I have been gaming when Cliffy B was still in diapers. I don't want an always on feature from MS with their next offering, and NO, I will not just "deal with it". Personally I went from an absolutely (camp out overnight if I have to) MUST OWN to a I will wait for E3 to see how this will be implemented.

If always-on is in fact a reality? That in itself probably wont deter me. BUT if the rumors of no rental or used games is true? Peace out MS. It's been a blast but we have grown apart.

sam1mur1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )


You just proved my point. Its not a rational decision unless you have "Eyes of green dollar signs"

Microsoft is a company. It has "eyes of dollar signs". It doesn't care if you're sad that there's online. Sales numbers justifies DRM.

And those aren't numbers out of the thin air. You have to be completely naive to think that the number isn't near there.... Actually, its higher...

The failure rate of xbox's is 27% as of 2009 (the middle of the xbox's life span). That number alone when taken out of 75 million....

Thats 20 million xboxs that are broken. So thanks for rebuting my argument to just make it stronger. 20 million broken xboxs. ~7,000 gamestops in operation, and add in the people who just don't play anymore.... Lets say that unrealistically, half of those people sent their xbox to get fixed(common sense).... the number alone in broken xboxs is 10 million...

So the number can be realistically estimated above 10 million, far above, due to the failure rates of xboxs, used xboxs, and those that aren't in play...

so 55-65 million xboxes in use and 45 million are on live.

EDIT: Like seriously... how can you argue that a company's intent isn't dollar signs. There's a reason EA doesn't give a poo about being the "Worst company in American history".

And... its not just an opinion... the sales facts, the trends in game development, and analyst statements prove that single player is dying.

GadgetGooch1949d ago

I find it funny that you got so many disagree's just for expressing your point of view lol.

AlphaJunk1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

I agree , I think he's ok. Of course, people tend to dislike people that don't agree instead of realizing people have different ideas.
Honestly I can't understand the big scare with always on - I think we have a bunch of broke asses worried about paying for their internet bill; then again, they somehow managed to post on here with their conspiracy scares.

Bimkoblerutso1949d ago


I fail to see your point. You can spout off numbers all you want. Diablo 3 and Simcity buyers were STILL pissed off at the DRM even given their ability to connect to the internet. It has nothing....NOTHING to do with whether or not a consumer is capable of connecting to the internet. What percentage of people complaining here on N4G do you think have internet access?

And what's really pissing consumers off is that these dickhole developers (like the newly anointed King of the Dickholes in the article) are trying to pass this off as just another case of gamer entitlement. That is goddamn INSULTING, I don't care how you spin it. This is a real issue, whether you be for it or against it. Idiots like Bleszinski telling us to "deal with it" should be insulting to people on both sides of this argument.

Dee_911949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

i dont even know how to reply to that.

first you say
"Who are you to say they aren't bought for multiplayer?"

then in the same comment you say.
"No one is buying Black Ops for single player, everyone is buying it for multiplayer. "
Who are YOU to say they are?

plus a plethora of similar asinine statements I wont waste my time quoting.

I dont even ... how do you have so many bubbles lol
Also you missed my point about eyes of green dollar signs.If you watch spongebob you would know that when mr krab gets eyes of dollar ( or hearts lol ms puff episode) all rationality goes out the window.My point was there is no rational thought behind this.They are blinded by trying to make and or save money.That will actually cause them to lose money ( not related to spongebob)


"The failure rate of xbox's is 27% as of 2009 (the middle of the xbox's life span). That number alone when taken out of 75 million "
So your saying that in 2009 there were 75million 360's sold?So they sold like 400k consoles from 2009-2013?
LMAO dude what are you smoking,it was 27% of how many they sold at the time they reported that, which was well under 75mill .. or even 40mill.Using your date, around that time it wouldve been no more than 5million bricked consoles.Hell il give you an extra million to compensate for a year.That would still make it 20 million consoles out 33million as of 2009 with live.Thats 13 million WORKING consoles without live.

MRMagoo1231949d ago


Every comment you made is so far of base it isnt funny.

"Which is the truth. If anyone is shelling out $600 for a console on launch day, they are going to play it online"

I bought the ps3 in AUS for $1000 Australian and i didnt even have the net at home yet.

"You can really notice the derogation of this site with the fact that your completely reasonable comment has 16 disagrees"

The whole point in the disagree and agree button is to show whether you disagree or agree right?

"No one is buying Black Ops for single player, everyone is buying it for multiplayer"

I have all the CODS on ps3 right now starting from COD4 and i have only played 2 of them online the rest i only played the campaign.

All in all your ideas of reality and the real reality are 2 very different things.

Broll1949d ago


"What percentage of people complaining here on N4G do you think have internet access?"

Like 100% Yo!

hay1948d ago (Edited 1948d ago )

It's fairly elementary, I worked with internet technologies for a looong time now, and this always online stuff will mean beta testing for all of us for the first few years.
There will be bottlenecks once the service starts, there will be downtimes, there will be maintenances, even further content cutting, and in several years, services will be closed down prohibiting usage of good old apps, forcing us in the end to crack and emulate this stuff at later times.

It's one of the stepping stones for internet licensing and censorship, leading to full control over what people could access in the net as people "dealing with it" will encourage more and more of similar tactics to be incorporated by various companies.
In about 10 years this will mean always on, always tracking, always licensed, always via official distributed channels(and we know they want to rape your wallet and jizz all over your family pics), always controlled, and when the infrastructure won't be bringing them enough money revenue, servers will be decommissioned putting even your favourite single-player titles dead in the water without resorting to mentioned "fourth party" solutions.

And here comes his "deal with it part". If we allow it, we will have to deal with it.

Vote with your wallets, it's all they dream about. Your wallet is ground below their feet, blood in their mechanical pumps, and all they have in their eyes.
Do not give it to them, they will shake and collapse like damned junkies.

+ Show (19) more repliesLast reply 1948d ago
koehler831949d ago

I've always found the dumbass things he says to be the rule rather than the exception.

Blaze9291949d ago

" Veteran games developer Cliff Bleszinski reacts to the recent firing of Microsoft employee Adam Orth over comments he made concerning the next Xbox being always connected. "

"Let’s pay attention to the wording here. Resigned. Not fired."

...this is why i really am starting to dislike this site -_-

Pintheshadows1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

I remember when the original UT maps he created were included on PC Gamer UK cd's before he even worked for Epic. Pretty crazy.

He even did guides for making maps. I tried. Key word there being tried.

X-Alchemist1949d ago

first of all this title was completely taken out of context, secondly dude did you even read the article?
this guy talks so much sense it's unreal

Jaqen_Hghar1949d ago

HA! A man gets it. Unreal. Like the game

IcyEyes1949d ago

Cliff Bleszinski is one the most overrated people in the VG biz.

Sure, Gears of war is awesome ... but seriously, he haven't designed that game alone ... He just love to put his face everywhere.

About his skill over games like UT ... well, everybody can go pro playing 6h at day the same game. Trust me.

Ps Anyway, Cliff was pretty skilled over the MP.

Aomizuchi1949d ago

What did you expect from an egomaniac?

FamilyGuy1949d ago

"Well behaved people rarely make history.

Deal with it."

I'm partially on his side but even he agreed that Adam was an idiot for blabbing. The guy could have easily said his opinion without being so offensive but he chose to be rude: "Why would I live there?" In that line alone he offended two cities.

Crazyglues1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

Well I will "Deal With it" by not buying the next Xbox...

||.........___||............ ||

1949d ago
solar1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

My PC has been connected to the net 24/7 since the day cable has been available. The world wont end if the 720 has to be too mates. Jesh.

Steam uses it and i have no problems. It at all bad.

jessupj1949d ago

Have you stopped to think for just a moment that... your not the only fking person in this world?

Rhythmattic1949d ago

Just want to point out Steam Has an Offline Mode.

3-4-51949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

Hey Cliff. What you say might effect people buying your games or games of people like you in the future.

You may lose sales, workers and even the company because we choose to spend our money elsewhere.

Deal With It.

stage881949d ago

What a pissy article. This guy sounds like a complete douche.

Also, yes, people make mistakes but when you have a top role in Microsoft then these mistakes will always cost you. It's the position you've accepted to be in.


Tyre1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

Cliffy B is the man who recently said that Gamers have the tremendous power to vote with their money and if Gamers are against something they should let the companies know by not buying it. Cliffy B the things your saying now are useless u completely contradict urself....The cat is out of the bag, dude you are trying to do damage control on your own statements. Are you afraid of the consequences? Gamers will sure let Microsoft know what is acceptable....if the always on is necessary to play games than Xbox will be a more used games, no more offline play? F it i'm not buying the NextXbox, MS messed up if this is for real. IT IS UNACCEPTABLE! Change it or prepare for EPIC FAIL. #Dealwithit!

PSN-JeRzYzFyNeSt1949d ago

word man this guy is a tool.. he thinks hes a pretty boy that can talk and back shit up.. he's fucking pissing me off hes a nobody to me.. wow you made GEARs.. this guy needs to do his job be good at it and stay humble and not piss gamers off. then maybe we can consider him as a good developer.

zerocrossing1949d ago

I knew the guy couldn't be all bad but he just comes across really anti consumer lately, probably due to certain ties to the industry IMO, that's a shame though since people may stop listening to him altogether.

omi25p1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

Read the actual article would you ffs. Allformats has posted it completely out of context.

He says if someone posts something on twitter you dont like you should deal with it. Not that you should deal with always online.

The fact the Adam Orth was forced to leave MS is a joke in its self.

If people actually bothered to look into what he said on twitter and not just whine like usual they would see he was actually tweeting to one of his BEST FRIENDS.

Now put yourselves in his shoes. Your sat comfortably at home and your friend writes a messages to you on twitter or on facebook/Tiwtter complaining about his interent. You jokely right its because you live in a slum. The next day you are fired.

The people who got antsy over what he said should be ashamed of themselves for making him lose his job.

Also you arent even allowed to submit Blog posts.

starchild1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

Why is it everytime you talk I get annoyed? Oh, that's right, you're a raging fanboy.

There is nothing wrong with Cliff Bleszinski. The problem is with you.

I'm not saying you have to agree with him on any particular subject, but if you have a problem with him in general it's likely because you're a Sony fanboy who associates him with MS and thus dislike him for it.

Most of you are a joke. It's obvious most of you didn't even read the article and just made baseless assumptions. It's clear who the real tools are.

jessupj1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

Or maybe, just maybe a lot of what clif says he not only disagrees with but feels it's anti gamer. You ever thought about that?

No of course not. Anyone that disagrees with the god and savior, ciffy b, is obviously an automatic fanboy.

MS fanboys piss me off more than any other group, I swear.

rainslacker1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

I actually respect the guy for the most part. He seems to be passionate about the games he makes.

That being said, I take his arguments much the same as I do as those he makes for Digital Distribution. Basically saying that it's the future, and then completely ignoring the valid complaints that people actually have about the idea of it. In this case he didn't really ignore the complainers, or those that have scenarios that show it's not a good idea, he called them "the fringe".

I find that rather condescending. The fringe is not such a small group to be ignored, both in DD, and in always on. The complaining on the forums(here and elsewhere) was almost unilaterally against. Even when it devolved into fan boy bickering, it was more, "MS sucks cuz of this" and "Lets just wait and see, it's probably not what it seems".

I also found it rather funny he talked about how technological advancement is not focused on the fringe. Almost every technological advancement to date starts with the fringe, and works it's way to the mainstream. One small one he, and we, may be aware of, VIDEO GAMES.

This advancement is not in the interest of technology. This advancement is about consumer control. Advancements for consumer control start with the mainstream, then work their ways toward the fringe.

Whymii1949d ago

Cliff Bleszinski is always online so "deal with it".

lizard812881949d ago

agree. I use to like him and his games, but now he is kind of annoying.

And when his game doesn't sell due to always on DRM, we can tell him, "deal with it".

sam1mur1949d ago


You are so so ignorant...

You call out my bubbles just because you disagree with me?

I used 2009 as an example because it was in the middle of the lifespan of the console. Thus the median. Are you five?

Prior to 2009 the failure rates were much higher, and after that it was in the low teens. 27% is an accurate median. I'm not gonna average every study just for the sake of a debate over n4g. You're bolstering my argument even more. With early launch being higher than 27%, and more xboxs being sold then, then the number of failed consoles is most likely higher than my initial prediction

You are such an ANGRY CONSUMER that your looking at this situation completely irrationally. If something is inline with the company's vision, and you don't like that, then you are not the consumer that they are targeting to.

Everyone gets so mad and complains, but in the end of the day nothing happens!

In the mid-late 2000s remember when everyone complained about DLC in various games? There's no way you don't. When companies started releasing dlc that was made during production of the game, people wrote in anger. What changed? Nothing. People are still buying the DLCs.

People complain about COD never having an updated engine. They still buy it, it breaks records every year. People complained about 15$ map packs. They sold millions, and continue to.

When people complained about EA origin, did you see any drops in sales?

EA screwed people over with Mass effect. Releasing essential content as DLC, the BS ending, etc. Yet people still loves Mass Effect, and when there's rumors for the new one everyones excited.

The Diablo DRM fiasco began at launch! People continue to buy it yet they know it has DRM. Its not like sales have been stagnant...

Steam's always online, yet it is the most popular form of digital game distribution.... They are doing fine.

People still bought heart of the swarm... Why would they be supporting Blizzard, if they are implementing DRM in their games?

People complained about Starcraft 2 LAN being taken out.... still sold millions.


The SimCity issues were mostly technical due to the DRM (Lag, internet, etc) But people still bought it REGARDLESS. It was announced months prior that it was only online.

Sorry I'm seeing it from a companies point of view... I'm not saying I support the implementing of DRM (I'm not I'm buying a PS4). But it doesn't matter what I think because if Microsoft is making this decision they are targeting people who DON'T CARE. If you care about DRM, 'Too bad, don't buy the product'. If you don't like the product then don't buy it.

Until there is an actual case of DRM completely destroying a company's integrity Microsoft is following a completely sound model.

And we can't assume that the DRM, if it is implemented, has entirely negative repercussions. If every game is a new game then Microsoft can implement a less expensive game policy, at least for first party games.

You can disagree with a company's direction, and you can refuse to buy their product, but that doesn't mean that it is not a sound decision. Until DRM destroys an entire fan base, or significantly effects a prominent company's sales there's no reason to assume that it would.

Shadowstar1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )

Steam is NOT always online. Perhaps some features require online, but if my internet connection goes down, I am still able to play my Steam games. Anyways, to the main points.

I buy Blizzard products in spite of the always-on DRM. I don't like it, and it has stopped me from playing sometimes because I'm anti-social and don't want my status broadcast to my friends when I'm not in the mood to talk, but... oh well. I will deal with it, because I really, really want to be able to play StarCraft. (I wish I hadn't bought Diablo though. That wasn't worth dealing with the always online part. I never even finished my first play through.)

On the other hand, I really wanted to play Spore. I've heard it was a pretty good game, but the DRM was a deal breaker for me, and perhaps others, given that the sales numbers are really low on VG Chartz. Maybe everyone downloaded it? I dunno. I don't know anyone who bought it, though.

I think the games everyone wants aren't going to feel the hit of the DRM implementation. You're not going to see DRM destroy a fanbase, because the fans buy games regardless. That's why they're fans. I hate that Hayter's not going to be there, but I'm going to buy the next Metal Gear because... darn it, it's Metal Gear. The games that people are on the fence about, the ones that don't have an established fan base? Those are the ones that are hurt. I think the always-on DRM stifles potential new IPs far more than anything established.

Awesome-Xanto1949d ago (Edited 1949d ago )


You know for gamers not wanting single players games anymore, Skyrim sure sold pretty damn well... so well it downright proved that gamers don't give a dang about if a game has multiplayer or not when it's filled with content warranting $60.

Millions of MS's customers don't have access to an XBL account, and throwing out millions of potential sales is bad no matter how your try to spin it.

And I can't believe Cliffy tried to compare this to electric... the Internet (while an issue) isn't the big issue here. You can't depend on publishers to still give you access to online depended games you payed for 1, 3, or 5+ years down the road because they no longer get $$$. Why should consumer's give the control to companies to take away access to something we payed for with a drop of hate?

This is going to become very apparent this gen when the next gen comes and all those patches, DLC, and games will disappear when MS shuts down it's servers for the 360. Meaning you better hope your current 360 doesn't die or your SOL and people are going to get a rude awakening about buying digital products.

My electric company will be happy to still give me electric 1, 3, or 5+ years down the road because I will still be giving them $$$.

CalvinKlein1949d ago

I have all playstations and both xboxs. I will nto be buying this new xbox if half this crap is true. Especially if the ps4 has more power, not buying this crap. I hate kinnect and any motion controls, hate catering to hipsters(MS wants to emulate apple's hipster success IMO) and I hate that they have shifted their focus from the people that made teh xbox a succes to begin with. MS will fail really ahrd this next generation if tehy expect people to pay a fee and be required to have Internet 24/7 still.

1949d ago
humbleopinion1949d ago

You probably hate him because he's not a corporate marketing tool thinking twice about every word he says and how it will please the fans, and instead he's a designers who already proved himself, owns nothing to no-one and speaks his mind in a clear way.

And sometimes when people do that, we hears things we don't want to. Things that challenge our perception. Things that we can't simply ignore. And this annoys us.
I, for example, thought that Adam was a complete Douche with how stupidly he cam off - but now Cliff reminds me that he wasn't even a spokeperson and maybe he now lost his job because of something that got people annoyed with no real harm.

Cliff also sets a reminder on how inevitable always online will be at one point for most major games - something that I don't want to accept but will probably be inevitable. Well isn't that a pain in the throat?

There is also a slight chance that you get annoyed about Cliff because he designed a successful Xbox 360 exclusive game (in a similar fashion of how people get annoyed about David Jaffe or David Cage just because they designed PS3 exclusive games) . I hope this isn't the case here, but it's surely the one for the person who submitted this article and didn't even bother to understand what Cliff actually referred to when he wrote "deal with it".

edic1948d ago

The Gaming Industry is just like politics. If someone in the government will say something negative or misbehave especially if it concerns the general public, of course people will react. It doesn't matter if he is a good person or not. It is not the publics fault if he resigns or have been fired. People have the right to say something. We know that everyone makes mistakes in our lives CLIFFY, and we all have faced the consequences of our actions. In other words, we should all "DEAL WITH IT"

+ Show (24) more repliesLast reply 1948d ago
Moonman1949d ago

So it's confirmed kind of? lol

dennett3161949d ago

MS just need to confirm that Always Online is a capability, but not a necessity for games to work....that will save them a lot of head aches and negative press.
Console gamers just don't want to have to put up with issues like Sim City and Diablo 3 players had to endure...tell them they won't have to, and it'll be fine. Unless, of course, that isn't the case and that's WHY they're being silent....

Jek_Porkins1949d ago

Cliffy used to be cool, but now every other word out of his mouth is something ignorant or how digital only is the greatest thing ever. I guess once he stopped working for Epic he was free to speak his mind, kind of puts things in perspective. Wonder how many people are working for one of these companies and secretly hates it or has strong feelings about things like DRM or DLC.

Conzul1949d ago

I prefer Pachter now way more than Cliffy.

Then again, Sess and Pachter take turns being on my good side, then one of them goes and says some stupid shit every other month or so.

rainslacker1949d ago

He was saying digital is the future when he worked at Epic. I never found it to be really offensive when he delivered his opinion though. Someone would ask him, he'd offer his opinion, and he'd back it up with some random hyperbole, and not address any valid concerns or issues involved...much like any random forum user. Given his position, I would assume he would be privy to many facts and statistics which could help support his argument, but I've yet to see anything substantial in my own research on the matters.

People in the public spotlight are allowed to have opinions, it's really just a matter in how they deliver them. Don't be arrogant or condescending to those that your addressing. It serves no purpose but to heat up a discussion, and the facts get lost in the fray.

Kind of like the owner of Chik-Fil-A. He got a lot of flack over his traditional marriage stance, which was really more about God than marriage. People went crazy over it, even though he was able to back up his opinion with reason(not that I found his reasoning to be terribly firm, but it's fair considering who he is and what he believes). As such, internet users should be a little more level headed when talking about such matters...something which didn't happen in this scenario, and not for the topic at hand.

"Wonder how many people are working for one of these companies and secretly hates it or has strong feelings about things like DRM or DLC."

Hard to say. From my own experience, people don't really hate on things until it affects them. They say things like "Deal With It" to those that may voice concern, and then come out with so much righteous indignation when one voices a counter argument. Then one day it hits them, and they say how it's awful, and can't look back and say, "You know what...maybe I should have looked at it from other people's point of view". Unfortunately by then, it's usually too late.

At least with all this, I can say I put my opinion out there, and affirm myself to not support anything so blatantly anti-consumer if it comes to pass. If it becomes popular, it won't be because of anything I did.