OXM UK: "There are a fair few always-online or online-heavy games in the works for Xbox One. Here are the titles we think make the best case for the model."
Basically all the top games at E3. Oh the irony of the E3 drama. Anyways most of that instigated mob mentality hysteria was born from trying to destroy Xbox and bring back the long lost king. Gamers have wanted bigger more complex online games with more players for years. Always online would have brought those desires to new heights. Now games have to be scaled back, visions not as ambitious because non online people have to be kept in mind. Luckily MSFT 1st and 2nd party devs and bigger 3rd party devs will stick to their guns and drag gamers into the future kicking and screaming LOL
Ha? Scaling games and their online capabilities don't have to depend on the always-online infrastructure. If your game is online only, then go ahead and incorporate always-online but only for that particular game. A console forcing this system for every game, both online and offline, is pushing it.
My bad, Wrong response.
no disrespect, but you sound just as idiotic as ms has when they were trying to force drn/24hr check ins. I mean really yes you may have the internet abd always online isnt a problem for you....gut thats YOU. im always online myself...but I dont forget that alot of gamers out there dont have the same luxuries as us...and the internet isnt reliable enough for always online. plus there are some gamers...well alot of gamers....no...most gamers (me included) live in a economy that is really fragile and they can be laid off at any moment to where their internet may be cut off because its hard to keep a job and even harder to get one. to think in the way you think is selfish and ms has learned this lesson HARD....gamer come in all shapes and sizes some rich, most poor, some in the army, some live in areas that dont have the internet connections others have,....but all gamers and this includes you my friend DO NOT WANT TO PAY $500+ ON A CONSOLE THEY CANNOT PLAY BECAUSE OF ONE OF THE MANY REASONS THE INTERNET IS DOWN. if I pay for something that is very expensive you bet your ass it better work at all times....PERIOD...not a rant...just fact.
Right, this was all about better games. Sure.
Kingthrash360 I dont necessarily agree with everything greenpowerz says but actually I do think this whole "everybody doesn't have the internet" is being overblown: #1. internet penetration is very high since june 2012 at 78.6% North and 63.2% for all of Europe where most xboxs have been sold and remember this is overall statistics of the entire population in each region which include very poor people many of which could care less about buying a game console, among those who actually can afford a game console its undoubtedly much higher penetration. http://www.internetworldsta... #2 Its not like you need a high speed reliable connection, it only took a few kilobytes and few seconds daily or whenever you next turned on your console to verify everything in the background. #3 You could tether your cell phone for this brief checkin...I mean who's buying a game console these days that doesn't own a smartphone or internet? #4 I have friends in the military every base including ones like Afghanistan have internet access, I get emails right now from one of them, yes ships at sea too, its only very remote FOB's (Foward Operating Bases) that dont have wifi for good reason=you dont have time to game, which means this online check would effect a minute % of military like on subs, also for good reason. #5 Devs are already dragging us kicking and screaming to always on, like it or not it has its benefits which is why we are starting to see it being incorporated into even the single player side of games to make persistent worlds that change overtime. #6 Hell yeah I'd take the 24hr check drm for the original family share plan and Im not alone many of the tweets, forum comments, media fan service sites after the reversal were asking for it back, go on Aaaron Greenbergs twitter right now you will see that...this wasnt a policy problem it was a failure on micros part to have a transparent plan and consistent message that laid out how their strategy/policy worked, backlash was a combination of confusion of real xbox fans and alot more whiners who just complain about anything xbox related. Its a game console progress shouldn’t be stifled for a relatively small few, especially when there's a reasonable alternative=ps4. Or are those folks not even MORE selfish for not wanting those of us who can/do have internet ONLY held back because they can't/ don't have internet?
"#5 Devs are already dragging us kicking and screaming to always on, like it or not it has its benefits which is why we are starting to see it being incorporated into even the single player side of games to make persistent worlds that change overtime." Tell that the people that have bought Diablo 3 or Sim City day one.
Batman, So because a couple dev's failed at first then the rest should all just give up? It's call learning from others mistakes adapting and making improvements. Besides it seems EA's biggest problem was no offline play which unless I read it wrong does not seem to be the case for the single player experience what we're talking about is that all these games will have the best experience available to those who are connected.
I couldn't agree more with JokesOnYou. We are just scratching the surface of the possibilities of always online. An always online console would have shifted this momentum even faster and we would have had even better experiences sooner. Personally I cannot wait! If you don't like always online, well there was an option called PS4 and Wii U. Now with the whining, there is only one type of option! I'm saddened MS failed to communicate the benefits to the masses!
@nukeitall "If you don't like always online, well there was an option called PS4 and Wii U." Which is why they reversed their position. Sorry, I really don't see any benefit in making the entire system mandatory "always-on". You can have the benefits of online stuff with out a 24hr check.
Sorry, but I prefer playing amazing single player games like The Last of Us and Heavy Rain. Destiny, Titanfall and The Division are just brainless action games. Funny, but with barely a story.
True bjmarty but is it not possible that future sequels to those amzing single player experiences like TLOU wouldnt be even better because the 2nd, 3rd, playthrough etc changes obviously not the whole game but where the enemy AI based on your play, enviroment details, Im not talking about a different outfit or weapon like in the past Im talking about real gameplay elements they make it better. Just a thought.
Good point. IMO offline must be an option, but adding online features is always welcome.
Right. Because everyone was really upset over the data necessity rather than why it was being used. No one cared about DRM or their gamefly account being useless or forced installs at all.
So, nothing is known about MGS5 multiplayer at this point, but everybody will want to play the entire single player portion connected to the internet because of the multiplayer? Makes sense so far. Titanfall will make me want to be always online? A multiplayer game, I never would have guessed. Not even going to bother with the ESO write up, since they marveled at their own obvious choice in the first sentence. Much of what they list is purely speculation, some a long way from anything currently planned/released (information wise). Minecraft is listed because the dev MAY "fiddle with a cloud-based version of it continually, adding mobs, modes and terrain types on the fly"? Who says the dev would even want to constantly release the amount of modes, game types, and terrains that would justify a 24 hour connection? OXM, you are trying a little too hard right now. Get back to me when The Witcher 3 has serious benefits to being constantly connected to the internet. Or Thief (if it is still Thief). Or the next true Elder Scrolls installment. Thanks.
I disagree with you here Dr Pepper I dont think its just "speculation" these are real examples of how being connected (you're not always online) will benefit games, in the past its always been you needed internet just to play multiplayer, now devs are basicly saying we can improve the whole experience when you are online. Bungie saying that they will have a ever changing world that isnt shackled by thr offline experience is real. What Forza5, The Crew, Project Spark is doing is real as stated by the devs themselves. So if more games are headed this route to get the BEST experience arent you going to have to be pretty much connected in a similar fashion as X1 was previously introducing? Again however small these initial benefits are I'm a gamer and any improvements are welcomed for me especially since I'm already always online.
There are NO games that would make me want to be always online. And I sink hella time into DC Universe, which is online only. But there isn't a game out there that would make me give up the right to use my console how I see fit.
The brainwashing continues. I say,let it happen. Some of these diehards deserve the original Xbone and all it's restrictions. They continue to line up to give away their rights. Next, there will be ten games that will make you want to lose the ability to sell used games and another ten that will make you want to check in every few hours our your console bricks, or ten games that make you want to only use MS proprietary head sets, or ten games that make you want more TV and ads... There are no games worth the restriction of always online FOR YOUR ENTIRE LIBRARY, which is the issue...and thats what it sounds like the author is implying by listing sp games. This type of article just softens the blow for next gen when MS pulls more bs from the sky and forces it on gamers.
Good list, right now I have my site set on Titanfall, Destiny, and The Divison for next year. Even if a game like Elderscrolls online sounds tempting, it is not F2P so I will avoid subscription based RPG as much as possible.
Lol im not always online wen it comes to games
What a surprise this article from OXM.
Didn't Microsoft say that you don't always have to be online now? Then why this article? The games said like Titanfall and Elder Scrolls Online have to be online to play since Titanfall is a mp only title I believe. For some of the other single player games mentioned, it doesn't really matter if you're online or not, unless you want to experience online play.
The article isn't really about current policy. The article is about how games and devs are moving towards a online direction. MSFT will be fully prepared and optimized for the future. As the consoles got more powerful the industry would have moved in this direction regardless of what MSFT tried to do with policy. MSFT just tried to take it to the next level and stake a dominant position in this future and the opposition supporters freaked out and worked up the other normal people that were scared and or ignorant of the future. MSFT did a poor job with PR, trying to juggle/handle genuine fears, not allowing competition to steal ideas and slandering/belligerent/vindict ive haters all at the same time. On the xbox side most the people complaining about the policies I've talked to were the gamefly members. Media also got all their MSFT frustrations of their chest at that time, helping fuel the fire. Some blame MSFT for the slow death of certain aspects of their business due to XBL. The *irony* some of the best new games are greatly enhanced by online or online only. Halo Reach's co-op will look like warm-ups when Halo on XB1 launches. I can see waves of hundreds of AI and more than 4 players in co-op in certain Halo game types if not the campaign because half of the processing won't be done on the local hardware.
There's not even one game.
Is anyone else laughing at these articles as much as I am?
No game will make me want to be always online. Games make entice me to try out multiplayer or online features, but I don't want to play a game that stops working because my internet stops working. I don't care what system has a game like that. If there is no offline option, then the game itself is not an option for me. Hell, just 2 days ago my internet was acting up all day on my ISP's end. Imagine me trying to play an always online game then. I couldn't. The future, in this instance, is only the future if we let it be. Anyone who gives up and says "it's the future and is going to happen whether we like it or not" is the problem. We decide what the future is, not the corporations.
"Anyone who gives up and says "it's the future and is going to happen whether we like it or not" is the problem." Obviously some games are meant to be made with an online community. Games like M.A.G., World of Warcraft and Destiny come to mind. When you know everyone is connected online you can tailor your game around it. We live in a social world and gaming is a hobby that can have great experiences with other people. Of course you should still be allowed to play games by yourself but it would be foolish to dismiss online only gaming and not want to push what is possible in that direction. I think the problem is some people fear change. Or they are afraid Big Brother may be watching them.
DragonKnight, None of the single player games mentioned stop working when you're not online, of course online multiplayer games wont work. This is not SimCity, they are still playable lets say for example if Halo4 had this always on implementation it would still be the exact same Halo4 with always online as part of it this would just make it possible when you are online to see different effects, changes in enemy location and AI, more co op and social features in game while connected. I don't understand why gamers are fighting against progress. It's a no lose situation if you're offline you get the same exact Halo4 as it is now, however if you're online you get a better experience.
@Mike: You know the drill. @4Show: "None of the single player games mentioned stop working when you're not online." Then they aren't always online, which defeats the purpose of you bringing that up. But can you say a SimCity situation is NOT going to exist? EA tried using the B.S. of "cloud calculations" to make SimCity work when it was proven to not be necessary at all, and we're hearing the same buzzwords being used for games on the Xbox One already. The point being is that when you buy something, you expect it to work. Outside forces beyond your control shouldn't prevent you from being able to play a game and that's a risk with an always online future. Always online also is not "progress." Unless you're talking about control issues.
Single player is so overrated give me co op any day and multiplayer only so many quests I can bother doing.
I want to know where al these people who worry about their internet going down are located, so I can be sure to never go there. I live in one of the most geographically isolated metro areas in North America, the nearest city to mine is almost 600 kilometers away. The next two tree closest are even farther. In the last two years I have lost internet service once, for about 10 hours, when a truck hit and took down a utility pole.
And if it goes down for longer you are punished. You're a good and loyal customer and you are punished. Doesn't matter how often it happens, its being punished for nothing. Console gamers buy consoles for the convenience of being able to play games quickly and easily, with no hassle. What MS did was essentially make it a hassle.
cool list of good games, but none of them make me want to always be online.
There are no true benefits to always being online, why not just allow for both?
No games make me want to be always online. I like playing offline.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.