Project Scorpio Should Bring Back the Original Xbox One Always Online Vision

AOTF -"Whether gamers like it or not, it looks like we're in for a console upgrade far faster than we've ever seen before."

[Overload]

Even if they did they would just do a 180 and change it. Lol.

[naruga]

@article ....haha probably a clickbait ..i dare them to do it ....(and after that draw a big red X on Xbox division HQ's storefront and quit console business once and for all)

[Kingthrash360]

Lmao....journalists going full veggie brain now. Gamers made their case about this already....if ms wants to test it again they can.
Imagine this thing costing 599. ..aaaaannndddd have drm....aaaaannndddd no exclusives.
Shit lol wow.

[XanderZane]

Microsoft isn't even thinking about that. The only 180 I can see them doing is actually making several exclusive Scorpio games that never go to PC or the original XB1. If Microsoft wants to sell lots of Scorpios, that would be a 180 worth doing.

[sammarshall102]

Imagine a Ryse 2 running on the Scorpio wow It would be jaw dropping

[shiva1]

It's the first 180 done by media and sony fan boys. Thought 3 yr old bullshit had enough media coverage but wait the console which is coming in after a yr has this feature already by Media. By this i conclude even media and sony fan boys learned something from MS on how to do 180.

If only I can write up an article...."Neo goes subscription based gaming and that too monthly.... PSN not included and DRM active, split screen additional charge"

[denawayne]

Actually the policy is still kind of in place. If you decide to buy all your games digitally like me, then you pretty much have to always be online

[XanderZane]

For the GWG games you do, but with digital games you purchase, I think you can play those offline. There are games like NBA 2K16 and such that require you be online to play it. Many developers are forcing gamers to be online to play their games now, which sucks. Most of EA and Ubisoft games are like that.

[XanderZane]

@Cobra951
Oh..ok. I thought you needed to be signed into XBL for it to confirm you were the game's owner before you could play it. I'm going to take my XB1 offline now and give it a try. I'll update later with confirmation.

[CaptainObvious878]

This might sound vindictive, and I don't wish anything bad to happen to honest MS fans, but for foolish ms fanboys like donthate and darth in this thread that are more than happy to bend over for MS, I would love to see the DRM policies be put in place on the scorp.

They deserve it.

[DC777]

A note in every box:

"Now deal with it!"

[Overload]

Lol.

[Majin-vegeta]

Yea it didnt go well the first time.You think people would put up with it again?

[darthv72]

How did it not go well the first time when there wasn't even a "first time" for people to put up with? The policy was killed before it left the factory.

@below... you guys are missing the point. Majin comment eludes to it having happened when in fact it did not. It wasnt about how or why. Plain and simple it did not happen and Majin was wrong to phrase it that way.

If MS HAD gone through with it and THEN removed it... his comment would be in the proper context. RIF: reading is fundamental

[OoglyBoogly]

And there's a reason for that.

[_-EDMIX-_]

@Darth- "The policy was killed before it left the factory"

So why was that you think? If it was "killed before it left the factory", if the same reasons exist why it was um "killed before ite left the factory" exist, what has changed?

It will be the same result bud. Its not here because "The policy was killed before it left the factory"....."The policy was killed before it left the factory" because of CONSUMER DEMAND!

THUS if consumers didn't want it then, why would they want it now?

[Kingthrash360]

Before it was killed....games top was gunna take it off its shelves and preorders were very bad. ...that's why the 180.

[donthate]

Yeah, the policy killed before it left the factory due to the regular clueless sheep and media riding on fear. Reality is that in the next 5-10-years when we are moving to majority digital and the status quo is upheld, we will look back and regret our decision.

Some of the sheeps though will still be in denial or not even realize it. Such is the life of clueless people. Ignorance is a bliss!

MS is not going to touch that with a ten foot pole. It's a touchy subject by clueless people. There is nothing more dangerous than that.

[leoms]

Annnd why was it killed????

[BlackTar187]

Lol at don't hate . The consumers who hate it are the stupid sheep? Rofl that's classic

[jb227]

@donthate

"Yeah, the policy killed before it left the factory due to the regular clueless sheep and media riding on fear."

What about the other 'policies' that MS has implemented in Windows 10? Like the ones where your settings automatically default to actively spy on you & sell info to consumers, or the one where you are unknowingly giving up precious bandwidth to random people in order to save MS some servers and force you into p2p to update other folks. Should none of that stuff incite "fear" from consumers? Shame on that big bad media wolf for working to inform consumers that some "features" you may be unaware of are actively hurting your experience & invading your privacy solely to funnel even more funds to MS. MS has literally never been transparent. Every single initiative they release has had a big catch that rarely ever gets pointed out until it's already too late. If MS wanted to give you a free OS update & the only catch was handing over bandwidth & security, that's fine, but be upfront w/ consumers. We shouldn't have to go digging to find out how big the stick on the other end of that carrot is.

If you honestly believe that there were no ulterior motives in the original vision for the XBO & that the few positives weren't majorly outweighed by the enormous negatives then I really don't see how you can call us the 'sheep'.

[KwietStorm_BLM]

Exactly why he said it didn't go well the first time...........

[MagicBeanz]

Apparently you missed a point yourself.

[Mystogan]

If people can afford a $600-700 console they can afford internet.

[Errorist76]

Not gonna cost more than 400-500.

[akurtz]

its the reliability of the internet connection and xbox servers. without one or the other, your console is a brick. .

[medman]

Many people live in places where the internet is unreliable, and that's being kind. It does you no good to be able to afford it when it's not consistent, or not up to snuff at all. And in much of the world, including rural America, that is the way it is.

[_-EDMIX-_]

So pay more for more resurrections and less freedom of games you buy?

.....I don't see that happening bud.

[rainslacker]

Hmmm...given how rabid the fan boys are about a mid gen upgrade being perfectly OK, MS actually may get them to fight for them this time. Last time they were absolutely silent, because what could they actually say that was a pro of the feature? Seen a lot of stupid involved with the Scorpio rationalization, so yeah....I can see people fighting for it this time.

Probably would still incite everyone who isn't a fan boy, and ultimately end the same way the X1 initial pre-orders did, but still...it wouldn't be so one sided this time in all likelihood.

@darth

Pretty sure majin was referring to the fact that it was their initial intent, not that MS implemented it on release. MS changed their policy due to the outcry and lack of sales because people didn't put up with it.

And well...we know how that went for them. Pre-order sales weren't low. Tons of backlash. Retailers backing PlayStation. Gamers in general pissed MS even considered such a plan. you know....that's how it went.

@more generally

I think MS is looking to entice people over to digital sales through more consumer friendly means. Much the way Steam did it back in the day, and now PC see's extremely high digital adoption. I doubt they'd be stupid enough to actually try controlling retail purchases again, although I wouldn't put it past them to have some sort of online connection requirement....although doubt it will be as restrictive as the OGX1 policy was when announced.

@donthate

Hate to break it to you, if MS doesn't want to touch the clueless with a ten foot pole, they'd seriously limit their customer base. You see...the vast majority of customers are pretty clueless, but they know what they want.

Knowing what one wants isn't being clueless, and I see nothing to regret by standing up and asking or fighting for what I want. nothing about MS original policy would have changed what the future brings, so there is even less to regret.

You may consider people clueless sheep, but it would seem the vast majority of the flock was against the policies, so those that were for it were more the black sheeps of the group, and they were quickly fleeced.

[Sciurus_vulgaris]

My Xbox One is always online, but it is always online by choice. The original Xbox One DRM while offering game sharing (digitally), removed lending games to friends and used games sales. I was once a month with out an internet connection (minus my phone). If my Xbox One had the original DRM plan I wouldn't have been able to play my games, despite having physical copies of them.

[sammarshall102]

I would never buy an always-online console. I'd switch consoles if the Scorpio was always-online

[XanderZane]

That's why it won't be always-online. Pretty sure Microsoft learned their lesson already. I would like to see a price cut for XBL though. Cut that price in 1/2 or at least make it FREE for a year for new subscribers who buy a Scorpio.

[PsylentKiller]

The always online was not explained properly. It was only to check to make sure the games were linked to the Xbox or the GT (forgot how it worked exactly), but it was only a ping once a day. If it didn't receive the signal back then you couldn't play your games until it had. The crappiest internet in the world would have been able to handle that.

You bring up a good point though. It was your choice to be always online, as I did the same. Maybe they could give the consumers the choice to be always online or not. Similar to how I can choose to make my console the home console or not. If I allow my friend to make his console the home console then I am shit out of luck of the internet goes out unless all my games are on disc.

Maybe they could allow people to use there cell phones to check in or use a regular phone line like those 56k modems back in the day.

[Cy]

Sorry, the words don't match but I'm pretty sure I just read "I'm so desperate for views, please click this article"

[ShadowKnight]

😂😂😂

[OpenGL]

Why the hell should they do that?

[Imalwaysright]

The only reason that the author gives is the sharing plan wich is something I doubt 3rd party publishers would ever allow.

[sammarshall102]

Microsoft aren't stupid enough to make the Scorpio online only

[Rude-ro]

Ehhhhhhhh
I would not call them the sharpest knives in the drawer. Kinect one was a overhyped and over promised gadget of which let everyone down and 3 years later they release a new one.
What are we... 7-8 years without a new 1st party AAA title game from a game company?
Two consoles being abandoned after 4 years.
Two years of denying the rrod....
They will try again. Probably make it optional this time.

[sammarshall102]

So they tried to improve motion controlled gaming and made 2 iterations so what. Fans of Xbox made it clear that they don't want it so the focus shifted away from it

[Rude-ro]

@sammarshall102
They did not try to improve it. They convinced people it was improved.
Fans did not change it, it was the joke of empty promises that made everyone laugh at the second versioning which was such a small upgrade, it was really just covering the cost of when they bought the technology from the creators.

[rainslacker]

I said they weren't stupid enough to make the X1 online only or block used games before it was revealed they were doing just that. I actively defended them against the Sony fan boys when the rumor mill was turning after the Adam Orth incident.

I was shocked....to say the least...when it was actually confirmed they intended to do just that. I was shocked more that they were unable to adequetely explain why they would do such a thing, or how it was actually beneficial for the consumer. I was more shocked at just how terrible their messaging was during that whole time, and it seemed more like they were all given little pieces of paper with different parts to play on how to sell the message, because it was the most disorganized I've ever seen a MS new product campaign be in the entire history of MS.

Then that shock wore off, and I was just angry they'd even fathom they should be able to control the market so tightly, and the rest is history. Pretty rare I'm actually outright angry at something a company does....but boy did MS push the right buttons.

This time though, they seem to be doing it more gradually, and finding incentives to push digital over just forcing it outright. That's the way it should be done, and the one's doing well in digital, and not getting the push back, are the ones letting the consumers take their time with adoption. MS just needs to be patient, but sometimes they aren't...which is why we saw the DRM plans.

[rainslacker]

True, the two aren't mutually exclusive. Obviously though, some online requirement will be required at some point, but that's just the nature of the beast.

But MS original policy only required online for validating purchases(digital distribution), collecting data, and delivering ads to the user. So while the two don't have to be connected, MS made them connected through it's software validation policy.

That being said, MS certainly isn't the end all be all of the digital purchase options out there, and for the most part, I feel there are plenty of options which are much conscious of the consumers needs to not be always connected. Many people choose to connect often, or stay connected all the time(within the limits of their connection), but to ignore those who can't have that connection by not offering a way to be offline for whatever reason and still use the device is just the wrong way to do things, and ultimately, such policies would be associated with digital distribution due to the way the waters get muddied on the internet.

[corroios]

here we go again. Microsoft: whats important are the 6 teraflops!!!! is it always on line? we got 6 teraflops of power!!!! but, is it always online? we got 5 times the power of the Xbox One!!!

[Sweendog007]

Everyone who is complaining about the idea of always online need to grow up a bit

How many games do people play offline ? , how many games in the current ps4 and Xbox one need updates ?, how many big title games require online at all times , division , need for speed , Star Wars , FIFA ultimate team , destiny , titanfall

Your phone is always online too, in fact a lot of people think if they don't have Internet they can't use their phones or laptops

Honestly what's the big deal , every game now requires online for something

[DrJones]

People who for whatever reason don't have internet at a specific place and at a specific time, will want to use their console sherlock

[Sweendog007]

Yes I get that but how many times does that happen ?

Why bring out big name games that require Internet to play it they know people don't have Internet.

Internet is not the same speed and their are earas which had limited amount of Internet but even then on a world wide bases everyone has Internet , wifi , broadband , fiber , cellar Internet , 3G , 4g even 5g is rolling out this year.

People are moaning about something that is poitnless because at the end of the day wether you want to accept it or not you are getting forced onto the Internet if games continue to go down the same path of playing online , very few games now come without online stuff. GTA is more popular online now , that's why they haven't brought out story content

Destiny ever few months get an online expansion pack , call of duty single player campaign gets shorter ever year to improve online stuff. Halo is the same , Star Wars , even this year you are buying games that require online , mirrors edge, even VR games require online

If people can't see that you are always online already then something is wrong , hardly anyone plays a game offline , even saved data is done in the cloud

[Omegasyde]

i had a major internet outage and was with out internet for 2 days.Also with the rise of cable cutters - You think ISP wont start enforcing data caps soon? The cons out weigh the pro's + Game sizes getting bigger !

[sammarshall102]

Your argument is flawed

Some games I never play online
You don't have to update games
Phones almost never have problems online besides areas with no service which sucks

[Sweendog007]

The argument is not flawed

Most games now require online at all times all the big hitters , and phones do have their problems too

Destiny , Star Wars, mirrors edge , doom, elder scrolls games , GTA online ( now more popular than the story )

Micro transactions in games even games that don't have multiplayer to it , expansion packs , season passes , free games ever month

Apps that require subscribers.

Hardly anyone now plays their Xbox without connected to the Internet , you might not play online games but people still use their machine for Netflix ,

If someone has an Xbox and ps4 that is not connected to the Internet in some way ( taking it to your friends house does not count ) , then message me ... If not my point stands

[Nitrowolf2]

And how well does that phone work for making calls or surfacing th3 net when coverage drops?

Not everyone has Internet or the supported speeds. I went on vacation for a few months in a place that had no Internet, that would of sucked balls if I couldn't play my ps4 on my free time.

Also, I constantly play offline

[nitus10]

"Your phone is always online"

People want to send and receive phone called hence the live connection. How else do you think that could happen - smoke signals?

Some of the latest games don't need an online connection or may have an internet component that adds to the enjoyment of the game. Games such as the Souls Series and Bloodborne which do have an internet component can easily be played without an internet connection.

If you like online only games then fine, however, you have to realise that when the servers are turned off and they will be one day then all you will have left is a coaster and/or wasted space on your storage device. As for knowing how long the servers for a game will remain up depends on the popularity of the game over time, since it could be a year or many years.

[leoms]

So only a handful of titles that require online compare to the vast mojority of games out there? From your list it seems like multiplayer is what requires online everytime.

[rainslacker]

Most of my games are offline games. 99% of them I'd wager. Many of them have some online component, but don't require online to play.

Many games come with day one updates, but those aren't absolutely required.

It doesn't matter what many do. The second you make a console require online, you are cutting off a large part of your potential customer base, and it's not just people who don't have internet, but those who have slow internet, or those who have bandwidth caps.

Despite popular belief, and the uptake of digital purchases, not everyone is willing and eager to just jump online, and for many, it's obvious that the idea they are restricted from their rightful purchases should they not have access for whatever reason is extremely distasteful. Beyond the logistical implications of those without or with limited internet still don't quell the matters of principal people have when it comes to such things.

I don't believe it's for you, or anyone else to say they need to grow up because they don't want to have a connection requirement and used games restriction for whatever reason. People can decide for themselves what they want, and with the case of X1 DRM, the majority decided they did not want it, and didn't care about people who said they were being irrational, because those people who said such things completely disregarded any reason the people had for not wanting those things in their console to begin with.

In other words, the world doesn't revolve around you and what you believe or want.

Also, I turn off the internet connections on my phone. It's connected always to the phone service, but not the internet. Why? Because I don't need access to the internet 24/7, nor do most people

[Imalwaysright]

The problem wasn't the messaging. It was the content of the message. We understood MS goal and the answear was a resounding no.

[sammarshall102]

I agree it wasn't how they explained it but it was the DRM in itself

[rainslacker]

True the content was distasteful. But can you say that MS seemed to even have a clue on what it was trying to sell when they talked about it? The messaging was just as bad as the content.

Luckily their problems with the messaging actually made people realize right away just what they were trying to peddle, otherwise they may have gotten some more support. The term "polish a turd" comes to mind, and some people are attracted to shiny things....especially in the console wars.

[MasterCornholio]

There is no way that Microsoft will try that again.

Those draconic DRM policies are dead for good.

[nitus10]

As much as would like to agree with you I can't.

Microsoft may not bring in draconian DRM in the fairly foreseeable future but if they get their walled garden where all PC and XBox operating systems are the same and there is only one (Microsoft of course) software store then I can see them reintroducing all the DRM policies they originally brought out with the XB1. Fortunately, at the moment there is plenty of competition but Microsoft are masters of the three E's. (Embrace, Extend, Extinguish) and their PR department is second to none.

You only have to look at what settings in Windows 10 are actually turned "on" by default to see that Microsoft is using their operating system to gather personal information. Yes, Google does something like this but if you don't like it you can turn Chrome off or disable data collection (it's pretty easy) or just choose a different Web browser. It's rather different when your operating system actually spy's on you by default. Saying I have nothing to hide is really short sighted.

[BlackTar187]

Luckily for us PC gamers are much smarter and stand up for themselves so that will never happen. If it was up to console gamers to save the day we'd be screwed.

[jb227]

"You only have to look at what settings in Windows 10 are actually turned "on" by default to see that Microsoft is using their operating system to gather personal information."

Someone who gets it. There was also a setting switched on by default that may have been pertinent to consoles as well. There was a setting that basically forced you into p2p handing over your bandwidth to assist w/ other user's updates. I have a feeling they were planning on using that bandwidth to power their cloud as well and they may still be doing so behind the scenes for all we know. For consoles I'd assume that if they kept their initial vision, your console would be a slave box essentially, draining your bandwidth in order to hand it over to someone else to update or download their games. That's flat out thievery in my book, I shouldn't have to go digging through my settings to keep my software from actively stealing from me. I honestly still wonder if this is actually happening for the XBO and that is the cause for the slower downloads & installs comparative to the PS4.

The only reason these settings have now been switched to 'off' is because MS was called out on it. This is the entire history of Microsoft, push some asinine draconian 'feature' on their users, hope they don't notice but if they do, remove it & bask in the praise of being "good guys" from senseless consumers unwilling to question what other issues may be brewing behind the scenes. My issue is that because of this I trust MS less than any other company or corporation in the market space. Who's to say that they aren't doing things behind the scenes that aren't getting found out?

I'd personally need a good solid half decade of above board decent operation sans shenanigans to even consider using an MS product. Companies mess up here & there from time to time and if its rare I'm willing to give the benefit of a doubt, but if it is a constant stream of the kind of shady tactics that really make you scratch your head & wonder how they aren't being flat out sued constantly at best or shut down entirely at worst, there's no chance I would expect anything different.

[MasterCornholio]

"If it was up to console gamers to save the day we'd be screwed."

Console gamers could have supported Microsoft's initial vision but instead they boycotted the XB1 even after Microsoft changed their policies to punish them.

[ziggurcat]

no, it shouldn't.

[Inzo]

Click bait

[superchiller]

Why would anyone think that the anti-consumer "always online DRM" garbage is a good idea? It wasn't 4 years ago, and still isn't now. Complete idiocy.

[Sweendog007]

Are you not already online at all times , are games not requiring you to be online at all times?

Star Wars , density , to name a few ?

Think about

[MasterCornholio]

"Are all games not requiring you to be online at all times? "

Not the ones that I own. I see no benefit with having draconic DRM policies. My games work just fine offline. Good thing for me since I don't have internet at my beach house. Don't see a point in contracting an internet connection for a whole year if I'm only there for a month. Not to mention we don't have fiber optic cables in the area which means online gaming would be terrible for me.

[superchiller]

You're completely missing the point. I buy games, both physically and digitally, to play them whenever I want to. I don't want a company to tell me when and where I can play the games I bought, or to make me jump through stupid hoops to play them. That's one reason why I totally skipped the XB1, after MS announced that policy early on, I decided to just stick with the PS4.

The author of the article really has no good reason to offer for bringing back the policy of always online DRM. And anyone who thinks that it would be a good idea is sadly mistaken.

[MatrixxGT]

Oh you named games I don't own. Why? Because I don't support online only games or games that require you to be online.

I have:
Forza
Fallout
Dragon age
The witcher
Tomb raiders
TloU
The order
Uncharted collection
Uncharted 4
Wolfenstein
Assassins creed's
Dishonored
Madden

...I can go on. Point is I can play and enjoy these games online or off. I have the option, the choice. I can return to these games at any time even after the Dev/pub decides to flip the switch on the servers.

what happens if there is another PSN outtage/hack that brings the service down for over a month and all your games you can't play because they require you to be online? Same for Xbox, I only bought a Xbox once the stupid DRM bullshit was for sure dead and gone no matter how much I like some of their games.

[ziggurcat]

@sween:

whether one is online anyways is irrelevant because that's their *choice*. there are still plenty of single player games on the market that don't have any online component, and forcing people to always be online would prevent them from playing those games if they happen to lose their internet connection or, in the unlikely event, if the same thing that happened to PSN back in 2011 happened to XBL.

[Yui_Suzumiya]

I've had Internet for awhile but at one time I went about a year without it and my games ran just fine :3

[nitus10]

Short answer No!

All the games (well over 200) I have are fully playable off-line. I do have some that have an on-line component but if my internet was down or I don't have access to one I can still play those games. With games such as "Star Wars Battlefront" which is supposed to have an offline component and "Destiny" which when you loose your internet connection or the servers go down then that game is unplayable.

Even Doom has an offline campaign that does not require an internet connection although you do for multiplayer which is understandable.

[jb227]

I don't have a single box that requires me to be online. Everything I own, from my phone to my computer to my tablet to my game systems have plenty of uses while offline. Why would I buy a unit that served none of its sole purpose when I lose a connection?

You just need to think about it a little bit more. Not everyone shares your tastes in games. I don't play Battlefront or Destiny or Titanfall or any mp fps game....I play sp campaigns offline. Always have, always will. I don't 'need' a persistent internet connection for anything I personally play, so why should I suffer when I have an outage? The kind of games I play should only ever "require" electricity.

[rainslacker]

You do realize the biggest issue with the online component, beyond the fact it even existed at all, was the fact it was only there so MS could implement their used game policy, collect user data, and target ads to the user(by their own admission at the reveal as if it were a feature).

Even MS couldn't find any damn good reason a console should be required to be online, or require check ins beyond controlling the licensing of software to the point where they made money off it, collecting user data, or targeting ads. All things which benefited MS....not the consumer.

If the console was going to be better by being online, it wouldn't have been a check in every 24 hours, it would have been a consistent connection any time the player wanted to play.

So, if the best damn reason MS can come up with to support it's online connection policy was to be able to control the used game market, target ads, and collect data, how is it that you can seemingly come up with the better reason that some games require online. MS could have just used that from the beginning....but they didn't, because it's absolutely a stupid argument to make. I mean, it's a better reason than MS reasoning of controlling used games, collecting data, and targeting ads, but not by much.

Think about that and get back to me.

[WOLFofWALLSTREET]

False

[Whirlwind_Fanfare_08]

Microsoft ain't that stupid to do that again, not after what happened with the XB1 getting so much flack because of that issue. LOL

[annoyedgamer]

Mathematics 101

Allways online + DRM = no sale.

[Sloth-Eater_]

I'm not even going to open this website. Everybody knows.

[milliniumstylz]

I wouldn't mind having the option. To be honest anytime my internet is disconnect I really don't play my Xbox.

[IamTylerDurden1]

Are they going to implement the other original policies as well? No used games ect.

[Mrveryodd]

i hope so , the xboxone i have has been online always , so has every other thing in my house , if it can use internet its on the internet.

[BlackTar187]

That is an irrelevant point so it means nothing.

[rainslacker]

OK. So because you always have it connected, you hope everyone else is forced to have it connected?

That doesn't make much sense. The connection not being required doesn't prevent you from connecting or playing your games. but the connection being required does prevent others, or could prevent others, from being able to play their games they way they want to.

The only benefit MS had for a required connection was their game sharing feature, and other companies have already implemented such things without requiring a consistent or routine internet connection. That is the only part of their vision which was consumer friendly, and outside of some kind of connection at some point, it shouldn't hinder the family share thing.

[MatrixxGT]

Anyone who wants to spend hard earned money on a game/console only to have the decision of when and where you can play it being in control of the corporations needs to revalue their decision making skills.

Obviously there will be online only games like MMOs, destiny, over watch, etc. But you understand and accept that eventually that game will be rendered useless once the Dev decides they don't want to support it anymore.

most of the time my consoles are connected to the Internet yes, however doesn't mean I'm playing online MP every time I'm playing a game. And if XBL or PSN went down I can continue to happily play my offline content as i choose.

[Razzer]

Channeling Don Mattrick?

[yomfweeee]

With Play Anywhere (digital only) they are trying to get people away from physical and kill the used game market. I think this is their alternative to DRM.

[rainslacker]

I think it's a better approach than trying to force the market into such a model. Steam was successful in converting PC gamers over to digital by offering compelling ways to buy digitally, and PC gamers seem mostly content with the digital marketplace.

MS problem was they tried to make it a system wide requirement, that had serious downsides for the consumer both in it's direct implementation, and possible long term scenarios where MS became the masters of controlling their products and the customer had no control at all.

Steam didn't really make digital any different than it was before....although they have done some good things for the consumer on that front(and some bad)....but at least they made it so people wanted to have digital content. Granted, even Steam doesn't require a constant connection, and neither do PS4 for digital purchases, and as far as I'm aware, the X1 doesn't require a connection to play digital purchases.

The online connection was attached to their DRM policies, but those policies aren't the same as the kind of DRM inherent in digital content purchases.

[MasterCornholio]

If it's only applied to digital copies I can see some sense in it especially if a feature like play anywhere is involved. But if it's for physical copies than its completely unacceptable.

[marioJP87]

Why the F*** would they do that when they saw the gaming world's reaction against it?

[Saranya]

lol it looks like fanboys(you know that) wrote this article.

I also think PS4 Neo should bring DRM too.

[amazinglover]

I actually liked MS always on vision other than lacking the ability to play offline for X number of days it was beat for beat what Valve already does with Steam.

[holtzy]

and the rest of the drm bullshit watch how little they sell if they try that bullshit.

[Max-Zorin]

No they shouldn't. Anyone that think they should, need to lay off the codeine.

[Nilla_Nate]

No it shouldn't!

[medman]

People like choice. When people spend their hard earned dollars, they should have choice. When you take away the people's choice, you subtract from your own profits. If Microsoft didn't learn that lesson, they've likely got another lesson incoming.

[KakashiHotake]

They should also bring back the Kinect, always on watching your every move, and DRM.

[Couldntfindasn]

The always online vision would work well with Scorpio. If you dont like? Go get an xbox one s.

[MasterCornholio]

So that's what they are going to tell people who work in submarines?

;)

http://www.playstationlifes...

[Couldntfindasn]

Honestly yeah. You dont need to have a scorpio. We try to accommodate for everyone when sometimes to move on to bigger and better things some people may get left behind. Its not like this is going to be a big problem for the world? How many people in a submarine absoluetly need to have the scorpio or would even want one? The Xbox one S will do the job. So yeah, that's what you tell them.,

[quent]

$60 Online rentals vs $60 retail ownership, mmmm, tough choice to make.

[madpuppy]

Yeah, Nothing like bringing back bad, failed ideas that nobody wants. Talk about the "definition of insanity".

[Gwiz]

Phil Spencer reading this: Sure you want me to fail but i'm not falling for it.

[Trekster_Gamer]

Dumb article!

The gamers spoke loud and clear and MS listened!

[Godmars290]

That would mean bringing back Kinect, since the main purpose of always online was to create a platform for user information gathering/market research so MS could attract advertisers.

[Tedakin]

Honest question. How often does anyone here with an Xbox or PS4 ever have it offline? I mean really.

[MasterCornholio]

One month a year.

But luckily I can still game during that one month.

Real question is, why are you saying it's OK for company's to apply draconic DRM policies to physical copies if there's no benefit for the consumer?

[NotEvenMyFinalForm]

What benefit there is to be always online? None. Just be tied down to an internet connection for the sake of it.

[donwel]

Are you people actually insane, or is this just some new variety of clickbait?
Either way I ain't clicking this shit, always online is as much of a monumentally idiotic idea as it was two years ago.

[MagicBeanz]

Yes absolutely please do that, that's what effectively ruined the xbone so they should defenitly do that again.

[LastcenuryRob]

What? That's just dumb! consumers showed they didn't want that anytime soon! thankfully MS listened! Apparently, someone needed a quick article for some easy click-bait....yawn.

[cd1]

Sounds like just another click bait article by a gamer who thinks he's a Journalist, so no click from me.

I also completely disagree with the title statement. Imo the decisions to make xb1 always online and restrictions to DRM were two of the main reasons MS lost so much of the Market to Sony (that, and performance differences). Even after MS chose not to impose those rules i think many were just put off with them attempting it in the first place - everybody knew MS could just change their mind at any time.

[angelusbrz]

You must be really stupid to ask for anti-consumer bullshit because of brand loyalty...

[supes_24]

If they go only online and digital only, you can definitely count me out. Digital only is a rip off, the idea of paying full price for a game thats been out for 2 years is beyond dumb. I'll quit gaming before I do that. You can't even preorder a game without paying full price, what if I only can afford $20 at the time? This would be a stupid move

[DFresh]

Hell no. If Microsoft did that they would have no chance catching up to PS4 let alone be consumer friendly towards gamers for future support.

[dangerousbrian0]

You all do realise Microsoft is only bringing out the Xbox Scorpio because they are butt hurt they are loosing to Sony they did the same thing with the original xbox.The average console cycle is actually 5 years not 4 years and the media are saying this generation is shorter because the last gen was longer no its not because of that the reason last gen was longer was that Microsoft was ahead ok at the end it was neck & neck but sony was doing a ten year plan as the original playstation lasted that long and Microsoft had no reason to bring out another console yet. .Right getting back on to the point the PS2 was released in 2000 and the original xbox was released in 2001 even with the year head start the PS2 was trumping the original xbox even with its more powerful hardware and because Microsoft was loosing to Sony from the get go just like they are this gen they released the xbox 360 in 2005 instead of 2006 with complete success.And let the downvotes happen in 3.2.1. as most of you can not admit that I am right its plain as day if you have been gaming since before the 2000s.

[qwerty676]

99% chance of this not happening.

[JasonKCK]

lol many new games require online to play.

[dcbronco]

Why would it. This is truly an attack of a fanboy. I smell a lot of Scorpio fear from the author trying to turn people against Scorpio even before it launches.

[jhpadilla]

"Whether we like it or not..."

Moron.

People didn't like it, Microsoft -whether they liked it or not- backpedaled and the damage of the original decision hunts them to this very day.

Technology is a human creation. Progress requires humans. Everything involves something, you just can't say "whether we like it or not". If we like it, it will happen, if we don't, it will get stomped to the ground.

[CyberThug]

Are you crazy? Somebody get a straight jacket for this guy.