Console Makers Pushing For More Network Reliance 198
There's a story on Joystiq about the convergence of games consoles and network play, suggesting that the industry is slowly moving away from physical media, preferring the control and simplicity of online distribution. The article points out that Microsoft's Games for Windows Live, despite being relatively unpopular, has seen continued development with an eye toward interacting with Xbox Live. Quoting:
"While it's unlikely that the next generation of consoles will completely forgo disc-based media, downloads are quickly becoming a much bigger part of the experience. Some games, such as Rock Band 2 and Gears of War 2, are now shipping with codes for free downloads. This isn't because the publishers like you and want to give you free stuff. It's part of a larger strategy to increase the importance of the online presence, where content can be tightly controlled and decrease the importance of physical media, and thus, used-game sales and rentals."
Arrrr (Score:5, Insightful)
Preferring (Score:5, Insightful)
the control and simplicity of online distribution.
control and simplicity of online distribution.
control and simplicity
control
Makes Sense (Score:3, Insightful)
My argument against this (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's have a look at the current broadband availability here and everywhere. Now let's compare that to the people who have these consoles. My guess is that there will be plenty of people that will be left out in all of this. This move obviously presumes nearly 100% broadband availability. That can't be smart.
Re:Makes Sense (Score:3, Insightful)
I hardly ever buy physical games or software for my PC
Most people don't either, but because they work standalone, they can get away with it. The whole "online services" thing software companies are trying to ram down people's throats these days (online OSes, word processing, spreadsheets, games...) is just so they can wrestle control of the software from people's hands and charge whatever the hell they want for anything.
So in short, you'd better not hope software on CDs and DVDs disappears, because you'll be very sad if it happens.
DLC is online activation for consoles (Score:5, Insightful)
Just like the activation servers for PC games will disappear in the future, and thereby rendering your game useless, DLC will disappear in the future, and thereby render your console game crippled.
Requiring online activation/DLC actually means you rent the game, rather than buying it. If you want to replay an old game in the future you probably have to rent the remake of it.
Re:My argument against this (Score:3, Insightful)
Because you thought "pushing for more network reliance" is a user-oriented wish? How quaint.
Console makers wouldn't mind it if only 1/3rd of the population had access to their online games, if said 1/3rd has to pay and pay to play. They don't care about providing service to the other 2/3rd, they only care about their bottom line.
Re:No thanks (Score:3, Insightful)
If you cannot really buy a game, then it should be called rental service, and that's it. What can be seen currently is that vendors try to keep the client to think he buys the game, while the cut his rights to effectively change it to rent.
Re:DLC is online activation for consoles (Score:2, Insightful)
I've been saying this all along.
Combined with the game makers pushing online features so hard with games means that a game is really only playable for a couple of months to a year.
That's why I have no interest in the current generation of consoles. 60, 70, 80$ games that you don't get to actually play once all the hype around the game dies down? A console that will surely max out my ISP's invisible bandwidth cap? No thank you.
Re:Arrrr (Score:4, Insightful)
> Plus, any online connection forces you to have a legal purchased copy.
Or a pirated server on the near-by PC.
Let's go on with the arms race. We'll see if the result pleases them.
Re:My argument against this (Score:2, Insightful)
Console makers wouldn't mind it if only 1/3rd of the population had access to their online games, if said 1/3rd has to pay and pay to play. They don't care about providing service to the other 2/3rd, they only care about their bottom line.
Uh ? Telling two thirds of your customers to screw themselves doesn't look like a reasonable business decision...
Re:Makes Sense (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not the physical waste, it's power.
When you sell directly to the customer, you don't have to deal with Walmart/Target/etc who will take a cut of the action, and bend you over when they feel like it. Of course, in this case "you" being Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft who set up the central gateways - it's they who won't have to deal with Walmart/Target as much. The developer still will have to deal with those three. Reminds me of the high cost of cartridges, especially with Nintendo being the only one making them for their console.
ATM, only PCs and Flash games put the power in the developer's hands.
They're listening to their audience. (Score:3, Insightful)
The only game I bought recently was Fable II on the 360, because I had to. Most of the games I buy for my PC are either via Steam, or other methods (I play LOTRO, the latest expansion was just me paying the upgrade fee and download). I don't see why consoles seem to see the need to lag behind. Sure I copy games for my console, mainly due to the price (AU$100+ for a new release) and also from the lack of ease of buying online.
I used to copy PC games, now I'm happy with a demo and digital delivery. I think the PC market has wised up to the way things ought to be. I bought Far Cry II days after it came out for 1/2 the price of the shops here in Australia. Even if price wasn't an issue, you have to pre-order, wait in line, all that kind of useless crap to say "I got a first copy". Why not give people the option of post-to with digital stop-gap a-la Warhammer Online (yes, I bought this from Amazon).
Even that seems smarter than this whole "you need to own the disc to own a license to our product" crap.
I say good on them, the more digital delivery, the more economical high volume high speed broadband (whatever the flavour) will become. The more music, movies & games delivered this way the better. It will force the hand that controls your packets.
Its always nice to have a hard copy (Score:3, Insightful)
Or at least a backup. If the download price is the same as the CD/DVD price then why not buy the latter because then you don't have to bother making a backup yourself? And thats assuming the console will allow you to make a backup in the first place and if it does whether than backup will run anyway. The way DRM is going I doubt it would.
preferring the control and simplicity of online (Score:5, Insightful)
TRANSLATION:
Blocking me from my two favorite activities: (1) Buying a game, playing it, and then selling to someone else to recoup my money. And (2) Buying a game, loving it, and keeping it for the next 10-20 years (classic gaming).
If things devolve to the point where I have to pay full price (versus my current average of only paying $2-3 per game), or where I have to keep buying/downloading Super Mario 64 every five years, instead of simply buying it once and keeping it forever... ...then I will simply stop gaming.
This is what the music industry is trying to do with perpetual renting of music rather than letting us OWN the record, cd, whatever. The game industry should not follow that same path.
They are LYING. (Score:5, Insightful)
They want internet connected and online distribution for two main reasons.
1 - it instantly KILLS the secondhand game market. you can no longer buy used games, this drives the price of old games back up to retail levels. no more buying Gears of War for $12.99 used at the local EB or on ebay.
2 - it eliminates 60% of the cost of a game. Packaging and distribution.
Game prices will stay the same or go up, your Quality of gaming will go down, and you can no longer buy used games or rent games to try them out.
That is their goal, everything else is pure BS to make the consumer have buy-in to their plans to screw you over.
Re:Arrrr (Score:4, Insightful)
But then, the value of a network is related to the number of people on it.
You could pirate, say, Left4dead and then play it by yourself or with other pirates. But you can't take your pirated copy and play with everybody else; the legitimate network is closed to you. Your experience of the game is not as good, because there are fewer players. So there is a good reason to pay up: the game is better if you do!
Re:No thanks (Score:4, Insightful)
Yep. If you buy a crap game, but can not sell it on ebay to recover your money, then you never truly owned that game. You were just granted a perpetual rental.
With Cartridge, CD, and DVD games, at least you have something you can physically trade or sell. You OWN it. This past year I've sold off about $4000 worth of my N64, PS1, PS2 game collection. Now imagine if that had been downloaded material instead; I'd be $4000 poorer.
Re:Arrrr (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:They are LYING. (Score:3, Insightful)
You're forgetting another very important reason: game companies can keep up the good old "release first, make it actually work later" schedule. I haven't bought a single game this past year where the final conclusion was: "ok, it's fun to play but buggy, let's put it on the shelf till they can be bothered to patch it". Fallout 3, Mass Effect, Civ4Col, all the same thing.
Re:Arrrr (Score:4, Insightful)
You can join a pirated server with thousands of players. How many more do you need to play a four players game?
Your reasoning only really applies to MMORPGs and yet some people play in WOW pirated servers.
Re:Arrrr (Score:3, Insightful)
Channeling Companese (Score:2, Insightful)
Looses has a specific meaning in the Companese language that I didn't want to lose in the original text. We don't want to Loose (Allow to act in an uninhibited fashion) any money, we want that Consumer Surplus Captured!
On a lighter note, did you know you can be replaced with a shell script?