PS4 Megathread

Deano7788

SouthTippBass wrote: »

I dont really expect them to go through with it either, it is extremly risky.
BUT, one of the biggest games of recent was Battlefield 3, and that game was only played online. It worked just fine, for me on PS3 and PC anyway. I pumped over 125 hours in total into it.

I think maybe people are just scared of the unknown, that their new console wont work. I say give ms a chance to show us what they can do before we damn them.

But that's a predominantly online multiplayer game. It's completely different. It's entire purpose is to play online with friends or whatever. But why should you have to be online to play a single player game in which being online serves no purpose for the gamer. If I was playing the next Batman game, a single player game as an example, and all of a sudden my internet dropped so my game stopped working I'd be pretty damn annoyed.

Deano7788

SouthTippBass wrote: »

It would mean less (no?) piracy for MS, which means bigger profits for MS, bigger profits means bigger budgets for games. Games are very expensive to make, apparently, especially those AAA titles we all like so much.

Benefit.

Nah, it probably won't. Firstly, if Microsoft do go ahead with it, it's to eliminate 2nd hand sales, not piracy. Secondly, the first thing hackers will do is get rid of the always online requirement (it happened with Sim City where they were able to bypass the 20 minute shutdown window), so piracy will continue.

SouthTippBass

Deano7788 wrote: »

Nah, it probably won't. Firstly, if Microsoft do go ahead with it, it's to eliminate 2nd hand sales, not piracy. Secondly, the first thing hackers will do is get rid of the always online requirement (it happened with Sim City where they were able to bypass the 20 minute shutdown window), so piracy will continue.

Yeah, probably right. Same result applies though. Only Gamestop will take a massive hit in the process. No harm!

Deano7788

SouthTippBass wrote: »

Yeah, probably right. Same result applies though. Only Gamestop will take a massive hit in the process. No harm!

I think there are better ways to go about this kind of thing though that won't anger or drive away gamers as much. Online passes being one.

SouthTippBass

Deano7788 wrote: »

But that's a predominantly online multiplayer game. It's completely different. It's entire purpose is to play online with friends or whatever. But why should you have to be online to play a single player game in which being online serves no purpose for the gamer. If I was playing the next Batman game, a single player game as an example, and all of a sudden my internet dropped so my game stopped working I'd be pretty damn annoyed.

I dont know Deano, perhaps theres benefits we havnt yet considered. Theres never been so many unanswered questions about a new console before. Maybe this is all part of MS marketing strategy to get people talking about the new xbox, knowing they have some pretty stiff competition with the PS4. Good buzz about the next gen though! :pac:

ahnowbrowncow

SouthTippBass wrote: »

It would mean less (no?) piracy for MS, which means bigger profits for MS, bigger profits means bigger budgets for games. Games are very expensive to make, apparently, especially those AAA titles we all like so much.

Benefit.

You're really clutching at straws...

stevenmu

SouthTippBass wrote: »

I'm hoping MS take a chance!

I hope they do too.

I like that they're making Kinect an integral part of the system and I'm really looking forward to seeing what cool things they can do with it.

I'm really hoping that the OS will be Windows 8 based, and that it will work with the existing W8 Marketplace. Having a console that runs the same apps as your PC, tablet and phone could be immense. No console has ever been so open to having people publish software to it, just think of all the indie games that would be made.

But, I really hope they don't require it to be always connected. I have a good connection that rarely goes down, so it wouldn't effect me too much, but from all the negativity that I have seen everywhere, I think it would sink the console before it even gets started.

Otacon

stevenmu wrote: »

I hope they do too.

I like that they're making Kinect an integral part of the system and I'm really looking forward to seeing what cool things they can do with it.

I'm really hoping that the OS will be Windows 8 based, and that it will work with the existing W8 Marketplace. Having a console that runs the same apps as your PC, tablet and phone could be immense. No console has ever been so open to having people publish software to it, just think of all the indie games that would be made.

/insert not-sure-if-serious.jpg

tok9

SouthTippBass wrote: »

There is nothing I can do about other peoples internet. Nothing. It dosent make me selfish to have a good connection and want to use it.

It would be the single boldest move of this console generation.

You seem to be under the impression that I have all the answers, and I'm here to sell you an always on console. I dont, and I'm not. I am just of the opinion that it could work if done right.

I think you might be here for an argument rather than a discussion. I'm not so good luck.

I'm not looking for an argument but I'm just baffled that you want it.

I'll give you an example of what a bold move would be- You can only use online if you have a headset connected.

An advantage would be a better online community.

Now I'm not saying I'd want the above but at least you could actually give an advantage for it but there is not one advantage for the gamer of an always online device.

Equium

SouthTippBass wrote: »

I got your point with the phone and I gave you an appropriate answer.

I'm selfish because I want something different than what you want? Ok.. :rolleyes:

Releasing the first always on console? Ah, thats a pretty freakin bold step whatever way you look at it. You might not agree with it, but you cant tell me that it is not, indeed, a very bold step.

Look at steam, I speak from my own experiance, but when I boot up my PC Steam starts automatically, and my PC is always connected to the net. Therefore, Steam is an always on platform. And guess what? Steam works great! When I want to play Left4dead online, I can, because everything works.

BTW, L4D is essentially an always on game and I'v never had any issue with it. And yes, I'm aware Steam has an offline mode.

Imagine another debacle like the attack on PSN in 2011. An always-online console could become a very expensive paperweight for a number of months. No ability to play single player games and possibly no other media playback options either. There aren't any advantages for the consumer when it comes to mandatory always-online consoles or games.

Microsoft should look long and hard at how SimCity was received in the last few weeks. The situation isn't completely analogous, of course, but it serves as a warning nonetheless in how potential customers can be turned off a brand in such circumstances

Chavways

SouthTippBass wrote: »

It would mean less (no?) piracy for MS, which means bigger profits for MS, bigger profits means bigger budgets for games. Games are very expensive to make, apparently, especially those AAA titles we all like so much.

Benefit.

I guarantee you the money that they save from stopping piracy will be a teeny tiny percentage of the money they lose from people not buying the console because of it being always online.If they announce it being always online people will run for the hills and that will be good night to Microsoft.

riclad

IF they switch to blue ray disks, that,ll likely cut out piracy ,as i don,t think its practical or economic to copy blue ray games,
especially when you can buy games in shops preowned for 25 euro.

Grayditch

Did I just read a page of a guy using terms like 'boldest move of a generation', and 'no guts no glory' about Microsoft using an only-online system?

maximoose

Grayditch wrote: »

Did I just read a page of a guy using terms like 'boldest move of a generation', and 'no guts no glory' about Microsoft using an only-online system?

Thank god you see it too, I thought I was going crazy.

CastorTroy

Grayditch wrote: »

Did I just read a page of a guy using terms like 'boldest move of a generation', and 'no guts no glory' about Microsoft using an only-online system?

They sound like terms that need to be accompanied by a training montage.

WolfForager

SouthTippBass wrote: »

I dont really expect them to go through with it either, it is extremly risky.
BUT, one of the biggest games of recent was Battlefield 3, and that game was only played online. It worked just fine, for me on PS3 and PC anyway. I pumped over 125 hours in total into it.

I think maybe people are just scared of the unknown, that their new console wont work. I say give ms a chance to show us what they can do before we damn them.

Oh for feck sake, will you just stop already? It's like watching a vegetarian trying to convince me that their life is great.

Benzino

Grayditch wrote: »

Did I just read a page of a guy using terms like 'boldest move of a generation', and 'no guts no glory' about Microsoft using an only-online system?

Grayditch

It just started to sound like that developer who was Tweeting defensively for MS. Using the foolish idea that just because they have hassle free internet, everyone should just embrace the change, despite there being no benefits I can see for the player.

Anti piracy? Gimme a break, it's like asking customers to seloptape their hands together in a store to prevent theft, to make it fair for everyone.

It's weird, is all. Have MS made a statement/suggestion that this could be a thing? If not, I'm sure they'll be glad they have their Knights Of The Green And Grey charging in before the horn, anyway.

1ZRed

If it is always online I bet they'll still require you to pay for XBL on top of that again or it won't even boot up.

stevenmu

I bet it stays connected so that when you go to sleep at night, a little remote control robot pops out of it and steals all your valuables.

Oh, and that's why it need Kinect too, so they can scan your room to see where you hide all the good stuff.

Grayditch

To be fair, I think the always-on thing won't come to pass; it's just talk. The Kinekt scanning the room for people enjoying MS products without paying, is just plain creepy and dystopian and if by some weird reason that comes to pass, it'll be the sign of a paranoid, crumbling corporation.

Or an even more successful one, if people keep saying 'its graaaand, it's revolutionary'.

SouthTippBass

WolfForager wrote: »

Oh for feck sake, will you just stop already? It's like watching a vegetarian trying to convince me that their life is great.

I did stop. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I'm just having an open minded discussion about the possibilities of an always on console.

Beefy78

SouthTippBass wrote: »

I did stop. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I'm just having an open minded discussion about the possibilities of an always on console.

Actually you're not. By talking about it being "bold" and the like you're seemingly trying to convince us that it could potentially be a good move even though you seem unsure as to how potentially that could be the case.

Being open-minded is fine. Being pro and 'always on' is also fine. It's all opinions and yours is no less valid than anyone else's. But at the moment you're not offering anything tangible that the rest of us can latch onto. It's like you're just saying we should trust that a big corporation like Microsoft aren't going to be primarily motivated by their own self-interest.

Otacon

SouthTippBass wrote: »

I'm just having an open minded discussion about the possibilities of an always on console.

My problem is I have yet to see one possible benefit an always-connected console will have for a consumer, however, I can think of many for Microsoft and game publishers.

SouthTippBass

Beefy78 wrote: »

Actually you're not. By talking about it being "bold" and the like you're seemingly trying to convince us that it could potentially be a good move even though you seem unsure as to how potentially that could be the case.

Being open-minded is fine. Being pro and 'always on' is also fine. It's all opinions and yours is no less valid than anyone else's. But at the moment you're not offering anything tangible that the rest of us can latch onto. It's like you're just saying we should trust that a big corporation like Microsoft aren't going to be primarily motivated by their own self-interest.

Like I said before, I dont have all the answers, and I'm not here to convince anybody to buy something they dont want. Thats the job of MS' marketing department in the the coming months. (if it should come to pass)
Of course MS are going to be motivated by their own self-interest, they are a buisness at the end of the day. I'm just saying, lets just see what they have to offer before dismissing them.

I'm just think its an interesting development in the console evolution, and one which I will be following closely. And if its executed properly, and MS' can sell it, then I would consider supporting it.

Grayditch

Do you have anything you might be imagining "always on" will bring, though? Is there anything you might be foreseeing or be hoping for?

As I said, I seriously doubt they would do this, because ... of all the reasons people here have suggested.

NTMK

Grayditch wrote: »

Do you have anything you might be imagining "always on" will bring, though? Is there anything you might be foreseeing or be hoping for?

As I said, I seriously doubt they would do this, because ... of all the reasons people here have suggested.

They wont theyre not stupid enough to shaft half their install base. this online requirement is for the dev kit to keep it secure and to give ms detailed feed back

thebman

NTMK wrote: »

They wont theyre not stupid enough to shaft half their install base. this online requirement is for the dev kit to keep it secure and to give ms detailed feed back

Maybe but even Visual Studio and their other development tools have an opt out on contributing statistics, at least for all previous versions I've ever used (VS 2003-2010 and SQL server the same).

NTMK

thebman wrote: »

Maybe but even Visual Studio and their other development tools have an opt out on contributing statistics, at least for all previous versions I've ever used (VS 2003-2010 and SQL server the same).

the statistics thing may not exist but i can definetly see a use for the stats for something that will be used for 5+ years
and after the durango dev kit (the intel/nvidia) MS had a **** fit trying to trace the source and there is the possibility that the latest dev kit batch (AMD) require online connection to keep them secure and more importantly sue the **** out of the next person to attempt to sell one

Introducing something like this could potently have their user base and it also gives their competitors an extra feature to advertise for no cost

trev179

Is this the ps4 megathread or xbox 720??