There has been a backlash on the internet recently over tweets sent out by Microsoft Studios creative director Adam Orth about the new Xbox console having to be "always on", or in other words always connected to the internet in order to play the games, even if you plan on playing offline. This has many people talking, and as you might imagine, many people don't like it.

The situation has been made worse due to the memories of SimCity's failed launch still fresh in the minds of many people. So my question is to everyone here on VR, what are your opinions on the matter?

Personally, I believe that if the rumors/leaks stay true to word, and the new xbox console has to have a constant and reliable internet connection in order to play, it will be a huge blunder for Microsoft. I have no plans on buying the new console, or any new console for that matter (not like I have the money anyways). I'm perfectly happy with my Xbox360 as things stand right now. If the new xbox console is like this, I suspect that many more people will invest in WiiU's or PS4's instead.

As long as broadband doesn't reach 100% of the populous, things like this are a very bad idea. A product needs to be able to reach every single person to be successful, but when a feature makes it so a sizeable percentage of the populous can's use the product, that can't happen.

I'm sure we all remember the failure that was the PSP Go.

I agree, this is one of the dumbest moves ever if it does happen. Like Shade said, not everyone has reliable internet so that cuts out a major group of people that'd be able to use it. As with the recent SimCity fiasco, it's not right that people spent a lot of money to play the game, only to not be able to play it due to the online connection. Ironically, by doing this type of stuff they are only encouraging piracy and hacks in order to make the game playable. Always-online doesn't hurt the hackers/pirates, they always find ways around it anyway. The people who hurt the most from this are the people who actually paid for the game in the first place.

Funny, I don't see always-online DVD or Blu-Ray players, and those are easier to make and distribute copies of video. Even a TV is still fully usable without a cable/digital antenna hookup. But to make a video game system always-online in order to function? That ain't right.

Think of it this way - If I want to play Assassin's Creed, a single-player game with absolutely no online capabilities, why should I have to be connected to the internet to do that? It's a terrible idea and games that have tried implementing ideas like that (such as SimCity and Diablo III) have received quite a bit of negative feedback.

One Microsoft employee told people to "#dealwithit" and is now receiving public backlash. Read the comments.

I feel like I already mentioned something like this before... But whatever...

The point of the "Always Online" Quota is so that they can appeal to the audience they want. Which is probably the ones who spend twenty hours online in multiplayer focused games. This literally cuts the demographic in half due to all the people who don't want to purchase an online account. (Since I don't believe Microsoft is getting rid of the LIVE program any time soon.) Cuts out people like me who have spaztic internet connections that like to drop in and out at random. People who have lower internet capabilities. And in general people who don't want to constantly see what their friends are doing, or achieving, or posting.

They can do this all they want. But the only way they'd get me to purchase their next console is if a game I want is REALLY worth it... I don't want everyone to have access to my stats so they can say I suck just because I don't always go for headshots....


This is also why I refused to buy Simcity '12...

Don't get me wrong, this isn't a completely bad thing. As it shows they can easily add patches into the game to fix it and possibly content. (Though that will mean lesser quality at launch...)
Easy to connect with fellow players and friends. Fun times can be organized easily as games are sometimes more fun with multitudes of people.

But if it goes in the direction that you can no longer play a game because you are not connected. THAT is where I would draw a line, put up a wall, set up a barricade, and wouldn't touch it with a 50 ft pole.

At the moment, I'm just ignoring anything preliminary (particularly rumors) before the actual E3. It'll be a while before I buy one of the next-generation consoles anyway.

I can safely say I have no interest in always online systems (consoles or games) for reasons stated earlier in this thread.

Gotta have an always-on system in the Xbox 720 to prevent people from illegally downloading Xbox 720s.

I'll be honest here, I'm hoping this is either some kind of joke with the 720 or that Microsoft's just screwing with us. If this is an actual thing with their next system, then I'm definitely going to be boycotting their stuff. I won't mind, anyways. PSN's free and on what-I-suspect-to-be a better console. Or, y'know, the Wii U's cool as well. It's also going to be doing this cool thing where it actually TRANSFERS YOUR PURCHASES. *gives a long harsh stare at Sony >:I*

This doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me since a majority of the games for XBox can already be found on PC and not like they require to be connected to the internet all the time.

If Microsoft does do this you might want to say good bye to them because people the company will become irrelevant soon. (which I personally don't bieleve but this is still stupid)

First the whole "used games won't work on our systems!" fiasco and now this. Well, this is now officially a rich boy's systems only. Because those electric bills suuuure are going to tower prettty high. I think the companies are starting to become blinded by their attempts to prevent things that is always going to happen anyways, no matter how hard they try. Or something like that. I am very disappointed to see the next gen systems doing this, let alone to see them already (it feels too soon for their proper welcoming). I still don't even own any of this generation's systems except for a 3DS and I'm happy with it's designs. I sure hope these consoles don't forget that they're a system for FUN ENTERTAINMENT rather than super-duper controlling silliness that would overshadow that core purpose.

No need to repeat what's already been said a lot. This is just another attempt by modern day companies to combine video gaming with social networking in a way that's seamless. But forcing such things doesn't appeal to all gamers who don't care that much about their friends and their achievements (like me), but it just so happens to be the popular thing to do at this point. If these rumors turn out to be true, then I'll probably have to skip out on this system, no matter how much I love Halo.

I feel like the Always Online thing is just going to go on for ages. The few months before E3, for a console's announcement, there's always a ton of rumours and you don't know which ones to believe. This is especially true for Microsoft and Sony, because everyone keeps spectating that it will be online only DRM. I just want to point out how much zero business sense this makes; just think about a kid on the way home from gamestop with his shiny new xbox 720392 or whatever, then he gets on and discovers that he can't setup his xbox without connecting it to the internet. Unfortunately, his mommy is too poor to afford internet. Or something like that.

That seems like a weird and unlikely situation, I know, but it's still entirely possible. I'd be pretty irritated if I was young and I couldn't play it because I didn't have internet. Not only that, but the ISP is so unreliable that if it goes out for a few hours, I'm doomed. Granted, I love the internet so I'll probably always have it, but that still doesn't justify Always Online.