It clearly will have a negative impact on people, but not everyone.
However, how does it in a real way actually improve your experience compared to downloading updates when a connection is available?
Just tell me that.
I can only guess. I really don't know of any future benefit. Perhaps there is potential for games to become lower priced if developers get more profit off sales by limiting reselling. I'm going to wait and see all of the reasons why the game check-in function has to occur. Maybe I'll be back complaining about it, if it turns out to be bad. In the mean time, not knowing doesn't make it bad though.
Apologies if this sounds assenine Autarch, but how a bit of your post is worded, it's coming off as a bit too defensive. May not be your intent, but thats just how I'm reading it. Its the "Just tell me that" part.
I have no issue at all with online games like MMO's and if some deveolpers decide to go that route with the Bone so be it, I have no issue with that. I play and MMO on PC, but if my interwebs are having an off day or week, I can play any of my offline games. My PC doesn't throw a hissy fit and lock me out of everything other than the one thing I dont need a console for ie TV and Movies.
Personally I think once a month for the check (which has nothing whatsoever with checking for updates whatever they say) is all that is needed. I disable Auto updates on my PC, I tend to wait till the end of the month and use whatever Data allowence left for updates, last thing I need is something that eats my data without me knowing how much in advance.
What they call making things easy, I call taking away my control.
I have no issue at all with online games like MMO's and if some deveolpers decide to go that route with the Bone so be it, I have no issue with that. I play and MMO on PC, but if my interwebs are having an off day or week, I can play any of my offline games. My PC doesn't throw a hissy fit and lock me out of everything other than the one thing I dont need a console for ie TV and Movies.
Personally I think once a month for the check (which has nothing whatsoever with checking for updates whatever they say) is all that is needed. I disable Auto updates on my PC, I tend to wait till the end of the month and use whatever Data allowence left for updates, last thing I need is something that eats my data without me knowing how much in advance.
What they call making things easy, I call taking away my control.
In that one month Knight any virus or worm that gets on you computer to get all the information it can gather about you and send it to whomever put it there.
Realistically since the SW behind the Xbox is going to be Windows 8 based, it needs that checking to determine if some virus/ worm has gotten on your console or if you're trying to send one out every 24 hours is a more pro-active choice on M$'s part than having to be re-active to 30,000+ servers being infected.
I'm not saying that it's right to deny us the ability to play games without having that check in, in fact I think it's deplorable. Take a minute to ask yourself this question though:
Can we step aside the point for a moment to try to understand why they need it in the first place? Maybe what we should be asking is if "why" X doesn't happen what is the reason that Y is a consequence?
Mind I mean a more detailed one than the "we just feel it's needed" statement that has been made.
Have they ever said it was for virus protection at all? Plus computers virus protection programs are optional. They aren't mandatory when you buy a computer and if you don't check for virus definitions daily then you can't run any program on the computer until you do that.
If that were the reason, why would they not mention it?
Also Gatsu I'm not sure what I'd be defensive of with that remark. I meant that even if it causes little to no harm to many people does not mean its any kind of improvement, benifit, great feature or anything like that while it cuts other people out of the market entirely. I'm just struggling to understand both the reason it is required and the relatively short timeframe compared to a week or a month.
I just don't see why this benifits me as a consumer, and for something that has such a large impact on consumers there should be a very large and clearly defined benifit expressed officially.
I do not understand a benifit for 24 hour checking in from a paying customer standpoint. Just because it doesn't impact some people does not mean it should be included, does it?
If there is no benifit to customers, but it has a definite, negative impact on some of them, then why have the 24 hour check at all?
What possible benifit outweighs people unable to use the console they purchase?
If there is no benifit to customers, but it has a definite, negative impact on some of them, then why have the 24 hour check at all?
What possible benifit outweighs people unable to use the console they purchase?
There are no worries for the gaming consumer. Anyone who cannot meet all the requirements for gaming on this console will not be buying it. It has always been like this. We as gaming consumers have always had to meet certain technological minimum requirements for usage. If we didn't meet the minimum, we didn't game. In spite of this, digital gaming has prospered.
If there is no benifit to customers, but it has a definite, negative impact on some of them, then why have the 24 hour check at all?
What possible benifit outweighs people unable to use the console they purchase?
There are no worries for the gaming consumer. Anyone who cannot meet all the requirements for gaming on this console will not be buying it. It has always been like this. We as gaming consumers have always had to meet certain technological minimum requirements for usage. If we didn't meet the minimum, we didn't game. In spite of this, digital gaming has prospered.
And that started long ago with simple PC gaming, graphics requirements/ PC spec requirements. the Dreamcast required a phone connection to play multiplayer games, the PS2 and Xbox required broadband...
If there is no benifit to customers, but it has a definite, negative impact on some of them, then why have the 24 hour check at all?
What possible benifit outweighs people unable to use the console they purchase?
There are no worries for the gaming consumer. Anyone who cannot meet all the requirements for gaming on this console will not be buying it. It has always been like this. We as gaming consumers have always had to meet certain technological minimum requirements for usage. If we didn't meet the minimum, we didn't game. In spite of this, digital gaming has prospered.
And that started long ago with simple PC gaming, graphics requirements/ PC spec requirements. the Dreamcast required a phone connection to play multiplayer games, the PS2 and Xbox required broadband...
Neither the Xbox 1 or the 360 need broadband. Nor do they need a live account. It's not required unless you want to play online. Offline requires no more than an electric supply and a TV.
Neither the Xbox 1 or the 360 need broadband. Nor do they need a live account. It's not required unless you want to play online. Offline requires no more than an electric supply and a TV.
People who do not believe in or cannot manage to utilize MS' new "Xbox One: A Modern, Connected Device" will not invest in it.
This what MS has stated. "At Xbox, we’ve always believed in a connected world of games and entertainment. With Xbox One, we are planning for a connected future. We can’t wait to show you what’s to come."
If people can't or won't meet the minimum requirements of this new mantra then other goals will have to be set. It's governed by personal limits and desires. At this time, it looks like people who can only reasonably accomplish gaming offline, need not consider the XB1. It's a pretty bold step for MS to take. I hope they know their market because that first step could be over a cliff.
Have they ever said it was for virus protection at all? Plus computers virus protection programs are optional. They aren't mandatory when you buy a computer and if you don't check for virus definitions daily then you can't run any program on the computer until you do that.
If that were the reason, why would they not mention it?
No A/V programs aren't required to run your computer when connected to the internet. But the amount of viruses, worms, and trojans make them nessacary by design. Without them any program or information can be denied access by you due to infection. So again, maybe the 24 hour check in (besides updates to apps and games) is based on a pro-active stance instead of a reactive one.
Autarch wrote:
At has such a large impact on consumers there should be a very large and clearly defined benifit expressed officially. I do not understand a benifit for 24 hour checking in from a paying customer standpoint. Just because it doesn't impact some people does not mean it should be included, does it?
If there is no benifit to customers, but it has a definite, negative impact on some of them, then why have the 24 hour check at all?
What possible benifit outweighs people unable to use the console they purchase?
Honestly I wish M$ would answer this themselves. They are currently standing on a cliff waiting for a wave to smack them for every day it goes unanswered. Albiet to them, it's a small wave to be sure.
Let me pose this question though, and I'm sure that you've seen me post a similar one to it already.
Does the outspoken minority of people who are upset about this particular issue really affect M$? The majority of people who are going to buy (well not actually buy) are teens who get their parents to buy the console with no real understanding or care of the issues at hand. The parents who buy them are going to be clueless and IF they figure things out will M$ change the problem?
Virus protection? I don't think it has nothing to do with that, the prevention of games running! That is the thing why? What possible reason is there for that? Yes yes these are the questions that need to be answered.
When the Bone connects to the internet it connects to MS servers, here is where the virus blocking is done. When you connect it does not say "connected to the internet" Like our PC's. No it will say "connected to Microsoft Live". So any Virus that gets in comes from there (not that any ever have to my knowladge) Remember the 360 is also just a computer, running an MS OS that doesn't need to connect every 24 hours to do a virus check.
Virus protection? I don't think it has nothing to do with that, the prevention of games running! That is the thing why? What possible reason is there for that? Yes yes these are the questions that need to be answered.
When the Bone connects to the internet it connects to MS servers, here is where the virus blocking is done. When you connect it does not say "connected to the internet" Like our PC's. No it will say "connected to Microsoft Live". So any Virus that gets in comes from there (not that any ever have to my knowladge) Remember the 360 is also just a computer, running an MS OS that doesn't need to connect every 24 hours to do a virus check.
If compaines like Norton/McAfee could legally connect to your compter and verify your computer contains no virus that they are currently not aware of and destroying it would they? From their corperate mentality this would be beneficial for a couple of reasons: They can identify possible "internet terrorists" or use that information to identify those people who are stealing your identity via the internet. Would you pay for such pro-active software to protect you?
M$ may be thinking this way, they require a small data packet transfer to verify that you are who you say you are and you're doing it from something that belongs to you. As I've already stated this can be something that will deter theft of your Xbox.
Autarch wrote:
To answer your last paragraph as best I can Kurupt -
I think this console has changed some things. The market used to be just as you say. However, now Microsoft is targetting additional market segments - they want to sell this console to people who have no interest in video games, but would use it for NFL fantasy stuff, interactive TV, ease of use interface, Skype, and any number of reasons and combinations.
Sadly, with these additional markets, they probably feel they can leave some core gamers by the wayside unable to meet the minimum requirements as Deep mentions, because of the additional sales from the new markets.
However, there is no official reason why consumers should happily embrace a 24 hour check in period. That said, gamers won't buy this because they don't meet a requirement that has no stated customer-focused benifit.
I think the Antivirus stuff is completely unrelated to this decision, and have no idea why virus protection would be at a console level instead of a server/network wide level. I don't think that is what's coming into play here at all to be honest.
I think that the Xbox 360 software is fairly stand alonish, maybe it's difficult to crack because it's not a OS that's based off of one currently published by M$ in other places. In turn they are not really concerned that the 360 software can be hacked to attack the Live servers. PS3's can have a version of Linux installed, which could have been the foothold the people who hacked PSN used. Thusly Windows 8 is a multi-platform OS, and could be exploited the same way and that's where the difference in why M$ wants to use this 24 connection may lie.
To answer your last paragraph as best I can Kurupt -
I think this console has changed some things. The market used to be just as you say. However, now Microsoft is targetting additional market segments - they want to sell this console to people who have no interest in video games, but would use it for NFL fantasy stuff, interactive TV, ease of use interface, Skype, and any number of reasons and combinations.
Sadly, with these additional markets, they probably feel they can leave some core gamers by the wayside unable to meet the minimum requirements as Deep mentions, because of the additional sales from the new markets.
However, there is no official reason why consumers should happily embrace a 24 hour check in period. That said, gamers won't buy this because they don't meet a requirement that has no stated customer-focused benifit.
Deep, I wasn't meaning they'd be worried. I mean they will be unable to use it and thus won't purchase. That to me is not a great thing. To me, it isn't all fine and dandy so long as people realize they can't use a product because they don't meet a requirement that has no stated reason to be there. Just because they realize they aren't going to be able to use it and don't buy it does not mean that is in any way a good or ethical deicision by Microsoft.
I think the Antivirus stuff is completely unrelated to this decision, and have no idea why virus protection would be at a console level instead of a server/network wide level. I don't think that is what's coming into play here at all to be honest.
So... why would they not let people play their games who aren't connected at all to Live hten Kurupt? It doesn't match up with virus protection, network security, or preventing physical Xbox theft.
They seem to be almost polar opposites - the reasons you give need Internet, the Xbox One disables gameplay when there is NO internet for over a day.
So... why would they not let people play their games who aren't connected at all to Live hten Kurupt? It doesn't match up with virus protection, network security, or preventing physical Xbox theft.
They seem to be almost polar opposites - the reasons you give need Internet, the Xbox One disables gameplay when there is NO internet for over a day.
I agree they are polar opposites, one reason should not deny the ability to play games but allow you to access TV, DVD's and others.
I want the same difinitive answers you do, why is gaming summarily being put on a back burner to reality TV watchers and couch quarterbacks.
But in this conversation I think I've had an epiphany, stop lashing out at M$ for their standpoint, instead get developers involved to support your position for it being unfair to customers.
So... why would they not let people play their games who aren't connected at all to Live hten Kurupt? It doesn't match up with virus protection, network security, or preventing physical Xbox theft.
They seem to be almost polar opposites - the reasons you give need Internet, the Xbox One disables gameplay when there is NO internet for over a day.
We'll just have to wait and find out. Nobody here can do anything other than guess. We're getting to the point where we are just stabbing in the dark. MS will eventaully let us know the why of everything. We'll either buy into it or not. If enough people do not buy into it, MS will have to change what ever is unacceptable.
Virus checkers do connect daily and update their databases...My point is your box never connects to the internet, it connects to a closed web. You never leave the Microsoft live servers. Your PC probably spends most it's time doing the same to be honest, connecting to Google or game servers. But it can go out into the wild so to speak and that is why we need virus protection.
Sony had their servers hacked.
Lets be fair, you have made up the idea that the once a day connection is about virus protection. There is nothing to suggest that is true, and much to suggest it's not.
Box gets stolen...phone call, please suspend my account my Box has been stolen. Account suspended, stolen box is a door stop. Get new Box...phone call, please transfer my account to this new box. Simples.
Anyway I have said all I have to say on the subject, there is no more for me to add until some real information is out. Arguing over what people think may be true has limits.
Knight I agree with you, my idea is neither substancial proof or a valid reason as to why Xbox requires this connection or a realistic reason as to why they demand it of us.
I simply like to put out ideas that make at least a plausable idea, in the hopes that others will take a step back and instead of stating no that they step back and may see something as objectively as possible.
My ideas may be on the fringe, but they are realistic.
I did create and use the following letter that I've already sent to Gearbox Software and am planning to send to others in short order:
Your success as a game publisher has been in part on Microsoft the Xbox consoles and Xbox Live. I believe your company is a wonderful one and have purchased many of your console games directly to support you and your endeavors. I want to continue to support your success as a developer/publisher in the future.
And here is where I need your help, I cannot support you in the future generation of consoles if you as a company do not speak out against Xbox and their stance on requiring a connection to their servers every 24 hours to play games. There is simply no good reason MS should deny me the ability to play my (and yours) games offline if I do not meet with that requirement, but people can still watch TV, DVD's and the like if that connection isn't established.
We as gamers need your support in this matter, speak out for us to Microsoft that you feel that it is unfair to preclude gamers in this way.
Thank you for your time and attention,
Please use it as well, our voices will likely go unheard as indiviuals. But M$ can't ignore the people who make the games we play if the devs/ publishers support us.
I think, and this is ME GUESSING, that the 24 hr cut off is perhaps directed at the previous X360 modders maybe? Thiis way they wouldn't be able to mod and then play off line or on their own network or with modded versions period? Bear in mind I'm NOT real tech savvy, just a thought.
Deep that isn't a system requirement as stated though. I guess that's the issue as I see it - the console and games CAN function without the 24 hour thing. This is CONFIRMED by Microsoft because of their stated intent to allow active duty deployed military members to play with Xbox One offline.
So no, it is NOT a system requirement as you say. Its a Microsoft requirement that can be changed if they want. I'm sorry, it can function without this.
It could EASILY not be a required part - this 24 hour check in - if Microsot chose to eliminate it as they would for the military.
Its one thing to need the internet to register a game, recover a profile, or sign into Live. Its another to REQUIRE 24 hour check ins with a server when that is already going to be eliminated for some people.
Deep that isn't a system requirement as stated though. I guess that's the issue as I see it - the console and games CAN function without the 24 hour thing. This is CONFIRMED (Dick caps) by Microsoft because of their stated intent to allow active duty deployed military members to play with Xbox One offline.
So no, it is NOT (Dick caps) a system requirement as you say. Its a Microsoft requirement that can be changed if they want. I'm sorry, it can function without this.
It could EASILY (Dick caps)not be a required part - this 24 hour check in - if Microsot chose to eliminate it as they would for the military.
Its one thing to need the internet to register a game, recover a profile, or sign into Live. Its another to REQUIRE(Dick caps) 24 hour check ins with a server when that is already going to be eliminated for some people.
You know Autarch sometimes you really do sound like a FUCKING WANKER (Dick caps)
Deep that isn't a system requirement as stated though. I guess that's the issue as I see it - the console and games CAN function without the 24 hour thing. This is CONFIRMED by Microsoft because of their stated intent to allow active duty deployed military members to play with Xbox One offline.
So no, it is NOT a system requirement as you say. Its a Microsoft requirement that can be changed if they want. I'm sorry, it can function without this.
It could EASILY not be a required part - this 24 hour check in - if Microsot chose to eliminate it as they would for the military.
Its one thing to need the internet to register a game, recover a profile, or sign into Live. Its another to REQUIRE 24 hour check ins with a server when that is already going to be eliminated for some people.
It is part of MS' big picture. We either buy into it or not. Nobody is hard done by this new mantra. Nothing has been taken away from us. MS is offering for sale this new product and associated services. The service scheme seem a little wierd but maybe it'll all be for the good. I don't know if it will succeed. Maybe MS' plan is much bigger and more involved than they have let on. Plans within plans. Bait and switch. Who knows?
I despise that site and it's alarmist articles. For you, I looked at it. MS is not the only company with these types of get out of jail free policies. The article, like so many on there, had no point other than to alarm people. I wish I could make everyone go sleep until the XB1 is already being sold. I'm still not sure when I'll get one. I only have Halo and possibly Destiny on my agenda and XB1 will have to come up with something pretty compelling for me to be a day one buyer. I bought the 360 a year too soon but I didn't know that until Halo 3 came out.
Sorry my passionate dislike for this checkin has offended you into insulting me, Cpro. It was not anything directed at any one - but I just do not like this individual facet of the required online portion. Without additional information there is no way I can believe this is a good idea. Feel free to disagree and debate it, as Deep does, but I'd ask you not simply insult me and leave nothing relevant to the topic at all. My passionate stance is against this requirement, not any person.
Deep, let me clarify my stance a bit more if I may. I think games requiring online connectivity in order to accomplish their features is acceptable. I think requiring internet to access streaming content, or download updates is very much acceptable. I think games being activated and tied to an account is acceptable, but doesn't neccessarily need to come at the moment the disc is first inserted, and could come instead when the console next connects online.
A 24 hour are-you-a-thief timeframe and check before you lose the ability to play any game on the console is what I drew issue with specifically. I realize they are not forcing anyone to buy the console - however, this forces some potential customers to be unable to become customers able to use the product.
True, nothing we have is being removed. However, they are removing a persons ability to use an upcoming product with a requirement, that can indeed be turned off by Microsoft, with no customer facing benifit to its name.
Its not something I can so easily shrug about even if it has no direct impact on me myself.
Why not follow your own advise? This is a forum and by definition that is a place for disscussion. If you don't wish to enter that discussion then don't. Most of the disscussion has been about what is known, the 24 hour checking and disabling of game playing if that fails. That is a fact and MS have stated it.
I don't agree with everyone here, but those I disagree with most are those clever people who come to the thread just to tell everyone what dicks they are.
Hey, no one knows how big a dick I am more than I do! Cept maybe the missus...
But while I'm certainly opinionated, I'm not fool enough to think my opinions everyone's opinion. And I certainly am not ignorant enough to think everyone else should agree with it.
One of the things I've learned in corporate America is to try to see things from view points other than my own. Also helps to understand what's important to you might not be to someone else. And it also makes it easier to explain why perhaps something else should be more important to someone else.
That doesn't mean I'll change my mind, but at least I see where the other guys coming from.
Apologies if this sounds assenine Autarch, but how a bit of your post is worded, it's coming off as a bit too defensive. May not be your intent, but thats just how I'm reading it. Its the "Just tell me that" part.
Does anyone realize your A/V program checks in once every 24 hours? It also collects data from your computer when it does.
I have no issue at all with online games like MMO's and if some deveolpers decide to go that route with the Bone so be it, I have no issue with that. I play and MMO on PC, but if my interwebs are having an off day or week, I can play any of my offline games. My PC doesn't throw a hissy fit and lock me out of everything other than the one thing I dont need a console for ie TV and Movies.
Personally I think once a month for the check (which has nothing whatsoever with checking for updates whatever they say) is all that is needed. I disable Auto updates on my PC, I tend to wait till the end of the month and use whatever Data allowence left for updates, last thing I need is something that eats my data without me knowing how much in advance.
What they call making things easy, I call taking away my control.
In that one month Knight any virus or worm that gets on you computer to get all the information it can gather about you and send it to whomever put it there.
Realistically since the SW behind the Xbox is going to be Windows 8 based, it needs that checking to determine if some virus/ worm has gotten on your console or if you're trying to send one out every 24 hours is a more pro-active choice on M$'s part than having to be re-active to 30,000+ servers being infected.
I'm not saying that it's right to deny us the ability to play games without having that check in, in fact I think it's deplorable. Take a minute to ask yourself this question though:
Can we step aside the point for a moment to try to understand why they need it in the first place? Maybe what we should be asking is if "why" X doesn't happen what is the reason that Y is a consequence?
Mind I mean a more detailed one than the "we just feel it's needed" statement that has been made.
Have they ever said it was for virus protection at all? Plus computers virus protection programs are optional. They aren't mandatory when you buy a computer and if you don't check for virus definitions daily then you can't run any program on the computer until you do that.
If that were the reason, why would they not mention it?
Also Gatsu I'm not sure what I'd be defensive of with that remark. I meant that even if it causes little to no harm to many people does not mean its any kind of improvement, benifit, great feature or anything like that while it cuts other people out of the market entirely. I'm just struggling to understand both the reason it is required and the relatively short timeframe compared to a week or a month.
I just don't see why this benifits me as a consumer, and for something that has such a large impact on consumers there should be a very large and clearly defined benifit expressed officially.
I do not understand a benifit for 24 hour checking in from a paying customer standpoint. Just because it doesn't impact some people does not mean it should be included, does it?
If there is no benifit to customers, but it has a definite, negative impact on some of them, then why have the 24 hour check at all?
What possible benifit outweighs people unable to use the console they purchase?
And that started long ago with simple PC gaming, graphics requirements/ PC spec requirements. the Dreamcast required a phone connection to play multiplayer games, the PS2 and Xbox required broadband...
Neither the Xbox 1 or the 360 need broadband. Nor do they need a live account. It's not required unless you want to play online. Offline requires no more than an electric supply and a TV.
This what MS has stated. "At Xbox, we’ve always believed in a connected world of games and entertainment. With Xbox One, we are planning for a connected future. We can’t wait to show you what’s to come."
If people can't or won't meet the minimum requirements of this new mantra then other goals will have to be set. It's governed by personal limits and desires. At this time, it looks like people who can only reasonably accomplish gaming offline, need not consider the XB1. It's a pretty bold step for MS to take. I hope they know their market because that first step could be over a cliff.
No A/V programs aren't required to run your computer when connected to the internet. But the amount of viruses, worms, and trojans make them nessacary by design. Without them any program or information can be denied access by you due to infection. So again, maybe the 24 hour check in (besides updates to apps and games) is based on a pro-active stance instead of a reactive one.
Honestly I wish M$ would answer this themselves. They are currently standing on a cliff waiting for a wave to smack them for every day it goes unanswered. Albiet to them, it's a small wave to be sure.
Let me pose this question though, and I'm sure that you've seen me post a similar one to it already.
Does the outspoken minority of people who are upset about this particular issue really affect M$? The majority of people who are going to buy (well not actually buy) are teens who get their parents to buy the console with no real understanding or care of the issues at hand. The parents who buy them are going to be clueless and IF they figure things out will M$ change the problem?
Virus protection? I don't think it has nothing to do with that, the prevention of games running! That is the thing why? What possible reason is there for that? Yes yes these are the questions that need to be answered.
When the Bone connects to the internet it connects to MS servers, here is where the virus blocking is done. When you connect it does not say "connected to the internet" Like our PC's. No it will say "connected to Microsoft Live". So any Virus that gets in comes from there (not that any ever have to my knowladge) Remember the 360 is also just a computer, running an MS OS that doesn't need to connect every 24 hours to do a virus check.
If compaines like Norton/McAfee could legally connect to your compter and verify your computer contains no virus that they are currently not aware of and destroying it would they? From their corperate mentality this would be beneficial for a couple of reasons: They can identify possible "internet terrorists" or use that information to identify those people who are stealing your identity via the internet. Would you pay for such pro-active software to protect you?
M$ may be thinking this way, they require a small data packet transfer to verify that you are who you say you are and you're doing it from something that belongs to you. As I've already stated this can be something that will deter theft of your Xbox.
I think that the Xbox 360 software is fairly stand alonish, maybe it's difficult to crack because it's not a OS that's based off of one currently published by M$ in other places. In turn they are not really concerned that the 360 software can be hacked to attack the Live servers. PS3's can have a version of Linux installed, which could have been the foothold the people who hacked PSN used. Thusly Windows 8 is a multi-platform OS, and could be exploited the same way and that's where the difference in why M$ wants to use this 24 connection may lie.
To answer your last paragraph as best I can Kurupt -
I think this console has changed some things. The market used to be just as you say. However, now Microsoft is targetting additional market segments - they want to sell this console to people who have no interest in video games, but would use it for NFL fantasy stuff, interactive TV, ease of use interface, Skype, and any number of reasons and combinations.
Sadly, with these additional markets, they probably feel they can leave some core gamers by the wayside unable to meet the minimum requirements as Deep mentions, because of the additional sales from the new markets.
However, there is no official reason why consumers should happily embrace a 24 hour check in period. That said, gamers won't buy this because they don't meet a requirement that has no stated customer-focused benifit.
Deep, I wasn't meaning they'd be worried. I mean they will be unable to use it and thus won't purchase. That to me is not a great thing. To me, it isn't all fine and dandy so long as people realize they can't use a product because they don't meet a requirement that has no stated reason to be there. Just because they realize they aren't going to be able to use it and don't buy it does not mean that is in any way a good or ethical deicision by Microsoft.
I think the Antivirus stuff is completely unrelated to this decision, and have no idea why virus protection would be at a console level instead of a server/network wide level. I don't think that is what's coming into play here at all to be honest.
So... why would they not let people play their games who aren't connected at all to Live hten Kurupt? It doesn't match up with virus protection, network security, or preventing physical Xbox theft.
They seem to be almost polar opposites - the reasons you give need Internet, the Xbox One disables gameplay when there is NO internet for over a day.
I agree they are polar opposites, one reason should not deny the ability to play games but allow you to access TV, DVD's and others.
I want the same difinitive answers you do, why is gaming summarily being put on a back burner to reality TV watchers and couch quarterbacks.
But in this conversation I think I've had an epiphany, stop lashing out at M$ for their standpoint, instead get developers involved to support your position for it being unfair to customers.
Virus checkers do connect daily and update their databases...My point is your box never connects to the internet, it connects to a closed web. You never leave the Microsoft live servers. Your PC probably spends most it's time doing the same to be honest, connecting to Google or game servers. But it can go out into the wild so to speak and that is why we need virus protection.
Sony had their servers hacked.
Lets be fair, you have made up the idea that the once a day connection is about virus protection. There is nothing to suggest that is true, and much to suggest it's not.
Box gets stolen...phone call, please suspend my account my Box has been stolen. Account suspended, stolen box is a door stop. Get new Box...phone call, please transfer my account to this new box. Simples.
Anyway I have said all I have to say on the subject, there is no more for me to add until some real information is out. Arguing over what people think may be true has limits.
The only thing we can say for sure is something we've been saying for a while: We need more official information
lol
Knight I agree with you, my idea is neither substancial proof or a valid reason as to why Xbox requires this connection or a realistic reason as to why they demand it of us.
I simply like to put out ideas that make at least a plausable idea, in the hopes that others will take a step back and instead of stating no that they step back and may see something as objectively as possible.
My ideas may be on the fringe, but they are realistic.
I did create and use the following letter that I've already sent to Gearbox Software and am planning to send to others in short order:
Your success as a game publisher has been in part on Microsoft the Xbox consoles and Xbox Live. I believe your company is a wonderful one and have purchased many of your console games directly to support you and your endeavors. I want to continue to support your success as a developer/publisher in the future.
And here is where I need your help, I cannot support you in the future generation of consoles if you as a company do not speak out against Xbox and their stance on requiring a connection to their servers every 24 hours to play games. There is simply no good reason MS should deny me the ability to play my (and yours) games offline if I do not meet with that requirement, but people can still watch TV, DVD's and the like if that connection isn't established.
We as gamers need your support in this matter, speak out for us to Microsoft that you feel that it is unfair to preclude gamers in this way.
Thank you for your time and attention,
Please use it as well, our voices will likely go unheard as indiviuals. But M$ can't ignore the people who make the games we play if the devs/ publishers support us.
I think, and this is ME GUESSING, that the 24 hr cut off is perhaps directed at the previous X360 modders maybe? Thiis way they wouldn't be able to mod and then play off line or on their own network or with modded versions period? Bear in mind I'm NOT real tech savvy, just a thought.
Deep that isn't a system requirement as stated though. I guess that's the issue as I see it - the console and games CAN function without the 24 hour thing. This is CONFIRMED by Microsoft because of their stated intent to allow active duty deployed military members to play with Xbox One offline.
So no, it is NOT a system requirement as you say. Its a Microsoft requirement that can be changed if they want. I'm sorry, it can function without this.
It could EASILY not be a required part - this 24 hour check in - if Microsot chose to eliminate it as they would for the military.
Its one thing to need the internet to register a game, recover a profile, or sign into Live. Its another to REQUIRE 24 hour check ins with a server when that is already going to be eliminated for some people.
You know Autarch sometimes you really do sound like a FUCKING WANKER (Dick caps)
http://kotaku.com/the-xbox-one-might-seem-like-a-horror-show-now-but-tha-511951891
Sorry my passionate dislike for this checkin has offended you into insulting me, Cpro. It was not anything directed at any one - but I just do not like this individual facet of the required online portion. Without additional information there is no way I can believe this is a good idea. Feel free to disagree and debate it, as Deep does, but I'd ask you not simply insult me and leave nothing relevant to the topic at all. My passionate stance is against this requirement, not any person.
Deep, let me clarify my stance a bit more if I may. I think games requiring online connectivity in order to accomplish their features is acceptable. I think requiring internet to access streaming content, or download updates is very much acceptable. I think games being activated and tied to an account is acceptable, but doesn't neccessarily need to come at the moment the disc is first inserted, and could come instead when the console next connects online.
A 24 hour are-you-a-thief timeframe and check before you lose the ability to play any game on the console is what I drew issue with specifically. I realize they are not forcing anyone to buy the console - however, this forces some potential customers to be unable to become customers able to use the product.
True, nothing we have is being removed. However, they are removing a persons ability to use an upcoming product with a requirement, that can indeed be turned off by Microsoft, with no customer facing benifit to its name.
Its not something I can so easily shrug about even if it has no direct impact on me myself.
Why not follow your own advise? This is a forum and by definition that is a place for disscussion. If you don't wish to enter that discussion then don't. Most of the disscussion has been about what is known, the 24 hour checking and disabling of game playing if that fails. That is a fact and MS have stated it.
I don't agree with everyone here, but those I disagree with most are those clever people who come to the thread just to tell everyone what dicks they are.
Hey, no one knows how big a dick I am more than I do! Cept maybe the missus...
But while I'm certainly opinionated, I'm not fool enough to think my opinions everyone's opinion. And I certainly am not ignorant enough to think everyone else should agree with it.
One of the things I've learned in corporate America is to try to see things from view points other than my own. Also helps to understand what's important to you might not be to someone else. And it also makes it easier to explain why perhaps something else should be more important to someone else.
That doesn't mean I'll change my mind, but at least I see where the other guys coming from.