Creative Director of Microsoft wants you to love Always-On
Posted: April 6th, 2013, 4:44 amhttp://www.ign.com/articles/2013/04/05/ ... al-with-it
In the wake of recent rumors that Microsoft's next console would require an "always-on" internet connection in order to power the console, Microsoft's CD, Adam Orth, had a few things to mention on Twitter about all the negative reaction that the rumor has received. You can read his tweets (which are now protected) in the link I've provided above.
Orth most likely spoke too soon. I would bet to say that if the Nextbox, which Microsoft is clearly working on, doesn't have an always-on requirement, he wouldn't have felt so obligated to defend the concept in the first place. Even still, Orth was laughably unprofessional in his attempt to defend this technology. To me, it shows that there is some cockiness at Microsoft surrounding the technology that they've probably invested in. Technology that nobody wants (well, save for a few who truly believe that this is the "future" of gaming). Technology that practically broke the launch of SimCity (and Diablo III from what I hear, but I haven't read too deep into that).
I will say that my main problem with this technology, particularly from Microsoft, is that if they still continue to charge people for Xbox Live in the next generation, then people who don't want to pay for the service - or just run behind on the bills - can't play any games, period.
I have other problems with a console that has an always-on requirement besides that, but just know that I don't find the technology particularly appealing (and clearly I'm not alone).
But what do you think about an always-connected requirement for game consoles? And what do you think of Orth's response? Do you plan to buy the Nextbox anyway? Let me know!
In the wake of recent rumors that Microsoft's next console would require an "always-on" internet connection in order to power the console, Microsoft's CD, Adam Orth, had a few things to mention on Twitter about all the negative reaction that the rumor has received. You can read his tweets (which are now protected) in the link I've provided above.
Orth most likely spoke too soon. I would bet to say that if the Nextbox, which Microsoft is clearly working on, doesn't have an always-on requirement, he wouldn't have felt so obligated to defend the concept in the first place. Even still, Orth was laughably unprofessional in his attempt to defend this technology. To me, it shows that there is some cockiness at Microsoft surrounding the technology that they've probably invested in. Technology that nobody wants (well, save for a few who truly believe that this is the "future" of gaming). Technology that practically broke the launch of SimCity (and Diablo III from what I hear, but I haven't read too deep into that).
I will say that my main problem with this technology, particularly from Microsoft, is that if they still continue to charge people for Xbox Live in the next generation, then people who don't want to pay for the service - or just run behind on the bills - can't play any games, period.
I have other problems with a console that has an always-on requirement besides that, but just know that I don't find the technology particularly appealing (and clearly I'm not alone).
But what do you think about an always-connected requirement for game consoles? And what do you think of Orth's response? Do you plan to buy the Nextbox anyway? Let me know!
