PixlBit

I can see Activision and EA especially pushing this. Makes business since for them as far as their concerned i would guess. They already have some of the biggest franshises with large fanbases so people will pay. I'm sure Capcom would have an interest in this also. I agree with you that whether it be implemented by the console or the game developer, online play for games purchased used is done...

If any two companies have zero fucks to give about alienating the internet at this point, it's EA and Activision. Most people playing Madden and COD won't give a fuck unless we see more SimCity-esque failures--and even then, I don't know how much of an issue it'll be if it becomes standard practice.

Yeah I agree. Someone who buys every year only games like Madden and CoD day 1 for the online play is not going to be impacted. It's everyone else who buys a lot of games and waits for lower pricing who suffers. These companies are following the $$$, as simple as that. Why cater for used game buyers when it doesn't help you? I can't say I blame them but it sure as hell sucks ass

I've already made up my mind not to buy any games that require me to be connected constantly online.  It takes anyway the consumers rights of ownership.  I pay for something, then it's mine to do what I want with it within the law.  These publishers are pushing practicies that are making the games we buy more like rentals.  We pay their fee and they tell us how to play, when to play, what to play it on, and how long we can play it.  

Im with ^^^ James

I'll 3rd that.

There'll have to be millions of people who agree with you to change their mind.

At this point, I think they just see pissing off people online as collateral damage that won't hurt their bottom line in a big way. I think there are plenty of execs who agree with "Sweet Billy" on this issue. 

If MS does go constant online, I think the usual craziness at launch will still happen, but a few months after that, MS will feel the hurt.  Same goes with the publishers.  Are constant onlined games selling any better?  I don't buy them and I know a lot of people that don't also.  I guess there will always be people that will buy the product no matter what.  I say let them get dicked.  It's no my problem. 

I'm sure the big companies will pull their usual hustle. I guess that's fine on account I'm not entirely reliant on the biggest companies for my gaming entertainment. I have choices! If one company dicks me I'll go to another one.

And thank God for that.

Always online = no sale. I refuse to support shitty practices that treat me like a thief. The publishers are doing a good job at attempted thievery with microtransactions/play-to-win.

100% agree

I can't wait to see more disastrous launches caused by this nonsense. It's gonna be a blast.

Yep. Disastrous launches guarenteed if "always online" required next gen. I hope console manufacturers tread very very carefully and wait a few gens before implementing this. It's going to happen eventually so I've accepted it but I'd rather it be a success when brought in than the companies failing and being forced to pull out of the industry. If this happens than we the gamer lose

I think it's pretty safe to say this concept of "always on" DRM isn't going away. Granted, there's still a lot we don't know about which direction Sony and Microsoft are going to take this with their consoles, but we might as well start getting it in our heads now that this will be implemented in some way.

I think you're definitely right in saying that it'll take some of the heat off Sony and Microsoft by leaving such things to the publishers, like Sim City. That being said, the responsibility should fall on the publisher to ensure a quality play experience for their paying consumers.

But the thing that's most irritating for me, especially in the case of Sim City, is that server problems have been known to occur. It's not like such things are unheard of. It's happened with WoW, and Diablo III. So you would THINK this would of have been anticipated to allow for as smooth a launch as possible, but that just didn't happen. Hopefully there will be some kind of remedy for this, and publishers won't keep falling into this same disaster launch trap.

Seriously. Maxis/EA in particular kept going on about how they HAD to make the game always-online. They even calling it an MMO, despite it being proven that the single player campaign works just fine offline. Yet somehow, they weren't able to anticipate demand and plan ahead accordingly? Give me a break.

I agree that they're marching towards these restrictions as quickly as they can, though. Several companies are convinced that they have to take this route to protect profits, and won't back off until it completely blows up in their faces. And the sad part is that there's no real guarantee that it won't if they can get around the technical issues--most people aren't going to care as long as it works.

Well in my personal opinion online only games and if Microsoft decides to do the 720 this way is doomed to fail, again theres alot of people like myself who buy games who dont wish to play online all the time and not only will they be decriminating against people who cant afford to be online but a lot of people including myself do not buy digital games and anyway you look at it whether its a physicle disc that requires online access to play is still considered digital software which i refuse to buy, im a loyal 360 fan, and if the 720 is released being online only I will not be purchasing anything Microsoft im not going to be forced to play digital only, as an American when I buy something  I want to own it, not rent it which you will be doing by being forced to play online and then after five plus years when there is no longer servers for these online only systems and games you will be stuck with a system you cant play not to mention the games will be useless.

And that's the main thing that bothers me about it.

A game that requires an online connection to play has no sense of permanence. Once they stop supporting it, then what do you do? It's not like with, say, online multiplayer servers going down, as that doesn't affect every game equally (or at all); surely people should at least be able to play the single player parts at least?

Well, in the wake of the ever increasing bloated budgets, they have to grub for every penny they can get. Still doesn't mean I have to like it, though.

Well, that's a major factor in me not deciding to buy one until down the line when we know how much all of this will be implemented. If the answer is "a lot," I'll just have to skip this next generation as well.

But whether the Pixlbit community and myself have as big of a problem with it may or may not be relevant to the mainstream at large that may not be bothered by it or realize the implications. So I'm ready to find out this is the future of gaming, but if it is, I'm done with it. I'm not paying full-price for digital rentals.

I think it's also a generational thing, too.

My guess is that a lot of the people who are most upset about this grew up with the older generations of consoles, where these measures weren't possible and the industry was small enough (and the games cheap enough) to tolerate resales. But now you have kids growing up with online passes, free-to-play, and digital-only games on smartphones and tablets.

As those kids grow up, and the network infrastructure gets better in the big markets for games, will this stuff even be a point of contention anymore? I feel like we're the last generation of gamers that are going to make a big stink about this, online or off. That gives it a depressing sense of inevitability.

If Sony and Microsoft were smart, they would do well to distance themself from an absolute solution.  Leave the system open and flexible, like it is now, just in case there is a fallout over harsh DRM practices and a downturn in the sales of new games. Let the individual companies decide on their own if they want to be a product- or service-based business, and let them deal with the consequences.

It's the only way to keep the heat off from both sides at once, really.

Well, I for one have enough unplayed games to last me for the next ten years. I will not feel the hurt of not having the newest, shiniest toy toy out there, and there are plenty of used games out there to keep me playing for a long time to come.