Next Xbox will not require always-on Internet connection

Well this is some good news I guess. If they could only say it would have backwards compatibility I would consider this system. Either way I would not get one right away and wait a year at least

And so MS bows down to pressure. They only did it due to the outpour of consumer agitation prior to the let go of the one idiot shooting his mouth off. It was the only way to correct such bad PR. Hopefully now MS can show us value for such high price of console.

Moved from the WILL NOT BUY list to the MAYBE list. Glad to hear this...

Microsoft has a competitive edge over $ony.

Originally posted by DarthMopar:

---

Moved from the WILL NOT BUY list to the MAYBE list. Glad to hear this...

---

Ditto... I think I will avoid the rumor mill and wait for the official announcement and E3... This is the problem with these blog/news sites... Hype and information based on assumption.

I just hate that even if I consider the NextBox that I would have to have two systems from Microsoft. It kind of defeats the convenient factor that consoles are supposed to have. Especially with a console with a $500 price tag.

If a $500 price-point is announced, I may keep shopping. I don't NEED another X-Box. I hardly get on the one I have now, anyway. Even my kids have gravitated towards their laptops these days. *Stupid Minecraft game!*

I knew people were jumping the gun based on the rumors circulating for the last month or so. Before you get too upset about possibility of it not being backward compatible (also still just a rumor) understand why.

They are upgrading to a chipset tech more familiar to gaming firms which will allow for cheaper gaming development and is the current industry standard. To make it backwards compatible they would have to include a redundant set for the sole purpose of the compatibility (which isn't to say they wont do so in one way or another). I for one will just hold onto my old console for awhile then move on when the nextgen library grows enough warrant parting ways. Or better yet wait for official word May 21st.

Originally posted by IceCold84:

---

I knew people were jumping the gun based on the rumors circulating for the last month or so. Before you get too upset about possibility of it not being backward compatible (also still just a rumor) understand why.

They are upgrading to a chipset tech more familiar to gaming firms which will allow for cheaper gaming development and is the current industry standard. To make it backwards compatible they would have to include a redundant set for the sole purpose of the compatibility (which isn't to say they wont do so in one way or another). I for one will just hold onto my old console for awhile then move on when the nextgen library grows enough warrant parting ways. Or better yet wait for official word May 21st.

---

Oh I completely understand the long term purpose working in IT myself.... I just do not like it as being limited on inputs on my TV and supplying power and all the cord necessary it is just disappointing... Maybe they will pull a rabbit out of their hat and say they got some good emulation (which will be hard to do on the x86 core since emulation is very processor intensive) or somehow squeeze in a PowerPC sub-processor to provide the calculations for the emulation.

I have to stop believing these blog sites reporting the news using words like "confirmed".... So many false stories over the years in an attempt to be first with the news.... In two weeks we should have more information....

If the information is good I will start putting money from my side jobs away and purchase one sometime in 2014 after it has some of the kinks worked out and I see what it can actually do...

Looks like some critics got all in a tizz over nothing, again.

Originally posted by Interestx:

---

Looks like some critics got all in a tizz over nothing, again.

---

More likely that M$ saw the backlash and changed their mind. No worries...I'm sure they will still charge for online features that are free on PC.

Quote:

---

More likely that M$ saw the backlash and changed their mind. No worries...I'm sure they will still charge for online features that are free on PC.

---

Exactly right. If their intention was leaning towards not having an always-online system from the beginning, than why did they simply not come out and say so from the beginning rather than avoid comment for months, which would have save their embarrassment over their own employee's flapping their mouths off and then even after they remained silent on the issue until now: so that says they were deeply considering it so and bowed down to pressure. Not too hard to read what corporate was thinking when you see beyond the lines of what is posted by journalism.

Well if ever there was a case of circular logic this is it.

Invent a narrative (as if it was such a fresh idea & insight anyway) and when it doesn't actually happen then claim it was your narrative that stopped it happening.

Brilliant.

Fact is rather than play this pointless game (they could never win, the critics would just claim they are lying ...or just not doing it yet) Microsoft never comment on this sort of speculation.
I know that really narks some people off but there it is.

Why would they let themselves get drawn into an endless & pointless game of 'are going to ...?'

Quote:

---

Why would they let themselves get drawn into an endless & pointless game of 'are going to ...?'

---

Simple really: controversy draws in people who discuss, which in turn derives into free intel which then helps provide solutions to MS regarding which direction from consumers they should focus on to get an understanding of supply and demand. Should the consumers not be ready for X product, it has to sit on the back bench until they are ready for it or shelved for life.

Every major corporation has done this, no matter what sector. There is no conspiracy here, it's just a tactic to get answers you don't have the balls to just ask yourself in the face you look like the enemy. Then after the solution presents itself, they can look as heroes by stating they are listening to the voice of reason and giving the consumers what they want: hence EA not having Always-On for The Sims 4.

Originally posted by Mysttic:

---

Quote:

---

Why would they let themselves get drawn into an endless & pointless game of 'are going to ...?'

---

Simple really: controversy draws in people who discuss, which in turn derives into free intel which then helps provide solutions to MS regarding which direction from consumers they should focus on to get an understanding of supply and demand. Should the consumers not be ready for X product, it has to sit on the back bench until they are ready for it or shelved for life.

Every major corporation has done this, no matter what sector. There is no conspiracy here, it's just a tactic to get answers you don't have the balls to just ask yourself in the face you look like the enemy. Then after the solution presents itself, they can look as heroes by stating they are listening to the voice of reason and giving the consumers what they want: hence EA not having Always-On for The Sims 4.

---

There is just one little issue with that method...when the company decides not to do what everyone is angry about, it doesn't make them heroes. It makes them neutral with less informed consumers and it makes them villains in the eyes of more informed consumers. It would be better; at least from a PR standpoint; to simply avoid pissing people off...but then they wouldn't know where the line is, so they wouldn't be able to put their toes right up against it, screwing the customers as much as possible without major backlash. Personally, my line on the xbox was already crossed when they decided I would have to pay for xbox live gold just to access netflix. I don't care if I would be paying for xbox live gold anyway...it isn't their service, they don't run the servers for it, and the live account does not give a discounted netflix membership; it is just a scam.

BTW...I gotta wonder if they will copy the Steam approach where you don't need always-on internet, but you must connect once a week (or more) or else it locks itself down until you do.

They're all very nice & interesting conspiracy theories but the fact is no matter what the off-stage noises Microsoft has always stayed quiet & refused to play the Xbox rumour game.

Lots of people (so obviously often biased) then spend an age writing at length about how annoyed & outraged they are - at the narrative they themselves created.

Only to be wrong in the end anyway...

...but then to top it all they flatter themselves that it was their huff & puff which led to their own imagined *thing* not coming to pass.

And those original theorists can't see how absurd that is?

It happens time after time with Xbox/Microsoft.
All sorts of lurid invented tales about how awful they are about to be to their prospective regular paying customers & in the end it turns out it was all just someone's imaginative invention & not actually related to the end product/plans.

It just gets very bit boring reading the same old same old.

but what is funny with this statement is they have said a always on internet connectivity isn't required but didn't say they wouldn't limit the consoles features unless you where on xbox live gold service which they have done on the 360 because the 360's latest dash is so xbox live gold enabled that without it the console is worthless

Originally posted by megadunderhead:

---

the 360's latest dash is so xbox live gold enabled that without it the console is worthless

---

Oh don't be so silly.

You said it right there "they have said a always on internet connectivity isn't required".

(except they haven't made any official announcem,ent, it's just become too clear it's not happening)

You then go on to complain that XBL gold gives certain features but you have to pay for them.
Well boo hoo hoo.

1) Nobody is making you or anyone buy XBL gold &
2) Xbox is far from alone now in offering a variety of premium features at a cost over and above the basic facilities the console comes with.

Microsoft haven't said that the next Xbox won't secretly gas you in your sleep.
maybe people should get worked up about that until an offical announcement to the contrary?

Originally posted by Interestx:

---

Well if ever there was a case of circular logic this is it.

Invent a narrative (as if it was such a fresh idea & insight anyway) and when it doesn't actually happen then claim it was your narrative that stopped it happening.

Brilliant.

Fact is rather than play this pointless game (they could never win, the critics would just claim they are lying ...or just not doing it yet) Microsoft never comment on this sort of speculation.
I know that really narks some people off but there it is.

Why would they let themselves get drawn into an endless & pointless game of 'are going to ...?'

---

Thank you. Completely agree. Most wildfire start with a spark after all.

Originally posted by IceCold84:

---

Originally posted by Interestx:

---

Well if ever there was a case of circular logic this is it.

Invent a narrative (as if it was such a fresh idea & insight anyway) and when it doesn't actually happen then claim it was your narrative that stopped it happening.

Brilliant.

Fact is rather than play this pointless game (they could never win, the critics would just claim they are lying ...or just not doing it yet) Microsoft never comment on this sort of speculation.
I know that really narks some people off but there it is.

Why would they let themselves get drawn into an endless & pointless game of 'are going to ...?'

---

Thank you. Completely agree. Most wildfire start with a spark after all.

---

Ditto