Microsoft fires the first shot in the "NEXT" generation.... - Page 150

I'd take a secondary source (a guy with a development kit) over a tertiary source like Edge any day of the week especially since he has a history that goes beyond the development kit.

I don't believe either one of those rumors, but I do believe that if there will be no more used games BOTH consoles will do it...not just MS. If Sony addresses that issue next week one way or the other, we'll know that MS will follow suit. If they make no mention of it, then the speculation will continue.

It may not be the console maker that says no used games. They may include the feature on the console but leave it up to the game developer to make that decision. It may not be an across the board feature that all games will be held to.

This was my thought as well. Recent statements by various publishers point to there being a lockout of some kind, and the way the Wii U is being man handled could also point to a lockout. (since Nintendo would be the only one not doing it)

Okay...all of the kids in the no rumors...no speculation...let's just all of us wait 3 years for them to come out...before we talk about them camp. Close your eyes...cover your ears...while the rest of us talk about this latest tidbit from EA's CFO;

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/02/13/ea-cfo-talks-next-gen-consoles

But hey...what does that bozo know...right?!

FWIW...the used game talk sure sounds like a tactical leak to ward off talk about devs and console makers going to war with retail trade partners anytime soon. While he didn't say it directly...he sure implied that EA was not fully on board with such a move. The big deal from the Dev/publisher side on used game sales is really simple at its core. And I have suggested a simple solution about 1-2 pages back. Their big problem is diversion of new games to uncontrolled markets when the heat cools down on them...along with tight distribution regulation of closeout goods via normal retail channels. Retailers are getting a 3 way margin bump from game makers to expedite flow. 1) New sales at suggested retail prices; 2) Markdown allowances to prevent returned goods on excessive inventory; 3) Closeout goods markdowns to move excess game maker inventory. They do all of this in sort of a hostage deal to carry more inventory on new releases...which starts the whole cycle over again.

The used game market Fits nicely within this strategy for retailers, because it allows them to bank all of the markdown allowances from vendors and enhance their total maintained margin structure on all games by re-churning inventory regardless of their going in margins/investments. This is what frosts the a.s.s.es of the big boys most. In their eyes...they are actually subsidizing their own margin erosion and ROI. They are caught in a catch 22 that should be quite easy to get out of without the drastic action of console lockouts. The used game market was a novel creation that enhanced retail margins while keeping the new game pipeline clean. We consumers benefit great from all tiers of this distribution strategy...from new game releases-black market diversion-subsidized sales-second hand games. IMO game developers should get a ROI throughout the inventory lifecycle. Especially since they subsidize it a ton with promotion allowances that feed the excess inventory glut. But as I stated earlier...it is a legal and financial issue best addressed through hard purchase, promotion and royalty based contract terms and negotiations. I certainly don't see the need to punish consumers with an Orwellian technical solution.

Interesting that EA let its highest financial officer take the point on opening up this discussion in the media.
Edited by barrelbelly - 2/13/13 at 2:20pm

Falls for what?


Anyway, EA also commented about BC. This I'm not too worried about, although it is nice to have in case the need arises.

Edited by Monger - 2/13/13 at 8:13pm

Well, could they not also take differing stances and come out on top? Sony announces at their event they won't support used games. So now MS can come in later and say "come to us, you can still play used games over here." I'd say MS would come out on top in that event.


**The previous statements were verified by a team of lawyers to be true and factual. Another team of scientists were employed to administer a drug that prevents me from changing any opinions formed as a result of these statements.**

I doubt it. both have been anti-used games for a long time now. both wanted to implement it this for the PS3 and 360, but chickened out at the last minute. if one goes, the other will definitely go. everybody eventually wants the fully DRM digital model that Apple, Google, Steam, etc. has. all the other fans have bought into that idea. now it's time for the consoles to buy in.

I always like going to the source article to see the full interview.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/186504/EAs_money_man_spills_the_beans_on_its_nextgen_plans.php#.URzNPmdZBIa
Edited by spid - 2/14/13 at 5:54am

Xbox founder: Apple TV gaming could ‘simply kill PlayStation, Wii U and Xbox’
By Brad Reed | BGR News –

Xbox DashboardThe Xbox is one of the best things that Microsoft (MSFT) has going for it right now, but one of the console’s founding engineers thinks the company is in grave danger of getting its hide handed to it by Apple (AAPL)… again. Nat Brown, a former Microsoft engineer who worked at the company until 1999 and who was one of the founders of the Xbox project, has written a long post on his personal blog making the case that Microsoft has only been winning the console wars over the past couple of years because Sony (SNE) and Nintendo (NTDOY) have been screwing up so badly. He also tears apart the company’s strategy for allowing independent game developers to create games for the platform, saying that the process for developing and distributing games on the console is far too cumbersome.

“Xbox’s primary critical problem is the lack of a functional and growing platform ecosystem for small developers to sell digitally-/network-distributed (non-disc) content through to the installed base of Xbox customers, period,” he writes, while detailing how Microsoft has thrown up all sorts of red tape to prevent small gaming developers from easily selling their games on the Xbox platform. “Microsoft, you are idiotic to have ceded not just indie game developers but also a generation of loyal kids and teens to making games for other people’s mobile devices.”

Brown wishes that Microsoft had the foresight to adopt the model for game and app distribution that iOS and Android have used to create enormous mobile gaming ecosystems and made fortunes for formerly unknown gaming companies such as Rovio. And to make things worse, Brown thinks that Apple could make a big move into the gaming sphere if it adding a gaming ecosystem to its Apple TV platform that made it just as easy to develop independent games for the big screen as it is to develop games for the iPad.

“Apple, if it chooses to do so, will simply kill PlayStation, Wii U and Xbox by introducing an open 30%-cut app/game ecosystem for Apple TV,” he writes. “I already make a lot of money on iOS — I will be the first to write apps for Apple TV when I can, and I know I’ll make money. I would for Xbox if I could and I knew I would make money.”

http://news.yahoo.com/xbox-founder-apple-tv-gaming-could-simply-kill-181039706.html

I totally disagree with this guy. I don't think consoles need to change to suit the latest trend. There's some neat stuff on the mobile platforms, but there is also an undeniable race to the bottom. You don't see people even attempting large projects. Maybe xbox can't spawn the next minecraft or angry birds, but iOS can't spawn the next skyrim or uncharted. Barriers to entry aren't necessarily a bad thing. The cinema doesn't need to change to suit YouTube.

I do think that Apple's reach may be an issue, but I have never agreed that the lack of these small developers have hurt either Sony or Microsoft. I do think both Microsoft and Sony will have to be more flexible with their patching policies.

"I can't really comment on where the next generation boxes are going to be relative to used games. I will say that the trend in the business is to have that always-on connectivity and connect with a customer, and to the extent that the software identifies a certain customer is going to create some issues going down the road in the used game market. But I do believe that the consumer likes it, and it's been good for the retail channel."

That part is what got my attention when I first read it. Something is going to limit used games in some way or form.

He def knows something that he's tap dancing around. But there's still a dozen different ways they can go with it, so its not confirmation of the worst.

He thinks customers like always online? He's insane. What customers like is "always available". So we don't have to be on the internet to play our single player game.

I'm just not sure that always online is as much of a deterrent when it comes to consoles. Theyre not like portables or laptops where you're frequently without a connection. And my Internet is working 99.99% of the time.

Some people are not so lucky and there are millions of 360s not connected at all. Mine stays connected but I don't allow my boys to have theirs connected. Also, you are subject to 2 forms of outage. Your service provider and xbox live. If either goes down, you can't play. That should never be a possibility.

***this response is in regards to a supposition based on speculation and rumor***

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm not exactly looking forward to more launch day disasters. But right now its easy to condemn this type of thing because we can more easily identify the downsides, and don't really know the upsides yet. It certainly means little to no piracy and cheating (which is a downside to some people )

EA is also the company that put the "Autolog" feature in a lot of their games. As far I can see that is an almost unanimously loved feature. If they feel they have more features like that they could do if the customer was always online then it could certainly be a benefit to the customer.

this is an honest question, but why is everyone so worried about apple? they have never really been into gaming and there has been little talk from apple or rumors about taking on the "big 3", so just curious to why everyone thinks they will just "take over"? once again i am honestly curious because i know people here keep up with this type of stuff much more than i do..

I don't mind a game pinging the server periodically to provide some benefit. I do mind not being able to play a game if live is down or the cable goes out orif I simply don't want a console (kids) connected.

***this response is in regards to a supposition based on speculation and rumor***

Because they could (and already have) shake things up in a huge way. They're bigger than Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft and Valve combined. Anything they do gets massive attention. They're already all digital, and their software/games are as cheap as it can possibly get. Their entrance will suck a huge amount of air out of the room, and the current players are either forced to deal with a behemoth on their territory, or try and carve out a niche that Apple isn't interested in.

Their entrance would probably be a net gain for gamers - the casual/indie space could really open up, and the core games are then forced to be even more "core" to coexist.

See, I just don't see this. Apple's games (and I use that loosely) are geared towards mobile users. People that are playing for 30 minutes and then they're done. Sure, they'd get attention if they announced AppleBoxStation but I don't think the majority of PS3/Xbox gamers would give two craps about it. If anything, it might eat into Nintendo, but I don't know if that would really say anything either since Nintendo is their own worst enemy.

Careful with the kid comment, im the sensative type... LOL
I would care to wager that I have a few years over you anyways Jr....

In all honesty im pretty much trollin here for the entertainment value.... I have been following this stuff since back in the days of Telstar / RCA Studio II systems, so I have seen this all before... Leaks, rumors, forum comments and speculation, and so on really doesnt phase me one way or the other at this point. As I said before, I will most likely make my buying decision after seeing final products in the store.

Two things:

First, the number of "traditional/core" gamers is shrinking. The next generation of gamers is moving to mobile for all gaming, not just portable gaming. As they get older, they're not going to transition to traditional consoles. Nintendo has seen this play out not just on 3DS, but also on Wii U.

Second, the traditional publisher model has killed off most console gaming development studios over the past 5-10 years. It's become an unsustainably hostile and risky environment, and only the very largest studios remain. The snake is eating its own tail. As a result, those other developers have all migrated to mobile and indie PC development. With more stable employment in that space, I don't see them returning to the old console mega-publisher model any time soon.

Between those two things, it doesn't matter if iOS games are "geared towards mobile users." Unsustainable business practices are quickly killing off traditional console development. And the way that people are playing games has changed. This next generation will be very interesting. It's the make-or-break point for traditional consoles. Either they evolve to account for these changes, or they go the way of the dodo. And with lots of competition on the horizon, they'll be fighting the "barbarians at the gates" for the next five years. And they may not win. The console wars are no longer about MS v. Sony.
Edited by confidenceman - 2/14/13 at 8:55am

There's some overlap though. Id give half a crap about it. Microsoft clearly wants a piece of that mobile/casual market even if they can't dominate it. Sony would like a piece of it too, but they'll do fine just retrenching into core games. I think it'd be the end of Nintendo hardware (hopefully), and Microsoft could probably sustain itself on a diet of mediocrity in all things for another decade or two.

I think It'd be a game changer, but like you I don't think it'll be a complete takeover.

I am basing my comments off what the EA exec said so there is no rumor about it. :>

I have gotten to the point I don't play games when I loose internet connect. My cable internet connect is fairly stable so if I loose internet connect it normally means I have lost power. Of course by always on he also mean pinging the server periodically as a check in.

Been that way since the damn thing came out, why would they not force it into the next xbox? I wish the console makers would abandon motion control, I hate it with a passion.

It's easier to just use a controller. When I sit down to play a game, on my couch, I have ZERO desire to move my damn hands around like I am having a seizure, nor do I want to constantly be talking to the TV screen.

I'm not saying it would have NO market, but it would be really small. Like the Ouya, but bigger because it's got an Apple on it. Apple people are like a cult. They'll buy anything the company releases, so I'm sure for hardware it would be a success. My point is that there's very, very little crossover in people that play the PS3/Xbox now, but would also want a home console to play Angry Birds.

I don't think it would even be the end of Nintendo, really. Their business is first party games and you're not going to see Mario, Zelda, etc on an Apple box.
Edited by bbexperience - 2/14/13 at 10:59am