I've learned long ago Cliff B. has been out of touch with gaming reality, and anything out of his mouth is utter stupidity and ignorance.
Despite this, however, I'm still disappointed the mentality he speaks of us widespread, as though these idiots can't see the facts before them.
Angry Birds is, by no means, a "AAA" title and yet it's managed to make more money than any "AAA" title out there. Why? Because it's got a price base of 99 cents, which attracts billions, yes with a "b", downloads. It's been using the same game engine as well.
Bethesda, makers of the Fallout and TES franchises, has been using their (broken) game engine for 4 games, and if Skyrim sales are any indication, it's proof companies can make stellar games and keep costs low.
EA and Ubisoft are two of the most asinine game companies out there. According to NPD, consumers spend nearly $2 billion on gaming last year, and if the most costly "AAA" title is $250 million to make, someone's either lying about profits or they're including their shovelware failures in the mix, which no respectable gamer's going to shell out $60 for.
I don't begrudge the opportunity, and massive risk, Microsoft is doing to allow gamers, for the first time ever to sell used digital games. I welcome the opportunity because it gives me flexibility.
But what I can't stand are articles like this which constantly omit this feature of the changes Microsoft is risking. Cliff B. obviously failed to take into account selling back a digital file is no different than gamers selling back a plastic disk.
Furthermore, it's this opportunity, when consumers knowingly sell off their games at a significant loss of what they paid, that allows them to try other games, usually at at the current MSRP.
The fact the gaming industry has three constant tiers of pricing based on their "production" of the games proves it's their model that's failing, not the consumer who is taking a loss at every turn and has been since the introduction of the NES (remember those old game stores which sold second hand NES cartridges we had to blow on to get to work?).
Gaming is a risky business by its very nature to do the consistent over-saturation of the market. Trying to sell the "next big thing" isn't going to be done unless thousand upon thousands of us review the game and offer our opinions.
With the 49k+ reviews on XBox 360, Bethesda owes each of them a massive "Thank you" as it was their near-5 star ratings which got me to buy Oblivion, and thus Fallout 3, Fallout: New Vegas, Skyrim, and the latest Dishonored (which was full price because I trust Bethesda's quality.
The world is moving to digital, and it's disgusting those who are finally, and slowly, migrating toward it aren't looking to open the doors to make it better for everyone, but are looking to ensure the same prices of physical goods are carried with it, despite their costs being lowered.
Hell, even their marketing budget shrinks thanks to the customer base reviewing their products, and those ratings absolutely influence sales.
You're correct, but I must caution about private keys: they're stored [i]in the same location on every computer[/i] by design, which means if someone's machine is broken into, possible with the back door options Microsoft gives "law" enforcement, those keys are pointless.
Ironically, the only way to protect a PgP key is to encrypt it, but the sheer hassle of so many levels of encryption/decryption makes the tools useless to most people who simply want to send their mothers a "Happy Mother's Day" message (and for them to read it).
I'm on the side with Snowden here. Our companies, who tell us via their ToS our privacy is important, should have blown the whistle on these requests years ago.
The fact they didn't is more a statement than politicians who stated they knew this was going on for 7 years.
Ironic, again, that Google helped stop SOPA, but didn't lift a finger to stop this blatant abuse of the 4th.
Indeed. The worst part about all this is that people don't understand why the XBox One requires a 24 hour check in while giving customers the ability to sell digital games.
I mean, common sense dictates why this is a necessity. I'm excited I can finally sell my digital games rather than delete them from my console, losing everything I paid into it when I'm done with it.
Physical and digital can't live together without restrictions. Otherwise, everyone will be selling both, and you can bet that won't go over well with publishers.
"Authorized" retailer means they need access to the gamer's XBox Live account to ensure they don't have a digital copy of the game (and if they do, it gets locked out) while trying to sell their physical copy.
Common sense, yet most of the internet's all "But I can't play my games without an internet connection??!! Lame!!!"
Derp. It's how we gamers, the whole customer-friendly aspect, can have the best of both worlds.
Sony has a reputation of saying one thing, then doing something else which is completely anti-consumer.
They sure set themselves up well to get millions to buy their console, and then months after doing so, customers get a rude surprise their "featureless" console is now full of those very features the XBox One has.
Developers are not going to "change their ways". There are billions out there to tap into, if we're to trust Gamestop's business model.
Do you really think they'll not try every possible attempt to get those billions as they trample over customers to get it?
Thanks to the PS4 readying itself for a launch, I see Microsoft took the immature road by yelling "FIRST!!1!!" to the world, and like most comments like this on the internet, then offer nothing else.
Unlike most people, I plan to wait months beyond its release before I buy it. This way, I allow the suck, er, gamers to throw down their cash and tell me what's up with the console (especially if it, you know, crashes and requires a send off to be repaired).
While I am fine with these new consoles being reclassified as "entertainment systems", it's really disappointing to see the gaming market is being forced to change in lieu of proprietary crap like this.
Doesn't matter if the game requires an always-on internet connection, or that codes have to be used to play used games, the bottom line here is Gamestop's billion dollar business model is ruined because everyone else believes those monies should be theirs and no one else.
If this is the future of gaming, they can keep it.
The great news in all this will be those who rush to sell their 360 and games means I can pick them up for a song (and maybe a dance), as I will most assuredly keep my 360 on hand for years to come, thanks to all the "new" games I'll have.
PS: The Kinect will be a deal killer for me. No way in hell will I ever allow Big Business to require a camera in my house for their use. NO WAY.
That's just going far, far, far over the line for "entertainment".
Anyone who complains about this feature in the future, because it will be abused, has no one but themselves to blame.