Looks like his efforts to be recruited on Microsoft by praising the DRM policies absolutely failed.
I got this from the second article. “I’ve said before if I worked at Microsoft I would not only POSITIVELY motivate users to go digital but also offer their own trading system in which they give you MORE money for your game than Gamestop and sell the used games for LESS than Gamestop. Include a Netflix style mailing system and move along your merry way by engaging the customer as opposed to treating them like criminals."
Can anybody make some sort of sense from this, cause I'm scratching my head right now. How does this fit with his "no used games ideals"?
I think his problem with used games is that all of the money given goes to the one selling it. If Gamestop sells a game for $30 used, they make way more money than if it was $30 new. If his plans were taken into account, then people would be interacting in a used-game ecosystem where some of the money goes to Microsoft and the publisher, like it would with a new game. Plus, it would be a better place for used game trading due to treating the customers better through better prices (according to him).
Oh I see, I read "I've said before, if I worked at Microsoft" as "I've said before I worked at Microsoft" which is why I was confused.
Looks like his efforts to be recruited on Microsoft by praising the DRM policies absolutely failed.
Why woud he need to be recruited by Microsoft? Dude is a millionaire who's been in the business since he was a teenager. I disagree with CliffyB, but lets be honest whenever he decides to come back to active devopment his game will be funded by the higest bidder.
WAT!
Hey check out my awesome new youtube channel shingi70 where I update weekly on the latest gaming and comic news form a level headed perspective.
3DS Friend Code: 3093-7342-3454 | Nintendo Network ID: shingi70
I think his problem with used games is that all of the money given goes to the one selling it. If Gamestop sells a game for $30 used, they make way more money than if it was $30 new. If his plans were taken into account, then people would be interacting in a used-game ecosystem where some of the money goes to Microsoft and the publisher, like it would with a new game. Plus, it would be a better place for used game trading due to treating the customers better through better prices (according to him).
In other words: he is not happy with the way used games are currently established and he prefers to see a certain degree of control over these while, of course, profiting even while you are harming consumers and traditional gaming stores alike, pretty much.
Why woud he need to be recruited by Microsoft? Dude is a millionaire who's been in the business since he was a teenager. I disagree with CliffyB, but lets be honest whenever he decides to come back to active devopment his game will be funded by the higest bidder.
Before Microsoft pulled back their ‘always-online’ and anti-used games DRM, Cliffy was pretty much agreed with their ideals; he even slammed Sony for their lack of used games blockers and he coined it as a free PR tactic. To me, that pretty much sounded like he wanted to gain a place in the company sooo bad. Now that Microsoft has finally shown some common sense, this guy totally lost his own.
This champ is known for being a total big mouth, and while most of his creations were undeniably good, it’s impossible to agree with much of the stuff he says. This one, in particular, is top class:
As you pointed out, the guy is a millionaire. But here comes the thing: on such state, I don’t think he’s got the right to come up with such a statement after profiting millions with the Gears of War series. Also, to his statement, there is an effective solution: lower their budgets. I don’t think developers need rocket science to know a game doesn’t necessarily need to be akin to Hollywood productions while encouraging for more ambitiously creative projects to stand out in the market.
All I am saying is: Cliffy should not come up teaching how to deal with business and most importantly how to treat consumers while riding his precious Lamborghini.
I think his problem with used games is that all of the money given goes to the one selling it. If Gamestop sells a game for $30 used, they make way more money than if it was $30 new. If his plans were taken into account, then people would be interacting in a used-game ecosystem where some of the money goes to Microsoft and the publisher, like it would with a new game. Plus, it would be a better place for used game trading due to treating the customers better through better prices (according to him).
In other words: he is not happy with the way used games are currently established and he prefers to see a certain degree of control over these while, of course, profiting even while you are harming consumers and traditional gaming stores alike, pretty much.
Why woud he need to be recruited by Microsoft? Dude is a millionaire who's been in the business since he was a teenager. I disagree with CliffyB, but lets be honest whenever he decides to come back to active devopment his game will be funded by the higest bidder.
Before Microsoft pulled back their ‘always-online’ and anti-used games DRM, Cliffy was pretty much agreed with their ideals; he even slammed Sony for their lack of used games blockers and he coined it as a free PR tactic. To me, that pretty much sounded like he wanted to gain a place in the company sooo bad. Now that Microsoft has finally shown some common sense, this guy totally lost his own.
This champ is known for being a total big mouth, and while most of his creations were undeniably good, it’s impossible to agree with much of the stuff he says. This one, in particular, is top class:
As you pointed out, the guy is a millionaire. But here comes the thing: on such state, I don’t think he’s got the right to come up with such a statement after profiting millions with the Gears of War series. Also, to his statement, there is an effective solution: lower their budgets. I don’t think developers need rocket science to know a game doesn’t necessarily need to be akin to Hollywood productions while encouraging for more ambitiously creative projects to stand out in the market.
All I am saying is: Cliffy should not come up teaching how to deal with business and most importantly how to treat consumers while riding his Lamborghini.
I saw the bombcast with Cliffy and Jon Blow on it from last week. I totally understand where Cliffy as a gamer creator is coming from though, while I disliked the 24 DRM check, I wouldn't disagree that Microsoft's intentions to used games weren't better for the industry overall.
Also lowering budgets while helping development won;t necessarily help the problem with used games. Even if we got rid of explosive budgets (which I think were going to see this generation as everyone moves to internally developed engines), it doesn't change the fact that used games sales are still a large chunk of money pubs and devs aren't seeing. Plus Budget is relative, Jounry wasn't a game with a massive budget but it still nearly and would killed thatgamecompany if the game wouldn't have become the breakout hit it was.
I do agree with you that Cliffy really doesn't have much leeway to talk about expensive budgets seeing as the gears games were financed by Epic's unreal engine and Microsoft's money. Plus while being a problem used games rarley effect AAA franchises like the Marios, Gears, Halos, and Uncharteds of the world.
WAT!
Hey check out my awesome new youtube channel shingi70 where I update weekly on the latest gaming and comic news form a level headed perspective.
3DS Friend Code: 3093-7342-3454 | Nintendo Network ID: shingi70
Car manufacturers don't get a cut of used cars sales, why should game publishers/developers?
Not that I agree with it, but I think the argument is that used game sales hurt the game industry more than other used markets hurt their respective industries.
Games used to be priced based on how much they cost to produce (technically advanced games like Super Mario Kart & Donkey Kong Country cost between $80-$100 when they first released due to their cutting edge tech), but nowadays, despite games costing more than ever to produce, devs aren't allowed to charge more than $60 (due to that underpricing, they can't make enough profit unless a game is a smash hit), so they have no choice but to target second hand sales, or hit the consumer with DLC.
Again, not saying I agree with it, but I can understand where they're coming from.
Currently Playing:
Switch - Blade Strangers
PS4 - Kingdom Hearts III, Tetris Effect (VR)
I can't figure out how any gamer can defend used game blockings. You're the consumer, you should want options.
1. Used games weren't a problem for decades until a few years ago they all of the sudden started "destroying the industry".
2. If Gamestop hurts the industry, why do publishers keep signing deals with them?
3. Used game blocks would make any out of print games cost a fortune, good luck playing the classics.
4. Most people who sell their games use it to buy new games
5. Many people who buy used do so because they couldn't afford new anyways
6. People will not want to put money into new games (Especially new IP's) if they have no resale value
7. Why do no other industries complain about used sales? If Gamestop is the bane of gaming, yard sales are the bane of dozens of industries.
8. Competition is good for the consumer. Used games create competition.
9. Why would anyone want to give money to publishers who don't want them to own their games?
10. Game companies go out of business because of bad business and bad games, not used sales.
I can't figure out how any gamer can defend used game blockings. You're the consumer, you should want options.
1. Used games weren't a problem for decades until a few years ago they all of the sudden started "destroying the industry".
2. If Gamestop hurts the industry, why do publishers keep signing deals with them?
3. Used game blocks would make any out of print games cost a fortune, good luck playing the classics.
4. Most people who sell their games use it to buy new games
5. Many people who buy used do so because they couldn't afford new anyways
6. People will not want to put money into new games (Especially new IP's) if they have no resale value
7. Why do no other industries complain about used sales? If Gamestop is the bane of gaming, yard sales are the bane of dozens of industries.
8. Competition is good for the consumer. Used games create competition.
9. Why would anyone want to give money to publishers who don't want them to own their games?
10. Game companies go out of business because of bad business and bad games, not used sales.
he did have a point. Almost everyone keeps everything online nowadays anyways, at least the people that have $400+ to spend on a gaming console.
I mean all it takes is to have a cell phone and you can have internet almost anywhere.
Either way, there is nothing to complain about anymore. They changed the DRM, so idiots would stop complaining.
The concern isn't with the consumer's internet connection, it was with Microsoft's servers.
If they couldn't handle the strain, if they got hacked or DDoS attacked and went offline then the consumer wouldn't be able to play their games.
Diablo 3 and Sim City are prime examples of this happening, not to mention the PSN hacking scandal a few years ago.
That was sony, this is Microsoft.
They have been running Xbox LIVE for over 10 years now, and in that time not only has not been any big hacking problems (aside from people falling for phishing and crap like that) and only 1 big downtime back during the Halo 3 launch (and they have been increasing their server capacity regularly). This isn't the company's first foray into an online infrastructure for a single player game or anything like that. There is no reason to believe XBOX LIVE would magically become like PSN and have regular downtime lasting over 24 hours and server issues all the time.
And Xbox LIVE did get DDoS-attacked a couple times, not a single time did the service go completely offline (parts of the service, like the store and website, did, but online multiplayer and the basic log in were unaffected)
Diablo 3 and Sim City are prime examples of this happening, not to mention the PSN hacking scandal a few years ago.
That was sony, this is Microsoft.
That is the dumbest Argument I've ever seen. Governments around the world get hacked, yet I guess somehow Microsoft is impervious to hacking? Gee, too bad they don't use their super anti-hacking programs/technology to use on the computers they sell that get hacked all the time.
Diablo 3 and Sim City are prime examples of this happening, not to mention the PSN hacking scandal a few years ago.
That was sony, this is Microsoft.
That is the dumbest Argument I've ever seen. Governments around the world get hacked, yet I guess somehow Microsoft is impervious to hacking? Gee, too bad they don't use their super anti-hacking programs/technology to use on the computers they sell that get hacked all the time.
The only computers they sell are the Surface RT and Surface Pro. For everything else, they just make the OS and Office software, for which they release regular updates. The problem is most government and companies don't usually update on an everyday basis. In the interest of time, they only update their software a couple times a year at most, just as was the case with sony, who had software with known vulnerabilities on their servers and had data stored in plain text.
They are not impervious to hacking, but certainly do a much better job at securing their network than others have done. Certainly having an OS that has been under constant attack all the time helps to keep your defenses up.
I'm actually surprised people want a PS4 at all after Microsoft bailed on their DRM and required online. There's basically no reason to want a PS4 aside from the exclusive games like Killzone, Knack, etc.
If you can't already tell, Xbox One has a better UI in terms of function, and they have WAY more announced exclusives already than Sony.
3rd party games don't count in this case, because they're not exclusive to only PS3, and Xbox One will be getting more games from PC.
EDIT: So Xbox One is getting the 3rd party games, some PC games, and its exclusives. We also knew Xbox Live would be better than PSN, and be a paid service the whole time.
When you really look at how things play out w/o jumping the gun, things didn't really play out in Sony's favor.
I'm actually surprised people want a PS4 at all after Microsoft bailed on their DRM and required online. There's basically no reason to want a PS4 aside from the exclusive games like Killzone, Knack, etc.
If you can't already tell, Xbox One has a better UI in terms of function, and they have WAY more announced exclusives already than Sony.
3rd party games don't count in this case, because they're not exclusive to only PS3, and Xbox One will be getting more games from PC.
EDIT: So Xbox One is getting the 3rd party games, some PC games, and its exclusives. We also knew Xbox Live would be better than PSN, and be a paid service the whole time.
When you really look at how things play out w/o jumping the gun, things didn't really olay out in Sony's favor.
Um, isn't the PS4 $100 cheaper? That seems like a really good reason to veer in Sony's direction. Plus, if one isn't interested in many of the One's exclusives, then that also seems like a reason.
Best thread ever
Feel free to add me on Miiverse or PSN.
Miiverse is Moomoo14, PSN is Moomoo1405390
3DS Friend Code: 4940-5561-6002 | Nintendo Network ID: Moomoo14
Forums
Topic: The everything Xbox thread
Posts 861 to 880 of 11,914
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic