Showing posts with label xbox 360. Show all posts
Showing posts with label xbox 360. Show all posts

Monday, March 14, 2016

Cross Platform Online is Good for Consumers, Bad for Platforms AKA Why I Own an XBOX360

Microsoft wants to do cross platform online with Sony, and that's a bad idea for them.

Hey there everyone, Happy Gamer hear and I heard that Microsoft is going to do cross platform online with the XBOX ONE and Windows 10 (not Steam, Windows 10 store), and they are trying to get Sony to do cross platform online with them, so if you have a PS4 and your friend has an XBOX ONE, both of you can play online so long as the game is on both consoles. This is something that online gamers have been dreaming about since online gaming became mainstream. However, this is a REALLY bad idea for Sony and Microsoft, and here's why.

First, lets go back to 2008; the XBOX 360 and PS3 were the current gen consoles. My brother and I were looking to get one of them (the Wii was off the table for reasons explained in numerous different posts). Since we were coming of the PS2, I said "hey let's get a PS3 because we liked the PS2 so much." He said "no let's get an XBOX 360 because that's what all my friends have and I want to play online with them," and while every online game he wanted was also available on PS3, he couldn't play with his friends on the PS3. Online didn't really matter to me since I prefer single player games, and since all I really cared about were multi-plats, we got an XBOX 360. Sure, I wanted the blu-ray and rumored Sly 4, but pretty much every game I wanted on the PS3 I could get on the 360. However, I didn't play it much because the 7th gen didn't do much for me since most games were shooters or sports (2 genres I don't care for). And even though I wanted to use the streaming services like Hulu Plus and Crackle, I couldn't because I needed Xbox Live Gold to do that, and by the time I got into streaming services neither my brother nor I wanted to pay for gold anymore.

Well in 2011 Wreck it Ralph came out and I said "I refuse to get this movie on DVD, I am getting a blu-ray player of some kind so I can watch this movie right." Since there was a killer deal on a black friday PS3, we bought a PS3. From then on, the PS3 was our primary gaming machine. Every multi-plat from then on we bought was for the PS3. We bought multiple exclusives like Last of Us and Sly 4. Once we bought the PS3, it became our primary gaming device with our XBOX 360 collecting dust. We bought maybe 3 XBOX360 games since buying the PS3, and those were exclusives I got for cheap at garage sales. Even after Microsoft dropped the whole "you need XBL Gold for streaming services" we prefer to use the PS3 for streaming. If it wasn't for platform locked online, we probably wouldn't have an XBOX 360. (Well, we wouldn't have an XBOX 360 as our 7th gen console. I'm a collector, I would have bought an XBOX 360 eventually because I want every console, but it wouldn't have been before I got a PS3).

And there you have it. My family wouldn't have bought an XBOX 360 if my brother could have played with his XBOX 360 friends from a PS3. It would have been great for us, but it would have cost Microsoft a sale. If I were an online gamer, I would be really happy about this because it is great for consumers. However, we honestly wouldn't have bought an XBOX 360 as our primary platform and bought all our games and live gold if cross platform online was an option in the 7th gen. Well, this has been Happy Gamer, signing off, and if I were Sony I wouldn't agree to cross platform online.

Saturday, March 12, 2016

Physical Games Will Never Die for Me

So I watched ReviewTechUSA's video on "physical media is dying" and this is the comment I left.



I still buy physical and I will as long as I can, because I love seeing the game on my wall. I don't care "how easy to use" and "installs" and all that, I like looking over at my DVD rack and seeing my Wii U, PS3, and XBOX 360 games along my wall. I love looking at my (3)DS game cases lined up on my (3)DS game shelf. I love flipping through my 3DS game case to get to my game. I play mostly single player games so 15 years from now my games will still be mostly functional.

Now for my "burned" story with digital, a story I plan on turning into skit video. I have a bunch of demos on my PS3 and 360 that I downloaded when I didn't really have money back in high school. When I finally got a job to buy games, I tried getting the full games from PSN and XBL. Oh, those games are no longer on the servers, and this was before PS4 and XBOX ONE. Then around the same time, I wanted to buy some launch DS games that I didn't have (Feel the Magic and Sprung to be specific). What did I do? I went on amazon and bought used copies. Now lets look at a more recent example. PT? Yeah, that digital Konami game that was only available for like 9 months and now it's impossible to get if you don't already have it. Now if only it was released physically. Even if there's game breaking bugs and the patches are no longer available, well it's still playable up to a point.

I will ALWAYS prefer physical.

Wednesday, May 14, 2014

XBOX Changes, XBOX ONE kinect free bundle and Gold is only needed for multiplayer

"I will never buy an XBOX ONE so long as I have to buy a Kinect." I don't know if I've ever said that here on this particular blog, but I know I've said it in the comment section on countless articles and videos about the XBOX ONE. This was not an idle threat, I hate the idea of being required to buy something I will never use and the potential will never be fully utilized except in maybe 1 game. Like before, not sure if I ever did my comparison of the Wii and the kinect on this particular blog, but I know I've said it whenever someone said "the technology in Kinect 2.0 is so much more advanced than the original kinect and it opens up the doors to so much." Yeah, the wii remote also had loads of potential, but all we got from that was 3 games that actually utilized the motion controls while the rest was shovelware or tacked on. The same exact thing was going to happen with the kinect. But back to me never buying xbox with kinect. I saw some amazing exclusives at E3. I saw some amazing exclusives on TV and in demo stations. I thought to myself "that sure looks like it'd be grand fun, to bad I'll never buy an XBOX ONE so long as kinect is a required purchase." Now praise the lord that the kinect is no longer mandatory. With that gone, I'm now considering the XBOX ONE as my next console.

On a less publicized note, Microsoft is now unlocking all the streaming media apps and other features from behind the XBOX Gold payment wall. Yeah, you heard right, you will not longer need XBOX Gold to use streaming apps like netflix, hulu plus, crackle, youtube, internet explorer, MLB, NFL, vevo, amazon instant video; the list goes on and on. What do I have to say to that, well thank-you for wising up Microsoft. Absolutely no other device, at least to my EXTENSIVE knowledge, required you to pay a payment wall to access services that are completely free elsewhere or only require you to pay the subscription for the single service. My PS3, all I have to do is pay my hulu plus subscription, buy the episodes or movies through Amazon instant video, or watch some commercials on Crackle. I don't need playstation plus to access these services. The same goes for the Wii, Wii U, Roku, any cell phone or tablet, apple TV, 3DS, PC, and EVERY OTHER DEVICE! When I heard that, I thought "hmm, looks like I'll be able to finally use my XBOX360 for something other than offline gaming." I only had gold for that 1 free month you get for creating an xbox live account. Never had it since. Never needed it. I don't like online multiplayer and they didn't have all the streaming apps I cared about before I got my PS3. Good on you Microsoft, you're giving us options. They're also reworking games with gold where you get free games for having gold, so now it's more like playstion plus, which is a plus. If I ever get the time to actually play videogames again, maybe, just maybe, I might want to get gold for the first time

Now for something that really irks me, when I read articles about people complaining about the kinect news. They're all sad that now we aren't forced to buy a kinect. The make it sound like Microsoft is completely dropping kinect support. News flash, it's still available, but now we don't have to buy it if we don't want to. "But without the known install base developers can't confidently develop for the kinect." Yeah and how well did that work with the Wii? All 3 of the games I played that actually utilized the motion controls were first party nintendo games. All the others were tacked on motion controls or shovelware. The same exact thing was going to happen to the kinect. And you know what, if a developer has an amazing idea for kinect integration or a kinect game, they're going to make it. Really, no developer is going to say "I have this amazing idea for a game that utilizes kinect and would be a system seller, and people would buy a kinect just to play this game, but I won't do it because there's not enough of an install base." If a serious developer went to Microsoft with that pitch, Microsoft would probably give them kinect royalties. But who am I kidding, no one is taking the kinect seriously except for Microsoft and a couple of crazy reporters and fanboys.

Well, that's enough rambling for this topic. This has been Happy Gamer signing off, and remember, you can't please all the people all the time, but you can please almost all of the people by removing crap.

Thursday, October 17, 2013

A second look at "day 1" DLC

I used to hate "day 1" DLC, but now I'm looking at things slightly differently.

So I was watching "Address the Sess" from Rev3 gaming and Adam Sessler and he brought up an interesting fact about "day 1" DLC, something I haven't thought about.

Now if you don't know, I am very critical of "day 1" DLC, and so you know, "day 1" DLC doesn't necessarily have to be released on the day the game is released. I consider DLC "day 1" if it was developed along side the game specifically intended to not be released as part of the full game. I am very critical of this because from companies like Capcom, it's used to nickel and dime the consumer and try to capitalize on used games. My argument, "the game wouldn't end up on a gamestop shelf if you give the consumer more bang for their buck and deliver a game that is worth $70 and only charge them $60, instead of selling $50 worth of content for $60 and then selling the other $20 worth of content to them for $20 and calling it 'DLC.'" That right there goes against all marketing logic according to my into to marketing class, and is a primary reason why Capcom is close to dead. The other reason is "no love for the blue bomber," but that's not what this is about.

Anyways, Sessler brought up a good point about DLC and game prices. In the US, new game prices are fairly fixed at $60. In other countries and regions, game prices are a lot more varied. However, if you release a game for more than $60, "well that's crazy, I won't buy it." His example was Skyrim. I haven't played it yet so I can't speak from experience, but I plan to eventually. Anyways, Sessler said that "a game like Skyrim, it's easily worth $100, so I wouldn't mind paying more for more, but because of game prices, it needs to be $60, so they cut out $30 worth of content, sell you the $30 worth as DLC, and you still get an awesome game."

I gotta admit, I haven't really thought of it that way. Not everyone who does "day 1" DLC is being Capcom and EA about it, where "oh we need to send updates and patches and maintain the online servers, and developing the game is just so expensive, and with used games not giving us money for the sale, we need to get the money somehow." Sometimes, game developers make a game that's worth $100 or more, but because of the market price for all new games is semificially $60, they have to cut out some so they aren't undervaluing their games. Sure I'd love to get $100 worth of content for $60, who wouldn't. Well not the developers. I know if I made a game that I know was worth $100, I wouldn't want to give it to people for $60 right from the start. I'm undervaluing my game by 40%. After a year, sure, knock 40% off, let me get some of the hold outs, but not from the start. However, the US game market dictates that "New games are $60, no exceptions, unless it's under $60." And I'm not saying "I put so much work and time and effort that I deserve $100 for this game even though it's only objectively worth $50," I mean actual "this game is so objectively good, I would be practically giving it away at $60." So yes, I see where some developers are coming from.

However, this still troubles me, because even though they are selling you maybe a little over $60 worth of content after the DLC cuts, I'm still bothered by the fact that part of the game was cut out and is released as DLC. I'd rather pay more in the first place and not have to buy it later primarily because of future gamers who weren't able to get the consoles when they were initially released.
I 20 years old at the time of posting. I have an Atari 2600 that I bought at a garage sale. My Atari is probably older than I am. I can still buy games for it, thanks to used games, and I can expect to get the full game when I buy the cartridges. 25 years later, what about the guy that find an XBOX 360 at a garage sale and want to collect retro XBOX 360 games? Servers for online PS2 games released 12 years ago are already gone. Servers for XBOX Live for 360 and PSN for PS3 aren't going to be up forever. In 20-30 years, I expect DLC support for XBOX 360 and PS3 to be gone. How will future generations enjoy the full game once the servers are no longer supported? Emulators? *raspberry fart* Emulators are stupid and only cheaters use emulators. Real gaming is done on the original console, with the original controller and original game cartridge/disk. HD remakes/virtual console releases? That might work for some games, but not every game gets a remake/re-release. Of all the amazing games released on the NES, SNES, N64, Master System, Genesis, Atari, etc, I'm going to guess that maybe 15-20% have had re-releases. So the only way to get those gems is by buying the used cartridges/disks. I pity the future generations of gamers who won't be able to enjoy the full games because of DLC.

Well that's enough rambling for today. Until next time, game and be happy.