Always online consoles more likely than you think?

There's another thread about this which I posted this in, but I'd like to hear more opinions on it.

So, as we all know rumors are flying that the next gen hardware will require always on-line connectivity. Everytime I see threads like this, it seems everyone doesn't even consider it a possibility, that it'd be suicide as there's still a large portion of gamers that aren't on-line. While I find the always on connection to be unlikely, I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility. Given all we've seen this gen I believe there's a good chance this will happen. Numerous rumors from various sites (for both systems as well) are not a good sign. And how I see it, it makes perfect sense from their perspective, and here's why.

If the used game market is eradicated through these means, wouldn't the revenue that was absent because of used games but now coming entirely from new games outweigh the lost consumer base that don't have constant Internet and those who decided not to buy? It's all a matter of weighing the losses to gains. Does anyone know what the percentage is of console owners who have Internet? I wouldn't think you would need a huge amount of people to be connected when all of the losses from used games suddenly turn into profit.

It seems to me profits from people always having to buy new would be greater than losses from those unable to be constantly connected. The lost sale of a system is a one time thing. However, people continually buy games throughout that system's lifespan, and they'd all have to be new. They'd make back that loss and then some in no time. Right? Wrong? Losing all those customers is an initial sacrifice they'd have to make, but it seems to me in the long run it would be more to their benefit. And Internet access is growing more widespread all the time. If used games are as big an issue as everyone makes it out to be and this is a surefire way to stop it, wouldn't it make sense to do this even though many wouldn't buy/couldn't use?

It's hard for me to imagine any company f*cking their consumers over like that, but when money enters the equation I don't rule anything out. I'm not a business or econ major, but this makes sense to me. Thoughts?

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/28058/Study_PS3_Has_Highest_Percentage_Of_Connected_Consoles.php

Seems pretty acceptable to lose 25% of your market for the sake of progress. If anything i think the percentage of HDTV owners in the US is only something like 65%. Should we go back to SD quality levels because some people just wont upgrade? of course not. Progress should not be held back because of a minority.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/28058/Study_PS3_Has_Highest_Percentage_Of_Connected_Consoles.php

Seems pretty acceptable to lose 25% of your market for the sake of progress. If anything i think the percentage of HDTV owners in the US is only something like 65%. Should we go back to SD quality levels because some people just wont upgrade? of course not. Progress should not be held back because of a minority.

XaosII

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/28058/Study_PS3_Has_Highest_Percentage_Of_Connected_Consoles.php

Seems pretty acceptable to lose 25% of your market for the sake of progress. If anything i think the percentage of HDTV owners in the US is only something like 65%. Should we go back to SD quality levels because some people just wont upgrade? of course not. Progress should not be held back because of a minority.

XaosII

That's actually a lot higher than I thought it would be. So, would Sony and MS losing money from cutting out approximately a quarter of their current user-base (this of course isn't including those that have access but would refuse to buy, which is pure speculation) be able to offset this loss from all the revenue only new games would bring in and the elimination of used sales?

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/28058/Study_PS3_Has_Highest_Percentage_Of_Connected_Consoles.php

Seems pretty acceptable to lose 25% of your market for the sake of progress. If anything i think the percentage of HDTV owners in the US is only something like 65%. Should we go back to SD quality levels because some people just wont upgrade? of course not. Progress should not be held back because of a minority.

XaosII

Connected to the internet does not equate to always on nor does it indicate that these systems engage in online gaming. Wasn't it Microsoft that said that the majority of Xbox users indulge in non gaming activity? Besides how is always being connected or requiring a console to be online a sign of progress?

its stupid to have an always on-line console.... that will cut a lot of the market out... and i know that i had the Internet when i had a ps3...but then there was like a 6 month period which i didnt..so does that mean i couldn't play any games? :|campzor

Getting rid of the used market is going to have to be painful. But if it's as big a deal as publishers/developers are making it out to be, it's necessary. The more I think on this, the more convinced I become these rumors will come true.

Hard to say. It seems like in countries with bad internet service, almost all games sold are pirated copies anyway, so maybe they wouldn't be losing much business. I would still guess that it's something that would be practical not in the next generation, but in the one after that.

It also depends on if one console manufacturer wants to take the chance of the other taking over all those territories.

Do i have to have my DVD player hooked up to the internet in order to watch a movie too? This has nothing to do with used sales anymore. If in order to stop used sales you have to hurt everyones ability to play games then you are not addressing used sales anymore.

If this were true then the only console i would need this gen would be the WII U since i dont think it would come with any of the bullsh** the others may come with. If you did have to have a constant internet connection i would stop playing games completely. New generation games that is. I would a be a retro gamer.

What happens when the online service goes down ( PSN hack ), what happens when my internet connection goes out? I have a set cap of time i can use on the internet a month. Combine that with downloads & it would cap my gaming time for the month too.

Really if i cant game without being plugged into the internet then gaming is dead. These are all speculation for now but if this is true then im done. Even right now my ethernet is hooked up to my computer & i have to move it to the console of choice when i want to play games online.

I almost never play games with an internet connection.

[QUOTE="campzor"]its stupid to have an always on-line console.... that will cut a lot of the market out... and i know that i had the Internet when i had a ps3...but then there was like a 6 month period which i didnt..so does that mean i couldn't play any games? :|MirkoS77

Getting rid of the used market is going to have to be painful. But if it's as big a deal as publishers/developers are making it out to be, it's necessary. The more I think on this, the more convinced I become these rumors will come true.

You are missing one important piece of the puzzle though.

If any of the next gen console's allows used games those customer's will move to that system, when they do there is a network effect, their friends will want to play with them.

Each following year (when people are choosing a next genration console to buy) the network effect continues to compound.

This is why the Xbox360 had done as well as it has, it had the most time on the market to compound its network effect.

In the end, the consoles that block used games will lose much more market share than software sales will be able to make up for.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/28058/Study_PS3_Has_Highest_Percentage_Of_Connected_Consoles.php

Seems pretty acceptable to lose 25% of your market for the sake of progress. If anything i think the percentage of HDTV owners in the US is only something like 65%. Should we go back to SD quality levels because some people just wont upgrade? of course not. Progress should not be held back because of a minority.

XaosII

I don't know in what world you live in to think that losing '25% of your market' is a feasible strategy. If anyone in Microsoft or Sony so much as pitched the idea and said that that was the collateral, they'd probably get fired.

Your comparison is also completely wrong. You can play a PS3 on a regular TV -- it has Component/AV outputs, and doesn't obligate you to use the HDMI. If you need to be online to play a game, you can't play offline. And I don't know how you see this as progress: the only progress they'd be making is towards an even tighter software/hardware control and a bigger and more expansive DRM.

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/28058/Study_PS3_Has_Highest_Percentage_Of_Connected_Consoles.php

Seems pretty acceptable to lose 25% of your market for the sake of progress. If anything i think the percentage of HDTV owners in the US is only something like 65%. Should we go back to SD quality levels because some people just wont upgrade? of course not. Progress should not be held back because of a minority.

iHarlequin

I don't know in what world you live in to think that losing '25% of your market' is a feasible strategy. If anyone in Microsoft or Sony so much as pitched the idea and said that that was the collateral, they'd probably get fired.

Your comparison is also completely wrong. You can play a PS3 on a regular TV -- it has Component/AV outputs, and doesn't obligate you to use the HDMI. If you need to be online to play a game, you can't play offline. And I don't know how you see this as progress: the only progress they'd be making is towards an even tighter software/hardware control and a bigger and more expansive DRM.

There's another thread about this which I posted this in, but I'd like to hear more opinions on it.

So, as we all know rumors are flying that the next gen hardware will require always on-line connectivity. Everytime I see threads like this, it seems everyone doesn't even consider it a possibility, that it'd be suicide as there's still a large portion of gamers that aren't on-line. While I find the always on connection to be unlikely, I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility. Given all we've seen this gen I believe there's a good chance this will happen. Numerous rumors from various sites (for both systems as well) are not a good sign. And how I see it, it makes perfect sense from their perspective, and here's why.

If the used game market is eradicated through these means, wouldn't the revenue that was absent because of used games but now coming entirely from new games outweigh the lost consumer base that don't have constant Internet and those who decided not to buy? It's all a matter of weighing the losses to gains. Does anyone know what the percentage is of console owners who have Internet? I wouldn't think you would need a huge amount of people to be connected when all of the losses from used games suddenly turn into profit.

It seems to me profits from people always having to buy new would be greater than losses from those unable to be constantly connected. The lost sale of a system is a one time thing. However, people continually buy games throughout that system's lifespan, and they'd all have to be new. They'd make back that loss and then some in no time. Right? Wrong? Losing all those customers is an initial sacrifice they'd have to make, but it seems to me in the long run it would be more to their benefit. And Internet access is growing more widespread all the time. If used games are as big an issue as everyone makes it out to be and this is a surefire way to stop it, wouldn't it make sense to do this even though many wouldn't buy/couldn't use?

It's hard for me to imagine any company f*cking their consumers over like that, but when money enters the equation I don't rule anything out. I'm not a business or econ major, but this makes sense to me. Thoughts?

MirkoS77

You are missing one important piece of the puzzle though.

If any of the next gen console's allows used games those customer's will move to that system, when they do there is a network effect, their friends will want to play with them.

Each following year (when people are choosing a next genration console to buy) the network effect continues to compound.

This is why the Xbox360 had done as well as it has, it had the most time on the market to compound its network effect.

In the end, the consoles that block used games will lose much more market share than software sales will be able to make up for.

trent44

Do you happen to know how many game sales are used? I don't have an exact % (and have tried to find a site), but IIRC I read a while back it was somewhere a lot higher than 50%. Maybe 75%. I don't know, I think they could afford to lose quite a bit of the market share if every game they sold was new and used were gone. And sure, a lot would jump ship to other systems, but there still would be many that would buy such a system as threads on here asking such have shown.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/28058/Study_PS3_Has_Highest_Percentage_Of_Connected_Consoles.php

Seems pretty acceptable to lose 25% of your market for the sake of progress. If anything i think the percentage of HDTV owners in the US is only something like 65%. Should we go back to SD quality levels because some people just wont upgrade? of course not. Progress should not be held back because of a minority.

XaosII

I certainly wouldn't call always-online DRM progress, though. If anything it's a step back from what gaming should be.

[QUOTE="trent44"]

You are missing one important piece of the puzzle though.

If any of the next gen console's allows used games those customer's will move to that system, when they do there is a network effect, their friends will want to play with them.

Each following year (when people are choosing a next genration console to buy) the network effect continues to compound.

This is why the Xbox360 had done as well as it has, it had the most time on the market to compound its network effect.

In the end, the consoles that block used games will lose much more market share than software sales will be able to make up for.

MirkoS77

Do you happen to know how many game sales are used? I don't have an exact % (and have tried to find a site), but IIRC I read a while back it was somewhere a lot higher than 50%. Maybe 75%. I don't know, I think they could afford to lose quite a bit of the market share if every game they sold was new and used were gone. And sure, a lot would jump ship to other systems, but there still would be many that would buy such a system as threads on here asking such have shown.

The only way they could increase sales of new games is if they force used game buyers to do so, or if new game buyer buy even more.

Neither of which would happen if any of the 3 next gen consoles fully allow used games.

Used game buyers would leave and bring a portion of new game buyers with them, and mixed buyers (that buy both used and new games) would leave as well.

Anyway, the result is a net negative effect on the absolute number of new game sales.

[QUOTE="trent44"]

You are missing one important piece of the puzzle though.

If any of the next gen console's allows used games those customer's will move to that system, when they do there is a network effect, their friends will want to play with them.

Each following year (when people are choosing a next genration console to buy) the network effect continues to compound.

This is why the Xbox360 had done as well as it has, it had the most time on the market to compound its network effect.

In the end, the consoles that block used games will lose much more market share than software sales will be able to make up for.

MirkoS77

Do you happen to know how many game sales are used? I don't have an exact % (and have tried to find a site), but IIRC I read a while back it was somewhere a lot higher than 50%. Maybe 75%. I don't know, I think they could afford to lose quite a bit of the market share if every game they sold was new and used were gone. And sure, a lot would jump ship to other systems, but there still would be many that would buy such a system as threads on here asking such have shown.

It's more like 30% at Gamestop, which is probably the biggest used game seller. Remember that a game has to be bought new first before it can be bought used.

As for me, I flat out refuse to buy anything that would lock out used game sales or force me to be online all the time, even though I'm probably amongst the 78% who are connected, and I generally buy all my games new. They can only get away with crap like this if we let them, so it's really our choice whether blocking used games and requiring always on internet is PR suicide or not.

I honestly think the game companies are bluffing to get all the used game businesses to pay royalties to whom the used game belongs. Because there would be A LOT of companies effected by a lack of a used game market. Just a bluff imo

always online would not work... broadband is not availiable to everyone, only people in populated areas. I do have a wireless type broadband, but bandwidth is limited and costly so i rarely have my console connected online to save bandwidth cost. If this idea is to stop piracy, it will definitely stop it somewhat, but they will lose far more in the amount of people that wouldn't bother buying consoles or games because of this...

Console gaming is barely enjoyable for me, it would take a very little push for me to take my 360 and smash it to pieces with a sludge hammer.

Here is the reality of it that I see. Ubisoft implemented the OSP always need an internet connection DRM for their PC games and people complained about not buying any game from them with it. While there are plenty of gamers who didn't buy any game with OSP attached to it, many others did showing that gamers will buy games with such oppressive DRM.

I also see gamers complain about the insane number of cookie cutter games on the market, yet, they still keep buying said games as those kind of games are still flooding the market.

Will the console makers require an always on internet connection? Hard to say, but one cannot fault them for trying it out (an update to the drivers can change that if implemented properly to begin with). As long as any gamers buy a new generation console from the manufacturers with such a requirement, they will not change to a model that does not require one.