"This is nothing new, both the Xbox 360 and PS3 have a web browser. But there's one difference: Both next gen consoles are built on x64 architecture.This changes everything! In many ways, it's great for consoles to be more like their PC counterparts, but unfortunately, this fact almost assuredly means they'll inherit the inherent problems within PC gaming: namely piracy. "
How exactly does the new architecture lend itself better to piracy than previous ones? I sort of understand how this may work, but since most of your article hinges on this fact and not everyone reading this is a tech geek, explaining this in a few sentences will make your writing more relatable for more readers.
"And keep in mind, both Sony and Microsoft are building their consoles for the long haul. At least 5 years! So if you're unconvinced about the ability of pirates, think about the future.
Even if piracy could somehow be currently prevented, who's to say in three years (after well over 20 million units of your consoles have been sold) a method isn't discovered that allows people to pirate games? A simple software update would NOT work, just look at PC gaming. Everyone knows consoles are sold at a loss, the only way to make money back is through the steady purchasing of software (games) over the years. In other words, a potential hack found in three years would be devastating for both Microsoft or Sony."
This is confusing because you spend the entire article up until this point saying that these "safeguards" of online connectivity and the barring of used games from systems is the only way to prevent hacking, then you say that it would be devastating if hackers DID hack the system, implying it can be hacked, thus nullifying your theory that these safeguards are the only things stopping hackers from hacking. The span of three years you're giving them is irrelevant, if it's possible and people want to find a way, they will do so relatively quickly. Basically, this is a confusing shift in your thought process that detracts from your argument without explaining why you're acknowledging this possibility.
"The last thing that needs said involves the state of the gaming industry, financially. Does this not paint a clearer picture for you? Piracy really is a huge problem, as are used games. Everything costs more, now, because of the improvements in technology. Several developers/publishers have went bankrupt or shut down, and even the ones that do good aren't sitting comfortably. You must understand that this isn't because they release terrible games, or because they implement DLC, it's just the nature of time. Does anything cost the same as it did twenty years ago? How about ten years ago? The fact is, a continued survival (much less regular success) in the gaming industry is a hard thing to achieve, and as the years pass, it becomes harder. There is no known perfect formula. "
Some statistics or concrete information would help you make your argument more believable and less easily refuted. You are writing about a very hot topic to which you will need to convince a die-hard opposition that you have some legs to stand on. This goes for the rest of the article as well.
Overall, this was a good read, but it really would have helped if it were broken up a bit by some pictures or something to give the reader's eyes a visual break.
Log in to comment