This is my first blog, and it will be fairly short (or maybe not), but I wanted to record my emotions for posterity...as in see how I was feeling at this time maybe 5 years or so down the road. Recently, Microsoft has been dealt a harsh blow after Adam Orth's tweets from his Twitter account were posted up by Kotaku and other gaming sites for users/gamers/consumers to read. In short, it was very insulting and showed that he was so out of touch with the general gaming public that frankly, I don't see how he had been gainfully employed by Microsoft as long as he had been (just under a year as of April 4th 2013). Orth, through a series of tweets, told another developer or programmer that he didn't understand why the general consumer was so up in arms about a console that would require a persistent internet connection, then made some snide comments about if the electricity went out that you wouldn't be able to use a vacuum cleaner so you better not buy a vacuum cleaner. The death knell came in the form of his parting shot when he left a hashtag message of "#dealwithit" and an image of President Obama with an indifferent grin on his face, shrugging his shoulder as he talked on a cell phone. Really!?! Are you that out of touch or just a complete **** idiot??? Since everyone else seems to be spelling it out on their own blogs, I'll do it here as well. At least I won't have to go read someone else's blogs to see what I really thought. Digital Rights Management, better know by it's acronym DRM, has been defined by Wikipedia as follows: "A class of controversial access control technologies that are used by hardware manufacturers, publishers, copyright holders, and individuals with the intent to limit the use of digital content and devices after sale. DRM is any technology that inhibits uses of digital content that are not desired or intended by the content provider. DRM also includes specific instances of digital works or devices." In a nutshell, you pay for the games and the machines, in some instances, but you don't really own them. If you did, you would be able to do whatever you want with them, but Microsoft is seeing fit to making it so that your future gaming experience will be crippled to the point of turning your console into a brick if you don't play by the rules. What has been said about how DRM will work for the next Xbox system is the system will require a persistent internet connection to use the machine. When you turn it on, you better have a connection or it won't start, and even after that, if the system detects a break in the connection for longer than 3 minutes, the system will suspend any programs running, including your games, and troubleshoot the network for a connection problem to repair. The main argument against this has been the fact that not everyone has a stable and reliable internet connection, but let's just say for the sake of argument that everyone did...including everyone who might own or possess one in a developing country with no internet access in some areas...why should a company dictate how YOU...the consumer...uses your own internet service? Microsoft certainly isn't paying for your monthly ISP bills, so who the **** do they think they are implementing something like this!??! This points to the title of this blog entry, "Elitist Gaming". I'm sure Adam Orth and the talking heads at Microsoft don't see the harm in this...I mean, how can they? They only want what is best for the consumer...right? And they also want to discourage piracy...that's all...right? I would have to say no on both accounts. Sure, piracy is going to be an issue, but punishing the consumer with such a rigid means of controlling your product does nothing good for the consumer and actually injures them by not allowing those who legally bought their games and machines, have used them without modifying them to play backups or burned copies, who don't cheat while playing online, and yet they suffer from an absolutely draconian means of ensuring there is no possible way they can use the products they bought without completely submitting to how Microsoft chooses how they use the product. That would be like putting a sensor in your toaster that determines that white bread is not good for you, so it won't toast white bread...oh, and it will be looking for an internet connection, even though you have no intention of sharing your toast online...or whatever you do with your toast. The point is, it's your toast...and no one should tell you what to do with the product you already payed for. As for the part about what is best for the consumer, I think most of us will agree that Microsoft doesn't really know you personally, outside of your shopping habits on XBL perhaps, so how could they know what is best for you? My guess is the "always on" internet connectivity will eventually serve as a means for product placement on the dashboard. Just another example of you paying for something, yet allowing Microsoft to tell you how to use it, or, to in fact, circumvent that boundary all together and just use YOUR machine how THEY see fit to use it. Personally, I'm tired of the whole internet thing with games. I have seen way too many games I bought on the date they were released, rush home to play, insert the disc in the drive and be greeted by a prompt to update the game. ARE YOU **** KIDDING ME!??! Did the developers NOT finish this game? That is likely what happened. Some pretty shitty beta testing that overlooked some glaring problems, so just address it in an update on Day 1. How would you like it if your doctor did that? "I have some good news and bad news Mr Smith. The good news is we successfully removed your gall bladder. The bad news is, we will have to go back in and retrieve the surgical tools...yeah...we left them in there and it might pose a problem later on down the road....in about 5 minutes. Sorry for the inconvenience. Ok nurse...hit him with the gas!" I know, pretty dramatic, but you don't allow things to get to the consumer in an unfinished state. It just screams "Bush League" and amateur. Going back to the "Elitist" stuff, I sort of figured out what it will cost you to play with your new Microsoft game machine if you still choose to purchase it (you sucker!!!). Here is the breakdown that covers what most people use over the lifetime of a console: Console hardware - $500 (this is the possible price quoted by Microsoft for the system upon release) Additional controller - $50 (I'm being generous here since it is likely to be $60) Xbox Live Account - $300 (this is $60 per year over a 5 year period. It's likely the console won't be phased out in 5 years, but we'll keep it to a round number) Internet Service Provider - $3000 ($50 per month for 5 years) 7 new games - $420 (the average software tie-in ratio is 7 games per console with first release titles costing $60 each...and no, $420 is not some hidden meaning here, although it could be) Total - $4270.00 Keep in mind, this is not an exaggeration...it's a reality if this new system requires an always on connection and ISP fees are likely to increase in the coming years along with everything else. So, how many people do you know spend approximately $800 per year to play 1 game? That is almost what it amounts to. In fact, your first year alone will be fairly expensive at over $1200 to get the console by itself, one game, one year of XBL and your monthly ISP fees to keep that piece of shit connected to the mothership at Microsoft. All of a sudden, that $600 for the PS3 doesn't look as bad as it did in 2006, does it? I won't tell you what to buy, that is up to you. I'm merely pointing out the fact that Microsoft has seemingly gone off the deep end here with this DRM, "always on" crap. It clearly shows how out of touch they have become, and quite possibly, that the success they have enjoyed this past generation has gone to their heads. That is how an Elitist thinks. Since cost is no object to them, well then, it must be the same for everyone else. Either that, or they'll make due somehow. I mentioned in a thread about all of this that a direct comparison could be made between the leadership at Microsoft and Marie Antoinette. Marie is known for the famous quote of "Let them eat cake!" in response to hearing that the commoners did not have bread. Whether she actually said this or not is unknown since this is usually regarded as a journalistic cliche and there is no record of her ever saying that, but she was generally out of touch with what was going on outside the confines of the palace and was never concerned enough to find out the true nature of life outside her sheltered world. Things didn't end well for Marie...and if things continue as they are without "Microsoft" coming down from their ivory tower to see things as they really are, this next generation of consoles might go just as badly for them!