While many of you cry about used game sales and constant online connection, the success of D3 has pretty much shown that gamers will buy and agree to whatever these big corporations want you to buy and agree to. One or two popular games will inevitablely lead those opposed to purchasing a new generation system to abdicate their principal. MS and Sony will still turn a profit, though it may be far less than they are forecasting. By the time the second generation of this policy comes around most will feel these abhorrent practices are the norm and no longer care.
See the article earlier this week about the suit against Steam. In the EU restrictions can't be placed on the resale of software, which I think includes both physical and downloaded software.
There's nothing wrong with a trilogy. But yes I think COD and Halo are overmilked, but they still have alot of catching up on Mario/Zelda/Metroid to do. Madden, eh, there's always going to be sports games emulating reality. It's not my cup of tea, but it is what it is.
Constant internet connection, no used games and...wait for it, $75 for a new game. If gamers are sheep and buy into this, whether you buy used games or not, game prices will remain high and fewer overall games will be sold. What does this mean? Many game developers will not be able to afford to stay in business, unless carried by a big name publisher (EA, Activision, Ubisoft, etc.). Therefore, even fewer risks will be taken and more games will play like already successful models. Many developers will have to look for alternative means of publishing their work or try to create a different spin on the COD model when they join the big publishers.
I don't think the Wii U will be as successful. The Wii U is comparable to a current generation system, so why buy it? Cause you can't play Mario or Zelda on your Xbox 360/PS3? Ninetendo has a bunch of tired franchises they've been milking for way to long. No, I see this news are promising for the future of the OUYA. People will still buy the Xbox or PS and play fewer AAA games on them. People will buy the OUYA as their second system cause it's cheap and many game developers will be cranking out new and innovative games for it (cause it's cheaper).
I will not buy any game system that requires a constant online connection. I will not buy a game system that restricts used game sales. If these two items become commonplace in the coming generation, then the Xbox 1080/PS5 will require direct access to your bank accounts to allow gamers to play.
I can usually connect online if I want to, however I don't want online lag to affect my enjoyment of singleplayer games. Further, I'm not always going to have an internet connection when I use a console. I prefer to buy new games, but if I missed out on a game or I'm sold a junk console by MS/Sony, I don't want to repurchase all my physical games again. Further, without used games, publishers will keep prices higher for longer periods of time.
The end is never the end. The world of the witcher can always be reopened at some point in the future, no matter what a company executive says. For that matter, the creator of the witcher books may take his IP to another game company to continue making games. I find it hard to believe, that when there's money to be made, that no one will just stop using of a popular IP for profit. However, it does appear they aren't going to milk the Witcher the way say Activision milks COD.
I would like to see the Witcher 1 ported to consoles, or maybe included in a collectors edition disc for the console release of W3.
My only concerns with W3 are the travel times (40 minutes on horseback from one end to another). I hate traveling espeically in previously cleared areas, so hopefully they put in teleports. Further, I hope they don't lose the story element of the W2 in favor of the meandering elements of the Elder Scrolls.
I liked the Witcher 2 better than the Elder Scrolls games. I have trouble staying interested in the meandering Elder Scrolls games. I hope going "open world" won't dilute the story aspect of the Witcher. Plus, the one comment that scares me is "40 minutes to travel from one end to another on horseback" as it sounds like it could be tedious to travel.
MS has two exclusive franchises, Halo and GoW. Sony has alot more. Most of the best 3rd party games are available on both systems and programming for either should be a whole lot easier in the next gen., with both systems featuring architectures similar to the PC.
Backwards compatibility and the ability to play used games may become a key to who wins the next generation. I'm not happy with either Sony (due to a bunk LCD TV they sold me) and MS (due to the RROD). So who do I pick, as I'm not buying both.
MS would be more attractive to me if I can play my old library of games, period. as I can't connect 20 different systems to my TV. There's still alot of Xbox games I'd play again. If neither system has backwards compatibility then I might as well go with Sony, as they have more exclusives and I'd be starting a library over anyways. However, if any system locks used games, then I'll pass on both and go back to PC gaming only.
Sony's gonna trump MS to the reveal.?!?! The MS unit is rumored to be slightly inferior to the PS4 (spec wise) and Sony has more exclusives. Things don't look to be off to a good start for MS with the next generation. The only way MS can catch up to Sony now is to include backwards compatibility which Sony (to my knowledge) has no plans of offering.
Suaron_x's comments