254 posts in this topic

Posted

I hope this is not one of those moments where consumers would be angry at this but when the console launches they'll cave in and buy it anyway

I don't think so. Those type of consumers would be clueless, until they have it and get disconnected and can't even start a game. They still won't associate it with DRM.

Those who know, and the console gaming community is a little more savvy than you average consumer, really won't. These guys will blackball a publisher into bankruptcy if they feel the publisher screwed up a franchise man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Here is what Francis thinks of this nonsense...

Hilarious ... Doritos Ads ... hahahaha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If you think DVD's are on the same level as Blurays in terms of scratch resistance, you are very misinformed.

That's not what I said, I said their total resiliance is about the same. the ceramic surface holds up to a lot more damage, but when it goes it fails totally, a DVD can be scratched to hell and back and still be read and never have the data layer damaged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What noone wants is the always online crap.

Not exactly, what no one wants, is to be required to be online at all times or the console will cease to function until you re-establish a connection to big brother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Blu Rays are more durable than DVDs, its not up for debate, and it has NOTHING to do with PS3 vs 360.......

Also this story on always online has caught on like wildfire, all over the internet and you can easily see what consumers think about the idea. No spinning that.

Still just a rumor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Still just a rumor.

We're aware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

We're aware.

You wouldn't think it given how people are attacking this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You wouldn't think it given how people are attacking this.

I think people are just getting antsy to hear from MS about what their next console will be like now that Sony has partially revealed their hand. Waiting sucks.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Tha social coating is plain ceramic. And when you scratch a DVD you don't damage the data either. On a DVD the data foil is sandwiched between to thick layers of plastic. They had to put the ceramic layer on BDs because the data foil was unprotected and very easily damaged.

Both are pretty equally resilient. While the ceramic is tougher,it's also a lot thinner and once you damage it, the disk is pretty much dead. DVD while they scratch easier, it generally doesn't matter, and you have to go REALLY hard at it to damage the data foil.

The coating has nothing to do with physically protecting the data layer. Both discs have error-correcting bits built-in. Let's say you scratch a DVD, and 100KB become unreadable. There are going to be some bits that are still readable adjacent to the scratch, so the error-correcting algorithms can still calculate what data is under the scratch. Because Blu-Ray is much more dense, a scratch of the same size would wipe out ~500KB of data with a much higher chance of also wiping out the error-correcting bits, so there's no way to calculate what's under the scratch. Because of this they invented a coating to stop scratches on Blu-Rays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

in the early days, before the PS3 and before BD was really public and there wasn't really any BD movies. but you could buy insanely overpriced BD readers and players. 3-4+ thousand dollar range. The BD disks didn't have the ceramic layer, and the BD disks didn't handle scratches AT ALL due to the extremely thin protection over the data layer. it was only marginally better than CD's which have the data foil unprotected on top of the plastic.

and of course they have error correction built in. error correction doesn't do you much good when you get a scratch in the data layer. a hair thing scratch on a BD disks, would cover hundreds of tracks with of it's scratched circularly. That means you can't read from advacent tracks, and depending on the length of the scratch, anythign from tens to hundreds megabytes of data could be gone. and if you scratch the data layer, there's not buffing or polishing, there's no data under the scratch, you scratched the data away. it's not there anymore.

So, yes, the coating was added to protect the data layer. and it's very effective at it's job, it's very hard to scratch or damage a bluray disk. DVD have a 50/50 sandwich with the data layer in the middle, BD is more like 90-95/10-5. And this was a big problem with the early prototypes. and one of the big concerns in the BD vs HD-DVD wars until the ceramic was added. granted there was also a lot more concerns like the fact BD wasn't finished, was fare more expensive to make and so on... but Sony had to much power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Personally, that's the most annoying post I've read on Neowin for slagging off other opinions with slangoistic terms.

I don't think you need to be rich to afford an internet connection these days and I'm sure stable internet is hardly a worry for most of the population. You can get a line plus broadband in the UK for as little as

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Why would you need to download blu-ray sized game of their server when the whole point is that the game comes pre-downloaded on the disk if you buy the disk version. and if not. doesn't take that long to download 10-25GB on modern broadband, if you buy it online or just start the download at another console while doing something else. and the XBL service poor? it's the fastest download service around, and unlike competitors, they have very little variation in the speed, they're fast when few peopel download and they're fast when there's a big release, unlike another service that slows to a crawl whenever there's a big release.

You mentioned downloading and playing without a disk. Which would lead one to think you were talking about downloading the games entirely via the internet(like how you said you'd want to do 'at a friends house').

Fastest around? Not really. Though i do agree on the little variance part. Back when i first got my 360 i had a 10mbit/sec connection. It wouldn't even max that out. Now i have a 15mbit/sec connection. And it still doesn't even come close to hitting the speed i had 2 years ago. So you're right, it doesn't vary much.

WTF? You are the first person I have seen complaining about XBL download speeds. That is one thing Microsoft always did right, XBL downloads are rarely slow (and have never been slow for me personally).

Well, i guess it may depend on what you call slow. I have a mere 15mbit/sec line, and xbl usually struggles to hit even half that speed most of the time(downloads tend to take 2-4x longer than they should). Unlike say, steam, that almost always maxes out my modest connection. So if you're happy with say, only 5mbps(give or take a little) on your downloads, then yea, you wouldn't have a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You mentioned downloading and playing without a disk. Which would lead one to think you were talking about downloading the games entirely via the internet(like how you said you'd want to do 'at a friends house').

Fastest around? Not really. Though i do agree on the little variance part. Back when i first got my 360 i had a 10mbit/sec connection. It wouldn't even max that out. Now i have a 15mbit/sec connection. And it still doesn't even come close to hitting the speed i had 2 years ago. So you're right, it doesn't vary much.

Well, i guess it may depend on what you call slow. I have a mere 15mbit/sec line, and xbl usually struggles to hit even half that speed most of the time(downloads tend to take 2-4x longer than they should). Unlike say, steam, that almost always maxes out my modest connection. So if you're happy with say, only 5mbps(give or take a little) on your downloads, then yea, you wouldn't have a problem.

15/5 FiOS here man and the truth is XBL is always fast for me(used to have 25/25).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Somethings wrong on your end. XBL downloads does not max out at 5Mbps. it'll max out as much as I let it on my 22(18)Mbps line. and the speeds you get on 50-100Mb fiber is just awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Somethings wrong on your end. XBL downloads does not max out at 5Mbps. it'll max out as much as I let it on my 22(18)Mbps line. and the speeds you get on 50-100Mb fiber is just awesome.

I wonder the same thing tbh. I tried directly connecting to ISP without modem, still slow as snail, lol. So I am wondering if it is my ISP being dick about XBOX Live.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Xbox Live and Origin have always been very slow for me, and never come close to maxing out my connection. I've had the Xbox take 2 hours to download a 30MB update, and Origin once took 3 days to download a 10GB game (That's about 300Kbps)

Anyway, I'd take this rumor with a gain of salt, the whole reason it started in the first place was people misreading an image about background updates and took that to mean always online DRM, so gaming websites have taken that basically as fact and run with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Xbox Live and Origin have always been very slow for me, and never come close to maxing out my connection. I've had the Xbox take 2 hours to download a 30MB update, and Origin once took 3 days to download a 10GB game (That's about 300Kbps)

Anyway, I'd take this rumor with a gain of salt, the whole reason it started in the first place was people misreading an image about background updates and took that to mean always online DRM, so gaming websites have taken that basically as fact and run with it.

Yeah, honestly the knee-jerk reaction is at epic levels and connections are being made with no proof just anonymous rumors. So far we know or expect that the next Xbox will share the same kernel as Win8 and WP. That alone brings with it the ability to be "always on" with features like connected standby which any of the new Win8 tablets have right now. Faster startup is also one thing to expect as well as multiprocessing and a more broad app/game store. It only seams reasonable to expect it to be able to auto update apps and games while it's sitting there late at night so you don't have to wait before you play like now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Honestly, I think the next Xbox will be pretty close to a Surface Pro, using Hyper-V for separation between the game, kernel/hardware and "dashboard" (Which would be more like the Win8 start screen, or just Win8 proper) They're half pushing HTML5 games via IE on the existing Xbox, integrating that into the base like on Win8 would go a long way towards allowing that.

Of course I could always be wrong, but unifying would help from a developer standpoint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

hah...I think its funny, down with consoles anyway they are dragging PC Gaming into the hell they have become.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If i can't play games offline then I won't buy the next xbox, flatout.

Do i have a reliable internet connection most the time? Yes, but its not up 100% of the time.

If my internet goes down, I don't want my xbox to be a paperweight.

I will buy a gaming system that suits my needs.

(One such need being offline play)

If the next Xbox does not meet my needs, I have no problem spending my money on a gaming system that does.

Also, an always online Xbox does not compare to Steam.

Steam has a offline mode that doesn't remove your ability

to play games you have bought should you lose internet connectivity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

We do have to keep in mind that games/consoles are aimed for the low to mid-teen market and thus our opinion might be a little too seasoned.

Are you sure? I think the average gamer is 30-something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Are you sure? I think the average gamer is 30-something.

Indeed, I think the last time I looked it up for something I was writing awhile back, it was 36 or close to that age.

I get peoples arguments that most people are always online these days. But there are those even in the states that are not, and never-mind in other countries where people have download limits, etc. I just do not think the entire world yet has the infrastructure to say anything HAS to always be online. We are at least a full decade out from where everyone on the planet can be part of something like that easily and affordably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'll be laughing my ass off when all of these rumors are proven false.

I will laugh at the journalists and all of those people taking these rumors as true and instantly claiming ps4 victory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There is no inherit benefit to being always online on a console, it should be the users choice if they wish to play connected to the internet or not. People move houses, people have internet outages, people have unreliable connections (even satellite broadband), people travel on holiday/army service/to visit relatives who do not have internet access, people have dialup, people live in developing countries, people live under broadband monopolies (australia with high prices/low caps?) and the people's list goes on.

Mix those occurrences with the majority of adults working in full time jobs, 9-5 or more each week, and yeah missing out on your small daily/weekly 30 minute window of gaming due to 1~3 of the internet outages you get a year IS going to **** you off if all you planned to do was play a SP game. It was unnecessary for you to miss out, you've been playing single player games for 20 years with or without your internet access, and now you can't? For what good?

It is one further step closer to completely removing ownership of a product you've bought by enforcing draconian DRM. It's fine saying you cannot use PSN/XBL without agreeing to conditions, but you cannot use your console at all unless you have internet access?

It's an increasingly grim time to be a gamer if this goes through/becomes standard. You are a very ignorant person if you believe the world revolves around you, your home and your internet connection. Gaming was brought about to try and involve gamers of all ages and locations, not you and your United States of America (not a dig at America, it just seems as if large amounts OF Americans forget about the rest of the world).

Lastly if this all turns out to be untrue, it was not simply a waste of time, this gives these companies a clear indication of how annoyed they will make lots of customers if they turn to such anti-consumerist approaches.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Boogies rage video is getting a lot of views, but his genuine one is better

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.