Cliff Bleszinski defends Former Microsoft exec Adam Orth and always-online - Polidicks

Being always online is bad, IQ decreased, got fat, deformed leg, neck brace, bad wrist, vision, mother crying, dad hate me. Now this fate will happen to my devices. Thanks to Cliff.

Adam Orth shouldn't have been forced to resign imo I mean it was just his opinion, a stupid one, but still just a opinion. I bet most of you guys didn't know who he was until he tweeted his support for always online.

[QUOTE=Iago;40265708]Adam Orth shouldn't have been forced to resign imo I mean it was just his opinion, a stupid one, but still just a opinion. I bet most of you guys didn't know who he was until he tweeted his support for always online.[/QUOTE] he treated potential customers with utter contempt, that's not someone you want in your company

[QUOTE=Horse Strangler;40263829]Cliffy B needs to stop pretending he's David Jaffe.[/QUOTE] Since when has Jaffe been popular? He hasn't done shit for the last five years other than be a judge on the Tester and continue to complain about Sony's handling of God of War. He's just been bitching the last few years. Anyway, I still don't understand the majority of people who complain about always online stuff. I mean of course I don't want my functionalites to be limited by an internet connection, but the most vocal amount of people are always the people who play single-player games while connected to steam with their friends list set to offline. They never complain that Steam is forcing them to connect to the internet, unless they get lucky with the spotty offline mode (That still requires you to save your login information for it to work.) Even if you choose to be 'offline' for Origin, UPlay, or Steam you're still checking into a closed environment on purpose. The thing is, Cliffy is right. Why is everyone happy that Orth "resigned"? We have absolutely nothing in common with this guy and we don't know anything about him. Sure he was a dick over twitter, but try looking at somebody you follow on twitter and they were an ass once for sure. If we're going to go "oh Cliffy is just a biased-business supporter" (which he is, meh), then lets look at what Jaffe said. [quote=twitter] @dibbsy8 being right or standing in solidarity w/fellow gamers but the joy taken by SOME in being mean,cruel,&kicking a man when he's down.[/quote] Just ponder for a minute, how many devices do you own that are pretty much always connected? My guess would be your iPhone is 4g and you're regularly connected. Of course a phone needs to be connected for calls and texts, but a mobile broadband connection is different imo. Think of the younger gamers who have grown up with their brother/sister's xbox/ps3 and online connections. They're used to being online, they don't care about it. We can still complain about always online, but it's not going to go away. [quote=Cliffy] Even then, it doesn’t matter. If you’re on a forum raging about Adam’s comments there’s a whole new generation of kids who are growing up always online who won’t really give a shit. And all that anger, all of that vitrol, all of that lynch mobbing that the internet seems to love to do lately will be for naught and forgotten. [/quote] Cliffy is right, again. We can complain about it but the industry is going to do it anyway. Yeah D3's handling of the game with no SP and an always-online requirement blows, but look how well it sold anyway. Gamersare notoriously bad for never following through on boycott claims or any sort of organized outrage and then blaming each other for being the cause of a publisher's business practices though they all bought the game. There's always a period of outrage, then people who don't play the game stop caring, and the people that play the game keep playing.

[QUOTE=zakedodead;40264640]So what you're saying is "Fuck you because most of the other people will be too dumb to notice"[/QUOTE] No, I'm saying that one day technology will be advanced enough to where everyone will have internet and the issue of being connected for DRM will be non-existent. Intelligence will have nothing to do with it, it will just be accepted as how things are, [i]which is not a bad thing.[/i] Just as we accept online services with friends lists and other community features, we will accept social connectivity within our games that doubles as security. Please don't twist my post again, I am not looking to put down anyone, and neither should you.

[QUOTE=Agoat;40264163]Obviously we're not at the point for always-online games. It is coming, but we're not there yet. I do enjoy the last bit of your post, implying that I don't think you should be able to play your games. I'll clarify. [/QUOTE] I wasn't implying that you don't think I should be able to play my games. Or at least I wasn't trying to. Sorry

[QUOTE=Super Muffin;40266205]Since when has Jaffe been popular? He hasn't done shit for the last five years other than be a judge on the Tester and continue to complain about Sony's handling of God of War. He's just been bitching the last few years. Anyway, I still don't understand the majority of people who complain about always online stuff. I mean of course I don't want my functionalites to be limited by an internet connection, but the most vocal amount of people are always the people who play single-player games while connected to steam with their friends list set to offline. They never complain that Steam is forcing them to connect to the internet, unless they get lucky with the spotty offline mode (That still requires you to save your login information for it to work.) Even if you choose to be 'offline' for Origin, UPlay, or Steam you're still checking into a closed environment on purpose. The thing is, Cliffy is right. Why is everyone happy that Orth "resigned"? We have absolutely nothing in common with this guy and we don't know anything about him. Sure he was a dick over twitter, but try looking at somebody you follow on twitter and they were an ass once for sure. If we're going to go "oh Cliffy is just a biased-business supporter" (which he is, meh), then lets look at what Jaffe said. Just ponder for a minute, how many devices do you own that are pretty much always connected? My guess would be your iPhone is 4g and you're regularly connected. Of course a phone needs to be connected for calls and texts, but a mobile broadband connection is different imo. Think of the younger gamers who have grown up with their brother/sister's xbox/ps3 and online connections. They're used to being online, they don't care about it. We can still complain about always online, but it's not going to go away. Cliffy is right, again. We can complain about it but the industry is going to do it anyway. Yeah D3's handling of the game with no SP and an always-online requirement blows, but look how well it sold anyway. Gamersare notoriously bad for never following through on boycott claims or any sort of organized outrage and then blaming each other for being the cause of a publisher's business practices though they all bought the game. There's always a period of outrage, then people who don't play the game stop caring, and the people that play the game keep playing.[/QUOTE] You're looking at the darker side of things. SimCity released recently and (to my understanding) there was an amount of community backlash from the always-on DRM. It had social features, but it was still met with a somewhat negative response. This thread has shown me that Diablo 3 had something similar. These systems were not perfect, but they are progress to what will ultimately be a new standard in an online service. Instead of pointing out negatives, it's important to note that developers and publishers will likely add new awesome features to coax gamers into accepting this new type of security. [editline]13th April 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=PaChIrA;40267023]I wasn't implying that you don't think I should be able to play my games.[/QUOTE] Then meet my posts with actual responses instead of snarky comments, please. I've further elaborated on my point if you're interested in a chat. :)

I just want to point out that always being online adds nothing, will never enhance anything, and only takes features away. Cause it's called just having a online mode... Come on, I know there are sides to this argument, but don't believe for a second this is the future.

[QUOTE=Tudd;40268445]Come on, I know there are sides to this argument, but don't believe for a second this is the future.[/QUOTE] In the grim darkness of the future, there is only share buttons.

[QUOTE=Tudd;40268445]I just want to point out that always being online adds nothing, will never enhance anything, and only takes features away. Cause it's called just having a online mode... Come on, I know there are sides to this argument, but don't believe for a second this is the future.[/QUOTE] It may not be the future you want, but it seems to be where we're headed.

[QUOTE=Valdread;40259095]I wouldn't be surprised if there was an increase in people jail breaking their console to get around always online, then its a small step to just pirating games to the console.[/QUOTE] I think part of the reason why publishers chose Diablo and SimCity for the always online is because a lot of people will buy it on inertia as part of a famous franchise, kind of like Call of Duty sells like hot cakes no matter the actual qualities of the particular version.

[QUOTE=Agoat;40269414]It may not be the future you want, but it seems to be where we're headed.[/QUOTE] Even fucking cellphones are not like this. It isn't a future were heading too, cause the idea of a always-online device wasn't even thought of [i]TILL LAST MONTH[/i].

[QUOTE=Agoat;40269414]It may not be the future you want, but it seems to be where we're headed.[/QUOTE] Why are you playing devil's advocate? It's silly when there's literally no benefit to always online.

[QUOTE=sltungle;40263742]I might pre-order the next Xbox soon, and if Microsoft officially announce it's always online cancel the pre-order. If enough people did that I think the message might go through. Simply NOT buying it in the first place isn't really going to work as well in my opinion because then they don't have too much comparison as to how many sales they COULD have had. If 4 million people pre-ordered the next Xbox then cancelled that pre-order it might be enough to jolt Microsoft back into reality even if millions more still buy the damn thing. Maybe.[/QUOTE] Or just not preorder it. Shit sales are shit sales. Doesn't matter if everyone pre ordered and cancelled them.

Realllly trying my patience Cliffy boy.

[QUOTE=Agoat;40269414]It may not be the future you want, but it seems to be where we're headed.[/QUOTE] Give another 10 or 15 years and always online will become the norm

[QUOTE=Van-man;40265365]I'm still waiting for a [I]GOOD[/I] Unreal Tournament sequel.[/QUOTE] Unreal 2004 all day every day

What's with all these people coming out and claiming "always online is the future, even if you don't like it". Fuck off. No customer is going to accept a service that requires an always online connect because [i]companies can't be trusted to stay online[/i] why should they force that requirement on us? As soon as some company makes an always online console, or phone or whatever, you bet your fucking ass ALL it's competitors will be bragging about their ability to work offline. Access to the internet is a utility, it shouldn't be a fucking requirement.

I'm surprised there's even a discussion about this. It should be crystal clear: Many places have a severe lack of quality in their internet infrastructure. And nothing is going to be "gained" consumer wise with going through with this extreme divide. Therefore, no.