Only one week after becoming available for pre-order, the Xbox One has been pulled from pre-order availability. This morning, Gamestop has confirmed that they are no longer taking pre-orders for the Playstation 4s largest competitor.
No details or explination has been given at this time and there is no indication whether or not this has anything to do with the negative reception of the Xbox One after the Microsoft E3 conference. As of now, it is not clear whether or not Gamestop will reopen pre-orders for the Xbox One.
Throughout history, there have been countless cases of individuals proclaiming that new technology or technological movements were a 'fad' and would never take off. You can look back at quotes from 30 years ago about how the internet will never be a large factor in peoples lives or how video games consoles would never be mainstream. 30 years later both the internet and consoles are billion dollar industries and in many cases go hand in hand with each other since the advent of online multiplayer. And now it seems 'Cloud Computing' is the next contender when it comes to standing the test of time.
Essentially, cloud computing is the ability to store data in a virtual "cloud" for later use. Whether you want to make back-ups of a file or share with someone without needing to physically give them a storage device, cloud computing allows you to do so.
So what does this have to do with video games? Well, if you've been following the slow stream of post-E3 info about the Xbox One and PS4 you're probably aware of Microsoft's family share plan that allows you to share one game at a time with one of 10 of your "family members". The family share plan utilizes a cloud system in which you store entire games in Microsofts cloud to distribute to your family members. Unfortunately, Microsoft seems insistent on using this as an excuse to shoehorn ridiculous DRM into their game system. So what will gamers potentially have to sacrifice for Cloud Computing?
DRM
In the past few years, the video game industry have been on fire with the debate of DRM. Specifically, the most intrusive DRM is the "Always-online" breed where the game in question needs to be connected to the internet every time you play it. This was implemented most likely to combat piracy, regardless of how
Blizzard devs tried to pass it off as anti-hacking measures (although, to be fair, they couldn't have Diablo 3s auction house without). Regardless of the specific reasons, DRM is a way for companies to make more money which is why I don't buy Microsoft's excuse for more intrusive DRM. I don't believe that in order to share your game over the internet, you need to "check in" with the internet every 24 hours.
We've seen a successful cloud computing system implemented without intrusive DRM with Valve's Steam service. DRM is, will and will forever be a way for companies to stop gamers from pirating games. And if that's the reason, fine. But don't stand there and pretend like I have to put up with more DRM for the sake of "The Future".
Server stability.
Remember back to the recent Simcity launch debacle. Remember the hundreds of thousands of players attempting to log into EAs servers just so they can play a watered down version of Sim City 4 plus better graphics. Not only could players not log in to play the game, the servers were so flooded with people that many couldn't even download the game to begin with.
What's to say these issues can't persist into the cloud computing world? Assuming Microsoft sells as many Xbox One's as they did Xbox 360 (70 million) were looking at tens of millions of players bombarding the Xbox Live servers at once. Should the unthinkable happen and the Xbox Ones servers be forced to shut down, Microsoft is looking at some 40 plus million people with no access to any games or online Xbox services for potentially hours. This, of course, doesn't take into account the possibility of player losing access to the internet for varies reasons.
Security
Where there is internet, there are hackers, and were there is valuable data, someone is going to want in. I was hesitant to store my backup data on Google Drive, Googles new clous data service. There are things I don't necessarily want everyone seeing. My class projects, art assets, writing. The same goes for the Xbox One. I doubt the Xbox Live service will simply stop at video games; there is potential to upload videos and music, art work, pictures and countless other bits of data you would rather keep to yourself. We have seen in the past with Sony's massive security breach that these systems are not impregnable and should a cloud network as massive as Xbox Live get breached, Microsoft will not only be looking at millions of customers data at risk, but also looking at hundreds of millions in lawsuit damages.
In addition to a security breach from a hacker, what about the NSA? Humor me for a moment, put on your tinfoil hat and dive down the rabbit hole. Microsoft was recently under scrutiny for potentially releasing user data to government entities.They released information showing that they shared minimal data with the NSA, which was great until we learned that the NSA has a nasty habit of not asking. Who's the say that the NSA will not data mine Xbox Live's cloud service? Especially considering that the Kinect, a camera AND microphone device can not be disconnected from the always-online Xbox One. Xbox users could be looking at one of the largest breaches of privacy in history if the NSA decides to snoop around the cloud.
Personally I can't wait to see the river of tears when the first story about the NSA breaching the Xbox Live service surfaces.
The not-so-bad news
Are there numerous issues with cloud data storage? Of course. But there are undoubtedly a lot of benefits to cloud computing. The family share plan will certainly be convenient for people who like sharing there games with family and friends. Having online backups makes it significantly harder to lose data than simply misplacing your external drive or having a hard drive die out. But as was discussed above, gamers will have to weigh these benefits against sacrificing true game ownership and replacing it with ridiculous DRM measures and whether the risk of a privacy breach is worth the convenience of being able to store data on-line.
Cloud computing may very well be the future of video games, but with recent revelations and uncertainty, it's going to take a lot of convincing for hard-core gamers to jump on-board and hope for the best.
You can stop the Free-to-Play train and Rift is further proof of that.
Entering it's 2nd year since release, Rift has maintained consistent updates, and even an expansion. It also has a fairly dedicated following that is about to grow rapidly. With the inclusion of Free-to-Play, players will be able to access all content of the original Rift MMO, however they will have to purchase the expansion, Storm Legion, is they wish to access any of it's content.
Although I never did a formal review of Rift and was not a subscriber, I have played through beta and took part in the unlimited trial. Rift is a solid game and definitely worth the download. Along with a solid base game, the expansion looks very promising and at only $24 there isn't much to lose.
Along with theFree-to-Play, Rift also includes a freemium option for anyone who would like to enjoy extra benefits, which include:
+15% currency.
Daily XP boost.
Instant access to your Banker, Guild Bank and trainers.
Daily boost for in-game currency (tokens)
+10% mount speed
Daily boost to PvP XP
10% off all Rift store purchases
Priority position in server queues
Daily boost to PvE reputation
Veteran rewards based on subscription length.
For more information and download, visit Rifgame.com and RiftStore for information on premium options.
Anyone unfortunate enough to be near me for more than 10 minutes has undoubtedly been bombarded with my unhinged, border-line hipster rants about how corporate influence, artistic sellouts and contrived, self-inflated publishers who proclaim financial shortcuts as "artistic direction" are spreading like a cancerous blotch on the face of electronic entertainment.
Firstly, I would like to say: I told you so and my ego feeds on the blood of the uninformed
Secondly, and perhaps unknowingly to most people, the so-called console wars has come to a cross roads that has perhaps gone unnoticed by the majority of people. In terms of public opinion (at least on the internet) there is obviously a clear divide between the Xbox One and the Playertastation 4. Xbox fanboys and Micro$oft apologists scramble to cling to any possible good news about the upcoming DRMbox and it's $499 piss-on-your-foot coming to a store near you this November while Sony advocates continue to drain their internet ballsacks in the perpetual circlejerk that is the post-E3 aftermath, it's important for all parties to step back from the crowd and really examine the impact and consequences of any potential victory in this generations console wars.
As I've stated before, there is a battle line in this war. Obviously, on one side is the PS3 and on the other the Xbox One but more importantly, it's becoming more and more evident that the true battle lies between a choice of more restriction in terms of the kind of always-online DRM that had even Electronic Arts, the company hell-bent on turning all video game brands into a pale shade of beige, running for the hills.
"Customers"
But not Microsoft. And why would they? Microsoft is a company that could fall on it's face for the next 20 years with every sub-par product they manage to belch out and still manage to limp to the finish line just in time for the release of the next un-optimized version of Windows. What do they have to lose? Customer satisfaction? That's adorable!
So here's what the board looks like and here's the choice we as gamers have to make. We can choose the kind of vision Microsoft has for consumers where optional accessories are no longer optional, games have a 10 person share limit, and console companies are allowed to dictate who we can give or sell our games to. Or we can choose not to. Even as a Wii-U or PC gamer, everyone has to make this choice and the choice is simple. Buy an Xbox One or don't. As for me, I'm of the opinion that anyone who buys an Xbox is either a fanboy, ignorant, uninformed or all of the above, not because I don't think there isn't reason to want an Xbox One, but because I refuse to be so cynical that there are actually people who would support this kind of assault on all facets of game development.
Not only do we, as consumers have a choice, but developers themselves are making choices. This is an easy enough choice for Indie developers as the PS4 allows self-publishing and free patch updates, but also a choice for larger developers. A recent report from a Sony Corporate PDF, the amount of the developers who choose the PS4 over the Xbox has jumped from 126 to 505 since February.
This is a war between the idea that more restrictive DRM will force people to buy more game copies so the empty suits can continue to feed their fun-sucking DLC fueled destroyer of entertainment, or whether the idea of consumer freedom allows for a free and fair market where the talented thrive. A market where sharing games becomes free advertising for talented game developers and doesn't detract from sales and in fact encourages them by rewarding developers who makes games so good that you NEED to buy your own copy. This is what the current console war is all about.
Even if you're on a sidelines as a Nintendo fan or a PC gamer, if you come across someone who is either uninformed of the Xbox One features and restrictions or continues to make excuses for unacceptable policies, it's your duty as a gamer to enlighten them about customer respect and that supporting this kind of behavior makes you the gaming equivalent of drug enablers who complain about the actions that the company they're throwing money at is taking. And then after you've informed them tell them a god damn wizard set their asses straight.
In the meantime, enjoy riding the tidal wave of flaming and slinging insults at people with different opinions.
Some interesting news has surfaced surrounding the Xbox One's online services. According to a Twitter post by Xbox Support, if a player has their account banned from Xbox Live, they forfeit not only that game but all other games attached to it's license. This is worrying for several reasons. Firstly, if you get banned from the multiplayer aspect of a video game, I'm of the opinion that you are still entitled to the single player aspect. Although this opinion should be a given, in the modern gaming industry that is a somewhat controversial opinion to have. But more importantly, we are still unsure of what license downloaded games on the Xbox One fall under. We saw a few months ago that all games on the Xbox One must be downloaded from the disk or online which presumably will hold all Xbox One games accountable to the same End User and Terms of Service License.
This is worrying news, unfortunately it is not news at all. Months ago, EA was under fire for banning people from all of their purchased games if they were banned under an Origin account. They have since reversed this stance, however. Microsoft, on the other hand, seems more determined to not backpeddle in their mind set of the Xbox Ones features and if all games fall under the same license, say goodbye to your games library.
Hopefully Microsoft will keep us updated on this issue to see if they budge on this hot-button issue.
UPDATE:
Xbox representative 'Major' Nelson clarified in an interview, that being banned from the multiplayer aspect of a game will NOT prevent you from playing the single player.
Now that the dust is settled and the score card has been tallied, journalists and gamers everywhere are picking a side in the continuation of the great console war between Microsoft's Xbox One and Sony's Playstation 4.
Going into E3, the Xbox was in a weaker position than the PS3. The intrusive DRM, not allowing used games unless under certain conditions, always requiring the Kinect to be plugged in (which looks even more unattractive with the recent revelations about the NSA). All in all, this was Sony's event to lose.
Television and Home Entertainment
Although gamers primarily don't buy a console just to watch movies and television, the television and movie features are a nice bonus for yourself or anyone else in the house who may want to head over to Netflix or pop in a blue-ray once in a while.
Both the Playstation 4 and Xbox One are essentially on par when it comes to home entertainment. Whether it's blue-ray, Netflix or cloud networks, both systems are ready to support these systems and thankfully none of these are behind a paywall in the form of PS+ and Xbox Live. In addition to these features, Microsoft and Sony are spearheading social networking. In fact the PS4 has a Facebook share button built into the controller while the Xbox One is streamlined with TwitchTV to easily stream game play and commentary(Because we really needed more TwitchTV streamers).
Down to Brass Tacks
Now that social networking is out of the way, lets tackle what we all care about. The games. The number of games, the quality of games, new games, old games, used games, indie games, triple A games. Games, games, games and the game gods did indeed bestow games upon us.
The Xbox One features 9 exclusives:
A new Halo title.
No Xbox would be complete without Halo .No formal information is given about the title, but I assume there will be Spartans and guns.
Titan Fall.
From Respawn Entertainment, Titan Fall is an Xbox One exclusive sci-fi mech game in which players face off with each other in what may be an exclusively multiplayer game (don't quote me). Players can also exit and fight outside of the mech, what that entails remains to be seen. There are plenty of mech games out there so I am hesitant to get excited about this one, but the ability to leave your mech has me curious.
Ryse: Son of Rome
Ryse puts you in the sandals of the Roman general Marius Titus. The opening scene looks like the beach invasion from Saving Private Ryan. I don't want to talk too much about the quality of the game before I get my hands on it, but from what I've seen this title really exemplifies what I dislike about modern gaming. QTEs are everywhere, Romans have British accents and it looks very hack and slash. Not the mention, why is a General on the front lines and why is he fighting alone if he is part of a Roman legion? I'm all for making an action based Roman game, but this doesn't seem to feature anything that made the Romans great to begin with.
Forza Motorsport 5.
I've never played any Forza games, however from what I hear, they are quality. I spent hours racing away in games like Grid and Gran Turismo. In fact Gran Turismo was one of my first racing games along with F Zero X. Forza 5 will include cloud computing and pretty innovative AI improvements that will simulate how the player drives and use that data to create more challenging races. Nice to see game companies are spear heading the way for a Skynet future.
Quantum Break.
The short demo showed us what appears to be a time bending shooter. Very little information was given aside from the fact that it will apparently blend with a television show. This may be similar to Trion Worlds Defiance, but again, no information has been released about either the game play or TV show.
D4.
From the creator of Deadly Premonition comes a episodic murder mystery game which seems to have some sort of kinect control scheme available.
Crimson Dragon.
The kinect enabled shooter puts you on the back of a dragon in what looks like a StarFox-esque rail shooter. The trailer is nice and the game looks solid, Star Fox fans should keep an eye out for this one.
Dead Rising 3.
Dead Rising is back and looks great. The newest game in the series is open-world and faces the protagonist Nick Ramos against zombies... Ya know, like every Dead Rising game... Hence DEAD RISING in the title. The game includes cars, artillery and air strike. I don't know about you, but my body is ready for Mercenaries plus zombies.
What Lies Below.
As someone who attempted to jump into the Indie Development field, I find that these games drive me to the point of insane jealousy. The games art looks great and the game play looks pretty fun. And who doesn't love a good indie game?(That was a rhetorical question by the way)
Well that's a wrap for the Xbox One game exclusives. But Sony isn't one to take shots without firing back, and fire back they did.
Killzone: Shadow Fall.
The Killzone serious continues with this newest PS4 exclusive. After playing the first Killzone, I was not largely impressed by it's mechanics and story, however the newest trailer may entice me into swooping this one up and giving the series another chance.
Knack.
Nothing like a good platformer if it's done right. Platformers give developers a chance to experiment with art work, puzzles and game play that wouldn't be possible in the 3D realm. Knack looks very promising in this regard and may satisfy some of the platformer fans out there.
Deep Down.
From Capcom comes a visually stunning game set in the medieval era. The trailer showed little in terms of gameplay, although we do see a dragon and some very pretty graphics that isn't crippled by a grey, brown and bloom overlay to water down the colors.
Drive Club.
From it's 1994 roots, the racing game returns on the PS4. We don't know much about the game and it's feature but here's a shocker, you drive and you race.
The Order 1886.
The makers of the God of War series is releasing a werewolf fighting action game where 3 hunters are embroiled in a battle against werewolves, using unique weapons like lightning guns and machine guns to fend off the hoards. The setting is a semi-future semi-sci-fi 1886 world with radios and Orwellian blimps over London.... So yeah, werewolves.
inFAMOUS: Second Son.
There was somewhat of a war between the Prototype and inFAMOUS games. At the time I stuck with Prototype, but from what I hear, inFAMOUS was better. I'm looking forward to seeing for myself at it's release.
So there we have the exclusives. But it's time to tally up the blows and end the war. Who won? Well it's goes a bit deeper than the number of exclusives this time.
Pound for pound
As I said in the beginning of this article, this was Sony's conference to win. Microsoft backed themselves into a corner with their stance on DRM, used games and the Kinect requirements. And wow did Sony fire all cannons.
The beginning of the conference was tame enough with the CEO talking about the PS Vita, continued PS3 support and PS4 games, but the final 10 minutes sealed the deal for many people. The remaining minutes of the Sony conference was met with a collective sigh of relief from the gaming community as Sony Computer Entertainment CEO Jack Tretton proudly proclaimed that the PS4 would not impose any restrictions on the used games market, a stark contrasted to the Xbox Ones requirement that used games be bought at selection retailers.
"They can trade in the game at retail, sell it to another person, lend it to a friend, or keep it forever"
-Jack Tretton, Sony Entertainment CEO.
Not satisfied with stopping at used games, Tretton continued to clarify that the PS4 would not impose additional restrictions with DRM, stating that PS4 games do not need to be connected online to play or check in periodically. Jack even added as a jab to Microsoft that the PS4 "won't stop working if you haven't authenticated in twenty-four hours".
The end of Trettons presentation included additional information on the Playstation Network.
So with Sony already vastly ahead of Microsoft all Sony had to do was sit back and reap the success, but were they yet satisfied? No. In a classic 'One more thing' moment, President and Group CEO for Sony Computer Entertainment Andrew House presented "We'll continue to offer to best value on the market. I'm very proud to announce that the Playstation 4 will be available at 399 dollars."
399 Dollars
399 Euros
349 Pounds
Sony did everything right in this presentation. They got the boring stuff no one cared about out of the way at the start (sorry Vita users) and ended their presentation on a bomb shell that Microsoft was reeling from. Not only is there no intrusive DRM, not only is there no mandatory Kinect system, no restrictions on used games, not only is the hardware better and the system itself smaller, it's also cheaper. That is exactly what gamers needed. They needed to be reminded that even though they gaming industry is being dragged through corporate homogeneity, that there are still game console companies that will still listen to their consumers.
The catalog of games looks impressive and the system itself is a cheaper, better solution. The question isn't who won this console war, the question is: was there ever any doubt that Nintendo ever lost? Yep, Nintendomination wins again.
But really, even if you have an internet connection and don't mind that the kinect is required and you don't mind forking over $100 for an inferior system, you shouldn't support the president that it's OK to restrict users and game sellers. There is something to be said when the point is made that enablers are half the problem.
After the dust settled, there is a clear winner in this war, and the winner is Sony but in the war between consumer and company, the winner, thankfully, is us.
E3 is well underway with the game media buzzing about the new Xbox, speculating about the PS4 conference and maybe holding a vague amount of hope that perhaps Half-Life 3 will maybe be released one day. Unlike Half-Life 3, however, we were treated to something that actually exists! A new trailer for my most anticipated game of the whole conference, The Witcher 3!
As you will remember if you played The Witcher 2 in its entirety the third game continues the story of the invasion of Nilfgaard, the mighty empire to the south of the Northern Kingdoms and the largest and strongest nation in the world of The Witcher. Whether or not Geralt directly interacts with elements from Nilfgaard often remains to be seen, however, considering the title is 'The Witcher 3: The Wild Hunt', it is a good bet that a healthy portion of the third installment of The Witcher will focus mainly on Geralts personal and background story between himself, Triss and the yet-to-be-seen Yennefer.
The trailer opens with Geralt riding on horseback through a mountainous forested area in a prime example of one of The Witcher 3s newest features, an open world and mounted game play.
Continuing, we see a hooded, bearded (and a fine beard it is) Geralt riding through a desolate landscape with a hooded figure to his left. The figure, from what I can tell is male (Dandelion perhaps?). Around them, scattered along the ground are bodies and banners in what is presumably a recent battlefield. Although it is hard to see, one of the banner colors are blue and white while the other is black and yellow. If this color scheme is correct, this may be the recent sight of a battle between Nilfgaard and Temerian soldiers. If this is the case than Nilfgaard has cut into the north quite significantly.
'They say he was a man obsessed; chasing memories, faces, sense'
In the next scene Geralt is showcasing some stylish new leather and chain armor. The armor style is consistent with the previous games philosophy of realism, nothing about it is silly or impractical, in fact the shoulders have a 'Lorica segmentata' look to them; almost Romanesque.
After a quick scene with Garelt riding his steed into a town and up to a burly looking gate guard with heavily furred armor and a viking-like helmet and beard (Beards: The Game), we are treated to stunning fly-over of the world of The Witcher.
"Multi-Region". I'm not really sure what this means. My only two guesses would be that the game is cut into chapters like the second and each chapter has it's own open world, or they are speaking in geographical sense in which the entire world is open and spans several regions. I'm assuming (and hoping) that the latter is the case. In spirit of this open world we see once again Geralt galloping hastily on his horse, which also makes me wonder, is there fast travel? If there was you would probably not need a horse unless The Witcher is following with Elder Scrolls system of discover and unlock fast travel points. I hope there is no fast travel feature as that can sometimes damage the potential of organic events happening in the world. These questions, however, will remain unanswered for now.
Afterward, we see Geralt facing down a town up in a roaring fire. There have only been two small towns in this game series that warrant Geralts attention. The outskirts of Vizima, and Rivia. Now I'm not saying it's probably Rivia, but it's totally probably Rivia.
The remaining sequences show Geralt riding (he apparently really likes his horse) through several cities and towns, all of which seem to have their own unique flavor. Some looks Gothic or even renaissance while others look medieval and impoverished
And of course, my favorite part.
Is that a flooded building to the left?
BAM.
What's that? You wanted a second Wind Waker? Well guess what, you get Wind Waker plus boobs and beards.
Just how open is this world that you not only need a horse for what looks like 90% of your travels, but also a boat as well? Information on the world scale of The Witcher 3 is still in the shadows, but my interest is piqued for more info on whether or not this world is as colossal as I hope it is.
The last scenes show very fluid combat with what looks like reactive animation. Every fight shown in the trailer looks like a cut scene, even more so than The Witcher 2.Wolves, giants, harpy's all seem to use animation and AI that make the fights feel truly authentic, the way Garelt immediately swings at that harpy when it swoops into range. The combat look damn impressive..
You hyped yet?
So that was a little taste of the game I'm looking the most forward to, and how delicious it was. CDPorjekt has set the bar high for them on this one, but from the quality that they have been able to put out as a studio who it's really well-known, I have no doubt that they have the talent and drive to make the best possible game they can and I look forward to more information about it, and really look forward to actually playing it.
So what does this have to do with video games? Well, if you've been following the slow stream of post-E3 info about the Xbox One and PS4 you're probably aware of Microsoft's family share plan that allows you to share one game at a time with one of 10 of your "family members". The family share plan utilizes a cloud system in which you store entire games in Microsofts cloud to distribute to your family members. Unfortunately, Microsoft seems insistent on using this as an excuse to shoehorn ridiculous DRM into their game system. So what will gamers potentially have to sacrifice for Cloud Computing?
Although I never did a formal review of Rift and was not a subscriber, I have played through beta and took part in the unlimited trial. Rift is a solid game and definitely worth the download. Along with a solid base game, the expansion looks very promising and at only $24 there isn't much to lose.
