Carmack: Xbox One “witch hunt” unjustified

Friday, 2nd August 2013 16:23 GMT By Dave Owen

John Carmack, cofounder of id Software, has stated that the furore surrounding Microsoft’s unpopular Xbox One DRM policies was unjustified. Microsoft may have changed their minds, but Carmack believes that the days of physical media are coming to an end.

“I think the witch hunt was a little bit unjustified there,” Carmack said during this keynote address at QuakeCon. “I personally am extremely fond of having all of my digital purchases in a curated garden. All of my iTunes, all of my Amazon stuff, all of my Steam things. And it’s a positive thing.”

Carmack is a firm believer that digital-only is the way forward. “Yeah, you can have better and worse ways of doing that, but we are very quickly going to be past the age of having a game that you hold in your hands on optical media,” Carmack said. “It probably won’t be many years before we wind up with SKUs that just have the optical drives deleted and everybody will just be getting it through the net. The future is obvious right there and it will be good for us in general.”

He also commented on the fears that the new Kinect camera could be used to spy on users. “If you go back ten years, the idea that everyone would carry around a phone that has your GPS-located position at all times would cause the tinfoil hat crowd to go absolutely crazy.”

Carmack’s answer to these concerns? “We’ll get used to it.”

Thanks, GameSpot.



  1. Ireland Michael

    Nobody is witch hunting the Xbox One. They just don’t appreciate being taken for a ride by Microsoft with straight up lies and pandering PR bullshit. I don’t feel the need to respect any company that tries to insult my intelligence.

    We didn’t accept it with Sony when the PS3 was originally announced, and we don’t accept it now.

    #1 1 year ago
  2. Viremi

    I personally don’t like Digital editions. I know it brings more, it’s cheaper, but I don’t feel like I own them.. I go quite out of my way to get physical copies of everything. If physical Media is dead, then I will not be purchasing as many games, which is sad.

    #2 1 year ago
  3. jmg24bad

    How is it unjustified to hate drm practices? We are paying for the fucking hardware, I want it to work when I want it to work dammit.

    We are paying them the money for a product we want.

    #3 1 year ago
  4. actuallyisnotafox

    @2 same here. you build up your hard drive with digital games and in the end you have hundereds of pounds worth of content and nothing to do with in, so id personally rather not buy a console thats all digital :p

    #4 1 year ago
  5. OrbitMonkey

    He’s right when he say’s we’ll get used to it.

    As soon as the visible advantage’s start outweighing the unseen disadvantages.

    #5 1 year ago
  6. fearmonkey

    Carmack’s statements do not surprise me, he is a tech head, and digital only is the techie’s dream. I disagree with him on multiple items in his speech. I respect the man’s accomplishment’s and all, but his personal opinions on certain things don’t match mine, and thats fine. Everyone has an opinion, but people respect him so much that they may take his personal opinion as fact, and its not.

    While he might love digital only, I am not a fan. I love Steam but I also like the collectable aspect of physical media, and I love having a choice. I rue the day when we no longer have a choice. I like cartridges and disks, and I still play my old systems from time to time. Going Digital only would ruin that,

    #6 1 year ago
  7. Cobra951

    I’m going to say this slowly, so that these surprisingly challenged people VG keeps parading here lately can understand me.

    The problem is not digital distribution.

    The problem is forcing people online.

    The problem is the consumer not owning what he buys.

    Eliminate the restrictive DRM practices, and I can accept digital. I accept it every day right now on the 360. I will never accept the DRM the XBO was slated to get initially.

    #7 1 year ago
  8. spazman

    I think the one eighty performed by MS confirms physical media is here to stay for a while yet, with sony & panasonic reputedly joining forces to usher in super blu ray (4k). And Xbox, the beloved shit box, deserved every ounce of acerbic abuse it got. Telling us what we can and cannot do – f**k off!

    #8 1 year ago
  9. orakaa

    I think Carmack don’t understand that the problem was not digital distribution, but DRM.

    I prefer boxed games, but I’m not totally against digital distribution and bought some games digitally. But don’t put DRM on it. If I pay something, then it’s mine and should not be caution to a connection to a company’s server who might be turned off some day in the future. This is not improvement: this is regression.

    There’s nothing wrong with the way digital games are distributed on Xbox 360 and PS3 through their respective stores. You can’t give more restrictions in the purchase process and not expect a backlash in return. The reaction was justified.

    #9 1 year ago
  10. bradk825

    The big problem wasn’t digital-only, it was disc with DRM. They tried to go half-way to digital to get people used to it and it just causes a shitstorm. The half-way stuff doesn’t work. Be digital, or be disc.

    #10 1 year ago
  11. sg1974

    When someone whose wallet doesn’t benefit financially from a digital-first or digital-only policy criticises its setback in the eyes of the average consumer, then I’ll listen. Until then, just keep filing these under “well you would say that, wouldn’t you”.

    Evidence strongly suggests consumers don’t want this yet. Live with it.

    #11 1 year ago
  12. lookingglass

    The witch hunt was unjustified. It was blown up by the conservative gamer sect, fearful their hobby was changing. Sadly they still aren’t smart enough to see that it’s going o happen anyways.

    The majority of gamers, the ones with money who matter, have good, reliable Internet. The Xbox features were some of the best features ever allowed to digital media. The console would have flourished outside of the ignorant fanboy crowds.

    Buy your discs. Sell them to GameStop. Enjoy your ignorance while it lasts. Eventually you won’t matter and the industry will leave you, kicking and screaming, far behind.

    The sooner the better.

    #12 1 year ago
  13. sg1974

    ^^ Some silly folk just hate people having a choice and failing to conform to their own view about how everybody else should behave.

    #13 1 year ago
  14. fearmonkey

    @12 – yeah well the gaming community overwhelmingly disagrees with you and carmack, so there is that.

    #14 1 year ago
  15. laughing-gravy

    Advantages to being spied on? Are you f***ing kidding me! Jesus. At least we know all the crap he’s been spouting lately has been paid for.

    #15 1 year ago
  16. thunderrun

    Like always !
    Carmack being confident about something that is not gonna happen any time soon !

    #16 1 year ago
  17. Phoenixblight

    “Evidence strongly suggests consumers don’t want this yet. Live with it.”

    Ha the number grows for the amount of people that purchase digital every year. Its now up to 40% of the market goes for digital and with the Xbox One and PS4 allowing Day 1 release and play as you download for digital you will see digital come on top. Convenience of not having to go to a store or outside to purchase a game is a huge boon. Its the same reason why digital is number one for the PC market.

    #17 1 year ago
  18. Froseidon

    @14 – Disagreement doesn’t always prevent change. Granted, the DRM was restrictive and I didn’t like it, however, his comments on digital only seem to hold some truth.

    Whilst I believe the disk medium will remain, I know that many developers seem fond of the ‘digital future’. Developers actually make more money from digital sales than they would disk sales, due to pre-owned sales hurting the revenue that developers obtain. If stores like GAME and Gamestop actually gave a percentage to the developers for pre-owned sales, then we wouldn’t be facing a ‘digital future’.

    With improving internet connections, storage mediums and other factors, digital is becoming a more popular medium. What people seem to forget is the platform Steam, which is currently the pinnacle of the digital medium. Steam is yet to fail, and I personally don’t think it will. It’ll fade out far after the disc versions of games do. The digital medium will, in the end, become more popular. As I said before, the disc medium will stay, but digital will end up becoming popular, however, this might not be for a long time, since the Xbox One u-turn.

    The “witch-hunt” on the Xbox One was partially justified. They had the ends in mind, but the means fell short. A DRM of that kind was bound to fail in the current times. In the future, maybe such an act would have worked. But not at the minute.

    #18 1 year ago
  19. DSB

    It’s like watching people talk about Steam back in 2004.

    I was one of them. Having to install a big ugly puke-green client to play the copy of Half-Life 2 I got in the mail was a “huge hassle” and “Valve were jerkbags” who couldn’t even match the prices of the physical stores.

    I was never a tinfoil hat sort of person, so I wasn’t whining about whether my games would still be there in 10 years, but it’s been 10 years, and they’re still there. Who’d a thunk it?!

    #19 1 year ago
  20. monkeygourmet


    They have to keep Half Life 2 around, otherwise people will stop waiting for HL3!!! :)

    #20 1 year ago
  21. ysleiro

    @13 Nah the gaming community doesn’t disagree with Carmack.

    WE THE FEW that go on gaming blogs do.

    #21 1 year ago
  22. MrWaffles

    @9 exactly this.

    I LOVE having my shit on the cloud, especially games. But the issue was the always-connected DRM.

    The problem with them backtracking is (And this is an assumption) I thin they were about to announce a lower price for games because of this… but, it wasn’t the time, nor the way.

    ISPs around the world will surprise you with their shitty service from years to come, so I really can’t believe they didn’t think of another method of preventing mass “sharing” of games.

    People just don’t get it…


    #22 1 year ago
  23. Joe Musashi

    Microsoft showed mistrust in their customers. Their customers returned the favour.

    The question is: who needs who more?


    #23 1 year ago
  24. bradk825

    @23 Puh-lease. Are you saying that if you could buy a game, install it to the HDD, and sell it the next day, but keep playing because it’s installed, you wouldn’t have done exactly that?

    I didn’t want the 24hr check-in either, but if you give a disc with the ability to play discless, you have to have it. It’s a bad model, but it’s not “mistrust.” You’d have to be retarded to offer a disc that can be installed any number of times to any number of people and never deactivate the content.

    #24 1 year ago
  25. DSB

    @22 Spot on.

    Using compulsion instead of incentive was the critical mistake.

    I don’t think most people realize the implications. Digital means cheaper games and more money going to the people who make games, instead of primarily benefitting the people who just make plastic.

    I do fear that the cloud could prove to be an even worse mistake though. If something like DRM checks and basic processes is seeemingly so impossible to operate for everybody else, how are Microsoft going to support complex realtime processes on that scale?

    @24 I think it’s extremely unambitious to see that as the only effective way of verifying the software you sell. It may be the most secure way, but it’s also the most boneheaded one for all involved.

    Take a platform like Steam. Everybody is effectively always online, the software is there to be verified, and no one had to be forced to cooperate. Microsoft could’ve done the exact same thing, and they would’ve had what they wanted.

    But instead of providing incentive to keep people connected, they tried to force it, and that sunk them.

    #25 1 year ago
  26. fps_d0minat0r

    @ DSB
    Please explain how having physical games means Sony/Microsoft must price digital games at a higher price?

    I’m sorry but there is no connection. The pricing of digital games is in no way linked with whether or not physical copies of the games are available in store.

    If Microsoft are so confident, they should have let their low priced digital games wipe out physical media via customers chosing digital over physical.
    What was the need for them to block physical media using DRM?

    The whole reason is so there is no competition between retailers like Amazon and GAME driving down the price.
    If for example Call of duty launched at £50, only available digitally, thats the price you pay, there is no alternative.
    Maybe in a sale it will be about £20 after a year or so.
    There will be no way you will be able to purchase call of duty from microsoft or sony for £5 like you can but it at the moment on physical media.

    #26 1 year ago
  27. Ireland Michael

    @19 I have never bought a single Steam-only full price retail game that can otherwise be bought on disc. 90% of my Steam collection is bundled stuff that also came with DRM-free editions, and a half of other titles. About the most money I have ever spent on a game on Steam was €20, for Torchlight 2.

    Digital is a nice *option*, but it is not and never should be the *only* one. If I’m going to be given a “digital-only” future, I’m not going to touch it unless airtight ownership of *my* purchases comes with it. As it stands, Microsoft does not have my trust that they can provide that, and the whole Xbox One DRM debacle did nothing but show me that this is *not* a company I should support.

    I will be picking up an Xbox One in the future, when there are games on it that I actually want to play, but for myself (and the vast majority of people that I know), the PS4 is going to be our primary hardware of choice for this generation simply because Microsoft has the gaul to try and treat us like shit-eating idiots that will swallow whatever fecal crap comes out of their corporate mouthholes.

    I have no grudge against the hardware itself. A company has to earn *my* trust though, not the other way around it.

    @24 They could have very simply made it so that the game requires an online check if not using the disc, but no check if the disc is inserted in the tray. Problem solved.

    #27 1 year ago
  28. Lengendaryboss

    I can’t believe you listen to that MS PR bot: if he enjoys being fucked up the ass with less choice more power to him.

    #28 1 year ago
  29. bradk825

    @27 yes, they could/should have. I was just pointing out that 23 was being a tool.

    #29 1 year ago
  30. DSB

    @26 You’re kidding yourself.

    The 60 dollar price point is neccessary if you want to make any kind of money while also paying to manufacture plastic, and shipping that plastic around the world, and finally splitting the take from that plastic with various retailers.

    Once you subtract the cost of manufacturing, shipping and retail, you could be making as little as 12 dollars, or an absolute maximum of 24 dollars on a 60 dollar game, while selling the same game online would net you 42 dollars.

    It’s a no-brainer for the industry.

    You can really only guess why Microsoft or Sony have been asleep at the wheel. They’ve obviously gotten away with charging people money for basic online functionalities that would be free on any other platform, so maybe that’s part of the answer.

    I agree it’s a problem that Microsoft and Sony haven’t opened the market, or provided a better service for their customers, but it could seem to me like those customers are too busy cheerleading to care that they’re being screwed over.

    #30 1 year ago
  31. Ireland Michael

    @30 This €60 a pop pricing model is old, tired and useless, but a digital only future is not the answer.

    #31 1 year ago
  32. DSB

    @31 You have to sell (at least) two physical copies to make the same money as you would selling a single digital one. That’s just reality.

    Selling a physical copy at 40 dollars would effectively mean that you’re selling at a loss, so unless you attach a different revenue stream (online passes, micro-transactions, piecemeal DLC) it’s simply not going to happen.

    Personally I’m tired of publishers ruining their games in the hopes of winning some spare change, and I’d much rather see them getting that money just by selling games.

    #32 1 year ago
  33. Ireland Michael

    If developers stopped wasting millions of dollars chasing a visual Hollywood pipe dream, this wouldn’t be a problem in the first place.

    Gaming is *hugely* expansive. Unfortunately, many of the “old guard”, gamers who grew up with the hobby in its infancy (Atari’s, C64s, SNES’s), are so caught up in the old way of doing things that they’re completely afraid of change. Those gamers are quickly under threat of becoming the new “old folks”, complaining about how things were better in the old days and that nothing ever changes for the better.

    Tablet and mobile gaming. Free to play models. Genuinely expansive DLC and long term game support. These are all valid ways of supporting games and turning a profit.

    Tablet and mobile gaming is still young, but its expanding all the time, and regularly innovating. Most gamers treat it like its the devil though. Free to play models *can* and *do* work, and there are countless success stories in that market. And when it’s done right, DLC is great – if its lazy, slapped together and impacts the original games, that’s the fault of the devs.

    But there’s a tonne of gamers who can’t see gaming as anything more than “I buy a game, I play through it, and its done.” *That* is an old fashioned approach to gaming.

    Chasing Hollywood will not make games profitable, because games aren’t movies. You can’t just keep throwing money at flashier experience and expect to turn a profit. It just isn’t going to happen.

    Sure, extra digital profit might stem the problem for a while, but what about the *next* next generation of hardware, when games get even more expensive to make? What then? Who are we going to blame then?

    #33 1 year ago
  34. bradk825

    @33 How many times did CoD take heat for using the same engine? Every installment since CoD4 was heavily criticized for this.

    The “visual pipe dream” is something that sells games. If devs are not improving on graphics a significant number of people are not going to buy from those devs. People complain that is isn’t attractive enough “doesn’t look next-gen” or doesn’t have enough new features or better mechanics than previous games. Chasing the bigger, better experience is a budgeting nightmare, but it’s also a sales necessity.

    #34 1 year ago
  35. Ireland Michael

    @34 “The “visual pipe dream” is something that sells games.”

    And yet its the people that made Angry Birds, Minecraft and the worst looking, most outdated FPS on the market (CoD) who are the ones laughing all the way to the bank.

    #35 1 year ago
  36. sebastien rivas

    Yes maybe physical media is coming to an end but gamers do not go against that idea.
    DRM means gamers do not own title they pay for.
    If I want to rent a game, then I will go and rent it, but again that won;t cost me 60~70$.
    Makes me wonder if “John Carmack, cofounder of id Software” actually followed the DRM issue or if he was paid by MS for more PR BS…?

    #36 1 year ago
  37. bradk825

    It’s true from a business sense that Angry Birds is profitable because you can make it for the cost of birdseed, but the same people are not purchasing content for Angry Birds that are planning to play Forza 5 and Destiny.

    Yes, small devs can make money on small games. But the AAA market is still there and still needs the great tech. Besides, the current graphics of games like Angry Birds are still well above anything that anyone could have imagined when they played on their NES. Somewhere along the line someone had to spend money to develop that tech too.

    #37 1 year ago
  38. Camfak

    Doesn’t Carmack have a lot of opinions in favour for the Xbox One recently?

    Looks to me he’s getting paid by MS.

    #38 1 year ago
  39. Phoenixblight

    ” but the same people are not purchasing content for Angry Birds that are planning to play Forza 5 and Destiny.”

    *Raises Hand* I have bought ANgry Birds and Plants Vs Zombie.

    Stop making generalizations because you will only come out the fool.

    #39 1 year ago
  40. Ireland Michael

    @37 That still doesn’t change the fact that the Triple A market can barely sustain itself, and its going to have to end up functioning like Hollywood if it wants to – only churning out the safest, most potentially profitable ideas. High budget, low risk. Play it safe.

    You have to accept that that extra cost comes at a price, both literally and figuratively.

    Personally, I’ve become utterly bored with the AAA market myself. It’s just the same old boring shit over and over again. All style, little substance. Heck, the supposedly more basic and limiting mobile platform has been releasing games with more complex gameplay than half the large titles of late have in them.

    #40 1 year ago
  41. bradk825

    @39 I have Forza and Destiny pre-ordered and I have not paid for Angry Birds.

    I am saying they are not the same market. I bought a car and also a blender. That doesn’t make them the same market, don’t be a tool. You know you’re just trolling with that comment. If you’re retarded enough to pay for a free game on a cell phone be my guest. Not my bag.

    My comment is that you can just stop making better tech and expect the gaming industry to grow because you lost your standards. Would there still be new games every year in 2013 if we never progressed past Super Mario Bros? Get real. Improving tech is necessary in most industries. Car companies spend millions to increase safety, no one is making them except the competition. If you want to compete against small indie games then of course you don’t need stellar graphics. If you want to compete against Bungie, Bioware etc then you had better invest in visuals and storytelling.

    #41 1 year ago
  42. Ireland Michael

    @41 “My comment is that you can just stop making better tech and expect the gaming industry to grow because you lost your standards. Would there still be new games every year in 2013 if we never progressed past Super Mario Bros?”

    That’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m saying that games need to function as more than just “hand over the money, play the game, and then you’re done” if the industry ever hopes to sustain itself. I mentioned a few examples in my earlier post.

    There’s space for all of them. But the gamers who hold onto the old fashioned way only, and refuse to accept that there are countless different approaches (and more importantly, that they are just are valid as games) are going to end up being the cranky old guy in the corner in a few years, shaking their walking stick at the kids who “don’t know any better”.

    Meanwhile, those kids will perfectly content playing their F2P MOBAs and their creative sandboxes and their cell phone RPGs (with more gameplay innovation in them than any Final Fantasy game has seen in the past half a decade). Of course, they’re eventually get old too, and end up doing the exact same thing.

    #42 1 year ago
  43. super3001

    carmack is right. people who want dead disc format is stupid and holding industry back.

    #43 1 year ago
  44. DSB

    @33 I agree with that, but if anything, they should learn from the movie industry. You have talented people making movies costing anywhere between 1 and 300 million dollars. There’s vastly more room to take risks on a bright spark with a vision.

    Regardless though, whether your game is 40 dollars or 60 dollars, you’re still going to want the most out of it. It’s about the percentage. Making and moving plastic is extremely wasteful when you could simply be beaming it through a cable, duplicating and delivering at very low cost within seconds.

    It doesn’t benefit us, and it doesn’t benefit the producer. It benefits the guys making and moving the plastic, and it benefits Gamestop who are selling and reselling it.

    #44 1 year ago
  45. sleaker

    @18 said “Developers actually make more money from digital sales than they would disk sales, due to pre-owned sales hurting the revenue that developers obtain.”

    I haven’t seen an article support this statement yet. A pre-owned sale would have been a new-sale if the product was sold at a lower cost. You can’t make a 1-1 comparison saying that a pre-owned sale means the game would have been purchased, or that they lost a sale. You probably also think that if someone pirates a game the developer loses money.

    #45 1 year ago
  46. Ireland Michael

    @44 Frankly, I’d prefer if the whole triple A summer blockbuster gaming thing died off completely. It’s the most outdated type of game design there is, and its starting to show its age.

    Its not a question of if Triple A gaming becomes like Hollywood, but when. It *is* going to become more risk adverse, it *will* churn out more identical looking games and sequels, and it *won’t* take many chances. There is no way it can’t (or won’t) if it wants to survive.

    Personally, I jumped off that hype train years ago.

    I’ve gotten more value for money out of Plants vs. Zombies on my iDevice and its 2+ years of constant free game updates than 90% of the full price retail games I’ve bought in the past five years have given me. And it cost me a grand total of €1… one fiftieth of the expense.

    What exactly is there to look forward to in Triple A gaming right now? Halo Activision? CoD with robots? More space marines? More guns? More explosions? More cars?

    Fucking yaaaaaawwwwwnn. No thanks.

    #46 1 year ago
  47. monkeygourmet


    Pikmin 3
    Lego Undercover
    Wonderful 101
    Zombie U
    Game and Wario
    Mighty Switch Force
    New SMBU

    Plus… Many more…

    #47 1 year ago
  48. DSB

    @46 I hear ya.

    I’ve said it several times before, but I think we need a Charlie Chaplin figure to come along and shake things up. Bring in some new values and new priorities, and show up the old timers. I don’t think they realize just how stuck they are.

    That’s why I was pretty excited to see Jason Rubin at the head of THQ. If you look up some of the things he’s said in the past, I think he has it exactly right.

    The industry needs creatives who are willing to take charge, who can penetrate the corporate bullshit, and eventually manage to put games back at the center of what the industry is all about.

    #48 1 year ago
  49. Phoenixblight

    ” have Forza and Destiny pre-ordered and I have not paid for Angry Birds.

    I am saying they are not the same market. I bought a car and also a blender. That doesn’t make them the same market, don’t be a tool. You know you’re just trolling with that comment. If you’re retarded enough to pay for a free game on a cell phone be my guest. ”

    Again you are generalizing. I have bought Plants vs Zombies for andriod, PC and Ps3. I have also bought many triple A games. They are the same market and your analogy sucks ass. Both phone, tablet and console are sharing the same entertainment space the only difference which is slowly blurring is how they market themselves and their business model.

    #49 1 year ago
  50. sh4dow

    Oh Carmack…

    It would be one thing if people e.g. had to pay a flat fee of $10 or maybe $20 a month and had access to ANY game they wanted at all times.
    An offer like that would make up for all the drawbacks coming from digital only and mandatory internet access.

    But that’s not what they did. They tried to have their cake and eat it too. Just like the music and movie industry. And who, by doing that, at least lost a major customer in me.

    Just the other day, I organized my collection of special/limited edition DVD boxes… let me tell ya… quite a couple, from all over the world. But… the last one I bought is probably three years old. Because I decided I won’t buy any more products of companies THAT greedy. (And – when I lived near a movie theater that showed great movies and sold 10 ticket blocks for $70-80, I went like once a week. But when it’s >$10, no discounts available?! Fuck that!)

    Similar things go for music and games. Fortunately, I can still buy a lot of stuff in those areas directly form artists/developers, DRM-free at reasonable prices, etc.
    And I guess in that sense, it’s a good thing that at least some people are driven away by big corporations and decide to instead get the good stuff right from the source.

    #50 1 year ago
  51. Ireland Michael

    @47 All great (or potentially great) games, but not exactly triple A stuff. Most of those games probably have fairly modest budgets… and they’re better for it in the long run too, because half the budget isn’t spent on flashy cutscenes.

    Those games are like the “indie movies” to Hollywood’s “summer blockbusters”. Nowhere near the same expense or flashiness, but possessing a hell of a lot more soul.

    #51 1 year ago
  52. monkeygourmet


    Bloody hell you switched and edited from earlier! :)

    #52 1 year ago
  53. monkeygourmet

    Can’t keep up… (Said in a Southern Honey Boo Boo style…)

    #53 1 year ago
  54. Ireland Michael

    @52 Say what?

    #54 1 year ago
  55. monkeygourmet



    I’m talking crap lol :)

    #55 1 year ago
  56. Joe Musashi

    @29 Having a view on something that doesn’t align with yours doesn’t make the person expressing it a tool.

    Oh. Hang on. Username+three digits? Appeared shortly after the XB1 announce? Ah. That explains it.


    #56 1 year ago
  57. Lahanas

    @12 Very well said. Many gamers are entitled little fuckers who cant see past their nose. They dont realise that if we go on like this there will be no game creators to make games.

    This model of a game changing hands so many times while the creators get the money of the first purchase only, has to die. Something has to change. Game creators deserve to be compensated for every person that plays their games.

    #57 1 year ago
  58. Dragon246

    I would just say MS pushed its consumers a bit too far. People aren’t exactly comfortable to change.
    However, the attitude is reminiscent of Sony circa 2006. Oh how the times have changed :D

    #58 1 year ago
  59. Lengendaryboss

    Thats right agree with the lunatic:

    #59 1 year ago
  60. Ireland Michael

    @58 Calm you tits, dude. *That* is getting tiresome.

    #60 1 year ago
  61. Dragon246

    Opinions,opinions,opinions. If you don’t agree, sorry. Cant do anything about that. Its not like my opinions will even indirectly cause any harm to you.

    Huh? Dude, weren’t you doing the same thing in Dragons crown thread ie. having a different opinion? I had no problems with you having a differing opinion.

    Btw, being realistic and with some data to back up, its clear that X1 will suffer in sales compared to PS4, at least at launch. X1 preorders are well behind PS4.


    One more thing, granted we are consumers, but does anyone try to put themselves in the shoes of “money grabbing” suits of pubs and devs?
    I can certainly tell you that they aren’t doing stuff with the sole purpose of pissing the internet.
    Different perspectives.

    In the end, its just a matter of different interest groups. Its clear MS pushed its consumers too far, and hence will pay the price. Not once am I justifying anyone or anybody.

    #61 1 year ago
  62. Ireland Michael

    @61 Whoooooooops, that was meant to be directed at #59.


    Lets try that again…


    @59 Calm you tits, dude. *That* is getting tiresome.


    There we go. Much better. =P

    #62 1 year ago
  63. Dragon246

    Oh, okay.
    This is awkward :P
    We are internet buddies, right :D

    #63 1 year ago
  64. Lengendaryboss

    My post was supposed to be aimed at 57, but yeah i’m done now. Not aimed at Dragon but 57.

    Twice i have made that mistake.

    #64 1 year ago
  65. fuchikoma

    @57 There were games before there were computers to play them on. There were games before there was a games industry. Before you could make a profit from them. As long as we’re free to develop for a platform, there will be games because there are always people with ideas who want to see them happen.

    It’s possible the huge AAA game industry will collapse on itself – personally I’d be fine with that. There will always be games for people to play, and having to support physical media isn’t going to change a thing. Not supporting it will lose a ton of would-be customers however.

    #65 1 year ago
  66. Vice

    Yes, days of physical media are over. However it doesn’t means that everything should be always online or even with once in 24 hours forced checks. Single player must always remain single player. Offline. Just on my system. And if mp will be forced down our throats, well then they can take their games and consoles and put it up their gay asses.

    #66 1 year ago

Comments are now closed on this article.