Fuck online.

But do we have the technology?

It's interesting (to me, anyway, and hopefully dR) that there is such disparity between the quality of the implementation of online features. I largely avoid multiplayer (because I'm shit at most games) but enjoy many other online features; I like that generally all games are available to download, I like that game patches and firmware updates happen automatically, I occasionally enjoy seeing friends comparisons (how my score for a particular feature compares to friends' scores, that kinda thing) although I (mathematically improbably) have fewer online friends than real life ones.

Given how smoothly these things work, I find it frustrating that, for example, Just Cause 3 regularly makes me wait for up to a minute while it attempts to sign into a server. It's unbelievably poor implementation; given that it's a single player game, that should be happening in the background. When, in 2016, this is being handled with such ineptitude, it makes me sceptical of games selling themselves on the back of such features. Crackdown 3 might be the first game to make me consider buying a One, but if I think for one second that the experience will be plagued by server login failures, it can get tae.

Then, there are the online features I don't want. One of the things that puts me off playing The Crew are the relentless prompts for doing this that or the other online, it has too many online leaderboard distractions, too many prompts that some mouth-breathing fucknugget wants to join (spoil) your fun. I'll be crucified for saying this, but that was another aspect of the Souls/Blood games that irritated me; I played offline whenever I could. More and more often I'm reading about games that would otherwise interest me, until I find out they are online only, and often rely on playing with the same people to be worthwhile.

In short, I think there's a lot of great stuff going on, but in the grand scheme of things it's probably early doors. If we do see greater online implementation and - as seems to be the regrettable direction - more seamless integration, I hope to hell we still get the opportunity to switch these things off without it being detrimental to the single player experience.

Andy wrote:

It's interesting (to me, anyway, and hopefully dR) that there is such disparity between the quality of the implementation of online features. I largely avoid multiplayer (because I'm shit at most games) but enjoy many other online features; I like that generally all games are available to download, I like that game patches and firmware updates happen automatically, I occasionally enjoy seeing friends comparisons (how my score for a particular feature compares to friends' scores, that kinda thing) although I (mathematically improbably) have fewer online friends than real life ones.

The 'core' platform services have taken some time to get to this point.

Remember when XBL (I know we had PSN, but most of the innovation started on Xbox) introduced the gamertag?
A unique and transparent identifier for players to use across every game they played. Utter genius. It was so good, that it took Nintendo's flaky 'usercode' system for us to appreciate just how cool XBL truly was.

Before XBL managed to find fans, I found myself agreeing with Sony. Let the developers work out the online scheme that's best for their game. But Microsoft insisted on an infrastructural approach.

Everything, from the dashboard, to achievements, and of course, the gamertag.

And to their credit, it worked admirably. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure Microsoft were the first to make this approach work on a console, at least. Not sure how advanced Steam was before XBL, but I'm at least sure that in game achievements (as an OS/platform feature) are a Microsoft invention

And yeah, like you, I take a cheeky little glance through the friends list, if only to see if they've found something worth playing... Though I'm not to fussed about how well they're doing, because like you, I'm shit at games. :]

Andy wrote:

Given how smoothly these things work, I find it frustrating that, for example, Just Cause 3 regularly makes me wait for up to a minute while it attempts to sign into a server. It's unbelievably poor implementation; given that it's a single player game, that should be happening in the background. When, in 2016, this is being handled with such ineptitude, it makes me sceptical of games selling themselves on the back of such features.

I don't know about Just Cause 3, but I do know Street Fighter 5.

That said, while SFV was primarily designed as a multiplayer game, the ill advised in game currency system should still allow you to earn money in it's single player modes without needing to be online... It would have taken some work to do (a 2 phase transaction when I come back online, or some shit), but (I think) it can be done. Capcom cut many such corners in a rush to get the game to market, and it's infuriating.

Then there are more pressing concerns, like player matchmaking, and penalties for cheating...

I know that SFV and JC3 are two completely different games, but what your post suggests to me, is that both games are suffering from elementary design issues that detract from the enjoyment of the game. And in both cases, they appear to be issues that have been addressed in the recent past. And that's jarring.

I suppose though, that kind of sloppiness is what allowed Colossal Order and Paradox Interactive to take so much custom away from EA and the Sim City franchise... And that's a good thing tbh.

Andy wrote:

Crackdown 3 might be the first game to make me consider buying a One, but if I think for one second that the experience will be plagued by server login failures, it can get tae.

I'm interested in this shit too. Something tells me that tech wise, it will run like a German train if it ever sees the light of day, but you're right. Who knows?

Andy wrote:

In short, I think there's a lot of great stuff going on, but in the grand scheme of things it's probably early doors.

It's starting to get very interesting. Plenty of stuff that had been promised sometime ago that's still to come to pass... Like episodic games... I think, again, SF5 is the nearest I've come to playing an episodic game, what with all the character release stuff. Olli Olli 2 and Rayman also has some nice daily challenge stuff, but the leaderboard format puts me off.

And the promise of a streaming service still appeals, especially after trying out PS Now on the Vita recently...
When it works, it's awe inspiring... Really... barring politics, what's stopping me from playing PS4 games (or better) on a handheld now?

Absolutely nothing. Though latency is still an issue...

Didn't read most of that. On a technical level, though, MS' gamertag is identical to Nintendo's code thing. Nintendo were just worried about not being able to block everything rude (which, to be fair, you can't).

Basically, what I want to say is MS don't deserve anywhere near the amount of kudos you seem to be giving them for their user name system. It's incredibly obvious and the reason they got it going first was because they weren't as bothered about its misuse because they were ready to deal with it having been active in similar areas already.

The obvious way? They didn't do anything special, they acted on complaints. They just knew they could weather it if a big one came up.

I joined to talk to the creatures.

Aye, since Joao, Dave and Ste left together.

Would we have all the shit we've become accustomed to, if our consoles were offline?

Meh.