In my first post I made a passing remark that may have made it seem like I dislike the casual gaming market. This couldn't be further from the truth. While I don't have much time for it personally I do own a Sony tablet and I will occasionally grab a free game to kill some time with, although my Wii has sat completely unused since about two weeks after I got it back in 2010 on a massive reduction. The casual market might not be for me but I do respect it and it's place in the industry, be it touch screen or motion controlled gaming.

A lot of the criticism of the casual market, particularly the touch screen, app based portion of it, is how simple the games are. This is total crap. These games are not simply "simple" they are just small, mechanic based experiences, like the games many of us grew up with. Is Temple Run's slidey, tiltey fun really in any way more offensive to hardcore gamers' sensibilities than jumping over barrel's in pursuit of a girlfriend-kidnapping primate? Mario Bros. can be boiled down to "hold right and tap jump a bit". As game engines, graphics and mechanics become more complex and impressive do we really expect ALL games to become more and more complicated? Is there people out there complaining when movies out there don't use CGI or 3D.  Just because the technology is there and you can use it, doesn't mean you must or even should.The really popular titles are original and fun little ideas, much like the games of our childhoods. Yes there's countless knock offs littering the online marketplace but they get the scorn they deserve. People love Angry Birds, they'll play Angry Birds and they will either ignore or ridicule ever Miffed Pigeons that comes their way.

The other side to simplicity is the controls. Touch screen and motion controls are not just useless gimmicks, they are training tools. When I was young I was playing with a joystick or a d-pad and maybe to or three face buttons on my controllers. Now we get two thumbsticks, a d-pad, 6 face buttons and 4 shoulder buttons. It wasn't always like this. I still remember not liking the analog sticks on my PS2 controller but then getting used to them to the point where playing my PS1 titles can be a pain in the hole if they were made pre-dualshock. We learned and we developed muscle memory slowly as controller's grew in size and complexity. Right now to a non-gamer a joypad can look quite intimidating. The Wii, Wii U and touch screen devices let's them wave and slide and stroke their way to comprehension with a spattering of button based interactions.

Casual games might not be for me but then again neither is Sesame Street or The Hungry Caterpillar, but I'm not going to direct my ire at what is essentially the building blocks of the medium I love.

One of the major issues with the Xbone and the next generation of consoles (finally after the better part of a decade maybe people can stop calling this current generation "next gen") is the subject of backwards compatibility. Now the odd thing about it is backwards compatibility is really a relatively new concept. Back when Nintendo were all but the only player it wasn't a thing for their full consoles, their handheld machines did it but other than that it wasn't really done or demanded. It wasn't until Playstation 2 that a console really had backwards compatibility down. So are gamers demanding too much of these companies? Well the short answer is no. The longer answer is why I'm writing now.

You see in the old days consoles were quite compact, lightweight and sturdy. Hanging on to your NES, SNES, N64 and Gamecube was not much of a hassle. They took up little space, they were highly portable and they still work today. Compare that to the failure rate of the 360 and the sheer bulk of the console and we start to see the problem. Now I'm relatively lucky. I've had my 360 for nearly 5 years without issue, I am however on my second PS3. The failure rate of modern consoles means there is a giant clock counting down to when all our current gen games are going to be unplayable and that's what has people worried. Have we spent almost a decade putting together a collection that's basically now rushing to the end of its lifespan?

A Microsoft exec recently said that "backwards compatibility is backwards" and that we should be moving forward. That only 5% of gamers actually use backwards compatibility. Considering those figures are based on a generation of consoles where only one console has it and it doesn't even work for all or most games and that it is almost entirely a used game market, ie almost impossible to keep track of, I find that figure dubious at best. At the end of the day Sony saw fit to distribute PS2's up until earlier this year. Go on any of the big 3's online marketplaces and you'll be flooded with previous gen games to buy and download, all the big publishers are pumping out HD remakes of their major last gen franchises and there is a booming market for buying and selling retro games. So what's the real issue? It's the same issue with DRM and online passes. Money. There is no way for the industry to monetise on backwards compatibility. How can the publishers possibly earn money on games you already own? No, it makes much more sense to sell you these games again. Maybe even crap out a HD remake like Konami's insultingly bad Silent Hill collection to make it look like they care when really all they're doing is making you buy the same game twice.

Now, I'm not a tech genius by any measure but the very basic reason full backwards compatibility is not available is that the processors just work differently. The only way to make it work fully without putting an older processor in is emulation. Just like emulators you definitely haven't downloaded for your PC to play old SNES and SEGA games because that's illegal. This is difficult to manage and basically requires patching the emulator constantly to make more games run on it. It is difficult, time consuming and costs man hours. The thing is though, pirates do this all the time for free supposedly on top of whatever their actual job is. Now I'm obviously not suggesting Microsoft and Sony's programmers do this for free also, I'm just saying that the process is possible.

Really the fact is the only thing consoles had going for them was convenience. But with the used game market being killed, always online DRM bullshit, system updates every other day, a game library with an extremely finite lifespan and a totally non-competitive price model, really the only thing I see this next gen of consoles doing is creating a new generation of PC gamers. 

(For those of you unfamiliar with it CAD is a once funny webcomic series written and drawn by ego-maniac and alleged pervert Tim Buckley. Now I’m not saying Tim Buckley definitely once sent pictures of his cock and balls to an underage  female user on a forum he moderated on, I’m just saying that anyone who would do that is a scumbag. To be clear I’m not saying Tim Buckley definitely once sent pictures of his cock and balls to an underage female user on a forum he moderated on.)

I still read CAD, I don't know why. To be fair I've never been formally tested so I can't know for certain that I'm not retarded. I never really read his blog posts under the comics though. The only times I have were the end of the original run of CAD recently and a few other occasions. The man is one of the most anti-consumer dickholes in the industry. I vaguely remember reading posts where he criticized people for boycotting games. Now once again he's telling us that we should just roll over and let the games industry step on the other side of our faces. Warning his post is quite long so this response will be even longer, I'll try to avoid being wall of texty.

Television:

There's no denying that a big part of the presentation talked about what the Xbox One does for television. A lot of people have their panties in a bunch over this. "Why should I care about TV, I buy a console for the games!"

They felt like talking about the various TV/Movie watching features of the X1 somehow stole valuable presentation time from all the video game footage people would have otherwise seen. Like it's pointless that the console does that.

Well Tim the main reason for that is it's true. If you have a finite amount of time to discuss something then covering one specific topic may automatically preclude discussing another because time has this nasty habit of moving forward. For instance, if I'm trying to sell you a car and I spend half an hour telling you about how awesome the cup holder is and that there's a radio that would be dumb. Likewise if you want me to spend 300-400 bucks on a console because it lets me watch tv much like my tv does then you've missed the point of your own fucking industry, congratulations.

I think that's a really narrow angle to look at it from. It's a next generation console. Of fucking course it's going to have games, and they're going to look better than this generation's games.

"There'll be games and they'll be pretty!" Once again missing the point. The main issue that gamers like myself have is that in recent years there’s been a shift away from the core gaming market. Everyone is scrambling to make the next CoD killer (by doing exactly what CoD does because no one wants to take risks anymore), by pumping out EA sports title after EA sports title and focusing on motion controls that no one asked for. When Microsoft reveals their next big console and tells us it has CoD, we can watch football on it and the fucking Kinect is a fucking requirement many of us are of course apprehensive that maybe the console market is just going to be another generation of the same uninspired bullshit we’ve been handed for the past 7 years. When Microsoft tells us that indie devs can’t self-publish and everything from indie titles made by some dude in his basement to a digital copy of Call of Duty are going to just simply be listed under “games” then yes, we start to worry that maybe videogames have become an afterthought.

Has there ever been a new generation of consoles that did not A) improve the graphics of the games and B) have a library of games? I feel like the knowledge that the new Xbox would look better than the 360 falls into "no shit" territory. So why wouldn't they talk about something new the console brings to the table?

No Tim but has anyone ever bought a console purely because it does stuff other  things in their house already do and better? If I'm going to buy an Xbone at or soon after launch it'll be because it has great games. Not pretty games and the ability to watch football. The fact that when marketing a videogame platform they don't think actually discussing, y'know, videogames might be important is telling of their attitude towards the industry and its consumers.

And personally, I'm on board with it. If it works with my cable service, and I have one less remote and one less input to swap between, bring it on. Swapping inputs doesn't bother me, I've been doing it forever. But the idea of not having to do it is nice. Yes, please let me switch between various things I want to do in my living room with a simple voice command. If its as responsive and fast as they say, it's pretty cool.

I suppose this feature is a problem for people outside of NA due to current lack of support, I don't know. It's not really my job to worry about what other people want/get from the console they buy. That someone else can't use this feature won't stop me from using it.

This is the prevailing attitude of the post right here. "If it doesn't affect me directly why should I care about shitty practices in the industry?” It’s the same attitude that dismisses the fact that Bethesda released a broken version of Skyrim for Playstation users just because you personally never experienced them. Shitty practices are shitty practices and we should all be worried when an industry starts to test what it can get away with.

Where were all the games?!

People are acting like because Microsoft didn't show a ton of game trailers yesterday, the X1 won't have any games. Seriously?

Actually Tim, the cause for concern is that if you're trying to market your videogame platform to people who like videogames and the only mention of videogames is that you'll definitely have them it does make us feel like an afterthought. It's not like the AAA industry has been striving to produce pure gold these days. Between motion controls, bullshit multimedia integration and clone title after clone title (so far we know the Xbone will have motion controls, bullshit multimedia integration and wow, we'll have a new CoD whoopdy fucking doo) a videogame console presenting itself based on anything but games tells us that the industry is indeed going down the route of bullshit like we've suspected. The fact that you think the issue here is graphics just shows how incredibly out of touch you are with the consumer.

They promised 15 exclusive titles coming to the console, more than half of which are brand new IPs.

Yes and as far as we know all 8 exclusives could be some kind of variation of Call of Honour or Medal of Duty. Excuse me if I'm not shit my pants excited yet. You know what would get me excited. Telling me about some of the games. This generation of consoles went in a few directions a lot of gamers didn't like. We want to be assured we're not sinking a few hundred bucks for more of the same and so far there's been very little to suggest otherwise. But no we should just be satisfied that Microsoft have told us there will be games. Of-shitting-course there’ll be games. Will they be good? Will they be adventurous? Will they be creative? Or do we have another generation of stagnating crap ahead of us?

Backward Incompatible

Yeah, no backwards compatibility. That's fine. When the 360 came out, I had one Xbox game that I really, really still wanted to pick up and play with a friend every once in a while, and that was The Warriors. And it was never added to the backwards compatibility list. I got over it.

Again, "I got over it" just shows his attitude so clearly. Tim, listen closely, a market is supposed to work by producers and distributors keeping the people who give them money happy. They are not some capricious gods we sacrifice a goat to and hope it doesn't rain. We give them our hard earned money in exchange for a product. Somehow demanding quality these days has turned into a "sense of entitlement". I get to decide what 300-400 bucks is worth to me. If a console doesn't have a feature I want and I refuse to buy it, that's not me "feeling entitled" that's me deciding it isn't worth the money. If a shop tried to sell you a loaf of bread for 50 bucks it's not "feeling entitled" to take your business elsewhere.

Always On

Again, whatever. My consoles are always connected anyway. I can see how this is an issue for people without a regular internet connection, but if that's the case, you simply don't buy the console. I mean, you wouldn't buy a cellphone if you lived in a city with absolutely no service. You just use landlines to make your phone calls. In this case the landlines are the Xbox 360 and PS3.

This is also known as the "Orthy Defense" and it has been discussed in depth already. There's nothing really left to say other than "fuck you, you sanctimonious prick". Whatever about any other "feelings of entitlement" you might throw up, to act like integrating a useless system that only serves to make it impossible for some people to enjoy the product is fine and anyone who disagrees with it is just whinging is a massive dick move. Seriously, fuck you in the neck sir. "I've dealt with it, of course it doesn't actually affect me."

Now we get onto used games. At first he just describes what we know of the system already, a game being installed and tied to a particular console. Then we get into his opinion of used games and the bastards who buy them.

Used Games

"I'm allowed to sell the car I own. I should be able to sell the video game I own. It's my property."

When you sell a car, you get less money for it because its used. Its overall lifespan and value has decreased. The person buying your car is getting a less valuable product than you got when you bought the car brand new. It's got miles on it, maybe some dents and dings. There are unknown mechanical problems lurking under the hood that the new buyer may have to address.

There is a tangible value disparity between a brand new car, and a used car that accompanies the differences in price. However a video game that is used is exactly the same product as it was when it was new. The programming does not deteriorate. Bugs and crashes aren't going to suddenly pop up due to age. No matter how many times the game is resold, the used product remains identical to the new product.

There is another difference, a never before owned car that's a year old will cost considerably less than a brand new car. The videogame industry does not go in for all this competitive pricing stuff. I can go into a shop, find a brand new copy of CoD BlOps 2 for 50 - 60 bucks, a 6 month old title. Console gamers need used games because we don't have services like Steam offering huge sales without having to leave the house. If we want to pick up a game that we don't feel is worth 60 bucks (and most of them aren't) we just have to hope that our local game store has a sale soon. I would almost guarantee that right up until the new CoD, BlOps will sell for about 50-60 bucks new if it's not on sale. The digital marketplace on consoles is often worse, charging the same as and often more than its boxed counterpart. The pricing system of the gaming industry is flat out broken. A flat rate of 50 – 60 euro for all games is stupid and unfair. People paid full retail for Aliens: Colonial Marines, a game that barely even worked.

Why would someone pay $60 for a game when they can get the exact same game for $40?

Because in the days of day 1 DLC and online passes you just don't get the same product for 40 as you do for 60. Is day 1 dlc going to become a thing of the past? Not likely because someone somewhere will lose their code and then publishers can get people to pay twice for content.

Now you can say "But they already got their money from the original sale! Car companies don't get a cut every time someone sells a used car!" That's true. But somebody shopping for a used car is not in the market for a new car. A used car buyer is not "stealing" a potential new car sale. However a used game buyer is stealing a potential new game sale. So whereas the developer might have sold two games, they have now sold one, and GameStop has sold one. It's not about ownership or "its my property", it's about used games presenting a threat to new game sales.

Oh goody he even used the word stealing. If I buy a used game I am not stealing anything and fuck you for implying it. If I have 40 quid in my wallet then guess what? I'm not in the market for a new game because they're all priced the exact same with no consideration given to features and no depreciation of value until the next in the series comes out. The pricing structure of videogames is fucking broken. If I can pay the same thing for a 100+ hour RPG as I can for Resident Evil fucking 6 that's just wrong. However if I can sink 30 on a preowned game then periodically buy up all the DLC over time for another 20 to 30 bucks then everybody wins. Devs get money, Gamestop get money, I get to enjoy the game.

It's up to the game's industry to give us an incentive to buy new. Not offer a shitty broken model and then attack any better system that comes along. Award me for buying new, don't punish me for buying used.

People who buy used games buy used games. When faced with the same product for cheaper, they aren't going to buy new just to support a developer. They're going to buy in favor of their wallet.

Seriously fuck you Tim. Here's a little story. I bought my 360 in 2009. With it I got one free used game. I picked up a little title called Mass Effect and fell in love. I immediately went online and bought the DLC. Mass Effect 2 rolled around and I pre-ordered the collector's edition. When Bioware also released Dragon Age:Origins I bought it day 1. DA:2 and ME:3 came out? Day 1 purchases and all the DLC. So fuck you, you arrogant prick. I buy games online. I have 20 ps1 games saved on my ps3. I could have just pirated them but I didn't. They are games I remembered really enjoying and I was willing to pay for them again. Most people buy used at some point or another. Maybe you've got nothing to play and only 20 bucks to your name? Tim is calling you a thief if you buy used. Explicitly calling you a thief.

Now, you can argue the morality of used games all you want, but the bottom line is that developers feel it takes money away from their business, and so they have every right to try and combat it. The most definitive thing you can do is simply not buy the console if it's a big deal to you, but let's be honest... you were clearly going to buy the games used if that's the case, so the developers won't know the difference. They weren't getting your money either way.

Fuck you Tim. Just, fuck you.