$8.00 hotdog?
 

Ok, so I said I would never be back. I kept lurking and just couldn't stay quiet any more. I guess that makes me a hypocrite. Oh well. HOWDY Y'ALL!!!

Anyways, here's what this whole UBI DRM thing got me thinking about. What with requirements of a constant internet connection and the move towards online saves, I wonder if video game companies' ideal end state is to move the entire game to their servers, thus leaving nothing on their users computers for them to copy. Software engineering and bandwidth problems aside, this model of interactive computer entertainment delivery seems to meet the big software companies' interests perfectly, namely making money and controlling who gets access to the code. You can already play Flash games online. What with the massive amounts of RAM computers are coming with these days, and the increases in bandwidth coming in the next decade, I'm willing to bet that copying a major hit on to you hard drive so you can play at your leisure will become a thing of the past. Instead either you'll have to rent access to a title or pay a per-use fee in order to play the game. Call it a virtual theme park if you will, where each game represents a different ride in the company's theme park server. When the user logs off the game simply gets wiped from RAM to prevent copying.

At least they won't be able to charge you $8.00 for a hot dog.

Hypocrite? No, just an addict. Addicted to a forum. Well, there are worse ones you could be stuck with. Either way, welcome back!:DL

I don't know about the future of video games, since the only ones I play consistently are related to aviation or naval history, and they are few and far between. I don't have to be online or pay-to-play to play miniatures games with my friends, and that's my real hobby.

So I don't have an answer, just ever more questions.

The world of video games (just like everything in life) is dynamic, so 20 years from now it doesn't mean we'll have to pay for each level/mission we play. Video game styles and concepts will change just as times change. Today we're facing with piracy so everyone is testing various protection methods (DRM and many more to come). Then there's also the mmorpgs that you buy or pay to play on a monthly basis. One thing is for sure, nowadays, the quality in games is decreasing rapidly. You spend much less time on a game, but better graphics and/or character immersion etc. Everything is a lot more commercial and pointed towards casual players that bring in the big bucks for the companies.

Frankly, I have little doubt the future of video games will be pay as you go. There may be boutique publishers who eschew this model and release stand alone, single player games. There is always someone willing to buck the trend, thank goodness. But they will be on the fringe.

I think the large developers and publishers will eventually move toward the "pay as you go" direction. I don't like it, mind you. But I think it's going to happen.

Even if games go in this direction there will always be ways around it. Just ask the people who don't play WoW online.

I remember well the, "dark days" when we all had to pay by the minute or hour for internet access of any type.

I suspect in the future, we'll see only run-of-the-mill games for the PC and more advertisement and subscription-supported sites like, "Pogo" (in the US - don't know if they're international) - one can either play, "Trivial Pursuit" or, "Scrabble" --- and little else. The major efforts and popular stuff'll be sent to the consoles where, "they" can more easily maintain profit margins and more easily control piracy.

So how is this different from putting money in the arcades? That was 'pay as you go' so it's hardly something we haven't seen before. GEtting older now and so I could care less if gaming dies(it won't of course), as I've still a backlog of many titles I haven't finished, and many mods to play, not to mention revisiting old favourites!

While it's something that has probably been considered, I cannot see it working for anything other than MMOs. If you are making people pay a subscription, then you have to provide something which makes that subscription worth paying, and that means content. Clearly this is something which most single-player games either cannot or will not do, and thus it's unlikely that many people would be willing to pay for them.

Regardless, such a system would probably spell the end of PC gaming as we know it today. I for one would steer well clear of games utilizing pay-to-play, and I'm sure I would not be alone in that conviction. Though this is really a moot point, since few companies are going to be foolish enough to implement it.

Well, the future is called OnLive and it starts in June 17 this year in USA. OnLive has a HUGE potential to be the future of gaming and I cannot wait to be available in Europe too.

I played WoW for 5 years and I really have no issues being online for a game if there is a benefit from it. This DRM thing it's plain stupid as is no gain for the consumers and is not at all an anti piracy solution. But OnLive its is and will kill forever the piracy, also will give the opportunity for everybody to play the latest games without being forced to have the ultimate pc nor gamming stations at home.

For those who don't know what OnLive means, here is the basics:
onlive Wiki
official site

Makes perfect sense... they seem to certainly make them as you go.

OnLive will require a VERY VERY VERY good internet connection, and at today's standards I belive there are few that could actually play any games using OnLive... it will probably take a LOT of time before the system is perfected granted the internet technology also advances some more, the only thing that interested me about OnLive is that you don't need a super duper uber gaming rig to play games (because I don't)

Well, I don't think you will need such a uber speed connection, 5Mbs connection speed tend to be the standard home connection in EU and USA already. Even under 5Mbs, this will work... quoting from OnLive

Those who played some MMO's for a longer time know that high speed connection is not really necesary. My only skepticism is related only to the hardware part. They would need some uber epic rigs on their side to be able to provide their clients a quality service. I have a hard time to accept that if they will be successful and they will raise their customer base at 8-10 million clients or more (as Blizzard have now with WoW), those rigs will not just crash when 5 or 10 million people will play at the same time.

Time will tell, but if this project will be succesful.. this will be the future of video games. Pay as you go, play how much and what you want, huge multiplayer options, no more piracy. The future looks good, I'm really excited about this project :)

You`re excited about the need to go online to play a single player game?

And after having spend a ton of money, loosing everything if you forget/couldn't pay your fee for 1 month? :-?

At least ten years from now I can still grab a box and install from disk, or from HD for digital downloads, and just play it, no costs.

Seriously, I don't get. I hope OnLive dies as fast as it appeared. :nope:



Ah, and super-uber-rig argument; this thing is 2 years old and still runs most new games maxed out without too much difficulty. Granted, they are typically games released on console as well, but even SH5 runs fine, without shadows of course (nvidia). :D

But that is exactly how videogames began in the first place :-) Inserting coins in the machine for a few minutes of game.