| Machiavellian said: How can you put out the fire Orth set when you have to make a statement about a product that does not exist. I just do not understand your reasoning. It's trivial to you concerning the issue but its totally different on the corporate level. Why would MS say anything about a product they have not released, that is not in the market if they already have a plan to deliver that message which is already probably costing them millions in prep. Why would they spoil that work just to set YOUR mind at ease. Once MS makes a state saying the Online only for the next xbox is false they just undermined their reveal, it opens up a can of words that potentially derail all the money they probably is spending and have spent on their reveal. |
I addressed this in my FIRST post in this thread. Here's how it would be done:
"The comments made by Adam Orth on Twitter are not representative of the opinion of Microsoft. We here at Microsoft do not consider the practice of always-online restrictions at the hardware level to be appropriate to the videogame industry. We view all consumers, irrespective of location or internet connectivity, to be equally important."
Not a word said about any sort of product, yet puts out the fire completely. Establishes that future consoles from them won't have always-online DRM, without ever mentioning any console, and yet leaves the door wide open to games on future consoles being always-online. And it does all of this in a way that also avoids any pretense of there not being a new console being prepared for announcement, and thus does not patronise its potential customers.
