Cliff Blezinski Defends Adam Orth, Always On

Cliffy B

Ex Epic Games and Gears of War top dog, Cliff Blezinski, has stood up for the recently resigned Adam Orth, who made sarcastic remarks about consumer hate for always-on systems, suggesting that Orth was right, it's something that's going to be increasingly prevalent and we might as well get used to it.

"My gut is telling me that an always online future is probably coming. It's coming fast, and possibly to the majority of the devices you enjoy. Adam's analogies weren't that far off; although the vacuum one was kind of weird. Sim City, with all of its' troubles on launch, seems to be selling briskly."

"Diablo 3, the poster child of a messy launch, is estimated to be at 12 million units. I would bet money that without the always online elements of Diablo 3 that it would have sold half of that."

He then drew a tangent between always-on adoption and Microsoft's decision to make the original Xbox a broadband only console, in the days when broadband adoption wasn't anywhere near the level it is today.

"I'd be willing to say that any early adopter for any new piece of technology is probably going to have some sort of solid internet connection," he said (via CVG). "Also, and I've stated this before, keeping that umbilical cord connected might not always require some sort of insane fat pipe. Sometimes just 3G might be enough."

"Technology doesn't advance by worrying about the edge case," he concluded.

Annoyingly, the man does have a point. The gaming industry does have a history of resisting change. Steam wasn't a popular idea initially and look where we are now. We're living in an increasingly interconnected world and we all spend half our lives on phones or PCs, looking at stuff online.

What do you guys think? Is Cliff making a good point, or speaking a load of gumf?

Add new comment

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.


All Corps S.U.C.K.!.!.! EA,MS,Sony,stEAm,GovCorp...Pick-1-Any-1

They (& I Mean All Giant Corps with Way Too Much Power including Da GubMint) have simply gone Padded-Room Sick with Madness like they own you. They want Everyone to Accept & Get Used to... ... ... ZERO Privacy + Full Accepted Invasion of it... Period. They're like Really Bad Parents of the Worst Narcissistic Kind... You Know, the ones who Do Every Bad Thing in the book plus write new ones with Ignorance & Bliss while telling the Kids (us) who aren't supposed to know their business, to do as they say, not as they do, but they need to know our business no matter what. Who we associate with, what we discuss, what we like to do, where we go, how often, how many times you __?__ a day, Your Personal Medical Records, Full Access to your PC,Phone,Tab, Living Room TV-camera, where your Phone & Vehicle Travels & who's around wherever you go. Did you make an extra $100 for Your Broke Self we weren't told about... Well?... ... Why Didn't You Tell Us? HmMM? ...tap...tap...tap...tap Well young Man/Lady That's Gonna Cost Ya, Let the Punishments Begin... Yea, That Kind... I wish the Masses weren't such Easy Suckers, if they would actually turn their backs to these freaks, keep their money & demand changes we wouldn't be in the Purposeful Messes we're in now With Everything & Growing Worse by the month nowadays... ... ... Eh, that's just my $29.98@Wal-Mart & 2 Cents+tax... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... (((Grins))) Power 2 People (((Fist))) Oh! Screw WalMart Too!

It's always the same

As usual, large companies refuse to learn lessons from other companies, they have to fail for themselves. Steam is always online if you want it to be, it has an offline mode for people who don't want to connect just to play a game. By providing players with the choice of always online or not Steam pleases a much larger audience and that's why it's so successful. Acting like Orth or this guy and their "It's the future, deal with it" attitude is a recipe for failure.


why don't they entice use to keep it always online but giving us the option to use the console or what ever offline. they say diablo was a success but how many of yous still play it?, diablo and starcraft are games that don't need to be always online at least with the single player element. why don't they follow steam with its offline mode (even though i can never get it working) so you can at least play the games you own on a laptop when your on a plane or train etc.

Practical problems?

My phone isn't always online. It's never online. I don't even have an account. I can turn WiFi on & off whenever I want. I bought it for the camera & a few other things, not to use as a phone. WTF is this idiot talking about? More DRM strategizing. That's all any of it is. It has nothing to do with improving user experience ('cuz that ain't what "Always On" does). Everyone can't be connected all of the time. So you'll lose tons of sales with customers in rural areas & also with customers who don't have the internet because they don't use it enough & then there's the issue with the net not being 100% reliable. It's less reliable than electricity & substantially less so than telephone service. It just ain't gonna fly. Either people don't buy the crappy consoles, or they mod 'em like they do now so that they work properly instead of being factory ****** right out the box. Another win for the PC I guess. Every gen' of consoles further defeats itself by removing one by one any claimed ease of use advantages it may have had (which is another load of horse loaf).

Gaming can evolve and

Gaming can evolve and flourish without chipping away at the liberties of the gamers or developers. Always Online has NOTHING to do with games or gamers, it's a ploy by Marketers and alike who leach off of developers and gamers. Always Online is good for the Fat Cats, and this guy is a small time lackey, can you say "dance puppet dance!"?


Some games, like MMOs, can't be made without always online connections. It's acceptable because it's necessary. It's the abuse of this feature that's a bad thing, not its existence or proper usage.

"We might as well get used to

"We might as well get used to it." - Dogs get used to their collars and short leashes. What does that make this guy and people like him? What does that tell us about the Gaming Society we have today? "I would bet money that without the always online elements of Diablo 3 that it would have sold half of that." - Because D2 didn't sell well absent the Online Leash. And it didn't sell well because of it's great Single Player Campaign.

Evolution is not a belief

It's a proven BIOLOGICAL FACT, and yes, we value freedom because it's our animal nature, freedom which applies to behavior, habits and yes, PCs too... Your pastor told you that PC gaming is the devil's industry? That Amerifags must turn to their zombie god? IDIOT!!!

biological fact huh? wow

biological fact huh? wow where is your evience to support this FACT and no all scientists do not say evolution is a fact and no games are not from the devil they are from porgrammers trying to make life more enoyable and fun

Evolution is proven as a part

Evolution is proven as a part of all living things, but the theory that evolution is all that there is and ever was is not (to my knowledge) proven. If you ask for facts about somebody's claim, then dispute that claim without providing facts to the contrary, that's hypocritical. The part about stupid amerifags is obviously a just insult not to be taken literally.

firstly im from uk secoundly

firstly im from uk secoundly i dont care what insults are thrown has thats usually a sign of some one who either has no proof or is a wimp . 2nd saying its part of all living things is just plain wrong u see you are mkixing up macro and micro evolution up a common mistake most make but we could just has easily give it another name lets say all life has the ability to adapt something i would expect that a intellegent designer would do otherwise they wouldnt be much of a god would they

If you want evidence of

If you want evidence of evolution you need to educate yourself first, trying to use science to explain things to creationists is like trying to prove something mathematically to an 8 years old, he'll look at the equation and ignore it because he doesn't understand it and he'll keep thinking you are wrong. There is a massive amount of evidence about evolution, but if you're not knowledgeable in biology, genetics and related areas, it's all just gibberish to you.

look at the so called

look at the so called evidence about evolution darwin was a ******** you have to be brain washed when you were young or be unthinking to beleive that or just a dumb *** who cant critically question it.. the thing is this all goes nowhere you know why?? COS YOU AINT PROVIDED ME ONE SCRAP OF PROOF OF EVOLUTION I ONLY ASKING FOR 1 OR 2 EXAMPLES BUT HAS USUAL I GOT NOTHING JUST A SMOKE SCREEN!!! TO DIVERTY THE ATTENTION AWAY FROM THE LACK OF IT

ok here we go explain the

ok here we go explain the evolution of the locking knee joint humans go ahead . or try and explain for me how the law of light and darkness how supremely tuned it is 1 to the 150th power to be precise explain why if the big bang is true how come the matter is not evenly spread and science has to make up stories just so the evolution theory doesnt look dumb . explain how the first life form came into existance then how it magically figured out how to reproduce .

"Evolution is proven as a

"Evolution is proven as a part of all living things, but the theory that evolution is all that there is and ever was is not (to my knowledge) proven." Sounds like the person who wrote this was clear. But Christianity and most religions are drenched in **** and blood. Whatever is behind everyone and everything, i guarantee it has nothing to do with our religions any more than sacrificing hundreds of people will make crops grow. Nothing will stop religions and their terrible rampage of death and misguidance, but at lease the theory of evolution does not encourage anybody in any way from causing harm to others. Explain away religions history of being the very definition of a terrorist organization, but don't drag down scientific theory for your own need to fulfill your belief in a fiction. Puppet.

oh and i promise you my

oh and i promise you my religion has never had anything to do with any of the atrocities that have been commited by say the catholics or any religion in fact all we are guilty of is waisting rooms in prisons for objecting to war of any kind

When the "Bible" is mentioned

When the "Bible" is mentioned, as it was earlier, its safe to assume the person is another brain washed christian. My mistake, and yours for not mentioning that you belong to whatever religeon you subscribe to. As a matter of fact you still don't, so expect to be labeled when you sound like just another crazy christian. Of course some religions are alright.

I never said that if people

I never said that if people did stupid things that meant god did not exist. If god does exist it likely has nothing to do with our religions, or the actions of humans. The answer to the first question is: Nothing. The answer to the second question is: people have free will and the ability to think for themselves, i expect them to use both and determine for themselves who is at fault.

at least answer this if a god

at least answer this if a god were to exist what does this have to do with what religion is doing or have done throughout history ? in other words how does the idea that people have done bad things in the name of god proove that he doesnt exist ?

First, this question is not a

First, this question is not a very good one. Second, i never said that if people did stupid things that meant god did not exist. Third, your right, if a god does exist it (god) likely has nothing to do with the religions, or the actions of humans. i think the only two things you can count on is we were given free will, and the ability to think for ourselves. The second of the two is hardly used.

after re reading the last

after re reading the last question it implies that it is a fact god exists you are right .. anyway even though you believe evolution im not convinced you understand it none of my questions on biological or interstellar evolution were answered so im guessing you dont know. fact is i have searched long and hard for an answer to those questions no evolutionist has provided even a half satisfactory explanation to them if you dont know the answers just admit you dont its ok not even the biologists do

I don't know the answers, and

I don't know the answers, and my posts were not about the answers to your questions. Frankly i don't care about your questions because lack of proof is not proof. If evolution cannot explain something it does not mean it proves some theory of god, nor does it prove that evolution is false. It also does not make you smart or cool. My posts were only to make sure some bogus claim that the bible has all the answers was met with strict resistance. If you want to rant about how cool and smart you are so be it, i can agree to disagree, but i don't target incomplete scientific theory in order to rant about myself or my theory of god.

so arent you using the same

so arent you using the same lame arguments some chrisitans are (not me) the fact the we cant disprove evolution it must be true .the fact you cant disprove god created it doesnt mean he didnt . the only way from your perspective to proove either way is if both of us observed it . saecoundly im not talking about a few things that cant be asnwered fact is there are no intermediary fossils. .ok some claim that we dont need them .i say thats true if you have already decided that evolution is true then we dont ,but this needs faith !.fact is there are no real evidences only inferences and micro evolution which falls inline with the model that it was created and well designed so how that can be evidence when it equally can be used with the creation model astounds me .and inferences are very lame i can use any inference you bring to the table to proof a god from same set of evidence . go ahead call my bluff i call yours

Im having a hard time reading

Im having a hard time reading your messages and dissecting exactly what you are saying. No, im not using the same argument as some lame christians. If you cannot disprobe evolution then you have answered your own question, that you cannot disprove it. To me evolution is like math, its a collection of proven facts like 1+1=2. It's easy to say that's because god made it so. It's also easy to say everything is an inference and therefor can be used to argue either way. This is like using an incorrect syntax to solve a problem. Or aguring for a syntax that cannot. To this point i never defind evolutions roll in the gand scheme of things, nor would i define math's roll. Both are collection of catagorised facts and they should not be tossed aside because the collections do not yet have all the answers relative to other areas of reality, logic or theorys in general. Nor do i like them to be the target of immaturity that claims their incomplete parts are a sing that they are bogus or that their incomplete parts prove that god fills in the rest. Also i never gave my perspective that the only way to prove something is for both of us to observe it. It seems like later you inquire that the creation modle and evolution can only be mutually exclusive but i cannot be sure what you are trying to say. If you think colletions of data can be used for both and/or either side of the argument then i guess i'd have to agree because that syntax cannot prove anyting or really help much. If you do not define terms then you cannot have a real discussion... I think... Also im enjoying you points weather i agree with them or not.

has long has you admit that

has long has you admit that mearly because i cant provide Cast iron proof evolution is not true this does not make it true.. if you already admitted to this then i apologise. i just watched another video on evolution (and i am trying my best to ignore what the bible says on it get better understand how you think) but u was tearing all the evidence to bits easily. oh i thank you for talking to me its nice when evolutionists dont run for the hills so to speak when i want to talk . on your point of syntax errors .so at this point we need to figure out if i have or you have a wrong thought process that brings either of us to a wrong conclusion on the evidences or inferences . also i did not say all the evidence was an inferred just the majority. one evidence id like to point out is the archeoptryx you probably believe it proves birds evolved from dinosaurs i would say it provesthat either there were dinosaurs with feathers our maybe birds evolved from dinosaurs . im just trying to get you to understand that even with evidence that is seemingly greater than mere inference two sets of ideas can be brought to mind . someone who is unbiased would have to come to both sets of possibilities in fact another species of dinosaur that has feathers was found in china recently found in china, also with the archeoptryx some still are unsure if it could fly or not. could you find a evolutionary video for me to watch that you feel has compelling evidence and post the link i will watch and give you my thoughts on ALL the evidence presented in order of it being shown then it gives us a better ground to debate on.

Probably would not know of

Probably would not know of any good videos. Our basis for science is bias and incomplete for so many reasons, there are more forces at work than we take account for. like when Einstein said the theory of the Ether (that tesla was working with) was an inevitability. So we are not adding all the "forces" into the equations that we should and to me that is so important. I remember they took piranha embryos and let them grow in a pressurized tank that simulated the atmosphere of dinosaurs age, the piranha grew allot bigger and there were some other changes. More recently; Where Did The Towers Go is a 2 hour video by Dr. Judy Wood that shows the level of technology responsible for the towers demise that we still do not include in our physics. Altho i know little about it personally her evidence seems sound. DNA reacts to many forces and i hypothesize it also reacts to more forces that we are admitting, like the Ether or even less understood forces. The Phantom DNA experiment is interesting. If you are interested, there is a miniseries (6 videos) called Ancient Knowledge on youtube, its long but good. Probably the most entertaining ive seen recently.

just one thing i wanted to

just one thing i wanted to tell you is about junk DNA, for decades it has been taught. i have had to have faith that it was not true and believe that biologists simply did not know what it was for . evolutionist have taught that the other 80 percent of dna was junk left over from the animal we evolved from . but finally barac abama and tony Blair Britains last priminister announced that 100 percent of DNA is used the other 80 percent that we previously thought was junk is now known to be error correcting code.. is this not now at least a strong inferance of a creator has it smacks of design .and if you view it not to be so then you really do have to give evolution a round of applause for its 100 percent zero waist ,most advanced information center (has its in effect infomation) the universe has ever seen :)

you just used a strawman

you just used a strawman arguement to take everyones attention away from the only FACT and that is you have no evidence to say i ignore it is amazing especially has you do not know me at all fact i studied evolution 7 years till i came to the realization that it is wrong if this wasnt the internet i meaning you probably live 500 miles away from me i would challenge you to a debate in public i dont mind . oh and one thing just simply saying that i dont understand it there fore its true is simply dumb .try that one in a court of law i dont think it would wash some how . ive debated 100s of evolutionist verbally of course they all end up slapping and running

You claim your educated

You claim your educated instead of providing facts. You sir are a lire, and an idiot. I say you study nothing and im a genius who knows your wrong. See how easy that was? I have seen no real evidence that evolution does not exist. If you had evidence you would have shared it. ****.


Every device is online be it a phone or a pc and console. People Forget being online has its advantages. My concerns over Digital is the price of online games being expensive when Cheaper by 70 percent in store. Imagine how much control Microsoft or sony would have on there Pricing of online games. They could force expensive games being constantly Expensive with no option to purchase cheaper. Control can Be bad

its not even about if we are

its not even about if we are online or not its about being forced 24/7 to be connected and being punnished if not .. i cant wait for the time (if this happens) when these people who are backing this when playing there favorite game a message comes up onscreen Screen sorry but you internet connection has failed DEAL WITH IT

A Bunch of Crap

The flaws in the logic here are so glaring I'm surprised he was willing to make these statements. The fact is, that forcing always on-line for a device that doesn't actually require it for it's basic functions is nothing but a restriction on the devices use and a removal of options. The advancement of tech, such as the original Xbox having broadband, is about adding options, not removing them. The Xbox's lack of dial-up didn't adversely affect the console because dial-up was no where near fast enough for any of the online functions of the Xbox. Even Steam, which does require an online connection to download games and verify games, can be run offline. Even my phone, if my online doesn't work and my phone isn't getting a signal, can still play videos and games that are on my phone. It doesn't become a useless brick because a service that is only necessary for certain functions isn't currently available. Diablo 3 and SimCity sold well because of expectations for the game. And the games sales, even though it contained ridiculous DRM, and yes that's what it is, says more about the expectations of the game than any thing else, and the idea that always online somehow increased sales is about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Not that it's representative of most gamers, but I know 4 people, including myself 5, who refused to buy D3 on principle, and instead purchased Torchlight 2. That's 5 lost sales at least. No matter what excuses and claims are made about always online, it will remove options, and the fact is that it will only hurt the 720, not help it. But, as long as the console doesn't tank, they'll tout it as a success, because they can't see the sales they didn't make.

I agree with most of what you

I agree with most of what you said but calling d3's always on requirement purely DRM is wrong. It has a reason to be, and that's the auction house. If people could play it offline, it'd be the hackfest d1 and d2 were, people creating and cloning items everywhere. You can't have that if people are allowed to sell items for real money, it'd completely kill the AH. IMO the AH was a horrible idea and a few weeks (maybe a month?) ago we had one of the d3 creators admitting it. In d3's case, it failed because it was built around the auction system, it wasnt built to be fun, it was built for farming and greed. Blizzard learned a valuable lesson from it, people don't play games for the same reason they make games (for money).

Explain to me, how would the

Explain to me, how would the AH be affected if Offline Single Player Characters and Items were treated separately from their Online counterparts? It was completely unnessesary to make D3 Always Online. It was done because Blizzard is now run by a marketing department. The same reason D3 sucked IMO.

Always connected not for me!!

I spend the summer out at the campground, I enjoy my rainy day gaming sessions and when I get a little time to kick back in the evenings. I wont be going Xbox 720 if it has to be always online. Deal breaker for me. Stupid idea, I have 15 buddies that I play xbox with and not one will go for this either. Im waiting for the official word from MS before I jump ship but starting to get worried.

out of the 40+ people that i

out of the 40+ people that i know who bought d3 around here (including me) noone has logged into it since oh.. about 2-3 rd week it was out. Sc2, Warcraft, yea they still play those games, but D3 is just complete utter garbage, and any ******* moron defending that game needs to be put down.

Diablo 3 sold well for 2

Diablo 3 sold well for 2 simple reasons: The Sequel to the fans' favorite RPG, Diablo 2 and because Blizzard "is Blizzard". I didn't buy it cause of the always on DRM, I'm not that stupid to fall for it. Skyrim didn't have always online DRM crap and sold over 7 million copies in the first week and currently it's Ranked 8th place in the most played game list. Cliffy may be a big figure among gaming and I respect and agree with some of the things he says but not on this one, he's wrong.


Add new comment