Like Tears in the Rain: Long-Term Concerns with Xbox One's Cloud Computing Initiative

I was reading the latest issue of Game Informer and, despite not being a fan of the Call of Duty series whatsoever, I found myself giving the extensive Titanfall article a read-through. I found the article interesting and the game, while not exactly blowing my mind (it kind of reads like a mash-up of Call of Duty with Zone of the Enders), did seem to bring some novel ideas to the table. Then I got to the reasoning Respawn offered behind making the game an Xbox One exclusive, and a thought started gnawing at the back of my mind.

 

Now, it seems to be the trendy thing at the moment to hate on the Xbox One. Certainly, Microsoft’s mishandling of practically every aspect of the new system has given plenty of reason to do so. From things such as the live, on-stage rape joke during the new Killer Instinct reveal at E3 (made by the producer of the game), to Adam Orth’s seemingly deliberate antagonism of a senior BioWare dev for sticking up for consumers, to Don Mattrick’s baffling post-E3 interview (have bad internet? Don’t want always-on? There’s a system for that: it’s called Xbox 360. I also absolutely love Geoff Keighley’s reaction in that video. You can hear it in his voice: “Really? That’s the message you want to put out there?”) and then bailing for Zynga, Microsoft is seemingly doing its level best to try to alienate its customer base. To be fair, the Xbox One DRM and always-on policies were reversed, but, in turn, the company claims that certain features of the system had to be removed as a result.

Here’s the problem with that reversal, though: it doesn’t really change anything. What causes me to make this claim is the aforementioned Titanfall article. Yes, the game is straight-up always-online multiplayer. Fair enough. What is concerning, however, is the discussion of Microsoft’s Cloud Computing Initiative for the Xbox One, which allows developers to offload some of the backend work of running games to Microsoft’s Cloud servers. This process sharing is meant to ostensibly make the Xbox One exponentially more powerful than the physical console that is available for retail purchase. It also makes total sense for an online-multiplayer game like Titanfall to take advantage of this boost in processing power.

The issue arises when developers start taking advantage of that added power for single-player experiences. Now, I know I may have just made myself look ridiculous for suggesting that single-player experiences are still an important concern when EA has asserted otherwise, but games like BioShock Infinite, Batman: Arkham Origins and the new Wolfenstein beg to differ. Okay, so what am I driving at? How can extra power be a bad thing for single-player games? Wouldn’t that extra power just allow for more immersive and expansive single-player experiences? Sure. Absolutely. For as long as the Xbox One is a Next/Current Generation console.

People are already concerned about what will happen to all of that great digital content that this generation of systems (Xbox 360; PlayStation 3; Wii) has made possible, a concern made even more prevalent by EA’s decision to shut down servers for games a year or two after release, especially in the mobile marketplace, where the games simply become unplayable. Keep in mind that this concern is for digital content that is stored on hard drives and which will still be accessible when the online servers are taken down. That mobile example, though? The one where iOS Rock Band is just not playable? That’s the future of the Xbox One.

I still own and play my old consoles. My PS2 is connected to my TV right now. I hook up my trusty NES on a fairly regular basis, and I even pull my ColecoVision out of storage every once in a while when I get the urge. These systems all offer fun experiences that allow for direct interaction with video gaming’s history. That’s not going to be possible with the Xbox One. When the next generation of Xbox (past Xbox One) is released, how long will those cloud servers used as extra backend power going to stay operational? Keep in mind that these servers are not free, and Microsoft will be paying to keep them up, running, and maintained.

To be fair, Microsoft did wait five years after the Xbox 360’s launch to shut down Xbox Live for the original Xbox, but it still happened. That was just multiplayer, however. I can still play original Xbox games on an original Xbox without the Live service. I can even play those games on my Xbox 360 (as long as they’re on the approved backwards-compatibility list). However, Microsoft isn’t concerned with backwards compatibility anymore. In fact, they’ve gone so far as to insult the people who want their systems to be backwards-compatible (although, once again to be fair, that was Don Mattrick speaking before he left the company). Given that stance, it’s clear that the disappearance of the Cloud with the inevitable next system isn’t a concern for them, because who wants to play old games, anyway? That’s like capitalizing on a long-term investment, and that’s just silly, right?

Really, once the Cloud servers come down, people who want to play Xbox games will have no choice but to buy the new Xbox, as the Xbox One will be seriously hobbled, if not unplayable. Future proofing, indeed.