MindFreak Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 I'm sad. This is sad. I liked the XBOne; cheaper games, no discs, cloud-processing could become the norm, you could share your games with 10 friends, you could play your games anywhere without having to bring the discs (as long as there is internet of course). These were good features! The only bad thing was the 24h check-in. It could have been 72 hours instead, leaving room for loss of connection, or there should be some way to check in manually without internet. I think the Mattrick-'article' was a geniune good read. It's mostly true. But I know I will not get any of you here to accept that someone actually liked what they heard. I'll still get an XBOne, though.
Cube Posted June 20, 2013 Author Posted June 20, 2013 I'm sad. This is sad. I liked the XBOne; cheaper games, no discs, cloud-processing could become the norm, you could share your games with 10 friends, you could play your games anywhere without having to bring the discs (as long as there is internet of course). These were good features! The only bad thing was the 24h check-in. It could have been 72 hours instead, leaving room for loss of connection, or there should be some way to check in manually without internet. Is the system completely gone? The system sounded amazing for their digital games (with a fairer check-in time on the console you bought it on, 24 hour on other consoles - with the console license transfer option if you upgrade a model or need to replace yours), but terrible for disc-based games. Especially if they sold the digital version in stores like Nintendo do. If they keep the sharing/trading features for digital games then they have a damn good selling point (then they'll need some games).
Dcubed Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 (edited) Xbox One DRM policy changes waited on gamers knowing “complete story” Microsoft’s eyebrow-raising reversal of its Xbox One DRM policies has been in the works for some time, corporate vice president of Xbox Marc Whitten has said, but Microsoft wanted to tell the “complete story” before it made such a dramatic public reversal. Speaking to Polygon, Whitten agreed that public opinion – cited by Xbox executive Don Mattrick as the primary motivator for the changes – has been strongly against DRM policies ever since they were first hinted at during the Xbox One reveal. “What we wanted to do was tell our complete story,” Whitten said of the delay in letting gamers know things had changed. “We knew our complete story was partially told at the Xbox One unveil and partially told at E3. We wanted to put our story out there and show the great games we have coming. We did that and people gave us a ton of feedback.” The “complete story” included a number of features which, thanks to today’s reversal, have been thrown out the window – sharing your games library with up to nine other household members; taking your full games library to a friend’s house just by logging in on their machine; and the ability to play without a disc. These conveniences weren’t enough to keep gamers on side, it seems, so Microsoft has returned to a more conservative model. There are some positive changes though, notably that the console will be region-free, but also should you take your disc to a friend’s house and install it there, they have the option to purchase it after you leave, saving them the hassle of getting their own disc; it will be as if they bought it from Xbox Live. It’s worth remembering that the DRM changes don’t make the Xbox One an offline console; games which require cloud processing will need an always-on Internet connection, like any MMO or online multiplayer game. “You have to be connected [for cloud processing to work]. All of the things that require the internet will require the console to connect. We want and expect most people to take advantage of those things, but we also want to give people the choice that they can play offline,” Whitten said. Finally, Whitten could not give any reassurance that Microsoft will not change its policies in the future. “There are our policies and we are really excited about them. By adding them we have shown that we are definitly listening,” he said. Ha ha! More like in development for all of a couple of days. Talk about bald faced Also this part really says it all... Finally, Whitten could not give any reassurance that Microsoft will not change its policies in the future. Can't wait for MS to try and sneak the DRM back in later on into the generation under our noses... Edited June 20, 2013 by Dcubed
MindFreak Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 Is the system completely gone? The system sounded amazing for their digital games (with a fairer check-in time on the console you bought it on, 24 hour on other consoles - with the console license transfer option if you upgrade a model or need to replace yours), but terrible for disc-based games. Especially if they sold the digital version in stores like Nintendo do. If they keep the sharing/trading features for digital games then they have a damn good selling point (then they'll need some games). Yes, completely gone. All of it. Or well, they might still do cloud-processing but the developers can't be sure that you've got an internet connection any more so they probably won't add it to a lot of games.
Shorty Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 (edited) So nobody liked the idea of diskless play, or playing all your games at a friend's house? Or registering 9 people as your family and just sharing your entire collection? You're all much happier now that GAME can continue to rip you off with £10 in-store credit on that £40 game you bought instead of the developers getting a bit of their money back? How many of you have a webcam built into your laptop? Bet that's always on, too. I might not've bought an Xbox One at that high price and without the much needed improvements to Gold, but I actually kinda liked the idea of having the choice between Xbox One and PS4 - having one company take some chances and seeing if we ended up with a Steam-like service on consoles. Everyone hated Steam when it first launched because of the DRM, but now it's all SUMMER SALE and PC Master Race and Gaben Gaben Gaben... We could've had that Summer Sale with XBLA games.... Edited June 20, 2013 by Shorty
Cube Posted June 20, 2013 Author Posted June 20, 2013 @Shorty the problem was limiting disc-based games. They can still have all those features on the Xbox One for retail games. They're great ideas for digital games, but not retail games.
Charlie Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 Is the system completely gone? The system sounded amazing for their digital games (with a fairer check-in time on the console you bought it on, 24 hour on other consoles - with the console license transfer option if you upgrade a model or need to replace yours), but terrible for disc-based games. Especially if they sold the digital version in stores like Nintendo do. If they keep the sharing/trading features for digital games then they have a damn good selling point (then they'll need some games). So nobody liked the idea of diskless play, or playing all your games at a friend's house? Or registering 9 people as your family and just sharing your entire collection? You're all much happier now that GAME can continue to rip you off with £10 in-store credit on that £40 game you bought instead of the developers getting a bit of their money back? How many of you have a webcam built into your laptop? Bet that's always on, too. I might not've bought an Xbox One at that high price and without the much needed improvements to Gold, but I actually kinda liked the idea of having the choice between Xbox One and PS4 - having one company take some chances and seeing if we ended up with a Steam-like service on consoles. Everyone hated Steam when it first launched because of the DRM, but now it's all SUMMER SALE and PC Master Race and Gaben Gaben Gaben... We could've had that Summer Sale with XBLA games.... All I want to say is screw everyone who complained about the system. I loved the idea of trading in downloadable games, taking them wherever I go without a disc. Now that system, which is the future of media, is gone for another generation.
MindFreak Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 @Shorty the problem was limiting disc-based games. They can still have all those features on the Xbox One for retail games. They're great ideas for digital games, but not retail games. I didn't have a problem with the limiting retail games as the games would potentially be 30 % cheaper than now (and thus 30 % cheaper than on the PS4).
Cube Posted June 20, 2013 Author Posted June 20, 2013 I don't see how anyone can have the opinion that the system was done correctly. Yes, there were some neat features but the restrictions were too much sacrifice. It's balance which is needed and I think having the different systems for retail and digital games would have been the perfect solution to this.
Dcubed Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 (edited) So nobody liked the idea of diskless play, or playing all your games at a friend's house? Or registering 9 people as your family and just sharing your entire collection? You're all much happier now that GAME can continue to rip you off with £10 in-store credit on that £40 game you bought instead of the developers getting a bit of their money back? How many of you have a webcam built into your laptop? Bet that's always on, too. I might not've bought an Xbox One at that high price and without the much needed improvements to Gold, but I actually kinda liked the idea of having the choice between Xbox One and PS4 - having one company take some chances and seeing if we ended up with a Steam-like service on consoles. Everyone hated Steam when it first launched because of the DRM, but now it's all SUMMER SALE and PC Master Race and Gaben Gaben Gaben... We could've had that Summer Sale with XBLA games.... None of that is worth losing the right to really own your game, or the ability to play a game without an internet connection 10/20/50+ years into the future. Steam has competition on the PC, which is an open platform. That's the key differentiator. On a console, you're locked into whatever draconian measures that the platform holders deem fit to lay upon you. Steam are kept in check by their competitors and the downward pressure on prices across the board, while MS have nobody to stop them from making you bend over and take it. Edited June 20, 2013 by Dcubed
Cube Posted June 20, 2013 Author Posted June 20, 2013 I didn't have a problem with the limiting retail games as the games would potentially be 30 % cheaper than now (and thus 30 % cheaper than on the PS4). The keyword is "potentially". PC games prices can largely be attributed to the lack of a license fee, which would still exist on the Xbox One. Digital games can potentially be cheaper right now, but nobody is doing that. The Xbox One game prices were confirmed to stay the same before this U-turn was announced.
Shorty Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 I don't see how anyone can have the opinion that the system was done correctly. Yes, there were some neat features but the restrictions were too much sacrifice. It's balance which is needed and I think having the different systems for retail and digital games would have been the perfect solution to this. I think the only place they went wrong was marketing. These were obviously going to be seen as negatives, but they let the bad news slowly leak out and never stood up to sell the positives. This sums it up well, they would've actually been better officially stating something along these lines http://pastebin.com/uCmdh9jB (pastebin from frustrated employee) I'm just curious, do you often sell used games at independent retailers? To me, these restrictions would've made no difference from the way I currently play games on the 360/PS3. I pre-order new games at launch, I always have an internet connection (even when I move I could tether 3G for a moment to ping my 24 hour access thing) and I'm not a moron so I don't believe that always on is anything but waiting for an "on" command or that Microsoft wants to watch me play Halo and eat pizza.
Sheikah Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 (edited) It's funny that they do a 180 on this just as I was starting to see the positives in the idea. I love Steam and this service sounded a heck of a lot like it. Trading downloaded games, taking my collection with me anywhere without the disks... nobody thought about the positives. They were taking a chance on a new direction and now they buckled before anyone really started to understand it. Hm. Maybe next generation. What pittance you would make from trading in digital titles would no doubt have been outweighed by the fact you're paying far more for your games in the first place. It was a terrible idea - that's why people hated it and that's why they scrapped it. Also bring able to download games on another friend's system instead of taking the disc is just ridiculous. As if you would wait however long to download a 20GB+ title on a potentially shaky internet connection rather than take along a small disk. Edited June 20, 2013 by Sheikah
Cube Posted June 20, 2013 Author Posted June 20, 2013 This sums it up well, they would've actually been better officially stating something along these lines http://pastebin.com/uCmdh9jB (pastebin from frustrated employee) Trying to compare it to Steam is even worse. Steam is great because it's an option on the platform and not the only way to buy games. Also, if Steam is the "true cost of a game", then why is it cheaper to have it put on a disc, put in a plastic box with some bits of paper, sent to another shop which is making a profit to myself then posted to my house? The "additional license" thing is also complete and utter rubbish. These restrictions would have not affected me, but that does not stop the system being completely wrong. If I didn't buy used games as a kid I would not be a gamer now. The same applies to if there was an online requirement.
Shorty Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 Trying to compare it to Steam is even worse. Steam is great because it's an option on the platform and not the only way to buy games. List of games requiring Steam authentication
Cube Posted June 20, 2013 Author Posted June 20, 2013 List of games requiring Steam authentication Even taking that into consideration, you're still not entirely locked into Steam as many, many games don't require it. Steam also has a two-week offline mode (longer if you don't exit Steam). Consoles are supposed to be easy. Just whack your disc in and play. The lack of any kind of authentication (be it serial code, one-time or regular checks) one of the points of consoles.
Shorty Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 (edited) Don't you think that disks are going to die altogether eventually though? We need to get the ball rolling on that, otherwise people who want to trade games to get them cheap are eventually going to have no option at all. Edited June 20, 2013 by Shorty
Cube Posted June 20, 2013 Author Posted June 20, 2013 Don't you think that disks are going to die altogether eventually though? We need to get the ball rolling on that, otherwise people who want to trade games to get them cheap are eventually going to have no option at all. Eventually, yes. But it will be after CDs and DVDs are completely dead, so it's still a long time away. And by then the EU will have fully implemented trading laws for digital games so it will be just like physical games.
Agent Gibbs Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 Wow they flip flop as much as British Politicians it seems! Too little too late for me, i got sick of my Adbox 360 and paying to use it online, the Xbone (now forever christened the xb180) just turned me off so much, i don't like kinect, i don't want to be forced online and i didn't want any of their DRM policies reversing those should be a good thing, but all it teaches me is that at a moments notice they can do a 180 on any policy so how could anyone trust them to keep this? all they need to do is wait until they get a large enough install base then switch back to the DRM policies and nobody would be able to argue i wouldn't be surprised if they eventually do an opt in to the original plans, and then after a period say it proved so popular they are just changing it for everyone trust is a big thing with consumers, they destroyed mine, but i'm one consumer so what will they care
Sheikah Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 Don't you think that disks are going to die altogether eventually though? We need to get the ball rolling on that, otherwise people who want to trade games to get them cheap are eventually going to have no option at all. Why now though? It would take ages to download the game at a friend's house, you'd just take the disc. Why on Earth are you defending this? Do you not like being able to buy games preowned for £10 or less?
Esequiel Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 Reading a few of the things on here it actually sounds better than i first though. This sums it up well, they would've actually been better officially stating something along these lines http://pastebin.com/uCmdh9jB (pastebin from frustrated employee) This inpaticular caught my eye, if only they priced digital games sensibly it would have been great. I.E £25 for new games. They could offer £12.50 "trade" in for a digital copy and sell the "used" copy for £20.
dwarf Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 Graham Linehan on Twitter: "We would have got away with it too, if it wasn't for those meddling kids." - Microsoft.
MindFreak Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 Why now though? It would take ages to download the game at a friend's house, you'd just take the disc. Yes. But you do not need to download the entire game before you may start playing it. Just a small portion. Also, it might be run mostly from the cloud (so the friend would require to have a rather good connection, yes).
Recommended Posts