Xbox One on the way. DRM removed, more details to come.

[MetalSlugger]

Microsoft is so full of shit on the "used games are destroying teh bizness!!1!" front.  If GameStop's new-to-used flip model really cost them so much money then why would they (assumingly) partner with them for authorized trade-ins?  Why would they allow you to share one copy of the game with ten other ing people?  Oh right, because they want to serve big corporations ahead of the people actually buying their games and completely kill off the market they have no control over, aka consumer-to-consumer transactions.  Complete horseshit.

 

[Blaster man]

Wow thanks for nothin major Nelson. "Hey, are you a lawyer? Okay then we shouldn't be discussing this." I guess ubless youre a lawyer you shouldnt read their TOS. How about all the ing times you changed the subject (known as a pivot in politics). You can tell every time he pivots the answer is going to be something bad for gamers.

http://youtu.be/6RtSGFryKwo

 

[brennok]

New video answering questions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lMhjM9BK7M

Side-note ....I love skydart....damn you chris hardwick.

Q5 Sony kicked your ass at E3. Are you gonna take your heads out of your ass now and possibly reconcile with your user base?

A5 No they can off. Did you see our games by the way? (look over here [switching the topic on the interviewer]; it's called the Kansas City Shuffle, aka misdirection).

I love that he mentioned Titan Fall. I can't wait to play it on the PC. I believe it is also rumored to be a timed exclusive and coming later to the PS4.

 

[htz]

Wow thanks for nothin major Nelson. "Hey, are you a lawyer? Okay then we shouldn't be discussing this." I guess ubless youre a lawyer you shouldnt read their TOS. How about all the ing times you changed the subject (known as a pivot in politics). You can tell every time he pivots the answer is going to be something bad for gamers.

http://youtu.be/6RtSGFryKwo

7:20 mark, lol next question.

 

[Blaster man]

New video answering questions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lMhjM9BK7M

Side-note ....I love skydart....damn you chris hardwick.

Q5 Sony kicked your ass at E3. Are you gonna take your heads out of your ass now and possibly reconcile with your user base?

A5 No they can off. Did you see our games by the way? (look over here [switching the topic on the interviewer]; it's called the Kansas City Shuffle, aka misdirection).

I love that he mentioned Titan Fall. I can't wait to play it on the PC. I believe it is also rumored to be a timed exclusive and coming later to the PS4.

I hadn't seen this one, here's what I interpret of them:

Q1: Will our games work after you replace XbOne?

A1: It hasn't been released yet, lets get the console out there first. Go buy it then we'll tell you if you're ed in 10 years from now.

Q2: If someone is banned will you have access to the games you purchased?
A2: You will always have access to the games you purchase.

Answer 2 is completely different than what we heard elsewhere.

Q3: Why don't games work with the disk inserted?

A3: Bullshit subject change about the cloud and "the future". This is "infinitely" more flexible.

Q4: What do I get out of being forced to be online every 24hrs?

A4: You get access to your games and patches are applied automatically.

Q5: Will you change anything after the Sony conference?

A5: No. GAMES GAME GAMES

Q6: What is your target audience? Folks out of the US can't use it.

A6: The console is built for the "future" what features are you talking about?

Q7: Explain the HDMI input.

A7: TV TV TV TV We are NOT a DVR. Don't you want to watch TV and play games at the same time?

Q8: Give us a question that you haven't been asked and ask yourself it.

A8: Every possible question in the Universe has been asked.

It's a bunch of softball questions that he bullshits none-the-less.

 

[htz]

I hadn't seen this one, here's what I interpret of them:

Q1: Will our games work after you replace XbOne?

A1: It hasn't been released yet, lets get the question out there. Go buy it then we'll tell you if you're ed in 10 years from now.

Q2: If someone is banned will you have access to the games you purchased?
A2: You will always have access to the games you purchase.

Answer 2 is completely different than what we heard elsewhere.

Q3: Why don't games work with the disk inserted?

A3: Bullshit subject change about the cloud and "the future". This is "infinitely" more flexible.

Q4: What do I get out of being forced to be online every 24hrs?

A4: You get access to your games and patches are applied automatically.

Q5: Will you change anything after the Sony conference?

A5: No. GAMES GAME GAMES

Q6: What is your target audience? Folks out of the US can't use it.

A6: The console is built for the "future" what features are you talking about?

Q7: Explain the HDMI input.

A7: TV TV TV TV We are NOT a DVR. Don't you want to watch TV and play games at the same time?

A8: Give us a question that you haven't been asked and ask yourself it.

A8: Every possible question in the Universe has been asked.

It's a bunch of softball questions that he bullshits none-the-less.

 

[Daywalker]

The Xbox One is reminding me of the Dreamcast: moving a console too far ahead for its time.  

 

[Paco]

The Xbox One is reminding me of the Dreamcast: moving a console too far ahead for its time.



Sega was moving in a good direction while ms is moving us to bondage. Hope ms dies and gets out of the consoles with this generation like nec did with the pc-fx

 

[Ashane]

Microsoft is so full of shit on the "used games are destroying teh bizness!!1!" front. If GameStop's new-to-used flip model really cost them so much money then why would they (assumingly) partner with them for authorized trade-ins? Why would they allow you to share one copy of the game with ten other ing people? Oh right, because they want to serve big corporations ahead of the people actually buying their games and completely kill off the market they have no control over, aka consumer-to-consumer transactions. Complete horseshit.

What gives you the thought that MIcrosoft gives a shit about the used game biz?

The DRM/Always online thing is about the console installing all games automatically and not requiring the disc. Not about screwing over used game sales. I'm pretty sure we've been over this and over this, but right now the hivemind theory is that somehow Microsoft magically hates used game sales... but then intelligent people (such as yourself obviously) point out that: If Microsoft hates used game sales, why are they partnering with Gamestop and other big chains to still sell used games?

The answer dosnet make sense does it? It has nothing to do with big corporations or serving anyone.

The bottom line is, Microsoft wanted to make a console that is always online, that does not require disc, and that eventually does away with discs all together. To accomplish this, certain cuts had to be made in preparation. When you design anything, your first thought isnt "In what way can we screw over these guys". It's "In what way can we innovate, in what way can we establish ourselves ahead of the pack and future proof our product as much as possible".

They've repeatedly said exactly why they are doing what they are doing. They've compared it to Cell Phones (No sir, I dont want a phone that does anything but make calls), to Steam (Digital delivery? /Fail Gaban Fail), to various other growing pain idea's that later turned out to be the new norm.

Will it work? Who the hell knows. Be happy everyone has a choice however. You can go with the same, or you can go with the one changing. Everyone wins in the end, right?

 

[MetalSlugger]

What gives you the thought that MIcrosoft gives a shit about the used game biz?

The DRM/Always online thing is about the console installing all games automatically and not requiring the disc. Not about screwing over used game sales. I'm pretty sure we've been over this and over this, but right now the hivemind theory is that somehow Microsoft magically hates used game sales... but then intelligent people (such as yourself obviously) point out that: If Microsoft hates used game sales, why are they partnering with Gamestop and other big chains to still sell used games?

The answer dosnet make sense does it? It has nothing to do with big corporations or serving anyone.

The bottom line is, Microsoft wanted to make a console that is always online, that does not require disc, and that eventually does away with discs all together. To accomplish this, certain cuts had to be made in preparation. When you design anything, your first thought isnt "In what way can we screw over these guys". It's "In what way can we innovate, in what way can we establish ourselves ahead of the pack and future proof our product as much as possible".

They've repeatedly said exactly why they are doing what they are doing. They've compared it to Cell Phones (No sir, I dont want a phone that does anything but make calls), to Steam (Digital delivery? /Fail Gaban Fail), to various other growing pain idea's that later turned out to be the new norm.

Will it work? Who the hell knows. Be happy everyone has a choice however. You can go with the same, or you can go with the one changing. Everyone wins in the end, right?

facepalm.jpg

I answered the question right after I asked it you ing moron.

They're partnering to control used sales; that's my entire ing point. The current system won't affect your ability to trade in/buy "used" games at GS, but it WILL absolutely DESTROY your first sale rights to the physical copy that you bought. No more CAG Trading, no more craigslist, eBay, or even ing garage sales. To this day I can go to a flea market, buy an Atari 2600 game and it will still play. The X1 completely does away with that. They're trying to make everyone swallow the bullshit that you're buying a license instead of a physical product.

They're not trying to innovate. They're trying to control their physical product by erasing our right to own any physical thing we buy.

Read this. This is what it's about: the Supreme Court sided with consumers to protect their first sale rights, and Microsoft is weaseling around it in every goddamn way they possibly can.

EDIT: I'll point out the pertinent part so you don't ignore it:

The movie and music businesses, software makers and other manufacturers worry that the decision allows unauthorized sales to undercut their businesses.

"The ruling for Kirtsaeng will send a tremor through the publishing industries, harming both U.S. businesses and consumers around the world. Today's decision will create a strong disincentive for publishers to market different versions and sell copies at different prices in different regions. The practical result may very well be that consumers and students abroad will see dramatic price increases or entirely lose their access to valuable U.S. resources created specifically for them," said Keith Kupferschmid, general counsel for the Software & Information Industry Association.

 

[esquire]

Will it work? Who the hell knows. Be happy everyone has a choice however. You can go with the same, or you can go with the one changing. Everyone wins in the end, right?

 

[Ashane]

What gives you the thought that MIcrosoft gives a shit about the used game biz?

The DRM/Always online thing is about the console installing all games automatically and not requiring the disc. Not about screwing over used game sales. I'm pretty sure we've been over this and over this, but right now the hivemind theory is that somehow Microsoft magically hates used game sales... but then intelligent people (such as yourself obviously) point out that: If Microsoft hates used game sales, why are they partnering with Gamestop and other big chains to still sell used games?

The answer dosnet make sense does it? It has nothing to do with big corporations or serving anyone.

The bottom line is, Microsoft wanted to make a console that is always online, that does not require disc, and that eventually does away with discs all together. To accomplish this, certain cuts had to be made in preparation. When you design anything, your first thought isnt "In what way can we screw over these guys". It's "In what way can we innovate, in what way can we establish ourselves ahead of the pack and future proof our product as much as possible".

They've repeatedly said exactly why they are doing what they are doing. They've compared it to Cell Phones (No sir, I dont want a phone that does anything but make calls), to Steam (Digital delivery? /Fail Gaban Fail), to various other growing pain idea's that later turned out to be the new norm.

Will it work? Who the hell knows. Be happy everyone has a choice however. You can go with the same, or you can go with the one changing. Everyone wins in the end, right?

facepalm.jpg

I answered the question right after I asked it you ing moron.

They're partnering to control used sales; that's my entire ing point. The current system won't affect your ability to trade in/buy "used" games at GS, but it WILL absolutely DESTROY your first sale rights to the physical copy that you bought. No more CAG Trading, no more craigslist, eBay, or even ing garage sales. To this day I can go to a flea market, buy an Atari 2600 game and it will still play. The X1 completely does away with that. They're trying to make everyone swallow the bullshit that you're buying a license instead of a physical product.

They're not trying to innovate. They're trying to control their physical product by erasing our right to own any physical thing we buy.

Read this. This is what it's about: the Supreme Court sided with consumers to protect their first sale rights, and Microsoft is weaseling around it in every goddamn way they possibly can.

EDIT: I'll point out the pertinent part so you don't ignore it:

The movie and music businesses, software makers and other manufacturers worry that the decision allows unauthorized sales to undercut their businesses.

"The ruling for Kirtsaeng will send a tremor through the publishing industries, harming both U.S. businesses and consumers around the world. Today's decision will create a strong disincentive for publishers to market different versions and sell copies at different prices in different regions. The practical result may very well be that consumers and students abroad will see dramatic price increases or entirely lose their access to valuable U.S. resources created specifically for them," said Keith Kupferschmid, general counsel for the Software & Information Industry Association.

Ugh

I pointed out you said it, I just don't agree with the conclusion you've reached.

Really, the bottom line is: If EVERY used game hurts developers/publishers, then does it matter if you have a limited choice of where to sell it or a unlimited choice? No it does not, especially considering the fact that the *vast majority* of used game trade in's occur at gamestop/amazon.

Therefor, logically, we have to say that it is not Microsoft's intent to destroy used game sales. So, we are left with what other reason? We already know MS intends to charge no fee for trading in games, so they arent out for money. We also know that even if EA and crew did charge it woudnt come out of *our* pocket (technically) but out of Gamestop's pocket. So they aren't padding anyone's bottom line.. especially considering the fact that EA, Ubisoft, and Activision all came out and said they had no clue that was the policy.

My conclusion? Microsoft wanted to innovate and bring the consoles into the completely digital realm ala Steam. They knew consumers wouldn't be completely ready (Internet wise, or intelligence wise) to do so right this second, but perhaps in 5-6 years. This is not a console for today, but 2014-2025. Does anyone here have any idea what the internet will be like in 2025? Our connection speeds? Etc?

 

[ChunLiBarbie]

Wow thanks for nothin major Nelson. "Hey, are you a lawyer? Okay then we shouldn't be discussing this." I guess ubless youre a lawyer you shouldnt read their TOS. How about all the ing times you changed the subject (known as a pivot in politics). You can tell every time he pivots the answer is going to be something bad for gamers.

I just finished watching this on his channel. Such a mess. Xbox None is the biggest clusterf*** I have ever seen! I don't, even, know where to begin.

Amongst the other FOOLishness, they said DRM was the publishers idea. Now, they will "work with them" if they decide they don't want DRM? Lmfao. What is there to "work with"? Should be done no questions asked. That thing will be on clearance before you know it.

 

[Mako1215]

The problem with them banking on the internet being better in x amounts of years is that the internet companies have to want that also, and right now they don't want to clean up the networks and move to better lines laid down.

Until the competition becomes thicker (Google Fiber is taking forever!!),which I don't see anytime soon, I don't think it will get better.

 

[ChunLiBarbie]

This sums it up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46yBdG6cicA

 

[aptanor]

Just goes to show you that Microsoft knew exactly what they were doing. They knew no matter what policies they decided to try out people like Ashane will defend them to the bitter end.

We don't know they don't plan to charge a fee, and at the very least they'll be charging trade in locations a fee to buy the special system required to accept Xbone licenses. They'll also, I'm sure, be charging a fee to the store per license deactivation/reactivation, which means already low trade values are probably going to go even lower. Every choice made for the Xbone was to pad MS pockets, at the cost of consumer rights, not to try to "push us into the future." At best that's an excuse.

 

[Ashane]

Just goes to show you that Microsoft knew exactly what they were doing. They knew no matter what policies they decided to try out people like Ashane will defend them to the bitter end.

We don't know they don't plan to charge a fee, and at the very least they'll be charging trade in locations a fee to buy the special system required to accept Xbone licenses. They'll also, I'm sure, be charging a fee to the store per license deactivation/reactivation, which means already low trade values are probably going to go even lower. Every choice made for the Xbone was to pad MS pockets, at the cost of consumer rights, not to try to "push us into the future." At best that's an excuse.

I'd defend Nintendo too if you want to get angry about them But then, everyone writes the Wii-U off like its some monster child that shouldn't get any love, even though the actual game play on the system is fantastic.

Do not really know how to respond to the rest of your post, since it's entirely opinions, most of which Microsoft have already said are false but are still being spread by the hive mind. Such as Microsoft taking a cut of the trade in values. They've already said they will not.

The problem with them banking on the internet being better in x amounts of years is that the internet companies have to want that also, and right now they don't want to clean up the networks and move to better lines laid down.

Until the competition becomes thicker (Google Fiber is taking forever!!),which I don't see anytime soon, I don't think it will get better.

Completely agreed.

Its a gamble. One that few companies could actually make other than Microsoft, Google, and Apple. No one else has the financial backing to be able to make such a gamble and accept the cost if it fails.

 

[io]

My conclusion? Microsoft wanted to innovate and bring the consoles into the completely digital realm ala Steam. They knew consumers wouldn't be completely ready (Internet wise, or intelligence wise) to do so right this second, but perhaps in 5-6 years. This is not a console for today, but 2014-2025. Does anyone here have any idea what the internet will be like in 2025? Our connection speeds? Etc?

All of this could have been done without the DRM. I'd say the way Sony is doing it is much better. You don't get rid of disc-based games and sharing/trading/selling/renting. You provide an incentive to pick up digital versions of games so that gamers ultimately make that transition on their own. PS+ is prepping people for digital distribution in a very gamer-friendly way by having free digital versions of games and huge sales on other digital content. I don't think I would have ever downloaded a full-sized game if it were not for PS+. Now I'm getting more used to the idea and I like that I can download on 2 systems and my kids can play all those games too. It seems like MS is trying to give some of that same benefit but it doesn't need to be done at the expense of physical copies of games.

For example, in whatever form it comes to pass, they could do this 10 person gamesharing thing on the digital versions of those games, while still allowing disc-play for the physical copies. Then they have the best of both worlds. If their Internet-connected offerings are so stunningly awesome as insiders and MS apologists seem to think they will be, then gamers will discover that over time and make the switch. As this generation goes on, maybe you slowly introduce more digital-only benefits such as early download (a day or 3 before the game is in stores) or, you know, an actual cheaper price. Yes, I know there will be squabbles with retailers over some of those practices, but the eventual all-digital model will cut them out anyway. They could even partner with someone like Gamefly and provide digital rentals that ultimately would provide an enhanced rental service (imagine being able to pick any game and get it the same day with no queue). I realize they very well could do this anyway, but in the short term it appears they have effectively killed off rental of Xbox One games and again, they could have had the best of both worlds here. There are a lot of things that could be rolled out over the next 10 years to lead us into this utopian future of digital games - but none of it had to be done at the expense of disc-based games today.

 

[aptanor]

Excuse me, the developers may charge a used game fee, or just disallow used games altogether. Even if MS won't take a cut personally, they designed the system to allow third parties to do so. And besides that, there's been so much flip-flopping from MS at this point that it wouldn't surprise me if they change their mind on not charging a fee on their own games.

And stop with the "hive mind" nonsense. The reaction is overwhelmingly negative because the information has been shoddy and extremely bad, not because everyone but you and your 3 friends are mindless sheep.

 

[Ashane]

Excuse me, the developers may charge a used game fee, or just disallow used games altogether. Even if MS won't take a cut personally, they designed the system to allow third parties to do so. And besides that, there's been so much flip-flopping from MS at this point that it wouldn't surprise me if they change their mind on not charging a fee on their own games.

And stop with the "hive mind" nonsense. The reaction is overwhelmingly negative because the information has been shoddy and extremely bad, not because everyone but you and your 3 friends are mindless sheep.

Which is different from how it is now? If I go out and buy the Last of Us used, and it's online pass has been used.. guess what? Instead of ME paying the fee, Gamestop will. Will that fee push onto me in some way? Most likely. Not going to deny that. However, just like now, if a game has a fee you can choose not to buy it. (Just like now, you can choose not to buy Last of Us used)

The reaction is overwhelmingly negative because people jumped to conclusions, didn't do proper research, and are flipping out over things that are still TBA/TBD with a console that isn't being released for 5 more months. I cant tell you how many times I need to remind people that the Kinect can be turned off, paused, or on. That you can actually sell used games just like always, but a bit more restrictive, etc. That there is indeed a Family Share Plan, and it was announced in *MAY*, not at E3.

I haven't defended MS's PR people, I've said repeatedly that their messaging sucks.. but the information is out there.

 

[thamaster24]

Like many have already said in this thread and others, I'm not really sure what MS is trying to accomplish with these features other than creating more revenue.  I have a few friends on Xbox Live that I've played with for many years and we'll all be moving over to the PS4.  I won't be buying it at launch, I will stick it out with the 360 for a while, but as soon as a nice bundle is out, I'm buying it.

It makes me sad, just a little, that I won't have Halo anymore. I poured so many hours into those games, but since Bungie left it became a different animal, it's not really familiar to me anymore. 

Who knows where we'll be a couple years down the line.  One thing is for sure, never get away from your initial market, it's how you mess things up. It might be different if MS came out and candidly talked about the feedback in the last week, but they're sticking to their guns and I won't be hanging around after my subscription to Xbox Live runs out.

 

[Mako1215]

The reaction is negative because I think (to me and most likely others) that the info is confusing, and when they get hit with questions for clarifying and situational answers they go TBA or wait and see.

Plus the arrogance is making it even harder to get through to people even with the info.

 

[Blaster man]

Excuse me, the developers may charge a used game fee, or just disallow used games altogether. Even if MS won't take a cut personally, they designed the system to allow third parties to do so. And besides that, there's been so much flip-flopping from MS at this point that it wouldn't surprise me if they change their mind on not charging a fee on their own games.

And stop with the "hive mind" nonsense. The reaction is overwhelmingly negative because the information has been shoddy and extremely bad, not because everyone but you and your 3 friends are mindless sheep.

Which is different from how it is now? If I go out and buy the Last of Us used, and it's online pass has been used.. guess what? Instead of ME paying the fee, Gamestop will. Will that fee push onto me in some way? Most likely. Not going to deny that. However, just like now, if a game has a fee you can choose not to buy it. (Just like now, you can choose not to buy Last of Us used)

The reaction is overwhelmingly negative because people jumped to conclusions, didn't do proper research, and are flipping out over things that are still TBA/TBD with a console that isn't being released for 5 more months. I cant tell you how many times I need to remind people that the Kinect can be turned off, paused, or on. That you can actually sell used games just like always, but a bit more restrictive, etc. That there is indeed a Family Share Plan, and it was announced in *MAY*, not at E3.

I haven't defended MS's PR people, I've said repeatedly that their messaging sucks.. but the information is out there.

I don't think anyone's jumping to conclusions. People are being negative because of the policies. First of all, many of these policies were rumored for months and months before the announcement but no one believed they were authentic. Then the announcement comes and execs give the details to reporters. This makes people angry because the details are anti-consumer and even more so for CAG's. Then they put out their press release info dump and it confirms the worst fears. Who the is jumping to conclusions? MS put that information out on the web in black and white.

 

[tokyostomp]

Sony fanboys don't want to admit that the family plan is a huge benefit.

It is a good thing, I however feel there will some sort of stipulation that they have not announced yet.

I find it hard that MS would be willing lose whatever percentage of Gold subscribers in this way.

Or maybe they have some metrics on how many Gold accounts connect through the same IP and see they aren't going to lose a large profit margin. Who knows?

 

[logicmeme]

Damn, I really can't believe there are fanboys as bad as Ashane and TimboSliceGB on CAG of all places. You would think a forum like this would be filled with people interested in getting cheap games and protecting their consumer rights. If you are believe these companies have any goal other than to maximize their profits you are either naive/ignorant, too young to have experienced the world, or thick headed. To make a case that MS couldn't innovate the game console and push for a digital future without 1) limiting your ability to resale PHYSICAL goods and 2) requiring constant online checks (single player downloaded games can't work offline, as they have since computers existed?) is an absurd argument. I really can't understand how anyone can waste their time and energy defending a corporation for anti-consumer practices?! The good news is that despite a minority of people defending such asinine policies, the majority does seem to see it as the sham that it is, and hopefully will follow through on voting with their wallet.

 

[io]

That you can actually sell used games just like always, but a bit more restrictive, etc.

"A bit more restrictive"? How is the complete inability to sell your game via eBay, Amazon, Craigslist, yard sale, whatever, just a "bit" of anything?

 

[thenutman69321]

The reaction is overwhelmingly negative because people jumped to conclusions, didn't do proper research, and are flipping out over things that are still TBA/TBD with a console that isn't being released for 5 more months.

I'll admit some things people are jumping to conclusions on and assuming the worst case scenario, although I'd argue all the past announcements about the XBone have done nothing but confirm our worst fears so there is a precedent for them following through with the worst case scenarios. However many things out there have been confirmed and we have plenty of hard concrete facts about the anti consumer restrictive policies of the XBone. The reaction is negative because of all the facts we do know.

 

[RiPPn]

Damn, I really can't believe there are fanboys as bad as Ashane and TimboSliceGB on CAG of all places. You would think a forum like this would be filled with people interested in getting cheap games and protecting their consumer rights. If you are believe these companies have any goal other than to maximize their profits you are either naive/ignorant, too young to have experienced the world, or thick headed. To make a case that MS couldn't innovate the game console and push for a digital future without 1) limiting your ability to resale PHYSICAL goods and 2) requiring constant online checks (single player downloaded games can't work offline, as they have since computers existed?) is an absurd argument. I really can't understand how anyone can waste their time and energy defending a corporation for anti-consumer practices?! The good news is that despite a minority of people defending such asinine policies, the majority does seem to see it as the sham that it is, and hopefully will follow through on voting with their wallet.

Well said.

And for anyone who hasn't watched this video, it is amazing how eerily similar to the Xbox One that Divx was:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Or4nWQpidk Espeially check out the 8:48 10:00 11:43 marks. lol

 

[ChunLiBarbie]

Damn, I really can't believe there are fanboys as bad as Ashane and TimboSliceGB on CAG of all places. You would think a forum like this would be filled with people interested in getting cheap games and protecting their consumer rights. If you are believe these companies have any goal other than to maximize their profits you are either naive/ignorant, too young to have experienced the world, thick headed, or work for them. To make a case that MS couldn't innovate the game console and push for a digital future without 1) limiting your ability to resale PHYSICAL goods and 2) requiring constant online checks (single player downloaded games can't work offline, as they have since computers existed?) is an absurd argument. I really can't understand how anyone can waste their time and energy defending a corporation for anti-consumer practices?! The good news is that despite a minority of people defending such asinine policies, the majority does seem to see it as the sham that it is, and hopefully will follow through on voting with their wallet.

Ok. So, I added the part after "thick headed".

 

[Corvin]

My conclusion? Microsoft wanted to innovate and bring the consoles into the completely digital realm ala Steam. They knew consumers wouldn't be completely ready (Internet wise, or intelligence wise) to do so right this second, but perhaps in 5-6 years. This is not a console for today, but 2014-2025. Does anyone here have any idea what the internet will be like in 2025? Our connection speeds? Etc?

All of this could have been done without the DRM. I'd say the way Sony is doing it is much better. You don't get rid of disc-based games and sharing/trading/selling/renting. You provide an incentive to pick up digital versions of games so that gamers ultimately make that transition on their own. PS+ is prepping people for digital distribution in a very gamer-friendly way by having free digital versions of games and huge sales on other digital content. I don't think I would have ever downloaded a full-sized game if it were not for PS+. Now I'm getting more used to the idea and I like that I can download on 2 systems and my kids can play all those games too. It seems like MS is trying to give some of that same benefit but it doesn't need to be done at the expense of physical copies of games.

For example, in whatever form it comes to pass, they could do this 10 person gamesharing thing on the digital versions of those games, while still allowing disc-play for the physical copies. Then they have the best of both worlds. If their Internet-connected offerings are so stunningly awesome as insiders and MS apologists seem to think they will be, then gamers will discover that over time and make the switch. As this generation goes on, maybe you slowly introduce more digital-only benefits such as early download (a day or 3 before the game is in stores) or, you know, an actual cheaper price. Yes, I know there will be squabbles with retailers over some of those practices, but the eventual all-digital model will cut them out anyway. They could even partner with someone like Gamefly and provide digital rentals that ultimately would provide an enhanced rental service (imagine being able to pick any game and get it the same day with no queue). I realize they very well could do this anyway, but in the short term it appears they have effectively killed off rental of Xbox One games and again, they could have had the best of both worlds here. There are a lot of things that could be rolled out over the next 10 years to lead us into this utopian future of digital games - but none of it had to be done at the expense of disc-based games today.

Exactly. There are better ways to do just about everything they've announced so far, but those ideas require them to relinquish the 100% complete control they want over your game library and system.

If people want to play offline, why not disable game sharing in that magical minute after 24th hour when the parent console no longer checks in?

Want to play with the disc? Disable game sharing as long as the disc is in the drive.

Want to require mandatory 24hr checks without alienating the user base, why not use a 3G chip like the kindle? Do random disc checks?

If the user wants to disable everything about Kinect why can't we unplug it? If a game needs it, we can pull it out and plug it in.

Answer: An offline console can't push you ads. A Kinect-less console can't spy on you to push you ads.

I mean they've basically just stopped short of saying X1 requires a Gold membership to use. We have a few months, so that reality may still come true as well.

 

[8bitArtist]

i love how ashane says that since you arent ready for completely digital, you arent ready intelligence wise. hahaha. i leave this thread for a few days to enjoy the last of us and i come back to the same ole dumb shit outta his mouth.

 

[Ashane]

That you can actually sell used games just like always, but a bit more restrictive, etc.

"A bit more restrictive"? How is the complete inability to sell your game via eBay, Amazon, Craigslist, yard sale, whatever, just a "bit" of anything?

I already explained why. Because CAG is the minority. Anyone looking at the statistics see's that the majority trade in their games via Gamestop, Bestbuy, and Amazon. (Not Amazon Marketplace, but just direct to Amazon)

Even on *this site*, you see people still trading in to the big three even if they KNOW they can get more via other methods. Why? The simplicity of it.

The real issue most people are upset (in my opinion) with is they think it will lead to lower trade in values. Which may, or may not, happen.

 

[logicmeme]

Damn, I really can't believe there are fanboys as bad as Ashane and TimboSliceGB on CAG of all places. You would think a forum like this would be filled with people interested in getting cheap games and protecting their consumer rights. If you are believe these companies have any goal other than to maximize their profits you are either naive/ignorant, too young to have experienced the world, or thick headed. To make a case that MS couldn't innovate the game console and push for a digital future without 1) limiting your ability to resale PHYSICAL goods and 2) requiring constant online checks (single player downloaded games can't work offline, as they have since computers existed?) is an absurd argument. I really can't understand how anyone can waste their time and energy defending a corporation for anti-consumer practices?! The good news is that despite a minority of people defending such asinine policies, the majority does seem to see it as the sham that it is, and hopefully will follow through on voting with their wallet.

Well said.

And for anyone who hasn't watched this video, it is amazing how eerily similar to the Xbox One that Divx was:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Or4nWQpidk Espeially check out the 8:48 10:00 11:43 marks. lol

Haha what a great video! If only Ashane and others could see corporate BS spin for intrusion on consumer rights is nothing new.

 

[DestroVega]

ok so this isn't true.. on to the next one.

 

[Superstar]

The fact of the matter is some people care about DRM and some people don't. Also, some people may care, but they will still get the Xbox One because they will want to play it's exclusives. Jumping on anyone who is going to buy a difference console than you is immature, and stupid. The argument "oh you are a part of ruining the gaming industry" is idiotic as well. Let people spend money on what they want. This whole "war" talk is also funny. Unless you are working for either company, who cares? When I go to a store and buy a Pepsi I don't think "oh!! I got Coca-Cola!!!! The war is on!!!! They won't get my $1.50!!"

 

[esquire]

The fact of the matter is some people care about DRM and some people don't. Also, some people may care, but they will still get the Xbox One because they will want to play it's exclusives. Jumping on anyone who is going to buy a difference console than you is immature, and stupid. The argument "oh you are a part of ruining the gaming industry" is idiotic as well. Let people spend money on what they want. This whole "war" talk is also funny. Unless you are working for either company, who cares? When I go to a store and buy a Pepsi I don't think "oh!! I got Coca-Cola!!!! The war is on!!!! They won't get my $1.50!!"

Who cares? That argument is what's idiotic. To simply turn a blind eye because it does not affect you personally is apathy, and that apathy affects those who do care and those who it will affect. This mindset comes from not only Microsoft fanboys and apologists, but also includes the low information consumers who have no idea what Microsoft is doing as to the XBone, and will go out and buy it because little Johnny wants his new game console and all his friends are going to be getting one as well. Of course they will spend their money how they like it. People have made bad decisions with their money throughout the ages, hence P.T. Barnum's phrase, "There's a sucker born every minute." That doesn't mean I cannot voice my displeasure with Microsoft's draconian DRM policies, and I think that is what most of us are doing.

To date, I have yet to hear one solid argument from Microsoft as to how its DRM policies are going to benefit me as a consumer as a whole when at the same time they are taking away my consumer rights. Now if there were some believable arguments we might be able to have an in intelligible debate about it, but Microsoft has failed to present any coherent policy, especially as to its family sharing (how exactly does it work?!?!), which seems to me to be an afterthought. Moreover, if you were going to eliminate full outright trading, selling and sharing as it exists now, you'd think they would have had everything resolved up-front prior to their presentation at E3. Rather, it seems they have back-tracking and trying to cover their asses after all of the consumer and media backlash.

 

[TimboSliceGB]

That you can actually sell used games just like always, but a bit more restrictive, etc.

"A bit more restrictive"? How is the complete inability to sell your game via eBay, Amazon, Craigslist, yard sale, whatever, just a "bit" of anything?

im sure amazon will be one of those allowed buyers of x1 games seeing it seems like amazon was talking non stop about x1 on monday when they said they were proud to announce pre orders are open.

 

[waldo21212]

That you can actually sell used games just like always, but a bit more restrictive, etc.

"A bit more restrictive"? How is the complete inability to sell your game via eBay, Amazon, Craigslist, yard sale, whatever, just a "bit" of anything?

im sure amazon will be one of those allowed buyers of x1 games seeing it seems like amazon was talking non stop about x1 on monday when they said they were proud to announce pre orders are open.

Maybe - Amazon gets their cut by selling them at retail, and aren't like GS where they have to allocate floor space for them. Even if Amazon couldn't do used sales, I see no reason why they wouldn't be fine with selling Xbox One consoles and games, take their retail mark-up and move on. All it takes is a little more warehouse space, which I've never heard Amazon has a shortage of.

 

[TimboSliceGB]

plus amazon already have a drm like system in place seeing thye sell digital pc games already so it would be really easy for them to do the same thing to buy and sell used games.

 

[DestroVega]

How long can the back and fourth arguing go on?

If you aren't going to purchase the system just stop visiting the thread. It would be cool to have some actual discussion about the console and not just "standing up for rights" talk. 

 

[htz]

The fact of the matter is some people care about DRM and some people don't. Also, some people may care, but they will still get the Xbox One because they will want to play it's exclusives. Jumping on anyone who is going to buy a difference console than you is immature, and stupid. The argument "oh you are a part of ruining the gaming industry" is idiotic as well. Let people spend money on what they want. This whole "war" talk is also funny. Unless you are working for either company, who cares? When I go to a store and buy a Pepsi I don't think "oh!! I got Coca-Cola!!!! The war is on!!!! They won't get my $1.50!!"

I'm not going to stop anyone from getting an xbox one, it is their choice, and I respect that. The only ones getting jumped on are the xbox fanboys that are defending Microsoft's actions against the ones who are affected. The same people that enjoy their products but aren't willing to give up their right to own something physical(license or no license) they paid for.

How long can the back and fourth arguing go on?

If you aren't going to purchase the system just stop visiting the thread. It would be cool to have some actual discussion about the console and not just "standing up for rights" talk.

Nobody is stopping you from having a discussion about the xbox one console. We are technically dicussing about the console, just not in a positive tone. You can change the subject, if you have anything worth discussing about.

 

[TimboSliceGB]

The fact of the matter is some people care about DRM and some people don't. Also, some people may care, but they will still get the Xbox One because they will want to play it's exclusives. Jumping on anyone who is going to buy a difference console than you is immature, and stupid. The argument "oh you are a part of ruining the gaming industry" is idiotic as well. Let people spend money on what they want. This whole "war" talk is also funny. Unless you are working for either company, who cares? When I go to a store and buy a Pepsi I don't think "oh!! I got Coca-Cola!!!! The war is on!!!! They won't get my $1.50!!"

I'm not going to stop anyone from getting an xbox one, it is their choice, and I respect that. The only ones getting jumped on are the xbox fanboys that are defending Microsoft's actions against the ones who are affected. The same people that enjoy their products but aren't willing to give up their right to own something physical(license or no license) they paid for.

How long can the back and fourth arguing go on?

If you aren't going to purchase the system just stop visiting the thread. It would be cool to have some actual discussion about the console and not just "standing up for rights" talk.

Nobody is stopping you from having a discussion about the xbox one console. We are technically dicussing about the console, just not in a positive tone. You can change the subject, if you have anything worth discussing about.

so no one can say they have no problem with some things on x1 which will make them ms fanboys? In the end it's all about games and alot of people that don't lend games/rent games and sell games will over look that issue and just enjoy the games. i think both systems will do well.

 

[htz]

The fact of the matter is some people care about DRM and some people don't. Also, some people may care, but they will still get the Xbox One because they will want to play it's exclusives. Jumping on anyone who is going to buy a difference console than you is immature, and stupid. The argument "oh you are a part of ruining the gaming industry" is idiotic as well. Let people spend money on what they want. This whole "war" talk is also funny. Unless you are working for either company, who cares? When I go to a store and buy a Pepsi I don't think "oh!! I got Coca-Cola!!!! The war is on!!!! They won't get my $1.50!!"

I'm not going to stop anyone from getting an xbox one, it is their choice, and I respect that. The only ones getting jumped on are the xbox fanboys that are defending Microsoft's actions against the ones who are affected. The same people that enjoy their products but aren't willing to give up their right to own something physical(license or no license) they paid for.

How long can the back and fourth arguing go on?

If you aren't going to purchase the system just stop visiting the thread. It would be cool to have some actual discussion about the console and not just "standing up for rights" talk.

Nobody is stopping you from having a discussion about the xbox one console. We are technically dicussing about the console, just not in a positive tone. You can change the subject, if you have anything worth discussing about.

so no one can say they have no problem with some things on x1 which will make them ms fanboys? In the end it's all about games and alot of people that don't lend games/rent games and sell games will over look that issue and just enjoy the games. i think both systems will do well.

If Microsoft's proposed policies don't affect you... Why the hell are you defending them against the ones that are being affected? If Microsoft backpeddles and goes back to the same policies as xbox 360 it won't affect you either way.

I'm just going to copy and paste what I wrote in another thread to answer your response timbo (I'm not directing this at you personally).

 

[TimboSliceGB]

don't people stand up for a product when people bash it or other thing which is what happens here

 

[htz]

is the the whole point of defending things is when people say something against that product or bash it.

You probably need to rewrite that sentence, cause I'm not sure what you are trying to write...

Edit: Yes and your point is?

 

[RedvsBlue]

I would have been disappointed about losing out on Halo if I hadn't played Halo 4. If that's the direction they're taking the franchise I'm not interested anymore. Forza isstill a great franchise but it definitely isn't a system seller for me. For me, all the DRM and online required junk just aren't worth their exclusives anymore.

 

[ChunLiBarbie]

.

 

[Wrathofoprah]

How long can the back and fourth arguing go on?

If you aren't going to purchase the system just stop visiting the thread. It would be cool to have some actual discussion about the console and not just "standing up for rights" talk.

You could always go start your own thread called Xbox One:Circlejerk and talk about how much you love MS and will stay with him no matter how hard he hits you because he is the father of your children.

 

[TimboSliceGB]

Who cares? That argument is what's idiotic. To simply turn a blind eye because it does not affect you personally is apathy, and that apathy affects those who do care and those who it will affect. This mindset comes from not only Microsoft fanboys and apologists, but also includes the low information consumers who have no idea what Microsoft is doing as to the XBone, and will go out and buy it because little Johnny wants his new game console and all his friends are going to be getting one as well. Of course they will spend their money how they like it. People have made bad decisions with their money throughout the ages, hence P.T. Barnum's phrase, "There's a sucker born every minute." That doesn't mean I cannot voice my displeasure with Microsoft's draconian DRM policies, and I think that is what most of us are doing.

To date, I have yet to hear one solid argument from Microsoft as to how its DRM policies are going to benefit me as a consumer as a whole when at the same time they are taking away my consumer rights. Now if there were some believable arguments we might be able to have an in intelligible debate about it, but Microsoft has failed to present any coherent policy, especially as to its family sharing (how exactly does it work?!?!), which seems to me to be an afterthought. Moreover, if you were going to eliminate full outright trading, selling and sharing as it exists now, you'd think they would have had everything resolved up-front prior to their presentation at E3. Rather, it seems they have back-tracking and trying to cover their asses after all of the consumer and media backlash.

x1000000000000.... Just a bunch of hogwash coming from them. They're scambling, more than ever. Figured they had a cakewalk of nonesense they could freely distribute till they got SLAPPED.

Sounds like all of this TBA and defensive rampling = We will see how +&*-#+*; preorder this thing and if enough do, we will continue with our schemes.

i have lived with drm and always online with pc gaming and steam for years which is why i don't see any problem with it other then the every 24 hour connection thing. some people acting like this is the first time this stuff has ever happend in the gaming industry. People bash xbox one for doing this but are dieing for a steam home video game system which will pretty much be what xbox one is doing.

i can understand why some people are upset about this and drm is why alot of people stay away from pc gaming but yet those are the same people that want a steam home system so they can get great deals pc gamers get on steam games even if we know we can't lend/rent and sell those games.

what i see as being not a right thing to do is bash someone becasue they want to buy a xbox one and don't mind what is going on with system. i have seen people called some nasty things on this board including people saying stuff to me for not bashing the system. In the end you like the system or you don't but don't sit their and call people names because they will be buying the xbox one we are all gamers and love video games and we are all CAG which is all that matters. We are part of this great community on this website and this thread has showed the evil in alot of people.

 

[Wrathofoprah]

i have lived with drm and always online with pc gaming and steam for years which is why i don't see any problem with it other then the every 24 hour connection thing. some people acting like this is the first time this stuff has ever happend in the gaming industry. People bash xbox one for doing this but are dieing for a steam home video game system which will pretty much be what xbox one is doing.

Denied.

http://www.develop-online.net/news/44530/Oddworld-dev-criticises-Xbox-One-self-publishing-policy

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-05-22-microsoft-wont-let-indies-self-publish-on-xbox-one

One of the great things about steam (which sony is copying) is the ability to self-publish. It's one of the reasons why its such a great marketplace. Sony is copying this. Microsoft is not.

It could be a small difference between the platforms. It could be a BIG difference. I bet when the standalone Day Z comes to PS4 and not Xbox One, there will be some soul searching.