[Khellendros]

@ Silencer:

I would say that the DRM was required to enable a feature like family sharing without it being abused to high heaven. The ability to be able to play not only your games, but that of any of your friends who were on this 'family' member list, from your own XBox, is one that definitely attracted me. To also be able to play online together with another person even if only one of the two of you actually owned the game. To resell a digital download game is unheard of on consoles (and pretty much unheard of full stop). I am not a fan of the digital-only future that we are heading towards (and we are heading there, though now not as quickly as MS would have liked us to), but these were features which made it more palatable

What you are on the verge of demanding with your 'show me the innovation!' is the kind of innovation that just doesn't happen - something unique out of the blue. Innovation builds upon previous ideas, so there is little surprise in some of these features bearing similarities to features already found elsewhere.

I am, or was, a used game guy. I own around 140 Xbox360 games, of which maybe 6 I bought new (and the others, all Ebay, as I shirked even GAME pre-owned prices). So The Xbone entirely turned me off before, but even so I had to acknowledge that I was intrigued by the above. With the PS4, I can't think of anything new that they've presented (a share button?) that has piqued my interest. So it became my choice for the next gen by default more than anything.


Read/watch the PS4 and now the most recent Xbone statements. It's pretty interesting, and maybe a bit sad, how often they say, 'just like on the PS3', 'just like on the Xbox 360'. On the one hand, it is great to see the turnaround from MS. On the other hand, I can't help but wonder if something has been missed out on. As you intimate (or more than intimate ) the price for that may have been too high, the company too greedy, but we won't know for another generation now. It would have been very very interesting to see these two very different (in terms of policy and direction of vision if not actual hardware) Sony and MS beasts competing over the next few years.


Having said all that, I am cheering to the rafters about one thing they announced (as well as rescinding the used games policy) - no region locking. Now that is a step forward from the Xbox360 (yes, I'm aware the PS3 had the same, but I'm talking console family progression).

This post has been edited by Khellendros: 20 June 2013 - 02:29 AM

[Lucifer's Heaven]

Just incase anyone was still in doubt.The rumoured new changes to the Xbone are confirmed.
You can't get much more official than that.

I am amused that they finally made a popular PR decision, but it is evident their PR team still really sucks. I mean c'mon, how passive aggressive can you be? It's a whiny child throwing a tantrum. "You didn't like the silly rules I set for playing with my toys, so I'm taking all my best toys away and it's all your fault!" *sigh*
Allowing disc based games to work as they should does not actually require losing any of their "innovations". Still allow the sharing list, but make it so that while you are using games from that list you must do the internet check-up every now an then. If you have the disc in the system, no internet required. It's not that frickin' difficult.

I still will not be purchasing one, because there are still a few major problem I have with it and they did NOT do this because their consumers complained. They did this because Sony is already doing this and their customers had an option. If they were really listening to their customers this announcement would have come before E3. If there was no PS4 being announced yet MS would just say "this is the way of the future, deal with it" (something they were saying for a while anyway) and change nothing because people wanting a next gen console would have had no choice. And they still only did it because I think the rumoured VERY large differences in PS4 and Xbone pre-sales is true. So for once, a large percentage of the gaming community may have actually stuck to their convictions! (though it's arguable if this would have remained so post launch) This surprises me as much as the MS U-turn. Though I suppose if there is one way to make people stick to their convictions it's to mightily piss them off and them keep them pissed off by continuously slapping them in the face with your PR department

Also, given how much they have overhauled their software post launch before, I am not confident they won't start re-instating those restrictions to future games down the line (or as someone else hinted effectively do the restrictions quieter and in more annoying ways).

[Silencer]

Khellendros, on 20 June 2013 - 02:27 AM, said:

@ Silencer:

I would say that the DRM was required to enable a feature like family sharing without it being abused to high heaven. The ability to be able to play not only your games, but that of any of your friends who were on this 'family' member list, from your own XBox, is one that definitely attracted me. To also be able to play online together with another person even if only one of the two of you actually owned the game. To resell a digital download game is unheard of on consoles (and pretty much unheard of full stop). I am not a fan of the digital-only future that we are heading towards (and we are heading there, though now not as quickly as MS would have liked us to), but these were features which made it more palatable

What you are on the verge of demanding with your 'show me the innovation!' is the kind of innovation that just doesn't happen - something unique out of the blue. Innovation builds upon previous ideas, so there is little surprise in some of these features bearing similarities to features already found elsewhere.

I am, or was, a used game guy. I own around 140 Xbox360 games, of which maybe 6 I bought new (and the others, all Ebay, as I shirked even GAME pre-owned prices). So The Xbone entirely turned me off before, but even so I had to acknowledge that I was intrigued by the above. With the PS4, I can't think of anything new that they've presented (a share button?) that has piqued my interest. So it became my choice for the next gen by default more than anything.


Read/watch the PS4 and now the most recent Xbone statements. It's pretty interesting, and maybe a bit sad, how often they say, 'just like on the PS3', 'just like on the Xbox 360'. On the one hand, it is great to see the turnaround from MS. On the other hand, I can't help but wonder if something has been missed out on. As you intimate (or more than intimate ) the price for that may have been too high, the company too greedy, but we won't know for another generation now. It would have been very very interesting to see these two very different (in terms of policy and direction of vision if not actual hardware) Sony and MS beasts competing over the next few years.


Having said all that, I am cheering to the rafters about one thing they announced (as well as rescinding the used games policy) - no region locking. Now that is a step forward from the Xbox360 (yes, I'm aware the PS3 had the same, but I'm talking console family progression).

But Khell, if you're trumpeting the "innovation" line of what could have been, in exchange for consumer freedoms, then that innovation actually needs to be at least hinted at, at least *possible* with what they've suggested.

It isn't. There was NOTHING new. You're wrong about digital games being resold: it may not be widespread, but it was ruled perfectly legal in the EU, and Steam, even GameStop have been looking into making it a reality. Heck, you can "gift" Steam games, right? Plus, iirc, GOG.com or one of those sites allows you to already. It is also NOT something that requires the kind of DRM M$ was proposing. You want to sell your digital game? That isn't happening via a disc transfer. You HAVE to be online to do THAT. Not to verify that the games on your HDD/that you're playing are legit every 24 hours. That applies to the physical copies being resold because you had to install all of them to your HDD - and could play without the disc. Simple solution: disc must be present. Don't want that? OK, if you want to resell your physical game, THEN you have to connect to the internet and deactivate it, at which point it is also uninstalled from your HDD. Much less intrusive while still enabling game reselling.

Again, you wouldn't be playing someone else's game remotely unless one or both of you were online - certainly *at some point* you would have to go online to share the game. Simple check against how many/who is loaning it/sharing it at the time, and BOOM there's your prevention for abuse. No need for DRM, AGAIN.

Also, read the posts; PS3 allows you to share your digital-only purchases with up to two other people. That is NOT A NEW OR INNOVATIVE FEATURE FOR THE X1, BY DEFINITION.



And if you're interested in innovative features, look into PS4's Gaikai. Way more "innovative" than anything X1 has to offer.




My point is, you can't say "innovation vs stagnation" when there was no innovation. The only truly innovative feature was the cloud computing and that is unaffected by the DRM side of things. Thus why I am asking for proof of this innovation concept you refer to. You say it's small steps, but I'm saying that there is no first step that has been taken. There was nothing the DRM and always-on Kinect enabled that the current gen of consoles didn't already do. Ergo the argument to innovation is actually only an argument to the digital age which, really, both consoles already can do, and there's nothing to suggest anywhere that going fully digital is going to provide new, innovative things.

To respond as you did is to present an inarguable point - you're basically saying "yeah, well, there COULD be innovation SOME TIME in the future because of this!" to which I say, "Sure. But the trade-off is here and now and there is no evidence of such pending innovations so what we are talking about is pure fantasy!" - ergo, there is no argument to be had, because you can hypothesize that the X1s DRM leads to a perpetual motion engine solving the world's energy needs forever while simultaneously stopping global warming. Unless there is something to suggest what those innovations might be, it's nothing more than wishful thinking, and we can't really debate innovation vs stagnation on those points.

Which is exactly why I bring up that all of the stuff M$ have is already being done, plus the things PS4 is bringing to the table in the "innovation" section. You know, tangible, real steps towards new things. I'm sorry, but arguing complete hypotheticals is just silly, even for a Devil's Advocate.

[Jakovasaurus]

[Obdigore]

We lose the family sharing feature so that whiney fucks can by used games for 15$ and sell them for a 1$. Hooray!

[Aptorian]

Jakovasaurus, on 20 June 2013 - 05:10 AM, said:

That's the exact thing I am suspicious of. Over the course of a year or two they could easily patch this shit back in. Blame it on Publishers pressure, hide it behind a new fancy update that adds rainbows and unicorns but only if you remember to log in every day.

Of course, the question is if this would be in violation of the consumer rights or the terms of service but as we know, terms of service can change from week to week.

[Morgoth]

Terms of service are mostly entirely illusory as a legal document. I'd be very surprised if returning the DRM features in a patch would be ruled legal anywhere in Europe (it certainly would be illegal in Scandinavia).

Whether something like that could be done in the US I cannot answer. It's a shame HD isn't posting much these days.

[Obdigore]

Morgoth, on 20 June 2013 - 07:38 AM, said:

Terms of service are mostly entirely illusory as a legal document. I'd be very surprised if returning the DRM features in a patch would be ruled legal anywhere in Europe (it certainly would be illegal in Scandinavia).

Whether something like that could be done in the US I cannot answer. It's a shame HD isn't posting much these days.

If the system doesn't require the check-in at the time of sale, they can't retroactively make it require it.

They could update xbox live to require something like that, but if you are getting on gold anyway it isn't going to matter. They wouldn't be able to make previously sold consoles require internet connectivity to work.

This post has been edited by Obdigore: 20 June 2013 - 07:53 AM

[Illuyankas]

Obdigore in part but all the people complaining about this totally sweet and reasonable feature, on 20 June 2013 - 06:09 AM, said:

We lose the family sharing feature so that whiney fucks can by used games for 15$ and sell them for a 1$. Hooray!

1. It wasn't going to work like people thought it was, no £5/$6 games to share among 10 dudes, two people at once at the most, single player only, no full game etc
2. Publishers were definitely not going to let people buy one copy per ten people
3. WELL WHY DON'T YOU JUST NOT BE POOR THEN
4. Sony has this feature already in a smaller format, and Steam's got bits of code involving lending digital games people found recently, so it's hardly revolutionary or never appearing again
5. It's ok, no-one's going to take away your Microsoft Club badge if you acknowledge they've fucked up heartily this generation
6. Look on the bright side, now people will actually buy it so you'll actually have a plausible population for games
7. Just wait another generation for all your software licensing needs
8. Waaaah public pressure, Gamestop pushing PS4 like mad and 20% of PS4 pre-orders = whiny fucks, waaaaah waaaaaaaaaaaah
9. FUKKEN HIPSTERS AMIRITE
10. Relax man, enjoy your Call of Duty: Robots Titanfall in peace.

[Obdigore]

Illuyankas, on 20 June 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

Obdigore in part but all the people complaining about this totally sweet and reasonable feature, on 20 June 2013 - 06:09 AM, said:

We lose the family sharing feature so that whiney fucks can by used games for 15$ and sell them for a 1$. Hooray!

1. It wasn't going to work like people thought it was, no £5/$6 games to share among 10 dudes, two people at once at the most, single player only, no full game etc

There was nothing stating it was single player only.

Quote

2. Publishers were definitely not going to let people buy one copy per ten people

It was a two for one, if you were friends with someone.

Quote

3. WELL WHY DON'T YOU JUST NOT BE POOR THEN

I'm not?

Quote

4. Sony has this feature already in a smaller format, and Steam's got bits of code involving lending digital games people found recently, so it's hardly revolutionary or never appearing again

In a much smaller format and not with two people playing at the same time, afiak. If I'm wrong, link it.

Quote

5. It's ok, no-one's going to take away your Microsoft Club badge if you acknowledge they've fucked up heartily this generation

Yes, but not going all-digital. Fuck discs.

Quote

6. Look on the bright side, now people will actually buy it so you'll actually have a plausible population for games

Implying like there wasn't going to be a 'plausible population' as is.

Quote

7. Just wait another generation for all your software licensing needs

I want my cake now!

Quote

8. Waaaah public pressure, Gamestop pushing PS4 like mad and 20% of PS4 pre-orders = whiny fucks, waaaaah waaaaaaaaaaaah

Meh. Microsoft should fire their entire PR team right about meow.

Quote

9. FUKKEN HIPSTERS AMIRITE

Totes, bro-tato.

Quote

10. Relax man, enjoy your Call of Duty: Robots Titanfall in peace.

Rather enjoy BF4 until Titanfall comes out.

[D'rek]

I don't have a current gen console (ps3/360/wii) and am not planning on getting a next gen one anytime in the next several years (but KH3 waaaaaaaah!), and I've never even connected a console to the internet, let alone played one online, but couldn't we have both? Have one console go all-digital, all-internet, cloud-enabled with all the funky features that entails, and the other console so offline and old-school that it doesn't need any DRM or license keys because it uses cartridges! I'd be more interested in the latter, but I'm sure lots of people would prefer the first. Why do the major consoles have to do the same thing in order to fight over one part of the audience, instead of each being different so that they each primarily target a different part of the overall audience? Seems like a bad strategy to me.

[Jakovasaurus]

Well, for sure Microsoft can rely on the parents of the 14 year old Call of Duty sycophants to be there when Xbone launches.

[Illuyankas]

Obdigore, on 20 June 2013 - 02:08 PM, said:

words

a; Wonderfully that was taken from a crappy youtube 'journo' interview with a MS dude which I saw and then forgot and there's a ton on my history, so here's a quote from a dude who also saw it:

Quote

You do realize that the best case scenario on the family sharing crap we've heard came from an amateur journalist's youtube followup video where he got clarification from MS that only two people in the plan could be concurrently playing the same game, and even then, they could only play the single-player mode of a video game, right? You missed the part where you and your friends would still have to buy ten copies of Collar Duty to play multiplayer together, right?

How would that have saved you any money on multiplayer?

And if you want to disregard that, feel free (not a real source), it's Microsoft's PR team who're the real assholes there.

b; See above

c; That was meant to be in quote marks and I forgot to add them when I went all caps later on

d; Just says up to 2, down from 5, looking for more info.

e; Both consoles have a digital store, pretty sure they have Day 1 Digital, not really a difference.

f; Realistically the Xbone would have sold only in reasonable numbers in the US. Brand loyalty only goes so far with higher price, massive restrictions - like being unable to play in your country, and depending on whether the mandatory online patch download when you first start your console has to be done on Xbox Live servers the 21 country limit may still be in place - and features that don't work outside the US. It'll sell more now, but not nearly as many as the 360 did. I'm guessing 20-40 mil over its lifetime? Considering the 360 did 77 million or whatever. But hey, you'll probably sell more than the Wii U is at the moment! All 3.5 million of them. Of course, there's also the fact developers would prefer to develop for the more popular console (and also the one that doesn't charge $40k per patch, aka the Fuck Indies policy, but since indie = hipster that's probably a plus for you, eh).

g; No way they'll patch it back in now, but you'll have your toys taken away arbitrarily soon enough.

h; Seconded like a motherfucker. Why couldn't they have compromised instead of throwing all their toys out of the pram? Keep your DRM for the family sharing optional, let people play offline with discs or installed, frankly what they should have done from the start if they had any faith in their ideas here, let alone going back to the baseline and wording it as 'you guys weren't ready for our AWESOME NEW IDEAS'.

i; *adjusts handwoven Sony keffiyeh*

j; Oh hey, PS+ has BF3 and Saints Row 3 free from July 3rd, what timing!

[Obdigore]

Illuyankas, on 20 June 2013 - 03:04 PM, said:

Obdigore, on 20 June 2013 - 02:08 PM, said:

words

a; Wonderfully that was taken from a crappy youtube 'journo' interview with a MS dude which I saw and then forgot and there's a ton on my history, so here's a quote from a dude who also saw it:

Quote

You do realize that the best case scenario on the family sharing crap we've heard came from an amateur journalist's youtube followup video where he got clarification from MS that only two people in the plan could be concurrently playing the same game, and even then, they could only play the single-player mode of a video game, right? You missed the part where you and your friends would still have to buy ten copies of Collar Duty to play multiplayer together, right?

How would that have saved you any money on multiplayer?

And if you want to disregard that, feel free (not a real source), it's Microsoft's PR team who're the real assholes there.

It came from a lolpennyarcade interview and was confirmed multiple times in other interviews by Microsoft Employees. I mean I know you want to downplay the whole thing, but at least know what is going on?

Quote

b; See above

c; That was meant to be in quote marks and I forgot to add them when I went all caps later on

d; Just says up to 2, down from 5, looking for more info.

e; Both consoles have a digital store, pretty sure they have Day 1 Digital, not really a difference.

All digital is a huge difference from lol-discs. It would allow them to get rid of retarded ass gamestop and allow them to do other things like full game sharing or steam sales. Not that I'm saying that was the plan, but it would be an intelligent move on their part as it would generate brand loyalty without effecting their bottom line.

Quote

f; Realistically the Xbone would have sold only in reasonable numbers in the US. Brand loyalty only goes so far with higher price, massive restrictions - like being unable to play in your country, and depending on whether the mandatory online patch download when you first start your console has to be done on Xbox Live servers the 21 country limit may still be in place - and features that don't work outside the US. It'll sell more now, but not nearly as many as the 360 did. I'm guessing 20-40 mil over its lifetime? Considering the 360 did 77 million or whatever. But hey, you'll probably sell more than the Wii U is at the moment! All 3.5 million of them. Of course, there's also the fact developers would prefer to develop for the more popular console (and also the one that doesn't charge $40k per patch, aka the Fuck Indies policy, but since indie = hipster that's probably a plus for you, eh).

But I don't give a shit about other countries playing the xbox one. I don't want to play with them because of the generally horrendous lag that comes with P2P gaming across oceans. That said it appears that MS is trying to move to all dedicated servers, but w/e.

Quote

g; No way they'll patch it back in now, but you'll have your toys taken away arbitrarily soon enough.

Quite Trite.

Quote

h; Seconded like a motherfucker. Why couldn't they have compromised instead of throwing all their toys out of the pram? Keep your DRM for the family sharing optional, let people play offline with discs or installed, frankly what they should have done from the start if they had any faith in their ideas here, let alone going back to the baseline and wording it as 'you guys weren't ready for our AWESOME NEW IDEAS'.

They would have had to have two environments. One for people who want to wah wah wah all the way to gamestop to get ripped off coming and going with used games, the other for the family plan with game sharing, that ties games to your account. You probably would have to opt-in to this, stating you will never sell your games or w/e, and could only share games with other people who have this (it would probably be a flag on the account) on. That said it is a pain in the ass to setup something like this in the first place.

Quote

i; *adjusts handwoven Sony keffiyeh*

I have no idea what a keffiyeh is. Does it have oil in it? If it doesn't, as a MURRICAN!!!! I don't want it.

Quote

j; Oh hey, PS+ has BF3 and Saints Row 3 free from July 3rd, what timing!

Both games I already have because I purchase the games I want, what a thought!

But seriously, there were two groups of people who complained about the MS's 'vision' for the XB1. The first are people who don't have the infrastructure setup to take advantage of it, or who don't have internet access and probably shouldn't be spending money on a game console, honestly. The second were whiney fucks who want to go buy and sell used games and are, quite frankly, a problem in the gaming industry.

[Lucifer's Heaven]

Obdigore, on 20 June 2013 - 07:45 AM, said:

If the system doesn't require the check-in at the time of sale, they can't retroactively make it require it.

They could update xbox live to require something like that, but if you are getting on gold anyway it isn't going to matter. They wouldn't be able to make previously sold consoles require internet connectivity to work.

This sounds about right, they wouldn't get away with changing all the DRM stuff for what you have bought.
But, correct me if I am wrong, what they could do is; 6-12 months down the track, do an update that switched back to their original ideas for all games that come out thereafter (or bring it in incrementally with only some games requiring it, increasing the amount until eventually all new games do). That would not be protected against, as the product you bought would still work as it suggested it would with the titles you have bought. If you want any of the newer games then you have to accept the new rules. The PS3 was allowed to patch out Linux support (you didn't need to accept and download that patch so you could keep using Linux). And then they'd be relying on the amount people have already invested in them for the customer to not turn away (both monetarily and online community of friends).

[Obdigore]

Lucifer, on 21 June 2013 - 03:21 AM, said:

Obdigore, on 20 June 2013 - 07:45 AM, said:

If the system doesn't require the check-in at the time of sale, they can't retroactively make it require it.

They could update xbox live to require something like that, but if you are getting on gold anyway it isn't going to matter. They wouldn't be able to make previously sold consoles require internet connectivity to work.

This sounds about right, they wouldn't get away with changing all the DRM stuff for what you have bought.
But, correct me if I am wrong, what they could do is; 6-12 months down the track, do an update that switched back to their original ideas for all games that come out thereafter (or bring it in incrementally with only some games requiring it, increasing the amount until eventually all new games do). That would not be protected against, as the product you bought would still work as it suggested it would with the titles you have bought. If you want any of the newer games then you have to accept the new rules. The PS3 was allowed to patch out Linux support (you didn't need to accept and download that patch so you could keep using Linux). And then they'd be relying on the amount people have already invested in them for the customer to not turn away (both monetarily and online community of friends).

Legally, probably. Although there was a class action lawsuit against Sony regarding patching out Linux support that I don't remember the final ruling on.

[Illuyankas]

Dude, there is so much stuff being said by MS dudes it's hard to keep track, hence me saying I can't confirm so disregard as needed, but thanks for pointing out the source while implying I'm uninformed, that's good too (seriously fuck Ben Kuchera)

Except Gamestop would have been one of the licensed resellers, and they make like $2 billion from new game and peripheral sales, far more than used, and that'll fuck over all the little shops and non-franchise outlets. And there is nothing stopping them from having Steam-quality sales on the Gold store, or good old Games for Windows Live, except OH NO THEY'RE COMPLETELY WORTHLESS. Steam competes against places like GOG and so on on top of the always-free pirates, evidence proves companies simply won't throw out arbitrary sales when they can charge full price and will do so when you have no alternative. Oh yeah, I have my entire game collection on my account, let's just wait around for hours downloading this 50 gig game over your rural connection so I can play at your house or I could just stick the disc in.

Yeah, fuck the global market, that's how profitable companies sell successful products when faced with a cheaper and more powerful competitor, they reduce the number of consumers who can buy it!

You're arguing that Microsoft will maybe do sales when they've never done so in the past. Out of the goodness of their hearts.

You're not online anymore, game sharing is closed and your sharing library is disabled until you're back up again. There we go, job fucking done. Also Amazon exists to deliver discs to your door because god forbid you have to experience the plebs face to face anymore (yes I know Gamestop have shitty policies but there are plenty of other stores who do not)

It's a hipster thing. You probably haven't heard of it before.

Both games released considerably earlier than seven years ago, too.

Bullshit. The first of your so-called two groups comprised people from one hundred and seventy five countries around the world, including the homes of two dev teams for Xbone games. Not everyone in the US has a steady internet connection, we're talking at least a hundred million people here who don't even have broadband. Natural disasters, enviromental factors and whatnot can all affect the internet for prolonged periods of time, and while the internet isn't necessary for everyday living, power is. This is ignoring the certainty of either internet providers or Microsoft servers going down repeatedly, preventing you from using your product. And telling people they're too poor to have a hobby is disgusting. Your second group are hardly an issue at all, Gamestop would lose a quarter of the profits they make from new stuff if they lost all used games sales, and EA spent half that sum on advertising ToR, and the other half on making the game. Used game selling is a dwindling market that is phasing out gradually and will probably be gone in a generation or two, Microsoft just tried to force it in a cashgrab fiasco too early. The stick had no carrot. They just dipped it in some orange paint.

Seriously, whiny fucks does not describe the vast, vast majority of people who had issues with this thing. Hell, if the leaked MS dev stuff is true, the shared games would be less shared and more ~1 hour demos. You seem to have a lot of problems realising that just because it doesn't effect you so bad, that other people might not see it that way!

e2: I like this quote:

Quote

It might surprise someone to know that I rail for used games even though I never actually buy or sell my games. I mostly rent games and buy the ones I really like.

I support used games because I know that the pricing pressure of used games drives the price of new games down quicker, so that I get a better deal. And I know it helps a lot of people play games that otherwise couldn't afford them. And also, it's very important to me ideologically that people own the things they purchase, that the world of software is not transformed into a glorified rental kiosk which will be really shitty for most people, even if they don't realize it and don't think that it affects them right now.

This post has been edited by Illuyankas: 21 June 2013 - 04:07 AM

[Obdigore]

Illuyankas, on 21 June 2013 - 03:40 AM, said:

Dude, there is so much stuff being said by MS dudes it's hard to keep track, hence me saying I can't confirm so disregard as needed, but thanks for pointing out the source while implying I'm uninformed, that's good too (seriously fuck Ben Kuchera)

So you admit you don't know what the family sharing plan actually was because you can't keep track, then whine about me implying you are uninformed? Interesting tactic I guess?

Quote

Except Gamestop would have been one of the licensed resellers, and they make like $2 billion from new game and peripheral sales, far more than used, and that'll fuck over all the little shops and non-franchise outlets. And there is nothing stopping them from having Steam-quality sales on the Gold store, or good old Games for Windows Live, except OH NO THEY'RE COMPLETELY WORTHLESS. Steam competes against places like GOG and so on on top of the always-free pirates, evidence proves companies simply won't throw out arbitrary sales when they can charge full price and will do so when you have no alternative. Oh yeah, I have my entire game collection on my account, let's just wait around for hours downloading this 50 gig game over your rural connection so I can play at your house or I could just stick the disc in.

You sure Gamestop would have been one of the licensed resellers? And Gamestop makes a larger portion of PROFITS from used games than new games or peripherals. They pay extremely low and sell back to the consumer for far over market value. That said, I've not seen a little shop or non franchise game outlet in... years I guess? (insert hipster dig here ). Again, I straight up said there is nothing that would make them do it, but that is where I would think they would go. If you can get new-ish games for cheaper on MS than Sony, it will effect the install base of the consoles.

Quote

Yeah, fuck the global market, that's how profitable companies sell successful products when faced with a cheaper and more powerful competitor, they reduce the number of consumers who can buy it!

And that is something for MS to worry about, not me See what I'm doing here, I'm being selfish

Quote

You're arguing that Microsoft will maybe do sales when they've never done so in the past. Out of the goodness of their hearts.

No, it is a tactic to increase their install base and sales figures for their platform, allowing them to charge more for console licensing and trumpet their higher games per console figure once again.

Quote

You're not online anymore, game sharing is closed and your sharing library is disabled until you're back up again. There we go, job fucking done. Also Amazon exists to deliver discs to your door because god forbid you have to experience the plebs face to face anymore (yes I know Gamestop have shitty policies but there are plenty of other stores who do not)

So I have to stay online until my friend finishes the last 3 hours of FFXV because he can't put it down? That doesn't work. A sharing library, unless it is only multiplayer sharing like how SC1 and... WC2 let you spawn multiplayer-only stuff on like 8 other machines.

Quote

It's a hipster thing. You probably haven't heard of it before.

Both games released considerably earlier than seven years ago, too.

And? It is just a business ploy, just like nearly everything else. Sony makes a move, MS makes a move, repeat. Meanwhile Nintendo is over in the corner walking away from the only reason they made money the past couple years (casuals).

Quote

Bullshit. The first of your so-called two groups comprised people from one hundred and seventy five countries around the world, including the homes of two dev teams for Xbone games. Not everyone in the US has a steady internet connection, we're talking at least a hundred million people here who don't even have broadband. Natural disasters, enviromental factors and whatnot can all affect the internet for prolonged periods of time, and while the internet isn't necessary for everyday living, power is. This is ignoring the certainty of either internet providers or Microsoft servers going down repeatedly, preventing you from using your product. And telling people they're too poor to have a hobby is disgusting. Your second group are hardly an issue at all, Gamestop would lose a quarter of the profits they make from new stuff if they lost all used games sales, and EA spent half that sum on advertising ToR, and the other half on making the game. Used game selling is a dwindling market that is phasing out gradually and will probably be gone in a generation or two, Microsoft just tried to force it in a cashgrab fiasco too early. The stick had no carrot. They just dipped it in some orange paint.

I agree that the list of countries was abhorrently small. That said, I saw no real complaints about that, it was all about DRM and not being able to do the whole used games thing.

Quote

Seriously, whiny fucks does not describe the vast, vast majority of people who had issues with this thing. Hell, if the leaked MS dev stuff is true, the shared games would be less shared and more ~1 hour demos. You seem to have a lot of problems realising that just because it doesn't effect you so bad, that other people might not see it that way!

The 'leaked dev' stuff is just as true as 'gamestop not selling Xboxones anymore!' and 'the Kinect cant be turned off!' and 'zomg the NSA is forcing MS to put the Kinect on every system to they can spy on us'. You seem to have a lot of problems separating fact from hyperbole.

This post has been edited by Obdigore: 21 June 2013 - 04:08 AM

[Illuyankas]

No one knows what it would be like, so good job there! It's hard to keep track of which Microsoft employee said which contradictory thing, from Mattrick to Major Nelson to Xbox Support twitter accounts struggling to do their best with the fuck all they've been told!

Of course Gamestop would have been, they're one of the biggest games sellers in your country and people taking games back to sell would need to physically take it there for them to reset it using the software they'd be given by Microsoft! Oh man, they get more per sale from used over new, what a shame they get far more actual cash and overall profit from new games then they do from used in the first place, rendering your point worthless! You're assuming stuff that flies in the face of every previous practice Microsoft have done and in fact could have begun doing already to even come close to Sony and Steam but haven't, and they listed Xbone games for £55 on Amazon back when they had stuff up for pre-order!

You're being an idiot for proclaiming practices that will reduce the amount of games made for your console by devastating the install base as being perfectly fine because you don't think they'll affect you! (That was the first time I've been actually out-and-out rude to you this whole topic, I think! Wowzers!)

Oh, they do digital sales already, sure sounds like a good time to do those sales you OH WAIT THEY DON'T AND NOW SONY HAVE SOLD MORE PS3S THEN MICROSOFT HAVE SOLD 360S BECAUSE SONY HAVE AND ARE DOING WHAT YOU THINK MICROSOFT WILL DO BUT HAVE TURNED DOWN EVERY SINGLE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO ALREADY! For some reason! Even if it'll make them more money now instead of some potential future scenario that is different than today because of reasons! And next generation they'll have less games because they have less first party developers and indie devs can't self publisher and they charge indie devs $40k per patch, and they had to make an exception to get Minecraft (which is going crossplatform anyway), which is why the Xbone has one indie title, I think Below, and PS4 has every other indie game ever!

No then silly you go offline and a message pops up saying HEY DICKWAD BUY THE GAME ALREADY and maybe he's so into it he buys the game, maybe he decides to keep denying the developers their hard-earned money and wait til you get up in the morning! Because Sony's initial game sharing thing was any of the games on your account could be shared with ANY FIVE PEOPLE WITH NO RESTRICTIONS LIKE A FRIENDS LIST and obviously publishers hated that so they cut it to two so good luck getting ten to stick as it was!

Of course it's a business ploy, what else would making BF3 and SR3 free before BF4 and SR4 come out be! That's why PS+ has ten fucking free games a month, so you buy it and play the games and get discounts on other games! It's an excellent business ploy and Microsoft are attempting to emulate it without understanding why it's so fucking good value by giving out games you can find ~*used*~ for less than the month of Live you need to get them! With no other benefits or reduced restrictions on other services, like paying MS on top of Netflix to watch it!

You obviously weren't looking hard enough! Did you even do any research about this ho ho ho seriously though this console is heavily anti-consumerist policy-ridden ass.

Leaked dev pastebin probably fake, Gamestop are still taking pre-orders but pushing PS4 heavily, Kinect can be turned off but explicitly cannot be unplugged and is mandatory and drives the price up to five hundred bucks, if you don't think word of mouth about a camera in your living room to underinformed consumers won't be a problem in the face of PRISM - no matter how unfounded - then you're being dumb yourself. You seem to think one crappily-explained feature justifies losing your rights to own products you bought personally. You definitely got me good though.

This post has been edited by Illuyankas: 21 June 2013 - 04:58 AM

[Obdigore]

Illuyankas, on 21 June 2013 - 04:51 AM, said:

No one knows what it would be like, so good job there! It's hard to keep track of which Microsoft employee said which contradictory thing, from Mattrick to Major Nelson to Xbox Support twitter accounts struggling to do their best with the fuck all they've been told!

I agree the PR and messages have been absolutely horrible. That said you can work through it all and see what they are actually saying. It has been done. I know you don't want to hear anything that isn't horrible about the Xboxone, but there it is.

Quote

Of course Gamestop would have been, they're one of the biggest games sellers in your country and people taking games back to sell would need to physically take it there for them to reset it using the software they'd be given by Microsoft! Oh man, they get more per sale from used over new, what a shame they get far more actual cash and overall profit from new games then they do from used in the first place, rendering your point worthless! You're assuming stuff that flies in the face of every previous practice Microsoft have done and in fact could have begun doing already to even come close to Sony and Steam but haven't, and they listed Xbone games for £55 on Amazon back when they had stuff up for pre-order!

You think dropping 44% of their revenue wouldn't crash their entire ecosystem? Really? Also, I have no idea what you pay for games now, so your 55 figure doesn't mean anything to me.

Quote

You're being an idiot for proclaiming practices that will reduce the amount of games made for your console by devastating the install base as being perfectly fine because you don't think they'll affect you! (That was the first time I've been actually out-and-out rude to you this whole topic, I think! Wowzers!)

But it wasn't devastating the install base. You completely overestimate the voice of the gamers complaining about this compared to the actual install base. Ironically, as far as I can tell, most of them are pretty much 'PC Master Race' gamers

Quote

Oh, they do digital sales already, sure sounds like a good time to do those sales you OH WAIT THEY DON'T AND NOW SONY HAVE SOLD MORE PS3S THEN MICROSOFT HAVE SOLD 360S BECAUSE SONY HAVE AND ARE DOING WHAT YOU THINK MICROSOFT WILL DO BUT HAVE TURNED DOWN EVERY SINGLE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO ALREADY! For some reason! Even if it'll make them more money now instead of some potential future scenario that is different than today because of reasons! And next generation they'll have less games because they have less first party developers and indie devs can't self publisher and they charge indie devs $40k per patch, and they had to make an exception to get Minecraft (which is going crossplatform anyway), which is why the Xbone has one indie title, I think Below, and PS4 has every other indie game ever!

Ahh yes, the old random caps in the middle of the paragraph? Have you seen xbox live and the indie titles available? I'm just curious? I feel like you haven't. Did you notice that the xbox has more exclusives and more MS-dev games announced, and Sony just said '10 indy titles!'? Yes/no?

Quote

No then silly you go offline and a message pops up saying HEY DICKWAD BUY THE GAME ALREADY and maybe he's so into it he buys the game, maybe he decides to keep denying the developers their hard-earned money and wait til you get up in the morning! Because Sony's initial game sharing thing was any of the games on your account could be shared with ANY FIVE PEOPLE WITH NO RESTRICTIONS LIKE A FRIENDS LIST and obviously publishers hated that so they cut it to two so good luck getting ten to stick as it was!

So now because Sony changed their sharing policy, clearly MS would have to change theirs?

Quote

Of course it's a business ploy, what else would making BF3 and SR3 free before BF4 and SR4 come out be! That's why PS+ has ten fucking free games a month, so you buy it and play the games and get discounts on other games! It's an excellent business ploy and Microsoft are attempting to emulate it without understanding why it's so fucking good value by giving out games you can find ~*used*~ for less than the month of Live you need to get them! With no other benefits or reduced restrictions on other services, like paying MS on top of Netflix to watch it!

Unless of course you actually play video games online on your console? Then the xbox live experience is (or was, I haven't been on my ps3 in... like a year) just straight up better. They also have cross game chat (which I assume is coming to PSN soon?) and if I wanted Netflix but not gold I would just watch it on my computer. You keep pulling up random shit that has no bearing on anything because you are running out of stuff to say.

Quote

You obviously weren't looking hard enough! Did you even do any research about this ho ho ho seriously though this console is heavily anti-consumerist policy-ridden ass.

Was that a Jabba the Hutt quote? Anyway, it is only anti-consumerist if your assumptions and the hyperbole and lies you believe about the family share plan(s) are correct. But hey, who cares about you know, reality, right?

Quote

Leaked dev pastebin probably fake, Gamestop are still taking pre-orders but pushing PS4 heavily, Kinect can be turned off but explicitly cannot be unplugged and is mandatory and drives the price up to five hundred bucks, if you don't think word of mouth about a camera in your living room to underinformed consumers won't be a problem in the face of PRISM - no matter how unfounded - then you're being dumb yourself. You seem to think one crappily-explained feature justifies losing your rights to own products you bought personally. You definitely got me good though.

I agree that it drives up the price unnecessarily, and I agree that it is one place where MS fucked up. Especially since they didn't show a game that really has any use for the Kinect beyond the 'voice commands'.