Xbox One

[Tong]

Originally Posted by Drkz

You know the PS3 sold at a loss right? I know plenty of people who bought because it was a cheaper Blu Ray alternative. That's the reason why the new consoles aren't backwards compatible because it cost too much money. If by some miracle the PS3 ends up in a dominate position it wouldn't mean much. I know plenty of people who dislike the ps3. If the Xbox really does tank, it just means they'll go back to PC. Majority of the people who migrated to the Xbox use to play PC. Hell some of them still game on the PC.

Here lies the important problem. Microsoft is trying to take over the way you play video games. Its not what we the fans, the consumer want. Its what they want. They literally want to control the way we play games. Instead of buying a console it feels like your renting one. They expect you to have a constant internet connection, pay top dollar for a quarter of a game and shove out another $100+ for dlc that should've been with the game. I don't know about you, but that just sounds insane. Remember how long the Xbox 360 lived? Before people started getting Red Ring? I'm pretty sure the next xbox will be getting the same problem. Another underlying fact. Regardless of how much people will whine and complain. If you PAY THEM. They'll continue to do it. They'll just ignore you and brush you off. The only way they'll listen to the consumers is if people boycott the console. Money speaks volumes. If they create a money sinkhole they'll need to cave into the consumer's demands. But this feels like a pipe dream. Because I already know plenty of people who will buy this console. Just think for one moment. There is no merit to pay for xbox live especially when it still has ads. Your getting charged to go online with your own internet connection. If Microsoft can get away with this whats to stop them from telling you need you a constant internet connection to play your game.

PS: You know how those people who buy a Wii U, register their game onto the console. The console dies and they can't get any of the games they bought back because the account is stuck on the dead Wii U? Whats stopping the same problem from happening to the Xbox One?

Summed up all the topic and the gamer's side.
Spoke nothing but the truth.

[Urzu 7]

Originally Posted by GDB

Actually, it is an all or nothing situation. What middle ground is there? It either fails or it doesn't. Anything but failure will invite others to adopt a similar strategy.

Unless MS does some major backpedaling (which they probably won't), I really hope the XBO fails, but I don't expect it to. A lot of gamers will bite the bullet because of Halo and Forza and other exclusives. And the XBox brand is very big in America. And also, even if the XBox One shows signs of struggling, MS can throw so much money at the system and they'll make it succeed. I don't expect XBO to do as well as XBox 360. My guess is that XBO will be Microsoft's N64. Their third system, following a very successful second system, and it doesn't fail; in fact it does pretty decent, but it definitely doesn't do as well as that second system. Actually, I hope XBO gets GameCube level sales. *snicker*

Originally Posted by Triple_R

No, it's not.

What Microsoft is trying to pull here would represent a dramatic shift in the video game world. This isn't just a company putting out a poor and/or overpriced product in a conventional sense. This is a company intentionally trying to completely change the relationship between buying and seller, to the great disadvantage of the buyer.

How they change the relationship with the buyer and the seller when it comes to games, well, it won't be there in the XBO successor. Those fools are screwing things up with XBO games because they are selling the games on disc where gamers buy physical copies of the games but MS is putting several restrictions on the games, as if it was like they were selling gamers the games as digital files via digital distribution, ala Steam. If doesn't work out. It clashes. Gamers don't like that. As we've seen, a lot of gamers hate that. If XBO had strict DRM on its games but all its games were sold via digital distribution, I bet the negative backlash about XBO and the policies on games would be a lot less. The XBO successor and the PS5 should distribute games digitally only. MS and Sony will eventually go the Steam route, I figure. It remains to be seen if they have frequent awesome sales, and it remains to be seen if MS and/or Sony find out ways to fuck up the wonderful template Steam has created.

[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by Urzu 7

Unless MS does some major backpedaling (which they probably won't), I really hope the XBO fails, but I don't expect it to.

It depends on what constitutes failure. Any significant decline from XBox 360 sales would likely constitute a failure.

Yes, a lot of gamers will probably bite the bullet. But all you need is 10 to 20% or so to say "No, I'm not putting up with this BS" and Microsoft may well feel the pinch.

How they change the relationship with the buyer and the seller when it comes to games, well, it won't be there in the XBO successor.

I think you're being a bit presumptive there. If the XBox One sells well, they may just keep the exact same approach for its successor.

[0utf0xZer0]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

"Hon, you think we should go on a camping trip again this year? Or maybe we should take a small vacation in New York?"

"Sorry, but I can't be away from home for more than 24 hours. If I am, my XBox One stops working on me."


The XBox One - Bringing hilariously bad new conflicts to young couples.


The more I think about it, the more absolutely asinine I find this "Must connect to the internet daily" bit.

More likely it'll be like the DRM scheme on the PC version of Assassin's Creed II - you regain access to the game on a successful check in, but you can't play until you that occurs.

(The ACII DRM was far worse than what MS is going here, as the initial release the game would end your game immediately if you lost your internet connection. Without saving.)

[Urzu 7]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

I think you're being a bit presumptive there. If the XBox One sells well, they may just keep the exact same approach for its successor.

What I mean is that, as I laid out, the XBO and its policies on games is that you buy physical copies of games but then the DRM on the games is strict and it is like they are treating game discs like digital purchases, and then furthermore, the XBO successor should not be like this because I expect the games to be sold digitally only. But they'll still have DRM. It is just that the nature of things will be different since the games are digital purchases.

[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by 0utf0xZer0

More likely it'll be like the DRM scheme on the PC version of Assassin's Creed II - you regain access to the game on a successful check in, but you can't play until you that occurs.

(The ACII DRM was far worse than what MS is going here, as the initial release the game would end your game immediately if you lost your internet connection. Without saving.)

What's the point of the 24 hours thing, then?

If it's just some short check-in to get things up and running again, who's going to bother with the 24 hours thing?

Originally Posted by Urzu 7

What I mean is that, as I laid out, the XBO and its policies on games is that you buy physical copies of games but then the DRM on the games is strict and it is like they are treating game discs like digital purchases, and then furthermore, the XBO successor should not be like this because I expect the games to be sold digitally only. But they'll still have DRM. It is just that the nature of things will be different since the games are digital purchases.

Yes, and quite frankly, you may very well be wrong about that. That's what I'm calling presumptuous.

People have been saying for several years now that physical media is going to die, but just look at the anime industry, where anime is selling as well on DVDs/Blu-Rays as it ever has.

[Shadow5YA]

Originally Posted by Jazzrat

Oh definitely not everyone but with enough people, it's not going to matter to the big company. Just look at DLC and how much outcry it received when it was introduced and now. Cash shops, micro transaction, free to play... how they are snuffed initially are starting to become the norm of gaming.

I'm pretty sure a large majority still hate Capcom's recent business models for DmC and Street Fight x Tekken.

And "free-to-play" cash MMO games have existed for decades. Do you honestly think it's a new trend? Do you know how old games like Maple Story are?

Originally Posted by Jazzrat

I m sure Wii crushed all other console during this generation with it's mighty install base... oh wait, it didn't because people either shelved for the lack of core games or bought it just one or two fitness/sports game.

Did PS3 fail because of it's higher price and unfriendly architecture? Hell no, it wasn't dominating like PS2 did but it certainly didn't fail as a product.

A console does not have to be the best seller to succeed. In fact, Nintendo hasn't been #1 since the SNES days. They still made massive profits with the Wii.

The PS3 however did not, as many others have already mentioned.

The Wii also had its share of core games (Mario, Zelda, Smash Bros, etc), even if it lacked the third party support they had in the past. Just because you shelved it does not mean billions of others did.

Lacking core games is an issue for the Wii U however, though that's a subject for another thread.

[0utf0xZer0]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

What's the point of the 24 hours thing, then?

If it's just some short check-in to get things up and running again, who's going to bother with the 24 hours thing?

1) The XBone does not require game discs to be inserted to play games after you've installed them.
2) We know that there's some sort of mechanism to sell your games.
3) Hence, installations of games that have been sold need to be deactivated.

That's almost certainly the story behind the 24 hour check in requirement.

[Destined_Fate]

Originally Posted by kenjiharima

YouTube

https://youtu.be/suUi1_EfuE0

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

What about deaf/mute people that plays video games? If a videogame needs and mandatory voice commands how can a deaf person play it?

They aren't the target audience.

Microsoft has had more success in Americas and Europe than the rest of the world and at those places they did much better in places with constant internet.

Microsoft is, though not outright saying it, abandoning everyone that isn't what they consider "core" and focusing on trying to keep and entice more people that fit their definition of "core". Those with constant internet fit "core" as they are more inclined to have more disposable income than those that don't. That and they're more successful with that crowd anyway. Globally Sony has done far better so it makes sense that Sony doesn't want to alienate anyone if they can, Microsoft is fine alienating everyone that isn't "core" as long as enough "core" buy into them instead of Sony or Nintendo or Apple or the such.

The only thing they missed was the Military and Microsoft seems to already be working on a solution/exception for them. Course it will only take one of those in the military to hand the unlocked XBox One to a group of hackers for all hell to break loose rather quickly.

If you're well off compared to the average person, have amazing 24/7 internet, and/or have a ton of disposable income than the XBox One's "restrictions" don't effect you all that much and you'll get your all in one system.

[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by 0utf0xZer0

1) The XBone does not require game discs to be inserted to play games after you've installed them.
2) We know that there's some sort of mechanism to sell your games.
3) Hence, installations of games that have been sold need to be deactivated.

That's almost certainly the story behind the 24 hour check in requirement.

Ok, you've completely lost me here. I don't see how any of those three things necessitates a 24 hour check-in requirement. Maybe I'm missing something here, but as far as I can tell, all the three things you mentioned can work fine without a 24 hour check-in requirement.

[0utf0xZer0]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

Ok, you've completely lost me here. I don't see how any of those three things necessitates a 24 hour check-in requirement. Maybe I'm missing something here, but as far as I can tell, all the three things you mentioned can work fine without a 24 hour check-in requirement.

The 24 hour check in is to ensure nobody avoids deactivating their sold games by leaving the console disconnected from the internet.

[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by 0utf0xZer0

The 24 hour check in is to ensure nobody avoids deactivating their sold games by leaving the console disconnected from the internet.

I'm sure they could have found a different, much simpler, and much less intrusive, mechanism for just that (like something that just automatically removes the game from your account upon the very moment of sale). And it would have been to their benefit too, as it would have lessened backlash considerably.

Sorry, but I don't find your position here all that compelling. I definitely don't think the 24 hour check-in is as benign as you are making it out to be.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

I'm sure they could have found a different, and much less intrusive, mechanism for just that. And it would have been to their benefit too, as it would have lessened backlash considerably.

Sorry, but I don't find your position here all that compelling. I definitely don't think the 24 hour check-in is as benign as you are making it out to be.

Benign? He never said that. Of course the 24 hour requirement is not benign, no one believe it is. 0utf0xZer0 isn't supporting MS here, he is merely telling you how it can be used to delete games from people's hard drives.

The requirement allows MS to access and control the Console daily. This is a big deal as it means no matter what you do with the console on your end, MS can reverse it. The only way you could stop it is by hacking it and render it offline forever. This in combination with the always-on mandatory camera and microphone, and you get the means for MS to get footage of your living room EVERY DAY. The only way to stop this is by unplugging the console from the power point.

[0utf0xZer0]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

I'm sure they could have found a different, much simpler, and much less intrusive, mechanism for just that (like something that just automatically removes the game from your account upon the very moment of sale). And it would have been to their benefit too, as it would have lessened backlash considerably.

And if the console doesn't receive an update from Microsoft's servers that the game has been removed from your account, the game will still be playable on the console.

I'm really not sure what other purpose Microsoft would have for such a check in.

(Edit: For those who suggest it's so the console can be used as a spy camera... Microsoft has said they won't be using Kinect for that purpose. Do I believe them? For the moment, yes - it would make a mockery of the "Google doesn't respect your privacy" message in some of their recent marketing if they didn't. If they change their minds, it'll be like Sony removing the ability to install Linux on your PS3 - they'll do it later once the console is established. And to be honest I don't think they have the guts to try it. It's not like the customer is never going to find out, given that the primary reason to get that data would be to sell it to marketters.)

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

The only way to stop this is by unplugging the console from the power point.

Pfft, that's what you think, but just wait until the XBOne.Two refresh, where MS will secretly install backup battery so it can watch you while you sleep!

[Vajra]

Originally Posted by kyp275

Pfft, that's what you think, but just wait until the XBOne.Two refresh, where MS will secretly install backup battery so it can watch you while you sleep!

Then there are only two options; 1) destroy it with fire or 2) don't buy it period (I prefer the second one personally)

[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

He never said that. Of course the 24 hour requirement is not benign, no one believe it is. 0utf0xZer0 isn't supporting MS here, he is merely telling you how it can be used to delete games from people's hard drives.

Sure, I don't doubt that's one way it can be used. And that may even be the pretext they give for it being there. But I really, really doubt it's the absolute only way they could ensure that when you sell your game, it's actually removed from your account.

I mean, come on, does anybody here really think that the tech guys at Microsoft can't come up with more than just one way of ensuring this? I'm very confident that they could have come up with a way that would have met with less of a backlash than this 24 hour check-in thing.

So, imo, the real reason for this 24 hour check-in is...

This in combination with the always-on mandatory camera and microphone, and you get the means for MS to get footage of your living room EVERY DAY.

Bingo. Free, daily market research on every customer. Such a thing would be truly invaluable.

Originally Posted by 0utf0xZer0

And if the console doesn't receive an update from Microsoft's servers that the game has been removed from your account, the game will still be playable on the console.

So Micorsoft's servers sends an update to the console at the moment of sale. Done.

(Edit: For those who suggest it's so the console can be used as a spy camera... Microsoft has said they won't be using Kinect for that purpose. Do I believe them? For the moment, yes - it would make a mockery of the "Google doesn't respect your privacy" message in some of their recent marketing if they didn't.)

So they wouldn't do it just because they're afraid it would make them look like hypocrites? That certainly doesn't stop politicians from doing and saying things that make them look like hypocrites, and politicians do it all the time.

And if Microsoft was so concerned about customer backlash they wouldn't be pulling half of what they're pulling anyway.

[0utf0xZer0]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

So Micorsoft's servers sends an update to the console at the moment of sale. Done.

The point of the 24 hour check in is to ensure that the console actually goes online sometime to receive that message. The system doesn't work if the console doesn't come online.

So they wouldn't do it just because they're afraid it would make them look like hypocrites? That certainly doesn't stop politicians from doing and saying things that make them look like hypocrites, and politicians do it all the time.

Was the second part of my edit up when you quoted that? I think any company that gets caught spying on people in their living rooms is going to have to worry about a lot more than looking like hypocrites.

Furthermore, as I've point out earlier in this thread, it's well within Microsoft's technical ability to track every single thing you do on your computer. They don't. They collect certain data that's useful for product development, such as debugging info. What you're suggesting goes against company's track record on privacy. Annoying licensing practices, on the other hand, are completely consistent with Microsoft's track record.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Phirk

Then there are only two options; 1) destroy it with fire or 2) don't buy it period (I prefer the second one personally)

You forget the other (only) option - nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.

[synaesthetic]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

Bingo. Free, daily market research on every customer. Such a thing would be truly invaluable.