Xbox One

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/connected

Once a day DRM. You can use mobile broadband. There's really 0 chance that I'll ever go through 24 hours without having an internet connection or mobile broadband unless I don't have power and can't even use an Xbox.

I just believe you shouldn't be forced to connect to their game servers to play your game. Regardless of how much or how little they do it. Oh wait, you're really only essentially renting the game from them.

Yes, it's called licensing, I don't see how it would affect me or anyone I know in any way. There are also some great benefits from it such as always being updated and never having to wait. I'm not saying I'm going to get it, but the Xbox One hate train is traveling way too fast. Just about everything the Xbox One does (with an exception to the always connected Kinnect if that is the case) would actually benefit me if I had the console. As someone from the States, I'd pick it over the PS4 any day unless they really messed up with their game catalog.
 

WildFire

Warrior of Linux
It's the principle. You buying an Xbox One will only encourage corporation behaviour like this to lock down the rights of the consumer and to allow your government to spy on you, simply put. Anyhow, I've made my points. You're more than entitled to your opinion, even if it's a stupid one.
 

3lionz

Legions Developer
http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/connected
Once a day DRM. You can use mobile broadband. There's really 0 chance that I'll ever go through 24 hours without having an internet connection or mobile broadband unless I don't have power and can't even use an Xbox.
While I can see the point that it may not directly affect you personally, I can see why people are very against the idea of 24 hour DRM. For those who don't have a stable internet connection (mobile or otherwise) this could be a problem. I personally do not like the idea that people are forced to verify for a service that will probably be circumvented anyway. Not only does it not seem necessary but its also a deal breaker to a lot of users. "Automatic updates" as a feature does not really seem to cut it for me.

I got nothing to hide. Especially nothing I ever did on my 360.

It's less about what you have to hide and the principle of the thing. Everyone should have a right to privacy and this potential invasion of it is a big problem,
Censorship follows quickly behind privacy. Not only that, but it is a lot BIGGER than "just what happened on your 360".

Personally I do not like being spied on, despite it being only a potential that the information could be used. ESPECIALLY if the thing that has this system has a camera and a microphone that must be connected in order for the system to function.

Again it is VERY paranoid to make leaps and jumps like that, but I can't say I am surprised about "how fast the hate train is moving". Normally they need a reason, of which they now have several.


I don't think I will be purchasing either, looking at the fact I have not played my PS3 for several months now... I think I will just wait for this mess to unfold.
 

SeymourGore

Flatulent Cherub
The idea behind the used games restrictions doesn't bother me too much (depending on their implementation of it). I think it's fair for a publisher to temporarily restrict new game releases from being resold to avoid situations where Gamestop is selling used copies of new releases for $5 cheaper than the new price (I reckon the publisher is not seeing a whole lot of money from that transaction). If MS and friends went the Steam route with decent weekly and holiday sales, this would all be a moot point for me. Also, Seymour's predicting Sony will introduce a similar controlling used game sales ability to publishers for its PS4.

I really want to see more information about this '10 family login' feature, which would be really cool if it allows me to buy one copy of a game and both myself and Baby Gore can play it on separate consoles at the same time.

The 24-hour DRM is a pain and should be rethought. Like some others have said, it alienates rural users, military personnel, anyone who doesn't have access to a internet connection. Sure, a good chunk of people can make this requirement, but why is this even a requirement? If the client is unable to connect to the internet, he'll only be playing offline singleplayer games (unless this thing has a LAN mode). And once the offline client has access to the internet, then the automatic updates can be performed before the client can play. Why must the system be rendered useless for gaming if it goes passed that 24 hours? And what happens if there's unforeseen network outages (ala the attack on Sony's PSN a few years back)? We'd be stuck with an expensive blu-ray player. If it's to combat piracy, sure, I can see a bit of that point of view, but with that said this system is running PC architecture and will get hacked for 3rd party uses with or without a 24 hour DRM scheme.

What about bans? If Johnny Mukhtar starts screaming racial slurs against opponents in a multiplayer game and gets himself banned from XBox Live, will he still have access to his 'offline singleplayer' games? What about when the system is at its EOL and a new Xbox is out, are we going to get a guarantee our old content will transfer over to the new system or that the DRM servers will be disabled or last indefinitely so we can still use our X1 content? I dunno, still too much unanswered stuff for me to be comfortable about it yet.

As for the Kinect, I still find the thing creepy, but I doubt MS will use it to view my impressively hairy, naked body. They've recently announced that the Kinect can be turned completely off. If that's the case, why even make it mandatory for the thing to be connected to the console?

Also, I'm really liking the fact that all games will be played off of the HDD (the optical discs are just to get the code to your system faster) and that games will be available both digitally and via retailers at the games release date.
 
The things that will REALLY kill the Xbox One are the price vs PS4 ($500 vs $400) and the dumb always connected Kinnect (if that does end up being the case). Also, the Xbox costs more overseas comparatively I believe.

I can tell you no casual console gamer in America cares about the DRM and probably wouldn't even see the resell restrictions coming before they bought one, but the price will kill it. MS definitely *danced* up.
 

Royalty

The Aussie
The things that will REALLY kill the Xbox One are the price vs PS4 ($500 vs $400) and the dumb always connected Kinnect (if that does end up being the case). Also, the Xbox costs more overseas comparatively I believe.

I can tell you no casual console gamer in America cares about the DRM and probably wouldn't even see the resell restrictions coming before they bought one, but the price will kill it. MS definitely *danced* up.
Still experiencing conflicting emotions... I don't know if Halo 5 will be enough to convince me to buy the shitbox that is ShitBox One...
 

Royalty

The Aussie
  1. Type "xboxdone.com" into your URL bar. (Didn't attach a hyperlink, so I can prove the link is what it seems to be)
  2. Also,
 

Maxter

Member
Well, now there's no more 24 hour check, no more region lock, no more used games block. Oh, and also we got offline play now. Pretty much everything that the PS4 is providing. I guess they were really feeling the pressure this time. Still, I understand what they were trying to do. I'm actually for a more digitalized gaming.

In my opinion, what Microsoft could do right now is to allow gamers the freedom of sharing, lending and reselling games digitally just like they do with their physical copies. For example, let's say I bought both the digital and physical copies of one game.

First of all, they could release that digital copy of the game at a, let's say 25% cheaper rate than that of it's physical copy. There will be no special authentication needed since the game is bought digitally. The gamer can then just install and play his game offline, if he wants to. Obviously he'd need internet to lend the game to his friend, but it'll be more like "hey xbox, this guy is my friend, so allow him to download this game from your server and play it". You could even do this on your phone. Just get on your account and tick the box next to the friend you want to lend the game to, and press share or something. And then maybe a notification will come up that your friend won't be able to play online. That's all right. Heck, it'd be even better if they let us choose which one of us can play both offline and online modes and who can't(you could do this on Steam if you're sharing an account with your friend). I mean why not? Maybe I'll buy a game that I like single player more but don't use the multiplayer part of it, so why not let my friend have access to it, since I'm not using it. And when I do try to use it, it could block me but could provide me with an option to switch it up. Meaning my friend will get the offline only mode and I'll get full online access to it. And then, if he's too bothered about that, I can just tell him to go buy his own copy of the game. This way, gamers save a lot of money, and you'll have more and more people turn to buying the digital versions of their games. As time goes on, people will slowly stop buying used games from companies like Gamestop.

Secondly, digital copies don't die, don't get lost, or in some cases, won't stay with your friends like physical copies. I remember the times when my friends took my PS2 game discs, but never returned them to me. Most times, I just forgot whether I gave the disc to somebody or just misplaced it. Maybe I do remember that I lent it to somebody but can't remember who I lent it to. I don't know if it ever happened to any of you, but during these times, my friends would just keep it quiet. They'll spout crap like "you gave it to me? Hmmm, you know what Max, I think you did, but I clearly remember giving it back to you":rolleyes:. Anyway, all I'm saying is that the games are always available on your account, if you bought them digitally, and that kind of crap will not happen to you.

Give people an option of whether gamers can allow their friends to view their online game libraries and send you requests of wanting to trade games or just lend it. My point to all this is that if digital games can have similar methods of sharing as physical versions do, then they will almost always be the chosen method of shopping. I got a 2mbps connection, so buying or lending digital copies is going to be hard for me, but that's why I still got the physical copy option. That doesn't mean I'll stick to it forever. The moment I get a better connection, I'll immediately start getting all my games from the online store. Microsoft just needs to encourage people to buy digital copies over physical ones by showing them the aforementioned advantages of owning the digital versions(while also providing them), instead of forcing people to change their ways immediately, and taking away the freedom of choice from the gamer.

I see a lot of people posting online, how the gamers "won". Not really. If anything, it's companies like Gamestop that really won. In the long run, thanks to the used game market, gamers and publishers will still get hurt, while Gamestop will continue to make money off of both of them. Still, if Microsoft can provide valuable services to people owning digital copies like the ones I mentioned above, they won't need to worry about the used game market.
 

SeymourGore

Flatulent Cherub
I think what really lost it for MS for their drm plans was their lack of info and ineffectiveness to communicate the positives of their system. Personally, I think it'd be great to have a Steam-style system where I can just login to my account and have access to my games on whichever X1 system. Some people assumed that being digital the games would have a lower pricetag and more sales, however MS never really commented on this, so who knows what they were thinking there.

Oh, and leaked information came out about the 'Family Sharing'. It was sounding more like a demo/preview mode (sorta like what the redesigned IA had going for it). Basically you could play a specific amount of time on the shared title before you were bumped to the marketplace with the option to purchase the game. Not nearly as cool as what people assumed it was going to be (and again MS not really describing it terribly well).

I think this will be a transitional stage between retail and digital, sure you could argue that the previous (PS3, X360, and Wii) could be described as a transitional stage for digital distribution, but the difference being here is that full AAA titles will be available alongside their retail based siblings from day one.
 

WildFire

Warrior of Linux
I think what really lost it for MS for their drm plans was their lack of info and ineffectiveness to communicate the positives of their system. Personally, I think it'd be great to have a Steam-style system where I can just login to my account and have access to my games on whichever X1 system. Some people assumed that being digital the games would have a lower pricetag and more sales, however MS never really commented on this, so who knows what they were thinking there.


I completely agree, lack of info about the system really killed it for them. I was only ever against the 24-hour online check. I believe that a steam-style system would be completely agreeable and would have an ability to do something along the lines of steam offline.

Although, I am still against the kinetic always having to be plugged in for the system to function. That's just creepy.
 

Dabbleh

Legions Developer
I love how they did this U-turn to cover up the fact that the Kinect will still be watching you 24/7.
 
Top