|
LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLL.
Guess Microsoft finally realized how stupid their online policy was.
Thank god.
When 95% of the people is flaming on your Xbox twitter and facebook, you know you messed up.
At least now there is still competition.
Though PS4 is still ahead with the lower prize point and the damage to Microsoft XBONE brand.
That's why Microsoft.
Don't fuck with us the consumers.
Overall, this is a good thing for everybody.
At least Xbox fans can play offline now.
|
On June 20 2013 07:56 Jophess wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:49 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:44 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:40 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:35 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity). The 24hr checks were clearly for the family sharing and discless play since both of those are now gone. Family sharing maybe, but discless play is still possible if you buy the digital copies. Right, but not anymore when you buy the disc. Being able to buy a disc, install it, and forget about it would be awesome, and it would let you avoid downloading 15gb+ for every game you buy. They could still do that if they remove the ability to sell used games. Actually, depending on how they had it set up it might still be possible with some tweaks... at least I can't think of a reason that it wouldn't... or I am struggling to come up with an idea of why it isn't possible anymore. They can't allow it now without changing something because I could install my disc, then give it to somebody else so they could install it, etc. Before, the disc was basically a serial key for the digital version, which proved that you owned the game. The 24hr checks made sure you haven't given the game away or sold it back to an authorized retailer.
I know what it did before, but before with discless you could play as long as you did the check-in. Do the discs have serial numbers to link it to your account? Or what prevented you from giving the disc to a friend after you install it and link the game to your account proving ownership?
|
On June 20 2013 08:00 FakeDeath wrote:
LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLL.
Guess Microsoft finally realized how stupid their online policy was.
Thank god.
When 95% of the people is flaming on your Xbox twitter and facebook, you know you messed up.
At least now there is still competition.
Though PS4 is still ahead with the lower prize point and the damage to Microsoft XBONE brand.
I doubt it had much to do with the people around the community flaming them. Im sure MS knew that the complaining wouldn't stop no matter what they did, thats what the internet does, complain. As you will notice, people are still trashing the Xbox One. Sony just beat them up so bad at E3 that they had to make a change.
|
I fully expected to see them flip-flop like this after E3. No way could they sit there and do nothing after the beatdown Sony put on them. It still makes them look terrible, but it's better than doing nothing.
All of this doesn't even matter to me, though, since I was never going to touch this system or any other that Microsoft builds. It did make me $50 though, since I bet a friend we would see an announcement like this within 2 weeks of E3.
|
On June 20 2013 08:01 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:56 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:49 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:44 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:40 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:35 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity). The 24hr checks were clearly for the family sharing and discless play since both of those are now gone. Family sharing maybe, but discless play is still possible if you buy the digital copies. Right, but not anymore when you buy the disc. Being able to buy a disc, install it, and forget about it would be awesome, and it would let you avoid downloading 15gb+ for every game you buy. They could still do that if they remove the ability to sell used games. Actually, depending on how they had it set up it might still be possible with some tweaks... at least I can't think of a reason that it wouldn't... or I am struggling to come up with an idea of why it isn't possible anymore. They can't allow it now without changing something because I could install my disc, then give it to somebody else so they could install it, etc. Before, the disc was basically a serial key for the digital version, which proved that you owned the game. The 24hr checks made sure you haven't given the game away or sold it back to an authorized retailer. I know what it did before, but before with discless you could play as long as you did the check-in. Do the discs have serial numbers to link it to your account? Or what prevented you from giving the disc to a friend after you install it and link the game to your account proving ownership?
Im sure it was like some PC games that required a serial number in order to actually play it. That would have made the most sense.
|
On June 20 2013 08:01 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 07:56 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:49 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:44 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:40 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:35 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:10 Blisse wrote:
Damn, I'm sad that they went back on the stuff. Like, I get why they felt compelled to do so since you're supposed to listen to community feedback, but I don't think the consumers were right in this case, and that Microsoft actually had a good vision that just received too much backlash to follow through on. We'll see next generation how this progresses (and whatever else Microsoft has in plan). I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity). The 24hr checks were clearly for the family sharing and discless play since both of those are now gone. Family sharing maybe, but discless play is still possible if you buy the digital copies. Right, but not anymore when you buy the disc. Being able to buy a disc, install it, and forget about it would be awesome, and it would let you avoid downloading 15gb+ for every game you buy. They could still do that if they remove the ability to sell used games. Actually, depending on how they had it set up it might still be possible with some tweaks... at least I can't think of a reason that it wouldn't... or I am struggling to come up with an idea of why it isn't possible anymore. They can't allow it now without changing something because I could install my disc, then give it to somebody else so they could install it, etc. Before, the disc was basically a serial key for the digital version, which proved that you owned the game. The 24hr checks made sure you haven't given the game away or sold it back to an authorized retailer. I know what it did before, but before with discless you could play as long as you did the check-in. Do the discs have serial numbers to link it to your account? Or what prevented you from giving the disc to a friend after you install it and link the game to your account proving ownership?
Every game had to be installed on your hard drive to play, no matter if they were disc or digital. I obviously don't know how it actually worked, but there must have been some kind of license (which was checked daily) attached to it in order for them to prevent duplicate installs and allow their "authorized" reselling.
Edit: Something similar to Steam where once you activate the game, it's yours.
|
11589 Posts
So Microsoft wanted to make Xbox One more like PC gaming, console players vehemently rejected it, and people are still trashing Microsoft for changing their stance on DRM and always online?
I can't begin to imagine how all of you rationalize your hate towards Microsoft when PC gaming has had these sort of features for forever.
|
I don't think it's haters as much as MS trying to bite the bullet and admit to lying out their ass to secure more bucks from gamers while not providing anything in return.
|
11589 Posts
On June 20 2013 08:07 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
I don't think it's haters as much as MS trying to bite the bullet and admit to lying out their ass to secure more bucks from gamers while not providing anything in return.
So people don't see a reason for always online and DRM?
I'd rather have the developer getting money from sales of its game than GameStop. Maybe other people disagree.
|
Its sad it took a massive backlash for this to happen. It should never have been that way in the first place.
I'm sure the preorders been massively skewed in PS4s favour helped scare the shit out of them too.
Kudos for getting rid of your DRM MS, now I'll buy your system when it gets to a reasonable price point. Hopefully we can also get a SKU without Kinect for launch...
|
On June 20 2013 08:07 Jophess wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 08:01 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:56 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:49 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:44 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:40 TheRabidDeer wrote:On June 20 2013 07:35 Jophess wrote:On June 20 2013 07:33 jinorazi wrote:On June 20 2013 07:24 Blisse wrote:On June 20 2013 07:14 TheRabidDeer wrote:
[quote]
I don't understand how you're still defending it. What features are lost because of this? Making people start to come to terms with the idea that you're soon always going to be online, even though you don't like it. Basically that. Doing this changes nothing about the console really for me so I don't see a "victory" in this if that makes sense. I guess it's a "consumer wins" thing where taking away these features don't really negatively affect the console and allows more people the ability to use the console (+ diminishing the backlash), but it means that future endeavours for companies who want to push for always-online things (even though lots already exist) are going to take a look at Microsoft's turnaround here and tell themselves they can't do it because look at how bad the backlash is going to be. But honestly I don't think for a lot of society (EU, other places?), our infrastructure is ready for this however much I would prefer it. But as a resident in a major city in North America, the infrastructure is available to the point where I don't care whether it does the activation check. I'm still definitely positive that the future of our technology is going to be "always online", so I don't see as much problem from the 24 hour activation check as others do either. And we also didn't get to see Microsoft's plan for the used games/DRM/Steam/iTunes-like system to unfold so we can't really comment on whether it was a loss or a gain here, but since I have about 0 used games I see it as a loss since we could've had potentially lower prices. its having the option of going offline, taking it somewhere without internet, whatever. you're right, majority of people who buy this wont have lack of internet problem but the option was always there to play offline. xbox basically removed this option without giving anything in return. they could have allowed both (now they have it). always online is fine (auto update, w/e), but i want to be offline too (no internet). so fuck periodic check up. there is zero reason why offline mode can't be added, unless, its for DRM (hello simcity). The 24hr checks were clearly for the family sharing and discless play since both of those are now gone. Family sharing maybe, but discless play is still possible if you buy the digital copies. Right, but not anymore when you buy the disc. Being able to buy a disc, install it, and forget about it would be awesome, and it would let you avoid downloading 15gb+ for every game you buy. They could still do that if they remove the ability to sell used games. Actually, depending on how they had it set up it might still be possible with some tweaks... at least I can't think of a reason that it wouldn't... or I am struggling to come up with an idea of why it isn't possible anymore. They can't allow it now without changing something because I could install my disc, then give it to somebody else so they could install it, etc. Before, the disc was basically a serial key for the digital version, which proved that you owned the game. The 24hr checks made sure you haven't given the game away or sold it back to an authorized retailer. I know what it did before, but before with discless you could play as long as you did the check-in. Do the discs have serial numbers to link it to your account? Or what prevented you from giving the disc to a friend after you install it and link the game to your account proving ownership? Every game had to be installed on your hard drive to play, no matter if they were disc or digital. I obviously don't know how it actually worked, but there must have been some kind of license (which was checked daily) attached to it in order for them to prevent duplicate installs and allow their "authorized" reselling. Edit: Something similar to Steam where once you activate the game, it's yours.
Alright, so lets say it is like that. Why can't they allow it to be played discless then? With the check-in they had a way to ensure that when you sold it to a retailer that it would become unlinked from your account somehow... that should still be in play even without a check-in. Right?
EDIT: Example being the next time you go online it'll become unlinked. Which means you cant really play any online games without it updating your account.
|
On June 20 2013 08:10 yamato77 wrote:I'd rather have the developer getting money from sales of its game than GameStop. Maybe other people disagree.
Hey, get this...I'd rather pay once for the game, have it be my property, and then let it be up to me whether or not I sell it privately to a mate or to any company I want. I don't even sell my games but still screw people trying to get rid of my rights.
The irony of course is they weren't cutting gamestop out anyway, it would've been one of the only places you could sell your games, meaning less competition for them, lower resale value for you.
|
On June 20 2013 08:07 yamato77 wrote:
So Microsoft wanted to make Xbox One more like PC gaming, console players vehemently rejected it, and people are still trashing Microsoft for changing their stance on DRM and always online?
I can't begin to imagine how all of you rationalize your hate towards Microsoft when PC gaming has had these sort of features for forever.
I guess you're new here? Well welcome to the internet! Email your address and we'll send you your starter package of pitchforks and bottled rage and instructions on how to never be happy with anything unless its awesome and free.
But like I said before, this is good news for PC gamers. Expect the PC to start getting more exclusives so thats good. Expect even more microtransactions and DLC for consoles so developers can actually recoup their money.
|
XBONE should be called the Xbox 180 now.
|
11589 Posts
On June 20 2013 08:13 Elwar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 08:10 yamato77 wrote:I'd rather have the developer getting money from sales of its game than GameStop. Maybe other people disagree. Hey, get this...I'd rather pay once for the game, have it be my property, and then let it be up to me whether or not I sell it privately to a mate or to any company I want. I don't even sell my games but still screw people trying to get rid of my rights. The irony of course is they weren't cutting gamestop out anyway, it would've been one of the only places you could sell your games, meaning less competition for them, lower resale value for you.
But the game isn't your property when you buy it. The game is the intellectual property of the developer/publisher. So I fully support the idea that they should have more control over the sale of their game, yes. You don't have a right to anything but to play the game when you buy it.
On June 20 2013 08:14 takingbackoj wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 08:07 yamato77 wrote:
So Microsoft wanted to make Xbox One more like PC gaming, console players vehemently rejected it, and people are still trashing Microsoft for changing their stance on DRM and always online?
I can't begin to imagine how all of you rationalize your hate towards Microsoft when PC gaming has had these sort of features for forever. I guess you're new here? Well welcome to the internet! Email your address and we'll send you your starter package of pitchforks and bottled rage and instructions on how to never be happy with anything unless its awesome and free.
Just because it is the status quo doesn't mean it shouldn't be challenged.
|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JZOCnud.jpg)
Someone had to post it 
|
On June 20 2013 08:15 FakeDeath wrote:
XBONE should be called the Xbox 180 now.
Pretty petty.
On June 20 2013 08:18 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 08:13 Elwar wrote:On June 20 2013 08:10 yamato77 wrote:I'd rather have the developer getting money from sales of its game than GameStop. Maybe other people disagree. Hey, get this...I'd rather pay once for the game, have it be my property, and then let it be up to me whether or not I sell it privately to a mate or to any company I want. I don't even sell my games but still screw people trying to get rid of my rights. The irony of course is they weren't cutting gamestop out anyway, it would've been one of the only places you could sell your games, meaning less competition for them, lower resale value for you. But the game isn't your property when you buy it. The game is the intellectual property of the developer/publisher. So I fully support the idea that they should have more control over the sale of their game, yes. You don't have a right to anything but to play the game when you buy it. Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 08:14 takingbackoj wrote:On June 20 2013 08:07 yamato77 wrote:
So Microsoft wanted to make Xbox One more like PC gaming, console players vehemently rejected it, and people are still trashing Microsoft for changing their stance on DRM and always online?
I can't begin to imagine how all of you rationalize your hate towards Microsoft when PC gaming has had these sort of features for forever. I guess you're new here? Well welcome to the internet! Email your address and we'll send you your starter package of pitchforks and bottled rage and instructions on how to never be happy with anything unless its awesome and free. Just because it is the status quo doesn't mean it shouldn't be challenged.
The contents, ideas, art and such are the IP of the dev/publisher. However, that disc that I buy which contains the content to be played is mine. Or should be. If I buy the disc, I have the right to use that disc how I see fit.
|
On June 20 2013 08:18 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 08:13 Elwar wrote:On June 20 2013 08:10 yamato77 wrote:I'd rather have the developer getting money from sales of its game than GameStop. Maybe other people disagree. Hey, get this...I'd rather pay once for the game, have it be my property, and then let it be up to me whether or not I sell it privately to a mate or to any company I want. I don't even sell my games but still screw people trying to get rid of my rights. The irony of course is they weren't cutting gamestop out anyway, it would've been one of the only places you could sell your games, meaning less competition for them, lower resale value for you. But the game isn't your property when you buy it. The game is the intellectual property of the developer/publisher. So I fully support the idea that they should have more control over the sale of their game, yes. You don't have a right to anything but to play the game when you buy it. Show nested quote +On June 20 2013 08:14 takingbackoj wrote:On June 20 2013 08:07 yamato77 wrote:
So Microsoft wanted to make Xbox One more like PC gaming, console players vehemently rejected it, and people are still trashing Microsoft for changing their stance on DRM and always online?
I can't begin to imagine how all of you rationalize your hate towards Microsoft when PC gaming has had these sort of features for forever. I guess you're new here? Well welcome to the internet! Email your address and we'll send you your starter package of pitchforks and bottled rage and instructions on how to never be happy with anything unless its awesome and free. Just because it is the status quo doesn't mean it shouldn't be challenged.
That is your opinion really.
Majority of the people want to own their games and do whatever they want with them(trading,lending,borrowing).
Microsoft clearly caved in because 90% of the people clearly want to own their games.
They clearly seen the pre-ordered and knew PS4 was stomping hardcore that it forced them to change their online policy.
|
On June 20 2013 08:18 yamato77 wrote:
Just because it is the status quo doesn't mean it shouldn't be challenged.
Hey I agree. In the end you won't change much but I respect the effort.
|
On June 20 2013 08:18 yamato77 wrote:
But the game isn't your property when you buy it. The game is the intellectual property of the developer/publisher. So I fully support the idea that they should have more control over the sale of their game, yes. You don't have a right to anything but to play the game when you buy it..
The IP is the IP of the publisher, the disc I buy is mine. Just like a book is my property once I've bought it, I can do whatever the fuck I want with the game. Resell it, snap it in half, download mods, eventually use an emulator to play it etc.
Publishers can put meaningless EULAs on it or whatever, but they're just that, meaningless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
