You guys are angry that you have to put discs in the console? Really?

Microsoft has already announced a fix for that:

A multi-disc disc-changer version for $600.

Oddly enough.... that would sell.

Meanwhile, Steam looks like they're positioning to adopt some of the positive aspects that the Xbone was trying to deliver, like the ability to share digital versions of games with your friends:

http://kotaku.com/steam-might-soon-let-you-share-your-games-with-your-fri-514219133

If they follow through on that (and publishers allow it so we can do it with games other than the ones Valve makes) it'd be great, not being able to lend/borrow games is one of the biggest problems with digital distribution and DRM, i got a bunch of great games that people i know wants to try before they buy(and there are a bunch of games i would like to try before i decide if i wish to buy them or not) and i don't want to lend someone my whole account (since that would lock me out of all my other games), Such a move might even boost sales (if it is only used for games that the owner and the borrower are likely to want to play together)

Are you okay? Mentally I mean. Your incoherent rambling makes no sense, and has no basis in reality.

Wow, you're such a nice, 30-odd-something-year-old guy! Yes, that was such an incoherent ramble of mine. How silly of me. Let me clear it up for someone like you!

I don't understand why people are complaining that Microsoft reversed their policies, essentially rendering the One a regular updated console. No one complained that Sony made an offline, shared-games-are-allowed console, but almost everybody complained about the One's need to check-in every 24 hours, and the lack of support for sharing games. And now that Microsoft have reversed those policies, people like you and that Gizmodo author are raising a big stink, saying how awful it is, and now it's more like an "updated 360" and not really new at all, when it is. It's really silly to say otherwise.

Here's what people (like you) are complaining about...

1 - Having to use actual discs and change them. What a tragedy.
2 - No required internet. Gee, a shame for people who may not be able to sustain a good connection. People like me.
3 - Being able to trade, buy, sell and play used games. People are actually complaining about this! I can't believe it!

Playing used games won't destroy the industry. No matter what DRM some company tries to implement, there will always be piracy, regardless of what companies might say about DRM preventing it.

My other point was that nobody complained about the PS4 being offline-ready and was able to share used games. But now that Microsoft have reversed their stance, suddenly everybody is calling the console "worse". I really don't get it.

Yes, I'm fine mentally, thanks very much. Did this clear it up at all for you, buddy?

Hey guys. Play nice. It's only hardware. :)

With that said, all of you are suckas! WiiU FTW! :P

I lived in South Africa for a couple of years, and it was there that I realized how big of an issue Internet really is. In South Africa:

• Internet is expensive (read: the majority cannot afford it every month)
• Internet is slow
• Internet is spotty (horribly so)
• Internet is capped (you typically get a 1-2 GB a month, though even the wealthy people I knew typically didn't have more than 5GB a month)

That alone completely changed how I viewed Internet and technology. Where I'm from in the US, broadband is the norm; it's uncapped, it's fast, it's occasionally spotty but rarely for more than a couple hours, etc. I just assumed the rest of the world had a similar Internet connection to mine.

But they don't.

If Microsoft wants to target an international audience (or even a wide national audience), it's absolutely critical that they backtrack on what they originally planned. I know people who will save up (some for a very long time) to get a new gaming console and a couple games. But they can't afford the constant, never ending drain of money that a high speed Internet connection would require (and even then, the Internet sucks so bad they can't even really get high speed Internet, let alone a stable connection).

Some people, and some parts of the world, are ready for a technological gaming revolution, the kind that the Xbox One was aiming for (with its Internet requirements and all). But the reality is that a lot of the word isn't ready for that. They're still catching up.

...snip...

I don't lend games to anyone now. It's simply not feasible to send someone in a different state a disc and expect them to send it back once their done. I've given games away to some friends that way, but I certainly didn't expect them back. With a feature like this, I would have obviously been able to share and borrow games MUCH more frequently.

but that comes back to my second point, huge game downloads are completely impractical for someone in my position. I can play multiplayer easily, and do the daily checks. but digital sharing/downloading is way outside of my reach.

And for people like you, because of how the system would have worked, you wouldn't have had to download the game -- You could have borrowed or rented the game disc locally, put it in your box where it would be ripped to the hard drive, and then you would have been able to continue playing it without the disc alongside your friend who actually owned the game. People still don't get this -- XBone discs were, and mostly still are, just a distribution mechanism no different than download. Literally the only thing that's changed now is that they're putting an in-perpetuity license for the game onto the disc itself.

Here's what people (like you) are complaining about...

1 - Having to use actual discs and change them. What a tragedy.
2 - No required internet. Gee, a shame for people who may not be able to sustain a good connection. People like me.
3 - Being able to trade, buy, sell and play used games. People are actually complaining about this! I can't believe it!

My other point was that nobody complained about the PS4 being offline-ready and was able to share used games. But now that Microsoft have reversed their stance, suddenly everybody is calling the console "worse". I really don't get it.

1 - It's 2013 now, when was the last time you had to put a disc or any other storage medium into your PC? Your iPod? Your Smartphone? Its not the end of the world, but it would have been nice to have your entire library on the console, and not have to get up and pull the game from the shelf.

2 - I agree they needed to loosen the 24-hour checkin, but only that. If they did a one-time check at install, combined with an on-disc license for those who lack any internet at all, the problem could have been solved without completely axing all the *good* things that the "DRM" enabled.

3 - It is. The point of the "DRM" system that's so maligned was not to prevent used games sales, but to enable you to sell and gift your digital game downloads as well! Now we can sell our physical discs hassle-free, but we can't share, sell or trade our digital copies at all. That's such a step forward.

"DRM" for all the bad rap that it has, is not an inherently-evil technology. Its the attached policies that can be evil.

They're calling it worse because it is worse. This is a classic case of being wary of what you wish for. Things are back to exactly where they were, and in the process we lost all the good things that were on offer. But its to be expected, because Microsoft let the message get so out of hand that no one actually had the information necessary to judge the value proposition that was being offered, instead, the angry mobs grabbed their pitchforks, Sony made them look like absolute clowns at E3, and some genius in the Xbox division decided that the only way to save face was to do a complete 180, instead of tweaking the system that wasn't fundamentally broken to begin with. The sheer ineptitude with which this whole thing has been handled from the very beginning is mind-boggling. Heads should roll for how badly it was handled. If not now, expect to see some high-profile departures from the Xbox division within 6 months from launch, and a major shakeup in marketing/PR.

If Microsoft were smart they would have left physical disc licensing as it is
and announced all the good news related to strong DRM-style licensing for download only games

"We will allow you to share downloaded games with up to 10 friends" would have been an PR coup!

Muppetsoft why are you so confused? Oh yes, too many software people in one place, common sense goes out the window ...

Personally I love watching them fail again and again and again ...

You wouldn't mean something like....

So obviously, I don't understand how all of this works exactly. If you have a game from disc, then you shouldn't be able to lend digitally. If you've downloaded a game from the cloud, then you should be able to. So if you digitally lend the game to your friend, then you should be effectively locked out from the game, until your friend gives it back. Why can't this work without (the check-in once a day) DRM?

And replace lock-out with "let 10 friends play".

...snip...

I don't lend games to anyone now. It's simply not feasible to send someone in a different state a disc and expect them to send it back once their done. I've given games away to some friends that way, but I certainly didn't expect them back. With a feature like this, I would have obviously been able to share and borrow games MUCH more frequently.

but that comes back to my second point, huge game downloads are completely impractical for someone in my position. I can play multiplayer easily, and do the daily checks. but digital sharing/downloading is way outside of my reach.

And for people like you, because of how the system would have worked, you wouldn't have had to download the game -- You could have borrowed or rented the game disc locally, put it in your box where it would be ripped to the hard drive, and then you would have been able to continue playing it without the disc alongside your friend who actually owned the game. People still don't get this -- XBone discs were, and mostly still are, just a distribution mechanism no different than download. Literally the only thing that's changed now is that they're putting an in-perpetuity license for the game onto the disc itself.

you missed the point, my argument wasn't about me going and buying a disk, and then turning out i had to dl a 20gb game. no i understand that buying the disk ment i didn't have to dl the game. his argument was that, "o i don't have to actually give my disk to my friend to lend it to them, even if they are on the other side of the planet, i can lend it to them, and they will just dl the game." but for someone in my position, being lent a digital game(where i don't have the physical disk) is completely impractical.

also, let's look at this from another point of view. what's the point of buying single player games, if all i have to do is wait for one of my xbox live buddies to get bored of it? I'd think this would hurt the industry more than used sales. it'd also force devs to always shoe-horn in some type of multiplayer component, even for campaigns.

1. You know what year this is right? Maybe you're okay being stuck with a gaming limitation from the 90's, but I'm ready to shed some of that burden.

then be happy you can still buy them digitally. don't see the problem you are having.

2. You know what year this is right? The vast majority of people who will buy a next gen console will also have internet access. This is pretty much a non-issue for the Xbox target market that was blown completely out of proportion.

no, it is an damn issue. get over you high horse for being someone lucky enough to live where you get decent internet. I don't wanna be left in the past simply because i can't afford good enough internet. I still wanna enjoy some of the great franchises available, that will only continue onto the newer generation. think of what future elder scrolls have in store when their baseline hardware has finally jumped up a notch.

3. You could still buy, sell and play used games so this really shouldn't be one of the big ideas you're rallying against. The difference was you would also be able to buy / sell / trade digital copies of these games. Of course some infrastructure would have to be in place to support this which is why details were so sketchy. I would almost guarantee GameStop would have been part of that system once it was up and running.

none of this was ever made clear, and if it was, i'd like to ask for an official link to microsoft. otherwise, all your doing is grasping at "what-ifs".

Some people, and some parts of the world, are ready for a technological gaming revolution, the kind that the Xbox One was aiming for (with its Internet requirements and all). But the reality is that a lot of the word isn't ready for that. They're still catching up.

I fully recognize that, but so what? Why should the gaming technology of first world countries be held back by countries where the vast majority of it's citizens wouldn't be able to afford the console in the first place? The average per-capita income in Africa is $315. I highly doubt there is a huge market there just waiting to pickup a PS4 or Xbox One.

you could say that about the ps3, it came out more expensive than the X1, and still is played heavily in third-world countrys. you have a pretty strong attitude of "it doesn't affect me, so who gives a rat ass about you."