Followers 0

# Microsoft and the Xbox One. Thoughts?

## 268 posts in this topic

but what prevents me from re-borrowing the game? and continuing, it's just a minor annoyance at worse.

Well first, your friend has to let you borrow it. Second, they could just throw some more DRM to limit not only the length of the borrowing but the number of times you borrow in a certain period. Like I said, DRMing the DRM gives infinite possibilities.
0

##### Share on other sites

but what prevents me from re-borrowing the game? and continuing, it's just a minor annoyance at worse.

Well first, your friend has to let you borrow it. Second, they could just throw some more DRM to limit not only the length of the borrowing but the number of times you borrow in a certain period. Like I said, DRMing the DRM gives infinite possibilities.

all i hear from this is absolutely terrible practices being imposed by microsoft, Alpha, i'm not sure if you were pro, or anti these restrictions. but if this were the case of what they would do to restrict trading, i for one am quite happy they've backpeddled on thses changes.
0

##### Share on other sites
I was against the once a day online check-in. And I was against the always-on Kinect.

However, I'm not against the features that tstrimple mentioned. I think they're pretty cool.

However, what I have been mentioning to you isn't anything Microsoft has said it would do. I've only been giving scenarios of what they could do with their online DRMs.
0

##### Share on other sites

but what prevents me from re-borrowing the game? and continuing, it's just a minor annoyance at worse.

Well first, your friend has to let you borrow it. Second, they could just throw some more DRM to limit not only the length of the borrowing but the number of times you borrow in a certain period. Like I said, DRMing the DRM gives infinite possibilities.

all i hear from this is absolutely terrible practices being imposed by microsoft, Alpha, i'm not sure if you were pro, or anti these restrictions. but if this were the case of what they would do to restrict trading, i for one am quite happy they've backpeddled on thses changes.

The proposed system was for you to have a circle of friends, and any of your friends could play games from your shared library. There was no mention of limited use apart from hourly checkins to make sure multiple friends weren't all playing at the same time. You didn't have to lend games to friends, they automatically had access to your full shared library. On top of that, your friends playing your games didn't prevent you from playing your games which opens up the possibility of playing multiplayer with a friend who doesn't own the game. Much like you can do now with a physical copy if you play split screen, except this would have been full screen and you didn't have to be in the same place.

And this is why FUD is bad people. Alpha is talking about what he thinks possible outcomes could have been, and slicer4ever believe that's what Microsoft was actually proposing, so he's off to spread the same FUD in other locations based on hearsay.

Edit: THANK YOU Alpha! Hopefully slice gets that last message.

Edited by tstrimple
0

##### Share on other sites

I was against the once a day online check-in. And I was against the always-on Kinect.

However, I'm not against the features that tstrimple mentioned. I think they're pretty cool.

However, what I have been mentioning to you isn't anything Microsoft has said it would do. I've only been giving scenarios of what they could do with their online DRMs.

Out of curiosity, why are you against the once a day checkin? Is it principle or are you regularly in an environment that doesn't have internet for more than 24 hours?

As far as the Kinect goes, it will never be a viable tool for game developers to use unless they can rely on gamers having access to it. You can disable the sensor in the settings to turn off features like the Kinect listening for "Xbox On" when the console is turned off.

0

##### Share on other sites

...snip...

The proposed system was for you to have a circle of friends, and any of your friends could play games from your shared library. There was no mention of limited use apart from hourly checkins to make sure multiple friends weren't all playing at the same time. You didn't have to lend games to friends, they automatically had access to your full shared library. On top of that, your friends playing your games didn't prevent you from playing your games which opens up the possibility of playing multiplayer with a friend who doesn't own the game. Much like you can do now with a physical copy if you play split screen, except this would have been full screen and you didn't have to be in the same place.

see, my problem is. I never seen microsoft say that's how this system was supposed to work. I mean it's most probable in the pr disaster that fell onto them, that it got lost in translation, but had they brought this concept to the front, it'd probably appeased more people. Of course then the question becomes what size of circle of friends? isn't this system worse for developers in terms of game trading?(see my previous point about single player games, and hell, even multiplayer games.) As you've said, the problem was their pr, but i'd like some official links to back-up these claims before i 100% take your word that this was their intention.

And this is why FUD is bad people. Alpha is talking about what he thinks possible outcomes could have been, and slicer4ever believe that's what Microsoft was actually proposing, so he's off to spread the same FUD in other locations based on hearsay.

Edit: THANK YOU Alpha! Hopefully slice gets that last message.

I knew alpha was only proposing hypothetical, but the fact that he could come up with simply ideas that microsoft could use to further restrict trading is worrying enough.

still, if this was all set in stone, i find it hard that microsoft had such a horrible PR disaster, it should have been made clear during the first announcment. someone had to of dropped the ball pretty damn hard to screw-up so badly.

also, the 24 hour check in was still crap, and i have no remorse that they took it out.

they could still make both systems work though, i woudn't see the benefit of the game sharing, since i coudn't dl the games on my connection, but they could have made it work if you had the physical media in the xbox for the game(basically to supersede the 24h check-ins.)
0

##### Share on other sites

As far as the Kinect goes, it will never be a viable tool for game developers to use unless they can rely on gamers having access to it.

I agree, which is why I think it's a pointless and costly addition, it's only really useful to developers working on exclusives. Until it becomes a standardised technology that all platforms have I don't see the reason for it. They could compete on price with PS4 if they just dropped it.

I could be way off but that's the way I currently see Kinect. It's a cool bit of kit but nothing more.

0

##### Share on other sites

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.

And imagine what a game like The Elder Scrolls could actually do if they had full online internet access and the processing power of the "cloud". Games like this are ideal targets for offloading calculations to Microsoft servers. You could have much? more immersive worlds where npcs have actual arcs and the worlds can see significant changes based on AI calculations that can be offloaded from the Xbox. Likewise with games like the Sims or Civilization. All of these games could be significantly better if they could rely on cloud computation, but that requires a stable internet connection.

you could say that about the ps3, it came out more expensive than the X1, and still is played heavily in third-world countrys.

I do say that about the PS3 which is not played heavily in third-world countries based on the sales numbers.

World Wide Sales Figures

Add up US, Europe and Japan sales for the PS3 and compare it to the world wide number. The number left over for third world countries is insignificant. South Africa gaming market is less than 100 million for a country of 50 million.

0

##### Share on other sites

All of these games could be significantly better if they could rely on cloud computation, but that requires a stable internet connection.

See, and that's why most people were upset by the once-a-day-check in; not everyone (even in America) has a reliable connection for such a feature. I can see it being an amazing and REALLY cool thing in the future to have, but really, the infrastructure for such a thing just isn't quite there yet.

0

##### Share on other sites

I was against the once a day online check-in. And I was against the always-on Kinect.

However, I'm not against the features that tstrimple mentioned. I think they're pretty cool.

However, what I have been mentioning to you isn't anything Microsoft has said it would do. I've only been giving scenarios of what they could do with their online DRMs.

Out of curiosity, why are you against the once a day checkin? Is it principle or are you regularly in an environment that doesn't have internet for more than 24 hours?

Well....

1. It is principle. It's one thing for PCs, but I don't believe that consoles should have to do such a thing.
2. I don't think it was necessary for them to have that "feature". They could have found a way to do what they wanted to do without that.
3. I'm not a fan of wireless connection for my console. I prefer it wired. With that said, I don't want to be wiring consoles all across my house. (Yes, I realize this is the weakest of the 3 arguments.)

As far as the Kinect goes, it will never be a viable tool for game developers to use unless they can rely on gamers having access to it. You can disable the sensor in the settings to turn off features like the Kinect listening for "Xbox On" when the console is turned off.

The conspiracist in me just says, "NO!". It's why I put tape over the built-in webcam of my laptop. Granted I'm a special case, so I'm not going to apply that issue to the general populace. It might be unique to only me :D

0

##### Share on other sites

South Africa gaming market is less than 100 million for a country of 50 million.

This is a very confusing sentence....

0

##### Share on other sites

South Africa gaming market is less than 100 million for a country of 50 million.

This is a very confusing sentence....

The total spending on gaming in South Africa is less than $100 million USD, compared to a population of 50 million. Better? They spend, on average,$2 per person on gaming a year.

0

##### Share on other sites
It's why I put tape over the built-in webcam of my laptop

Me too, and I won't have a webcam in the house, the times I have walked naked into a room only to see myself on a laptop screen being sent across the world to my parents-in-law

0

##### Share on other sites

Edited by slicer4ever
0

##### Share on other sites

All of these games could be significantly better if they could rely on cloud computation, but that requires a stable internet connection.

See, and that's why most people were upset by the once-a-day-check in; not everyone (even in America) has a reliable connection for such a feature. I can see it being an amazing and REALLY cool thing in the future to have, but really, the infrastructure for such a thing just isn't quite there yet.

Is that REALLY a problem? I'm not talking about your grandparents living in rural Kansas. I'm talking about the target market of the xbox one. We constantly hear about how most people only buy COD or Halo for their multiplayer. I'm sure most of those people have reasonably reliable internet.

And honestly, if you really don't have internet, maybe video-gaming is just not the hobby for you? Put it this way, I love snowboarding, so I live near mountains. Someone complaining that Ethopia has no decent snow should probably take up a different hobby.

Hell, I live in New Zealand and everyone I know has broadband. It might have pretty average speed and frankly ridiculous bandwidth caps (10 gig a month!!!), but in terms of a stable, always on connection, this is pretty much a non-issue for anyone who wants to game.

0

##### Share on other sites

And honestly, if you really don't have internet, maybe video-gaming is just not the hobby for you? Put it this way, I love snowboarding, so I live near mountains. Someone complaining that Ethopia has no decent snow should probably take up a different hobby.

You owe me a new keyboard.

But honestly, as I just said in another thread, why the hell do I need the internet to play a game?! That's a ridiculous requirement! It should be optional, not mandatory. I don't need my game console to be a PC. I need it to be a game console. If I want to be play PC games with a controller.... guess what I buy for that...

0

##### Share on other sites

...

1) 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.

...

2) 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) 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".

...

4) 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."

1) I'm not entirely clear that it isn't you who is missing the point. My point was that if you're ina  position where you can't download 20GB of game data, your friend can still lend you his "copy" -- that is, his license to play the game -- digitally, and if at some point you ever had a physical copy of that game in your system, you would not need to download it at all, as long as you still have the disc image on your machine. No purchase necessary.

2) Why are your minority preferences so important that they should hold back a majority of people who don't face such restrictions. I can sympathize with your situation, but its not as if playing certain games on certain hardware is a human right. If you're in rural China its appropriate to consider ox-drawn carts when building a road, that doesn't mean its much of a consideration for the first-world.

3) I don't have a citation handy, but I can confirm that I've also read that myself.

4) You have a pretty strong attitude of "it does affect me, so who gives a rats ass about the rest of you." You're of course entitled to speak out and lobby for your own benefit, but lets not pretend that you doing so is any less self-interested. Holding back a majority, for benefit of a minority is, in this case, likely doing a greater disservice to the platform as a whole, and its typical user.

0

##### Share on other sites

from the horses mouth:

http://news.xbox.com/Search?q=licensing

What exactly are you trying to point out here?

I thought he was just providing official info. No?

0

##### Share on other sites

I thought he was just providing official info. No?

Not sure... it just goes to a search result for "licensing".

0

##### Share on other sites

Interestingly, members of the US military were more than a little pissed off at always online idea. This is on the front page of the Navy Times right now: http://www.navytimes.com/article/20130620/OFFDUTY02/306140030/Microsoft-does-about-face-new-XBox-restrictions.

Seriously, there are times even in the urbanized first world (which I suspect is significantly smaller than you guys think) where the daily check in would be a total deal breaker. I remember living only slightly out of town (in 'murica) and having our internet go down for three weeks or so after a bad storm, which sucked because Steam was such a buggy piece of crap back at that time that I couldn't even play Half-Life Source...

Hell, I live in New Zealand and everyone I know has broadband.

Because it's not like New Zealand isn't one of the most developed countries on the planet...

0

##### Share on other sites

Interestingly, members of the US military were more than a little pissed off at always online idea. This is on the front page of the Navy Times right now: http://www.navytimes.com/article/20130620/OFFDUTY02/306140030/Microsoft-does-about-face-new-XBox-restrictions.

This is mostly blown out of proportion as well. Pretty much all modern military basis have internet access available. Yes, even bases in Afganistan. Sure, they aren't going to be streaming videos too often or downloading 20GB games, but a daily checking would not have been a major barrier to use for deployed troops. I still maintain that the best way to handle it would have been to be able to bypass the 24 hour offline check when the disc was in the drive.

0

##### Share on other sites

Hell, I live in New Zealand and everyone I know has broadband.

Because it's not like New Zealand isn't one of the most developed countries on the planet...

Well, yes and no. Yes it's developed, but the broadband infrastructure is pretty poor, and service is way overpriced.

Besides I keep going back to the target market. Surely the "most developed countries" are the ones with the disposable income to afford an xbox one?

0

##### Share on other sites

...snip...

1) I'm not entirely clear that it isn't you who is missing the point. My point was that if you're ina  position where you can't download 20GB of game data, your friend can still lend you his "copy" -- that is, his license to play the game -- digitally, and if at some point you ever had a physical copy of that game in your system, you would not need to download it at all, as long as you still have the disc image on your machine. No purchase necessary.

2) Why are your minority preferences so important that they should hold back a majority of people who don't face such restrictions. I can sympathize with your situation, but its not as if playing certain games on certain hardware is a human right. If you're in rural China its appropriate to consider ox-drawn carts when building a road, that doesn't mean its much of a consideration for the first-world.

3) I don't have a citation handy, but I can confirm that I've also read that myself.

4) You have a pretty strong attitude of "it does affect me, so who gives a rats ass about the rest of you." You're of course entitled to speak out and lobby for your own benefit, but lets not pretend that you doing so is any less self-interested. Holding back a majority, for benefit of a minority is, in this case, likely doing a greater disservice to the platform as a whole, and its typical user.

1. the original discussion clearly proposed sharing digital games to people that you wouldn't normally be able to lend games to(by way of them downloading the game).

2. are you sure you arn't the minority? because obviously with Microsoft back-peddling, they apparently agree with the people that live in rural area's, and don't have the luxury of high-caps/high bandwidth. and consider the shear shit-storm this caused, apparently it's defiantly enough of an issue that yea, you're going to be held back by us "minority".

3. tstrimple has made this point more clear since my previous post.

4. fair enough.

0

## Create an account

Register a new account