Print 157 comment(s) - last by kypd275.. on Jun 11 at 11:36 AM

Microsoft-published games will be available

Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) has cleared the muddied waters somewhat about its plans regarding "always on" digital rights management (DRM) and used games for its upcoming Xbox One console.  Until now much of the reports on the topic did have some official sources -- Microsoft employees interviewed at press events -- but Microsoft had not formally announced its plans as a company.

I. Microsoft Looks to Shift the Blame for Used Game Bans to Third Parties

The good news when it comes to used games is that Microsoft won't charge you an additional fee on top of the inflated rates used game stores typically charge.

For Microsoft-published games, the stated policy is as follows:

Microsoft does not charge a platform fee to retailers, publishers, or consumers for enabling transfer of these games.  We designed Xbox One so game publishers can enable you to trade in your games at participating retailers.

Note the key phrase is "participating retailers".  That most likely means the days of buying games at garage sales or on Craigslist are at an end.  It also may prohibit customers from buying and selling games on auction sites like eBay, Inc. (EBAY).

Used Xbox 360 games
Third party publishers get to ban used game sales or charge extra fees.
[Image Source: Multiplayer]

Microsoft allows more liberal sales policies for third party publishers -- but it also allows them to opt out of used game sales.  Its policy for them is as follows:

Third party publishers may opt in or out of supporting game resale and may set up business terms or transfer fees with retailers. Microsoft does not receive any compensation as part of this. In addition, third party publishers can enable you to give games to friends. Loaning or renting games won't be available at launch, but we are exploring the possibilities with our partners.

As publishers like Electronics Arts, Inc. (EA) have already looked to lock out used gamers and don't seem overly concerned about negative publicity, it seems likely that at least some of them will ban used game sales altogether now that Microsoft allows them this option.  This is a pretty sneaky tactic from Microsoft.  Remember, Microsoft gets no license fee on these sales either -- but by allowing third parties to make the decision on whether to ban the new games it can shift the blame to the publishers.  

EA Madden 25
EA will likely be among the first to ban used games, given that it's
already tried to do so in the past.

One loophole may be for customers to sell a game via unauthorized means and then "give" the game away.  This will only work with acquaintances and online buddies, though, as you're required to have been Xbox Live friends with the recipient for at least 30 days before the transaction, and "each game can only be given once" (seemingly suggesting subsequent transfers from the receiver are forbidden).

II. "Always On" -- It's Official, Folks

Microsoft has already stated that it "hopes" developers will make games unplayable offline (or on slower internet connections) by taking advantage of its cloud-processing features.  Microsoft revealed that its suggested connection for stable play will be a 1.5 Mbps connection, which means that users in some rural areas may be out of luck when it comes to certain titles.

internet connection
No internet, no Xbox One, Microsoft says. [Image Source: C Blog]

But even without cloud computing, you won't be able to play any titles without at least a periodic internet connection.  In its announcements Microsoft made "always on" official.  As rumored, Microsoft's console must "phone home" every 24 hours (you get one free hour without a check if you play a game you own on a friend's console).  The company writes:

[The connection will be used to] verify if system, application or game updates are needed and to see if you have acquired new games, or resold, traded in, or given your game to a friend.

Engadget queried Microsoft regarding providing offline playability to overseas military officers playing Xbox or customers in rural regions.  Microsoft's comment was:

The blog posts on Xbox Wire detail everything we can share today. We look forward to sharing more details in the months ahead.

In other words, if you don't have a stable, always on internet connection, you may not be able to use the Xbox One unless Microsoft changes course from its currently announced plans.  It's slightly ironic that Microsoft fired Creative Director Adam Orth for arguing in support of the policy on Twitter:

Adam Orth comments
..then went and carried out the rumored policy anyhow.

Microsoft also revealed that that it would allow users to disable the voice control activation ("Xbox On") and offer a set of privacy controls at launch. 

Sources: Microsoft [1], [2], [3], Engadget

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By Motoman on 6/7/2013 11:44:56 AM , Rating: 5
Dear Microsoft,

Go f%ck yourselves.

People with brains.

RE: [finger]
By half_duplex on 6/7/2013 11:52:56 AM , Rating: 2

People who may want to game outdoors.

RE: [finger]
By Kiffberet on 6/10/2013 7:20:53 AM , Rating: 1
I bet PS4 has the same restrictions...

RE: [finger]
By wempa on 6/7/2013 12:26:38 PM , Rating: 5
Dear Microsoft,

Go f%ck yourselves.

Ditto. This seals the deal for me. No Xbox One and probably no console at all. Such a restricted console has significantly reduced value to me. The only way I'd ever go for something like this is if the console were free and games were $10-$20 each. I love how the policy is littered with terms like "the game publisher may allow you to". Excuse me ??? They may allow me to do something with the game that I already own because I spent $60 on it ??? I'll be sure to warn as many of my friends as possible about this nonsense. PC gaming on the TV is looking more and more attractive to me. Even my daughter loves playing PC games with me.

RE: [finger]
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 12:41:07 PM , Rating: 3

The XBox 360 we have is dead weight. Hasn't been turned on in maybe a year. Our Wii isn't much better...gets used once in a blue moon when guests want to do something like Mario Kart.

So we weren't exactly in the market for a new console anyway. Waste of money. We do *enormous* amounts of gaming in this house...but all on PCs, none on consoles.

Having said that, at this point I'm pretty tempted to go buy a Wii U or a PS4 just out of spite.

RE: [finger]
By Digimonkey on 6/7/2013 1:27:49 PM , Rating: 4
From what I understand PS4 is rumored to act in the same way, leaving it up to developers whether or not they want to allow resale of the game license.

RE: [finger]
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 2:23:04 PM , Rating: 3
If it does, then Sony can get the same outrage. But they can make serious bank off of this simply by not doing it. MS will lose large numbers of potential customers to the PS4 just so long as Sony isn't as abusive of the consumer as MS is.

RE: [finger]
By Digimonkey on 6/7/2013 2:34:31 PM , Rating: 2
They may also run the risk of alienating game developers. Exclusives are probably the deciding factor this round. I'm a PC gamer so don't care how it turns out, but it will be fascinating to watch.

RE: [finger]
By Mitch101 on 6/7/13, Rating: -1
RE: [finger]
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 3:39:47 PM , Rating: 5
Maybe every 24 hours is unacceptable but what is acceptable?

Never. Never would be OK. Because never is the only interval in which one can provide any justification for requiring a console to be online.

Why? Because there is zero benefit to the consumer for requiring internet access. And it's going to get used like a hammer for DRM and to ban used games...which is wildly abusive to the consumer. There is no possible case in which the consumer benefits from any *requirement* to be online.

Naturally, consumers can *choose* to put their consoles online if they want to...and if they have access to dependable broadband. But it's categorically unacceptable to have any requirement for it, regardless of whatever other conditions there may be around that requirement.

No requirement will ever be OK. So...the answer is "never."

RE: [finger]
By Digimonkey on 6/7/2013 5:58:26 PM , Rating: 1
Why? Because there is zero benefit to the consumer for requiring internet access.

Well there are console and game patches/updates in which you need an internet connection to download. The world is also going the digital distribution route, both Sony and Microsoft have plans to eventually get away from physical media altogether.

RE: [finger]
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 6:06:34 PM , Rating: 3
I know a large number of families with consoles that have never downloaded a patch or update. And they don't care to.

Digital distribution or not, the fact of the matter is there's no benefit to the consumer in any possible shape or form by ever requiring an internet connection.

Also, I don't see how the console makers can leave the physical media model...that's where retailers make their money. If everything is a digital download, what is there for Target to sell? And again, if you switched to digital download only, then you've senselessly cut yourself off from tens of millions of Americans that don't have access to real broadband, and to whom *any* hint of streaming or downloading is a laughable delusion.

RE: [finger]
By TheJian on 6/8/13, Rating: 0
RE: [finger]
By Spuke on 6/7/2013 4:07:00 PM , Rating: 2
love how everyone immediately goes to F#@% the world

RE: [finger]
By kypd275 on 6/7/2013 10:54:26 PM , Rating: 1
nobody knows, because Sony hasn't said anything, those rumors you hear are from MS fanboys desparate to see everyone else to sink along with them.

RE: [finger]
By kypd275 on 6/11/2013 11:36:20 AM , Rating: 2
From what I understand Sony just burned MS and fanboys like you :p

RE: [finger]
By karimtemple on 6/7/13, Rating: -1
RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/7/2013 2:16:02 PM , Rating: 1
Yea, i bought a few games that I know I will play. Never bothered to sell it as by that time, it's not worth much to bother. I think used games is for single player games, everything is multiplayer now. If the multplayer sucks, the resell value is usually crap anyways. I think the only exception was Oblivion.

RE: [finger]
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 2:22:07 PM , Rating: 5
I cannot stress enough how much your personal opinion about used games doesn't matter.

The used game trade is MASSIVE. And therefore obviously important to MASSIVE numbers of people.

Whether or not you think it's important matters to no one but you.

RE: [finger]
By karimtemple on 6/7/13, Rating: -1
RE: [finger]
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 2:59:35 PM , Rating: 2

RE: [finger]
By Mitch101 on 6/7/13, Rating: -1
RE: [finger]
By karimtemple on 6/7/13, Rating: -1
RE: [finger]
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 3:53:36 PM , Rating: 5
Because it's an abject violation of the first-sale doctrine.

Nobody gets to have any interest in the sale of the product after the original sale to the original consumer. Stating any opinion otherwise labels you positively as an idiot of biblical proportions.

Start imagining that for cars...appliances...houses...anything else that you might buy and then sell to someone else later.

No...there is absolutely, positively, no way to justify letting someone violate the principle of first-sale.

I would hope that if any such thing starts to happen that there's a massive class-action lawsuit that bankrupts whatever company was so horrifically abusive as to even try it.

RE: [finger]
By karimtemple on 6/7/2013 4:08:12 PM , Rating: 4
Actually that's a pretty strong argument. I concede.

RE: [finger]
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 4:18:19 PM , Rating: 4

I think that might be the first time that ever happened on DT.

Someone should note that on a calendar or something.

I tip my hat to you sir, and bid you a good day.

RE: [finger]
By karimtemple on 6/7/2013 4:20:44 PM , Rating: 3
LOL. I'm a classy motherf#%@er.

RE: [finger]
By Mitch101 on 6/7/2013 6:35:12 PM , Rating: 2
Same here Motoman wins.

RE: [finger]
By mcnabney on 6/8/2013 10:32:16 AM , Rating: 2
Not to pile on, but the EU now has laws in place requiring digital purchases to be transferable. While Steam can exist in the US alone, MS and Sony can't write-off the entire European market.

RE: [finger]
By karimtemple on 6/7/2013 4:18:23 PM , Rating: 2
I should clarify that now that I'm on your side of this issue, my opinion is that MS has merely perfected what everyone has already been doing (and that technically they're all wrong when it comes to this doctrine).

I can't sell anyone my Steam games, which admittedly is slightly different because Steam doesn't have a non-installed disc-only playback mode, but then again neither does the XBO.

A lawsuit wouldn't be likely to go far unless it went after Steam and pretty much everyone and essentially rocked the entire software universe. Good luck with that.

RE: [finger]
By ven1ger on 6/7/2013 4:47:25 PM , Rating: 3
Don't need a lawsuit, voting with your wallet helps when people don't want to buy into bad decisions like this. I would have love to play Diablo III but I decided I didn't like having to play single player online so I voted with my wallet, as many others have. When sales tank, MS will realize that they made a mistake, and only then.

RE: [finger]
By just4U on 6/10/2013 12:35:29 AM , Rating: 2
Wow.. I've not been posting much, simply lurking but I have to say that's the strongest rebuttal I've seen on any of this.. Motoman should have a "6" for stating it. I didn't even know what the first-sale doctrine was.

Thanks for the education.

RE: [finger]
By marvdmartian on 6/10/2013 10:14:06 AM , Rating: 2
So would you then support car manufacturers making $500 every time one of their cars was re-sold? How about the builder of your house making $1000 if it's re-sold? Care to shell out an extra twenty bucks if you buy a used phone, or refurbished electronics??

Once a product is sold, you lose any ability to claim value in its reselling. This includes software or video games.

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/7/2013 3:19:27 PM , Rating: 2
MS will probably lose many hardcore console gamers. It's like win8 all over again. At least in this situation, we actually have an equivalent alternative option.

RE: [finger]
By karimtemple on 6/7/2013 3:44:16 PM , Rating: 2
Unless PS4 does the same thing.

It really will not matter, especially if they start doing sweet Steam-like sales.

Also, "hardcore gamers," man, I don't know how to say this. We're not a lucrative bunch. Not caring about hardcore gamers is just good business sense, rofl.

RE: [finger]
By Manch on 6/8/2013 10:29:38 AM , Rating: 2
I equate hardcore gamers to gear heads. While we are not the biggest market share, we are the most vocal about products, and can greatly affect how a product does in the market. You can look through the history of videogames and cars and see how the vocal minority that buys the Halo products have affected the course of a company and their respective markets.

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/8/2013 11:29:45 AM , Rating: 2
that's because the vocal minority buys a lot more games and accessories than the silent majority. They are also like walking advertisements. If anyone knows how to make gaming better then it's the vocal minority.

As a supplier, you want to listen to the vocal minority and make money at the same time. It's a compromise to stay in business.

RE: [finger]
By karimtemple on 6/7/2013 1:13:24 PM , Rating: 2
The only thing that bothers me about this is the 24-hour thing. Everything else is negligible. It's so cartoonishly stupid that I'd bet money they renege or compromise somehow between now and release.

RE: [finger]
By wempa on 6/7/2013 2:26:13 PM , Rating: 2

Actually, the only thing that does NOT bother me is the lack of backwards compatibility. I totally get that. It's a lot of effort for little reward, especially when you consider that most people have completely moved over to the new console games after a year or so anyway. Plus, you can always get out your old console if you really want to play those games. The online DRM and the restrictions on selling/giving/lending a game to somebody else is ridiculous.

RE: [finger]
By karimtemple on 6/7/2013 3:12:26 PM , Rating: 1
DRM is only a problem when it gets in the way. It's the part where paying customers get dicked over that makes it an issue. Right now it doesn't seem that obtrusive on XBO except for the connect-within-24-hours thing (which again, is comically absurd).

As for used games, good lord. I use Steam. I was never able to lend anybody my game, or sell it used or whatever. I spend about $25 - $30 for AAA titles months or even weeks after they've just released, and a lot less for a lot of other titles.

For my consoles I wait for sale prices. If you buy a game for $60 and then sell it for $13, you did not win. I bought it for $45, so I still made more money than you did by selling your game to Gamestop.

RE: [finger]
By Ramstark on 6/7/13, Rating: -1
RE: [finger]
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 12:48:30 PM , Rating: 4
~45 million Americans have no access to true broadband internet, period.

VAST numbers of console gamers NEVER hook their consoles up to the internet. Because there's no reason to do so.

I know a large number of families who live in areas with no broadband access who have consoles that their kids play all the time. And none of them are connected to the internet.

In one case, some friends asked me to help them connect their 360 to the internet so their kids could download a free track that was DLC for their new motocross game. The 360 had never been online...and really, shouldn't have ever been online, especially granted that like many families out of that ~45 million people, they're on very limited cellular internet (they get 5Gb per month).

Putting the 360 online was a retarded nightmare...required a credit card to even start. What a farce. Then after we managed to get through all of that BS, we were finally able to try to have the 360 download that free track for that game - which was something like a 500Mb download.

Which, granted that they're on cellular internet, failed a large number of times because cellular internet isn't all that reliable, and in the end the net result was that the family wasted a couple Gb of their monthly cap on that exercise (causing them to spend about a week on ~20Kbps speeds), never did get the track fully downloaded, the 360 was promptly disconnected from their internet service and now the entire family hates Microsoft with a passion and will never ever buy another MS product unless they literally have no reasonable choice.

There is NEVER any possible excuse for requiring a console to be online. Even if it's "only" every 24 hours. Anyone who wants to disagree with that is frankly such a waste of space that I don't care to hear anything more about your "opinion."

RE: [finger]
By Ramstark on 6/7/13, Rating: -1
RE: [finger]
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 1:32:18 PM , Rating: 4
good, I'd rather see them buying a freaking sun-powered heater.

...yet more proof why your "opinion" should be ignored. These aren't "poor" people. These are people often with six-figure incomes. Who live in areas with no DSL, no cable, no fiber optic, etc. They'd happily buy cable, DSL, or fiber if it was available. It just isn't.

It's your own ignorance and willful stupidity about people who don't live in typical urban environments that makes you invalid. Just like the XBox One. BTW...interesting that this is the attitude that got Orth fired, but MS is still bulldozing ahead with it. Why fire a guy for saying what you're going to do anyway?

RE: [finger]
By Spuke on 6/7/2013 4:18:43 PM , Rating: 2
It's your own ignorance and willful stupidity about people who don't live in typical urban environments that makes you invalid.
X2, there's a WHOLE lot of wealthy people that don't live anywhere near a city and don't have access to broadband or at least decent broadband.

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/7/2013 2:06:48 PM , Rating: 2
There is NEVER any possible excuse for requiring a console to be online.

Nobody needs an xbox and certainly not everyone have internet. Still no reason to bash a company for approaching their product design a different way. Just buy the competitor's console.

It's not like they surprised everyone after it was sold.

RE: [finger]
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 2:16:19 PM , Rating: 3
How many people do you think honestly pay attention to this information at all before purchase?

Realistically...close to none, percentage-wise. Sure, everyone here on DT is all over it. But we have to understand we're a tiny minority of the population as a whole. There will be MILLIONS of people who will buy these things blithely without the slightest inkling of the internet requirements and used games issues.

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/7/2013 2:26:43 PM , Rating: 3
Then who is at fault? the consumer or the manufacturer?

If people don't read the requirements on the side of the box then who is to blame? It's not like they hide it in ultra fine print.

I used to warn people before shooting .44 magnums to hold it firm. Everybody just ignore it until it smacks them in the face. You can't stop stupid from being itself.

RE: [finger]
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 2:35:50 PM , Rating: 3
Then who is at fault? the consumer or the manufacturer?

Both, but the fact of the matter is that the practices are abusive to the consumer to start MS bears the brunt. If they weren't taking such abusive actions, no one would have any problems with them.

You can point a finger at the ignorant consumer who bought an abusive product all you want...but the bigger issue is that the abusive product is put out in the first place.

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/7/2013 2:44:03 PM , Rating: 2
I would say it's abusive if we don't have a choice. Clearly, we have a choice to buy another console with just as many games and most of which are the same games.

IMO you cannot abuse someone who simply have the choice to walk away.

Win8 could be considered abusive.

RE: [finger]
By EnzoFX on 6/7/2013 2:57:16 PM , Rating: 3
but that's what rules, regulations, laws, etc are for. To avoid discriminatory tactics. Why try to justify those tactics? The real options argument would be to allow the consumer to turn off the phoning home. Simple really.

RE: [finger]
By EnzoFX on 6/7/2013 3:00:49 PM , Rating: 2
Note I'm not trying to say what the answer here is, just that your argument seemingly boils down to being against protections in general. Needless to say, people do need to vote with their wallet. The people that are hurt the most by it, would be the many that won't know of this at all.

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/7/2013 3:17:36 PM , Rating: 2
Note I'm not trying to say what the answer here is, just that your argument seemingly boils down to being against protections in general. Needless to say, people do need to vote with their wallet. The people that are hurt the most by it, would be the many that won't know of this at all.

You want the government to make a law forcing them to disclose that it needs an internet connection to work? MS will list that in the requirements on the side of the box like every piece of hardware out there. If people don't read the requirements, then it's their fault.

I don't support MS with this always-on and DRM/no used games thing. But I don't think there's any grounds for any wrongdoings. What they are doing is practicing bad business. It will blow up in their face like win8 and lose billions if there's that many people against it. Then someone will jump in and take their place. It could be Apple since they're going towards that segment.

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/7/2013 3:11:51 PM , Rating: 2
but that's what rules, regulations, laws, etc are for. To avoid discriminatory tactics. Why try to justify those tactics? The real options argument would be to allow the consumer to turn off the phoning home. Simple really.

They're not discriminating anyone here. Their tactics is targeting their demographics. Obviously, it is not for most of us here. You don't need a console and you have more than one option if you were to buy one.

Basically, they're giving people what a lot of people don't want. You can buy something else that will have almost all the same games it has. With both console being so similar in hardware and OS, I don't see why it's even the least bit problem to walk away from the xbox.

Your phone works the same way.

RE: [finger]
By dxf2891 on 6/7/2013 3:47:19 PM , Rating: 3
Man, I can't tell you how many of my customers sought out my opinion on which console to purchase (PS3 or Xbox 360) as their "resident tech guy." This little cadre of "techies" on DT are problably sought out for their opinons on these consoles A LOT! So if Microsoft chooses to ignore our disagreement with their tactic, which is completely their choice, we will ignore their console when making a decision to purchase or give our opinion on which to buy, which is completely our choice.

RE: [finger]
By jjmcubed on 6/7/2013 9:37:42 PM , Rating: 2
Also, will we have to deal with situations like the removing of OS install on the PS3? This is just more erosion of good will to their customers. I was all over a new console, but was against Sony for their past moves(removing options from the console I purchased, Rootkits, many other). Now with Microsoft doing this, I will not be buying a new console. No amount of goodwill will get me to buy from either of these companies.

RE: [finger]
By tdktank59 on 6/7/2013 1:54:56 PM , Rating: 2
When I was traveling for Business I had no need for wifi at the hotels and fuck if I was going to pay the $20 for a day in some placed but I was on the road for weeks at a time and brought my xbox with me so I could relax when I got back to the hotel.

I was offline for those weeks and with this model I would not be able to do this.

Another instance is went up to my buddies cabin and they have no internet there (or more than a bar of voice coverage (notice I said voice, and not cell). During the day we were hiking and running around the property (was a huge property) and in the evening we would chill and play some video games.

Again I was offline for that and with this model I would not be able to do this.

At home its fine, I have nice broadband internet and everything is just peachy.
But I have multiple use cases where internet is not available

RE: [finger]
By Concillian on 6/7/2013 2:13:52 PM , Rating: 2
This is the exact case I was thinking of.

How many times when I went on vacation as a kid did we bring the Nintendo and hook it up to the hotel TV?

The whole point of a console is the ease of use and portability... But both of those are going away this generation. Now it's basically a PC with a sandboxed interface. I guess people love it with apple, so they assume it will work. I'm not so sure it will in this market.

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/7/2013 2:21:02 PM , Rating: 1
Why would you bring a console on vacation? people are hooked onto games these days lol

The one time I ever moved a console was bringing my Wii to a party playing smash brothers tourney and karaoke.

Put the games down and enjoy your vacation.

RE: [finger]
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 2:24:59 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, no. I know a number of people who consider their consoles to be permanently transportable devices. They take them everywhere with them. The idea of going to a friend's house without it (unless they already have one) is just foolishness. Let alone going on a trip or vacation.

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/7/2013 2:30:45 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe we just live different lifestyles. Everyone I know have a PS3 or Xbox but nobody brings it anywhere. When we go on vacation or party, we enjoy our time and the company of others without the need for gaming.

To each his own. I don't take gaming that seriously.

RE: [finger]
By aGreenAgent on 6/7/2013 3:06:38 PM , Rating: 3
I'd never heard of anybody ever moving a console until this XB1 discussion started. I'm not sure what to make of it.

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/7/2013 3:20:58 PM , Rating: 2
Different people, that's all. Some people are more hardcore with gaming than others.

RE: [finger]
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 3:42:05 PM , Rating: 2
My cousin and his friends carried around their console all the time when they were in college.

Hardcore? Only if you consider Donkey Conga to be "hardcore" - because that was their favorite game...bongos and all.

It has nothing to do with being "hardcore" or not. It has to do with the fact that you enjoy playing games on your console, and you like to play games on your console at places other than your own home.

RE: [finger]
By Spuke on 6/7/2013 4:52:05 PM , Rating: 2
Sounds hardcore to me. Nothing wrong with that though.

RE: [finger]
By superflex on 6/7/2013 3:35:12 PM , Rating: 2
Never felt the need to take mine anywhere, but I had a coworker who brought his with him when working out of town and staying in hotels for weeks at a time.

RE: [finger]
By Concillian on 6/7/2013 7:36:54 PM , Rating: 3
"Why would you bring a console on vacation? people are hooked onto games these days lol
Put the games down and enjoy your vacation."

Think about kids, not adults. Family goes on vacation and the teenage kids don't really wanna go. Bring the console along to give them something that they want to do so they aren't bugging the adults while they're trying to do stuff that the kids think is boring.

Bringing the console along [i]helps the adults enjoy their vacation[/i] because the kids aren't whining about doing crap they don't wanna do.

Alternately, with a toddler or younger, you're stuck in the room for 2 hours while they nap. If your spouse isn't in the mood you're just gonna watch TV. Why not bring a console along to pass the time when you're stuck in the room.

You gotta think beyond the single 20 something customers.

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/10/2013 7:40:21 AM , Rating: 2
I always thought one of the worst things you can do as a parent was to shove games and TV in their face to shut them up.

You really wonder why most kids grow up these days hooked onto electronics having terrible social problems and manners.

RE: [finger]
By ProZach on 6/10/2013 7:11:18 PM , Rating: 2
I don't buy any of this.

Kids don't need TV and video games forced onto them, they gravitate towards it on their own (similar to Chris Rock what said about drug pushers not being pushy). Availability is a factor. Responsible parental moderation also matters.

As for kids' social and behavioral problems I defer to those who are qualified to answer, but I highly doubt electronics is the underlying reason why some kids are clueless a--holes to everyone including their own parents.

RE: [finger]
By p05esto on 6/10/2013 10:19:46 AM , Rating: 2
Idiot. It's not up to you to dictate if people bring their games up north to a cabin, or a friends house, or even play the system in 15 yrs when all the MS servers are offline. Screw MS, screw your lame comment.

RE: [finger]
By ProZach on 6/10/2013 7:32:00 PM , Rating: 2
And furthermore I also pose the following possibilities:

- What if gaming is what your cabin buddies usually do anyway?
- What if it's the practical entertainment late-night when it's too dark and dangerous to ski/hike/etc?
- What if there was an existing routine to play daily sessions and it was not interrupted just because of travel?
- What if gaming was the common factor for interacting with the person but instead of playing online it becomes more entertaining playing along-side them?

Not to mention the two-horse towns where the hotel offers mediocre channel selection with no optional internet connection and the only bar closes at 9 P.M. (except Fridays).

RE: [finger]
By wallijonn on 6/7/2013 2:04:10 PM , Rating: 2
Ok, so, can you please explain why is it SO BAD to have a check up every 24 hours?

Hurricane Sandy. Blizzards. Floods. You may not be directly affected but if the electricity goes out for more than a day your XBO becomes a movie player. Maybe. If it won't even allow movie playing then it's a paper weight.

What happens if you're a casual gamer and only play one day a week and you like turning off your wireless modem to prevent broadband theft?

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/7/2013 2:11:13 PM , Rating: 2
I think the always online thing is to play games. That's a DRM thing so people can't use illegal copies or used games. i don't think that applies to DVDs or non game content in your HD.

RE: [finger]
By inighthawki on 6/7/2013 3:50:40 PM , Rating: 2
You may not be directly affected but if the electricity goes out for more than a day your XBO becomes a movie player.

You lost electricity and you're worried about your xbox connecting to the internet?

What happens if you're a casual gamer and only play one day a week and you like turning off your wireless modem to prevent broadband theft

I would call you insanely paranoid. If you're worried about people hacking the password on your wireless connection (which btw is unbelievably uncommon to begin with on a secured network), then just use a MAC address whitelist and use only your devices.

RE: [finger]
By lexluthermiester on 6/9/2013 10:45:17 PM , Rating: 3
(which btw is unbelievably uncommon to begin with on a secured network)

This is FAR more common than you might think. WPA[any version] can be cracked using a mildly powerful laptop in less than 10 minutes, and if you spoof the MAC address of your wifi card than you become nearly untraceable. I have had a serious problem with wifi hacking in my neighborhood for some time. And this is in fact a VERY common problem. MAC address filtering only works if you're not broadcasting your MAC. EVERY wifi device does, thus making it easy to capture and spoof[IE mimic].

So this is not paranoid, it is reasonable precaution.

You, sir need to do your homework before spouting wildly inaccurate information.

RE: [finger]
By inighthawki on 6/10/2013 1:39:25 AM , Rating: 2
I didn't make any claim about HOW secure it is, I was claiming the rarity of people actually trying that. The average person will steal connections from unsecured connections in a heartbeat because you can just click connect, but very few people will actually go through the trouble to steal a secured connection, let alone yours.

Obviously you live in an area where this is more commonly an issue, a higher population density. Even still, hijacking secured connections is not SUPER common of a thing to worry about.

RE: [finger]
By lexluthermiester on 6/10/2013 1:26:45 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't make any claim about HOW secure it is, I was claiming the rarity of people actually trying that. The average person will steal connections from unsecured connections in a heartbeat because you can just click connect, but very few people will actually go through the trouble to steal a secured connection, let alone yours.

You missed the point. The tools to crack WPA and spoof a MAC address can be found easily. And it takes very little time to do. Tell us all, how often do you change the password on your wifi router? My guess is rarely or never. And that is what internet thieves count on. And I did not say the average person does this kind of thing? But it does happen on a regular basis here where I live and if it is happening here, it's happening everywhere.

Obviously you live in an area where this is more commonly an issue, a higher population density. Even still, hijacking secured connections is not SUPER common of a thing to worry about.

It's common enough to be a problem from a legal stand-point. And I live in one of the smaller cities in the USA.

You see, anyone who wants to do things that might otherwise get them in trouble, "borrow" the internet connection of others to do those things. The finger of blame never points to them because, TADA!, they mimic the another machine's MAC and use the connection of said household. Whether they download pron, music, movies, tv shows or other things they might get nailed for, wifi hacking is and will continue to be a serious problem for the common wifi user.

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/10/2013 1:51:40 PM , Rating: 2
The tools to crack WPA and spoof a MAC address can be found easily

Easily found by who? Joe Schmoe aint going to find that stuff. The vast majority of people don't even know IRC.

RE: [finger]
By lexluthermiester on 6/10/2013 2:16:18 PM , Rating: 2
Google much? Or perhaps Yahoo? Maybe even Bing? Or even AltaVista will work. Ya don't need IRC...

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/10/2013 5:58:59 PM , Rating: 2
No retard. I'm saying the vast majority of people don't want to do that. They don't want to hack as much as they don't want to be hacked. Just because you're the scum that does that stuff doesn't make other people the same as you

RE: [finger]
By lexluthermiester on 6/11/2013 3:45:10 AM , Rating: 2
So you're assuming that because I know how it's done I do it myself, right? And YOU are calling ME retarded scum? Don't you think the pathetic way you are reacting to a very lucid[and factual] argument says more about your feeble mentality, lacking maturity and delusional view on reality than it does anything else?

Try not to break your fragile mind thinking too hard about that one.

RE: [finger]
By BRB29 on 6/10/2013 9:39:16 AM , Rating: 2
Hacking for internet is relatively easy in difficulty. However, virtually nobody does this anymore so it is rare. If you do it then you are one of the very few scums out there.

When hacking these days, you usually encounter problems with signal. 5Ghz is becoming common and has problems going through walls and especially fire walls. 2.4ghz freq is usually very polluted since everyone has wifi now as well as appliances on the same freq. If you live in the suburb in a single family home with less pollution then you have a greater distance so your signal will be low and unreliable.

Almost nobody feels the need to hack because internet access is everywhere and it's cheap. You also have it on your phone. There's no urgent "need" for it unless you are just doing for sport. In that case, then you are a very small minority. When my router goes down, I just ask my neighbor and nobody ever said no. I wouldn't try to play xbox on it because signal quality if poor. If anyone says no to you, it's probably because you look and act like a shady character.

RE: [finger]
By lexluthermiester on 6/10/2013 2:04:50 PM , Rating: 3
You so wrong it's sad. And you've contradicted yourself. Let's analyze your response.

Hacking for internet is relatively easy in difficulty. However, virtually nobody does this anymore so it is rare. If you do it then you are one of the very few scums out there.

Thank You for calling me "scums". Just because I know how it's done doesn't mean I do it myself. I have been the victim of this kind of hacking[which caused a number of problems, including identity fraud] and wanted to know how it was accomplished. But you are right about it being easy, VERY.

When hacking these days, you usually encounter problems with signal. 5Ghz is becoming common and has problems going through walls and especially fire walls. 2.4ghz freq is usually very polluted since everyone has wifi now as well as appliances on the same freq. If you live in the suburb in a single family home with less pollution then you have a greater distance so your signal will be low and unreliable.

Signal strength is a non-issue as signal boosters can be purchased or made cheaply. Parabolic signal boosters can extend the range of a wifi adapter to nearly two miles. You were saying? And 2.4ghz "pollution" would assume that everyone used the same channel at the same modulation in the same area. Even in a crowded city, this is not a serious problem and even if it were, would cause little problem to someone with an aforementioned signal booster.

Seek knowledge before speaking genius.

RE: [finger]
By just4U on 6/10/2013 12:47:59 AM , Rating: 2
For me.. I turn on my console once every couple of months when I am bored.. I can't see them being so hardcore to disable it all just because you haven't had it on. That would kill the sale for me :(

no resale is good for customers
By Ananke on 6/7/13, Rating: 0
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 12:54:39 PM , Rating: 3
The prices of game titles will fall to $20 for AAA titles, as they used to be 5 years ago, when there was no developed second hand market.




Did you actually say that with a straight face? OMFG.

Look everybody, this guy actually thinks that game prices are going to GO DOWN. Let's publicly mock him.

RE: no resale is good for customers
By Quadrillity on 6/7/2013 1:12:04 PM , Rating: 2
You can convince me if you come up with one single economic incentive for the gaming industry to sell their products at significantly lower prices.

RE: no resale is good for customers
By tayb on 6/7/2013 1:36:09 PM , Rating: 2
The price of a game is based on supply and demand. Used game re-sale value is a significant safety net for consumers that helps alleviate concerns about a game being sub par. If I don't like the game I can sell it for 70-80% of the value I paid for it. If there is no used game market consumers will be less willing to gamble on a $65+ purchase. The end result will be decreased demand with no change in supply.

Game studios can either live with the reduced revenue, increase prices to off-set reduced quantities (a la movie theaters), or reduce prices to generate more demand. The only solid long term economic solution would be to reduce prices.

You can debate whether or not there will be a dip in demand but I am confident there will be. Personally, I refuse to spend $65+ for a game no matter how great it is. I have no problem being patient and waiting for it to come down in price. Current generation I would simply wait a few weeks and pick up a used copy. If the next generation destroys the used game market I'll simply wait for the price to fall or skip it all together, as I do with EA titles.

Microsoft will feel the backlash from this. It's such big news that it is being talked about far outside of tech circles. They are angering a lot of people right now.

By Motoman on 6/7/2013 1:38:38 PM , Rating: 2
I guarantee that game prices aren't going to change.

The XBox One may fail spectacularly though, which is exactly what MS deserves. People will buy the PS4 instead...and they'll buy and sell their games as the always have.

By flyingpants1 on 6/7/2013 5:15:08 PM , Rating: 2
Or they'll make record profits thanks to next-gen exclusives and a growing market, raise prices anyway, more DRM, repeat..

By lexluthermiester on 6/9/2013 11:06:29 PM , Rating: 2
Personally, I refuse to spend $65+ for a game no matter how great it is.

Do you remember the SNES? Secret of Mana? Super Metroid? Final Fantasy 3 maybe? How about Chrono Trigger? Those games were $70 to $80 new in their day, and worth every penny. But that is because SquareSoft[at that time] put time into games to perfect them to the point of being works of art, and it showed.

So perhaps you should re-qualify your statement...

or skip it all together, as I do with EA titles.

Exactly! I have a WiiU and love it. This looks like the wiser choice, if Sony goes the same route and MS. I skipped the 360 altogether and will be skipping XBO. This is just as epic a failure to listening to a core audience as the "Windows 8" experiment. Microsoft has lost as much grasp on reality as EA and is just as pathetically clueless.

RE: no resale is good for customers
By Ananke on 6/7/2013 5:01:31 PM , Rating: 2
Dip in demand and competition by "cloud", "tablet" gaming...Marketing through online places as iTunes is much more lucrative for the owner of that market. MS is moving towards MS Market, Sony is going towards PlayStation Market. For the game industry this will be the Steam effect. Titles will need to be cheaper in order to sell, because they have no resale value.
Another example: one of the reason of Apple products to keep higher upfront value, is because of their resale market. Hence, Apple is creating "resale" market of their hardware as we speak, literally. It is their strategy.
What MS want is enough margin on their consoles, not to sell them as loss leaders, and good margin on THEIR subscription services on their consoles, instead of allowing their "partners" to get the largest part :) through high upfront prices. MS is doing exactly what Apple has done. SONY tries, but they are slightly behind - they don't have the OS infrastructure to unify that many platforms /and subscription services/ that MS can do.

RE: no resale is good for customers
By ven1ger on 6/7/2013 5:23:15 PM , Rating: 3
Different markets, different ecosystems.

Apple was able to capitalize on their App store because there was virtually no market there. Let's not also forget, that smartphones and tablets usually have some kind of internet service.

Trying to attach the same ecosystem to a game console is going to piss off a lot of customers that don't want their consoles always tied off to their internet connection just to play a game, especially when other game consoles don't require it. I'll vote with my wallet and just buy the game consoles that don't require internet connection like many others will, at least we can support those that listen to their customers instead of trying to rake the customers for every cent.

By lexluthermiester on 6/9/2013 11:34:12 PM , Rating: 2
Trying to attach the same ecosystem to a game console is going to piss off a lot of customers that don't want their consoles always tied off to their internet connection just to play a game, especially when other game consoles don't require it.

Well put. Where game consoles are concerned, the internet is not needed except for online multiplayer games, which most people[myself included] avoid. Most people prefer multiplayer split screen or LAN.

By Digimonkey on 6/7/2013 1:49:13 PM , Rating: 3
If this was true then we should've been enjoying cheaper AAA titles for the PC years ago.

By ven1ger on 6/7/2013 5:15:06 PM , Rating: 2
Can you give me one example that this has ever happened? When games came on floppies, they were already a bit expensive, with the advent of CDs, it was supposed to cut down on costs and save the consumer money, guess what...nada. With DVDs, nada. Removing hardcopy manuals, nada. With DLC, nada...get the drift?

Somehow prices are still high for new AAA titles.

RE: no resale is good for customers
By Bateluer on 6/7/2013 8:53:32 PM , Rating: 2
Did you seriously just state that AAA game prices will fall to 20 dollars because customers can't resell them? With a straight face? If anything, they're going to go up another few notches. Get ready for the new starting price point for X1 games, 69.99 and 79.99.

RE: no resale is good for customers
By tayb on 6/8/2013 12:10:16 AM , Rating: 2
He didn't state it as a direct cause but his conclusion is not unreasonable and could come to fruition if the market reacts violently to a ban on used games.

If there is a dramatic decrease in new game game sales as a result of a ban on used games there are only a few things that can possibly happen.

Game prices go up. This is the path movie theaters have been taking for over a decade. It's a short term solution, a punt really, that is not sustainable long term.

Game prices remain the same. In this scenario it's simply a waiting game for someone to undercut someone else. Either that or studios will just be content with reduced revenue, which is unlikely.

Game prices go down. This is the most likely reaction to a steep drop in demand. Reduced prices decreases the barrier for entry and would drive demand. As demand increases prices will increase until they reach equilibrium. This would without a doubt result in reduced game prices but likely not anywhere near $20. $45 might be reasonable.

It might take years for the market to correct itself as stubborn players stick to their guns but change will happen whether you believe it or not.

RE: no resale is good for customers
By Motoman on 6/8/2013 12:15:51 AM , Rating: 2

What will happen is the Xbox Done will tank and be a miserable failure. Everybody will buy PS4s, and games will all still be $60 apiece. It's just that virtually everyone will be buying PS4 games instead of XBox Done games.

The chances that video game prices go down are less than zero.

RE: no resale is good for customers
By tayb on 6/8/2013 12:10:40 PM , Rating: 2
You can think whatever you want, fact remains that a drop in demand will eventually result in a drop in prices. Raising prices to offset reduced demand isn't a viable long term economic option. There is no other solution besides insolvency. Your personal opinion is irrelevant.

As far as used games are concerned Microsoft isn't doing anything vastly different than Sony. The main concern is the online requirement.

By inighthawki on 6/8/2013 1:15:11 PM , Rating: 2
I feel like you are boht a little right here. Prices will drop but not at launch,. there will likely just be more specials like steam does and lower prices more quickly, instead of keeping the games at $60. Even with a decrease in demand of used games I don't see it likely that the $60 price tag will fade. At best it would mean that it will last a bit longer before they decide that $70 is more reasonable ;)

And there we have it.
By Quadrillity on 6/7/2013 12:38:12 PM , Rating: 2
If a single one of you buys and xbox, you are a f****** idiot.

No excuses. Stop supporting companies that head in this direction.

RE: And there we have it.
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 12:50:56 PM , Rating: 3
Agreed. But look at the retards posting in favor of it.

The depth of human stupidity is staggering. They're all around human lemmings begging to be tossed off the cliff.

RE: And there we have it.
By Spuke on 6/7/2013 5:01:11 PM , Rating: 2
The depth of human stupidity is staggering.
Dude you are seriously cracking me up today!

RE: And there we have it.
By mritter1981 on 6/10/2013 4:16:35 AM , Rating: 2
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

If you do, you end up attempting to defend against their undying stupidity (ie:Apple fanboys).

Is it just me...
By dxf2891 on 6/7/2013 3:30:31 PM , Rating: 2
or does it seem like there is a back and forth dance with console manufacturers. First the PS2 held the crown, then the Xbox 360 and now it looks as if Microsoft is handing it back to Sony for their PS4. MS may be able to shift blame to the game developers, but as a consumer I don't care who is to blame, I just won't buy that console if it limits me in my ability to play games I purchase regardless of the source. If this is the case, why not limit themselves further and require you to purchase games via download and remove the middleman all together? That way, there would be no surcharges for the "stores" that would carry them. Microsoft you had a good run. Too bad you spiked the ball 10 yards before you hit the endzone!!!

RE: Is it just me...
By Bateluer on 6/7/2013 8:55:28 PM , Rating: 3
Don't think its fair to say the X360 held the crown this generation. The PS3 sales figures were pretty close, and shifted towards the PS3's favor as their life cycles continued, since the PS3 could play blurays and the 360 couldn't.

RE: Is it just me...
By wallijonn on 6/10/2013 10:25:25 AM , Rating: 2
The XBox360 was the crown champ because Sony sold more PS3 as BD players than as game consoles. Consider the tactics Sony employed to defeat HD-DVD. Sony concentrated on selling the system as a BD player, selling the hardware at a high price but selling BDs for $10 apiece, while Toshiba was selling the hardware cheaply but HD-DVDs were going for $35 apiece. DRM won that battle. The gaming side of the PS3 was ignored. Heck, many PS3 games could only do 720p but the same game on the XBox360 could do 1080p. Perhaps the number of consoles was close but not the number of games sold on each console.

And so, just as few bought the PS3 for its gaming ability, few will probably buy the XB1 for it's gaming ability. What MS is likely to tout is TV video teleconferencing and DVR capabilities. Everything else can probably be done though a $30 LG Smart Box, if the HDTV doesn't have built in Smart abilities, like Netflix, Hulu, UTube, et. al. If some TV maker decides to install an SSD or Hard Disk in their TV then there won't be any need for DVRs since many already have wireless access.

So the question is, to whom does the XB1 appeal to mostly? The TV viewer (DVR, Internet apps.), the film aficionado, or the gamer?

If MS dismisses the gamer then it will likely be ignored by gamers just as the PS3 has.

By half_duplex on 6/7/2013 11:46:57 AM , Rating: 2
This is really going to blow up in their face.

I was about as loyal as one can be to the XBOX franchise, but now I'm going to try and convince anyone who'll listen to pass on MS.

Reading these press releases, I don't even think I'll need to try to hard... even casual gamers are not going to like the idea of this nonsense.

By dxf2891 on 6/7/2013 4:35:15 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft was as successful as it was because they got out in front with Xbox Live. Think about it, they had a paid service that did better than Sony's free service. Why? Because those who invested in the Xbox 360 first, convinced their friends to do so, so they could play together online. I know that's how it progress in my little clan of about 75 gamers. And each one of them probably did the same as well as others all over the country, if not the world. This time around, it will be the PS4. Microsoft is killing the sales of it's own console.

Net Neutrality or unlimited home net...
By Demonhitman on 6/7/2013 3:23:52 PM , Rating: 2
I been thinking about this and I wonder if Net Neutrality could be damaged or the way we get out home net could be changed with these new systems.

I mean if you think about it X1 (and maybe PS4) will always be on for most part and always accessing your Net. The X1 also does some of it's rendering in the cloud, how many KB/MB/GB will that be to UL or DL? I can see ISP starting to really complain. They are already upset they can't limit Netflix, how you think they going feel about game systems always UL or DL something? The ISP's will say with people having Tab's, other devices, and now game systems always accessing the net they can't make money. Some ISP's already give you GB limits and I see more joining. I think we all are about be screwed!

By Motoman on 6/7/2013 7:32:32 PM , Rating: 2
Rendering in the cloud is BS. Not happening, and I don't care what anyone at MS has said about it. It's a horrifically moronic idea that doesn't have the slightest chance in hell of working in the real world.

My Opinion is...
By unimatrix725 on 6/7/2013 5:58:01 PM , Rating: 2
The only way I could accept this DRM scheme from Microsoft or Sony is to foot the internet bill. Why not embed a cellular component with optional antenna. Hell a trac-phone can be bough for15$ or less. The manufacturer or game developer then pays for their forced access.

RE: My Opinion is...
By flyingpants1 on 6/7/2013 8:36:43 PM , Rating: 2
Should be a USB add-on.

Initially - SO WHAT.
By rippleyaliens on 6/8/2013 1:26:53 PM , Rating: 2
So what if the Device wants internet, 24/7.. YADA YADA..

BUT then, Thoughts came a running..
1. Their LAST Console, IE Xbox360, could barely stay on for 3-4 hrs, before OVER-Heating.. Red Ring of Death.. SOOO many Xbox's Burning themselves out..
NOW they want to keep the Device on 24/7..- F-That..

Used games.= That was comming no matter what.. BUT- NOW Microsoft wants to Dictate, on WHAT we purchase, HOW we play it, AND WHAT to do with it, when its OLD???===- F-THAT..

AND-- THE BIGGEST, OH F-THAT--.. Microsoft allows the NSA IE the Ultra secret Government agency-ACCESS to All their stuff.. AND with a gaming system, which has a VERY highspeed Camera\Sound recording capability\CAN sense bodyheat, ETC...
SO now they want us to keep a potential 24\7 Surveillance device online, at all times..

Naa.. F-That.. This is getting very Freaky.. I can only imagine, the First Arrest, BASED on Xbox1- Surveillance..

RE: Initially - SO WHAT.
By half_duplex on 6/9/2013 6:51:15 PM , Rating: 2
I actually agree with the NSA-Facebook-Big Brother-XBOX One connection feeling like a possibility in the future.

It's all getting a little too creepy. Always online, phoning home, data collection, control sets, pattern recognition.

It was just a few years ago people were afraid their iPhones would becoming tracking devices. They have.

By spamreader1 on 6/7/2013 2:14:42 PM , Rating: 2
Unless you go to one of those rumored wifi enabled campsites...

Don't matter to me much anyway, I've gotten my kids slowly weened off consoles, who knew, life exists outside the living room.

By NihilistZerO on 6/7/2013 3:42:24 PM , Rating: 2
The only question is will Sony take advantage? I have a strong feeling they will. Doing nothing is the perfect strategy in the face of Microsoft's stupidity.

no way
By KOOLTIME on 6/7/2013 7:15:09 PM , Rating: 2

Why would I want to be forced online and pay expensive network ISP fees, to play a video game, that's not necessary and expensive.

99.9% of online games are nothing but name calling noobs, or scammers or spammers that are just a hassle to deal with, not fun at all online.

offline, like solitaire on the computer, no hassle no password or accounts or fees to deal with, just simple relax and play a game you like without stupid 3rd parties trying to manipulate my life for every nickle and dime, online.

I would never pay for game that someone else could later tell me i cant play any more due to they have the network control of it.

If i pay 60 bucks for a game I liked, i would want to be sure i could play it whenver I choose, for as long as i wanted to, not some network forcing me to pay more for something i already paid for and ( SHOULD OWN ) but you dont they will block your account, so now all the xbox and games paid 1000's for become a paperweight at their disposal.

No way would i pay 1000's for a system and games, and give up my rights to control such property after i rightly paid for it. I purchased the games, they are not "leased" so to hell with them trying to control something i rightfully paid in full for after the fact.

Cloud the next DRM
By Nephelai on 6/7/2013 8:44:03 PM , Rating: 2
Cloud served leased content will be the next sue-do DRM.

People will never own anything but lease served content from the cloud.

This is just the start of that plan.

By mugiebahar on 6/8/2013 1:29:35 AM , Rating: 2
Every good time must come to an end. I enjoyed the possibilities of Xbox One, but that is now gone. I rooted for you with Xbox and Xbox 360, I bought every peripheral and loads of games (about a 100 each) and even HD DVD player. But now you have made me do something I haven't done in 17 years to buy a Playstation and nothing else. I will even consider the Wii U now as a secondary system as I always buy 2 each round.

I loved you XBOX team from 2000-2013, see you hopefully next console but I can't say for sure I will look @ you again unless lots of fundamentals have changed first.

Good Bye, my Friends I miss you already

Your Friend Mugiebahar

By kileysmith104 on 6/9/2013 11:10:44 AM , Rating: 2
Elizabeth. although Julie`s report is shocking... on tuesday I got Cadillac from earning $7572 this last five weeks and-in excess of, 10-k last-month. it's actualy the most financialy rewarding I've ever had. I started this six months/ago and straight away began to make minimum $81.. per-hr. I went to this web-site, Bow6.comTAKE A LOOK

That sucks
By p05esto on 6/9/2013 10:42:35 PM , Rating: 2
MS blew another one BIG time. I won't buy this and it's DOA, only suckers will buy this thing. Spread the word my tech friends, we influence the world and make things happen. XboxOne will DIE, make it happen one and all.

First sale doctrine?
By purplemonkey111 on 6/10/2013 3:17:05 AM , Rating: 2
So does that mean there is no first sale doctrine with the Xbox One?

X-Box None
By mritter1981 on 6/10/2013 4:26:06 AM , Rating: 2
If M$ does this, I can bet that they will lose product sales to Military Personnel. Most overseas bases have the worst on-base internet services imaginable (basically always on 48.8k for just $90 per month). This also does not include "austere" bases (ie: F.O.B.'s) where there is no commercial broadband. If sony reverses the Cranio-Rectal-Insertion, for the PS4. They will see it easily outsell the competion.

By p05esto on 6/10/2013 10:15:58 AM , Rating: 2
Have to post again.... this sucks and will be the death of the system. Always on internet and no used games is a deal killer for me. Total deal killer.... I promise not to buy this POS system. Is PS4 is the same then I will not buy that either, I'll stick with PC games or just stop gaming...which I do less and less anyway. This will kill the whole industry like what happened in the 1980s

By room200 on 6/10/2013 9:08:08 PM , Rating: 2
Lost a sale from me. I have the original Xbox and the Xbox360. I liked the niftiness of some of the features, but I'm not about to pay 500 bucks for niftiness on a restricted console.

24 hours?
By Mitch101 on 6/7/13, Rating: -1
RE: 24 hours?
By half_duplex on 6/7/2013 11:50:29 AM , Rating: 2
LOL... piracy... hilarious.

This has nothing to do with piracy, this is only about generating new streams of revenue.

The reason good games studios go out of business is because of policies like this.

RE: 24 hours?
By Mitch101 on 6/7/2013 12:17:21 PM , Rating: 2
I agree there is certainly money to be made in the resale of games.

I do believe it is also to cut down on the piracy numbers as well. Microsoft has proven bricking pirate consoles leads to more console sales.

I dont agree that good game studios go out of business because of policies like this. If its a good game let them make a buck on the resale. Its not much but its something otherwise they get nothing by the game being resold. It doesnt have to be much they would otherwise not get a dime from resold games.

This is obviously pressure from game studios who want this and Microsoft catering to them.

RE: 24 hours?
By Spuke on 6/7/2013 4:54:35 PM , Rating: 2
If its a good game let them make a buck on the resale.
Would you let Toyota make a buck on the resale of your Camry (just an example)?

RE: 24 hours?
By Mitch101 on 6/7/2013 6:38:51 PM , Rating: 2
I conceded above to Motoman's argument on resale. Im onboard with this being the wrong decision on Microsoft's behalf.

RE: 24 hours?
By ClownPuncher on 6/7/2013 11:55:11 AM , Rating: 2
I was going to click "Not Worth Reading", but I'd rather say it. Your post was not worth reading.

RE: 24 hours?
By Mitch101 on 6/7/2013 11:57:25 AM , Rating: 2
Not worth explaining?

RE: 24 hours?
By ClownPuncher on 6/7/2013 12:02:45 PM , Rating: 2
My internet has gone out for more than 24 hours. Even when I lived in Redmond.

RE: 24 hours?
By piroroadkill on 6/7/2013 12:06:21 PM , Rating: 2
Mine was out for 6 weeks at one point. The line needed repair.

RE: 24 hours?
By tayb on 6/7/2013 1:27:25 PM , Rating: 1
I live in Dallas, TX and in January moved to an upscale high-rise complex. It took me 8 days to get someone out there to hook up the internet. If I were an owner of the Xbox One I would have just been shit out of luck for that entire period. I wouldn't be able to play the games I legally and lawfully purchased.

Fuck that. Seriously, fuck that. I don't care if the Xbox One launches with every game I've wanted. I won't buy it out of protest for bullshit anti-consumer policies.

RE: 24 hours?
By Mitch101 on 6/7/2013 3:29:15 PM , Rating: 1
All anyone has to say is I think it should be 14 or 30 days Ive run into situations where I couldn't get internet for X days.

State your case instead of going on crazed rampages.

RE: 24 hours?
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 3:50:07 PM , Rating: 2
How about you state a case where there's a benefit to the consumer to have any requirement at all?

...because there is none.

RE: 24 hours?
By inighthawki on 6/7/2013 3:59:23 PM , Rating: 2
Unfortunately in the business world not everything is about the customer. It is very obvious that this feature is intended to publishers. Unfortunate but true.

I do believe if the feature is implemented well enough, though, the used games market could actually get a large boost. Sure people like gamestop will see a hit, but it may be easier than ever for people to deactivate their game online and get credits for new games, as well as others to reactivate at a lower cost, all while allowing the developer to keep more of the money (instead of gamestop). Again though... if done responsibly.

I'm not saying I agree with an internet connection being a requirement, but I think the system as a whole has more potential than many people here are giving it credit for. You are not looking beyond problems that are to face a tiny fraction of their target demographic in exchange for a large potential gain.

RE: 24 hours?
By ven1ger on 6/7/2013 5:03:35 PM , Rating: 2
A large potential gain? For whom? Not for the consumer, all the potential you see will amount to probably nothing except to allow publishers to make more money.

RE: 24 hours?
By inighthawki on 6/8/2013 11:32:47 AM , Rating: 2
Obviously I speak only for myself, but as an avid steam user I welcome these changes. It makes it far easier for me to buy new games and manage my game library without hassle. Digital distribution also means more money in the developers pockets which means (hopefully) better games.

I understand not everyone shares my views, but I feel like this type of thing is exactly what steam has been doing for years now, and I happen to enjoy the capabilities that steam offers, and its unification of everything. We will see.

RE: 24 hours?
By V-Money on 6/7/2013 1:58:23 PM , Rating: 2
Who's internet goes out for more than 24 hours?

As a former (and soon to be again) submariner, mine. It turns out that there isn't much internet down in the ocean deep, and since its kind of a stressful job its nice every now and again to play a game to relax in the very little free time that you get.

Since the world revolves around you though and it doesn't affect you I guess its not a problem. You sound just as bad as someone in San Diego asking why anyone would ever need a truck or 4 wheel drive, its always such beautiful weather and no one needs anything more than a Prius.

In short what I'm trying to say is F#@% Microsoft and F@^# you.

RE: 24 hours?
By Mitch101 on 6/7/2013 3:27:39 PM , Rating: 2
So why not just come out and say it would acceptable if it were 30 days instead of F#@% everyone?

RE: 24 hours?
By Motoman on 6/7/2013 3:33:42 PM , Rating: 2
I have a better idea. Why not just forget *ever* requiring that the console be hooked up to the internet?

Because there's not the slightest reason why that should be a requirement. Ever. Period. Done.

RE: 24 hours?
By Mitch101 on 6/7/2013 3:39:13 PM , Rating: 2
We would all love to see that but if its not going to happen the question then is what is acceptable but you've already answered that.

I really hope they don't do this but I have a good internet connection and it makes no difference to me.

RE: 24 hours?
By dxf2891 on 6/7/2013 4:18:06 PM , Rating: 2
It will make a difference if you buy the console on good faith, but those of us who have supported Microsoft consoles in the past don't, and then their the bevvy of games dries up due to dwindling sales of said console. I think someone said it earlier, this all comes down to choice. If Microsoft and the game companies choose to do this on the Xbox One, I see only Microsoft suffering as a result. If the PS4 decides to forge ahead with business as usual, then Sony will be the winner here. It all comes down to choice. My choice will be predicated by Microsoft's choice.

RE: 24 hours?
By superflex on 6/7/2013 3:39:46 PM , Rating: 2
Why not just STFU and admit you were wrong?

RE: 24 hours?
By V-Money on 6/7/2013 7:54:13 PM , Rating: 2
Because you specifically said who doesn't have access to the internet. I was only proving a point. Also, show me a submarine that doesn't go out for more than 30 days at a time. I once spent 89 days straight under the ocean, thats a long time of unplayability.

RE: 24 hours?
By inighthawki on 6/8/2013 11:35:25 AM , Rating: 2
I'm wondering why, considering how similar it already is to steam, why they don't have(or at least haven't announced) an offline mode. This would pretty much solve all the issues regarding the "always on" connection.

You people are pathetic
By flyingpants1 on 6/7/13, Rating: -1
RE: You people are pathetic
By opy on 6/7/2013 6:34:41 PM , Rating: 1
You wanna disclose the company you work for mate?

RE: You people are pathetic
By flyingpants1 on 6/7/2013 8:12:59 PM , Rating: 2

RE: You people are pathetic
By wempa on 6/7/2013 11:30:44 PM , Rating: 1

Interesting rant there. You're right that we're not entitled to anything. However, we certainly have a right to (1) not buy the console (2) let MS know exactly WHY we won't be buying it and (3) informing potential customers about these ridiculous restrictions that will be used on the Xbox One.

RE: You people are pathetic
By flyingpants1 on 6/8/2013 2:11:07 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with all of what you said.

Market pressure is not necessarily effective though, considering how oligopolistic the gaming industry is, and the fact that the overwhelming majority of games are now supercasual COD/Skyrim players.

RE: You people are pathetic
By p05esto on 6/10/13, Rating: 0
RE: You people are pathetic
By dxf2891 on 6/10/2013 12:08:20 PM , Rating: 1
And this is why people mod consoles. GREED is the root of all evil. They charge is $300 - $600 for the console and then $50 - $70 for the game and $50 - $60 annually to play online, and that's not enough? No, they want us to pay a fee for "used" and/or borrowed games. What's next, controller usage fees? Hard drive access fees? Power on/ Login fees? If we, the consumer, don't make a stand and hurt them in delusional greed filled tizzy, they'll continue to propogate this behavior. Well, I for one refuse to stand for it. As long as I'm buying games for my 360, they'll hopefully keep making them for it. And when they don't, hopefully there will be an innovative, independent, consumer friendly manufacturer that will come on the scene.

"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki