Microsoft backtracks on DRM and used games

[NaNoo123]

That's how i read it, so hopefully in the near future they will implement some of the features etc. Just 'ruled out' for launch.

 

[michfan]

but what... story? honestly i dont know what people like you expected them to say, but i always understood the purpose of this DRM 24 hours check. only because people covered their eyes and ears it doesnt mean Microsoft told you could share games with 10 persons, play anywhere, dont worry about discs and resell and give it to someone and use used games.
maybe its that other humans are too dumb to understand all those interviews with Xbox guys and news from Xbox site? because I always understood how Microsoft vision was and what they were trying to achieve.
anyway, most people always complained, still today people say "now Microsoft allows resell and play used games" like if that wasn't the case before. so again, only because some people covered their eyes and ears to some stuff, it doesn't mean Microsoft didn't say it.

1) MS let the cat out of the bag in a press release
2) It's not my job as a consumer to go to dozens of websites to try and piece it all together, it's MS' job to make a coherent sales pitch to me
3) When MS had the platform at E3 they did not directly explain "we need 24-hour check-in because ...","we will only allow a game to be gifted once because...", "you have to be friends for 30 days before gifting a game because...", "3rd party publishers can set their own policies for trade-in because...", "you can no longer sell games on eBay because...". So this is what happens when you let the public complete those sentences.

Not fair to expect people to scour the internet in an effort to redeem MS, not fair to call them dumb for not doing so.

 

[_Emi_]

Petition
http://www.change.org/petitions/xbox-one-give-us-back-the-original-xbox-one#share

awww poor little thing! I wanna hug you. they wont give it back! not on release. I know it was a nice feature and it was ruined by some idiots. but they are giving you sharing games and all! because apparently people would rather to share their games on discs with people close to them, expecting your disc survive. than share then digitally.. you know with people around the world! world world world(that was the echo ;D).

The problem is that Microsoft didn't make the benefits clear to everyone. Family share was only ever mentioned on their website and it has been so often misrepresented in articles in newspapers and even on gaming websites that your average customer basically has no chance to know what it really is. Microsoft didn't really take control of their PR past reveal because the Xbox One quickly became "always online" and "no used games" in the public perception, even though both of those things clearly weren't the case. But once the public starts believing one thing, it's too late to change their mind. Basically, if Microsoft would've handled the PR better post X1 reveal, we might be still awaiting the digital future...

but that's my point! they explained it in a lot of ways, but people never were listening to them, why? because never wanted to do it! they only expected them to say. no matter how you wanna put it, some people would never want to hear even if you write it, say it, scream it. they would rather believe the rumors that are really old and are proven to be false than trying to understand the vision Microsoft wanted.
isn't it funny? people complaining about xbox one being region blocked like if 360 wasn't region blocked as well? that's what I mean... people seem not to use much their brain these days. so I don't expect they would understand Microsoft vision even if it had some benefit, I mean... if they keep saying how ALL games ran on win7 pcs, and MS has no confidence in win8, and that's why xbox one is crap because not even games ran on it (which is a lie) that's the kind of ignorance and stupidity you have to expect from humans these days. because they believed that! but they couldn't see "10 family sharing feature" and think "oh that sounds really good because it means I can share my games with my family around the world!" no, a lot of people didn't do that. because again, they closed their eyes and ears and just expected and wanted "xbox one ftl" "xbox one is crap" "ps4 ftw".
example, just look at windows 8, it works the same as win7, it works sometimes faster, it works really good even in old hardware, but people still say its crap, and windows 7 is for "real work" and windows 8 not. and don't say MS hasn't explained the vision they want to achieve with win8, or how it works the same than win7 and it only looks a bit different. see! people are dumb, no matter what you do

 

[DavidinCT]

I was thinking similarly. Why not give the option. You buy the game and the second you put it into your console it asks you if you want it to be installed on the hard drive or kept on the disc. If you choose the former, you can have all the benefits of the previous strategy; if you choose the latter, you can have your crappy offline-only experience that you and your ignorant friends think you wanted.

You could not do that, it would confuse people. Discs have to be DRMed or not, there is no in between. People would want to know 100% if they buy a disc, they can use it, if some were DRM'ed and others not, it would be too much of a headache for people.

Sorry to say, it was 100% impossible to make EVERYONE happy here. The gamers have spoken and people are afraid of change, this is what caused this. I think the biggest problem here was 24 hour checks, it's a pretty big deal to a lot of people and people who have NO ACCESS to internet where they live.

Who is the biggest at fault here ? Not the gamers or people here, it's Microsoft plain and simple. They gave little tidbits of info with out all the details. They left a LOT of questions open and people/tech writers started assuming and that made it even worse. Now people who didn't care anyway about it started to learn about the possible faults with DRM, and the internet blew up. Not just this site, global and in many different languages. I have been reading every detail about this I could find, and yes in different languages.

Should have MS gonej this route ? Yes and no. They want a digital world for gaming, like Steam has done but they did it and marketed it the complete wrong way. Now the changes will make MOST people happy not everyone but most.

My honest thoughts here. Microsoft should of kept the same model but make digital downloads and media content total different items. Physical media will be like it is with the 360, exactly but, digital will give you the option to, not need a disc, share with family, and all the other features that they were promoting. People would learn very quickly about the differences, so for $59.99+ tax, you can get a physical disc that you can do what ever you want with OR you can get a digital download with all the features like people might want. This could grow the digital marketplace and if it grows that quick, it could get it where Microsoft wants to go. Also they could offer a something to send in the disc with $5-10 to convert it to a digital for those features(then used game could be resold for more $$f for devs/ms)

I was leaning to accept no real used games (or at least good prices on them) but my biggest issue was 24 hour checks, I loved everything else. Not everyone has a perfect internet connection/ISP so this could be a big issue with a lot of people.

Microsoft should met people 1/2 way here, give a little and take a little but they just through in the towel.

I am sure you will still have to install it to you HD but, you would need to confirm with the disc

 

[theefman]

At the end of the day this is Microsoft's screw up. They should have known requiring a 24 hour internet checkin would affect people and whether they are a minority or not they would not be happy. A system should have been worked out to accommodate them as well as their online scenario but in typical Microsoft fashion they chose to just plow ahead hoping people wouldn't make a fuss. A truly forward thinking company would have found a way to move forward with their ideas while also making sure those who didn't want to or couldn't work with their system would be accommodated instead of conceding them to their competitor. The fact that they were willing to just completely disregard people in the military all over the world says a lot so if anyone is to blame for losing some nice features its Microsoft themselves.

 

[dba415]

MS did the smart thing here. The current DRM console would have gotten CREAMED by the PS4 in sales. This new Xbox stands a chance.

 

[TechFreak1]

1) MS let the cat out of the bag in a press release
2) It's not my job as a consumer to go to dozens of websites to try and piece it all together, it's MS' job to make a coherent sales pitch to me
3) When MS had the platform at E3 they did not directly explain "we need 24-hour check-in because ...","we will only allow a game to be gifted once because...", "you have to be friends for 30 days before gifting a game because...", "3rd party publishers can set their own policies for trade-in because...", "you can no longer sell games on eBay because...". So this is what happens when you let the public complete those sentences.

Not fair to expect people to scour the internet in an effort to redeem MS, not fair to call them dumb for not doing so.

Very true indeed, if they made it clear cut and concise instead of letting get into a huge mess like for example Mattrick said if you want offline stick with the 360.. that attitude really didn't help.. it just made things worse and showed a lack of compassion towards their consumers very very evident, also they did not disclose what the pay wall fee would be either that was another item to contend with. Sony where as on the other hand, their message was clear cut and of course MS not explaining their stance played their advantage.

 

[mrpuny]

awww poor little thing! I wanna hug you. they wont give it back! not on release. I know it was a nice feature and it was ruined by some idiots. but they are giving you sharing games and all! because apparently people would rather to share their games on discs with people close to them, expecting your disc survive. than share then digitally.. you know with people around the world! world world world(that was the echo ;D).



but that's my point! they explained it in a lot of ways, but people never were listening to them, why? because never wanted to do it! they only expected them to say. no matter how you wanna put it, some people would never want to hear even if you write it, say it, scream it. they would rather believe the rumors that are really old and are proven to be false than trying to understand the vision Microsoft wanted.
isn't it funny? people complaining about xbox one being region blocked like if 360 wasn't region blocked as well? that's what I mean... people seem not to use much their brain these days. so I don't expect they would understand Microsoft vision even if it had some benefit, I mean... if they keep saying how ALL games ran on win7 pcs, and MS has no confidence in win8, and that's why xbox one is crap because not even games ran on it (which is a lie) that's the kind of ignorance and stupidity you have to expect from humans these days. because they believed that! but they couldn't see "10 family sharing feature" and think "oh that sounds really good because it means I can share my games with my family around the world!" no, a lot of people didn't do that. because again, they closed their eyes and ears and just expected and wanted "xbox one ftl" "xbox one is crap" "ps4 ftw".
example, just look at windows 8, it works the same as win7, it works sometimes faster, it works really good even in old hardware, but people still say its crap, and windows 7 is for "real work" and windows 8 not. and don't say MS hasn't explained the vision they want to achieve with win8, or how it works the same than win7 and it only looks a bit different. see! people are dumb, no matter what you do

Well, yes and no. I agree there's a tendency to pile on Microsoft in the media and blogs, but MS didn't do anything to help themselves. Can you honestly say you fully understood how the system was supposed to work. Exactly? Like how many licenses would there be for a single game? How would family member check out the licenses? (I was listening to an AV related podcast, and the reasonably tech savvy hosts were confused about the issues, debating them, and the one thing they finally agreed on was it didn't seem like even MS fully understood what they were proposing, and one of them made a comment like "whatever they're talking about, it'll probably work completely differently six months after release. Funny enough, 2 of the 3 hosts ended up picking the Xbox one, though...)

If MS really had this fleshed out, why didn't they show examples? Maybe at the end of their E3 presentation, they could have shown an example of opening a Skype session, inviting one of their engineers to play a game, and when he says he doesn't have it, telling him to just log into the shared library and try it out. Or when Sony did their "how to share PS4 games video", MS could have countered with comparison videos between PS4 and Xbox One sharing. Here's an idea. A guy wants to borrow a game and <pick one>: the PS4 game owner keeps forgetting it at home, the PS4 game owner wants it back and the borrower keeps forgetting to return it, the PS4 owner gets the disc back and it looks like it's been scraped over sandpaper, etc., whereas the Xbox One owner just says "hey just check it out from my shared library". Simple and it would have been hard to counter. But MS almost seemed to want to ignore the family sharing after bringing it up.

2nd edit: (First was changing Kinect session to Skype session) If the "Family sharing" was supposed to not be strictly family sharing, but anyone no matter their relation and the geographical proximity as one of their execs stated, why call it "family sharing" and confuse the issue. Why not call it something like "inner circle" (ok, that's horrible), but something that would indicate that it's not just family, rather than confusing the issue?

 

[lemonsteveo]

Oh well, fangirls can't complain anymore. But damn, no family sharing - that would've been great. I guess it kinda made a difference though, the Xbox has regained it's crown as best seller on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/best-sellers-...ag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=UUwpUvbUpU2014128

 

[DaveGx]

I had some complaints but my biggest was the lack of real details and the horrible PR by MS. I think everything would've been fine if they all got on the same page and layed things out in detail.

Now that sharing is going away, I wonder what other negative affects there will be if any with the direction MS wanted to go and the benefits of it.

 

[oldpueblo]

I knew from the start how it worked, with almost no effort. The only effort was basically reading an article. So sorry, no excuse for ignorance. MS was clear from the start, people just couldn't hear them over their own whiny screams of DRM!!!

 

[Keith Wallace]

I knew from the start how it worked, with almost no effort. The only effort was basically reading an article. So sorry, no excuse for ignorance. MS was clear from the start, people just couldn't hear them over their own whiny screams of DRM!!!

That's a total lie. It STILL hasn't been stated clearly how the system would have worked. That is why it was stated that Major Nelson would have an update on his blog about it this week. We did not know the restrictions on synchronous play. We did not know the restrictions on what determined who could be shared with. We did not know if a person could be in multiple families. We did not know if disc-based and digital games would have the exact same restrictions and rules. There was plenty that wasn't plainly explained, which is why the general public was not willing to accept change.

As I had mentioned, I might be accepting of the check-in system if the clarifications of the sharing system showed that they were worth the possible inconvenience of the check-in. Instead, Microsoft kept quiet about the benefits of their sharing system, and so no one decided it was worth considering.

 

[ncxcstud]

You can tell how much MS failed in conveying their message by just looking at the comments of any article about this news. How many times do I have to read - "But, now you can lend your game disc to the WORLD instead of just 10 people."

Come on MS!

I'm just going to buy digital games from here on out in hopes that the feature will come back for digital purchasers...

 

[Musicman247]

I was going to purchase digitally anyway. I had a friend in Europe that had already decided with me that we would be sharing games as family members since he doesn't have the income to buy many games and I do. To bad for him, I guess.

 

[DaveGx]

Good article on this. https://medium.com/adventures-in-consumer-technology/a849a9d4d530

I still think what they screwed up before was PR. They did not do a good job at getting their message out. Yes, many tech sites and such are against them, but there were some of us who might have had issues with it, but it was hard to get clear answers about things. Inexcusable for a company as large and wealthy as MS to continue to fail at PR.

Im starting to think we indeed lost a good deal with this 180. From the article I linked:

• If you purchased a physical disc game, your game was tied to your account and you could go to any other Xbox One and be able to have access to your entire library without carrying physical discs around
• You could re-sell your physical disc game to Gamestop or any participating outlet that opted into Microsoft’s revenue sharing system
• You could buy a used physical disc game from a participating retailer and play it like a new game
• You could install all your games onto your hard drive and not have to get up all the time to swap discs
• You could buy a digital copy and sell it or gift it to a friend (a previously unheard-of policy in digital games)
• You could potentially share your entire library with 10 friends/family members, with the only limitation being that you couldn’t play the same game at once


The poor messaging and lack of clear message is what did MS in. They couldve cleared it all up and stuck with one message, and perhaps tweaking things a bit for the better. Now we are left with just another console. I admit I had my doubts about things, but did not expect or want this to happen.

 

[In Limbo]

I recant my former statements about Microsoft

 

[smoledman]

Well this sucks...

And I mean Microsoft has already put a lot or money, time, and R&D developing all these cool next gen stuff that they just took out.
I feel like what they'll do is just shelf it for 6 months after the release, get in all the preorders and happy *cough*ignorannt*cough* consumers that wanted all the old changes to buy xboxone..and then slowly introduce the the next gen stuff like sharing and internet and DRM, either in a mix of old and new gen, or opt in.

Microsoft's problem for not doing due diligence before spending a lot of money on DRM features that nobody asked for.

 

[smoledman]

1) MS let the cat out of the bag in a press release
2) It's not my job as a consumer to go to dozens of websites to try and piece it all together, it's MS' job to make a coherent sales pitch to me
3) When MS had the platform at E3 they did not directly explain "we need 24-hour check-in because ...","we will only allow a game to be gifted once because...", "you have to be friends for 30 days before gifting a game because...", "3rd party publishers can set their own policies for trade-in because...", "you can no longer sell games on eBay because...". So this is what happens when you let the public complete those sentences.

Not fair to expect people to scour the internet in an effort to redeem MS, not fair to call them dumb for not doing so.

How are they supposed to do that above the roar of a hateful media?

 

[DaveGx]

Me: "Xbox Play Halo"

Xbox: "Get up off your **** and switch discs!"

Damn it! I liked the no disc feature and fast switching. Too bad they can't keep some features for those that wanted them. I bet you most people would've opted in for them. That's what they should've done. Have an opt in feature.

 

[DaveGx]

How are they supposed to do that above the roar of a hateful media?

You're right, but its clear they failed hard on PR with all this. Not everyone was on the same page and there were still details not known.