Microsoft backtracks on DRM and used games

mrpuny

New member
Jan 1, 2013
172
0
0
Visit site
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.

Do you almost get the feeling we've been punk'd (showing my age) or stuck on 'candid camera' (truly showing my age) with this? WTF is going on that MS could announce a system, get the messaging so completely screwed up, not have any coherent response, and then do a 180 within a couple of weeks? If Ballmer is any sort of leader, heads should be rolling. If he's not a leader, his head should be rolling.....
 

ncxcstud

New member
Dec 16, 2010
1,147
0
0
Visit site
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.

The lone solace is that we can buy the digital versions of those games and still (HOPEFULLY) retain that ability...
 

squire777

New member
Feb 21, 2012
1,345
0
0
Visit site
It's funny reading comments on game sites from people saying that they still won't get an Xbox One even though MS changed their policies. I think the people who complained loudest about the Xbox One were probably never going to buy one regardless of what features it had.
 

oldpueblo

New member
Jan 14, 2011
892
0
0
Visit site
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.

Uh no, I guess I was just paying attention more than you were. We don't need to know every single detail and petty rule because we had the concept up front. All that was left was the logistics of it. But is that what people complained about? No, they complained about being watched by Kinect and what about the military having ****ty Internet. There was no additional inconvenience for the modern age any more than any other current day service we all use daily. Just babies crying. Well now we all get to eat chewed up baby food because some of us couldn't grow up.
 

theeboredone

New member
Oct 7, 2012
325
0
0
Visit site
It's kinda amazing how such a big corporation can screw up so bad. You figure they would've taken notes from the PS3 "599.99 US Dollars" or any other debacles MS themselves had in the past and go from there. I mean, aren't these guys coming from universities with great backgrounds, experience, and just overall an understanding or the market? It's almost like MS lost touch with gamers, and along with it went how to properly explain their technology.

Given the fact they didn't have all the details on the DRM and sharing games at E3, something tells me that they had not worked out all the kinks. So as stated earlier, it wouldn't surprise me if they decided to roll this out later on. If we're expected to have another long cycle of 7-8 years, I can see the DRM/Sharing coming out 2-4 years down the line.
 

vertigoOne

New member
Nov 1, 2012
226
0
0
Visit site
In one of the very many articles that I have read since this news broke, it was stated by a notable MS representative that Don Mattrick was never supportive of the 24-hour check-in. It's not that hard to see why the advantages were not highlighted at all...they were already considering to change the policy and the reaction at the Sony conference all but sealed the deal.

From what I gather, they wanted the focus of E3 to be the games and not the DRM policies...but I think their games would have gotten a lot more attention if they had diverted the issue by addressing this policy change during E3. Even a simple "we have heard what you want, and we are working on a solution" would have sufficed. If I had anything to do with it, that messaging would have been out there as a direct response on Youtube to the PS4 game sharing video.
 

Angry_Mushroom

New member
Jan 18, 2013
402
0
0
Visit site
Check that out... Microsoft does listen to consumers. 8.1 will bring back a start button, and now the One will undo everything we hate about it. Of course there will still be a Kinect. I'm still wondering just how many servicemen/women on submarines play videogames...
 

Keith Wallace

New member
Nov 8, 2012
3,179
0
0
Visit site
Uh no, I guess I was just paying attention more than you were. We don't need to know every single detail and petty rule because we had the concept up front. All that was left was the logistics of it. But is that what people complained about? No, they complained about being watched by Kinect and what about the military having ****ty Internet. There was no additional inconvenience for the modern age any more than any other current day service we all use daily. Just babies crying. Well now we all get to eat chewed up baby food because some of us couldn't grow up.

Good to see that you backed anything up with facts, instead of saying "no." Prove that they promoted and fully explained the sharing system and its benefits, along with how it would function, re: synchronous play. Link me the article explaining the rules and restrictions on joining a family (or multiple families).

It's not just having sub-par internet in the military. It's many rural areas and military bases that could not access the Internet dependably. It can also happen that a college campus can lose its Internet for a period of time (my school did, though I think it was only for a day, if even that). The problem isn't just that it was an inconvenience, either. It turned a $500 investment into a useless paperweight for no good reason that wasn't avoidable.

If you REALLY want to blame anyone though, blame Microsoft. They refused to clarify the situation. They refused to put any effort into making a system that worked for everyone. It wouldn't have been that difficult to take the initial system and add a disc-based check-in as a backup. Basically, they could have taken the new (well, old), disc-based system, and made it a secondary addition to the digital one, and it would have solved the offline issues while not hurting those who liked the prospect of sharing games and were OK with needing a frequent Internet connection. So call it "babies crying" because people want to be able to play the consoles that they purchase, and I'll say that you're the petty one.
 

Keith Wallace

New member
Nov 8, 2012
3,179
0
0
Visit site
Check that out... Microsoft does listen to consumers. 8.1 will bring back a start button, and now the One will undo everything we hate about it. Of course there will still be a Kinect. I'm still wondering just how many servicemen/women on submarines play videogames...

In fairness, the Start button that is coming is just that Start screen window that already comes up when you have the cursor in the lower-left of the screen. It's just a Start screen redirect. People want the Start MENU, not the button.

Also, it's not just submarines. As someone here claimed (and I cannot verify), Sony's consoles aren't allowed on the DoD's network. That might (and likely would) apply to the Xbox as well, meaning those overseas on bases would be in a similar situation. My friend in the Navy has also said that his Internet is unreliable, and that's on a carrier in open water. I'm not sure if that's just a testament to inconsistent speeds, or if there is a frequent loss of connection altogether, but it's not a submariners-only thing. In fact, I wonder if such devices are even ALLOWED on submarines, given the need for efficient use of space.
 

Keith Wallace

New member
Nov 8, 2012
3,179
0
0
Visit site
? 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 big problem is that I'd never HEARD of that first part, and they never clarified on the second. They let all of the media members hear about the bad, but they elected to use their PR department to say "it's fine if you don't like it," rather than saying "it might be a bit inflexible, but you get THIS as a result." Microsoft just chose to ignore informing the seething masses about the positives of the new system, so while it might be that the media and gamers caused the switch, Microsoft was equally at-fault for the change, because they ignored several opportunities over a 2-week span to calm people down. They also ignored finding a simple middle ground, instead deciding that if they can't force the new system onto everyone, they'll punish those willing (even wanting) to accept the new system.

I mean, I legitimately wonder if Microsoft has some strong desire to cause its users to hate each other, or if they just want to anger EVERY customer possible by making one group mad to the point where many won't even listen to anything good, then switching to a platform that angers the other half of the aisle. They literally took the worst route to this possible, and it could be argued that this fix actually leads to a worse system for everyone.

What it seems Microsoft failed to do it both explain their position and REALLY listen to people. They took "we want to play offline" as "change it back," rather than "make it better." It's like they only listened to those who were anti-Microsoft regardless, rather than trying to take input from folks such as myself, who wanted to make a workable hybrid system. I mean, I legitimately question if Microsoft is capable of making this situation any worse. I mean, I guess they could say that the switch will mean $70 games or something.
 

oldpueblo

New member
Jan 14, 2011
892
0
0
Visit site
Good to see that you backed anything up with facts, instead of saying "no." Prove that they promoted and fully explained the sharing system and its benefits, along with how it would function, re: synchronous play. Link me the article explaining the rules and restrictions on joining a family (or multiple families).

It's not just having sub-par internet in the military. It's many rural areas and military bases that could not access the Internet dependably. It can also happen that a college campus can lose its Internet for a period of time (my school did, though I think it was only for a day, if even that). The problem isn't just that it was an inconvenience, either. It turned a $500 investment into a useless paperweight for no good reason that wasn't avoidable.

If you REALLY want to blame anyone though, blame Microsoft. They refused to clarify the situation. They refused to put any effort into making a system that worked for everyone. It wouldn't have been that difficult to take the initial system and add a disc-based check-in as a backup. Basically, they could have taken the new (well, old), disc-based system, and made it a secondary addition to the digital one, and it would have solved the offline issues while not hurting those who liked the prospect of sharing games and were OK with needing a frequent Internet connection. So call it "babies crying" because people want to be able to play the consoles that they purchase, and I'll say that you're the petty one.

I don't need to prove anything, sufficient information was given about the potential of sharing for those of us that applied some brain power to understand it. That was not anywhere near what people were complaining about. Seriously we need to design everything around the military's and poor people's limitation's now? That is amazingly dumb. We knew we had an awesome new sharing and online ability, the rest was just fine print. There are numerous "daily used by millions of people" precedents for always online technology. You know what's worse than not knowing every tiny detail about something you know is going to be par for the course for current technology? Having the same old ****ty rules that we have right now, having to deal with physical media. Hey Netflix I have a great idea, you should dump your online streaming because I love putting in DVDs all day and sharing those with my friends! Let me save you some future headache and complaining, don't ever use the below services:

Netflix
Hulu
Amazon Prime
HBO Go
Steam
Youtube
Facebook
Twitter
Online multiplayer games
MMORPGs
Literally any modern day technology/service

And who are you to know exactly what is possible and what isn't? You claim their just lazy but I'm pretty sure you didn't sit there with them planning the technology that would work best for the largest install-base. Which FYI isn't people in third world countries with ****ty Internet. And it's for damn sure not just for the military. Let Uncle Sam work that one out, that's THEIR job. MS is a business and they of course WANT to design for literally everybody. But you can't. If you do you end up with the lowest common denominator of technology. Which is what it looks like we're getting now, yay.
 

smoledman

Banned
Apr 17, 2012
1,303
0
0
Visit site
The fact remains is that console gaming is a super-special snowflake not to be compared with Steam/Netflix/whatever. Why, because it's SPECIAL and gamers EXPLODE WITH RAGE.
 

DreadVenom

New member
Dec 6, 2012
269
0
0
Visit site
Firstly small portion of blame goes to MS for the way they explained these policies BUT a majority goes to these people(gamers) that MS thought had the common sense to realise that what they were looking to implement would not only be a revolution but the next logical step for console based gaming. This could have been the gateway for a steam like implementation.

I wont go on but this is truly a sad day for gaming technology. I really hope MS doesn't totally abandon it as their approach makes perfect sense.

Well done everybody, again the company that is said doesn't innovate tried, with something new, radical, revolutionary and would have evolved gaming. Oh well i guess ms can shut down them 300k servers.
 

CaptDjob

New member
May 11, 2012
159
0
0
Visit site
This is a sad, sad day for gaming.

I'll have to strongly reconsider if the Xbox One is worth my time and money now.


Sent from my iPhone

I agree, but I still buy this. Hopefully you can buy all games digitally on launch day (with good download speed) and that way have the online game library still. Also that you could play your games at any xbox with your login.
 

AaHaa

New member
Oct 15, 2012
200
0
0
Visit site
Is it me or is the internet relatively quiet about this change? I mean, I've seen hundreds of GIFS about how hard the Xbox One #FAILS, but none about this whole thing. Seems kinda unfair.
 

MC_A_DOT

New member
May 22, 2013
15
0
0
Visit site
Sorry but I have to say that I'm happy about the removal of the 'enhancements/restrictions'. They didn't bother me at all...I was all in but everybody I know, including my closest friends for many years who have a 360 (apart from one person) had already decided that they weren't happy with what Microsoft were doing and were moving to PS4. I know for a fact that this will bring them back.

Too bad about the family share option...i was really looking forward to that....I guess the complaints showed that people aren't ready for some new technology.
 

martinmc78

New member
Oct 30, 2012
2,745
0
0
Visit site
Is it me or is the internet relatively quiet about this change? I mean, I've seen hundreds of GIFS about how hard the Xbox One #FAILS, but none about this whole thing. Seems kinda unfair.

Have you not been looking at the comments on the reports on the tech websites - practically every other comment is now asking to remove Kinect and drop the price - Even Xbox360 magazines twitter account has been going on about that all morning - saying its the best option to offer two versions and lower the price to compete with Sony.

MS have given in once - how long before they take heed of the new round of whining b*tches and give in again and remove the Kinect. 2 weeks? A month? - Can guarantee that's what's next.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
323,689
Messages
2,244,222
Members
428,099
Latest member
kowpozx