How Games Licensing Works on Xbox One

[DaveGx]

DRM has always existed on consoles, with maybe the exception of the Dreamcast, but Microsoft is choosing to push it into the internet age where Sony is hanging on to the Disc as Nintendo hung on to the cartridge.

With the restrictions and hassles I think its going to hurt MS more than they realize. Word of mouth alone over this is going to hurt them badly. Sony and Nintendo are smart in not rushing out to do this.

The ONLY way I see this working out for MS is if game publishers go to them first with more games and big exclusives and shying away from the other two. I dont see that happening.

The recent talk of privacy issues in our government and now forcing a Kenect on some who wont want isn't a good either.

 

[TonyDedrick]

I swear nobody has read the actual Microsoft press release. It says in big fat letters this can be done easily via mobile internet.

Pretty much every article I've read across all the tech sites misses this vital information, or hides it at the bottom of the article, deliberately to prompt nerd rage.

I honestly can't remember the last time I went 24 hours without access to the internet via Broadband, Wifi, or mobile broadband. Can't say i'm worried about the 24 hour timer.

My wife works for a university. Her job requires we live on campus. So we are at the mercy of their internet and cable services. I can say for a fact that there are moments (due to weather) the internet goes out. And sometimes, it is for a day. When there's no cable or internet, then gaming is really all you got (outside of watching a movie, reading a book or playing a board game). I wouldn't really be too broken up. But it would stink

 

[Reflexx]

If Sony doesn't have something similar, but you can play a game from the hard drive without the disc, there will be rampant piracy.

Well, unless publishers use their own DRM requiring either the disc be in the tray or an online connection. So when consumers ger upset, the publishers are left to take the blame.

 

[smoledman]

Most hardcore gamers are online.

There will be a select few that will choose Sony just because they don't like the idea of DRM. There will also be a tiny amount that select Sony because they don't have an internet connection.

This, of course, is with the assumption that Sony doesn't have DRM.

Though, I'm sure that one of Microsoft's main pitches when approaching publishers is that they have greater control of their intellectual property. So MS may end up getting many more exclusives that otherwise would have been multi-platform.

Sony is intentionally keeping quiet on DRM to gin up as much negative press against Microsoft as possible. Then they will release a slightly less restrictive DRM scheme and hope that the media carnage against Microsoft worked.

 

[smoledman]

If Sony doesn't have something similar, but you can play a game from the hard drive without the disc, there will be rampant piracy.

Well, unless publishers use their own DRM requiring either the disc be in the tray or an online connection. So when consumers ger upset, the publishers are left to take the blame.

Also remember Sony is willing to take losses to hurt Microsoft in market share.

 

[paulxxwall]

Xbox one and ms are all about the Benjamins

 

[paulxxwall]

This is your opinion. I personally have no problem with ANYTHING they are doing. In a year, it will all be irrelevant. If Xbox One doesn't work for you, that's your problem. Families will not be buying a PS4 for the living room. Families will be buying an Xbox One. That will make up for any lost sales to gamers.

not if there going through hard times and can't afford internet o but kinda like a ms rep told me if you have no internet then your poor and if your poor you shouldn't buy an Xbox one I was like wow I can't believe I just heard that!

 

[theeboredone]

I'm still concerned in regards to lesser known game shops + rental centers. Yeah Gamestop or Best Buy will have the devices to allow trade ins, but what if there's a local one I prefer for one reason or another? I really hope MS is not giving the "too bad, so sad" attitude to pretty much anything that they don't see as profitable.

 

[smoledman]

Xbox one and ms are all about the Benjamins

Sony is all about being a charity enterprise.

 

[paulxxwall]

Sony is all about being a charity enterprise.

and the also make sum sweet stuff too

 

[Reflexx]

not if there going through hard times and can't afford internet o but kinda like a ms rep told me if you have no internet then your poor and if your poor you shouldn't buy an Xbox one I was like wow I can't believe I just heard that!

Actually, if you are poor, you shouldn't buy it. What's so hard to believe?

It's called being responsible.

 

[paulxxwall]

Actually, if you are poor, you shouldn't buy it. What's so hard to believe?

It's called being responsible.

ok so now what your saying quoting me is that if you have no internet then your poor?

 

[theeboredone]

Poor is subjective. One family may save up every year to go on a vacation. Another family might just save up so their kids can have an Xbox.

 

[paulxxwall]

Poor is subjective. One family may save up every year to go on a vacation. Another family might just save up so their kids can have an Xbox.

that right so no just because you have no internet does not mean your poor

 

[heelo]

I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft set up an online community for reselling XB1 games. They could handle all of the authorization/deauthorization, and they could make it part of Xbox Live baked right into the console.

That would be extremely gamer-friendly by creating a frictionless market for used games, and developers would be happy as well because they could negotiate the exclusively-new window (say, 90 days) and also set their fee on the transaction.

For example, GTA5 would sell for $60 new on Jan 1. Then on April 1 gamers who've played through it all could list their copy on the XBL marketplace. Rockstar could decide that the first-month transaction fee would be $25, and decrease by $5 every 60 days until it hit $5. Thus right when the window opened a gamer could list his copy for $40, and he would get $15 and the publisher would get $25. Although this looks like a rip off for the gamer and somewhat of a bonanza for the publisher ($25 is likely more than their cut of a new game sold at Gamestop), the reality is that the gamer has been able to receive value for his game immediately and reliably, and the purchaser has been able to download the game at full quality immediately at a "deal" price. The seller could, of course, hold onto the game for another 60 days and then sell it and have the publisher take only $20, but by then the demand has probably leveled off a bit and thus he wouldn't get $40 for it anymore.

From a purely theoretical perspective the system seems controlling and greedy, but I believe that in practice its probably a win all around.

 

[theeboredone]

I hope MS also has those random sales that Steam is notorious for. Hell, it was just announced that PSN+ members can now download Uncharted 3, Deus Ex, XCOM, and LBP2 for free. A year membership of PSN+ is 50 bucks. Cost difference already made up.

Truth to be told, I can see that being a system a consumer can take advantage of. It's not hard to find a game anywhere from 10-20 bucks off within two months of release. Buy it when you see that awesome sale, beat it, trade it in, get 15 bucks, and you technically saved a maximum of 35 dollars off that game if you're not planning to keep it.

The downside however is...it's 15 bucks. I've sold games like Arkham City and AC3 2 months after its release for 40 bucks each on craig's list. That was much easier than going through the above mentioned process.

 

[DavidinCT]

I hate how people compare this to Steam, as part of it is nothing like Steam...and should stay the way it is.

1.digial downloads, like now is exactly like Steam. You buy a game on you Xbox and it's tied to you account and non-transferable. Simple and I don't have an issue with it

2. Physical media. This is what is changing and should not change (currently nothing like Steam), you buy a physical disk, install to you Xbox, play game. When you are done with it, sell, give or burn you copy. You should have a right to do what you want with your physical media. Microsoft is trying to take this right away and a lot of people have an issue with it. I like to buy games for 1/2 price used a month after release on a lot of titles that I want to play but, not willing to pay $60 for it. Microsoft is trying to kill private sales, like ebay.

In any case, I feel the physical disk should rule. If I sell the disk to someone I don't know, after he or she installs it, it disables it from my account for good till I put the disc back in. This is how it works now and should work this way till we go 100% digital. Wile there is discs, this should not change.

As for PC games, I buy used games for the pc all the time. Not Steam but physical discs and used ones work fine.

 

[mrpuny]

I'm torn on this approach on the Xbox One licensing - in part because I still don't understand exactly what Microsoft is describing. To DavidinCT's point, the Xbox One approach definitely de-emphazises physical media and in many ways just makes physical media an alternate "download" method. In other words, rather than downloading possibly tens of GB for a game, you just install from a disc, but otherwise it will be treated like a download. Well, not exactly, because it may still be possible to resell a used disc depending on the publisher. So it's a weird hybrid.

In a way, I can see a logic for this. Physical media is trending away in general and I think it's likely that the transition to primarily digital downloads will happen over this next console generation; it's difficult for me to imagine a next generation of consoles after the Xbox One and PS4 (say coming out around 2020) still depending on physical media. So I can see that downloaded games will become steadily more important over the next several years, and the issues with physical media will become less important. So maybe any problems with the licensing approach won't matter in the long term, but may still cause acceptance problems in the near future.

The thing is, though, that to give up the benefits of physical media for downloads (reselling games, buying used, etc.), I'd want something in return, and I imagine most people will as well. So one thing is lower prices compared with new physical media purchases, like the Steam sales, and MS does a little of this with their game sales, but not anywhere near to the same degree. It'll be interesting to see pricing for Xbox ONE games, though, given the potential restrictions.

Another thing that would be helpful to me, having multiple consoles and a couple of kids who game as well, is an ability to share the games among devices and user accounts. This is common on the iOS/Android/Windows 8 app stores. The Xbox 360 already does this to an extent since downloaded games can be played by any account on the console that it was purchased on, and also under the purchaser's account on another console. In fact, I recently learned that that two copies of a single digital download game purchase can be running at the same time. I haven't tested it very much, but I downloaded Call of Duty 4 under my account, and while my son was logged in on his account and playing it (on the console I purchased it on), I was able to sign in with my account on another console and we could play a multiplayer system link game together. That's all we tried, so I don't know if we could also go online together. So I'll be interested to see exactly what the details of the family sharing licensing are for the Xbox ONE. Granted, this won't mean much for someone without a family. Well, maybe it depends just how....."non-traditional" Microsoft allows families to be defined.

 

[TonyDedrick]

Actually, if you are poor, you shouldn't buy it. What's so hard to believe?

It's called being responsible.

That's a bit of a ignorant statement to make, don't you think?

 

[ag1986]

If Sony doesn't have something similar, but you can play a game from the hard drive without the disc, there will be rampant piracy.

Well, unless publishers use their own DRM requiring either the disc be in the tray or an online connection. So when consumers ger upset, the publishers are left to take the blame.

Consumers have so far seemed okay with the disc having to be present. Being able to play without the disc is not enough to justify the loss of being able to resell your games.