06-16-2013 12:11 PM
182 ... 45678
tools
  1. nufan947's Avatar
    If it comes down to Steam type model I think people would love it. A new game released last week, on sale $45 download only (a good game). It would do very well, never mind the companies dont have to deal with the overhead of building, shipping and selling a Disc based product. I personally would not even look at used games because the value would be so high in a download only format.
    This this this this x100. I agree. I think most people would agree. Valve understands what people want and does it well while respecting the Devs and publishers. There would be a lot less dissatisfaction I think and a lot more adoption of the new stuff if there were less barriers to entry.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4 Beta
    06-11-2013 03:41 PM
  2. Reflexx's Avatar
    I have a feeling that we'll be able to "check-in" with SmartGlass on the phone too.

    The chances of you being without internet connection AND without cell phone connection for 24+ hrs is probably pretty low.
    06-11-2013 03:47 PM
  3. blzr409's Avatar
    Sony has clarified to a few websites that they were referring specifically to the online pass model when talking about restrictions on used games.
    nufan947 likes this.
    06-11-2013 04:02 PM
  4. DavidinCT's Avatar
    Sony has clarified to a few websites that they were referring specifically to the online pass model when talking about restrictions on used games.
    Link ?

    Personally, I would not have a problem with that if Microsoft went that route with all used games. If you want to play online with a used game then it's $5-10 extra. That would be acceptable to me. Most games I play the single player game becase I want a game with a good story that pulls me into the game, like a good movie.

    Playing online with every game it's not always the best thing, and some games I have no interest in playing on line... so by that, I dont have to pay for features I dont use...

    Edit: thanks for the link, If Microsoft would follow suit here, I think this would make most people happy but, I am sure it will be about greed and they wont admit to it...


    This this this this x100. I agree. I think most people would agree. Valve understands what people want and does it well while respecting the Devs and publishers. There would be a lot less dissatisfaction I think and a lot more adoption of the new stuff if there were less barriers to entry.
    Microsoft's goal here is to go to a totally online system. Doing a steam type model would be the ONLY way for them to get there. They would have to release newer games at big discounts. Not 6 month old games that a lot of people dont care about any more...
    Last edited by DavidinCT; 06-11-2013 at 04:26 PM.
    nufan947 likes this.
    06-11-2013 04:10 PM
  5. blzr409's Avatar
    Link is here: Sony: Third-Party DRM Refers to Playing Used Games Online Only | Game Front

    Also says Sony won't be using online passes on any first party games, I guess since they're collecting money through PS Plus for all online play now anyway.
    06-11-2013 04:17 PM
  6. onysi's Avatar
    Microsoft needs to detach Kinect to even the price with Sony. They should only sell Kinect 2 as peripheral or bundle it to keep the 499.
    Kinect 2 is the only thing costing the console this much. Its too heavy of a burden for college gamers.
    06-11-2013 05:08 PM
  7. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    Being honest I was sold on the Xbox One from the original launch and it could probably sell well with just Titanfall as a launch title. Whats worrying is the negative hype drummed up by the Sony fanboys and some of the games press is severely distorting the truth. Ive spent most of my morning digging up facts and linking articles to contradict things that people have been coming out with purely because of a slight spin on the negatives.

    Wildest thing ive heard is that the xbox 24 hour check in has got a suicide switch - so if you don't log in for 24 hours its got a 12 hour security period after you've logged back in before you can play on your games!!

    Im doing a pretty decent job so far on damage control and have swayed most of my friends back to the xbox. Hopefully they pass on what I have to their friends and so on and so on and the BS stops. Theres some crazy things out there that people are taking as gospel because theyve seen it on a forum message board.
    You might be providing the truth, but the truth doesn't equate to a good thing. There might not be a killswitch (which I've never even heard of in this context), but the required check-in is still one of the major inconveniences I dislike about the console. It is unlikely to ever affect me, but I don't approach things simply with the mindset of "does this hurt me?" I think about "is the company hurting consumers?" In the case of the check-in, there is harm being done. Those in rural areas, or even just poor neighborhoods where reliable Internet is not available (or affordable for low-income families), are being hampered by the check-in system. While that doesn't include me, I do not like the thought of supporting a company's product that is deliberately harmful to its users. I also hate that I HAVE to pay for the Kinect, and also plug it in.

    Like I said, I don't have issues with believing the truth, it's just that the truth about this console is that it is restrictive and inflexible in ways that drive many of us away from Apple.
    06-11-2013 05:16 PM
  8. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    For me it isn't nearly so much the actual hassle of checking in every 24 hours (which is a pain in the a$$ anyway) as it is the principle of it. It's an implementation that I don't agree with and don't want to support. Same thing with the DRM. Like everyone has said, we'll see if the publishers impose it on PS4 anyway, but at least for now it does seem like Sony cares more about making sure people get what they want and it's delivered fairly.

    A lot of people around here constantly rag on Google for spying and collecting and selling data. For me the 'essentially always on,' and no selling of used games, and Kinect always on, are just as serious impediments to my gaming experience as people feel Google is to their web and/or mobile experience.

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4 Beta
    I completely agree. Microsoft might not be doing things to inconvenience ME here, but they are doing thing that hurt consumers as a whole. I mostly bnought EA titles new, so the Online Pass never would have caused me much grief (Madden being the only instance I might have bought used). However, I so strongly disagreed with the implementation of the Online Pass that I did not buy from EA for almost 5 years, from 2008 until I purchased NBA Jam on my Lumia 920, ust a couple of days after EA said that the Online Pass would go away. As soon as EA dumped that, I started buying from them again immediately.

    In that same vein, I won't be buying the Xbox One. If Microsoft dumps this DRM fiasco, I will. Until then, I will stick to my Xbox 360.
    06-11-2013 05:20 PM
  9. theeboredone's Avatar
    You might be providing the truth, but the truth doesn't equate to a good thing. There might not be a killswitch (which I've never even heard of in this context), but the required check-in is still one of the major inconveniences I dislike about the console. It is unlikely to ever affect me, but I don't approach things simply with the mindset of "does this hurt me?" I think about "is the company hurting consumers?" In the case of the check-in, there is harm being done. Those in rural areas, or even just poor neighborhoods where reliable Internet is not available (or affordable for low-income families), are being hampered by the check-in system. While that doesn't include me, I do not like the thought of supporting a company's product that is deliberately harmful to its users. I also hate that I HAVE to pay for the Kinect, and also plug it in.

    Like I said, I don't have issues with believing the truth, it's just that the truth about this console is that it is restrictive and inflexible in ways that drive many of us away from Apple.
    I agree. On top of that, while it may not "hurt" me personally in anyway...neither does the NSA looking over my phone records. However, if we don't stand up and say "no", then companies (and government) will continue to strip away our rights until 100 years into the future, where it's required to do a freaking finger print match to play your game.
    06-11-2013 05:49 PM
  10. Reflexx's Avatar
    Microsoft needs to detach Kinect to even the price with Sony. They should only sell Kinect 2 as peripheral or bundle it to keep the 499.
    Kinect 2 is the only thing costing the console this much. Its too heavy of a burden for college gamers.
    That would be a bad business move.

    The reason Kinect is bundled is because it gives a base system target for game developers.

    When a developer is creating a game, they need to know the specs and abilities of their target system. If the game is expensive to make, they'll want to create things that are accessible by 100% of systems out there.

    Bundling Kinect means that developers can feel confident in including advanced controls and features that are only possible with Kinect. They can include it in core gameplay without the worry that someone may not have a Kinect.

    Why is this important?

    If Kinect remains a peripheral, then any Kinect abilities will just be add-ons. Developers will never truly explore what they can do to with it because they know that a lot of people won't have it.

    MS wants to change the game. They want to include new ways to interact with your game console. They want developers to do things on XBOX ONE that just aren't possible on other consoles. And that doesn't happen by having Kinect as a separate peripheral.
    06-11-2013 06:20 PM
  11. Reflexx's Avatar
    I agree. On top of that, while it may not "hurt" me personally in anyway...neither does the NSA looking over my phone records. However, if we don't stand up and say "no", then companies (and government) will continue to strip away our rights until 100 years into the future, where it's required to do a freaking finger print match to play your game.
    That is a ridiculous comparison.
    06-11-2013 06:27 PM
  12. JamesDax's Avatar
    Yes!
    06-11-2013 06:47 PM
  13. Reflexx's Avatar
    Game Dev Steve: My team just made an awesome game! Check it out!

    Consumer Dave: I played the demo. It's awesome!

    Game Dev Steve: It comes out tomorrow. Will you buy it?

    Consumer Dave: Nah. I'll wait a week and then buy it for $5 cheaper at Gamestop.

    Game Dev Steve: I know it's cheaper, but my team needs the support of consumers. We make nothing from Gamestop.

    Consumer Dave: So? Sucks to be you.

    Game Dev Steve: How about if you buy it on the XBOX ONE? You'll still be able to buy a used version, but at least Gamestop will pay my team a commission.

    Consumer Dave: Have fun applying for Unemployment Steve.
    a5cent, curseoftheninja and acl14 like this.
    06-11-2013 07:19 PM
  14. Vallos's Avatar
    Guy, we pretty much live in an age of entitlement where people do nothing and expect everything to be handed to them. Being a (retired) working musician, I totally understand the plight of artistic professionals who toil and sacrifice in trying to make a living from their art. Your descriptive attitude of "Consumer Dave", is exactly the sort of narcissistic entitlement gamers are displaying throughout this supposed DRM controversy.
    a5cent and curseoftheninja like this.
    06-11-2013 07:58 PM
  15. Ridemyscooter86's Avatar
    Basically, no. And this is coming from someone that completely defended the xbox one until E3 and they dropped the ball, a couple of reasons why:

    1) Used games: Doesn't really bother me as I'm a PC gamer who relies mostly on steam, so being able to buy/sell used games wouldn't really affect me at all, but from a console gamer's standpoint, even though there isn't a used game fee, the mere fact that you need to "friend" somebody for 30 days until you can transfer the game is a little ridiculous especially when all you should have to do is uninstall the game immediately from your console and give/sell it to somebody. Also, this won't be that big of a deal simply because physical media is dying and people want more online content distribution. I would imagine that if you buy a game from the xbox store or the playstation store, same way for both consoles, that you probably wont be able to share them on either console.

    Bad PR/Business move on MS part, hopefully they will change this, but MS can be pretty stubborn at times, so I wouldn't expect it.

    2) Always connected: Another thing that I really think is a dumb point that people are making a fuss about; all of my electronic devices, my cell phone, pc, and my 360 are always connected to the internet, so I don't really see why people even have an issue with this as almost everyone has 1) a wireless router, 2) a broadband internet connection. If you don't have on or either of these, then you probably need to update to the 21st century or you probably live in a 3rd world country, either which way, this is something you probably shouldn't be buying anyways. Seriously I don't get people's gripe on this one, I mean online gaming is so popular now, that if you game online, then this is a non-issue and just a point sony fanboys want to bring up just for the sake of argument.

    Still, not a good PR move on Microsoft's part, even if it is kind of a dumb point.

    3)Kinect: I like the kinect, I think that the integration with xbox looks really cool and futuristic. Making it standard was a great idea since it will hopefully bring motion games out of a niche/toy market into mainstream gaming where it hasn't really ever gotten a foothold despite being out for years now.

    Great idea to make it standard for games, bad idea in the fact that it brings me to my 4th and most important point and that is:

    4)price: Sure the xbox may not seem competitive when you factor in the less power, and the used game and always connected restrictions. Even though in xbox's defense that its not very much less powerful (not like 50% as some people are saying, and it probably won't make a bit of difference except for 1st party games), it does include the kinect, and the OS looks way better and more powerful/featured than the ps4, the problem is really coming down to price. Because they decided to standardize the kinect and include it with every console, 100$ will make a difference to many. A lot of people will buy it because its an xbox and they already have an xbox live account and such, but for a lot of people, that 100$ difference is almost 2 games or a year subscription to PS+. Its why the wii sold well, its why the xbox 360 sold way better initially compared to the ps3 was price.

    If MS can just knock 50-100$ off the price it would be good. Also, if they can let people play used games without having to friend someone for 30 days that would help too. Unfortunately the xbox one console is fine, its just a very bad PR move on MS part and somewhat bad business. I mean, I think there will be a decent amount of people that will buy the PS4 over the xbox one simply because of the used game/DRM policy, despite the fact that sony tries to act innocent at it and they just said "we'll leave it up to the developers", which means in actuality that it will be every bit as bad as the xbox or worse since its not standardized, just from a PR perspective, they did a much better job than MS.
    06-11-2013 08:00 PM
  16. theeboredone's Avatar
    That is a ridiculous comparison.
    No, it's not. It's sad that we live in a age, in which a physical product we buy is not something we even fully own. It's sad that developers not only want to push this DRM stuff, but have already been pushing "incomplete" games via on disc DLC, let alone wasting development time making DLC for later releases. People didn't complain much about it, and now companies like Crapcom can get away with charging you for Super Duper Awesome Cake Street Fighter every year, when all they do is add a few characters. Oh, but you can get some extra costumes for another 5 bucks! Nevermind that content is already on the disc! Companies want you to buy "season passes" for 30 bucks, so you can get access to future DLC. So you're paying 90.00 day 1 for a video game. Ridiculous.

    Last I checked, used movies, cars, paintings don't get a kick back to the developers. So why should games be the exception? Because companies can't manage their budget, and expect every game they make to sell millions upon millions? A lot of gaming companies try to nickel and dime us, and I guarantee you if no one complains, they will continue to impose more restrictions on the products we buy.
    06-11-2013 08:14 PM
  17. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    Guy, we pretty much live in an age of entitlement where people do nothing and expect everything to be handed to them. Being a (retired) working musician, I totally understand the plight of artistic professionals who toil and sacrifice in trying to make a living from their art. Your descriptive attitude of "Consumer Dave", is exactly the sort of narcissistic entitlement gamers are displaying throughout this supposed DRM controversy.
    That's simply a lie. You're assuming that we want things for no cost, but that's not the case. What we are asking for is the freedom to use the goods we buy in a manner we choose, within the legality of our governments' respective copyright laws. You are saying it is the fault of the consumers for the unwillingness of GameStop to offer financial compensation for the used game market. I have no desire to circumvent giving money to the creators of a game. However, it seems that those creators DO have a desire to prevent my seeking of the best deal we can for a product.

    We don't buy used games because we don't want developers and publishers to get paid, we buy them because they are cheaper. I have LONG suggested the concept that publishers get together and create their own means of offering used games. That could mean either the publishers joining forces to create their own physical store to rival GameStop or an online marketplace where they offer to buy back games from consumers, then sell them at a discount to others (though that would admittedly be a tricky thing, since they could buy a game back, repackage it, then call it a new game again, which is very dishonest).

    I'm all for financially supporting the makers of content, but I will never support a content provider who first chooses to punish those who financially support that provider.

    Say we're entitled all you want, but that's so far from the reality that I can't even pick a word to properly describe it.
    theeboredone likes this.
    06-11-2013 08:41 PM
  18. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    Game Dev Steve: My team just made an awesome game! Check it out!

    Consumer Dave: I played the demo. It's awesome!

    Game Dev Steve: It comes out tomorrow. Will you buy it?

    Consumer Dave: Nah. I'll wait a week and then buy it for $5 cheaper at Gamestop.

    Game Dev Steve: I know it's cheaper, but my team needs the support of consumers. We make nothing from Gamestop.

    Consumer Dave: So? Sucks to be you.

    Game Dev Steve: How about if you buy it on the XBOX ONE? You'll still be able to buy a used version, but at least Gamestop will pay my team a commission.

    Consumer Dave: Have fun applying for Unemployment Steve.

    No, Game Dev Steve. I will not buy your game on a platform that charges me extra to do the same things I always have by forcing an undesired accessory on me. Maybe if you looked into ways to enter and compete in the used game market through your publisher, you'd make progress. To expect me to greatly inconvenience myself when I already buy enough $60 games from you is ridiculous.
    06-11-2013 08:44 PM
  19. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    That is a ridiculous comparison.
    It absolutely is not. People just refuse to see the big picture with things. It's how we end up with ridiculous things like the Patriot Act, and the possibility for a scandal like this one with the NSA in the first place. I mean, heck, look at airports. We're all treated like potential terrorists the second we go through an airport. The American government thinks that the way to fix a broken, penniless economy is to tax everything in sight, then spend twice what that increase in tax revenue is.

    This is a simple case of "give them an inch, and they'll take a mile." All Microsoft would have to do it bury some seemingly-inane language about "improve the Kinect experience through device feedback," and then they can watch millions of people essentially agree to being spied on, under the guise of "quality control."

    Standing up and saying "no," to the British via the Boston Tea Party is how America started on the path to its creation. Now, we're taxed probably 5-10 times what the British were taxing us that CAUSED the Boston Tea Party, but the laziness and complacency of the American people allows it to go on unchecked, and that's why we're in such a terrible economic state. It's a similar matter with privacy, where the government claims it needs to spy on you to keep you safe, and people are so sold on the idea of "security," that they will basically do anything Big Brother says, if it means they'll be "safe."
    theeboredone likes this.
    06-11-2013 08:50 PM
  20. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    The reason Kinect is bundled is because it gives a base system target for game developers.
    Maybe, but I can say with 100% certainty that there is going to be negative fallout from it. I've sold family and friends on several Microsoft products over the years. I've personally led to the purchase of 2 Windows 8 licenses, 4 Windows Phones, at least 10 Zune devices, at least 4 original Xbox consoles, at least 8 Xbox 360 consoles, and at least 6 Xbox LIVE Gold subscriptions. I'd say that there are at least 5 people (myself included) who will listen to me about this new console. I'll be telling them al of the things that I think are wrong, and why. I know most will agree with me, one already does.

    You say that the inclusion of the Kinect means that developers will work with the Kinect more. you know what else it means? I won't be touching the Xbox One, at least for a while (and not at all, if some things don't change). They might get developers working with their accessory more, but they're also going to lose people's business because they either can't afford $500, won't willing pay $500, or simply on the principle of the console's inconveniences. It doesn't matter if developers include Kinect commands in games if the inclusion of the Kinect means people won't buy the console.

    Yeah, I know Amazon just said that the thing is getting pre-ordered like crazy, but that's just more a testament to the sheep-like nature of consumers. It'd sure be nice if people overlooked brand loyalty and tried to make the gaming culture better as a whole. I guess that's the downside to the popularization of things, though--the mainstream dictate the market, and those who hold gaming near and dear are ignored.
    wpn00b likes this.
    06-11-2013 09:00 PM
  21. Reflexx's Avatar
    No, it's not. It's sad that we live in a age, in which a physical product we buy is not something we even fully own.
    You do own the physical product. The disc. But you do not own the code on it. That is intellectual property of the publisher/developer.

    When they create a game, they choose to sell you the ability to play it. They do not give you ownership of the code used to make that game. That's not yours.

    That code took millions of dollars and thousands of man-hours to create. You don't get to own it for $60.

    It's sad that developers not only want to push this DRM stuff, but have already been pushing "incomplete" games via on disc DLC, let alone wasting development time making DLC for later releases. People didn't complain much about it, and now companies like Crapcom can get away with charging you for Super Duper Awesome Cake Street Fighter every year, when all they do is add a few characters. Oh, but you can get some extra costumes for another 5 bucks! Nevermind that content is already on the disc! Companies want you to buy "season passes" for 30 bucks, so you can get access to future DLC. So you're paying 90.00 day 1 for a video game. Ridiculous.
    Do you know why this happens? Because games are EXPENSIVE to make, and consumers don't appreciate or understand that.

    The game should be selling for $75, but that won't happen. So devs and publishers have to find other ways to get that revenue in.

    Last I checked, used movies, cars, paintings don't get a kick back to the developers. So why should games be the exception? Because companies can't manage their budget, and expect every game they make to sell millions upon millions? A lot of gaming companies try to nickel and dime us, and I guarantee you if no one complains, they will continue to impose more restrictions on the products we buy.
    They nickel and dime you because they know that you won't pay what the game should cost.

    Basically, you're saying "f*** you" to the people who put their blood, sweat, and tears into making the content you enjoy because many consumers don't really understand the industry.
    curseoftheninja likes this.
    06-11-2013 09:01 PM
  22. Reflexx's Avatar
    That's simply a lie. You're assuming that we want things for no cost, but that's not the case. What we are asking for is the freedom to use the goods we buy in a manner we choose, within the legality of our governments' respective copyright laws. You are saying it is the fault of the consumers for the unwillingness of GameStop to offer financial compensation for the used game market. I have no desire to circumvent giving money to the creators of a game. However, it seems that those creators DO have a desire to prevent my seeking of the best deal we can for a product.
    Would you pay $75-$100 per game without complaining? Do you think enough consumers would?

    We don't buy used games because we don't want developers and publishers to get paid, we buy them because they are cheaper. I have LONG suggested the concept that publishers get together and create their own means of offering used games. That could mean either the publishers joining forces to create their own physical store to rival GameStop or an online marketplace where they offer to buy back games from consumers, then sell them at a discount to others (though that would admittedly be a tricky thing, since they could buy a game back, repackage it, then call it a new game again, which is very dishonest).
    What do you think this new system is? It's a way for devs to get a cut of used game sales from retailers.

    I'm all for financially supporting the makers of content, but I will never support a content provider who first chooses to punish those who financially support that provider.
    You're not for financially supporting the makers of content.

    Punish? There is no punishment.

    Is Steam punishment?

    This is a new platform with new rules.

    Say we're entitled all you want, but that's so far from the reality that I can't even pick a word to properly describe it.
    You're entitled.
    06-11-2013 09:08 PM
  23. Reflexx's Avatar
    It absolutely is not. People just refuse to see the big picture with things. It's how we end up with ridiculous things like the Patriot Act, and the possibility for a scandal like this one with the NSA in the first place. I mean, heck, look at airports. We're all treated like potential terrorists the second we go through an airport. The American government thinks that the way to fix a broken, penniless economy is to tax everything in sight, then spend twice what that increase in tax revenue is.

    This is a simple case of "give them an inch, and they'll take a mile." All Microsoft would have to do it bury some seemingly-inane language about "improve the Kinect experience through device feedback," and then they can watch millions of people essentially agree to being spied on, under the guise of "quality control."

    Standing up and saying "no," to the British via the Boston Tea Party is how America started on the path to its creation. Now, we're taxed probably 5-10 times what the British were taxing us that CAUSED the Boston Tea Party, but the laziness and complacency of the American people allows it to go on unchecked, and that's why we're in such a terrible economic state. It's a similar matter with privacy, where the government claims it needs to spy on you to keep you safe, and people are so sold on the idea of "security," that they will basically do anything Big Brother says, if it means they'll be "safe."
    Wow. Talk about over reacting.

    You're seriously comparing an oppressive all powerful government implementing actions against your will without telling you to businesses that let you know terms up front and give you an EULA to describe everything they can and can't do.

    Posts like that one show when someone has lost all sense of reality.
    06-11-2013 09:11 PM
  24. Reflexx's Avatar
    Maybe, but I can say with 100% certainty that there is going to be negative fallout from it. I've sold family and friends on several Microsoft products over the years. I've personally led to the purchase of 2 Windows 8 licenses, 4 Windows Phones, at least 10 Zune devices, at least 4 original Xbox consoles, at least 8 Xbox 360 consoles, and at least 6 Xbox LIVE Gold subscriptions. I'd say that there are at least 5 people (myself included) who will listen to me about this new console. I'll be telling them al of the things that I think are wrong, and why. I know most will agree with me, one already does.

    You say that the inclusion of the Kinect means that developers will work with the Kinect more. you know what else it means? I won't be touching the Xbox One, at least for a while (and not at all, if some things don't change). They might get developers working with their accessory more, but they're also going to lose people's business because they either can't afford $500, won't willing pay $500, or simply on the principle of the console's inconveniences. It doesn't matter if developers include Kinect commands in games if the inclusion of the Kinect means people won't buy the console.

    Yeah, I know Amazon just said that the thing is getting pre-ordered like crazy, but that's just more a testament to the sheep-like nature of consumers. It'd sure be nice if people overlooked brand loyalty and tried to make the gaming culture better as a whole. I guess that's the downside to the popularization of things, though--the mainstream dictate the market, and those who hold gaming near and dear are ignored.
    So, if consumers don't have the same opinion about an entertainment product as you, they're sheep?

    But if they go along with what you say because you tell them so, then they're not sheep

    BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
    06-11-2013 09:14 PM
  25. Keith Wallace's Avatar
    Basically, you're saying "f*** you" to the people who put their blood, sweat, and tears into making the content you enjoy because many consumers don't really understand the industry.
    I call so much bull on this statement that I can't even see beyond the mountain of crap created in that statement. Conversely, I say that those who put their money, half-assed work, and greed into making the content I enjoy are saying "f*** you" to the people who put their hard-earned money (which individually is much less than probably any meaningful employee at a developer or publisher) with this DRM garbage.

    Sorry, how is letting a friend borrow a game a "f*** you" to a developer? How is playing my game offline a "f*** you" to a developer? How is not plugging in my Kinect a "f*** you" to a developer?
    06-11-2013 09:17 PM
182 ... 45678

Similar Threads

  1. List the new XBOX ONE released or coming games here!!!
    By BIGPADDY in forum The Xbox Lounge
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: 05-30-2014, 06:22 PM
  2. XBOX One controller
    By Coreldan in forum The Xbox Lounge
    Replies: 109
    Last Post: 04-07-2014, 03:25 PM
  3. So, who's getting an Xbox One?
    By Muessig in forum The Xbox Lounge
    Replies: 432
    Last Post: 11-29-2013, 09:46 AM
  4. We're getting plenty of new games, but no Xbox ones?
    By WindowsPhone8User in forum Windows Phone 8
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-16-2013, 03:58 PM
  5. Did any one know about this event?
    By Nataku4ca in forum Microsoft News & Rumors
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-24-2012, 03:39 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD