Well, the developers who lose millions of dollars due to piracy probably wouldn't describe it as "unnecessary DRM", but, yes, I understand the backlash--I just don't understand why it's not aimed at Sony too (they're still allowing it), or why it never came against Apple or Google for iOS and Android for doing the same thing.
In a basic sense, they are pretty much the same: they're devices you use to access and play games. But, yeah, I feel the same way: it would be nice to have the option to play offline if that's your cup of tea or if the 'Net goes out or if you want to go vacation up in the mountains or whatever. But we've got to consider the pros and cons of it all. I think I'm ready to give that up to get the benefits of cloud-based gaming (not just the performance improvements of updates and cloud processing, but the ability to no longer haul around physical media, although I realize some people like this). You can still lend games and sell them. In some ways it's more restrictive (i.e., only being able to be sold once), but in other ways it's easier (sharing with up to 10 friends digitally and remotely). As for 'mandatory DRM' vs. leaving it up to the publisher, I prefer Microsoft's route as I like standardization. I memorize the rules once, and that's that. Sony's strategy is going to create chaos with some publishers doing X, some doing Y, and some doing Z. Yes, I've read that the promised cloud computing benefits of Sim City didn't live up to expectations, and I cannot comment much on it since I'm not a computer programmer, but I don't think Microsoft would be touting it so much if it was just a gimmick. My point is that I'm not a fan of the DRM thing either, particularly the check-ins, but I don't get why people think PS4 will be any better.
As for the Kinect, that is what excites me the most. My experience with the original Kinect was piqued interest that quickly faded: most of the motion control is clumsy and quickly gets old. But, that's first generation hardware and software. With each generation it will get better, especially with Microsoft motivating developers to innovate by bundling it with the system. Sure, right now nothing beats the controller, but I for one sure hope that ten, twenty years from now we aren't still sitting on a chair holding a controller. I want full body immersion, and Microsoft is pushing toward that with Kinect and Illumi Room. Sony isn't pushing the industry in the direction I want it to go: the same old games with slightly prettier graphics aren't what I want.
Don't get me wrong: I'm not an advocate of what Microsoft is doing (although, I do think it's better than what Sony is doing). I just feel that people are freaking out about things they already do (being constantly connected on their Xbox 360s or smartphones), and defecting to Sony for things that will undoubtedly exist on the PS4 too. I recall them softening their stance on the used games, and I think that's good. I hope they soften it in other ways too (particularly, the 24-hour check-in). As for the price difference between consoles and smart phone apps, presumably this DRM junk is also going to result in lower prices for console games too, as it did on Steam. Here's to hoping that comes true, otherwise the consumer really is getting shortchanged.
I think they're going to argue that the Xbox One is no longer a physical media machine, much like PC software. Yes, you get a physical disc, but it's only for installation purposes (so you don't have to download 50GB games all the time). In this sense, the past is gone. Apple and Valve changed it and everyone is going to follow suit. It will face some growing pains, but ultimately I think the pros outweigh the cons as long as we're thinking from an innovation point of view. Again, I get the backlash against this; I just don't get why gamers don't realize that Sony's move was just PR bull**** and that the PS4 will be the same way.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram