Major Nelson is awesome... wonder what the story is behind the fur he's rockin'? I know Major Nelson is pretty much at the forefront of PR *on* the Xbox itself, and through his personal blog and twitter, but why is he still hidden away? They don't even link to his blog from xbox.com! He used to do all those "60 second" updates on games and such in the industry that you could watch via the Xbox - but they got rid of that, so he has even less of a presence. People have to kind of search him out when there aren't big events such as this going on. Microsoft needs to position him more of a main PR guy - maybe at least for interviews and such. He just seems like a fun, relatable guy, and he's very up front about everything that he can share (I've listened to his podcasts. He does tease little things but generally doesn't mention things as fact unless they are)
I also find the girl interviewing him to be really cute. Nice video
Ninja Edit: As Keith mentioned above, I did also take issue with him dodging the "but what if you lose connection" type question. I felt the question needed to be MUCH more direct though... not "Why can't this be an option" but "What happens when the internet goes out for over 24 hours, and not even my limited edition disc based games will work? Will there be an option for validating via game disc in certain scenarios?"
Every Xbox One game needs to be installed on your HDD, So you guys fail to understand the concept. If there is ability to play offline, then what is stopping someone for installing the game and give the disk to someone who never goes online? This about it. Its a well thought out feature, IMO.
The disc is just a delivery method. It's all digital now.
As was already pointed out in this thread, if a disc was the "failsafe", then someone could buy and install the game on their account, then give the disc to his friend that plays and finishes the game while offline. Then keep passing the game to the next friend and next friend etc... All of them playing and finishing the game while offline.
Is there REALLY a group of maybe 2 or 3 people with the initiative to do that? You'd basically be asking the person to stay offline completely for days at a time, then give it up to the next person. I mean, with the 10-person sharing policy we're supposedly getting, when would that even be NEEDED?
We know this. We also have discussed this elsewhere, and possible means of getting that possible problem solved. Here is something I suggested elsewhere:
Allow SmartGlass to handle check-ins. If your Internet goes out, you could use the WiFi direct (which basically creates a direct WiFi connection between two devices without a router--in this case, between the Xbox One and the smartphone) as a means of verification. What you would do is give the SmartGlass app the ability to ping the servers. You make the phone into a tethering device, but without the requirement of a tethering package, I guess. You feed the verification information over the WiFi direct connection, then through the cellular connection to Microsoft's servers. Microsoft receives that ping, sends it over cellular back to the phone, and then SmartGlass receives a tiny file that it sends to the Xbox to reset the 24-hour check-in or something. Not everyone has a family data plan with free tethering, and a non-family plan with tethering requires a 5GB data plan at $50/month (which no one wants), so this could circumvent that.
Or, if that's not a good-enough option, make the Xbox One capable of reading information from smartphones. You start with a USB connection from the Xbox to the smartphone. You'd transfer the licensing file on the Xbox to the phone, send it over cellular data, then get a verification file back, plug back into your Xbox One via USB, and transfer the license verification from the phone to the console.
In either instance, you are required to get verification of license ownership from Xbox, but you can do it if your broadband ISP's connection goes out. Losing both your home and mobile Internet is such a rare occurrence that I would consider it out of the realm of reasonable problems to worry about, meaning it would be EXTREMELY rare someone suffers from that and cannot get verification through either data connection. Even then, cellular is widespread, so you could likely drive 10 minutes from your house, get a connection, and receive the file.
They are long-winded explanations in writing, but they are very simple in practice. It's either fire up an app and do it or plug in your phone and do it. They're only 4 or 5 simple steps, really.
Yep, for sure. There were people who had spare xbox 360 consoles that they had hacked and were using for offline play only. Some of them knew they would get banned if they brought them online, so they never connected it... and some did, risking it for a bit, got banned, then bought another xbox for legit online play.Is there REALLY a group of maybe 2 or 3 people with the initiative to do that? You'd basically be asking the person to stay offline completely for days at a time, then give it up to the next person. I mean, with the 10-person sharing policy we're supposedly getting, when would that even be NEEDED?
The Xbox One
authorization file is “kilobytes,” you can authorize your games by tethering
your phone
The PA Report - The Xbox One authorization file is “kilobytes,” you can authorize your games by tethering your phone
lol, just thought it would be funny. I generally add the "Edit" in there if I have any more significant thoughts to add after the full post, so that if someone quickly quotes me and then spends half an hour writing their reply, it won't look like I just added something to change my point of view. Yep, even before the system puts in the "edited by" stuff - kind of an honesty thing. I have been known to go back and clean things up - fix typos, edit grammar, and sometimes remove a line and add a parenthesis comment depending on if I think that statement might be misleading what I am trying to represent in my post/point of view.Tip: Putting "Ninja Edit," in bold kills any hope of stealthily doing anything.
The Xbox One
authorization file is “kilobytes,” you can authorize your games by tethering
your phone
The PA Report - The Xbox One authorization file is “kilobytes,” you can authorize your games by tethering your phone
I think the odd person willing to have their console offline to play games with the disk in system trying to work the system, is acceptable loss.
Especially considering that they can now get a cut out of the used game market, and offset by people who will buy console but wont due to check in, service personnel etc.
I think that being online is and will be too important for most people to keep off line when they can get online.
So, people will get 11 family members instead of 10.... Just don't see people doing it when we now have the sharing that is possible.
If people are confident that the checkin will stop pirates finding a way to hack the system, all i can say is i don't share your confidence.
To be fair, it isn't confirmed that is exactly how it will work. Obviously you know what I am referencing when I mention the various conflicting reports. But it just seems as if you are stating, right there anyway, that is how it is going to work so it is wrong. We don't know that. Maybe you and your brother-in-law can both play online or campaign, and your cousin is still able to play RYSE by himself? It's frustrating... but Major Nelson will be sharing more details about game sharing on his blog soon. We can only hope he goes into as much detail about that as he did with the new Matchmaking and Reputation systemHowever, this isn't a case of avoiding that. Not allowing everyone to play ONLINE together, I can understand limiting. Making my cousin wait to play RYSE by himself is a little weird. He's not making use of the social aspects, so just lock him out of multiplayer.
I like it. I myself got confused a little with the costs and how it would work, but it sounds more like the game sharing future Microsoft looks to be heading toward. We're going to win either way with game sharing, but your suggestion really looks like an advanced way of doing it. I guess the 24-hour checks might give them the flexibility to pull something like this off.What I actually wouldn't mind seeing is this: Make all physical (and some digital) versions of a game $60, and shareable among 10 people. Include the primary licensee-plus-one simultaneous play. As an alternative, also offer a digital version of the game that functions like this: Make this version $30-40. Lock it to a single user. If someone else wants to piggyback off of that license (in the way the $60 game allows), it costs $10. What you get with this is the ability to simultaneously play, regardless of the number of people already playing from that initial license. If you want, limit this to the same 10-person maximum as the physical copy. This would allow the flexibility of simultaneous play (removing the need to hide offline and bringing back the option to use disc-based checking for the hard copies), and allow for more POTENTIAL revenue. Instead of all 10-person games having $60 in revenue, you would have this online-only option that would have a potential revenue of $120-130 ($90 for the additional $10 licenses, plus $30-40 for the initial license). Maybe there's too much possibility for confusion with the two purchasing systems, but it would be an option to both satisfy consumers AND add potential revenue into Microsoft's pocket.
I suggest this on my own personal experiences. Odds are, if I and those I know get consoles, we'll mostly share a license for $60 and deal with the 2-person play limit. However, if my suggested digital alternative was available, I'd be totally willing to use that system. I think that the biggest that group of mine would get is about 6 or 7. We could all play together, and Microsoft would get $90-100. Microsoft (and the developers) would make more money, and we would be less restricted in our gameplay.