Just to clarify, you can pay GoD's with MSP.
Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
Just to clarify, you can pay GoD's with MSP.
Going back through some of the interviews Major Nelson confirms that your not fully sharing 10 games, not a direct quote but says "it not like your buying one copy for all 10 members", its at the ~4:00 mark. Still going through the rest of the interview though....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RtSGFryKwo
Using language like "check it out"....seems confirmed to me.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm a bit surprised by your response. Did you even care to read my entire point about why I left PC gaming? There's nothing silly about not liking the experience gaming on the PC offers. As I mentioned, not everyone enjoys the experience having to start up a PC and a Windows OS to install and then play a game. I use a PC 10 hours at work a day and I'm happy enough to get my gaming experience through a flawless plug&play experience. No fiddling with mouse or keyboard or having to sit in front of a desk with my face glued to a 24inch fullHD LCD screen in my small office/bedroom (that's what I actually have) when I can be rather playing my games on the big screen (a very big screen in my case) on the comfortable couch with high-end audio equipment. At this point, I could care less about what it costs to play on the PC, as that is not part of the reason at all. Then there's also the social value, of having my friends linked for online-play (they don't game on the PC either) or being able to play social games with guests in that comfortable environment.
It's a trade-off. You may prefer better visuals, better framerates and the noisy heater (sorry PC) sitting in your living-room next to your classy high-end equipment... I don't. As I explained - graphics on consoles, to me, have come a long way. Thanks to improved image quality and sub-HD/HD resolutions now at an acceptable level [for the big screen], I don't mind, even if the visuals are inferior. Because the experience to me, isn't defined solely by the graphics, but more because of the gameplay mechanics, the fun and entertainment factor, the games (and that includes the exclusive content you will not see on PC) as well as the flawless plug & play experience that works in your livingroom that's provided on consoles.
If the trade-off were bigger, then perhaps I would consider playing on the PC and change around my livingroom to accomondate that without having to sit in my office to play. As I said, there are a few games I actually would play on the PC, namely strategy and flight-sim games (and I would have no issue with actually booting up my old games like Falcon 4.0 and playing on extremely old pixelated graphics), but apart from that, no thanks. There's nothing there I really want to play that I can't already play on consoles. Lucky for me, since consoles provide me with more and better games (well, the good games on PC are mostly multi-platform anyway and I'm not too interested in the exclusives on PC), it's a win/win for me.
Strangely, I don't think I'm in the minority. Many polls suggest that many PC gamers defected to consoles (mainly to the Xbox) for those exact reasons. But hey, if you prefer PC gaming, good for you. Not everyone has the same priorities or look for the same experience.
BTW - the games is also a reason why I'm not too interested in the Xbox. Because the games that do interest me, are provided either on both consoles, or are exclusive to the PlayStation brand. Perhaps, if Microsoft got all those games as an exclusive on their console, I would consider switching. Now, getting back to the topic - this latest backtracking by Microsoft might actually sway some gamers away and back to PC, but I think the majority of ex-PC gamers that ended up gaming on the Xbox, will either stay on that platform (they left the PC for a reason afterall) or get a PS4. I'm really not sure how the PC experience suddenly gained over what is offered on consoles. Because the hardware on next-gen consoles are not pushing the bounderies as they arguably did in the past?
Prophecy2k
Veteran
Really? I wasn't aware of that.
Gonna remove my account from my bro's PS3 then and get it deactivated. He barely uses the thing anyway.
Cheers for that info. Shifty
Michellstar
Regular
Anyone Think that after all the outrage publishers got scared and left MS alone??
This is absurd - and shows the entire problem with your side of the argument. Your "two copies" solution only works if ALL of my family shares the exact same friends and family. I hate to tell you this - but most of my brothers and sisters are also married. Their husbands and wives also have families. Interestingly enough - they also have their own friends. The only way I could end up with "greater sharing abilities" is if ALL of us only had the same social group. The truth of the situation is that it is not possible to mix and max 10 person groups to solve the problem.
This is even more absurd when you realize that without their DRM, the problem doesn't exist. You can try to wave your hands and make it go away by "yeah, but you are just one person". However, I have to ask if you've been paying attention the last few weeks. Do you realize that polls were showing that between 85% and 95% of the people asked had issues with the DRM policy? Each has their own situation, and each situation is dismissed by the same hand waving "yeah, but you are just one person" argument.
The simple truth of the situation is that those who liked and/or supported the DRM are in a very small minority. Eventually you guys will have to come to grips with that.
Both you and Jedi didn't bother to read my post. I have already given you the solution. My games are on a first come, first serve basis when I'm done with them. I just give the person who asks the disk. I know that is an overly complicated solution compared to a complicated DRM scheme with a restricted "friends and family" policy - but I like it.
Indeed. People think the book is only about marketing but it transcends all of that. It certainly got me to realize why I joined the Navy and why I went the route that I did once in. It made me realize why at a job at a previous employer why I was so much better than my co-workers at a number of things and vice versa at another employer. Today, it helps me know why the place I consult for has so many problems.
As for blakjedi, commodities are discussed as well, but nothing you said answers the question of the reason the person BUYS the particular thing they test drove or wore however for the things you mentioned they're commodities so it doesn't quite matter as much. As an aside, I did NOT need to test drive a Tesla Model S before I reserved one and I believe the total all in cost of the vehicle will run me $114,000.
Before the Civil Rights Act in the United States people polled also would have kept me and my family from being server in a restaurant. Same goes for me voting. The same goes for integrating the school system and military. Women voting.
People who are polled before a change happens tend to stick with status quo. People complain about the government and want change but then vote their particular members of Congress into office constantly.
This is an interesting take on things. I have valid complaints about the DRM - to which I've been told basically that my situation doesn't matter. Other legitimate concerns such as military deployment, lack of reliable internet connection, and the restriction of rights of ownership have been brought up - to which the response is "they aren't the target audience".
So basically what you are saying is that a minority of you trying to force a restrictive DRM policy on the rest of us because you like it are similar to bigots who supressed civil liberties?
Just to make sure you understand - let me rephrase that. You are saying that are actively campaining to reduce the amount of ownership I have over my software (which many would argue is a civil liberty shouldn't have an opinion because people in the past supported the "status quo"?
I mean - this is a whole new level to the argument. You manage to dismiss legitimate complaints and compare this to racial intollerance all in one fell swoop. That was pretty impressive.
Guess what I'm going to be saying next. Go on, guess. Got it?
This is not the thread to discuss the morals and ethics of DRM and games sharing!
NavNucST3's point is polls aren't indicative of society's unwavering commitment to an ideal. He's not likening anything to huge social and political issues - just using a rather famous reference point to support his argument.
This is not the thread to discuss the morals and ethics of DRM and games sharing!
NavNucST3's point is polls aren't indicative of society's unwavering commitment to an ideal. He's not likening anything to huge social and political issues - just using a rather famous reference point to support his argument.
Last edited by a moderator:
You can have the right to complain about DRM I do not find complaints such as "military deployment" as valid they were only ever brought up as a shame tactic, shaky internet is certainly an issue with respect to single player/offline gaming but the rights of ownership is absurd if you think DRM is something new, just because you purchased something it has never given you carte blanch to do with it what you will. You cannot even cross a countries border with certain items you own hardware, software, alcohol, fruit, this isn't new. Just because you have a complaint does not make it legitimate. In this case, Microsoft felt that your complaints were legitimate or even if they didn't they capitulated
If you can't handle the socio-polls then find another one maybe directly related to gaming before any shift or even paradigm shift. Maybe one about Achievements or one about ethernet only on the XBOX or charging for online multiplayer or $700 cell phones or browsing the web from a phone...
In the poll we have here, since you seem to like polls, a whopping two of you will now be purchasing the One though 7 of us have reversed our purchasing decision. The same people who weren't going to purchase still aren't while the list of maybes is suspect for a few of the names and possible for a bunch of others.
What I am actually saying is that YOU are the minority and the majority simply didn't give a shit about a 24 hour check-in or reselling or even sharing and many of the vocal opponents, certainly not all, were NEVER going to purchase the One ANYWAY.
Maybe these publishers should have tried to back up Microsoft a little when all that mud was thrown at just them for this entire DRM business.
Or maybe they could be pissed at Sony because without their E3 PR stunt it probably would have gone down quite differently.
The fact they didn't shows the publishers weren't in support of the move. They may have liked it, but they weren't willing to back it.
What E3 stunt? Again, the publishers knew what Sony's strategy was. If they wanted DRM, they could have demanded it, getting together to boycott Sony's platform if Sony didn't match what they were hearing from MS.
If publishers wanted this, they should have made it happen, and they've no-one but themselves to blame.
Edit: I'll go another step in the conspiracy theories direction, and how's about the publishers betrayed MS? Maybe MS was expecting the publishers to be outwardly vocal in favour, saying it was better for consumers and publisher and the industry, but instead the publishers saw the user reaction and changed stance, publicly saying they have no problem with the existing market structure?
Of these possibilities:
1) MS went it alone with no particular backing from anyone
2) MS had publisher backing who expect Sony backing and Sony double-crossed
3) MS had publisher backing who double-crossed when they saw the public outcry
...they all seem just as plausible to me. Actually, only the first really seems plausible. I'm not convinced of double-dealings. The relationships between console companies and publishers are too symbiotic for anyone to go unilaterally pissing the others off.
(Very mild NSFW)
Scene 1: MS and gamers
Scene 2: MS and publishers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20g3QIUnOgY
MS went it alone.
They wanted to change the traditional way consoles worked. Skimming rentals and used games revenues would have been ways to extract more money out of an endangered business model.
They also tried to strengthen the media business but couldn't get any game-changing content deals so you end up with a glorified remote control.
They wanted to change the traditional way consoles worked. Skimming rentals and used games revenues would have been ways to extract more money out of an endangered business model.
They also tried to strengthen the media business but couldn't get any game-changing content deals so you end up with a glorified remote control.
I actually think the whole sharing concept they wanted to pursue with the DRM (and perhaps more potential features they could include further down the road) fits in nicely with the more casual crowd they are targeting. As Joker put it, his wife was very much interested in the whole sharing concept, being able to share with family, who in turn will grow up and become active gamers. It's actually a good concept on how to get other people interested in something. It's always easier when it's "free" than if you have to "pay to check out". One of the reasons piracy is such a big issue and on such a large scale (no, please don't reply to this, or it will get too much off topic).
Publishers have always had this power they choose not to use because right now they are in general profitable with the status quo. Both MS and Sony say that publishers can do whatever they want with their respective DRM schemes. Publishers could just about kill the used game market tomorrow if they liked.
They could make the same deals with Gamestop that MS was going to. Skim profits back from used game sales with an authentication system. Gamestop and some other partners ( if they are large enough ) get pricing power because have exclusive access to the authentication system. That would take a little more time but they have months to do so
Bingo.
Being on the Jimmy Falon Show (US show) I'm sure had the attention of more than a couple higher up execs, and seeing the response of not only xbone but ps4 might have brought their attention to actively seek and look further into the preorder nums, and perhaps get a pulse on other medias and public reaction.
But bottom line, preorder numbers had to have had an affect on their decision WRT DRM.
At this point though, they've already shown their cards. Even though they are back tracking now (for now), nobody has anything vested in xbone (aside from some pre-orders), so it is easier to "jump in" to the competitions camp. Many have already made their peace with that decision *raises hand* regardless of this policy change (which will likely change back as soon as they feel they have a big enough userbase).
