More DRM Discussions *spinoff*

[Nesh]

And so it starts.

https://twitter.com/XboxP3/status/821799720712486913

Capcom will be releasing a Play Anywhere title for XBO and Windows. I suspect they won't be the last.

Regards,
SB

I dont like where this is going. MS is trying to lure the market towards their initial plans that backfired back then at the first XBONE announcement.
You CANT get play anywhere if you DONT buy the XBONE version digitally based on Phil Spencer's response to one of the replies.
Since the initial plan didnt work, they are trying to slowly make this adjustment through the backdoor until it is finally be implemented and accepted by consumers without realising this is what they didnt accept before.
At the end everything will be digital and DRM controlled

 

[AzBat]

Oh no, Microsoft are evil again.

Xbox Play Anywhere has always been about the digital version. I guess getting 2 platforms with one purchase is not enough for some of you. What's next? You want 3 platforms? 4?

Tommy McClain

 

[mrcorbo]

I dont like where this is going. MS is trying to lure the market towards their initial plans that backfired back then at the first XBONE announcement.
You CANT get play anywhere if you DONT buy the XBONE version digitally based on Phil Spencer's response to one of the replies.
Since the initial plan didnt work, they are trying to slowly make this adjustment through the backdoor until it is finally be implemented and accepted by consumers without realising this is what they didnt accept before.
At the end everything will be digital and DRM controlled

How is this different from cross-buy on the PS3/4 and Vita? Why weren't you freaking out about how that was going to trick people into buying into Sony's digital and DRM-controlled ecosystem?

 

[iroboto]

I dont like where this is going. MS is trying to lure the market towards their initial plans that backfired back then at the first XBONE announcement.
You CANT get play anywhere if you DONT buy the XBONE version digitally based on Phil Spencer's response to one of the replies.
Since the initial plan didnt work, they are trying to slowly make this adjustment through the backdoor until it is finally be implemented and accepted by consumers without realising this is what they didnt accept before.
At the end everything will be digital and DRM controlled

Having more options can't be worse than having less.

If publishers continue to provide additional incentives to purchasing digital and lock themselves with DRM, that is entirely up to the consumer to decide if that's the direction they want to go. I would like to see publishers continually offer _more_ to digital purchases as it benefits users who enjoy digital properties, and it helps publishers remove physical units off the market (which in terms of revenue loss, is worse than digital piracy)

 

[Nesh]

Having more options can't be worse than having less.

If publishers continue to provide additional incentives to purchasing digital and lock themselves with DRM, that is entirely up to the consumer to decide if that's the direction they want to go. I would like to see publishers continually offer _more_ to digital purchases as it benefits users who enjoy digital properties, and it helps publishers remove physical units off the market (which in terms of revenue loss, is worse than digital piracy)

The idea that the market always adjusts to consumer behavior is false. Companies can and do manipulate the market based on what they strategically decide to make available to the consumer The consumer that way offers his consent without realizing or caring about the disadvantages or the potential advantages of other options that could have been available (but were deliberately not made available). Its behavioral economics and marketing and it has been extremely successful (i.e you want to increase sales of harmful cigarettes? Advertise it as a revolutionary symbol of feminism and women's strength. It happened).
Companies often add or remove incentives according to their own goals and the consumer reacts to what's artificially available. Having choice and options is in many cases just an ilussion

How is this different from cross-buy on the PS3/4 and Vita? Why weren't you freaking out about how that was going to trick people into buying into Sony's digital and DRM-controlled ecosystem?

Sony didnt try to impose everything under their DRM control like MS did with the XBOX One announcement. Cross buy between PS3/Vita/PS4 was available in some physical copies as well (See Street Fighter X Tekken) and it is in most cases isolated to small indie games. This was mostly used to increase adoption for Vita. We know for a fact that one of MS major strategies is to make everything digital and under their own store. The first plan didnt work, so this is plan b

 

[mrcorbo]

Sony didnt try to impose everything under their DRM control like MS did with the XBOX One announcement. Cross buy between PS3/Vita/PS4 was available in some physical copies as well (See Street Fighter X Tekken) and it is in most cases isolated to small indie games. This was mostly used to increase adoption for Vita. We know for a fact that one of MS major strategies is to make everything digital and under their own store. The first plan didnt work, so this is plan b

And Sony also has cross-buy between PS4 and PS3 for some titles. These are restricted to digital copies purchased through PSN. Sony were using cross-buy to try to sell Vitas, but now are using it to incentivize engagement with their digital store. Again, what is the difference?

Also, people who would be attracted to Play Anywhere are PC gamers who have already overwhelmingly shown that they are OK with digital purchases and DRM. They are not exactly having to work hard to convert anyone to the concept, it's just getting them to engage with *their* digital store instead of the market leader (Steam).

 

[Nesh]

And Sony also has cross-buy between PS4 and PS3 for some titles. These are restricted to digital copies purchased through PSN. Sony were using cross-buy to try to sell Vitas, but now are using it to incentivize engagement with their digital store. Again, what is the difference?

Provide examples.
Then compare that with MS where every major title (not some small projects) is being cross buy between XBOX One and PC if you only buy digitally. Both current gen platforms. PS3? Not so much
Even if Sony has a similar incentive it is irrelevant since their strategy is weak and still puts more effort to make the PS4 as relevant as possible with exclusive titles whereas MS has eliminated that almost completely.
Also your example would have been better if you mentioned PS Now and lack of basic Backwards Compatibility on the PS4 so that the consumer is forced to rent a service. It is a different example with a different strategy but is relevant with the discussion and I disagree with it just as much. Sony also calls this "option"

 

[mrcorbo]

Provide examples.
Then compare that with MS where every major title (not some small projects) is being cross buy between XBOX One and PC if you only buy digitally. Both current gen platforms. PS3? Not so much
Even if Sony has a similar incentive it is irrelevant since their strategy is weak and still puts more effort to make the PS4 as relevant as possible with exclusive titles whereas MS has eliminated that almost completely.
Also your example would have been better if you mentioned PS Now and lack of basic Backwards Compatibility on the PS4 so that the consumer is forced to rent a service. It is a different example with a different strategy but is relevant with the discussion and I disagree with it just as much. Sony also calls this "option"

So you're OK with Sony's strategy to drive people towards digital purchases because it sucks?

 

[Nesh]

So you're OK with Sony's strategy to drive people towards digital purchases because it sucks?

I cant be concerned with a strategy that almost doesnt exist.
I am not ok with Sony not providing PS1 and PS2 BC so that they force PS Now. Isnt it that good enough for you?
Or are we going to argue based on your assumption that I have double standards?

 

[mrcorbo]

I cant be concerned with a strategy that almost doesnt exist.
I am not ok with Sony not providing PS1 and PS2 BC so that they force PS Now. Isnt it that good enough for you?
Or are we going to argue based on your assumption that I have double standards?

Well, if your position is that any initiative that gets significant numbers of people to buy games digitally vs. physically is a bad thing I guess that's not really something I'm going to try to argue with you about.

 

[eastmen]

I dont like where this is going. MS is trying to lure the market towards their initial plans that backfired back then at the first XBONE announcement.
You CANT get play anywhere if you DONT buy the XBONE version digitally based on Phil Spencer's response to one of the replies.
Since the initial plan didnt work, they are trying to slowly make this adjustment through the backdoor until it is finally be implemented and accepted by consumers without realising this is what they didnt accept before.
At the end everything will be digital and DRM controlled

Oh get off your high horse bro. Its people like you that are the reason the original plans for xbox one were scrapped. Now you are complaining because those plans are scrapped and you don't even see it.

Your complaining that you have to buy the digital copy to get play anywhere. That is because there is no real DRM on the discs to allow for getting the paly anywhere editions of the games without then opening up the system to be exploited. Buy game at $60 for xbox one , get play anywhere edition , return xbox one title or trade it in. Keep play anywhere edition.

MS's original plan was to provide drm on the disc that would have to be deactivated by selling back the disc or giving up the rights. The disc itself would be nothing more than an installer. But no that wasn't good enough so everyone threw a fit. Now you are throwing a fit cause they didn't do it.


IF you want the perks of digital buy digital. Nothing is stopping you. If you want the perks of physical buy it. For me digital is the better option. On plays anywhere titles I get it for the xbox one and pc (perhaps even scorpio) . I can pick the platform I want at my leisure with saves syncing in the cloud. Its great and worth the money even if I save 20% buying physical preorders on amazon. I also odn't have a huge amount of plastic discs rotting in my house. Oh and I don't have to get up to change a disc everytime I want to play a different game.

If trading in a physical disc is more important to you than all that , then stick with what you want but don't complain

 

[mrcorbo]

Oh get off your high horse bro. Its people like you that are the reason the original plans for xbox one were scrapped. Now you are complaining because those plans are scrapped and you don't even see it.

Your complaining that you have to buy the digital copy to get play anywhere. That is because there is no real DRM on the discs to allow for getting the paly anywhere editions of the games without then opening up the system to be exploited. Buy game at $60 for xbox one , get play anywhere edition , return xbox one title or trade it in. Keep play anywhere edition.

MS's original plan was to provide drm on the disc that would have to be deactivated by selling back the disc or giving up the rights. The disc itself would be nothing more than an installer. But no that wasn't good enough so everyone threw a fit. Now you are throwing a fit cause they didn't do it.


IF you want the perks of digital buy digital. Nothing is stopping you. If you want the perks of physical buy it. For me digital is the better option. On plays anywhere titles I get it for the xbox one and pc (perhaps even scorpio) . I can pick the platform I want at my leisure with saves syncing in the cloud. Its great and worth the money even if I save 20% buying physical preorders on amazon. I also odn't have a huge amount of plastic discs rotting in my house. Oh and I don't have to get up to change a disc everytime I want to play a different game.

If trading in a physical disc is more important to you than all that , then stick with what you want but don't complain

These discussions usually go well.

 

[iroboto]

The idea that the market always adjusts to consumer behavior is false. Companies can and do manipulate the market based on what they strategically decide to make available to the consumer The consumer that way offers his consent without realizing or caring about the disadvantages or the potential advantages of other options that could have been available (but were deliberately not made available). Its behavioral economics and marketing and it has been extremely successful (i.e you want to increase sales of harmful cigarettes? Advertise it as a revolutionary symbol of feminism and women's strength. It happened).
Companies often add or remove incentives according to their own goals and the consumer reacts to what's artificially available. Having choice and options is in many cases just an ilussion

This seems like slightly narrow point of view of the situation, and I dont mean this in reference to your DRM theory. The issue is that your entire viewpoint revolves around 1 critical piece of assumption, that is, physical media will still be able to be usable, or keep up with, technology. In that in a few years from now, as we move towards different methods of absorbing entertainment, the thought that some form of physical drive will be available to use to plug in or trade around.

We all know it's going digital eventually, should those discussions about DRM be happening now?

 

[Nesh]

Oh get off your high horse bro. Its people like you that are the reason the original plans for xbox one were scrapped. Now you are complaining because those plans are scrapped and you don't even see it.

Your complaining that you have to buy the digital copy to get play anywhere. That is because there is no real DRM on the discs to allow for getting the paly anywhere editions of the games without then opening up the system to be exploited. Buy game at $60 for xbox one , get play anywhere edition , return xbox one title or trade it in. Keep play anywhere edition.

MS's original plan was to provide drm on the disc that would have to be deactivated by selling back the disc or giving up the rights. The disc itself would be nothing more than an installer. But no that wasn't good enough so everyone threw a fit. Now you are throwing a fit cause they didn't do it.


IF you want the perks of digital buy digital. Nothing is stopping you. If you want the perks of physical buy it. For me digital is the better option. On plays anywhere titles I get it for the xbox one and pc (perhaps even scorpio) . I can pick the platform I want at my leisure with saves syncing in the cloud. Its great and worth the money even if I save 20% buying physical preorders on amazon. I also odn't have a huge amount of plastic discs rotting in my house. Oh and I don't have to get up to change a disc everytime I want to play a different game.

If trading in a physical disc is more important to you than all that , then stick with what you want but don't complain

I am not complaining because the plans are scrapped. I am pointing out that MS is trying to re implement them via a different route. As for being scrapped...good

Sent from my SM-J320F using Tapatalk

 

[Nesh]

Well, if your position is that any initiative that gets significant numbers of people to buy games digitally vs. physically is a bad thing I guess that's not really something I'm going to try to argue with you about.

No. Digital is not necessarilly a bad thing. My position is against any market path where the provider gains aditional control over the product or service that has already been purchased by the consumer. It is just that in the case of this industry, digital fits better that purpose.


Sent from my SM-J320F using Tapatalk

 

[iroboto]

I am not complaining because the plans are scrapped. I am pointing out that MS is trying to re implement them via a different route. As for being scrapped...good

Sent from my SM-J320F using Tapatalk

It's not that, which is the issues, we are eventually reaching a converging point everything will be digital regardless. This concept of selling and holding physical media will eventually come to and end. regardless of what MS does

 

[Nesh]

This seems like slightly narrow point of view of the situation, and I dont mean this in reference to your DRM theory. The issue is that your entire viewpoint revolves around 1 critical piece of assumption, that is, physical media will still be able to be usable, or keep up with, technology. In that in a few years from now, as we move towards different methods of absorbing entertainment, the thought that some form of physical drive will be available to use to plug in or trade around.

We all know it's going digital eventually, should those discussions about DRM be happening now?

See above

Sent from my SM-J320F using Tapatalk

 

[Nesh]

It's not that, which is the issues, we are eventually reaching a converging point everything will be digital regardless. This concept of selling and holding physical media will eventually come to and end. regardless of what MS does

Most likely it will but how innevitable it is or not doesnt change the argument

Sent from my SM-J320F using Tapatalk

 

[iroboto]

Most likely it will but how innevitable it is or not doesnt change the argument

Sent from my SM-J320F using Tapatalk

Sure it does, because you're asking for a perfect solution before we've arrived there. You want an open license where you can do whatever you want with your digital media and not be tied down Or controlled by any provider. I get that, but it's unrealistic that we ever just get there in a finger snap, it takes years to build policy over so many providers. And more importantly it takes adoption.

 

[Nesh]

Sure it does, because you're asking for a perfect solution before we've arrived there. You want an open license where you can do whatever you want with your digital media and not be tied down Or controlled by any provider. I get that, but it's unrealistic that we ever just get there in a finger snap, it takes years to build policy over so many providers. And more importantly it takes adoption.

Lets say that the incentive is for providers (investors is an even better term) to have more control and personally I am highly positive that the market will most likely and enentually favor them with the appropriate policies, laws and marketing strategies that will make the consumer more receptive regardless how long it will take.

Sent from my SM-J320F using Tapatalk