News & Rumors: Xbox One (codename Durango)

[-tkf-]

lol such a horrible argument. Are there big block buster titles that require steam to play ? Yes or no ?

IF yes then there is no difference between the platforms. Yes you can run a spread sheet program on the pc and not have to activate it on steam but that hardly matters in comparision to a console.

Once you buy a piece of software on steam you are stuck in that walled garden until you either sell the software (which you can't) or pay for it again on another platform. Sadly there are a lot of steam only games and thus jumping off the platform wont work

Of course it isn't a horrible argument, you make it seem like i have no choice where i put my money.

You could argue there are PC only titles that can only be bought on Steam and no other platform. I have no idea how long that list is. But it sure as hell isn't the biggest blockbuster titles as they will see release on Discs for consoles. I have a choice, hell i can even choose my DD platform. I can choose to spend money on DRM Free games. I can buy cake for the money i would have used on games.

Microsoft tried to limit the choices and options for it's customers and they are getting the karma back. And once more for the record, i am not a giant steam supporter. I don't like it's limitations and i don't like the legal rights i have as a customer. So i try to choose carefull and balance the purchases i make with the prices and other options i have.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

lol such a horrible argument. Are there big block buster titles that require steam to play ? Yes or no ?

IF yes then there is no difference between the platforms.

When you buy a PC box, you have the options 1) buy an online requiring Steam game, 2) buy an offline disc game. When you (would have) bought an XB1, you had the options 1) buy an online requiring game, 2) ummm, no, that's it.

Given the different options, how can these platforms not be different?

 

[Malo]

I believe the point he was trying to make was that a lot of disc games nowadays require steam, despite the fact that it came from disc. It just meant you didn't have to download it first but the same restrictions apply irrespective.

 

[zed]

In my world it was stupid, i understand we have a few guys out there that

Mate its more than a few guys, with the xbox360 ~1/3 dont use live, either silver or gold. Think of that for a minute.

going DD only would of meant the xbone would of sold no where near what the ps4 will sell. Now they have a chance to match them, yes next generation going DD is perhaps a good idea but now its too soon

 

[Grall]

When you buy a PC box, you have the options 1) buy an online requiring Steam game, 2) buy an offline disc game.

Almost no steam games actually require online of course... Ubisoft titles probably all do due to their bullshit DRM system, and then anything that is online-only or wants you to log in on an internet server for whatever reason, but most everything else can run in steam offline mode just fine.

...But of course, you knew all this already. Just pointing out, for completeness' sake.

I believe the point he was trying to make was that a lot of disc games nowadays require steam, despite the fact that it came from disc.

...And so what? You have offline mode if you don't want steam's conveniences of automatic patching, friends and community features, workshop, achievements and shit like that. You can also download the game rather than haul out the disc after activating the steam key if you need to reinstall some day, which I'd say is a big plus actually, unless you have a terribly slow and/or metered connection that is, in which case steam is neither a gain or a loss.

 

[Cranky]

Mate its more than a few guys, with the xbox360 ~1/3 dont use live, either silver or gold. Think of that for a minute.

going DD only would of meant the xbone would of sold no where near what the ps4 will sell. Now they have a chance to match them, yes next generation going DD is perhaps a good idea but now its too soon

What your analysis lacks is the lifetime profit of a Gold vs non-gold user, especially considering that MS could double their revenue per game purchased while still enabling publishers to keep more $ per game sold.

 

[orangpelupa]

Overall, pc have choice

But when we limit it to multiplatform big budget games, pc don't have choice for a disc that can be resold. it can't be resold.

Those games always release in Ubi Drm, Steam drm, or Origin/ea drm.

 

[eastmen]

Of course it isn't a horrible argument, you make it seem like i have no choice where i put my money.

You could argue there are PC only titles that can only be bought on Steam and no other platform. I have no idea how long that list is. But it sure as hell isn't the biggest blockbuster titles as they will see release on Discs for consoles. I have a choice, hell i can even choose my DD platform. I can choose to spend money on DRM Free games. I can buy cake for the money i would have used on games.

Microsoft tried to limit the choices and options for it's customers and they are getting the karma back. And once more for the record, i am not a giant steam supporter. I don't like it's limitations and i don't like the legal rights i have as a customer. So i try to choose carefull and balance the purchases i make with the prices and other options i have.

had to work both jobs today but I wanted to respond to everyone.

You state that on PC some titles can only be bought on steam and no other platform and I agree with you. You then go on to speak about them being avalible for purchase other platforms.

Its the same exact thing with the xbox one. There are only going to be a handful of titles over the next 5-8 years that you can only get on the xbox the same with steam and the ps4.

MS has done nothing other than what valve or EA or Apple or Google have done.

I could understand if ms put out the xbox one and then after millions bought it decided to change these policy's but they announced them upfront.

When you buy a PC box, you have the options 1) buy an online requiring Steam game, 2) buy an offline disc game. When you (would have) bought an XB1, you had the options 1) buy an online requiring game, 2) ummm, no, that's it.

Given the different options, how can these platforms not be different?

Many games don't have those 2 options. For example , Bioshock is a steam works game , I could buy a disc but its not any different than the dd verison both are the same. Same with xcom and civ 5 and what not.

Malo I believe the point he was trying to make was that a lot of disc games nowadays require steam, despite the fact that it came from disc. It just meant you didn't have to download it first but the same restrictions apply irrespective.

Yes this is exactly right

 

[-tkf-]

had to work both jobs today but I wanted to respond to everyone.

You state that on PC some titles can only be bought on steam and no other platform and I agree with you. You then go on to speak about them being avalible for purchase other platforms.

Its the same exact thing with the xbox one. There are only going to be a handful of titles over the next 5-8 years that you can only get on the xbox the same with steam and the ps4.

MS has done nothing other than what valve or EA or Apple or Google have done.

I could understand if ms put out the xbox one and then after millions bought it decided to change these policy's but they announced them upfront.

Many games don't have those 2 options. For example , Bioshock is a steam works game , I could buy a disc but its not any different than the dd verison both are the same. Same with xcom and civ 5 and what not.

Yes this is exactly right

But i don't think Steam is better than Discs, so how would that make Microsoft the good guy in my world?

Microsoft told me, you used to have a choice, buy the Disc or Download the game, now there is no choice, everything is DD and we added a 24 hour check to your purchase. In return, you get nothing.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Many games don't have those 2 options. For example , Bioshock is a steam works game , I could buy a disc but its not any different than the dd verison both are the same. Same with xcom and civ 5 and what not.

I actually wasn't aware of that (I know same games have always on DRM, but I also read about the outrage and eventual removal of that DRM), although it's still a case-by-case situation rather than a locked-down experience. MS was taking online activation to the next level so it's still different on the platform level. It may not be different for some games (Bioshock on PC and on XB1 requiring an internet connection) but it is for the paltform and thus people's perception of that platform. You probably won't find that the people who were complaining about MS's choice are also PC gamers used to internet requirements.

 

[eastmen]

But i don't think Steam is better than Discs, so how would that make Microsoft the good guy in my world?

Microsoft told me, you used to have a choice, buy the Disc or Download the game, now there is no choice, everything is DD and we added a 24 hour check to your purchase. In return, you get nothing.

in return you get 10 friend sharing , ability to download the game anywhere or use the disc to play it, the ability to sell your dd and the ability to trade it in , something you can't currently do with other dd platforms.

DD is the way of all modern platforms and ms was offering a way for those with slow connections to take advantage of it.

The only thing they impose is a 24 hour check in , which we have all argued about already , some people might have a fancy backpack with a xbox one in it and a 42 inch tv and walk around playing games for more than 24 hours strait with no acess to internet be it tethering from a cell phone or stealing someones. The vast majority will sit the console under their tv , hook it to wifi and never touch it again.

I actually wasn't aware of that (I know same games have always on DRM, but I also read about the outrage and eventual removal of that DRM), although it's still a case-by-case situation rather than a locked-down experience. MS was taking online activation to the next level so it's still different on the platform level. It may not be different for some games (Bioshock on PC and on XB1 requiring an internet connection) but it is for the paltform and thus people's perception of that platform. You probably won't find that the people who were complaining about MS's choice are also PC gamers used to internet requirements.

IT is a case by case situation that is getting worse each year. All steam games need to be activated online to play, you do that either by purchasing dd or by entering a gamecode that came with your disc. With ms its done by a 24 hour check. Surprisingly I feel even if ms went with a more steam route people would still complain since now your locked down by a code and in order to sell it (something you can't do on steam) you'd have to jump through hoops to deactivate the code

A large portion of the pc gaming industry actually has mobile computers however. Tablets , laptops and the like aren't allways going to have an internet source since they are mobile and ment to be taken to other places or used while traveling.

An xbox one is a console and is mean for on the go gaming. But still you'd only have to activate once every 24 hours. Anyone with a smart phone would allways have acess to a way to check in while on the road.

 

[-tkf-]

I actually wasn't aware of that (I know same games have always on DRM, but I also read about the outrage and eventual removal of that DRM), although it's still a case-by-case situation rather than a locked-down experience. MS was taking online activation to the next level so it's still different on the platform level. It may not be different for some games (Bioshock on PC and on XB1 requiring an internet connection) but it is for the paltform and thus people's perception of that platform. You probably won't find that the people who were complaining about MS's choice are also PC gamers used to internet requirements.

Comparing steam/pc to consoles can be valid, but at the same time the platforms are so different that in many cases it makes ZERO sense. For every example of being just like the original XB1 policy there is a counter example.

Alan Wake.. Steam works title.. can also be bought DRM free from GOG. So what version do we choose?

Alan Wake on the XBOX1 as pr original Microsoft policy, could be bought on disc or DD, once activated that was it, yours forever, no way to trade the disc. But you can actually buy DD games on the PC today, and sell it to others. (Besides the moral right to doing this i have no idea how it would work legally).

It goes without saying that those that buy games from Steam accepts the policies, though i think many have no idea just what that means in every case. The same would be the case for Microsofts always on XB1. Those that would have bought the machine and games would (hopefully) understand the limitations.

But as long as there is a choice the customers are bound to go some place else if they want to. Steam has several advantages over a Console based similar system. They have 10 years of building respect, they are openly embracing several platforms, from linux to windows. They have a offline mode that beats, for example Origins crappy mode. And they run lots of sales making it easy to build customers attachment rate to their system.

And Microsoft understood that this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWSIFh8ICaA limitless sharing technology was hard to beat. As did the customers. If Sony and Microsoft agrees that this isn't the case with the PS5/XB2 maybe Nintendo will create the same video..

 

[Strange]

For starters, Steam doesn't require you to pay for hardware, nor do they make you pay for online gaming. Stop comparing the two as if they're even remotely similar...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

With ms its done by a 24 hour check. Surprisingly I feel even if ms went with a more steam route people would still complain since now your locked down by a code and in order to sell it (something you can't do on steam) you'd have to jump through hoops to deactivate the code.

Yes. Those 'people' will not be Steam users, but console gamers used to the perfectly simple current method of hand-over-your-disk. Any DRM that adds faff to that will be met with complaint and resistance. If that DRM adds usability, extolling the benefits would offset people's natural reticence. I think MS would have got away with it just fine had they presented the benefits far more strongly.

 

[Rockster]

For starters, Steam doesn't require you to pay for hardware, nor do they make you pay for online gaming. Stop comparing the two as if they're even remotely similar...

Uh, they would like to (so they are building Steam boxes), and what difference does it make as you still need hardware to run the games regardless of who gets paid. Consoles are usually a loss leader designed to steer customers to a platform. Xbox Live, PSN, Steam and any other service that is an online marketplace for games are in competition with each other, and therefore inherently similar. They are all fighting to provide an environment appealing to games developers and their customers for the purpose of earning a royalty on their transactions. In that sense they are identical.

Regardless of what the loud minority may have you believe, the world is moving away from the historical models of game/entertainment delivery and distribution; and so everything you saw from MS with regards to DRM, etc. was their attempt to get out in front of it. Sony smartly cached in on that screaming minority to win mind-share. But the votes which count, (ie. the services people are actually spending money on), should tell you exactly where this train is headed.

 

[-tkf-]

Regardless of what the loud minority may have you believe, the world is moving away from the historical models of game/entertainment delivery and distribution; and so everything you saw from MS with regards to DRM, etc. was their attempt to get out in front of it. Sony smartly cached in on that screaming minority to win mind-share. But the votes which count, (ie. the services people are actually spending money on), should tell you exactly where this train is headed.

Come up with numbers or step away from the discussion, your generalization aren't helping, you are just being a "loud minority" yourself.

The only smart thing Sony did was ... nothing! It was Microsoft that made them look smart.

 

[GrimThorne]

Come up with numbers or step away from the discussion, your generalization aren't helping, you are just being a "loud minority" yourself.

The only smart thing Sony did was ... nothing! It was Microsoft that made them look smart.

Well no one has real any numbers right now. lol But it's not hard to imagine how this all ends.

The most likely scenario is that "the whales" will start staying home. Without the need to journey to their local retailers at midnight or any other time, they will make all digital purchases. The impact of that will be immediately felt by "the leechers" as they go to the game stores and find the used shelves with the pickings being from slim to none.

The game publishers will catch on quickly enough when they realize that they don't have to make available as many physical copies of new releases anymore. That will signal another shift in terms of the kinds of DLC and other pre-order content made available at the retail counter.

If you're Microsoft you realize that you don't have to force this, they can relax and wait for it to happen naturally. So in the end they get exactly what they wanted. If it happens on gamers terms there'll be less fuss and fighting about it.

 

[dobwal]

Come up with numbers or step away from the discussion, your generalization aren't helping, you are just being a "loud minority" yourself.

The only smart thing Sony did was ... nothing! It was Microsoft that made them look smart.

It was more than that. The PS4 in design and marketing philosophy is heavily influenced by the missteps that happened around the PS3.

Its why the PS4 design doesn't seem to stray that far from a general AMD APU/PC design. Its why Sony valued lower pricing of the standard sku versus the increasing sticker price because of the addition of a camera. Its why Sony strongly pushed for indie development on their new console. Its why Jack Tretton isn't as visible as last gen and has toned down all the colorful PR.

Sony took lessons learned last gen and applied them to this gen.

There is no "lets use our console to push some proprietary technology". There is no "lets skimp on development tools even though we have exotic tech because the devs will figure it out eventually". There is no "Hey, go get a second job because our console is worth it."

What you see as "nothing", I see as a 180 degree turn around in Sony's approach and usually going from arrogant to humble isn't an easy or effortless endeavor. Its why it usually takes someone else "stomping a mudhole into your a@# and walking it dry" to convince someone to make that transition.

MS's main problem is that they seem to have been oblivious to the issues Sony dealt with last gen. Or that they allowed their own arrogance to convince them, they could take some of the same steps Sony took last gen and execute better.

Kinect adds to the retail price of the console as well as the R&D costs based on potential that may or may not be recognized much like BluRay. Instead of SPEs in the PS3 we have a bunch of specialized fixed function accelerators in Durango. We hearing the same "supercomputing" language from MS this gen as we heard from Sony last gen. On top of all that, MS wanted to finish it off with "Always ON Online DRM". Probably the biggest misstep ever taken by a manufacturer of a commerically popular console platform.

MS seemed to watch Sony walk into minefield and trip more than a few mines and basically believe "its okay we have better metal detectors". Then commenced to walk itself into a bigger and more dangerous minefield with the potential of blowing up the whole division and realizing "better" and "capable" does not mean the same thing. And since E3, MS has dropped those metal detectors broke out some good old fashion sticks and have been retracing their steps to safety.

MS doesn't come into this gen with close to 250-300 million in console unit sales over a decade and all the good will that those consoles generated, which is why MS is even in a more precarious position than Sony ever was. Luckily MS saving grace is its willingness to address some concerns and remove infamous features before the launch of the console.

 

[DrJay24]

Regardless of what the loud minority may have you believe

Why didn't MS just market their console to the silent majority and not change their stance on just about everything?

 

[Malo]

...And so what? You have offline mode if you don't want steam's conveniences of automatic patching, friends and community features, workshop, achievements and shit like that. You can also download the game rather than haul out the disc after activating the steam key if you need to reinstall some day, which I'd say is a big plus actually, unless you have a terribly slow and/or metered connection that is, in which case steam is neither a gain or a loss.

I completely agree. I was simply pointing out what he was trying to say.