XBox One, PS4, DRM, and You

[RenegadeRocks]

What happened here?

People are sad cause MS removed the DRMs? Never heard people going crazy and slitting throats when Witcher and Wither 2 were given DRM less by GOG.com !You guys don't like to own your stuff?

As for sharing, PSN allowed sharing on 5 consoles, brought it down to 2 as they were losing sales, I don't see MS taking it up to 10 and losing all the sales. THey are not doing charity here, they are here to sell and going by the DRMs they had proposed they are really serious about it too. I am happy the online checks and DRMs are gone, now I can actually consider XBoxOne and we finally have competition for the PS4 which had earlier got everything thrown in its kitty.

and why are you guys so worked up about DDs. THey are here already, I have been buying exclusively DD games for the last 2 years from PSN, Humble Bundle, Steam and Origin and so have you been! You will still be able to buy from XBL too. Nothing is lost by losing an online only restriction and getting back to freedom to do what we want with our discs!

Calm down and discuss if you want to, but please stay civil. We got our rights back for discs, the digital future is still there as before. I can understand internet journalists trying to get hits and writing offbeat opinions, but individuals know the value of their money and ownership rights. Why the furore?

 

[MrFloopy]

What happened here?
As for sharing, PSN allowed sharing on 5 consoles, brought it down to 2 as they were losing sales, I don't see MS taking it up to 10 and losing all the sales.

I haven't used the sharing feature on PSN. How does it work? If I share it on 5 consoles, any user can use it without restriction? All 5 can use it simultaneously without restriction?

 

[Cyan]

The person who writes like they poured a bunch of vulgar and misspelled fridge poetry magnets into a bag and dumped them out on the screen, Google translated it to Esperanto, then Bing translated it gibberish, then rubbed a cat on the keyboard, was misinterpreted?

Fun! Agreed, because in this case silence is golden. Am I the only one who thought there was hidden text in his words?

 

[zupallinere]

Time magazine wrote this:

http://techland.time.com/2013/06/20...ies-is-precisely-the-right-move-by-microsoft/

I am in the other side, I wanted a console like the one Microsoft planned, with a few touches here and there. I blame the decision to a last minute change on investors.

Looking back, Microsoft’s been pretty consistent in ignoring criticism about the Xbox 360. When people griped about the company’s extortionately priced, proprietary Xbox 360 hard drives, Microsoft spun a dubious tale about drive imaging costs. When people griped about the company sequestering multiplayer behind Xbox LIVE’s paywall, Microsoft blamed its matchmaking “service” (when people further asked why Netflix and Hulu were behind the paywall — services Xbox LIVE adds no value to — Microsoft was reticent). When people griped about the company’s $100 Xbox 360 USB wireless adapter (in a market where functionally identical adapters could be had for less than half that price), Microsoft just dodged the criticism.

I forgot about the 100 dollar usb wireless adapter Yeah those drives

 

[zupallinere]

Because:

What if you got a nag screen every hour but they allowed you to continue to play ?

 

[brasnial]

Microsoft's DRM 24 hours check in was all about trying to take a the best of physical disk owning and merge it with a digital future .

Ability to sell your game.
trade your game amongst your friends .

Now there were draw backs the 24 hour check in was to make sure people where not abusing the system by passing one disk around a 100 machines and basicly getting the game for free .
Now there would have been teething problem with this new approach to digital but no doult things would have been ironed out over time .

The publishers may or may not have been in favor of this new future ....we just don't no the pros where no more piracy and the ability to get a cut of the used game market .

The cons where people sharing a games but hat already exists today but with out the benifits of the new system .

Microsoft failed in getting the message across because people had fears about this new future and clever people used these fears to whip up a storm against this new future.

Before a rational discussion about the pros and cons happened there where leaks .........now the fear of no more second hand games or being able to lone a game to a friend were run with .

A negative message designed to pander to someones fears will always gain ground very quickly and become true in peoples eyes .
This kind of negative messaging playing to peoples fears is very hard to fight its takes incredible amounts of positive messaging to reverse the negative.

I'd love a psychiatrist or a human behaviorist to take a look at this whole DRM story .I bet the white paper wrote on it would be one very interesting read .

Now its over the rational discussion is happening in the media and on message boards a pity it never happen like this when the new way of doing digital was still on the table .

 

[(((interference)))]

CBOAT's original post is up on GAF for anyone to see and it does not say anything about a down clock, it states there are issues with the ESRAM. People jumped to all sorts of conclusions when other people said they heard similar things but they went into much more detail about the alleged issues.

He's not publicly behind it, but I have been told by one of the people behind the downclock rumour that he was the source behind it. Which also matches with what Rangers has heard.

And to be fair, he didn't exactly go out of his way to contradict it either - his posts tacitly supported it if anything.

For what it's worth, Aaron Greenberg just completely denied this rumor on twitter. The family plan was NOT sharing demos and it was NOT limited to 60 minutes.

https://twitter.com/aarongreenberg/statuses/347911202057379840

But come on, there's no way MS is going to let any 10 people share their game libraries with each other without any catch. The 60 minute timer (whether it applies to just a demo or the whole game. ie you can only play in 60 minute blocks) is far more plausible than them not having any restrictions on the sharing.

I mean PS3 used to do this with digital downloads early in this gen and it was scrapped, hardly see how MS would go out of its way to do the same thing (except much easier, as with that PS3 sharing you'd have to log in to each PS3 with your account to download it to that machine) especially as they're all for reducing the value of used games and 'freeloading' in general,

 

[temesgen]

He's not publicly behind it, but I have been told by one of the people behind the downclock rumour that he was the source behind it. Which also matches with what Rangers has heard.

And to be fair, he didn't exactly go out of his way to contradict it either - his posts tacitly supported it if anything.



But come on, there's no way MS is going to let any 10 people share their game libraries with each other without any catch. The 60 minute timer (whether it applies to just a demo or the whole game. ie you can only play in 60 minute blocks) is more likely than them not having any restrictions on the sharing.

I mean PS3 used to to this with digital downloads early in this gen and it was scrapped, hardly see how MS would go out of its way to do the same thing (except much easier, as with that PS3 sharing you'd have to log in to each PS3 with your account to download it to that machine) especially as they're all for reducing the value of used games and 'freeloading' in general,

K - I see we were referencing two different things... FWIW he was wrong about a game announcement at E3; I think it was Prince of Persia.....

 

[zupallinere]

But come on, there's no way MS is going to let any 10 people share their game libraries with each other without any catch. The 60 minute timer (whether it applies to just a demo or the whole game. ie you can only play in 60 minute blocks) is far more plausible than them not having any restrictions on the sharing.

I mean PS3 used to to this with digital downloads early in this gen and it was scrapped, hardly see how MS would go out of its way to do the same thing (except much easier, as with that PS3 sharing you'd have to log in to each PS3 with your account to download it to that machine) especially as they're all for reducing the value of used games and 'freeloading' in general,

There is nothing said on the MS website nor by any MS executive or PR person that contradicts the alleged MS employees statements. Is there a canonical version of the Family Share rules floating around ?

 

[zupallinere]

The cons where people sharing a game buy that already exist today but with out the benifits of the new system .

Allowing 2-10 people to share one game on the same day that the game is launched hurts publishers more because the first week or first 2 weeks of sales are the most important. Why do people want to hurt publishers and developers ??

 

[bkilian]

But come on, there's no way MS is going to let any 10 people share their game libraries with each other without any catch. The 60 minute timer (whether it applies to just a demo or the whole game. ie you can only play in 60 minute blocks) is far more plausible than them not having any restrictions on the sharing.

I mean PS3 used to to this with digital downloads early in this gen and it was scrapped, hardly see how MS would go out of its way to do the same thing (except much easier, as with that PS3 sharing you'd have to log in to each PS3 with your account to download it to that machine) especially as they're all for reducing the value of used games and 'freeloading' in general,

It's not "without a catch", it's clearly one person playing at a time. It is exactly the same as you giving the disc to a friend.

It was quite well called out by Major Nelson in an interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RtSGFryKwo&feature=youtu.be&t=3m50s

 

[brasnial]

Allowing 2-10 people to share one game on the same day that the game is launched hurts publishers more because the first week or first 2 weeks of sales are the most important. Why do people want to hurt publishers and developers ??

I view it as a trade off ...give and take ...this still happens today fred come over tonight you have got to see this new game I've picked up
Fred comes over plays the game with me then goes what about the other game you brought last week can I borrow that one sure mate take it I've got this now .

The difference is under the new model developers had a cut of the second hand games and no piracy .
Where as today they don't ......see give and take under the new system Fred didn't have to come round I didn't lose my game to him for how ever long he had it .

 

[temesgen]

I forgot about the 100 dollar usb wireless adapter Yeah those drives

You might think the hard drives, wifi adapters and so on were over priced but honestly accessories have always been expensive. Further some thought the hard drives for example were a good deal, I remember a debate about MS's hard drive prices a couple of years ago on B3D with strong opinions on both sides.

The reality is Sony charged more upfront and included more out of the box in an attempt to market their so-called value, the 360 OTOH allowed you to build out your experience the way you saw fit. Many praised MS's approach for being more democratic at the time. Like wise others thought Sony's take was better. Its sort of ironic that now that the roles are reversed both sides are pointing out the new business plans as either short sighted or draconian depending on which side of the fence you find yourself....

But again the cost of those peripherals was pretty much par for the industry, MS didn't invent the markup biz.

 

[RenegadeRocks]

I haven't used the sharing feature on PSN. How does it work? If I share it on 5 consoles, any user can use it without restriction? All 5 can use it simultaneously without restriction?

Yes, you could do all that on 5 systems earlier, now its down to 2, but yes, we buy a game on a new account, activate the account to two systems and all users on those 2 systems can play that game , no restrictions.

No way MS is gonna make it 10, ever. On one ps3 we can have 16 accounts play the games bought on any one of those accounts. Most prbly MS must be allowing 10 users on the same system to play the games. Maybe.
Theres no way they can let 10 Xboxs play the game u bought once Please ppl.

You just got some restrictions lifted, enjoy. No reason to be sad here.

I am gonna bail out before someone slits my throat here.

 

[temesgen]

Yes, you could do all that on 5 systems earlier, now its down to 2, but yes, we buy a game on a new account, activate the account to two systems and all users on those 2 systems can play that game , no restrictions.

No way MS is gonna make it 10, ever. On one ps3 we can have 16 accounts play the games bought on any one of those accounts. Most prbly MS must be allowing 10 users on the same system to play the games. Maybe, theres no way they acn let 10 Xboxs play the game u bought once Please ppl.

You just got some restrictions lifted, enjoy. No reason to be sad here.

I am gonna bail out before someone slits my throat here.

I just noticed your sig, if you haven't already it would nice to hear your take on indie support on the new platforms as well as you analysis of viability of Android and Iphone as competitors to PS4 and XB1 especially now that joystick support is coming to Iphone this fall.

 

[zupallinere]

I view it as a trade off ...give and take ...this still happens today fred come over tonight you have got to see this new game I've picked up
Fred comes over plays the game with me then goes what about the other game you brought last week can I borrow that one sure mate take it I've got this now .

The difference is under the new model developers had a cut of the second hand games and no piracy .
Where as today they don't ......see give and take under the new system Fred didn't have to come round I didn't lose my game to him for how ever long he had it .

Well piracy isn't a problem since there has been DRM for evah and both new consoles will be very secure. In terms of getting a cut for the second hand game thing since MS was blessing Gamestop before why can't publishers just make the same deal with Gamestop now ?

 

[brasnial]

Well piracy isn't a problem since there has been DRM for evah and both new consoles will be very secure. In terms of getting a cut for the second hand game thing since MS was blessing Gamestop before why can't publishers just make the same deal with Gamestop now ?

I wish I new the answer to that question but I don't like you it seems like common sense to give a cut back to the hand that feeds you .
If games shop makes money from a game new or used the developers should get a cut I believe that just like you seem to .

We are heading towards a all digital game world eventually i'd like to have the best of both the new and the old .....I think Microsoft's plans were trying to do that .

P's there are plenty of chipped machines out there piracy still exists be it smaller than it once was .

 

[MrFloopy]

Yes, you could do all that on 5 systems earlier, now its down to 2, but yes, we buy a game on a new account, activate the account to two systems and all users on those 2 systems can play that game , no restrictions.

Yeah, no wonder they changed that

No way MS is gonna make it 10, ever. On one ps3 we can have 16 accounts play the games bought on any one of those accounts. Most prbly MS must be allowing 10 users on the same system to play the games. Maybe.
Theres no way they can let 10 Xboxs play the game u bought once Please ppl.

Not at the same time, no.

You just got some restrictions lifted, enjoy. No reason to be sad here.

I am gonna bail out before someone slits my throat here.

I got 99 reasons to be sad, but this ain't one. Hey look, I'm all meme-y and stuff.

 

[2real4tv]

It's not "without a catch", it's clearly one person playing at a time. It is exactly the same as you giving the disc to a friend.

It was quite well called out by Major Nelson in an interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RtSGFryKwo&feature=youtu.be&t=3m50s

I justed posted to same interview in another thread and I read his comment differently he explicitly states "its not like your buying one copy for all ten members", also using language like "they can check it out".

 

[dagamer]

He's not publicly behind it, but I have been told by one of the people behind the downclock rumour that he was the source behind it. Which also matches with what Rangers has heard.

And to be fair, he didn't exactly go out of his way to contradict it either - his posts tacitly supported it if anything.



But come on, there's no way MS is going to let any 10 people share their game libraries with each other without any catch. The 60 minute timer (whether it applies to just a demo or the whole game. ie you can only play in 60 minute blocks) is far more plausible than them not having any restrictions on the sharing.

I mean PS3 used to to this with digital downloads early in this gen and it was scrapped, hardly see how MS would go out of its way to do the same thing (except much easier, as with that PS3 sharing you'd have to log in to each PS3 with your account to download it to that machine) especially as they're all for reducing the value of used games and 'freeloading' in general,

Sure, the catch is pretty simple, most games are going to mix single and multiplayer seamlessly such that multiple people will end up wanting to buy the game anyway. I mean, with Call of Duty, game sharing was never going to work because everyone wants to play at once. It is not pure coincidence that most of the big games announced at E3 have inherent multiplayer in them to keep you playing the game longer.