XBox One, PS4, DRM, and You

[RancidLunchmeat]

I just preordered the next LEGO game from amazon.. tell me how i will be able to buy any game on the XBONE that will not require STEAM.. ehmm sorry Microsoft's activation servers to run?

You don't. But you also don't have to preorder because there will be 1st day digital downloads. So what is the benefit of preordering? And, how will that work? Will they still include "preorder bonuses" if you preorder for a 1st day DD? Will you have to pay for the entire preorder in advance? Or will preorder bonuses be restricted to the physical media, which then allows stores like Gamestop and Best Buy, etc to still profit from selling physical discs? (Why else even have physical discs? Why would stores spend shelf space on them?)

Sony will very likely have to do just as the publishers want (i hope they just tell them to fuck off and go another platform). But they have alot of exclusives that they publish and from what they are saying those games will be actually OWNED by those that buy them..

I don't see how this is any different than the MS published games which they've stated will allow you to trade in your games.

In our role as a game publisher, Microsoft Studios will enable you to give your games to friends or trade in your Xbox One games at participating retailers. Third party publishers may opt in or out of supporting game resale and may set up business terms or transfer fees with retailers. Microsoft does not receive any compensation as part of this. In addition, third party publishers can enable you to give games to friends. Loaning or renting games won’t be available at launch, but we are exploring the possibilities with our partners

MS has already said you own the games they publish, just as you claim Sony has said. MS has also stated that games not published by MS Game Studios may have different requirements depending upon what the particular publish deems optimal (for them, not you), while Sony has been totally silent on the issue.

These things are going to be similar, if not identical, folks.

 

[Billy Idol]

That's a valid point actually, it could affect Steam sales. I don't know about iTunes as I don't have any iOS devices anymore. Right now though because of Steam's restrictions I generally don't buy anything there unless it's in the $5 to $15 range because once you bought it that's it, no selling, no trading, nothing. With Xb1 though I'd be comfortable spending more since every digital game purchase there is basically two games in one. I get the original game, and the game I'll be trading it for. If Steam followed suit then their having less sales wouldn't affect me as much because I'd be willing to spend more since my games aren't as locked down as they are now. Realistically it's probably not enough to get me to go back to consoles for gaming, but I do kinda wish Steam and phones would follow Microsoft's lead here and let people trade apps. Maybe those two platforms can get away without it though since their digital content is so cheap whereas digital content on consoles has historically been comparatively very expensive.

But did I read it wrong? Only if a publisher alows it, you are able to sell your game...which publisher will allows this? Publisher decide if they want a fee or not, if they allow used games...please don't say that this sounds exactly what you want?!?

 

[expletive]

Right but some people like me want it that way. I don't want physical anything anymore. I want a fully digital forward compatible platform that I can bounce around my content at will on any of my devices and trade them with friends, and have it all managed by the host provider. The most interesting thing about the XB1 to me is that is goes with vm's for the apps. To me that hints at some point in the future all XB1 content will be executable on other devices. That's because I'm not buying physical content tied to one machine, an obsolete practice in my mind, I'm buying a license to use a digital product on all supporting devices. That's the direction I want things to go and to me anything else is a step back. Yes to have that possible means drm checks otherwise you get situations like with DirecTV where 3 neighbors all share the same dish while paying for just one account. I'm fine with drm checks as long as I get everything all digital, forward compatible, sharable on my other devices and tradable with others. Steam gives me most of that but not all, Microsoft has taken it to the next step and I feel that will pressure Steam to follow, and who knows maybe Apple and others. I get that you don't like it, that's totally fine and there are other options available to you. Or if you don't have reliable internet where you live then likewise you should move on to a different product, XB1 is not for you. But some people, myself included, want things to go in the direction that Microsoft is taking it. It's the natural evolution to an all digital shareable world. As others have said the best thing you can do is vote with your wallets.

I would not be surprised if buying a game on XBO also allows access via the MS Store (or Marketplace or whatever its called) on Windows 8 as well. That would also be a nice perk. Personally, the flexibility these new policies provide suit me fine as well. I'm really looking forward to having a console full of games i can switch around between so easily, and in other parts of the house too.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Xbox One is a platform. Steam is a platform. EA Origin is a platform. Your choice is to buy Xbox hardware, Sony hardware or PC hardware. Steam is absolutely no different. I'm not sure how someone could sit at home angry at Xbox One while buying games on Steam, iOS Appstore, EA Origin or Google Play etc. Right or wrong, the reality is that all of the platforms are going to digital distribution, and this gen for consoles will be a half-measure.

No. Steam and Origin are means of distribution for the PC platform.
Braid is a game that can be bought on either Steam or GOG. That doesn't make it a multiplatform title.

Whatever you and I think is the future of distribution for software isn't a valid reason to force stuff down the consumers' throat, unwillingly.

 

[bkilian]

Hello to thanks but no thanks, it's basicly a list of things feared from the start. On top of it all is the lack of ownership of something i BOUGHT.. i hope that the EU will sue Microsoft into hell until they give in.

Oh no, you own that blu-ray disc free and clear. It's the contents that you don't own, and never have. Same with most software, all music, and all movies. When you buy a DVD, you _cannot_ use it in your movie theater, you _cannot_ make copies of it and sell them, you _cannot_ rent it out. In the US, doing any of those things can result in criminal charges. Most other countries are similar.

Same for games. Steam is actually the closest to what publishers have wanted, and copyright law allows. They're just extending that, with significant consumer-friendly concessions that Steam does not even have, to the content on the shiny disc. Just changing the physical form of the product does not change the rights of the copyright holder.

Now you may disagree with this, as I generally do (I have not, nor will I ever, buy a game on Steam because of their restrictions), but don't assume for one minute that you have ever "owned" a game.

 

[Cyan]

I bring up Steam only to show that as a digital content provider they have now fallen behind their competition in terms of flexibility.




Right but some people like me want it that way. I don't want physical anything anymore. I want a fully digital forward compatible platform that I can bounce around my content at will on any of my devices and trade them with friends, and have it all managed by the host provider. The most interesting thing about the XB1 to me is that is goes with vm's for the apps. To me that hints at some point in the future all XB1 content will be executable on other devices. That's because I'm not buying physical content tied to one machine, an obsolete practice in my mind, I'm buying a license to use a digital product on all supporting devices. That's the direction I want things to go and to me anything else is a step back. Yes to have that possible means drm checks otherwise you get situations like with DirecTV where 3 neighbors all share the same dish while paying for just one account. I'm fine with drm checks as long as I get everything all digital, forward compatible, sharable on my other devices and tradable with others. Steam gives me most of that but not all, Microsoft has taken it to the next step and I feel that will pressure Steam to follow, and who knows maybe Apple and others. I get that you don't like it, that's totally fine and there are other options available to you. Or if you don't have reliable internet where you live then likewise you should move on to a different product, XB1 is not for you. But some people, myself included, want things to go in the direction that Microsoft is taking it. It's the natural evolution to an all digital shareable world. As others have said the best thing you can do is vote with your wallets.

That's fine and dandy, but everything you dream of can be done without that DRM.

Customers have rights too, not only the corporations.

There are people who like to feel they own what they buy. Back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, they said it was God who declared what belongs to whom, and now it is Microsoft?

I insist -from another post- there should be no need for the Xbone to keep checking that you are online, licensed to use the game etc. It adds anything of real value for the user.

It's pretty common in the USA to remain silent when it comes to those things and accept things as they are.

Here in Europe we are fortunately light years ahead when it comes to that and people have choices.

Europe is small but it is so diverse in languages and cultures that respect is very valued.

The European court is going to take matters in their hands, and I am happy with it.

 

[XpiderMX]

No. Steam and Origin are means of distribution for the PC platform.
Braid is a game that can be bought on either Steam or GOG. That doesn't make it a multiplatform title.

Whatever you and I think is the future of distribution for software isn't a valid reason to force stuff down the consumers' throat, unwillingly.

Steam is a digital distributionplatform. And it is a multiplayer and communications platform too.

At the end, it is a platform, you have an ID, you can link your games, and you have some game services liked to your ID.

 

[dobwal]

I just preordered the next LEGO game from amazon.. tell me how i will be able to buy any game on the XBONE that will not require STEAM.. ehmm sorry Microsoft's activation servers to run?

On the PC i actually have choices, hell i can usually buy the games from more than one DD distributor. I can just choose to go the Disc route (screw the activation servers). On the XBONE i can choose not to buy it, or in many cases buy the PC version, and again have choices.. There is no alternative to the activation server hell on the XBONE.

Sony will very likely have to do just as the publishers want (i hope they just tell them to fuck off and go another platform). But they have alot of exclusives that they publish and from what they are saying those games will be actually OWNED by those that buy them..

On consoles you also have choices, the only difference is that your choice of console services requires platform specific hardware.

And lets not pretend that Sony will be "forced" into an identical scheme. Stopping the used game market benefits Sony as well as publishers as they get to collect additional licensing fees. If Sony adopts a similar scheme, they may cry on stage but backstage Sony executives will be popping champagne and doing the tootsie roll. Basically celebrating a complete turnaround of last gen PR fiascos while accomplishing the death of the used game market without all the flak MS is getting.

You haven't owned your games in a long time. The difference is that the license is tied to your gamertag instead of an optical disc and lack the flexibility of license transfer that optical disc offers.

 

[Cyan]

Oh no, you own that blu-ray disc free and clear. It's the contents that you don't own, and never have. Same with most software, all music, and all movies. When you buy a DVD, you _cannot_ use it in your movie theater, you _cannot_ make copies of it and sell them, you _cannot_ rent it out. In the US, doing any of those things can result in criminal charges. Most other countries are similar.

Same for games. Steam is actually the closest to what publishers have wanted, and copyright law allows. They're just extending that, with significant consumer-friendly concessions that Steam does not even have, to the content on the shiny disc. Just changing the physical form of the product does not change the rights of the copyright holder.

Now you may disagree with this, as I generally do (I have not, nor will I ever, buy a game on Steam because of their restrictions), but don't assume for one minute that you have ever "owned" a game.

(had to restart the post, I accidentally closed the tab in the browser, sigh)

I think that's more true if you know the small print. If people knew in detail they would be a bit more strategic about buying this kind of stuff. Plus, Mr Average User, which is most of us, (I honestly think) doesn't know all the details or might find the information that has been revealed yesterday highly confusing. But I understand what you mean.

It has to be other solutions than just this annoyance Mr Average is going to hate.

It's not unreasonably either that the console needs to do certain checks to ensure you actually "own" the game.

I can't really know or say what the solution is, but it is certainly not my job to figure that out anyways.

 

[wco81]

I'll be surprised if Sony doesn't have restrictions as well.

If Valve comes out with a Steam console, I hope these same people get their pitchforks out. Same for Sony.

I don't like anything that restricts my ability to sell the things I buy. So on these platforms, the value of games, for me, will be lowered. It just means I wait for sales or buy less games. That's all there is to it. No outrage.

Well we can hope.

People said Sony would have to charge for online and they didn't for online gaming.

If they follow suit, I think it will dampen some of the enthusiasm. These consoles might have been harder sells anyways, because a lot of money has been diverted to mobile -- and will continue to be.

Policies perceived as born out of greed won't help matters.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Mr. Average probably cares less than you think. Mr. Average buys a game, plays it for a while and throws it in a box when he's done. He might be offended if he found out that he doesn't actually own his software, but it's not all that likely to affect him.

 

[Cyan]

Potential solutions:

We talked about the first one time ago here.

1) They should offer the ability to run games with the disc in the drive when an internet connection is not available.

If a disc isn't present in the drive or the disc for a particular game, the counter begins -be it either 1 or 24 hours-.

2) Giving people a longer grace period based on their track record. Or something.

3) It's a good thing you can install the games and play them without needing the disc in the tray. BUT this only should be possible if you are online and for short periods of time except if you've downloaded the game to your HD (pretty much like registering and keeping track of your download history)

To avoid having people trade or lend games without registration is the key of the problem for me. In that sense, I can understand those "checks" to ensure the game is your own.

 

[MrFox]

I "own" my cellphone. It's illegal for me to build identical copies of it, I don't own it's design, nor any patents used to make it. I don't own the logo of it's company. That doesn't change the fact that I own the cellphone to the full extent of consumer protection laws. The company selling it cannot require me to ask permission to use my phone every 24 hours, and they can't stop me from reselling it, because I own it. The company cannot claim I only own a "license" to use my cellphone and deactivate it remotely. Reselling my cellphone is protected because of the ownership status.

I "own" my blurays and games and I also own the content. What I don't own is the copyright applicable to it's content. I don't own the studio's logo in it, I can't claim I'm the author of the film. It's illegal for me to make copies of it and resell them, because copyright laws protects the author. I can't make public representations because copyright laws protect the author. But the law also protects the ownership status, and I can resell the disc with it's content however I choose. I can also insure it. My insurance company will reimburse me the the disc with it's content, not just a blank disc.

Not so with a license. Owning a license isn't worth shit.

 

[expletive]

Oh no, you own that blu-ray disc free and clear. It's the contents that you don't own, and never have. Same with most software, all music, and all movies. When you buy a DVD, you _cannot_ use it in your movie theater, you _cannot_ make copies of it and sell them, you _cannot_ rent it out. In the US, doing any of those things can result in criminal charges. Most other countries are similar.

Same for games. Steam is actually the closest to what publishers have wanted, and copyright law allows. They're just extending that, with significant consumer-friendly concessions that Steam does not even have, to the content on the shiny disc. Just changing the physical form of the product does not change the rights of the copyright holder.

Now you may disagree with this, as I generally do (I have not, nor will I ever, buy a game on Steam because of their restrictions), but don't assume for one minute that you have ever "owned" a game.

Which makes it embarrassing to watch the games media publish such ignorant content like "SAY GOODBYE TO OWNING GAMES. THX MICROSOFT!" (Looking at you euro gamer). It's such an uninformed stance and makes the whole industry come off like amateurs.

 

[Cyan]

Mr. Average probably cares less than you think. Mr. Average buys a game, plays it for a while and throws it in a box when he's done. He might be offended if he found out that he doesn't actually own his software, but it's not all that likely to affect him.

But that's not the point, Alphawolf. Mr Average doesn't want the hassle, he wants somethign that works.

I'd hazard a guess that a pretty high amount of smartphone users, like me as shown in the forum (I had to ask and let me tell you I am not illiterate -my mother's tongue is a language only 2,000.000 million people speak in Europe and I speak like 3 languages -4 if I add Portuguese, but I understand it almost 100%, speaking it is a different matter for me), don't know how to tether another device to their mobile phone.

Ok, perhaps this is a situation that isn't going to occur very often for most users, but they are solutions to problems that shouldn't exist in the first place, actually.

Mr Average isn't going to know there are timers in his games, the information is highly confusing for him and for almost anyone else -I had to re-read a few parts, especially after some proposition bkilian mentioned yesterday-.

The little details aren't that good for consumers, most people who buy the console might try to play by inserting the disc and go to find out that's not the way it works.

The information has to be easy to comprehend for an average Mr, for those with slow/unstable connections -less than 1,5MBs broadband-, and your typical user who likes to trade in and buy used games.

Most likely Mr Average is going to buy a PS4 -especially- or a Nintendo, because of the word of mouth and the talk of the town.

The info from us, the cores, to the masses is going to spread easily and most cores aren't happy.

I feel indifferent but I want the console to at least sell some units so the community keeps alive and the console has a chance. Suing Microsoft is the way to go then.

 

[anexanhume]

Which makes it embarrassing to watch the games media publish such ignorant content like "SAY GOODBYE TO OWNING GAMES. THX MICROSOFT!" (Looking at you euro gamer). It's such an uninformed stance and makes the whole industry come off like amateurs.

It's accurate. It allows the publisher to violate first sale doctrine. Furthermore, your physical copy is essentially just your CD key. The physical copy is worthless without a regular online connection and Microsoft's DRM servers up and running. It's merely a convenience (load to HD from OD instead of DL) and a way to maintain retail presence, which is essential for consoles. For all practical purposes, it's a digital copy with more restrictive usage restrictions than Steam (which does not require you to be online to play your content). The fact that resale or redistribution power lies in the hands of the publisher leads one to assume the worst case as fact - that resale is not allowed and first sale doctrine, an expectation of physical media, has been violated. Why? Because that option would be in the publisher's best immediate financial interest, and thus, their shareholders' interest.

It also neuters the intent of the collector market. Someone has to deal with the possibility that they won't be able to enjoy their old classics again in 15 years. And if they can, it may be on Microsoft's terms once again after they re-purchase the game for a different platform.

 

[Cyan]

Which makes it embarrassing to watch the games media publish such ignorant content like "SAY GOODBYE TO OWNING GAMES. THX MICROSOFT!" (Looking at you euro gamer). It's such an uninformed stance and makes the whole industry come off like amateurs.

I think Mr Fox explained perfectly what ownership means here in Europe, in USA, and so on:

I "own" my cellphone. It's illegal for me to build identical copies of it, I don't own it's design, nor any patents used to make it. I don't own the logo of it's company. That doesn't change the fact that I own the cellphone to the full extent of consumer protection laws. The company selling it cannot require me to ask permission to use my phone every 24 hours, and they can't stop me from reselling it, because I own it. The company cannot claim I only own a "license" to use my cellphone and deactivate it remotely. Reselling my cellphone is protected because of the ownership status.

I "own" my blurays and games and I also own the content. What I don't own is the copyright applicable to it's content. I don't own the studio's logo in it, I can't claim I'm the author of the film. It's illegal for me to make copies of it and resell them, because copyright laws protects the author. I can't make public representations because copyright laws protect the author. But the law also protects the ownership status, and I can resell the disc with it's content however I choose. I can also insure it. My insurance company will reimburse me the the disc with it's content, not just a blank disc.

Not so with a license. Owning a license isn't worth shit.

 

[Cyan]

Extract of an article from an American webpage -I think-, which talks about the cloud -nothing to do with Xbone- and mentions the ownership thing.

There are several disadvantages of cloud gaming that will need to be addressed by any company planning to offer cloud gaming services. Potential customers may avoid cloud services because they may feel they are paying for something that they do not own. Buying a physical game gives you a sense of ownership, that you have bought that game and can play it at any time. With cloud gaming you are paying for a game that you will not have a copy of - if the service goes down or goes out of business then you will be unable to play any of the games that you have paid for. Another potential disadvantage of a cloud service is that, because it is a fairly new technology, there are bound to be a number of initial technical problems and issues that will need fixing or patching. The newness of the service may also mean that multiplayer games will have a sparse user base until more people sign up - leaving customers with no one to play against. The second-hand game market will suffer, and likely disappear, if cloud gaming becomes the norm - but this could be an advantage or a disadvantage, depending on where you stand.

Despite its initial flaws, it seems likely that cloud gaming will be an important development for the video game industry. It has a great deal of potential and really fits in with the variety of internet-based services that are now the norm.

Read more: http://www.articlesnatch.com/Article/Video-Game-Evolution--Cloud-Gaming/4525124#ixzz2VZWX8lDB

 

[XpiderMX]

It's accurate. It allows the publisher to violate first sale doctrine. Furthermore, your physical copy is essentially just your CD key. The physical copy is worthless without a regular online connection and Microsoft's DRM servers up and running. It's merely a convenience (load to HD from OD instead of DL) and a way to maintain retail presence, which is essential for consoles. For all practical purposes, it's a digital copy with more restrictive usage restrictions than Steam (which does not require you to be online to play your content). The fact that resale or redistribution power lies in the hands of the publisher leads one to assume the worst case as fact - that resale is not allowed and first sale doctrine, an expectation of physical media, has been violated. Why? Because that option would be in the publisher's best immediate financial interest, and thus, their shareholders' interest.

It also neuters the intent of the collector market. Someone has to deal with the possibility that they won't be able to enjoy their old classics again in 15 years. And if they can, it may be on Microsoft's terms once again after they re-purchase the game for a different platform.

Steam requires to be online. If you want to go "off-line" you need to be connected.

 

[DrJay24]

Oh no, you own that blu-ray disc free and clear. It's the contents that you don't own, and never have. Same with most software, all music, and all movies. When you buy a DVD, you _cannot_ use it in your movie theater, you _cannot_ make copies of it and sell them, you _cannot_ rent it out. In the US, doing any of those things can result in criminal charges. Most other countries are similar.

Same for games. Steam is actually the closest to what publishers have wanted, and copyright law allows. They're just extending that, with significant consumer-friendly concessions that Steam does not even have, to the content on the shiny disc. Just changing the physical form of the product does not change the rights of the copyright holder.

Now you may disagree with this, as I generally do (I have not, nor will I ever, buy a game on Steam because of their restrictions), but don't assume for one minute that you have ever "owned" a game.

Don't make a straw man, no one claimed when I buy a game in the store that I own the IP and can sell it via copies. But I do "own" the disc I"m holding. I can resell it, gift it and lend it. Maybe you want that to change, but lots of people don't.