XBox One, PS4, DRM, and You

Status
Not open for further replies.
Its always about greed. These are public corporations where stockholders expect shares to increase in value indefinitely.

But its more to it than that.

We've come to expect console manufacturers to sell hardware for practically no profit because thats whats they've done the last couple of generations. Mostly motivated by the profit potential of the software. Yet we also expect them to ignore a market that potentially undercuts their ability to realize that profit

The used game market competes with the new game market with only one market contributing to the viability of the overall market. Yes people trade in old games to buy new games but those 3 or 4 games you traded in to buy that new title gets put on the shelf and generates more revenue than the 1 new title that was bought. Used games sales wouldn't be a profitable if that wasn't a regular reality. The used game retail market thrives because they take more from gamers than they give back regardless if whats given back is used to finance new titles.

I think MS has it backwards. Cut out GS and retailers like them and allow direct connections between gamers. I think they would be better off if they created an online exchange for used game licenses. Simply charge a fee based off percentage of the sale and split it between themselves and pubs. They have the infrastructure already in place. Plus, retailers like GS typically extract far more than whats usually seen by manufacturers in the form of licensing fees. If GS is paying $20-$30 dollars for recently released games and selling them for $5 dollars under the new retail price then MS could easily extract fees while gamers would see larger returns for selling their licenses.

You end up with an used market where the more sales you have the more manufacturers and pubs are pleased. Not like the current reality where the opposite is true.

You could even do things like having a Gold membership gives you access to a discount on fees associated with used license transfers.

You don't destroy huge markets like the used game market, you co-opt it.
In this particular case, it sounds quite reasonable to me. In the end retailers need these companies but these companies also need these retailers to sell their physical media and the hardware.

I had made "friends" sometimes in those places, and at this rate it looks like we are going to have everything in our hands, lying on bed and pressing a button in the headboard.

Retailers are aware of the challenges ahead, and they probably negotiated something interesting with Microsoft.

Gamestop's CEO praised the Xbox One just recently, and defined it as a very compelling, hot device that would change the world.

Am I missing anything here? :oops:
 
I see Gamestop being relegated to just pre-orders that come with retailer specific content/merchandise/discounts/value adds. Retailers make their money when gamers come in & buy other stuff along with their game. Some people are still going to want to go to midnight openings. You can't buy new controllers, headsets, battery packs or even consoles digital. As for the retailer specific content, I can see little statues, or other physical items being included for collector's editions. And who here thinks they won't continue making retailer specific game content free with pre-order? You buy your game digitally you'll probably have to give up on all that. That's the cost of the convenience of buying it day 1.

BTW, I think this was interesting idea...



GameStop President Tony Bartel Promises 'Seamless Transition' Of Xbox One Used Game Sales

So maybe you won't have to give up on extra content for digital pre-orders. Could it be that Microsoft has negotiated special programs for retailers like GameStop that can be accessed directly from the dashboard as well? They could tie something into GameStop's PowerUp Rewards programs. That could be an interesting way to bring retailers to the digital frontier.

Tommy McClain
Retailers are certainly trying. In fact Gamestop has a digital download service which works like a charm. Game also began offering a similar service as of recently. I have found games there I couldn't find anywhere else -this includes Steam, which I am not a big fan of, btw-

I downloaded these games using the Gamestop App. It worked great:

- Age of Empires III and ALL its expansions (I wanted this one so badly and it wasn't anywhere near in a physical store, nor it is available in the most popular dd services)

- Medieval II: Total War (Gold Edition)

- Titan Quest and its expansion

- Total War - Rome (Gold)

- Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines

Not bad if you ask me. :smile:
 
with all this drm issue and online check ups once every 24 hrs , i am wondering what if selling a used game be declared as illegal . And if so happens should game prices be halfed like from 60 to 30 buckS so that the people who used to buy used games can buy new copies of games at a lower price .
I am a resident of india . Here i dont have the priviledge of buying used games as there are no gamestop like trading shops , so i have to buy actual new games . I do wait for the prices to come down to 30-20 bucks and then buy it . It usually takes about 9-10 months for this kind of price drop . Otherwise i pay full 60 to buy it on its release .
so i dont buy used games as there is no way to buy them in my region. Also my broadband is very unreliable. If microsoft do not change its online policies , then customers like me will get screwed .

so can microsoft or sony really replace the used game market and not with this online verification?
 
yes there is going to be more to this DRM story going forward... I think they gave us the pointy end last night and now we will get the brush.
 
Old?

Microsoft last night finally announced its pre-owned plans. It's not blocking pre-owned. It's not even charging for pre-owned.
But, due to the system's new licence-based business model, publishers could block pre-owned or could charge for pre-owned. Or insists on a pre-owned time delay. Or do any number of things, really.
It's still early days, they may not know just yet, but we asked them anyway. Are you going to block pre-owned? And if not, will you charge retailers to sell used games?
The responses?
Bethesda – Has not announced any Xbox One games yet, so 'not offering a comment at this point in time'
Capcom – Also has yet to announce any Xbox One games so ""We’ve nothing to comment on at this moment in time."
Activision – No comment
Ubisoft – 'Politely' declined to comment
Namco Bandai – Declined to comment
Rising Star Games – "We have no comment to make at this point."

Sega – Seeking a response
EA – Hoping to come back to us
2K Games – Seeking a response

Codemasters– Awaiting reply
Square Enix – Awaiting reply
Warner Bros – Awaiting reply
2K Games – Awaiting reply
Deep Silver – Awaiting reply
Konami – Awaiting reply

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/will-publishers-charge-or-block-pre-owned-no-comment/0116814
 
Retailers are certainly trying. In fact Gamestop has a digital download service which works like a charm. Game also began offering a similar service as of recently. I have found games there I couldn't find anywhere else -this includes Steam, which I am not a big fan of, btw-

I downloaded these games using the Gamestop App. It worked great:

- Age of Empires III and ALL its expansions (I wanted this one so badly and it wasn't anywhere near in a physical store, nor it is available in the most popular dd services)

- Medieval II: Total War (Gold Edition)

- Titan Quest and its expansion

- Total War - Rome (Gold)

- Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines

Not bad if you ask me. :smile:

Yeah, they bought Impulse from StarDock as a hedge against digital downloads.
 
I don't understand this hacking business. Hacked to what end? To enable you to play games offline?

Okay, let's say that it is hacked so that is made possible. The benefit of that to anybody is what exactly?

You'd still have to go purchase a very expensive piece of equipment. You would then lose all the functionality (on-line capability) that actually makes it worth the investment in the first place - if you even believe it offers something worth the asking price, which those opposed to everything MS is doing are basing their opinions on the fact that it isn't worth it anyway.

If you want to play games off line, why wouldn't you just spend that money on a PS4? (Working under the assumption the PS4 doesn't require broadband connections and doesn't have the same DRM restrictions), because the PS4, as we all know because the internet has told us so, will have far superior games.

So, what purpose is there to hack the console? There's no way anybody is going to be able to hack the console to the point you're going to be able to "trick" their every hour or every 24 hour validation. Now, perhaps there can be a hack that will allow the console to work for 24 hours before the authentication comes around, but that just means that every 24 hours, you'd have to wipe your console and re-install the hack.

Wouldn't it?

Can one of you Pro-Hackers, hoping the One will be hacked, thinking the One will be the most hacked console ever, explain to me the benefits of doing so, because I'm clearly not seeing them.
For hackers it's all in the name of the challenge, perhaps? :smile:

Plus, when a machine is plagued by hatred because of some policies, hackers will act. We know it from this generation and previous generations.

I might be wrong though, they could probably ignore the Xbox One, but I don't think I am.

I see no point in hacking, I have always been a bit of a *coward* when it comes to that.

Plus, I have this overbearing sense of honour above all and almost everything before dishonour, also I am nothing without my honour lil' crap that keeps my moral in borderline examination.

But if they hacked the Xbox One, I don't blame them for trying.
 
Only for those stores that also sell used games, and only providing that the PS4 doesn't also have similar used game DRM.

But yes, it's a question I asked earlier about pre-orders. What's the point of a pre-order if there are Day 1 digital downloads? Are the pre-orders only going to be available on physical copies? If not, where is the benefit to the store to actually even stock the games? Why would anybody go the store to buy the physical disc when there are Day 1 digital downloads and the content is identical?

So sure, there's no question, there's a paradigm shift here. How much money do those stores make on selling the hardware? Are they still going to sell the hardware if there is virtually no follow-up software sales?

These are interesting and valid questions.

As far as the consumers "not knowing what to buy", that's what advertising and marketing is for. And the One is going to be marketed towards Joe Average with an emphasis on all the wonderful networked capabilities and TV integration that gamers hate. I'm not saying that the games won't also be marketed, but that's clearly a secondary market to MS.

MS has always wanted their customer base to be connected, be online, have Live, so they get a revenue stream from Live subscription fees and also then feed them advertising they get extra revenue from and the ability to up-sell services that go beyond gaming. With the One, MS isn't wanting anything. They're telling you. This is what is required of YOU in order to be OUR customer. If you don't fit into their customer profile, then either you need to change or you won't be their customer.

I completely understand how that is a slap in the face to those people who don't already fit their customer profile.
I can tell you that I certainly fit their customer profile.

I bought more than 200 games -retail, XBLA, Games on Demand, indie- on the Xbox 360. Not to mention tons of DLC, movies, music videos, and I am thinking about subscribing to Xbox Music and listening to Sophie Ellis Bextor for hours.

PS4 appeals to me -many exclusives- as a friendly companion to the Xbox One, but I'd be lying if I didn't tell you I have always been a Xbox fan at heart. It was my first console and I've grown to love prior Xbox consoles.

So my plan is to have a Xbox One as my primary gaming device. The problem for me is that I don't want it to be hated by almost everyone, it makes me feel uneasy. Xbox 360 was a memorable console in that sense, there were haters but just what you expected.

Xbox One, on the other hand, is filled with hatred. And that's a huge turn off for me. :cry:

I just want to have a console that most people like.

Golden rule :yep2:: "Do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wouldn't worry about it cyan. People hated the xbox 360 also. For almost its first year of life people called it the xbox 1.5 and complained about things.


The xbox one will hit the ground running and people will by it and that will be it , soon people will forget about drm and used games and what have you and just enjoy the games.
 
I owned a Dreamcast, one of the "less popular" consoles, and I enjoyed it a lot. I owned a Xbox, a non-popular console, I enjoyed it a lot. I own a Xbox 360, the "1.5" console, I enjoy playing games with it.

I'm not afraid of being "hated" because trolls, If games deserve it, I will own a Xbox One, maybe the most hated console ever :LOL:
 
There's a flipside to all this that's worth considering too. MS is the first large digital marketplace that is creating a policy for a transfer of license. The current online marketplaces on Live (or PSN or Steam or App Store or Kindle, etc) is extremely restrictive, but it's something that more and more people are willing to give up for digital convenience. I actually wonder if they'll voluntarily apply the new policies to this generation's purchases - I'd love to be able to sell select digital purchases from my 360 library.

I imagine by the end of the next generation (say, in 2020 or so) the current model of not being able to sell your digital libraries at all will seem extremely archaic compared to the model MS is offering up. I'm also sure the other marketplaces will adapt to not dissimilar models with their own flavour over the next few years, too.

It's a bit confusing as to why this is all happening now. I admit, I felt the same levels of uncertainty when HL2 launched and needed Steam way back when. It's simply that fear of change is part of human nature. Now, the idea of having to pull out the disk to replay the game reeks of simply archaic. I'm hoping other parties transition to this 100% digital marketplace, with disks just being the means of saving the need to download.

I only hope the downsides are legitimately overcome - say, by offering to disable online checks as patches once they start taking down servers, and offering a means of selling my games on a direct-to-user marketplace (Ebay without Ebay if you will).
 
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.

The point is, when i buy my game today it's up to me to decide what i do with it (within limits of the law of course), i can let everyone i know in the world play it, i can play it 10 years after Microsoft and Sony switches off the activations servers (though how it's turning out it may be the publishers servers which makes it even more scary). I can keep it in shrink wrap and sell it as a collectors item in 30 years.
It's a lot more like owning something than having a license to games that will be killed.
 
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?)
With a physical pre-order on Amazon i get the game earlier than if i purchase the game on release day.
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.
If Sony doesn't require an activation of their games it's all the difference in the world.
These things are going to be similar, if not identical, folks.
I think you are right, the publishers are most likely to require the same form of licensing from both platforms (no reason to buy those games then). But when it comes to Sony and Microsoft published games it very well may differ. And if the indications are true Sony will win that one hands down. But lets prepare to be disappointed.
 
Right now no publisher allows this on Apple's store, Steam's store, etc. Microsoft as far as I know is the first to even allow this option, the ability to trade digital content. That's a good thing no? As for what I want, I want a fully dd system shareable across all the devices I own with the ability to trade. Simple :) No one has done this yet, but Microsoft looks to be on that path. So yeah that's exactly what I want.
That's not a bad thing. As of currently I am resorting to tricks, like giving my best friend the password of my GOG account so she can download a game there if she wants to.

I fully trust her and it's not that I am going to get caught -if only they checked the IPs..., because she is from the royal England and I am not- doing that, especially because it is my choice and my account. -talks of ownership-

I don't know if she ever downloaded a single game there or not, I never asked, but I gave her my pass and an alternative like trading digital content with a friend sounds great and it's a novelty.

I'm looking forward to that although I think we may have to wait a bit more for that. But who knows, I'd love to be surprised and have them reveal at e3 how xb1 games could also be played on Windows 8 devices. Realistically though they need to get the xb1 platform established first before going to that next step.
I think keeping all the advantages of the digital distribution and the cloud while loosening their DRM policies and restrictions, with TV services, flipping back and forth between games and other utilities on the fly, Miracast, etc, etc, it has the potential to be one of the best consoles ever.

But if you really want the console to establish and succeed perhaps some changes are necessary.

Right now though I mostly hear of irate people, some users cancelling pre-orders, etc.

The console is less powerful than the PS4, some critical aspects of its design are based upon the DRM policies, games will probably run at a lower resolution than the PS4, it reserves 3GB for the OS, etc etc.

I like the architecture a lot, but with those DRMs in place, the Nintendo WiiU, which wasn't an option for most people, is now apparently an option.



Sure, people have the right to not buy it. I would consider it because I like the idea, the convenience and the convergence, it works for me whereas what their competitor has in mind to me seems dated and of no interest. To each their own as they say, we'll see what people go with. Personally I don't see how this is possible without drm checks though. Without it the system would be badly abused.
I haven't figured out a way to solve the situation, it's all related to DRM, system security etc as I understand it, so they can ensure the best they can that the *owner* :???: of the games is not playing pirated games offline or some such.

I think some faithful customers and well behaved owners should be given grace periods and such that they could share with other less fortunate people who have the potential to reach that status.

In my case, I had the original Xbox, I bought the Xbox 360 from day 1, and never pirated a single game, paid everything religiously, Microsoft should know I am not going to change my habits after all these years. :cool:

If we could share those grace codes between us, a rich, thriving community could blossom from there and grow around them.

Like: "I am going on a cruise and I want to lug my Xbox One. Can please someone share a grace code with me?". :) PLAM. "2 months of offline gaming from a grace code".

"I am on a trip to my house in the mountains. Spare me a grace code PLZ". Conceded. :smile:

Those with Xbox Live for years and unblemished track record should be granted those from the very first day we purchase the console.
This is OT, but I can tell you first hand not being an American and having believed the same stereotypes as many had about the USA, that oh my I realized how wrong I was when I moved here. Each state is basically like it's own country, there really is no way to generalize the USA. Or that's a fancy way to me to say that your stereotype is wrong :) What makes it a bit funny to me is that having lived in and visited many places, LA has been the most multi cultural place I've ever been in, more so than even Europe or cities like Montreal. It's not unusual to walk the street and hear over a dozen different languages. But I get it, like I said I thought the same thing you did before I lived here.
It sounds like a country made of many countries, so to speak. That's typical European because there are very small countries in Europe with various languages in a relatively small area btw.

If everything go as planned I will travel overseas by the end of the year or so. Then I will have a chance to know the country a little, but just a little at most, sadly.

Cliches and stereotypes aren't good. I don't dislike americans at all, but that's another story.

My point is that common practices in the USA can be considered illegal here for whatever reasons.

The EU court has fined Microsoft twice -afaik- here in Europe for anticompetitive practices, because they bundled their Internet Explorer -IE10 is my favourite browser, and I tried them all, some for more than a year, Opera, Chrome, Firefox- with Windows, which according to them constitutes monopoly. Right or wrong it gives you a different perspective.

Too much typing today again. Good...and that's just my view on everything, because speaking from experience...it's tricky.

Take care of you!
 
They can write anything they want on the EULA, but it will always be "void where prohibited by law".

"void where prohibited by law" you mean illegal
someone should put a stop to this practice, putting illegal clauses in a eula is just wrong
 
There's a flipside to all this that's worth considering too. MS is the first large digital marketplace that is creating a policy for a transfer of license. The current online marketplaces on Live (or PSN or Steam or App Store or Kindle, etc) is extremely restrictive, but it's something that more and more people are willing to give up for digital convenience. I actually wonder if they'll voluntarily apply the new policies to this generation's purchases - I'd love to be able to sell select digital purchases from my 360 library.

Again, if you read the Microsoft page, they are explicitly only talking about 'enabling' transfers for disc games.
 
Yes it's a shame that some companies are based on old business models that are no longer valid. Gamestop and their ilk is really no different than the Horse-Whip-Makers going under with the uprising of the automobile. With all businesses they need to adapt or die.

Didn't they adapt and create a whole new industry with used games as the engine? Then the publishers, ehmm horse whip makers decided that because they didn't get a cut of that they would call everybody thieves and pirates if they EVER sold or BOUGHT a used game, ehmm i mean horse whip makers of course.
 
Didn't they adapt and create a whole new industry with used games as the engine? Then the publishers, ehmm horse whip makers decided that because they didn't get a cut of that they would call everybody thieves and pirates if they EVER sold or BOUGHT a used game, ehmm i mean horse whip makers of course.

link?

and lol, i thought people hated gamestop? now suddenly i guess they're a white knight. funny.
 
What makes you think that the publishers threaten Microsoft?

Really? Do you believe that? And if you do, don't you think they also threatened Sony with the same deal?

Isn't it far more likely that the publishers came to MS and Sony and they all came to an agreement on what was going to happen? And if Sony didn't agree, well... aren't they just going to get fucked? In terms of not getting their games released at the same time, etc.. etc..?

I don't doubt for a second that this is all coming from the publishers. But when you say the publishers threatened MS, you must be out of your mind. MS could buy up every single one of them if they wanted to. Of course they don't, because those publishers are still (balance sheet wise) showing losses.

But do the publishers still have enough push to say "This is what we want.. everybody needs to agree."

Yes, they do. And do they have enough push to say "If you do this for us and they won't, we'll give you 6 moths or 1 year exclusivity.." Yes they do.

All those people who think this is MS's idea are so far in left field that they can't even catch the fly ball. They're playing baseball when the game is basketball and the shot is clean and open.

It's pathetic. Either Sony is going to have the same DRM that MS has already announced, OR MS is going to have such a far superior relationship with the publishers that Sony can't even touch it will be the death bell for Sony.
I've actually been asking myself the same questions...

In regards to threatening, it's just a way of speaking. But I guess publishers wanted more money from the used games and re-sales and offered some preferential treatment in exchange.

While there is no doubt publishers have something to do with the DRM policies, the root of the problem though seems to be the new people leading the entertainment division though. By that I don't mean Don Mattrick, Phil Harrison or Phil Spencer but some VIPs in the company. I wouldn't say it's Major Nelson's fault either.

It's ironic that now when EA -allegedly "the worst company in America"- is removing online passes, that days after John Riccitello wrote an open letter to Sony and MS to advise them to not use DRM restrictions and protect the core gamer that did lead them where they are, and Microsoft said they were listening to us, using your sports example, they got us blindsided with this one.

Microsoft need to thank the core gamer for where they are. It's about fairness, after all.

I can't say what will happen, this industry in particular is so unpredictable, but as you say, either Microsoft are going to have a superior relationship with publishers or Sony will follow suit, OR Sony are going to have an unique relationship with their customers.

To me it's unfair business practice to throw those measures only in legitimate customers face, because in the end that's how it is.

I don't want this to look like protectionism, because Sony may well do the same after all, but they said they were listening and they apparently did.

As far as I am aware, Sony is just another mega corporation, and I don't expect much better from them in some regards. They didn't win this generation, not even close, but they aren't harming the consumers, who are the ultimate judges here.

If Microsoft do not change their policies Sony are probably happy with them as Microsoft are probably allowing for market dominance.

Your last paragraph is literally very relevant to your own argument. Sony are probably playing with fire if they don't follow suit somehow, I am sure they do. Because in that hypothetical scenario, it does prevent them from using a competitor's product, where as not much time ago it would do.

Additionally, I have been mostly using the "dominating position" argument to defend consumers.

And we have precedents in Europe. If you place yourself in a dominating position in relation to your consumers you can be in serious trouble. I mean, Microsoft are potentially becoming a special case to prosecute.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top