XBox One, PS4, DRM, and You

[Deleted member 11852]

Yeah... my first thought was that it now sounds like a more flexible approach to PS3's system activation - not tied to the system but people, and there are more activations. I know of one person with 5 PS3s, one account, and can't share anymore...

Nobody cares about Ken Kutaragi's problems!

 

[dobwal]

What if you and 10 friends wanted to go?

Then someone drives by themselves. Not much of a friend if they get all disgruntle because of you have to adhere to a policy that you didn't create. You could split the group into 5 and 6 if everyone wants to incorporate everyone else.

 

[dobwal]

how the hell is Ms not talking about this every day?

Yeah, when it comes to social features on a gaming console. That is practically by far the best ideal ever. "Hey, watch me game with funny captions and all!!!" is no where near as attractive as "Hey, lets share libraries!!!".

 

[Kb-Smoker]

This issue with DRM is starting to get interesting, we had some pretty candid statements from Activision CEO and EA's COO Peter Moore yesterday about DRM but that doesn't seem to match up with what is being reported here:

http://www.edge-online.com/news/e3-...ar-policies-across-both-consoles-say-sources/

Both of these guys do not support online passes now.

Its comes down to the one that do that now... Ubisoft is the big one...

 

[function]

I'd like some clarity on this issue, if anyone knows. Is a "family" unique to each person so you can have overlapping memberships, or does each person that wants to share have to agree to share only within the same 10 person (max)? In other words, does a unique "family" group belong to each user, or does each user have to belong to only one family?

Because if it's the former then that's a bit limiting but it could work okay for people who are unpopular or don't have many friends that game. If it's the latter though, that's all kind of bullshit.

 

[dobwal]

Both of these guys do not support online passes now.

Its comes down to the one that do that now... Ubisoft is the big one...

EA says its done with online passes in their current form. But it said it also needs to reconvene after e3 and mash out its DRM policy going forward.

 

[brasnial]

OK I have no problem with Microsoft's DRM policies I see digital as the future not disks.

Specialist Game retailers in my opinion will go the way of the specialist record store .
owning a physical copy of a game will become a very small part of the market for games just like CDs have for music .

One of the possible out comes of a DRM policy like Microsoft's which is built into the infrastructure of Xbox live is game rentals delivered on line .


Game rentals in my opinion will go online under Microsoft's DRM in the same way as films .

Let's say next year they come to E3 with a rental service for all retail games let's say 24 hour .....48 hour ....and week long rentals .

Microsoft get a cut of the rental so does the publisher and developer .

This is just one of the possibilities of a fully integrated DRM policy and a my opinion will not only happen but will be a very big reason to buy a Xbox one for a lot of families if it happens .

Most kids never finish there games hell I'm sure I read somewhere very few people play a game all the way to the end .

Convenience is a big selling point.......convenient spur of the moment game rental in my opinion will be big very big exspecialy if they allow achievements and a game save.

That way you can carry on from the same point in game as you last rented the game .

I can see such a system generating big money for Microsoft publishers and developers years after a games release date like films do for film companies .

How hard would it be for Microsoft to introduce online game rental under there DRM system ...,?

I don't know but if they do and developers and publishers agree to such a move .in my opinion it could become a big draw to your average consumer .

 

[dobwal]

I'd like some clarity on this issue, if anyone knows. Is a "family" unique to each person so you can have overlapping memberships, or does each person that wants to share have to agree to share only within the same 10 person (max)? In other words, does a unique "family" group belong to each user, or does each user have to belong to only one family?

Because if it's the former then that's a bit limiting but it could work okay for people who are unpopular or don't have many friends that game. If it's the latter though, that's all kind of bullshit.

Probably both. If each of the 10 members are all tied to each then you end up with a big homogeneous shared library. If each of your 10 friends don't share any connections with each other then each gets access to shared libraries but each is unique to each individual. Dependent on each's friends on the list and the games they are offering to share.

I am not sure either way can be abused more readily then the other.

 

[Cranky]

OK I have no problem with Microsoft's DRM policies I see digital as the future not disks.

Specialist Game retailers in my opinion will go the way of the specialist record store .
owning a physical copy of a game will become a very small part of the market for games just like CDs have for music .

One of the possible out comes of a DRM policy like Microsoft's which is built into the infrastructure of Xbox live is game rentals delivered on line .


Game rentals in my opinion will go online under Microsoft's DRM in the same way as films .

Let's say next year they come to E3 with a rental service for all retail games let's say 24 hour .....48 hour ....and week long rentals .

Microsoft get a cut of the rental so does the publisher and developer .

This is just one of the possibilities of a fully integrated DRM policy and a my opinion will not only happen but will be a very big reason to buy a Xbox one for a lot of families if it happens .

Most kids never finish there games hell I'm sure I read somewhere very few people play a game all the way to the end .

Convenience is a big selling point.......convenient spur of the moment game rental in my opinion will be big very big exspecialy if they allow achievements and a game save.

That way you can carry on from the same point in game as you last rented the game .

I can see such a system generating big money for Microsoft publishers and developers years after a games release date like films do for film companies .

How hard would it be for Microsoft to introduce online game rental under there DRM system ...,?

I don't know but if they do and developers and publishers agree to such a move .in my opinion it could become a big draw to your average consumer .

They will also be able to finely tune when in the lifecycle to make a game available for rental to maximize revenue.

 

[brasnial]

They will also be able to finely tune when in the lifecycle to make a game available for rental to maximize revenue.

Agree its a win win for developers and customers .
You can still buy games or you can just rent much like DVDs today .

 

[upnorthsox]

I'd like some clarity on this issue, if anyone knows. Is a "family" unique to each person so you can have overlapping memberships, or does each person that wants to share have to agree to share only within the same 10 person (max)? In other words, does a unique "family" group belong to each user, or does each user have to belong to only one family?

Because if it's the former then that's a bit limiting but it could work okay for people who are unpopular or don't have many friends that game. If it's the latter though, that's all kind of bullshit.

And who pays for it and how much?

 

[dobwal]

And who pays for it and how much?

Its a gold feature which is priced the same as last gen. The only big difference is basic gold is shareable so no need for the family plan.

 

[bkilian]

We have a book lover here.

Aah, nice. Your sarcastic statement is only valid if you believe a book is nothing more than it's physical representation. As a "collector" I suppose you have that materialistic world view. A book is an idea. Once that idea is out there, you _cannot_ destroy it. That's why I laugh at book burnings. Burn them all you like, the idea is already loose, and you cannot control that.

I have hundreds of digital books, I spend hundreds of dollars a year on books, and if my digital copies were to vanish tomorrow, so what? I've read the book, I have been exposed to it's idea. It has already changed me. Sometimes I want to read it many times, so I would prefer it not disappear, but most times, once is enough.

Your materialistic ways come from the concept of scarcity. That concept no longer exists in the digital information world. There are more authors writing and releasing books today than ever before, and those books can have infinite copies. I will never run out of new things to read.

 

[3dilettante]

That's why I laugh at book burnings. Burn them all you like, the idea is already loose, and you cannot control that.
...
Your materialistic ways come from the concept of scarcity. That concept no longer exists in the digital information world. There are more authors writing and releasing books today than ever before, and those books can have infinite copies.

Well, unless they add a killswitch.

 

[ERP]

Perceptions of ownership change with age, I used to collect video games and DVD's, the bulk of my classic video game collection I gave away last time I moved because of the shear space they took.
I have probably 1000 DVD's in boxes in my shed, probably 100 Laser Disks.
Yet I own perhaps 2 bluray disks both were gifts and I haven't bought a paper book in years, to me the convenience factor of no physical media is a huge win, one I'd actually pay a premium for over the physical media.
The only thing that irritates me with my Kindle is the region locking, I can't access my media when I'm in Japan, I understand this isn't Amazon's decision, but damn it's irritating.

 

[upnorthsox]

Its a gold feature which is priced the same as last gen. The only big difference is basic gold is shareable so no need for the family plan.

Link?

 

[liolio]

I think that lots of gamers have lost the plot because of all this DRM talk, imo the worse issue for costumers (and lot of them it seems if you look at the numbers GOld members and PSN+ subscribers vs the ps360 userbase) is that there is no longer a core gaming device that offers MP plays for free.

I think the Blezinski is right, it is going to be a bloodbath. I wonder what will be lots of parents reactions when there kids tell them that they have to spend 60$ a year so they can play with their friends. I think that industry is getting sort of crazy, games costs more and more to make, they want to grow they user bases, etc. At the same time now the majority of the gamers will spend 60$ and the publishers won't see as only that few people have stretchable budgets.

Imo the DRM talk, while I dislike them, is the tree hiding the forest, there is no longer free MP gaming in the console world (Nintendo aside) and nobody react to it on the web. I actually expect real people to react to that.
As for the average CEO answer "it costs money to run the service" I wonder about which costs they are talking about, clearly (till the xbox1 uses of the cloud) it was not the cost of the online gaming, if anything that expense is more on publisher arms. No the reality is that what they mean is "it costs money to update the system and services". Pretty it much it is as if MSFT, Apple or Google were asking people to pay a subscription 'cause it costs money to update windows, iOS and Android (or worse the apps market place...).

Imo if it is not my problem if MSFT or Sony doesn't make enough money out of the moeny they spend on the UI /services/etc. Consoles are consoles, manufacturers are expecting to find the golden egg though TV consumption of media, or what not but it doesn't pay for it-self (on the contrary to OS, search engine, apps store), imo it should not the problem of gamers if manufacturers are wasting money on something that is not marketable for people, presenting that as the cost for "online gaming" is a scheme.

It is almost magic that the web doesn't see the issue, this market is getting crappy and schizophrenic, they want growth, reach casual, etc. they start by taking 60$ from people wallet to fond goals most people don't care about. At the same they want more costumers but they seems to behave as if the people that buy a couples of game a year are not good enough, what with that bullshit?
Imo people in that industry are getting it wrong they want to change costumers instead of changing some of their unsustainable practices, I think it could back slash.

I think, especially as from a hardware pov matching (~) next gen performances on the next node should not be tough, the odd for somebody entering and disrupting that market are growing.

 

[3dilettante]

Perceptions of ownership change with age, I used to collect video games and DVD's, the bulk of my classic video game collection I gave away last time I moved because of the shear space they took.
I have probably 1000 DVD's in boxes in my shed, probably 100 Laser Disks.
Yet I own perhaps 2 bluray disks both were gifts and I haven't bought a paper book in years, to me the convenience factor of no physical media is a huge win, one I'd actually pay a premium for over the physical media.

That seems closer to shifting perceptions as to what makes up a product, not what ownership is.

The only thing that irritates me with my Kindle is the region locking, I can't access my media when I'm in Japan, I understand this isn't Amazon's decision, but damn it's irritating.

This is an example where scarcity is reintroduced into the digital realm for reasons not material to the thing or its use case.

 

[expletive]

Yet I own perhaps 2 bluray disks both were gifts and I haven't bought a paper book in years, to me the convenience factor of no physical media is a huge win, one I'd actually pay a premium for over the physical media.

But technically you should pay less for digital downloads from MS because the disc-based games have residual trade-in/resale value while the online purchases do not.

 

[Scott_Arm]

I think printing books is important. Books are history, and they need to be preserved. That said, most people cannot have their own collection because of the space it takes up. Digital is pretty much the only way a lot of people can have their own vast collections of things to read. The same is true for any collection. Most people just don't have the space to collect things. I live in an apartment. My space is limited. I collect records, and have for a long time. That means I cannot collect anything else, even other music formats. My collection can only be so big before I look like a freakish hoarder. Everything else has limited space. Most people do not want or cannot have a huge library of old videogames around. I pretty much need to sell all of my remaining 360, PS3 games asap, or I'll get stuck with them when they're worthless.