![Microsoft reverses stance on 24-hour check-in, used games for Xbox One [update]](https://d1lss44hh2trtw.cloudfront.net/resize?type=webp&url=0&width=1032&sign=hjPf1YK82dV-QT8oL3v_lLzC62zix4hvLjTqBJFhHgY "Microsoft reverses stance on 24-hour check-in, used games for Xbox One [update]")
Microsoft reverses stance on 24-hour check-in, used games for Xbox One [update]
Microsoft may be backtracking on its DRM and used game stance for the Xbox One.
Microsoft has heard the cries of frustrated fans about the mandatory 24-hour check-in and used game restrictions for Xbox One, announcing today that it was reversing those policies to reflect its current stance for the Xbox 360.
In a post to fans on the official Xbox One site, Microsoft revealed that now "After a one-time system set-up with a new Xbox One, you can play any disc based game without ever connecting online again. There is no 24-hour connection requirement and you can take your Xbox One anywhere you want and play your games, just like on Xbox 360."
Also, "There will be no limitations to using and sharing games, it will work just as it does today on Xbox 360." Regional restrictions on the console are also being removed.
Microsoft's Don Mattrick said fan feedback was important in making these changes:
"You told us how much you loved the flexibility you have today with games delivered on disc. The ability to lend, share, and resell these games at your discretion is of incredible importance to you. Also important to you is the freedom to play offline, for any length of time, anywhere in the world.
So, today I am announcing the following changes to Xbox One and how you can play, share, lend, and resell your games exactly as you do today on Xbox 360."
He said that the company still has faith in its original plan. "While we believe that the majority of people will play games online and access the cloud for both games and entertainment, we will give consumers the choice of both physical and digital content. We have listened and we have heard loud and clear from your feedback that you want the best of both worlds."
Microsoft had received criticism for its mixed messaging on its policies for the Xbox One. During E3, the company defended its game stance, saying the industry was "in transition." Sony, however, chose to capitalize on the controversial policies by announcing at it's E3 press conference that it "won't impose any new restrictions on your use of PS4 game discs."
While the 180-degree shift by Microsoft may make more people consider pre-ordering the console, there is still the price: $399 for PS4 versus $499 for Xbox One. The Kinect 2 is a mandatory part of the the MS console, while the PlayStation Eye is an optional purchase for an additional $59.
-
Shacknews
replyJohn Keefer posted a new article, Report: Microsoft backtracking on DRM, used games.
Microsoft may be backtracking on its DRM and used game stance for the Xbox One.-
I knew this would happen the moment I heard what PS4 wasn't doing it. Fallon even mentioned the whole used games thing on his show last night.
-
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
They post from work.
-
-
-
-
Apparently they don't.
I mean, it's not like MS would have lied about it, would they? EA didn't like about Simcity using the cloud, did they? Oh wait...
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
Link to GB article, but we're getting hammered right now:
http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/microsoft-to-pull-complete-reversal-on-xbox-one-dr/1100-4673/-
So is Microsoft, apparently.
http://news.xbox.com
How were they going to handle being "always on" again?-
[deleted]
-
-
Congrats to and on the Scoops.
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
still won't buy one but lol
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
indeed, it is...indeed...
-
leave microsoft alone!
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
I would pick a brick 7 years into the consoles life rather than 50% RROD at the beginning. Sony's always been cooler than Microsoft.
-
Brick that can be patched, that is.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
more like going from "youll buy our shit and like it." to "oh no, gamers arent as dumb as we initially thought, change something quick."
-
-
http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/update
Your Feedback Matters – Update on Xbox One
By Don Mattrick, President, Interactive Entertainment Business posted June 19, 2013 at 2:00 PM
Last week at E3, the excitement, creativity and future of our industry was on display for a global audience.
For us, the future comes in the form of Xbox One, a system designed to be the best place to play games this year and for many years to come. As is our heritage with Xbox, we designed a system that could take full advantage of advances in technology in order to deliver a breakthrough in game play and entertainment. We imagined a new set of benefits such as easier roaming, family sharing, and new ways to try and buy games. We believe in the benefits of a connected, digital future.
Since unveiling our plans for Xbox One, my team and I have heard directly from many of you, read your comments and listened to your feedback. I would like to take the opportunity today to thank you for your assistance in helping us to reshape the future of Xbox One.
You told us how much you loved the flexibility you have today with games delivered on disc. The ability to lend, share, and resell these games at your discretion is of incredible importance to you. Also important to you is the freedom to play offline, for any length of time, anywhere in the world.
So, today I am announcing the following changes to Xbox One and how you can play, share, lend, and resell your games exactly as you do today on Xbox 360. Here is what that means:
An internet connection will not be required to play offline Xbox One games – After a one-time system set-up with a new Xbox One, you can play any disc based game without ever connecting online again. There is no 24 hour connection requirement and you can take your Xbox One anywhere you want and play your games, just like on Xbox 360.
Trade-in, lend, resell, gift, and rent disc based games just like you do today – There will be no limitations to using and sharing games, it will work just as it does today on Xbox 360.
In addition to buying a disc from a retailer, you can also download games from Xbox Live on day of release. If you choose to download your games, you will be able to play them offline just like you do today. Xbox One games will be playable on any Xbox One console -- there will be no regional restrictions.
These changes will impact some of the scenarios we previously announced for Xbox One. The sharing of games will work as it does today, you will simply share the disc. Downloaded titles cannot be shared or resold. Also, similar to today, playing disc based games will require that the disc be in the tray.
We appreciate your passion, support and willingness to challenge the assumptions of digital licensing and connectivity. While we believe that the majority of people will play games online and access the cloud for both games and entertainment, we will give consumers the choice of both physical and digital content. We have listened and we have heard loud and clear from your feedback that you want the best of both worlds.
Thank you again for your candid feedback. Our team remains committed to listening, taking feedback and delivering a great product for you later this year.-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
Is this out for sure?
-
Personally, I would rather have a second hand market than to have MS in control of pricing in perpetuity. With second hand, I can go on Amazon and eventually buy an old game for $5-$20 a price likely set by consumer demand for the title. Under MS's proposed plan, the price could be set to whatever whim MS deems necessary. This would likely never be a price comparable to what the second hand consumer market would have set.
-
Sure I lose family library, which was a good thing, but as Total Biscuit pointed out, the family plan was a solution to a problem Microsoft themselves created themselves.
Since I have to pick only one, I'd rather have a second hand market than have a family plan.
-
-
-
-
-
-
As long as "disk based games will require the disk in the tray" actually means "We just spin up the disk and do a quick check. Who wants to hear that thing spinning up all the time" I'm cool with it.
-
[deleted]
-
MS, I'll give them one thing, they sure can make me laugh! Guess they couldn't handle being scrutinized for another 4-5 months. Ah well they'll probably just re-integrate it sometime after the holiday sales anyway as the customers they're aiming for then are N/A parents anyway.
-
-
-
yes
-
-
-
-
The bigger problem is probably with publishers. You can do something like that if you say you are going to eliminate sharing discs with friends.
Ultimately the real issue is that Microsoft was being forward thinking and designed a console for the digital age. Consumers loudly complained that they do not want a console designed for the digital age and want physical media to stay around longer. Personally I think Microsoft's original design was far superior, but that's a matter of taste.-
But Microsoft is too forward thinking. A successful company takes things at the pace users can handle. Whether it's with Xbox or with Windows 8, Microsoft is overestimating the ability of their customers to adapt to change, and they're paying dearly for it.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Same here. My biggest issues with the XB1 were the higher price and the slight lower performance compared to the PS4, but I also thought that putting restrictions on all physical purchases was also going a bit far.
Its too bad that they cannot still give the option for library sharing by limiting it to an opt-in where the lender and borrower both agree to periodic online checks, and only people who download content can share.
It was a cool feature but I guess its all-or nothing. There has to be a way to incorporate these new features while maintaining physical media methods.-
-
I don't see why it has to be that way unless sharing for all purchases was the only way to make it worthwhile.
Sharing encourages digital purchases, more digital purchases discourage used game sales. It sounds like great incentive. I don't understand why they can't have it both ways, traditional physical media for people who want to buy/sell used games and bypass DRM, and digital purchases for people who want more convenience/features at the expense of DRM, etc.
It isn't rocket science, convenience at the expense of DRM has been happening for years in other areas like movies and books.-
[deleted]
-
-
-
It's a question of preventing abuse/theft. Remember copy protection dongles? That's exactly what a CD is. When you remove the dongle the protection needs to manifest itself in another form. In this cause it was handled by software (MSA accounts). Take away the MSA account validation and you have to revert back to the dongle.
-
Right, but that doesn't explain why different policies can't be applied to digital and physical purchases.
Physical copies can be bought/sold/traded, digital copies with DRM and an opt-in for online checks when sharing can have family sharing.
It isn't like there's no precedent for Microsoft to follow, this has been happening for years with books and movies. You can buy a physical copy that you have control over, or you can buy a digital copy with DRM that also has more features and greater convenience.-
I guess I don't understand why a physical dongle can't be completely taken out of the equation, just give these features to digital purchases tied to an account and enforced via periodic online checks. Let physical on consoles behave as they always have.
Is this a technical impossibility?-
I don't think anything is impossible from a technical standpoint. Impractical and unmaintainable however is probably more to the point. The digital stuff would probably need to be a different build that would know it needs to authenticate/be tied to the MSA. The physical copies would be just like the 360 is today. If you don't have the different versions, for the cloud/sharing, stuff it becomes hellish to manage. How do you know that you didn't load/sell the disk and keep the cloud copy to play (etc)? There are a plethora of permutations about how you can game the system here. If they want to enabled both scenarios it's going to take a lot of work, where as before it was simple -- you have the MSA account to manage it and everything falls behind it.
-
-
Also if you say you're going to focus on digital and make the disks more like paperweights for those that want them, retailers like Walmart, Target, etc aren't exactly going to be jumping up and down for joy and super excited to carry your physical goods (memory cards, hard drives, controllers, base units etc). They make much much more selling software then the hardware.
-
-
-
Certainly. That said, the console mindset is very different from the PC mindset. The PC platform is always connected no matter what, DRM on the PC has been around for years with activation keys for our operating systems/applications/games, and the used market has always been big on consoles since the average user age skews lower and with less disposable income. Even in the early 2000s there wasn't real demand for used PC games even though it was possible.
What made DRM on the PC workable is added convenience and eventually lower prices. No more activation keys to keep track of and no more DVDs taking up space once the game was installed on the hard drive.
Consoles were never as inconvenient as PCs before services like Steam came along. You just put the media in and go. Right now console DRM isn't in exchange for greater convenience (outside of no more media swapping, and every platform offers downloads now) or lower prices. Those are big humps to get over.
-
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
Completely agree. I didn't care for resale myself (and many do, which is fine, they're not me!) the complete loss of the library/family sharing to me is a big old step backwards.
I found this feature to be actually quite exciting, really. A real digital flexibility I didn't have earlier, and would've been something that almost guaranteed me and my brother getting XBones this generation, so we can share games and be able to play them together.
Oh well. I guess the vocal folk got what they wanted. Such a pity.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
You'd rather have a bad change?
-
I don't think it was a bad change. I think it was a step in the right direction. It was a step towards purely digital distribution and offering trading/borrowing with digital distribution.
Personally, I think they should have left discs alone and changed nothing about that allowing trading and selling and blah blah with disc based stuff. All the new stuff should have been for digital.
Instead, we get nothing.
Steam will implement it and everyone will say how amazing, awesome, groundbreaking, and forward thinking Steam is.-
There will still be digital market place.
Second hand market allows for a consumer controlled pricing way later down the line. MS's plan was to be in control of pricing throughout perpetuity. That's a bad thing. You couldn't possibly trust neither Sony or MS to place generous pricing for games that are in a leading market.
If PC gaming was the dominant market over consoles, believe you me, the vendors on Steam would never put their games anywhere as generous as they are now. -
[deleted]
-
Both are pretty incompetent at customer service but at least Valve knows how to throw a good sale and support a project until the end. MS has a tendency to abandon ship on things that have potential to grow.
-
I don't know what "trust" has to do with anything.
I don't trust any company. They want to make money. That's their job. Trust from a company perspective is completely gone.
All I want at this point is to support the company that's pushing forward in directions I want to see the world go. I didn't agree with everything Microsoft had outlined in their new policies, but I think if they were allowed to hit the floor that they could have been modified to make almost everyone happy without losing the spirit of them.
Maybe backing off completely and starting over is the right thing to do rather than pushing forward with it, but it just makes me sad to see everyone take an all or nothing stance on shit like this when a large portion of it is great stuff. -
Neither. If not for crazy sales, my Steam account would rarely be touched.
-
If forced to choose, Microsoft in a heartbeat. I see Valve purely as a source of cheap games, and patching of said game.
I don't use the community features, I don't care for most of Valve's first party games, and I don't even particularly like the client - forcing all my games under one folder for years and years is just a ludicrous idea.
Microsoft, at least, helps me pay the bills - they have a great development environment, an extremely wide reaching operating system, and a stable target to aim for. I have never had any of my Live accounts hijacked, and never needed customer service with them.
But do I trust any actual company? Not really. I'll always be jaded by any company.-
I guess it all depends on if you buy your games day one or not. If I was to buy a game like Bioshock a month after it came out, I could get it on Steam for $25 and would have to wait a year before MS cracked that $59.99 mark. Steam surely is a source of great sales, but what else is there? When you mention Steam sales you say it like it is a bad thing - I would argue that it is the most important thing when you couple it with the immense ecosystem that Steam has versus MS in terms of the sheer number of available games.
What are you talking about Steam forcing all your games under one folder for years and years? Do you mean Steam forces you to play them through Steam? If so, aren't consoles doing the same thing with their hardware - isn't it better that Steam is cross generational and relatively long lived versus consoles?
-
No, the sales is the only thing I care about. I don't care about Greenlight, or beta access, or the community features, or any of that crap. For me, it's a source of cheap games, and that's it. But I also use GOG, Origin, etc. To me, Steam offers nothing over cheap sales for me. And interestingly, I don't mind Origin - it gives me the same thing, just with a better download service.
And frankly, I've got a lot of buyer's remorse - lots of cheap games that turned out to be crap. But that's my own fault :)
As for Steam and folders, unlike traditional installers, I can't choose where to install individual games. I have progressively upgraded storage over time, and I like the ability to put more important stuff on some drives rather than others. Steam, for a long, long time, forced all my games on to one drive, one partition, all under the Steam folder. I could use junctions and other hacks, but come on, that's ridiculous that I have to do that as a consumer. This is a technical implementation problem, and shouldn't be a consumer one. Thankfully, that appears to be changing now.
Generally, I prefer PC - I know my games won't magically become incompatible because a new generation of hardware comes out. I was VERY disappointed at the lack of BC on PS4/XBone. But I much prefer the streamlined console experience (drivers, patches, in a lounge room, etc). And I had hopes that this would've turned out better this generation, especially like the XBOne family sharing.
-
-
-
-
I think it was a step in the right direction that was hamstrung by their need for physical media. If they'd gone 'all-in' on a Steam-like console box with similar restrictions it might have been a different story.
Also, they REALLY should have had a better handle on the PR for this one. Pretty much every media interaction was fucked up by Microsoft.
-
-
-
-
-
-
While this is excellent news and I applaud Microsoft for backing down, I still think that if they could have gotten away with it, they wouldn't have changed a thing.
The fact that they decided to do this in the first place shows their attitude towards their customers and I don't like it one bit.-
Very good point.
-
What does "gotten away with it" mean? You mean if people didn't hate what they were doing? Well, of course they wouldn't have changed it in that scenario.
But I'm not sure what point "they would have done it if most people were okay with it" is supposed to make about them.
-
Story has been updated to reflect the changes are official
-
-
[deleted]
-
Quit trying to summon him. Just on the off chance it's a Beetlejuice/Bloody Mary kind of thing....
-
-
-
And why do you suppose the shareholders were concerned if not for the popular response to Microsoft's prior intentions?
-
-
-
-
I think money was the cause for what they were doing and I think money is the cause for why they are backing off it.
-
-
-
I really think the shack mods need a way to pull other threads under a news article or something like that. Look at this.
http://www.shacknews.com/chatty?id=30356504#item_30356504
These 2 threads should be joined somehow, surely someone smart could code that up? Make the non 'official' post a primary reply under the main one perhaps?-
-
The day you can edit your posts is the day you all get WTFhorse headers.
-
-
Too little, too late. MS can keep their polished, corporate presentation, brogrammers, and bro gaming community. They've completely lost touch with the rest of us, from users to devs, and show a fundamental lack of respect for us. I can understand wanting to push the industry in a new direction, but I feel more like a dollar sign to them than anything else.
And I've been an Xbox user for a decade!
Sony has shown a sensibility and respect for the community, from devs to users, that is very appealing. Maybe ignorance is bliss, but they seem... genuine, or at least more in touch with us than MS right now.
MS saw their initial sales forecast plummeting, so they pull this. Give them a year or two - once they have buy-in, they'll be back with this shit.-
I bet they'll gradually worm it in, pushing online requirements into games that don't need them, like bullshit cloud calculations.
-
-
lol... They're both giant corporations whose overriding purpose is to make money. There's really no difference there but if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside to imagine that you and Sony have some sort of special heart-to-heart connection then go for it I guess.
-
-
Can you imagine if Sony came out and said, "Hey guys guess what? You can now share your library with no changes to anything!"
Yes, I realize publishers would pretty much force them to have a DRM scheme for that, I just think the uproar would be "cray", like MS seems to think we speak. -
-
[deleted]
-
LOL Totally!
-
It's nice to see a company listen to it's consumers, but sad to see stupid people ruin the day once again because they failed to understand the technology. Can I opt in for the 24 check in so that I can play games from the hard drive without having the disc in the tray? Or will all games be downloadable from day 1?
-
games will be downloadable from day 1, but all the other cool stuff is out
-
Nope, stupid people killed the best points of the xbox.
I can't share games(can't do that on steam, but hey MS was trying to 1 up them). I can't go to a friends house and play a game i own without bringing my scratched up piece of shit disc. I have to re-buy the game if my disc gets too scratched. If I only buy online, I can't trade them. Cloud computing just took a nose-dive in ability(not that i thought it would be for anything more than some extra visual physics, which can still be done) but the future is in jeopardy. 10 person family plan just got killed I believe too.
PS4 was not future thinking and I was excited for the xbox features. Yes I thought the 24 hour/1 hour was a little harsh but reversing that completely is just stupid.-
You think is gonna use dvds, how cute are you
-
-
-
I am completely amazed that they did this. Beyond amazed. Astounded maybe.
MS has been AWFUL about listening to customer criticisms. They get an idea, run with it, and expect customers to just follow along.
I guess walking back some of the changes in Windows 8 with 8.1 might have been a sign that they finally understanding that huge changes like these can't just be foisted on people.
Of course, all this shit will happen eventually, but just pushing everyone over the edge of the cliff at one time was a spectacularly bad idea. -
-
[deleted]
-
hmmm you can still buy games digitally and they can entice consumers to go for that more in the future
in fact i dont think getting rid of used games does anything for the environment, if anything itd be more plastic because people would more likely throw their discs away when its useless without activation-
[deleted]
-
-
-
Xbox 180 still not buying it... They will probably turn the DRM features back on in the future. Horrible problems last get RROD, don't want to go through that crap again.
Where is that vision of the future Microsoft? Does this mean the xbox 180 won't have the power of 4 xbox 180's in the cloud? Why is Kinect still in the package?
PS4 is still cheaper, more powerful, better controller according to reports, motion camera is an option.
Blah blah blah about Titanfall, guess what its on PC also.-
[deleted]
-
ohh Good to hear. I don't know about you guys. But im never buying this product. The damage was done at E3. This ofcourse is great news. Should keep this next gen somewhat competitive (hopefully). Id love to see Sony run with it all the way though.
Can't wait for a Don Mattrick or Major Nelson interview. Hope they tell us how good that crow taste...
Thank you for replying!-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
Internet(oh the irony) kiddies just ruined the best points of the Xbox.
While I agree that the 24/1 rule was harsh I'd rather they just loosen this than go full reversal.
1)Thanks to the idiots we lost the ability to play our games at our friends house without bringing the disc.
2)Thanks to the idiots we lost the ability to share our games with friends without physically handing them a disc. Good luck getting it back without a scratch if your friends aren't careful.
3)Thanks to the idiots we lost the ability to trade games/sell games to people without a physical disc
4)Thanks to the idiots we lost the ability to buy a game and have 10 people be able to play the game in our family(this may still be possible, but at this point, I'm not holding my breath).
5)Thanks to the idiots we need to put a disc in a tray to play our games
6)Thanks to the idiots we probably won't see Steam level sales, though i doubted this more due to license fees to bring a game to the Xbox, since there are only small fees for PC.
Thanks. Hopefully they will reverse this reversal over time...ugh-
[deleted]
-
^^ This. A lot of those (all?) are not mutually exclusive. It almost sounds to me like MS just said "OK FINE, no soup for you then" and decided to remover any actual features the system would have in retaliation.
One of the suggested fixes - not needing a 24hr check if the game was in the disk - would work well, for example. But no, Microsoft had to go all black & white on this. -
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
but I dont want what I asked for!
-
-
I know! AND I LOVE IT! Maybe now you can turn your vitriol towards each other
https://twitter.com/CoreyFlawless/status/347485233395933185/photo/1 -
I do wonder if this reversal will just disappoint the people like you who were looking forward to the One as it was, while not actually doing much to convert anyone from the PS4 camp. Judging by the POTM thread, this may well be the case. Which is actually just digging their hole deeper.
-
-
I don't buy this for a second. Microsoft showed their hand too early and is now attempting to shuffle the cards around to fool everyone into thinking they have different intentions.
Make no mistake, Microsoft WANTS all of those features in their system. We know it now. Don't be fooled into thinking the Xbox One won't ship without these capabilities. Microsoft is simply turning them off for the time being and will flip the switch back on when it suits them. Even if I'm wrong and Microsoft is madly working to strip this functionality out, they will try again.
To reference a game, GLaDOS just tried to lower us into the fire pit. There's no party. Are you going to assume the submission position?-
A party, like, is just an issue of perspective, man. Someone's got to be a vol-au-vent or a tin bucket filled to the brim with gin, and who are you to ruin a good party?
-
-
-
-
The PS3 could play blurays and was cheaper than a lot of other Bluray players at the time.
-
Dont see a price cut but definitely see a subsidized model being offered.
-
-
Why the one time connection requirement?
-
-
Are they manufacturing them at this point then?
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
Oh, Microsoft. Bet you're kicking yourself now for not doing this from the beginning, huh? Could have avoided all this trouble.
-
I wish they would leave some of the options available if you are actively online. Things like not requiring a disc to play and the family sharing stuff. :(
-
-
:((((
-
I think people were a little delusional that that loophole would be a thing that would exist for long if ever.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
I totally agree. Give people incentive to be always connected. If you are always connected, you get these great things and features! If you can't be, that's to bad but you can still play games like normal.
-
-
right, but now theres not even that option
-
-
-
So what if a year after launch they revert back to the original plan and push an update to the console making it so. What would you do?
-
eat cake
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
I was hoping we would get Steam for the Xbox. Not going to happen now.
-
[deleted]
-
That's about the right time for broadband coverage to truly cover most locales in the US, and for the industry in general to GROW UP from all of the ridiculousness of online accounts, content delivery, and economy min-maxing. There's no forcing function right now for the industry to grow up; it's the Wild West, and it's not regulating itself well enough, as illustrated by ridiculousness like Zynga, SimCity 5, XBox Games on Demand for three-year-old games being up to double the price of new in-box retail equivalents.
-
-
On the one hand I'm very happy about this. Sony forced their hand, and it's a fantastic result for consumers.
On the other hand, I really wanted them to go ahead with it and get fucking killed in sales. Sony got cocky at the start of this gen, they fucked up, and they've demonstrated that they've learned their lesson. I feel like Microsoft needed a taste of that same humble pie, but the way this has panned out I've got a funny feeling they've learned nothing.-
[deleted]
-
I see what you're saying, however their original plans had very definite negative repercussions for consumers, while you're only talking about hypothetical benefits. I think over the next generation we're going to see both Sony and Microsoft really push digital sales regardless of this news, but I feel that Microsoft totally misread the market in thinking the world was ready to have the digital age forced upon them.
-
-
-
I'm pretty sure the people at Microsoft are having to eat plenty of crow humble pie as it is. This miscalculation is a major, damaging embarrassment for them already.
-
It's probably just my totally subjective interpretation of what's happened, but from the improvements Sony have made to the PS3 towards the end of it's life and their amazing PS4 presentation it genuinely seems as if Sony has learned that they'll pay the price if they don't put the consumer first.
However in this instance, it just appears that Microsoft shit a brick after the negative press and doubled back on these particular plans. If they can get the word out, they might never lose a penny over this whole debacle and I'm concerned that if they don't face a blow to their cash flow we're just going to see this anti-consumer attitude rear it's head in other forms somewhere down the line.
-
-
-
lol @ We have listened and we have heard loud and clear from your feedback that you want the best of both worlds.
This conflicts with our previous belief that you wanted the best of one world and the worst of the other world -
A very forward thinking policy, explained by an arrogant executive who should have realized he had one and only one shot to sell this to a reactionary crowd. Now, panic.
Such a shame. I liked the idea of being able to share games with a small circle of friends, people who don't live down the street or down the hall from me, easily and safely. I liked the idea of not having to screw around with physical disks, even as I was able to have a physical copy of the game. Frankly, it was a forward-thinking model, and no more threatening than Zune or Amazon's Kindle.
Frankly, I'd opt-in for the old model if they offered both as an option. I have no interest in piracy and I almost never sell a game back to the retailer.-
-
And that wouldn't have changed.
-
And does this mean developers now ignore the cloud processing, assuming that they have to make a game that works offline all the time?
-
-
seriously! The launch games weren't going to take advantage of it, but who knows about games down the line. I suppose it could still come into play for an always-online game. I assume they are still going to have MMO type games and if the game requires a connection at all times they can go ahead and play with the cloud magic
-
The only major title that's talked about doing significant things with it is Titanfall, and that's an MP-only game, so this changes nothing for them.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
I think I actually respect them less now for caving in. I know their policies ruffled a lot of feathers, but I think it was kind of the future of the industry and almost a necessary growing pain to get where things are going. I had a certain amount of respect for them to push in that direction, and it actually did come with benefits. That family plan was actually pretty cool, and not having to have the disk to play... and playing all your games at a friends house without a disk etc. All of that was actually very forward thinking and cool. I think it would have been better for them to take the hit (of bad press) for the first year... but then benefit in the long run from making the right choice. The way it is now, they will have a hard time reversing their policy again in the future when they want to move in this direction again (and you know they will).
-
Microsoft's strategy is brute force, while Sony's is passive appeasement. Honey works better than vinegar.
-
-
This feels like Mattrick not wanting to get Sinofsky'd, after being called "the new Ken Kutaragi". And it's not like Microsoft didn't have warnings; the 9-11-2012 Bombcast called it, and highlighted how Sony's PS3 unveil had so much hubris going in.
That said, Microsoft still has some serious Stockholm Syndrome audience going, between Windows 8 and XBox One. This time, though, was the fastest turnaround from official message to backtracking (even though the always-on rumors started way back in February 2013).
Still, though, the XBox One will fail the Zero Connectivity Test, and I'm guessing it will still require the creation of a Live account (this hasn't been explicitly spelled out, but the "initial setup" connection requirement has been spelled out).
It's not rocket science to do a Zero Connectivity Test: I have an "Internet dead zone" right next to my Asus RT-N66R, where my 360 S Arcade and my PS3 Slim are sitting. The PS3 has tasted Internet a couple of times for patches to GT5, Catherine, and Bayonetta, but it has a local profile, and has never authenticated to PSN. The 360 has never touched Internet EVER. Microsoft easily could have performed this usability test, and asked themselves what a consumer who couldn't connect to the Internet would think. Instead, they kept their ostrich heads in the sand, and delivered their insensitive PR message.-
-
For the case of military, it might be a problem if there's an online account associated with the hardware device, due to personally identifiable information. The "user story" is essentially, "This unit is going into the mess hall of a nuclear submarine stationed underwater for weeks at a time; why the hell does the purchaser have to sign up for an account before it can play a game?"
-
what exactly are you complaining about now? the exact same situation the 360 and PS3 are in where you have to make an account on the console? why does it even matter if you have to make an account when the device is never going online?
-
You can make a local-only account on the 360 and PS3. The PS3 even lets you name it. The 360 endlessly tries to upsell you, and then whines and says, "Okay, FINE! Your name is Player1!".
In order to support trophies / achievements and set a base storage location for saves, you must create at least one profile. It also sets the stage for potentially creating lesser privileged local accounts (for example, kids accounts, with parental lock controls).
-
-
-
-
Apparently, according to Marc Whitten, Microsoft never DID go through what this experience would be, because they hadn't laid out the strategy start-to-end until the May 21st show!
http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/microsoft-s-marc-whitten-talks-xbox-one-s-big-poli/1100-4675/
"This was our first opportunity, frankly, if you look over the last month, from the Xbox One unveil to E3, to actually lay out what our program is, and to talk about it. We’ve been working on it for a very long time, and this is our first time to start getting feedback."
"We believe a lot in this digital future, and we think most people will be using Xbox One connected,..." (sundry marketing points blah blah blah...) "...But we clearly heard that there were times that they needed the box to work in an offline state, whether they just wanted to use it offline or were going on vacation or they were in a low connectivity area, and, frankly, that they loved the familiarity of physical discs and really wanted it. So, we just responded to that."
YOU FAILED. You didn't even TRY to simulate a 100% offline experience, because you were so stuck in your reality distortion field of a tony, coddled Seattle suburb! And you went into the May 21st and E3 conferences with NO humility, and used your PR handlers to actively antagonize anyone attempting to pose hard questions to Mattrick!-
I'm also laughing at the artful dodge of this VERY simple question:
Giant Bomb: The machine does require a connection at least once when a user purchases it. Why is that?
Whitten: It was always part of the plan for Xbox One. It's as simple as the difference between our manufacturing schedules and our software schedules. There was always going to be a day-one update when we launched it.
NO. SERIOUSLY. WHAT METADATA IS IT EXCHANGING WITH MICROSOFT'S INFRASTRUCTURE?! IS A LIVE ACCOUNT REQUIRED TO PRIME AN XBOX ONE FOR OFFLINE?!-
[deleted]
-
the archville believes in a future where everyone steps backwards into an always offline world
-
I'm okay; I'm just having a little fun with this. There are ultimately technical reasons for all the decisions they are making, but the digital guts of what they're proposing are nowhere near as on marketing message as the prose that Whitten is able to effortlessly whittle off, as a Chief Product Officer would be expected to do.
-
-
[deleted]
-
Okay; not so much "dodge" as "balderdash". He could have just said "because the firmware wants to download the day one patch", and mentioned how, and whether it would demand a Live account authentication.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
I'm torn. I kinda wish MS followed through just to see if it actually ended up benefitting consumers. On the other hand, I sincerely doubt it would result in lower game prices, more interesting gameplay, or a better experience in general -- so I'm not all that sad.
Now i hope publishers are less likely to run their own 24 hr checkin scheme on the PS4 just because it would have been standard on the xbone.-
That was never going to happen on PS4 anyway. Publishers saw the reaction and most quotes I saw around the announcements seemed highly suggestive of just doing things the way we have.
-
i am too actually.. its not only because i revel in the xbone hate
was kinda curious to see what may have happened with the Xbones initial "features"
-
-
Honestly they should have just cut the 24hr checkin and 1 transfer for disc based games, and required the disc. As someone who intended to only buy games digitally I was fine with a steam model where I don't need any discs and can access all of my games from everywhere. Hopefully this is still the case.
-
Yeah same here minus the going all digital. Plus I never let anyone borrow my games a) they don't take care of them b) their kids greasy little hands fingerprints always end up on the disk c) manuals returned all banged up.
But the Xbox 180 will not last 10 or 20+ years for me to enjoy going all digital. Hell I can pass down my steam account to my kids. Being on PC has its ups for all digital. For consoles not so much. Production will eventually stop. Unless they offer backwards compatibility, maybe next Gen? It will have to be next Gen for now since they caved in.
-
-
Ha! Maybe next they will drop the price to actually try to compete with PS4,or maybe Sony will reconsider it's new multiplayer policy for requiring PS+.
Man oh Man,looks like it could be a big chess game between MS and Sony,and MS just narrowly escaped from being checkmated...for now. -
Fuckin' SOLD!!!
I was going to buy one of these at launch and one six months or so later. I can't stand the Playstation controllers, but I was going to go with PS4 at launch, hoping that the Xbone would change after launch if the PS4 sold well enough. (which did have some great looking exclusives to boot)
*PHEW*
Seriously, guys. Stop being such freaking cynical bastards. This is great news. I was thinking and saying for the last month, "There is no chance in hell I am going to buy the Xbox if the don't change this before launch, and I loved all the Xbox trailers and features." You know that a lot of the games are going to require internet connections anyway, but at least now you won't have to have it all the time for stuff like "Watch Dogs" or some Bethesda style single player epic. Freaking great news.
Please don't interject with, "Watch Dogs DOES require an always on connections, though!" Because I'm sure you all know what I meant by that...-
-
That's not in my ball court, whining for the sake of it ( I always whine because I think something is worth whining about). I can tell just from watching people handle the PS4 controllers that they are vastly improved over the PS3 controllers, but the position of the sticks is still in the wrong place, to be honest. (I didn't phrase that thought in that manner to troll...) I just can't handle the PS4 layout, though I will admit that seeing how much wider they made it and giving it trigger-esque buttons goes a long way.
Plus, on the side of the Xbone controller having something cool, instead of the PS4 controller having something wrong, that per trigger force feedback sounds amazing. Listening to Garnett give it positive review was something of a relief. I was afraid that it was going to be a new "waggle your controller" for grass rupees.
There are a few exclusives that I want to play on the Playstation, but I will be going with the Xbox as my main console Platform now. For sure.
Sold!
-
-
I'm some what disappointed in these turn of events, the Internet has really changed Microsofts policies. Yes we're gaining used games which we never loss, no 24 hour check in, but we're losing the family plan, complete games stored online, and my personal favorite the ability to install the game and never have to put the game in. I personally liked the original policy more, now I feel like It's not forward thinking anymore. People, consumers are stuck on the old way without trying to move forward, really sad that Microsoft who was forward thinking reconsidered their policies
-
You can blame the internet all you want but the fact is Microsoft did a fucking terrible job explaining why these changes were coming and what if any benefits they would have brought.
-
Some of the surrounding articles and noise around this announcement have been "interesting" to read with industry people now turning around and blaming consumers for impeding development towards the future by not supporting Xbox One's original policies...
Every time we as consumers voice our displeasure at something we are told, "if you don't like it simply don't support it by buy it then." Followed by "they say they won't support it but come release they will all buy the shiny new thing anyway."
Now here we are, Microsoft presented the Xbox One and consumers asked them to provide reasons to buy said product, but all we got in return was vague "it'll do thing we can't do now", "it'll become clear once you start using it" and "cloud" instead of a single clear reason or example of how it would benefit us or why we should support it.
So we decided to let it be known that we weren't satisfied with what they were offering and did what we have always been told to do as consumers "don't buy stuff that you don't want." And now we are being told that it's our fault that we can't have a live in a wonderful utopia with clouds everywhere and where developers see 100% of their profits.
As I said, been some 'interesting' takes on events of the past few days from the media...-
Well, that's because the people who are creating the articles and noise surrounding this development are, like you said, industry people. The games media is an organ of the games industry, and by the very nature of how they consume these products, they can't help but to be mostly anti-consumer.
Unfortunately.
-
-
Great I was holding out and thinking about PS4 but now I'm buying Xbox One for TitanFall!!!!!
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
LOL!!! no.
-
-
Lol. Will surely change some minds, but not enough. What a mess.
-
To be honest "we" din't help change anything, the PS4 did. We did help change the PS4. Team Xbox could of cared less. "O yeah we heard you" yeah they heard you when you spoke with your wallet.
"Any company who can even THINK about doing what MS did, then take SO DAMN LONG to say they're gonna change, CAN'T be trusted so easily. "OH WE CHANGED GUYS, BUY OUR CONSOLE". Oh really? How the fuck do I know you want undo it, how the fuck do I know you're not gonna try something else that's equally stupid? You've shown you're DEAD serious about screwing us over, but we're so suppose to believe it's ok now? Your policy states it can change at any time. Care to fucking ELABORATE ON THAT BITCH?!" - Some guy from youtube.-
Really? Consumers vote with their dollars. If MS saw a negative reaction in terms of sales to their announcement and noticed that Sony saw a positive in sales to their announcement it would lead to exactly what we saw... MS changing their ways.
Consumers absolutely love Steam. Steam, a digital service (even if you buy it boxed you're required for many games to tie it to your Steam account for many popular titles) doesn't allow you to resell or even borrow games. It does give you some great sales. They can disable your access to your entire library games for a violation of the ToS at any time and if you don't agree to any changes they make. Consumers love it.
So by consumers coming out in strong support of Sony they did force the change from MS. I don't know why anyone would think differently these are just an XB and PS we are talking about here... no-one needs one and thus these companies can't force you to buy one. It's not like it's food or water.
Now it is funny that trust is brought up in negative terms against MS. I completely agree we should never trust these companies. Which also applies to Sony... did everyone hit their head and forget the huge "we didn't bother to encrypt your personal info on PSN and kinda lied about the hacking" or "hey no rootkits to see here" or possibly at the PS3 E3 reveal "yes this is actual in game footage of Killzone.. woops".
So we shouldn't trust either. Both have left DRM measures up to the publishers. Both have done things consumers that negatively affected consumers. So while so many are having a meltdown over MS attempting to push a Steam styled system (that everyone oddly loves on the PC) don't pretend that either company is one to trust.
Vote with your dollars. Personally I think both consoles will do well and I'll probably end up buying both. I'm not going to pre-order or buy at launch due to the RROD fiasco of last time on the Xbox, Sony having so many PSN issues and I want to see the actual games. I have enough self control to wait and see how these promises really pan out. If you all recall publishers were doing "online passes" last gen (EA/Sony claim to have ended that) but time will tell now won't it?-
Those Quotes were some guys post... Yeah love how steam works. Don't think that would ever work on consoles unless it had a prolong life.
Voting with your dollars is where its at like you mentioned. When i meant "WE" i meant the DRM campaign (should of been clearer). Sony did change with the no DRM campaign. Xbox didn't till the sales numbers came in.
Everyone should watch Adam Boyes when joined the Giant Bomb crew after E3 @3:19 http://www.twitch.tv/giantbomb/b/416674255
Adam Boyes on giant bomb was EPIC...
-
-
-
I am disappointed that MS changed their stance. Obviously there was more than enough consumer backlash to get them to throw out that system that was in place fairly close to launch. That is a pretty big deal.
Now I was looking forward to the "family plan" with it's proposed way to share games, lend them and even apparently "trade/give" it once. The once a day call back home internet deal didn't bother me as both my 360 and PS3 currently are connected to my wifi and if I am going to play them they are online anyway. So no difference for me personally. I do understand and have one friend who cannot play online games due to where he lives however even he who relies upon a data capped Verizon mobile internet connection at his home sounds like he would be able to check in to verify if it truly was only a few bytes (he doesn't play/download much due to his data cap).
I wanted to move towards a more Steam style system (which has not in it's nearly decade of existence allowed me to trade games, play friend's titles, etc). So I am a bit confused as to why so many people that are more than happy to buy into Steam had such a negative reaction to this. I do believe the digital sales would have had sales at some point. I believe most of us believe that these companies want to make as much money as possible (some would call this greed). According to Gabe Steam sees an increase in revenue (more money) by selling games at discounts. He's stated this in interviews. So gamers get cheaper games and companies make more money at the same time. Now I understand MS is not Valve. However looking to EA's Origin they also have sales (BF3 was just $5 for a few days) which dispelled the idea that EA would keep prices forever at $59.99. If we are to believe that these companies are greedy or at least want to make more money then we should believe they would like to move towards a Steam systems that apparently enables that.
There seems to be a belief that a once per 24hr check in = you were required to always be online. This was always wrong. So while I can appreciate people who cannot get online have issues with this .. I didn't see it as a big deal. Also what I believe is worth noting is that despite this change publishers are allowed to implement their own DRM schemes on the Xbox as well as the PS according to heads at both companies.
DRM. Do people honestly not understand that while you may have a physical copy of a game that doesn't mean it's not DRM free? Having a physical copy being required to be in your system during play in and of itself is DRM. The PC gaming community has overwhelmingly adopted this. Buy a physical copy of Bioshock 2 and you will find yourself tied into Steam (where you're purchases are labeled as "subscriptions" if you care to read the ToS). So what I am getting at is if Steam is widely perceived as being so great and is full of DRM, requires you to get online (although it doesn't require that every 24hrs), doesn't allow trading/reselling/etc but is absolutely loved... why do those same people despise the formerly proposed XB1 digital focus? I would absolutely love to play games from the libraries of my friends on Steam. I'd love to be able to borrow console games without having to mail a disc across the country.
-
For me the sad part is that MS was trying to do something even better than Steam. The whole notion of sharing digitally owned content anywhere is just awesome and then being able to sell your digital game. That is unprecedented. Sadly not to be.
I think the other thing people did not consider, because it does not apply to everyone, is that games being sold digitally might have led to more cross device love i.e. being able to play Xbox games on the PC or vice versa.
Problem is the console market was not ready. I think they need to offer a similar service and let consumers decide, which is where they made their mistake. They should have done both and if the digital distribution took off they could phase out discs.
-
