Xbox one
- Thread starter strawman
- Start date
They've already said the detail in the camera is good enough to know who is who. With two people playing, the screens will swap sides when the players do. And if it can track your heartbeat it's gotta be pretty advanced. We'll see when it's released though. I'm not going to discount it on imagined scenarios.[DOUBLEPOST=1371679390][/DOUBLEPOST]
Yep. http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/...everse-controversial-game-licensing-policies/
Exactly, other than Halo and that Remedy game (and let's be honest, when has a Remedy game not ended up on PC) everything else is PC bound.
Maybe not Dead Rising 3, but I still suspect it might go multiplatform eventually.
As for account security - not that hard. If the kinect is actually as good as they claim, it can make a pretty accurate biometric scan of pretty much anyone. I mean, my laptop had my fingerprint as a password, I know people with retinal scanners on their laptops, I don't see why a Kinect couldn't be used for either, or actually body size etc etc.
That said, whoo, protesting brought a big company to its knees. Let's watch as whiney gamers use this as an example of protesting working to whine ever more about anything.
I mean, I'm all in favor of these changes, but the precedent (I know it isn't the first time, but still) is bad. Whine as long as possible and even the big ones will fold!
That said, whoo, protesting brought a big company to its knees. Let's watch as whiney gamers use this as an example of protesting working to whine ever more about anything.
I mean, I'm all in favor of these changes, but the precedent (I know it isn't the first time, but still) is bad. Whine as long as possible and even the big ones will fold!
figmentPez
Staff member
If it can pick out just the person currently using the device, that'll be a step up from the current Kinect voice commands. Tech journalist Alex Albrecht had to disconnect his 360 Kinect while watching the E3 presentation because it kept picking up on the commands people were issuing in the stage demo.
I saw this when I got up this afternoon. This takes care of 2 of my main concerns. I've been a Gamefly subscriber since I got my 360 5 years ago, & probably 50% or more of my games I have gotten from GF & decided to keep. That system would have been nigh impossible under the original Xbone plan. Also last fall my modem took a dump & the cable company's inept service department screwed me over for 6 days before a tech arrived to fix the problem. At least then I was able to play offline games during that time.
Now if we could just adjust the price tag...
As for the Kinect, I'm not concerned about it because frankly, I'm not important enough to be concerned. Maybe when I start my little brown boy-girl import business I'll worry, but not yet. I'm more concerned right now that TWC finally completed their takeover of my local cable company this past week.
I do think however that this reversal will mean a huge hit to their plans for a complete cloud-based experience. They would have to come up with a method that somehow removes the rights to the media when the game is sold or traded. Otherwise, what's to keep someone from installing the game to the cloud & then returning or selling the game? The most basic method would of course be a physical disc check a-la PC's, but as PC's have proven, there are more than enough people working on no-disc cracks for that kind of stuff. Not to mention it would defeat the point.
I know Amazon has a method of allowing other kindle owners to "borrow" their books. It moves the digital media to the borrower's device & removes access from the lender's device, so it can be done.
Now if we could just adjust the price tag...
As for the Kinect, I'm not concerned about it because frankly, I'm not important enough to be concerned. Maybe when I start my little brown boy-girl import business I'll worry, but not yet. I'm more concerned right now that TWC finally completed their takeover of my local cable company this past week.
I do think however that this reversal will mean a huge hit to their plans for a complete cloud-based experience. They would have to come up with a method that somehow removes the rights to the media when the game is sold or traded. Otherwise, what's to keep someone from installing the game to the cloud & then returning or selling the game? The most basic method would of course be a physical disc check a-la PC's, but as PC's have proven, there are more than enough people working on no-disc cracks for that kind of stuff. Not to mention it would defeat the point.
I know Amazon has a method of allowing other kindle owners to "borrow" their books. It moves the digital media to the borrower's device & removes access from the lender's device, so it can be done.
Gah double - possibnle triple post. Getting database errors. Even getting one when trying to delete one of the posts
figmentPez
Staff member
I have a question, how do you think consumers would have reacted if, instead of the Xbox 180, Microsoft had instead presented it this way:
This would've gone some way towards pleasing both camps, but probably would be a bitch to implement.
figmentPez
Staff member
The only hard part I can see would be getting customers to understand what they get with each type of purchase. I don't see any reason why it would be technically difficult to do.
I have a feeling it came down to the same reason a kinect is required. Everything needs to work the same, otherwise it gets confusing. If you buy a game at Best Buy, you should be able to get the same experience out of buying it online. If someone makes the mistake of doing that, there's no way for them to get the digital copy, and the other way around. It's all or nothing. Otherwise you get too many people that get frustrated and upset about being stupid and not knowing how it works.
figmentPez
Staff member
People are already having to learn about physical media versus digital when it comes to movies and TV shows purchased on DVD/BluRay versus iTunes/Amazon/etc. Games purchased digitally on Xbox Live for the 360 right now have a different experience than games bought on a disc. This is an issue that already exists, and will continue to exist, I don't see why Microsoft shouldn't make the most of it.
Fair point. Cable charges €5.99 to wach a new movie, while buying the DVD costs me €19.99, but I get to keep it - if they managed to do a similar thing with games ($30 for a one-time-one-location deal or $60 for the disc to keep and reinstall) most people would understand; though it would still be considered killing the 2nd hand market to a lot of people.
I'll just be waiting and watching for the bitching that'll start when MS says "no achievements (and the like) when off line".
If they start introducing ways for people to get their console gaming in for cheaper, I feel like most folks aren't going to actually care about the 2nd hand market.
Family sharing is no more. So you can no longer have up to 10 XBL Profiles that can access your games and play them from any Xbox One. Disc Required for all disc based games.Yeah, I'm sure I'll be crying myself to sleep at night about ALL the things I'll miss about the previous XBone policies.
But god help you if you try to share that bag of doritos with your friends.
Actually, it was the drubbing that Microsoft was seeing in preorders that likely caused the backpedaling. Gamers (for the first time ever it seems) actually voted with their wallets.
I think this is more on the PR department at MS. Unanswered questions and misinformation killed them from the start. They also should have had better incentives to make the all digital option sound more enticing. I have a feeling this will go down as one of the greatest PR flops of all time.
Exactly. I don't think they ever answered whether people in the same family could play the same game at the same time on two different xboxs.
For such a big change they needed to be out in front of this. Instead they just ignored the questions until employees who shouldn't have been answering them, like support, tried to answer them with incorrect or misleading answers.
Well, maybe some day, far far into the future, Microsoft will learn to announce things with the appropriately positive spin (and without all of the overly-restrictive DRM side of the coin) and there won't be so many pissed off potential customers that they have to remove all of their features. Or, you know, they could develop them in such a way that the feature side of things isn't completely tied to the overly-restrictive DRM/prohibitive resale and side of things in the first place, so they can actually implement the positive things. Honestly, this loss of Family Sharing seems much more like Microsoft getting one final jab in as they collapse under the weight of their shitty PR. More of a "Oh yeah? You want to make it so we can't put in the limits we wanted? Well guess what? You can't have the nice things we were going to give you either, so there!"
Especially since there was nothing preventing them from assigning game codes that could be used multiple times, on multiple machines, and across multiple accounts, in order to allow disc sharing and Family Sharing codes. From an internal account configuration point of view, it's actually easier to allow more access than it is to restrict it. I wouldn't be at all surprised if, several years into the life cycle of the XBone, you start to see system updates that add in the capabilities that they've just yanked out of the launch; just because they really do want to put those things in the console, but they don't feel that they have time to re-code those capabilities to untie them from the DRM aspects before launch, and they don't want to have to push back the release of the console.
Think about it. What was that 10-person Family Sharing game code setup anyway? It was a 10-seat software license, the same as Microsoft's been offering for Office and Windows for enterprise and school customers for years. You put the disc in, you connect to the XBLA servers, you tell it which 10 accounts you want to have access, or a portion of which 10 accounts, and it notes those accounts so that the next time they sign in, they get the game license and the option to download the software. Nothing about reversing their stances on always on DRM, 24-hour connection requirements, inability to sell games, inability to trade games, etc. makes that option any less viable.
The only possibly negative effect that allowing game selling by customers could have had on the scheme would be that someone could have used up all or a portion of those 9 additional license seats, so that the next person who bought the game wouldn't have had the full 9 available, in which case, you just make it known that the first person to buy the game gets 9 additional seats for free, and every additional customer has to pay a small fee for additional license seats - call it $5 per additional user account that you want to have access with a group discount of $40 for a full 9-pack - and suddenly Microsoft isn't being a bunch of overly restrictive asshats, they're offering a valuable service; and this piece of the anti-Xbone argument never happens, or at least, the outcry is much quieter.
Especially since there was nothing preventing them from assigning game codes that could be used multiple times, on multiple machines, and across multiple accounts, in order to allow disc sharing and Family Sharing codes. From an internal account configuration point of view, it's actually easier to allow more access than it is to restrict it. I wouldn't be at all surprised if, several years into the life cycle of the XBone, you start to see system updates that add in the capabilities that they've just yanked out of the launch; just because they really do want to put those things in the console, but they don't feel that they have time to re-code those capabilities to untie them from the DRM aspects before launch, and they don't want to have to push back the release of the console.
Think about it. What was that 10-person Family Sharing game code setup anyway? It was a 10-seat software license, the same as Microsoft's been offering for Office and Windows for enterprise and school customers for years. You put the disc in, you connect to the XBLA servers, you tell it which 10 accounts you want to have access, or a portion of which 10 accounts, and it notes those accounts so that the next time they sign in, they get the game license and the option to download the software. Nothing about reversing their stances on always on DRM, 24-hour connection requirements, inability to sell games, inability to trade games, etc. makes that option any less viable.
The only possibly negative effect that allowing game selling by customers could have had on the scheme would be that someone could have used up all or a portion of those 9 additional license seats, so that the next person who bought the game wouldn't have had the full 9 available, in which case, you just make it known that the first person to buy the game gets 9 additional seats for free, and every additional customer has to pay a small fee for additional license seats - call it $5 per additional user account that you want to have access with a group discount of $40 for a full 9-pack - and suddenly Microsoft isn't being a bunch of overly restrictive asshats, they're offering a valuable service; and this piece of the anti-Xbone argument never happens, or at least, the outcry is much quieter.
Exactly how it feels. They're taking their ball and they're going home.
I have a feeling it has more to do with agreements with the publishers. They most likely had it all worked out on the idea that there will be a 24 hour check in. Without that they'd have to renegotiate with them and make sure they're all on board. They probably wanted to end all the bad press, so they didn't have enough time to rework agreements with them. I'm guessing MS is more pissed that the publishers sat back and said "I had no idea!" when they most likely knew all along. There's no way MS would allow these options without them being on board.
"You put the disc in and type in a one time use code" is the part you're missing.
Since the game discs are now the key to playing the game, then you can have 10, or a hundred, accounts playing the same game, as long as the disc is in the machine.
If you say you're going to kick me in the balls, and I say no and refuse, and you finally relent, I'm still allowed to think you're a jerk for wanting to.
Yes, but my argument is that they didn't need to do it that way. I'll have to sit down and actually think through the various types of issues at play here, but for now I'm having trouble deciding if all of these issues are because Microsoft is working with external publishers, because they're trying to make their console work like Windows does, or because of individual personality issues within the team responsible for developing the console and/or the account infrastructure.
The game disc should be obsolete. That's all that Microsoft was going for.
Why go to a retailer to get a game? Why shop online, then twiddle your thumbs waiting for them to physically hand you a media that merely contains digital bits?
It's stupid and backwards.
For those with slower internet, it might make sense, but even low end DSL and cable internet will download even the largest xbox games in less than a day, so going to the store might be faster, but shipping it won't be.
For typical gamers with decent internet speeds a big game should take an hour or two to download.
There are issues with purely digital distribution though. And people are focusing on them as though it's the end of the world.
The only thing Microsoft really changed with this announcement is that games will no longer come with keys, meaning you can't tie a game to your account, you have to have the disc in to play, and you can sell or trade it with impunity.
But they'll still probably sell digital versions of the same games, and you probably still won't be able to sell or trade them, whereas before you might have been able to.
They aren't backing down on digital distribution, that's simply the future of all gaming. They are changing how discs work, though, to suit the small fraction of gamers for whom trading games is critical to their enjoyment of a console.
And, honestly, they should have done it this way from the beginning. People expect that physical media is the key itself, and can be traded and sold. It was confusing at minimum.
Why go to a retailer to get a game? Why shop online, then twiddle your thumbs waiting for them to physically hand you a media that merely contains digital bits?
It's stupid and backwards.
For those with slower internet, it might make sense, but even low end DSL and cable internet will download even the largest xbox games in less than a day, so going to the store might be faster, but shipping it won't be.
For typical gamers with decent internet speeds a big game should take an hour or two to download.
There are issues with purely digital distribution though. And people are focusing on them as though it's the end of the world.
The only thing Microsoft really changed with this announcement is that games will no longer come with keys, meaning you can't tie a game to your account, you have to have the disc in to play, and you can sell or trade it with impunity.
But they'll still probably sell digital versions of the same games, and you probably still won't be able to sell or trade them, whereas before you might have been able to.
They aren't backing down on digital distribution, that's simply the future of all gaming. They are changing how discs work, though, to suit the small fraction of gamers for whom trading games is critical to their enjoyment of a console.
And, honestly, they should have done it this way from the beginning. People expect that physical media is the key itself, and can be traded and sold. It was confusing at minimum.
Seriously funny post. You act a good Adam Orth if I ever heard one.
There's still a lot of America that doesn't have access to broadband internet access. I know that sounds weird, but for those of us in these unlucky areas, it's a big deal.
We only really got broadband service in this area LAST YEAR, and it's only one provider, through a 4G cellular connection. It's also on a hard 5GB/month data limit, and the only reason I'm able to use it and download games on it is due to being grandfathered in on a much much older unlimited plan. Even then, my bandwidth gets severely throttled should I go over an unspecificed amount.
Digital distribution is nice, but with the lack of internet infrastructure, it should still be OPTIONAL.
We only really got broadband service in this area LAST YEAR, and it's only one provider, through a 4G cellular connection. It's also on a hard 5GB/month data limit, and the only reason I'm able to use it and download games on it is due to being grandfathered in on a much much older unlimited plan. Even then, my bandwidth gets severely throttled should I go over an unspecificed amount.
Digital distribution is nice, but with the lack of internet infrastructure, it should still be OPTIONAL.