Microsoft defends Xbox One game policy, says industry is in 'transition'

Microsoft's policies on game ownership on Xbox One have not been taken very well. However, while trading and sharing retail games may be more difficult on Microsoft's next-gen console, they argue that their new digital policies "look forward" to what consumers really want.

58

Microsoft's policies on game ownership on Xbox One have not been taken very well. However, while trading and sharing retail games may be more difficult on Microsoft's next-gen console, they argue that their new digital policies "look forward" to what consumers really want.

Microsoft Studios corporate vice president Phil Spencer said that the new policies are in place because gamers are going to "end up with consoles in multiple rooms in their home over time. Not everybody, but you see that happening today." Taking a page from Netflix, the company wants you to be able to access the same library across multiple devices, no matter how many systems you have in your home.

Spencer argues that physical media has inherent flaws, pointing out that it has "some kind of shelf life" and that discs "can be scratched."

It doesn't appear that Mirosoft will turn around on their controversial policy any time soon, telling Eurogamer that "we're going through a transition; you've seen this in other mediums... As you go through a transition it's definitely true that you're not going to be able to support every single thing. But as you look forward and you think about the benefits, we asked, what are the systems we have to put in place to support these benefits, and what are the features of the existing scenario that we want to make sure we want to support?"

While Xbox One may have restrictions on physical media, it does appear their digital strategy is more generous than Sony's. Microsoft says that you can have your library work on up to 10 systems. Sony, on the other hand, allows your digital library to work on two activated systems.

"Basically what we've said is you can install the bits to the hard-drive and then you have a license for that content in the cloud for you wherever you go, regardless of what happens to the disc. That content is yours, it will roam wherever you go, it will work, and we think there are distinct advantages of you having the content that you own associated with you and your identity," Spencer argued.

Filed Under
From The Chatty
  • reply
    June 14, 2013 3:45 PM

    Andrew Yoon posted a new article, Microsoft defends Xbox One game policy, says industry is in 'transition'.

    Microsoft's policies on game ownership on Xbox One have not been taken very well. However, while trading and sharing retail games may be more difficult on Microsoft's next-gen console, they argue that their new digital policies "look forward" to what consumers really want.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 3:46 PM

      [deleted]

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 3:54 PM

        Probably not, but they are doing a hell of a job explaining and selling it.

        • reply
          June 14, 2013 4:02 PM

          This. It's all about attitude. Sony and Microsoft have one foot in physical media, one in the future. They're allowing gamers to transition at their own speed rather than the manufacturer's.

          • reply
            June 14, 2013 4:04 PM

            "Sony and Microsoft" should read "Sony and Nintendo".

          • reply
            June 14, 2013 4:07 PM

            Wouldn't you say that "Sony is allowing the *publishers* to move at their own speed" is more accurate?

            • reply
              June 14, 2013 4:08 PM

              I don't think the publishers will have control over the disc games, but they can choose to publish as digital-only.

              • reply
                June 14, 2013 4:25 PM

                I have a feeling that Sony's setup will be eerily similar to Microsoft's a few years after launch.

            • reply
              June 14, 2013 4:37 PM

              Specifically, I mean the consumer's ability to purchase a game, on day one, as either a digital download or on physical media.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 3:55 PM

      We're going through a transition that can make us more $$$$$$$$$$$ If you got a problem with it go buy a Xbox 360...

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 7:54 PM

        That is what Don Mattrick said to Geoff Keighley:

        http://www.geekwire.com/2013/xbox-chief-microsofts-offline-option-xbox-360/

        Q: “Stick with 360, that’s your message if people don’t like it?”

        Mattrick: “Well, if you have zero access to the Internet, that is an offline device. I mean, seriously, when I read the blogs, and thought about who’s really the most impacted, there was a person who said ‘Hey, I’m on a nuclear sub,’ and I don’t even know what it means to be on a nuclear sub but I’ve gotta imagine it’s not easy to get an Internet connection."


        And how is that different from the cultural insensitivity of what Adam Orth tweeted back in April? http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/microsoft-executive-always-online-xbox-critics-deal-it-1B9231940

        "Sorry, I don't get the drama around having an 'always on'console," Orth tweeted early Friday morning. "Every device now is ‘always on’. That's the world we live in. #dealwithit"

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 3:59 PM

      I REALLY want the option to Craigslist my games.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 4:02 PM

      Microsoft really double down on the job titles don't they? Corporate Vice President Admiral Executive General Director.

      It was amusing to hear the job titles spoken aloud at their E3 conference too, while Sony just went with the name of the person and had their job title on a screen.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 4:03 PM

      Phil is right, I am transitioning from Xbox to Playstation where I can still use my GameFly account.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 4:05 PM

      The consume is unlikely to benefit in expected ways with this. Prices won't go down with digital delivery, the same way prices didn't go down when they stopped added manuals to game boxes. Publishers keep cutting everything from the consumer experience except the price they pay, and then continue on to nickle and dime them down the line on DLC and other dumb shit that used to come standard in all games.

      Poodarts

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 4:07 PM

        I was really shocked the last year or two. No manuals, and the cases are so thin that a few games ive had shipped have arrived cracked. I did a side by side of an old game case and a new one and WOW the difference.

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 6:17 PM

        Prices did effectively go down - we've had nearly 15% inflation over this console generation in the US, but they haven't raised the retail price yet to compensate (nor do they seem set to next generation).

        • reply
          June 14, 2013 10:49 PM

          This argument makes me want to kick a baby in the mouth. It's irrelevant and used by people trying to sound smarter than they are.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 4:06 PM

      The industry might be changing but gamers are not. As you can see from forum posts andE3 poll's Xbox is behind and a lot of people are switching to PS4. Ive only owned Xbox's but im switching to PS4. I dont have the money to own 3 consoles and I want the ability to buy and sell used games and not had a machine listening to me every moment of every day. I really think Xbox CEO's need to be readjusted they arnt in touch with what the market really wants, they just care about the bottom line. You will learn trying to make more money by pinching pennies will make you lose dollars.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 4:06 PM

      transition away from microsoft

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 4:08 PM

      RIP non-gamestop used marketplaces.

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 4:18 PM

        Oh, they might allow a couple of others to be "participating retailers". Don't be shocked if the one that consistently gives people the best deals is the one that gets screwed. (And likewise all individual sales.)

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 4:10 PM

      The problem is that there is no benefit to their delivery model. Sony will allow digital delivery also but wont lock down the physical copy aspect. This generation is a no brainer on which console to get. Gg microsoft.

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 4:32 PM

        [deleted]

        • reply
          June 14, 2013 4:35 PM

          Redownloading all your titles after xbone rrod #13 would be a huge PITA.

          • reply
            June 14, 2013 4:37 PM

            yeah that's why we all avoid Steam and XBLA/PSN downloads as much as possible today

          • reply
            June 14, 2013 4:38 PM

            First we have no idea if the hardware will have issues and second who the hell needs to immediately download every game if such a thing did happen? If you worry that much, put your games on an external drive.

          • reply
            June 14, 2013 4:58 PM

            [deleted]

        • reply
          June 15, 2013 12:27 AM

          Again, convenience over freedom. The illusion of ownership over actual ownership.

          Don't get me wrong, I have plenty of digital games that I'm fully aware I won't be able to own forever, but at least they all work without having to be connected to the internet.

        • reply
          June 15, 2013 6:14 AM

          Looking at Germany f.e where T-Online will start throttling to 75 GB data per month in 2014, this could easily impact a 4-5 person household.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 4:13 PM

      What transition? Their last console had digital downloads and Xbox Live and all this stuff. There's no transition whatsoever besides some old men getting crazy eye staring at discs and wondering "why don't we just create an endless pyramid scheme by controlling used games." It was a stupid thing to overreach on.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 4:14 PM

      The more I think about my situation, the more reasonable their policy sounds. Honestly I don't buy that many games, because I just don't have enough time to play most of them. Games that I do purchase tend to be the all-time-favorites that I never intend to sell. On the other hand if I did have the time to play a lot of games, then I would be subscribed to Gamefly anyways, and it seems MS and Gamefly are figuring out a system to make this work.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 4:19 PM

      "That content is yours, it will roam wherever you go, it will work, and we think there are distinct advantages of you having the content that you own associated with you and your identity,"

      Just another thing to lose if our "identity" is stolen.

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 4:21 PM

        I sure hope they've figured out how they will deal with it gracefully...

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 4:30 PM

        It'll work wherever I go? I leave the US a lot- http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/14/4429218/xbox-one-may-not-work-in-unsupported-countries

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 4:39 PM

        It's NOT my content, though. Microsoft will ground me if I don't check in once a day.

        • reply
          June 14, 2013 4:54 PM

          Even if they don't remove the check-in requirement. I really hope they decide to extend it from 24 hours to a week or so. 24 hours is just too much.

          • reply
            June 14, 2013 9:08 PM

            The reason they need that 24 hour check is for reselling. If they eased it off to a week, in that time, you could sell the physical disc version back to gamestop and then have a week left to play your game.

            Or, you could buy and install the game, disconnect from live and return your game for full price stating wrong purchase, then have a week to complete it.

            The only way they can now remove or limit the time limit would be to get rid of physical media all together.

      • reply
        June 15, 2013 12:52 AM

        It will roam as long as you connect every hour.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 4:32 PM

      I'll be honest, for most of how I use my console, Microsoft's policies probably wouldn't affect me at all. I do however take offense to the path they're going down.

      I can't see a single benefit for me, yet they are imposing more restrictions on how and when I can use something that I'm buying.

      I keep seeing this shift from consumers "buying" something to "long term renting". Maybe that's the shift. If they just came out and said "You aren't buying games anymore, we're just going to rent them to you for a long period of time" maybe it'd clear up the conversation.

      So in the end I pre-ordered a PS4 on amazon, and won't get a xbox one (for now).

      • Ziz legacy 10 years legacy 20 years
        reply
        June 14, 2013 6:19 PM

        I got a PS4 pre ordered on Amazon too. Not a launch day sadly, I'll try and win a Xbox One from Mountain Dew, but if I don't I'm not buying one.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 4:33 PM

      Gamers love Steam, hate Xbox one. Why? They like the reality of online distribution but they don't like the idea of it.

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 4:37 PM

        Easy. A lot of those people buy Steam games for super-cheap. People won't care as much about trading games they paid $15 or less for. Some gamers really need to recoup costs from the $50+ games, though.

        • reply
          June 14, 2013 4:38 PM

          So as much as people bitch about consumer rights it really is about getting to play games as cheap as possible.

          • reply
            June 14, 2013 4:39 PM

            That, and Steam isn't as restrictive as X1.

            • reply
              June 14, 2013 6:19 PM

              Steam is more restrictive than X1. No transfers of your games to someone else, no letting up to 10 others play from your library...

            • reply
              June 14, 2013 6:28 PM

              you're kidding right? and how many years did it take for Steam's offline mode to work correctly?

              • reply
                June 14, 2013 6:59 PM

                At least Steam HAS an offline mode. MS doesn't even have one planned for the Xbone.

                • reply
                  June 14, 2013 11:06 PM

                  Every time someone brings up steam's offline mode I want to kick them in the face. When my internet connection dies, steam had already detected tufts, and it promptly asks me to check my connection so it can reconnect. I have no option to switch to offline mode. If I can't reconnect, no steam for me. I have never been able to use second sight to know when my cable will be down, rare as that is, and switch to offline mode before the fact. If steam doesn't work that way for you, congratulations, but my experience is different and not at all unique.

                  • reply
                    June 15, 2013 1:27 AM

                    This sounds really strange. I did not have any problems with offline mode for years now. Maybe reinstall Steam or something.

                    • reply
                      June 15, 2013 1:30 AM

                      You have to be online before you can go offline. And it's limit is two weeks. That is purely offline too. As in unplugged and wireless disabled. Even offline set Steam will ask to try to go online. You can set offline mode and still be connected which resets the two week countdown because steam is still dialing home.

                      • reply
                        June 15, 2013 4:51 AM

                        You can switch offline after the internet goes down, you just have to wait for the login to time out then a prompt asking if you want to use offline will show up. Granted you shouldn't have to do that but its there. Steam is pretty good about letting you still use your games if the internet goes down after you have been logged in as well.

                      • reply
                        June 15, 2013 5:04 AM

                        If my Internet goes out while I'm logged into steam I can still access my games.

          • reply
            June 14, 2013 4:45 PM

            Of course! Is it strange for people to seek consumer-friendly solutions? People will seek low prices, and items that can be resold easily.

            • reply
              June 14, 2013 4:49 PM

              But items cannot be resold easily on Steam. People like to bitch and moan about wanting consumer rights, but happily go to Steam for the better value when the option presents itself. At the end of the day I wish people would just be honest and not use the idea of consumer rights as a friendly way of saying "I want to pay as little as possible".

              • reply
                June 14, 2013 5:14 PM

                It's been explained plenty of times in so many ways and it's not that hard to understand.

                I don't need a receipt for a donut. I probably won't be needing that $1 back no matter the quality. For more expensive food, perhaps as there's more of an investment.

                When I'm paying $5-15 for my average games and it's more of an impulse purchase, no, I don't mind as much about having a way to get my money back on such a purchase. The risk is worth giving away my ability to see the game back in any fashion to anyone. I learn my lesson for $5-15. I don't wish to take that chance with no ability to resell the game on an open market with more expensive products, no matter the product. Video games aren't somehow alone here. Yes, depending on the price, a consumer may be more likely to forego the ability to resell or even return a product, nothing magical here. I think it's even been said many times that if the price of games (even first party exclusives!) were cheaper on the One, they would have some leverage. So far, there's been very little to leverage and the message alone has been confusing as shit.

                I feel the frustration from those that enjoy MS, but this is not on the consumers. MS really is doing something out there on many levels in the world of consoles and it's on them to properly explain what it is, how it works, and why it's of value to your consumer base you've worked to cull over the years. Right now, that's not happening.

                • reply
                  June 14, 2013 6:24 PM

                  That works if you only buy games that are 2-3 years old. If you buy games at launch, you're still paying the same $50-60 as on consoles.

                  • reply
                    June 14, 2013 7:01 PM

                    You've never done anything with PC games have you? Sales happen often enough a month after a game has launched. It's not uncommon to see games at 75% off at the christmas sale, even major games that have only been released a month prior.

                    • reply
                      June 14, 2013 7:39 PM

                      It's been about three years since I abandoned PC for 360, after I got tired of not being able to let my family play my games without sharing my account. At the time they certainly weren't down to $5-15 a month after release. I'd be surprised if they are now.

                  • reply
                    June 14, 2013 7:07 PM

                    I think you mean to say 2-3 months.

                  • reply
                    June 14, 2013 7:08 PM

                    Can't remember the last time I payed that much for a new PC release. You can pre-order most games from GMG for under $40 (the sales often have a 24hr window at launch if you don't like pre-ordering), and most things go one sale within a month or two of release.

                    Example http://blog.playfire.com/2013/06/voucher-refresh.html

            • reply
              June 14, 2013 8:53 PM

              But it's not about consumer friendly. It is about how can one get games as cheap as possible. Read the reviews on iOS apps sometime. People review an app as 1 star and say they like the app, but they feel ripped off that it was $1 when there are other games that are free. So consumers are not interested in consumer rights. Consumers are interested in paying as little as possible for the most stuff.

          • reply
            June 14, 2013 6:36 PM

            It's about getting what you pay for.

        • reply
          June 14, 2013 4:59 PM

          Most games I buy on steam I could get cheaper elsewhere, but it's just easier on steam.

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 4:58 PM

        Everyone hated steam in the beginning too. I can't wait until the console is out so we can start talking about games.

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 5:00 PM

        What Eye said is only one reason. The most important reason is that Steam is op-in. There are other options, either direct retail games, Origin, GoG, Impulse, or Amazon Digital.

        Here's more:
        "But wait, Steam’s offline functionality has a history of horrific jankiness, and we can’t resell games at all. Goodness, why haven’t we rioted in the streets yet? Well, largely because Steam provides so much excellent game-centric convenience and functionality that we’re less to prone to care – even if we probably should. Valve gives PC gamers constant updates, cloud saves, absurd sales, one-button mod support, one-stop shops for F2P and early games, and most importantly of all, hats. Oh, and that all comes sans arbitrary monthly fees. Steam is by no means perfect, but it generally does a great job of piling on so much convenience that the more problematic elements of its nature quietly suffocate below."
        http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/06/13/e3-2013-next-gen-and-pcs-bizarre-invisibility-problem/

        • reply
          June 14, 2013 5:46 PM

          Do you guys think Valve sets those prices without publisher consent?

        • reply
          June 14, 2013 6:28 PM

          There's sometimes other options. Except for games using Steamworks, like... anything from Valve or 2K or a couple of other publishers.

          If you don't have any friends or family members to share games with, PC is not a bad option. But if you do, either next-gen console platform is more flexible.

          • reply
            June 14, 2013 7:09 PM

            You can very easily buy Steamworks titles from places other than Steam. There are options.

            • reply
              June 14, 2013 7:36 PM

              You can buy them from other places, but they still require Steam to use, with all the restrictions that imposes.

        • reply
          June 14, 2013 6:34 PM

          that is such revisionist bullshit. I remember being one of the few who saw the potential for Steam when it came out and remember vividly how 95% of gamers were bitching and moaning about it. Back then if you'd say something positive about Steam and where Valve was taking the industry you would get PILED on. It took years for Valve to build what they have today, and it took years for gamers to come around to see the benefits of the change.

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 8:15 PM

        Shackers hate everything new. If I had a nickel for every time a patch came out for (insert fps title here) and that weekly shack battle crapped all over it, I'd have more money than Microsoft.

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 8:49 PM

        It's not that at all. Gamers know they can get cheap games on steam and also LOVE VALVE, but mostly they know they can get cheap games on steam. They know this because steam has done a ton of sales. However gamers don't know that there will be sales on xbone for digital download that would be similar to used game prices or steam prices so they are freaking out. Basically everyone wants more for less and they see MS policy as the opposite and getting less for more. Time will tell if their assumption is true or not. Looking at the other gaming platform that is heavy on digital sales and no used market, PC, we can see that there are sales. There are sales not because of the kindness of valve's heart, but because the same companies that sell both PC and console games want money, and they know that they can make more of it by selling games at sale prices when the game is older.

        But basically everyone is money money money money

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 10:29 PM

        I think the fundamental thing missing here is that Steam is a SERVICE, while the Xbox One is a console tied to a service with no alternatives.

        It's one thing to have the option to use Steam, but it's completely different to be required to use it.

        • reply
          June 14, 2013 10:36 PM

          there are people here that won't buy a game unless it's on steam

          • reply
            June 14, 2013 10:38 PM

            I'm actively avoiding Steam now except where I can't. i.e. Steamworks or it's Online Multiplayer. Otherwise I'll wait for sales so it's closer to paying rental prices.

          • reply
            June 15, 2013 6:15 AM

            and then there are even some people that won't buy a game unless it's on GoG.

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 10:50 PM

        Steam isn't the only option on a PC. A retarded cousin of that model is the only option on the One.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 4:38 PM

      For those apposed to the XBOX One because of it's online needs don't buy one. For the rest of us that will buy an XBOX One, we have a few questions that need to be answered first. What happens to the XBOX One when Microsoft's servers stop checking our console every 24 hours once this console cycle ends? Does our box become a brick after this new cycle ends and our game libraries lost? Does Microsoft intend to have this system be the last console they produce in that case? Once these are answered, XBOX One may have a bright future ahead of it.

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 5:18 PM

        This is pretty important. Microsoft's seemingly lax attitude and the comments like "unreliable internet connection? stick with a 360" don't exactly inspire confidence in this scenario. Most-likely the XBox One will be supported and usable long after the cycle is over and hell they may even come up with a way to carry your purchases over, but based on the rhetoric coming from them over the last couple months, I would understand if anyone was skeptical and I wouldn't try to convince them not to be. That's Microsoft's job.

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 5:41 PM

        in order

        yes, yes, no

      • Ziz legacy 10 years legacy 20 years
        reply
        June 14, 2013 6:34 PM

        This still worries me about Steam, I mean how long can it last?

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 4:54 PM

      Yeah they are transitioning over to the PS

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 5:13 PM

      The Xbox one can only work on 10 systems because you can have up to 10 people in your 'family' group to be able to share games with. This is pointless!

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 11:08 PM

        Why? Are you anti social?

        • reply
          June 14, 2013 11:29 PM

          Single player gamer / collectors who treat a game like a movie and just want to pull it off the shelf and play it through are the exact ones who get 'boned' when Microsoft pull down their activation servers.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 5:27 PM

      Steam box ... save me.

      • reply
        June 20, 2013 10:27 PM

        Good thing Steam allows you to share and sell your games, huh? Thank god! Where would we be without it?

    • Ziz legacy 10 years legacy 20 years
      reply
      June 14, 2013 5:47 PM

      Guy at work was talking about the Xbox One etc and pretty sure I heard em say that either the consoles will be or are 2 years ahead of PC. I was gonna comment to em that a lot of people aren't happy about the 24 hour check in etc to see what he'd say. He plans on buying a One, this other guy at work plans on getting the PS4.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 5:58 PM

      This is my situation now. I have 3 360s. One in family room, one in office and one in 'man cave' / basement. Having my entire game library and saves available across all three, for different profiles (kiddos) would actually be pretty cool. And then if I can add my brother and best friend who are casual game players (1 or 2 games a year) and give them access to my library, bonus.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 6:15 PM

      You know what should be in transition, changes the prices of new games. Not every game should be $60.. In an ideal world, they would be individually priced.

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 6:21 PM

        Yeah, totally agree, sure price the AAA titles like Bioshock and COD and the others at 60, but the small time titles, especialy the cheaper movie-tie in games or the kids/casual games should top out at 40 bucks, max.

        price of game should be assosciated with the cost to make the game not just "everything is 60"

        • reply
          June 14, 2013 7:07 PM

          Especially when most games drop so quickly in price. It seems a better idea to price them correctly from the get go and increase the install base/word of mouth with the initial marketing push.

          Buying a digital game for a reasonable price at the onset limits the amount of regret later on when the price drops and you can't recoup any of your money. However, I can't imagine microsoft's model will work with their current pricing policies on digital content. That will certainly need to transition.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 6:33 PM

      While the used game policy and the 24 hour online check are terrible, I personally think the requirement to have Kinect always connected and configured is far worse.

      Firstly there are the privacy concerns, but more importantly it's clearly the first stage in implementing this patent:

      http://kotaku.com/5958307/this-kinect-patent-is-terrifying-wants-to-charge-you-for-license-violation

      People really need to reject the Xbox One to send a clear message that policies like this will not be tolerated. Sadly it seems a lot of people are happy to give up their privacy and consumer rights and are planning on buying an Xbox One.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 7:20 PM

      Andrew,

      You're comparing the Xbox One's next-gen sharing policy to the current-gen PS3's, which are completely apples and oranges. The PS3's policy applies to digital content, not retail discs, while the Xbox One strategy will encompass content bought on physical media as well. The PS3 digital content will work offline for more than 24 hours, the Xbox One's games won't. Just pointing that out.

      We don't know if Sony will employ the same DRM strategy on the PS4 as they did with the PS3 regarding digital content, but if you ask me, allowing me to register my content with up to two consoles and play it whenever I want, even in the absence of an internet connection, seems a lot more generous to me.

      • reply
        June 14, 2013 7:29 PM

        I'm having a hard time understanding this.

        The number of times I want to play my games on a console that isn't registered to me >>> The number of times I want to play my games on a console that isn't hooked up to the internet

        By a wide margin. Like, it's not even close. And I would guess that most people are in the same boat. Sony's policy sounds more generous on paper, but in practice the Xbox DRM makes way more sense for my usage.

        (I did preorder a PS4, but that had nothing to do with the Xbox One DRM.)

        • reply
          June 15, 2013 12:10 AM

          Well Mikkle, not everyone is in your situation. I play most of my games on my console at home, and occasionally over at my younger brother's house. We both own Xbox 360s and PS3s. So I only need to have my profile on two consoles anyway (when it comes to the PS3/or potentially PS4...the Xbox 360 DRM is far worse than what it will be on Xbox One).

          If I want to play games on my console elsewhere, I either download my saves from the cloud (provided my host already has the game and/or DLC needed), or I take my console with me.

          And that brings up another problem I have with the Xbox One...it's too honking big. The PS4 I can just take with me to a friend's house if I absolutely need to, but the Xbox One with it's huge bulk and mandatory Kinect camera will be too much hassle.

          Right now, I see nothing on the Xbox One that truly excites me enough to put my issues with the DRM aside. Microsoft needs to repeal the online DRM check-in or I won't be buying one. For me it's that simple. I will take Don Mattrick's advice and "stick to 360", PS3, and PS4.

          • reply
            June 15, 2013 12:35 AM

            yeah so I still don't understand your point, because it sounds like the Xbox One DRM would work perfectly for you.

            You go to your brother's house and play all of your games on his Xbox One, you don't need to bring any media -- what's the problem there? You have access to your profile and all your games at his place, in fact you have access to all your stuff from anyone's Xbox One, not just your brother's. Hell, with the new DRM your brother can play your games library even when you're not at his house.

            I get that there are genuine scenarios where the new DRM will be a pain, but this is definitely not one of them. In fact, quite the contrary.

            • reply
              June 15, 2013 5:12 AM

              And on top of that there's the Xbox Live Family feature where you'd be able to share your library with your brother so you would most definitely be able to play the games at his house. Both the ones you bought and he bought.

        • reply
          June 15, 2013 12:16 AM

          Oh, and what I meant by more generous was that I think it's more generous and gracious of a company to let me own the games I buy and let me do what I want with them, than to sell me a license and let me use the content on 10 different consoles, but if I am without internet for 24 hours or more, the content becomes useless. If I'm given a choice between more freedom and more convenience, I will take more freedom.

        • reply
          June 15, 2013 3:56 AM

          We currently have PS3s in all our cabins on the ship I work on for 6 months of the year. We do not have internet in all of the cabins. Basically, the XBOX one solution makes it completely unusable when we decide to upgrade to next gen.

          • reply
            June 15, 2013 5:51 AM

            This is one of those rare unfortunate scenarios that is not addressed in any way by their current solution. Microsoft will need to find a way around this issue at some point in the near future, as well as for military deployments. I assume it will come in time, hopefully it's sooner than later.

            • reply
              June 15, 2013 6:08 AM

              They already have a solution for that, it's called a 360.

          • reply
            June 15, 2013 6:30 AM

            Are they networked? That seems like the kind of cabling job that would be an absolute nightmare with all the metal bulkheads, and wireless would be useless.

            • reply
              June 15, 2013 3:26 PM

              Wireless is possible with strategically placed routers, and newer ships than my current one are completely wired. The problem is, our company has a policy that limits internet access to public internet lounges and select senior personnel. The reason for this is people using it for porn, etc. Other companies deal with this on a case by case basis and discipline individuals who misuse, but our company is run by fucking idiots.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 9:40 PM

      How about this.....I'll stick with my fucking PC which at least has a sane take on software Ive purchased.

      I so regret every day i didnt stay in college to learn how to be a spineless piece of shit bent on screwing those who pay my over inflated salary.

    • reply
      June 14, 2013 11:39 PM

      You know even if Microsoft gets past this DRM shit, they then have a task to convince people to buy their less powerful console at $100 more.

      • reply
        June 15, 2013 12:53 AM

        Well, the Kinect pack-in makes that kind of obvious why it's more expensive.

        • reply
          June 15, 2013 4:57 AM

          Here, pay 100$ for something you don't want. I see his point.

    • reply
      June 15, 2013 3:42 AM

      the fact that I can't play bf3 right now because it's "updating" is reason enough for me to say no thank you to this horse pocky. Thank you Jesus loves you

    • reply
      June 15, 2013 4:27 AM

      It is probably true that Digital Distribution maybe the future the industry is transitioning towards but the DRM model they are implementing doesn't have to be. It is funny how little MS learned from the DRM debacles since 2006. DRM doesn't have to be so onerous. It is however easy to make systems that go overboard such as the UBISOFT Uplay Always on DRM, early versions of secuROM with no deactivation tools, or fees. If they want to stay digital they could get around the whole issue of loaning games to friends by implementing an system kind of like how you can loan kindle e-books to people or have spawn installs like PC games use to have in the early to mid 90's.

    • reply
      June 15, 2013 7:52 AM

      I don't think Microsoft has cared about what consumers wanted since before they released Windows 8.

    • reply
      June 15, 2013 8:01 AM

      Consoles in multiple rooms? Not at $600 per, jack. Oh sure, the price will come down over time, but barring a total sales flop I have a hard time seeing it coming down to $300 in any reasonable time frame short of the follow-on console coming out. MS realizes that the PC used game market hasn't existed in any meaningful sense for years due to Steam/DRM etc which made selling a PC game largely useless. Console games (disc based releases anyway) haven't got to that point yet, but MS is pushing in that direction, and I don't see any good reason why other than pocket-lining.

    • reply
      June 15, 2013 8:41 AM

      Not that it will happen, but if publishers made new games less expensive, dropped the price faster or gave the consumer additional free content on XBox One over the PS4 because of the "no used games" policy, would that make it more aacceptable?

      • reply
        June 15, 2013 9:37 AM

        IMO, if any console offered day 1 downloads for $20 off physical copy retail, they would kill used copy sales very, very quickly. Anyone that had a choice would download for the lesser price. And as long as they offered a Steam type pricing model where prices drop over time and there are sales, they'd continue to do well over time. And if you couldn't download for whatever reason, pick up the physical copy and still have the ability to sell when you're done.

        I still don't care for the 24 hour checkup on the Xbox One, because I'm in the service and deploy to areas for long periods of time where I can't use the internet for game systems. I know they've said they're going to do something for us, but it just seems so unnecessary and overly draconian. I don't think you need the check in if you go to the model I detailed above. What if they're hacked? At least when Sony was hacked - which stank - I could still play games.

        I have both current gen consoles and I probably play the 360 more, so I'm not a rabid Sony fan or anything.

    • reply
      June 16, 2013 4:08 PM

      Andrew Yoon: "It doesn't appear that Mirosoft will turn around on their controversial policy any time soon"

      Who is Mirosoft? :)

    • reply
      June 18, 2013 1:01 PM

      Like a fisherman in Egypt, Microsoft is in denial (geddit? geddit?). Couldn't help myself:
      http://memegenerator.net/instance/38869656

Hello, Meet Lola