Jimquisition: Xbox One and the Death of Ownership

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

I'm jumping off the Microsoft ship because now they want to me to go to reception every day to ensure I get a new stamp on my hand, and for some reason have a surveillance camera in my room.... they refuse to give me food if I don't!

Theres always Play Station 4.. and PC.. and older consoles. Good bye Microsoft. Next time why don't put a fucking ankle brace on me, that blows if I don't come to my X-box One every 12 hours, that requires my blood sample.

Ha! We didn't start out very strong together Jim, but I think we've become great friends. And I've found myself taking your words with sincerity.

Good for you for making it into that part of my heart Jim.

Aardvaarkman:

Colt47:
If someone worked on cars and ended up needing a wrench from a manufacturer that he disliked in order to service a customers car, do you think it's fair to tell the customer "sorry, can't fix your car because I don't like the wrench manufacturer?"

Car mechanics don't tend to publish public podcasts ranting against the evils of wrench manufacturers. Also, we don't pay Jim Sterling to fix our cars (or our games).

Guess we agree to disagree then.

Roxor:

DTWolfwood:
Would be nice to see the gaming press to show a bit of solidarity to the consumer by not covering the system and its exclusives upon release.

Having it die a pitiful death from lack of coverage is the best way to say fuck you to Microsoft and their new xbox.

I'll do my part in not buying the system, but alas me and my kind only make a small percentage of xbox customers. :(

It would be nice to see games reviewers adopt the position of "It's on the Xbox One. 0/10", but that'll never happen.

As for me, I'm not going to buy it. Why would I when I already have a decent PC?

Indeed. You can always buy a PS4. You know the next gen console thats $100 less and doesnt require internet to work.

Colt47:

Aardvaarkman:

Colt47:
If someone worked on cars and ended up needing a wrench from a manufacturer that he disliked in order to service a customers car, do you think it's fair to tell the customer "sorry, can't fix your car because I don't like the wrench manufacturer?"

Car mechanics don't tend to publish public podcasts ranting against the evils of wrench manufacturers. Also, we don't pay Jim Sterling to fix our cars (or our games).

Guess we agree to disagree then.

So car mechanics do publish public rants against wrench manufacturers and refuse to service people's cars because of it? Can you give me a link to that?

I'm also unaware of anybody paying for Jim Sterling to fix their car, but I suppose only Jim can answer that question accurately.

Aardvaarkman:

Colt47:

Aardvaarkman:

Car mechanics don't tend to publish public podcasts ranting against the evils of wrench manufacturers. Also, we don't pay Jim Sterling to fix our cars (or our games).

Guess we agree to disagree then.

So car mechanics do publish public rants against wrench manufacturers and refuse to service people's cars because of it? Can you give me a link to that?

I'm also unaware of anybody paying for Jim Sterling to fix their car, but I suppose only Jim can answer that question accurately.

There isn't an end to this argument Aard. You're assuming that he has a reasonable out to reject purchasing the Xbox One and I'm assuming otherwise. That is why I made the previous statement.

Aardvaarkman:
I have to disagree with this. By buying the product, you are supporting it. If you sincerely mean what you are saying here, you would refuse to buy it, and put that stance ahead of your job as "game reviewer." It also seems that you have plenty of potential income as a commenter on the games industry without having to directly review games. Your Jimquisition episodes are very popular here, and none of them have been an actual game review.

So, I think you should put your money where your mouth is. If you disagree so vehemently with what Microsoft is doing, then you should not support them financially by buying their games, consoles, or Operating Systems. That just enables the policies you supposedly despise.

And what of your viewers/readers? Those of us who aren't game critics don't have the excuse of "it's my job." If you enjoy a Xbone game, do we get moral absolution to buy the Xbone, despite us not being employed as game critics? Apart from the financial support you would be providing Microsoft, any positive review you would give of an Xbone game would equate to promoting the platform.

I think hypocrisy is a very appropriate word to use here, because you want to use your pedestal to be outraged, while simultaneously enjoying the system without guilt.

Still all very much based in assumption. I may not even have to buy an Xbox One to review it, for one thing, depending on how blacklisted I am by Microsoft at this point.

In any case, my game reviewing work is my actual job. My primary source of income, and I am contracted to review videogames for major systems. I see no conflict in honoring my contract while very publicly making my disdain known for a company's business practices. I think people see hypocrisy where they want to, because they love the thought of catching people in the act.

Like I told the other guy, maybe work out what I do in my other lines of work and wait to see what I do in November before rushing to use everybody's favorite H-word.

Jimothy Sterling:
Like I told the other guy, maybe work out what I do in my other lines of work and wait to see what I do in November before rushing to use everybody's favorite H-word.

Helium? I didn't know you were a Hynerian, Jim. May you always have the finest foodstuffs, my Dominar.

With all this talk of Xbox One, I think Jim should change gears and talk about how Sony is now charging for online gaming by making it part of PS Plus. People keep making posts acting like I should feel grateful to be paying for something that was once free. Then there is the fact that now Sony will get guaranteed income from the sheeple who will buy it up and fail to realize that Sony doesn't have anymore incentive to make PS Plus as appealing as it is now with all the free games.

Then there is the fact that Sony didn't really do anything, yet people are still praising them. All they did was not screw up like microsoft. PS4 may be better than Xbox One, but there still are a few things preventing me from getting a PS4.

I wonder if it is too far along in development for Watch Dogs to use the always-on internet and Kinnect to make a statement and change the game mechanic with some Psycho Mantis style twist. It wouldn't be a twist if they told anyone about it though and possibly illegal.

The Xbox One will probably get hacked at one point in its lifecycle any way.

Akalabeth:

Hahaha.
Dude quit embarrassing yourself by making this personal. You're more intelligent than that.

I don't care who you are. And I don't care if you or anyone else cares who I am. And I really don't care who these alleged millions of people are either. There are millions of people who have issues but none of them seem to regularly complain on these forums or any of the other forums I visit. People are still buying games. People are still buying new PS3 consoles when they dropped BC. They complain, and then they buy it anyway. The PS3 used to be the worst seller of the main three, then they dropped BC and they dropped the price, and then sales took off.

So if you're a console manufacturer.
And you drop the BC
And then sales increase

What do you think your plan for the future will be?

Are you going to release a pricier console with BC?
Or are you going to release a cheaper console without it?

If you resell a game that's already available via BC and people buy it, are you going to spend money to try and keep those gamers happy by ensuring they can play their old games? Or are you going to spend a few bucks, refurbish it, and resell it so people will buy it again?

The only voice that matters is how you spend your money and the way that people have been spending their money is determining, in part, the next generation of consoles. If you don't like the way it's going, then don't buy into it.

Whatever. The fact is there are plenty of people out there who want things like backwards compatibility and to be able to trade, borrow and sell games anywhere they want and don't want things like 24 hour internet check ins and used game fees, and I think you know it. I don't have actual numbers for this, but it's a common sense thing and even if I did I have the feeling you wouldn't listen anyway.

Buddy, I don't know who you are, but the only one embarrassing themselves here is you. I'm not going to argue with you further. I'm starting to wonder why I started to begin with, if you honestly don't know why people want things like backwards compatibility and why what Microsoft is doing is wrong from the very start, then there was never any hope for you. What's become quite clear to me after all you've said is this: you know I'm right, you know you are wrong, and the only reason you're still arguing at this point is you just don't want to admit it. I mean, how could you not know? I and everybody else here has blown every one of your arguments so far out the water they're hitting the moon and you're STILL ARGUING! Either that, or you are impossibly ignorant, but I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt here, because I'm trying VERY hard not to insult you at this point. Any REASONABLE person would have conceeded my point LONG ago.

Akalabeth:

TheSpyIsASpyWDZ:

Akalabeth:
Holy Snip...

Right, because your not basing any of your points on opinions at all, and your applying a liberal amount of facts here too right? Right...? I mean, you had evidence to back up that people don't keep their games? I'm just saying anecdotal evidence is better than what you have, which is none.

Evidence that people don't keep their games?
HAVE YOU BEEN IN A STORE? Do you not see an ENTIRE WALL devoted to used games? Do you not see bins full of used games? Or entire stores that sell nothing but used games?

Man alive.

TheSpyIsASpyWDZ:

I mean, I keep my games instead of trading them in, so I can replay them. But that's just my experience so it obviously doesn't matter. I mean, your complaints about lack of evidence really is kind of strange when you have hardly any evidence for what you said. Also, what evidence do you have for Steam users not having Dial-Up, because I used Steam with Dial-Up at one point. Sure, downloads were painful, but at least I could play games.

Good for you. Now with the xbox one, you can do EXACTLY the same thing, play your games.

As for your old games, what are you going to throw out your 360? I have a Sega Master System, I don't complain that I can't play those cartridges on my 360. I didn't complain that I couldn't play Atari games on my Master System.

And yes, the EARLY 360s were notably unreliable, the later models are not. The 360 will be around for a long time. And if at some point it happens to die out, then I'm sure some guy is gonna throw together an emulator and you can play them on PC or the popular ones will get rereleased in cheap bundles or whatnot.

Wait, this is sorta fun actually, YOU went to a GameStop store and the wall was full of used games? ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE. If you say you can't use human experience as evidence I won't take it from you either. You really like making blanket statements saying that people don't keep their games without having a single figure to prove it. I'm sorry, it's just kinda hypocritical, and I refuse to believe that the majority of games are sold back to GameStop without evidence. That's the main problem I find with that argument. I dunno, the idea that people don't keep their games the majority of the time just seems off.

AgDr_ODST:
I'm at abit of an impasse when it comes to how I feel about what you said and the next gen moving forward. On one hand I agree unquestionably that you and I as gamers don't owe loyalty to any particular console or company be it MS&Xbox or Sony&PS4 but the heavy handed wording over the check in, I don't quite agree with. If I were to still buy an Xbox One, at this particular time I would have no problem by and large with the 'check in', but I can see how for many it would be an issue so I'm not so blindly ignorant as to not be able to see how it would affect others. The used games thing might present a problem if not for the fact that I buy most of my games new and at launch[1], that might become an issue later on down the road if I stick with Microsoft for now at least its not an issue. One final thing you say you were a 'huge' 360 owner, but what prompted the change? Was it something before or after the X-One reveal that made you change your mind?

I'd be happy to tell you what caused the change of heart.

Frankly, I just took a big step back and looked at the Xbox One, and all I see is a system defined by what it CAN'T do rather than what it CAN, and then I took a step further back and saw how it compared to its competition.

The Xbox One:
1) must check-in with Microsoft once a day. If it fails its check-in, it will not work for 24 hours. Obviously, some people have better internet than others, but nearly 60% of next-gen console owners did not take their system online, while many don't have good connections in rural areas, and, globally, internet use is much more limited. This doesn't take into account servicemen serving overseas, college dorms that have rules that you can't use their internet for gaming, and impractical housing layouts that don't put an internet router near the television. Again, problem for many, but not all. PS4 works 100% offline so nobody playing it has to worry.

2) inevitable loss of games. All the games, old AND new, require that online check to work. But eventually Microsoft will shut down the servers when they feel they don't need them anymore, and you'll have a brick for a system and no way to play the games you paid hundreds of dollars for. It's like shutting down an MMO; that's the end, only a system-wide scale. In 10 years, none of your games may work. Xbox 1's servers were totally shut down three years ago; what promise is there that in 10-20 years you can play ANY games on this system? PS4 games will never have this problem.

3) loss of game ownership; and this is a big one. The reason Microsoft can even DO that is they have taken the stance that games are not a product you own but exclusively a service they provide; a service offered on their terms which they have the right to alter and even discontinue to their benefit. It's a huge slap in the face of consumer rights, spits on the First Sale Doctrine, and generally robs customers of a protected legal right they've had for decades. You don't "own" a game collection any more; you have an extended rental they permit you to possess until they call it in. PS4 games will work decades from now with full game ownership rights in-check.

4) used game fees and restrictions. Reselling your games is now a major hassle, and can only be done at "approved" retailers (I assume Ebay, Amazon, Craigslist, and YOU YOURSELF don't qualify). This doesn't include the additional activation fees, the inability to properly share or loan your games, or the fact that game "licenses" can only be transferred ONCE, meaning the used game market will be stifled. That also rubs me the wrong way that Microsoft and the publishers feel entitled to getting a share of used game profits, when legally they are entitled to NONE of it, while actual developers won't see a dime because they're paid hourly wages anyway. PS4 has ZERO used game restrictions.

5) The system is region-locked. This is nothing new, but it's still a major issue for people who move around or travel, or, in this generation's case, the fact that really amazing games and DLC were locked out of certain regions (I created a UK and Japanese account just to get some UK-exclusive and Japanese-exclusive DLC for Xbox games that never made it to America). It's a huge block to importers and those that travel or move internationally. Again, PS4 is region-free.

6) mandatory Kinect and privacy concerns. Microsoft tried to downplay this and even deny it, and people who defend them will claim "conspiracy theory nuts" and "tin-foil hats", but then the scandal that is the government spying program PRISM comes to light just the other day and Microsoft is revealed to be the first person on-board with giving the government access to user's personal and private information, chat-logs, skype videos and conversations, etc. And then they create the "always-on", mandatory Kinect that can see everything you do, even in the dark, track your movements and moods, your spending habits and gaming habits, etc. It's not optional, is not removable, and even "turning it off" only puts it in a state of hibernation. That, and the fact that apart from Dance games, the Kinect never worked well. PS4 has an optional PS Eye device that's not required whatsoever.

7) Xbox Live is still a rip-off. It really is. Of course, Playstation is charging for online now too, but unlike Xbox, which is more expensive and fills your dashboard with a sea of unwelcome ads, the Playstation version is cleaner and actively rewards PS+ users with new games that fully justify the price of the service.

8) non-removable harddrive and mandatory installs. The Xbox One has mandatory game installs, and a 500GB HDD. That seems like a lot, but if games are going to be around 40-50GB that's going to fill up FAST. It's non-upgradable, non-removable, so you're stuck with it, even if you have an external HDD. PS4's HDD is customizable and upgradable, plus gives gamers the option of playing from disc if they desire, leaving space open for other games or features.

9) System power. Many devs have come forward and confirmed the PS4 is actually more powerful than the Xbox One, with more memory to use, faster processing power, better CPU and internal hardware, more developer-friendly, and gaming optimized.

10) indie support (or lack of it). This is a big one too. Xbox One showed... what, one or two indie games, and one of them is an "indie" game bought by over 11 million people already? They only went after the most popular ones, while Playstation 4 revealed a nearly 20+ roster of indie games. Furthermore, Xbox One demands indies find triple-A publishers, or have Microsoft publish it (and take some money from the indies), while PS4 allows indies to SELF-PUBLISH while PS4 revealed plans to actively promote the indie games, including offering them as free titles on PS+. Huge win for indie gaming.

11) Price. $499 for Xbox One. $399 for PS4. A hundred dollars is a huge difference, especially when the PS4 offering more player options and freedom with better system hardware. Xbox One tacks on additional fees too and has far less options (unless "I can watch TV on a console" is a big deal to you).

12) Games. This is always going to be debatable, but I feel Sony just has better games and exclusives coming their way. Microsoft's "exclusives" have not been getting favorable press coverage, while their old hallmarks have sort of passed their prime (Bungie abandoned Halo for "Destiny" which is on PS4, Epic has no plans to make more Gears of War games, Fable has sunk in quality, etc.). Even "Killer Instinct" was revealed to be a money-grabbing free-to-play game where you have to buy every single character in the roster... ugh.

13) Gamers. Xbox One doesn't want you. It doesn't want gamers. It wasn't made with you in mind, just publishers and TV watchers. Games are a tangible side-effect, like games on an iPhone. Any system that has so much between YOU and the GAMES is a system not for gaming. PS4, by comparison, is a game system, front and center, for gamers, with very little between you and your games. It's more convenient, more powerful, more respectful of you as a consumer, less expensive, and boasts enough exclusives and genre variety to keep gamers happy for months and years to come.

That's how I saw all of this, at least, and I know I'm forgetting some things (such as PS4's Cloud-based backwards compatibility plans and Vita connectivity), but that's the overall gist. I hope that clarifies why I changed from Xbox to Playstation this upcoming generation.

[1] At this moment only 2-3 of the games in my admittedly small library were either previously owned or are currently on loan from a friend.

Akalabeth:

Every time I turn on my 360 it goes to Xbox Live.
So explain to me how this next generation will be any different?

It wont affect me in the slightest, and that's the bottom line. Not only that but gold is offering free games now just as PS+ is doing. More incentive to buy into a program that I would not otherwise do.

I must wonder if some of the more vocal opponents of the 360 daily check in are not in fact individuals with modded consoles.

Because millions of people who turn on their 360s do NOT go to Xbox Live. Are you seriously suggesting that people who play offline all have modded consoles, or could it maybe just be that many people who don't live in giant cities in more rural parts of the nation (and world) don't have high-speed internet? Microsoft claimed that a "mere" 1.5 mps connection speed would suffice, yet when I test mine it was 1.41 mps... uh oh. I must be a modder, though. That must be it. Certainly not the fact I live in the middle of Oklahoma in a small town.

Secondly, they're only giving out YEARS-OLD Xbox games on Xbox 360 until Xbox One launches. The give-away stops after that (and, seriously, Playstation Plus just said they're giving out recent and NEW games, while Halo 3 and Assassins' Creed 2 are going for, what, a couple of bucks these days?)

Also, so it doesn't effect you, thus it's not your problem, eh?

They came for the offline gamers, but I did not speak out because I was not an offline gamer.
They came for the anti-social gamers, but I did not speak out because I want Facebook, Skype, and Twitter everywhere I go.
They came for the single-player gamers, but I did not speak out because I thought multiplayer made every game better.
They came for those that played online for free, but I did not speak out because I thought Xbox Live was a good deal.
They came for the used game buyers, but I did not speak out because I pre-ordered everything new.
They came for the gamers that shared their games with each other, but I did not speak out because I was selfish and never lent games.
They came for the gamers that sold their games on Ebay, but I did not speak out because I only traded in games at Gamestop for a fraction of the value.
They came for the importers who bought games overseas, but I did not speak out because I bought all games in America and never minded region-locks.
They came for the people that played their old games on new systems, but I did not speak out because I felt backwards compatibility was backwards.
They came for gamers' consumer rights, but I did not speak out because I felt companies held all the power and games are merely "services" and no longer products.
And then they came for me... and there was no one left to speak for me.

Banzaiman:
Of course, digital distribution throws a cinch in that. Physical license keys are replaced with digital license keys, discs with accounts, and new measures need to be put in to be sure that they're not abused. Hence no account sharing, the constant desire to want you to be online for them to make sure you're really you and not your friend borrowing your account do download a game they can then use thereafter. The Xbone is basically Microsoft's flailing attempt at figuring it out, settling on something that works well for em, but then seriously pisses off the customers because they have to jumpt through hoops to enjoy their games - of which I am one just as a side note.

I agree. We are buying a license which is enforced by a key. In the case of physical media, that key is the disc itself. In terms of digital distribution, a digital "key" would suffice. So the idea of "used" games becomes a matter of license transfer. At which point, XBOX One, and the way they are apparently handling this, makes quite a bit more sense that Jim lets on.

Sleekit:

theApoc:
*le snip*

you made me read a lot

now try some back

http://www.twobirds.com/English/News/Articles/Pages/UsedSoft_v_Oracle_What_does_it_mean_for_your_business.Aspx

the more i've read the more im sure i know know what the immature "cloud gaming" is about and the more i believe this will probably end with Microsoft in court (in Europe anyway)

and Jim was exactly right when he spoke of "Statutory Rights".

"Statutory Rights" cannot be signed away. it's actually illegal to even try and get someone to do so in the UK (under the sale of goods act) which is why ever competition or promotional offer in the UK that has conditions and basic rules always carries an always visable "This does not affect your statutory rights" sign tacked on by the legal department....and our "Statutory Rights" (and much of rest of the worlds) actually have a great deal to say on the subject of "economic loss" and its deliberate incursion on one party by another at a given point in the supply chain because it runs contrary to the entire basic structure of all civilized Human trade.

ye see "second hand" is not just "second hand"....at every point in a chain when a thing is sold, thoughtout the entire time a thing exists someone gets paid (even its so casual both parties involved don't see it as a sale and even if said sale only results in "payment in kind" it's sill "economic activity") and easily half the real world economy is "off the books" and more than that has to stay that way to stay as vibrant and fundamentally supportive of the "real economy" as it is.

it's a precedent that cannot be allowed to gain ground and i don't mean "cannot be allowed" in the sense "let's start a facebook page!" i mean cannot be allowed in the sense the highest courts have already laid down the law and the only reason its not being applied is because as of yet said courts are largely ignorant about what the relatively new video games industry is actually up to.

there has been a crunch coming in this area for a while and if anything Microsoft have seriously shot themselves in the foot by selling physical media and and then saying "you can sell it on once but no more that that" thereby placing the incurrence of deliberate economic lose squarely in their hands.

I am not sure what you are getting at. You are buying a physical item, it is intended for your own use, that item give you access to licensed content. You do not "OWN" that content. Not the DVDs, not your MP3's, not even your old VHS. What you can and cannot do with that material has ALWAYS been pretty darn clear.

When you trade in a game, the reason that most places don't give you cash, is primarily because you don't actually have the right to sell that item. HOWEVER a licensed re-seller can accept the item in trade for some other service or equivalent value item.

Understand this, you DO NOT own the content of your media. You OWN the license to play, view and listen to that media. In the case of physical media, your "license key" is the disc. That is why duplicating that disc is in fact a crime.

The problem is not the fees for license transfer. The problem is not the fact that you do not own your media, the problem, plain and simple is that the games industry charges you like your OWN the media. Game prices do not reflect the purchase, and digital purchases are even worse.

Do you think a designer "OWNS" photoshop? Um, no, they own a license, the software is free to use as long as you have a valid license, they have strict limitations on how many uses of that license are allowed. How is what MS is doing any different?

theApoc:
At which point, XBOX One, and the way they are apparently handling this, makes quite a bit more sense that Jim lets on.

It does, but at the same time I think Jim's concerns are valid as well, particularly because Microsoft's solutions to the swapping keys thing is to just limit that entirely.

In the case of a license key, the owner of that license key - I believe at least - should be able to do with it as they please, so long as it is not duplicated. Selling the key is perfectly valid, because it's giving someone else access to the content. The buyer gives money for the license to access content, the seller gives away his or her ability to access that content in exchange for money. It's a valid exchange.

What Microsoft is terrified of is people taking the key from one account and using it to install across multiple consoles, thus duplicating the key. If it could instead find a way that an Xbone user could trade that digital key to someone else for a certain amount of time - forfeiting their license to play that game so someone else could play it for a bit instead - and then not limit that exchange then that'd probably take out a lot of the hoops people have to jump through. Except for the once-a-day check-in which seems a little arbitrary.

That said, since the things till takes discs anyway I have to wonder why the physical key needs to be scrapped for a digital one in that instance. The disc can still act as the key, can't it?

EDIT: Oh yeah, also think that requiring the Kinect with the console utter bullshit. I've seen what it can do in Tech labs and virtual simulators, but as a gaming input? Give me a button any day.

Strazdas:

This is outrageous. The guy should be there within 2 hours at most. 99.9% uptime is in the contract.
That being said i cant remmeber the last time internet went down for more than 5 minutes. in fact it hasnt went down for even a second in the last 9 months.

http://business.comcast.com/docs/ent-solutions-docs/bus-svcs-tcs-ver20-published-130401.pdf?sfvrsn=0

This is Comcast's terms of service. Please look at Article 15A, on the bottom of pg 12. They have 24 hours to send out a repairman, or they issue a credit for the 24hour period to your account. They are not required to provide 99% uptime, and they are not required to come out within 2 hours.

And I fail to see how the fact that your internet hasn't failed means that internet never fails for anyone else anywhere.

Strazdas:

Remember that you live outside of America or EU, or live in any rural area with minimal internet access
im sorry but US is the one with no internet.
image

Dark blue regions have the most access to internet. That is Canada, Australia, EU, and America. Blue regions have moderate access (South America, Russia). Light blue regions (the rest of the world) have 40% or less internet penetration. In other words, internet is not readily accessible for large regions of the map. Microsoft is cutting out a large customer base.

Regardless, that still doesn't answer the question. How is someone's gaming experience is improved by being forced to connect once a day? What purpose or benefit does the daily connection serve, other than the server checking for hacked systems?

I am not sure what you are getting at. You are buying a physical item, it is intended for your own use, that item give you access to licensed content. You do not "OWN" that content. Not the DVDs, not your MP3's, not even your old VHS. What you can and cannot do with that material has ALWAYS been pretty darn clear.

We own a copy of the media to do as we please.
image

hauptberg:

He is right though, Microsoft has already stated that the XOne needs be connected to the internet at all times, it has to check in at least one hour a day in order to work. If it can't do that due to internet being down, and it happens a lot. There is only one internet service provider where I live and they can't keep the damn thing stable all the time.

One hour a day? State your sources.

immortalfrieza:

Buddy, I don't know who you are, but the only one embarrassing themselves here is you. I'm not going to argue with you further. I'm starting to wonder why I started to begin with, if you honestly don't know why people want things like backwards compatibility and why what Microsoft is doing is wrong from the very start, then there was never any hope for you. What's become quite clear to me after all you've said is this: you know I'm right, you know you are wrong, and the only reason you're still arguing at this point is you just don't want to admit it. I mean, how could you not know? I and everybody else here has blown every one of your arguments so far out the water they're hitting the moon and you're STILL ARGUING! Either that, or you are impossibly ignorant, but I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt here, because I'm trying VERY hard not to insult you at this point. Any REASONABLE person would have conceeded my point LONG ago.

"Impossibly ignorant" isn't an insult?
Right.

Yes, this discussion is finished. And you're blocked as well. Congrats.

TheSpyIsASpyWDZ:

Wait, this is sorta fun actually, YOU went to a GameStop store and the wall was full of used games? ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE. If you say you can't use human experience as evidence I won't take it from you either. You really like making blanket statements saying that people don't keep their games without having a single figure to prove it. I'm sorry, it's just kinda hypocritical, and I refuse to believe that the majority of games are sold back to GameStop without evidence. That's the main problem I find with that argument. I dunno, the idea that people don't keep their games the majority of the time just seems off.

You complain I'm not using anecdotal evidence and then when I provide some for your benefit you complain again.
Have fun in last gen guy, I'll be playing Titanfall.

I'd be interested how this plays out in europe, where that recent court case said people are allowed to resell software. It's not been confirmed for games yet, but Microsoft probably doesn't want to be caught in a position where it has to turn off some of its DRM via patching sometime in the next few years if it is. If any of it is hardware coded, that could be an exensive recall.

In the meantime I'll stick to my PC.

Trishbot:

Because millions of people who turn on their 360s do NOT go to Xbox Live. Are you seriously suggesting that people who play offline all have modded consoles, or could it maybe just be that many people who don't live in giant cities in more rural parts of the nation (and world) don't have high-speed internet? Microsoft claimed that a "mere" 1.5 mps connection speed would suffice, yet when I test mine it was 1.41 mps... uh oh. I must be a modder, though. That must be it. Certainly not the fact I live in the middle of Oklahoma in a small town.

You're lying actually. Or just flat-out wrong.
Microsoft RECOMMENDED 1.5 mps. They didn't claim that was the bare minimum requirement.

Trishbot:

Secondly, they're only giving out YEARS-OLD Xbox games on Xbox 360 until Xbox One launches. The give-away stops after that (and, seriously, Playstation Plus just said they're giving out recent and NEW games, while Halo 3 and Assassins' Creed 2 are going for, what, a couple of bucks these days?)

Deus Ex HR is a recent, new game? Really?
And do you have a source to cite for the claim that the free games are going to stop at a certain point?

Trishbot:

Also, so it doesn't effect you, thus it's not your problem, eh?

[snip 7-8 examples too many]

And then they came for me... and there was no one left to speak for me.

What you don't understand the principle of convenience. It doesn't affect me, so I don't care. As long as their change is integrated in a seamless way where it doesn't affect me why should it bother me? The Xbox One is designed to run in a lower power mode, presumably this means it will basically be always connected so even if I turn on my console at a time when there's no internet then as long as it had internet at some point in the last 24 hours I'll be able to play no problem.

Typing in an EA online code is a pain in the ass, it's inconvenient, as Jim has said, so it affects me.

Having my xbox check in once a day does not affect me in the slightest.

I also don't buy used games. And rarely trade in the ones I have. And rarely need to replay the same game twice.

So why would I care? I don't.

I care about it being cheap, affordable, dependable and convenient with good games to play.

Thing is, this shit has happened long ago. It happened when I bought Half Life 2 from a store, was forced to install Steam, and saw that my game didn't actually work off the shelf because the disc only had 95% of the game. Now nearly everyone is ready to bend over for whatever Valve wants and will defend them to their dying breath. Gamers will get over it.

That's the thing, Valve killed ownership LONG AGO. Microsoft is simply catching up. But get in any Valve thread and speak against them and what happens? Everyone jumps on you like a pack of wolves. And thing is, Xbox One still has used games, depending on the publisher from what I understand, so they're STILL better than Valve/Steam.

This shit has happened before, it will happen again, and people will keep playing and keep buying. Even if you don't, then the next generation will.

If Microsoft pisses me off, as Valve did, then I'll just avoid their products. But nothing about Xbox One pisses me off. Yet . . .

Banzaiman:

That said, since the things till takes discs anyway I have to wonder why the physical key needs to be scrapped for a digital one in that instance. The disc can still act as the key, can't it?

EDIT: Oh yeah, also think that requiring the Kinect with the console utter bullshit. I've seen what it can do in Tech labs and virtual simulators, but as a gaming input? Give me a button any day.

That is a pretty good question, if they are still going to have physical media, why not just use that to "lock/unlock" the game as they do now.

I think I will be sticking to PC and what I already have, which is a Wii, and an original x-box.

was that a fist dildo?

I largely agree with the video except on two points:

EDIT: I went back and rewatched the video, and sure enough, I misheard.
It was "Indie RETAILERS".

Fair point. And I'm pretty sure Gamestop has been shafting local game retailers just by proxy for over a decade now.

2) Gamestop will not benefit from controlled Used Game sales.

Used Games is profitable because of something called "Arbitrage".

Arbitrage is basically buying a good at a lower price in one market, and selling it at a higher price in a similar but separate market. In this case, between the New Game Market and the Used Game Market.

Arbitrage is more effective the less restrictive the market is. (well, until you get into the topic of Black Markets and smuggling which can get complicated very quickly)

Gamestop grew filthy rich by exploiting arbitrage. Normally, I'd agree with those developers and publishers who say that Gamestop is ripping their sales figures a new one, because logically, they were.

However, I don't feel sorry at all for those same publishers when they continued to do business with Gamestop anyway; they're obviously still benefiting from exposure and exclusive deals enough to warrant doing business with them.

Anyway, by restricting that supply of second-hand goods AT ALL, regardless of what the customer gets in the second-hand market (which at Gamestop, is pittance) they are restricting the source of games Gamestop can resell at a full margin; That is, the cut of the cash the shop receives on the deal.

100% is always going to be the largest cut Gamestop can get, and they get it *only* from Used Games.

Yet, on the Xbone, the only way Gamestop will be included in M$'s Used Game program, (which is being done on a per-game basis) is if the Publisher OKs it for their game.

So, why would the Publisher OK it unless they can get a cut of the deal?
Say what you want about crony-ism, there is no backroom deal or threat that Gamestop can make that would end with the publisher giving the entire sale to Gamestop.

Gamestop stands to LOSE a lot of revenue from this no matter how you slice it, because arbitrage works best between markets with few to no restrictions. (Incidentally, for anyone who wonders why those annoying and seemingly unnecessary Region Locks exist; it's mostly to prevent arbitrage between relatively rich and poor markets)

This week's Jimquisition is a perfect example of why there has never been a better time to migrate to PC gaming. I'm gonna hold onto my 360 for dear life but at this point onwards, my transition from console to PC is absolute.

Prosis:

http://business.comcast.com/docs/ent-solutions-docs/bus-svcs-tcs-ver20-published-130401.pdf?sfvrsn=0

This is Comcast's terms of service. Please look at Article 15A, on the bottom of pg 12. They have 24 hours to send out a repairman, or they issue a credit for the 24hour period to your account. They are not required to provide 99% uptime, and they are not required to come out within 2 hours.

And I fail to see how the fact that your internet hasn't failed means that internet never fails for anyone else anywhere.

well, the part you pointed states 24 hours, so thats not "next friday" though.
there is no uptime sadly or i missed it (havnet read the whole document), but:

Comcast makes no representation regarding the speed of the Internet Service. Actual speeds may vary and are not guaranteed. any factors affect speed including, without limitation, the number of workstations using a single connection.

WOW. our contracts have an "Article" where it states that speeds privided cannot be slower than that of the plan chosen and if any such problem occur due to providers fault it shoudl be remedied as quickly as possible (no time given though) with exception of unreasonable circumstances (like someone stealing the cables or something). the actual situation is that most of the time speeds are higher than per plan due to "hey we got free capacity thats nto used at this moment we may as well let people use it" thinking. the cables are there anyway, and you only need to limit it at peak hours. no doublr speeds or something, but my 50mbps (cheapest) plan goes up to 80mbps sometimes. though for those with 300mbps this probably dont happen. at least i didnt notice when i had that, but that could be due to my limited router back then that i used to connect a laptop+PC combination to.
ANd we do have a clause for 99.9% uptime (because 100% is "unreasonable" according to them), and they deliver by now, that used to be problematic in the past, say, 5 years ago, when once a month it would go out for a few hours or so and thne you could try counting the %, though as far as i know noone sued them yet (our people dont like to sue everyone for everything unlike americans).
And if there is a problem you usually call them and they fix it from thier end over phone. firend onf mine had internet that woudl reset every few hours, so he called them every day, for 2 weeks, they got pissed off and fixed it :D

Dark blue regions have the most access to internet. That is Canada, Australia, EU, and America. Blue regions have moderate access (South America, Russia). Light blue regions (the rest of the world) have 40% or less internet penetration. In other words, internet is not readily accessible for large regions of the map. Microsoft is cutting out a large customer base.

notice how almost whole europe and parts of asia is darker than america? US is 33rd in the world compared by internet speeds.

While yes, there are large regions that are lighter, you have to look at them. they are usually 3rd/2nd world countries, where most inhabintants would not be affording a console anyway, and those that would likely has internet to begin with. The amount of people who have internet acess is 300 times larger than the amount of people who has current generation consoles (even if we ignore that one person may have multiple consoles and those sales that were made to replace broken one).
Microsoft is cutting out a small userbase who prioritized consoles over internet when they are so poor they cant afford both, but not poor enough to afford at least one. and a few people who need the console on the go (liek soldiers) of course, but i dont think thats ther target audience to begin with with what they been showing us.

Regardless, that still doesn't answer the question. How is someone's gaming experience is improved by being forced to connect once a day? What purpose or benefit does the daily connection serve, other than the server checking for hacked systems?

Its not, there is no benefit of forced used control for the users. Hence me and plenty of other people are not buying it out of the principle and not because we do not fit the requirements.
Still that is not to say that the console will sell poorly because people lack internet - they dont. it will sell poorly because its anti-consumer product.

FreedomofInformation:

We own a copy of the media to do as we please.
[/img]grumpy cat[/img]

sadly, this statement has been false for quite a few years now.
remember the guy that got jailed for jail-breaking PS3s? he did not have a right to do as he please with hardware that he "owns" because "sony didnt like it".

Akalabeth:
Deus Ex HR is a recent, new game? Really?

well lets see. it came out August 26, 2011 for EU audience (me). that is less than 2 years ago. Id say thats pretty recent.
Then again, i think Fallout3 is a recent game, and if you want to talk old games, lets talk Return Fire (1996).
Your probably one of those guys "omg its 6 months old, thats old garbage i wont play it".

What you don't understand the principle of convenience. It doesn't affect me, so I don't care. As long as their change is integrated in a seamless way where it doesn't affect me why should it bother me?

government spying on your does not bring inconvienience. People blowing eachother in middle east doesn ot bring us inconvienience. and yet we care. you know why? because convenience is not equal happiness.

Thing is, this shit has happened long ago. It happened when I bought Half Life 2 from a store, was forced to install Steam, and saw that my game didn't actually work off the shelf because the disc only had 95% of the game. Now nearly everyone is ready to bend over for whatever Valve wants and will defend them to their dying breath. Gamers will get over it.

I still dont use Steam. and if i buy a game that requires it, there are ways around it. and yes the disk does hold 100%, they just want to check it with the steam anyway.

That's the thing, Valve killed ownership LONG AGO. Microsoft is simply catching up. But get in any Valve thread and speak against them and what happens? Everyone jumps on you like a pack of wolves.

are you new to escpaist? while admittedly not everyone, but there are plenty of people that hate Valve for this.

That is a pretty good question, if they are still going to have physical media, why not just use that to "lock/unlock" the game as they do now.

you can copy the keys and if them achine does not check online for verification, you can, effectively, have unlimited installs on unlimited machines with same key, even for uillegaly obtained copies. also requires the console to know combinations to check for them for games nto created yet = impossible or extremely restrictive on code generator (which will get cracked). Using server-side checks for that does go around the whole "offline so cant verify if tricked" part.

Atmos Duality:

Gamestop grew filthy rich by exploiting arbitrage. Normally, I'd agree with those developers and publishers who say that Gamestop is ripping their sales figures a new one, because logically, they were.

However, I don't feel sorry at all for those same publishers when they continued to do business with Gamestop anyway; they're obviously still benefiting from exposure and exclusive deals enough to warrant doing business with them.

and you know why it worked so well? because most games were a one-off 5 hour spectacles, that you woudl trade back in then ext day. if the games were actually attractive enough for you to keep them for, say, a year, the arbitrage market would fall upon itself due to lack of supply. and whne supply finally comes the demand would be too small because we all know games sell over 80% of their sales in first 3 months.

Strazdas:

and you know why it worked so well? because most games were a one-off 5 hour spectacles, that you woudl trade back in then ext day. if the games were actually attractive enough for you to keep them for, say, a year, the arbitrage market would fall upon itself due to lack of supply. and whne supply finally comes the demand would be too small because we all know games sell over 80% of their sales in first 3 months.

5 hours sounds a bit too low, but yeah, I see your point.
Not helping is that the increased homogeneity between games. How many shooters are on the market now? How many are relying on multiplayer to keep people playing? How many of them feature hyper-linear campaigns?

I'm not saying that all shooters are bad, but it's not exactly helping when each game is doing very little to distinguish itself.

(When a Transformers game is in serious contention for being among the most distinct shooters I've seen and played in the last generation, something has gone SERIOUSLY wrong.)

Strazdas:

Akalabeth:
Deus Ex HR is a recent, new game? Really?

well lets see. it came out August 26, 2011 for EU audience (me). that is less than 2 years ago. Id say thats pretty recent.
Then again, i think Fallout3 is a recent game, and if you want to talk old games, lets talk Return Fire (1996).
Your probably one of those guys "omg its 6 months old, thats old garbage i wont play it".

You know what the last game I played was? Master of Orion 1 from GOG.com

So, guess again.

Strazdas:

What you don't understand the principle of convenience. It doesn't affect me, so I don't care. As long as their change is integrated in a seamless way where it doesn't affect me why should it bother me?

government spying on your does not bring inconvienience. People blowing eachother in middle east doesn ot bring us inconvienience. and yet we care. you know why? because convenience is not equal happiness.

Frankly it's insulting that you're even comparing the Xbox One to people getting killed in the middle east.

Strazdas:

Thing is, this shit has happened long ago. It happened when I bought Half Life 2 from a store, was forced to install Steam, and saw that my game didn't actually work off the shelf because the disc only had 95% of the game. Now nearly everyone is ready to bend over for whatever Valve wants and will defend them to their dying breath. Gamers will get over it.

I still dont use Steam. and if i buy a game that requires it, there are ways around it. and yes the disk does hold 100%, they just want to check it with the steam anyway.

It does not hold 100%.
Ways around it? In the same way that there are ways around pirated games for the 360? Like playing it exclusively offline? Is that your real issue?

Strazdas:

That's the thing, Valve killed ownership LONG AGO. Microsoft is simply catching up. But get in any Valve thread and speak against them and what happens? Everyone jumps on you like a pack of wolves.

are you new to escpaist? while admittedly not everyone, but there are plenty of people that hate Valve for this.

The number of people who dislike Valve and are willing to state this is definitely in the minority. At least in my personal experience.

My solution is simple. Keep playing PC games, keep showing others that PC isn't a scary monster they think it is. That there is endless free and diverse choices on the PC. My PC is my gaming machine, my entertainment center. My work station my form of communition in Digital form. For those who think that PC's are over prices you don't need 5k to have a good rig. For those out there who are upset with Xbox and know to game on the PC show and teach your friends. Everyone i know used to be big into xbox and know everyone plays 90% on their PC. PC is still King.

James Brunton:
was that a fist dildo?

Yes it was, I think someone sent to him as a joke. I'm pretty sure its called a Bella Donna Bitch Fist.

Ya know what's really sad?

Back when RE6 was released, Jim, you were citing the exact OPPOSITE problem. Back then, companies were trying to hard to please everyone at once.

Now, Microsoft and others don't care AT ALL about pleasing their customers.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here