Escapist News Now: Fans Petition Microsoft For DRM

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

You know what I miss most about the "old" Xbox One? Insane region locking that prevented half of the world from even using the console. Because fuck the rest of the planet so long as I get to keep my glorious DRM. Then I'll be happy.

Oh, my apologies. It seems I drifted off into opposite world there for a moment.

Meh, it's not worth is.

Guys, don't worry. This DRM stands for Drugs and Rim-jobs for Mostly everybody. MS was actually being a lot more generous than we thought. Give 'em a break.

I'd say something, but I don't think I could possibly do a better job than Angry Joe.

We didn't ask for family sharing to be taken away, we just wanted to keep the rights we've always had.

Silentpony:
Brings up a good point. "At least not before the console is released" My guess is Microsoft is going to wait 'till post Christmas, maybe...March of '14, then BOOM! System wide update that fucks everything up again. I mean why wouldn't they? They obviously thought it was a good idea the first time and only relented when they thought Sony would out sell them. So just reverse the reversal when the console hits the market. What are gamers going to do then? Go back in time and not buy it? Return it? Maybe some, but a lot will just hang their heads in defeat and fork over money.

I'm pretty sure if they did that Xbox One owners would be morally obligated to form a mob, storm Microsoft and lynch everyone involved[1] That would be seriously unethical, especially to anyone no longer able to play the console.

Though in reality it'd probably result in some massive lawsuit or something. I'm no legal expert but I can't imagine doing something like that wouldn't violate some consumer rights law or something.

[1] Just kidding of course, violence is bad.

Wait. Is the person who started this petition from Georgia?
...
Look, guys, that crappy Honey Booboo (or however you spell it) is making us look bad enough. We really don't need this, too.

Yeah, I thought this was a joke at first. But, it's apparently real. And that's a thing. I seriously can't say much more than that. Doesn't affect me, though. I won't have a Xbone.

Arawn:
I do recall a topic were people were disappointed with losing the game sharing aspect of Xbox One. The details on the library sharing system are stilled debated to some extent. Some claim it's only a demo like trial of said games that you share with friends/family. Others said it's the full game. The former is hardly worth the DRM that accompanied it, and the latter would be unprofitable to MS and game producers. Why would you make a system where you would sell fewer games? I'm at a loss. I'm very curious to have tried the original system just to see what it was truly capable of. Still I say no to the DRM. It's not innovative enough to warrant a loss of control of my games. I guess I don't have much a right to say anything since I'm not going to purchase the revise Xbox One.

You pretty much summed up my opinion on the Family Sharing plan. There was a rumor that it was a one hour demo or something. I heard Microsoft has denied it, but I am not aware if they stated what it was "actually going to be." And honestly, that makes me think it really was going to be a one hour demo. And I really don't see Publishers supporting a system that allows people to play their games for free. That sounds worse than used games. Ten times worse in this case.

Not that I think Used Games are some plague on gaming. But if you do, why would you do what would be far worse?

OlasDAlmighty:

Silentpony:
Brings up a good point. "At least not before the console is released" My guess is Microsoft is going to wait 'till post Christmas, maybe...March of '14, then BOOM! System wide update that fucks everything up again. I mean why wouldn't they? They obviously thought it was a good idea the first time and only relented when they thought Sony would out sell them. So just reverse the reversal when the console hits the market. What are gamers going to do then? Go back in time and not buy it? Return it? Maybe some, but a lot will just hang their heads in defeat and fork over money.

I'm pretty sure if they did that Xbox One owners would be morally obligated to form a mob, storm Microsoft and lynch everyone involved[1] That would be seriously unethical, especially to anyone no longer able to play the console.

Though in reality it'd probably result in some massive lawsuit or something. I'm no legal expert but I can't imagine doing something like that wouldn't violate some consumer rights law or something.

The sad truth is those people would have no recourse. Odds are the Xbox One terms of use would restrict them from doing any such thing. You can practically guarantee that if someone tried they wouldn't eve get into a court room. For example, Sony had a similar policy that prevented people from suing over the Linux removal. If Microsoft didn't have the same policies in place before, they do now.

How many people actually read those Service Agreements anyway?

[1] Just kidding of course, violence is bad.

Magmarock:
Whoever thinks that always online for a console is good is probably over privileged and makes far tot much money. Or has really good internet and doesn't think of those who don't.

Also I hope Jimm does as episode on this.

I think an always online console could be a really cool thing. Microsoft hasn't handled this as well as they could have, but the benefits and possibilities of an always online console is exciting. I'm not over privileged, and I barely make enough money to pay for new games often, but I can still realize that if a company wants to move their product in a certain direction, even if it doesn't suit my wants/needs, I don't HAVE to buy that console, but that doesn't mean it's a terrible idea.

My guess is that anyone (serious or not) signing the petition will be added to a depopulation list and will soon be purged.

Honestly I don't get why any of that crap is worth blatantly consumer unfriendly DRM. Maybe it's Stockholm syndrome and the victims are defending their antagonists now.

This looks like a bad piece of astroturf that's been hijacked by trolls.

Tell ya what Microsoft, if you want to turn the DRM back on, and NOT charge me for playing online as you want to include ads and the like on the dashboard... I will buy your console.

But so long as you have ads, pay for online play, and what not, there aint a chance in hell.

This is so clearly a plant by microsoft. We should do ourselves a solid and just ignore the hell out of this.

This entire thing is ridiculous.

Someone tell these mooks that the features Microsoft talked about implementing with the DRM can still exist WITHOUT THE DRM measures.

There is no reason your physical copy of the game can't be given to you as a Digital copy of the game once registered.

No reason y 10 family members can try out your digital games library. Shit, some of the games i bought on Steam actually registers on my Origin account. (I have 2 copies of the game for the price of one)

Microsoft took these features away as a matter of spite. Not because their DRM scheme was essential for it to function.

On the bright side, this will go no where. The PR nightmare was too strong :P

OlasDAlmighty:
I'd say something, but I don't think I could possibly do a better job than Angry Joe.

There are dolphins who talk better than Joe did in that video. Literally hundreds of people have said it better and with less histrionics.

so is there going to be another xbox1 jimquisition, or is he just covering this in an article I am yet to read where he calls everyone sighning this petition a moron?

Haefulz:

Magmarock:
Whoever thinks that always online for a console is good is probably over privileged and makes far tot much money. Or has really good internet and doesn't think of those who don't.

Also I hope Jimm does as episode on this.

I think an always online console could be a really cool thing. Microsoft hasn't handled this as well as they could have, but the benefits and possibilities of an always online console is exciting. I'm not over privileged, and I barely make enough money to pay for new games often, but I can still realize that if a company wants to move their product in a certain direction, even if it doesn't suit my wants/needs, I don't HAVE to buy that console, but that doesn't mean it's a terrible idea.

But if you don't buy the console because you can't afford/have no internet then that is a lost sale so it is still a bad idea. Also if you can't afford games at $60 imagine paying $100, because that is how mu ch they are over here. Consoles are fast being obsolete in a world that no longer needs them. With services like GOG, and all the free/indie games that are out there who needs a console.

Smilomaniac:
You shouldn't be so quick to dismiss it or the people who want it; The DRM policy might be a better future for gaming, if it brought reasonable prices, being able to sell games again and sharing them with friends, all without much hassle.

Yes, a monopoly on what they'll get to charge for the digital market of their console is what will bring out the benevolence of Microsoft. I mean the current console digital markets are already charging just as much as retailers and doing very little to no price degradation already so... wait.

Honestly I don't see the need to roll the dice for the future of any media on a might. DRM isn't required for any of those things to occur, and realistically you shouldn't be giving them any more power over you than they already have by your patronage before expecting some benefit for said patronage.

Magmarock:

Haefulz:

Magmarock:
Whoever thinks that always online for a console is good is probably over privileged and makes far tot much money. Or has really good internet and doesn't think of those who don't.

Also I hope Jimm does as episode on this.

I think an always online console could be a really cool thing. Microsoft hasn't handled this as well as they could have, but the benefits and possibilities of an always online console is exciting. I'm not over privileged, and I barely make enough money to pay for new games often, but I can still realize that if a company wants to move their product in a certain direction, even if it doesn't suit my wants/needs, I don't HAVE to buy that console, but that doesn't mean it's a terrible idea.

But if you don't buy the console because you can't afford/have no internet then that is a lost sale so it is still a bad idea. Also if you can't afford games at $60 imagine paying $100, because that is how mu ch they are over here. Consoles are fast being obsolete in a world that no longer needs them. With services like GOG, and all the free/indie games that are out there who needs a console.

Everything past your first sentence has nothing to do with an always online console, but consoles are nowhere near being obsolete. I don't know how you got that idea.

And just because an always online console loses sales of people who can't always be online, doesn't mean it's a bad idea. For people who can consistently be online, it could be a great experience. I'm not saying Microsoft's timing was good; many people who have been loyal customers would be getting the short end of the stick with an always online console (soldiers overseas is one example), but the idea of an always online console isn't an inherently bad one.

Haefulz:

Magmarock:

Haefulz:

I think an always online console could be a really cool thing. Microsoft hasn't handled this as well as they could have, but the benefits and possibilities of an always online console is exciting. I'm not over privileged, and I barely make enough money to pay for new games often, but I can still realize that if a company wants to move their product in a certain direction, even if it doesn't suit my wants/needs, I don't HAVE to buy that console, but that doesn't mean it's a terrible idea.

But if you don't buy the console because you can't afford/have no internet then that is a lost sale so it is still a bad idea. Also if you can't afford games at $60 imagine paying $100, because that is how mu ch they are over here. Consoles are fast being obsolete in a world that no longer needs them. With services like GOG, and all the free/indie games that are out there who needs a console.

Everything past your first sentence has nothing to do with an always online console, but consoles are nowhere near being obsolete. I don't know how you got that idea.

And just because an always online console loses sales of people who can't always be online, doesn't mean it's a bad idea. For people who can consistently be online, it could be a great experience. I'm not saying Microsoft's timing was good; many people who have been loyal customers would be getting the short end of the stick with an always online console (soldiers overseas is one example), but the idea of an always online console isn't an inherently bad one.

Yes it is you're almost winning my argument for me.

First, name one benefit a console has over a PC aside from exclusives.

Second, for me it's about ownership, you own nothing if you need to be online all the time. Not even Steam has that and if you don't like Steam you can always go with GOG. They have great games both new and old without DRM and what you down is what you keep.

Yeah... no. I can't even play my digital copy of Arkham City on my PC right now because for some stupid reason I can't login to Windows Live (which I shouldn't have to in the first place) so I can't access my save files for my single player game. Because it works so well now that people want more of it?

I think the reason the not-trolls want it back is that for digital goods, it was actually a decent policy. Right now you can't really share or trade digital goods at all (legitimately). This system allowed you to do that and had a few other features that could be seen as a step towards progress.

The main issues, of course, are the stupid check in every 24 hours and that they tried to apply the same policies to the physical discs as well. That was just stupid. Had they just applied the afore mentioned systems to digital goods only, they wouldn't have seen any of the blowback and they would have been poised to have some control moving forward.

But they are idiots and seem to only be able to work with an all or nothing mentality.

Haefulz:

Magmarock:
Whoever thinks that always online for a console is good is probably over privileged and makes far tot much money. Or has really good internet and doesn't think of those who don't.

Also I hope Jimm does as episode on this.

I think an always online console could be a really cool thing. Microsoft hasn't handled this as well as they could have, but the benefits and possibilities of an always online console is exciting. I'm not over privileged, and I barely make enough money to pay for new games often, but I can still realize that if a company wants to move their product in a certain direction, even if it doesn't suit my wants/needs, I don't HAVE to buy that console, but that doesn't mean it's a terrible idea.

The connectivity features are not that bad of an idea. And even cloud computing gives me mental wood over the possibilities for gaming. However, requiring that I always be connected to the internet is. Especially when I don't need to be. This isn't a matter of Microsoft handling it poorly; this is just bad design from the get go.

Go back to the Great PSN Outage of April 2011. Now, just think about how much more suck that would have been if instead of losing the store and online multiplayer, you couldn't do ANYTHING on your console except watch a Blu-ray. It's bad enough that you would lose access to the things you purchased online and have downloaded to your machine, but your physical copies would be just as worthless.

That's not bad PR; that's exactly what Microsoft said would happen if the Xbone failed to register with their servers.

Tumedus:
I think the reason the not-trolls want it back is that for digital goods, it was actually a decent policy. Right now you can't really share or trade digital goods at all (legitimately). This system allowed you to do that and had a few other features that could be seen as a step towards progress.

The main issues, of course, are the stupid check in every 24 hours and that they tried to apply the same policies to the physical discs as well. That was just stupid. Had they just applied the afore mentioned systems to digital goods only, they wouldn't have seen any of the blowback and they would have been poised to have some control moving forward.

But they are idiots and seem to only be able to work with an all or nothing mentality.

That's a fair assumption: if the online requirements only applied to game borrowing, people would have been fine with it. Even me. But that wasn't what Microsoft wanted; they wanted an entire machine to be restrained by a digital chain. Remember: the entire console itself required an internet connection to operate, as well as the Kinect 2.0 Spybot. And honestly, it still looks like the Kinect will still be needed for the system to even turn on.

spoonybard.hahs:

Haefulz:

Magmarock:
Whoever thinks that always online for a console is good is probably over privileged and makes far tot much money. Or has really good internet and doesn't think of those who don't.

Also I hope Jimm does as episode on this.

I think an always online console could be a really cool thing. Microsoft hasn't handled this as well as they could have, but the benefits and possibilities of an always online console is exciting. I'm not over privileged, and I barely make enough money to pay for new games often, but I can still realize that if a company wants to move their product in a certain direction, even if it doesn't suit my wants/needs, I don't HAVE to buy that console, but that doesn't mean it's a terrible idea.

The connectivity features are not that bad of an idea. And even cloud computing gives me mental wood over the possibilities for gaming. However, requiring that I always be connected to the internet is. Especially when I don't need to be. This isn't a matter of Microsoft handling it poorly; this is just bad design from the get go.

Go back to the Great PSN Outage of April 2011. Now, just think about how much more suck that would have been if instead of losing the store and online multiplayer, you couldn't do ANYTHING on your console except watch a Blu-ray. It's bad enough that you would lose access to the things you purchased online and have downloaded to your machine, but your physical copies would be just as worthless.

That's not bad PR; that's exactly what Microsoft said would happen if the Xbone failed to register with their servers.

I see your reasoning, and at this point, with virtually nobody in the world having a 100% stable internet at all times, it isn't the time for an always online console. But think about the transition between landline phones and cell phone. For all intents and purposes, a cell phone MUST be always connected to Verizon or AT&Ts network, otherwise it is completely useless. It's got to the point now, though, where those networks are so reliable and stable, that outages almost never happen. Even the rare times, they do, it's usually no more than an hour or two. And that's the sacrifice you make for having the convenience and benefits of a cell phone.

Think about this as well; cell phones are much more integral to our lives than a gaming console... if I can deal with something as necessary and important as a cell phone network going on, rendering my phone useless, then I can go without a console for a short period of time as well.

Like I said though, the technology isn't at that point--most people don't have a stable enough connection right now. But it's getting there, and there will be a point when enough people will buy an always online console, because they'll see that, for them, the benefits and possibilities outweight the inconvenience of not being able to play their console if an outage happens.

Haefulz:

Like I said though, the technology isn't at that point--most people don't have a stable enough connection right now. But it's getting there, and there will be a point when enough people will buy an always online console, because they'll see that, for them, the benefits and possibilities outweight the inconvenience of not being able to play their console if an outage happens.

If the network on my phone goes out for a period, I can still use all of the applications that do not require the network.

If my internet goes out, I can still use my PC to do everything that a PC can do without an internet connection.

If my power goes out, I can still do things in my house. WEStar doesn't come around and kick everyone out of their house until they can get the power back on.

There is and never will be a justification for requiring a constant internet connection. Even if all the world managed to magically sprout Google Fiber all over the damn place, such a requirement is still a terrible design and breaks the fundamental rules of programming and engineering. Chiefly, make the damn thing as flexible as possible and to work in as many conditions as possible.

Haefulz:
For all intents and purposes, a cell phone MUST be always connected to Verizon or AT&Ts network, otherwise it is completely useless.

Well, no. Even when the towers went down, I could use it for my non-phone-calling options. You only need a phone network for the phone part of the phone. Now, that may seem obvious, but the Bone would require an internet connection for every aspect except TV and BD. additionally, a mobile phone requires a mobile connection out of necessity, as it's a mobile communications device. By the same stretch, nobody really complains that an MMO needs an online connection because it's already an online game. A single-player experience will see a lot of flak for an online requirement, because it does nothing to service the game from the player end and may take away content instead.

It's got to the point now, though, where those networks are so reliable and stable, that outages almost never happen.

You sound like Don Mattrick now. Much as I'd like to live in one of those places, I don't. and a lot of Americans don't, either.

if I can deal with something as necessary and important as a cell phone network going on, rendering my phone useless, then I can go without a console for a short period of time as well.

I can go without a console, period. Oddly enough, that's my plan for the Bone. Even now. Still, the point is that just because you can doesn't mean you should have to.

I spent almost a month in the hospital with nothing but my phone and a Kindle. I have a ton of gadgets I use at home, none of which I need, and I can clearly do without 'em. Hell, I didn't even bring my PSP, DS, or laptop. They're by nature portable devices, too. I can get by. Even the phone and Kindle were technically unnecessary; it was not a smart phone, so all the functionality could be replaced by the in-room phone and I could have just...Stared at ceiling tiles or something.

Still, just because I can go without them doesn't mean I want to add the further inconvenience if internet check-ins.

because they'll see that, for them, the benefits and possibilities outweight the inconvenience of not being able to play their console if an outage happens.

Name one. One thing that you would need a persistent internet connection for. My PC can do almost everything Microsoft advertised without losing basic functionality if the servers crash or my internet goes down. What added convenience would I be gaining? Please don't tell me sharing, because there's no reason for that to be an issue. Hell, it looks like Steam's going to be offering that in a future update, and Steam's client doesn't require a persistent connection. A couple weeks go, I played offline for almost a week before I even noticed.

Apparently PS4 fans have been signing the petition because less people would buy the Xbox lol!

This has to be an elaborate group of trolls who are doing this.

Humanity just cannot sink this low by accident.

Smilomaniac:

zalithar:
First off, fuck those who actually want it.

You shouldn't be so quick to dismiss it or the people who want it; The DRM policy might be a better future for gaming, if it brought reasonable prices, being able to sell games again and sharing them with friends, all without much hassle.

I'm ambiguous on this point, because I'm not going to buy one anyway, but it'd be an interesting experiment.

I'm a huge supporter for a free digital world, I absolutely believe that all movies, games and music are part of cultural history and should after a while be free for everyone. I think this is the true way, but I don't believe it's possible before we change a lot of things about society in general. It'll likely never happen.
Until such a thing is possible though, this is a viable strategy that may or may not bust.

All in all, people should think it over, instead of rage about it.

i'd rather pay a bunch for something good than a little for horse crap.

 Pages PREV 1 2

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
Register for a free account here