Xbox One DRM Won't Deter Witcher 3 Studio

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Xbox One DRM Won't Deter Witcher 3 Studio

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt screen

CD Projekt co-founder Marcin Iwiński said it's up to gamers to decide which platform they want to support - and whose rules they're willing to live with.

CD Projekt is well known for its unwavering stance against DRM, which it has said several times in the past is ineffective and serves only to alienate legitimate customers. It's a position that might appear to put the studio at odds with Microsoft, whose Xbox One console has some pretty arcane restrictions on game sharing and preowned sales, but Iwiński said that no matter how it worked out, the studio won't step away from the platform.

"We have not received anything from Microsoft until today on [DRM policies] and, before we form any definite opinions here, we would like to have this process explained in details by the platform holder," he told Eurogamer. "Having said that, we strongly believe in the freedom of choice and voting with your wallet. I would disagree that it would do any good if we decided to abandon one of the platforms, especially when we have the capacity to create games for it."

Iwiński said that while CD Projekt has no influence on Microsoft's DRM policies, consumers have a choice about which company and console they support. "I am sure that a lot of gamers will choose one of the consoles for its convenience and easiness of use - that's fine, and by doing so they will agree to whatever rules the platform holder will impose," he continued. "What I can, however, guarantee here and now, is that if you want the 100 percent DRM-free experience you will have it on the PC, the platform where we set the rules for our games."

CD Projekt's latest game, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, is in development now for the Xbox One, PlayStation 4 and PC, and will come out sometime in 2014.

Source: Eurogamer

Permalink

Gotta love these guys, they've always been rather smart about all of this. Earned them some good PR every now and then.

Roofstone:
Gotta love these guys, they've always been rather smart about all of this. Earned them some good PR every now and then.

Their swords aren't the only thing that is silver :P

Can't argue with the logic. If you don't want to support xbox one crap DRM then buy it on one of the many other choices. I personally will PC this game to hell

Aren't they the co-creators of GOG (Good Old Games), the major DRM-free digital games service?

One of my new favourite developers.

I like the statement behind the statement. "Don't get mad at developers for their support of getting their games out. Just buy it how you want to play it."

Then they should not cry when game gets pirated again.

Moeez:
Aren't they the co-creators of GOG (Good Old Games), the major DRM-free digital games service?

"Co-creators?"

I guess if you considered the distinction between CD Projekt RED S.A. and CD Projekt RED Sp. z o.o. to be that important, then yes, they would be co-creators. Today they are only one company called CD Projekt RED, but even back then, it was just one owning the other.

It's like calling a movie made by Fox a "co-creation" between 20th Century Fox and News Corporation; It doesn't matter because News Corp is Fox's parent company!

Xbox One DRM won't deter Witcher 2 developers.

... But it will deter me from the Xbox One version of their game.

Points for Sony, then, at least. Glad they didn't stick it on just that one system.

GAunderrated:
Can't argue with the logic. If you don't want to support xbox one crap DRM then buy it on one of the many other choices. I personally will PC this game to hell

This, except minus the "crap" portion of the comment.

Frankly, I don't see why this is a big deal or issue. For those of us who care more about games than about how companies keep people from stealing them, the Xbox One has few flaws. I like the system, I like what it's trying to do, and I'm a grown man who will own BOTH systems and have a great PC. I have internet and that argument crying about "Oh wooooe! What if you don't have internet access?!? Logging in on a daily basis to verify my game's license! That's draconian booo hoo!"

Really??? Xbox is the go to system for most FPS gamers that want to play multiplayer games. That's not disputed. So who is it that doesn't have a reliable enough internet connection to allow their xbox to access it once a day? If you live in NORTH AMERICA or the WESTERN hemisphere, very, very few people can lodge this complaint. Nowadays this is life as we know it, step into the future. Always connected, wifi-plugged in.. this is the future of EVERYTHING.

And if you don't like it, buy a PS4. Or a PC. You've got options! Don't get mad because OTHER people don't agree with YOUR choices.

And let's not forget SONY's less than stellar history in regards to DRM combat. ROOT KIT anyone?? Do you think that if the Xbox pulls off what Microsoft is attempting to do that Sony won't follow suit immediately? And the developers are rightly so keeping their mouths shut about it because at the end of the day they know it means MORE profit for them, less for Gamestop and used games stores, which might be of tremendous delight and benefit to us broke-ass consumers, but are essentially leeches to developers that really would prefer their games to be bought at full price and to be compensated for each used sale.
If Gamestop didn't want this to happen, they should have voluntarily came up with a way to ensure developers got their cut of the resell pie. All the semantical arguments about "this is my game I bought it so I can sell it for whatever I want to whom I want Nyaaaah" sounds adorably quaint but it's a one-sided (and rather limited) perspective, considering apart from the initial money we paid for the game's purchase we had little involvement with its creation, and even less impact on its success.

AJey:
Then they should not cry when game gets pirated again.

This is why we can't have nice things. -.-

HyenaThePirate:

GAunderrated:
Can't argue with the logic. If you don't want to support xbox one crap DRM then buy it on one of the many other choices. I personally will PC this game to hell

This, except minus the "crap" portion of the comment.

Frankly, I don't see why this is a big deal or issue. For those of us who care more about games than about how companies keep people from stealing them, the Xbox One has few flaws. I like the system, I like what it's trying to do, and I'm a grown man who will own BOTH systems and have a great PC. I have internet and that argument crying about "Oh wooooe! What if you don't have internet access?!? Logging in on a daily basis to verify my game's license! That's draconian booo hoo!"

Really??? Xbox is the go to system for most FPS gamers that want to play multiplayer games. That's not disputed. So who is it that doesn't have a reliable enough internet connection to allow their xbox to access it once a day? If you live in NORTH AMERICA or the WESTERN hemisphere, very, very few people can lodge this complaint. Nowadays this is life as we know it, step into the future. Always connected, wifi-plugged in.. this is the future of EVERYTHING.

And if you don't like it, buy a PS4. Or a PC. You've got options! Don't get mad because OTHER people don't agree with YOUR choices.

And let's not forget SONY's less than stellar history in regards to DRM combat. ROOT KIT anyone?? Do you think that if the Xbox pulls off what Microsoft is attempting to do that Sony won't follow suit immediately? And the developers are rightly so keeping their mouths shut about it because at the end of the day they know it means MORE profit for them, less for Gamestop and used games stores, which might be of tremendous delight and benefit to us broke-ass consumers, but are essentially leeches to developers that really would prefer their games to be bought at full price and to be compensated for each used sale.
If Gamestop didn't want this to happen, they should have voluntarily came up with a way to ensure developers got their cut of the resell pie. All the semantical arguments about "this is my game I bought it so I can sell it for whatever I want to whom I want Nyaaaah" sounds adorably quaint but it's a one-sided (and rather limited) perspective, considering apart from the initial money we paid for the game's purchase we had little involvement with its creation, and even less impact on its success.

Seriously bro? I won't judge anyone who wants to buy an XB1 but how can you justify them adding restrictions to when you can play? How do I know I won't get hit by a hurricane tomorrow and lose my internet connection for 2 weeks. Am I just supposed to deal with it because god forbid I get in the way of multi-million dollar corporations making even more money off of me. You complain about gamers crying "boo hoo"? What about the publishers in tears because "Boo hoo, my game only sold 8 million copies instead of 20 million like Call of Dudy. It must be because of used game sales and not because I'm charging $60 for a game people clearly want but don't want to pay that much for. If only there was a way I sell my games cheaper in a form they couldn't resell like digital copies. But that would mean I have charge less!" I accept that the way dev's and publishers make money off of games is completely different than say cars, but that doesn't mean I should have to give up my rights to do whatever I want to my copy of a game because a publisher's swimming pool of money has gotten a little low

And maybe you need a refresher on Sony's future drm and game sharing policy: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.410247-PlayStation-4-Game-Sharing-This-Is-How-Its-Done

If publishers want my money, they should make more incentives for me to buy their shit. Not curb stomp my freaking rights to own and play a game I paid for. And you're right, I have options so I'll be buying a ps4 and if that goes down the shitter in the next few months then I'll only game through Steam or GoG

How can CDPR be such a "good guy" company? It's amazing how reasonable and chill their every statement sounds.

BTW, I completely support what they're trying to say there. The choice is always up to the customer, we're not forced to buy anything we don't like.

"CD Projekt is well known for its unwavering stance against DRM"

Except when they put DRM in The Witcher 2. Which was kind of a blessing, I guess, because I didn't buy it until much later at a lower price point after they had removed the DRM. And found out that it was awful, and not worth $60.

BloodSquirrel:
"CD Projekt is well known for its unwavering stance against DRM"

Except when they put DRM in The Witcher 2. Which was kind of a blessing, I guess, because I didn't buy it until much later at a lower price point after they had removed the DRM. And found out that it was awful, and not worth $60.

It's been quite a while, but from what I remember TW2 was DRM-free from day one (after a patch, if I remember correctly) on GOG and Steam (except for steam's own drm, of course). If it wasn't from day one, it was removed within a week or two.

EDIT:

[Quote from Wikipedia]

"On April 14, 2011, CD Projekt RED announced during their CDP Days 2011 Spring Conference that retail copies of the game would feature SecuRom DRM. However, the protection would still allow for infinite installations on an infinite number of PCs, with the ability to play on up to five PCs at any one time. It was also confirmed that the game would feature no censorship between regions.[11] The Witcher 2 was also distributed through several digital distribution services such as Steam and CD Projekt RED's own service GOG.com. The version sold on GOG.com was the only version that did not have any DRM at release."

"At launch, many critics and gamers complained about activation problems, registration issues, and performance on high-end systems with both Nvidia and AMD cards. The 1.1 patch of the game also resolves some of the above noted issues.[15]
Note that patch 1.1 removes the DRM.[16] Tech Spot claimed, based on user reports, that the DRM on the retail version of The Witcher 2 drastically reduced frame rates and increased load times.[17] Patch 1.1 reportedly increased frame rate simply by removing the DRM.[17] The release notes indicated that the "Game now runs 5-30% more efficiently and game loading has been accelerated. Efficiency increases will vary depending on system configuration and game version."[17] The release notes also stated that owners of the boxed versions of the game would notice the most significant improvements.[17]"

Please note that the patch that removed the DRM from all non-GOG.com versions of the game was released within 9 days of the game's release.

AJey:
Then they should not cry when game gets pirated again.

I dont think CD Projeckt ever cried about their games getting pirated, in fact I think they said a while back that they would like people to play it first and formost, and if they enjoy it then to support the developer so they can make more games.

OT:

CD Projeckt, you magnificent bastard, I READ PLAYED YOUR GAME!

seriously, just got done with the Witcher 1 and while it wasn't that great in my view, it was a nice experience.

Havent thought about getting 2 yet, but if somehow it comes out on the PS4 sometime after launch, preferably as a download I will play it.

Witcher 3? definitely getting it for the PS4, the 360 is the last console I buy from Microsoft.

BloodSquirrel:
"CD Projekt is well known for its unwavering stance against DRM"

Except when they put DRM in The Witcher 2. Which was kind of a blessing, I guess, because I didn't buy it until much later at a lower price point after they had removed the DRM. And found out that it was awful, and not worth $60.

It was DRM free from day one. The publisher enforced it(retail discs), CDPR removed it with a patch not very long after release. GoG.com version was DRM free from the get go.

Kalezian:
I dont think CD Projeckt ever cried about their games getting pirated, in fact I think they said a while back that they would like people to play it first and formost, and if they enjoy it then to support the developer so they can make more games.

They did, a while back. They were talking about how their game was downloaded a lot from torrents. No one's perfect.
But I think actions speak louder than words. And so far CDPR is acting good.

mateushac:

It's been quite a while, but from what I remember TW2 was DRM-free from day one (after a patch, if I remember correctly) on GOG and Steam (except for steam's own drm, of course). If it wasn't from day one, it was removed within a week or two.

EDIT:

[Quote from Wikipedia]

"On April 14, 2011, CD Projekt RED announced during their CDP Days 2011 Spring Conference that retail copies of the game would feature SecuRom DRM. However, the protection would still allow for infinite installations on an infinite number of PCs, with the ability to play on up to five PCs at any one time. It was also confirmed that the game would feature no censorship between regions.[11] The Witcher 2 was also distributed through several digital distribution services such as Steam and CD Projekt RED's own service GOG.com. The version sold on GOG.com was the only version that did not have any DRM at release."

"At launch, many critics and gamers complained about activation problems, registration issues, and performance on high-end systems with both Nvidia and AMD cards. The 1.1 patch of the game also resolves some of the above noted issues.[15]
Note that patch 1.1 removes the DRM.[16] Tech Spot claimed, based on user reports, that the DRM on the retail version of The Witcher 2 drastically reduced frame rates and increased load times.[17] Patch 1.1 reportedly increased frame rate simply by removing the DRM.[17] The release notes indicated that the "Game now runs 5-30% more efficiently and game loading has been accelerated. Efficiency increases will vary depending on system configuration and game version."[17] The release notes also stated that owners of the boxed versions of the game would notice the most significant improvements.[17]"

Please note that the patch that removed the DRM from all non-GOG.com versions of the game was released within 9 days of the game's release.

DRM which you have to install a patch to get rid of is still DRM. Patching is even more trouble than a normal authentication would have been in the first place.

"A little better than other companies about DRM, sometimes" is not an "unwavering stance".

BloodSquirrel:

mateushac:

snip

DRM which you have to install a patch to get rid of is still DRM. Patching is even more trouble than a normal authentication would have been in the first place.

"A little better than other companies about DRM, sometimes" is not an "unwavering stance".

You see, there's always been DRM-free versions of TW2 for sale. The issues they had with Steam were obvious and the DRM on physical copies was enforced by the publishers (okay, you might not be willing to believe this, but it was their official stance since before release). Even if you believe the whole DRM on physical copies thing was intentional, you still had GOG.com supplying DRM-free digital copies from day one. Maybe they were trying to encourage digital sales instead of retail, but who's to blame them for playing business to their advantage?

Also, you should patch a game sometime. You'll see that it may be quite easy.

This is why they're so great. Even when they disagree with everything the console is doing DRM-wise, they're still going to release it there so that anyone without a great PC can still get their hands on it. Good Guy CDProjekt

/applause

NKRevan:

AJey:
Then they should not cry when game gets pirated again.

This is why we can't have nice things. -.-

Yap... cause a simple comment pointing out the flaw of their decision is why we can't have nice things. Great logic!

nevarran:

Kalezian:
I dont think CD Projeckt ever cried about their games getting pirated, in fact I think they said a while back that they would like people to play it first and formost, and if they enjoy it then to support the developer so they can make more games.

They did, a while back. They were talking about how their game was downloaded a lot from torrents. No one's perfect.
But I think actions speak louder than words. And so far CDPR is acting good.

That's not crying. Someone asked the CEO how many times they thought the game was pirated, and he made a quick calculation. Saying your game was pirated 4.5 million times isn't complaining, that's just stating a number. He even stands by the lack of DRM on their games despite this.

'In my almost 20 years in the industry, I have not seen DRM that really worked (i.e. did not complicate the life of the legal gamer and at the same time protect the game). We have seen a lot of different protections, but there are only two ways you can go: Either you use light DRM, which is cracked in no time and is not a major pain for the end-user, or you go the hard way and try to super-protect the game.

Yes, it is then hard to crack, but you start messing with the operation system, the game runs much slower and - for a group of legal gamers - it will not run at all. None of these solutions really work, so why not abandon it altogether?'

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/11/29/interview-cd-projekts-ceo-on-witcher-2-piracy-why-drms-still-not-worth-it/

How in God's name is that crying? That's just a CEO discussing the inevitability of piracy, and that he's OKAY WITH IT.

I love CD Projekt Red. The Witcher 2 is a fantastic game and I can't wait for The Witcher 3. I plan purchasing the PC version when it is released.

AJey:

NKRevan:

AJey:
Then they should not cry when game gets pirated again.

This is why we can't have nice things. -.-

Yap... cause a simple comment pointing out the flaw of their decision is why we can't have nice things. Great logic!

It's a flaw to give the game without DRM? So you are in support of MS and their anti-DRM policies. And Ubisoft's? And EA's?

Have CDPR cried before when the game got pirated? (See the post above for clarification on this)

Is it now suddenly OK to pirate a game because hey, there's no DRM, so they should expect it!

Gaming community cried for less DRM and wants publishers and dev's to be more trusting and yet when a company does just that, people come along and tell them to suck it up when their game gets stolen.

Great logic!

NKRevan:

AJey:

NKRevan:

This is why we can't have nice things. -.-

Yap... cause a simple comment pointing out the flaw of their decision is why we can't have nice things. Great logic!

It's a flaw to give the game without DRM? So you are in support of MS and their anti-DRM policies. And Ubisoft's? And EA's?

Have CDPR cried before when the game got pirated? (See the post above for clarification on this)

Is it now suddenly OK to pirate a game because hey, there's no DRM, so they should expect it!

Gaming community cried for less DRM and wants publishers and dev's to be more trusting and yet when a company does just that, people come along and tell them to suck it up when their game gets stolen.

Great logic!

Well, it's been a while seen I have seen such a dramatic misinterpretation of a simple sentence. Let me elucidate. With the things as they are in MS world, XBone is not gonna be on many people's shopping lists. However, XBox fans who dont want to buy new console but want to play the game, will most likely justify pirating said game by pointing at MS and calling them evil. I never said I condone piracy, I never mentioned I appreciated MS business practices. My comment was meant as a jab at Witcher's piracy history by making a correlation between said history and their business partnership with MS. In other words - I was not talking about DRM, I was talking about obvious conflict of interest between the two companies.

AJey:

NKRevan:
snip

Well, it's been a while seen I have seen such a dramatic misinterpretation of a simple sentence. Let me elucidate. With the things as they are in MS world, XBone is not gonna be on many people's shopping lists. However, XBox fans who dont want to buy new console but want to play the game, will most likely justify pirating said game by pointing at MS and calling them evil. I never said I condone piracy, I never mentioned I appreciated MS business practices. My comment was meant as a jab at Witcher's piracy history by making a correlation between said history and their business partnership with MS. In other words - I was not talking about DRM, I was talking about obvious conflict of interest between the two companies.

Why would MS fanboys pirate the game if they do have versions available for PC, PS4 and XboxOne? Seriously, what else could CDPR do to prevent pirates from pirating? No DRM has ever prevented anyone from making bootleg copies.

Sure, the game will get pirated to hell, but so will every great game that launches on PC (and sooner or later on consoles too), no matter how much DRM you cram into it.

mateushac:

AJey:

NKRevan:
snip

Well, it's been a while seen I have seen such a dramatic misinterpretation of a simple sentence. Let me elucidate. With the things as they are in MS world, XBone is not gonna be on many people's shopping lists. However, XBox fans who dont want to buy new console but want to play the game, will most likely justify pirating said game by pointing at MS and calling them evil. I never said I condone piracy, I never mentioned I appreciated MS business practices. My comment was meant as a jab at Witcher's piracy history by making a correlation between said history and their business partnership with MS. In other words - I was not talking about DRM, I was talking about obvious conflict of interest between the two companies.

Why would MS fanboys pirate the game if they do have versions available for PC, PS4 and XboxOne? Seriously, what else could CDPR do to prevent pirates from pirating? No DRM has ever prevented anyone from making bootleg copies.

Sure, the game will get pirated to hell, but so will every great game that launches on PC (and sooner or later on consoles too), no matter how much DRM you cram into it.

Piracy is about excuses, finding a stupid thing to say and justify stealing intellectual property. When you release your game on an unattractive platform, you are creating an excuse to pirate it (no matter have silly that excuse might be).

HyenaThePirate:

GAunderrated:
Can't argue with the logic. If you don't want to support xbox one crap DRM then buy it on one of the many other choices. I personally will PC this game to hell

This, except minus the "crap" portion of the comment.
-snip-

And if you don't like it, buy a PS4. Or a PC. You've got options! Don't get mad because OTHER people don't agree with YOUR choices.

-snip-

you've both basically made the same point, why the rant?

HyenaThePirate:

This, except minus the "crap" portion of the comment.

Frankly, I don't see why this is a big deal or issue. For those of us who care more about games than about how companies keep people from stealing them, the Xbox One has few flaws. I like the system, I like what it's trying to do, and I'm a grown man who will own BOTH systems and have a great PC. I have internet and that argument crying about "Oh wooooe! What if you don't have internet access?!? Logging in on a daily basis to verify my game's license! That's draconian booo hoo!"

Really??? Xbox is the go to system for most FPS gamers that want to play multiplayer games. That's not disputed. So who is it that doesn't have a reliable enough internet connection to allow their xbox to access it once a day? If you live in NORTH AMERICA or the WESTERN hemisphere, very, very few people can lodge this complaint. Nowadays this is life as we know it, step into the future. Always connected, wifi-plugged in.. this is the future of EVERYTHING.

And if you don't like it, buy a PS4. Or a PC. You've got options! Don't get mad because OTHER people don't agree with YOUR choices.

And let's not forget SONY's less than stellar history in regards to DRM combat. ROOT KIT anyone?? Do you think that if the Xbox pulls off what Microsoft is attempting to do that Sony won't follow suit immediately? And the developers are rightly so keeping their mouths shut about it because at the end of the day they know it means MORE profit for them, less for Gamestop and used games stores, which might be of tremendous delight and benefit to us broke-ass consumers, but are essentially leeches to developers that really would prefer their games to be bought at full price and to be compensated for each used sale.
If Gamestop didn't want this to happen, they should have voluntarily came up with a way to ensure developers got their cut of the resell pie. All the semantical arguments about "this is my game I bought it so I can sell it for whatever I want to whom I want Nyaaaah" sounds adorably quaint but it's a one-sided (and rather limited) perspective, considering apart from the initial money we paid for the game's purchase we had little involvement with its creation, and even less impact on its success.

First off your missing an important part, that while your net (and mine and most others) may always be on, theirs wont. Weather it be a technical issue or not, eventually they will switch them off, which then kills all games and consoles. I do not accept that Ford can turn up one day and steal my car, nor would I allow Parramount walk in and steal my copy of Star Trek when they wanted, so neither will I let Microsoft steal my games in 10 years (or whenever it is) when they turn off the system and say "tough luck, upgrade".

Second, how you can think that game companies get some special permission to demand money from second hand games when everything else can freely be traded and by most countries laws must be able to be traded freely is beyond me, do you really believe that customers have no rights? I know America has some weird laws regarding consumer rights but even by American standards this is rediculas and gamestop is not in the wrong to be providing a service to resell games, it's what our economy runs off. I don't buy used games (unless its old games that aren't sold anymore), but even I won't accept them being stopped out of American corporate greed on principle alone.

No it isn't one sided, its the way economy works and how everything else is sold, traded and resold, it's how items have a value and are worth purchasing knowing you can give them to a friend once done or resell. Only the ignorant would accept the crap that publishers are spinning, I get that they want more money but they make millions if not billions every year, they need to stop wasting it on DRM/used game restrictions, and start budgeting accordingly. Theres a reason that Rockstar, who make only a few games every few years, is rolling in money. They budget accordingly and make excellent games that people want. Theres no excuse for not being able to do that.

Great answer... its going to be how this age of gaming unfolds true enough. Speak with what you buy, pc for total freedom, ps4 for freedom in the regaurd of not doing anything newly offensive and xbox for simply taking the cronic piss out of us consumers... again sad they've polarized us more so than ever...

Here's dreaming sony studios produces the halo tv show :P want to watch it on my ps4 for irony's sake.

I have a feeling we may see this repeat with other devs. They know how the Big Names' decisions are fucking them over, and I don't think many of them will stand for it.

Captcha: One upon a time

Yes... once upon a time we didn't have to worry about all this.

AJey:
Then they should not cry when game gets pirated again.

They never have cried about it. Unlike most publishers they realise that a minor amount of piracy is simply an expected cost of doing business and not worth alienating the far larger mass of paying customers over.

HyenaThePirate:

GAunderrated:
Can't argue with the logic. If you don't want to support xbox one crap DRM then buy it on one of the many other choices. I personally will PC this game to hell

This, except minus the "crap" portion of the comment.

Frankly, I don't see why this is a big deal or issue. For those of us who care more about games than about how companies keep people from stealing them, the Xbox One has few flaws. I like the system, I like what it's trying to do, and I'm a grown man who will own BOTH systems and have a great PC. I have internet and that argument crying about "Oh wooooe! What if you don't have internet access?!? Logging in on a daily basis to verify my game's license! That's draconian booo hoo!"

Really??? Xbox is the go to system for most FPS gamers that want to play multiplayer games. That's not disputed. So who is it that doesn't have a reliable enough internet connection to allow their xbox to access it once a day? If you live in NORTH AMERICA or the WESTERN hemisphere, very, very few people can lodge this complaint. Nowadays this is life as we know it, step into the future. Always connected, wifi-plugged in.. this is the future of EVERYTHING.

And if you don't like it, buy a PS4. Or a PC. You've got options! Don't get mad because OTHER people don't agree with YOUR choices.

And let's not forget SONY's less than stellar history in regards to DRM combat. ROOT KIT anyone?? Do you think that if the Xbox pulls off what Microsoft is attempting to do that Sony won't follow suit immediately? And the developers are rightly so keeping their mouths shut about it because at the end of the day they know it means MORE profit for them, less for Gamestop and used games stores, which might be of tremendous delight and benefit to us broke-ass consumers, but are essentially leeches to developers that really would prefer their games to be bought at full price and to be compensated for each used sale.
If Gamestop didn't want this to happen, they should have voluntarily came up with a way to ensure developers got their cut of the resell pie. All the semantical arguments about "this is my game I bought it so I can sell it for whatever I want to whom I want Nyaaaah" sounds adorably quaint but it's a one-sided (and rather limited) perspective, considering apart from the initial money we paid for the game's purchase we had little involvement with its creation, and even less impact on its success.

The main issue is that most people want to own their content, not license it. Eventually the Xbox one servers will be closed down, and the consul will be useless. I still play older games, and the idea that I'm effectively renting a game at full price is insulting.THE Xbox isn't cheaper then the PS3, despite placing huge emphasis on digital content. This is inexcusable. If they wanted to undercut Sony with digital media they could, but at this point they still haven't. This is simple greed. At least Sony embraces trading games and used games. They emphasize more with cash strapped buyers then the Xbox does. The Xbox barely even supports indi games, which are typically cheaper.

The main issue is that the xbox is taking away consumer choices. Sony stepped in and offered an alternative, and they have gained support as a result. It's classic capitalism at work. People have the right to their opinion. You can buy the Xbox, that's fine. Personally I will buy the PS3, and so will many others. However, it is not childish or juvenile to want ownership over the things I purchased, especially when I spend so much for a single game.

You say consumers perspectives are limited, but of course consumers are going to take a position that benefits them. It's the companies job to impress us, not the other way around. If they impress us enough, then we will consider purchasing their merchandise. However, they have no right to complain about failure due to their bad business practices, or their rights as producers, when their troubles are self created. I'm a consumer, I was not impressed by them, so I'll take my business elsewhere. I don't owe Microsoft anything.

AJey:
Then they should not cry when game gets pirated again.

They don't. If they did, THEY WOULDN'T RUN THE BIGGEST DAMN DRM-FREE DISTRIBUTOR ON THE WHOLE GODDAMNED INTERNET.

They're just disappointed when it happens, as they should be.

 Pages 1 2 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