85 réponses à ce sujet

[Galbrant]

The Xbox One does still require online connection. You have to be online at least once a day.

http://kotaku.com/xb...lay-o-509164109

Well if my internet goes out for a few hours cool I can still play awhile... But if I lose the internet for a week or have to move... you're screwed.

[AshedMan]

Who needs EA's online passes when the new XBOX will do it for them.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Khayness wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

Khayness wrote...

It's a trap!

On PC you can't buy new titles used anyways (unless you register each one of them on different Origin account and trade it along with the game?), if the no used games always on DRM nextgen crap turns out to be true, many people called it as getting some goodwill out of removing a soon to be obsolete feature.

Sony confirimed that there won't be always online and I think MS confirmed it too.

Interesting.

Well it is true that X1 isn't always online, but yes it was a trap, and tbh I knew it was.

Modifié par DinoSteve, 22 mai 2013 - 03:25 .

[Sajuro]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

But it would. Because there are basic property laws that state that once you buy that shirt, you can give it to whomever you wish to wear. 

Video games try and get around that by stating it is digital media, not acutal property, but there are numerous legal challenges to that. It is hardly an accepeted legal doctrine that when you buy a video game, you are only "renting" the ability to play it.

But you didn't buy the shirt, remember. You bought the right to wear the shirt. The company still owns the shirt. They...licensed it to you.

Yes?

I don't know of any business model in the world where you would or even could rent a shirt. Again, property and ownership laws start coming into play. "Possession is 9/10's of the law" and all that. If you have the shirt in your possession, at what point would the company in question try and either repossess your shirt or block you (or someone else) from wearing it? 

And nowhere in the agreement of gamer and publisher is it ever implied that you are LEASING a game. It is always a purchase. There is no terms and conditions you are forced to agree to or sign when you walk out of the store with your game, unlike the vast majortiy of rental/lease agreements. 

The game publisher is attempting to push an agreement that isn't backed by legislation nor agreed (or even informed) on the part of the purchaser. I'm no lawyer, but that is a VERY hard position for a company to take, let alone defend.

I think that would be in the end user license agreement
Also, it would be 'There are no terms....'
just saying

[Eternal Napalm]

Gee, I wonder why they are doing this? Lol. And indeed, some people are dumb enough to actually spend money on the Xbox One (lol!)

[Mendelevosa]

Used game fees for next-gen consoles......

LOL! I knew there was a catch.

[BadExamp1e]

No more online passes? They are only going to charge gamers for something else then.

[bEVEsthda]

Of course they're going to charge gamers. It's their business.
There really isn't anything wrong with providing goods for a fee. It's how products and services are exchanged between humans, thanks to a great universal trading item called money.

The problem isn't charging for something, or protecting your goods from thieves.
The problem is convoluted schemes which hide future costs, and inconvenience or restrict customers.

[MstrJedi Kyle]

They are removing them because MS will be doing it for them. Nothing changes but EA gets to look like they did something right.

[Naughty Bear]

You can guarantee EA will apply for the always online method for their games.

[RedArmyShogun]

lol looking at how far into the Xbox one EA is and the PS4's own rules which while not as bad are in the same region it doesn't need to do online passes anymore. Its being done for them.