9 réponses à ce sujet

[Eternal Napalm]

Let me state the obvious.

Modifié par Eternal Napalm, 06 juin 2013 - 07:54 .

[Allan Schumacher]

The borrowing tangent can die now, since it's not particularly funny and the point has been made.


In any case, it seems like the console is adopting a delivery method very similar to Steam, in that physical media is just used as an installer. Instead of validating with a CD key, it must validate with something else I imagine (not sure on the details).

The decision will severely affect (i.e. eliminate) used physical copies. I actually don't know much about the console, and haven't really seen much aside from synopsis that have gone around the past day, but it sounds like there's a rumor that games can be sold digitally, and in that case the "fee" won't apply since it'll be able to remove the license from the seller's account, and transfer it to the purchaser's account.

Interesting shift for used games, if this is in fact the case.

[Allan Schumacher]

The Hierophant wrote...

Regarding the fees for used games, will Microsoft pocket the money for themselves or give it to the game maker's companies?

My expectation is that it'd be like any other game sale.  It'd probably be inviting all sorts of bad legal scrutiny to bank all the money themselves.  It'd also not really foster positive relationships with third party developers.

[Allan Schumacher]

Battlebloodmage wrote...

Wouldn't the third party own the intellectual property of the products? I don't how Microsoft can keep all the money without legal rammification from the developers. Even if Microsoft's willing to share the money, could the developers negotiate the percentage or will it be a set percentage? 

On the other hand, when you buy a used game from gamestop, the developers usually get nothing as well since they were paid in full the

Perhaps I wasn't super clear, but when I said "like any other game sale" I meant that the money distribution would be the same as if someone went into a store or bought it online.

In other words, that Microsoft would not get all the money.

[Allan Schumacher]

Battlebloodmage wrote...

Oh, I see, I guess I misread your post, although I'm not sure if the other developers can do anything if they decide to keep the money. It's a used game, and if the developers don't usually get paid for when they buy a physical used game, I don't see how they should get paid for a used digital game. I'm not sure if there's some kind of laws that differentiate a physical copy with a digital one.

The difference is that it comes across as more a sale of a license, rather than the transfer of a physical good.  Especially if all games must be installed on the hard drive, and that they do not require the disc to play (more similarities to Steam).  The fact that the disc isn't required is probably a big motivator for this decision too, as unlike past "borrowing" of games, you just install it on the machine and you don't need the disc anymore.  As such, it'd make casual piracy trivial.

Selling a disc via gamestop is still selling a physical good.  Microsoft saying "Thanks for all your money" while more clearly selling a license is a bit different than Gamestop buying and selling physical media.  Especially given that the "fee" you pay will effectively be what the current price of the game is (likely through digital means).

[Allan Schumacher]

billy the squid wrote...

There is a problem because it doesn't actually do those other things better than the other specialised devices that are already in existence, which do the job better, and I already own them.

I don't admit it makes TV better, it was a stupid move. A system which is supposed to replace TV, but requires an actual TV to work >.< demented in every sense of the concept. The digital TV I'm using can connect to the net, I can watch films on demand quicker than on xbox, and I have the various menus I can program....why would I need to do any of this via an xbox? The Digital HDTVs do a better job, and I already have it, I don't need to pay extra for that service!

Rubbish. The PS4 is centred around games and the incoming steambox from Valve is essentially an miniturised modular PC to play games on, post console, please. the X1 simple decided to jump off in a completely different direction to ensure it's own redundancy.

Multimedia my arse. I have skype on my iPhone, what possible need do I have for it on xbox, I also have it on my PC. My PC is for work and high end games, watching and downloading films music etc. My TV lets me watch TV at the drop of a hat and browse films on demand. My console should focus on games and enhance that experience. The Wii was a novelty using games like Mario and the touch sensor system.

What microsoft did was declare themselves an entertainment system ignoring the fact that all their competitors already do what they're trying to do and do it better. They ensured their own irrelevency by giving up the middle ground to Sony, and lets not even start with the online, ID and system locking issues, xbox live costs etc.

The important thing to always remember is that, because it doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean no one will find it appealing (whether or not people will find it appealing remains to be seen of course).

I, personally, haven't felt a need for a console since I was in a Rock Band craze in 2008, and that petered out relatively quickly.  Still, more "hardcore" units were shipped for both the primary consoles than my platform of choice.

EDIT: Although, for what it's worth, it won't be running into the same
issues other Always Online fiascos (like Diablo 3 and SimCity) had. This
will be a quick check in to make sure all licenses are valid... there
won't be a server you have to play your games out of as par for the
course. 

So it is still a concern, but less of a guaranteed-disaster, in my book.

It makes it more inline with Steam, IMO.  Which was also something that, while still having its critics now, was almost universally derided as something that offered features that were better obtained elsewhere and ultimately was seen as more of a liability than anything worth actually having.  So I think it's something we'll have to see let play out.

Steam does have a much nicer than 1 day allowance in terms of offline outages, however.  Still, it's on Microsoft to make sure that the infrastructre is still there, as there will be loads of server demand on new releases regardless (a huge issue Valve ran into with Half-Life 2 actually).

I'm also curious if there's simply some level of "inertia of status quo" at play.  It's different, and may be easier to focus on worst case negatives rather than even considering fringe benefits (let alone best case benefits).


From what I hear, it sounds like they tried to make it clear that E3 is where they were going to focus most of their gaming discussion, however, so it's hard for me to not see a lot of the initial outrage as being some level of Chicken Little screaming.

[Allan Schumacher]

As a further note, I recognize that there will be some level of "inconsistent application of forum rules" since I don't frequent off topic section a lot, but I will be following this thread and will not have a large amount of tolerance for people just wanting to jump on the hate wagon, especially if it involves attacking other posters (or even Microsoft).

[Allan Schumacher]

That seems to be the underestimation of the PC, but it's not only a gaming platform, which is what the X1 has tried to immitate, but the PC does everything the Xbox does, and more, and does it better. The issue is that consoles are able to cater to a larger audience who may find building a PC daunting, or those that don't want to fiddle with specs. That's what MS relinquished to Sony by shifting focus to entertainment with Gaming as a preripheral, while Sony maintains gaming as a focues, with other aspects to enhance it.

I think this is an important observation. I'm of the opinion that the PC has always been able to do everything a console can do, and more. Yet, consoles are the dominant gaming device (especially for "HD Gaming" i.e. not mobile apps or social games).

It seems to me that MS is really looking at shifting to much more than just a gaming platform. The thing is, even with games, people only demand a particular type of game once they have been given it. Outside of random musings for a City building simulator, fanatical demands for more don't come until after SimCity released all those years ago.

You can really see this when you look at fans demands from developers. It's always, if not a direct sequel, a game like a previous game. The irony I always find with this is that, had a sequel been made instead of that new game, would we have been happier? Imagine if BioWare decided to go with Shattered Steel 2 instead of Baldur's Gate.

[Allan Schumacher]

I hear people say that with any digital download platform but it rings a bit hollow to me right now. Absolutely, Steam sucked and people hated it when it first came out. And some people still dislike it. But Steam was also the very first big DD platform of its kind, making it the trailblazer of sorts. And it came out close to 10 years ago now.

Are you making an assumption that, because Steam happened 10 years ago, that people are more embracing of change than they one were (I'd adamantly disagree with this perspective).

WIth respect to used games, that is usually a big issue with pricing- get a used game cheaper than a new copy. With Steam, you have tons of Steam sales, either directly through Steam or via Amazon or GMG. Has MS shown any drive to do that kind of competitive pricing digitally thus far? Why would they start if they have their own walled garden?

Why does Steam do it despite being the biggest market share for digital distribution? Steam does Steam sales because, as the distributor, it doesn't care if it's making $1 million with 20 sales, or 500k sales. They're taking the cut of the money. So Steam does Steam sales because it gets people buying games in large quantities.

You seem to feel that the human beings using Xbox One are somehow fundamentally different than human beings using Steam. They aren't (in many cases they are actually the same people).


I could go point by point, but basically it comes down to this:

And at this point, Valve is more trusted by me than I trust MS. Trust is a big deal with any digital download service.

The only reason why you let Valve do the same things that MS (specifically phrased this way to drive the point home) is because you trust them more. It has little to do with the specific features, functions, or capability, and much more to do with whether or not you feel like you're not going to get ripped off.

I would have loved to seen the reaction if this was the SteamBox reveal, to be perfectly honest. I have no doubts that opinions would be different, fueled in large part by their impressions of Valve as well as whether or not they have used (and enjoyed) the Steam service.

[Allan Schumacher]

MerinTB wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...
The only reason why you let Valve do the same things that MS (specifically phrased this way to drive the point home) is because you trust them more. It has little to do with the specific features, functions, or capability, and much more to do with whether or not you feel like you're not going to get ripped off.

Allan, just answer this:

You DO know that you don't have to be online to play Steam games once they are installed, right?

Yes I do.

And, if you are feeling generous to me, also answer this:

You have seen that Valve/Steam not only continues to support it's old games (Counterstrike) where MS/Games For X doesn't (Halo?), but that Microsoft pricing of digital items stinks on ice as compared to Valve pricing of digital items.  I mean, you can compare Amazon to Steam, or maybe Stardock, but Zune/Games For X/ Xbox Marketplace?  You do know that Microsoft's digital platforms and Valve's are not at all equal, right?

Given that I've stated that it seems like Microsoft is looking to adopt a Steam method, I figure it was pretty clearly implied that I do not feel that Microsoft's digital platform and Valve's are at all equal.

If I did think they were equal, I wouldn't be saying that it looks like the Xbox One was moving to a platform more like Steam, since it'd already be there then.