4196 réponses à ce sujet

[The Love Runner]

I had told a friend of mine about this, and he said he would now consider it.

I've never been an Xbox fan overall, so this doesn't change my purchasing decision. Still getting PS4 and Wii U instead. But it's nice to see Xbox One owners having less restrictions regarding their games.

[Volus Warlord]

OdanUrr wrote...

Gizmodo seems none too happy about Microsoft's "capitulation":

http://gizmodo.com/t...fault-514411905

Holy hell! That article is SOO vomitworthy! Concentrated fail left and right!


Greivous Error and Misrepresentation List:
1.) World of Warcraft does not have a DRM in the traditional sense. It is an online only game designed from the ground up to be an online only game. It's an MMO. The fact that you have to be online for a game that is strictly MP is not DRM, it's part of the game's functionality. Yes, Blizz had extensive power over your account, but Blizz can generally be trusted not be be jackasses with their power. More so than Microsoft, for certain. When they pushed for authenticators, it was to reduce account theft, not to give them more power or control. 

2.) I don't lose my music or books without internect connectivity with Amazon or Itunes. And Itunes did not stop music piracy in the slightest. That is a laughable assertion.

3.) DRM never made anything cheaper. Not for us, anyway. If anything, it makes it easier to fix prices, as seen on Xbox 360.

4.) The ability to connect to the internet to retrive material is not the same thing as DRM. 

5.) Being disappointed that your own voice is heard is idiocy. 

6.) Microsoft did NOT have to scrap all these features. If they wanted to implement them, they (in part) still could, and that may have helped dissuade gamers from their current stance for future console generations. Instead, they scrapped them wholesale like an angry teen. 

For instance: The Vision
-Tying games to your account isn't that much a plus. Yes, you'd be able to download it to other consoles and you wouldn't have to worry as much about disc damage, BUT I really don't take my account anywhere and I don't know many people who do. Other than changing consoles when your current breaks. If you did want to visit a friend, instead of taking the disc, you'd have to sit through an often painfully slow DL before you could play. The only upside is it saves you from disc damage.
-Reselling the games digitally over Xbox One would monopolize the used game market or shut it down entirely, not bolster it. Cmon, most of the big boys ****** and moan over used games all the time.
-Whether or not publishers make money on resold games is not my problem. Stop trying to make it my problem.
-The idea of prices going down due to monopolizing the market is total horse****.
-Better returns on the used games is pure speculation and again most likely horse****.
-Steam has competition and Microsoft would not.
-The "Sharing" thing may have still worked. You put a code on the disc that is linked to the account. The account is linked to the group. Group can access the game, but not more than one at a time or however many codes are in the group "pool". New buyer can still play the used game, but not use group share because the code is already on your account. You could force online for the group share to prevent abuses. Not hooked up, you can't play shared games or have others play your library. Why wouldn't that work? I wouldn't complain if certain FEATURES were always online rather than brute forcing EVERYTHING to be always online.

So the only thing we lost was the Sharing thing, which we weren't even sure how well or how poorly it would work. I'll take that trade.

[Ravensword]

bobobo878 wrote...

Wait, they reversed it? They actually reversed it?

En Taro Adun!

[Steelcan]

Ryzaki wrote...

Ghost Lightning wrote...

IntelligentME3Fanboy wrote...

PS4 will still probably dominate everywhere outside US

Well considering that it's only available in 20 countries other than the US, I'm inclined to agree (especially seeing as how Japan is not one of those 20 countries).

didn't they change that too? Without the need for constant servers they should be able to launch everywhere.

.  Apparently it is no longer region locked

[HiddenInWar]

I'm back from a picnic, what'd I miss? MS actually reversed everything?

[Ryzaki]

Steelcan wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Ghost Lightning wrote...

IntelligentME3Fanboy wrote...

PS4 will still probably dominate everywhere outside US

Well considering that it's only available in 20 countries other than the US, I'm inclined to agree (especially seeing as how Japan is not one of those 20 countries).

didn't they change that too? Without the need for constant servers they should be able to launch everywhere.

.  Apparently it is no longer region locked

excellent. Both PS4 and Xbox One 80 () won't have region lock.

@Hidden: They reversed a lot of the crap.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 19 juin 2013 - 11:21 .

[TheBlackBaron]

MerinTB wrote...

Not if going all-in on digital was their goal, the future.

Movies, tv, etc - all DIGITAL, NO DISCS.  You want to play your blu-ray collection, your dvd's, etc?  Use your existing players.

But the drive was there.  And that made EVERYTHING DIFFERENT.

Fundamentally I have to disagree here. Driving console gaming into digital is one thing, especially when half the gaming market has already saturated the digitial sphere (besides music, what other media industry has adopted digitial distribution as heavily as PC gaming?).

Movies, however, still lag behind both for new media, and further are not something Microsoft directly particpates in. Netflix is a great service, but it still has significant time lag between new movies being released on Blu-Ray and new movies being available for streaming. 

I did see a suggestion on another site for making "retail" purchases of games work like retail puchases of XBL subscriptions, or MS points, or Steam cash, or all all variations thereof. I think that idea has some merit for pushing the gaming into digitial while still allowing for compatibility with the dominant form of distribution with movies.

OdanUrr wrote...

The problem Microsoft now faces is trying to sell Kinect 2.0. Considering how its predecessor fared they're in a tough spot.

Yeah, um, the Kinect 1 hasn't had any problems selling. To gamers, perhaps, but not the population at large. 

[LPPrince]

HiddenInWar wrote...

I'm back from a picnic, what'd I miss? MS actually reversed everything?

They reversed a lot, yeah.

[Overdosing]

HiddenInWar wrote...

I'm back from a picnic, what'd I miss? MS actually reversed everything?

Not EVERYTHING, just the issues with DRM and used games.

[Bekkael]

Volus Warlord wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

Gizmodo seems none too happy about Microsoft's "capitulation":

http://gizmodo.com/t...fault-514411905

Holy hell! That article is SOO vomitworthy! Concentrated fail left and right!


Greivous Error and Misrepresentation List:
1.) World of Warcraft does not have a DRM in the traditional sense. It is an online only game designed from the ground up to be an online only game. It's an MMO. The fact that you have to be online for a game that is strictly MP is not DRM, it's part of the game's functionality. Yes, Blizz had extensive power over your account, but Blizz can generally be trusted not be be jackasses with their power. More so than Microsoft, for certain. When they pushed for authenticators, it was to reduce account theft, not to give them more power or control. 

2.) I don't lose my music or books without internect connectivity with Amazon or Itunes. And Itunes did not stop music piracy in the slightest. That is a laughable assertion.

3.) DRM never made anything cheaper. Not for us, anyway. If anything, it makes it easier to fix prices, as seen on Xbox 360.

4.) The ability to connect to the internet to retrive material is not the same thing as DRM. 

5.) Being disappointed that your own voice is heard is idiocy. 

6.) Microsoft did NOT have to scrap all these features. If they wanted to implement them, they (in part) still could, and that may have helped dissuade gamers from their current stance for future console generations. Instead, they scrapped them wholesale like an angry teen. 

For instance: The Vision
-Tying games to your account isn't that much a plus. Yes, you'd be able to download it to other consoles and you wouldn't have to worry as much about disc damage, BUT I really don't take my account anywhere and I don't know many people who do. Other than changing consoles when your current breaks. If you did want to visit a friend, instead of taking the disc, you'd have to sit through an often painfully slow DL before you could play. The only upside is it saves you from disc damage.
-Reselling the games digitally over Xbox One would monopolize the used game market or shut it down entirely, not bolster it. Cmon, most of the big boys ****** and moan over used games all the time.
-Whether or not publishers make money on resold games is not my problem. Stop trying to make it my problem.
-The idea of prices going down due to monopolizing the market is total horse****.
-Better returns on the used games is pure speculation and again most likely horse****.
-Steam has competition and Microsoft would not.
-The "Sharing" thing may have still worked. You put a code on the disc that is linked to the account. The account is linked to the group. Group can access the game, but not more than one at a time or however many codes are in the group "pool". New buyer can still play the used game, but not use group share because the code is already on your account. You could force online for the group share to prevent abuses. Not hooked up, you can't play shared games or have others play your library. Why wouldn't that work? I wouldn't complain if certain FEATURES were always online rather than brute forcing EVERYTHING to be always online.

So the only thing we lost was the Sharing thing, which we weren't even sure how well or how poorly it would work. I'll take that trade.

*slow clap*

That person is entitled to his opinion, but I certainly cannot and do not share it. The average Joe works hard for his/her money and does not deserve to be told lots of things his/her game console CAN'T DO because of reasons.

I'm glad Microsoft changed it's tune. I'm sure it was only done because their backsides were in the fire, but a change is still a change, whether grudgingly done with gritted teeth or not.

[C9316]

I agree, I think Microsoft jumped the gun and now sees that. Also look at the state of the Xbox 360's features and interface now compared to when it launched; it should not be outside the realm of possibility that they can implement the features they have to sacrifice sometime during this console's lifespan.

[Ravensword]

Bekkael wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

Gizmodo seems none too happy about Microsoft's "capitulation":

http://gizmodo.com/t...fault-514411905

Holy hell! That article is SOO vomitworthy! Concentrated fail left and right!


Greivous Error and Misrepresentation List:
1.) World of Warcraft does not have a DRM in the traditional sense. It is an online only game designed from the ground up to be an online only game. It's an MMO. The fact that you have to be online for a game that is strictly MP is not DRM, it's part of the game's functionality. Yes, Blizz had extensive power over your account, but Blizz can generally be trusted not be be jackasses with their power. More so than Microsoft, for certain. When they pushed for authenticators, it was to reduce account theft, not to give them more power or control. 

2.) I don't lose my music or books without internect connectivity with Amazon or Itunes. And Itunes did not stop music piracy in the slightest. That is a laughable assertion.

3.) DRM never made anything cheaper. Not for us, anyway. If anything, it makes it easier to fix prices, as seen on Xbox 360.

4.) The ability to connect to the internet to retrive material is not the same thing as DRM. 

5.) Being disappointed that your own voice is heard is idiocy. 

6.) Microsoft did NOT have to scrap all these features. If they wanted to implement them, they (in part) still could, and that may have helped dissuade gamers from their current stance for future console generations. Instead, they scrapped them wholesale like an angry teen. 

For instance: The Vision
-Tying games to your account isn't that much a plus. Yes, you'd be able to download it to other consoles and you wouldn't have to worry as much about disc damage, BUT I really don't take my account anywhere and I don't know many people who do. Other than changing consoles when your current breaks. If you did want to visit a friend, instead of taking the disc, you'd have to sit through an often painfully slow DL before you could play. The only upside is it saves you from disc damage.
-Reselling the games digitally over Xbox One would monopolize the used game market or shut it down entirely, not bolster it. Cmon, most of the big boys ****** and moan over used games all the time.
-Whether or not publishers make money on resold games is not my problem. Stop trying to make it my problem.
-The idea of prices going down due to monopolizing the market is total horse****.
-Better returns on the used games is pure speculation and again most likely horse****.
-Steam has competition and Microsoft would not.
-The "Sharing" thing may have still worked. You put a code on the disc that is linked to the account. The account is linked to the group. Group can access the game, but not more than one at a time or however many codes are in the group "pool". New buyer can still play the used game, but not use group share because the code is already on your account. You could force online for the group share to prevent abuses. Not hooked up, you can't play shared games or have others play your library. Why wouldn't that work? I wouldn't complain if certain FEATURES were always online rather than brute forcing EVERYTHING to be always online.

So the only thing we lost was the Sharing thing, which we weren't even sure how well or how poorly it would work. I'll take that trade.

*slow clap*

That person is entitled to his opinion, but I certainly cannot and do not share it. The average Joe works hard for his/her money and does not deserve to be told lots of things his/her game console CAN'T DO because of reasons.

I'm glad Microsoft changed it's tune. I'm sure it was only done because their backsides were in the fire, but a change is still a change, whether grudgingly done with gritted teeth or not.

But what about licenses and IP, Bek?

[HiddenInWar]

I like how PS4 vs. X1 is becoming the most intense console battle yet, while nintendo is just doing its own thing and its fanbase is showering in goodies.

Modifié par HiddenInWar, 19 juin 2013 - 11:32 .

[Battlebloodmage]

HiddenInWar wrote...

I like how PS4 vs. X1 is becoming the most intense console battle yet, while nintendo is just doing its own thing and its fanbase is showering in goodies.

That's to be expected, since Nintento stated from the very beginning that they target a different market than the other two.

[Bekkael]

Ravensword wrote...But what about licenses and IP, Bek?

Stirring the hornet's nest?

They get my $60, I get my disc of content that I can do whatever the heck I want to with, plus if it's a good game I will bend over some more and buy their DLC. Everybody's happy. If not, tough. They are welcome to kiss my petunia, because it's not my problem.

[MerinTB]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

MerinTB wrote...
Not if going all-in on digital was their goal, the future.

Movies, tv, etc - all DIGITAL, NO DISCS.  You want to play your blu-ray collection, your dvd's, etc?  Use your existing players.

But the drive was there.  And that made EVERYTHING DIFFERENT.

Fundamentally I have to disagree here.

That having the drive proves that they weren't going all in on digital, or that having the drive made everything different about most of their proposed policies?

TheBlackBaron wrote...
Movies, however, still lag behind both for new media, and further are not something Microsoft directly particpates in. Netflix is a great service, but it still has significant time lag between new movies being released on Blu-Ray and new movies being available for streaming.

If you are only looking for a subscription-based streaming service, sure.

But, uhm, Amazon is on all the consoles.  Beyond Prime, which is streaming like Netflix, you can RENT or BUY digital copies of practically any new movie as soon as it is released on disc.

So non-issue.  You only have to worry about storage space... wait, Amazon does the cloud storage, you bought it from them you can stream or download it whenever.  So really, non-issue.

And THAT is ignoring Crackle, Redbox Instant, Zune/Xbox Live Marketplace, whatever PSN has, HBO Go, etc.  Granted, an episode of True Blood is like $4 to buy from Live, but it IS available.

Movies and their availability, digitally, is not an issue.  Streaming might be, but not owning.  Again, Amazon.

The most resistant thing to going digital, right now, are console games.  They are one of the last entertainment media bastions against fully embracing digital.  Comics are there, newspapers are there, books are there, music is there, and movies really are there.  PC games are totally there.

Consoles are the ones that need to be dragged, kicking and screaming.

But MS dropped the ball on doing that, if that was truly their intention.

Instead of, say, just trying to kill used game sales via digital distribution.  Cause THAT is what it looked like to everyone, whether it was true or not.

No disc drive would have really deflated that perception.

Modifié par MerinTB, 19 juin 2013 - 11:53 .

[The Heretic of Time]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

HiddenInWar wrote...

I like how PS4 vs. X1 is becoming the most intense console battle yet, while nintendo is just doing its own thing and its fanbase is showering in goodies.

Nintendo is always the dark horse that winds up outselling the other guys. Well, at least since the Wii.

So by "always", you mean "once"?

I do recall the NES and SNES outselling the competitors of their generation, as well as the Wii outselling the X360 and PS3. That's not once, that's three times.

And lets not start about the handheld market, where Nintendo utterly demolished every single rivaling handheld device ever made so far (the PSP and PSVita just barely manage(d) to survive).

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 20 juin 2013 - 12:06 .

[Bekkael]

Ha! I just got an email from Gamestop with the title: Xbox One - Important Updates.

I bet that company is doing the happy dance right now and is eager to reel in as many customers as they can.

Sorry Gamestop, it's still not better with kinect. :innocent:

[TheBlackBaron]

MerinTB wrote...

That having the drive proves that they weren't going all in on digital, or that having the drive made everything different about most of their proposed policies?

The latter more so than the former - I think they were more strongly committed to gaming digitial than making other content digital; in that arena a lot of what the X1 was showing was just an incremental step from what's currently on the 360. 

But ...

If you are only looking for a subscription-based streaming service, sure.

But, uhm, Amazon is on all the consoles.  Beyond Prime, which is streaming like Netflix, you can RENT or BUY digital copies of practically any new movie as soon as it is released on disc.

So non-issue.  You only have to worry about storage space... wait, Amazon does the cloud storage, you bought it from them you can stream or download it whenever.  So really, non-issue.

I actually hadn't considered this.

But, I think the sticking point here is I think gaming is one thing, especially when most of us are used to getting our games digitially anyways.

But while it's easy to sell digital gaming to people who already have significant experience with it, and easy to sell digital gaming to families or whoever who don't have much experience with gaming period, I think it'd be a lot harder to convince them that the X1 can be their all-in-one entertainment system - which is clearly something they're banking on being a major selling point - if it can't play what they continue to getting most of their movies from. Part of it may be conservatism in an arena that, like I said, Microsoft doesn't have much involvement at all in compared to gaming. 

It's an excellent point nonetheless, and if Amazon is doing a significant amount of business in digitial moviesit's even better.

And THAT is ignoring Crackle, Redbox Instant, Zune/Xbox Live Marketplace, whatever PSN has, HBO Go, etc.  Granted, an episode of True Blood is like $4 to buy from Live, but it IS available.

Most of these are still streaming services, though, if I'm not mistaken. 

Modifié par TheBlackBaron, 20 juin 2013 - 12:11 .

[MerinTB]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

HiddenInWar wrote...
I like how PS4 vs. X1 is becoming the most intense console battle yet, while nintendo is just doing its own thing and its fanbase is showering in goodies.

Nintendo is always the dark horse that winds up outselling the other guys. Well, at least since the Wii.

So by "always", you mean "once"?

I do recall the NES and SNES outselling the competitors of their generation, as well as the Wii outselling the X360 and PS3. That's not once, that's three times.

And lets not start about the handheld market, where Nintendo utterly demolished every single rivaling handheld device ever made so far (the PSP and PSVita just barely manage(d) to survive).

NES's competition was, what, Atari 2600?  It was a much older console by 1986, and by 1990 the Sega Genesis was beating it.  SNES's competition was that same Genesis and the SNES, in North America at least, never overtook Sega.

Microsoft and Sony didn't have consoles then.  When the Playstation came out, it clobbered Nintendo and Sega.  Destroy Sega, in fact.  The PS2 made Sony king, kicking Sega out of making consoles all together and Nintendo licked it's wounds to a horrible Gamecube of sales.

The Wii sold more consoles as a gimmicky thing.  It won the "number of consoles sold" war.  But most of the money is in games, and the Wii didn't sell crap for games overall.  The 360 really won the current gen.

Again - not a Sony fan.  Never owned one.  I only ever owned a used Dreamcast from Sega, but did own an NES and SNES.  So not speaking form personal bias.

[Ravensword]

Bekkael wrote...

Ravensword wrote...But what about licenses and IP, Bek?

Stirring the hornet's nest?

They get my $60, I get my disc of content that I can do whatever the heck I want to with, plus if it's a good game I will bend over some more and buy their DLC. Everybody's happy. If not, tough. They are welcome to kiss my petunia, because it's not my problem.

Agreed. It's just that there are those who feel the opposite. I know you've argued w/ some industry apologists over this before.