If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Xbox 360)   XBox 180   (news.xbox.com) divider line 369
    More: Obvious, xbox, multiplayer games  
•       •       •

7031 clicks; posted to Geek » on 19 Jun 2013 at 6:59 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



369 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-19 09:53:54 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: MythDragon: There seems to be quite  a few people on gamefaqs that are pissed at this. For God's sake why? They seem to think that DRM ladden games would be cheaper. And taking away the constant on-line requirement somehow ruins the system? The fark?

Why are people actualy mad about this?

Because none of it was a big deal to most of us? If you buy the games you want the used games policy doesn't matter, and since I already have a Kinect and a 360 that's on and connected more often than not I give that part of it a big meh. It's really not a big deal. None of it is. The only thing that matters is the price.


LOL

Microsoft just went through with a massive reversal, further damaging their reputation and credibility not only with consumers but with publishers and developers who were sold on their DRM policies, over something that 'really not a big deal.'

I mean, seriously?

You would think people would understand that just because Microsoft's anti-consumer policies didn't affect them, it doesn't mean they're suddenly a majority. The very fact microsoft would go back on their initial policies is proof enough. The arrogance is astounding really.
 
2013-06-19 09:55:16 PM  

degenerate-afro: The 10 person model, while ambitious was shooting themselves in the foot. Sure it SOUNDS nice to have 1 person buy a game and 10 different people play it, but when that option requires that you no longer OWN the game, it's a problem.


Except that the 10 people would not be allowed to play the game at the same time.  If two people wanted to play the same game at the same time on two different consoles in your house, you would still have to buy two copies of it.  The only thing the DRM did is eliminate the need to have a disc.
 
2013-06-19 09:57:53 PM  
Seems I should continue to follow my "console policy"...let all the arguing fanboys be the early adopters, let the manufacturers change their ideas and implementations, let developers actually see what features the community likes...come in a while later and see where they actually stand when the prices are a bit more reasonable and their respective libraries are a bit more robust.

Admittedly, Sony's price point has tempted me to pick one up at launch--but rarely have I found a "launch game" experience to be anything more than a previous gen game with slightly better graphics.  It takes a couple of generations of games before they're really using the full hardware capabilities and stretching the boundaries.

All this hand wringing and gnashing of teeth has been fun to listen to, though.  And still waiting for a game that's as fun as playing Goldeneye64 on the couch with my friends.  Only FPS style game I've ever enjoyed enough to play for more than 20-30 minutes.

Let's see how these two shape up around May-June of next year.  And see how many titles each has that actually appeal.  Then we'll see who gets my money.  Not before.

/full disclosure
//PS2-PS3-Wii-N64
///MS hasn't managed to attract me with any of their consoles/exclusives
////N64 still gets weekly use, though
 
2013-06-19 10:03:59 PM  

space1999: degenerate-afro: The 10 person model, while ambitious was shooting themselves in the foot. Sure it SOUNDS nice to have 1 person buy a game and 10 different people play it, but when that option requires that you no longer OWN the game, it's a problem.

Except that the 10 people would not be allowed to play the game at the same time.  If two people wanted to play the same game at the same time on two different consoles in your house, you would still have to buy two copies of it.  The only thing the DRM did is eliminate the need to have a disc.


It was vaporware, and their morning meeting with publishers (saying frak that) refusing today probably lead to this 4:30PM policy change.

If you honestly believe that MS would implement all this anti-consumer, walled garden DRM and then basically allow you to pay 1/10th the price for "family shared" games, I got a bridge to sell you.  Things too good to be true and not true.  Just look at the damn timeline and you'll see this was thought up in a panic after their flop release conference and the DRM bomb going off.  Going into E3 they needed some sort of good PR, especially with none of their games running on dev kits yet.  Enter the Family Plan!  Unfortunately they forgot to notify the publishers.

Sony actually already had this on PSN, with sharing over 5 different consoles.  Publisher revolted and shut it down damn quick.  There's no way this was ever reality, and if it was it was just a hook that would have reeled people in before the hatched came down.  Publishers aren't in the business of selling new games for $10.
 
2013-06-19 10:04:02 PM  

Someothermonkey: Adolf Oliver Nipples: MythDragon: There seems to be quite  a few people on gamefaqs that are pissed at this. For God's sake why? They seem to think that DRM ladden games would be cheaper. And taking away the constant on-line requirement somehow ruins the system? The fark?

Why are people actualy mad about this?

Because none of it was a big deal to most of us? If you buy the games you want the used games policy doesn't matter, and since I already have a Kinect and a 360 that's on and connected more often than not I give that part of it a big meh. It's really not a big deal. None of it is. The only thing that matters is the price.

LOL

Microsoft just went through with a massive reversal, further damaging their reputation and credibility not only with consumers but with publishers and developers who were sold on their DRM policies, over something that 'really not a big deal.'

I mean, seriously?

You would think people would understand that just because Microsoft's anti-consumer policies didn't affect them, it doesn't mean they're suddenly a majority. The very fact microsoft would go back on their initial policies is proof enough. The arrogance is astounding really.


It's NOT a big deal. Things become big deals because people get wound up about them, often for no good reason. I've heard the reasons, but they're not good ones.  Do you really think that Microsoft is going to be watching you with always-on Kinect? Do you really think that trading intellectual property away after you've used it doesn't hurt the developers financially and that they shouldn't have an interest in trying to protect their creations?

To quote you.. I mean, seriously?

Now, you may actually believe these things, in which case there's nothing I can say to convince you otherwise. As it is I've already wasted my time because I know you believe these things. But for most of us it makes no difference. We play the games we want, we don't worry about spying, and we enjoy ourselves. If that's not for you, please stick with the XBox 360/PS3/Wii/Dreamcast/Intellivison/2600/Vectrex/whatever.
 
2013-06-19 10:07:22 PM  

MythDragon: There seems to be quite  a few people on gamefaqs that are pissed at this. For God's sake why? They seem to think that DRM ladden games would be cheaper. And taking away the constant on-line requirement somehow ruins the system? The fark?

Why are people actualy mad about this?


I'm annoyed at this change.  I couldn't care less about used games because I don't sell my games and it's been years since I bought one.  What I was looking forward to most was disc-less gaming.  Just install the game and then you can switch between TV, apps, or any game seamlessly.  Now you'll need to swap discs to switch between games.  No more playing one game, getting an invite to another game and switching without digging around on your shelves to find the new disc.

I can still get a similar experience buying the full games off of XBL, but my bandwidth caps suck so I'll be paying a lot of overage fees if I want to enjoy disc-less gaming and if I delete something from the HDD I'll need to re-download it rather than reinstalling it from a disc.  It's stupid that the same data needs to be treated differently just because one set of data was downloaded and the other set was burned to a CD and shipped.  It's not a popular opinion, but I would rather that MS did away with used games as a means of disabling the 24 hour check-in rather than leaving used games intact and requiring a disc check before playing.
 
2013-06-19 10:21:37 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Someothermonkey: Adolf Oliver Nipples: MythDragon: There seems to be quite  a few people on gamefaqs that are pissed at this. For God's sake why? They seem to think that DRM ladden games would be cheaper. And taking away the constant on-line requirement somehow ruins the system? The fark?

Why are people actualy mad about this?

Because none of it was a big deal to most of us? If you buy the games you want the used games policy doesn't matter, and since I already have a Kinect and a 360 that's on and connected more often than not I give that part of it a big meh. It's really not a big deal. None of it is. The only thing that matters is the price.

LOL

Microsoft just went through with a massive reversal, further damaging their reputation and credibility not only with consumers but with publishers and developers who were sold on their DRM policies, over something that 'really not a big deal.'

I mean, seriously?

You would think people would understand that just because Microsoft's anti-consumer policies didn't affect them, it doesn't mean they're suddenly a majority. The very fact microsoft would go back on their initial policies is proof enough. The arrogance is astounding really.

It's NOT a big deal. Things become big deals because people get wound up about them, often for no good reason. I've heard the reasons, but they're not good ones.  Do you really think that Microsoft is going to be watching you with always-on Kinect? Do you really think that trading intellectual property away after you've used it doesn't hurt the developers financially and that they shouldn't have an interest in trying to protect their creations?

To quote you.. I mean, seriously?

Now, you may actually believe these things, in which case there's nothing I can say to convince you otherwise. As it is I've already wasted my time because I know you believe these things. But for most of us it makes no difference. We play the games we want, we don't worry about spying, and we enjoy ourselves. I ...


Oh wow.

First of all, nice straw man. I never mentioned anything about the kinect. So why even go there other than to spin your deluded little narrative?

Secondly, I can't tell if you're being serious or just being terribly disingenuous about this whole affair. It's not a big deal? really? Says who?

I'm not sure if you're capable of understanding this, but just because it wasn't a big deal to you, doesn't mean it wasn't a big deal to others. Microsoft was trying to destroy the first sale doctrine and the traditional concept of ownership over physical products. That is a big deal, even if you're not capable of realizing it.

Publishers/Developers get their money from the first sale. They do not deserve seconds cuts - no other industry tries to do this, but for some reason, entitled, spoiled and whiny developers in the game industry think they deserve it. Sheer lunacy.

I believe spying rumors on the Kinect? Please, feel free to point out where I said that. Otherwise, you might not want to lie so blatantly and when you know you don't have an argument worth anything.

Oh, and don't worry, I'll stick to gaming on other consoles. Fortunately, I don't have a corporate hand stuck up my ass like you do and feel the need to defend blatantly anti-consumer policies.
 
2013-06-19 10:26:14 PM  

Elegy: I'm actually a little bummed that MS backed down. I understand why they did it - Internet hate machine was steamrolling them and all - but with the DRM checking came the ability loan out digital copies of my game library, meaning I could have swapped games with my XBL friends. Now, no DRM, back to shiatty single-use licensing for digital content.

However, I do understand why that trade off doesn't work for soldiers, people with dodgy Internet connections, and the global market, and I do think MS made the right move


It still might not work for them. The link says any new game requires a one time system setup but doesn't say weather or not you need to be connected when you do this. I worry that microsoft wants some kind of authorization one time check in to play any new games which would still require the internet.

FlashHarry: the always-on camera is still spooky though.

DanZero: And yes, still no word on the invasive camera.

snuffy: still there is bills unblinking eye on you.

Yeahhhhh, that ones been debunked.


I read that "debunked" and no it hasn't. Tell me i can disconnect the camera and put it away and we'll talk.
 
2013-06-19 10:31:22 PM  
Too late. I aint planning on going back to MS. PS4, here I go.
 
2013-06-19 10:31:57 PM  

MythDragon: There seems to be quite  a few people on gamefaqs that are pissed at this. For God's sake why? They seem to think that DRM ladden games would be cheaper. And taking away the constant on-line requirement somehow ruins the system? The fark?

Why are people actualy mad about this?




There was alot of speculation from people (myself included) about what the new model might mean to players and the industry. There was also endless doomsaying from those who didn't want change.
Good, bad, it was at least different to the "it just does games" approach of Sony and Nintendo. Its disappointing to not get to see the theory in action and find out who was right.

That said, Microsoft fully acquiesced to customer demands on the same day that Sony showed its customer service skills be randomly breaking people's systems.

There is something rather ironic about that.
 
2013-06-19 10:38:20 PM  

space1999: TheOmni: It's not no DRM. It's just back to the shiatty DRM we have had before instead of a new and differently shiatty DRM.

What DRM?  You buy a game disc, you can play the game from the disc.  Any Xbox with the disc in it can play the game.  That's not DRM.  Game consoles have operated that way for 35 years.


It's DRM. Just because everyone co-opts the word DRM to mean something new every year doesn't mean no DRM. The most basic definition of DRM is copy-protection. DRM covers everything from region-locking and hardware incompatibility to persistent online authentication, which is what we're talking about.

It's not "no DRM." It's "some DRM." Just because it's common or old doesn't mean it's not DRM.
 
2013-06-19 10:38:35 PM  

Someothermonkey: I'm not sure if you're capable of understanding this, but just because it wasn't a big deal to you, doesn't mean it wasn't a big deal to others. Microsoft was trying to destroy the first sale doctrine and the traditional concept of ownership over physical products. That is a big deal, even if you're not capable of realizing it.


I can think of lots of "big deals" that really aren't. There are some threads in the Politics tab right now attesting to that. That doesn't make them actual big deals, it makes the people who believe them paranoid loonies. More to follow.

Someothermonkey: I believe spying rumors on the Kinect? Please, feel free to point out where I said that. Otherwise, you might not want to lie so blatantly and when you know you don't have an argument worth anything.


I don't give a shiat if you personally believe this one or not. This is one of those "big deals" that isn't. Scroll up and read at your leisure. Lots of people do believe it, and since it's one of those "reversals" (since always-on is now "gone", even though it always was) it's part of the argument.

Someothermonkey: Publishers/Developers get their money from the first sale. They do not deserve seconds cuts - no other industry tries to do this, but for some reason, entitled, spoiled and whiny developers in the game industry think they deserve it. Sheer lunacy.


EVERY industry tries to get a second bite of the apple. Some are more successful than others. But let's play this through. You (this time it is you personally I am talking to) create a game. One person buys it and gives it to 10 other people. You get paid once. You don't see the issue with that and why they might be keen on recapturing some of that? I don't care one way or the other, to be honest, but it's an easy argument to understand, and I hardly begrudge a company trying to capitalize as much as possible on their property. It's just music redux, and the existing arguments apply the same way.

Someothermonkey: Oh, and don't worry, I'll stick to gaming on other consoles. Fortunately, I don't have a corporate hand stuck up my ass like you do and feel the need to defend blatantly anti-consumer policies.


I don't defend blatantly anti-consumer policies. I assert that they are perfectly acceptable to me and the way I play games/access applications. It's clear that not everybody finds them as unacceptable as you, and I submit that if this raises your hackles you'll be going stark raving bonkers soon enough because it's the way of the future. It's inevitable. The objections to this stuff are like my Luddite stand against smart phones with my old-school flip-phone. In the end nobody notices except for me, and nobody cares about me either.
 
2013-06-19 10:43:12 PM  

TyrantII: Sony actually already had this on PSN, with sharing over 5 different consoles.  Publisher revolted and shut it down damn quick.


Nonsense. PSN Gamesharing was going on for years. There was nothing quick about its removal.
 
2013-06-19 10:55:29 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Someothermonkey: I'm not sure if you're capable of understanding this, but just because it wasn't a big deal to you, doesn't mean it wasn't a big deal to others. Microsoft was trying to destroy the first sale doctrine and the traditional concept of ownership over physical products. That is a big deal, even if you're not capable of realizing it.

I can think of lots of "big deals" that really aren't. There are some threads in the Politics tab right now attesting to that. That doesn't make them actual big deals, it makes the people who believe them paranoid loonies. More to follow.

Someothermonkey: I believe spying rumors on the Kinect? Please, feel free to point out where I said that. Otherwise, you might not want to lie so blatantly and when you know you don't have an argument worth anything.

I don't give a shiat if you personally believe this one or not. This is one of those "big deals" that isn't. Scroll up and read at your leisure. Lots of people do believe it, and since it's one of those "reversals" (since always-on is now "gone", even though it always was) it's part of the argument.

Someothermonkey: Publishers/Developers get their money from the first sale. They do not deserve seconds cuts - no other industry tries to do this, but for some reason, entitled, spoiled and whiny developers in the game industry think they deserve it. Sheer lunacy.

EVERY industry tries to get a second bite of the apple. Some are more successful than others. But let's play this through. You (this time it is you personally I am talking to) create a game. One person buys it and gives it to 10 other people. You get paid once. You don't see the issue with that and why they might be keen on recapturing some of that? I don't care one way or the other, to be honest, but it's an easy argument to understand, and I hardly begrudge a company trying to capitalize as much as possible on their property. It's just music redux, and the existing arguments apply the same way.

Someothermonkey: Oh, ...


Again, the very fact that Microsoft reversed course should be indicative that this was a big deal. You are not the centre of the universe, nor do you have the ability to dictate what other people consider a big deal or not. Get over yourself.

And seriously, they went back on their used games policies, not the kinect, which is still tied to every console, even though almost no one wants it. Who cares if others are making a big deal out of the kinect system, because that's not what Microsoft backpedaled on.

Evidently, microsoft found that destroying the first sale doctrine and the traditional concept of ownership was a big deal, so they decided not to. It's a business; they found out that screwing consumers wasn't good for the bottom line, so they pulled back. Accept it or not, right now, you are in the minority. Maybe in the future digital becomes entirely ubiquitous, but simply put, the current infrastructure is no where near capable of supporting that. And until that improves, your future will have to wait.

And yes, you are defending blatantly anti-consumer policies; at least take responsibility for your positions. Prior to the reversal, microsoft was forcing one route to gaming; online or nothing. There was no option to game otherwise. And reducing options for consumers is very much, anti-consumer. Unless you believe the less options people have, the better off they are. Which is utterly ridiculous.
 
2013-06-19 10:56:17 PM  
space1999: What DRM? You buy a game disc, you can play the game from the disc.

To elaborate on what moothemagiccow said.

DRM schemes are usually lumped in with Anti-mod schemes (the checks are somewhat the same). While in theory they prevent piracy and mods, in reality, the pirates hack this stuff in days/weeks/months.

Regular paying customers are always the ones who get the shaft from these protection schemes. For example, on my launch-era 360, something was up with the optical drive (it was giving "disk unreadable" errors on certain games (Halo 4 and only halo 4 AFAIK, seven other games I tried loaded and played just fine) brand new out of the package). Tried multiple copies of the game, same error, whereas those same copies worked fine on other xboxes.

I figured the optical drive was dying, so the techie in me thinks (hmm, just crack it open and replace it with another one) right? ... WRONG.

The EPROM on the circuit board of the optical drive has a serial number (of sorts) encoded into it. The mobo of the 360 also has the serial number encoded. If the serial number on the optical drive doesn't match the serial number on the 360, what you end up with is an expensive DVD player (it will refuse to run games).

I figured I had a problem with either the laser assembly, or the spin motor. So I bought a replacement drive off of amazon and basically swapped the internals (my original board and tray motor + the spin motor and laser assembly from the new drive).

Nope, still getting errors ... so it's either something wrong with the 360 MOBO, or something wrong with the optical disk circuit board (I ruled out the HD because I swapped that as well).

I could copy the EPROM from the optical CB and insert it into the new circuit board. But that's a moderately involved process (including the time it would take me to set up a windows box, as the tools for flashing the EPROM are windows based and are too low level to run from a VM).

My time was worth more than that, so I finally said "fark it" and bought a new 360 (using the dough that I potentially would have spent on an XBOX One.

// in the meantime, I still have a disassembled 360 and two disassembled optical drives sitting on one of my counters. Someday I will be bored enough to tinker with it again :P
 
2013-06-19 10:59:49 PM  

Someothermonkey: And yes, you are defending blatantly anti-consumer policies; at least take responsibility for your positions. Prior to the reversal, microsoft was forcing one route to gaming; online or nothing. There was no option to game otherwise. And reducing options for consumers is very much, anti-consumer. Unless you believe the less options people have, the better off they are. Which is utterly ridiculous.


You have two options. You always had two options. Those options are 1) Take it, and 2) Leave it. Those options remain.
 
2013-06-19 11:01:28 PM  
Congrats to Microsoft for doing the right thing, albeit only begrudgingly.

That said, it's telling that the PS4 is STILL a better deal even with the DRM gone.

-$100 cheaper
-Keyboard and mouse support
-Included headset
-Better indie support
-PS+ not required for Netflix and other paid services (that's a real dealbreaker for me. I don't like paying twice for something)
-Better specs
-Much greater likelihood of Japanese titles that the Xbox won't get

Neither console has anything that's impressed me on the exclusives front yet, but I can't imagine MS has anything impressive enough to compensate for that list.
 
2013-06-19 11:05:09 PM  
Adolf Oliver Nipples: 2) Leave it.

People said "we're leaving it", and other people said "hey it's not that bad, it's actually good" and then the first people said "WTF are you crazy?" and the second people said "you just don't like change or can't afford it or blah blah blah" and now Microsoft is saying "ohh shiat, WTF did we do?"
 
2013-06-19 11:06:49 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Someothermonkey: And yes, you are defending blatantly anti-consumer policies; at least take responsibility for your positions. Prior to the reversal, microsoft was forcing one route to gaming; online or nothing. There was no option to game otherwise. And reducing options for consumers is very much, anti-consumer. Unless you believe the less options people have, the better off they are. Which is utterly ridiculous.

You have two options. You always had two options. Those options are 1) Take it, and 2) Leave it. Those options remain.


And now I have more options. Online or offline, or both. And I still have 'take it' or 'leave it.'

I can't understand why you would think more options is a bad thing.
 
2013-06-19 11:07:34 PM  

Mike_LowELL: Absolutely disgusting.  If I go into your house and break something, I would go to jail, if I was poor.  You walked into Microsoft's consumer market and broke their business model.  You imbeciles caused billions of dollars of damage to a corporation.  How is that not a criminal offense?


LOL. In order for something to break, it must first be not broken.
 
2013-06-19 11:11:16 PM  

lordargent: Adolf Oliver Nipples: 2) Leave it.

People said "we're leaving it", and other people said "hey it's not that bad, it's actually good" and then the first people said "WTF are you crazy?" and the second people said "you just don't like change or can't afford it or blah blah blah" and now Microsoft is saying "ohh shiat, WTF did we do?"


This too. Evidently, too many people were saying 'leave it.'

It turns out, microsoft actually wants to sell these consoles and you know, make money. Hard to do that when you're ensuring that anyone without a 1.5mbs connection or better can't use it.
 
2013-06-19 11:17:17 PM  
i.imgur.com
Console game is toy for baby men.
 
2013-06-19 11:18:51 PM  
nytmare: LOL. In order for something to break, it must first be not broken.

Can we sue developers for breach of contract or false advertisement for creating crappy games that in no way reflect demo videos.
 
2013-06-19 11:21:22 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: So, all they have to do is do everything you want with nothing you don't and you'll buy it.


They don't seem like unreasonable requests to me.

If he's representative of a large segment of the market, Microsoft would be stupid not to offer him what he wants.
 
2013-06-19 11:27:16 PM  
None of you understand this issue, this guy gets it.

More studios WILL close and you'll see more PC and mobile games.
I have seen the number of unique gamer tags vs actual sales numbers and it ain't pretty.
At the end of the day many hardcore dislike what was attempted. You can't do well in that space with many of your core unhappy... Especially when users have a choice. The nature of capitalism encourages competition and Sony played into that.
Brace yourselves. More tacked on multiplayer and DLC are coming.
You're also about to see available microtransactions skyrocket. HATS FOR EVERYONE.
I want *developers* who worked their asses off to see money on every copy of their game that is sold instead of Gamestop. fark me, right?
*Sony* forced Microsoft's hand, not the internet whining.
You're going to see digital versions of your favorite games with added "features" and content to lure you to digital over disc based.
I find it funny how people are saying that I "lost" when I don't have a job or an allegiance now.
What I do have is 20 years of experience making games and seeing how the sausage is made.

-Cliffy B.
 
2013-06-19 11:28:01 PM  
Adolf Oliver Nipples: So, all they have to do is do everything you want with nothing you don't and you'll buy it.

Do most of what I want, with little of what I don't want.

Everyone has their own wants and dislikes. The sooner people understand that, the better they will do in life.

Being able to place yourself in the shoes of someone else and understand their perspective (even if you don't agree with it) is a very powerful negotiation tool.

Media companies will try to take whatever they can, and consumers will try to get the best deal that we can for a given amount of effort.

At the end of the day, we all vote with our dollars, that's the bottom line and everything else is just fluffy foamy bullshiat.
 
2013-06-19 11:28:40 PM  

Strolpol: Congrats to Microsoft for doing the right thing, albeit only begrudgingly.

That said, it's telling that the PS4 is STILL a better deal even with the DRM gone.

-$100 cheaper
-Keyboard and mouse support
-Included headset
-Better indie support
-PS+ not required for Netflix and other paid services (that's a real dealbreaker for me. I don't like paying twice for something)
-Better specs
-Much greater likelihood of Japanese titles that the Xbox won't get

Neither console has anything that's impressed me on the exclusives front yet, but I can't imagine MS has anything impressive enough to compensate for that list.


This.  So far, anyways.  If one of my "must-have" franchises or studios goes exclusive with one or the other, that's the one I'm going to buy, but I'm leaning way more toward PS4 than I am XB1 right now.
 
2013-06-19 11:30:11 PM  
but...but...I thought they said that they couldn't turn it off?

Looks like all that talk of "cloud gaming" was more like smoke being blown up our asses.

Let's see how long this lasts until they "flip the switch" back after they've reeled in enough suckers.
 
2013-06-19 11:30:21 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2013-06-19 11:31:42 PM  
Dammit...preview is there for a reason...let's try that image again...

img.fark.net
 
2013-06-19 11:38:47 PM  

DerpHerder: Elegy: I'm actually a little bummed that MS backed down. I understand why they did it - Internet hate machine was steamrolling them and all - but with the DRM checking came the ability loan out digital copies of my game library, meaning I could have swapped games with my XBL friends. Now, no DRM, back to shiatty single-use licensing for digital content.

However, I do understand why that trade off doesn't work for soldiers, people with dodgy Internet connections, and the global market, and I do think MS made the right move

FlashHarry: the always-on camera is still spooky though.

DanZero: And yes, still no word on the invasive camera.

snuffy: still there is bills unblinking eye on you.

Yeahhhhh, that ones been debunked.

This is what I've been telling all my friends. Everyone was freaking out and taking the used game market the wrong way. This was a cool idea killed by small minded people. Im sure M$ execution of the market would have been less than it could have been but still being able to digitially loan a game would be cool. At the least I would take loaning games digitally over getting 5$ at gamestop... Thats what they get for trying to reinvent the wheel though considering the majority of the console community aren't big thinkers its not suprising.


My understanding of the system was that you never really "loaned" a game to a friend, you gave it to them. And you could never get it back after that. I may be wrong though.
 
2013-06-19 11:39:10 PM  

Cytokine Storm: None of you understand this issue, this guy gets it.

More studios WILL close and you'll see more PC and mobile games.
I have seen the number of unique gamer tags vs actual sales numbers and it ain't pretty.
At the end of the day many hardcore dislike what was attempted. You can't do well in that space with many of your core unhappy... Especially when users have a choice. The nature of capitalism encourages competition and Sony played into that.
Brace yourselves. More tacked on multiplayer and DLC are coming.
You're also about to see available microtransactions skyrocket. HATS FOR EVERYONE.
I want *developers* who worked their asses off to see money on every copy of their game that is sold instead of Gamestop. fark me, right?
*Sony* forced Microsoft's hand, not the internet whining.
You're going to see digital versions of your favorite games with added "features" and content to lure you to digital over disc based.
I find it funny how people are saying that I "lost" when I don't have a job or an allegiance now.
What I do have is 20 years of experience making games and seeing how the sausage is made.

-Cliffy B.


Or, we can get developers working harder at making games that are so  good  that we won't want to trade them in at gamestop (or sell them online if you want a decent price). There are tons of games in my library (not literal tons) that I would never part with because I enjoy playing them. I have some games that I couldn't even come close to counting how many hours I have put into them. Why should developers of shiat games that get bought and resold repeatedly get more of a cut than the developers that make games that are so good no one wants to trade them in?
 
2013-06-19 11:41:25 PM  
I thought that Kinect with Forza could allow head tracking so if you look left or right your view tracks that movement and does the same only scaled so you can look over your virtual shoulder in-game while still seeing the screen. That was my understanding of the awesome of Kinect with Forza, that you can still use the steering wheel and all that fun stuff, but it's a hell of a lot easier to look into your turns, and see what's around you. Perhaps I misunderstood since I don't have one.
 
2013-06-19 11:42:28 PM  

Elegy: Sony bricks users consoles with upgraded HDDs, MS reverses on DRM.

[img.fark.net image 294x515]

I need more popcorn.


Microssoft was kind enough to sell people consoles that bricked without an update, free of charge! *coughRRODcough*
 
2013-06-19 11:45:05 PM  

DerpHerder: This was a cool idea killed by small minded people.


I think this puts it best:

TyrantII: If you honestly believe that MS would implement all this anti-consumer, walled garden DRM and then basically allow you to pay 1/10th the price for "family shared" games, I got a bridge to sell you.


Sure, MS could have implemented this in a really cool way that benefited the consumer. If you think that was a likely outcome, you are farking kidding yourself. This would have lead to the consumer getting dicked over even more than we are now, because that's what would have been the most profitable way for this to be implemented.

I never knew there were so many people gullible enough to think Microsoft genuinely wanted to give them cheap, easily shared games. So many people willing to choose the stick right now for the promise of a carrot in the future. Hell, in the case of "cheaper games" it wasn't even the promise of a carrot (MS never said the DRM would make games cheaper), just pure speculation that maybe one day there might be a carrot, possibly.
 
2013-06-19 11:46:36 PM  
Cytokine Storm: None of you understand this issue, this guy gets it.

More studios WILL close and you'll see more PC and mobile games.
I have seen the number of unique gamer tags vs actual sales numbers and it ain't pretty.
At the end of the day many hardcore dislike what was attempted. You can't do well in that space with many of your core unhappy... Especially when users have a choice. The nature of capitalism encourages competition and Sony played into that.
Brace yourselves. More tacked on multiplayer and DLC are coming.
You're also about to see available microtransactions skyrocket. HATS FOR EVERYONE.
I want *developers* who worked their asses off to see money on every copy of their game that is sold instead of Gamestop. fark me, right?
*Sony* forced Microsoft's hand, not the internet whining.
You're going to see digital versions of your favorite games with added "features" and content to lure you to digital over disc based.
I find it funny how people are saying that I "lost" when I don't have a job or an allegiance now.
What I do have is 20 years of experience making games and seeing how the sausage is made.

-Cliffy B.


i love me some salt and tears
 
2013-06-19 11:50:24 PM  
"after a one-time system set-up with a new Xbox One, you can play any disc based game without ever connecting online again"

If it still requires an internet connection for a new game, albeit a one time connection for each new game, then wouldn't soldiers still be unable to use it?
 
2013-06-19 11:52:55 PM  

Cheater71: "after a one-time system set-up with a new Xbox One, you can play any disc based game without ever connecting online again"

If it still requires an internet connection for a new game, albeit a one time connection for each new game, then wouldn't soldiers still be unable to use it?


I believe the new policy is one time connect with the xbox (not the games), then all games just go in like normal.
 
2013-06-19 11:57:24 PM  
Cytokine Storm: -Cliffy B.

Cliffy B.?

Gears of war 3 sold over 19 million copies and the development costs are only in the tens of millions.

$60 * 19,000,000 - $30,000,000 - whatever else => dude, huge amount of money
 
2013-06-19 11:58:06 PM  
The cloud makes every experience better and more accessible.

imageshack.us
 
2013-06-20 12:00:17 AM  
Is it me, or is this more of a cleaned up rewrite of the crass, ass-monkey statements that Donnie forked out in the notorious interview.

Wait and see.
 
2013-06-20 12:16:03 AM  

Cytokine Storm: None of you understand this issue, this guy gets it.

More studios WILL close and you'll see more PC and mobile games.
I have seen the number of unique gamer tags vs actual sales numbers and it ain't pretty.
At the end of the day many hardcore dislike what was attempted. You can't do well in that space with many of your core unhappy... Especially when users have a choice. The nature of capitalism encourages competition and Sony played into that.
Brace yourselves. More tacked on multiplayer and DLC are coming.
You're also about to see available microtransactions skyrocket. HATS FOR EVERYONE.
I want *developers* who worked their asses off to see money on every copy of their game that is sold instead of Gamestop. fark me, right?
*Sony* forced Microsoft's hand, not the internet whining.
You're going to see digital versions of your favorite games with added "features" and content to lure you to digital over disc based.
I find it funny how people are saying that I "lost" when I don't have a job or an allegiance now.
What I do have is 20 years of experience making games and seeing how the sausage is made.

-Cliffy B.


Cliffy B is the Rob Liefeld of video games.
 
2013-06-20 12:16:43 AM  

FuryOfFirestorm: Cytokine Storm: None of you understand this issue, this guy gets it.

More studios WILL close and you'll see more PC and mobile games.
I have seen the number of unique gamer tags vs actual sales numbers and it ain't pretty.
At the end of the day many hardcore dislike what was attempted. You can't do well in that space with many of your core unhappy... Especially when users have a choice. The nature of capitalism encourages competition and Sony played into that.
Brace yourselves. More tacked on multiplayer and DLC are coming.
You're also about to see available microtransactions skyrocket. HATS FOR EVERYONE.
I want *developers* who worked their asses off to see money on every copy of their game that is sold instead of Gamestop. fark me, right?
*Sony* forced Microsoft's hand, not the internet whining.
You're going to see digital versions of your favorite games with added "features" and content to lure you to digital over disc based.
I find it funny how people are saying that I "lost" when I don't have a job or an allegiance now.
What I do have is 20 years of experience making games and seeing how the sausage is made.

-Cliffy B.

Cliffy B is the Rob Liefeld of video games.


It sounds like he's really getting a kick out of some of these replies.
 
2013-06-20 12:20:12 AM  

Cytokine Storm: I want *developers* who worked their asses off to see money on every copy of their game that is sold instead of Gamestop. fark me, right?

-Cliffy B.


Well, Cliff, if you are talking about first sale, then I agree!  Direct-market your games and price them appropriately.  People don't want to pay $70 and not have transferable media in hand.  However, as is seen with Steam, millions of times over, you offer a "digital copy" at a reasonable or downright cheap price and you'll make up for the discount loss in volume of sales.

Now, if you are talking about used sales (and I hope you aren't that stupid), well then, yes, fark you.  <insert auto manufacturer> would like to have a cut of every vehicle sold on the used market.  That's not the way it has, does or ever should work.

And fark Gamestop anyway.  Place is a shiathole!
 
2013-06-20 12:22:23 AM  

justtray: http://www.fark.com/users/justtray">justtray    http://www.fark.com/totalfarksignup" target=_top>http://img.fark.net/images/2003/totalfark.gif" width=54 height=11>
First it's ironic that Sony is now taking the high ground on anti-DRM.

Secondly, Microsoft will cave to public opinion on this. They're stupid, but not stubbornly so.


11 Jun 2013 05:50 PM


Not if their telemetry is telling them the same shiat I see on my friends list.  What are they going to do?  Believe what people say or believe what people do?
 
2013-06-20 12:23:18 AM  

chozo13: Cheater71: "after a one-time system set-up with a new Xbox One, you can play any disc based game without ever connecting online again"

If it still requires an internet connection for a new game, albeit a one time connection for each new game, then wouldn't soldiers still be unable to use it?

I believe the new policy is one time connect with the xbox (not the games), then all games just go in like normal.


I guess as long as the systems get set up before they ship out, everything should be good. Still don't like the kinect though.
 
2013-06-20 12:34:01 AM  
you guys actually believe you had something to do with these results
 
2013-06-20 12:35:27 AM  

Cheater71: chozo13: Cheater71: "after a one-time system set-up with a new Xbox One, you can play any disc based game without ever connecting online again"

If it still requires an internet connection for a new game, albeit a one time connection for each new game, then wouldn't soldiers still be unable to use it?

I believe the new policy is one time connect with the xbox (not the games), then all games just go in like normal.

I guess as long as the systems get set up before they ship out, everything should be good. Still don't like the kinect though.


I never purchased a kinect for my current xbox, and I don't plan to. I am glad that they addressed a lot of the concerns that I had with the system, but I still cannot see myself purchasing the xbox one. I will not reward a company that tried so hard to hose paying customers and finally cave when they realize that gamers are not as stupid as they assumed. They were prepared to take away ownership rights from any gamer that was going to buy their system (and they would have gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for those meddling kids). I cannot support a company that thinks so little of their user base.

All this really proves is that they were blowing smoke when they were talking about what an amazing experience being always connected will be. We all saw how that worked out for SimCity.
 
2013-06-20 12:40:17 AM  
Silly MS - you don't announce that you're going to reduce functionality for your product BEFORE putting it on sale. That's not good business.

You wait for a bit until everyone's bought one, then you push in a mandatory patch, like Sony does.
 
2013-06-20 12:52:15 AM  

fisker: you guys actually believe you had something to do with these results


No, the people swarming to lay down preorders on the ps4 over the xbox did.  People voted with their wallets and it wasn't looking good for MS.

Now?  Now they have a chance again.  Now its a matter of can they convince you with games to spend $100 more for a less powerful system.  It's an interesting challenge, but one that money could overcome.
 
Displayed 50 of 369 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report