true. There's been no confirmation for the reason for the change, and there probably never will be. In two years, DRM-gate will not even be thought about and we'll still be 8 years from any sort of digital gaming advancement.
At least Gen 9 won't have a disc slot. Mark my words on that one.
Again, it's a small percentage of people who would have internet be down for over a 24 hour period within their gaming day, and also not have a cell phone that they could connect to their system via wifi to "check in."
You can't please everyone all the time, and never will be able to. When the next gen after this goes all digital there will still be people without good internet SOMEWHERE, and they will just have to not buy them.
Again, it's a small percentage of people who would have internet be down for over a 24 hour period within their gaming day, and also not have a cell phone that they could connect to their system via wifi to "check in."
You can't please everyone all the time, and never will be able to. When the next gen after this goes all digital there will still be people without good internet SOMEWHERE, and they will just have to not buy them.
So what would have happened if MS's server had issues? I think thats what a lot of people were wondering myself included. Remember that MS use to have a music service to compete with iTunes. Guess how that worked out for people who purchases songs that can no longer be authenticated due to the server shutdowns.
Just really think if would have been a one time check when you first installed the game, like Steam does then more people would have been onboard with it. Telling people that you are shutting their games down if for any reason you can't monitor it every 24hrs was a little much.
Again, it's a small percentage of people who would have internet be down for over a 24 hour period within their gaming day, and also not have a cell phone that they could connect to their system via wifi to "check in."
You can't please everyone all the time, and never will be able to. When the next gen after this goes all digital there will still be people without good internet SOMEWHERE, and they will just have to not buy them.
So what would have happened if MS's server had issues? I think thats what a lot of people were wondering myself included. Remember that MS use to have a music service to compete with iTunes. Guess how that worked out for people who purchases songs that can no longer be authenticated due to the server shutdowns.
Just really think if would have been a one time check when you first installed the game, like Steam does then more people would have been onboard with it. Telling people that you are shutting their games down if for any reason you can't monitor it every 24hrs was a little much.
Unfortunately it is statements like the bolded part that make me shake my head. It's this uninformed reasoning that is the problem. You didn't realize that the entire reason for the checks was that each disc would be fully installed and not require you to keep that disc in the drive, so you could swap between all your games and keep even the disc games in the cloud tied to your gamertag. If you could have installed the game, checked once, and then never checked again - what was stopping you from reselling to Gamestop or giving to a friend to play at the same time? The whole reason for checks was that we are in an intermediary stage where some people still want a circular piece of plastic in a case on their shelf, or there are people without access to the internet. If all was digital - then no checks, as you can't pass around a digital game physically since it's tied to your gamertag already.
Again, it's a small percentage of people who would have internet be down for over a 24 hour period within their gaming day, and also not have a cell phone that they could connect to their system via wifi to "check in."
You can't please everyone all the time, and never will be able to. When the next gen after this goes all digital there will still be people without good internet SOMEWHERE, and they will just have to not buy them.
So what would have happened if MS's server had issues? I think thats what a lot of people were wondering myself included. Remember that MS use to have a music service to compete with iTunes. Guess how that worked out for people who purchases songs that can no longer be authenticated due to the server shutdowns.
Just really think if would have been a one time check when you first installed the game, like Steam does then more people would have been onboard with it. Telling people that you are shutting their games down if for any reason you can't monitor it every 24hrs was a little much.
Unfortunately it is statements like the bolded part that make me shake my head. It's this uninformed reasoning that is the problem. You didn't realize that the entire reason for the checks was that each disc would be fully installed and not require you to keep that disc in the drive, so you could swap between all your games and keep even the disc games in the cloud tied to your gamertag. If you could have installed the game, checked once, and then never checked again - what was stopping you from reselling to Gamestop or giving to a friend to play at the same time? The whole reason for checks was that we are in an intermediary stage where some people still want a circular piece of plastic in a case on their shelf, or there are people without access to the internet. If all was digital - then no checks, as you can't pass around a digital game physically since it's tied to your gamertag already.
Well I will admit that is not something that I had thought of. Point taken. I am so use to buying my games digitaly thru Steam that I hadn't given much thought about someone taking and sadly scamming others. I wonder if they might look at release digital copies on the same day they release disc copies. That way people that want and have the ability can download the game and not worry about disc. Not sure if that has been mentioned or not but would seem like maybe a compromise.
Again, it's a small percentage of people who would have internet be down for over a 24 hour period within their gaming day, and also not have a cell phone that they could connect to their system via wifi to "check in."
You can't please everyone all the time, and never will be able to. When the next gen after this goes all digital there will still be people without good internet SOMEWHERE, and they will just have to not buy them.
So what would have happened if MS's server had issues? I think thats what a lot of people were wondering myself included. Remember that MS use to have a music service to compete with iTunes. Guess how that worked out for people who purchases songs that can no longer be authenticated due to the server shutdowns.
Just really think if would have been a one time check when you first installed the game, like Steam does then more people would have been onboard with it. Telling people that you are shutting their games down if for any reason you can't monitor it every 24hrs was a little much.
Unfortunately it is statements like the bolded part that make me shake my head. It's this uninformed reasoning that is the problem. You didn't realize that the entire reason for the checks was that each disc would be fully installed and not require you to keep that disc in the drive, so you could swap between all your games and keep even the disc games in the cloud tied to your gamertag. If you could have installed the game, checked once, and then never checked again - what was stopping you from reselling to Gamestop or giving to a friend to play at the same time? The whole reason for checks was that we are in an intermediary stage where some people still want a circular piece of plastic in a case on their shelf, or there are people without access to the internet. If all was digital - then no checks, as you can't pass around a digital game physically since it's tied to your gamertag already.
You can embed a code into the disc that ties that disc to the license. Some OEMs use this to tie the Windows disc that comes with the computer to that specific computer. Example: My Dell laptop has a disc for Windows. We have 4 laptops here at the office that are the exact same model. However, I can't use my laptop's Windows disc to install Windows on any of those other 3 laptops, even with their legal Windows authentication code, because my disc is tied to my licensing code. No checks after the initial authentication to validate the code Dell gave me was legit. To transfer that license, I'd have to contact MS to have the license (and in effect the disc) transferred.
It's not impossible to offer discs and ease up on that check at all.
You can embed a code into the disc that ties that disc to the license. Some OEMs use this to tie the Windows disc that comes with the computer to that specific computer. Example: My Dell laptop has a disc for Windows. We have 4 laptops here at the office that are the exact same model. However, I can't use my laptop's Windows disc to install Windows on any of those other 3 laptops, even with their legal Windows authentication code, because my disc is tied to my licensing code. No checks after the initial authentication to validate the code Dell gave me was legit. To transfer that license, I'd have to contact MS to have the license (and in effect the disc) transferred.
It's not impossible to offer discs and ease up on that check at all.
Thats what they were doing with the Xbox One. The registration was on the disc. But in order to share it with people, in order to de-register it without making a phone call to MS......they needed that once a 24 hour check in. This was to ensure people who didn't have internet, couldn't just copy your game disc and keep it on their console. Or to keep you from trading in a useless disc to Gamestop or rip someone off on Ebay. Not saying anyone here would do that.
Now like you said earlier, if we could choose to just keep the disc in, and turn off the sharing when we weren't logged in, that's kosher. Whether they can do that or not, I dunno. Maybe they can. But will they? Probably not.
I personally think we're missing out on some cool stuff now. But thats just my opinion. Not everyone feels the same way. And that's fine. And we would not have known if MS was gonna be the devil in this scenario until someone took the plunge and some time passed by. Would they have ever given us steam deals? No one knows for sure. Speculation and guesses. I wasn't even honestly caring too much about the steam deals. I was okay with sharing games with 10 people and saving some cash on Xbox Live gold, and still be able to trade in my games or sold them as I chose.
Am I glad Microsoft listened to its customers and changed policy. Yes. Am I sad that some of the features I liked are getting axed now. Yes. It doesn't matter what we get now over what we were going to get, at least to me. Again not everyone feels the same way and that's fine. But when you want bacon, and someone gives you a pickle...you may love pickles. But it ain't that bacon you were craving.
You can embed a code into the disc that ties that disc to the license. Some OEMs use this to tie the Windows disc that comes with the computer to that specific computer. Example: My Dell laptop has a disc for Windows. We have 4 laptops here at the office that are the exact same model. However, I can't use my laptop's Windows disc to install Windows on any of those other 3 laptops, even with their legal Windows authentication code, because my disc is tied to my licensing code. No checks after the initial authentication to validate the code Dell gave me was legit. To transfer that license, I'd have to contact MS to have the license (and in effect the disc) transferred.
It's not impossible to offer discs and ease up on that check at all.
Thats what they were doing with the Xbox One. The registration was on the disc. But in order to share it with people, in order to de-register it without making a phone call to MS......they needed that once a 24 hour check in. This was to ensure people who didn't have internet, couldn't just copy your game disc and keep it on their console. Or to keep you from trading in a useless disc to Gamestop or rip someone off on Ebay. Not saying anyone here would do that.
Now like you said earlier, if we could choose to just keep the disc in, and turn off the sharing when we weren't logged in, that's kosher. Whether they can do that or not, I dunno. Maybe they can. But will they? Probably not.
I personally think we're missing out on some cool stuff now. But thats just my opinion. Not everyone feels the same way. And that's fine. And we would not have known if MS was gonna be the devil in this scenario until someone took the plunge and some time passed by. Would they have ever given us steam deals? No one knows for sure. Speculation and guesses. I wasn't even honestly caring too much about the steam deals. I was okay with sharing games with 10 people and saving some cash on Xbox Live gold, and still be able to trade in my games or sold them as I chose.
Am I glad Microsoft listened to its customers and changed policy. Yes. Am I sad that some of the features I liked are getting axed now. Yes. It doesn't matter what we get now over what we were going to get, at least to me. Again not everyone feels the same way and that's fine. But when you want bacon, and someone gives you a pickle...you may love pickles. But it ain't that bacon you were craving.
Okay your calm, logical post may not be allowed in one of the Threads of Anger! ;)
Been called an asshole, fucking idiot, whiner, and my personal favorite an "Empty can". Accused of being "bat shit crazy" and needing a tin foil hat. I provided article and link after link to support why I felt the DRM and anti used game policies were bad. I spoke with respect to you all after the initial flame war between myself, Autarch and Shadow.
Lets get this straight however, I nor anyone else on this or any other forum took your precious sharing plan away. Microsoft chose to remove this functionality after seeing their preorder sales figures. The consumer did exactly as it is supposed to do. They saw what was being offered and didn't buy it. Sending a clear message to the manufacturer that, no we would not buy into their view of the future.
If Microsoft had all of these grand plans and this family sharing plan was so misunderstood, then why didn't they come out and reveal all of the little secrets they had been refusing to talk about since the failed unveiling of the system? They would not have to remove all of the DRM or 24 hour checks if they were even remotely confident that what they were offering was a superior gaming experience. Don't blame the customers who didn't buy the console. Blame the company that to this day refuses to tell you exactly what they are offering.
What did you expect when you tell our service men and women to go kick rocks!? Or long time partners Gamefly,Gamestop/Redbox,Bestbuy etc that we're either going to cripple you or run you out of business entirely. Or, a Kinect has to come with every system and is always connected? How about being over $100 more expensive than your competitor while imposing the strictest DRM ever attempted on a console?
Microsoft did this to themselves, and all of their loyal customers. No one did this to them. It was not a conspiracy, nor a group of rabble intent on destroying your good time in the "future".Quit bitching about people who voiced genuine and legitimate concerns and instead direct your rage at the company that went down like a $2 hooker instead of actually explaining their "Amazing new future technology" in a way that would make the consumer understand. Take off the stupid hats, and answer the fucking questions instead of double talking everything and maybe people would have preordered your console.
Been called an asshole, fucking idiot, whiner, and my personal favorite an "Empty can". Accused of being "bat shit crazy" and needing a tin foil hat. I provided article and link after link to support why I felt the DRM and anti used game policies were bad. I spoke with respect to you all after the initial flame war between myself, Autarch and Shadow.
Lets get this straight however, I nor anyone else on this or any other forum took your precious sharing plan away. Microsoft chose to remove this functionality after seeing their preorder sales figures. The consumer did exactly as it is supposed to do. They saw what was being offered and didn't buy it. Sending a clear message to the manufacturer that, no we would not buy into their view of the future.
If Microsoft had all of these grand plans and this family sharing plan was so misunderstood, then why didn't they come out and reveal all of the little secrets they had been refusing to talk about since the failed unveiling of the system? They would not have to remove all of the DRM or 24 hour checks if they were even remotely confident that what they were offering was a superior gaming experience. Don't blame the customers who didn't buy the console. Blame the company that to this day refuses to tell you exactly what they are offering.
What did you expect when you tell our service men and women to go kick rocks!? Or long time partners Gamefly,Gamestop/Redbox,Bestbuy etc that we're either going to cripple you or run you out of business entirely. Or, a Kinect has to come with every system and is always connected? How about being over $100 more expensive than your competitor while imposing the strictest DRM ever attempted on a console?
Microsoft did this to themselves, and all of their loyal customers. No one did this to them. It was not a conspiracy, nor a group of rabble intent on destroying your good time in the "future".Quit bitching about people who voiced genuine and legitimate concerns and instead direct your rage at the company that went down like a $2 hooker instead of actually explaining their "Amazing new future technology" in a way that would make the consumer understand. Take off the stupid hats, and answer the fucking questions instead of double talking everything and maybe people would have preordered your console.
The root reason why Microsoft had to back down on their changes and make things stick with the way they are, it’s because they did a horrible job selling their new features and what they could have meant for the consumer.
MS also did a horrible job introducing what they had to know would be unpopular concepts. It was all equally horrid marketing and PR from there. This fiasco is not the internet's fault. It's Microsoft's.
MS also did a horrible job introducing what they had to know would be unpopular concepts. It was all equally horrid marketing and PR from there. This fiasco is not the internet's fault. It's Microsoft's.
What we know today about how games are going to work on the new consoles still wouldn't fill a thimble. I don't care how badly MS peformed in getting out the information, no one made anyone draw a conclusion one way or the other on an incomplete set of facts -- they did that all on their own based on what they read and wanted to be true. Freaking sheeple.
The 24 hr check in would have been more palatable if it had been a check in when you log onto the net thing, like e-mail. So you grab your box and fly into a cabin in the canadian outdoors for a week of beer, fish and gaming ( forget the electricity thing). Your box continues to work fine offline, and when you get back, and plug the net in, a quick check, everythings fine and back at it. IS Microsoft's PR/Marketing division that damn messed up? because if you ask engineers if something can be done, it's usually yes, or we'll figure it out, and rarely it's no, more often it's yes but it's too expensive.
But the end results the same, I get a newer 360...which is better than what I have now, but it's still the "what I could have had" scenario...
People kept their ability to get ripped off by gamestop, which comes at a much higher monetary cost through the other features now lost.
+1 Last time I went to pawnstop I picked a game out of the new release section. Went to the counter and to my suprise they pull the game disc out of a drawer and put it in the case from off the wall. I asked about the code card for the online portion (was BF3) and the guy gave me a puzzled look and said someone must have taken it out. Yea here's your game back, haven't bought a game there since.
Any time anyone defends Gamestop, I just shake my head. Why does anyone want a middle man? I want my games direct, and digitally shareable. Cut out the middle man and give devs/publishers more of a cut, then hopefully prices fall more in line with Steam.
I think we can all agree that MS PR did a horrible job at getting the information out the right way. If I were in charge or the PR department over their, I will be packing my bags.
I hope they do a revision of the policy and do some type of combo thing like Tdrag/Kitten and others have said. If you go digital and allow once every 24hr check, then you can do what we had planned. If you go physical media, then you got what you can't.
But lets clear up a couple of things:
MS did the change to make more money off of consumer "fears". Period. They can now can offer less functionality for the same amount of money.
Some people believe they will no longer have a drm check. This is completely wrong. You no longer have a virtual drm check, you now have a physical drm check.
I do not think MS would ever really get around to a price point of a Steam sale, the only way they could is if they would put in place the contracts with the retailers to give them a cut of the digital sale. Note I said retailer, because that is who is the MS/publishers customer. We are not the customer of publishers/hardware manufactuers (unless you buy directly from them). When we buy a game/hardware, the retailers do not cut a check to MS/Sony or publisher saying LB just bought a copy of TitanFall, here is your cut. MS (or Sony) would not want to undercut their direct customer with pricing. Steam is able to do this because they are the digital distributor for some publishers and they only cut the price of a game after an agreed amount of time.
Stating the publishers where putting pressure on MS to change the sharing policy is a little bit of a stretch. Game sharing is still possible with the change, the only differnce is that it will take longer. Yes it is by far less convienent, but those same 10 people will still be able to share the same game. If this were the case, then the publishers are being short sighted and lost out the oppurtunity to make micro transactions an addition revenue model for them. He LB is using that game sharing deal and not buying that single player only game, But he does want to get a xp boost/fancy gun camo/vehicle booster pack so he does not have to spend 9 hours grinding to get what he wants. Thanks for paying the extra 5 dollars we will pocket for virutally zero effort. Now multiply that by thousands. Think I am insane? Ask the makers of f2p (Free to Play) games likes Tribes Ascend or Super Monday Night Combat how they are doing with the cash that keeps rolling in.
People are now happy they do not have to worry about not being able to play their game because they have the physical media and no internet check is in place to prevent them from playing. This is accurate as long as the publisher that made that game is not using the cloud computing function as a major part of the game. In the beginning the publishers will probably not completely utilize that funcitonality to its fullest, but over time when they come to optimize and figure out the system, you can bet it will be a more and more embeded part of the majority of a game. For example you are playing a game that you need to cross a bridge to get to the next quest/mission/land, well why waste processor power on creating a static item that will never change, lets just have the cloud do it. Well, now these same people have one of their frequent web disruptions/storms scenerios and that bridge you needed is now gone because your box can't connect to the cloud.
I can see MS also come out before the launch saying they are going to offer and XB 1 without the Kinect for a 399 price point. I really do not know what would be stopping them at this point.
true. There's been no confirmation for the reason for the change, and there probably never will be. In two years, DRM-gate will not even be thought about and we'll still be 8 years from any sort of digital gaming advancement.
At least Gen 9 won't have a disc slot. Mark my words on that one.
Again, it's a small percentage of people who would have internet be down for over a 24 hour period within their gaming day, and also not have a cell phone that they could connect to their system via wifi to "check in."
You can't please everyone all the time, and never will be able to. When the next gen after this goes all digital there will still be people without good internet SOMEWHERE, and they will just have to not buy them.
So what would have happened if MS's server had issues? I think thats what a lot of people were wondering myself included. Remember that MS use to have a music service to compete with iTunes. Guess how that worked out for people who purchases songs that can no longer be authenticated due to the server shutdowns.
Just really think if would have been a one time check when you first installed the game, like Steam does then more people would have been onboard with it. Telling people that you are shutting their games down if for any reason you can't monitor it every 24hrs was a little much.
Unfortunately it is statements like the bolded part that make me shake my head. It's this uninformed reasoning that is the problem. You didn't realize that the entire reason for the checks was that each disc would be fully installed and not require you to keep that disc in the drive, so you could swap between all your games and keep even the disc games in the cloud tied to your gamertag. If you could have installed the game, checked once, and then never checked again - what was stopping you from reselling to Gamestop or giving to a friend to play at the same time? The whole reason for checks was that we are in an intermediary stage where some people still want a circular piece of plastic in a case on their shelf, or there are people without access to the internet. If all was digital - then no checks, as you can't pass around a digital game physically since it's tied to your gamertag already.
Well I will admit that is not something that I had thought of. Point taken. I am so use to buying my games digitaly thru Steam that I hadn't given much thought about someone taking and sadly scamming others. I wonder if they might look at release digital copies on the same day they release disc copies. That way people that want and have the ability can download the game and not worry about disc. Not sure if that has been mentioned or not but would seem like maybe a compromise.
You can embed a code into the disc that ties that disc to the license. Some OEMs use this to tie the Windows disc that comes with the computer to that specific computer. Example: My Dell laptop has a disc for Windows. We have 4 laptops here at the office that are the exact same model. However, I can't use my laptop's Windows disc to install Windows on any of those other 3 laptops, even with their legal Windows authentication code, because my disc is tied to my licensing code. No checks after the initial authentication to validate the code Dell gave me was legit. To transfer that license, I'd have to contact MS to have the license (and in effect the disc) transferred.
It's not impossible to offer discs and ease up on that check at all.
Thats what they were doing with the Xbox One. The registration was on the disc. But in order to share it with people, in order to de-register it without making a phone call to MS......they needed that once a 24 hour check in. This was to ensure people who didn't have internet, couldn't just copy your game disc and keep it on their console. Or to keep you from trading in a useless disc to Gamestop or rip someone off on Ebay. Not saying anyone here would do that.
Now like you said earlier, if we could choose to just keep the disc in, and turn off the sharing when we weren't logged in, that's kosher. Whether they can do that or not, I dunno. Maybe they can. But will they? Probably not.
I personally think we're missing out on some cool stuff now. But thats just my opinion. Not everyone feels the same way. And that's fine. And we would not have known if MS was gonna be the devil in this scenario until someone took the plunge and some time passed by. Would they have ever given us steam deals? No one knows for sure. Speculation and guesses. I wasn't even honestly caring too much about the steam deals. I was okay with sharing games with 10 people and saving some cash on Xbox Live gold, and still be able to trade in my games or sold them as I chose.
Am I glad Microsoft listened to its customers and changed policy. Yes. Am I sad that some of the features I liked are getting axed now. Yes. It doesn't matter what we get now over what we were going to get, at least to me. Again not everyone feels the same way and that's fine. But when you want bacon, and someone gives you a pickle...you may love pickles. But it ain't that bacon you were craving.
Been called an asshole, fucking idiot, whiner, and my personal favorite an "Empty can". Accused of being "bat shit crazy" and needing a tin foil hat. I provided article and link after link to support why I felt the DRM and anti used game policies were bad. I spoke with respect to you all after the initial flame war between myself, Autarch and Shadow.
Lets get this straight however, I nor anyone else on this or any other forum took your precious sharing plan away. Microsoft chose to remove this functionality after seeing their preorder sales figures. The consumer did exactly as it is supposed to do. They saw what was being offered and didn't buy it. Sending a clear message to the manufacturer that, no we would not buy into their view of the future.
If Microsoft had all of these grand plans and this family sharing plan was so misunderstood, then why didn't they come out and reveal all of the little secrets they had been refusing to talk about since the failed unveiling of the system? They would not have to remove all of the DRM or 24 hour checks if they were even remotely confident that what they were offering was a superior gaming experience. Don't blame the customers who didn't buy the console. Blame the company that to this day refuses to tell you exactly what they are offering.
What did you expect when you tell our service men and women to go kick rocks!? Or long time partners Gamefly,Gamestop/Redbox,Bestbuy etc that we're either going to cripple you or run you out of business entirely. Or, a Kinect has to come with every system and is always connected? How about being over $100 more expensive than your competitor while imposing the strictest DRM ever attempted on a console?
Microsoft did this to themselves, and all of their loyal customers. No one did this to them. It was not a conspiracy, nor a group of rabble intent on destroying your good time in the "future".Quit bitching about people who voiced genuine and legitimate concerns and instead direct your rage at the company that went down like a $2 hooker instead of actually explaining their "Amazing new future technology" in a way that would make the consumer understand. Take off the stupid hats, and answer the fucking questions instead of double talking everything and maybe people would have preordered your console.
This
MS also did a horrible job introducing what they had to know would be unpopular concepts. It was all equally horrid marketing and PR from there. This fiasco is not the internet's fault. It's Microsoft's.
Adding hostage situation to this list of claims about Xbox One.
What we know today about how games are going to work on the new consoles still wouldn't fill a thimble. I don't care how badly MS peformed in getting out the information, no one made anyone draw a conclusion one way or the other on an incomplete set of facts -- they did that all on their own based on what they read and wanted to be true. Freaking sheeple.
The 24 hr check in would have been more palatable if it had been a check in when you log onto the net thing, like e-mail. So you grab your box and fly into a cabin in the canadian outdoors for a week of beer, fish and gaming ( forget the electricity thing). Your box continues to work fine offline, and when you get back, and plug the net in, a quick check, everythings fine and back at it. IS Microsoft's PR/Marketing division that damn messed up? because if you ask engineers if something can be done, it's usually yes, or we'll figure it out, and rarely it's no, more often it's yes but it's too expensive.
But the end results the same, I get a newer 360...which is better than what I have now, but it's still the "what I could have had" scenario...
Agreed. I'm going to be upset with what I could have had for awhile, I think.
People kept their ability to get ripped off by gamestop, which comes at a much higher monetary cost through the other features now lost.
+1 Last time I went to pawnstop I picked a game out of the new release section. Went to the counter and to my suprise they pull the game disc out of a drawer and put it in the case from off the wall. I asked about the code card for the online portion (was BF3) and the guy gave me a puzzled look and said someone must have taken it out. Yea here's your game back, haven't bought a game there since.
Please dont lock the thread. This is Gold Jerry!
Why don't they call it Round-tine? The glass is round. The container is round.
Any time anyone defends Gamestop, I just shake my head. Why does anyone want a middle man? I want my games direct, and digitally shareable. Cut out the middle man and give devs/publishers more of a cut, then hopefully prices fall more in line with Steam.
I can't get on XBLive. Co-incidence? Local outtage?
Judging by a couple of tweets I'm seeing, it doesn't seem to be a local outage.
looks like a DOS attack from people trying to prove a point. That's what I would guess.
What a bunch of crap if that's the case. I never understood the need to pull off a DDOS.
Wanna encourage digital dlds, release them 2 days before discs go live, they will flock in droves to digital...all to be first...(whatevah!)
@zombiekitten - LOL yeah. Despite my recent posts....I try to stay calm and make sense. Doesn't happen often. But I try.
I think we can all agree that MS PR did a horrible job at getting the information out the right way. If I were in charge or the PR department over their, I will be packing my bags.
I hope they do a revision of the policy and do some type of combo thing like Tdrag/Kitten and others have said. If you go digital and allow once every 24hr check, then you can do what we had planned. If you go physical media, then you got what you can't.
But lets clear up a couple of things:
MS did the change to make more money off of consumer "fears". Period. They can now can offer less functionality for the same amount of money.
Some people believe they will no longer have a drm check. This is completely wrong. You no longer have a virtual drm check, you now have a physical drm check.
I do not think MS would ever really get around to a price point of a Steam sale, the only way they could is if they would put in place the contracts with the retailers to give them a cut of the digital sale. Note I said retailer, because that is who is the MS/publishers customer. We are not the customer of publishers/hardware manufactuers (unless you buy directly from them). When we buy a game/hardware, the retailers do not cut a check to MS/Sony or publisher saying LB just bought a copy of TitanFall, here is your cut. MS (or Sony) would not want to undercut their direct customer with pricing. Steam is able to do this because they are the digital distributor for some publishers and they only cut the price of a game after an agreed amount of time.
Stating the publishers where putting pressure on MS to change the sharing policy is a little bit of a stretch. Game sharing is still possible with the change, the only differnce is that it will take longer. Yes it is by far less convienent, but those same 10 people will still be able to share the same game. If this were the case, then the publishers are being short sighted and lost out the oppurtunity to make micro transactions an addition revenue model for them. He LB is using that game sharing deal and not buying that single player only game, But he does want to get a xp boost/fancy gun camo/vehicle booster pack so he does not have to spend 9 hours grinding to get what he wants. Thanks for paying the extra 5 dollars we will pocket for virutally zero effort. Now multiply that by thousands. Think I am insane? Ask the makers of f2p (Free to Play) games likes Tribes Ascend or Super Monday Night Combat how they are doing with the cash that keeps rolling in.
People are now happy they do not have to worry about not being able to play their game because they have the physical media and no internet check is in place to prevent them from playing. This is accurate as long as the publisher that made that game is not using the cloud computing function as a major part of the game. In the beginning the publishers will probably not completely utilize that funcitonality to its fullest, but over time when they come to optimize and figure out the system, you can bet it will be a more and more embeded part of the majority of a game. For example you are playing a game that you need to cross a bridge to get to the next quest/mission/land, well why waste processor power on creating a static item that will never change, lets just have the cloud do it. Well, now these same people have one of their frequent web disruptions/storms scenerios and that bridge you needed is now gone because your box can't connect to the cloud.
I can see MS also come out before the launch saying they are going to offer and XB 1 without the Kinect for a 399 price point. I really do not know what would be stopping them at this point.