Xbox One Catch-all

MannishBoy wrote:
shoptroll wrote:

I wouldn't put it past any of the hardware manufacturers to try and pull a PSP Go strategy part-way into this generation.

After seeing this situation and seeing how the Go went, it won't be Sony sticking their neck out.

PSP Go was also 4 years ago. Digital services like Steam are a lot more entrenched now than they were then. Plus all the hardware manufacturers have dramatically improved their online stores since then, so a pure-digital system should be a lot more viable now than when the Go launched. Not to mention the fact that we've seen some outstanding digital-only titles since 2009.

Jayhawker wrote:

Steam may soon allow game-sharing with friends

I will laugh when Valve decides to backtrack now.

Valve doesn't have to walk it back because Steam doesn't attempt to support retail discs alongside digital games. If there weren't discs involved MS probably wouldn't have needed all the DRM they were applying to the system.

And MS could easily allow sharing of digital games at a later date if they want.

Thin_J wrote:
Faceless Clock wrote:

Not even that, 'cause you can bet your ass a lot of people complaining have huge Steam collections.

These are the ones that blow my mind. It's so spectacularly hypocritical. Amazing.

Did it occur to you that maybe those people don't want their consoles to be like their PCs?

The biggest problem was they included a disc drive. They should not have. And if they didn't think digital was ready for primetime, they should have never mentioned DRM or digital sharing in the first place.

MannishBoy wrote:
shoptroll wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
shoptroll wrote:

I wouldn't put it past any of the hardware manufacturers to try and pull a PSP Go strategy part-way into this generation.

After seeing this situation and seeing how the Go went, it won't be Sony sticking their neck out.

PSP Go was also 4 years ago. Digital services like Steam are a lot more entrenched now than they were then. Plus all the hardware manufacturers have dramatically improved their online stores since then, so a pure-digital system should be a lot more viable now than when the Go launched. Not to mention the fact that we've seen some outstanding digital-only titles since 2009.

Tell that to MS.

Except the One wasn't pure digital in the original incarnation. If anyone wants to do a "Steambox" style console the market is a lot more accepting of it now than they were 4 years ago. MS just made the blunder of trying to simultaneously support two models that don't mesh well together. EDIT: In addition to completely face planting on the messaging.

Quintin_Stone wrote:
Thin_J wrote:
Faceless Clock wrote:

Not even that, 'cause you can bet your ass a lot of people complaining have huge Steam collections.

These are the ones that blow my mind. It's so spectacularly hypocritical. Amazing.

Did it occur to you that maybe those people don't want their consoles to be like their PCs?

That's also a good point.

shoptroll wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
shoptroll wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
shoptroll wrote:

I wouldn't put it past any of the hardware manufacturers to try and pull a PSP Go strategy part-way into this generation.

After seeing this situation and seeing how the Go went, it won't be Sony sticking their neck out.

PSP Go was also 4 years ago. Digital services like Steam are a lot more entrenched now than they were then. Plus all the hardware manufacturers have dramatically improved their online stores since then, so a pure-digital system should be a lot more viable now than when the Go launched. Not to mention the fact that we've seen some outstanding digital-only titles since 2009.

Tell that to MS.

Except the One wasn't pure digital in the original incarnation. If anyone wants to do a "Steambox" style console the market is a lot more accepting of it now than they were 4 years ago. MS just made the blunder of trying to simultaneously support two models that don't mesh well together.

In an environment where discs have to exist (this gen), nobody's going to take the risk to pull out the optical drive after what just happened.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

Did it occur to you that maybe those people don't want their consoles to be like their PCs?

At least mention why people wouldn't want their consoles to be like their PC instead of leaving me to guess.

Faceless Clock wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

Did it occur to you that maybe those people don't want their consoles to be like their PCs?

Good point? This isn't even a point. At least mention why people wouldn't want their consoles to be like their PC isn't instead of leaving me to guess.

Pretty ironic considering your "the Kinect's virtues need no explanation, dummy" post from last night...but in this case, I actually agree.

MannishBoy wrote:
shoptroll wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
shoptroll wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
shoptroll wrote:

I wouldn't put it past any of the hardware manufacturers to try and pull a PSP Go strategy part-way into this generation.

After seeing this situation and seeing how the Go went, it won't be Sony sticking their neck out.

PSP Go was also 4 years ago. Digital services like Steam are a lot more entrenched now than they were then. Plus all the hardware manufacturers have dramatically improved their online stores since then, so a pure-digital system should be a lot more viable now than when the Go launched. Not to mention the fact that we've seen some outstanding digital-only titles since 2009.

Tell that to MS.

Except the One wasn't pure digital in the original incarnation. If anyone wants to do a "Steambox" style console the market is a lot more accepting of it now than they were 4 years ago. MS just made the blunder of trying to simultaneously support two models that don't mesh well together.

In an environment where discs have to exist (this gen), nobody's going to take the risk to pull out the optical drive after what just happened.

Depends on how you market it. Remember too the Go was more expensive than the disc based version of the PSP. That right there turned off many people who were willing to buy into the all-digital version especially because PSP games actually ran better when they weren't loading from the UMD. High hardware price coupled with worse selection than retail is what killed the Go.

With digital releases available on Day 1 they can definitely avoid the Go. Nintendo has been crowing a lot this week about how Animal Crossing: New Leaf smashed the day 1 eShop sales records in nearly every territory. People are switching to digital, they just don't want to be forced. A Go equivalent system could happily exist alongside a traditional discbased version of the hardware if the manufacturer is willing to properly support it. Sony didn't properly support the Go hence it failed.

Totally agree, Jay.

SallyNasty wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:
These changes will impact some of the scenarios we previously announced for Xbox One. The sharing of games will work as it does today, you will simply share the disc. Downloaded titles cannot be shared or resold. Also, similar to today, playing disc based games will require that the disc be in the tray.

The Luddites won.

I wouldn't go that far. I think MS lost because they really marketed themselves poorly. I know I was, and continue to be, on board - but I buy new and keep games, so I had no skin in the literal game(with regard to used sales). I would have liked to see a progression towards a more steam-like console experience, as the world is moving towards a digital future - but alas, maybe next time.

That said, I am really disappointed that this will basically negate any possibility of the sharing plan.

Oh, Microsoft deserves the largest part of the blame due to their incredibly poor job of telling their story. But it has been the fear of the digital future that fueled the rage, even before the May 21st reveal. As soon as stuff began to leak, people that should know better began to freak out and raise hell. Microsoft should have addressed this better in May and filled in the story as they moved on to E3.

Instead, MS froze and botched their message even more.

Jayhawker wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:
These changes will impact some of the scenarios we previously announced for Xbox One. The sharing of games will work as it does today, you will simply share the disc. Downloaded titles cannot be shared or resold. Also, similar to today, playing disc based games will require that the disc be in the tray.

The Luddites won.

I wouldn't go that far. I think MS lost because they really marketed themselves poorly. I know I was, and continue to be, on board - but I buy new and keep games, so I had no skin in the literal game(with regard to used sales). I would have liked to see a progression towards a more steam-like console experience, as the world is moving towards a digital future - but alas, maybe next time.

That said, I am really disappointed that this will basically negate any possibility of the sharing plan.

Oh, Microsoft deserve the largest part of the blame due to their incredibly poor job of telling their story. But it has been the fear of the digital future that fueled the rage, even before the May 21st reveal. As soon as stuff began to leak, people that should know better began to freak out and raise hell. Microsoft should have addressed this better in May and filled in the story as they moved on to E3.

Instead, MS froze and botched their message even more.

I think the root of this was that they tried too much to be everything to everybody. Want digital? Great. Want physical? Great. Want both? Great.

However, here's this long confusing list of things we have to do to get the publishers to give you all this stuff...

I think as much as it brought a bunch of features, it brought more compromises. Some of the stuff should have been cut to have gotten to a clearer picture to tell.

Xbox New Coke.

MannishBoy wrote:
EvilDead wrote:

I'm wondering (hoping) if you will be able to register multiple xboxes to the master account since a single Gold membership can cover multiple people.

I'm betting that's also gone. I'm betting a Gold fee per account now.

Hopefully I'm wrong.

Sony used to allow 5 on one PS3 account, but it's down to 2 now I believe. I expect Xbox won't allow more than that, but they might allow 2 or 3 if it is any kind of pain to deauthorize an xbox, like if it dies.

MannishBoy wrote:

Xbox New Coke.

XBox Pepsi Clear or XBox Pepsi Blue would be more appropriate given the current PepsiCo promotion, but nice comparison regardless.

I wonder how Sony views this. Do they regret pushing so hard that Microsoft course corrected? Are they celebrating because all they expected was to convince some people that digital sharing was evil, and instead Microsoft killed off their own big advantage?

Chairman_Mao wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
EvilDead wrote:

I'm wondering (hoping) if you will be able to register multiple xboxes to the master account since a single Gold membership can cover multiple people.

I'm betting that's also gone. I'm betting a Gold fee per account now.

Hopefully I'm wrong.

Sony used to allow 5 on one PS3 account, but it's down to 2 now I believe. I expect Xbox won't allow more than that, but they might allow 2 or 3 if it is any kind of pain to deauthorize an xbox, like if it dies.

Sony also now charges for multiplayer per account on PS4.

They're still missing the boat. They could easily have maintained all the features of their old system: "If you don't have the disk, we need a check-in every day or three for validation." I thought they had some great ideas, and I was receptive to their thinking. I wish they had actually put some thought into how to educate people about what they were planning, as opposed to obfuscating things and even sometimes putting out false information.

Chairman_Mao wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
EvilDead wrote:

I'm wondering (hoping) if you will be able to register multiple xboxes to the master account since a single Gold membership can cover multiple people.

I'm betting that's also gone. I'm betting a Gold fee per account now.

Hopefully I'm wrong.

Sony used to allow 5 on one PS3 account, but it's down to 2 now I believe. I expect Xbox won't allow more than that, but they might allow 2 or 3 if it is any kind of pain to deauthorize an xbox, like if it dies.

You can already install any downloadable xbox game you own on any xbox as long as you log in with the purchasing account. What we were / are hoping for is that they allow you to share the game with other XBL accounts.

That New Coke analogy is mind-blowingly accurate, Mannish. That one's going in your obituary (hopefully many years hence).

MannishBoy wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
EvilDead wrote:

I'm wondering (hoping) if you will be able to register multiple xboxes to the master account since a single Gold membership can cover multiple people.

I'm betting that's also gone. I'm betting a Gold fee per account now.

Hopefully I'm wrong.

Sony used to allow 5 on one PS3 account, but it's down to 2 now I believe. I expect Xbox won't allow more than that, but they might allow 2 or 3 if it is any kind of pain to deauthorize an xbox, like if it dies.

Sony also now charges for multiplayer per account on PS4.

But the Xbox One is still $100 more than PS4.

Unless MS caves on that, too.

firesloth wrote:

They're still missing the boat. They could easily have maintained all the features of their old system: "If you don't have the disk, we need a check-in every day or three for validation." I thought they had some great ideas, and I was receptive to their thinking. I wish they had actually put some thought into how to educate people about what they were planning, as opposed to obfuscating things and even sometimes putting out false information.

No they couldn't have. If you traded the disc and unplugged, you'd still have access to the game along with whoever you sold it to. The whole check in thing was designed to make sure you still owned the licenses.

Faceless Clock wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

Did it occur to you that maybe those people don't want their consoles to be like their PCs?

At least mention why people wouldn't want their consoles to be like their PC instead of leaving me to guess.

Maybe they want different things to be different things? I don't know. A couple of people I've talked to said they don't want them to act the same; they did not get into the nitty-gritty of it. And of course there's been no shortage of console gamers in this thread explaining why they didn't like MS's DRM scheme. Maybe you could go back and read those posts.

While some of the interesting features leaving is sad, I'm good with the changes. I was getting very close to just dumping the preorder.

As far as the steam comparison goes, is be ok if the Xbox was like steam, but it came off as more restrictive. Now, that may just be the messaging.

MannishBoy wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
EvilDead wrote:

I'm wondering (hoping) if you will be able to register multiple xboxes to the master account since a single Gold membership can cover multiple people.

I'm betting that's also gone. I'm betting a Gold fee per account now.

Hopefully I'm wrong.

Sony used to allow 5 on one PS3 account, but it's down to 2 now I believe. I expect Xbox won't allow more than that, but they might allow 2 or 3 if it is any kind of pain to deauthorize an xbox, like if it dies.

Sony also now charges for multiplayer per account on PS4.

To clarify, I meant I could have my single PS3 account authorized on up to 2 (5 previously) different PS3s, now down to 2. I hope you're not saying that Sony will try to charge me more if I need to authorize my account on a second PS4. That would make me very wary about going with Sony.

edit: that is what it sounded like EvilDead was asking about, but I may have misunderstood.

MeatMan wrote:

But the Xbox One is still $100 more than PS4.

Unless MS caves on that, too.

I think it's relevant, but not nearly as much as the DRM. Especially if they can actually start selling Kinect as more than big brother in a black box.

$100 over the lifecycle of a console really doesn't sway me one way or another. But when you've got your friends list built, gamerscore, etc, you've got some lock in for some group of consumers.

TempestBlayze wrote:

This is why we wait on preordering consols.

They still haven't made games internally that appeal to me in ~3 years

That's been my reason for abandoning ship all along.

Chairman_Mao wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:
MannishBoy wrote:
EvilDead wrote:

I'm wondering (hoping) if you will be able to register multiple xboxes to the master account since a single Gold membership can cover multiple people.

I'm betting that's also gone. I'm betting a Gold fee per account now.

Hopefully I'm wrong.

Sony used to allow 5 on one PS3 account, but it's down to 2 now I believe. I expect Xbox won't allow more than that, but they might allow 2 or 3 if it is any kind of pain to deauthorize an xbox, like if it dies.

Sony also now charges for multiplayer per account on PS4.

To clarify, I meant I could have my single PS3 account authorized on up to 2 (5 previously) different PS3s, now down to 2. I hope you're not saying that Sony will try to charge me more if I need to authorize my account on a second PS4. That would make me very wary about going with Sony.

edit: that is what it sounded like EvilDead was asking about, but I may have misunderstood.

I think you're confusing how MS accounts work, or I'm confused. Xbox has always allowed you to log onto however many Xboxes you want with one account (one at a time). The new world said Gold was also tied to a particular "home" Xbox as well, so that anybody playing on that box would have the benefit of Gold. I'm saying that all those free riders on that home console will either not get access to Gold content and multiplayer, or you'll have to buy Gold to get them access now. That's what I'm guessing is happening based on what they said.

What you're describing with the PS3 isn't the same thing in the new world.

MannishBoy wrote:
firesloth wrote:

They're still missing the boat. They could easily have maintained all the features of their old system: "If you don't have the disk, we need a check-in every day or three for validation." I thought they had some great ideas, and I was receptive to their thinking. I wish they had actually put some thought into how to educate people about what they were planning, as opposed to obfuscating things and even sometimes putting out false information.

No they couldn't have. If you traded the disc and unplugged, you'd still have access to the game along with whoever you sold it to. The whole check in thing was designed to make sure you still owned the licenses.

I think I left one thing out of my comment: Each time a person has a disk for a new game, you'd need to connect to the internet at least once to validate it and invalidate the other copies.

So, under my scheme...we'll call it Firesloth's Magical Fun-time Rights Management Compromise (FMFtRMC):

Each time a person has a disk for a new game, you'd need to connect to the internet at least once to validate it and invalidate the other copies. You can install the game to your HDD and play without the disk if you choose. If you don't have the disk in the drive, the machine would require you check-in every 24 hours or it would invalidate the license on the drive.

So, the only way you could play the game without the internet is to have the disk in the drive. In this way, you could trade the disk in, but your Xbox would check every 24 hours to make sure you still had rights to play the copy on your HDD. Once someone else installed the data from that specific disk, it would invalidate your copy within 24 hours.

Bummed to hear if I buy a game on disc, the disc will still have to be in the tray. Would a service like iTunes Match be feasible?

At least day one digital sales are still a go, although also bummed that sharing/re-selling is out. Will those purchases still exist in the cloud, and be downloadable to and playable on any console you're logged in on?

What I don't get is why MS seemingly never had all this hammered out months before the announcement. What have they been researching and focus-testing over the last several years? How developed are these policies and how committed to them are MS are they can be dropped or reversed in days? This has felt like amateur hour since the Xbone's announcement.

I expect MS to be fluid, and definitely expect that the Xbone will inevitably evolve to a better service—but that's an evolution over its lifetime, not seemingly winging it in the weeks leading up to release.

obirano wrote:

While some of the interesting features leaving is sad, I'm good with the changes. I was getting very close to just dumping the preorder.

As far as the steam comparison goes, is be ok if the Xbox was like steam, but it came off as more restrictive. Now, that may just be the messaging.

The only thing that was more restrictive than Steam was the check in frequency was higher.

Everything else was more liberal. Sharing among up to 10 accounts, the ability to trade digital games, ability to gift games you've played yourself, etc.

MannishBoy wrote:
firesloth wrote:

They're still missing the boat. They could easily have maintained all the features of their old system: "If you don't have the disk, we need a check-in every day or three for validation." I thought they had some great ideas, and I was receptive to their thinking. I wish they had actually put some thought into how to educate people about what they were planning, as opposed to obfuscating things and even sometimes putting out false information.

No they couldn't have. If you traded the disc and unplugged, you'd still have access to the game along with whoever you sold it to. The whole check in thing was designed to make sure you still owned the licenses.

Just like i mentioned earlier they just need to move this feature over to the digital purchase side. Make digital purchases more enticing but still have a physical disc for those that prefer it or those with crappy internet. I don't think anybody argued that all digital wasn't the future they just needed to have a stepping stone to that future. There was such an easy middle ground here that I just don't know how they messed it up so bad, maybe it was publisher demands but who knows.