-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Pennello: "People just weren't ready for all digital Xbox One". Post #657 = ether.
- Thread starter Jomjom
- Start date
soul creator
Member
Er, there weren't any planned fees to register discs. You buy the game once, and then install it, just like any other game. The 24 hr check was basically there to support trade-ins and "easily" prevent abuse (otherwise, there's no real point to having it)
I guess in a roundabout way, one could argue that places like Gamestop would've lessened trade-in values under this newer system, and therefore that's a "fee", but that's harder to follow.
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
I certainly agree on that. What I was trying to get at was that I think they just assumed that Sony's radio silence on the issue combined with the heat they were likely getting from publishers led them to believe that Sony's was going to follow suit going all-digital. I don't think they really conceived of the idea Sony would take the opposite tack. The fact that they never really tried to make a case for all-digital is to me, evidence that, as you say, they never thought they'd have to.
Teletraan1
Banned
You cant base your mass market device on something that only works for a fraction of your possible customers. An all digital future doesn't work when I have bandwidth caps and you have 50GB games. I have really fast internet but I am constrained by bandwidth caps. Other people have internet packages that are more suitable for browsing the web and checking in with social media. For instance my sister's internet package would hit a cap after 1 game download. The price difference per month is like $30-$40 compared to mine, if you go over the cap it is $1 per GB. Almost the price of a game for the privilege of downloading a game rather than buying it in a store. The current setup is favorable to me since I can afford the cap space to buy some smaller digital titles and still buy those 50GB games on a disc which I can trade in if I choose. Options are always the best. Restrictions with no tangible benefit are not.
I don't have the concern about "lessons not learned" that some here do, partly because I'm aware of behavior by several companies I still trust that was along the same lines as this. Worse yet, in some of those cases, they didn't figure it out in advance of the product launch. That seems like it would be more troubling than plans that were never executed on, if all things are being treated equally.
Responding to concerns about the failure of the PSP Go and in light of the announcement of the PS Vita:
If we're regarding the behavior and intent of Sony on the same terms some are Microsoft, an all-digital platform with no ability to purchase used games or sell purchased games sounds akin to the standards for "anti-consumer" I see used here. Having fully launched that platform and in light of it's failure using the words "the time is still not right" *should* raise the same red flags for people upset by statements like the OP by Microsoft. The same concerns *should* also apply to basically every Apple product. The claim that the price is right for digital purchasing sure didn't apply for the Go, even if it would for Apple.
Again, I do trust these companies to tailor their products more or less to what's acceptable by the market. I'll buy a well-implemented product with compelling software, if the price is right. People riling themselves up at the language used to justify the original plans by one company or the other sure better be aware of some of the same behavior and language being used by representatives from their own corporate preference, or else they may be ignoring something that apparently concerns them.
Responding to concerns about the failure of the PSP Go and in light of the announcement of the PS Vita:
If we're regarding the behavior and intent of Sony on the same terms some are Microsoft, an all-digital platform with no ability to purchase used games or sell purchased games sounds akin to the standards for "anti-consumer" I see used here. Having fully launched that platform and in light of it's failure using the words "the time is still not right" *should* raise the same red flags for people upset by statements like the OP by Microsoft. The same concerns *should* also apply to basically every Apple product. The claim that the price is right for digital purchasing sure didn't apply for the Go, even if it would for Apple.
Again, I do trust these companies to tailor their products more or less to what's acceptable by the market. I'll buy a well-implemented product with compelling software, if the price is right. People riling themselves up at the language used to justify the original plans by one company or the other sure better be aware of some of the same behavior and language being used by representatives from their own corporate preference, or else they may be ignoring something that apparently concerns them.
uh huh
spookyfish
Member
You're right -- at the time, it was assumed that Sony would follow suit. But you know any of these mega-corporations: Google, Apple, MS, Sony, etc. They want to set the standard for the industry to follow.
I personally think they are genuinely perplexed why people didn't run with open arms to their idea.
By retroactively framing the argument to be about digital distribution instead of the unnecessary DRM, when digital inevitably catches on, they will say, "haha! Told you so. We were right all along. Take that stupid customer!" even though that was never the main point of contention among consumers.
Agreed. The Digital Distribution market will continue to grow side-by-side with physical retail but it won't kill it, unless these closed ecosystems start doing the things that retail/online stores can do with physical, like discounted games.
I will buy physical media over digital download EVERY TIME, and only buy digital titles when they're only available as digital.
Snapshot King
Member
Totally agree. Sony and Valves digital future are a-okay in my book, while Nintendo and MS' are not. MS thinks the problem is that I'm ignorant, which is frankly insulting.
Super Nothing
Member
That's because none of those reasons appeal to or benefit the consumers. Microsoft and their business partners (game publishers) could make tons more money from their proposed system at the expense of the consumer, but explaining that wouldn't do a whole lot to calm the fury of the gaming public.
you do. You always do despite what many try to tell you. You just don't buy the product. Message sent and received.
Hopefully people will be smart enough to see through it, MS could potentially destroy their brand if they aren't smart about it.
There is no doubt that its coming but how they go about doing it is what matters and its important that they meet the consumer half way.
OmegaDL50
Member
You know if this reality did come true. Retailers would just resort to selling game keys to get their cut of the pie.
I wouldn't underestimate Amazon,Bestbuy, Target, Walmart, and of course Gamestop to find some way to curb this and get into the action by selling digital keys for XB1 games.
In fact they already do this in regards to PSN and XBL Cash Cards, they even sell PSN and XBLA game codes, and Amazon sells Steam Keys, so they'll adapt as well.
The only three that I am uncertain of is Bestbuy, Walmart, and Target. I mean I know they sell PSN and XBL Cash Cards, but I haven't seen any digital game cards from them, they'll adapt though to get their cut of the money.
I wouldn't underestimate Amazon,Bestbuy, Target, Walmart, and of course Gamestop to find some way to curb this and get into the action by selling digital keys for XB1 games.
In fact they already do this in regards to PSN and XBL Cash Cards, they even sell PSN and XBLA game codes, and Amazon sells Steam Keys, so they'll adapt as well.
The only three that I am uncertain of is Bestbuy, Walmart, and Target. I mean I know they sell PSN and XBL Cash Cards, but I haven't seen any digital game cards from them, they'll adapt though to get their cut of the money.
I have great internet their proposition was shit.
SeventhSon
Member
Microsoft thought Sony would collude on DRM. Sony didn't, and when MS's 'vision' had to compete with Sony's, it couldn't, so it had to change to what the market wants.
Fushichou187
Member
Maybe an alternate future where access to a cheap, fiber-optic infrastructure a la Google Fiber is ubiquitous in the markets the console is aiming for; underscored by how enormous these installs are.
If the Internet infrastructure across the board was a lot faster, affordable, and just plain available then I think more people would have taken a wait-and-see approach to MS' proposal.
simplythebest
Banned
Keyword "Slowly"
I'm not against digital, hell a significant portion of my library is digital, which is a big reason why I think no bc whatsoever is bullshit, but that's another story.
Anyway it's thanks to things like sales and PSN+ that my digital library is so big, it's also Sony selling first party games at price parity with what can be found in shops was what pushed me into getting TLOU digitally (yeah fuck that £60 COD bullshit). It's all due to offering me incentives to go digital rather than ramming it down my throat, not telling me the benefits and and then say deal with it.
I also value having discs for things like sports games specifically so I can trade them in the next year.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Yeah, I agree with you. If Sony had gone with a similar DRM as many expected, I don't think they would have faced as much resistance themselves. Obviously, many consumers would have still been irate at both Sony and Microsoft, but if they both held strong, the argument for the inevitability would have been easier to make. They were clearly caught with their pants down after Sony's E3 conference.
I meant for trade ins or for borrowing. If you lent the game to someone they could only play it for a limited time before having to pay some fee. At least that's what I remember, and MSoft never clarified if it was in fact a fee or a full purchase price. I could be mistaken in some details though, everything was very unclear back then.
staticneuron
Member
If they actually believed that they wouldn't have had a BR player built into the device nor ship titles on disc.
Or it could be because all of these games started production before hardware was finalized. You forgot that Sony's announcement was a surprise to some of their own internal studios, it certainly caught the other parties of guard (probably was the point). So unless you think all of these deals and games started production of Feb this year then that stance doesn't make much sense. Especially Ryse, that was announced years ago.
Mr. Waffle
Member
Amazing... they still don't get what they did wrong.
Portugeezer
Member
They don't need to force all digital to support all digital.
Lol when they flick the switch back on.
Lol when they flick the switch back on.
AstroNut325
Member
iTunes doesn't have a 24-hour check. I can install apps with or without a connection in the event Apple goes out of business or stops supporting these devices.
I just drag that file into iTunes and sync it right to my phone.
With Steam, I don't need a constant connection:
I didn't need a 24-hour check. Right now it's TWO WEEKS, but Valve is already trying to make it last forever: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/new...urce=postit&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=all
And here's the kicker of that:
THAT'S A BUG. It is MEANT TO BE FOREVER ALREADY.
None of these abilities came close to offering what the Xbox One did.
And finally, to drive the point home:
Uplay
GOG
GreenManGaming
Impulse
Origin
What do all those have in common?
They run on the same platforms as Steam. If Steam goes tits up, or becomes some post-apocalyptic wastleand, competitors will step up. What happens when MS starts requiring your stem cells to make the game work? Where will you go for games on the Xbox?
This cannot be quoted enough. Introducing an all-digital future can be a good thing. Heck, it can be a great thing. But the model MS tried to push was essentially stripping away consumer rights with NOTHING in return. I really wish MS and it's supporters would stop claiming the Could-Have-Been Xbox One was following the Steam model. It simply wasn't.
DangerMouse
Member
This.
I feel like the fact that they are still talking about this is a big fat neon warning sign, it's just unbelievable. They're weeks away from launch and they're still doing it.
This. And at this point I'm not shocked at all they are still trying to "sell" that nastiness and still don't get the response they received.
Wolves Evolve
Member
I wonder the extant to which Sony rope-a-doped Microsoft here.
Were they telegraphing increased DRM lock-down? If they did, I don't remember it. But why else would MS make such a leap of faith unless they expect Sony to come with them?
NullPointer
Member
They are only a step removed. Just require Gold to use any aspect of the console. Gold authentication already requires that you be online, so they get the always-online requirement without explicitly stating it.
Simple.
They just have to convince people that a subscription fee is worth paying for every use of the system, because its all part of the service, and does that idea honestly sound so far-fetched?
They have been conditioning their user base for some time now.
MoGamesXNA
Unconfirmed Member
.
If they had scrapped physical media entirely people would certainly have reacted differently to the DRM
That isn't entirely true. What you got in return for that horrible 24 hour check in was the ability to trade in your games. Something that Steam doesn't allow
ReDelicious
Member
I think people working for these giant corporations forget that not everyone has access to fiber networks and/or unlimited bandwidth. It would only take 3 next gen games to cap my bandwidth, and I know there's providers out there that provide much less.
And still people trust them not to try it again...
spookyfish
Member
Really? Because that's what everyone said when MS introduced their plan: "Sony's gonna do it too!!!"
How'd that work out?
And as others have said, it wasn't about the digital, it was about the DRM.
Of course it's inevitable. But until we reach a point where the physical option it's more inconvenient/expensive and the digital option is truly ubiquitous in terms of availability then there needs to be the two options available for the user to choose. Don't force the user to go digital only by simply taking away that choice. Give him the choice and steadily and slowly show the benefits of going digital over physical to win him/her over.
The problem is that Sony does not have the tech to implement all of what MS wanted initially for the xbone.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Well, I remember stories (and a thread here) that Sony had researched (maybe even patented) technology that would eliminate resale. I think at the very least, many people expected this type of scheme being optionally available on a publisher by publisher basis. I know I was surprised myself when they announced at E3 that ownership of a title would work exactly the same as it does now.
Doug Heffernan
Member
This, absolutely.
All digital IS the future, like it or not. I just want something like Steam for consoles, not the version Microsoft was peddling.
soul creator
Member
The "fee" you're referring to was simply buying the full game. The idea was that If I brought a game to your house, and I'm logged in on your console, we could play the full game. Once I log out, it's still technically installed on your machine, but since you're not the "owner", you can only play part of the game. It's basically a time-limited trial (probably a 60 minute timer or something). If you want to get the full game on your account, then you would buy it from there without having to reinstall or download or whatever.
I think the Steam family sharing idea is basically the same thing.
Trogdor1123
Gold Member
What ever happened to the "weve listened" crap they were spouting a while back? I assume they are no longer doing so?
Only rope-a-dope Sony was doing was pretending they were behind in console development. As someone else said, Microsoft was betting it all purely on user complacency from their healthy user base.
toddhunter
Member
See I don't mind that so much.
If everything was 100% digital you could see the benefits for some and the problem for others. More importantly you could just make the choice about how you want to buy your games.
The always online thing was the big problem. That isn't something that improves with infrastructure or gets better with time. That will *always* be a bad idea because your games are at the mercy of Microsoft keeping their servers running, which is not something you can rely on.
So I don't buy the "not ready" argument. Some people are ready for digital and Microsoft can choose to sell to them. Nobody should ever be ready for forced authentication checks to play games and there is no future where I want that to happen.
I'll evaluate where they are at with their console after this generation and see if they have learned.
This. Steambox is all digital and we'll be fine with that. Its the idea that you have physical discs and then tell us they work like digital games that's the problem.