Support NeoGAF

[Recall]

As long as the features remain for digital customers, there should never be an issue with this. Hoepfully MS have learnt their lesson that physical customers are just as valuable as digital.

Going digital has many benefits, I hope you all can see that.

- Digital renting
- Digital sharing
- No need to swap discs
- No fear of losing the disc
- Good chance for the value fo the games to go down

Just a few off the top of my head. It's the execution that matters. But physical discs need to stay, with an option to bind the game to our account if want.

Digital prices on both Xbox Live and PSN both surpass the available prices of games here. £35 for a retail product £50 for a digital product.

Its an assumption that things will be different, assumptions are the mother of all fuck ups. Assumption is not fact.

Also you didn't list a single benefit.

I don't lose my games, swapping discs doesn't bother me, I lend my games to my brother with ease. What you are stating is that digital is the same as retail media not that there are any benefits.

 

[Amir0x]

I think of course they will. They invested too much in this ecosystem and they clearly have a lot of mindshare involved in this concept to let it go.

It is why despite the changes, and despite the protests of some fans saying "haven't they changed enough for you!?", it's really not enough. Because now there is a trust issue that goes to the fundamental heart of what it means to buy a Microsoft system. Are we contributing to their investment in future anti-consumer measures? Are they going to slowly implement them into the system over its life? Will the next system simply be the same as the XBO originally was?

I hope that when the time comes, the community is ready to push back same as ever, unless Microsoft has a damn good value proposition to replace what is being lost.

 

[Rebel Leader]

- Good chance for the value fo the games to go down
.

 

[Acheteedo]

Only way this could happen is if they had a massive lead on PS4 and got cocky. That's not going to happen so they won't risk the fallout.

 

[Jeanmamadou]

What the heck a poll on that matter on Neogaf is going to solve anyway ? Weird post.

 

[Moneyhats2k5]

I think of course they will. They invested too much in this ecosystem and they clearly have a lot of mindshare involved in this concept to let it go.

It is why despite the changes, and despite the protests of some fans saying "haven't they changed enough for you!?", it's really not enough. Because now there is a trust issue that goes to the fundamental heart of what it means to buy a Microsoft system. Are we contributing to their investment in future anti-consumer measures? Are they going to slowly implement them into the system over its life? Will the next system simply be the same as the XBO originally was?

I hope that when the time comes, the community is ready to push back same as ever, unless Microsoft has a damn good value proposition to replace what is being lost.

That's the thing. If MS decides they want to enforce this DRM future, consumers are smart enough to give them pushback. Sony is going to push a DD future too, they aren't going to put a gun to your head to get there though (See Day 1 Digital, PSN+ games).

 

[Finalizer]

What the heck a poll on that matter on Neogaf is going to solve anyway ? Weird post.

About the same as any poll on any forum sets out to accomplish.

Dumb post.

 

[Sapphire Dreams]

I still find it suspicious that they'll ship the console, with the DRM intact in it and we will need an online patch for it to be removed. They 180ed the policies fairly early on and I think they were able to replace the unites they had.

 

[shiftplusone]

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/new...ium=rss&utm_campaign=news#MQGkGOE8beg0vxjD.99

"Our commitment through Xbox Live and updating the software and keeping the games coming is a long-term service commitment." That's why the whole check-in-once-a-day bit existed in the first place and why, Spencer says, "those advantages will be coming, some at launch and some later."
Read more at http://www.escapistmagazine.com/new...ium=rss&utm_campaign=news#JzatoZwppLZ7ilsi.99

 

[RobotRocker]

The one thing prevalent is that people are thinking it will be the exact same draconian structure they originally pitched. Which they are never going to try because Microsoft isn't stupid to try that twice.

Will they bring it back? Sure, they are committed to it. But likely not in the original form. More than likely they are going to find much softer methods of it and keep it optional. One way would be to start shipping CD Keys with games with the idea that if you sign the game to your account, you get the digital benefits at the cost of resale value and having to trade at an approved retailer. But you don't have to enter that key and can still keep resale going as long as you don't enter it. No loss to the consumer or retailers since most customers won't sign it unless they really like the game and will likely keep it, while giving the option for the consumer to go digital if they want to and get the benefits of it as they have shown like Smart Match. Giving consumers the freedom to opt in to that ecosystem if they want would go down significantly better than brute forcing it and it's much more likely they will fall down that path than the draconian nature of the original plans.

There's a lot more easier methods to introduce digital that you wonder why they didn't think of them in the first place.

 

[thewhitehawk]

That's the thing. If MS decides they want to enforce this DRM future, consumers are smart enough to give them pushback. Sony is going to push a DD future too, they aren't going to put a gun to your head to get there though (See Day 1 Digital, PSN+ games).

The biggest differentiator between Sony and Microsoft and even Nintendo in my eyes is that Sony's digital purposes work on most of their platforms whereas the same can't be said for Microsoft or Nintendo (though they don't share the same number or variety of ones).

My PSOne and PSPgames work across 2 or 3 different platforms with no extra costs or added loopholes, license transferring. It just works. With Nintendo, you are limited in what you can transfer, how many times you can transfer and what hardware you can run it from and sometimes you have to pay for "enhanced editions".

Microsoft hasn't mentioned anything about supporting their old XBLA games but Sony has stated multiple times that they will offer a solution for some titles. Given their track record I tend to trust them at this point. I'm guessing that they will have PS1 software emulation and most other purchases will be streamed by Gaikai.

Sony also, in my opinion, is the company that makes it easiest to manage your downloadable content. You can backup anything you want rather easily and you can replace your physical media rather easily also (the Vita is the weakest link in this regard). With Microsoft you have to buy a proprietary hard drive or void your warranty to replace or upgrade your physical drive. With Nintendo, even though they support external hard drives, their content is still tied to hardware IDs so eventually you have to jump through some hoop just to get to your content and they're fine with charging you while you jump through it.

Right now, with the PSP, PSVita and PS3 I strongly feel that out of the three console manufacturers Sony is the one that respects and supports my software purchases the best.

 

[Ghost]

It wont come back in the form it was in, it would just be way too confusing to consumers to have some discs out there that work like 360 discs and some that don't.

What you might see is publishers no longer releasing retail discs. Releasing more and more games digital only, at best for retail they'll sell download keys on cards and things like that.

Then publishers will get all the benefits they wanted and consumers don't even get the measly benefits MS were offering.

But you'll see that on both platforms.

 

[zsidane]

I have no faith in Microsoft (or Sony). If the system has the feature built-in, I do not trust any of them. Sony did remove Linux from my PS3 and I was forced to update it if I wanted to play new releases. They broke the moral contract between us and lost my faith in them.
Microsoft has already done more 180° than Tony Hawk can do in a ride.

Even Nintendo did remove MP3 capability from the Wii Photo channel.
One has to admit that we live in a period where we don't read the fucking ridiculous EULA, agree to it (like we have a choice) then find out we have been screwed...

 

[Zemm]

wow, really surprised at the poll results, I expected the opposite. Them going back on it when they've already sold millions of consoles would be suicide.

 

[GribbleGrunger]

wow, really surprised at the poll results, I expected the opposite. Them going back on it when they've already sold millions of consoles would be suicide.

Well, they tried committing suicide once so I see no reason why they wouldn't try it again.

 

[Zemm]

Well, they tried committing suicide once so I see no reason why they wouldn't try it again.

There's a huge difference between laying out your (terrible) DRM plans before the console has been released and doing a switcheroo halfway through the generation when millions of the consoles have been sold. When Sony removed OtherOS Amazon UK started giving refunds to people that bought the original PS3 because of the uproar, this would be magnitudes bigger. MS wouldn't just be pissing off people like us, but retailers too.

 

[MJLord]

wow, really surprised at the poll results, I expected the opposite. Them going back on it when they've already sold millions of consoles would be suicide.

The question was could they, not do you think they should.

 

[twobear]

They could, but I would be very surprised if they do, and I'd be even more surprised if they'd announced plans to do so in an interview before launch, so I think that assuming their comments refer to bringing the DRM back and not finding other ways to build a digital ecosytem (Steam manages it fine without such restrictive DRM) is reaching.

It would be interesting to bookmark this thread and return to it at the end of the generation, though.

 

[2San]

The question was could they, not do you think they should.

The question in the poll is different though. It's "will they".

I don't think they will. Scummy as they are, they haven't screwed people over with policy changes on the 360.

 

[MJLord]

The question in the poll is different though. It's "will they".

I don't think they will. Scummy as they are, they haven't screwed people over with policy changes on the 360.

I think they will, It's going to be over a longer period though. Just coming out and saying DD is the future and we have it didnt go down well with a lot of people. When they've made DD more appealing and a large majority of people are using it they'll look to phase out disks.

 

[thewhitehawk]

There's a huge difference between laying out your (terrible) DRM plans before the console has been released and doing a switcheroo halfway through the generation when millions of the consoles have been sold. When Sony removed OtherOS Amazon UK started giving refunds to people that bought the original PS3 because of the uproar, this would be magnitudes bigger. MS wouldn't just be pissing off people like us, but retailers too.

Well, it wasn't exactly a feature removal but Microsoft did significantly revamp the interface a couple of times. Once to accommodate the avatars and give a more streamlined interface and a second time to provide a way to use Kinect to interact with the system and shove more advertisements in our face.

Sony's removal of otherOS is to me, more of a showcase of their technical incompetence than anything else. They pushed a panic button at the first sign that someone seemed to have hacked their console and instead of fixing the issue, they pulled a fast one on consumers to quickly resolve the issue.

Microsoft proved that they were happy to alter their console's interface in order to motivate further sales of one of their peripherals and to gain more money through advertising to the detriment of all other users who had no interest in either of those two things.

Neither of them are perfect, far from it, but I'll take a bit of technical incompetence over Microsoft's change of hearts.

 

[2San]

I think they will, It's going to be over a longer period though. Just coming out and saying DD is the future and we have it didnt go down well with a lot of people. When they've made DD more appealing and a large majority of people are using it they'll look to phase out disks.

It's been going on for a longer period, yet the 360 was a console that could always be played offline and that includes XBLA titles and firmware updates came on game discs.

Neither of them are perfect, far from it, but I'll take a bit of technical incompetence over Microsoft's change of hearts.

A change of heart before the actual console was released and when the policies weren't set into a stone.

 

[thewhitehawk]

Multiple changes of heart and muddled messages before the actual console was released and when the policies weren't set into a stone.

I fixed that for you.

Microsoft had many changes of heart during the 360's lifecycle also. They started off the console by letting Rare release new games like Kameo and Perfect Dark, gave them one more shot with Banjo Kazooie Nuts and Bolts and then put their efforts near entirely onto avatars and Kinect games.

Microsoft also, once upon a time, believed in the Japanese market and put their money with many talented japanese developers who brought some of the nicest jRPGs of this generation to their console, then they abandoned that completely and focused near-exclusively on their shooters, Fable and Forza.

Early on the console's lifecycle XBLA was touted as the home for the next great independently developed games and for a period of time, that was very much true. But as some of their policies became more public, and as independent developers started gaining distrust and other negative feelings towards Microsoft their store switched from a small haven of good indie games into a cesspool of clones of more popular games and a whole lot of shovelware.

Last, but surely not least, as I already mentioned, they also changed their interface to better suit their other products (that makes sense), but as they did so they brought multiple negative things to the interface which before was rather streamlined and straightforward. Advertisements now took up most of the main menus, more menu jumps are required to get to your content and Independent Developers saw their games being pushed further deep into the store and having much worse visibility than they previously did.

With all due respect, don't tell me Microsoft only changed their mind once regarding policies that aren't set in stone when they had several changes of heart during the course of this generation and they've clearly stated that their aim is to bring back the same policies which you think they are abandoning.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

We didn't have online passes or the ilk in 2006. Microsoft will slowly re-implement it, and they'll make it sound like it's of great benefit to you.

 

[Row]

If MS was predominately a gaming company I'd doubt it this gen, but given that it's such a minuscule part of the company I think they will over time as the lure of a closed garden to them is worth the risk

 

[MJLord]

It's been going on for a longer period, yet the 360 was a console that could always be played offline and that includes XBLA titles and firmware updates came on game discs.

A change of heart before the actual console was released and when the policies weren't set into a stone.

But how appealing did they make it? The prices were extortionate and if the UK ever got a sale I didn't hear about it through the dashboard.

 

[2San]

I fixed that for you.

Microsoft had many changes of heart during the 360's lifecycle also. They started off the console by letting Rare release new games like Kameo and Perfect Dark, gave them one more shot with Banjo Kazooie Nuts and Bolts and then put their efforts near entirely onto avatars and Kinect games.

Microsoft also, once upon a time, believed in the Japanese market and put their money with many talented japanese developers who brought some of the nicest jRPGs of this generation to their console, then they abandoned that completely and focused near-exclusively on their shooters, Fable and Forza.

Early on the console's lifecycle XBLA was touted as the home for the next great independently developed games and for a period of time, that was very much true. But as some of their policies became more public, and as independent developers started gaining distrust and other negative feelings towards Microsoft their store switched from a small haven of good indie games into a cesspool of clones of more popular games and a whole lot of shovelware.

Last, but surely not least, as I already mentioned, they also changed their interface to better suit their other products (that makes sense), but as they did so they brought multiple negative things to the interface which before was rather streamlined and straightforward. Advertisements now took up most of the main menus, more menu jumps are required to get to your content and Independent Developers saw their games being pushed further deep into the store and having much worse visibility than they previously did.

With all due respect, don't tell me Microsoft only changed their mind once regarding policies that aren't set in stone when they had several changes of heart during the course of this generation and they've clearly stated that their aim is to bring back the same policies which you think they are abandoning.

We are talking about policies like DRM. If you suddenly want to talk about what games get published I don't know what to say. Know this though, when capcom pushed for online DRM for DD games, Sony was the only one who allowed it.

But how appealing did they make it? The prices were extortionate and if the UK ever got a sale I didn't hear about it through the dashboard.

I think the X1 is unappealing overall as well, especially seeing how the PS3 is 100 euro cheaper, hence my preference for the PS4. However that is beside the point.

 

[coldfoot]

The biggest issue was the 24-hour online check-in and limitations on trading/resale. If Microsoft were really thinking of their customers they could have easily not implemented this feature originally and still keep their vision, only difference being you'd have to "deactivate" your game from your console through the internet before selling/loaning it. The fact they didn't go with this solution but with the 24-hour checkin shows how little they cared about their customers and all this bad rep is well deserved imho.

 

[eroots]

yes, of course they can bring it back....and then some!

 

[Sloane_Ranger]

Pretty much. They'll just find a new way to market it this next time so it isn't quite so obvious that you're giving up all your content rights for the ability to not change a disc. Plenty of people will have the console in their homes at that point, and it's not like they're going to return it.

Exactly! And they have seen it work first hand - with the addition of advertising to the dash. ... I have zero trust for Microsoft moving into the nextgen.

 

[sixteen-bit]

sure it could happen

 

[ChryZ]

That day1 patch says to me that it's still all there and they can easily flip that switch again.

 

[Hystzen]

As soon as they mentioned it just going be patched out at launch the thought of it crawling back went into back of my head. They had be stupid to do it but it could be implemented on both consoles if publishers make a push for it

 

[flyinpiranha]

Do we even know what we're arguing about here? "DRM" is such a huge umbrella over this subject that I'm not even sure what people are arguing against or for.

This is my take on what "DRM" means:

MS flips the switch to ON:
Can't sell disk-based games
Online check every XX hours

MS flips the switch to OFF:
Can resell disk-based games
No online check ever XX hours

Is there some 'other' DRM that I'm not aware of? Besides DLC and DD based games not being resalable and certain online-enabled games not being playable offline (just like every other ecosystem), what am I missing?

People actually think that MS will just turn on mandatory online checks for ALL games (disk based also) AND just suddenly stop people from buying/selling used games?

Then my answer is no, I don't think that at all. There is always a slim chance of course, anything is possible, but I can't imagine this ever happening this generation. Generation after this all bets are off.

 

[Boombloxer]

There's a huge difference between laying out your (terrible) DRM plans before the console has been released and doing a switcheroo halfway through the generation when millions of the consoles have been sold. When Sony removed OtherOS Amazon UK started giving refunds to people that bought the original PS3 because of the uproar, this would be magnitudes bigger. MS wouldn't just be pissing off people like us, but retailers too.

Tip of the iceberg. While it's always a possibility, and I do think a few of the policies will return, they won't be the same platform killing initiatives that they were before.

Don't think it'll happen.

 

[Raw64life]

I fully expect them to at some point. Don't know how you can trust them.

 

[thewhitehawk]

We are talking about policies like DRM. If you suddenly want to talk about what games get published I don't know what to say. Know this though, when capcom pushed for online DRM for DD games, Sony was the only one who allowed it.

There's a difference between Sony allowing a publisher to put DRM, Online Passes or other ways of monetization in their titles and what Microsoft did: Consumers had a choice.

I had no choice in how Microsoft changed Rare from one of the most creative and talented developers to a Kinect-focused development group. The few chances Microsoft gave to Rare were either for rushed launch titles or Nuts and Bolts. Everything else was focused on selling the Kinect and appealing to the casual market.

I didn't have a choice in how Microsoft treated independent developers or how they were catalogued in their store's redesign. It was contrary to the message they were telling us gamers, and we thought it was in the indie developer's best interests to support them. They proved us wrong, and they have moved to other platforms, and it had nothing to do with gamers, we had no say in the matter.

I didn't have a choice but to update to the new advertisement filled, Kinect-optimised interface if I wanted to use their store or any other online service. The same is true for any Sony update to their consoles, but they never radically changed the experience or the interface from what it originally was, they only added more features to it.

Microsoft spent most of the generation taking choice away from my personal gaming tastes and when they unveiled the console they seemed rather keen on taking some of my consumer rights along with the new console and all the things they had previously taken.

Thankfully with my console purchases, and with shitty DRM-filled games, I do have a choice.

 

[Skeff]

They will be back, make no mistake about that, but they'll certainly be described as features and a lot of the user base will rejoice. The console is coming with an "Internet connection required" sticker due to the day one console, so legally, they've got it covered.

 

[Owensboro]

There's a huge difference between laying out your (terrible) DRM plans before the console has been released and doing a switcheroo halfway through the generation when millions of the consoles have been sold. When Sony removed OtherOS Amazon UK started giving refunds to people that bought the original PS3 because of the uproar, this would be magnitudes bigger. MS wouldn't just be pissing off people like us, but retailers too.

Except they aren't going to throw some big red switch that just turns everything on at once, it's going to be a death by a million cuts.

I think they will, It's going to be over a longer period though. Just coming out and saying DD is the future and we have it didnt go down well with a lot of people. When they've made DD more appealing and a large majority of people are using it they'll look to phase out disks.

Exactly, and perhaps instead of "forcing" everyone kicking and screaming into the DD future they will actually let the market decide and some good will come out of this whole fiasco. Instead of being told "You can't resell any game" we could get "Disc games are the same. Digital games cannot be sold, but you can share them with friends anywhere" or "you can sell digital games back to Microsoft and get a small credit for your next digital purchase".

Of course, companies only exist to make money, so I have absolutely no faith that anything super generous to the consumer will happen. At best, we might get Steam-Store like discounts on console games digitally

 

[Macho Madness]

Think about this before you start slinging more mud: Do they need to? I don't know who was paying attention at E3, but most next gen games looked to be "fully connected, online experiences" that probably won't work without an Internet connection. What they should do, and what I expect them to do is emphasize the digital version of the game. They do that, and there's no reason to reimplement the DRM. The market will take care of itself.

 

[Alpende]

Well they could. The use a patch to get rid of the DRM stuff so who is to say they won't bring out a patch in the future that brings DRM.

 

[U-R]

They will be back, make no mistake about that, but they'll certainly be described as features and a lot of the user base will rejoice. The console is coming with an "Internet connection required" sticker due to the day one console, so legally, they've got it covered.

I think too few people have focused on this little detail. If this doesn't look like a legal setup for the switch-on...

And yep, the DRM will be back, because, why exactly not? From their point of view the whole fiasco was the lack of communication about how awesome digital distribution and DRM are: at no point, i think, they believed they were wronging the customer with the original DRM plan.

 

[rakkadakka]

Of course they could.

If they do, they'd be smart to clearly articulate what consumers get out of it rather than just saying, "this is how it's gonna be".

They won't though.

 

[Into]

Its what they originally wanted to do, but were pressured into backing off likely due to poor pre order numbers.

The idea is probably to coerce people in other ways to accept their DRM features, instead of slamming it on the table at once, introduce them one at a time, so it does not cause as much of a noise as the all do combined.

They did not change their opinion about DRM, they changed their policy, the opinion part is still there.

 

[border]

But they wont make it unplayable, it just wont be playable online (regardles of being a gold member).

Will it cause a shitstorm, yes. However, the vast majority of existing 'One' owners will just grumble but still hit the "Yes I accept the terms" as they are already financially tied into its ecosystem.

Only those with high principles and deep pockets would be likely to dump the console. If MS do this change, they will do it when they have a large userbase. The only way I see these policies being completely dead & buried is if the console tanks.

The original DRM required you to login every 24 hours to validate your game licenses. There is no way to re-institute this policy without basically ruining the entire console for everyone with no internet access or limited internet access. The console would demand to connect to the server, they wouldn't be able to do it, and then it would refuse to play games. These people would be shit-out-of-luck, and have nothing to play. The backlash would be ten times worse than E3 2013.

 

[Neuromancer]

Not this gen, it'd be suicide for them after the reversals. Who knows what shitty things they'll dream up next round, though. I'll certainly never trust them again to do the right thing by the consumer if they think they can get away with it.

What the heck a poll on that matter on Neogaf is going to solve anyway ? Weird post.

I don't know, why don't you ask the mod or admin that made the poll why he/she did it? Since regular members can't make polls.

 

[Majmun]

I'm not sure. I'm leaning to NO. Don't really trust them now.

 

[quickwhips]

About 800 PS Fans posting in this thread. The rest of yes answers are level headed posters.

Spoiler

I voted yes

 

[kiunchbb]

Maybe it conceivable that MS could create a second tier to Live that users could opt into for particular benefits and restrictions that apply to those accounts, rather than to the specific games. But again, it all depends upon what is meant by the term "drm" as its being used here.


Seriously, what could this even look like? Hey everybody, the next firmware update requires a constant internet connection to use any of your purchased software? Is that the fear, specifically?

They will just slowly releasing more and more games that required online connection, it is very unlikely for people to switch system since they already invested for much money. It is kind of like crappy Nintendo Eshop, the whole thing about locking the game to a single system made no sense. People are still buying games on Eshop knowing this since they can't resist not playing their favorite games.

 

[PhatSaqs]

Pretty broad question. What part of the " Xbox One DRM" is the poll referring to? The DRM on digital purchases or the DRM in regards to disc based games that limited resale, trades, etc? For disc based games it would be pretty hard for them considering the amount of changes that would have to occur at retail and such. For digital purchases, it already exists on 360 so....