m0dus said:"This is not a moral argument, At best, it's a difference in consumer philosophy."
To put this quote in the context for people, it came from the locked thread on whether not Xbox one fans should be "Shunned" in this community (which was closed because,as a impetus for discussion, it was completely unacceptable from a community standpoint).
I should state, for the record, that the policies that Microsoft has put forward are, at best, despicable. But turning it into the equivalent of a religious discussion was, in effect, taking it a bit too far. As such, the statement above actually addressed the attitude directed toward the system's potential supporters and fans, not toward the company in question. So, that thread had to be closed.
The ethics of what MS is proposing, however, in terms of limiting consumer freedom, DRM, and privacy, should absolutely be openly laid bare.
So by all means, DO debate this, as it makes for a truly compelling discussion.
Now, back to your regularly scheduled OT.
I think the DRM and other "features" of the Xbone represent a violation of our consumer rights and even our privacy. The systematic introduction of these elements into every single game released on a platform is dangerous, and if such a system were to be adopted by other manufacturers (like Sony), it would result in a sort of video game consumer rights apocalypse. Let's not forget that games that require services will cease to function once these services are turned off. Will the Xbone generation result in a missing hole in video game history?
I feel very strongly on this issue, to the point where people who disagree or even just present apathy toward it seem not just wrong, but immoral.
If this is a moral issue, then they are being selfish. If this is a consumer philosophy issue, then I am the one being selfish. Which is it? Is the Xbone a moral argument, or simply a difference in consumer philosophy?