Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 8th Jun 2013 19:04 UTC, submitted by Adurbe
Games Yes, it's as bad as we expected. This particular paragraph illustrates everything that is wrong with what Microsoft is doing: "Xbox One is designed so game publishers can enable you to give your disc-based games to your friends. There are no fees charged as part of these transfers. There are two requirements: you can only give them to people who have been on your friends list for at least 30 days and each game can only be given once." Yes, with this, Microsoft and publishers are destroying the ability to sell your games on Ebay or similar sites (because of the 30-day requirement). To make matters worse, the ability to sell or even loan games to your friends can be disabled by publishers. Asinine.
Order by: Score:
Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Sat 8th Jun 2013 19:16 UTC
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

This is absurd. The restrictions are unreasonable. I can certainly understand pressure from publishers but it seems like Microsoft was more than willing to put these controls in.

What's wrong with requiring an online connection once a week or 30 days? 48hrs is a little much. Even their DRMd Xbox Music Pass streaming music is on a 30 day refresh.

The used game restrictions for friend to friend dealings are similarly unreasonable. The friends list thing is dumb.

Id prefer a brokered sales model with publishers taking a tiny cut of the overall sale, but no restrictions beyond that.

Microsoft doesn't do itself any PR favors by doing crap like this.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by Nelson
by UltraZelda64 on Sat 8th Jun 2013 20:59 UTC in reply to "Comment by Nelson"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

See, the problem is, I am pretty sure Microsoft is one of the major publishers of games for the Xbox brand of gaming consoles... they themselves can gain a lot from this. They're just a bunch of slimy, crooked bastards.

Reply Score: 5

In between worlds
by sukru on Sat 8th Jun 2013 19:37 UTC
sukru
Member since:
2006-11-19

So far we had a dual model which worked well:
- You could "buy" and "own" games on consoles
- You'd "license" games on the PC

This was acceptable, because although console games were more expensive, you could trade/rent/resell them. And while PC games were locked in, they were much cheaper (thanks to Steam, GoG, and Humble Bundles) - some of them were DRM free.

Next gen consoles are merging the worst aspects of the two worlds (I'm afraid PS4 might be similar). The games are locked and expensive.

The effect would be just cannibalizing themselves. I'm pretty sure people will continue to buy this stuff due to Call of Duty (or whatnot) addiction, however they will lose a significant portion of "core" customers (including myself). They are pretty much shortsighted, repeating the pattern where everybody cloned WoW or farmville and failed.

Reply Score: 3

korrel
Member since:
2006-10-05

And four years from now a new xbox will come. And microsoft will pull the plug from there servers for the than old xbox one.
This means all your games will not be playable and the xbox one and all the games you bought for it will be useless. Xbox one is a big scam!!

Reply Score: 7

ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

Why was this poster modded down? It's a legitimate concern.

Microsoft could come out with the Xbox 2 in 10 years and then shut the servers down. Why wouldn't they? Because they care about gamers? Is that why they created this stupid system that no gamer wants?

They haven't even announced any games yet and most the gaming world wants nothing to do with it. You have to sell a new console with new features, not by taking away features that have existed in consoles for decades.

The underlying problem is that Microsoft is ran by idiots. Ballmer is an idiot and has stacked the deck with slimy idiots that don't play video games and view the world as one where customers are sheep that need to be sheered. The idea of increasing profits by adding value to a product is beyond them.

Oh and I'm a Microsoft Certified Partner and I'd be happy to prove that to any of you paid Microsoft whores that troll public forums.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=579945

I can provide excerpts from the latest partner emails and also some old ones like how I should attend Silverlight conventions because it is the future.

Anyways only a company of idiots would hire people to do forum p.r. work on Reddit instead of (GASP) making a better product. A company of idiots and all we can hope with the Xbox one is that it is used by an activist shareholder as yet another example of why Ballmer is an idiot who has no business running Microsoft. The dorm buddy of Bill Gates needs to go.

Edited 2013-06-09 00:27 UTC

Reply Score: 4

tidux Member since:
2011-08-13

Canonical, on the other hand, actually has their executives (or at least Jono) directly submitting posts on /r/linux and answering questions in the comment thread.

Reply Score: 1

Ironic
by vitae on Sat 8th Jun 2013 21:25 UTC
vitae
Member since:
2006-02-20

I'm always surprised that anybody would buy any of these games new at those ridiculous prices, but if they didn't, I could not then buy the used versions. I guess all good things must come to an end. Thank you all you people with more money than sense for making it possible over the years.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Ironic
by ze_jerkface on Sun 9th Jun 2013 16:01 UTC in reply to "Ironic"
ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

Entertainment value is relative.

I'm surprised people go see the latest Die Hard in theaters but I'm not going to project my own values on them. For some people I'm sure paying to see it in the theater was worth every penny and made their weekend. It has nothing to do with sense, it's all relative.

I can easily drop $60 taking my woman out for dinner and drinks so in that regard a $60 game has good value because it lasts more than one night. But neither feels like a waste of money because they are both activities I enjoy.

Sure I could wait a few months and get the game at a cheaper price but I wouldn't enjoy my hobby as much. I like being able to just buy the game I want and not spend anytime waiting or looking for a bargain.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Ironic
by vitae on Sun 9th Jun 2013 20:45 UTC in reply to "RE: Ironic"
vitae Member since:
2006-02-20

I'm not sure the movie comparison works. You can see one of those for $8 or so. Or buy the dvd for $20. Or watch it on Netflix for cheaper that that. We're talking about $50-60 for a game you could easily be tired of in a week. And really what is the excuse for a game costing more than a movie anyway?

But you folks who have money to throw around should definitely do just that because the economy needs all the stimulation it can get.

Edited 2013-06-09 20:46 UTC

Reply Score: 2

So not at all then
by Soulbender on Sun 9th Jun 2013 01:27 UTC
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

To make matters worse, the ability to sell or even loan games to your friends can be disabled by publishers.


So in effect you won't be able to do it at all, except maybe with games from smaller publishers who actually value their customers.

Reply Score: 3