Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 19th Jun 2013 23:02 UTC, submitted by M.Onty
Games "Microsoft has sensationally abandoned its controversial plans to restrict the sharing of XBox One games, and has also removed daily online authentication requirements for its forthcoming console", reports The Guardian. They had no choice. Still a good move.
Thread beginning with comment 565297
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Going to put this here
by Soulbender on Sat 22nd Jun 2013 01:40 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Going to put this here"
Member since:

No.. it really isn't. None of those physical goods are a parallel to digital content. really is. It's a product that you purchase. The fact that it happen to be "digital" is irrelevant.

I believe what detractors to the philosophy of the developer being able to monetize every person that plays their game are saying is that they want to maintain ownership and dollar value of the game they purchased and be able to transfer that ownership to another individual without the original content creator involved.

Yes, exactly. I bought it, I own it and what I do with it after the sale is of no concern whatsoever to the content producer and the seller. Every other product works like this and software is not special.

If I was a game developer I would want it that way.

I really don't give a shit what they want. Construction companies and workers would love it if everyone torn down houses and built new ones instead of selling the old houses but I don't see anyone arguing that we should do that.

As long as the pricing for the content is fair. AAA games cost MILLIONS and YEARS to produce.

So what? Do you think designing and manufacturing a car is cheap and done over the weekend?
Anyway, how much it costs to produce is irrelevant to my ownership of the product I have purchased.

The more money that flows into the content creator's hands the better off the industry is.

Well, you know, the more money that flows into the hands of construction workers the better off the industry is. Heck, if everyone built new houses all the time it would be a construction boom.

Edited 2013-06-22 01:48 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[7]: Going to put this here
by jonoden on Sun 23rd Jun 2013 16:04 in reply to "RE[6]: Going to put this here"
jonoden Member since:

We can just agree to disagree. People tear houses down and build new ones all the time. I'm not about to begin equating a roof over someone's head or transportation to an optional entertainment product that is content not a required investment to live.

BTW.. I live in NYC where probalby 90% of the citizens RENT. They see NONE of their investment back, much akin to licensing somewhere to live.. right?

Reply Parent Score: 1