I seriously doubt I will buy it. It seems they are more interested in annoying the consumer than actually producing anything revolutionary.
The original xbox 360 looked modern and the design was clean and fresh. The new one looks very utilitarian , bordering on dull
That's why Microsoft is requiring the XBox One to check in every 24 hours. Those daily checks are to make sure you arne't up to any silly buggers with your console. If you are, they will shut down your system and your account, and you won't be able to access either until they say so.
THAT's how they keep you from perpetrating undesirable activities. Constant vigilance.
The 'phone home' technique has been used for software in the past. It's often fooled, even with a custom server to simulate the MS response. Obviously that won't be there on day 1, and it may never happen, but just saying that my prediction is there will eventually be a workaround.
The 'phone home' technique has been used for software in the past. It's often fooled, even with a custom server to simulate the MS response. Obviously that won't be there on day 1, and it may never happen, but just saying that my prediction is there will eventually be a workaround.
What about the games that are going to require access to the internet to run? Microsoft has confirmed the possibility of games that literally won't run without access to the cloud, and that those decisions will be made at the publisher level. (so Microsoft will not be regulating them directly)
Activision and EA will be able to check in on the legitimacy of your XBox One games, and they will be able to do it on a per-game basis. In order to spoof this sort of system effectively you would need copies of Microsoft's servers, every publisher's servers, and the individual validation for each game.
They're going above and beyond this time around, and baking everything into the design of the system itself. They are insuring that any viable workaround is just too much trouble and expense to implement. Even if you could get what you needed, it would probably cost you thousands of dollars just to set it up. As long as they can deter casual software pirates, their job is done.
Here is my view on the used games/sharing/not sharing thing. Games are software in the end and are starting to be treated more as such. We can't loan our copies of Office, Windows, Max, Photoshop, etc to others and I think games are finally starting to catch on.
I am perhaps an optimist with these things but from what I read and anyone can interpret it differently but it seems like Steam but with the ability to trade, share games in the family, etc... Sounds pretty cool to me.
Yeah everything they put out with this newest press release just seems to confirm eveything is the best case scenarios of the rumored drm and restrictions. I don't see anything "really evil". The restrictions on how many times you can give away a game is new is very limiting for consoles, but no worse than steam. The shared games list is a decent compromise for giving away/lending games, but from what I understand, wont be a launch feature. The 24 hour check in does really suck though, I've played consoles while camping and just after moving before the internet gets installed.
I don't think the comparisons to utility software and Steam are apt. I don't know anybody who 'lends' stuff like photoshop, you don't finish photoshop, it's a tool somebody always wants. Same with PC games and Steam. I haven't met many people who would visit a friend and then log into their Steam and download games to have a bit of a playdate. I mean LANs happen but don't really count when it's your computer anyway.
One of the pros of consoles was that if you were just hanging with friends you could just pop a game in sand start playing. It wasn't so your friend got a free game, all that mattered was, "you got console? you got TV? you got game? Yay no problems lets play!"
I don't think you can have two Xbone consoles on at the same time playing the Same one copy of a game. Also I feel steam is a whole different ball game. Hell, most of my steam games I buy because they are on sale for super cheap. ..psn and xblive still have older games for super expensive. Any major purchases I buy physical. Mostly for collections sake! And you never know if you wanna play those games A while from now. I still play my NES games!
Consoles are entering the dematerialized world. The PC did its transition with great success, hopefully the consoles will too. But that means changing the price policy on those console games at some point.
Though I am assuming they could just patch that in, probably. But still. Free market, and the most consumer friendly will be what the consumer decides. This is an exciting and interesting year. Watch the 3do 2 come out and win it all.
That is my biggest concern, in 20 years when I want to play "retro" games I won't be able too :S
That's part of why steam is okay and console drm is disliked, if I buy an arcade game on an Xbox 360, I will just have that game as long as I have an Xbox 360. If I buy a game on PC, I'll have it as long as I have a PC and steam is alive. I'll be able to play any of my stream games 10 years from now.
on a related note: yay for Humbe Bundle - got a lot of non Steam, non DRM versions recently even though I own some of them on Steam. I love Steam for its convenience, but if there's a chance to get the same thing without it (e.g. GoG) then even better.
I'll be able to play any of my stream games 10 years from now.
Only as long as Steam exists. What if for some reason Valve went under. Not likely but a big what if. Don't you then lose access to that whole library you have created?
When or if the Steam servers went down how long would you have to play your games or would you even be able to launch them?
I love Steam but there are issues with it. It is much better now then it was at start but shouldn't other options (xbox: one, origin, etc) be allowed to have a chance as well?
DRM sucks but what is a better solution? I think Microsoft and publishers are trying to find a way to stop the crazy amount of used game sales that only benefit Gamestop and not the creators. I think Dead Space 1 had like 3 million plus unique users or whatever but only sold half of that new.... That sucks!
Steam doesn't really force their DRM on you as developer though. There's a few Steam games which have no DRM, using Steam just as distribution platform only. Not sure what's worse though - being dependent on a service's availability for DRM or being dependent on a certain piece of technology (DVD/CD drive) and physical media. (although I also remember the the real old skewl DRM: manuals and code wheels )
I'd hope devs would release patches for games to allow them to be played without steam authentication after the service retires, or steam themselves could release something like that. But we don't know what would happen with that, I can easily see the service sticking around for another 10 years, will it make it 20? I start having my doubts at that point. But I love being able to redownload and play a game I forgot about on stream.
I also believe the steam store does a better job at having sales and pimping indy games and games without big publishers. Whenever I see the Xbox dashboard, it's just the newest $60 everywhere. Valve has release a lot about how sales and price cuts cause games to start selling more in the long term, and the Xbox store seems stagnant. I also see Sony and Valve handling free to play and patches better, they seem to work better with devs to release games that that change overtime.
I think Microsoft and publishers are trying to find a way to stop the crazy amount of used game sales that only benefit Gamestop and not the creators.
A game will have a lower value for the same price in the future.
Today if we pay $60 for a new game, we can assume that we'll get $20 for it used. We are actually paying $40 to play the game if we plan to sell it quickly.
In the future, a game might be $70 new and have zero resale value. That is a 75% increase over the price we pay today.
There are rumours that HAWKEN is gonna be f2p exclusive on Xbone. That would be rad! I haven't picked up HAWKEN in a while after i spent all my credits on a gun that I ended up sucking with and didn't wanna grind for another 3 hours to afford another one..
Microsoft recommends Xbox One users have a broadband connection of at least 1.5 Mbps. Because every Xbox One owner has a broadband connection, developers can create massive, persistent worlds that evolve even when youre not playing, the company said.
Well if the whole reason the Xbone is connecting to the internet every 24 hours is for updates and new content, I expect DLC/patches/new content every day.
Well if the whole reason the Xbone is connecting to the internet every 24 hours is for updates and new content, I expect DLC/patches/new content every day.
Come on developers, chop chop.
If Microsoft still charges devs a ton of money to patch their games, that's not going to happen.
I don't understand the swathes of gamers I see willing to just lay down and accept these restrictions. Am I the only one who remembers taking games over to my friends house as a kid? Trading games with those same friends? I mean ... I dunno, it seems like people lose all self control in the face of, "OMG, NEW COD, I'LL DO WHATEVER YOU WANT MAN!!"
Kind of disappointing.
And the whole defense of "Oh, just throw a towel over the Kinect". That's a solution? That's fucking stupid. And even if I CAN turn it off, why is the default that it's on? That's ... Eh, anyway. I'll just side with the PS4 this time around and move along. I'll do what is always advocated - vote with my wallet. I'm obviously not going to convince anyone to think differently.
I think my favourite takeaway from the article was 'you can play any of your games whilst logged in at a friends house!'.
Yeah, after spending ten+ hours downloading it.
The game will be playable immediately and downloads/installs as you go. You should still be able to bring the disc over and play that way if logged into xbl. It's not perfect, but should hopefully work ok.
I bought into microsoft's idea of connecting everything together a long time ago, and 360 has been my favorite console. Some of these things that just got announced ar making me think about the one purchase, whereas before it was a definite pre-order. 24 hr offline play needs to be upped to something like 72 hrs as a compromise, and game lending needs to be implemented before launch. I need to have the option to de-activate a game on my console, give a co-worker a disc to play, have them de-activate it, and allow me to re-play. Or, just handle that all through xbl but not have restrictions on who I can lend to.
The game will be playable immediately and downloads/installs as you go.
For the record, this was also a claim with the 360 and it never materialised (also the 'install to HDD and play whilst installing never materialised properly either).
The reality is that this is almost never the case. You generally need a fairly large chunk of the game content installed before you can play anything. More importantly you will play through the game faster than you can download it.
Current gen games are in the order of 25-30GB now, and they're going to get bigger. There has never been a generation that has not exceeded the storage capacity of it's original media format and this will be no exception - games will rapidly become 50GB+.
Microsoft's example of a minimum required 1.5Mb/s down means that to download the first two hours of Bioshock: Infinite as an example, you need to download in excess of 6GB of data, which will take 13 hours under perfect conditions. This is a best case scenario. You realistically will probably need to obtain some 12GB or more in order to play the first two hours.
This claim they have is an ideal, it is not a reality. It probably won't be a reality within the lifetime of the console.
Microsoft always geared their business to be 'developer-friendly'.
Microsoft simply is catering to the whims of the hundreds of studio closures that have plagued this industry. They likely have talked to all of the key developers, and publishers and felt this is the best course of action.
The 'gamer' always has been, and always will be secondary with Microsoft's business model. And that's not necessarily a bad thing.
For the record, this was also a claim with the 360 and it never materialised (also the 'install to HDD and play whilst installing never materialised properly either).
The reality is that this is almost never the case. You generally need a fairly large chunk of the game content installed before you can play anything. More importantly you will play through the game faster than you can download it.
Current gen games are in the order of 25-30GB now, and they're going to get bigger. There has never been a generation that has not exceeded the storage capacity of it's original media format and this will be no exception - games will rapidly become 50GB+.
Microsoft's example of a minimum required 1.5Mb/s down means that to download the first two hours of Bioshock: Infinite as an example, you need to download in excess of 6GB of data, which will take 13 hours under perfect conditions. This is a best case scenario. You realistically will probably need to obtain some 12GB or more in order to play the first two hours.
This claim they have is an ideal, it is not a reality. It probably won't be a reality within the lifetime of the console.
I don't remember the 360 claim about being able to install and play instantly, but it's possible they said it. In your example of someone with slow internet, those people should continue buying retail discs.
I think the reference MS made with the 360 was in relation to the PS3, back in the day. There was a lot of talk about the install process, for games on the PS3, which would leave you waiting to play your game the first time (especially the long waits in metal gear). The 360 was the standard instant load/play.
Has there been any word on PS4 used games/always online policies? I've been looking and it's very unclear what they plan to do, some sites say their policy will be similar to MSFT's, while others say they've dialed that back? All thing being equal this could be a big deal as far as which console gamers choose.
People criticized MSFT for being unclear, and how it was such a stupid strategy, but look at Sony now, they're sitting back, letting MSFT take an absolute beating(in the gaming media, very important to remember this), all the while being just as nebulous about their own DRM policies. I'm not saying MSFT is right in the direction they're taking consoles in, I'm just saying it seems there's a double standard on the interwebz. I just want E3 to come and go so I/the community, can have all the information and finally make an informed decision.
Ya know, say what you will about the WiiU, but at least they were straight up with their way of doing backwards compatibility. "Yes, you can play Wii games on it."
Only as long as Steam exists. What if for some reason Valve went under. Not likely but a big what if. Don't you then lose access to that whole library you have created?
When or if the Steam servers went down how long would you have to play your games or would you even be able to launch them?
I love Steam but there are issues with it. It is much better now then it was at start but shouldn't other options (xbox: one, origin, etc) be allowed to have a chance as well?
DRM sucks but what is a better solution? I think Microsoft and publishers are trying to find a way to stop the crazy amount of used game sales that only benefit Gamestop and not the creators. I think Dead Space 1 had like 3 million plus unique users or whatever but only sold half of that new.... That sucks!
The difference is that I can download a crack for most Steam games and be up and running again in a matter of minutes. Cracking XB1 games will be much harder if they pull the plug.
Xbox and Origin are standing on the accomplishments of Valve, they shouldn't have many of the same issues Steam did in its infancy, they have an example to go by as to what works and, yet, they still persist in weighing it down with stupid DRM measures and broken functionality.
Yes, developers are annoyed about used games, but does pissing on the cake really make people want to but it more? I'd rather buy cake from someone that doesn't piss on them. If they go through with this, they are going to gut their own sales. There are people that choose to buy new because they know they can resell it if they decide they don't want it anymore, recovering some of the cost. And let's not pretend that prices will go down if the used market disappears tomorrow. Without a used market, publishers have a monopoly and you can be damn sure they're going to exploit it. Take away used game sales and prices will go up, not down. Think about it. If you were a merchant that had the only supply of a particular product and there was a high demand for it, would you price it low or high? I think we know the answer. And before anyone brings up the fact that PC games have no used market, remember this: PC games are easily separated from their media and they have no dependency on custom hardware. XB1 games are going to be very much tied to the media and hardware they're used on.
Has there been any word on PS4 used games/always online policies? I've been looking and it's very unclear what they plan to do, some sites say their policy will be similar to MSFT's, while others say they've dialed that back? All thing being equal this could be a big deal as far as which console gamers choose.
People criticized MSFT for being unclear, and how it was such a stupid strategy, but look at Sony now, they're sitting back, letting MSFT take an absolute beating(in the gaming media, very important to remember this), all the while being just as nebulous about their own DRM policies. I'm not saying MSFT is right in the direction they're taking consoles in, I'm just saying it seems there's a double standard on the interwebz. I just want E3 to come and go so I/the community, can have all the information and finally make an informed decision.
Um, as far as I am aware, if you visit any gaming news site or forum/hub for the past 3-5 weeks, they mentioned that the PS4 system will be pretty much like that of the PS3, everything is optional and nothing will be locked or restricted outside of the norm.
Also, are you kidding? People were beating on Sony because they didn't show the console, the only difference is, Sony didn't call people 'backwards' because they wanted to play their old games, which means they left some room for them to re-release games if something doesn't work out in the hardware line.
MS on the other hand, almost over-night had to mention that "Oops, what we meant to say is that keep your old X360, haha, cheecky us".
Also, somewhere along the lines Twitter and Tumblr threw a fit because apparently Sony doesn't have a female CEO, that became the "I'm not buying your console because you don't have a female CEO" thing of the week.
So yeah, Sony is the old uncle who is busting for a piss and driving down the road raging for the bathroom, MS is acting like the big brother on the alcohol limit, driving near a school full of children and trying to sell them candy at midnight.
PR management is an art-form, as a consumer of any age or demographic, who is buying products from a company, I'm under no obligation to hear MS call me backwards on a speech level, on something that is a basic function for much hardware.
The more I can tell that a part of some thing's design was made to benefit the creator, the more I don't care for it. I'm not naive I know that everything business does is to increase profits, but usually that's done by hiding those motivations under quality products and services that always benefit the consumer. Basically if they can fool me into thinking that they're all so dedicated to giving me what I want and improving the world, then maybe I'll buy their stuff.
This used-game DRM debacle gives me no benefits as a consumer. It's obvious from every angle that this new feature of the the Xbox One is designed to make money for business. Seriously Microsoft, how in the world did you think this news would go down? What in the world is exciting or useful about this?
On the side, I feel the same about the media I consume. I know good stories and games are designed to illicit a certain action/emotional response from the audience, but I lose so much immersion when I can tell that's what the creators wanted.
My guess is that MS is gonna drop all that "used game" policy after they realize how unpopular it is and nobody will be buying the console or the games.
I don't remember the 360 claim about being able to install and play instantly, but it's possible they said it. In your example of someone with slow internet, those people should continue buying retail discs.
For a significant part of the world, this isn't 'slow Internet'. It's around two-thirds of the world average, and those averages are massively skewed by places like South Korea whose infrastructures make a mockery of the West.
They can buy the disc. What would you suggest is a better way to handle this specific point? If you're in an area with average internet in your example, you probably buy the disc, in which case you just bring that over to your friend's house. If you're a person that downloaded the game because you've got better internet, you have the option of downloading and playing at their house. Hopefully they have internet comparable to you. If they don't, I guess that sucks, but perhaps you should continue buying retail discs.
Some of these announced policies are not perfect, and some are making me re-consider a launch purchase, but the point you're talking about actually sounds like more options than we currently have. I can now download full retail titles on release day and presumably start playing them before they've even finished downloading. That is awesome.
Has there been any word on PS4 used games/always online policies? I've been looking and it's very unclear what they plan to do, some sites say their policy will be similar to MSFT's, while others say they've dialed that back? All thing being equal this could be a big deal as far as which console gamers choose.
Sony isn't being nebulous. They are simply not providing any information at all. There is nothing evasive or muddled in their message, there simply is no message at this time.
And yes, there is the possibility that Sony will do the exact same thing with the PS4. Or they could do something different, but equally antagonistic toward used games and/or consumers. Until we know more, the sky is the limit on what Sony could be doing.
At the end of the day, I do think Sony took the right approach. They locked down their messaging much more tightly. Whatever they finally tell us, it will be much more managed, controlled, and certain. Microsoft is just running damage control for all the bad news that managed to leek out before they wanted it to.
Some of these announced policies are not perfect, and some are making me re-consider a launch purchase, but the point you're talking about actually sounds like more options than we currently have. I can now download full retail titles on release day and presumably start playing them before they've even finished downloading. That is awesome.
This is a feature that has been present in Steam for years. One of my biggest complaints with this fresh flurry of news is that Microsoft seems intent on directly competing with Steam. But they can't. Steam has been doing all of this longer, and better. And Steam provides a much broader selection of hardware options.
Right now, the big advantage of the XBox One is its ability to work as a TV remote.
i have a magic remote that controls my tv, sound system, and even can turn my pc on if i want it to.
i do not need an xbox to do this. especially at the price difference involved here.
I don't subscribe to full cable. My TV hasn't been connected to a cable feed for years. (literally, almost seven years now) The XBox One's extra media features don't matter to me at all.
This is a feature that has been present in Steam for years. One of my biggest complaints with this fresh flurry of news is that Microsoft seems intent on directly competing with Steam. But they can't. Steam has been doing all of this longer, and better. And Steam provides a much broader selection of hardware options.
Yeah, and isn't it great that they're taking features that people like from steam and incorporating them? I love the idea of buying full games digitally, and possibly being able to preload them (not sure if this is happening or not).
Yeah, and isn't it great that they're taking features that people like from steam and incorporating them?
It is great to have good features come to the XBox One. I don't really think that all-digital games is a feature, though. Steam didn't go that way because they were trying to add a feature. They simply saw all-digital and an integrated storefront/service as the ultimate direction of PC gaming. Lo and behold, they were right.
Now Microsoft is trying to follow their example. Going with an all-digital console is ballsy, I'll give them that. If they can get enough consumers to buy into the idea, they'll probably be able to pull it off. The margin on digital games is much better. And this approach will enable publishers to lock exploitative retailers like GameStop out of the loop. (or insist on getting a huge chunk of their profits, either way...$) It isn't necesarrily a bad thing.
But it is definitely a DIFFERENT thing. People can adapt to change, but they will also be resistent to it. (in much the same way many consumers were originally resistant to Steam) And of course, there are going to be alternatives. With Microsoft going this route, they place themselves in much more direct competition with Steam. They will lose such a competition. For those consumers who aren't on board with this digital future, they have the Wii-U to turn to. And we still don't know what Sony has up their sleeves for the PS4.
But they can still buy retail discs. It's not an all digital console, they are just giving consumers the option to treat it that way if they want to. It's still clearly targeted at a different market than steam, especially given all the importance placed on an all-in-one media solution.
They can buy the disc. What would you suggest is a better way to handle this specific point? If you're in an area with average internet in your example, you probably buy the disc, in which case you just bring that over to your friend's house. If you're a person that downloaded the game because you've got better internet, you have the option of downloading and playing at their house. Hopefully they have internet comparable to you. If they don't, I guess that sucks, but perhaps you should continue buying retail discs.
Some of these announced policies are not perfect, and some are making me re-consider a launch purchase, but the point you're talking about actually sounds like more options than we currently have. I can now download full retail titles on release day and presumably start playing them before they've even finished downloading. That is awesome.
It would be nice if they had an option to download now and have a disc sent in the mail. A lot of business do this, even Microsoft offers it as an option for windows. It costs a little more but for those that want it, great.
But they can still buy retail discs. It's not an all digital console, they are just giving consumers the option to treat it that way if they want to. It's still clearly targeted at a different market than steam, especially given all the importance placed on an all-in-one media solution.
The disc is superfluous. It is only there as a matter of convenience. Once the game is installed on the system, you never have to touch the disc again. It doesn't have to be in the system, it isn't required for updates. It is only there so that you don't have to download multiple gigabytes of data. You can borrow your friends disc, install the game, and then purchase the game over XBox Live. There is no difference.
It is an all-digital console. It operates like Steam does. You can still buy some PC games at retail, that come with a DVD, and a Steam code. Once the game is installed on your PC, the disc could be a coaster. The Steam code was what you were really paying for, and what you really need to play the game.
You are right about targeting at a differnet market than Steam. Steam was designed from the ground up to cater to the more traditional PC gamer. The XBox One seems like some bizarre attempt to appeal to families. It's possible that its scattershot approach at multiple demographics will pay off. But I'm not convinced.
It would be nice if they had an option to download now and have a disc sent in the mail. A lot of business do this, even Microsoft offers it as an option for windows. It costs a little more but for those that want it, great.
Oh man! I never knew companies did that! If PSN had that option, shit.. I'd do that over buying from Amazon any day.
Replies
The original xbox 360 looked modern and the design was clean and fresh. The new one looks very utilitarian , bordering on dull
The 'phone home' technique has been used for software in the past. It's often fooled, even with a custom server to simulate the MS response. Obviously that won't be there on day 1, and it may never happen, but just saying that my prediction is there will eventually be a workaround.
:P
What about the games that are going to require access to the internet to run? Microsoft has confirmed the possibility of games that literally won't run without access to the cloud, and that those decisions will be made at the publisher level. (so Microsoft will not be regulating them directly)
Activision and EA will be able to check in on the legitimacy of your XBox One games, and they will be able to do it on a per-game basis. In order to spoof this sort of system effectively you would need copies of Microsoft's servers, every publisher's servers, and the individual validation for each game.
They're going above and beyond this time around, and baking everything into the design of the system itself. They are insuring that any viable workaround is just too much trouble and expense to implement. Even if you could get what you needed, it would probably cost you thousands of dollars just to set it up. As long as they can deter casual software pirates, their job is done.
I am perhaps an optimist with these things but from what I read and anyone can interpret it differently but it seems like Steam but with the ability to trade, share games in the family, etc... Sounds pretty cool to me.
One of the pros of consoles was that if you were just hanging with friends you could just pop a game in sand start playing. It wasn't so your friend got a free game, all that mattered was, "you got console? you got TV? you got game? Yay no problems lets play!"
That is my biggest concern, in 20 years when I want to play "retro" games I won't be able too :S
That's part of why steam is okay and console drm is disliked, if I buy an arcade game on an Xbox 360, I will just have that game as long as I have an Xbox 360. If I buy a game on PC, I'll have it as long as I have a PC and steam is alive. I'll be able to play any of my stream games 10 years from now.
Only as long as Steam exists. What if for some reason Valve went under. Not likely but a big what if. Don't you then lose access to that whole library you have created?
When or if the Steam servers went down how long would you have to play your games or would you even be able to launch them?
I love Steam but there are issues with it. It is much better now then it was at start but shouldn't other options (xbox: one, origin, etc) be allowed to have a chance as well?
DRM sucks but what is a better solution? I think Microsoft and publishers are trying to find a way to stop the crazy amount of used game sales that only benefit Gamestop and not the creators. I think Dead Space 1 had like 3 million plus unique users or whatever but only sold half of that new.... That sucks!
I also believe the steam store does a better job at having sales and pimping indy games and games without big publishers. Whenever I see the Xbox dashboard, it's just the newest $60 everywhere. Valve has release a lot about how sales and price cuts cause games to start selling more in the long term, and the Xbox store seems stagnant. I also see Sony and Valve handling free to play and patches better, they seem to work better with devs to release games that that change overtime.
A game will have a lower value for the same price in the future.
Today if we pay $60 for a new game, we can assume that we'll get $20 for it used. We are actually paying $40 to play the game if we plan to sell it quickly.
In the future, a game might be $70 new and have zero resale value. That is a 75% increase over the price we pay today.
If consumers agree to this, great for publishers!
This presents a fantastic opportunity for indies.
Well if the whole reason the Xbone is connecting to the internet every 24 hours is for updates and new content, I expect DLC/patches/new content every day.
Come on developers, chop chop.
If Microsoft still charges devs a ton of money to patch their games, that's not going to happen.
Yeah, after spending ten+ hours downloading it.
Kind of disappointing.
And the whole defense of "Oh, just throw a towel over the Kinect". That's a solution? That's fucking stupid. And even if I CAN turn it off, why is the default that it's on? That's ... Eh, anyway. I'll just side with the PS4 this time around and move along. I'll do what is always advocated - vote with my wallet. I'm obviously not going to convince anyone to think differently.
The game will be playable immediately and downloads/installs as you go. You should still be able to bring the disc over and play that way if logged into xbl. It's not perfect, but should hopefully work ok.
I bought into microsoft's idea of connecting everything together a long time ago, and 360 has been my favorite console. Some of these things that just got announced ar making me think about the one purchase, whereas before it was a definite pre-order. 24 hr offline play needs to be upped to something like 72 hrs as a compromise, and game lending needs to be implemented before launch. I need to have the option to de-activate a game on my console, give a co-worker a disc to play, have them de-activate it, and allow me to re-play. Or, just handle that all through xbl but not have restrictions on who I can lend to.
For the record, this was also a claim with the 360 and it never materialised (also the 'install to HDD and play whilst installing never materialised properly either).
The reality is that this is almost never the case. You generally need a fairly large chunk of the game content installed before you can play anything. More importantly you will play through the game faster than you can download it.
Current gen games are in the order of 25-30GB now, and they're going to get bigger. There has never been a generation that has not exceeded the storage capacity of it's original media format and this will be no exception - games will rapidly become 50GB+.
Microsoft's example of a minimum required 1.5Mb/s down means that to download the first two hours of Bioshock: Infinite as an example, you need to download in excess of 6GB of data, which will take 13 hours under perfect conditions. This is a best case scenario. You realistically will probably need to obtain some 12GB or more in order to play the first two hours.
This claim they have is an ideal, it is not a reality. It probably won't be a reality within the lifetime of the console.
Microsoft simply is catering to the whims of the hundreds of studio closures that have plagued this industry. They likely have talked to all of the key developers, and publishers and felt this is the best course of action.
The 'gamer' always has been, and always will be secondary with Microsoft's business model. And that's not necessarily a bad thing.
I don't remember the 360 claim about being able to install and play instantly, but it's possible they said it. In your example of someone with slow internet, those people should continue buying retail discs.
People criticized MSFT for being unclear, and how it was such a stupid strategy, but look at Sony now, they're sitting back, letting MSFT take an absolute beating(in the gaming media, very important to remember this), all the while being just as nebulous about their own DRM policies. I'm not saying MSFT is right in the direction they're taking consoles in, I'm just saying it seems there's a double standard on the interwebz. I just want E3 to come and go so I/the community, can have all the information and finally make an informed decision.
The difference is that I can download a crack for most Steam games and be up and running again in a matter of minutes. Cracking XB1 games will be much harder if they pull the plug.
Xbox and Origin are standing on the accomplishments of Valve, they shouldn't have many of the same issues Steam did in its infancy, they have an example to go by as to what works and, yet, they still persist in weighing it down with stupid DRM measures and broken functionality.
Yes, developers are annoyed about used games, but does pissing on the cake really make people want to but it more? I'd rather buy cake from someone that doesn't piss on them. If they go through with this, they are going to gut their own sales. There are people that choose to buy new because they know they can resell it if they decide they don't want it anymore, recovering some of the cost. And let's not pretend that prices will go down if the used market disappears tomorrow. Without a used market, publishers have a monopoly and you can be damn sure they're going to exploit it. Take away used game sales and prices will go up, not down. Think about it. If you were a merchant that had the only supply of a particular product and there was a high demand for it, would you price it low or high? I think we know the answer. And before anyone brings up the fact that PC games have no used market, remember this: PC games are easily separated from their media and they have no dependency on custom hardware. XB1 games are going to be very much tied to the media and hardware they're used on.
Also, are you kidding? People were beating on Sony because they didn't show the console, the only difference is, Sony didn't call people 'backwards' because they wanted to play their old games, which means they left some room for them to re-release games if something doesn't work out in the hardware line.
MS on the other hand, almost over-night had to mention that "Oops, what we meant to say is that keep your old X360, haha, cheecky us".
Also, somewhere along the lines Twitter and Tumblr threw a fit because apparently Sony doesn't have a female CEO, that became the "I'm not buying your console because you don't have a female CEO" thing of the week.
So yeah, Sony is the old uncle who is busting for a piss and driving down the road raging for the bathroom, MS is acting like the big brother on the alcohol limit, driving near a school full of children and trying to sell them candy at midnight.
PR management is an art-form, as a consumer of any age or demographic, who is buying products from a company, I'm under no obligation to hear MS call me backwards on a speech level, on something that is a basic function for much hardware.
This used-game DRM debacle gives me no benefits as a consumer. It's obvious from every angle that this new feature of the the Xbox One is designed to make money for business. Seriously Microsoft, how in the world did you think this news would go down? What in the world is exciting or useful about this?
On the side, I feel the same about the media I consume. I know good stories and games are designed to illicit a certain action/emotional response from the audience, but I lose so much immersion when I can tell that's what the creators wanted.
For a significant part of the world, this isn't 'slow Internet'. It's around two-thirds of the world average, and those averages are massively skewed by places like South Korea whose infrastructures make a mockery of the West.
Some of these announced policies are not perfect, and some are making me re-consider a launch purchase, but the point you're talking about actually sounds like more options than we currently have. I can now download full retail titles on release day and presumably start playing them before they've even finished downloading. That is awesome.
Sony isn't being nebulous. They are simply not providing any information at all. There is nothing evasive or muddled in their message, there simply is no message at this time.
And yes, there is the possibility that Sony will do the exact same thing with the PS4. Or they could do something different, but equally antagonistic toward used games and/or consumers. Until we know more, the sky is the limit on what Sony could be doing.
At the end of the day, I do think Sony took the right approach. They locked down their messaging much more tightly. Whatever they finally tell us, it will be much more managed, controlled, and certain. Microsoft is just running damage control for all the bad news that managed to leek out before they wanted it to.
This is a feature that has been present in Steam for years. One of my biggest complaints with this fresh flurry of news is that Microsoft seems intent on directly competing with Steam. But they can't. Steam has been doing all of this longer, and better. And Steam provides a much broader selection of hardware options.
Right now, the big advantage of the XBox One is its ability to work as a TV remote.
i have a magic remote that controls my tv, sound system, and even can turn my pc on if i want it to.
i do not need an xbox to do this. especially at the price difference involved here.
I don't subscribe to full cable. My TV hasn't been connected to a cable feed for years. (literally, almost seven years now) The XBox One's extra media features don't matter to me at all.
Yeah, and isn't it great that they're taking features that people like from steam and incorporating them? I love the idea of buying full games digitally, and possibly being able to preload them (not sure if this is happening or not).
http://www.polygon.com/2013/6/7/4406170/xbox-one-internet-trade-policy
It is great to have good features come to the XBox One. I don't really think that all-digital games is a feature, though. Steam didn't go that way because they were trying to add a feature. They simply saw all-digital and an integrated storefront/service as the ultimate direction of PC gaming. Lo and behold, they were right.
Now Microsoft is trying to follow their example. Going with an all-digital console is ballsy, I'll give them that. If they can get enough consumers to buy into the idea, they'll probably be able to pull it off. The margin on digital games is much better. And this approach will enable publishers to lock exploitative retailers like GameStop out of the loop. (or insist on getting a huge chunk of their profits, either way...$) It isn't necesarrily a bad thing.
But it is definitely a DIFFERENT thing. People can adapt to change, but they will also be resistent to it. (in much the same way many consumers were originally resistant to Steam) And of course, there are going to be alternatives. With Microsoft going this route, they place themselves in much more direct competition with Steam. They will lose such a competition. For those consumers who aren't on board with this digital future, they have the Wii-U to turn to. And we still don't know what Sony has up their sleeves for the PS4.
Next week is going to be fascinating.
The disc is superfluous. It is only there as a matter of convenience. Once the game is installed on the system, you never have to touch the disc again. It doesn't have to be in the system, it isn't required for updates. It is only there so that you don't have to download multiple gigabytes of data. You can borrow your friends disc, install the game, and then purchase the game over XBox Live. There is no difference.
It is an all-digital console. It operates like Steam does. You can still buy some PC games at retail, that come with a DVD, and a Steam code. Once the game is installed on your PC, the disc could be a coaster. The Steam code was what you were really paying for, and what you really need to play the game.
You are right about targeting at a differnet market than Steam. Steam was designed from the ground up to cater to the more traditional PC gamer. The XBox One seems like some bizarre attempt to appeal to families. It's possible that its scattershot approach at multiple demographics will pay off. But I'm not convinced.
Oh man! I never knew companies did that! If PSN had that option, shit.. I'd do that over buying from Amazon any day.