In the original Manhunt you could plug in a microphone headset and use it to distract enemies and could hear the warden straight from the earpiece. Hardcore mode with the sensitivity up to max - don't breath to loud.
ffffuuu that was the most terrifying horror game I've ever played, I couldn't imagine doing that with a headset.
The original XBox bit it big time in Japan. The XBox 360 only fared marginally better, despite a massive marketing push and decent support from native Japanese developers. even though it did better than its predecessor, its performance was still abysmal, and even worse when stacked up against its competition. (the Wii and PS3 embarrassed the 360 in Japan)
It's actually understandable that Microsoft would not prioritize the XBox One in Japan. They failed so miserably with their past two consoles, it hardly seems worth the effort.
If you are an XBox fan living in Japan, I'm sorry. But its quite unlikely that Japan is going to be seeing any XBox One love anytime soon.
well I went in to my local rental shop in Tokyo today, and to find something Xbox you have to walk like 100m and you will find dead or alive beach edition, COD and BF3 + a standard xbox package, and next to that is the ps1 and gameboy advance shelfs, ps2 is prioritized before xbox 360 so I guess that says something about their motivation to try and gain market here.
Also they would be have to do something revolutionizing to get japanese to buy xboxes, like maybe gain the rights to a pokemon mmo?
My girlfriend just stopped using line when she found out the japanese company that made it was bought by some other countries company. Also I'll probably have to buy a crappier and more expensive sony tv instead of a Samsung because she would rather kill herself then have that in our house (^_^;) So I guess that kinda says a lot,
Many japanese will buy more expensive and worse products just to be able to buy from a japanese company, so why would they buy choose an american product that does the same thing as their japanese one.
literally just destroyed any chance they have of beating sony.
Some places don`t have 360 stuff out to buy. MS doesn`t really support 360 here themselves it seems. No services, no perks.. feels like they are gonna let it die out.
After I finish the few 360 games I own, I`ll be putting it away in a box. Use the controllers for the PC and that`s about it.
I have a feeling the XBOne will have the same fate.
I wonder if all those SHMUP companies will start putting their games on playstation consoles instead of Xbox consoles...
They (Cave/MossJP) do small runs and the cost of the games skyrockets at times. Makes it a pain finding them in stores. I would like to see what they do next, only reason why my 360 hasn`t been retired yet.
How omitting and changing a few words can distort a statement right ?
The original text: "For an optimal experience, we recommend a broadband connection of 1.5Mbps. (For reference, the average global internet connection speed as measured recently by Akamai was 2.9 Mbps)."
I hate this quote, because it's deliberately dishonest on Microsoft's part and it's certainly not realistic at all.
Anyone who knows anything about statistics knows that averages are used for one thing: lying. They do not paint an accurate picture of anything.
It is probably true that 2.9Mb/s is the global average. This is however MASSIVELY skewed by countries like South Korea, Hong Kong etc who have a very strong telecommunications infrastructure. These countries are not where the console is being sold. Some countries where it is being sold have average connection speeds that are lower than their recommended minimum (for example Brazil).
Akamai actually provides data to show how skewed this is: . It is shown here that between 40% and 50% of the world population does not have a suitable Internet connection, and that the chart suggests that it's possible that between around 50% to 75% might not actually meet the recommended requirement.
At this juncture, it only gets worse. Average connection speeds on a per country basis are ALSO massively skewed, usually by their capital cities and main business hubs.
Light green areas are the best, like Greater London. Greater London has an average speed of 8.8Mb/s, and despite being the capital, 15% of people do not even have access to broadband and 8% of users who do still get less than 2Mb/s. This is situation in the business capital of the world.
Light blue areas are still pretty good, but worse off. One example (the Wirral) has an average of 8.3 Mb/s. Decent broadband is however only available to 60% of the population and 10% of people are getting sub 2Mb/s speeds.
Orange areas are where you stand a reasonable chance of being able to meet the recommended requirements for Xbox One.
Purple areas are unlikely to be able to meet it. Aberdeenshire has a 0% availability of fast broadband and over 15% of people receive under 2Mb/s. The average speed is still 6.1Mb/s (see how deceiving these averages are now?).
Finally, red areas are quite likely to not be able to meet it. Stornoway has 0 fast broadband availability, and one in every four people get less than 2Mb/s. The average is still over 5Mb/s.
Needless to say, there are a lot of red and purple areas on that map - the majority in fact. High broadband speeds are basically only available around six major cities and nowhere else. A very small number of people skew the average connection speed colossally.
and that's the UK, a literally tiny country for its internet infrastructure. These comments from Microsoft crack me up as an Australian with my huge island and its tiny spread out population. Our new Internet infrastructure is quite the topic for our upcoming elections.
and that's the UK, a literally tiny country for its internet infrastructure. These comments from Microsoft crack me up as an Australian with my huge island and its tiny spread out population. Our new Internet infrastructure is quite the topic for our upcoming elections.
And it looks like a high chance of getting the shit option as well.
Yeah, and us Yankees have a lot of spread out populations between the coasts. Unless you live in a metro or a suburb, your options are shit to none. In rural states, service outside of the capital of major cities is 5Mbps at best. Many are still only served by dial-up. I only had to move 10 minutes away from my rural home to the neighboring city of 50K and the speed goes from 5Mbps to 30Mbps. The majority of the US is clustered in dense cities while the rest is spread over a massive area. The moment you move outside of those dense centers, the speed drops dramatically. It would be like having 80Mph speed limits in the city and then having to drop to 10Mph when you go beyond the city limits. If you're planning a cross-country trip, that's mind numbingly slow.
Not sure if this was posted yet. didnt read through everything. buuuut here is the pre-order disclaimer.... and a few twitter questions to xbox.... and a perfect movie quote to sum it all up.
(Seriously, wtf is wrong with the youtube embedding... Its been busted ever since youtube changed the share options. I take out the s, or all the extra crap. still doesnt work)
@Ambershee Of course the average means nothing, the point is that for ANY online game or service, 1.5Mb/s is recommended, on ANY device. If your connection download speed is slower than 180KB/s, you will wait hours for an update and will experience terrible pings, whatever the platform.
So putting the blame on MS for that very sentence like his article did is fanboyism and sensationalism to me.
@Ambershee Of course the average means nothing, the point is that for ANY online game or service, 1.5Mb/s is recommended, on ANY device. If your connection download speed is slower than 180KB/s, you will wait hours for an update and will experience terrible pings, whatever the platform.
So putting the blame on MS for that very sentence like his article did is fanboyism and sensationalism to me.
The blame is on MS because they designed their system to be dependent on everyone having a certain level of internet service when the reality is far from that. The fact is, they've built a system that requires infrastructure that is currently impractical as it is. If the roads are all made of asphalt, but your car can only drive on maglev, you're doing it wrong.
I'm pretty sure they checked their numbers one billion times. If they go this way, it's probably because they have data that show enough people have that infrastructure, I don't think they are blind or stupid.
They have a PR problem though, and should ask Apple how to build closed overpriced internet-dependent hardware and still have people handing them money with a smile on their face.
I'm pretty sure they checked their numbers one billion times. If they go this way, it's probably because they have data that show enough people have that infrastructure, I don't think they are blind or stupid.
They have a PR problem though, and should ask Apple how to build closed overpriced internet-dependent hardware and still have people handing them money with a smile on their face.
I highly doubt they did. It's more likely they just didn't care because they only care about the consumers that have compatible connections. Perhaps you missed that MS comment about people without adequate connections should just get a 360? It looks very much that they just don't give a damn because they care more about control than customer satisfaction.
Apple products utilize an internet connection, but they don't stop working when the connection is lost. Steam even has an offline mode, though if you muck up your login file you're hosed until you can get online again or apply a crack.
I'm pretty sure they checked their numbers one billion times. If they go this way, it's probably because they have data that show enough people have that infrastructure, I don't think they are blind or stupid.
They have a PR problem though, and should ask Apple how to build closed overpriced internet-dependent hardware and still have people handing them money with a smile on their face.
That's where things fall apart.
Italy vs. Japan, internet infrastructure wise, these numbers wouldn't make sense. One place where piracy is rampant and the law doesn't care vs. another where they actually go after you, again, another number that doesn't make sense.
They're planning on delaying they said? Again, that doesn't make sense, unless they need to plan something...something which is already done in a place like Russia?
Overall, it's clear MS is going after 'certain' infrastructures, they don't even actually care about the Speeds at this point, and have given up trying to PR manage this since as soon as they do, someone will shed some light on their latest lie.
I wouldn't be surprised if somewhere down the line, MS does the Intel thing, where they try and create entertainment bundle packages that you can buy on the cheap.
That's the only way you explain this stuff, the countries in the list are some of the top dogs when it comes to "licensing" stuff, so maybe MS is honestly just doing something different in all this, albeit in a real weird way.
Pick any 9 friends on your friends list (I would assume there's criteria, probably that they have to have been on your list for 30+ days like giving a game away). You and those 9 friends only ever have to buy a single copy of each game between you all, and you can all play it, but only one at a time. So its like swapping a physical disk around with up to 9 other friends, but they can be anywhere in the world.
Personally this sounds very cool, especially for single-player games. My brother doesn't have the money to buy every major release, and we work different schedules, so while I'm at work, he can play my copy half-way across the country all without exchanging a disk.
I can't understand it I really don't they are so god damned stubborn, even the face of massive revolt of not only consumers but tech journo's and even games developers they still stick to their always on and second hand game policy ... and not to mentioned forcing us to buy shitty kinnect 2.0 (which 75% of games don't even need nor want).
Xbox one had the games, the line up I wanted but the price and the policies they have are literally FORCING me to buy a ps4 because of it, it just seems business suicide.
There's definitely an idea behind this, but how does it make things better/positive to those that already do a similar thing? I let my brother borrow a game, he lets me borrow 1 or two - whatever. If a game is single player orientated - yet with a heavy multi-player element I'll say to my brother - "sure borrow it and complete the single player campaign but give it back afterwards, so that I can play some awesome multi-player" How can that not work as a system?
Mindfreeze - what happens to the online/server stats of the player that first purchased the game once it's been given away/sold?
I guess it makes things better in the way that you can lend a game to someone you are not in direct contact with, and you can also lend digital games purchased through the XBoxLive, not only BR games.
Well the scenario that came to mind was basically free rentals. Of the 9 people I'd add to my "family" none of us buy all the same games every time, so I know that even if I don't have the money at the time to buy the full game, one of my buddies will get it and I can try it out for a while. If it works right it could be a really awesome, very convenient feature.
The only worry I have is if MSFT would charge a one-time thing per person using it. If they don't directly, they could allow third-parties to do it, as both MSFT and Sony are allowing with used game restrictions.
It's still pretty vague though, at least there's some response.
The whole family library thing is a great idea, that solves me and my brother out. Playing at the same time thing? Will have to see.
- What are they going to do when the console is retired, are people going to be able to still play the games they bought?
- How much rights do the publishers have, what publishers are going to have what restrictions, it's a total cop out saying we wont stop you from "blank" but publishers can. Don't shift the blame onto someone else and stand up for customer rights, at list to some limit
- Are you going to improve sales and prices along with digital purchases? Microsoft isn't known for lowering their prices in the store on the 360, Sony has given away newer and more popular games for discounts and for free. Mircosoft is doing something similar, but with old titles, just until the One comes out. Their Arcade has always been a mess.
- How is the indie game and free to play game support going to be? So far it looks horrid.
- Is the cloud based computing actually going to do anything, PS4 and Xbox One says it does, games like TitanFall say they use it, but the same game is also being released on the Xbox 360.
There has been so much confusion and misinformation...
It restated everything that I understood about it. And I still have the same concerns. Here's my breakdown of the points made there:
Used Games: Once again, it is only through deals made with 'approved retailers'. So, they'll make a deal with Gamestop, so the publishers can get a cut. The concerns have been, who will pay for that cut? Obviously, Gamestop will pass it to the consumer, which will result in people no longer using Gamestop, thus killing the market. That's the very likely outcome.
Gamestop aside, what if I want to sell my games on Ebay (as I have many times)? This is NOT discussed, and appears to be an impossibility. Yard sales (where my kids have bought games before)?
To me, it seems like the source of the communities anger, is the corporation taking care of corporation. MS may not be taking a cut, but obviously they are trying to help the publishers, at the expense of the consumer. Oh, and Mom&Pops can just kiss off.
Renting Games:
Once again, through deals between big business, rentals may still be an option (this was the only thing new I saw on that link). Who's going to eat the fees that Gamefly will have to pay publishers (and you know they will). The consumers.
DRM:
That's a matter of choice, and internet access. Playing offline, if I have a disc, would be a good compromise, but the author speculates that as a solution. That's NOT how the system exists at the moment.
A GAME OF CIRCLES:
That was honestly one of the few positives I've had about the Xbone. This method of sharing was unexpected, and a nice option.
Giving away games:
Once again, no confusion there. Thirty days on your friends list. I should be able to disable the license, and hand it to someone. No need for a 30 day friendship.
The Kinect:
Yes, everyone saw that you can turn it off. Great. I still don't trust the systems security to prevent someone from turning it on. There has been a lot of focus about what MS will do, but I'm more concerned about home security. I don't want someone to see what is going on in my home (and i have no doubts it will become a possibility).
I understand why every Xbone is coming with an kinect, and I'm fine with that. I know some people want it excluded to make the system cheaper, but I already understood the need to have it included. If you don't, then publishers will never include it. If they KNOW it's available, then they'll develop for it.
The thing is, why does it HAVE to be connected? Shouldn't it be good enough for the publisher to know I OWN it? Let me unplug the damn thing if I don't want to use it. Not every game will make use of it (and I suspect a small percentage will ever make use of it).
There are reasons people are upset, and MS/Fanboys should stop treating these people as though they are tinfoil wearing, crazed, lunatics. Yeah, there are some that are uninformed, but most of us who have issues with the system, are not. If it was the only option, I would just go back to PC only again. It just so happens that Sony has a solid alternate option.
Renting Games:
Once again, through deals between big business, rentals may still be an option (this was the only thing new I saw on that link). Who's going to eat the fees that Gamefly will have to pay publishers (and you know they will). The consumers.
Shouldn't the publishers(and devs) get a cut of game rentals, though?
Shouldn't the publishers(and devs) get a cut of game rentals, though?
I'm pretty sure they already do, if not rental companies would probably be illegal. They probably either pay an expensive license that allows them to rent the game or pay royalties on rentals.
Shouldn't the publishers(and devs) get a cut of game rentals, though?
Why? Why are games such a special case that they are the one exception to the second hand markets? Don't say it's because a used game is identical to a new game. That's no excuse. Quality of the goods at resale isn't relevant to why it can or can't be resold. Buying a used car vs a new one negates a sale of new cars just as much as a used game negates the sale of a new game. If I buy a 2010 Mustang used from a private seller, Ford lost an opportunity to sell me a new one and they certainly don't get a cut of the used sale.
There's nothing stopping a used car dealer from buying used cars that have been barely driven for a low price and selling the "like new" car for 5-10% less than the MSRP of a new car. However, here's the difference, the car owner has no incentive to resell his damn-near new car after a brief use because the car is worth keeping for much longer than a week or so, while most games offer no reason that the consumer would want to hang on to them until they lose significant resale value. Most games are pretty much disposable. You just play the game to completion and take it back to Gamestop to recover some of the cost and move on to the next one. If the game industry wants to weaken the used games market, they should be focusing on making games that people don't want to resell. User generated content is one such example. People don't like to let go of games they can mod and make their own personal experience.
Shouldn't the publishers(and devs) get a cut of game rentals, though?
Why should it be limited to a select few?
I don't know if it's like videos, but video stores pay 5 times as much for each video. That's why they use to charge so much to replace them, if you didn't return them.
Both systems will have their titles available for purchase digitally the same day as discs hit the streets so it's a foregone conclusion. Gamestop is going bye-bye and the small town mom & pop stores they put out of business will start to come back, so we all win in the end. Hopefully as a bonus it means retailers can't strong-arm publishers into pricing digital the same as physical sales.
Why should it be limited to a select few?
I don't know if it's like videos, but video stores pay 5 times as much for each video. That's why they use to charge so much to replace them, if you didn't return them.
The rules of digital mediums have completely changed and shifted copyright laws, ownership of material, and licencing.
And the very content creators are dictating what the rules of their content are. That's always been the case.
Why? Why are games such a special case that they are the one exception to the second hand markets? Don't say it's because a used game is identical to a new game. That's no excuse. Quality of the goods at resale isn't relevant to why it can or can't be resold. Buying a used car vs a new one negates a sale of new cars just as much as a used game negates the sale of a new game. If I buy a 2010 Mustang used from a private seller, Ford lost an opportunity to sell me a new one and they certainly don't get a cut of the used sale.
There's nothing stopping a used car dealer from buying used cars that have been barely driven for a low price and selling the "like new" car for 5-10% less than the MSRP of a new car. However, here's the difference, the car owner has no incentive to resell his damn-near new car after a brief use because the car is worth keeping for much longer than a week or so, while most games offer no reason that the consumer would want to hang on to them until they lose significant resale value. Most games are pretty much disposable. You just play the game to completion and take it back to Gamestop to recover some of the cost and move on to the next one. If the game industry wants to weaken the used games market, they should be focusing on making games that people don't want to resell. User generated content is one such example. People don't like to let go of games they can mod and make their own personal experience.
I think the way Microsoft is doing it might be a bit too much, but comparing games to used cars just sounds stupid.
Games don't age inside the game, buttons don't just start to act weird, games doesn't get more buggy based on it's age, the customer of the used copy gets a 100% first hand experience.
and also the sale we get is the only income "for most times" we get of a game.
Also games is an experience, most finish it once then its done and finished, It's not something you need to get to work, someone buys a game then that one copy maybe gets bought and paid by 10 people, does that mean we should sell the game 10x the current price instead?
I'm more for a personal game type of system, with cheaper prices then today, more like steam.
But I'm all for finding ways around it, like selling a game cheap then charching monthly for multiplayer, seems weird that someone that didn't pay one cent to the makers are using servers that has to get paid for.
Holy cow. This is getting overly complicated for just a game platform. So much to read, like I'm buying a freakin' national security breaching device.
It's a game platform. Just a game platform. And look at how many wall of texts there are just to clarify what it does.
Maybe I'm spoiled by smart phone games. Finding games on google/apple, single click pay, automatic install, everything have become so easy and simple. And smart phones aren't even a gaming platform.
I remember when I worked at blockbuster at a managers meeting they told us that rental copies cost alot more than regular copies. Movies were about 4x the retail price for them to buy in, so they had to rent that copy about 20-30x before they made a profit on them. I think games were similar but not as expensive for them to buy in. I remember that you couldn't just transfer retail to rental aswell due to license agreements. Games are trickey though as they don't have rental specific copies like they do movies, so rely on honest retailers.
I am pretty sure Sony was talking about online stuff with games. You can still play offline anytime no matter what with any game.
They never said that. They said it's up to the publishers/devs.
If a publisher wants their game to be always on, or have a DRM authentication, they can put it on.
If a studio wants to make a game that takes full advantage of the DISTRIBUTED CLOUD COMPUTING capabilities the PS4 has, then the developer can use them.
Replies
ffffuuu that was the most terrifying horror game I've ever played, I couldn't imagine doing that with a headset.
But why no Japan? I don't understand?
The original XBox bit it big time in Japan. The XBox 360 only fared marginally better, despite a massive marketing push and decent support from native Japanese developers. even though it did better than its predecessor, its performance was still abysmal, and even worse when stacked up against its competition. (the Wii and PS3 embarrassed the 360 in Japan)
It's actually understandable that Microsoft would not prioritize the XBox One in Japan. They failed so miserably with their past two consoles, it hardly seems worth the effort.
If you are an XBox fan living in Japan, I'm sorry. But its quite unlikely that Japan is going to be seeing any XBox One love anytime soon.
Also they would be have to do something revolutionizing to get japanese to buy xboxes, like maybe gain the rights to a pokemon mmo?
My girlfriend just stopped using line when she found out the japanese company that made it was bought by some other countries company. Also I'll probably have to buy a crappier and more expensive sony tv instead of a Samsung because she would rather kill herself then have that in our house (^_^;) So I guess that kinda says a lot,
Many japanese will buy more expensive and worse products just to be able to buy from a japanese company, so why would they buy choose an american product that does the same thing as their japanese one.
I never found it that scary, however it was very good at making me jump when I thought I was being stealthy and then heard, "There he is!"
After I finish the few 360 games I own, I`ll be putting it away in a box. Use the controllers for the PC and that`s about it.
I have a feeling the XBOne will have the same fate.
But $120~$140 for a game... geeze..
I hate this quote, because it's deliberately dishonest on Microsoft's part and it's certainly not realistic at all.
Anyone who knows anything about statistics knows that averages are used for one thing: lying. They do not paint an accurate picture of anything.
It is probably true that 2.9Mb/s is the global average. This is however MASSIVELY skewed by countries like South Korea, Hong Kong etc who have a very strong telecommunications infrastructure. These countries are not where the console is being sold. Some countries where it is being sold have average connection speeds that are lower than their recommended minimum (for example Brazil).
Akamai actually provides data to show how skewed this is:
At this juncture, it only gets worse. Average connection speeds on a per country basis are ALSO massively skewed, usually by their capital cities and main business hubs.
Let's take a look at data for the UK - one of the top 15-20 nations in the world for average broadband speeds. (interactive source: http://maps.ofcom.org.uk/broadband/broadband-map-2011/)
Light green areas are the best, like Greater London. Greater London has an average speed of 8.8Mb/s, and despite being the capital, 15% of people do not even have access to broadband and 8% of users who do still get less than 2Mb/s. This is situation in the business capital of the world.
Light blue areas are still pretty good, but worse off. One example (the Wirral) has an average of 8.3 Mb/s. Decent broadband is however only available to 60% of the population and 10% of people are getting sub 2Mb/s speeds.
Orange areas are where you stand a reasonable chance of being able to meet the recommended requirements for Xbox One.
Purple areas are unlikely to be able to meet it. Aberdeenshire has a 0% availability of fast broadband and over 15% of people receive under 2Mb/s. The average speed is still 6.1Mb/s (see how deceiving these averages are now?).
Finally, red areas are quite likely to not be able to meet it. Stornoway has 0 fast broadband availability, and one in every four people get less than 2Mb/s. The average is still over 5Mb/s.
Needless to say, there are a lot of red and purple areas on that map - the majority in fact. High broadband speeds are basically only available around six major cities and nowhere else. A very small number of people skew the average connection speed colossally.
Finally, to make matters worse, average connection speeds are actually going down (and quite quickly) according to the very same source that MS used for that cherry-picked data.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/akamai-internet-broadband-speeds-bandwidth,15525.html
1.5 megabits/s equals a ~187kbytes/s, think about that for awhile in terms of the modern internet, that's their optimal requirement, not the minimum.
and that's the UK, a literally tiny country for its internet infrastructure. These comments from Microsoft crack me up as an Australian with my huge island and its tiny spread out population. Our new Internet infrastructure is quite the topic for our upcoming elections.
And it looks like a high chance of getting the shit option as well.
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one/pre-order-xbox-one/disclaimer
[ame="
(Seriously, wtf is wrong with the youtube embedding... Its been busted ever since youtube changed the share options. I take out the s, or all the extra crap. still doesnt work)
I found one too!
[ame="
My favourite gif so far.
http://i1.wp.com/gameraudits.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/The-Ultimate-Xbox-One-Gif.gif?resize=40%2C40
So putting the blame on MS for that very sentence like his article did is fanboyism and sensationalism to me.
The blame is on MS because they designed their system to be dependent on everyone having a certain level of internet service when the reality is far from that. The fact is, they've built a system that requires infrastructure that is currently impractical as it is. If the roads are all made of asphalt, but your car can only drive on maglev, you're doing it wrong.
They have a PR problem though, and should ask Apple how to build closed overpriced internet-dependent hardware and still have people handing them money with a smile on their face.
I highly doubt they did. It's more likely they just didn't care because they only care about the consumers that have compatible connections. Perhaps you missed that MS comment about people without adequate connections should just get a 360? It looks very much that they just don't give a damn because they care more about control than customer satisfaction.
Apple products utilize an internet connection, but they don't stop working when the connection is lost. Steam even has an offline mode, though if you muck up your login file you're hosed until you can get online again or apply a crack.
Probably denotes which member of the team replied.
Italy vs. Japan, internet infrastructure wise, these numbers wouldn't make sense. One place where piracy is rampant and the law doesn't care vs. another where they actually go after you, again, another number that doesn't make sense.
They're planning on delaying they said? Again, that doesn't make sense, unless they need to plan something...something which is already done in a place like Russia?
Overall, it's clear MS is going after 'certain' infrastructures, they don't even actually care about the Speeds at this point, and have given up trying to PR manage this since as soon as they do, someone will shed some light on their latest lie.
I wouldn't be surprised if somewhere down the line, MS does the Intel thing, where they try and create entertainment bundle packages that you can buy on the cheap.
That's the only way you explain this stuff, the countries in the list are some of the top dogs when it comes to "licensing" stuff, so maybe MS is honestly just doing something different in all this, albeit in a real weird way.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/06/microsoft-defends-the-xbox-ones-licensing-used-game-policies/
Quick summary via reddit:
Pick any 9 friends on your friends list (I would assume there's criteria, probably that they have to have been on your list for 30+ days like giving a game away). You and those 9 friends only ever have to buy a single copy of each game between you all, and you can all play it, but only one at a time. So its like swapping a physical disk around with up to 9 other friends, but they can be anywhere in the world.
Personally this sounds very cool, especially for single-player games. My brother doesn't have the money to buy every major release, and we work different schedules, so while I'm at work, he can play my copy half-way across the country all without exchanging a disk.
Xbox one had the games, the line up I wanted but the price and the policies they have are literally FORCING me to buy a ps4 because of it, it just seems business suicide.
Mindfreeze - what happens to the online/server stats of the player that first purchased the game once it's been given away/sold?
The only worry I have is if MSFT would charge a one-time thing per person using it. If they don't directly, they could allow third-parties to do it, as both MSFT and Sony are allowing with used game restrictions.
FINALLY!!
There has been so much confusion and misinformation...
The whole family library thing is a great idea, that solves me and my brother out. Playing at the same time thing? Will have to see.
It's not just ^PC, there's also ^PS. Clearly, they're feeling the Personal Computer and PlayStation platforms are a step ^ up.
Still leaves questions.
- What are they going to do when the console is retired, are people going to be able to still play the games they bought?
- How much rights do the publishers have, what publishers are going to have what restrictions, it's a total cop out saying we wont stop you from "blank" but publishers can. Don't shift the blame onto someone else and stand up for customer rights, at list to some limit
- Are you going to improve sales and prices along with digital purchases? Microsoft isn't known for lowering their prices in the store on the 360, Sony has given away newer and more popular games for discounts and for free. Mircosoft is doing something similar, but with old titles, just until the One comes out. Their Arcade has always been a mess.
- How is the indie game and free to play game support going to be? So far it looks horrid.
- Is the cloud based computing actually going to do anything, PS4 and Xbox One says it does, games like TitanFall say they use it, but the same game is also being released on the Xbox 360.
Used Games: Once again, it is only through deals made with 'approved retailers'. So, they'll make a deal with Gamestop, so the publishers can get a cut. The concerns have been, who will pay for that cut? Obviously, Gamestop will pass it to the consumer, which will result in people no longer using Gamestop, thus killing the market. That's the very likely outcome.
Gamestop aside, what if I want to sell my games on Ebay (as I have many times)? This is NOT discussed, and appears to be an impossibility. Yard sales (where my kids have bought games before)?
To me, it seems like the source of the communities anger, is the corporation taking care of corporation. MS may not be taking a cut, but obviously they are trying to help the publishers, at the expense of the consumer. Oh, and Mom&Pops can just kiss off.
Renting Games:
Once again, through deals between big business, rentals may still be an option (this was the only thing new I saw on that link). Who's going to eat the fees that Gamefly will have to pay publishers (and you know they will). The consumers.
DRM:
That's a matter of choice, and internet access. Playing offline, if I have a disc, would be a good compromise, but the author speculates that as a solution. That's NOT how the system exists at the moment.
A GAME OF CIRCLES:
That was honestly one of the few positives I've had about the Xbone. This method of sharing was unexpected, and a nice option.
Giving away games:
Once again, no confusion there. Thirty days on your friends list. I should be able to disable the license, and hand it to someone. No need for a 30 day friendship.
The Kinect:
Yes, everyone saw that you can turn it off. Great. I still don't trust the systems security to prevent someone from turning it on. There has been a lot of focus about what MS will do, but I'm more concerned about home security. I don't want someone to see what is going on in my home (and i have no doubts it will become a possibility).
I understand why every Xbone is coming with an kinect, and I'm fine with that. I know some people want it excluded to make the system cheaper, but I already understood the need to have it included. If you don't, then publishers will never include it. If they KNOW it's available, then they'll develop for it.
The thing is, why does it HAVE to be connected? Shouldn't it be good enough for the publisher to know I OWN it? Let me unplug the damn thing if I don't want to use it. Not every game will make use of it (and I suspect a small percentage will ever make use of it).
There are reasons people are upset, and MS/Fanboys should stop treating these people as though they are tinfoil wearing, crazed, lunatics. Yeah, there are some that are uninformed, but most of us who have issues with the system, are not. If it was the only option, I would just go back to PC only again. It just so happens that Sony has a solid alternate option.
Shouldn't the publishers(and devs) get a cut of game rentals, though?
also:
I'm pretty sure they already do, if not rental companies would probably be illegal. They probably either pay an expensive license that allows them to rent the game or pay royalties on rentals.
Why? Why are games such a special case that they are the one exception to the second hand markets? Don't say it's because a used game is identical to a new game. That's no excuse. Quality of the goods at resale isn't relevant to why it can or can't be resold. Buying a used car vs a new one negates a sale of new cars just as much as a used game negates the sale of a new game. If I buy a 2010 Mustang used from a private seller, Ford lost an opportunity to sell me a new one and they certainly don't get a cut of the used sale.
There's nothing stopping a used car dealer from buying used cars that have been barely driven for a low price and selling the "like new" car for 5-10% less than the MSRP of a new car. However, here's the difference, the car owner has no incentive to resell his damn-near new car after a brief use because the car is worth keeping for much longer than a week or so, while most games offer no reason that the consumer would want to hang on to them until they lose significant resale value. Most games are pretty much disposable. You just play the game to completion and take it back to Gamestop to recover some of the cost and move on to the next one. If the game industry wants to weaken the used games market, they should be focusing on making games that people don't want to resell. User generated content is one such example. People don't like to let go of games they can mod and make their own personal experience.
Because they can.
Hehe.
Why should it be limited to a select few?
I don't know if it's like videos, but video stores pay 5 times as much for each video. That's why they use to charge so much to replace them, if you didn't return them.
The rules of digital mediums have completely changed and shifted copyright laws, ownership of material, and licencing.
And the very content creators are dictating what the rules of their content are. That's always been the case.
Yeah, but it's just plain stupid. They're just going to torpedo their own boat instead of just making games that people want to keep and replay.
I think the way Microsoft is doing it might be a bit too much, but comparing games to used cars just sounds stupid.
Games don't age inside the game, buttons don't just start to act weird, games doesn't get more buggy based on it's age, the customer of the used copy gets a 100% first hand experience.
and also the sale we get is the only income "for most times" we get of a game.
Also games is an experience, most finish it once then its done and finished, It's not something you need to get to work, someone buys a game then that one copy maybe gets bought and paid by 10 people, does that mean we should sell the game 10x the current price instead?
I'm more for a personal game type of system, with cheaper prices then today, more like steam.
But I'm all for finding ways around it, like selling a game cheap then charching monthly for multiplayer, seems weird that someone that didn't pay one cent to the makers are using servers that has to get paid for.
It's a game platform. Just a game platform. And look at how many wall of texts there are just to clarify what it does.
Maybe I'm spoiled by smart phone games. Finding games on google/apple, single click pay, automatic install, everything have become so easy and simple. And smart phones aren't even a gaming platform.
Do you realise the PS4 likely has all of the same restrictions?
The only thing Sony said was 'We will let the publishers manage how they do it'.
As a result, M$ lost the PR battle, and very likely the entire console war.
They never said that. They said it's up to the publishers/devs.
If a publisher wants their game to be always on, or have a DRM authentication, they can put it on.
If a studio wants to make a game that takes full advantage of the DISTRIBUTED CLOUD COMPUTING capabilities the PS4 has, then the developer can use them.