Popular Post Patticus Posted June 7, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted June 7, 2013 This article deserves its own thread. It is a must-read for any non-sheep who care about their rights: Microsoft kills game ownership and expects us to smileLast time they shipped a console that didn't work by accident. Here's one that doesn't work on purpose. By Tom Bramwell Published Friday, 7 June 2013 Almost exactly a year ago, at the end of an E3 press conference in which Microsoft heralded fitness software, Kinect, Internet Explorer, Bing and dying action games as the future of entertainment, I wrote that anyone who has paid attention to Microsoft's business over the years should not be surprised by its apparent lack of self-awareness. "If we are entertained by what Microsoft chooses to do for its own gain," I suggested, "then that is simply a happy coincidence." Guess what? The coincidence is over. The fact that Microsoft's policies governing game ownership, sharing and privacy are not surprising does not make them any less devastating to consumer rights, should they be formally adopted and become a standard. They sacrifice our freedom to own and trade games for no other reason than corporate self-interest. To save you skimming large tracts of condescending prose about how much Microsoft loves and respects you as a human wallet, here is a summary: You do not own the games you buy. You license them. Discs are only used to install and then license games and do not imply ownership. People can play games installed on your console whether you're logged in or not. 10 people can be authorised to play these games on a different Xbox One via the cloud, but not at the same time, similar to iTunes authorised devices. Publishers decide whether you can trade in your games and may charge for this. Publishers decide whether you can give a game you own to someone for free, and this only works if they have been on your friends list for 30 days. Your account allows you to play the games you license on any console. Your Xbox One must connect to the internet every 24 hours to keep playing games. When playing on another Xbox One with your account, this is reduced to one hour. Live TV, Blu-ray and DVD movies are exempt from these internet requirements. Loaning and renting games will not be possible at launch, but Microsoft is "exploring the possibilities". Microsoft may change these policies or discontinue them at any point. There is also a promise that Microsoft Studios' games will all allow you to trade them in and give them away for free, bringing a whole new emphasis to the expression, "It's the least we could do!" The only positive thing in the whole document is confirmation that you can turn off Kinect and its data will never be uploaded without your permission. Let us all applaud Microsoft's "OK, fine!" decision not to intrude on our privacy. The suggestion that these changes to game ownership have been taken to combat piracy or limit the damage that used game sales do to the primary market do not stand up to much scrutiny - at our most charitable, we can say that the data is merely inconclusive, but analysis of other industries that have dealt with these issues for much longer is pretty clear that the overall benefits at least balance out the risks of allowing piracy and used markets to flourish. The more likely reason for this unprecedented new attitude to console game ownership and sharing is that Microsoft wants to turn its game business into the equivalent of iTunes. The signs are already there in the merger of Xbox, Windows and Windows Phone app stores and the decision to run Xbox games off a Virtual Machine 'game OS' within Xbox One, which could easily be included in new hardware derived from the same architectural roadmap. This is a neat business way of getting everything to line up. It is done in service to Microsoft's corporate objectives. It is not even done with any particular malice towards you and I. Nevertheless, it signals the most significant divergence to date of Microsoft's goals for the Xbox business from our own. It also puts an unspecified expiry date on every Xbox One game ever made and gives you no control over it. Yes, at a point in time where consoles are becoming less relevant, Microsoft's solution is to make them less permanent. The addition of cloud gaming functions, the avoidance of DVD or Blu-ray disc access times, the convenience of global access - these are the rewards we are being offered for our complicity in Microsoft's decision to eradicate the concept of console game ownership. They are not good enough and very little ever will be. Digital marketplaces like Netflix, iTunes and the present Xbox Live are a good thing, but they should be additive. They allow us to form a different kind of relationship with art - a more convenient, expansive and often cheaper one that includes better tools for exploration beyond the borders of our current interest. We should and I do celebrate these things. But a critical reason that I accept them is that I still have the option to own an untouchable physical copy of the things I find there as well. You can say this is no worse than what Steam does, you can say that it is no worse than what a lot of 'content' companies do, and those statements are true, but they do not engage with the most important detail of this news, which is what we are being told to give up in exchange for this new arrangement: the opportunity to form tangible, lasting relationships with art that matters to us. If you never had that, then why would you miss it? But we do. And soon we won't.Collectors will still be able to buy Xbox One games on disc, of course, and we may line them up happily on our shelves so that our friends and families can admire our dedication and taste forever more. But under Microsoft's new rules, we are no longer building a collection of games - we are building a collection of loans that may be recalled from us at any time, leaving us with nothing but distant memories. And that loss will be simple, instant and complete. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-06-07-microsoft-kills-game-ownership-and-expects-us-to-smile Bramwell has some damn refreshing balls, I'll give him that! It's going to be interesting to see over the coming months which publications and/or writers of Xbox One appraisals are on the Microsoft payroll (e.g. any journalist defending this shit), and which aren't. This isn't the only article of its kind out there right now, either; neither Forbes, Metro's GameCentral nor NowGamer seem particularly impressed (Metro's GC gave it both barrels), but I shall leave those articles for others to read and disseminate at their leisure. 30 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarah Jane Smith Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 It'll never become an industry standard because no one is stupid enough to support this crap. Microsoft is being quite idiotic and just lost the last bit of respect I had for them. I won't be wasting money on the "console" and will be telling everyone I know to stay away from it as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaos Warp Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 (edited) And this is why Microsoft represents a threat to gaming right now (if this thing sells and other companies follow suite next gen) and no one in their right mind should buy this piece of utter shit. Edited June 7, 2013 by Chaos Warp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ming Ming Hatsune Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 This is gonna be another good discussion. <3 But it's like...we know already. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabz Girl Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Awesome article. There should definitely be more like this, and less of those that are obviously kissing Microsoft's ass. >_> 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JezMM Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 (edited) I think the biggest difference between this and say Steam, or PSO Go, is intent. Xbox One is a home game console, and it is selling physical discs. They are using a different set of rules on consumers who will be expecting the norm. When I purchase a Steam game, I do so KNOWING that there is no refund or giving it back. People who buy physical discs will be assuming that there is, and Microsoft probably know this very well, I'd be genuinely surprised if they go out of their way to warn consumers of the limitations before purchase. Though it's also a lot easier to defend Steam when it doesn't require an internet connection every 24 hours to keep playing. Some games started kicking up a fuss a bit when I tried doing particular things where it usually expects an internet connection (for example forcing L4D into versus mode so I could play against bots), but I was able to play pretty much all my installed games to my heart's content after a move where I had no internet for a whole month. Steam also doesn't plaster you with adverts every 10 seconds. Edited June 7, 2013 by JezMM 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperLink Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Sterling wrote a similar article Good to see game journalists are actually being journalists rather than sensationalising social issues in games *coughkotakucough* 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tara Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 I would personally like to thank whatever deity of whatever religion made the stars align so that Sega partnered with Nintendo for the new Sonic game and not Microsoft. I completely and wholeheartedly disagree with anyone who attempts to defend or otherwise justify what Microsoft is doing by saying that these practices are anything like what Steam is doing. In practice, yes, but in delivery, no. Steam is an online client. An online client being primarily online makes sense. The only hardware I need to purchase for Steam is a computer, which is something most of us have anyway. I didn't buy a computer specifically for Steam. I bought a computer because a computer has a variety of uses, but Steam was a great additive. The Xbox One on the other hand is, first and foremost, a game console with little in the way of useful features aside from gaming. Oh, wait, nevermind! I can watch live TV on Xbox! That was something I could never do without it... oh wait! Secondly, as my own Steam history would dictate, I don't have to log in to Steam everyday to keep my games. I very rarely log in to Steam, but when I do, I can be certain the games I spent my hard-earned cash on will still be there until otherwise specified. (Which usually translates out to "forever" but things do happen; Enemy Territory: Quake Wars comes to mind) Hell, I don't even have to have the games installed on any computer to own them. Out of the 25 games I have purchased through Steam, I only have five installed on my PC right now and I plan on uninstalling them as soon as I beat them. Some of them haven't even been touched since 2011, but if I decided one day, "Hey, I haven't played L4D in awhile, I think I'll install that!" I know I won't be charged for it at least. I may have to wait a million years to download an update I didn't even want, but at least it's a free update. Third, yes, Steam discourages people from sharing games and sharing accounts. (It's a bannable offense) But see, here's the thing. They are ONLY available online. They do not sell retail discs in the same manner that Microsoft does. Sharing accounts in that case literally has no downsides because it's just as good as owning the game. If Valve allowed people to share accounts on Steam, they would literally make no money. However, there are plenty of advantages to buying a console game for yourself. For one, you don't have to ask permission to do things with it because now you're the owner. Now, you get to save as many files as you want. Now you get to add as many mods and DLC as you want. You're in control. In addition, it means you can play the game at your own leisure in the comfort of your own home and you won't feel obligated to return it. Microsoft essentially takes away that luxury, which is a good way to discourage sales. No matter awesome and mighty your marketing, first-hand experience is still the best publicity. That's the very reason that rental stores were established in the first place. Fourth, you can play your games on any compatible computer for as long as you want without any repercussions. Say my computer dies but luckily I have a friend that is kind enough to let me use his until I get a new one. I can just install Steam and connect to Steam Cloud. No repercussions in the slightest. (Note, I have not actually done this, so I may be mistaken, but everyone I know seems to say that it works like that) I'm not limited on how often or for how long I play. The only problem is that, depending on how new the game and rather or not it makes use of Steam Cloud, is that all my mods and save files may not be on the other computer, but you can't fault Steam for that. Microsoft is essentially making a system based on penalties and infractions, and you know... that doesn't sound very entertaining. It's like they're punishing you for being interested. If this unit fails to sale, I won't be at all surprised... but then, I also won't be surprised if it's a smashing success. Only time will tell, I suppose. 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candescence Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Akito pretty much simply nailed it. Once again, this shortsighted horseshit is what is holding gaming back as a medium that can have its works properly preserved for future generations. I do NOT trust Microsoft to care about the longevity of its console and games, unlike Valve, who have outright promised to ensure that Steam games will still work if Steam ever shuts down. How can we hope to preserve the history of gaming if greedy fucking suits would rather just make more fucking money over actually considering the long-term health of the medium. All to combat the "problems" of piracy and used games. Except the former can't be solved with DRM, and trying to combat either will do absolutely jack fucking shit to solve the problems the industry has right now. The industry is plagued by rampant game development mismanagement and inefficiency, overbloated budgets, catering to the 'dudebros' in an utterly futile attempt to get the Call of Duty audience (who, guess what, already has Call of fucking Duty), little-to-no "medium budget" titles available due to pressure to make things "big, better and prettier", ignoring audiences who want genres and subgenres that are sorely lacking representation, and too many game developers who are actually frustrated film directors who should have no business developing a game. Those aren't caused by piracy or used games. That's the industry's problem, and they're too stuck up their asses to acknowledge it. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crash Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 None of us will support this shit so it won't go anyway. However, I know that some people in my school are going to get one because Microsoft brainwashed them and they can't break free they think Xbox is the best thing ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ming Ming Hatsune Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 That's the annoying thing. Most Xbox/CoD/Halo fans will buy the console regardless of the DRM. They no idea what's going to hit them though and they deserve it because they couldn't do a bit of research on this console. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MegasonicZX Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 It will be a sad day when gaming becomes a business transaction rather than actual gaming cause that's pretty much what im getting from this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tara Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 That's the annoying thing. Most Xbox/CoD/Halo fans will buy the console regardless of the DRM. They no idea what's going to hit them though and they deserve it because they couldn't do a bit of research on this console. To be fair, I wouldn't say they totally deserve it. Imagine you're not that big of a gamer, like me, but you do enjoy CoD or Halo, not like me. The past two generation of consoles have had plenty of hardships for sure, but to someone who only likes the very occasional game, said news might not transfer nearly as fast as to someone who is really into gaming. There's no reason it would cross someone's mind to do research on the various flaws of a console when you've come to expect much of the same. While I agree with you that every purchase you make should be an informed one, research typically demands priority and as such, someone who sees the console as less of a priority might not bother with as much research if any at all. I guess you could compare it to buying milk. When I'm buying milk, the only thing I look for is the expiration date and that it's whole milk and not 2%. If there was a sort of milk controversy (lol, milk controversy) and my local grocery store had yet to get word of the recall, I wouldn't think to go online and see if there was some kind of poisoning in the milk. However, there might be people who work in the field of dairy... distribution (I guess?) and be keenly aware of the milk crisis (hehe, milk crisis) long before I even set foot in the grocery store. You can't put too much blame on them for buying something more out of habit than out of dedication. Also, you have to take into account the parents and grandparents who will undoubtedly buy them for their children and grandchildren without thinking. So yes, I agree that when buying something like a console, you should be well-informed beforehand, but there are many reasons why someone might buy it, oblivious to all the cons that come with it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrownSlayer’s Shadow Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 The industry is plagued by rampant game development mismanagement and inefficiency, overbloated budgets, catering to the 'dudebros' in an utterly futile attempt to get the Call of Duty audience (who, guess what, already has Call of fucking Duty), little-to-no "medium budget" titles available due to pressure to make things "big, better and prettier", ignoring audiences who want genres and subgenres that are sorely lacking representation, and too many game developers who are actually frustrated film directors who should have no business developing a game. Those aren't caused by piracy or used games. That's the industry's problem, and they're too stuck up their asses to acknowledge it. And to think I was about to join this industry when I graduated... This is all the more reason why, despite my Computer Science degree, that I'm going to take up becoming a writer and novelist as my main career instead. I never thought I would lose so much faith in the industry, and I'm sure there are many people who have terrific game concepts that will hardly ever get the chance to be realized because of this mess. Although I think I can still take up indie gaming if I ever wanted to take a shot at it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solkia Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 I'd go for indie gaming. The industry could use more indies with a passion for gaming. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patticus Posted June 7, 2013 Author Share Posted June 7, 2013 There were some rumors going around not so long ago, which I think that I may have heard on the GiantBombcast, that Phil Harrison is actually dead set against the X1's authentication idea, that he had fought to extend the original three minute window, and deliberately spoke out about the 24hr policy early to provoke a reaction and prove his point. It's just a rumor though, so who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tara Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 (edited) There were some rumors going around not so long ago, which I think that I may have heard on the GiantBombcast, that Phil Harrison is actually dead set against the X1's authentication idea, that he had fought to extend the original three minute window, and deliberately spoke out about the 24hr policy early to provoke a reaction and prove his point. It's just a rumor though, so who knows? I want to believe that there were plenty of people who saw the obvious flaws in the system but for one reason or the next their voices went completely unheard. I refuse to believe that an entire development and marketing team could look at this kind of proposal and say "Yeah, that sounds good!" But stranger things have happened, I suppose. (The Virtual Boy existed) Edited June 7, 2013 by Akito Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroMIX Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Because people are bringing up Steam as a point of comparison, I will, whole-heartedly, concede that on the same scale, Xbone and Steam are at completely opposite ends, but I'd rather not be supporting anyone on that scale at all if I can help it. I'd much rather gaming move towards a more DRM-free system, especially for digital games. When I buy from services like GOG I feel vindicated, but many other current systems make me feel villainous, no matter now pleasant they might be. I just want to feel like I own the things I purchase and not be punished for doing so. I'm extremely concerned for what the future might hold, especially if MS are successful with their new DRM features. The day that Nintendo follows suit is probably the day that I give up gaming for good, but I sincerely hope that they won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now