[trustn0!]

http://www.computera...e-for-xbox-one/

Quote

Individual games will be tied to Xbox Live accounts, Microsoft said, meaning that the software giant can detect whether a game has been sold to a retailer and repurchased, or handed from one friend to another. In such instances, the second user must pay a fee.

"On the new Xbox, all game discs are installed to the HDD to play," a Microsoft representative told Wired.

The company added that, once discs are installed on the hard drive, games can be played without a disc being in the tray.

The Wired article then elaborates: "What follows naturally from this is that each disc would have to be tied to a unique Xbox Live account, else you could take a single disc and pass it between everyone you know and copy the game over and over. Since this is clearly not going to happen, each disc must then only install for a single owner."

It added: "Microsoft did say that if a disc was used with a second account, that owner would be given the option to pay a fee and install the game from the disc, which would then mean that the new account would also own the game and could play it without the disc."

Microsoft did not disclose what the second-user fee would amount too, and did not clarify further on the matter.

The article claims that there is no sweeping 'always-online' requirement for future Xbox One games.

Update:

Quote

On second hand games: you buy disc, it installs, you play from HD. Sell disc, it installs to new console and deactivates your install.

You have to be fucking kidding,

[Steveeeie]

trustn0!, on 21 May 2013 - 11:38 AM, said:

http://www.computera...e-for-xbox-one/





You have to be fucking kidding,

I'm not really that bothered by this, I primarily play games through steam on the pc, this is no different.

[Mikko]

Yeah this is pretty much considered a standard if you're a PC user these days.

[Inspector Lagomorf]

I'm not bothered either. This is the natural evolution of DRM.

[Kathy]

Also, online is required.

Quote

Q: Does Xbox One require an “always on” Internet connection?
A: No, it does not have to be always connected, but Xbox One does require a connection to the Internet.

I'm out.

[Steveeeie]

Cathy, on 21 May 2013 - 12:15 PM, said:

Also, online is required.

I'm out.

Agreed.

My internet is ultra pants, and is not going to get upgraded any time soon :/

[trustn0!]

Update:

Quote

On second hand games: you buy disc, it installs, you play from HD. Sell disc, it installs to new console and deactivates your install.

[Steveeeie]

trustn0!, on 21 May 2013 - 12:24 PM, said:

Update:

Its better than what the current pc user is faced with. god I wish I could give my sim city away.

[Kathy]

Steveeeie, on 21 May 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

My internet is ultra pants, and is not going to get upgraded any time soon :/

My internet is fine, but I don't like the requirement. It shouldn't be needed to play a single player game. But since they're doing this for control I'm not going to be a part of that.

Besides, yeah, the internet could be down. And I assume you would definitely need it when turning on console.

Quote

Its better than what the current pc user is faced with. god I wish I could give my sim city away.

I'm pretty sure MS is making this mandatory. PC is more flexible in that regard. And why did you pre-order Sim City?

Btw, recent EA announcement about doing away with Online Passes was probably associated with this.

[ReaperMan]

I hope the next generation of consoles fail.

[Kathy]

Forceful slashing of used games market might make it happen.

[Sangman]

Cathy, on 21 May 2013 - 12:15 PM, said:

Quote

Q: Does Xbox One require an “always on” Internet connection?
A: No, it does not have to be always connected, but Xbox One does require a connection to the Internet.

Wait what did I just read? "It doesn't have to be connected but it does require a connection". HUH? For first time activation purposes or something?

Anyway I saw the reveal and I'm not too interested in this. It's mostly stuff about watching TV which is pretty pointless.

[ReaperMan]

I find it funny that it looks like a VCR. Maybe a 3DO.

[Hank]

I had a shitty day, this topic does not help.
Fuck Microsoft, Fuck DRM, fuck them all, EA, Steam,
I have like 78 games, I am 54 years old, this will have to do.
Did I say fuck them all? If not, let me be very clear, fuck them all.

[ReaperMan]

^ This

[Kathy]

Pretty much. The only reason people really like and use Steam is because despite online DRM it has lots of advantages and cheap prices(which makes it somewhat okay to essentially rent games). Xbox1 will have the drm part, not the cheap prices, but all the control. Also, TV. Yeah.

[Tetsuo]

I have sort of an issue with the assertion that one is "renting" games from Steam. Renting to me implies that after a certain time one has to send their games back either because of a time limit (traditional rental) or so other titles can be sent to them (netflix) or the rights to the rented files expire (online rental such as movies rented on itunes). With Steam you download them and have them indefinitely as long as you want while at the same time being able to download more without having to deactivate or "send back" other games in your library... and can download them as many times as you want. The same as if you installed them from physical media only you installed them from the cloud.. the only difference is having to log into steam first... There's also no fees for continued use after a period of time and no subscription fees.

I don't expect anyone here to listen to me or even agree but there's my "two cents". I have to wonder how exactly is it renting?

[Fox]

Because Steam can deactivate your account for whatever reason they feel.

[Paul B]

Nothing has really changed in the software industry in terms of the EULA (licensing agreement). This guy is basically pissed off that he can't pirate video games like that was legal at one point? The fact is when you purchase a software video game you don't purchase it to own the rights to do what you want with it. You purchase it for the right to play the game, not to make copies of the game, resell it or to lend it to other people. This has always been illegal in Microsoft's licensing models and most companies licensing models. The Software is licensed, not sold. The fact he wasn't abidding by the license agreement before will now ensure he has to agree to Microsoft's terms and conditions even more. It was kind of painful watching this 21 minute video. Grr!

I am not a console gamer, but the one thing that would piss me off is the lack of backwards compatilibity or if they made the XBOX 1 only accessable to online play and not offline play.

If there is anything about Microsoft that pisses me off it would be: They come out with a stellar product something that kicks ass then over time they basically rape the product until all those features you rely on and expect are no longer there and you find out after the fact you have to pay extra for those "Features"
that you use to get previously for free. It's like they do it to get your hopes up then when everyones onboard they remove features so they can make more money by bundling them in other separate paid applications. It is such a money driven industry and it's not about the consumer its about how much money they can get their hands on.

[Tetsuo]

Fox, on 21 May 2013 - 08:54 PM, said:

Because Steam can deactivate your account for whatever reason they feel.

OK, but how many times does this happen on a daily basis? Does a person over at valve sit there and say.. "I think I'm going to fuck with a bunch of our customers today and deactivate their accounts for no reason"?

[Jimmy]

>2013
>Still playing consoles even though they're just shitty computers at this point
>lolwut

[ReaperMan]

Jimmy, on 21 May 2013 - 09:32 PM, said:

>2013
>Still playing consoles even though they're just shitty computers at this point
>lolwut

You filthy troll!

[Fox]

Tetsuo, on 21 May 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:

OK, but how many times does this happen on a daily basis? Does a person over at valve sit there and say.. "I think I'm going to fuck with a bunch of our customers today and deactivate their accounts for no reason"?

I don't think you can determine at which frequency it becomes a matter. But for example, if you own an apartment you don't expect the manager to knock at your door and say "I suspect you are doing something I don't like, so you are banned of this building." The thing is that you "own" your apartment not because it's unlikely that he would do that, but because he couldn't possible do that.

[Lunick]

Fox, on 22 May 2013 - 12:17 AM, said:

I don't think you can determine at which frequency it becomes a matter. But for example, if you own an apartment you don't expect the manager to knock at your door and say "I suspect you are doing something I don't like, so you are banned of this building." The thing is that you "own" your apartment not because it's unlikely that he would do that, but because he couldn't possible do that.

I actually imagine this happens...

[Tetsuo]

Micky C, on 22 May 2013 - 12:21 AM, said:

I actually imagine this happens...

I agree... and also I'd go out on a limb and say no one "owns" their apartments... as soon as you stop paying your monthly fee (paying rent) then you are given notice and then ultimately evicted. Hell, many people don't even own their houses (the bank does) and similar things happen to them. On the other hand... no I don't expect a landlord to evict me for no reason.... on the same token I don't expect Valve to deactivate my Steam account for no reason either. Unless I really did do something publicly visible and shady to give probable cause. But on the other hand we don't have to pay a monthly fee to Valve there's no paying Steam rent.

[Inspector Lagomorf]

Fox, on 22 May 2013 - 12:17 AM, said:

I don't think you can determine at which frequency it becomes a matter. But for example, if you own an apartment you don't expect the manager to knock at your door and say "I suspect you are doing something I don't like, so you are banned of this building." The thing is that you "own" your apartment not because it's unlikely that he would do that, but because he couldn't possible do that.

If you have a written contract, everything that the manager can and cannot do is stipulated in that contract. If you don't have a contract, you have no leg to stand on. Many people often do verbal month-to-month leases, and during that time, yes, the manager can simply toss said residents out on their ear whenever they damn well please.

You sign (without reading it, most likely) a boilerplate EULA every time you install a game. Legally, you do not own the game, and if the game publishers were to take you to court they would win on that fact alone. You merely own the right to play it. Up until recently, people who distribute or modify games have relied on the fact that publishers do not always have the capacity to enforce their legal powers.

[MusicallyInspired]

Its a good thing I've abandoned consoles already. I would never support this crap.

[Fox]

Tetsuo, on 22 May 2013 - 03:35 AM, said:

I agree... and also I'd go out on a limb and say no one "owns" their apartments... as soon as you stop paying your monthly fee (paying rent) then you are given notice and then ultimately evicted.

People don't buy apartments where you live?

Tetsuo, on 22 May 2013 - 03:35 AM, said:

On the other hand... no I don't expect a landlord to evict me for no reason.... on the same token I don't expect Valve to deactivate my Steam account for no reason either. Unless I really did do something publicly visible and shady to give probable cause.

But it is well know that it happens, the Steam landlord simply kick people of their homes for no reason. But it is not a matter of how many times that happens, but that it is possible to happen, meaning that you don't own the game, someone else owns it and allows you to play his game.

[MusicallyInspired]

Not on GOG. No drm means you own it. It's even clearly stated in their faq.

[ReaperMan]

^
Thats why we love them.