By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Microsoft: Valve’s Steam Box Approach Validates Ours With Xbox One

ListerOfSmeg on 28 September 2013
Zekkyou said:
ListerOfSmeg said:
I agree. Let's be honest. A good portion of the people that hated were never going to buy the xbox1 to begin with. Valve has pretty much the same DRM and notice how 24 hours later, the internet is not flooded with hate against them.
I actually prefer being able to switch between games without swapping out discs. Wii U is the first console I have owned in a long time because I can go all digital. I still love my PC. While I am typing this, I have youtube open, Rift running, Civ5 at the end of the turn and Rosetta stone waiting for me to come back. Now I know some of that has nothing to do with gaming but it helps me be able to multi task. Once you get use to not being tied down to disc or 1 program at a time, its hard to go back.

I will never own a MS console but I don't have any issues with their DRM policy and I welcome it.

Rest assured if Sony had announced it, the internets wouldn't have exploded. It would have been heralded as the next big thing in gaming. Instead people used it as a reason to hate and stopped the advancement on consoles in the process.

If Sony had announced it the internet would have exploded just as much P:

Steam can get away with the DRM because they are on a platform (PC) which people are unlikely to own without an internet connection. Steam is also not always on DRM, which is what people had the biggest problem with. I don't mind having to connect once when i log onto Steam and then going into offline mode, but having to have a connection at all times is bothersome. MS tried to rush the market rather than slowly transition over, which resulted in the backlash we have seen.

Also, you can go pretty much entirely digital on any console P: (except the Wii xD)



No they wouldnt have. Just look at PS+ as an example. Of course you and many other will try to justify it I am sure but it makes no difference. People hated on MS for and now love Sony for it.

I know many people with PCs with out internet. The only difference is they have no choice not to game because without internet you cannot use it for games on PC. How is that any different than what MS was going to do? Its not and its silly to try to say one is ok but the other is bad when they are pretty much the same service only MS was going to allow you to sell your games where Steam doesnt.

 Since when is once every 24 hours always on?



Around the Network
Osc89 on 28 September 2013
ListerOfSmeg said:
Osc89 said:
ListerOfSmeg said:
I agree. Let's be honest. A good portion of the people that hated were never going to buy the xbox1 to begin with. Valve has pretty much the same DRM and notice how 24 hours later, the internet is not flooded with hate against them.
I actually prefer being able to switch between games without swapping out discs. Wii U is the first console I have owned in a long time because I can go all digital. I still love my PC. While I am typing this, I have youtube open, Rift running, Civ5 at the end of the turn and Rosetta stone waiting for me to come back. Now I know some of that has nothing to do with gaming but it helps me be able to multi task. Once you get use to not being tied down to disc or 1 program at a time, its hard to go back.

I will never own a MS console but I don't have any issues with their DRM policy and I welcome it.

Rest assured if Sony had announced it, the internets wouldn't have exploded. It would have been heralded as the next big thing in gaming. Instead people used it as a reason to hate and stopped the advancement on consoles in the process.


That sums it up really. With every console this gen you can go all digital, but you don't have to. MS tried to force everyone to go all digital, but if someone wants that they can do it anyway. The only people who this affected were the people who actually prefer to buy retail, who obviously don't want this.

Thing is if you look at history people always fought advancement. When radio was invented book lovers fought it. When TV came along radio lovers fought it. When CDs came along record lovers hated it. It never has stopped advancement and never will though


In this case it has at least delayed it. The reaction has forced MS to roll back to the 360 arrangement. I think the main issue was they messed up the reveal, so instead of hearing the positives we got all the negatives before they could tell us why this system was better. The rumours of the "always on" stuff got so bad they had to confirm before they were ready to. This gave the hate a chance to build, killing the X1 image.



PSN: Osc89

NNID: Oscar89

Zekkyou on 28 September 2013
ListerOfSmeg said:
Zekkyou said:

If Sony had announced it the internet would have exploded just as much P:

Steam can get away with the DRM because they are on a platform (PC) which people are unlikely to own without an internet connection. Steam is also not always on DRM, which is what people had the biggest problem with. I don't mind having to connect once when i log onto Steam and then going into offline mode, but having to have a connection at all times is bothersome. MS tried to rush the market rather than slowly transition over, which resulted in the backlash we have seen.

Also, you can go pretty much entirely digital on any console P: (except the Wii xD)



No they wouldnt have. Just look at PS+ as an example. Of course you and many other will try to justify it I am sure but it makes no difference. People hated on MS for and now love Sony for it.

I know many people with PCs with out internet. The only difference is they have no choice not to game because without internet you cannot use it for games on PC. How is that any different than what MS was going to do? Its not and its silly to try to say one is ok but the other is bad when they are pretty much the same service only MS was going to allow you to sell your games where Steam doesnt.

 Since when is once every 24 hours always on?

You're delusional if you don't think the reaction would be the same if Sony did it (remember the PSN hack?). They got away with PS+ because it happened while everyone was focused on the DRM drama. Had they done it at a different time a lot more people would have been pissed (plenty of people here are annoyed about it). I have no reason to try and "justify it", i'm a PC gamer and never play online on consoles, i couldn't care less how much they charge for any online service.

You must live in a very different place to me then, because i can't think of anyone who has a PC without internet P: A PC without internet would be a weird way to spend your money (unless it was just a notebook or something), seeing as you wouldn't be able to download anything any software.. You'd have to find a shop that sells actual copies of software xD (can't use the internet to check where though, let the hunt begin! ;P).

You have to remember MS didn't announce half this stuff until later on. When they first announced the Xbone everyone thought it was always online and had no used games system at all. By the time they explained everything the damage was already done. It's there own fault for that god awful reveal. You can't just push a primarily retail market onto the internet in one well swoop and not expect the market to push back.

Remember when steam first launch? Everyone hated the shit out of it. It's because it's had several years to change and grow it's user base that the PC market doesn't mind it, yet even after all that many people are still vocal about their hate for it's DRM (after having no internet the first 3 weeks after moving homes, i can understand why).



Darth Tigris on 29 September 2013
Zekkyou said:
ListerOfSmeg said:
Zekkyou said:

If Sony had announced it the internet would have exploded just as much P:

Steam can get away with the DRM because they are on a platform (PC) which people are unlikely to own without an internet connection. Steam is also not always on DRM, which is what people had the biggest problem with. I don't mind having to connect once when i log onto Steam and then going into offline mode, but having to have a connection at all times is bothersome. MS tried to rush the market rather than slowly transition over, which resulted in the backlash we have seen.

Also, you can go pretty much entirely digital on any console P: (except the Wii xD)



No they wouldnt have. Just look at PS+ as an example. Of course you and many other will try to justify it I am sure but it makes no difference. People hated on MS for and now love Sony for it.

I know many people with PCs with out internet. The only difference is they have no choice not to game because without internet you cannot use it for games on PC. How is that any different than what MS was going to do? Its not and its silly to try to say one is ok but the other is bad when they are pretty much the same service only MS was going to allow you to sell your games where Steam doesnt.

 Since when is once every 24 hours always on?

You're delusional if you don't think the reaction would be the same if Sony did it (remember the PSN hack?). They got away with PS+ because it happened while everyone was focused on the DRM drama. Had they done it at a different time a lot more people would have been pissed (plenty of people here are annoyed about it). I have no reason to try and "justify it", i'm a PC gamer and never play online on consoles, i couldn't care less how much they charge for any online service.

You must live in a very different place to me then, because i can't think of anyone who has a PC without internet P: A PC without internet would be a weird way to spend your money (unless it was just a notebook or something), seeing as you wouldn't be able to download anything any software.. You'd have to find a shop that sells actual copies of software xD (can't use the internet to check where though, let the hunt begin! ;P).

You have to remember MS didn't announce half this stuff until later on. When they first announced the Xbone everyone thought it was always online and had no used games system at all. By the time they explained everything the damage was already done. It's there own fault for that god awful reveal. You can't just push a primarily retail market onto the internet in one well swoop and not expect the market to push back.

Remember when steam first launch? Everyone hated the shit out of it. It's because it's had several years to change and grow it's user base that the PC market doesn't mind it, yet even after all that many people are still vocal about their hate for it's DRM (after having no internet the first 3 weeks after moving homes, i can understand why).

Again, the problem was the leaks and rumors, not anything that MS announced.  They didn't address it (as they weren't prepared to talk about it yet) and people believed the worse.  Then they were forced to address it before they were ready and the message was all over the place.  

Leaks are really bad for the industry, for most industries in fact.  And leakers don't at all care about the damage.