| pbroy said: A lot of people are thinking so negatively about Microsoft's DRM. Instead of thinking outside of the box, they are calling for witch hunts. I do agree that MS doesn't know shit about explaining their stance. So now let's think outside of the box and bring the positive to what MS is doing. What Microsoft is doing is future proofing your game library. Making it so that next gen and beyond, you will retain your game library without having to repurchase them. Lets bring some light into the whole PSP and PSP Go fiasco. You bought a game for PSP. Sony releases the PSP Go which is digital only. Shit hit the fan when people found out that they couldn't convert their games over to PSP Go. You had to repurchase the digital version. Wouldn't it have been nice if Sony anticipated this from the start. Made a way so that if you bought a physical copy, you would automatically get a digital copy too? Enter Xbox One. Your physical copy is also your digital copy. Every game you buy will be added to your digital game collection, future proofing you for the digital age. For me, it wouldn't make sense to buy digital. Why buy it and have nothing physical to show for it, when I can buy a store copy and get it converted digitally for free? There have been many times when I've been relaxing on the couch, playing a game. Then decide to play another game, but I don't have the disc in. Makes me wish I bought the digital version. It's a pain having such a divided gaming experience on current consoles, where half of the games you can play instantly and half the games you need to get up and put a disc in. Microsoft's current system does have it's flaws with 24 hour check-in. They should have added a check disc, if no internet connection, verfication. So that all you would need to play offline is the disc in the drive. Sony can also future proof themselves if they choose. The simplest way being to add a digital voucher to every copy. This would also help with making people to want to buy a new copy, where the voucher hasn't been used. |
Several things:
* You do realize there is a risk of thinking "outside the box" in defense of a company, when this box you are outside of may end up being a box that doesn't even contain what the company you are defending is doing.
* Considering that One does NOT play 360 games, what guarantee do you have that Microsoft is going to enable the ONE content to be playable in the future? As I have seen this generation unfold, and where we are now, Don Mattrick of Microsoft said backwards compatibility is "very backwards", and companies have repackaged and resold old content. Sony even did this, and you get people on here cheering it on, saying it is awesome.
* Companies make NOTHING off of enable people to play their old content. They just end up allowing it so they don't get ticked off too soon. So, unless you go with there being a library you pay an ongoing fee to access, it does NO financial good for a company to be able to allow you to keep content between generations.
In short, what I am seeing is you are dealing in a case of rationalizing of wishful thinking and trying to persuade others to agree with you on this.
And futureproofing? I would say it is like waterproofing. In both cases, what is the first sylable of the proof word is what is prevented.
