kitler53 said:
"magine a family where a Dad and his two sons want to play Halo against each other. With the Xbox One, they would only need one copy of Halo, now with the changed rules, they need to buy three."
confirmed false. he misunderstands what MS said.
"Because every single game, physical or digital, would be tied to an account, publishers couldcreate a hub to sell and resell the games digitally"
nothing is preventing that from still happening. this is in no way tied the the current or previous policy.
"YOU: New games could then be cheaper. Why? Publishers KNOW that they will not make money on resold games, so they charge more to you, the first buyer."
a point completely and utter obliterated by his incorrect notion of how game sharing worked in top quote and further nullified from MS's official statement that new games cost $60.
"You also would have started getting a better return on your “used” games—because a license does not have to be resold at a diminished rate."
if publishers get a cut of used game sales someone is paying for it. directly or indirectly the value to the consumer would be diminished.
"There is something ironic about people going online to complain about the 24-hr check on the Xbox One. "
there is nothing ironic in standing up for my consumer rights.
|
Im not going to argue these points but make a single point...
We don't know where this new path Microsoft was going to lead to. For people that want their disks and to stay with the current status quo, there was the awesome PS4.
Xbox One was doing something different. Right now we have 2 consoles with downright identical components that work exactly the same and will have 90% of the same gaming library.
We lost a choice as consumers and gaming industry lost a possible path that may be the better way.
For now at least...I see this coming back in a few years.
