Machiavellian said:
I am actually interest to understand what was unethical about MS pre-release plans. Are you taking about the DRM part. If so could you explain what was unethical about it. |
It is really just my speculation as they never actually went forward with the plans due to the 180. IMO, there were several things on the table that did not scream ethically sound. The policies for always online and to check in once every 24 hours were basically making the console largely unuseable in countries / areas with terrible and unreliable internet connectivity which is relatively common and something people take for granted, yet they were certainly planning on selling it there anyway. (South America, Eastern Europe, Southern Asia etc.) I also felt the want to limit how previously bought games could be accessed was bad. MS was basically saying that all armed servicepersons would not be able to game on their XBox1 at sea, or deployed to remote locations with no or limited internet, which is hugely popular with 360 and those folks, and let's face it if you live that stressed a life you deserve to play the new consoles just like everyone else. Serious questions about privacy also went unanswered regarding always on Kinect despite ongoing NSA headlines.
Also there was the whole paying youtube creators to promote X1 but making them unable to disclose they were being paid or say anything bad about the console which many claim violates FTC rules.
None of these things are illegal but I find them leaning towards unethical. All that being said I did buy an X1 after getting a PS4 myself anyways, as I don't hold grudges towards companies or people who make the right decisions going forward. While some may seem like not that big of a deal, it's important to look at them from the mindset of an uninformed average consumer.








