absolutely not...I would brace MS with open arms...though I'd still play my Vita :p

Nope, and I would have preferred if the positions were switched cause I was really hoping I could stick with Microsoft for another generation. But now I will only get the Xbox One when it becomes much cheaper in 4-5 years and that is just for Halo. For now I plan to get a PS4.

"mtu9356 4 hours ago





ListerOfSmeg said:
"chapset 16 minutes ago




If Sony did it I would be all for it, am sick and tired of owning my games it complicate things so much, having the option to resell, being forced to look at their resell value it's so freaking hard. Why own when you can rent for a long period of time."

Can always tell a Sony gamer.... LMAO.. You must not know you have never owned a game. Open the instruction manual and read the back of it on ANY game going back to the Atari 2600. You are buying the rights to play the game. It's always been that way regardless of what you think you may know. Companies never have and never will sell software. They sale a license to use that software. If they sold you the actual software you could do anything you wanted with it, even rewrite it and resale it.lol

Anywho, OT. Sony fans would be okay with it. Just like they were made about used games til Sony announced the exact same thing be left up to 3rd parties. Sony fans have not only done a complete 180 on used games now, they are actually making excuses for Sony. as if 3rd parties were forcing this on Sony and they unlike Nintendo had no choice but to accept it.
History has proven that Sony fans are always against something til its on their console then its beyond anything offered elsewhere.

Gamers have always owned the disc and the ability to do what they please with it. Fine print on a manual is meaningless in this reguard.

Not 100% sure but I believe I read somewhere that its legal to create backups of games you have purchased.

Unlike what you think I will not support Sony if they have drm similar to Microsoft's. They, like Microsoft, need to learn not to bite the hand that feeds them.


I don't understand people who would readily give up the right to buy/sell used games. We've had that right for decades. The days of being able to just pop a disk/cartrige in and play is gone and some seem to be fine with that, its kinda sad."

Yes you own the disc but not the software on it. You can claim the EULA is meaningless but it isn't. As a PC gamer the system MS is introducing is very similar only it gives you the option of reselling while the current PC market doesn't.
You are also allowed to make one back up of any medie you own be it movies, games, etc. Again though that does not give you the right to the movie.

Just because I buy a DVD of Star Wars, I don't suddenly get the rights to Star Wars to edit, alter and rerelease that movie and make money on it. That is why you do not own the actually software. ANother example. You buy a used car. Fix it up and then resale it and make money. Without laws in place to stop them, developers could actually do that too with software, which is again why you don't own it.

IN the Atari 2600 days I could take me Atari games and play them on my cousin colleco vision. Why don't we have that today? Because consoles in and of themselves are a form of DRM. Even though all but one of the next gen consoles is x86 based, I wont be able to just buy the PC version and play it on a PS4 or X1. People don't complain at all about that today though.

And that's where their thinking, as well as those who agree with it, is flawed.  With piracy, the publisher sees no payment whatsoever if thousands, even millions, pirate the game.  With used games, there has to be the initial purchase of a game for there to even be a used copy.  And that game will only realistically change hands a limited amount of times.  I would imagine a good estimate would be 2-3 times per copy.  Also, considering the original purchaser is a gamer, he is very likely to use the money he made off the sale to purchase another game.  The 2nd buyer is also more likely to purchase DLC for the game than the guy who just wanted to get rid of it after playing it, whatever the reason. 

So, what happens when you block, or make it much harder to purchase, used games?  The original owner is stuck with every game he buys.  This means he is going to be much more careful in his purchases, which will decrease impulse game sales.  This also means that many gamers who may have purchased the used game will not be purchasing any DLC for the game, hence a loss in possible revenue.  In the end, blocking used games will only hurt the industry, not help it.

You're absolutely right that you can buy physical discs or books that you can lend and sell freely, and I while I don't have a problem with the X1 requiring an internet connection, I would certainly like to see its online restrictions relaxed (for example, I'd like to see a renting system put in place so that Gamefly can stock X1 games.  Also, I'd like the time allowed between verifications extended to several days, if not a whole week).  As for the price of books and songs, it certainly does make restrictions on Kindle or iTunes more palatable for people, but it isn't really relevant to the discussion of consumer rights.  If Apple and Kindle get a pass on not allowing you to sell or trade digital books and songs as freely as you can with physical versions just because they don't cost much, then by that logic Microsoft should get a pass on its restrictions if they start offering huge sales on Xbox One games (and for the record, there ARE already some great deals to be had on Xbox Live; just recently I picked up a digital copy of Alan Wake off of the Marketplace for $5, when the standard price is $30!).

The same logic applies to Steam sales. You're right that the great sales on Steam help make the DRM more palatable for customers, and I'm hoping that Microsoft and publishers will take advantage of the Xbox Live as a digital platform to introduce plenty of sales for Xbox One.  But using Steam sales as a justification passes by the concerns surrounding consumer rights.  Steam gets a pass on allegedly violating consumer rights and on implementing awful, no good, must be defeated DRM because it allows games to be cheaper.  By that logic, if Microsoft offers lots of huge deals on Xbox One games, they should be given a pass on DRM as well.

My point in bringing up Steam, iTunes, and Kindle is that none of these services allow you to own the products you get licences for, all of them have various restrictions, and yet despite the fact that there are other places to get the same products with less restrictions, these services still thrive and are not considered by most people to be a grave threat to their respective industries.  The best we can tell, Sony will not mandate online requirements for all games or restrictions on selling, loaning, or giving away your games like Microsoft has (though the latest rumor we heard about the PS4 was that Sony would let publishers do exactly that with their own, individual games if they want), which means that you WILL be able to find digital and physical versions of console games without any DRM, just as you can find digital and physical versions of PC games (which includes most console games) without DRM.  Xbox and Playstation and Nintendo and and Steam and GOG: all are platforms that offer games with varying amounts of DRM, or no DRM at all (some of them just have dedicated hardware which can only access their own platform; interestingly enough, the Steambox is likely to be just that for Valve, though of course you will still probably be able to just use a PC).  All of them can coexist, just as bookstores and CD stores coexist with Kindle and iTunes.

Well, they can coexist until the all-digital age arrives, anyway.  My hope is that by the time that arrives, publishers and platform-holders will have learned enough through processes like what Steam has gone through (and now Microsoft) to figure out how to implement all-digital in a way that offers as much freedom and as many luxuries to the consumer as possible while still avoiding piracy.

That^^

I do not think anyone is actively defending it; it is more that we do not care and it is not the end of world for us like it seems to be for some of you.

I understand that people will not be affected by DRM and the used game restriction, so i will respect their decision. This personally affects me - with my shitty internet and my obsession with buying dirt cheap used games for collection building, that is why i am not buying xbox one. If the position was switched with the ps4 using drm and the one drm free i would buy the one over the ps4.

There would be no need to defend it. There are three console choices for a reason. Though the xbone requirements don't effect me all that much, it still seems like an unecessary pain.

Sony already pissed me off with their non backward compatabilty crap, if they did what MS did, i just wouldnt buy it. If im going to deal with PC crap, im better off getting a PC.

I would stick with PC and portable gaming where i can play most of my games offline.