• 75 results
  • 1
  • 2
Edited 11 months, 28 days ago

Poll: People actually wants Microsoft to bring back the DRM policies, WTF? (251 votes)

They're fucking insane... 56%
Well I don't see anything wrong with it, does it make me crazy? 32%
I'll sign it just for shits and giggles. 12%

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/07/11/fans-petition-for-microsoft-to-restore-original-xbox-one-policies

“This was to be the future of entertainment,” the petition says. “A new wave of gaming where you could buy games digitally, then trade, share or sell those digital licenses. Essentially, it was Steam for Xbox. But consumers were uninformed, and railed against it, and it was taken away because Sony took advantage of consumers uncertainty. We want this back. It can't be all or nothing, there must be a compromise.”

(I wasn't going to make a thread this soon, but I just had to get this off my chest)

Honestly I really don't know what mindset some of these people have going on. The DRM policy only really benefited Microsoft, and gave people restrictions on the console. So I guess giving are rights for the xbox one will be the compromise. If Microsoft manages to approve the petition, then I'll just be at a lost of words.

#1 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

Im sure 99% of them signed it for shits and giggles. It seems like one giant troll thing.

#2 Edited by believer258 (11555 posts) -

I don't know. Some people thought that the whole friends-sharing thing would pan out quite well for them (i.e. they could have a circle of friends that all share games and not spend money on every game that comes out). But that feature was later rumored to limit those games to demos or something.

People also wanted the Steam-like ability to put a disc in, install it, and then never need the disc again.

Neither of these advantages sound worth it to me when a company suddenly has absolute control over the stuff that you own, up to and including the very moment that stuff becomes worthless. So, yeah, I do think it's really short-sighted and, frankly, dumb to want it all back just for laziness's sake.

#3 Posted by Mijati (875 posts) -

Absolutely nothing wrong with their DRM policies. In fact they're a fantastic thing to try and bring gaming forward. The steam model is absolutely fantastic and they were trying their best to replicate that with the tools available to them. Sure it could have had some tweaks but to remove it entirely is crazy.

The only issue I had with their's was the 24 hour limit, that's a little too harsh but other than that it's fantastic. I hate having to switch discs over if I want to play a game. If I buy a game I want to be able to play it anywhere at any time, with the disc based system I am unable to do that. And with the disc system the way it is now I'm punished on price for buying digitally. The new policies punish those like me who buy the majority of their games digitally just because some people who are always connected to the internet anyway complained.

#4 Posted by falserelic (5270 posts) -

Im sure 99% of them signed it for shits and giggles. It seems like one giant troll thing.

I really do hope its a troll petition, if not then I don't know what to think anymore.

#5 Edited by Winsord (1147 posts) -

People like Cliffy B greatly desire the ability to not have to change discs, and some of the other 'benefits' that were promised. I can understand it to some extent, but Microsoft was really non-specific on all of the user-beneficial policies, things like lending, passing games on, etc. It's kind of crazy to me to want that stuff back considering how very little we knew about any of the given positives, but I can at least see where those people are coming from; if your internet access is never going to be a problem and you don't care about used games, then maybe the more harsh DRM policies were worth it to you.

I'd say the chances of Microsoft switching back at this point though, at least to exactly what they had before and to implement it before launch, are about one in a million. The crowd that wants it back seems to be substantially smaller than those that don't, and I don't think Microsoft would dare do anymore PR damage by flip-flopping again.

Edit: Also, the "I hate switching discs" argument has always been really crazy to me. I can understand not wanting a stack of physical disks to some extent, but I don't get how getting up for 30 seconds to switch a disc is such an incredible hassle. There are even people who go to the extent of re-buying games they already own for full price on Games on Demand, just so they don't have to deal with a disc. Personally, I'd rather switch the disk than have an inevitably more bloated UI.

#6 Posted by Dot (163 posts) -

I'm liking some of the names people are coming up with. They're hilarious.

#7 Posted by connerthekewlkid (1796 posts) -

I hate to say this but this was make as a joke by 4chan and then alot of Sony fans from Neogaf came in and signed it.

#8 Posted by falserelic (5270 posts) -

@winsord said:

Edit: Also, the "I hate switching discs" argument has always been really crazy to me. I can understand not wanting a stack of physical disks to some extent, but I don't get how getting up for 30 seconds to switch a disc is such an incredible hassle. There are even people who go to the extent of re-buying games they already own for full price on Games on Demand, just so they don't have to deal with a disc. Personally, I'd rather switch the disk than have an inevitably more bloated UI.

On top of that games can take up so much memory. I'm sure the xbox one hard drive space will be gone fast...

#9 Posted by EXTomar (4444 posts) -

I think the "friend sharing" would have been an interesting idea but it never sounded more than "the stuff we thought up at one meeting" kind of design. If they demonstrated it on stage or on the floor I'd be more inclined to say those people have a point but otherwise going to with DRM to replace something that works right now (ie. given the disk to your friend to share the game) is crazy.

#10 Edited by JasonR86 (9578 posts) -

lol

#11 Posted by Sticky_Pennies (2019 posts) -

I'm personally not going to want an Xbox One either way, and that's mostly because of it forcing Kinect down my throat.

#12 Edited by MariachiMacabre (7039 posts) -

I love the disc switching argument. "Getting up and switching discs is such a hassle! THERE'S GOT TO BE A BETTER WAY!"

It takes less than a minute to switch discs. You get up, walk over to your console, open up 2 cases (Because people who don't put their discs in their cases are fucking monsters) press the button on the console ONCE, take the disc CAREFULLY out of the tray (DO NOT TOUCH THE BOTTOM.) and put it in it's case. You then take the other game from it's case (again carefully), put it into the disc tray and press the button, sending the disc tray back into the console.

But if it's worth not really owning your games to skip that grueling task, then sure I guess the old policies were for you.

#13 Posted by Tireyo (6408 posts) -

Im sure 99% of them signed it for shits and giggles. It seems like one giant troll thing.

This.

#14 Posted by Humanity (8709 posts) -

A sweaty intern bursts into the R&D division, panting and doubling over he shrieks "the DRM, put it back in!"

#15 Posted by TheDudeOfGaming (6078 posts) -

I'm signing it because I want the Xbox One to fail. *evil laughter*

#16 Posted by TyCobb (1944 posts) -

I had no issues with the DRM. I would be fine if Microsoft did another 180 and brought it back.

#17 Edited by connerthekewlkid (1796 posts) -

I'm signing it because I want the Xbox One to fail. *evil laughter*

#18 Posted by falserelic (5270 posts) -

I just don't get why some people want to make gaming so complicated.

#19 Edited by Blu3V3nom07 (4136 posts) -

Its whatevs.

#20 Posted by joshwent (2041 posts) -

Almost all of their DRM decisions were clearly only for the hypothetical benefit of MS and publishers, fucking us in the process. Buuuuuuuut, if they flip flop again, just imagine the potential "XBox... 360" jokes.

SIGN THAT PETITION!

#21 Edited by falserelic (5270 posts) -

My friend just got through telling me, that Xbox fans are there worse enemy.

#22 Posted by OnYourWifi (7 posts) -

An all-digital distribution platform which gives me the freedom to share, loan, and sell games sounds great. It'd be better than Steam. But Microsoft never gave the impression that their DRM system was planned to be as consumer-friendly as Steam, much less better. All evidence indicated that the XBox One DRM scheme was purely for the benefit of large content producers, at the expense of everyone else.

#23 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -
#24 Posted by falserelic (5270 posts) -
#25 Posted by Rick_Fingers (524 posts) -

@mijati: agreed.

Some of it could have been modified and I certainly trust Microsoft less than I do Valve, but I would rather have had that system than what we wound up with.

The funny part is that Microsoft have no one else but themselves to blame for the PR shemozzle that occurred.

#26 Posted by DarthOrange (3803 posts) -
#27 Edited by AlexGlass (688 posts) -

That's because there are some people who have common sense,.

Apparently the "intelligent" anti-DRM mob fail to acknowledge the humongous problem that everything and more they despised about DRM is worse now when it comes to digital games without MS"s Digital Game Sharing plan.

We're moving towards digital, and you have absolutely 0 second hand value when it comes to digital media.

No ability to share games.

No ability to loan games.

No ability to trade games.

No ability to rent games at the moment.

No ability to share game cost, etc.

Worthless once you beat it.

Digital only games available day 1.

I'm still wondering when some will come to their senses and realize why some of us want those things. It's one thing to want freedom for physical media, it's another to not care AT ALL about those same things when it comes to digital. DRM allowed some second hand value to digital games. That's gone. So of course there's people that want that.

I was going to buy an Xbox One at launch when they had that announced because frankly I prefer buying digital games. But I don't want to support either console, the PS4 or the Xbox One, which offer digital downloads, like for example Killer Instinct, where after I'm done with it I can't even use it as leverage to try out another game or swap it with a friend. I will now wait until one of the companies have a reasonable solution. Hopefully they will bring it back. Until then, pre-order canceled.

#28 Edited by phantomzxro (1558 posts) -

I feel that its a trap or has become a trap, because it seem like people are only signing in hoping Microsoft crash and burn with those policies.

#29 Posted by TheHumanDove (2496 posts) -

Yes, people are stupid. Also half those signatures are people who legitimately just want the xbone to die.

#30 Edited by AgnosticJesus (539 posts) -

There's an article about this on Yahoo. Apparently the 13,000 signatures they've gathered are PS4 fans wanting the Xbox One to fail.

#31 Posted by phantomzxro (1558 posts) -

@mijati: agreed.

Some of it could have been modified and I certainly trust Microsoft less than I do Valve, but I would rather have had that system than what we wound up with.

The funny part is that Microsoft have no one else but themselves to blame for the PR shemozzle that occurred.

I understand that some people really wanted this system as it was but i don't understand how no one at Microsoft could explain it in such a way to get more people excited. If they could not do that than this future they wanted was not ready for the market yet. Also aside from having your game library go with you wherever you go i don't see why you can't have a digital future right now.

#33 Posted by Confirm4Crit (138 posts) -

Please note that the following point is only reflective of *me*. My living conditions.

I personally have stable access to the internet.

As, like, an experiment, I kinda wanted to see it happen.

Like, what if there were Steam like sales more often on XBL then? Last week was something, even though I think it was still behind a XBLGold paywall.

Albeit, that's a fantasy. But, like, it'd be kinda funny to see EA and what they value Madden if it would always have to be sellable though a digital storefront. Would they just take the old maddens down, only accessible though my download account history? What if I want Madden 2014 in 2018? (hence why you don't what that crit jesus can't you see DRM -)

Yes, imo, in this situation, it'd be bad. But it'd be fun to *watch*.

I'm not saying it'd be fun for consumers. But watching MS the past few months has been the ultimate "dis gonna be gud" for me.

#34 Posted by xyzygy (9867 posts) -

To those signing it because they want it to fail: get a fucking life and don't buy it.

#35 Posted by jdh5153 (1034 posts) -

I signed the petition because I agree with it. Going backwards is not a good thing. Used games are not a good thing.

#36 Posted by Devil240Z (3250 posts) -

They're all sony fanboys.

#37 Posted by Dagbiker (6938 posts) -

My problem with microsoft is that, for the whole of last generation, their relationship with me has been them taking more and more, and not giving me more in exchange.

I got more and more adds, The price of XBL went up, I cant even start a game with out waiting for ever for all the UI to load in. God forbid I want to find out what is new on XBL arcade.

I have my issues with the Playstation interface, dont get me wrong. But my relationship with them has always felt more then fair. They have updated the platform many times. But never have they put a single add in front of me when I havent asked for it.

#38 Posted by connerthekewlkid (1796 posts) -
#39 Posted by connerthekewlkid (1796 posts) -

@dagbiker said:

My problem with microsoft is that, for the whole of last generation, their relationship with me has been them taking more and more, and not giving me more in exchange.

I got more and more adds, The price of XBL went up, I cant even start a game with out waiting for ever for all the UI to load in. God forbid I want to find out what is new on XBL arcade.

I have my issues with the Playstation interface, dont get me wrong. But my relationship with them has always felt more then fair. They have updated the platform many times. But never have they put a single add in front of me when I havent asked for it.

I just hope that, the subscription on the PS4 will go to dedicated servers or that would be a shame.

#40 Posted by LiquidPrince (15833 posts) -

@mijati said:

Absolutely nothing wrong with their DRM policies. In fact they're a fantastic thing to try and bring gaming forward. The steam model is absolutely fantastic and they were trying their best to replicate that with the tools available to them. Sure it could have had some tweaks but to remove it entirely is crazy.

The only issue I had with their's was the 24 hour limit, that's a little too harsh but other than that it's fantastic. I hate having to switch discs over if I want to play a game. If I buy a game I want to be able to play it anywhere at any time, with the disc based system I am unable to do that. And with the disc system the way it is now I'm punished on price for buying digitally. The new policies punish those like me who buy the majority of their games digitally just because some people who are always connected to the internet anyway complained.

It was absolutely broken policy. Any one who defends it the way it was is crazy in my books. I mean once your X1 finished and the X2 was coming out there was absolutely no guarantee that you would still have access to your games. Think about all the people who collect NES or SNES games nowadays. How will your grandchildren collect digital games?

#41 Posted by Hunkulese (2624 posts) -

People want an actual next-gen console. The Xbox One is a lot closer to a next-gen console and they had to strip a lot of stuff that could have been interesting because of their lack of DRM.

PS4 is more or less just a shinier version of what we have now.

This is just another example of how the cliche "The customer is always right" is really fucking stupid.

#42 Posted by connerthekewlkid (1796 posts) -

@mijati said:

Absolutely nothing wrong with their DRM policies. In fact they're a fantastic thing to try and bring gaming forward. The steam model is absolutely fantastic and they were trying their best to replicate that with the tools available to them. Sure it could have had some tweaks but to remove it entirely is crazy.

The only issue I had with their's was the 24 hour limit, that's a little too harsh but other than that it's fantastic. I hate having to switch discs over if I want to play a game. If I buy a game I want to be able to play it anywhere at any time, with the disc based system I am unable to do that. And with the disc system the way it is now I'm punished on price for buying digitally. The new policies punish those like me who buy the majority of their games digitally just because some people who are always connected to the internet anyway complained.

It was absolutely broken policy. Any one who defends it the way it was is crazy in my books. I mean once your X1 finished and the X2 was coming out there was absolutely no guarantee that you would still have access to your games. Think about all the people who collect NES or SNES games nowadays. How will your grandchildren collect digital games?

You really think they could withstand the backlash of having all your games be null and void? Not even Steam could get away with doing that.

#43 Posted by Abendlaender (2732 posts) -

Okay, this is stupid but.....wouldn't it be fucking great if MS reversed their policies again? I mean just from a WTF IS HAPPENING? level?

#44 Posted by SlashDance (1800 posts) -

PS4 is more or less just a shinier version of what we have now.

1. What's wrong with that ? Is it so backwards to buy a game in a fucking box and play without having to prove you own it every 5 minutes ?

2. What's preventing you from buying everything digital if you want to ?

3. What's preventing them from allowing family sharing and all the other "great features" for games you bought digitally ? I understand this can't work for boxed games anymore because you can be offline forever, but for digital games ? It's as simple as linking the games to your account and allowing you to give/share/sale them only when you're connected. This way you can live in your digital heaven without having to screw over half the planet in the process.

#45 Posted by shinjin977 (743 posts) -

I don't know. Some people thought that the whole friends-sharing thing would pan out quite well for them (i.e. they could have a circle of friends that all share games and not spend money on every game that comes out). But that feature was later rumored to limit those games to demos or something.

People also wanted the Steam-like ability to put a disc in, install it, and then never need the disc again.

Neither of these advantages sound worth it to me when a company suddenly has absolute control over the stuff that you own, up to and including the very moment that stuff becomes worthless. So, yeah, I do think it's really short-sighted and, frankly, dumb to want it all back just for laziness's sake.

According to CBOAT, that sharing this is a glorified game demo (your friends can download from your game library but can only play for xx hours) and seeing how right he was about everything that happen at e3, he is probably right about this as well.

#46 Posted by believer258 (11555 posts) -

@believer258 said:

I don't know. Some people thought that the whole friends-sharing thing would pan out quite well for them (i.e. they could have a circle of friends that all share games and not spend money on every game that comes out). But that feature was later rumored to limit those games to demos or something.

People also wanted the Steam-like ability to put a disc in, install it, and then never need the disc again.

Neither of these advantages sound worth it to me when a company suddenly has absolute control over the stuff that you own, up to and including the very moment that stuff becomes worthless. So, yeah, I do think it's really short-sighted and, frankly, dumb to want it all back just for laziness's sake.

According to CBOAT, that sharing this is a glorified game demo (your friends can download from your game library but can only play for xx hours) and seeing how right he was about everything that happen at e3, he is probably right about this as well.

Eh. I wouldn't put it past Microsoft to dance around this "game sharing" thing just being a demo. I also wouldn't put it past someone who, uh, "reports" these things to get a streak of correct ones, then turn around and try to get more attention with one that sounds like it could be true.

So I don't know who to trust on that and I won't declare it as anything more than a rumor without more concrete information.

#47 Posted by CptBedlam (4449 posts) -

People want an actual next-gen console. The Xbox One is a lot closer to a next-gen console and they had to strip a lot of stuff that could have been interesting because of their lack of DRM.

PS4 is more or less just a shinier version of what we have now.

This is just another example of how the cliche "The customer is always right" is really fucking stupid.

Bullshit. There is no reason that features like sharing can't work without a 24-h-check. Just make it so that people who want to use the feature have to be online to play a shared game, not everyone using the console in general. That way they could've checked the licences and made sure only one person at a time is playing a shared game.

Luckily, most consumers saw through this bullshit and rejected the DRM crap.

The people who made this petition are obviously completely gullible and uninformed.

#48 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

@hunkulese said:

People want an actual next-gen console. The Xbox One is a lot closer to a next-gen console and they had to strip a lot of stuff that could have been interesting because of their lack of DRM.

PS4 is more or less just a shinier version of what we have now.

This is just another example of how the cliche "The customer is always right" is really fucking stupid.

Bullshit. There is no reason that features like sharing can't work without a 24-h-check. Just make it so that people who want to use the feature have to be online to play a shared game, not everyone using the console in general. That way they could've checked the licences and made sure only one person at a time is playing a shared game.

Luckily, most consumers saw through this bullshit and rejected the DRM crap.

The people who made this petition are obviously completely gullible and uninformed.

Ya I do not get why you cant go diskless if you just stay connected to the internet. Something is fishy about it all.

#49 Posted by SlashDance (1800 posts) -

@shinjin977: Also, seeing how they went through all this trouble to eliminate the used market in the first place, why in the world would they allow you to share games with 10 people anywhere in the world without limits?

#50 Posted by CornBREDX (4739 posts) -

From the comments on it that I have read, it seems like a joke.

I know there are people who want it back, but those people don't seem to realize there is no reason for always online DRM to get the cool things out of this. That's not how networks work.

Microsoft removed that stuff because they're throwing a fit. They'll find a way to slowly re-add it so it benefits them and isn't as much of a PR nightmare.