• 75 results
  • 1
  • 2
Edited 1 year, 2 months 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.

#51 Posted by bobafettjm (1504 posts) -

I would be 100% fine with Microsoft's former DRM policies if disc based games would work like before and digital games had the DRM.

#52 Edited by Hunkulese (2743 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.

Their was a lot more benefits to their always online approach than just sharing, it's just a shame Microsoft's PR team was so clueless they ignored everything interesting and focused everything on sharing. They were so caught up in the used game drama they got stuck in a defensive position and ignored everything else. If you listened to the developers during E3 a lot of them were more excited about the possibilities available with the Xbox one and didn't a far better job expressing that than Microsoft did.

#53 Edited by Hunkulese (2743 posts) -

@hunkulese said:

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.

Sharing games and digital sales were the least interesting aspect of what Microsoft was doing.

#54 Edited by LiquidPrince (15962 posts) -

@liquidprince said:

@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.

And yet recently, Microsoft closed down their older music service (MSN music or whatever it was called) and basically told everyone they had a short amount of time to download any of the songs that they had previously purchased, because once they closed it down, those songs would no longer be accesible. So... precedent?

#55 Posted by GiantBomber (350 posts) -

I'm guessing we'll eventually see something very similar in place by 2017 as an optional service, perhaps even on Playstation as well, it's too early to say.

Right now I get the feeling this petition will be mainly catering to those certain Sony fans, who are aggravated about Microsoft's decision to pull the DRM.

#56 Posted by shinjin977 (761 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.

I have a few choice words to say about this. That saying is fact not opinion. When you (as a store/producer/server/business) are trying to sell something to people, it does not matter if the customer want a damn raw meat on a piece of molded bread and you are selling the best fucking burger in the world. As long as they want it and you want their money, you will do anything necessary to sell that shitty raw burger, be it make them sign paper to get you out if they die or whatever. Now if you don't need that money, you can say "fuck off" and everyone is fine with it but Microsoft obviously want that money, so they will sell want people want.

With that said I disagree with their ex-DRM policies and I am happy it is gone. I also agree people want a next-gen console but base on Microsoft 180 and their continue effort to reach out to indie, we can conclude they are getting kill in per-order. People want next-gen console but base on these reactions, that same-old shiner ps4 is next gen.

#57 Edited by CptBedlam (4453 posts) -

@hunkulese said:

@cptbedlam said:

@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.

Their was a lot more benefits to their always online approach than just sharing, it's just a shame Microsoft's PR team was so clueless they ignored everything interesting and focused everything on sharing. They were so caught up in the used game drama they got stuck in a defensive position and ignored everything else. If you listened to the developers during E3 a lot of them were more excited about the possibilities available with the Xbox one and didn't a far better job expressing that than Microsoft did.

Of course the devs were excited... DRM!

Also, what benefits? Please detail some of them. As I said, stuff like sharing, but also reselling digital "used" games is completely possible without arbitrary 24-h-online checks. And if devs need permanent online-features for their game, they can just make it an online game like Titanfall. There's absolutely no reason to force an online connection no matter what (except, of course, DRM and shoving marketplace content and ads in our faces each and every day).

#58 Posted by connerthekewlkid (1838 posts) -

@connerthekewlkid said:

@liquidprince said:

@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.

And yet recently, Microsoft closed down their older music service (MSN music or whatever it was called) and basically told everyone they had a short amount of time to download any of the songs that they had previously purchased, because once they closed it down, those songs would no longer be accesible. So... precedent?

But they gave them a way to get them, unlike if a console service shutdown and there would be no way to get them off.

#59 Posted by connerthekewlkid (1838 posts) -

@hunkulese said:

@cptbedlam said:

@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.

Their was a lot more benefits to their always online approach than just sharing, it's just a shame Microsoft's PR team was so clueless they ignored everything interesting and focused everything on sharing. They were so caught up in the used game drama they got stuck in a defensive position and ignored everything else. If you listened to the developers during E3 a lot of them were more excited about the possibilities available with the Xbox one and didn't a far better job expressing that than Microsoft did.

Of course the devs were excited... DRM!

Also, what benefits? Please detail some of them. As I said, stuff like sharing, but also reselling digital "used" games is completely possible without arbitrary 24-h-online checks. And if devs need permanent online-features for their game, they can just make it an online game like Titanfall. There's absolutely no reason to force an online connection no matter what (except, of course, DRM and shoving marketplace content and ads in our faces each and every day).

If you hate ads that much I cant wait to see you next gen.

#60 Edited by SlashDance (1818 posts) -

@slashdance said:
@hunkulese said:

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.

Sharing games and digital sales were the least interesting aspect of what Microsoft was doing.

Examples?

#61 Edited by GERALTITUDE (3345 posts) -

@cornbredx said:

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.

QFT

#62 Edited by CptBedlam (4453 posts) -

@connerthekewlkid: You won't see me using an Xbone anytime soon, that's for sure. I'm already sick of MS' ads and "content promotion" whenever I turn on my 360. If I pay for a service, I don't want to see ads. Period.

Sony may have some advertising, true, but I doubt they'll go as far with it as MS does.

#63 Edited by AlphaDub (4 posts) -

@connerthekewlkid: You won't see me using an Xbone anytime soon, that's for sure. I'm already sick of MS' ads and "content promotion" whenever I turn on my 360. If I pay for a service, I don't want to see ads. Period.

Sony may have some advertising, true, but I doubt they'll go as far with it as MS does.

I honestly don't have any issues with the limited advertising I see on the marketplace. I mean it could be worse. I mean hell, most of it's actually worth a look in my opinion.

#64 Posted by connerthekewlkid (1838 posts) -

@connerthekewlkid: You won't see me using an Xbone anytime soon, that's for sure. I'm already sick of MS' ads and "content promotion" whenever I turn on my 360. If I pay for a service, I don't want to see ads. Period.

Sony may have some advertising, true, but I doubt they'll go as far with it as MS does.

Optimism is always nice, but im almost sure you'll be seeing a good amount of ads even with paying for PSN.

#65 Edited by danmcn12 (86 posts) -

I can understand it. People are looking at it like this is some battle that must be fought to protect our consumer rights. I just want GameStop, physical discs, and with it over produced 60$, 10 hour yearly rehashes to finally die. MS's option definitely had its flaws and they did a terrible job selling it but I was sadden by how far away consoles are from becoming digital centric.

#66 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

I don't agree with DRM being hardware bound. AT ALL.

If my console flat out refuses to play games because it hasn't checked in, you can bet you're not getting my money.

#67 Edited by Andorski (5330 posts) -

@danmcn12 said:

I can understand it. People are looking at it like this is some battle that must be fought to protect our consumer rights. I just want GameStop, physical discs, and with it over produced 60$, 10 hour yearly rehashes to finally die. MS's option definitely had its flaws and they did a terrible job selling it but I was sadden by how far away consoles are from becoming digital centric.

Why would $60 price mark for full games be reduced if games go digital only? Why would single player games stop being 10 hour campaigns? Why would publishers stop doing yearly releases?

And wanting physical discs does not prevent digital distribution. They aren't exclusionary market models. You can have a console that sells games at retail while also having them being sold on the console's online store.

#68 Posted by eccentrix (1568 posts) -

It's the security/freedom balance. I'd like to see what we could get for a little more freedom.

#69 Posted by AlphaDub (4 posts) -

I just don't understand the point of bitching about something that's so trivial anyway. I haven't loaned games to a friend since the original Xbox. Perhaps it's the fact that within days of a launch my friends and I often buy the same games. My friends and I literally have no objection to hauling our tv's and consoles to one another's houses. I've literally done that with every Halo release.

I also think that people forget that we are a connected society. A generation that can hardly go 24 hours without checking their Facebooks, their email, or even the sites they use daily. My Xbox has literally been contact to the Internet for almost 8 years, say a few power outages.

Personally I felt like I saw the benefits over way the restrictions. I liked the idea of sharing your content with your family and friends. The always online would have made cloud and game interactions something interesting. And possibly give the overall experience a bit more kick.

At least they kept the kinect, which I'm happy about. PlayStation's camera will just be an after thought item. While third-party games may look and run the same on both consoles, the always connected kinect will add possibly new gameplay mechanics that will be universal for everyone on that machine.

There's nothing exciting about the upcoming console gen anymore. We might as well call this current gen 2.0 honestly.

#70 Edited by lebkin (331 posts) -

@alphadub said:

I just don't understand the point of bitching about something that's so trivial anyway. I haven't loaned games to a friend since the original Xbox. Perhaps it's the fact that within days of a launch my friends and I often buy the same games. My friends and I literally have no objection to hauling our tv's and consoles to one another's houses. I've literally done that with every Halo release.

Just because YOU don't share games doesn't mean that others don't share games. Of the 200 hundred games I've played on the 360, there is likely less than a dozen that were played by me and only me. Paying $60 for a 12 hour campaign that only I play is CRAZY. If I can't share it with my circle of gamers, it simply isn't worth that much. I will wait until it drops to $20. If everything is digital and prices almost never drop (ala current Xbox Games on Demand), I will simply never buy it.

It is, in fact, the ease of sharing discs that meant I played far more 360/PS3 games this generation than PC ones. Steam, with it's generous offline mode, can be used for sharing. But just giving someone a disc is far easier. It requires no exchanging of codes, gamertags, or anything like that. "Here's a disc" and you're done.

#71 Edited by EXTomar (4761 posts) -

It is trivial to loan a disk to my brother today. Why should I be excited about a convoluted system that raises more questions than answers on whether or not I can loan a game I am done with to someone else?

Suggesting the system Microsoft came up with is a "trivial matter" belies the fact the thing was an unimpressive, convoluted mess.

#72 Posted by Hailinel (24966 posts) -

If this isn't a joke, these people really fell hard for Microsoft's Kool-Aid laced, vaguely defined promises.

Online
#73 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

Again I am sure 90% if the people who signed it are people being trolls or people who never had an intention of getting the system anyways.

#74 Posted by falserelic (5444 posts) -

The ps4 is our salvation, godspeed Sony...

#75 Edited by AlphaDub (4 posts) -

I'm merely only stating "I" don't see the point in all the fighting and flaming over their choices is all. I as one I'm sure of many was not threatened nor bothered by their policies.

They spoke of a sharing system. From my understanding you would be able to play your games on a number of systems. Something akin to the way you can authorize your iTunes library on up to 5 computers while also sharing games and content with up to 10 family members on your own console.

#76 Edited by kkotd (305 posts) -

I honestly didn't have a problem with the DRM shit, what I did have a problem with is the lack of choice to opt into it. For those that want to be online, convert disc to digital and have family sharing, let them have it. For the people overseas, under the sea or in a countr-e-a (sorry, I had to, it was bound by law), let them play the games offline with the disc in the machine.

But Knux, how in the blue blazes would it work?

Easily my dear Watson, just put a digital copy in the box like they do with Blurays, hell, charge an extra $5 for that version of the game. I'd honestly pay a premium to never have to put plastic discs in my system and still be able to buy them at retail. Why? Because sometimes you want the box, sometimes you want the crappy free map that comes with Elder Scrolls, sometimes you want the Collectors Edition (and don't even start with that Digital Deluxe bullshit ITS NOT THE SAME! :P) But seriously, give me added value for your crappy system, as long as it works, I honestly wouldn't care.

EDIT: Also a reminder, any 'cloud supported' game HAS to be online to be played. So by getting the DRM 'removed' we've kinda fucked ourselves. They'll force it on us one way or another, which is why I'm waiting to get an Xbox One until they've hashed it all out. PS4 on the other hand, they seem to know what they want to do right now.

#77 Posted by TechnoSyndrome (918 posts) -

Getting rid of the DRM hasn't changed anyone's opinions on the Xbone, so I don't see why not. If they have stable internet and liked the features that came along with that bullshit it makes sense they'd want it back.