Giant Bomb News

281 Comments

Microsoft Digs Bigger Hole Over Used Games

The company has assigned Major Nelson the task of trying (and failing) to clarify its stance with Xbox One.

No Caption Provided

In a bizarre attempt to provide “clarification” over the mixed signals on how Xbox One will handle used games, Xbox evangelist Larry “Major Nelson” Hryb has issued a statement meant to clarify the company’s stance. The statement does not succeed in doing that.

Here’s what he passed along:

“The ability to trade in and resell games is important to gamers and to Xbox. Xbox One is designed to support the trade in and resale of games. Reports about our policies for trade in and resale are inaccurate and incomplete. We will disclose more information in the near future.”

This conversation about used games as we become digital consumers was coming, and it was only a matter of which hardware manufacturer pulled the trigger first. Why, though, would Microsoft decide to stick its foot into the used games discussion without specific answers for consumers? There’s no room for half measures with used games. You are taking away some consumer rights, and if consumers are gaining anything in this transaction, Microsoft needed to make that clear from the very beginning.

Now, it's backpedaling. Now, it's trying to clarify. That means you've already lost the messaging war.

It’s possible there’s actually a pretty reasonable situation where players have the ability to turn in digital licenses for purchased games in exchange for Microsoft Points to spend on the Xbox Marketplace and used games continue to exist at GameStop and other retailers. Since the details of those arrangements is clearly changing, the onus would be on Microsoft to make the coming changes abundantly transparent.

Microsoft didn't, and it wants to pretend it's not its fault.

The statement itself is a joke, too.

“Reports about our policies for trade in and resale are inaccurate and incomplete.”

Microsoft is the one who put its executives and representatives in front of the press earlier this week, and presented increasingly conflicted information. The problem has been getting anything remotely resembling a clear answer out of them. The press hasn’t mangled Microsoft’s message, it’s that Microsoft has very little to say, and wants to point the blame at someone else with the wave of a hand. It won't work.

Sorry, Microsoft. It’s your problem, not mine. Try a little honesty next time?

Patrick Klepek on Google+
290 CommentsRefresh

Avatar image for tylerxship
Edited By TylerxShip

That's a big shock to me, I am sure to others also, he cant even give a right answer and he's with Microsoft.

Avatar image for wrenchninja
Posted By WrenchNinja

@fiberpay: How does the crow taste? Does the crow taste good?

Avatar image for lind_l_taylor
Posted By Lind_L_Taylor

@echoecho said:

@lind_l_taylor said:

I am Jack's utter contempt & disgust. Hell, I'm surprised nobody is raising a furious stink about the toss out of backwards compatibility! I've got a significant investment in 360 games, some I haven't even played yet. I was going to to play those on the new Xbox...until they just threw the feauture out the window. That was the only thing I cared about. Now my Collectors Editions of Fallout: New Vegas, Duke Nukem, Alan Wake, Mass Effect 2...well in a few years from now it'll be worthless land fill because nobody will be able to use them as the 360 device fades into the sunset. What's the point in buying games if I have to chuck them when the Console goes away? It's getting close to the point where I might start going to Pirate Bay for my gaming needs. Had I the PC version of my collectible's, I wouldn't feel so fucked over by Mr. Softy. I don't care about its TV features. I wonder if they'll start bricking 360s at some point in the future for those that don't upgrade. And how much more is the fucking monthly going to be for XBL with all those crap-ass features they've tacked on? Screw Microsoft.

Backwards compatibility isn't just a switch they can flip. The Xbox 360 and Xbox One have completely different architecture, and games programmed for the 360 are not going to magically "just work" on the new hardware. They would have to be recoded.

Considering it would probably add a significant additional chunk to the cost of the system if they put a 360 SOC in there to run legacy games, I would rather they not. And writing emulation software in an attempt to brute-force it never panned out especially well on the 360 for playing original Xbox games, with many of them completely unable to be emulated, and several others having all kinds of issues due to imperfect emulation.

The 360 is never going to just stop working. I can still fire up my original Xbox and play games on it; the only thing that doesn't function is Live. Considering all those games you listed are single player experiences, you don't even have anything to worry about. If you want to play Fallout or Mass Effect, then plug in your 360 and play them -- you don't need any kind of online authentication for it.

I thought last gen would have proven that backwards compatibility is never a given, and usually for good reason. If there was an easy, inexpensive (for the consumer) way to include backward compatibility in their system, that would be a selling point, they would want to have it -- the assumption that they are ignoring it just to screw us over is misguided.

Well since some 360 games are still being released at sunset (FUSE, Remember Me, Metro LL, etc), they must have a EULA agreement in place to protect game vendors that will guarantee they have a year or two on the existing system.

But whatever, I won't be buying any further 360 games if I can help it, nor an Xbox One. Frankly I don't see the point. Buy a $60 game for the Xbox One so I can throw it away later when Softy decides to switch back to x86 on the next iteration? Whereas if I had it on the PC the entire time, that game would still be there whether I upgrade my PC with new parts or not. No renewal of XBL either, I'll just have to watch Netflix & other features on something else, like an Apple TV. Hopefully I'll be able to sell off my 360 library for reasonable used prices.

Avatar image for deactivated-586642a039045
Edited By deactivated-586642a039045

I had planned to buy the xbox one on pre-order and even said to the guy in my local GAME store (in the UK, the main gaming retail chain here) that "unless xbox is a total & utter disaster I will be pre-ordering the console with you next week". The retail store manager asked me "what would you regard as a total & utter disaster?" I replied "probably if they are asking me to spend a big chunk of that money on crap I don't care about such as TV, music and that awful kinect bollocks. That would be a disaster...but I'm sure it won't happen, they can't be THAT stupid".

Needless to say its looking like I'll be buying the PS4 instead now. ;)

Avatar image for grimluck343
Edited By Grimluck343

Passive aggressive Patrick is my second favorite Patrick.

Avatar image for graf1k
Edited By graf1k

@fizzylift said:

The decision to make mandatory install games was a bad one.

To be fair, I don't think mandatory installs were so much a decision as a necessity of the size of next gen games (in bytes I mean, not scale) and the relatively slow speed of blu-ray.

As for this article, I find Patrick's reasoning here a little perplexing:

Since the details of those arrangements is clearly changing, the onus would be on Microsoft to make the coming changes abundantly transparent.

If the situation is a fluid one, how exactly is Microsoft going to make coming changes transparent? A paragraph earlier you are giving Microsoft shit (rightfully I'd say) about not having a clear message about used games at their unveiling, but now the only way back from the precipice is to muddy the waters even more, possibly needlessly? I don't see how that helps them at all. No, I have to say the message Major Nelson is putting out there now is the one they should have gone with all along. Until whatever their plan is is finalized and set in stone, they only do themselves harm by commenting before then.

Whatever hit they would have taken in the press or in reaction from gamers for essentially "no comment"-ing the issue is a fraction of what it is now. If the solution is something palatable to most people, they've hurt themselves needlessly in the mean time. If it's something 3rd parties are pushing and Sony will have to follow suit, they should have waited and that way they aren't taking the full brunt of the criticism. If they were stupid enough to have made a devil's bargain with 3rd parties that Sony didn't/wouldn't make, then they only have themselves to blame, but the likelihood of that is very slight, I'd estimate.

Ask yourself that age old maxim, "Cui bono?" Who benefits? Putting an end to used game sales does next to nothing to Microsoft/Sony's bottom line, while it would be a huge financial boon to 3rd party publishers. Why would Microsoft take even the PR hit for almost no benefit if they know the competition doesn't have to?

Avatar image for doomsday65
Edited By Doomsday65

I'm scared. I just want to play video games

Avatar image for fizzylift
Edited By fizzylift

The decision to go on tv was a bad one.

The decision to name it xbox one was a bad one.

The decision to make connect mandatory was a bad one.

The decision to make mandatory install games was a bad one.

The decision to make it an entertainment hub instead of a game console was a bad one.

But I'm sure you'll get to play Halo 19, Madden 2059, and Call of Duty: All Dogs go to Heaven. So people will buy it.

Avatar image for wiredfolf
Edited By WiredFolf

@grandizer:

I never said I hated Microsoft, but this whole situation does leave me disappointed in them.

It is all speculation at this point, you are correct. This could in fact be some big plan to turn the entire internet into one huge focus group, but again it's all assumptions and hearsay.

I haven't written off MS as a company but given what I do know about the coming Xbone and the potential features and policies it may have, I feel compelled to speak out against it because many of these new elements seem gimmicky or at best nothing to write home about. I was disappointed in the Kinect (yes they say the first Kinect was largely a beta, but they certainly didn't advertise that when selling it for a couple hundred dollars), I already have a DVR to watch TV on and a PC where I use Skype. Generally everything they covered in the conference was underwhelming to me and really didn't make me want to invest in such an expensive system. Then all this other information started trickling out...

So yea, while I don't hate them, the general way they've presented the new Xbox was not up to the standards I'd expect from such a large and influential company. They may in fact put all our worries to rest in the coming months, or even blow us all away at E3, but personally it'll take a lot for me to reconsider Xbone as a future purchase.

Avatar image for porjos
Edited By porjos

@grandizer said:

@porjos:

So I just want to get this right.

You are saying (at the same time) that Microsoft has not been clear in their message and so therefore we do not really know what they are going to do in the future, and yet you are also saying that you do not like where they are headed.

Also, you are saying that a company which literally dominates the PC market with their Windows OS and is an international Fortune 500 company - DOESN'T have their "shit together?"

I just wanted to make sure I understand you correctly.

We both don't know anything about the future, we're just debating about our feelings with the information we know... because that's all we can do.

Also, beware of thinking any company, no matter how large, is not infallible. As a subscriber of both the Surface RT and Windows Phone 7, I can tell you how sucky the Marketplace is. Also, perhaps you are aware of things like Windows Vista and the almost crippling Red Ring of Death. Billions of dollars and years of development still do not make things infallible.

Regardless, I don't want this to turn into me bashing Microsoft. in fact, If I do choose PS4, it will be my first Sony product.

Avatar image for grognard66
Posted By Grognard66

Sad to see the enthusiast press get suckered into this false narrative. Why is MS the only one being taken to task when Sony said the exact same thing about used games and every rumor (just as everything pertaining to MS' policies are just rumor at this point) indicates they are looking at the exact same solution. Why haven't these game sites asked Sony for clarification on their policy and where are the negative articles on Sony's non-response?

The big third-party publishers are the ones pushing for this and understand that it will only work if they get both MS and Sony on board. Either both will do this or neither will do this - so why are "journalists" like Klepek (who should know better) letting the fanboys drive the story towards their preferred multibillion corporation?

Avatar image for grandizer
Posted By GRANDIZER

@wiredfolf:

Well, that is kind of my point.

We have a very large company that is successful and obviously has lots of resources, and yet they seemingly have all this "disarray" when talking about this admittedly hot-button topic.

The real question is "why?"

I think everyone is just "jumping the gun" when they IMMEDIATELY assume that Microsoft employees are "idiots" and so on. . .

No one stops to even try to think about the possibility that maybe they are purposefully presenting conflicting information.

So again, "Why?"

I honestly do not know. Maybe you guys are correct and they just messed up. On the other hand, maybe they are doing (like someone else suggested) and "testing the waters" prior to actually implementing anything. But make no mistake, "Always Online - Completely Digital Content" is coming. It is just a matter of time. Again, this is NOT just a Microsoft "thing." EVERYONE is going to do this eventually. I believe Microsoft is simply trying to gauge when will be the best time to do so.

In any event: All you people who want to string up Microsoft Employees by their toenails for simply "messing up their message" need to take a long hard look at your lives and seriously consider where and when it went "wrong."

I mean, how many other companies have "messed up their message" in the past. There was NEVER this amount of UNIVERSAL out pouring of pure HATRED for ANY of these other companies. Seriously! Why do you people just HATE Microsoft so much? For making hardware and software that people use and enjoy all the time? Seriously?!?

Avatar image for wiredfolf
Edited By WiredFolf

@grandizer: In regards to the Xbox One they do not have their shit together.

They had no grip on their employees in regards to talking to the press so we've gotten numerous conflicting reports. Most of which suggesting all the feared rumors are true.

Now MS has Major Nelson give the closest thing to an official statement and all that amounts to is "Check back with us later."

You said it yourself, they are a company which literally dominates the PC market and is an international fortune 500 company. Yet we're expected to believe they didn't have a detailed info packet set up to answer all the questions and concerns of their next generation gaming console which is due out in six months?

Avatar image for grandizer
Posted By GRANDIZER

@porjos:

So I just want to get this right.

You are saying (at the same time) that Microsoft has not been clear in their message and so therefore we do not really know what they are going to do in the future, and yet you are also saying that you do not like where they are headed.

Also, you are saying that a company which literally dominates the PC market with their Windows OS and is an international Fortune 500 company - DOESN'T have their "shit together?"

I just wanted to make sure I understand you correctly.

Avatar image for xaviersx
Posted By Xaviersx

Not buying any of the new toys until they are older and reduced in price. I've never bought a launch device, the used market I've entered is the used console market, along with the used games. If Microsoft wants to backpedal and spin in the mud, it won't affect me in the upfronts, and if Sony wants to patent a used game killer and not use it, fine, but I'll keep an eye on them as well. As for Nintendo, I haven't had a piece of their hardware for decades, but I wish them all well as far as companies go. And my PC is my work and entertainment but not my gaming box ~ I'd buy Civilization or SimCity, but they've developed some nasty always on quirks as drm.

Avatar image for porjos
Edited By porjos

@grandizer:

Or, Microsoft could just state something once and mean it. I mean, that's the point of a "press conference".

I totally get what you're saying, but I like it when a company has their shit together. When it comes to investing my money in the next 10+ years of a console, it's not unreasonable to want that. Yeah it's early, so that's why no sane person is making a decision right now. However, as of now...I don't like where MS is going.

I feel like that's what Alex and Patrick's articles are stating.

Avatar image for grandizer
Posted By GRANDIZER

I seriously DO NOT understand what all of you people are upset about. (including Patrick K.) Are you really that upset about Microsoft not telling us exactly how a possible/rumored used game market for Digital Media might actually work (if it exists) for a console that HAS YET to even have a LAUNCH DAY announced yet!?!?

Is that what you are upset about?

Seriously, you people have absolutely NO patience. . . . at all. We will find out all of this information in due time.

The argument should really be about whether or not Digital Media is a good thing in general for the consumer. Of course, that really isn’t much of a discussion because it obviously isn’t.

Here is my prediction:

There will still be game discs but there will also be digital game downloads. Both of

these will be the same price. You will NOT be able to re-sell your “used” digital games.

Companies will print less and less game discs (over time) in order to create a manufactured rarity of actual game discs, in an effort to force people to move towards an ALL Digital Game Download market. They will do this because (surprise surprise) they MAKE MORE MONEY by doing so.

Once sales of Digital Downloads outnumber the amount of sales of physical copies we (the general consuming public) will be presented with the FALSE fact that “people in general prefer Digital Downloads to physical boxed copies of product.” This will then be used as the reason why ALL games (in the future) will be COMPLETELY digital)

So, the reason why this WILL HAPPEN is because companies want to make as much money as possible. Consumers will be forced to go along with this because we do not make our own games/game consoles.

Furthermore:

This is not JUST a “Microsoft thing.” Sony will do the same thing as well as ANY OTHER hardware manufacturer.

Someone responded to one of my posts earlier stating something to the effect that “Microsoft has to implement a used Digital Market because they would lose out on a lot of sales if they didn’t because the people that buy used games would not buy those games if they were not receiving a discount to begin with.” I do NOT agree with this statement. People buy used games because they are cheaper than brand new products. If people were not allowed to buy products at a cheaper price they would still pay full price. Also, Microsoft/Sony/developers do NOT receive ANY money from the re-sale of physical discs. Only Gamestop/BestBuy/etc… do. This is why the major game manufactures (as well as developers) want to move to a total online Digital Market. That way they can charge us FULL PRICE ALL THE TIME! That is the point.

If you guys really want to do yourselves a favor you will NOT buy ANY digital games. That way business will move away from an “all digital market.” Of course, people (in general) do not have the self discipline or principles required to actually stop themselves from buying “stuff” that they want. I mean, no doubt there will be one title in the future that is just “so good” that “everyone has to have it,” at which point, even though it is only offered digitally, we will all buy it.

Thank you to those who actually read this whole rant.

Avatar image for sykosis
Edited By Sykosis

i feel like this the point where they need to backpedal if they want to try to make this right. Although i understand why this pissed Patrick off so much. Microsoft went through all this trouble to get the press to report on their new console then giving them the shaft as soon as that falls apart.

Avatar image for honkyjesus
Posted By honkyjesus

Apparently Major Nelson is the present Xbox media relations guru.

This should go well.

Avatar image for hbkdx12
Edited By hbkdx12

I can't help but feel like MS is just using all this as a litmus test to see what boundaries and envelopes they can push. I'm convinced they're more in control of the situation then this perceived blunder suggests. One of two things will happen...

1) They create something in the middle where this whole used game thing still turns them a profit and gamers just accept it with the feeling "at least it's not as bad as what they planned originally" or

2) They'll backpedal on the entire thing and act like they're doing consumers a huge favor and "giving the consumer what they want" to try to gain positive PR

in the mean time i hope Sony is preparing their PR people for E3 and how to handle this situation because sure journalist and the gaming media are going to want to try to nail down Sony's approach to the whole used games issue which is certainly going to affect how MS moves forward on the situation

Avatar image for crab_slayer
Posted By Crab_Slayer

As someone who does not give a damn about used games, this kind of shady PR is putting me off regardless. I was already angry about my hundreds of dollars worth of arcade games not being available to import. Pawning your own failures off on the media is super slimy.

Exactly what I was thinking! I'm already pissed that my digital arcade collect wont transfer, but for microsoft to sit here and blame the press for your miss information is just a bad move.

Avatar image for greenocelot
Posted By GreenOcelot

For crying out loud. Just give us an FAQ page or something, otherwise you're going to lose quite a section of your market.

Avatar image for n2nother
Posted By N2NOther

@danielmackie_photography:

As an aside here, how would it work with a game if I wanted to sell my game to a friend. If the game goes to a reseller, they must update Microsoft that it is in there system. So it deactivates from you and is ready to sell on and activate somewhere else. Where they have stated it will not require a secondary fee.

But if I sell my game to a friend......... Currently they state if it is "lent" it deactivates on your system whilst you are logged in on their console. Once I leave they then have an option to purchase the game for their own account.

So how do I sell my game privately, I charge £10 ( say ) they take the disk install - it is still registered to me- they are then paying a fee to ( also ) buy the game.

Unless there is a feature at install that asks if you have bought the game from the previous owner, then it would deactivate from my account - I suppose. Dependent on the trade in and sale values through shops, and the install value via taken as a purchase from a friend and installing via their account to their console. Private sales could be valueless.

My brain hurts. Have I got the logic right here.

There will be no private sales with this system. MS's wording specifically includes the words "at retail." They want to control use sales in order to wring money from it. This is my biggest issue on the whole matter.

Avatar image for gnokey
Edited By Gnokey

@golguin said:

@fiercedeity said:

I love how people heap praise on Steam every day yet through a shit fit when Microsoft does the same exact thing. Oh and before someone mentions it - yes, Steam does have sales, but that's just a matter of competition. The principle remains the same. Yet I never see a single article complaining about Valve not allowing you to trade used games. I call hypocrisy.

Did you stop and consider that maybe people who buy consoles don't use Steam or play PC games? The VAST MAJORITY of people who play console games don't play PC games. There is no hypocrisy.

I was referring to people who bitch and moan about this and then go "PC master race!"

Why not throw a shit fit? They're taking one of the advantages consoles had over the PC and throwing it out the door. I'm okay with buying a game on steam that I'll never be able to sell used or lend to a buddy because I get all of the advantages that come with it being a PC game along with it. If the inability to do what I wish with a game after purchasing it comes along with the whole console experience, then it is far less palatable to me, particularly if competing consoles stick with the old ways.

Avatar image for danielmackie_photography
Edited By danielmackie_photography

As an aside here, how would it work with a game if I wanted to sell my game to a friend. If the game goes to a reseller, they must update Microsoft that it is in there system. So it deactivates from you and is ready to sell on and activate somewhere else. Where they have stated it will not require a secondary fee.

But if I sell my game to a friend......... Currently they state if it is "lent" it deactivates on your system whilst you are logged in on their console. Once I leave they then have an option to purchase the game for their own account.

So how do I sell my game privately, I charge £10 ( say ) they take the disk install - it is still registered to me- they are then paying a fee to ( also ) buy the game.

Unless there is a feature at install that asks if you have bought the game from the previous owner, then it would deactivate from my account - I suppose. Dependent on the trade in and sale values through shops, and the install value via taken as a purchase from a friend and installing via their account to their console. Private sales could be valueless.

My brain hurts. Have I got the logic right here.

Avatar image for fiercedeity
Posted By FierceDeity

@golguin said:

@fiercedeity said:

I love how people heap praise on Steam every day yet through a shit fit when Microsoft does the same exact thing. Oh and before someone mentions it - yes, Steam does have sales, but that's just a matter of competition. The principle remains the same. Yet I never see a single article complaining about Valve not allowing you to trade used games. I call hypocrisy.

Did you stop and consider that maybe people who buy consoles don't use Steam or play PC games? The VAST MAJORITY of people who play console games don't play PC games. There is no hypocrisy.

I was referring to people who bitch and moan about this and then go "PC master race!"

Avatar image for brocksampson
Edited By BrockSampson

@milk195 said:

I love you Patrick, but that read like some dramatic sorority sisters angry email to the rival tri deltas for booking a formal on the same weekend.

Look, this isn't a "product launch", there are things they most likely don't have locked down for a million legal/technical reasons. Yes, it seems pretty obvious these kinds of questions were coming and they should have hired Carl Rove or something to help with dodging questions.

...

My bigger concern is the ENTIRE GAMING MEDIA just fucking jumping off the 360 bandwagon they have ridden on for almost a decade in literally five weeks or so...it's amazing. Podcast by podcast, article by article each of them began to talk about how "Sony just gets us man." What? Am I missing something? I'm too tired to list all of their epic blunders over this generation, but it's like none of it happened overnight. I don't care about who "won or lost" or who will, I'll buy both like always then eventually migrate back to the PC. What bothers me is the lack of respect for Microsoft's scars...give them the respect they earned this generation.

Look at it this way, look at both the PS3 and 360 on launch day. They were just these gaming consoles that promised a bunch of shit and had terrible UI and some pretty bad design choices overall and sounded like jet engines when booting up. Then jump to today and I think it's much easier to appreciate the amazing shit Microsoft pulled off this generation. NOBODY could have imagined the things that your 360 does today when it came out. They kept evolving, changing, adding features, services, VALUE...ugly ass metro tiles...you get the point. On the other hand Sony's shitty UI and awful network setup (or whatever makes updates take hours) finally in the last year or so has "maybe" brought itself to parity with the 360.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Avatar image for milk195
Edited By Milk195

I love you Patrick, but that read like some dramatic sorority sisters angry email to the rival tri deltas for booking a formal on the same weekend.

Look, this isn't a "product launch", there are things they most likely don't have locked down for a million legal/technical reasons. Yes, it seems pretty obvious these kinds of questions were coming and they should have hired Carl Rove or something to help with dodging questions.

...

My bigger concern is the ENTIRE GAMING MEDIA just fucking jumping off the 360 bandwagon they have ridden on for almost a decade in literally five weeks or so...it's amazing. Podcast by podcast, article by article each of them began to talk about how "Sony just gets us man." What? Am I missing something? I'm too tired to list all of their epic blunders over this generation, but it's like none of it happened overnight. I don't care about who "won or lost" or who will, I'll buy both like always then eventually migrate back to the PC. What bothers me is the lack of respect for Microsoft's scars...give them the respect they earned this generation.

Look at it this way, look at both the PS3 and 360 on launch day. They were just these gaming consoles that promised a bunch of shit and had terrible UI and some pretty bad design choices overall and sounded like jet engines when booting up. Then jump to today and I think it's much easier to appreciate the amazing shit Microsoft pulled off this generation. NOBODY could have imagined the things that your 360 does today when it came out. They kept evolving, changing, adding features, services, VALUE...ugly ass metro tiles...you get the point. On the other hand Sony's shitty UI and awful network setup (or whatever makes updates take hours) finally in the last year or so has "maybe" brought itself to parity with the 360.

It bothers me. It's been bothering me for weeks now. It's this whole "What Have You Done For Me TODAY" generational vibe that seems to have no respect for accomplishments made and will salivate over whatever shiny new thing comes around the bend.

Avatar image for flashflood_29
Posted By FlashFlood_29

Let's remember: nothing is set in stone. They even clarified that in a recent e-mail sent out to current Xbox Live subscribers.

Online
Avatar image for bawlzinmotion
Posted By BawlZINmotion

I imagine whatever plan Microsoft has is already well in motion, so I doubt we will see much of a change between now and launch. If I were an executive at Sony, I would go the traditional way with physically bought games and the give incentives to purchase the digital version. Asking the consumer to pay the same for something they have less control over, and has a purely digital existence, is at the very least unreasonable. Why on earth would people give up something for nothing in return? That's not how business works, and like it or not, Microsoft and the people who buy their products are business partners. Microsoft should should do a better job of remembering that.

Avatar image for lucasov
Posted By lucasov

Something just came to my mind. If keeping games locked to one single account is already generating so much discussion what will it be about all the living room TV hub thingy. I might be wrong but my understanding is that the new Xbox will be useless unless you are logged in with your Xbox account... What happen when my parents come to visit? Does my mum need to setup an account with a user name and password in order to change a channel on my TV? (btw my mum is 68 and hates the internet except for emails).

Also, if you buy a cartoon for your kids using your account they won't be able to watch it unless I am in the room and that Kinect can recognize me to log me in? These large corporation really don't get it, it is not because of the money that people download pirated media, it is just much more flexible and convenient than their DRM alternative. When people pay more they expect more benefits not more restrictions!!!

Avatar image for sagalla
Edited By Sagalla

@fiberpay said:

Articles like these are why i'm glad Patrick is at least moving out of the GB office, hopefully he won't be on as often. Sony has been even more shady about their used games approach, yet no article about them. But what else should I expect from Patrick "one side of the story" Klepick.

This is good news. Whenever Patrick talks about a games company he acts as if they would be doing much better if only they would listen to him... It's annoying to say the least

Avatar image for tpoppapuff
Edited By TPoppaPuff

Microsoft's statement should have been:

Our reports about our policies for trade in and resale are inaccurate and incomplete.”

Avatar image for golguin
Posted By golguin

I love how people heap praise on Steam every day yet through a shit fit when Microsoft does the same exact thing. Oh and before someone mentions it - yes, Steam does have sales, but that's just a matter of competition. The principle remains the same. Yet I never see a single article complaining about Valve not allowing you to trade used games. I call hypocrisy.

Did you stop and consider that maybe people who buy consoles don't use Steam or play PC games? The VAST MAJORITY of people who play console games don't play PC games. There is no hypocrisy.

Avatar image for n2nother
Posted By N2NOther

Not sure if anyone mentioned this before but the whole idea that used sales are sales not going to the publisher/developer is erroneous at best. The person who bought the used game was probably not going to buy the new game anyway. Also, it's not like used games reproduce more used games. For every used game sold, a new copy was purchased that created said used copy. The publisher got the money they were going to get for that game when it was first purchased. There can never be more used games than sold new games (barring stealing which is hardly common enough to cause a dent).

Regardless of the whole "It's usually only $5 cheaper anyway" rhetoric, $5 is $5. That's a gallon of gas, a fast food meal, a pack of cigarettes (if you don't live in NY) or whatever else the value is to the purchaser of the used game. Not only that, but if you're buying used from Gamestop there is a very good chance to have the "Power Up" card or whatever it's called these days, which makes the game 10% cheaper than retail which could be up to $10. Do that 5 times and you've saved enough for another used game (6 and you can buy a new game).

I certainly do appreciate Patrick's stance here, because it's one I agree with and have said outloud several times to anyone who would listen. What I want to know is why has every single journalist who has reported on this as a negative or at all, not asked "Why" as a follow up?

Why is Microsoft instituting a fee? Why will they not say what their policy is? Why do we have to wait for a later date before they clear up what is obviously an issue?

This opinion wasn't unheard of before Tuesday. This information has leaked time and again, since months ago. They knew gamers were pissed at the very IDEA that this was going to be implemented, and yet while they knew they were implementing this thing that THEY KNEW WAS GOING TO PISS PEOPLE OFF, and the still don't have an answer prepared? I don't think I've ever seen anything like this in all my 30 plus years of gaming.

I will be attending E3 as press this year and if this isn't cleared up before then, I will definitely be asking everyone I can "why?"

Avatar image for fiercedeity
Posted By FierceDeity

I love how people heap praise on Steam every day yet through a shit fit when Microsoft does the same exact thing. Oh and before someone mentions it - yes, Steam does have sales, but that's just a matter of competition. The principle remains the same. Yet I never see a single article complaining about Valve not allowing you to trade used games. I call hypocrisy.

Avatar image for lucasov
Posted By lucasov

Microsoft seems to focus on the US market (it's hard to imagine all that TV stuff working around the world) while Sony is more after a worldwide market. Online DRM is not a good proposition in many countries around the world and since that is the way MS is planning to regulate second hand games I don't think Sony will fall for that. (I am assuming that if the Xbox One needs to connect only once every few days it won't be streaming anything but just checking for DRM like making sure that your games serial code has been locked)!

Avatar image for lucasov
Edited By lucasov

Stopping people from buying second hand games will not make money appear in their wallets by magic. the only thing you achieve is that consumer will play less games!

When I was a kid I only got two new games a year; one for Christmas and one for my birthday. We used to coordinate with my friends which games we would get and with a group of 10 people exchanging games we got to play 20 games a year. If you charge me the price of a new game to play my friends game on my console that would leave me with my 2 stupid games every year! If I was a kid with limited budget today I would go for a 3DS!

Avatar image for golguin
Posted By golguin

@markjw said:

@gnokey said:

Whatever position Microsoft backpedals itself into on used games in the end, it's pretty clear that they're attempting to restrict our rights as consumers. We have the right to trade, sell or lend legitimately purchased copyrighted materials. I can lend you a book, sell him a CD or trade DVDs with that guy. It applies to video games as well, that's why gamestop et al exist. They facilitate our ability to sell the copyrighted games we've bought.

The scenario Klepek mentioned with turning in licences for points (they announced they're removing points, by the way)? Hell no, that's not acceptable to me. If I want to sell the stuff I bought for cash I damn well have the right to do so. The Azure service thing Microsoft mentioned retailers will have to use to be able to buy used games? Again, unfuckingacceptable. If I want to sell my game to the kid down the street, I have the right to fucking do so.

They are attempting to turn the purchase of a product, which is both the beginning and end of a consumers relationship with the seller, into the purchase of the rights to use their product, which will leave you reliant on their continued support of the product as well as their permission to take actions with the shit you buy that you already have the right to take. Don't accept this as a reasonable change.

You were ALWAYS buying JUST A LICENSE to play videogame. Always. This has never changed. You do not own a videogame and you will never own a videogame (unless you make one yourself). You will only ever own a license.

That doesn't mean anything. Under the law you are able to sell or destroy anything you buy. It's the "First Sale Doctrine." Video game companies can say whatever they like, but the law is the law.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm01854.htm

"The first sale doctrine, codified at 17 U.S.C. § 109, provides that an individual who knowingly purchases a copy of a copyrighted work from the copyright holder receives the right to sell, display or otherwise dispose of that particular copy, notwithstanding the interests of the copyright owner."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine

The first-sale doctrine plays an important role in copyright and trademark law by limiting certain rights of a copyright or trademark owner. The doctrine enables the distribution chain of copyrighted products, library lending, gifting, video rentals and secondary markets for copyrighted works (for example, enabling individuals to sell their legally purchased books or CDs to others). In trademark law, this same doctrine enables reselling of trademarked products after the trademark holder put the products on the market. The doctrine is also referred to as the "right of first sale," "first sale rule," or "exhaustion rule."

Avatar image for agentboolen
Posted By agentboolen

Sounds like it such a big deal that there afraid to say anything that really has any meaning to mean. M$ might want to just abandon.

Avatar image for fiberpay
Posted By fiberpay

@wrenchninja: All that Sony has said "yea you can play used games". That's being real descriptive, Microsoft could have said the same thing. At least Microsoft has told you what to expect Sony is just going to drop this bomb as late as possible so Microsoft gets all the bad press. Sony is going to do the same as Microsoft because this is a huge push from Devs and Publishers.

Also, that Sony article makes my point perfectly about Patrick. I'm not saying that he is one sided towards Microsoft, i'm saying ALL his articles are one sided. When he writes an article he harps on that point big time, but always forgets the other side of the discussion.

Also I don't know if Patrick has a hard time reading but the press release by Major Nelson was pretty clear, just about as clear as Sony, but yet not article about Sony digging a bigger hole?

Avatar image for wrenchninja
Posted By WrenchNinja

@fiberpay said:

Articles like these are why i'm glad Patrick is at least moving out of the GB office, hopefully he won't be on as often. Sony has been even more shady about their used games approach, yet no article about them. But what else should I expect from Patrick "one side of the story" Klepick.

Lol you can't be serious. There have been ZERO rumours about Sony doing anything like this while we've been hearing for months about how Microsoft was going to attempt this always online DRM and used games squashing. Shuhei Yoshida has already said that they had never considered it and that they are leaving it up to the publishers. And while that leaves wiggle room for Sony, their situation isn't remotely similar when Phil Harrison, vice president of business for Microsoft and Matt Booty, the General Manager of Redmond Games Studios have been shooting themselves in the foot and validating the rumours that have been circulating and then having Major Nelson accuse the press for misleading the community.

Patrick has been doing great work and this is just another article in a long line of great ones. It's not like Patrick hasn't been harsh on Sony before, unless you're conveniently forgetting how he continued to bring up the hacking and letter writing campaign with regards to Sony updating their EULA a year or so back.

Avatar image for sexualbubblegumx
Posted By SexualBubblegumX

@markjw: If you said that ten years ago you would of gotten laughed at. Back when Box Copies mattered, it really was more than just a license. There was indeed a sense of Ownership.