Jimquisition: Xbox One and the Death of Ownership

[Trishbot]

Every time I turn on my 360 it goes to Xbox Live.
So explain to me how this next generation will be any different?

It wont affect me in the slightest, and that's the bottom line. Not only that but gold is offering free games now just as PS+ is doing. More incentive to buy into a program that I would not otherwise do.


I must wonder if some of the more vocal opponents of the 360 daily check in are not in fact individuals with modded consoles.

Because millions of people who turn on their 360s do NOT go to Xbox Live. Are you seriously suggesting that people who play offline all have modded consoles, or could it maybe just be that many people who don't live in giant cities in more rural parts of the nation (and world) don't have high-speed internet? Microsoft claimed that a "mere" 1.5 mps connection speed would suffice, yet when I test mine it was 1.41 mps... uh oh. I must be a modder, though. That must be it. Certainly not the fact I live in the middle of Oklahoma in a small town.

Secondly, they're only giving out YEARS-OLD Xbox games on Xbox 360 until Xbox One launches. The give-away stops after that (and, seriously, Playstation Plus just said they're giving out recent and NEW games, while Halo 3 and Assassins' Creed 2 are going for, what, a couple of bucks these days?)

Also, so it doesn't effect you, thus it's not your problem, eh?

They came for the offline gamers, but I did not speak out because I was not an offline gamer.
They came for the anti-social gamers, but I did not speak out because I want Facebook, Skype, and Twitter everywhere I go.
They came for the single-player gamers, but I did not speak out because I thought multiplayer made every game better.
They came for those that played online for free, but I did not speak out because I thought Xbox Live was a good deal.
They came for the used game buyers, but I did not speak out because I pre-ordered everything new.
They came for the gamers that shared their games with each other, but I did not speak out because I was selfish and never lent games.
They came for the gamers that sold their games on Ebay, but I did not speak out because I only traded in games at Gamestop for a fraction of the value.
They came for the importers who bought games overseas, but I did not speak out because I bought all games in America and never minded region-locks.
They came for the people that played their old games on new systems, but I did not speak out because I felt backwards compatibility was backwards.
They came for gamers' consumer rights, but I did not speak out because I felt companies held all the power and games are merely "services" and no longer products.
And then they came for me... and there was no one left to speak for me.

 

[theApoc]

Of course, digital distribution throws a cinch in that. Physical license keys are replaced with digital license keys, discs with accounts, and new measures need to be put in to be sure that they're not abused. Hence no account sharing, the constant desire to want you to be online for them to make sure you're really you and not your friend borrowing your account do download a game they can then use thereafter. The Xbone is basically Microsoft's flailing attempt at figuring it out, settling on something that works well for em, but then seriously pisses off the customers because they have to jumpt through hoops to enjoy their games - of which I am one just as a side note.

I agree. We are buying a license which is enforced by a key. In the case of physical media, that key is the disc itself. In terms of digital distribution, a digital "key" would suffice. So the idea of "used" games becomes a matter of license transfer. At which point, XBOX One, and the way they are apparently handling this, makes quite a bit more sense that Jim lets on.

 

[theApoc]

*le snip*

you made me read a lot

now try some back

http://www.twobirds.com/English/News/Articles/Pages/UsedSoft_v_Oracle_What_does_it_mean_for_your_business.Aspx

the more i've read the more im sure i know know what the immature "cloud gaming" is about and the more i believe this will probably end with Microsoft in court (in Europe anyway)

and Jim was exactly right when he spoke of "Statutory Rights".

"Statutory Rights" cannot be signed away. it's actually illegal to even try and get someone to do so in the UK (under the sale of goods act) which is why ever competition or promotional offer in the UK that has conditions and basic rules always carries an always visable "This does not affect your statutory rights" sign tacked on by the legal department....and our "Statutory Rights" (and much of rest of the worlds) actually have a great deal to say on the subject of "economic loss" and its deliberate incursion on one party by another at a given point in the supply chain because it runs contrary to the entire basic structure of all civilized Human trade.

ye see "second hand" is not just "second hand"....at every point in a chain when a thing is sold, thoughtout the entire time a thing exists someone gets paid (even its so casual both parties involved don't see it as a sale and even if said sale only results in "payment in kind" it's sill "economic activity") and easily half the real world economy is "off the books" and more than that has to stay that way to stay as vibrant and fundamentally supportive of the "real economy" as it is.

it's a precedent that cannot be allowed to gain ground and i don't mean "cannot be allowed" in the sense "let's start a facebook page!" i mean cannot be allowed in the sense the highest courts have already laid down the law and the only reason its not being applied is because as of yet said courts are largely ignorant about what the relatively new video games industry is actually up to.

there has been a crunch coming in this area for a while and if anything Microsoft have seriously shot themselves in the foot by selling physical media and and then saying "you can sell it on once but no more that that" thereby placing the incurrence of deliberate economic lose squarely in their hands.

I am not sure what you are getting at. You are buying a physical item, it is intended for your own use, that item give you access to licensed content. You do not "OWN" that content. Not the DVDs, not your MP3's, not even your old VHS. What you can and cannot do with that material has ALWAYS been pretty darn clear.

When you trade in a game, the reason that most places don't give you cash, is primarily because you don't actually have the right to sell that item. HOWEVER a licensed re-seller can accept the item in trade for some other service or equivalent value item.

Understand this, you DO NOT own the content of your media. You OWN the license to play, view and listen to that media. In the case of physical media, your "license key" is the disc. That is why duplicating that disc is in fact a crime.

The problem is not the fees for license transfer. The problem is not the fact that you do not own your media, the problem, plain and simple is that the games industry charges you like your OWN the media. Game prices do not reflect the purchase, and digital purchases are even worse.

Do you think a designer "OWNS" photoshop? Um, no, they own a license, the software is free to use as long as you have a valid license, they have strict limitations on how many uses of that license are allowed. How is what MS is doing any different?

 

[Banzaiman]

At which point, XBOX One, and the way they are apparently handling this, makes quite a bit more sense that Jim lets on.

It does, but at the same time I think Jim's concerns are valid as well, particularly because Microsoft's solutions to the swapping keys thing is to just limit that entirely.

In the case of a license key, the owner of that license key - I believe at least - should be able to do with it as they please, so long as it is not duplicated. Selling the key is perfectly valid, because it's giving someone else access to the content. The buyer gives money for the license to access content, the seller gives away his or her ability to access that content in exchange for money. It's a valid exchange.

What Microsoft is terrified of is people taking the key from one account and using it to install across multiple consoles, thus duplicating the key. If it could instead find a way that an Xbone user could trade that digital key to someone else for a certain amount of time - forfeiting their license to play that game so someone else could play it for a bit instead - and then not limit that exchange then that'd probably take out a lot of the hoops people have to jump through. Except for the once-a-day check-in which seems a little arbitrary.

That said, since the things till takes discs anyway I have to wonder why the physical key needs to be scrapped for a digital one in that instance. The disc can still act as the key, can't it?

EDIT: Oh yeah, also think that requiring the Kinect with the console utter bullshit. I've seen what it can do in Tech labs and virtual simulators, but as a gaming input? Give me a button any day.

 

[Prosis]

This is outrageous. The guy should be there within 2 hours at most. 99.9% uptime is in the contract.
That being said i cant remmeber the last time internet went down for more than 5 minutes. in fact it hasnt went down for even a second in the last 9 months.

http://business.comcast.com/docs/ent-solutions-docs/bus-svcs-tcs-ver20-published-130401.pdf?sfvrsn=0

This is Comcast's terms of service. Please look at Article 15A, on the bottom of pg 12. They have 24 hours to send out a repairman, or they issue a credit for the 24hour period to your account. They are not required to provide 99% uptime, and they are not required to come out within 2 hours.

And I fail to see how the fact that your internet hasn't failed means that internet never fails for anyone else anywhere.

Remember that you live outside of America or EU, or live in any rural area with minimal internet access
im sorry but US is the one with no internet.

Dark blue regions have the most access to internet. That is Canada, Australia, EU, and America. Blue regions have moderate access (South America, Russia). Light blue regions (the rest of the world) have 40% or less internet penetration. In other words, internet is not readily accessible for large regions of the map. Microsoft is cutting out a large customer base.

Regardless, that still doesn't answer the question. How is someone's gaming experience is improved by being forced to connect once a day? What purpose or benefit does the daily connection serve, other than the server checking for hacked systems?

 

[ANTIcarrot]

I'd be interested how this plays out in europe, where that recent court case said people are allowed to resell software. It's not been confirmed for games yet, but Microsoft probably doesn't want to be caught in a position where it has to turn off some of its DRM via patching sometime in the next few years if it is. If any of it is hardware coded, that could be an exensive recall.

In the meantime I'll stick to my PC.

 

[theApoc]

That said, since the things till takes discs anyway I have to wonder why the physical key needs to be scrapped for a digital one in that instance. The disc can still act as the key, can't it?

EDIT: Oh yeah, also think that requiring the Kinect with the console utter bullshit. I've seen what it can do in Tech labs and virtual simulators, but as a gaming input? Give me a button any day.

That is a pretty good question, if they are still going to have physical media, why not just use that to "lock/unlock" the game as they do now.

 

[Drake the Dragonheart]

I think I will be sticking to PC and what I already have, which is a Wii, and an original x-box.

 

[James Brunton]

was that a fist dildo?

 

[Atmos Duality]

I largely agree with the video except on two points:

EDIT: I went back and rewatched the video, and sure enough, I misheard.
It was "Indie RETAILERS".

Fair point. And I'm pretty sure Gamestop has been shafting local game retailers just by proxy for over a decade now.

2) Gamestop will not benefit from controlled Used Game sales.

Used Games is profitable because of something called "Arbitrage".

Arbitrage is basically buying a good at a lower price in one market, and selling it at a higher price in a similar but separate market. In this case, between the New Game Market and the Used Game Market.

Arbitrage is more effective the less restrictive the market is. (well, until you get into the topic of Black Markets and smuggling which can get complicated very quickly)

Gamestop grew filthy rich by exploiting arbitrage. Normally, I'd agree with those developers and publishers who say that Gamestop is ripping their sales figures a new one, because logically, they were.

However, I don't feel sorry at all for those same publishers when they continued to do business with Gamestop anyway; they're obviously still benefiting from exposure and exclusive deals enough to warrant doing business with them.

Anyway, by restricting that supply of second-hand goods AT ALL, regardless of what the customer gets in the second-hand market (which at Gamestop, is pittance) they are restricting the source of games Gamestop can resell at a full margin; That is, the cut of the cash the shop receives on the deal.

100% is always going to be the largest cut Gamestop can get, and they get it *only* from Used Games.

Yet, on the Xbone, the only way Gamestop will be included in M$'s Used Game program, (which is being done on a per-game basis) is if the Publisher OKs it for their game.

So, why would the Publisher OK it unless they can get a cut of the deal?
Say what you want about crony-ism, there is no backroom deal or threat that Gamestop can make that would end with the publisher giving the entire sale to Gamestop.

Gamestop stands to LOSE a lot of revenue from this no matter how you slice it, because arbitrage works best between markets with few to no restrictions. (Incidentally, for anyone who wonders why those annoying and seemingly unnecessary Region Locks exist; it's mostly to prevent arbitrage between relatively rich and poor markets)

 

[MercurySteam]

This week's Jimquisition is a perfect example of why there has never been a better time to migrate to PC gaming. I'm gonna hold onto my 360 for dear life but at this point onwards, my transition from console to PC is absolute.

 

[Strazdas]

http://business.comcast.com/docs/ent-solutions-docs/bus-svcs-tcs-ver20-published-130401.pdf?sfvrsn=0

This is Comcast's terms of service. Please look at Article 15A, on the bottom of pg 12. They have 24 hours to send out a repairman, or they issue a credit for the 24hour period to your account. They are not required to provide 99% uptime, and they are not required to come out within 2 hours.

And I fail to see how the fact that your internet hasn't failed means that internet never fails for anyone else anywhere.

well, the part you pointed states 24 hours, so thats not "next friday" though.
there is no uptime sadly or i missed it (havnet read the whole document), but:

Comcast makes no representation regarding the speed of the Internet Service. Actual speeds may vary and are not guaranteed. any factors affect speed including, without limitation, the number of workstations using a single connection.

WOW. our contracts have an "Article" where it states that speeds privided cannot be slower than that of the plan chosen and if any such problem occur due to providers fault it shoudl be remedied as quickly as possible (no time given though) with exception of unreasonable circumstances (like someone stealing the cables or something). the actual situation is that most of the time speeds are higher than per plan due to "hey we got free capacity thats nto used at this moment we may as well let people use it" thinking. the cables are there anyway, and you only need to limit it at peak hours. no doublr speeds or something, but my 50mbps (cheapest) plan goes up to 80mbps sometimes. though for those with 300mbps this probably dont happen. at least i didnt notice when i had that, but that could be due to my limited router back then that i used to connect a laptop+PC combination to.
ANd we do have a clause for 99.9% uptime (because 100% is "unreasonable" according to them), and they deliver by now, that used to be problematic in the past, say, 5 years ago, when once a month it would go out for a few hours or so and thne you could try counting the %, though as far as i know noone sued them yet (our people dont like to sue everyone for everything unlike americans).
And if there is a problem you usually call them and they fix it from thier end over phone. firend onf mine had internet that woudl reset every few hours, so he called them every day, for 2 weeks, they got pissed off and fixed it

Dark blue regions have the most access to internet. That is Canada, Australia, EU, and America. Blue regions have moderate access (South America, Russia). Light blue regions (the rest of the world) have 40% or less internet penetration. In other words, internet is not readily accessible for large regions of the map. Microsoft is cutting out a large customer base.

notice how almost whole europe and parts of asia is darker than america? US is 33rd in the world compared by internet speeds.

While yes, there are large regions that are lighter, you have to look at them. they are usually 3rd/2nd world countries, where most inhabintants would not be affording a console anyway, and those that would likely has internet to begin with. The amount of people who have internet acess is 300 times larger than the amount of people who has current generation consoles (even if we ignore that one person may have multiple consoles and those sales that were made to replace broken one).
Microsoft is cutting out a small userbase who prioritized consoles over internet when they are so poor they cant afford both, but not poor enough to afford at least one. and a few people who need the console on the go (liek soldiers) of course, but i dont think thats ther target audience to begin with with what they been showing us.

Regardless, that still doesn't answer the question. How is someone's gaming experience is improved by being forced to connect once a day? What purpose or benefit does the daily connection serve, other than the server checking for hacked systems?

Its not, there is no benefit of forced used control for the users. Hence me and plenty of other people are not buying it out of the principle and not because we do not fit the requirements.
Still that is not to say that the console will sell poorly because people lack internet - they dont. it will sell poorly because its anti-consumer product.

We own a copy of the media to do as we please.
[/img]grumpy cat[/img]

sadly, this statement has been false for quite a few years now.
remember the guy that got jailed for jail-breaking PS3s? he did not have a right to do as he please with hardware that he "owns" because "sony didnt like it".

Deus Ex HR is a recent, new game? Really?

well lets see. it came out August 26, 2011 for EU audience (me). that is less than 2 years ago. Id say thats pretty recent.
Then again, i think Fallout3 is a recent game, and if you want to talk old games, lets talk Return Fire (1996).
Your probably one of those guys "omg its 6 months old, thats old garbage i wont play it".

What you don't understand the principle of convenience. It doesn't affect me, so I don't care. As long as their change is integrated in a seamless way where it doesn't affect me why should it bother me?

government spying on your does not bring inconvienience. People blowing eachother in middle east doesn ot bring us inconvienience. and yet we care. you know why? because convenience is not equal happiness.

Thing is, this shit has happened long ago. It happened when I bought Half Life 2 from a store, was forced to install Steam, and saw that my game didn't actually work off the shelf because the disc only had 95% of the game. Now nearly everyone is ready to bend over for whatever Valve wants and will defend them to their dying breath. Gamers will get over it.

I still dont use Steam. and if i buy a game that requires it, there are ways around it. and yes the disk does hold 100%, they just want to check it with the steam anyway.

That's the thing, Valve killed ownership LONG AGO. Microsoft is simply catching up. But get in any Valve thread and speak against them and what happens? Everyone jumps on you like a pack of wolves.

are you new to escpaist? while admittedly not everyone, but there are plenty of people that hate Valve for this.

That is a pretty good question, if they are still going to have physical media, why not just use that to "lock/unlock" the game as they do now.

you can copy the keys and if them achine does not check online for verification, you can, effectively, have unlimited installs on unlimited machines with same key, even for uillegaly obtained copies. also requires the console to know combinations to check for them for games nto created yet = impossible or extremely restrictive on code generator (which will get cracked). Using server-side checks for that does go around the whole "offline so cant verify if tricked" part.

Gamestop grew filthy rich by exploiting arbitrage. Normally, I'd agree with those developers and publishers who say that Gamestop is ripping their sales figures a new one, because logically, they were.

However, I don't feel sorry at all for those same publishers when they continued to do business with Gamestop anyway; they're obviously still benefiting from exposure and exclusive deals enough to warrant doing business with them.

and you know why it worked so well? because most games were a one-off 5 hour spectacles, that you woudl trade back in then ext day. if the games were actually attractive enough for you to keep them for, say, a year, the arbitrage market would fall upon itself due to lack of supply. and whne supply finally comes the demand would be too small because we all know games sell over 80% of their sales in first 3 months.

 

[Atmos Duality]

and you know why it worked so well? because most games were a one-off 5 hour spectacles, that you woudl trade back in then ext day. if the games were actually attractive enough for you to keep them for, say, a year, the arbitrage market would fall upon itself due to lack of supply. and whne supply finally comes the demand would be too small because we all know games sell over 80% of their sales in first 3 months.

5 hours sounds a bit too low, but yeah, I see your point.
Not helping is that the increased homogeneity between games. How many shooters are on the market now? How many are relying on multiplayer to keep people playing? How many of them feature hyper-linear campaigns?

I'm not saying that all shooters are bad, but it's not exactly helping when each game is doing very little to distinguish itself.

(When a Transformers game is in serious contention for being among the most distinct shooters I've seen and played in the last generation, something has gone SERIOUSLY wrong.)

 

[misg]

My solution is simple. Keep playing PC games, keep showing others that PC isn't a scary monster they think it is. That there is endless free and diverse choices on the PC. My PC is my gaming machine, my entertainment center. My work station my form of communition in Digital form. For those who think that PC's are over prices you don't need 5k to have a good rig. For those out there who are upset with Xbox and know to game on the PC show and teach your friends. Everyone i know used to be big into xbox and know everyone plays 90% on their PC. PC is still King.