Poll: XBOX ONE DRM BACK!

[TrulyBritish]

Why do people point to Steams DRM and say "see! Other stuff can have DRM!" like this suddenly validates everything? Steam may have DRM, but I'm pretty damn sure that that's looked down upon as a slightly negative feature of Steam, only bettered by the fact that Steam has an offline mode so doesn't get in the way of anything. The reason Steam gets away with it is it's sales, in other words it's good benefits outweighed it's DRM (and what other issues there are). People looked at Microsofts form of DRM, saw it was worse/needless in it's context, felt there weren't enough benefits (or adequately explained benefits depending on your view), and decided that the Xbone was shit.
Steam doesn't prove that DRM is good or beneficial, it merely proves that people are willing to put up with DRM as long as it's not intrusive/obstructive and there are plenty of other benefits to using the system.

 

[TehCookie]

Steam is not a great thing, it's a steaming pile of shit that won't let me play the games I bought. Why would I want that on a console?

 

[BloodSquirrel]

But no. A bunch of whiny @zz holes heard the words "no sharing games" panicked, and threw a big hissy fit. They didn't allow or listen to the fact that it would be like steam and games would be saved to your gamertag.

Funny, I was just thinking about how a bunch of whiny @zz holes can't get it through their thick skulls that not everybody likes Steam, and that being able to play my games when my internet is down is a lot more valuable to me than some unlikely scenario where I'm on the other side of the world without my Xbox and suddenly want to play my games.

Good riddance to the DRM, and good riddance to all of the insufferable, immature, obnoxious turds who post threads like this because they lack the capacity to understand the concept of other people having opinions that aren't directly in service to them.

 

[Souplex]

We need to step away from Steam, its ilk, and digital distribution as a whole.
Not owning your games is pretty stupid.

 

[Griffolion]

Spoiler: Am I the only one who's thought this more than once about the Escapist forums since the whole XB1 debacle?

[/spoiler]

I know you should never say "am I the only one", because it's the internet and you're never the only one. But I figured it's an interesting enough question.

There's nothing I want to say since others have more eloquantly made the arguments than I can.

[QUOTE=HydroFire]D: thanks for being so welcoming...[/QUOTE]

All I will say is that the OP shouldn't complain about a bad welcome, when he called everyone who railed against the original iteration of the XB1 a "whiny asshole" (btw, it wasn't a bunch, it was a vast amount of people, hence why MS backed down). The Escapist was one of the centers of the backlash in regards to internet presence and discussion, so you're essentially calling a significant portion of the forum userbase, from whom you want a nice welcome, whiny assholes.

I'm not going to tell you leave the forum, it's not my right. But I will ask you if the Escapist is a place you want to be with that opinion, and your lack of tact in discussing it. Aren't you best off in a forum with people more conducive to your line of thinking? Or, at the very least, just maybe toning down the insults a little?

 

[EquiusZahhak]

No matter what, you can never justify the kind of stuff Microsoft was trying to do

It became clear that it wouldn't make sense financially to use that kind of DRM. The people wouldn't buy it, so Microsoft had to change their product.

That's kind of how capitalism works. There wasn't demand for a console with bullshit DRM, so Microsoft didn't supply one.

I mean, if you don't understand why Microsoft started changing their tune
LOOK AT YOUR OWN POLL.

 

[Spacemonkey430]

Another one? Where the hell do you people come from? I need to just stop looking at these...

 

[Weaver]

Unlike now, where you just take the disc over and play the game on someone elses console?
You can get a 100 disc CD wallet for like $10.

 

[SilkySkyKitten]

The difference is that Valve has made it quite explicitly clear that whenever their company comes to an end, their games will live past them and their fans will be able to enjoy what they have purchased even if Valve is not there to be able to support them.

Actually, no they haven't. They have made no such promise, and they wouldn't even be in a position to make such a promise for games they don't publish.

Actually, yes they have. Gabe Newell himself has stated on several occasions that, if Steam were to be discontinued or Valve were to go under, updates would be released and a contingency plan would be put into place so that everyone would still be able to access their games on Steam or at least download everything with the requirement for Steam removed.

So yeah, Valve has a backup plan. Whereas Microsoft haven't stated if they do or not, and considering their track record and extreme reliance on a "The cloud is the future and if you don't believe so, you're backwards and should just stick with your outdated crap!" train of thought, it's safe to assume they don't.

 

[UnnDunn]

The difference is that Valve has made it quite explicitly clear that whenever their company comes to an end, their games will live past them and their fans will be able to enjoy what they have purchased even if Valve is not there to be able to support them.

Actually, no they haven't. They have made no such promise, and they wouldn't even be in a position to make such a promise for games they don't publish.

Actually, yes they have. Gabe Newell himself has stated on several occasions that, if Steam were to be discontinued or Valve were to go under, updates would be released and a contingency plan would be put into place so that everyone would still be able to access their games on Steam or at least download everything with the requirement for Steam removed.

So yeah, Valve has a backup plan. Whereas Microsoft haven't stated if they do or not, and considering their track record and extreme reliance on a "The cloud is the future and if you don't believe so, you're backwards and should just stick with your outdated crap!" train of thought, it's safe to assume they don't.

I would love for you to provide evidence for this claim.

 

[Robert Marrs]

No matter how you slice it drm is a bad thing. It might have its bonuses but all of those are things that could be implemented without some corporation having total control over how, when and where you play the things you paid cash money for. Microsoft did not have to get rid of game sharing. They just took their ball and went home because they did not get their way. I dont care what positives microsoft claims the drm had. At the end of the day all they want it is to completely control the way you play and buy your games. If they can make a platform that gives you no reason to buy a physical game they can start to really profit from the digital market.

Unlike pc however the only digital market you can get your games from is microsofts on xbox. You find games on xbox live still going for full price that came out years ago. Granted their have been some decent sales as of late but it really just seems like a desperate attempt to keep up with ps plus. Ok im getting off topic. Basically yes there were some good policies that the xbox was going to have all of which would have worked just fine without drm. Also microsoft did not change those policies because people complained. They changed the policies because microsoft was getting slaughtered in pre-order sales. So blame microsoft for acting like a child and taking its shiniest toys home, not consumers for having legitimate complaints and voting with their wallets.

 

[Doom972]

Steam has competition on PC games, they are not the only digital distributor for that platform and anyone can start a similar service. On the Xbone it's just Microsoft, which means no competition on Xbone game prices. Steam is so popular due to being cheap, not just comfortable to use.

 

[michael87cn]

The controversy over the two NEW systems made me finally decide to pick up a PS3.

Love it.

Never going back to Microsoft, don't like how they treat publishers, don't like how much they charge publishers to provide customers with updates (like $40,000 to release a single patch- Source: Torchlight devs).

Even with the loss of free online with PS4, I think overall the PS3 feels like a much more refined machine for GAMING. And that sits well with me.

 

[TomWiley]

The difference is that Valve has made it quite explicitly clear that whenever their company comes to an end, their games will live past them and their fans will be able to enjoy what they have purchased even if Valve is not there to be able to support them.

Actually, no they haven't. They have made no such promise, and they wouldn't even be in a position to make such a promise for games they don't publish.

Actually, yes they have. Gabe Newell himself has stated on several occasions that, if Steam were to be discontinued or Valve were to go under, updates would be released and a contingency plan would be put into place so that everyone would still be able to access their games on Steam or at least download everything with the requirement for Steam removed.

So yeah, Valve has a backup plan. Whereas Microsoft haven't stated if they do or not, and considering their track record and extreme reliance on a "The cloud is the future and if you don't believe so, you're backwards and should just stick with your outdated crap!" train of thought, it's safe to assume they don't.

Can you refer me to the article or video where Gabe promises that? It doesn't make sense to me that Valve would promise something like seeing as the way things work now, if you get blocked from Steam, you pretty much lose all your games.

As to the promise to path their SAAS not to need connectively should their servers go down, I'm pretty sure Microsoft have made similar promises.

 

[Robert Marrs]

The difference is that Valve has made it quite explicitly clear that whenever their company comes to an end, their games will live past them and their fans will be able to enjoy what they have purchased even if Valve is not there to be able to support them.

Actually, no they haven't. They have made no such promise, and they wouldn't even be in a position to make such a promise for games they don't publish.

Actually, yes they have. Gabe Newell himself has stated on several occasions that, if Steam were to be discontinued or Valve were to go under, updates would be released and a contingency plan would be put into place so that everyone would still be able to access their games on Steam or at least download everything with the requirement for Steam removed.

So yeah, Valve has a backup plan. Whereas Microsoft haven't stated if they do or not, and considering their track record and extreme reliance on a "The cloud is the future and if you don't believe so, you're backwards and should just stick with your outdated crap!" train of thought, it's safe to assume they don't.

Can you refer me to the article or video where Gabe promises that? It doesn't make sense to me that Valve would promise something like seeing as the way things work now, if you get blocked from Steam, you pretty much lose all your games.

As to the promise to path their SAAS not to need connectively should their servers go down, I'm pretty sure Microsoft have made similar promises.

I have heard the same thing many times but attempts to find a quote or even mention of him saying it have failed. In all honesty though i trust valve to an extent (at least more than most corporation) so it seems like they would at least try to do something like this.

 

[Something Amyss]

Steam is not a great thing, it's a steaming pile of shit that won't let me play the games I bought. Why would I want that on a console?

PC gamers have given up their rights and freedoms, so you should, too!

We need to step away from Steam, its ilk, and digital distribution as a whole.
Not owning your games is pretty stupid.

The only plus side to Steam is that, at a couple bucks each on sale, I can live with the concept of a rented game.

 

[Something Amyss]

I have heard the same thing many times but attempts to find a quote or even mention of him saying it have failed. In all honesty though i trust valve to an extent (at least more than most corporation) so it seems like they would at least try to do something like this.

Why, though? It takes a massive shitstorm to get them to refund purchases of a broken, unplayable game. For a while they had an F rating with multiple branches of the BBB. It may even still be true. Why would a company like that be proactive enough when they're sinking if they can't be bothered to provide simpler service solutions when they're smaller scale and Valve is in the position to do so?

Because you like them? Because they offer sales? Because ponies?

 

[Saika Renegade]

The difference is that Valve has made it quite explicitly clear that whenever their company comes to an end, their games will live past them and their fans will be able to enjoy what they have purchased even if Valve is not there to be able to support them.

Actually, no they haven't. They have made no such promise, and they wouldn't even be in a position to make such a promise for games they don't publish.

I only said 'their games', meaning Valve's own property. I made no statements regarding games published by others. Will I miss FTL on Steam if the service dies? Yes, but I have alternatives.

And from what I can tell, their own site staff have made us aware of a contingency patch in the event of the death of Valve. The details of the patch have not been divined so far, and I stand corrected on the explicitness on the matter.

Still, it's more than Microsoft has offered to answer the question of "What then?"

 

[IamLEAM1983]

I just don't get the OP's arguments, much less Microsoft's pre-rollback.

"Hey, the online features are neat because you can download your purchased titles on a friend's Xbone!"

Um - games tend to run upwards of six gigs, nowadays. That's not the kind of traffic I'd stick on any connection being handled by a friend of mine without said friend's explicit permission. That's a heck of a lot of bandwidth for a single download. Considering, I don't see that as a courtesy so much as a disservice. What about the Impulse Download kids? You're fine with Little Timmy blowing your bandwidth cap because he's friends with Little Jimmy, who happens to have Call of Modern Battlefield: Halo Duty 6?

"Who rents games these days?"

Seriously? I do. I very much do. I have close to zero money to spend on console games at the moment and I like to stay abreast of what's going on. Rentals and weekend binges are the only way I've managed to have any sort of appreciation for the more standard and triple-A side of the industry, as of the last two years.

"BRING BACK TEH DEE ARR EMMS, I WANTS MAH FEATURES!"

Your "features" are in no way tied to Microsoft's rights policy. Their initial take on data rights management was nothing but a misguided attempt to try and nip the chipping and game-copying scene in the bud - at the expense of their entire consumer base.

The trick is to look past the rosy promises landed by PR, OP. Of course, Jennifer Larson-Green has been ostensibly hired to tell you that Feature X they've come up with is a good thing, and that you have to agree. If you don't, her job is to rectify that. Stop reading Microsoft-mandated press releases, stop listening to the pundits caterwauling about needy gamers ruining everyone's fun, and broaden your horizons.

 

[TomWiley]

The difference is that Valve has made it quite explicitly clear that whenever their company comes to an end, their games will live past them and their fans will be able to enjoy what they have purchased even if Valve is not there to be able to support them.

Actually, no they haven't. They have made no such promise, and they wouldn't even be in a position to make such a promise for games they don't publish.

Actually, yes they have. Gabe Newell himself has stated on several occasions that, if Steam were to be discontinued or Valve were to go under, updates would be released and a contingency plan would be put into place so that everyone would still be able to access their games on Steam or at least download everything with the requirement for Steam removed.

So yeah, Valve has a backup plan. Whereas Microsoft haven't stated if they do or not, and considering their track record and extreme reliance on a "The cloud is the future and if you don't believe so, you're backwards and should just stick with your outdated crap!" train of thought, it's safe to assume they don't.

Can you refer me to the article or video where Gabe promises that? It doesn't make sense to me that Valve would promise something like seeing as the way things work now, if you get blocked from Steam, you pretty much lose all your games.

As to the promise to path their SAAS not to need connectively should their servers go down, I'm pretty sure Microsoft have made similar promises.

I have heard the same thing many times but attempts to find a quote or even mention of him saying it have failed. In all honesty though i trust valve to an extent (at least more than most corporation) so it seems like they would at least try to do something like this.

Well, I really don't nor will I ever. All companies want to do only one thing: make money, and the only thing that separates them is how good they handle their PR. Valve is no exception, and I'm not going to fool myself into thinking they got my back, especially when I consider how their EULA is way more anti-consumer than that of EA (which is never a good sign).

It's the same with all other companies. I'm not going to forget that Sony was a public supporter of SOPA and used to sue their own users for trying to install Linux on PS3 just because, right now, they seem like the lesser of two evils.