When the "vocal minority" begins to actually hurt us consumers.

[WeepingAngels]

Steam already has DRM, consoles do not. That's the difference.

I'm going be vocal when it comes to keeping that vile repulsive shit off consoles, I like to be able to play my games. DRM does not allow me to play them when I want to, Steam already bricks my games with no internet even with it's "offline mode." Which doesn't work unless I'm online which is redundant. I get kicked out from playing when my internet so much as has a 5 min hiccup (and the most recent game was Skyrim, which isn't multiplayer nor 24 hour DRM). Not to mention with my 3rd world internet it takes 10 hours to download the average AAA game.

Consoles have DRM, always have. You need to have the disc in the drive and back in the cartridge days, there was a sumcheck and some other check that determined that a cart wasn't copied.

 

[TehCookie]

Steam already has DRM, consoles do not. That's the difference.

I'm going be vocal when it comes to keeping that vile repulsive shit off consoles, I like to be able to play my games. DRM does not allow me to play them when I want to, Steam already bricks my games with no internet even with it's "offline mode." Which doesn't work unless I'm online which is redundant. I get kicked out from playing when my internet so much as has a 5 min hiccup (and the most recent game was Skyrim, which isn't multiplayer nor 24 hour DRM). Not to mention with my 3rd world internet it takes 10 hours to download the average AAA game.

Consoles have DRM, always have. You need to have the disc in the drive and back in the cartridge days, there was a sumcheck and some other check that determined that a cart wasn't copied.

Online DRM. Do I really need to specify that?

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

That was the one function of the xbox one that people didn't complain about. What people were angry at was that if you gave the physical copy of the game to your friend it was digitally monitored and limited.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Steam already has DRM, consoles do not. That's the difference.

I'm going be vocal when it comes to keeping that vile repulsive shit off consoles, I like to be able to play my games. DRM does not allow me to play them when I want to, Steam already bricks my games with no internet even with it's "offline mode." Which doesn't work unless I'm online which is redundant. I get kicked out from playing when my internet so much as has a 5 min hiccup (and the most recent game was Skyrim, which isn't multiplayer nor 24 hour DRM). Not to mention with my 3rd world internet it takes 10 hours to download the average AAA game.

Consoles have DRM, always have. You need to have the disc in the drive and back in the cartridge days, there was a sumcheck and some other check that determined that a cart wasn't copied.

Online DRM. Do I really need to specify that?

Yes you do because DRM and Online DRM are not the same thing.

 

[NiPah]

You missed the boat by several months, not only are you outright lying but you're also misinformed.
Don't worry though, you can always argue for Zynga next time.

 

[TehCookie]

Steam already has DRM, consoles do not. That's the difference.

I'm going be vocal when it comes to keeping that vile repulsive shit off consoles, I like to be able to play my games. DRM does not allow me to play them when I want to, Steam already bricks my games with no internet even with it's "offline mode." Which doesn't work unless I'm online which is redundant. I get kicked out from playing when my internet so much as has a 5 min hiccup (and the most recent game was Skyrim, which isn't multiplayer nor 24 hour DRM). Not to mention with my 3rd world internet it takes 10 hours to download the average AAA game.

Consoles have DRM, always have. You need to have the disc in the drive and back in the cartridge days, there was a sumcheck and some other check that determined that a cart wasn't copied.

Online DRM. Do I really need to specify that?

Yes you do because DRM and Online DRM are not the same thing.

And my ranting about internet didn't give you a clue which one I meant? Do I need to specify I mean video games instead of board or card games as well?

 

[Something Amyss]

I feel dirty. Ugh. I have to...Defend Steam.

Fast forward 3 months to now, and Valve announces the SAME functionality, and powers it with the SAME type of content control underpinnings, and they are hailed as the heroes of the industry and placed on a golden pedestal by the same people!

First off, I doubt it's the same people. I bet there's some overlap, but for the most part, what the console market and the PC market want aren't the same. I have no doubt the console outcry was based on the desires of console gamers. I also doubt this whole "vocal minority" crap. That was Microsoft's line, yet they were being outsold like 11 to 1 at one point.

Second, it's Steam EXPANDING versus Microsoft RESTRICTING. Holy false equivalence, Batman! Yes, they're going to get praise the expansion of something. Who knew?

Finally, and the reason I've actually got to defend Steam. Same thing? So Steam requires me to check in daily? Since this isn't my first PC, I have to check in hourly? That's...Odd. A couple months ago I accidentally ended up in offline mode and didn't notice for probably a week. IT was only when I was told I had been offline for a couple days, and I was all "huh. How aboot that."

 

[Something Amyss]

edit: does it really matter? I can't play one game while someone else plays another. I'm not really sharing my game with someone.

You're still sharing it. You just can't have simultaneous users. Even then, it's more lenient than physical sharing.

Admittedly, it is dumb, but it's still sharing.

 

[Weaver]

edit: does it really matter? I can't play one game while someone else plays another. I'm not really sharing my game with someone.

You're still sharing it. You just can't have simultaneous users. Even then, it's more lenient than physical sharing.

Admittedly, it is dumb, but it's still sharing.

Well, sure. I'll concede that. By the definition of sharing, it's sharing. It's not what personally springs up in my mind when someone asks to borrow a game, but sure; it's sharing.

 

[Altorin]

Microsoft didn't get panned because they decided to do something revolutionary and awesome.

they got panned because they completely misjudged their audience, and when asked simple questions, every representative gave different/contradictory answers.

And it wasn't just "the vocal minority" when it came to Microsoft. The entire gaming press that attended their reveal got the impression that they had no clue what they were doing. It was Wii Music all over again as far as they were concerned.

Steam gets away with it because Steamworks DRM is already an accepted part of PC gaming - we've been dealing with CD Keys since the late 90s, and Steam, while providing the same network of account locking DRM did so without a lot of the headaches, and if PC gamers were going to be locked to keys anyway, Steam made sense. And if your memory goes back far enough and clear enough, Steam didn't shine in the beginning. Early adopters mostly hated it. But soon it became apparent that they were doing it the right way, as opposed to Microsoft's own attempt at locking down PC Gaming, the much maligned Games for Windows Live, which Microsoft never did address or fix before scrapping the market place, probably to reintroduce it later...

So Steam introducing this concept makes sense. It's a clear upgrade to the service they're providing.

Microsoft's plan, while similar, was mired in confusion from the getgo. Introducing brand new draconian DRM that fundamentally changed the way people consume console games with the faint promise that "Yeah, there might be some neat stuff to make up for it, maybe". That's really all we got. Question Marks, and Deal With Its. That's not good business practice.

And honestly, the whole idea of the "vocal minority" in the case of gaming bothers me. If you take any one issue, you might get a minority, but when the "vocal minority" seems to be contradicting itself, step back, think for a moment and realize that there are lots of minorities. Each person is their own divining rod when it comes to what they want and what they don't want, and when an issue effects them and they speak out about it, you do yourself and "the consumers" a disservice by sweeping those comments under the rug as some "vocal minority" that doesn't matter because it's so small.

My thought with the Xbox One was always "I'm not buying it with those policies." Did I ask them to change it? I don't think I ever did. I just knew that *I* wasn't going to buy it, and I told people about it. That's it. I'm sorry that Microsoft's plan was so ass backwards and their conviction wavered in the aftermath due to this overwhelming "vocal minority". That's really not my problem.

 

[lacktheknack]

Everyone liked the idea of family sharing. They hated the idea of an always online check every 24 hours and a nightvision, infrared, heartbeat sensing camera wired up to the NSA that had to be on or the machine wouldn't function. It was then further revealed that the Xbox one's plan was basically limited to 1 hour demos anyways. After that time limit, the user your sharing with would have been prompted to buy the game or stop playing it.

For the record, Valve's sharing plan sounds like complete dick.
It locks your entire library if someone wants to play ONE game from it. So I can't play ANY games if someone wants to play one of mine. Screw that.

The Valve plan lets you always access your library, even if someone else is playing one of your games. If someone is playing your game, and you sign on and play, the other person will have a few minutes to log off, or buy their own copy of the game.

This is stated clearly in the FAQ for the Steam Family Sharing system. Please read it.

I'll go do that. Thanks for the link.

edit: does it really matter? I can't play one game while someone else plays another. I'm not really sharing my game with someone.

That's because it's realistic.

When I heard people say that the Xbox One was going to let up to ten or eleven people play the same game at the same time, all my NOPE alarms went off as if I'd read the TimeCube page. Apparently, that WASN'T going to be the function after all, which I fully believe. There was no way they were going to do that, because it literally could cut their sales down to a fifth, because no one needed to buy anything if they had a friend with a "free slot" open.

With this, people who want to play one of your games can only do so if you're not online.

It's like lending a physical CD-required copy, minus the actual exchange of hands. It's as good of a system as we're going to get that doesn't actively open itself to ludicrous abuse.

Plus, if a publisher gets cold feet, it can lock itself out of the program by requiring a CD-key, so risk of alienation is low.

 

[Agayek]

Thoughts?

Short version: You crazy.

Long version: You're drawing parallels and making assumptions about fundamentally invalid comparisons.

The backlash against Microsoft was not against the share plan or the like. It was quite explicitly against the draconian and blatant anti-consumer bullshit they were heaping on top of it. They said "Yea, sure you can share games... BUT you must be constantly connected to the internet, you must leave the Kinnect we force on you on at all times, you must accept that physical disks are one-time-use, you must sacrifice a goat hourly to please the Dark Gods, and you must wear a silly hat in view of the Kinnect. Fail to meet any of these requirements and your console becomes a paperweight."

That was the problem. People railed against all the pointless and blatantly anti-consumer bullshit that Microsoft tried to pass off as a good thing. It just so happened that in response, Microsoft axed the one part of the console that people weren't bitching about.

If they had approached it like Steam is (read: it has no impact on your experience as a customer, but it does allow you to improve the experience of your friends), then Microsoft's attempt would have been just as warmly received. They didn't do that though. They tried to strip all property rights from console owners and placate them with the share feature (which, according to hearsay, was mostly just a glorified demo service more than actually sharing games), and gamers called them on their bullshit.

 

[Abomination]

edit: does it really matter? I can't play one game while someone else plays another. I'm not really sharing my game with someone.

You're still sharing it. You just can't have simultaneous users. Even then, it's more lenient than physical sharing.

Admittedly, it is dumb, but it's still sharing.

Well, sure. I'll concede that. By the definition of sharing, it's sharing. It's not what personally springs up in my mind when someone asks to borrow a game, but sure; it's sharing.

Wait, so you can't share different games on the same account?

I mean, you're essentially just letting the other person log in with your account... which you already can do (well, it's against the TOS but you CAN still do it).

 

[wintercoat]

edit: does it really matter? I can't play one game while someone else plays another. I'm not really sharing my game with someone.

You're still sharing it. You just can't have simultaneous users. Even then, it's more lenient than physical sharing.

Admittedly, it is dumb, but it's still sharing.

Well, sure. I'll concede that. By the definition of sharing, it's sharing. It's not what personally springs up in my mind when someone asks to borrow a game, but sure; it's sharing.

Wait, so you can't share different games on the same account?

I mean, you're essentially just letting the other person log in with your account... which you already can do (well, it's against the TOS but you CAN still do it).

It's pretty much Valve allowing account sharing, without having to give the other person the password, or having to log in for the other person, while keeping them from being able to, say, sell/give away the things in your inventory. In other words, it's Valve approved, safe account sharing.

 

[V8 Ninja]

Ugh...

How many times does it need to be explained?

MICROSOFT WAS MASSIVELY HINDERING THE CONSUMER BEFORE HELPING THEM IN ANY WAY.

Yes, the game-sharing probably would have been an awesome feature, but it was tied to an unnecessary and extremely restrictive 24-hour check-in system and the near-total elimination of used games.

 

[Tanakh]

I like it. It's similar to my often used:
Q: A pound of manure mixed with a pound of ice cream. What do you get?
A: 2 pounds of manure.

Is this an actual saying? Guess people don't know what manure is or farming this days...

Steam already has DRM, consoles do not. That's the difference.

I'm going be vocal when it comes to keeping that vile repulsive shit off consoles, I like to be able to play my games. DRM does not allow me to play them when I want to, Steam already bricks my games with no internet even with it's "offline mode." Which doesn't work unless I'm online which is redundant. I get kicked out from playing when my internet so much as has a 5 min hiccup (and the most recent game was Skyrim, which isn't multiplayer nor 24 hour DRM). Not to mention with my 3rd world internet it takes 10 hours to download the average AAA game.

You might want to contact Valve, your Steam is malfunctioning, have heard that their costumer service is quite mediocre tough. Anyway, using system failures as arguments about it having no "offline mode" sounds quite fallacious.

 

[Abomination]

I like it. It's similar to my often used:
Q: A pound of manure mixed with a pound of ice cream. What do you get?
A: 2 pounds of manure.

Is this an actual saying? Guess people don't know what manure is or farming this days...

I think the point is, would you eat a scoop of 50% manure, 50% ice cream?

Or even 25% manure, 75% ice cream?

At what point is it an acceptable ratio where the ice cream off-sets the manure?

I mean, your milage may vary but I will only eat an ice cream with less than 0.001% manure contamination.

 

[Tanakh]

I think the point is, would you eat a scoop of 50% manure, 50% ice cream?

Or even 25% manure, 75% ice cream?

At what point is it an acceptable ratio where the ice cream off-sets the manure?

I mean, your milage may vary but I will only eat an ice cream with less than 0.001% manure contamination.

I get the point, it just saddens me that people use the manure to express that. Good organic manure is a wonderful object full of life, kind of a black rich and good smelling soil, dropping ice cream into that would certainly ruin it.

 

[Atmos Duality]

OK...this topic again.

What was Xbone initially offering? What was digital game sharing, REALLY?

The convenience of not having to lend discs out.
That's it: A PURELY CIRCUMSTANTIAL benefit.
That's not "revolutionary" at all, that's just Steam on multiple computers....only with no Offline Mode.

And what cost would console gamers pay to access this "glorious" convenience?
Just throwing away literally every single advantage their console had over PC.

And the Xbone Heartbreaks still sit here and wonder why people were mad..