Xbox One's Policy Reveal, According To Microsoft's Whitten

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

...I wonder what Jago1130 is up to now...?

shame he got himself banned, i'd be interested on his stance here

Jago1130 got banned?

Huh.

As for this recent announcement, this is all I've read.

Backpedal, You guys suck I'm taking my ball with me, Backpedal, Oh gods the rage is leaving the internet and normal people are taking notice! Backpedal, and even more Backpedal.

 

[Ironside]

Mandatory kinect is still a deal breaker, but i wouldn't trust MS to keep this promise anyway - there is nothing stopping them changing their mind mid way through the generation and reversing it. It also sounds like some games will require always online anyway, because thats the way they were made.

 

[tdylan]

With the xbone 6 months till release, its really not hard to believe they can change this stuff now. Its not like they are changing it mid release like PS3 with its backward compatibility. I really dont think they could just decided to add DRM, that would give people the reason to sue them for it. Its a major change that goes against the product you bought. An of course they well say "we cant turn it off" they are selling their product. Why would they say they could turn it off? End of the day the console is 6 months a way and they can still tweak it all they want until they start production.

But yes, i agree. There is a small chance that they could switch it back. The techs all their to make it able to. I guess its a risk. I guess you either trust them or not. But even Sony could do the same thing in the future. But to be honest, i doubt either company will.

lol My capture said Swan Song. So maybe that means im wrong.

I don't feel that the "6 months til release" argument holds water. If they really had "all that time" to make changes, they could make them beforehand so that the console doesn't require a "day one update." The "day one update" says to me that everything's already written in stone, and patching it is the only way they can remove it.

Also, if they can undo it with an update, they can restore it with an update. Sure, you won't have to download the update that restores it, but they can simply make the update mandatory for playing online, or using any of the functionality outside of single player. "If you don't want a brick, you'll update."

 

[GAunderrated]

the 24 hour check in - is no longer a thing, games which require a connected state, like Forza with its drivatars, will still need one regardless of Microsoft's policy change. "But that's up to the game experience and sort of how they use those features," says Whitten.

this is all I wanted for single player games, a bit of choice. not have the online features forced upon us (although, I might like them if i give them a try) - speaking in general here not specificallt Xbone

Then you might want to wait and see how this plays out. There is still the whole "cloud processing" situation looming ahead that could essentially go the SimCity route and basically be a sneaky always online DRM hiding in the xbox one.

 

[mrpollio]

Getting better Microsoft, now just add a way to disable the Kinect. I don't care if you put in Spaceballs the Game 2: The Search For More Money and it requires you to activate it for the game but I don't want guests in my living room or bedroom being an involuntary Nielson Family.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

With the xbone 6 months till release, its really not hard to believe they can change this stuff now. Its not like they are changing it mid release like PS3 with its backward compatibility. I really dont think they could just decided to add DRM, that would give people the reason to sue them for it. Its a major change that goes against the product you bought. An of course they well say "we cant turn it off" they are selling their product. Why would they say they could turn it off? End of the day the console is 6 months a way and they can still tweak it all they want until they start production.

But yes, i agree. There is a small chance that they could switch it back. The techs all their to make it able to. I guess its a risk. I guess you either trust them or not. But even Sony could do the same thing in the future. But to be honest, i doubt either company will.

lol My capture said Swan Song. So maybe that means im wrong.

I don't feel that the "6 months til release" argument holds water. If they really had "all that time" to make changes, they could make them beforehand so that the console doesn't require a "day one update." The "day one update" says to me that everything's already written in stone, and patching it is the only way they can remove it.

Also, if they can undo it with an update, they can restore it with an update. Sure, you won't have to download the update that restores it, but they can simply make the update mandatory for playing online, or using any of the functionality outside of single player. "If you don't want a brick, you'll update."

I would argue, until its release date and the goods are on the shelf. MS can do whatever they want with the Xbone until it goes to final production. They are selling a product, they are not going to contradict themselves are they? They will say "this is what it is" because they cant say "this is what it is, though their are changes that may or may not happen". Software can be changed easily. Its not an issue to MS. End of the day, if they lied, then they will face major gamer wrath in the future.

 

[saxman234]

I am just curious, did any of the game at the show even use Kinect? I think they have a new kinect sports, but besides that I didn't see one game that even incorporated kinect elements. Yes, the kinect is still as vital as ever, because navigating a menu is so much more difficult than trying to get Kinect to bring up the correct video sharing, tv, movie, whatever feature.

 

[BloodSquirrel]

With the xbone 6 months till release, its really not hard to believe they can change this stuff now. Its not like they are changing it mid release like PS3 with its backward compatibility. I really dont think they could just decided to add DRM, that would give people the reason to sue them for it. Its a major change that goes against the product you bought. An of course they well say "we cant turn it off" they are selling their product. Why would they say they could turn it off? End of the day the console is 6 months a way and they can still tweak it all they want until they start production.

The notion that this DRM was something that they couldn't turn off at-will was always absurd.

The primary DRM on a modern console exists to prevent anyone except the console manufacturer from updating the OS. Otherwise, the console is just a computer. If Microsoft wants to turn DRM on or off with an OS update, there's nothing to stop them from a technical standpoint.

Of course, they can't turn the DRM back on for consoles that aren't connected to get updates. So if they do turn it back on, they'll just be risking people not updating their consoles or buying new games anymore to avoid having their system locked into DRM.

 

[Diablo1099_v1legacy]

Wonder how the defenders are going to react to this? I mean, they can say "Hey! Xbone doesn't Suck!" for real this time, but they REALLY went out of their way to defend a product that even M$ gave up on in the end.

 

[Megacherv]

No purchase from me still, I'd rather give my money to the company that's supporting the indie devs properly than making them jump through hoops or charging them money

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

the 24 hour check in - is no longer a thing, games which require a connected state, like Forza with its drivatars, will still need one regardless of Microsoft's policy change. "But that's up to the game experience and sort of how they use those features," says Whitten.

this is all I wanted for single player games, a bit of choice. not have the online features forced upon us (although, I might like them if i give them a try) - speaking in general here not specificallt Xbone

Then you might want to wait and see how this plays out. There is still the whole "cloud processing" situation looming ahead that could essentially go the SimCity route and basically be a sneaky always online DRM hiding in the xbox one.

well I'm predominently don't buy pre-order/day one. especially where so much money is involved I like to see how things work out beyond hype. plus i'm predominently a PC gamer

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

With the xbone 6 months till release, its really not hard to believe they can change this stuff now. Its not like they are changing it mid release like PS3 with its backward compatibility. I really dont think they could just decided to add DRM, that would give people the reason to sue them for it. Its a major change that goes against the product you bought. An of course they well say "we cant turn it off" they are selling their product. Why would they say they could turn it off? End of the day the console is 6 months a way and they can still tweak it all they want until they start production.

The notion that this DRM was something that they couldn't turn off at-will was always absurd.

The primary DRM on a modern console exists to prevent anyone except the console manufacturer from updating the OS. Otherwise, the console is just a computer. If Microsoft wants to turn DRM on or off with an OS update, there's nothing to stop them from a technical standpoint.

Of course, they can't turn the DRM back on for consoles that aren't connected to get updates. So if they do turn it back on, they'll just be risking people not updating their consoles or buying new games anymore to avoid having their system locked into DRM.

I agree, they are quickly changing major things. DRM, used gaming etc. That is changing a lot of stuff. Major choices they made as a company. They turned if off, but i agree the tech is still there. They havnt binned it. I guess im giving them the benefit of the doubt. They could turn it all on, but i dont think they would. I think you buy a product based on its ability, if they change that stuff then its not the product you bought. So MS will be sued, mostly cos of the internet issues etc. Would be like buying a kettle and 2 months later they say "Nope, no more hot water, only lukewarm water". It totally destroys the reason the product was bought for.

So yeah, they could turn it all on. But people were moaning cos there is DRM. Now they are moaning cos MS may turn the DRM on maybe. Im not saying your fears are not justified, just that people are moaning whatever MS does. Hell, even Sony could add DRM in the future. But know one is on SOnys case on what they may hypothetically do in the future.

 

[BakaSmurf]

They didn't listen to consumers. They listened to pre-order numbers and the loss of money in the bank because of the DRM policies and Kinect issue. Unfortunately, they still haven't dealt with the kinect or the price discrepancy, so it's a no purchase for me.

Yeah, because lord knows it isn't consumers that make pre-orders, roight...?

 

[Lokoloshe]

"While always online - or its near-equivalent, the 24 hour check in - is no longer a thing, games which require a connected state, like Forza with its drivatars, will still need one regardless of Microsoft's policy change. "But that's up to the game experience and sort of how they use those features,"

Considering the admission that Forza will require you to be online in some form or another anyway I'm willing to bet that all the X1's 1st party exclusives will have some feature that will require it.

 

[Callate]

It's hard for me to read this without thinking:

"We love getting feedback from gamers," Microsoft's Marc Whitten said through bared teeth as he ground a rock into powder between white-knuckled fingers.

 

[Mumorpuger]

I wish XBLA would just adopt Steam's online/digital distribution model/offline mode.

 

[DuelLadyS]

However one benefit of this is that, when you take a disc to your friend's Xbox One and play it there, should your friend want to buy the game no download will be required, as the digital heavy lifting will already have been done by the disc.

So, that means the 'every disc must download to the hard drive' thing is still going? Because I really, REALLY don't want that. I don't want to wait for the download to play. I don't want to eat up my hard drive space. I still have the disc- why can't I play off the disc?

 

[tdylan]

They could turn it all on, but i dont think they would. I think you buy a product based on its ability, if they change that stuff then its not the product you bought. So MS will be sued, mostly cos of the internet issues etc. Would be like buying a kettle and 2 months later they say "Nope, no more hot water, only lukewarm water". It totally destroys the reason the product was bought for.

So yeah, they could turn it all on. But people were moaning cos there is DRM. Now they are moaning cos MS may turn the DRM on maybe. Im not saying your fears are not justified, just that people are moaning whatever MS does. Hell, even Sony could add DRM in the future. But know one is on SOnys case on what they may hypothetically do in the future.

Sony touted the PS3s ability to do something or the other with Linux. They later removed it resulting in an uproar. However, they could not be sued due to the EULA stating that Sony could change the features of the device any time they wanted, regardless of what they promised when you bought it. You could agree to the new terms, or not. But you couldn't sue them for changing them. I have no doubt MS will have the same thing in place.

I also don't think the "Sony can change their stance in the future but no one's giving them grief about that possibility" argument is just. A lot of people could do a lot of things, but we don't necessarily condemn them for what they have the potential to do. MS, on the other hand, is being condemned for what they themselves proudly exclaimed they intended to do. They haven't reversed course due to a change of heart, or epiphany that their approach was a misguided one. They changed course because they finally realized how royally they had screwed up. To me it's more like someone hellbent on abusing their spouse, but not going ahead with it not because "you know what, this is wrong," but instead because "you know what? I might end up going to jail." They have every intention of doing it, and may feel it's worth doing in the future, but at the present moment they've decided not to out of fear of reprisal, not out of morality.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

They could turn it all on, but i dont think they would. I think you buy a product based on its ability, if they change that stuff then its not the product you bought. So MS will be sued, mostly cos of the internet issues etc. Would be like buying a kettle and 2 months later they say "Nope, no more hot water, only lukewarm water". It totally destroys the reason the product was bought for.

So yeah, they could turn it all on. But people were moaning cos there is DRM. Now they are moaning cos MS may turn the DRM on maybe. Im not saying your fears are not justified, just that people are moaning whatever MS does. Hell, even Sony could add DRM in the future. But know one is on SOnys case on what they may hypothetically do in the future.

Sony touted the PS3s ability to do something or the other with Linux. They later removed it resulting in an uproar. However, they could not be sued due to the EULA stating that Sony could change the features of the device any time they wanted, regardless of what they promised when you bought it. You could agree to the new terms, or not. But you couldn't sue them for changing them. I have no doubt MS will have the same thing in place.

I also don't think the "Sony can change their stance in the future but no one's giving them grief about that possibility" argument is just. A lot of people could do a lot of things, but we don't necessarily condemn them for what they have the potential to do. MS, on the other hand, is being condemned for what they themselves proudly exclaimed they intended to do. They haven't reversed course due to a change of heart, or epiphany that their approach was a misguided one. They changed course because they finally realized how royally they had screwed up. To me it's more like someone hellbent on abusing their spouse, but not going ahead with it not because "you know what, this is wrong," but instead because "you know what? I might end up going to jail." They have every intention of doing it, and may feel it's worth doing in the future, but at the present moment they've decided not to out of fear of reprisal, not out of morality.

No idea about the Linux thing or PS3. So will agree with you their as your in the Know. I was seeing it like Sony changed their BC rules, but release a new PS3 that had no BC in it. Where as BC still worked for those that bought early. I wouldnt be surprised if MS didnt have a get out clause if things went bad. I would like to think MS are not stupid. But money is the decider, and thus why they changed their tune. But if they reversed everything, it will go against them, unless they reversed it all but had cheap DL games like with Steam. Then its not that much an issue.

 

[Robetid]

They didn't listen to consumers. They listened to pre-order numbers and the loss of money in the bank because of the DRM policies and Kinect issue. Unfortunately, they still haven't dealt with the kinect or the price discrepancy, so it's a no purchase for me.

Yeah, because lord knows it isn't consumers that make pre-orders, roight...?

Yea, except I think they had a chance to listen to consumers before pre-orders went up, instead they banked on xbox fanboys to carry them through. When they realized that wasn't the case the pre-orders spoke louder than the voices of the general public, or consumers.

OT: While this is a big step forward for the console, whatever the reasons for changing their "selling point", I think this will turn out to be too little to late for a lot of gamers. Then there is the kinekt to consider, in an age where conspiracy theories run rampant a lot of people are generally spooked by the idea of a mandatory camera/microphone being connected anytime their console is on.