Microsoft pulls a 180 (heh) on Xbone DRM (1 Viewer)

[DaveF]

To date, people hate time-based charges and won't pay for it. (See also microtransactions per webpage view) Even a la carte is of dubious interest. Buffet style is successful: pay monthly get all you can. Netflix, cable TV, pandora. More likely is a monthly gaming service, as Sony has started with their paid "gold" system. Get free games, to play and keep, so long as you're a member. I'd bet its extended in the future, like Amazon Prime and Netflix, to be an on-demand service.But paying per minute of gameplay? Nope.

 

[Sam Posten]

Yeah, that's my reaction to all of these doomsday predictions too. It only takes one service to not be that stupid to kill all of the others from doing so.

 

[Chuck Anstey]

I can't say that buffet style paying would be good for game developers. The only company that is guaranteed to get their money is the one running the scheme and the "extra" will be distributed as the controlling company sees fit. Hollywood accounting anyone? At least now game developers get their amount on consoles on each unit sold upfront (minus console fees) and that is a number easier to agree on.

From a consumer's POV, buffet style could be great if the costs are reasonable and you fit into the right group or it could be a disaster. Try any game for a few hours to see if you like any for a dollar or two instead of $60. Plus if the game only has 10 hours of gameplay with no replayability then you can simply move to another game without additional cost. However, those who buy only a few games and play them for 100's of hours would likely find a monthly fee to be a much higher cost. TV has been getting away with it for a long time now but there is very small but growing population of people that realizes for them it would be cheaper to watch a la carte through the use of Netflix, rentals, buying, and streaming. At some point the fee cost gets so high because of an increasing number of choices where each choice provider wants a minimum cut that it exceeds that amount of hours a family could watch or play per month.

 

[Dave Upton]

And crazy. Don't forget crazy!

The correct term is "nutter"

 

[Morgan Jolley]

It sounds like you guys are describing OnLive: one monthly fee gets you a few hundred free (and old) games while you can buy brand new games to play, streamed through the internet on top-notch hardware.

I think the appeal of physical media is in its presence. Just like you might like to buy a crapload of never-to-be-played Steam games and look at your library, others like to do the same with discs. Who doesn't like looking at a DVD/bluray shelf that's loaded with classics that they can show off to their friends? How are games any different? Sure, digital and downloadable offer more flexibility and can be very simple (and sometimes cheap, especially on PC) but that sense of owning something is kind of lost. You don't have a disc, you have the DRM rights.

I think that the explosion of downloadable indie games is great because it really does let everyone gain exposure without requiring everyone to download 50 GB files for everything. That said, I kind of liked the XBOne's idea of installing games off the disc (back to the "bandwidth of a cargo container" topic) so that it's quasi-digital.

The easiest thing, in my opinion, would be the ability to install games from a retail disc or download the game (a la XBOne originally) but then also sell the digital rights back to the publisher once you're basically "done" with the game. If I decide I don't want Bioshock Infinite anymore once I've played through it, why should I only be able to resell/trade in the disc but not the digital download? I believe Steam is working on something like this and I'd really prefer it.

And again, if I'm going to make the sacrifices of digital only (no physical media to show off, can't trade it in, need good bandwidth, etc.) then they NEED to make it the more financially attractive option.

 

[Sam Posten]

A 3rd 180:
http://kotaku.com/xbox-one-wont-actually-need-kinect-plugged-in-microso-1113142909

 

[Chuck Anstey]

Just to add some fuel to this download only discussion, here is what happened to me last night. We have some severe thunderstorms come through and knock out the cable TV, cable internet, and our cell phone service but miraculously not the power. So my son and I decide to continue playing our coop Borderlands 2 game on our PCs, both Steam games. First it took me several minutes and several tries to even start B2 because Steam absolutely wanted to talk to home base but couldn't. Then after it finally gave up and allowed me to start in offline mode, B2 locked up within 5 minutes and then again at 15 minutes after a restart. Never had that happen while connected to the internet. Later the internet comes back and viola, no issues during another 90 minutes of playing. It just reinforces my belief that Steam's "offline" mode isn't actually offline at all and that Steam knows exactly what I am playing and is verifying / sending info regardless. Offline only means they don't send your info to other Steam users.

Even if you don't buy into my belief that it was the fact that Steam without an internet connection accidentally on purpose locked up my game, it still was my lack of internet that caused the issue and such an issue shouldn't happen to a system that has been in use for years if unintended. So imagine how reliable a scheme like this would be on a brand new console with all new software even if they don't intend to require a live internet connection at all times to play a game.

 

[Sam Posten]

Steam's offline mode is designed to be initiated when network connectivity is established in preparation for an offline event. If you start it without connectivity yes there is pain.

 

[Edwin-S]

Crawl, M$, crawl...........mmmmbwwwaaahhaahaaa.Next announcement.........a Kinectless Xbone sku.

 

[Clinton McClure]

I live in a town where the only two options for broadband are satellite (slow and expensive) and wireless line-of-sight from an ISP about 15 miles away (a bit less slow and not quite as expensive). Our population is around 800 so AT&T has no plans to expand DSL to us. I have wireless and pay $70/mo for a 3Mb/s connection with a real world speed of about 2Mb/s. Highway robbery, but it's the best of two bad choices.The point I'm making is I don't support a download-only market because it isn't feasible where I live and I can't pick up and buy a house 15 miles down the road just so I can enjoy a 50Mb/s connection for roughly the same price. Same reason I don't use Netflix or Dish on Demand. I don't have the speed to support it, to say nothing of how long it would take me to download a 30-50GB game.

 

[Sam Posten]

Fair enough Clinton. The question becomes how reasonable is it for the rest of the world to stop moving forward just because there are a (presumably large) percentage of folks in your position. As I said we aren't going to solve the digital divide via debate on HTF and those standing on either side of it are going to have trouble seeing eye to eye with those on the other side. This generation has been hobbled from moving in that direction because of the divide, it's unlikely that the story will be the same the next round. It's a political and economic issue, not a technology one. The tech is there.

 

[Clinton McClure]

Agreed Sam. What really grinds my gears is that AT&T put a fiber optic line along the interstate, two blocks from my home, over 10 years ago during "project: Lightspeed" with the promise of broadband within 6 months. Never happened. The line is there, the residential gateway equipment is there and the populous wants it connected but AT&T reneged on their promise and decided our town is too small and doesn't need it. Pissed on us and passed us by, they did. I don't think the world should stop spinning because of a boneheaded corporate decision but I also think physical media should not go away because of people trapped in small towns and rural areas whom are essentially locked out from a technological standpoint because of said boneheaded decisions.

 

[Sam Posten]

I specifically favored buying in my current town over others nearby due to FIOS availability, it wasn't a deal breaker but it WAS a consideration.

 

[mattCR]

Hell, AT&T went to the State of Kansas legislature, and got them to agree AT&T could pull out of offering land line phones in communities where it couldn't make a profit. I thought that's why everyone pays that Rural Service tax on every single phone bill.. guess not.

 

[Edwin-S]

Ok, in my area I can get up to 100Mb/s service through cable. The cost is 85/month (before added taxes) with a 500GB monthly cap. I can even get unlimited data if I'm willing to pay 200/month for it. The main reason I don't like digital only is that it puts too much control in the hands of the content owners. DaveF says people don't like time-based charges, so it can't happen. I say who cares what people like? If content owners decide to start time-based charging, because digital access makes it easy for them to do so, then what people like or don't like won't matter to them. It will be a matter of take it or leave it. And I can tell you, no matter how many people will spout rhetoric about "leaving it", the reality is is that most people won't. They'll swallow whatever the corporations dish out. because people are not about to drop their entertainment, any more than they drop their driving habit because of gas going up or their drinking habits because the price of booze rises.

 

[Edwin-S]

Hell, AT&T went to the State of Kansas legislature, and got them to agree AT&T could pull out of offering land line phones in communities where it couldn't make a profit. I thought that's why everyone pays that Rural Service tax on every single phone bill.. guess not.

That's what starts to happen when the entire political and economic order is being engineered to benefit corporations and their shareholders, instead of the common good.

 

[Morgan Jolley]

Why couldn't MS just give people the option of having their XBOne experience be either the current/legacy model or the digital-focused one? If I want to install my game to my HDD and then make require an internet connection to check DRM, why can't MS let me or anyone else do that? They seemed to over-backtrack when they reversed course.

 

[Clinton McClure]

If I had my druthers, I would move to a bigger/better city tomorrow. I've lived in this town my entire life and in this house for almost 20 years, so obviously broadband wasn't even a consideration when I got the place. Didn't even know what the internet was in 1994.

 

[Jeffery_H]

I live in a town where the only two options for broadband are satellite (slow and expensive) and wireless line-of-sight from an ISP about 15 miles away (a bit less slow and not quite as expensive). Our population is around 800 so AT&T has no plans to expand DSL to us. I have wireless and pay $70/mo for a 3Mb/s connection with a real world speed of about 2Mb/s. Highway robbery, but it's the best of two bad choices.The point I'm making is I don't support a download-only market because it isn't feasible where I live and I can't pick up and buy a house 15 miles down the road just so I can enjoy a 50Mb/s connection for roughly the same price. Same reason I don't use Netflix or Dish on Demand. I don't have the speed to support it, to say nothing of how long it would take me to download a 30-50GB game.

Just wanted to say hello from a fellow in nearly the same situation as yourself. Our population is about 5,000 and we don't have anything but what you do in terms of internet service. The reason is simply due to the fact there is a lot of farm land, I would expect like in your area, so it's simply not cost effective for them to make any investment as such. Even if you got better than 50% to sign up, you still wouldn't count for expense. I get taken for a ride just like you and pay $75/mo for almost the exact same speeds, 4 Mb/s X 1 Mb/s with real speeds around 2.5-3.0Mb/s X 765kbps. So don't feel alone.

As far as moving, many people around here have farms that date back a good 100+ years in their family. Many, like myself, could move anywhere they wanted. But the connection to something more tangable besides consumer goods is why most stay. We have history and lived here for several generations.

I get amazed by others that think everyone that matters has these fast and reliable connections. Like you, it would take me forever to download a Steam game around 40+ GB each. That's why I still buy boxed copies, there's no other choice really. Also, I never even considered an XB1 until they changed from their inital policies. Always on or having to "ping" their servers even if "offline" would cause trouble at times for sure.

Just nice to see others out there too.

 

[Sam Posten]

You guys know that if you pre-purchase you can download these big games weeks in advance and then you only get a small unlock code at midnight when they go live, right? Edwin brings up a good point about the take it or leave it situation tho, we have that now with EA vs. Steam. Because of it EA was voted the worst company in America.http://consumerist.com/2013/04/09/ea-makes-worst-company-in-america-history-wins-title-for-second-year-in-a-row/To combat that they are trying to get consumer good will by putting their games on HumbleBundle this week, with Steam codes for games that have it and Origin for those that don't.What they aren't doing is pulling off shitty Origin and putting their games back on Steam.It is indeed a frustrating situation.But it is one that won't last forever.