What's new

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

Morgan Jolley

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2000
Messages
9,712
EA was voted worst company in America because lunatic fanboys swarm internet polls. I think EA could cure cancer and people would still hate them (while buying their games/cancer cure constantly).

Even if downloading a game over a couple weeks was reasonable, being online frequently/constantly is a pointless hassle for some. That said, you can still go the download-only route if YOU choose to.
 

DaveF

Moderator
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
28,687
Location
Catfisch Cinema
Real Name
Dave
Edwin-S said:
. 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.
We were pay per minute on landline long distance, now it's fixed price. We were pay per minute on cellphones, now it's fixed price. We were pay per hour on pre-Internet data services, now its fixed price.TV and movie watching is moving from fixed price of time-based channels (cable, satellite), to fixed price for all you can watch (Netflix). I don't believe we'll return to time-based pricing.
 

DaveF

Moderator
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
28,687
Location
Catfisch Cinema
Real Name
Dave
Clinton McClure said:
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.
There was an over-expansion of fiber in 90s, I've read.http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-dark-fiber.htmVerizon also ended its Fios fiber rollout two years ago. I think it was supposed to be a long-term national upgrade. But they've decided it's not worth the cost to go beyond the big cities they've done.http://gizmodo.com/5503428/verizons-fios-rollout-drawing-to-a-closeI do think the US would benefit from imrpoved broadband across the nation.
 

Edwin-S

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
10,000
So what is the fastest connection available to the average consumer in the US? In Canada, through telcoms, it is up to 50Mbs down. Cable is up to 100Mbs down. I think in the larger cities thre may even be faster connections through cable.
 

Chuck Anstey

Screenwriter
Joined
Nov 10, 1998
Messages
1,640
Real Name
Chuck Anstey
I have cable @ 30Mbs down and that is the fastest advertised speed I have seen. I know there is faster available in very select areas but I thought 30Mbs was the fastest "common" cable modem speed and maybe 15Mbs for DSL if you are extremely lucky but 6 or 9 seemed much more common.

Looks like we are going to need another Rural Electrification Act except this time for internet access. Yeah, good luck with that in the US today.
 

Edwin-S

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
10,000
So far they have announced nothing that would spark an interest in me buying an XBone. Not saying that I would never buy one, I just don't see a need to rush out and buy one based on what they have announced. Not even CoD:Ghosts is piquing my interest for a Xbone. The whole CoD series has become rather boring in its gameplay. Online modes don't interest me and the practice of DLC being made available to one system and not the other, for games released on both, should be made illegal. Providing a lower level of support for the same game, from the same developer, based on what system is being used is a bullshit practice that needs to stop.
 

Edwin-S

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
10,000
Sam Posten said:
Good luck with that.
I'm not saying it will happen. It just should happen. Developers providing different levels of support for the same game on two different systems is bullshit, pure and simple. It's practices like that that invite regulation to be imposed, since it is obvious that businesses will not do what is right unless they are forced to by an iron fist. It's just too bad that governments are so owned by corporate interests that they are incapable of actually regulating the bastards anymore.
 

Chuck Anstey

Screenwriter
Joined
Nov 10, 1998
Messages
1,640
Real Name
Chuck Anstey
Edwin-S said:
I'm not saying it will happen. It just should happen. Developers providing different levels of support for the same game on two different systems is bullshit, pure and simple. It's practices like that that invite regulation to be imposed, since it is obvious that businesses will not do what is right unless they are forced to by an iron fist. It's just too bad that governments are so owned by corporate interests that they are incapable of actually regulating the bastards anymore.
I understand this but as someone whose heyday of console gaming was the Atari 2600 to the 3DO, it is somewhat different to expect a game to be for more than one console at all, let alone that it must be an exact equal port. Such a requirement seems to be the cause of games being greatly limited on PCs when they are the most powerful gaming platform for those who can afford it.
 

Edwin-S

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
10,000
On consoles, the reality is that cross-platforming games is the rule, rather than the exception. Exclusives on consoles are getting rarer because developers want to scratch out every dime from a game that they can before it ends up in the clearout bin. My issue isn't that it is a duplicate port. My issue is that a developer releases on the same game on to different platforms and then makes content that extends the playability of the game exclusive to one console, while charging the exact same price for the original game on both consoles.

So, in the case of CoD, the original game costs 60 dollars, whether you buy it for XBone or PS4; however, the developer is going to make content available to XBone owners that will extend the life of their original 60 dollar investment, while the PS4 gamer's version expires as far as extended playability goes. It is a bullshit practice and it needs to stop. If they release a game to PC, Xbone, PS4, WiiU or what have you, then DLC packages that extend the life of the game on one platform should be available on every other platform as well. Exclusives, to promote purchase of a gaming console is one thing. Making DLC content exclusive to one platform to encourage purchasing one unit over the other is quite a different thing in my book.
 

Morgan Jolley

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2000
Messages
9,712
Edwin - to be fair, the exclusive content is usually pretty minimal, crappy, or ends up on other platforms, anyway. Personally, I dislike preorder bonuses and platform exclusives but the fact that they're so minimal is why I don't REALLY care that much.

That said, the reason those exclusives exist is because someone did pay more money for them: Sony or Microsoft. The only time you get a "freebie" bonus feature is if the game uses Move/Kinect/anything-on-the-Wii-or-Wii-U because only that platform can utilize it.
 

DaveF

Moderator
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2001
Messages
28,687
Location
Catfisch Cinema
Real Name
Dave
Edwin-S said:
The whole CoD series has become rather boring in its gameplay. Online modes don't interest me and the practice of DLC being made available to one system and not the other, for games released on both, should be made illegal. Providing a lower level of support for the same game, from the same developer, based on what system is being used is a bullshit practice that needs to stop.
Edwin-S said:
It's practices like that that invite regulation to be imposed, since it is obvious that businesses will not do what is right unless they are forced to by an iron fist. It's just too bad that governments are so owned by corporate interests that they are incapable of actually regulating the bastards anymore.
We need iron-fisted govt regulation to force EA to make better games for the PS?You're really getting out there with the rants...
 

Morgan Jolley

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2000
Messages
9,712
Yeah, I think the government can only step in if there is blatant false advertising going on. I mean, you can't complain when the DVD version of a movie isn't 3D but the Bluray is. Unless, of course, the DVD version advertises being in 3D.

But like I said, the exclusive content is usually relatively meaningless or ends up available on all platforms. This is similar to preorder bonuses, which I also think are stupid.
 

Edwin-S

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
10,000
DaveF said:
We need iron-fisted govt regulation to force EA to make better games for the PS?You're really getting out there with the rants...
I guess you didn't read what I wrote. I didn't say they have to force EA to make better games for PS. I said the practice of supplying DLC for one system over the other for the same game from the same publisher needs to stop. If they don't stop it on their own then I guess it means the government has to do it for them.

I never said that DLC makes the game better. All DLC does is extend the playability of the game for a short while.

Morgan Jolley said:
Yeah, I think the government can only step in if there is blatant false advertising going on. I mean, you can't complain when the DVD version of a movie isn't 3D but the Bluray is. Unless, of course, the DVD version advertises being in 3D.

But like I said, the exclusive content is usually relatively meaningless or ends up available on all platforms. This is similar to preorder bonuses, which I also think are stupid.
Comparing a DVD to a Blu-ray disc is meaningless. DVD can't support 3D. If it could and they didn't provide the option for people to buy that version then I'd say people who own DVD players would have a right to complain.

You might think that the DLC is inconsequential, but others might not. Making it available to other platforms is left at the whim of the publisher. Maybe they put it out and maybe they don't. Either way, restricting DLC of any kind to one console or the other for the same game is a shitty practice.

It is also a practice that shows how stupid and banal the people running these companies are. Devs and publishers are moaning and whining that they are losing money on games because of used game sales, but fail to take advantage of the one area that they DO have total control over: the provision of meaningful downloadable content being available on every platform. If the morons stopped using DLC as a cheap-ass promotional tool and actually started providing DLC that truly added value to a previously purchased game then the problem of used game sales would be drastically reduced.

I'm sure gamers would be willing to pay a reasonable price for meaningful DLC that truly added value to a previously purchased game. Good quality chargeable DLC, released on a regular basis, would extend the period of time before a game ended up in a used game store; however, the twits running video game companies would rather engage in the practice of using DLC to create an unequal playing field based on which console you happened to purchase, instead of taking advantage of the one area that companies like EB games or Gamestop have zero control and influence over.

No.The solution to Gamestop, in the eyes of devs and publishers, was to try to ram a shit ton of DRM down the throats of gamers via M$: a company that thinks it is so godlike that every thing they do will be willingly lapped up by their "customers", only to find out again and again and again that people aren't going to swallow their crap in OSs or in consoles. It goes to show how ridiculous M$'s market power is, when they can have failure after failure and still be in business. Any other software company would be totally bankrupt if they had as many massive failures as M$ has had.

And DaveF says that I'm way out there when I say these guys need to be regulated by the government. Hell, the more I think about it, the more it becomes apparent that government regulation of the software industry is way overdue in more areas than just something as puny as video game DLC. What other industry can put shitty substandard products, full of bugs, on the market, charge you for it, and then tell you to wait for version 1.1.1.1 to get it to work half-assed decently then tell you to wait for version 1.1.1.2 to fix new bugs that were introduced while trying to fix the old ones?

It's like an auto company releasing a car knowing the brakes are defective then telling the purchaser to just wait for a bit, because they have a fix coming for it. They fix the brake problem (assuming you survive) and then go, BTW, we fixed the brakes but now the turn signals don't work; however, don't worry...we have a fix coming for that.
 

Sam Posten

Moderator
Premium
HW Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 30, 1997
Messages
33,674
Location
Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
Real Name
Sam Posten
/boggle
Edwin-S said:
If they don't stop it on their own then I guess it means the government has to do it for them.
Again, good luck with that. Also, the games I have enjoyed lately have done superb jobs with their DLC. Skyrim. Dishonored. Saints Row the third (And IV looks to be starting strong too). Borderlands 2. If you don't like the DLC don't buy it. If it's not on your system of choice buy the other system. Expecting this to be solved by the government tho, I don't even know how to credulously address that because it's just fantasy.
 

Edwin-S

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
10,000
Sam Posten said:
/boggle


Again, good luck with that. Also, the games I have enjoyed lately have done superb jobs with their DLC. Skyrim. Dishonored. Saints Row the third (And IV looks to be starting strong too). Borderlands 2. If you don't like the DLC don't buy it. If it's not on your system of choice buy the other system. Expecting this to be solved by the government tho, I don't even know how to credulously address that because it's just fantasy.
The only thing that boggles my mind is that you could write that I should spend 400 dollars on another console to gain access to DLC for games that are available on both systems from the same publisher, instead of the publisher being required to make that content available to anyone who wants it, regardless of the system they bought.
 

Carl Johnson

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 6, 1999
Messages
2,260
Real Name
Carl III
If companies were jeopardizing lives by intentionally diminishing the safety of food medicine or vehicles then I would be all for government intervention. If the government gets into the practice of regulating DLC on game consoles that's a sure sign that we have too much government. Sent from my SPH-M830 using HTF mobile app
 

Morgan Jolley

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2000
Messages
9,712
The exclusive DLC adds value to the idea of owning a particular console. "It's great that I have an Xbox 360 because I get 2 exclusive costumes in that game!" It sucks, but no more than the idea of having console exclusive games in the first place.

I kind of hate DLC and I would be more than happy if it went away. Yes, it extends the life of a game, but I very, very, very rarely buy any DLC. Character costumes, bonus multiplayer content, music/themes, avatars....absolutely none of that interests me. And meaningful DLC (extra story missions, bonus characters, unique modes like inFamous 2 or Far Cry 3 had) is frequently too crappy to buy. I never even touched Uncharted 3's multiplayer mode, letalone the DLC crap for it, but I instantly bought Mortal Kombat's Freddy Krueger character DLC.

I don't think console-exclusive content/DLC is an attempt at getting more game sales. It's a tactic by the platform holders (Sony, MS, Nintendo) to give money to the developer/publisher to try and get an edge on the competition. That's why Call of Duty always has timed-exclusive maps on Xbox, which sadly does give Xbox a sales advantage.

Can you think of any relevant console-exclusive content? I certainly can't. And preorder exclusives are the same as console exclusives in that they usually go multiplatform and are unimportant.
 

Aaron Silverman

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 22, 1999
Messages
11,411
Location
Florida
Real Name
Aaron Silverman
I agree with Edwin that console-exclusive content sucks, but I also agree with Carl that it ain't the guv'mint's problem.

Of course, I also agree with Scootplex Jr. that most DLC is too crappy to worry about anyway. :) I like to think of it as teenagers paying for silly stuff like "skins" so I can pay less for the base game (wishful, I know). . .
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,624
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top