Microsoft reverses controversial game licensing policies • Hacker News Board

Re: Microsoft reverses controversial game licensing policies

#131

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Jun 20, 2013, 4:24 AM UTC

Cyril-Boh wrote: post #127

tjdetwiler wrote: post #5

I always thought they should have applied all the new DRM features to digital downloads only. In that context, sharing and selling does look consumer friendly and if they make it convenient consumers will move away from physical media.

I wish they coined another term for this rather then digital downloads. How can a download not be digital?

Provided you had an analog communication channel and storage medium you could have analog downloads -- it would be similar to recording per-digital TV on a VCR. But, yeah, "digital download" is mostly pointless noise.

Re: Microsoft reverses controversial game licensing policies

#132

Post by Radix_ » Thu, Jun 20, 2013, 4:41 AM UTC

drivingmenuts wrote: post #121

sivam wrote: post #56

They should rename the Xbox One to the Xbox 180, it would be very apt. On a more serious note, I don't like this rollback. It only goes to show how the witchhunt and echo chamber on Reddit worked. Even before the reveal, Microsoft was falsely accused of trying to game Reddit and everyone flew off the handle over someone pretty much lying to be a troll. Say the word "DRM" and you get bucketloads of Reddit karma and po…

A friend posited the theory that all of this was a calculated move on Microsoft's part. First, they throw up the idea of some draconian DRM, which they then later retract. The first move gets them tons of publicity and tongue-wagging, the second move starts to make that positive publicity. They're banking on gamers being so addicted, they won't really care that they've been played for idiot chumps. If the market for…

I like this theory a bit but I don't think the part about getting positive publicity works out. They don't really look good here and, though I haven't read Reddit's response yet, I don't think they're going to look good to hardly anyone. At least not the 20-35 year olds who were aware of the snafu.

I think I cleaner interpretation is that they were aware that the push might fail but figured going back on the setup as they've done wouldn't set them back too far. And the move, even if it failed, would set them up for basically the same change in the future of the consoles life. Remember they changed the Xbox dashboard a lot. They can still add the planned sharing features to download only games. At first only to developer opt-in games then just the MS published games will have the additional features. After that other publishers will need to have their games use the extra features for licensed download games.

So everyone saying they ought to have done both may be right but maybe it wasn't ideal and they reached a bit too far. So they've fallen back and are retooling. I just wish they'd let me take off adverts on the damned main dashboard! I never buy anything and they know it.

Re: Microsoft reverses controversial game licensing policies

#133

Post by bskap » Thu, Jun 20, 2013, 4:43 AM UTC

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #43

>On the downside, there will be no digital "family" sharing as was previously announced, and disc-based games will require the disc to be in the tray to be played. Nooooooooooooooooo. Please still allow me to opt in for digital downloads so I can finally stick the console somewhere where I don't have to see it, hear it or suffer it's heat wrath.

I believe they are planning to have day-1 digital downloads. This backtrack does mean that, at least for day 1, the family sharing and used-digital-game features won't be available but you can still get all the games without discs.

Re: Microsoft reverses controversial game licensing policies

#134

Post by bskap » Thu, Jun 20, 2013, 4:44 AM UTC

superuser2 wrote: post #36

nivla wrote: post #31

During this whole fiasco, I was trying to put myself into their shoes on what they were trying to achieve. On the outside, it looks like a great idea. The ability to share games with family. No longer you need to carry discs to your friends house. You can lend them games to strangers on the Internet without worry about losing it. You can have an organized catalog on the cloud, and never have to get up to pop the disc…

Deactivate on the first console before allowing sale?

The only way to do that would be to limit used game sales to specific retailers that have the ability to check if a disc has been deactivated before accepting it. You know, that thing that people got really annoyed at because they want to just hand the disc to another person and be done with it.

Re: Microsoft reverses controversial game licensing policies

#135

Post by jonny_eh » Thu, Jun 20, 2013, 4:47 AM UTC

InclinedPlane wrote: post #85

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, so now it's just two-for-one. Now I get to buy and play Halo5 and then give the disc to my brother.

And? Some people will take advantage of it, most won't because it's too much of a hassle. Look at netflix back when it was just a disc-based service. Just get as many DVDs delivered as possible, rip them to your HD and then pop them back in the mail. Some people did that. Most didn't. Also, the Xbox One HD is only 500 GB, you can't install quite so many games (delivered on blu-ray) before it gets full.

You're being rational about DRM, that's not going to get you anywhere.

Re: Microsoft reverses controversial game licensing policies

#136

Post by warfangle » Thu, Jun 20, 2013, 4:49 AM UTC

drivingmenuts wrote: post #121

sivam wrote: post #56

They should rename the Xbox One to the Xbox 180, it would be very apt. On a more serious note, I don't like this rollback. It only goes to show how the witchhunt and echo chamber on Reddit worked. Even before the reveal, Microsoft was falsely accused of trying to game Reddit and everyone flew off the handle over someone pretty much lying to be a troll. Say the word "DRM" and you get bucketloads of Reddit karma and po…

A friend posited the theory that all of this was a calculated move on Microsoft's part. First, they throw up the idea of some draconian DRM, which they then later retract. The first move gets them tons of publicity and tongue-wagging, the second move starts to make that positive publicity. They're banking on gamers being so addicted, they won't really care that they've been played for idiot chumps. If the market for…

Gonna have to invoke Hanlon's razor here.

Re: Microsoft reverses controversial game licensing policies

#137

Post by bskap » Thu, Jun 20, 2013, 4:52 AM UTC

LaurelCrowned wrote: post #126

knodi wrote: post #124

This is a shame, I was really looking forwards to disc-less play and family sharing. How cool would it have been if all my friends made a family group and with that we can all play each others games. But no people love gamestop.

Pretty sure they would be limiting that to one IP address. There would be restrictions.

There was no IP limitation, as I understand it. Everyone on your console could always play all of your games. And you could designate 10 people that had access to your library from anywhere.

Re: Microsoft reverses controversial game licensing policies

#138

Post by ricardobeat » Thu, Jun 20, 2013, 5:12 AM UTC

sivam wrote: post #56

They should rename the Xbox One to the Xbox 180, it would be very apt. On a more serious note, I don't like this rollback. It only goes to show how the witchhunt and echo chamber on Reddit worked. Even before the reveal, Microsoft was falsely accused of trying to game Reddit and everyone flew off the handle over someone pretty much lying to be a troll. Say the word "DRM" and you get bucketloads of Reddit karma and po…

Re. used game sales, it surprises me to see everyone repeating the idea that game stores "skim" value from publishers. The license has been paid for, the original owner will lose his ability to play the game; there is no value being created and no reason at all for the publisher to participate in that transaction. Do you think car makers should be entitled to a fee every time you sell your used car?

Re: Microsoft reverses controversial game licensing policies

#139

Post by gamble » Thu, Jun 20, 2013, 5:12 AM UTC

princess3000 wrote: post #29

ameen wrote: post #14

If this is true, there isn't going to be the announced "Family Share plan" or the "Disc-less" operation. Also, the fact that a few consoles might not be connected to the Internet means, MS can't really do cloud processing as it claimed (since it would lead to variable experiences of the same game). I see this as a step-backward than a step ahead. Sure there will always be a vocal minority, but rather than provide the…

I'm not super technical but I've always been skeptical of "cloud processing," especially after the Sim City debacle. Are there any scenarios where actually processing information on a server instead of on the user's home Xbox make sense, aside from things like WoW and Diablo III where you need to do the calculations on the server to make the multiplayer aspect fair?

I can't see many developers putting the time to offload calculations when they'd have to make the game work seamlessly with varying levels of latency or the servers becoming unavailable. Just look at how difficult it has been for games to utilize a handful of CPU cores. Microsoft's claims about the cloud remind me of ten years ago, when the .net label was being applied to everything they made and all software was somehow going to be delivered as web services. Plus I doubt MS is offering cloud server time to developers for free. Every service they provide to devs comes at a cost.

Re: Microsoft reverses controversial game licensing policies

#140

Post by sivam » Thu, Jun 20, 2013, 5:18 AM UTC

ricardobeat wrote: post #138

sivam wrote: post #56

They should rename the Xbox One to the Xbox 180, it would be very apt. On a more serious note, I don't like this rollback. It only goes to show how the witchhunt and echo chamber on Reddit worked. Even before the reveal, Microsoft was falsely accused of trying to game Reddit and everyone flew off the handle over someone pretty much lying to be a troll. Say the word "DRM" and you get bucketloads of Reddit karma and po…

Re. used game sales, it surprises me to see everyone repeating the idea that game stores "skim" value from publishers. The license has been paid for, the original owner will lose his ability to play the game; there is no value being created and no reason at all for the publisher to participate in that transaction. Do you think car makers should be entitled to a fee every time you sell your used car?

There is quite a large difference between a new car vs. a used car to the buyer. New cars have the new car look and smell and status, and typically have better features, mileage, safety, size and design compared to an old one. Not the same as a game which is the exact bits and pixels. And a car is not usually a thing that people get bored with and sell, many people need it to even make a living. Meanwhile, game devs lose a lot of revenue after the first few weeks because of used games.