1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

*** Project Scarlett - Holiday 2020 ***

Discussion in 'Console Games & Hardware' started by ic1male, Jun 9, 2019.

Tags:
  1. dragonslayer

    Gangster

    Joined: Jul 9, 2012

    Posts: 395

    Location: Nottingham

    Would be pretty good if ms made it so that you could connect a handheld device to the Xbox for their own version of the switch but more powerful with "better" games
     
  2. Nitefly

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Sep 24, 2005

    Posts: 30,828

    The reason everyone got annoyed with xbone on day one was, as far as I can remember, annoying everyone by fixing software to specific consoles (which they backtracked on) and a huge overemphasis on gimmicky motion controls.

    In fact, wasn’t the original PS4 controller expensive and motion based?? They do quietly get rid of these things don’t they :p
     
  3. Moonpie2

    Mobster

    Joined: Dec 23, 2002

    Posts: 2,642

    Location: Shiny Shanghai

    No?

    Are you thinking of the PS3's "sixaxis"?
    The drama around that was that they'd removed rumble claiming it was impossible to implement AND keep the motion controls working.
    But we all knew it was due to a lawsuit from a haptic technology company that I forget the name of.
     
  4. Nitefly

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Sep 24, 2005

    Posts: 30,828

    Ah yes that was it :)
     
  5. Combat Fighter

    Mobster

    Joined: Jun 6, 2009

    Posts: 4,934

    Location: No Mans Land

  6. satchef1

    Mobster

    Joined: Apr 17, 2009

    Posts: 3,932

    Not quite.

    Games were never going to be tied to a console, or even an account. Most of the vitriol was over two problems:

    1. To enable the trading of digital keys, license checks were needed. You had to connect to the Internet every 24 hours to have your licenses renewed. If you couldn't do this, you wouldn't be able to play any games.

    2. Publishers were set to be given control over the resale market. All Microsoft games would be freely tradable, but other publishers would be free to choose whether their games could be resold, and on what terms (a cut of the sale price, for example).

    Ultimately, the biggest problem was how badly they communicated what was to be a new and fairly complicated system. There was a lot of misunderstanding among Microsoft employees at the time, and therefore a lot of contradiction and false information.

    For more info on the original Xbox One vision, see:

    https://www.ign.com/boards/threads/original-xbox-one-drm-policies.454196923/
     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2019
  7. Chris1712

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Jul 29, 2004

    Posts: 8,634

    Location: Somerset

    Ironically I think if they released the next Xbox with this system, it would be welcomed with open arms. I didn't understand the vitriol at the time either, a digital resale market would be incredible. I buy 90% of my games digitally now, and that will only go up.

    I also recall that there would bbe 3rd party store fronts? EG. a 'Game' app that sold games etc, so there would be actual digital competition and better pricing. Again this was binned.
     
  8. Grim5

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Feb 6, 2019

    Posts: 1,059

    delete
     
  9. TheVoice

    Capodecina

    Joined: Aug 15, 2005

    Posts: 20,554

    Location: Glasgow

    One of those "sounds great in theory" ideas. The reality being that the price difference would probably be meagre at best, and either physical games would continue to be much cheaper or the pricing of physical titles would be increased to match the online stores.

    I doubt we'd ever see anything like it now, as you say yourself people are buying more and more digital titles regardless of the significant price difference so there's little benefit to a complicated system when MS and the publishers are getting massive cuts of each sale through the single online store anyway.
     
  10. spoffle

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 4, 2012

    Posts: 16,191

    Because it makes no sense at all for developers or publishers to get a cut of second hand sales, and they are completely delusional even thinking that it's okay for them to expect any more money than what they got from the first sale.
     
  11. Kreeeee

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Jul 13, 2004

    Posts: 41,314

    Location: /* */

    Physical media degrades over time, and can get lost or damaged.

    If digital licences could be sold in the same manner as physical copies then the developer is ultimately losing out as the licences are immune to decreasing in supply over time.
     
  12. spoffle

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 4, 2012

    Posts: 16,191

    Eh, not really. But that still doesn't entitle developers to a cut after the initial sale. It is a nonsensical expectation.
     
  13. Kreeeee

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Jul 13, 2004

    Posts: 41,314

    Location: /* */

    Definitely, but feel free to articulate your argument if you disagree

    Why are you entitled to resell software? I appreciate being able to resell my old games, but I don't feel entitled to do so.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2019
  14. 233

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 21, 2004

    Posts: 12,537

    Location: Glasgow

    Maybe we'll see game developers going the Adobe route and you get a 12.monthly licence for a game
     
  15. fez

    Capodecina

    Joined: Aug 22, 2008

    Posts: 12,618

    Location: Sidcup

    Because like pretty much everything in this life, if you own it, you can sell it. Buy a car, you can sell it. Buy a new piece of clothing, you can sell it.

    Why should software be any different. I'm struggling to see your argument against it.
     
  16. spoffle

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 4, 2012

    Posts: 16,191

    It's a consumer good, consumers should be free to sell on their consumer goods without the original manufacturer trying to scab a cut when they've been paid for the item already. You aren't presenting an argument for why they should be entitled to additional money for a product they've already been paid for.