**XBOX ONE** Official Thread
- Thread starter valkia
- Start date
They had to the drm was integral to the system, by removing it, you've list all the cool digital features.
Welcome to 10 pages ago
I'll step back into the PC Section
On topic.
Not sure 'power' is going to win this generation. I kind of see where Microsoft are going with the media hub - one box for all sort of idea. As a gamer however, I thought their presentation did nothing.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 17,933
- Location
- Liverpool, UK
I had a good think about the whole situation on my walk to work this morning, and something doesn't add up to me. I'll see if I can put it into a coherent post....
Microsoft changed their policies based largely on their poor pre-orders compared to the PS4. This much is obvious. I would imagine that even though the PS4 was in the lead pretty much from the start, they would wait a week or so before making any decisions. E3 finished last Wednesday, so waiting until yesterday makes perfect sense.
So, they woke up yesterday, they looked at the pre-order figures and they heard gamers loud and clear. "We don't want to have to be online every 24 hours". "We don't want to be restricted on how we buy and trade our games". "We don't want the ability to easily share our games with our family country-wide"p). That's what the pre-order figures were shouting out, and MS knew they had to respond.
So, they made the decision to revert back to the policies we are used to today. Beyond an initial internet connection required during setup, the Xbox One can be played completely offline. You are completely unrestricted in how you buy, sell, trade or loan your games. Innovation has been put on the back burner (for now hopefully), and we revert to the status quo.
To do this, they will have had to first of all test how easy it would be to implement on the Xbox One. After all, some of the policies they had in place were core features of the console. After testing and confirming it would work fine, they then had to notifiy the developers and publishers of their decision, so that they can adjust their games as necessary.
As this is fine so far, except for one thing - did they really do this in one day? Seems to me like this is something that would take at least a few days to sort out but would MS really have decided to make these changes off the backlash of only a few days after E3? Something doesn't add up for me. Perhaps they had already considered the possibility their original policies wouldn't be accepted, and they already knew they could revert to the old style way. Maybe they were never fully serious about their new policies, and wanted to gauge public reaction to it (very dangerous if that was the case).
I don't know if that makes sense, it was just something that ran through my head this morning.
Microsoft changed their policies based largely on their poor pre-orders compared to the PS4. This much is obvious. I would imagine that even though the PS4 was in the lead pretty much from the start, they would wait a week or so before making any decisions. E3 finished last Wednesday, so waiting until yesterday makes perfect sense.
So, they woke up yesterday, they looked at the pre-order figures and they heard gamers loud and clear. "We don't want to have to be online every 24 hours". "We don't want to be restricted on how we buy and trade our games". "We don't want the ability to easily share our games with our family country-wide"
p). That's what the pre-order figures were shouting out, and MS knew they had to respond.So, they made the decision to revert back to the policies we are used to today. Beyond an initial internet connection required during setup, the Xbox One can be played completely offline. You are completely unrestricted in how you buy, sell, trade or loan your games. Innovation has been put on the back burner (for now hopefully), and we revert to the status quo.
To do this, they will have had to first of all test how easy it would be to implement on the Xbox One. After all, some of the policies they had in place were core features of the console. After testing and confirming it would work fine, they then had to notifiy the developers and publishers of their decision, so that they can adjust their games as necessary.
As this is fine so far, except for one thing - did they really do this in one day? Seems to me like this is something that would take at least a few days to sort out but would MS really have decided to make these changes off the backlash of only a few days after E3? Something doesn't add up for me. Perhaps they had already considered the possibility their original policies wouldn't be accepted, and they already knew they could revert to the old style way. Maybe they were never fully serious about their new policies, and wanted to gauge public reaction to it (very dangerous if that was the case).
I don't know if that makes sense, it was just something that ran through my head this morning.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 17,933
- Location
- Liverpool, UK
I'll step back into the PC Section
On topic.
Not sure 'power' is going to win this generation. I kind of see where Microsoft are going with the media hub - one box for all sort of idea. As a gamer however, I thought their presentation did nothing.
I agree regarding the power. I think there comes a point when the extra power just means a few extrs FPS in games, but if both consoles can run the same game at a solid 30/60FPS and 1080p, will it matter if one has a little more power under the hood? Time will tell on that one I think.
Well done XBox 180
But have they actually changed anything, looking through the policies it looks like they've just been cleverly worded.
Erm, of course they've changed anything. They've changed everything, I don't see how you can't see that.
Well done XBox 180
But have they actually changed anything, looking through the policies it looks like they've just been cleverly worded.
Yeah nothing has changed they just want you to think it has, thankfully you are clever enough to see through it and come and tell us how nothing has changed
Are you serious?
An internet connection will not be required to play offline Xbox One games –
After a one-time system set-up with a new Xbox One, you can play any disc based game without ever connecting online again. There is no 24 hour connection requirement and you can take your Xbox One anywhere you want and play your games, just like on Xbox 360.
Wasn't one of there main reasons behind always on internet was that they where moving away from disc distribution?
So Kinnect is still required regardless, how does this removal of the required internet connection effect games like Froza 5? Will the games be limited unless you are always connected? Will you only get access to "half the game" until you connect?
In the official statement it mentions nothing to do with region locks?
http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/update
After a one-time system set-up with a new Xbox One, you can play any disc based game without ever connecting online again. There is no 24 hour connection requirement and you can take your Xbox One anywhere you want and play your games, just like on Xbox 360.
Wasn't one of there main reasons behind always on internet was that they where moving away from disc distribution?
So Kinnect is still required regardless, how does this removal of the required internet connection effect games like Froza 5? Will the games be limited unless you are always connected? Will you only get access to "half the game" until you connect?
In the official statement it mentions nothing to do with region locks?
http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/update
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 17,933
- Location
- Liverpool, UK
Well done XBox 180
But have they actually changed anything, looking through the policies it looks like they've just been cleverly worded.
Don Mattrick said:
Yes, that's not changing anything at all!
I had a good think about the whole situation on my walk to work this morning, and something doesn't add up to me. I'll see if I can put it into a coherent post....
Microsoft changed their policies based largely on their poor pre-orders compared to the PS4. This much is obvious. I would imagine that even though the PS4 was in the lead pretty much from the start, they would wait a week or so before making any decisions. E3 finished last Wednesday, so waiting until yesterday makes perfect sense.
So, they woke up yesterday, they looked at the pre-order figures and they heard gamers loud and clear. "We don't want to have to be online every 24 hours". "We don't want to be restricted on how we buy and trade our games". "We don't want the ability to easily share our games with our family country-wide"
So, they made the decision to revert back to the policies we are used to today. Beyond an initial internet connection required during setup, the Xbox One can be played completely offline. You are completely unrestricted in how you buy, sell, trade or loan your games. Innovation has been put on the back burner (for now hopefully), and we revert to the status quo.
To do this, they will have had to first of all test how easy it would be to implement on the Xbox One. After all, some of the policies they had in place were core features of the console. After testing and confirming it would work fine, they then had to notifiy the developers and publishers of their decision, so that they can adjust their games as necessary.
As this is fine so far, except for one thing - did they really do this in one day? Seems to me like this is something that would take at least a few days to sort out but would MS really have decided to make these changes off the backlash of only a few days after E3? Something doesn't add up for me. Perhaps they had already considered the possibility their original policies wouldn't be accepted, and they already knew they could revert to the old style way. Maybe they were never fully serious about their new policies, and wanted to gauge public reaction to it (very dangerous if that was the case).
I don't know if that makes sense, it was just something that ran through my head this morning.
It makes sense that they would have had a backup plan. I suspect that they were expecting a bit of a backlash, but it actually turned out to be much worse than they had initially thought. Remember, even with just the 'always online' they were instantly locking out around 30million XBox360 owners who have not used their 360 online.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 17,933
- Location
- Liverpool, UK
Yes. For now at least, digital distribution is being pushed to the side (or at least not pushed to the front as much).
Yes, Kinect is still required. Will it cripple games? No, of course it won't, and I can't believe anyone would actually think that. If you play offline, you lose any online functionality, just like you do today.
It very clearly states that there will be no region lock. Again, not sure how you're missing that.
Voting with your wallets does work! MS have still blown it by ****ing off so many by even trying to do what they were intending IMO, some may be enticed back but I'm not going to be one of them the system is still over priced compared to PS4 & as far as I'm concerned the exclusives were not massive draws on either console.
The bold was to emphasise the fact that its only for disc based games and i was under the impression they are moving away from disc based games.
Forza 5 has that download AI thing and it'll drive the cars for you? Surely without an internet connection that aspect of the game wont work?
I actually couldn't find it, hence why i asked
What about if you take a disc based game you own and have registered to your account and take it around to your mates house? Will that still require the hourly checks?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 17,933
- Location
- Liverpool, UK
Unfortunately a lot of people seem to think this way. I appreciated what they were trying to do (though I would have made several changes personally), and I think backtracking, while probably the more popular decision, is a shame as the features they were planning how the potential to be really innovative. I hope they revisit it during the lifespan of the Xbox One.
PS4 is still £100 cheaper, 25% more powerful and cheaper multiplayer.
For the company that even the Financial Times described as "not having a strong consumer gene" MS must be really worried about getting murdered by Sony this time round for a change of strategy this fundamental.
All good for the customer, thank goodness, but how much damage has already been done?
All good for the customer, thank goodness, but how much damage has already been done?