**XBOX ONE** Official Thread

Macro said:
So two separate senior execs of a public company would categorically lie, in writing, in public, about a feature they're no longer going to do anyway?
Click to expand...

No, that is totally inconceivable, I mean they would certainly tell us the truth if the major selling point of their retarded DRM was actually a massive joke and hope that would boost sales now it is reversed because they aren't going to screw us over with false information.
 
You may need to buy in some extra tin foil... :) Seriously, think about it, we already have downloadable DRM locked down time or level limited demos on 360, PC, PS3 etc, that's not what the library sharing was.
 
I'm sure publishers/devs were totally happy one license supplied ten people up and down the country.

Seems most games don't have demos these days, also neither of them stated the full game was playable, only it wasn't a one hour demo, hardly tin foil hat, just not willing to give microsoft benefit of the doubt considering they wanted to implement massively restrictive DRM already
 
Purdy said:
I'm sure publishers/devs were totally happy one license supplied ten people up and down the country.
Click to expand...
Again, if you think about it I think it was a pretty sensible and innovative approach to piracy and lost revenue through sharing with a win for publishers as well as players.

Players could share and play games from 10 "registered" friends and family (with restrictions like you had to have someone on your friends list for 30days first) which is an interesting and potentially positive thing for players.

In return the plus for publishers was DRM locks the system down to prevent abuse, it limits sharing to 10 people (currently there's no limit to how many people you could lend a disk or make a copy of it and give away), if things moved to all digital they get a bigger % of the first sale price because there's no retail, packaging and distribution to take a slice and they get a slice of the resale price all of which potentially offset lost sales.

I know I'm in the minority but I though it was quite an interesting way of thinking differently about how to give players something they would get a benefit from as well as publishers. It may not have been perfect but perhaps with some fine tuning (maybe online check once a week and offline play possible but requiring the disc in the drive) it could have been a reasonable step forward.

Unfortunately such was the drama that I don't think anyone was listening anymore so they decided to scrap it completely. I think it was a mistake, if they'd stuck with it they'd have taken a hit at Christmas but once there was an installed base using Xbox One actually getting use out of the library lending system I think they would have won a lot of people round.
 
Last edited:
Macro said:
*sigh* Given that everything we had read previously indicated that the friends and family loan system was not time limited demos and that's been categorically confirmed again I don't think there's anything to "admit". The only thing suggesting it was some kind of time limited demo came from an anonymous post by someone who supposedly worked on it via pastebin after the fact. I could go post on pastebin tomorrow pretending to be a disaffected employee and that "I've been working for Sony on a system to implement mandatory no resale DRM which Sony have now put on hold after seeing the backlash for Xbox, we're still working on it though", it's still not true.
Click to expand...

What are you sighing for?

There was a 60 page thread at Neogaf and still no one understood what MS were going to do with regards sharing.

Major Nelson had promised clarification in his blog but it never happened. It was a rushed response to a car crash E3 which ended up making no sense.

You also need to consider Sony had a sharing system years ago on PSN downloads which quickly got nerfed as publishers weren't happy at all with it.
 
Last edited:
Macro said:
So two separate senior execs of a public company would categorically lie, in writing, in public, about a feature they're no longer going to do anyway as opposed to an anonymous post on a forum from some one claiming to be an employee in the know?
Click to expand...

Are these the same execs that also said they could not remove the DRM because it was built in to the architecture? Then two days later announced they are removing the DRM.... The same execs that have been condraticting each other far the past month? Hardly a convincing set are they.
 
saving starts today!

2sb0kzp.jpg
 
Craterloads said:
I think you misunderstood, he's telling you :o
Click to expand...

You asked if these were the same execs that said DRM could not be removed, I said no and kitch further confirmed that by saying it was Major Nelson that said DRM could not be removed.

I know Major Nelson said it and never said otherwise, it was you that asked the question. I thought you were already asked to stop trolling this thread anyway?
 
Last edited:
Mr Men said:
You asked if these were the same execs that said DRM could not be removed, I said no and kitch further confirmed that by saying it was Major Nelson that said DRM could not be removed.

I know Major Nelson said it and never said otherwise, it was you that asked the question. I thought you were already asked to stop trolling this thread anyway?
Click to expand...

I don't think it really matters whether the exact same people said DRM couldn't be removed. The point is Major Nelson is someone who they are paying to be one of the faces of the Xbox brand, he's probably their most well known PR guy and is talking in absolutes and being abrasive toward interviewers when he has precisely zero idea what is going on himself. It's not exactly a far stretch to assume the execs aren't being entirely truthful when at Microsoft the left doesn't even seen to know what the right hand is doing.

That doesn't mean that they lied though, it could mean that potentially they don't actually know the full ins and outs themselves. It wouldn't be hard to believe that was the case considering key figures such as Major Nelson, the entire gaming press, and the population of the Internet still can't really make head nor tail of a bunch of the stuff we were told at E3, with Microsoft completely failing to clarify things, often making them MORE complicated to understand in the process.

Add in smarmy retards like Don Mattrick who unbelievably is the president of interactive entertainment business then it's easy to see why people may not fully trust the words that are coming out of Microsoft's mouths at the moment. It wouldn't surprise me one bit to find out later on down the line that this amazing, revolutionary feature was nothing more than an extended demo for your friends and family.

After all the PSN had this feature to begin with, allowing you to register up to 5 different devices with which to store your content. Publishers didn't like that and the number of devices was slashed from 5 to 2, so why are they suddenly ready to accept ten different machines with one license of the game? It makes no sense to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom