PDA

View Full Version : Xbox One & PS4



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7

Daftvirgin
29th May 2013, 21:41
Edit by Driber:

This is now a dedicated PS4 & XB1 thread. Use this thread for off topic (i.e. not related to TR) discussions about XB1 and PS4 so to avoid derailing other threads :)

/edit


Indeed.

The world pretty much knows who Lara Croft is, whether you are a fan of the game or not. Even non-gamers knows who she is. She's a cultural icon, regardless of the frequency of her name being dropped in the media.

COD may sell like hot-cakes, but I doubt many people outside the COD fanbase could name any of their characters :whistle:

Well COD now has a new mascot :lol:

https://si0.twimg.com/profile_images/3690933056/8e5af99e4ad405f2765844e4647176ee.jpeg

BridgetFisher
29th May 2013, 22:13
Well COD now has a new mascot :lol:

https://si0.twimg.com/profile_images/3690933056/8e5af99e4ad405f2765844e4647176ee.jpeg

Xbox One at the big reveal, they showed it can make dogs, hmmmm ok, dont really care or know what they were thinking over there that anyone would find this groundbreaking that they can make dogs. I still love the fact that the Xbox Reveal its presentation, and preperation are estimated to have cost over 160 million dollars. I loved the part where they went into explicit detail about how I can watch TV on my TV, or use social media to auto post my game progress to twitter or facebook. I made this image to show how little I cared, also didnt care about the failed kinect that has yet to have any application. Pretty sure everyone owns a smart tv today, in fact ALL tvs made now are smart tvs, they have netflix, youtube and facebook apps. So the xbox doing it isnt anything new if my tv that is a year old does most of that already. Id rather a game console please, then again Im crazy, I thought game consoles were for games, not Fios interactive media online.

http://i.imgur.com/ATDYfwf.jpg

AdobeArtist
29th May 2013, 22:13
Well COD now has a new mascot :lol:

https://si0.twimg.com/profile_images/3690933056/8e5af99e4ad405f2765844e4647176ee.jpeg

A Mascot is Born :p

Valenka
29th May 2013, 22:20
http://i.imgur.com/ATDYfwf.jpg

You'd be amazed at how many people actually use those features. I use Netflix, YouTube, Facebook and sometimes Skype, so having those on my Xbox are a convenience. The world doesn't revolve around a single person, you know. Microsoft is thinking about what appeals to everyone - some people will use those features, some won't. Don't complain just because you have no interest in them.

Weemanply109
29th May 2013, 22:31
Yep. Things are much more social now. I'm not surprised that they're taking this route with Xbox One, tbqh. LOTS of people will use these features.

BridgetFisher
29th May 2013, 22:38
You'd be amazed at how many people actually use those features. I use Netflix, YouTube, Facebook and sometimes Skype, so having those on my Xbox are a convenience. The world doesn't revolve around a single person, you know. Microsoft is thinking about what appeals to everyone - some people will use those features, some won't. Don't complain just because you have no interest in them.

I understand that but all tvs made now do that already, so its nothing new. its just redundancy, if their gonna show something off it can do that is new for 160 million dollars they shoulda came up with something better then what my one year old tv can do or my ipad, haha. I mean for 160 milion dollars I want to see something ANYTHING that would amaze me, instead I got nada, and Im an xbox fan, so that is just sad. but hey as one poster noted it can make dogs, amazing what 160 million will buy :P

Murphdawg1
30th May 2013, 01:01
You'd be amazed at how many people actually use those features. I use Netflix, YouTube, Facebook and sometimes Skype, so having those on my Xbox are a convenience. The world doesn't revolve around a single person, you know. Microsoft is thinking about what appeals to everyone - some people will use those features, some won't. Don't complain just because you have no interest in them.

Bridget has a point. Consoles need to be focused on games and gamers and with this next generation it seems like the PS 4 is doing that more than the Xbox One which is the reverse of what happened this generation where Sony tried to be the all in one machine while the 360 was more game centric.

Valenka
30th May 2013, 01:57
Bridget has a point. Consoles need to be focused on games and gamers and with this next generation it seems like the PS 4 is doing that more than the Xbox One which is the reverse of what happened this generation where Sony tried to be the all in one machine while the 360 was more game centric.

So because it has a handful of additional features, you make the assumption that its primary focus is not on gaming and gamers?

Murphdawg1
30th May 2013, 04:04
So because it has a handful of additional features, you make the assumption that its primary focus is not on gaming and gamers?

That just isn't my opinion but yes most people did not think Microsoft did themselves any favors at the reveal of the Xbox One. I mean essentially the One is going to work like a PC where you have to put the disc in and then install the game to your hard drive(which can't be removed) so where's the advantage of owning a One over a PC?

Valenka
30th May 2013, 05:00
That just isn't my opinion but yes most people did not think Microsoft did themselves any favors at the reveal of the Xbox One.

Just because some people were disappointed with what they heard at the conference does not mean that Xbox One will not be gaming/gamer centric. I personally was impressed and I'm not jumping to conclusions before official answers are even given.


I mean essentially the One is going to work like a PC where you have to put the disc in and then install the game to your hard drive(which can't be removed) so where's the advantage of owning a One over a PC?

That 'feature' is one of many that people continue to bring up, completely oblivious to the fact that Microsoft stated that it's still being considered and altered. :rolleyes: It's not final yet.

EowynFan
30th May 2013, 05:31
So because it has a handful of additional features, you make the assumption that its primary focus is not on gaming and gamers?

I'm sorry, I know this was not directed at me, but I thought it may be OK to add my thoughts, as I've been following it at least somewhat closely. I see the number of features as being problematic in this way: it takes up RAM. Any amount less of RAM for gaming taken by features such as fantasy sports, Skype and the like that some people will not use is pretty bad for those who will never even want to use them, and in a way hurts those who will be interested in them, because that RAM is still being taken away from the gaming aspect.

As far as these features making the focus not gaming, I'd say yes and no. E3 hasn't happened yet, so we'll see. But the reveal? That was not gaming centric at all. I was excited for it, watched the whole thing and all it seemed to deliver was how TV based it was.


That 'feature' is one of many that people continue to bring up, completely oblivious to the fact that Microsoft stated that it's still being considered and altered. :rolleyes: It's not final yet.

I am genuinely interested, not trying to be a condensing jerk: can I have a link to this? As mentioned above, I've been trying to follow this and last I heard was an interview posted on GS with the VP of Microsoft saying in a very roundabout way that, yes indeed installs are required, however that was about a week ago, so I do believe more could have come up about it.

Valenka
30th May 2013, 05:42
I'm sorry, I know this was not directed at me, but I thought it may be OK to add my thoughts, as I've been following it at least somewhat closely. I see the number of features as being problematic in this way: it takes up RAM. Any amount less of RAM for gaming taken by features such as fantasy sports, Skype and the like that some people will not use is pretty bad for those who will never even want to use them, and in a way hurts those who will be interested in them, because that RAM is still being taken away from the gaming aspect.

And just like on Xbox 360, I'm sure some apps that you aren't interested in can be uninstalled. :)


As far as these features making the focus not gaming, I'd say yes and no. E3 hasn't happened yet, so we'll see. But the reveal? That was not gaming centric at all. I was excited for it, watched the whole thing and all it seemed to deliver was how TV based it was.

The fact of the matter is, just because additional features are added for your entertainment does in no way confirm that Microsoft's focus is not on gaming.


I am genuinely interested, not trying to be a condensing jerk: can I have a link to this? As mentioned above, I've been trying to follow this and last I heard was an interview posted on GS with the VP of Microsoft saying in a very roundabout way that, yes indeed installs are required, however that was about a week ago, so I do believe more could have come up about it.

I don't bookmark everything I find on the Internet. :p
I'm sure a simple Google search will heed the results you desire. Try searching "Xbox One Conference Follow Up" or something similar. The article was on either Game Informer or Kotaku or something of the sort.

Murphdawg1
30th May 2013, 05:54
And just like on Xbox 360, I'm sure some apps that you aren't interested in can be uninstalled. :)



The fact of the matter is, just because additional features are added for your entertainment does in no way confirm that Microsoft's focus is not on gaming.



I don't bookmark everything I find on the Internet. :p
I'm sure a simple Google search will heed the results you desire. Try searching "Xbox One Conference Follow Up" or something similar. The article was on either Game Informer or Kotaku or something of the sort.

But do you not understand that the PS 4 is going to be alot easier to develop for than the PS 3 was and that Sony is making the PS 4 Indie friendly as well? Things that supposedly Microsoft did well with the 360 are now going to Sony. Which is fine by me since the only console i'll be getting is the PS 4 but if you're an Xbox fan you have to be letdown after that reveal.

BridgetFisher
30th May 2013, 06:13
But do you not understand that the PS 4 is going to be alot easier to develop for than the PS 3 was and that Sony is making the PS 4 Indie friendly as well? Things that supposedly Microsoft did well with the 360 are now going to Sony. Which is fine by me since the only console i'll be getting is the PS 4 but if you're an Xbox fan you have to be letdown after that reveal.

MADNESS!!!! How and when is the PS4 or the new xbox one more developer friendly? Their inadequate use of processors and internal architecture are a nightmare for development, there were people getting PHD's writing thesis papers on how to take advantage of the architecture in the PS3 and 360 and it was pure FAIL, due to their terrible design. Far as I know at M$ they still lack the engineering talent to make that work, maybe PS4 can but doubtful, their just going to slap in more processors into some archaic array that may or may never be able to used like the last generation, seems to be what those two companies do, the engineers at both always seem outta their league when it comes to consoles, both companies kept solvent and running not by their consoles but other products on the consumer marketplace as they struggle to keep up with Nintendo.

Lord Martok
30th May 2013, 06:23
What is Nintendo?



:D

EowynFan
30th May 2013, 06:26
And just like on Xbox 360, I'm sure some apps that you aren't interested in can be uninstalled. :)

The fact of the matter is, just because additional features are added for your entertainment does in no way confirm that Microsoft's focus is not on gaming.

I don't bookmark everything I find on the Internet. :p
I'm sure a simple Google search will heed the results you desire. Try searching "Xbox One Conference Follow Up" or something similar. The article was on either Game Informer or Kotaku or something of the sort.

I cannot comment on this one way or the other, as we have no official word from MS, the features seem too central to the purpose of the devise to just get rid of them. It's always good to think positive though, and I can certainly see it being a possibility.

Again, I'll say yes and no is still my opinion as we have not seen all E3 (and MS) has to offer. For now, I do not know how gaming focused the X1 will be. All I'm saying is that the reveal in particular was not gaming centric.

Hmmmm, been looking but to no avail unfortunately; again I am not saying I do not believe it's possible, just that I cannot find anything when taking a good look at both Kotaku and GI. I'm just wondering if MS would back pedal on their mandatory install and used game restrictions, as they seem pretty firm to implement it in some format.

Let's hope that E3 is where everything is revealed, and revealed clearly because all of the speculation and oddly worded answers aren't doing anyone any good.

EowynFan
30th May 2013, 06:29
What is Nintendo?



:D

They have some good IPs, great ones actually. Super Smash Bros will rock, because it always does.

But that Wii U controller...it is not well received.

Murphdawg1
30th May 2013, 06:35
They have some good IPs, great ones actually. Super Smash Bros will rock, because it always does.

But that Wii U controller...it is not well received.

It looks almost like the Xbox controller except with the right stick above the face buttons instead of being below them.

EowynFan
30th May 2013, 06:44
It looks almost like the Xbox controller except with the right stick above the face buttons instead of being below them.

The Wii U? The controller is essentially a tablet. It's a gigantic rectangle with a screen in the middle, analog sticks at the top and a D pad and face buttons to the sides.

Perhaps you are confusing this and the DualShock?

Murphdawg1
30th May 2013, 06:47
MADNESS!!!! How and when is the PS4 or the new xbox one more developer friendly? Their inadequate use of processors and internal architecture are a nightmare for development, there were people getting PHD's writing thesis papers on how to take advantage of the architecture in the PS3 and 360 and it was pure FAIL, due to their terrible design. Far as I know at M$ they still lack the engineering talent to make that work, maybe PS4 can but doubtful, their just going to slap in more processors into some archaic array that may or may never be able to used like the last generation, seems to be what those two companies do, the engineers at both always seem outta their league when it comes to consoles, both companies kept solvent and running not by their consoles but other products on the consumer marketplace as they struggle to keep up with Nintendo.

I have no clue how developer friendly the Xbox One will be but for the current generation between the 360 and PS 3 it is the 360 that was determined to be easier to develop for.

Murphdawg1
30th May 2013, 06:49
The Wii U? The controller is essentially a tablet. It's a gigantic rectangle with a screen in the middle, analog sticks at the top and a D pad and face buttons to the sides.

Perhaps you are confusing this and the DualShock?

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/erikkain/files/2012/06/Wii-U-Pro-Controller1.jpg

I was referring to that.

EowynFan
30th May 2013, 06:55
http://blogs-images.forbes.com/erikkain/files/2012/06/Wii-U-Pro-Controller1.jpg

I was referring to that.

Oh! OK. The Wii U Pro. I understand. I was referring the tablet one (obviously) not being well received.

BridgetFisher
30th May 2013, 06:59
I have no clue how developer friendly the Xbox One will be but for the current generation between the 360 and PS 3 it is the 360 that was determined to be easier to develop for.

What makes the Xbox 360 much more indie friendly isnt the garbage engineering involved in making it, heh heh heeeeeeeeeeeeeeh. Its the fact that M$ is very helpful with indy developers and always have been. They have an entire department with dev consoles and everything that indy devs are free to use, xbox is way ahead on that, then again that is here in America, maybe japan has the same thing for japanese game develoepers over there I have no dea, but for an indy dev in say sweden to use those facilities of course they would have to to go to washington state in America.

Daftvirgin
30th May 2013, 08:46
Please, use some eloquent language otherwise I can't take you seriously. People might think you're a fanboy.

Driber
30th May 2013, 10:08
Pretty sure everyone owns a smart tv today, in fact ALL tvs made now are smart tvs, they have netflix, youtube and facebook apps.

Completely false.

Not everyone owns a smart TV. Far from it.

And not all TVs made today are smart TVs. Far from it.


Yep. Things are much more social now. I'm not surprised that they're taking this route with Xbox One, tbqh. LOTS of people will use these features.

The world is actually getting less social when you think about it.

FB and Twitter are working hard at making this world a much less personal and shallow place. And if what BridgetFisher said is true ("I loved the part where they went into explicit detail about how I can watch TV on my TV, or use social media to auto post my game progress to twitter or facebook.") you just know it's going to make people even more lazy and attention whoring :whistle:


So because it has a handful of additional features, you make the assumption that its primary focus is not on gaming and gamers?

You can't blame the guy - MS did portray that their focus is creating a multimedia machine, instead of just a gaming console.


That just isn't my opinion but yes most people did not think Microsoft did themselves any favors at the reveal of the Xbox One. I mean essentially the One is going to work like a PC where you have to put the disc in and then install the game to your hard drive(which can't be removed) so where's the advantage of owning a One over a PC?

The advantage of consoles in general over PCs is still comfort. PCs allow users to install all kinds of dodgy or badly coded programs, causing conflicts with gaming. Plus, a console you always connect to a TV and you game from your comfy couch etc, whereas PC gamers are usually (not always) behind a desk. This also makes console gaming more social than PC gaming.


Just because some people were disappointed with what they heard at the conference does not mean that Xbox One will not be gaming/gamer centric. I personally was impressed and I'm not jumping to conclusions before official answers are even given.

But you are - you said "And just like on Xbox 360, I'm sure some apps that you aren't interested in can be uninstalled" ;)


That 'feature' is one of many that people continue to bring up, completely oblivious to the fact that Microsoft stated that it's still being considered and altered. :rolleyes: It's not final yet.

MS put it out there, so criticism is fair game IMO.

If the makers of the platform of my choice, PlayStation, comes with a public announcement that states that they are probably going to inhibit the second hand market, I expect people to give them hell for this, as well. I'd probably join in, myself.


The fact of the matter is, just because additional features are added for your entertainment does in no way confirm that Microsoft's focus is not on gaming.

It does not confirm, no, but MS does show that's where their focus is going to be. Their whole mission statement is even in the freaking name of their next console FGS.


MADNESS!!!! How and when is the PS4 or the new xbox one more developer friendly? Their inadequate use of processors and internal architecture are a nightmare for development, there were people getting PHD's writing thesis papers on how to take advantage of the architecture in the PS3 and 360 and it was pure FAIL, due to their terrible design. Far as I know at M$ they still lack the engineering talent to make that work, maybe PS4 can but doubtful, their just going to slap in more processors into some archaic array that may or may never be able to used like the last generation, seems to be what those two companies do, the engineers at both always seem outta their league when it comes to consoles, both companies kept solvent and running not by their consoles but other products on the consumer marketplace as they struggle to keep up with Nintendo.

Yeah, it's way too early to make any statements about which next gen console is going to be more "developer friendly". Only time will tell.


What is Nintendo?



:D

Only the most efficient and most successful console developer :whistle:


I have no clue how developer friendly the Xbox One will be but for the current generation between the 360 and PS 3 it is the 360 that was determined to be easier to develop for.

Easier does not necessarily mean better.

We all know that MS pays big bucks for developers to choose their console over PS3 for development.

And not just development, but it also throws big bucks at marketing their brand. Perhaps because they know without such heavy marketing they'd lose devs to other consoles...

Daftvirgin
30th May 2013, 10:15
Only the most efficient and most successful console developer :whistle:

In terms of handhelds as of lately though.

Driber
30th May 2013, 10:26
In terms of handhelds as of lately though.

No.

Nintendo has always had much better knowledge of hardware and how to efficiently build consoles compared to Sony or Microsoft.

The PS3 and 360 are basically PCs in fancy packaging (and from what I understand - 360 much more so than PS3).

As for handhelds - that's wrong, too. The Wii has been outselling PS3 and 360 for a loooooooooong time... and by a landslide.

PS3 and 360 are very focused on a specific demographic, whereas Nintendo knows how to appeal to a much broader audience.

Edit: and let's not forget that the 360 enjoyed a head start because it was released back in 2005. As soon as Wii entered the market, it has already been selling better than 360 AND PS3. Just about one year after the release of the Wii, it had already caught up with 360's head start and made the 360 eat its dust :p

Murphdawg1
30th May 2013, 15:05
Completely false.

Not everyone owns a smart TV. Far from it.

And not all TVs made today are smart TVs. Far from it.



The world is actually getting less social when you think about it.

FB and Twitter are working hard at making this world a much less personal and shallow place. And if what BridgetFisher said is true ("I loved the part where they went into explicit detail about how I can watch TV on my TV, or use social media to auto post my game progress to twitter or facebook.") you just know it's going to make people even more lazy and attention whoring :whistle:



You can't blame the guy - MS did portray that their focus is creating a multimedia machine, instead of just a gaming console.



The advantage of consoles in general over PCs is still comfort. PCs allow users to install all kinds of dodgy or badly coded programs, causing conflicts with gaming. Plus, a console you always connect to a TV and you game from your comfy couch etc, whereas PC gamers are usually (not always) behind a desk. This also makes console gaming more social than PC gaming.



But you are - you said "And just like on Xbox 360, I'm sure some apps that you aren't interested in can be uninstalled" ;)



MS put it out there, so criticism is fair game IMO.

If the makers of the platform of my choice, PlayStation, comes with a public announcement that states that they are probably going to inhibit the second hand market, I expect people to give them hell for this, as well. I'd probably join in, myself.



It does not confirm, no, but MS does show that's where their focus is going to be. Their whole mission statement is even in the freaking name of their next console FGS.



Yeah, it's way too early to make any statements about which next gen console is going to be more "developer friendly". Only time will tell.



Only the most efficient and most successful console developer :whistle:



Easier does not necessarily mean better.

We all know that MS pays big bucks for developers to choose their console over PS3 for development.

And not just development, but it also throws big bucks at marketing their brand. Perhaps because they know without such heavy marketing they'd lose devs to other consoles...

I was mainly comparing the PS 3 to the PS 4 in how Sony has basically made the PS 4's architecture like a PC's.

Valenka
30th May 2013, 16:28
But do you not understand that the PS 4 is going to be alot easier to develop for than the PS 3 was and that Sony is making the PS 4 Indie friendly as well? Things that supposedly Microsoft did well with the 360 are now going to Sony. Which is fine by me since the only console i'll be getting is the PS 4 but if you're an Xbox fan you have to be letdown after that reveal.

What does the ease of the PS4's development have to do with the primary focus of the Xbox One? Let's not get into a console war over speculation. And actually, I do not "have" to be let down by the Xbox One reveal. I was impressed, as I stated previously.


I cannot comment on this one way or the other, as we have no official word from MS, the features seem too central to the purpose of the devise to just get rid of them. It's always good to think positive though, and I can certainly see it being a possibility.

How do they seem "central" to the device? Just because they were talked about in great detail? Even still, just because some features were talked about more than others does not lessen the impact of validity of the features yet to be discussed.


Again, I'll say yes and no is still my opinion as we have not seen all E3 (and MS) has to offer. For now, I do not know how gaming focused the X1 will be. All I'm saying is that the reveal in particular was not gaming centric.

Well (and I mean this generally, not directly to you) if people would learn to stop being so negative and grabbing pitchforks before they even hear the whole story, the world would be a better place. ;) Microsoft said they were showing more at E3 - maybe that's when we'll see more about how gaming will work. :)


Hmmmm, been looking but to no avail unfortunately; again I am not saying I do not believe it's possible, just that I cannot find anything when taking a good look at both Kotaku and GI. I'm just wondering if MS would back pedal on their mandatory install and used game restrictions, as they seem pretty firm to implement it in some format.

Well therein lies your problem; I said it was on either Kotaku, Game Informer, or something of the sort. I didn't state factually that it was on either website. :p Microsoft wants money. So do a lot of companies. It's no surprise. If they want to do what they can to cut back on lost profits by gamers purchasing used games, they can do whatever they please. But they must also take into consideration the general consensus of gamers. If the Xbox One does not allow used games to be played at all, nevermind with an accompanying fee and the PS4 does allow it, everyone will purchase the PS4 instead of the Xbox One and Microsoft would have shot themselves in the proverbial foot.


You can't blame the guy - MS did portray that their focus is creating a multimedia machine, instead of just a gaming console.

True, but most of those features are available on the Xbox 360, but I don't hear anyone complaining that it's not gaming centric.


But you are - you said "And just like on Xbox 360, I'm sure some apps that you aren't interested in can be uninstalled" ;)

No, I'm not jumping to any conclusions whatsoever. :scratch:
I made an educated assumption based on being able to uninstall what you do not wish to have on the Xbox 360. I can't possibly imagine Microsoft requiring applications to maintain permanent residence on your hard drive - taking up space - when you do not use them.


MS put it out there, so criticism is fair game IMO.

If the makers of the platform of my choice, PlayStation, comes with a public announcement that states that they are probably going to inhibit the second hand market, I expect people to give them hell for this, as well. I'd probably join in, myself.

Yes, criticism, not gathering pitchforks and torches before the final word has been given. If Microsoft were to say "Enter feature you do not like here is FINAL," then I can understand. There's a lot of room for change between now and its release and people need to understand that and let the flames of wrath simmer down.


It does not confirm, no, but MS does show that's where their focus is going to be. Their whole mission statement is even in the freaking name of their next console FGS.

Hold the phone. Is it not possible to have multiple lines of focus in different aspects? Who are you or I to say that Microsoft's focus is more on general entertainment than gaming? Based on what, a reveal that showcased more additional features than its primary? Like I said before, maybe they're waiting until E3 to show us something mindblowing. The theme of my entire standpoint is that patience is a virtue.

Their mission statement is in the name of the console? What? "One?" Yeah, perhaps everything you could possibly want in the field of entertainment all in one console. That doesn't mean gaming is not a priority.

Driber
30th May 2013, 17:23
Oh don't get me wrong, I fully agree with the quick pitchfork mentality being a bad thing. I've been arguing just that on several occasions here (TR9 $30 Japanese language pack, anyone? :whistle:)

BUT, why are you bringing it up in this thread? Where is this pitchfork mentality on this forum? Where are those flames of wrath you mentioned?

Did I miss something? :scratch:


Their mission statement is in the name of the console? What? "One?" Yeah, perhaps everything you could possibly want in the field of entertainment all in one console. That doesn't mean gaming is not a priority.

Of course gaming is not not going to be a priority for the X1. No one is claiming otherwise. But it apparently is a whole lot less of a priority compared to the 360 if their grand reveal event focuses heavily on home entertainment rather than gaming.

If that's the first thing MS chooses to showcase, then that gives us an indication that that is going to be thing that will drive the sales of this new console. Or at least, that's what MS seems to be banking on; whether it's going to be a smash hit or just another desperate attempt to try to keep up with the world, remains to be seen...

I'm not holding my breath for any spectacular game related innovations with this new console. The X1 will probably just have a bunch more RAM, a faster processor, yada yada.

Valenka
30th May 2013, 17:44
To quell any flames of angst and scepticism, Microsoft just announced (rather high-horseish) that they will "Kill Sony at E3."

http://www.gamechup.com/microsoft-xbox-one-will-surprise-the-world-at-e3/

*sigh*

I wish companies would just wake up and coexist instead of being at each others throats. Priorities should be the gamer, not winning a pissing match. Not to start a console war, but last I checked, Sony had a bigger consumer base than Microsoft had with the PS3 and Xbox 360. Microsoft must be banking on something heavy to be making such ballsy remarks.


Oh don't get me wrong, I fully agree with the quick pitchfork mentality being a bad thing. I've been arguing just that on several occasions here (TR9 $30 Japanese language pack, anyone? :whistle:)

BUT, why are you bringing it up in this thread? Where is this pitchfork mentality on this forum? Where are those flames of wrath you mentioned?

Did I miss something? :scratch:

I was speaking generally when I said that - there hasn't been so much pitchforks and torches here as up in arms about what they've heard and jumping to conclusions before the rest of the information has been given.

The point I was trying to make is that people are getting fired up over the X1 conference which was basically only a taste of what's to come. Sure, it's beyond understandable that people are upset that Microsoft chose to talk about general entertainment firstly as opposed to gaming, which is what the console is about. But as I said, that was most likely their way of gearing up for the "big reveal" at E3 where they'll undoubtedly showcase nothing but gaming.


Of course gaming is not not going to be a priority for the X1. No one is claiming otherwise. But it apparently is a whole lot less of a priority compared to the 360 if their grand reveal event focuses heavily on home entertainment rather than gaming.

I never said people are claiming that the Xbox One will not be gaming centric - however, the comments made implicate disbelief, which is nonsensical given that Microsoft has not dealt their entire hand yet. As I said before, they are most likely gearing up to show us the number one feature: gaming. Think of it as a countdown, so to speak.


If that's the first thing MS chooses to showcase, then that gives us an indication that that is going to be thing that will drive the sales of this new console. Or at least, that's what MS seems to be banking on; whether it's going to be a smash hit or just another desperate attempt to try to keep up with the world, remains to be seen...

That's presupposition in all honesty. It's perfectly okay to judge based on what you've seen but to make conclusions before the entire product's abilities has been shown is silliness. At the end of the day, gamers will decide what is best for them. If the consumer would rather have nothing but gaming, they'll go with the PlayStation 4. If they would like to have gaming and other entertainment features, they'll go with the Xbox One. There's also that percentage of people who'll end up with both consoles at some point.


I'm not holding my breath for any spectacular game related innovations with this new console. The X1 will probably just have a bunch more RAM, a faster processor, yada yada.

I see someone missed out on watching the conference. :p
Microsoft already detailed that the Xbox One comes preloaded with an 8GB RAM and 500GB hard drive. I believe the processor was described as well, but I'd have to go back and watch it again to confirm it.

Daftvirgin
30th May 2013, 18:04
It seems everyone takes the Blunty approach to criticize people.

Driber
30th May 2013, 18:07
To quell any flames of angst and scepticism, Microsoft just announced (rather high-horseish) that they will "Kill Sony at E3."

http://www.gamechup.com/microsoft-xbox-one-will-surprise-the-world-at-e3/

*sigh*

I wish companies would just wake up and coexist instead of being at each others throats. Priorities should be the gamer, not winning a pissing match. Not to start a console war, but last I checked, Sony had a bigger consumer base than Microsoft had with the PS3 and Xbox 360. Microsoft must be banking on something heavy to be making such ballsy remarks.

Oh brother :rolleyes:

You know, this kind of language only divides gamers even further. I used to think it was just silly gamers having console wars amongst each other, but now I see the companies themselves even promote this kind of lame rivalry.

How sad.


I was speaking generally when I said that - there hasn't been so much pitchforks and torches here

Ah, okay. Thanks for clarifying that.


The point I was trying to make is that people are getting fired up over the X1 conference which was basically only a taste of what's to come.

....and now you just made it confusing again :nut:


Sure, it's beyond understandable that people are upset that Microsoft chose to talk about general entertainment firstly as opposed to gaming, which is what the console is about. But as I said, that was most likely their way of gearing up for the "big reveal" at E3 where they'll undoubtedly showcase nothing but gaming.

If most people left with a bad taste in their mouths from the event, one could only conclude that it was a bad marketing move to not showcase the gaming element first :whistle:


I never said people are claiming that the Xbox One will not be gaming centric - however, the comments made implicate disbelief, which is nonsensical given that Microsoft has not dealt their entire hand yet. As I said before, they are most likely gearing up to show us the number one feature: gaming. Think of it as a countdown, so to speak.

People react to what they see. I have to agree that it may not be the smartest of things to first talk about non-gaming things at the first reveal of a new console. As long as people's comments are devoid of the aforementioned pitchforks, it's all justifiable IMO.


That's presupposition in all honesty. It's perfectly okay to judge based on what you've seen but to make conclusions before the entire product's abilities has been shown is silliness. At the end of the day, gamers will decide what is best for them. If the consumer would rather have nothing but gaming, they'll go with the PlayStation 4. If they would like to have gaming and other entertainment features, they'll go with the Xbox One. There's also that percentage of people who'll end up with both consoles at some point.

Ah, if only it was as simple as that :whistle:

In reality, gamers are sort of forced to buy a console they do not like, due to all the exclusivity deals and all that evil.


I see someone missed out on watching the conference. :p
Microsoft already detailed that the Xbox One comes preloaded with an 8GB RAM and 500GB hard drive. I believe the processor was described as well, but I'd have to go back and watch it again to confirm it.

I'm assuming that by your emboldening of my word "probably" you inferred that I was speculating whether or not X1 will be more powerful than 360. Of course it is going to be; that's a no-brainer, lol.

What I was saying is that we probably will not see any ground breaking innovation with the X1. Just making a console more powerful than its predecessor is not innovation.

The specs you just mentioned are exactly what I was referring to, so yes, I do know them ;)

Rider
30th May 2013, 18:27
http://www.ps4site.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ps4vsxboxone.jpg

Daftvirgin
30th May 2013, 18:31
I am honored to be the thread's OP :D

Elessar78
30th May 2013, 18:47
You can't blame the guy - MS did portray that their focus is creating a multimedia machine, instead of just a gaming console.

It was a presentation for the general / mainstream audience, not particularly gamers. I don't blame MS for trying to cater to them. On E3 the focus will be on games, according to MS. In fact MS stated it will launch 15 exclusive games for ONE in its first year, more than ever for XBox. Probably among them some Kinect titles no gamer is interested in but still even if a third of them are triple A big budget titles, that would be good. I dunno where the problem is...

As for mandatory installs, i always install games anyway. How they will handle used games is not clear yet, so i won't bother comment on rumors.

Games on 360 are easier to develop for than on PS3, that's a fact.

And Nintendo is a joke.

Elessar78
30th May 2013, 18:58
Nintendo has always had much better knowledge of hardware and how to efficiently build consoles compared to Sony or Microsoft.

How would you know? What do you even mean by "efficient"? And what is wrong with PC architecture?



The Wii has been outselling PS3 and 360 for a loooooooooong time... and by a landslide.

The 360 and PS3 are outselling the Wii by a landslide for over a year now. Overall, the lead of the Wii is not that big, 99 million units vs 77 million (360 and PS3 each).

Let's not mention the flop that is Wii U.

Valenka
30th May 2013, 19:09
The 360 and PS3 are outselling the Wii by a landslide for over a year now. Overall, the lead of the Wii is not that big, 99 million units vs 77 million (360 and PS3 each).

Uh...no.
As of March 2013, the Nintendo Wii has sold close to one billion units, Xbox 360 at around 77 milion and 70 million with the PS3. Unless you do arithmetic differently in your country of origin, the Nintendo Wii continues to dominate the gaming industry in terms of profit.

The Wii's lead is not that big? It must be nice living in delusion, I must try it sometime. :vlol:
Twenty-two million units is a rather substantial lead.


You know, this kind of language only divides gamers even further. I used to think it was just silly gamers having console wars amongst each other, but now I see the companies themselves even promote this kind of lame rivalry.

Well, now we know who to blame for any Xbox One/PS4 console wars this generation: Microsoft. Sony hasn't said a single anti-Xbox thing yet and Microsoft is already gearing up to make an arse of themselves. Shame, really.


....and now you just made it confusing again :nut:

Stop overthinking lest I slap ye with a slice of pizza. :p
I was trying to say that since the X1 conference, gamers left and right are up in arms about it and jumping to conclusions; Microsoft hasn't shown us everything yet nor have they stated what is final and what is being worked on. I personally don't feel it's appropriate to be at Microsoft's throat before all of the information is given. :)


If most people left with a bad taste in their mouths from the event, one could only conclude that it was a bad marketing move to not showcase the gaming element first :whistle:

While that's perfectly understandable, it does not alter the fact that people are making judgements based off of information not yet given. "The Xbox One does not focus on gaming," is ludicrous because Microsoft has not yet shown us how gaming works on the Xbox One.


People react to what they see. I have to agree that it may not be the smartest of things to first talk about non-gaming things at the first reveal of a new console. As long as people's comments are devoid of the aforementioned pitchforks, it's all justifiable IMO.

Well of course, it wasn't a bright idea to talk about every feature except gaming on a gaming console's unveiling. It's certainly justifiable to be upset, but some of the comments being made are not appropriate given that we've not yet seen what gaming will be like. That's the point I've been trying to make. :p


Ah, if only it was as simple as that :whistle:

In reality, gamers are sort of forced to buy a console they do not like, due to all the exclusivity deals and all that evil.

I wouldn't use the word 'force' in that context; 'influenced' would be more appropriate. Gamers aren't forced to choose between one console and another and if they feel that they are, it's because they have the mentality of "Well I want it now." If you honestly feel like you can't choose between the Xbox One and the PS4 because both consoles have exclusives that you want, you have three choices:

1.) Wait until you can afford to purchase both.
2.) Purchase one and purchase the other when you can afford it.
3.) Purchase one and find a friend who has the other and hang out with them and play the other console.

You are never forced to do anything, really. ;)


I'm assuming that by your emboldening of my word "probably" you inferred that I was speculating whether or not X1 will be more powerful than 360. Of course it is going to be; that's a no-brainer, lol.

What I was saying is that we probably will not see any ground breaking innovation with the X1. Just making a console more powerful than its predecessor is not innovation.

In all honesty, when was the last time something was truly innovative in the gaming industry? The last true innovation I can think of is the transition from Xbox and PS2 to Xbox 360 and PS3 and that generation started what, seven or eight years ago? Following that was the Nintendo Wii with their motion-style gameplay, in which Microsoft and Sony followed with the Kinect and Move. Other than that, I can't think of anything else.

There will never be any ground-breaking innovation until immersive, virtual reality is invented. In this day and age, "innovation" is simply building atop last year's model. It's not only the X1 but the PS4 as well - if one cannot imagine Microsoft doing anything innovative, the same must be said for Sony as well.

EowynFan
30th May 2013, 19:10
How do they seem "central" to the device? Just because they were talked about in great detail? Even still, just because some features were talked about more than others does not lessen the impact of validity of the features yet to be discussed.

Well (and I mean this generally, not directly to you) if people would learn to stop being so negative and grabbing pitchforks before they even hear the whole story, the world would be a better place. ;) Microsoft said they were showing more at E3 - maybe that's when we'll see more about how gaming will work. :)

Well therein lies your problem; I said it was on either Kotaku, Game Informer, or something of the sort. I didn't state factually that it was on either website. :p Microsoft wants money. So do a lot of companies. It's no surprise. If they want to do what they can to cut back on lost profits by gamers purchasing used games, they can do whatever they please. But they must also take into consideration the general consensus of gamers. If the Xbox One does not allow used games to be played at all, nevermind with an accompanying fee and the PS4 does allow it, everyone will purchase the PS4 instead of the Xbox One and Microsoft would have shot themselves in the proverbial foot.


That's exactly why they seem central. If you did not know this was a gaming system, and went solely off the reveal (the things we know to be true) you'd think it was a multimedia box with gaming features along with TV and social features. I don't think I said that gaming will not be a big part of the X1. All I am saying is that the with the reveal itself MS decided to showcase primarily non-gaming features; and no, I do not think it lessens the validity of the gaming features, I merely said they were not strongly shown at the reveal. I do agree with you: come E3, which is indeed for gaming, we will see more of the X1 has to offer in gaming.

I thank you for not directing this at me, because my pitchfork and touch are safely stowed away. I do agree though, the pitchfork mentality is pretty absurd and people need to know more before getting really upset about rumors and speculation. But unfortunately, we know it will still happen, silly as it is.

I also did your suggested Google search (but I guess I only found it necessary to mention specifically the sites you mentioned specifically,) and later more digging , and all I've found concerning MS backpedaling is this:

http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/microsoft-sorta-addresses-big-xbox-one-questions-u/1100-4646/

And that's not really too clear cut at all.

Anyhow, even if the most anti-consumer policies were implemented on the X1 (or PS4 or any console) people would still buy it, because they want to play those games or simply just don't care. A bunch of people have been saying, "I don't buy used, so I don't care." They'll still buy. So far, MS has seemed to shoot themselves in the proverbial foot (or face, judging by all the pitchfork and touch internet outrage.) E3 will be telling. I hope they do backpedal on the used games thing or tell us it's all rumors, because it will be a sad day if/when used game sells die.

Wow... it's sad to see the actual companies having console wars. They're going to "kill Sony"? Yeesh, that's childish.

Elessar78
30th May 2013, 19:23
To quell any flames of angst and scepticism, Microsoft just announced (rather high-horseish) that they will "Kill Sony at E3."

http://www.gamechup.com/microsoft-xbox-one-will-surprise-the-world-at-e3/

*sigh*

I wish companies would just wake up and coexist instead of being at each others throats. Priorities should be the gamer, not winning a pissing match. Not to start a console war, but last I checked, Sony had a bigger consumer base than Microsoft had with the PS3 and Xbox 360. Microsoft must be banking on something heavy to be making such ballsy remarks.

I kind of like companies stooping to our level. Always being nice and all is boring. :)

Sony doesn't have a bigger consumer base, they are neck and neck with the PS3 and 360, the latter having a headstart, though.

But overall, i agree with your posts.

BridgetFisher
30th May 2013, 19:34
Hmmm xbox one, this has nothing to do with my interests in Tomb raider :(

Weemanply109
30th May 2013, 19:38
The fact that they focused their presentation solely on TV features suggests that whilst gaming is a priority, it's more of a priority to Microsoft to make the device a social hub. I see this being the perfect thing for casuals and It's already evident that hardcore gamers are anticipating Sony's console much more, atm since they're not impressed.

However, to slam Xbox One's credibility as a gaming console is a bit pre-mature, I suppose. If they have 15 exclusives set up for the console and are investing 1 billion solely on that then I'm certain they're putting extreme effort into making sure gamers (albeit causal or hardcore) get what they expect from the console. Then clearly it's not that bad. :p


What is Nintendo?



:D

The question the general public have been asking themselves since the 3DflopS.


To quell any flames of angst and scepticism, Microsoft just announced (rather high-horseish) that they will "Kill Sony at E3."

http://www.gamechup.com/microsoft-xbox-one-will-surprise-the-world-at-e3/

*sigh*

I wish companies would just wake up and coexist instead of being at each others throats. Priorities should be the gamer, not winning a pissing match. Not to start a console war, but last I checked, Sony had a bigger consumer base than Microsoft had with the PS3 and Xbox 360. Microsoft must be banking on something heavy to be making such ballsy remarks.

CEO of Sony's response:

http://i.imgur.com/QkXvY34.png

Valenka
30th May 2013, 19:50
That's exactly why they seem central. If you did not know this was a gaming system, and went solely off the reveal (the things we know to be true) you'd think it was a multimedia box with gaming features along with TV and social features. I don't think I said that gaming will not be a big part of the X1. All I am saying is that the with the reveal itself MS decided to showcase primarily non-gaming features; and no, I do not think it lessens the validity of the gaming features, I merely said they were not strongly shown at the reveal. I do agree with you: come E3, which is indeed for gaming, we will see more of the X1 has to offer in gaming.

Well that's where I take issue. "If you did not know this was a gaming system..." I think everyone who tuned into the Xbox One conference knew what it was. My grandmother - who hasn't touched an electronic other than the television remote - can differentiate between an Xbox and a PlayStation. Case and point: anyone who's interested knows what it is, so Microsoft isn't really required to educate the ignorant on that front. :p I understand your point though, gaming should have been priority one in the discussion since it is a gaming console after all, but it was not and while we can sit here talking about could-haves and would-haves until the cows come home, we've no other choice but to simply wait and see what else Microsoft will share with us. :)


I also did your suggested Google search (but I guess I only found it necessary to mention specifically the sites you mentioned specifically,) and later more digging , and all I've found concerning MS backpedaling is this:

http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/microsoft-sorta-addresses-big-xbox-one-questions-u/1100-4646/

And that's not really too clear cut at all.

Yes, that's the one I was talking about. True, it does not give definitive answers, but the fact that Microsoft is addressing it is enough to quell any flames until the official and final answers are given. :)


Anyhow, even if the most anti-consumer policies were implemented on the X1 (or PS4 or any console) people would still buy it, because they want to play those games or simply just don't care. A bunch of people have been saying, "I don't buy used, so I don't care." They'll still buy. So far, MS has seemed to shoot themselves in the proverbial foot (or face, judging by all the pitchfork and touch internet outrage.) E3 will be telling. I hope they do backpedal on the used games thing or tell us it's all rumors, because it will be a sad day if/when used game sells die.

I understand the situation with used games completely, but it's rather nonsensical when you think about it. Allow me to outline some points about used games and combat them with a rebuttal:

Purchasing preowned games saves you money.
Yes...after a few months. Used copies of new games are usually only cheaper by $5. The longer the game has been available (as well as popularity and demand) the cheaper the used copy will be.

Purchasing preowned gives you a way to back out if you don't like it.
This is only partly true. I have a better understanding of the market now that I work for GameStop and the company policy is that you can return a preowned game within seven days for any reason for a full refund or exchange for something different. After the seven days, you may only return it for another copy of the same title. Now pay attention, because this is the interesting part: as outlined in the company's policy - the fine print that no one likes to read - as well as in the employee manual, GameStop reserves the right to deny a return if it's determined that the customer is abusing the policy as a rental service. So the next time you're compelled to purchase a preowned game, play it for seven days, return it for something else and repeat the process, I'd bear that in mind.

Primarily, the reason why I'm concerned about Xbox One and PS4 doing away with the used games market is because I don't want to lose the job I've been after since I was fifteen. :vlol:


Hmmm xbox one, this has nothing to do with my interests in Tomb raider :(

Then why waste a post? :scratch:

BridgetFisher
30th May 2013, 19:56
Ive never agreed with the resale of used games by these retail stores that operate in my perspective as a criminal enterprise without the duty to track paperwork like a pawn shop. Its legalized piracy since none of the sales of used games are returned to the developer allowing these stores to rob the families of those who work hard to produce the media we all enjoy. On consoles this problem has been solved, a 360 could do it, it has the ability with its patented signature technology but that was just a test bed for how its being rolled out on the Xbox One. Finally these stores can end their unethical practices of stealing from hard working developers who spend days AND nights staring at screens punching keys to do stuff. Sadly it wont be the nail in the coffin for brick and mortar stores but its one step closer to closing the lid on the coffin for them.

EowynFan
30th May 2013, 20:42
Well that's where I take issue. "If you did not know this was a gaming system..." I think everyone who tuned into the Xbox One conference knew what it was. My grandmother - who hasn't touched an electronic other than the television remote - can differentiate between an Xbox and a PlayStation. Case and point: anyone who's interested knows what it is, so Microsoft isn't really required to educate the ignorant on that front. :p I understand your point though, gaming should have been priority one in the discussion since it is a gaming console after all, but it was not and while we can sit here talking about could-haves and would-haves until the cows come home, we've no other choice but to simply wait and see what else Microsoft will share with us. :)



Yes, that's the one I was talking about. True, it does not give definitive answers, but the fact that Microsoft is addressing it is enough to quell any flames until the official and final answers are given. :)



I understand the situation with used games completely, but it's rather nonsensical when you think about it. Allow me to outline some points about used games and combat them with a rebuttal:

Purchasing preowned games saves you money.
Yes...after a few months. Used copies of new games are usually only cheaper by $5. The longer the game has been available (as well as popularity and demand) the cheaper the used copy will be.

Purchasing preowned gives you a way to back out if you don't like it.
This is only partly true. I have a better understanding of the market now that I work for GameStop and the company policy is that you can return a preowned game within seven days for any reason for a full refund or exchange for something different. After the seven days, you may only return it for another copy of the same title. Now pay attention, because this is the interesting part: as outlined in the company's policy - the fine print that no one likes to read - as well as in the employee manual, GameStop reserves the right to deny a return if it's determined that the customer is abusing the policy as a rental service. So the next time you're compelled to purchase a preowned game, play it for seven days, return it for something else and repeat the process, I'd bear that in mind.

Primarily, the reason why I'm concerned about Xbox One and PS4 doing away with the used games market is because I don't want to lose the job I've been after since I was fifteen. :vlol:



Then why waste a post? :scratch:


I think we are saying the same thing here, are we not? MS will show more about the X1 and gaming at E3, until then we cannot say anything for sure but that what we saw. And what we saw was not strongly about gaming; so that being said, I do not find it hard to believe that would leave people to believe gaming is not taking front and center. They certainly should have shown more gaming related, I feel, but there what is done is done and now we can only look ahead. :)

The way they are handling it is very confusing. The VP says there will be a fee, XBOX Support Twitter says there will not, Major tried to smooth ruffled feathers by saying you can play a game at a buddy's house by logging in to you account on his/her console. Nothing is really clear here.

For saving money it really depends on how long you're willing to wait. I've been wanting to try Gears of War, and after a long time got them used, $6 for Gears 1 and 2 instead of the roughly $120 I'd have to have spent for brand new copies. Used game market is also great for old current gen games. Say you want to play Perfect Dark Zero. You are not going to find that anywhere new because it is so old, used is the perfect solution.

I agree with this point fully, and I did indeed know they can stop you from returning games. It's a sad thing though, that people would use it like a rental service.

BridgetFisher
30th May 2013, 20:48
I think we are saying the same thing here, are we not? MS will show more about the X1 and gaming at E3, until then we cannot say anything for sure but that what we saw. And what we saw was not strongly about gaming; so that being said, I do not find it hard to believe that would leave people to believe gaming is not taking front and center. They certainly should have shown more gaming related, I feel, but there what is done is done and now we can only look ahead. :)


E3 isnt the issue, at this point business wise it doesnt matter what they do. Financial analysts and business people have judged with their wallets, M$ spent an estimated 160 million to show as you stated nothing to wait until E3? if that is how their managing their company wasting that much money on nothing, I wouldnt count on them being able to get much done at E3. MS though as the money to burn and so does Sony since the revenue overall is being generated by other consumer goods outside of consoles. Hopefully this is the last generation for MS and PS before investors pull the plug due to poor leadership and mismanagement. Heard Sega might have something in the works, could it be the old Nintendo vs Sega all over again? that would be pretty exciting.

Valenka
30th May 2013, 20:55
Ive never agreed with the resale of used games by these retail stores that operate in my perspective as a criminal enterprise without the duty to track paperwork like a pawn shop.

We don't need your permission. It's under the company policy. You ever trade in a game at GameStop and the associate has you sign your name on the signature pad? Did you actually read the disclaimer before signing your name and hitting accept? When you trade in your products and sign your name, you are signing over ownership and authorising GameStop to basically do with it what we will. What, do you think your traded products just sit on a back shelf until they expire? :scratch:


Its legalized piracy since none of the sales of used games are returned to the developer allowing these stores to rob the families of those who work hard to produce the media we all enjoy.

It's not piracy whatsoever, it's business. When you purchase a new game with say, serial number 0052, the profits from that sale are divided (not evenly, mind you) between the publisher, developer and the seller (GameStop.) When you bring the game back to GameStop and trade it in, the profits from the sale of that game (serial number 0052) already went to the respective parties, so now GameStop has the given right (by the companies and legally by right) to make their own profit from the resale. You can't make a profit on the same thing twice. What if you sold a game to your friend? If you're going to have that attitude, I hope you're sending a share of the money received from the game to the developers and publishers. :rolleyes:


Finally these stores can end their unethical practices of stealing from hard working developers who spend days AND nights staring at screens punching keys to do stuff. Sadly it wont be the nail in the coffin for brick and mortar stores but its one step closer to closing the lid on the coffin for them.

:lol:

You're preaching about a subject you can't even begin to understand. Companies need GameStop and similar middlemen to sell their games. GameStop will never go out of business unless the only way to obtain a video game is to download it out of thin air. It's not unethical, it's not stealing. You just have no sense of how the video game market works and I urge you to educate yourself before speaking about it further. :)


It's a sad thing though, that people would use it like a rental service.

Where there is kindness, there are people willing to take advantage of it.

Lord Martok
30th May 2013, 20:56
@BridgetFisher,

Car companies don't complain about used cars.
Movie companies don't complain about used movies.

It's not piracy.

Not everyone can afford a $60 (or more, depending on the edition purchased) title right off the bat....that means one of two things: 1. They have to wait until the game comes down in retail price, which could be up to a year, perhaps even more, depending on how well the game sells. 2. They'll have to wait until a used copy of a game becomes available at the local GameStop/Best Buy/Pawn Shop. And used game prices are apparently (as far as I can tell) determined by how well a game is doing in the new sales market. (Anyone with a bit more insight on this, I would love some enlightenment. :) ) It could still take a while for even a used game to come down in price for something that less fortunate families/users can afford.

The only (supposed) evil that GameStop might be engaging in is that they actually push (or at least, used to push) the sale of used games over new, because that's how the company makes their profit. Every trip that I've been on to GameStop lately though, it would seem they have abandoned that practice. (It's been a while since I've worked for a GameStop too....but at the time, the practice was definitely that the Game Advisors were encouraged to try and actively sell used titles first. Valenka, perhaps you can confirm current sales practices? --Edit...and it looks like you did since I was typing up this overlong post. :lol: :) ) But, to sum up, a game developer/publisher makes its money ONCE on a product sold per unit, just like every other manufacturing or production company. Game companies have tried to up the ante by recouping in used game sales by requiring "online passes" if gamers purchasing used titles wish to play the latest, greatest multiplayer titles...or pimping "season passes" if players wish to get a supposedly good deal on DLC (whether single or multiplayer).

As for Nintendo Wii, I am frankly amazed that it sells as well as it does. It might have some good original, childrens' titles, but just about every port (just about...not every) I've seen of games that were made for PS3/Xbox 360 blow goats when it gets ported to the Wii in terms of both graphics and game play. It sounds like their online interface (which seems to be rather minimal) is less than user friendly, especially in the social area. The only reason I would've gotten a Wii would've been for the Resident Evil Chronicles titles, but now that those have been ported over to PS3, I have no need for it.

And everything I've seen or heard about the Wii U seems to point toward its ever increasing obscurity.

The big stinks with Xbox One, (aside from its initial presentation which seemed to focus on the X1 being more of a set-top box than an actual gaming console), are its apparent designs for used games. Wanna play a used game? Pay the same as "retail", or some such horse hockey. A friend of mine who works at Best Buy said that it seems like the route that M$ is going, Best Buy will be charged a fee for every used title that gets sold to them by users. Likely will be the same with GameStop. And then, what happens when those used games are sold to new end-users? The end-users end up getting charged the fees that GS and BB were charged when receiving used titles. So, the practice that M$ is engaging in is trying to kill the used games market by discouraging such sales...kinda like how heavier taxes are placed on cigarette sales, with the intent being that if higher prices are placed on such things, the less folk will want to buy them. (And some folks who are desperate enough for a smoke...Thank God smoking is something I've never taken up....will actually pay another smoker just for one cigarette. Phillip Morris, et al, never see a red dime from those sales...LOL!) M$ is imposing that if you want to be able to play the latest and greatest titles (regardless of how far down the road you may be able to get the game) you must pay full retail. As stated before, not everyone can afford full retail...which means that by the time they can actually afford the title, it won't be the latest and greatest anymore...and likely even moreso end up being nearly obsolete because the latest and greatest edition of said title will be rolling out soon. Shoot, if I recall correctly, even when Halo 2 came out for Xbox, the original Halo was still going for full retail price, and had not come down yet.

Quite honestly, I don't see the used game market hurting the new games market (and the devs/pubs) one bit. It takes the sale of a new game in order to turn around and make that unit as a used title. That's one unit sold, period. The pubs/devs have made their money off the new sale. What happens to that unit afterwards is out of their hands. Even if a gamer returns the title, and gets a full refund because said title "sucked", it cannot be resold as a "new" title. That unit has been used...or as is the current jargon "previously enjoyed" (or perhaps more accurately "previously endured" if the game sucked in the original end-user's opinion. :) ) It's a 1 to 1 deal initially. It takes a million new units to make the potential for a million "used" units. (And only a fraction, even if it is a sizeable fraction, actually take their games back to trade in on new titles. Many still hang on to their older titles. Hell, I still have a considerable portion of my old PS2 and Xbox titles.) Used units are in circulation, so perhaps their sales could potentially outweigh new sales in terms of units sold, but still, used units do not self-propagate or perpetuate.

You see, children....when a developer and a publisher really, really love each other, they get close. And then the publisher sticks his hoo-dilly into the developer's cha-cha...and then...... (ooops....sorry, children, nuthin' ta' see here...move along, children, move along.) :D

Valenka
30th May 2013, 21:05
The only (supposed) evil that GameStop might be engaging in is that they actually push (or at least, used to push) the sale of used games over new, because that's how the company makes their profit. Every trip that I've been on to GameStop lately though, it would seem they have abandoned that practice. (It's been a while since I've worked for a GameStop too....but at the time, the practice was definitely that the Game Advisors were encouraged to try and actively sell used titles first. Valenka, perhaps you can confirm current sales practices? --Edit...and it looks like you did since I was typing up this overlong post. :lol: :) )

Quite alright, Lord Martok! :D I'll give as much information as I legally can, and it basically boils down to common sense, so I won't be under scrutiny for sharing this. :p A lot of people say GameStop is a rip off because you could buy a $60 game today and trade it in tomorrow and only get $25 for it. It's much like purchasing a car. The moment you drive it off the lot, the vehicle depreciates in value immediately by a substantial amount. Same goes with video games. It's ludicrous to expect GameStop to basically buy the game back from you when we could just get a new copy from the developer. We're not going to buy your game back for $50 and then sell it for $30. That's a poor business practice and it also makes us lose profit. Believe it or not, GameStop does care about the gamer, but we have to make a profit to keep ourselves running. It's much like the law enforcement. Everyone hates them until they need them.

As for pushing the sale of used games, that remains partly true. There are two reasons why we push purchased used games: one, because it benefits the consumer thanks to our policy. If the game did not meet your expectation (which is the primary reason of used game returns), you are able to return it within seven days for a full refund or for another game of your choice, as long as you do not abuse this policy. Two, because we make a large percentage of our profits on the sale of used products.

However, should you choose to purchase a new game instead of a used one, you are more than welcome to do so because we do want you to support the developer as well. :)

Going back to trade-ins and such, customers that have a PowerUp Rewards membership are given percentage bonuses to trade-in values as well as other worthy incentives. In addition, GameStop will occasionally have promotions such as the current: you can get an extra 30% store credit when you trade in games and products toward select products, like Call of Duty: Ghosts and Grand Theft Auto V. While the funds from trading in the products are required to go toward a valid promotional item, you get to keep any funds after the item is paid off. So say if you trade in 5 games toward GTA 5 and with the extra 30%, you only need 3 to pay off the game, you still get an extra 30% on the other two games and you can do what you want with the funds. :)

Driber
30th May 2013, 21:06
Who's my dad, goddamnit?!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/77/EricCartman.png/220px-EricCartman.png

Daftvirgin
30th May 2013, 21:10
Ive never agreed with the resale of used games by these retail stores that operate in my perspective as a criminal enterprise without the duty to track paperwork like a pawn shop. Its legalized piracy since none of the sales of used games are returned to the developer allowing these stores to rob the families of those who work hard to produce the media we all enjoy. On consoles this problem has been solved, a 360 could do it, it has the ability with its patented signature technology but that was just a test bed for how its being rolled out on the Xbox One. Finally these stores can end their unethical practices of stealing from hard working developers who spend days AND nights staring at screens punching keys to do stuff. Sadly it wont be the nail in the coffin for brick and mortar stores but its one step closer to closing the lid on the coffin for them.

No it's not piracy, that's a term these Hollywood corporations coined to add a denotative value to sharing.

If I purchase a disc based game, I should have full ownership over it. This means I can do whatever I want with it. I can play it, lend it to a friend, break it, use it as a Frisbee, flush it down the toilet, etc. The same principle is applied on any other goods you purchase, such as a chair. Now if I want to resell said item, I should be able to do it. After all, I'm the owner of it.

What publishers are doing is taking these ownership rights from the consumer and offer the game as a service instead. With the new system for used games on the xBone in place, they can impose limitations with terms of use and most notably DRM. why? to cash in and earn a few extra dollars is one, but two, also to control your purchase, and that can lead to nasty experiences.

Now if I need a service done, I can hire people to do something for me, be it a cook, a carpenter, a cab driver, etc. but services cannot be passed around. It is a service and therefore not material. This means I can't ask the person to do whatever I want. There are limits to what a person is willing to do. That's why there are terms of use or conditions linked to those services. You can't abuse the service or misbehave in a restaurant.

One striking problem here is that these publishers are trying to sell something that isn't really a good, nor a service: I have a physical copy of the game, so I should posses ownership of it; I should be able to lend it or resell it. But yet I do not because in reality they are offering a service with terms of use tied to it, which is rather unfair since I own a copy of the game and yet cannot do everything I desire with it.

The main notion here is that any other goods do not come with a mechanism which blocks resell in order to earn the manufacturer money each time it's passed on a new "customer". Imagine they'd impose some kind of wicked system to prevent people from reselling their furniture just so that the original carpenter can earn extra money out of his creation.

This is sadly the same thing happening with software in general.

Lord Martok
30th May 2013, 21:27
Quite alright, Lord Martok! :D I'll give as much information as I legally can, and it basically boils down to common sense, so I won't be under scrutiny for sharing this. :p A lot of people say GameStop is a rip off because you could buy a $60 game today and trade it in tomorrow and only get $25 for it. It's much like purchasing a car. The moment you drive it off the lot, the vehicle depreciates in value immediately by a substantial amount. Same goes with video games. It's ludicrous to expect GameStop to basically buy the game back from you when we could just get a new copy from the developer. We're not going to buy your game back for $50 and then sell it for $30. That's a poor business practice and it also makes us lose profit. Believe it or not, GameStop does care about the gamer, but we have to make a profit to keep ourselves running. It's much like the law enforcement. Everyone hates them until they need them.

As for pushing the sale of used games, that remains partly true. There are two reasons why we push purchased used games: one, because it benefits the consumer thanks to our policy. If the game did not meet your expectation (which is the primary reason of used game returns), you are able to return it within seven days for a full refund or for another game of your choice, as long as you do not abuse this policy. Two, because we make a large percentage of our profits on the sale of used products.

However, should you choose to purchase a new game instead of a used one, you are more than welcome to do so because we do want you to support the developer as well. :)

Going back to trade-ins and such, customers that have a PowerUp Rewards membership are given percentage bonuses to trade-in values as well as other worthy incentives. In addition, GameStop will occasionally have promotions such as the current: you can get an extra 30% store credit when you trade in games and products toward select products, like Call of Duty: Ghosts and Grand Theft Auto V. While the funds from trading in the products are required to go toward a valid promotional item, you get to keep any funds after the item is paid off. So say if you trade in 5 games toward GTA 5 and with the extra 30%, you only need 3 to pay off the game, you still get an extra 30% on the other two games and you can do what you want with the funds. :)

Thanks for the info on that, Valenka. :)
Yeah, I have a Power Up Rewards card meself, and tons o' points I still have yet to spend. :)

Valenka
30th May 2013, 21:36
Take-Two Interactive (publisher of Grand Theft Auto 5) weighs in on the potential fee for used games.

http://www.oxm.co.uk/55086/gta-5-publisher-if-microsoft-is-taxing-used-games-we-should-get-paid-too/

Take-Two Interactive CEO Strass Zelnick doesn't think it necessary to "punish" consumers for purchasing second-hand games, arguing that "pushing up quality" and delivering robust DLC is a more effective way of persuading people to keep hold of the disc. That said, he's bang up for a share of Microsoft's rumoured Xbox One "pre-owned fee", assuming the scheme actually exists.


Thanks for the info on that, Valenka. :)

No problem! Glad I could be of help! :D

CakeLuv
30th May 2013, 21:44
Hmmm xbox one, this has nothing to do with my interests in Tomb raider :(

You gave TR 0/10, Still don't know what are you doing here :p

Lord Martok
30th May 2013, 22:05
No it's not piracy, that's a term these Hollywood corporations coined to add a denotative value to sharing.
It's really only piracy if someone outside of the dev/pub system (or worse, someone within the dev/pub system) manages either to obtain source code and other codes, and create copies of that game that they can sell themselves, illegally. Or, if someone is actually able to make copies of their one purchased game, and sell those copies, making their own profits, and cheating the devs/publishers out of money they should be seeing for new sales. That's kinda like when someone downloads a movie off the internet, especially before that movie has even been released theatrically (clearly an inside job). When you get enough people doing that, suddenly the company that made that movie is not making the money it should for its investment in same. And, perhaps, while the numbers might seem insignificant, it still gets the attention of the companies enough to warrant things like copy-protection on movies when they reach the legal digital medium, etc...not that such copy protection is infallible...there's always someone who finds a way around it.



If I purchase a disc based game, I should have full ownership over it.

One striking problem here is that these publishers are trying to sell something that isn't really a good, nor a service: I have a physical copy of the game, so I should posses ownership of it; I should be able to lend it or resell it. But yet I do not because in reality they are offering a service with terms of use tied to it, which is rather unfair since I own a copy of the game and yet cannot do everything I desire with it.

My roomie and I discuss this a lot, and are agreed that ultimately, if we buy something, especially a physical copy of a product, be it a car, or a piece of software, it should be ours...period. However, copyrights and such are still in place to protect the intellectual property of the creator of the product we purchase. So, while it might be within our rights to let a friend borrow the title, or to play it on any compatible system we wish, or any of the other uses you mentioned (frisbee, coffee coaster, Chakram, etc.. :D ), it is not our right to copy the game (even for free) and distribute that copy/those copies to other folks. Perhaps making a singular backup for ourselves is one thing...but mass copying (whether for free or for profit)? Nyet. :)

Valenka
30th May 2013, 22:06
If I purchase a disc based game, I should have full ownership over it.


What publishers are doing is taking these ownership rights from the consumer and offer the game as a service instead. With the new system for used games on the xBone in place, they can impose limitations with terms of use and most notably DRM. why? to cash in and earn a few extra dollars is one, but two, also to control your purchase, and that can lead to nasty experiences.


One striking problem here is that these publishers are trying to sell something that isn't really a good, nor a service: I have a physical copy of the game, so I should posses ownership of it; I should be able to lend it or resell it. But yet I do not because in reality they are offering a service with terms of use tied to it, which is rather unfair since I own a copy of the game and yet cannot do everything I desire with it.

With all due respect, that is something that a majority of people do not understand. Just because you purchase something does not mean you've acquired full ownership. Yes, you own the physical item but you must still abide by the creator's policy which primarily exists to prohibit unlawful distribution, or piracy.

However, if I might ask for some enlightenment, what exactly is it that you wish to do with your copy of a product that you "unfairly" cannot? :scratch:

BridgetFisher
30th May 2013, 22:18
My roomie and I discuss this a lot, and are agreed that ultimately, if we buy something, especially a physical copy of a product, be it a car, or a piece of software, it should be ours...period. However, copyrights and such are still in place to protect the intellectual property of the creator of the product we purchase. So, while it might be within our rights to let a friend borrow the title, or to play it on any compatible system we wish, or any of the other uses you mentioned (frisbee, coffee coaster, Chakram, etc.. :D ), it is not our right to copy the game (even for free) and distribute that copy/those copies to other folks. Perhaps making a singular backup is one thing...but mass copying (whether for free or for profit)? Nyet. :)

Here is another part where I disagree, these are not physical goods they are digital goods in a different medium. With that said I believe the consumer owns no title to the product, where would that end? Would consumers be entitled to the source code? Of course not engines are patented, characters are trademarked. This is why Steam shot to the number one delivery service for digital goods for computers since they protect the consumer in this manner from fraud and deceptive practices. Games are not a car in that aspect where the product is somehow damaged over time, or runs down, the product when sold on day one will be the same game at the end of year one, so there is no real devaluation from degradation of the goods themselves such as with a car or physical good. To this end I believe no user is entitled to ownership directly of any digital good, from movies to games and books, allowing the product to be removed at the publishers discretion since they are the creator of the content. This is why Valve pursued a person who stole their code for Half Life 2 to imprison them, Valve since created steam under the same practices that at any time steam can remove titles or shut down oweing nothing to the end user per the terms of service all users agree too, trading a product tied to an account on steam is forbidden per the TOS with any violation of that resulting in immediate account termination of an account by Valve since the user violated the TOS.

Same thing with purchasing a game, the consumer is entering into a contract with the publisher to possess that data, any transfer of title or the product thereof outside the control of the creator should be seen as a criminal attempt to circumvent the governing regulations of the terms of service agreed to by the consumer by purchasing the product. Lending a game or borrowing a game from someone, or letting someone else play a game whose title is owned by another party is also considered theft since the publisher never consented to that user being granted free access to their content while at the same time it endangers a person playing a game that they have no title of ownership to since they may be participating in violating the legal contract agreed to by the originating party of ownership though purchasing the item opening that person up who is not a title holder to legal prosecution civilly and possibly criminally since their stealing from the creators of the content. Giving someone else a game to play is equivalent criminally to giving someone your health insurance card, or taking a test in school for someone else, both unethical and worse it breeds further criminal behavior since people begin to ignore morals or ethical judgements thinking of themself instead of the greater good of society, a chain reaction with an inevitable conclusion of jail time, and most countries have enough people in jail as it is.

Its the same way a Xbox One could read a 360 disc if MS wanted it to, it just has to do with the disc reading lens or laser like a blu ray / dvd player, Microsoft will not let the Xbox One read the older content from a 360 because it operates outside the system designed to protect consumers from deceptive business practices involving the resale of used games which can harm the creators of the content.

Consumers deserve the freedom of choice, the freedom to not risk obtaining goods not properly approved by the creator of the content. This protects all consumers of digital goods from being ripped off at the hands of those who wish to defraud people of the original content as it was intended by the creator. Consumers have the choice to purchase a product and use it in a lawful manner according to the contract agreed to by paying for an item, or they can choose not to participate in the system and thus the invisible hand of the free market is at place without forcing people to have access to used games which have no papertrail endangering people by putting them in harms way that the product they may be purchasing may not be at the will of the creator of that content.

Valenka
30th May 2013, 22:27
Games are not a car in that aspect where the product is somehow damaged over time, or runs down, the product when sold on day one will be the same game at the end of year one, so there is no real devaluation from degradation of the goods themselves such as with a car or physical good.

Incorrect. Where there is a physical item (mainly in automobiles and electronics) there is depreciation. You can't sell a digital item once you've purchased it (like downloadable content or a full game from the Xbox Live Marketplace or PSN) but the physical copy that is made on disc, inside of a case with a manual can be sold, traded, etc. As I said previously, to which you did not acknowledge, the moment you take it out of its packaging, it loses value. Same situation when it comes to collectibles and things of that nature.


Same thing with purchasing a game, the consumer is entering into a contract with the publisher to possess that data, any transfer of title or the product thereof outside the control of the creator should be seen as a criminal attempt to circumvent the governing regulations of the terms of service agreed to by the consumer by purchasing the product.

I take it you're still talking about GameStop's accepting of trade-ins and reselling the product. You're trying to create an issue where there is none. It's perfectly legal and it's not criminal, especially when you consider the fact that middlemen like GameStop have the (unrequired) permission of the developer and publisher to do what they do because profits made from the product's initial purchase have already been collected.


Its the same way a Xbox One could read a 360 disc if MS wanted it to, it just has to do with the disc reading lens or laser like a blu ray / dvd player, Microsoft will not let the Xbox One read the older content from a 360 because it operates outside the system designed to protect consumers from deceptive business practices involving the resale of used games which can harm the creators of the content.

No, the Xbox One will not be backward compatible because Xbox One uses a different core architecture than the Xbox 360 does and if Microsoft would alter the core of the Xbox One to accept Xbox 360 discs, the console's abilities will suffer, providing they don't work around what they'd need to keep the Xbox One as is and make it backward compatible as well.

"Designed to protect consumers from deceptive business practices involving the resale of used games which can harm the creators of the content."

Don't take this the wrong way, but I picture you sitting in the dark with a tin-foil hat on as you write your responses. :lol: If you took the time to read anything I wrote in my last post addressed to you, you'd understand that reselling used games does NOT harm anyone.

BridgetFisher
30th May 2013, 22:38
Don't take this the wrong way, but I picture you sitting in the dark with a tin-foil hat on as you write your responses. :lol: If you took the time to read anything I wrote in my last post addressed to you, you'd understand that reselling used games does NOT harm anyone.

All resellers of used games do nothing to track and or verify the integrity of the product, at no time are checks done to check if the disc has been reproduced, without a way to trace the media there is no way to tell if the product itself is genuine or a fake. Any walk in a downtown area will have stores full of fake merchandise, sadly no form of retail is safe from counterfeiting. Meaning the consumer who purchased a used game may be engaging in criminal conduct by purchasing counterfeit or stolen goods, subjecting that individual to arrest and prosecution to the maximum penalties the laws allow including fines and jail time for those who seek to try and beat the system. These new protections in the next generation are there to enhance a consumers experience providing more confidence in the digital market since the fear of ending up with fraudulent or counterfeit goods has been eliminated.

Piracy directly harms consumers in that every purchase not legally obtained takes away from the funds available for a publisher to generate further content. The types of harm can vary from economic to physical, to infringement, fraud, indirect vs direct, the list goes on, all of these apply destroying families of hard working people who fight to make these great games while consumers get left disillusioned feeling betrayed for not being protected so they could continue to be provided with quality content for their own enjoyment. Finally there is an answer to all of this in the next generation that will end the possibility of a consumer risking imprisonment for purchasing a used game that may have been counterfeit making them a criminal for possessing the item. Ending up in jail is a harm associated with the practice of purchasing a used game, consumers today worry about ending up in jail and are upset they have to roll the dice everytime they make a purchase if the next knock on their door will be law enforcement with a warrant for their arrest for being in possession of counterfeit goods. Noone wants their day to end like that, and MS figured out how to protect the consumer so this is no longer a driving concern for consumers and caring parents who want to protect their children since they love their families.

In any event with Xbox One flubbing their reveal having spent 160 million, PS4 having a conference if that counts, and WiiU being well a WiiU, its pretty clear E3 is something we can all look forward too because its going to be like christmas. Also its like a trainwreck since watching these companies Sony and MS go down the tubes in the console market is always fun to watch, Nintendo is just careful always playing it safe.

Here is some recent news with links for your reading pleasure from the CEO of Sony, of course its pandering to an audience but the point is they are working for that audience going out of their way to do interviews all over the place to get their message out, oddly its getting more attention than the Xbox One reveal, and it cost nothing, pure sheenius Kaz.

http://venturebeat.com/2013/05/30/sony-ceo-plays-down-media-hub-and-says-playstation-4-is-for-gamers/

“I fundamentally believe that the initial market that we need to make sure we appeal to with any new platform … is really the gaming audience,” Hirai said. “They will be the supporters of your platform and they will help propel the installed base.”

He said Sony would add other entertainment apps, “But that’s after we establish the platform as a video game platform. We want to make sure that we are there for the gamers with our PS4 as well. They will go beyond this, but they’ll definitely start with gamer first.

He concluded, “For us, it’s all about the gamers.”

http://allthingsd.com/20130530/kaz-hirai-sony-playstation-4-will-be-first-and-foremost-a-game-player/?refcat=d11

“The most important thing we need to make sure we do at least initially is that we all agree and understand that the PS4 is a great video game console that appeals to video gamers,” Hirai said in a briefing with reporters after his onstage appearance at D: All Things Digital. “If we miss that part than I don’t think we get the initial establishment of the console.”

“We take a look at this first and formest as a game console,” Hirai said. “We don’t want to end there. That’s an area we will obviously reveal and talk about in the coming months.”

Valenka
30th May 2013, 22:48
All resellers of used games do nothing to track and or verify the integrity of the product, at no time are checks done to check if the disc has been reproduced, without a way to trace the media there is no way to tell if the product itself is genuine or a fake. Any walk in a downtown area will have stores full of fake merchandise, sadly no form of retail is safe from counterfeiting.

In any event with Xbox One flubbing their reveal having spent 160 million, PS4 having a conference if that counts, and WiiU being well a WiiU, its pretty clear E3 is something we can all look forward too because its going to be like christmas. Also its like a trainwreck since watching these companies Sony and MS go down the tubes in the console market is always fun to watch, Nintendo is just careful always playing it safe.

:scratch:

What does that have to do with anything?

Lord Martok
30th May 2013, 22:58
Incorrect. Where there is a physical item (mainly in automobiles and electronics) there is depreciation. You can't sell a digital item once you've purchased it (like downloadable content or a full game from the Xbox Live Marketplace or PSN) but the physical copy that is made on disc, inside of a case with a manual can be sold, traded, etc. As I said previously, to which you did not acknowledge, the moment you take it out of its packaging, it loses value. Same situation when it comes to collectibles and things of that nature.



I take it you're still talking about GameStop's accepting of trade-ins and reselling the product. You're trying to create an issue where there is none. It's perfectly legal and it's not criminal, especially when you consider the fact that middlemen like GameStop have the (unrequired) permission of the developer and publisher to do what they do because profits made from the product's initial purchase have already been collected.



No, the Xbox One will not be backward compatible because Xbox One uses a different core architecture than the Xbox 360 does and if Microsoft would alter the core of the Xbox One to accept Xbox 360 discs, the console's abilities will suffer, providing they don't work around what they'd need to keep the Xbox One as is and make it backward compatible as well.

"Designed to protect consumers from deceptive business practices involving the resale of used games which can harm the creators of the content."

Don't take this the wrong way, but I picture you sitting in the dark with a tin-foil hat on as you write your responses. :lol: If you took the time to read anything I wrote in my last post addressed to you, you'd understand that reselling used games does NOT harm anyone.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/martok2112/tumblr_m8zzueM9sW1r7t68g_zpsbe193dbf.gif (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/martok2112/media/tumblr_m8zzueM9sW1r7t68g_zpsbe193dbf.gif.html)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/martok2112/Gifs/GIJoeEndPSA001_zps5a91604a.gif (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/martok2112/media/Gifs/GIJoeEndPSA001_zps5a91604a.gif.html)

:D

Valenka
30th May 2013, 23:06
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/martok2112/Gifs/GIJoeEndPSA001_zps5a91604a.gif

:lol:

Lord Martok
30th May 2013, 23:10
<----takes a bow

10-q, 10-q! :)

Daftvirgin
30th May 2013, 23:10
@Valenka & Lord Martok: Eh, I'll write an elaborate post tomorrow :p

@BridgetFisher: piracy doesn't harm the consumer in a single bit:

You buy a retail copy - 60 bucks
You get a pirated copy - free

either way you are getting the same content. It only harms publishers. That's why they want to stop it. I don't see why you're defending these Hollywood giants anyways.

Lord Martok
30th May 2013, 23:18
@Valenka & Lord Martok: Eh, I'll write an elaborate post tomorrow :p

@BridgetFisher: piracy doesn't harm the consumer in a single bit:

You buy a retail copy - 60 bucks
You get a pirated copy - free

either way you are getting the same content. It only harms publishers. That's why they want to stop it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/martok2112/Vidgamepiracynotvictimlesscrime_zps0a3d3899.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/martok2112/media/Vidgamepiracynotvictimlesscrime_zps0a3d3899.jpg.html)

:D


I don't see why you're defending these Hollywood giants anyways.

Maybe I want another Star Wars or Star Trek movie! Didja ever think about that?! Cripes, won't somebody think about the children?!!! (sniff....sob....)

:D

Daftvirgin
30th May 2013, 23:24
Sorry, I'm off to bed guys :wave: I am quite excited to see you guys being so eager to discuss this :D

Lord Martok
30th May 2013, 23:27
Sorry, I'm off to bed guys :wave: I am quite excited to see you guys being so eager to discuss this :D

Rest well. :) (I would say "Rest In Peace"...but somehow, that just doesn't sound right. --I keed, of course.)

:lol: Suddenly, a comic skit pops in me 'ead...


LORD HERSHINGLY: (speaking to his manservant, Sejneesh) Very well, Sejneesh. I'm retiring for the night.
SEJNEESH: Ahhhhh..... Rest In Peace, Sahib.
LORD HERSHINGLY: (eyebrows raised) I beg your pardon?
SEJNEESH: (clears throat) Errr...ahem, I meant, "rest well, Sahib".

:D

Daftvirgin
30th May 2013, 23:32
How about a good old-fashioned "good night"? :lol:

Thanks anyways :D

Lord Martok
30th May 2013, 23:32
How about a good old-fashioned "good night"? :lol:

Thanks anyways :D

Good night. :)


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/martok2112/Gifs/RestInPeaceerWellsahib_zpsdb5fb7c1.gif (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/martok2112/media/Gifs/RestInPeaceerWellsahib_zpsdb5fb7c1.gif.html)

Murphdawg1
31st May 2013, 02:56
No it's not piracy, that's a term these Hollywood corporations coined to add a denotative value to sharing.

If I purchase a disc based game, I should have full ownership over it. This means I can do whatever I want with it. I can play it, lend it to a friend, break it, use it as a Frisbee, flush it down the toilet, etc. The same principle is applied on any other goods you purchase, such as a chair. Now if I want to resell said item, I should be able to do it. After all, I'm the owner of it.

What publishers are doing is taking these ownership rights from the consumer and offer the game as a service instead. With the new system for used games on the xBone in place, they can impose limitations with terms of use and most notably DRM. why? to cash in and earn a few extra dollars is one, but two, also to control your purchase, and that can lead to nasty experiences.

Now if I need a service done, I can hire people to do something for me, be it a cook, a carpenter, a cab driver, etc. but services cannot be passed around. It is a service and therefore not material. This means I can't ask the person to do whatever I want. There are limits to what a person is willing to do. That's why there are terms of use or conditions linked to those services. You can't abuse the service or misbehave in a restaurant.

One striking problem here is that these publishers are trying to sell something that isn't really a good, nor a service: I have a physical copy of the game, so I should posses ownership of it; I should be able to lend it or resell it. But yet I do not because in reality they are offering a service with terms of use tied to it, which is rather unfair since I own a copy of the game and yet cannot do everything I desire with it.

The main notion here is that any other goods do not come with a mechanism which blocks resell in order to earn the manufacturer money each time it's passed on a new "customer". Imagine they'd impose some kind of wicked system to prevent people from reselling their furniture just so that the original carpenter can earn extra money out of his creation.

This is sadly the same thing happening with software in general.

I agree. Not everyone can afford to buy every game brand new so you either wait for the price to drop on the game or you buy it used. Hard copies of console games are not like PC games where you have to install the game onto your hard drive and accept an End user license agreement. You should be able to buy, sell and trade games and it's not like someone is making a copy for themselves and letting someone else have a copy.

Lord Martok
31st May 2013, 04:47
I agree. Not everyone can afford to buy every game brand new so you either wait for the price to drop on the game or you buy it used. Hard copies of console games are not like PC games where you have to install the game onto your hard drive and accept an End user license agreement. You should be able to buy, sell and trade games and it's not like someone is making a copy for themselves and letting someone else have a copy.

The highlighted part is exactly what Xbox One is going for. Now the good side to this is they say once you install the game, you won't need the physical disc.

But the reason that Xbox 360 and PS3 started the whole "install your game" option was to allow for the fact of being able to take the constant running strain off of your blu-ray/dvd disc drive. So it was more of a preventive maintenance and life-lengthening issue...much more benign cause and circumstance.

Now, Xbox One is doing it to emulate PC security for Xbox One titles. Once the game is opened, you can't resell it back to the merchant. (Here in Louisiana, we had a locally owned game store chain that actually did buy and sell used PC titles, but I think they went out of business. Very sad, I miss those places because I could usually buy hard to find PC titles.)

Xbox One apparently will allow you to resell your title, but then they invoke their "fees". I guess this prevents Joe Gamer from selling to his friend, but will allow Joe Gamer to buy or sell used games from merchants (with the fees being invoked on the purchaser..be it the store or the customer).

Murphdawg1
31st May 2013, 06:01
The highlighted part is exactly what Xbox One is going for. Now the good side to this is they say once you install the game, you won't need the physical disc.

But the reason that Xbox 360 and PS3 started the whole "install your game" option was to allow for the fact of being able to take the constant running strain off of your blu-ray/dvd disc drive. So it was more of a preventive maintenance and life-lengthening issue...much more benign cause and circumstance.

Now, Xbox One is doing it to emulate PC security for Xbox One titles. Once the game is opened, you can't resell it back to the merchant. (Here in Louisiana, we had a locally owned game store chain that actually did buy and sell used PC titles, but I think they went out of business. Very sad, I miss those places because I could usually buy hard to find PC titles.)

Xbox One apparently will allow you to resell your title, but then they invoke their "fees". I guess this prevents Joe Gamer from selling to his friend, but will allow Joe Gamer to buy or sell used games from merchants (with the fees being invoked on the purchaser..be it the store or the customer).

That's going to kill portability for Xbox games. I mean what i've read lets say you take a game over to a friend's house and you sign on to your Xbox Live account from there well you could play the game on your account while there but if your friend wanted to play the game after you left they have to pay a fee which doesn't seem right.

Driber
31st May 2013, 06:43
Stop overthinking lest I slap ye with a slice of pizza. :p

Oh please do! I'm starving and would eat it :p

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_KqLKZFRTHM8/SvGJIlkkUcI/AAAAAAAABf8/afBZKnydG6A/s320/ist2_1626529-pac-man-pizza.jpg

Nom nom nom...


@BridgetFisher: piracy doesn't harm the consumer in a single bit:

You buy a retail copy - 60 bucks
You get a pirated copy - free

either way you are getting the same content. It only harms publishers. That's why they want to stop it. I don't see why you're defending these Hollywood giants anyways.

I haven't read the whole discussion, so I'm probably quoting out of context, so just for the sake of discussion - piracy does indeed harm the consumer.

- Piracy causes obtrusive or even draconian DRM.

- Piracy causes losses to developers/publishers, which can hurt the health of franchises.

- Piracy causes crazy legislation like SOPA, ACTA and HADOPI.

So in short, piracy hurts us all. Not just big companies.

Shaikh
31st May 2013, 10:20
I can see lots of Kinect 2 exclusive feature of Tomb Raider 10.

Voice commands list in Tomb Raider 10 (Right sides are the one you will command with Kinect 2.0):
Moaning = (uh, ah, oh, o-yeah)
Voicing for QTE's = ('E', 'F', 'Space bar')
Instinct Mode = 'On' and 'Off'
White ledges = Go Vapor
Calling out someone = Sam... Sam... Saaaaaaaaam

BridgetFisher
31st May 2013, 11:01
I can see lots of Kinect 2 exclusive feature of Tomb Raider 10.

Voice commands list in Tomb Raider 10 (Right sides are the one you will command with Kinect 2.0):
Moaning = (uh, ah, oh, o-yeah)
Voicing for QTE's = ('E', 'F', 'Space bar')
Instinct Mode = 'On' and 'Off'
White ledges = Go Vapor
Calling out someone = Sam... Sam... Saaaaaaaaam


Are you RAD enough for the Nintendo Laserscope.... er, I mean The Official Xbox One Kinect?

https://wiki-land.wikispaces.com/file/view/laserscope01.jpg/111832355/329x500/laserscope01.jpg

Pythia
31st May 2013, 12:05
XBOX One?

I hope it's backwards compatable.

I also read somewhere that it will retail for $900. Please someone tell me that's not true!!!

Pythia
31st May 2013, 12:09
oops

Defected
31st May 2013, 13:34
Xbox one lol . Just invest into PC gaming you will get better graphics and bigger community . PC gaming is a whole new beast now since you can play it anyway you like and then some . Now gaming at 2560 x 1600p and my eyes have visual organisms every few minutes of the day .

Murphdawg1
31st May 2013, 14:16
XBOX One?

I hope it's backwards compatable.

I also read somewhere that it will retail for $900. Please someone tell me that's not true!!!

It's not backwards compatable but i'm pretty sure it won't be $900.

Lord Martok
31st May 2013, 16:17
That's going to kill portability for Xbox games. I mean what i've read lets say you take a game over to a friend's house and you sign on to your Xbox Live account from there well you could play the game on your account while there but if your friend wanted to play the game after you left they have to pay a fee which doesn't seem right.


Yeah....it's a lot of crap.

It's definitely lending to a notion that "you never really truly own what you buy".

Valenka
31st May 2013, 16:47
XBOX One?

I hope it's backwards compatable.

I also read somewhere that it will retail for $900. Please someone tell me that's not true!!!

You're reading the wrong information.
It is not backwards compatible and no price has been announced.

Wh1t3Kn1te
1st Jun 2013, 00:47
the $900 is just a temporary price so they can accept preorders, rumors have it around $499

also i am waiting for e3 for more concrete info on some of the aspects of this system. im am especially iffy about it especially since the NSA utah surveliance building opened yesterday. combine the two and things get really interesting really fast.

Weemanply109
1st Jun 2013, 00:58
bigger community

Hardly. Most online PC games have dead or dying communities unless it's a MMO (which are also declining) or a classic. PC gaming as a whole is very unprofitable for most developers compared to consoles unless there's free 2 play titles with microtransactions or it's a Valve game. :p A lot of the games are pirated more than they're bought. Let's be honest here.

Driber
1st Jun 2013, 09:29
Hardly. Most online PC games have dead or dying communities unless it's a MMO (which are also declining) or a classic. PC gaming as a whole is very unprofitable for most developers compared to consoles unless there's free 2 play titles with microtransactions or it's a Valve game. :p A lot of the games are pirated more than they're bought. Let's be honest here.

I would like to see some solid stats to back that claim up.

Piracy is big. But bigger than legitimate sales? Hmm....

AdobeArtist
1st Jun 2013, 20:26
Well, now we know who to blame for any Xbox One/PS4 console wars this generation: Microsoft. Sony hasn't said a single anti-Xbox thing yet and Microsoft is already gearing up to make an arse of themselves. Shame, really.


Maybe not in this generation (8th), at least not so far. But Sony isn't exactly innocent of the practice. At the beginning of the 7th gen, before PS3 launched to counteract the 360 already being on market, they fired their own shots, calling it "Xbox 1.5". They're also quoted as saying "Xbox shoots for the moon, PS3 shoots for the sun" (quite a bizarre analogy at that) and "Next gen doesn't begin until we say it begins", in an effort to dismiss 360 as the beginning of that generation. They even said Xbox was no real competition to the Playstation brand, though how market numbers turned out over the course of that gen say otherwise.

But hey we can even look back farther. Does anybody remember Sega's campaign, "Genesis does was Nintendon't" ? And it ain't limited to just the gaming industry. How often do Coke and Pepsi trade blows in the ad wars?

Trash talk may seem jevenile but I don't take it too seriously neither. That's just business as usual. It's the nature of competition, to sway the consumers buying dollar towards your product over theirs. That's the way it's always gonna be.




You're preaching about a subject you can't even begin to understand. Companies need GameStop and similar middlemen to sell their games. GameStop will never go out of business unless the only way to obtain a video game is to download it out of thin air. It's not unethical, it's not stealing. You just have no sense of how the video game market works and I urge you to educate yourself before speaking about it further. :)


aaaaaaaaand, guess what? That model is already in place. PC really pioneered this and we already have that infrastructure in X360 and PS3, where you can buy "retail games" off their online market place.

Even for disc copies, more and more people end up downloading them to the HDD anyway for the simple reason that games run far better off the hard drive than the optical media disc (DVD or Blu Ray alike). This is an advantage PC gamers have known for a long time. I'm predicting XBO and PS4 will see an even larger user purchase of their respective games from the online market place, even with new releases (like Halo 5, GT6, new Killzone, new Assassin's Creed, etc...) being available online Day 1 right along side the disc copies.

With the growing predominace of games being purchased online, and even discs being installed to the HDD, it can be argued that the plastic disc becomes an uncessesary "middle man" to the consumer experience, and ultimately redundant. Hell it's even more convenient to download from the comfort of home than the hassle of the commute and waiting in line when you get there. Or they ran out of copies, whereas digital media is infinite in supply.

So it might be said that the brick and mortar store is in fact outdated and sorry to say Valenka, completely uneccessary for publishers and devs to get their product out there to the gaming public. They can do just fine now without Gamestop, BestBuy, or any other retail outlet.

BUT.....

Retailers still do have one weapon up their sleeve that will get gamers to keep on coming into their store to buy that game and forego the afformentioned convenience of home download. Is it some sentimenal attachment to the familiarity of a game case and the shiny plastic disc? Not at all. That by itself is fast becoming outmoded.

The only advantage left to stores is retail exclusive content. While digital distribution can still provide extras in the way of virtual content, those in-game extras like additional skins, weapons & gear, bonus support characters, missions, maps, vehicles and such, again that's all intangible and downloaded anyway. But when going to a store to pick up a physical copy, while the disc is redundant people will get it for the physical bonuses that are typically limited edition and not found in toy stores - statues, replicas of the trademark weapons, art books, large scale maps of the game world, full sized posters, key chains... well you get the idea.

If a particular gamer is only really interested in the game itself, they might be more inclined to download it and just play away. But the dedicated fan of a series who places value on those physical collectibles (and has a trophy shelf as a tribute to their passion) will buy a physical copy not really for the disc itself, but those special items that can't be downloaded. Evem I gotta admit, I'm a sucker for a well produced art book.

Daftvirgin
1st Jun 2013, 20:59
^Xbox One has no swappable HDD. So you're stuck with a 500GB hard drive unless you're willing to keep an external hard drive connected (which is a rather unpractical solution).

AdobeArtist
1st Jun 2013, 21:15
^Xbox One has no swappable HDD. So you're stuck with a 500GB hard drive unless you're willing to keep an external hard drive connected (which is a rather unpractical solution).

If they allow the use of any branded external drive (Seagate, Western Digital, Lacie, etc...) that will be a far more viable and more fair solution than the proprietary drives 360 had that were very limited and over priced. With the abundance of USB HDDs out there, the customer has a great selection of size and pricing options.

It's also better to have two drives both at your disposal rather than one or the other. This allows for doubling or even tripling total storge space.

But that all depends on IF MS will allow this but since the ports on the console are standard USB, seems more likely.

Daftvirgin
1st Jun 2013, 21:17
It's really only piracy if someone outside of the dev/pub system (or worse, someone within the dev/pub system) manages either to obtain source code and other codes, and create copies of that game that they can sell themselves, illegally. Or, if someone is actually able to make copies of their one purchased game, and sell those copies, making their own profits, and cheating the devs/publishers out of money they should be seeing for new sales. That's kinda like when someone downloads a movie off the internet, especially before that movie has even been released theatrically (clearly an inside job). When you get enough people doing that, suddenly the company that made that movie is not making the money it should for its investment in same. And, perhaps, while the numbers might seem insignificant, it still gets the attention of the companies enough to warrant things like copy-protection on movies when they reach the legal digital medium, etc...not that such copy protection is infallible...there's always someone who finds a way around it.



My roomie and I discuss this a lot, and are agreed that ultimately, if we buy something, especially a physical copy of a product, be it a car, or a piece of software, it should be ours...period. However, copyrights and such are still in place to protect the intellectual property of the creator of the product we purchase. So, while it might be within our rights to let a friend borrow the title, or to play it on any compatible system we wish, or any of the other uses you mentioned (frisbee, coffee coaster, Chakram, etc.. :D ), it is not our right to copy the game (even for free) and distribute that copy/those copies to other folks. Perhaps making a singular backup for ourselves is one thing...but mass copying (whether for free or for profit)? Nyet. :)


With all due respect, that is something that a majority of people do not understand. Just because you purchase something does not mean you've acquired full ownership. Yes, you own the physical item but you must still abide by the creator's policy which primarily exists to prohibit unlawful distribution, or piracy.

However, if I might ask for some enlightenment, what exactly is it that you wish to do with your copy of a product that you "unfairly" cannot? :scratch:

...will answer both of you later...


If they allow the use of any branded external drive (Seagate, Western Digital, Lacie, etc...) that will be a far more viable and more fair solution than the proprietary drives 360 had that were very limited and over priced. With the abundance of USB HDDs out there, the customer has a great selection of size and pricing options.

It's also better to have two drives both at your disposal rather than one or the other. This allows for doubling or even tripling total storge space.

But that all depends on IF MS will allow this but since the ports on the console are standard USB, seems more likely.

Hey, I was thinking more about the fact that the USB ports are located on the side and back of the console.

And I still don't think we should sacrifice DRM-free games for the convenience of digital purchases.

Lord Martok
2nd Jun 2013, 04:04
If they allow the use of any branded external drive (Seagate, Western Digital, Lacie, etc...) that will be a far more viable and more fair solution than the proprietary drives 360 had that were very limited and over priced. With the abundance of USB HDDs out there, the customer has a great selection of size and pricing options.

It's also better to have two drives both at your disposal rather than one or the other. This allows for doubling or even tripling total storge space.

But that all depends on IF MS will allow this but since the ports on the console are standard USB, seems more likely.

Sadly, M$ will likely not allow external third party HDD's for things like storage of games and such. I used to have a third party 2GB memory chip which designed to be switched between a USB chip adapter, and memory card that also held the 2GB chip, and my 360 did not allow its usage for things like profiles, game storage, or even save files. M$ is very stingy when it comes to third party peripherals, largely because a lot of hackers make use of unlicensed 3PP's (my little abbreviation for third party peripheral) for cheating and glitching.

chriss_99
2nd Jun 2013, 11:21
I'm no planning to buy a new console in the next couple of years. Be it Xbox One or PS4.
It all depends on price, games and if CD will still continue to be supported by Microsoft.
And I'm definitely waiting for the slim version of the console :P

Microsoft is planning to support 360 for the next five years. We'll see if they can keep their word.

Joanna_Dark_
2nd Jun 2013, 11:30
That just isn't my opinion but yes most people did not think Microsoft did themselves any favors at the reveal of the Xbox One. I mean essentially the One is going to work like a PC where you have to put the disc in and then install the game to your hard drive(which can't be removed) so where's the advantage of owning a One over a PC?

The amount of control they are offering gamers they can keep. This console is not even on my radar anymore. Sorry but I dont' need to be hooked up to the internet to play my single player games or have to do full game/disk installs. That's just crazy.

You seriously have to be kidding me.

Lord Martok
2nd Jun 2013, 12:18
The amount of control they are offering gamers they can keep. This console is not even on my radar anymore. Sorry but I dont' need to be hooked up to the internet to play my single player games or have to do full game/disk installs. That's just crazy.

You seriously have to be kidding me.

We wish we were, dear Joanna. But this is the impression that M$ has left a lot of gamers with.

I'm still of the sneaking suspicion that they're going to pull a shortened version of EA's little stunt recently (eliminating/retro-eliminating season passes from their games because they weren't going over well with gamers. I remember being majorly irked with EA when all of a sudden, after one of their update patches, I could not play Battlefield 3 single player mode because I could not connect to the BF3 servers. Whaaa?! Since when did I need to connect to an online server to play an offline session?! Yeah, way to go EA. You find a way to ruin everything good about gaming, and now act like you're trying to redeem yourselves. All well and good, until you find the next way to screw gamers.). In this case, I have this crazy sneaking sense that M$ will suddenly say: "A lot of those things you've heard about that were going to be implemented into Xbox One....we've decided not to implement them because we listened to you the gamers!" A move that, likely in their own eyes, will make them look like some sort of "avenging angels" of video gaming.

It would be a lousy PR move on their part, but as I've said before, I put little past Micro$oft.

kiadaw
2nd Jun 2013, 21:25
I'm no planning to buy a new console in the next couple of years. Be it Xbox One or PS4.
It all depends on price, games and if CD will still continue to be supported by Microsoft.
And I'm definitely waiting for the slim version of the console :P

Microsoft is planning to support 360 for the next five years. We'll see if they can keep their word.

Even if a new TR game is release on next gen? :p

Valenka
2nd Jun 2013, 21:44
aaaaaaaaand, guess what? That model is already in place. PC really pioneered this and we already have that infrastructure in X360 and PS3, where you can buy "retail games" off their online market place.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mcqsgiDcYP1rk387jo1_500.gif

[/sarcasm]

Honestly though, the huge gamer I am, you didn't think I was already privy to this? I shake my head as I feel the need to explain my point. I meant my statement to reflect the future (year 3013) where you could literally just pull a game out of thin air and immediately start playing it. Not to mention the fact that I said "if the ONLY way to obtain a game" were to download it. I feel like you deliberately ignored that just to state the obvious and attempt to make me look foolish.

Gold star for trying.

AdobeArtist
2nd Jun 2013, 21:58
Valenka: my point was that you overestimate the "need" for places like Gamestop for publishers to distribute their product. Sure it's still around but that doesn't make them the necessity as you imply, just another venue. And one that in the coming years (in my estimate) will lose ground to the cyber market.

Look at it this way, how many people still go to stores to buy CDs for the latest music tracks and albums?

But then games can provide the physical incentives of limited items like statues and art books to appeal to those who are more than just casual players, but fans who are collectors.

Driber
2nd Jun 2013, 22:07
Digital sales is the future. B&M stores will be a thing of the past in the future.

Not that this is necessarily a good thing (I do like my physical copies) but physical media is quickly becoming outdated.

The vast majority of PC gamers prefer DD over retail discs. If the console makers would have a good online shop like Valve has, hordes of people would rather download their games.

At least, that's my prediction...

Weemanply109
2nd Jun 2013, 22:16
I would like to see some solid stats to back that claim up.

Piracy is big. But bigger than legitimate sales? Hmm....

Really? It's common sense. For 1 legitimate sale, there's probably loads more being illegally downloaded. Why would people buy the game when it's easily accessible to download for free?

Look at the sales for CoD: Black Ops:

Official Sales according to VGCharts (I know isn't 100% reliable): 1.46 million copies.
Illegal downloads: 4 270 000 million. (http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/01/04/call-of-duty-black-ops-most-pirated-game-of-2010/)



There's many developers who've spoke out about it before and many statistics were posted around the time we The Pirate Bay wasn't blocked here. :o

I'll try and find it, though.

Driber
2nd Jun 2013, 22:45
^ lol, thanks for the link - it actually debunks your theory and confirms mine :D

"The Call of Duty: Black Ops piracy figures are still dwarfed by the game’s success at retail, with Activision having announced that they’ve already made one billion dollars from worldwide sales."

Valenka
2nd Jun 2013, 22:47
Valenka: my point was that you overestimate the "need" for places like Gamestop for publishers to distribute their product.

And you underestimate the value of stores like GameStop.

Weemanply109
3rd Jun 2013, 00:04
You're preaching about a subject you can't even begin to understand. Companies need GameStop and similar middlemen to sell their games. GameStop will never go out of business unless the only way to obtain a video game is to download it out of thin air. It's not unethical, it's not stealing. You just have no sense of how the video game market works and I urge you to educate yourself before speaking about it further. :)

Didn't places like HMV and GAME go into administration, though?

Surely the need for places like Gamestop, etc are in severe decline. The digital revolution is upon us and within years, we'll see the majority of our gaming content being delivered solely through digital distribution. (if that's what y'all are talking about)


^ lol, thanks for the link - it actually debunks your theory and confirms mine :D

"The Call of Duty: Black Ops piracy figures are still dwarfed by the game’s success at retail, with Activision having announced that they’ve already made one billion dollars from worldwide sales."

Erm. You don't get the point. :scratch:

I'm speaking about the PC market, though. Those billions ain't coming from no PC market. It's overall (also, let's not forget that Acti overprices CoD to make the extra $$$ in revenue, unlike most of the market where most PC games are considerably cheaper). I was specifically talking about PC games. They're usually pirated more than the legit sales numbers. That was my point, nothing else to it. So consider putting those statistics into perspective with PC exclusive titles.

Consider your point debunked? :D

Daftvirgin
3rd Jun 2013, 00:14
Piracy on consoles rarely occurs, mainly because a console isn't a tool as powerful as a computer in order to pirate it.

Weemanply109
3rd Jun 2013, 00:17
Yep. The statistics I was looking at showed that in 2011(?) the highest pirated game was downloaded only at 800,000-ish copies (If I remember correctly). Wii seems to be the worst for piracy numbers, though.

Valenka
3rd Jun 2013, 02:27
Surely the need for places like Gamestop, etc are in severe decline. The digital revolution is upon us and within years, we'll see the majority of our gaming content being delivered solely through digital distribution. (if that's what y'all are talking about)

It's hardly a "revolution" when you consider that:

A.) Not everyone wants digital to be the primary/only source of obtaining entertainment products.
B.) Not everyone has a decent enough Internet connection to download as much as they would purchase physically.
C.) Not everyone has Internet at all.
D.) Some people prefer physical ownership.

I can't see digital acquisitions becoming the next big thing until at least another couple of decades.

Furthermore, to answer your question about the need for places like GameStop: do you know of any other outlet in which you could get top notch recommendations, a wide and varying selection, enthusiasm for the subject at hand and employees willing to spend the day chatting with you about video games and the industry?

There are two types of people I've met while working at GameStop:

1.) Those who know what they want and pick up their product and leave. (10%)
2.) Those who want your input on specific games and/or genres, recommendations and to just have a general chat about the subject. (90%)

I doubt that 90% would be happy about their ideal video game destination ceasing to exist. You can't get the benefits of GameStop while downloading Call of Duty 39.

Lord Martok
3rd Jun 2013, 03:27
Furthermore, to answer your question about the need for places like GameStop: do you know of any other outlet in which you could get top notch recommendations, a wide and varying selection, enthusiasm for the subject at hand and employees willing to spend the day chatting with you about video games and the industry?

There are two types of people I've met while working at GameStop:

1.) Those who know what they want and pick up their product and leave. (10%)
2.) Those who want your input on specific games and/or genres, recommendations and to just have a general chat about the subject. (90%)

I doubt that 90% would be happy about their ideal video game destination ceasing to exist. You can't get the benefits of GameStop while downloading Call of Duty 39.

LOL! I'd dare say I flip flop between the two personalities.....OMG, I'm schizoid! GaaahhhhhH!!!!!


But seriously, yeah, sometimes I'm that 10 percent that knows precisely what I want, get in, get it, and get gone. And then sometimes I'm the guy who wants to chat with the Game Advisors, and other customers if they are so inclined, about games. :)

Driber
3rd Jun 2013, 07:24
I'm speaking about the PC market, though. Those billions ain't coming from no PC market. It's overall (also, let's not forget that Acti overprices CoD to make the extra $$$ in revenue, unlike most of the market where most PC games are considerably cheaper). I was specifically talking about PC games. They're usually pirated more than the legit sales numbers. That was my point, nothing else to it. So consider putting those statistics into perspective with PC exclusive titles.

Good point :)

Though it bears mentioning that not all those pirated copies are a "direct loss" to the devs. Many folks pirate games (and music, and movies, etc) that they normally would not buy, anyway. I personally know people who do just that. And then there are those who pirate to try out a game before purchasing, often when no demo is available.

Not that either of those reasons are justifications for piracy, of course. It's still wrong.


Consider your point debunked? :D

lol

Well, not really, since I never made actual claims otherwise :D

Weemanply109
3rd Jun 2013, 18:08
It's hardly a "revolution" when you consider that:

A.) Not everyone wants digital to be the primary/only source of obtaining entertainment products.
B.) Not everyone has a decent enough Internet connection to download as much as they would purchase physically.
C.) Not everyone has Internet at all.
D.) Some people prefer physical ownership.

I can't see digital acquisitions becoming the next big thing until at least another couple of decades.

You have good points, tbh.

BUT We're on the Xbox One thread, though. The specific console that requires internet connection every 24-hours (as rumoured) and requires a one-time online activation tied to an online account.

People without internet won't be able to buy these "next generation" titles anyway, so putting them into the equation will soon be irrelevant if the rumours are true, me thinks. Not to mention that the next-gen console's will have a BIGGER focus on their own online marketplace for gaming, every game will be available online this time around (for PS4, atleast) so it means that accessibility to games are easier, also, let's not forget that these platforms are becoming more social. Recommendations could be listed (like Steam does, showing what your friends think) and metascores, and reviews and maybe even game-specific online forums, etc. The store page can provide video and photographic content to give you perspective on what to expect. All of which could phase out the need to go to a GameStop store to ask for any recommendations at all (though I do realise that some people prefer word of mouth rather than online reviews, recommendations, etc).

It just seems like Microsoft and Sony want to cut out the middleman with next-gen consoles to some extent (of course to prevent used game sales and get a better profit margin) which could phase out physical market if it does work for them, regardless of those who prefer physical copies.

Though, you have a first hand experience with retail work in the gaming market, so you can shoot me down if you disagree. :p

Speaking of internet speeds, fibre optic broadband is becoming more widespread and general speeds and internet usage will increase in years to come.

Judging by this, I think "decades" (more so the plural use of it) is a bit of an overstatement.

BridgetFisher
3rd Jun 2013, 23:40
These threads are always great, implying either has one engineer capable of developing anything useful at either place, sony has the talent but their working on other things NOT the ps4, M$ lost theirs years ago before the 360, still havent been able to find anyone good, hence this one video I watched is with an interior designer who shows off his hashion designs for the xbox one, buwahahahaha, as if anyone cares!!!!!! Oh M$ and PS4 I cant quitcha........

inb4 zomg they have so much power look at all those processors!!!! well, good luck figuring out how to use them, any dev will tell you the platforms are like a human brain 80% unusable, spoiler: their doing the same thing again, ooOOOOo, do love watching me a train wreck!!!

Valenka
4th Jun 2013, 02:28
BUT We're on the Xbox One thread, though. The specific console that requires internet connection every 24-hours (as rumoured) and requires a one-time online activation tied to an online account.

I'm aware of the thread, silly goose. I'm also aware that you seem to not be keeping up with development. It was stated that the Xbox One does not require a constant Internet connection; it merely needs to be connected to perform its routine check to ensure you're playing legitimate copies of games. As for the one-time activation, that feature is still under construction and we've received word from Microsoft at work about how it'll work in the used game market. I just cannot reveal it myself.


People without internet won't be able to buy these "next generation" titles anyway, so putting them into the equation will soon be irrelevant if the rumours are true, me thinks.

People without Internet won't be able to acquire content digitally either, so I'm not sure what your point is. :scratch:


It just seems like Microsoft and Sony want to cut out the middleman with next-gen consoles to some extent (of course to prevent used game sales and get a better profit margin) which could phase out physical market if it does work for them, regardless of those who prefer physical copies.

Though, you have a first hand experience with retail work in the gaming market, so you can shoot me down if you disagree. :p

There's nothing I can legally say in response to that other than that Microsoft and Sony definitely have no plans of cutting out GameStop as a middleman. With that being said, it also goes hand-in-hand with the 'one-time activation' fiasco.


Judging by this, I think "decades" (more so the plural use of it) is a bit of an overstatement.

I disagree; the digital market has been around for approximately ten years now - give or take - and the masses have been slow to embrace it. Statistics show that gamers purchase more physical products than digital and film-goers go after DVDs and Blu rays more than digitally. So while some believe that the digital 'revolution' is upon is, it's moving at a glacial pace, especially while a larger percentage of consumers prefer physical copies of entertainment outlets. So my estimation of decades seems rather on point. :p


These threads are always great, implying either has one engineer capable of developing anything useful at either place, sony has the talent but their working on other things NOT the ps4, M$ lost theirs years ago before the 360, still havent been able to find anyone good, hence this one video I watched is with an interior designer who shows off his hashion designs for the xbox one, buwahahahaha, as if anyone cares!!!!!! Oh M$ and PS4 I cant quitcha........

inb4 zomg they have so much power look at all those processors!!!! well, good luck figuring out how to use them, any dev will tell you the platforms are like a human brain 80% unusable, spoiler: their doing the same thing again, ooOOOOo, do love watching me a train wreck!!!

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mavmcv63JG1rcculko4_500.gif

Weemanply109
4th Jun 2013, 13:44
I'm aware of the thread, silly goose. I'm also aware that you seem to not be keeping up with development. It was stated that the Xbox One does not require a constant Internet connection; it merely needs to be connected to perform its routine check to ensure you're playing legitimate copies of games. As for the one-time activation, that feature is still under construction and we've received word from Microsoft at work about how it'll work in the used game market. I just cannot reveal it myself.


There's nothing I can legally say in response to that other than that Microsoft and Sony definitely have no plans of cutting out GameStop as a middleman. With that being said, it also goes hand-in-hand with the 'one-time activation' fiasco.



I disagree; the digital market has been around for approximately ten years now - give or take - and the masses have been slow to embrace it. Statistics show that gamers purchase more physical products than digital and film-goers go after DVDs and Blu rays more than digitally. So while some believe that the digital 'revolution' is upon is, it's moving at a glacial pace, especially while a larger percentage of consumers prefer physical copies of entertainment outlets. So my estimation of decades seems rather on point. :p

Fair enough, you seem to know more than the rest of us right now, so I can't really add anything. :p So I'll hold off a bit till it's out in the open.

BUT in response to:


People without Internet won't be able to acquire content digitally either, so I'm not sure what your point is. :scratch:

There wasn't really a significant point to it, I was just responding to your point where you mentioned that people whom don't have internet will still prefer to use gamestop when the next-gen console will kind of phase those people out from being able to play or even purchase any game due to the account-tied DRM.

Elliot Kane
4th Jun 2013, 13:52
I think The Escapist captured the whole XBox 1 mess very well in this cartoon (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comics/critical-miss/10358-Xbone-Week-5).

Makes sense to me! :D

Lord Martok
4th Jun 2013, 14:24
I think The Escapist captured the whole XBox 1 mess very well in this cartoon (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comics/critical-miss/10358-Xbone-Week-5).

Makes sense to me! :D

:lol: indeed.


(And btw, I do remember "Demon Seed") :D

Valenka
4th Jun 2013, 16:37
There wasn't really a significant point to it, I was just responding to your point where you mentioned that people whom don't have internet will still prefer to use gamestop when the next-gen console will kind of phase those people out from being able to play or even purchase any game due to the account-tied DRM.

I understand, but that is based on the speculation that without an Internet connection, you won't be able to play at all. There's no telling what Microsoft has in store yet. For all we know, there might be an alternate way of validating the game you're playing for those without Internet. In addition, we're speaking of the Xbox One. Perhaps the PS4 will not share such a feature and those without Internet can purchase the PS4 instead.

CakeLuv
4th Jun 2013, 17:10
These threads are always great, implying either has one engineer capable of developing anything useful at either place, sony has the talent but their working on other things NOT the ps4, M$ lost theirs years ago before the 360, still havent been able to find anyone good, hence this one video I watched is with an interior designer who shows off his hashion designs for the xbox one, buwahahahaha, as if anyone cares!!!!!! Oh M$ and PS4 I cant quitcha........

inb4 zomg they have so much power look at all those processors!!!! well, good luck figuring out how to use them, any dev will tell you the platforms are like a human brain 80% unusable, spoiler: their doing the same thing again, ooOOOOo, do love watching me a train wreck!!!

And this kids, is why you have to say NO to drugs :)

Driber
4th Jun 2013, 21:12
:lol: indeed.


(And btw, I do remember "Demon Seed") :D

Utterly lame joke (the cartoon), but funny to see the Demon Seed reference, hehe.

I remember that movie, too. And quite vividly so! Great movie for its time.

But I'm afraid folks like you and me are vastly outnumbered by a generation (I shall name it, "Generation One" :lol:) that doesn't know their classics.......nor cares, probably :p

Lord Martok
4th Jun 2013, 22:33
Utterly lame joke (the cartoon), but funny to see the Demon Seed reference, hehe.

I remember that movie, too. And quite vividly so! Great movie for its time.

But I'm afraid folks like you and me are vastly outnumbered by a generation (I shall name it, "Generation One" :lol:) that doesn't know their classics.......nor cares, probably :p

Gaahhhh..... one foot in the grave at a time, pal! One foot in the grave at a time. :D

Driber
4th Jun 2013, 22:47
I'm not your pal, son! :mad:

Lord Martok
4th Jun 2013, 23:08
I'm not your pal, son! :mad:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/martok2112/Gifs/Eyeballing001_zps466141c4.gif (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/martok2112/media/Gifs/Eyeballing001_zps466141c4.gif.html)


:D

Driber
4th Jun 2013, 23:36
God, that looks perverted :lol:

chip5541
5th Jun 2013, 06:31
God, that looks perverted :lol:

:scratch:

:lmao:

Lord Martok
5th Jun 2013, 06:59
God, that looks perverted :lol:

:lol::lol:

Weemanply109
5th Jun 2013, 13:30
Wait. And people get infractions for spam/offtopic posts when half of this thread page is the epitome of spam/useless posts. Mine ain't any better, but someone had to say it. :whistle:

Ontopic. Kinect will change the way games are played. ;)

BridgetFisher
5th Jun 2013, 14:42
Wait. And people get infractions for spam/offtopic posts when half of this thread page is the epitome of spam/useless posts. Mine ain't any better, but someone had to say it. :whistle:

Ontopic. Kinect will change the way games are played. ;)

If by change the way games are played, you mean put in technology that devs will not use, and even when they do the kinect is so poorly made it wont work properly. Lets look at the MOST hardcore title made for Kinect so far, Steel battalion, its a Kinnect game that uses the controller too because its so hardcore. Problem the kinnect will fail half the time to read movements correctly based upon how a person holds the controller, oh these silly posts watching people discuss technology that they cant understand, it must all just seem like mag to most people :P The kinnect hasnt produced anyhing substantial yet and never will, since the explosion of the digital market on PC, few if any devs will build a game that limits what platforms they can sell it on.

Weemanply109
5th Jun 2013, 14:45
How do you know it's poorly made? We've barely seen anything of it.

Plus, the fact that Kinect is included with the Xbox One package means that developers don't have to take the risk with extra developement costs to build a feature that only a small percentage of 360 gamers would use, splitting features amongst different demographics. However, this console changes that. It makes it more safe for games to take advantage of this technology, thus games will advance in design and how they're played will advance.

Lord Martok
5th Jun 2013, 15:57
I still need to go back and play the original Steel Battalion on old Xbox with its big 40 button controller (which I still have :) ) and the add on pack that was made for it.

BridgetFisher
5th Jun 2013, 16:09
How do you know it's poorly made? We've barely seen anything of it.

Plus, the fact that Kinect is included with the Xbox One package means that developers don't have to take the risk with extra developement costs to build a feature that only a small percentage of 360 gamers would use, splitting features amongst different demographics. However, this console changes that. It makes it more safe for games to take advantage of this technology, thus games will advance in design and how they're played will advance.

Its poorly made since its the EXACT SAME technology driving the unit itself, the lens is different but other than that, its the same, keep in mind there is nothing really they could add since Kinect isnt old to begin with, M$ doesnt invent technology they unify it into their products, and no nothing new has been invented to make kinect work better.

Bundled or not like the power glove for an old Nintendo is a moot point, big studios arent going to build for something that limits their marketshare into other platforms such as PC's or the wii. Hence why on 360 most of the titles are funded heavily by M$, their trying over there but it wont go anywhere, its a gimmick, ask Nintendo about gimmicks and how well those work out, power glove, virtual boy, etc.... or the officially licensed Nintendo Speedboard.

love watching stuff like this go down, titans falling, etc.... its all about the moneh... money money money as that guy says in killing floor....

Valenka
5th Jun 2013, 17:23
Its poorly made since its the EXACT SAME technology driving the unit itself, the lens is different but other than that, its the same, keep in mind there is nothing really they could add since Kinect isnt old to begin with, M$ doesnt invent technology they unify it into their products, and no nothing new has been invented to make kinect work better.

That's really funny because last I checked, the Kinect 2's technology specifications and the technology itself is different than the original Kinect. ;) Furthermore, there's a handful of newly added features to the Kinect. You really need to do your research before spouting off about subjects you know nothing about.


Hence why on 360 most of the titles are funded heavily by M$, their trying over there but it wont go anywhere, its a gimmick, ask Nintendo about gimmicks and how well those work out, power glove, virtual boy, etc.... or the officially licensed Nintendo Speedboard.

What in the bloody hell are you talking about?


love watching stuff like this go down, titans falling, etc.... its all about the moneh... money money money as that guy says in killing floor....

What the actual...?

Driber
5th Jun 2013, 18:50
Wait. And people get infractions for spam/offtopic posts when half of this thread page is the epitome of spam/useless posts. Mine ain't any better, but someone had to say it. :whistle:

Please leave the moderating to the moderators. We do not take kindly to this kind of trouble making. Your post is far more harmful than the OT you refer to. You never received an infraction for posting spam, so you must be referring to the gossip of another member. Please do not stir up things you have no overview about.

FYI, the brief OT on the previous page was nothing bad. Only one post was actual spam, and hence it was removed.

BTW, you just broke rule #16. I won't give you an infraction this time, but I expect you to take criticism about the forum staff into PM next time, as per our TOU. I'm being very lenient here, don't let me down ;)

BridgetFisher
5th Jun 2013, 19:00
snip....

There is ZERO new hardware technology minus the lens which isnt part of the underlying architecture in the new Kinect system, anything you read otherwise about the architecture of the hardware itself changing for the kinect and its detection is something to get link clicks maybe or sell papers cause MS never said that and it isnt true, nothing has been invented to improve upon the current kinect technology. You may be confusing what you read about new hardware being invented at M$ which by the way M$ does not do, never did, and didnt start now. You are thinking of new software via applications written to support the existing hardware, this software however will not be able to overcome the physical limitations of the hardware itself. Currently they are pushing new applications for the device, never have they made any such claim I am aware of that they have invented new transistors, capacitors, processors, what they do push are the applications of the product such as voice recognition, which isnt new, nor invented at M$, see old 8 bit Nintendo Laser Scope. However, In order to use the Nintendo Laser Scope required you to be Rad, now anyone can use the kinect regardless of how Rad they are, Im not sure I agree with this new direction, these are troubling times.

money money: refers to the mad bank many unscrupulous people are making from shorting stocks, devaluing company assets, market manipulation, etc. Its a wild exciting time for the handful of people right now who have that unusual enjoyment :D

Weemanply109
5th Jun 2013, 19:06
Is there a link to support any changes or (lack of) in hardware in the Kinect? Regardless, even if it is or isn't the same, it WILL change how games are played.

Valenka
5th Jun 2013, 21:10
I'm just going to ignore any nonsensical replies from here on in instead of addressing them with attention. :rolleyes:

@Weemanply, just Google it - I'm sure you'll find some supportive articles. :)

Tecstar70
6th Jun 2013, 07:54
Is there a link to support any changes or (lack of) in hardware in the Kinect? Regardless, even if it is or isn't the same, it WILL change how games are played.

Kinect is much better.

t6gHM95JQq0

Lord Martok
6th Jun 2013, 08:07
Now, I will say this.... the 3D animation app that I use, Reallusion iClone 5 Pro is designed to utilize (with a couple of patches) the Kinect as a motion capture device to create custom animations for characters in iClone.

If they are able to utilize the Kinect function on Xbox One, and it proves to be more effective than the current Kinect, I might just get an Xbox One, but right now, I see no real incentive to get it, still considering the other BS they're throwing into the mix.

Driber
6th Jun 2013, 08:09
:eek: @ Kinect video

Yeah......this WILL change the way we play games, indeed.

AyenRCJ_4Ww

Tecstar70
6th Jun 2013, 08:12
Now, I will say this.... the 3D animation app that I use, Reallusion iClone 5 Pro is designed to utilize (with a couple of patches) the Kinect as a motion capture device to create custom animations for characters in iClone.

If they are able to utilize the Kinect function on Xbox One, and it proves to be more effective than the current Kinect, I might just get an Xbox One, but right now, I see no real incentive to get it, still considering the other BS they're throwing into the mix.

From what I can tell, most of the BS hasn't come from MS at all. Wild speculation and interpretation has generated most of the stuff that I have read about.

Lord Martok
6th Jun 2013, 09:52
^ And to me, that's precisely what M$ is counting on....if they are going on the tack of being just vague enough about what they're planning with the Xbox One as a gaming system (charging fees to play used games, requiring a once a day internet connection, requiring games to be installed on the HDD, etc) so that it does invite wild speculation, then they've done so in glorious spades....because just about every gamer on the planet it seems is rather pissed off about what the Xbox One's functions are. And then, M$ will come around and say "My God, where did you all get those ideas? We're not doing any of that! (charging used fees, etc) This is a gaming system. Please, don't work yourselves up over information that hasn't been substantiated yet."

That would serve to do a few things:
- Make M$ look like the proverbial "Golden Boy" of video gaming. (No, no, this is a gaming console...and we support the gamers.)
- Insult millions of gamers because of the PR course that M$ took. (Vagueries inviting-- and counting on the wild speculations of gamers and end users.)
- Likely drive those insulted millions away from even thinking about getting an Xbox One.

Sorry, (no disrespect intended :) ) but right now, I am not sold on Xbox One....and I've loved Xbox since the beginning.

Tecstar70
6th Jun 2013, 10:08
In terms of vagueness, you could lay the same accusations at Sony. Hasn't Sony's silence on other aspects been deafening? All they can say is "ours is gaming console" !! We knew that already! So you could criticise MS's approach with holding a Hardware Reveal Event, but the fact that the public then criticise it for not being something it was not intended to be in the first place seems to me to be short-sighted. Yes, people want to see games, and the fact is they will - it just wasn't going to be at a hardware reveal event!

When you actually break down what MS showed us, it actually wasn't that far removed from what a 360 does already. Think about it - the TV thing is all about 2 things: the ability to control your cable box - its an IR port. The OS integrates better with social stuff (including gaming). The demo's were showing the abilities of the hardware and the interface. Put it in this perspective and where was the disappointment?

I find it interesting how peoples perceptions can create turmoil when it isn't warranted. It may be reflective of the dominant media culture we live in - looking for criticism, seeking sensationalism, readiness to knock down rather than be objective, always having to look for a conspiracy, the large corporation getting too big for its boots etc.

All the public negativity is about peoples misunderstanding of the event and how it differed from what they wanted to see. Combine it with the media culture and we have a s**t-storm!

Regarding SH games, this is the most accurate reporting I have seen so far:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-05-24-this-is-how-xbox-one-game-trade-ins-will-work-apparently
I don't think it's in their interest to kill off the SH market, but it is in their interest to get a cut of it. I think what you will see is an overall price increase in SH games, initially anyway, and possibly as a sweetener to the retailers there will be no way of deactivating them yourself, so they will be the only way to sell them.

The question is, when you buy a game are you buying the physical game itself, or are you buying the right to play it? Whatever it is now, there is the potential for them to change it going forward and their cut of the SH market will be contentious.

Also, don't be fooled, if whatever they do works Sony will be considering the same thing!

Driber
6th Jun 2013, 10:49
In terms of vagueness, you could lay the same accusations at Sony. Hasn't Sony's silence on other aspects been deafening?


Silence is MUCH better than being vague or dropping hints.

If MS was silent about controversial issues like SH there would be no s-storm right now as you put it. Well, correction - there could still be, but at least then it really is the fault of the people and not of the company.

If as a company you're going to say things like "Hey guys, here's our new console. It does TV and social stuff and oh btw, we *may* kill the SH market, but we're not sure about it yet, so just stay tuned..." then the entire argument about "sensationalism" (which is indeed a problem in modern day life and in the media in particular) goes right out of the window, because then as a company you are at fault for the speculation and for people getting worried or even angry.


Also, don't be fooled, if whatever they do works Sony will be considering the same thing!

I'm not fooled whatsoever. In fact, I have been saying this from the start. And that's damn worrying.

If these proposed SH killing methods is something that MS is going to pursue for sure (yes, we don't know for sure right now, but it's good to talk about it nonetheless) and if gamers are going to take it laying down, then Sony will try it, too, and before we know it all our discs will be completely useless after the first install :whistle:

Tecstar70
6th Jun 2013, 11:32
If these proposed SH killing methods is something that MS is going to pursue for sure (yes, we don't know for sure right now, but it's good to talk about it nonetheless) and if gamers are going to take it laying down, then Sony will try it, too, and before we know it all our discs will be completely useless after the first install :whistle:

What is it that will kill SH Games?
The retailer pricing - maybe. MS are likely to keep the retailers happy, aren't they? But if their GoD pricing is anything to go by this is still up for speculation.

The ability for the users to sell SH, for example through ebay. If this isn't possible, then that will break a lot of people.

MS have indicated that they have planned for the SH market from the start, but at what price to the consumer? I would suggest that at this stage rather than kill it dead they are just looking for a piece of the pie. When they see the revenue it will cement their way forward one way or the other. It's in their interest (at the moment anyway) NOT to kill it.

The real SH killer is when ALL games go online download only. That will likely kill retail too. Is this likely to happen?

AdobeArtist
6th Jun 2013, 11:44
If this turns out to be true, that you can only sell your games through select retailers who are part of microsoft's program, that will limit your options.

Selling through independant shops, ebay, or even direct selling to your friends won't work as there's no way for the system to track the exchange of ownership and activate the copy to the other console.

It's especially the part about not being able to sell to friends that is most bothersome. I mean if selling to a store (especially gamestop), they're a corporte entity who will take your game and just sell it for profit. I can understand MS wanting to get a cut of that profit. When selling to a friend, it's passing the game directly to another end user who will get their own personal use of the product. MS shouldn't get in between that.

The strategy (again IF true) doesn't stop the second hand market, but ot does cripple it. Which may be just as effective to encourage more players to buy all their games new instead of used.

Tecstar70
6th Jun 2013, 11:57
If this turns out to be true, that you can only sell your games through select retailers who are part of microsoft's program, that will limit your options.

Selling through independant shops, ebay, or even direct selling to your friends won't work as there's no way for the system to track the exchange of ownership and activate the copy to the other console.

It's especially the part about not being able to sell to friends that is most bothersome. I mean if selling to a store (especially gamestop), they're a corporte entity who will take your game and just sell it for profit. I can understand MS wanting to get a cut of that profit. When selling to a friend, it's passing the game directly to another end user who will get their own personal use of the product. MS shouldn't get in between that.

The strategy (again IF true) doesn't stop the second hand market, but ot does cripple it. Which may be just as effective to encourage more players to buy all their games new instead of used.

What they are doing (apparently) is implementing a system whereby each game has its own serial number. It is mandatory to install the game on your hard drive. When you do, it is tied to your Gamertag. You can take that disk to a mates house and play it there, provided you log in on his Xbox. Once you log out, even though the game is installed, your mate cant play it. (The same as now, except what stops them is not having the disk). If your mate wants to play it without you logged in, he can opt to buy it. When you want to sell your game, it will be dis-associated with your gamer tag so even though you have it installed, that disk serial will no longer belong to you.

It seems from unofficial reports that retailers will have software in-store that will check if your disk is associated with any gamer tag, and if so be able to dis-associate it. For this, MS will charge the retailer, which will obviously be passed on to the customer.

What is not known is how much MS will charge, and therefore the impact on SH prices and also if a user can dis-associate the game themselves and sell it on ebay. The ebay option will pose a risk, of course because what if you buy a game that hasn't been dis-associated?

So yes, the ambiguity of information has caused wild speculation, it may have the "that's not too bad" effect when they do announce full details, but I do think that Sony are being given more credit than they deserve for staying silent when its clear they will follow MS along similar paths in all aspects of the next-gen consoles.

Driber
6th Jun 2013, 13:17
^ AA was talking about selling a game to your mate, not going over to your mate so that he can play it.

People may have mates that they'll be happy to sell their used games to, but not necessarily happy to spend every day at their house so that those games actually work :nut:

----

Wanting a piece of the pie, tracking discs and who it belongs to, charging fees for disassociating your copy....all of this would already be enough for me to give a big

jcdlff_negative.jpg

to Microsoft.

If I buy a product, it is my right as a consumer to sell that product to anyone I can think of. No need for any greedy companies to get in the way of that.

<insert the much repeated used car sales analogy>


The real SH killer is when ALL games go online download only. That will likely kill retail too. Is this likely to happen?

If everyone just rolls over and takes all this BS and if everyone is okay with having their consumers rights stripped away from them under their noses, then I'm sure that will eventually happen, yes.

Tecstar70
6th Jun 2013, 13:52
^ AA was talking about selling a game to your mate, not going over to your mate so that he can play it.

People may have mates that they'll be happy to sell their used games to, but not necessarily happy to spend every day at their house so that those games actually work

i know, I was just explaining the principle. ;)


If I buy a product, it is my right as a consumer to sell that product to anyone I can think of. No need for any greedy companies to get in the way of that.


I guess it's the old chestnut of what you are purchasing when you buy a video game. Are you actually buying the physical game as you would buy a board game of Scrabble, or are you buying the rights to use the software that is distributed on a shiny disk but not to actually own the game itself. I guess MS think the latter, as they have referenced the disc as a method of delivering the bits, and Sony would be happy to take the same view IMO.

Microsoft has promised that its controversial DRM proposals have "a lot of advantages" for gamers.

Phil Spencer, Microsoft Studios' corporate vice president, has said that there is still a place for the secondary market in the next generation of consoles.

The company has announced that Xbox One users will have their games assigned to their own console, with an extra fee to register pre-owned games.
"I think the whole idea of a secondary market is important and it'll be important in the next generation, and we've designed with that in mind from the beginning," he told Edge magazine.

"We think there are a lot of advantages of having your content assigned to you digitally - we did that on 360 with cloud-saved games - and we want to do that with content.
"We understand there are implications... just know that we recognise the importance of that market and we've designed with it in mind from the beginning."

Microsoft has said that it has not finalised the policies for Xbox One.

Weemanply109
6th Jun 2013, 16:28
Yea. I remember seeing that video with the new features of the Kinect which influenced my opinion about how it'll change how games are played. Though, I watched with no sound, bu surely the hardware would have to be improved in order to do much more of what the original Kinect can't (and this is more of a reply to BridgitFisher)? Which is why I'm wondering why he's talking about it being more or less the exact same thing. :/

Valenka
6th Jun 2013, 18:06
Wanting a piece of the pie, tracking discs and who it belongs to, charging fees for disassociating your copy....all of this would already be enough for me to give a big thumbs down to Microsoft.

Like I said previously, Microsoft is still in development with this feature; it has not been finalised and it would be most unwise to go through with it. If Microsoft is going to charge you a fee to play a game that does not belong to them, they're going to have to split the profits of the fees paid between the publisher, developer and quite possibly the middleman (as GameStop, GAME, etc. get a small profit of selling new games as well.) That will null and void Microsoft's only intentions of creating the used game fee system: to make themselves money.

Of course, they could have that philosophy of "Well a little money is better than no money." However, Microsoft would be pissing off a lot of gamers and not even earning that much money in the process. I doubt they'd want to risk that for slim to nothing.

In addition, we've received some news at work about some ideas Microsoft has been throwing around about how it'll work. I can't say anything about it, but two of the ideas are rather promising. Fingers crossed that they go with one or the other.


If I buy a product, it is my right as a consumer to sell that product to anyone I can think of. No need for any greedy companies to get in the way of that.

With all due respect, a consumer's rights fall under the company's terms and conditions policies. If you purchase say, an MP3 player and the product's terms and conditions of use state that you may not resell the product to an individual and to rid yourself of it, you must say trade it in at store of original purchase and put it toward something else. Legally, that is what you must do.

Despite popular belief, a consumer's rights stretch only as far as the product's or company's terms allow, from a legal standpoint.

Elliot Kane
6th Jun 2013, 19:22
With all due respect to you, Valenka, you are completely wrong.

The law states that you as a consumer have certain rights which may not be taken from you under any circumstances. Those rights may vary by country, but NO company in ANY country is legally able to take them from you.


If this turns out to be true, that you can only sell your games through select retailers who are part of microsoft's program, that will limit your options.

Selling through independant shops, ebay, or even direct selling to your friends won't work as there's no way for the system to track the exchange of ownership and activate the copy to the other console.

It's especially the part about not being able to sell to friends that is most bothersome. I mean if selling to a store (especially gamestop), they're a corporte entity who will take your game and just sell it for profit. I can understand MS wanting to get a cut of that profit. When selling to a friend, it's passing the game directly to another end user who will get their own personal use of the product. MS shouldn't get in between that.

The strategy (again IF true) doesn't stop the second hand market, but ot does cripple it. Which may be just as effective to encourage more players to buy all their games new instead of used.

My understanding of how this will work is that you can buy and sell second hand games normally, but as every game has to be registered with MicroSoft on MSN, MicroSoft will charge you an additional amount (Presumably by credit card) to activate the game on your account when you try to register it.

The exact amount MS will charge doesn't seem to have been worked out yet, though nothing appears to have been ruled out, either, up to and including full retail price...

Driber
6th Jun 2013, 20:39
I guess it's the old chestnut of what you are purchasing when you buy a video game. Are you actually buying the physical game as you would buy a board game of Scrabble, or are you buying the rights to use the software that is distributed on a shiny disk but not to actually own the game itself. I guess MS think the latter, as they have referenced the disc as a method of delivering the bits

And that is completely and utterly wrong for them to make that reference.

You see, the only reason the big companies take this non-nonsensical stance of "discs are just a way to deliver the bits" is because it wasn't until recent that big companies found a way to cripple SH market in games and/or getting a piece of the pie.

Not too long ago we were all buying games on these things:

jhxgfr_mwcartdifferent.jpg

People were trading these things on a massive scale. And it was considered the most normal thing in the world, just like you would trade your old comic books.

When you think about it, there is not really that much difference between a game cartridge and a game disc. It's all "a way to deliver the bits", really.

Do you think that big companies in those days didn't wish for the SH market to die? Hell freaking yeah they did! Any trade that didn't go through Sega's or Nintendo or Atari's hands was basically a "loss" for the company's wallet (or rather, their big fat bank accounts :whistle:).

It wasn't until recent that companies found a way to finally profit from this SH market. A market the companies have no business sticking their noses in, IMO. And now we've got people (like yourself, it appears) toeing the company line and making excuses for them and basically advocating that "it is only fair that the companies deserve a piece of the pie".

Well guess what - it is not. If they deserve a piece of the pie, then so do all other companies who produce non-gaming products.


- Car manufacturers should get a piece of the pie when you sell your 5 year old Toyota to your neighbor because you just got yourself a promotion and can now afford a BWM.

- TV manufacturers should get a piece of the pie when you sell your 32" LCD TV on eBay because you just purchased yourself a 40".

- Book publishers should get a piece of the pie when you're having trouble paying your mortgage and you're forced to sell half of your personal library.

Only then can you righteously argue that it's "fair" that companies like MS get a piece of the pie of SH sales. Either ALL companies profit from consumers selling stuff to other consumers, or NONE of the companies profit.

By using these in my view sneaky ways to cripple a legitimate market is giving companies like Microsoft an unfair advantage over other companies. And I'm not talking about Sony, but about the aforementioned car manufacturers, book publishers, etc.


and Sony would be happy to take the same view IMO

Why do you keep going back to Sony? This isn't a platform war. At least not to me. I don't care who is doing it, everyone who tries this BS is evenly bad in my eyes.

I'm a PS3 guy and would choose PS3 over 360 any day of the week, and will probably go for PS4 if I had to choose between that and XB1. But if you think I'm a fanboy who's just interested in criticizing MS, think again. I don't care which next console is better in regards to this debate on consumer rights. If Sony tries to pull off this nonsense, I will criticize them just as hard as I do now Microsoft for seemingly going the wrong direction :whistle:

The argument "well, Sony will probably follow" doesn't hold any water in regards to my criticism towards MS right now after hearing these disturbing hints about where MS might be heading towards.


Microsoft has promised that its controversial DRM proposals have "a lot of advantages" for gamers.

Phil Spencer, Microsoft Studios' corporate vice president, has said that there is still a place for the secondary market in the next generation of consoles.

The company has announced that Xbox One users will have their games assigned to their own console, with an extra fee to register pre-owned games.
"I think the whole idea of a secondary market is important and it'll be important in the next generation, and we've designed with that in mind from the beginning," he told Edge magazine.

"We think there are a lot of advantages of having your content assigned to you digitally - we did that on 360 with cloud-saved games - and we want to do that with content.
"We understand there are implications... just know that we recognise the importance of that market and we've designed with it in mind from the beginning."

Microsoft has said that it has not finalised the policies for Xbox One.

That's some mighty fine PR talk, but don't be fooled for a second that Mr. Spencer said any of that in the interest of the gamers.

It's important, yes. Important because Microsoft (apparently) found a way to profit from SH game sales. If there was no financial gain for them, you can bet your behind that they'd do everything in their power to continue to cripple the SH market as much as possible.

Apologies for double post - will merge later :)


Like I said previously, Microsoft is still in development with this feature

Doesn't stop me from making critical notes based on what we've heard so far. I'm not going to wait with discussing the possibilities and their possible implications for when it's possibly too late to do anything about it.


it has not been finalised and it would be most unwise to go through with it.

Agreed.


With all due respect, a consumer's rights fall under the company's terms and conditions policies. If you purchase say, an MP3 player and the product's terms and conditions of use state that you may not resell the product to an individual and to rid yourself of it, you must say trade it in at store of original purchase and put it toward something else. Legally, that is what you must do.

Despite popular belief, a consumer's rights stretch only as far as the product's or company's terms allow, from a legal standpoint.

As EK mentioned, this is completely false.

The law always trumps a company's terms and conditions on a product. T&C are only legally binding if they do not contradict the law.

That MP3 player's T&C could state that you may use the player to stone a puppy to death and that you would not go to jail for it. But guess what - you still would.

A crude comparison, I know, but you get the point.

Weemanply109
6th Jun 2013, 22:01
I heard that Microsoft rushed the development of the console to the extent that they've messed a few things up, resulting in them having to downclock their GPU, thus making the performance margin between the PS4 and Xbone much LARGER (PS4 is more powerful, btw).

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=576869

Lord Martok
6th Jun 2013, 22:12
I heard that Microsoft rushed the development of the console to the extent that they've messed a few things up, resulting in them having to downclock their GPU, thus making the performance margin between the PS4 and Xbone much LARGER (PS4 is more powerful, btw).

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=576869

WOW!... simply.....wow.

Rider
6th Jun 2013, 22:20
New info, just read this:

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/license
http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/privacy
http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/connected

Fail! tbh.
How can someone limit this so much?

You can give a game to friend only if he/she is more than 30 days on your list?
You can give one game just once only if developers of the game agree??
You can sell games only to retailers they tell you???

I CAN'T!!! :lol:

pidipidi39
6th Jun 2013, 22:40
This is turning into something really ridicolous :lol:

Rider
6th Jun 2013, 22:43
Sony save us tbh!

AdobeArtist
6th Jun 2013, 23:24
It seems from unofficial reports that retailers will have software in-store that will check if your disk is associated with any gamer tag, and if so be able to dis-associate it. For this, MS will charge the retailer, which will obviously be passed on to the customer.



And therin lies the catch for used games. At least as far as Gamestop's used game business model goes. Since there, a used game in only $5 less than a new copy. Which is why I stopped getting used games, they never provided a substantial savings incentive.

But getting back to the main point; so MS will extract a fee from the retailer's used game sales. You'd think the store will raise the cost of a used game to cover that fee so they don't lose the profits they're used to.

Now do you see where this is going?

How much can they raise the price of their used copies when there's only a $5 margin? If they raise the price to the same as new, then what's the reason for someone to buy used at all??? A new game and a used game both selling for $60, any consumer will buy the new copy knowing that all the material is in there, especially DLC codes.

This policy of MS forces Gamestop to take a dent in their used game profits, which they hate. But what choice do they have? They can't raise the price of a used game by even $5 to the same as new, that will defeat the purpose of the used market.

I can't see any scenario how gamestop and other used store retailers aren't getting the shaft from this pre-owned fees policy.

Lord Martok
6th Jun 2013, 23:55
And therin lies the catch for used games. At least as far as Gamestop's used game business model goes. Since there, a used game in only $5 less than a new copy. Which is why I stopped getting used games, they never provided a substantial savings incentive.

Well....a game that is fairly new is only going to drop a few bucks for used price if the game is doing particularly well in its new run. After a while, the used price goes down, often considerably.

Elliot Kane
7th Jun 2013, 00:28
And therin lies the catch for used games. At least as far as Gamestop's used game business model goes. Since there, a used game in only $5 less than a new copy. Which is why I stopped getting used games, they never provided a substantial savings incentive.

But getting back to the main point; so MS will extract a fee from the retailer's used game sales. You'd think the store will raise the cost of a used game to cover that fee so they don't lose the profits they're used to.

Now do you see where this is going?

How much can they raise the price of their used copies when there's only a $5 margin? If they raise the price to the same as new, then what's the reason for someone to buy used at all??? A new game and a used game both selling for $60, any consumer will buy the new copy knowing that all the material is in there, especially DLC codes.

This policy of MS forces Gamestop to take a dent in their used game profits, which they hate. But what choice do they have? They can't raise the price of a used game by even $5 to the same as new, that will defeat the purpose of the used market.

I can't see any scenario how gamestop and other used store retailers aren't getting the shaft from this pre-owned fees policy.

They can't raise the price they sell at; they CAN drop the price they BUY at, meaning second hand games will be worth far less to their owners...

AdobeArtist
7th Jun 2013, 01:28
They can't raise the price they sell at; they CAN drop the price they BUY at, meaning second hand games will be worth far less to their owners...

That will mean owners will have even less reason to sell it to gamestop. If they could only offer me $10 for something they'll sell for $55 (new title) or just $2 for something they'll sell for $25, then it would benefit me more just to keep the product for my personal collection. There's just no incentive to sell for so little return.

The whole reason to sell the old is to basically apply a disount on a new purchase. But if all that old game will let me save is $2-8, I really see no point. If it takes me a stack of games to save $20 on something new, I see it as a rip off to sacrifice so much of your collection for just one game.

If gamestop does lower the buy in rate for players games, that will effectively be the same as raising the selling price in an attempt to compensate for the new fees they have to deal with. Either way if they can't sell at a reasonable price (to which I say $5 less than new is NOT reasonable) nor make a reasonable offer for your games (and as it stands I consider their buy in offers before pre-owned fees already insulting to begin with) that would cripple their SH market.

Considering the huge margin they had from what they paid to what the priced for sale, they'll either have to accept a reduction in that profit margin, or see their second hand market vanish when the trade in value reaches diminishing returns for the game owners.

All this of course being subjective for now without the actual details of Microsoft's pre-owned fees system. This entire argument is based on what we've heard of it, not what we know.

Valenka
7th Jun 2013, 02:36
With all due respect to you, Valenka, you are completely wrong. The law states that you as a consumer have certain rights which may not be taken from you under any circumstances. Those rights may vary by country, but NO company in ANY country is legally able to take them from you.


The law always trumps a company's terms and conditions on a product. T&C are only legally binding if they do not contradict the law.

I understand the points you're both trying to make but if I could be jokingly snide for a moment, it would depend on what country you're speaking of. In America and the United Kingdom there are indeed laws that stand in the event a company pretty much tries to take consumer rights away from you, but I doubt either of you know the consumer laws for, say, Yugoslavia. :p Perhaps over there, companies can do whatever they want.

Getting back on topic, the general point I was trying to make is that Microsoft and other companies can do what they want as long as it doesn't go against the laws of the country. There's no law against Microsoft acting against the sale of used games. If Microsoft wants to make it so once you activate the code for the game, no one else can use it, that's their prerogative. However, as I said, I highly doubt that's what they would do and based on what I've heard about development, it most likely will not happen unless they've lost their bloody minds.


Doesn't stop me from making critical notes based on what we've heard so far. I'm not going to wait with discussing the possibilities and their possible implications for when it's possibly too late to do anything about it.

I understand that. :)
I was just bringing to the table what I've heard, hoping it'll quell some worries. You can make whatever criticisms and judgements you desire - I'm just giving you some insight into what I know. :)

Valenka
7th Jun 2013, 03:08
Speak of the devil. My boss just emailed me this article confirming what Microsoft told us:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/gaming/2013/06/06/microsoft-xbox-one-used-games/2398825/


Microsoft also says players can resell or trade older titles -- no fees required -- at participating retailers. However, it appears there will be some limitations in sharing games. According to a post on game licensing, users can offer a one-time gift of a select title to a friend, so long as they've been on their Xbox Live friends list for at least 30 days.

The company also says loaning and renting Xbox One games "won't be available at launch, but we are exploring the possibilities with our partners."

Lord Martok
7th Jun 2013, 03:53
Jacktards....the lot of 'em. This is panning out almost exactly as I predicted. Cause a fervor among the players with a bunch of DRM and SH BS, and then turn right around and say "we're working on the possibilities of trimming down the problematic stuff."

Nice way to pull an EA, M$! Three thumbs up....and one of 'em ain't part of a hand.

Valenka
7th Jun 2013, 08:10
I think everyone should just take the time to pray and be grateful there's the PlayStation 4 to go for instead of the Xbox One...unless of course Sony follows in the same footsteps; then we're all buggered.

Truth is, I couldn't give any less of a fig. I don't buy games unless I know I'm going to like them and I don't let anyone borrow my games. I don't care if Microsoft wants to watch me through my Kinect - I don't do anything worth watching in my room anyway.

All I really care about is making sure Microsoft doesn't screw up so much to the point where GameStop becomes obsolete - I'm rather fond of my job.

Elliot Kane
7th Jun 2013, 09:00
Latest known details on the XBox One (http://www.destructoid.com/xbox-one-games-require-online-verification-every-24-hours-255542.phtml)

Verification every 24 hours, else nothing works.
If you are playing at a friend's house, verification every hour.
'Participating retailers' only allowed to sell used games - and only then if the publisher allows!
Loaning & renting NOT available at launch.
Kinect can be paused, but not detached.
Giving a disk away is allowed IF the publisher permits and IF the person you give it to has been on your friend list for longer than 30 days.

If MS' servers ever go down for any length of time, for any reason at all, games cannot be played.

Yeah, I think I'll just leave that there with no comment from me...

***

Adobe,

Yeah, you'd think they were trying to kill the second hand game market stone dead with all this, wouldn't you... And rental. And swapping/gifting... And loaning. And...

Rider
7th Jun 2013, 09:10
^ That is HORRIBLE imo! Ppl can't let this happen, they are ruining gaming industry!

http://i.imgur.com/Y4GdHwg.gif

Dead! :lol:

Lord Martok
7th Jun 2013, 09:50
Further and further I sail away from the island that is Xbox One. Over the horizon it passes from my sight, into the sunset.....no...wait...into a glacier.

Technical frak ups.....bad business modeling....putting the screws to gamers....yes, the Xbox One should be renamed.....(pause for dramatic effect) .... Titanic!

Driber
7th Jun 2013, 10:00
New info, just read this:

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/license
http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/privacy
http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/connected

Fail! tbh.
How can someone limit this so much?

You can give a game to friend only if he/she is more than 30 days on your list?
You can give one game just once only if developers of the game agree??
You can sell games only to retailers they tell you???

I CAN'T!!! :lol:

Oh dear lord :rolleyes:

Okay, so we have...

A new generation of games with power from the cloud: Because every Xbox One owner has a broadband connection, developers can create massive, persistent worlds that evolve even when you’re not playing.

...a company who assumes everyone has the luxury of having an internet connection and a broadband connection at that. Right.

And more striking...

With Xbox One you can game offline for up to 24 hours on your primary console, or one hour if you are logged on to a separate console accessing your library. Offline gaming is not possible after these prescribed times until you re-establish a connection, but you can still watch live TV and enjoy Blu-ray and DVD movies.

Hurray! You need to sign in every 24 hours in order to keep playing the games you bought.

A nice big slap in the face for everyone who cannot or do not want to do this.

And what about if their servers go down? Like, you know, PSN was down just last year for a really long time. So then you can't even play your games? :eek:

---

I really hope I'm missing something here, because if I understand all of this correctly - this is freaking INSANE.


I understand the points you're both trying to make but if I could be jokingly snide for a moment, it would depend on what country you're speaking of. In America and the United Kingdom there are indeed laws that stand in the event a company pretty much tries to take consumer rights away from you, but I doubt either of you know the consumer laws for, say, Yugoslavia. :p Perhaps over there, companies can do whatever they want.

I don't know the consumer laws for Yugoslavia, no, but as I'm not from there and hence their laws do not apply to me, I don't particular care as far as this point is concerned.

BTW, Yugoslavia hasn't existed for, like, a decade now. Just saying' :cool:


Getting back on topic, the general point I was trying to make is that Microsoft and other companies can do what they want as long as it doesn't go against the laws of the country. There's no law against Microsoft acting against the sale of used games. If Microsoft wants to make it so once you activate the code for the game, no one else can use it, that's their prerogative.

That will remain to be seen.


However, as I said, I highly doubt that's what they would do and based on what I've heard about development, it most likely will not happen unless they've lost their bloody minds.

Well, knowing how big companies tend to operate...

:whistle:


I understand that. :)
I was just bringing to the table what I've heard, hoping it'll quell some worries. You can make whatever criticisms and judgements you desire - I'm just giving you some insight into what I know. :)

And nothing wrong with that :)

Tecstar70
7th Jun 2013, 10:24
And that is completely and utterly wrong for them to make that reference.

You see, the only reason the big companies take this non-nonsensical stance of "discs are just a way to deliver the bits" is because it wasn't until recent that big companies found a way to cripple SH market in games and/or getting a piece of the pie.

Not too long ago we were all buying games on these things:

jhxgfr_mwcartdifferent.jpg

People were trading these things on a massive scale. And it was considered the most normal thing in the world, just like you would trade your old comic books.

When you think about it, there is not really that much difference between a game cartridge and a game disc. It's all "a way to deliver the bits", really.

Do you think that big companies in those days didn't wish for the SH market to die? Hell freaking yeah they did! Any trade that didn't go through Sega's or Nintendo or Atari's hands was basically a "loss" for the company's wallet (or rather, their big fat bank accounts :whistle:).

It wasn't until recent that companies found a way to finally profit from this SH market. A market the companies have no business sticking their noses in, IMO. And now we've got people (like yourself, it appears) toeing the company line and making excuses for them and basically advocating that "it is only fair that the companies deserve a piece of the pie".

Well guess what - it is not. If they deserve a piece of the pie, then so do all other companies who produce non-gaming products.


- Car manufacturers should get a piece of the pie when you sell your 5 year old Toyota to your neighbor because you just got yourself a promotion and can now afford a BWM.

- TV manufacturers should get a piece of the pie when you sell your 32" LCD TV on eBay because you just purchased yourself a 40".

- Book publishers should get a piece of the pie when you're having trouble paying your mortgage and you're forced to sell half of your personal library.

Only then can you righteously argue that it's "fair" that companies like MS get a piece of the pie of SH sales. Either ALL companies profit from consumers selling stuff to other consumers, or NONE of the companies profit.

By using these in my view sneaky ways to cripple a legitimate market is giving companies like Microsoft an unfair advantage over other companies. And I'm not talking about Sony, but about the aforementioned car manufacturers, book publishers, etc.


I'm not necessarily "toeing the line", just trying to state what has been officially said and what has been speculated. I agree that you shoudl have the right to sell your game. the only thing that sMS should be doing is preventing piracy.Interestingly MS have now said that any fee's will go to the publishers, so they must be getting a kick back elsewhere.






Why do you keep going back to Sony? This isn't a platform war. At least not to me. I don't care who is doing it, everyone who tries this BS is evenly bad in my eyes.


Only because at the moment I am reading a lot of stuff where people seem to think the sun shines out of their backside, and again just pointing out to people that just because Sony haven't mentioned it doesn't mean they won't be doing it.





That's some mighty fine PR talk, but don't be fooled for a second that Mr. Spencer said any of that in the interest of the gamers.


Absolutely!


Oh dear lord :rolleyes:

Okay, so we have...

A new generation of games with power from the cloud: Because every Xbox One owner has a broadband connection, developers can create massive, persistent worlds that evolve even when you’re not playing.

...a company who assumes everyone has the luxury of having an internet connection and a broadband connection at that. Right.

And more striking...

With Xbox One you can game offline for up to 24 hours on your primary console, or one hour if you are logged on to a separate console accessing your library. Offline gaming is not possible after these prescribed times until you re-establish a connection, but you can still watch live TV and enjoy Blu-ray and DVD movies.

Hurray! You need to sign in every 24 hours in order to keep playing the games you bought.

A nice big slap in the face for everyone who cannot or do not want to do this.

And what about if their servers go down? Like, you know, PSN was down just last year for a really long time. So then you can't even play your games? :eek:

---

I really hope I'm missing something here, because if I understand all of this correctly - this is freaking INSANE.


Agreed! :mad2: MS testing the water again maybe?

Driber
7th Jun 2013, 10:31
@Tecstar: gotcha :)


All I really care about is making sure Microsoft doesn't screw up so much to the point where GameStop becomes obsolete - I'm rather fond of my job.

Worry. It's bound to happen if this anti retailer movement continues :rolleyes:

Record stores are going out of business like crazy. I'm sure game stores will follow in the not-so-distant future.


Latest known details on the XBox One (http://www.destructoid.com/xbox-one-games-require-online-verification-every-24-hours-255542.phtml)

Verification every 24 hours, else nothing works.
If you are playing at a friend's house, verification every hour.
'Participating retailers' only allowed to sell used games - and only then if the publisher allows!
Loaning & renting NOT available at launch.
Kinect can be paused, but not detached.
Giving a disk away is allowed IF the publisher permits and IF the person you give it to has been on your friend list for longer than 30 days.

If MS' servers ever go down for any length of time, for any reason at all, games cannot be played.

Yeah, I think I'll just leave that there with no comment from me...

***

Adobe,

Yeah, you'd think they were trying to kill the second hand game market stone dead with all this, wouldn't you... And rental. And swapping/gifting... And loaning. And...

:mad: :mad2:

Tecstar70
7th Jun 2013, 10:36
Time to play the waiting game, maybe? 2014 could be the year to buy a new console!

kiadaw
7th Jun 2013, 15:27
I soon be able to tell my son, in not too long future, that gaming used to be just popping a disc or cartridge into a machine, end of.

kiadaw
7th Jun 2013, 15:35
Gaming is already considered very expensive for many people. If they try all these nonsense, it will only make people spend less in future.

If I spend for instance 1k a year on games (combination of used, trade in & new). I will not suddenly pay 1.5k for next gen. Not gonna happen. At best, I buy less games.

If they wanted to save on cost, cut things that not many people cared about, like using famous artistes for voice & music making.

Tecstar70
7th Jun 2013, 15:45
Oh my dear God....it gets even worse:

Microsoft kills game ownership and expects us to smile..

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-06-07-microsoft-kills-game-ownership-and-expects-us-to-smile

You do not own the games you buy. You license them

Discs are only used to install and then license games and do not imply ownership

People can play games installed on your console whether you're logged in or not

10 people can be authorised to play these games on a different Xbox One via the cloud, but not at the same time, similar to iTunes authorised devices.

Publishers decide whether you can trade in your games and may charge for this.

Publishers decide whether you can give a game you own to someone for free, and this only works if they have been on your friends list for 30 days.

Your account allows you to play the games you license on any console.

Your Xbox One must connect to the internet every 24 hours to keep playing games. When playing on another Xbox One with your account, this is reduced to one hour. Live TV, Blu-ray and DVD movies are exempt from these internet requirements.

Loaning and renting games will not be possible at launch, but Microsoft is "exploring the possibilities".

Microsoft may change these policies or discontinue them at any point.

Weemanply109
7th Jun 2013, 16:14
Meh. Couldn't give less of a jobby about the DRM limiting lending games (it seems quite reasonable, enough, the second hand market is killing developers, imo) and it doesn't seem as bad after reading this. Games tied to my account = convienence and I love the kinect features so this is another plus (though, I'd probably turn it off unless it's really required).

I don't have anything significant to complain about this anymore from WHAT I've READ. :/

kiadaw
7th Jun 2013, 16:35
I feel very happy with what Microsoft announced. If Sony announced similar policy, I will be overjoyed.

Finally, there are convincing reasons for me not to play games anymore.

Valenka
7th Jun 2013, 17:07
I'm honestly amused - with no offense to anyone here, as I am speaking generally - that so many people are freaking out over DRM and consumer rights now that Microsoft is announcing all of this news, when in reality, this is not a new thing. No one has ever completely owned products (namely electronics since that seems to be the most popular when it comes to DRM complaints) and quite honestly, Microsoft is not wrong for doing this whatsoever.

While it sucks completely and is entirely pointless, looking at it from a business standpoint - since Microsoft is a business, after all - it's completely understandable. It just annoys me when people speak ill of what 'Micro$oft' does without understanding why they're doing it. If you can acknowledge at least the reasons for all of this and then complain that you don't agree with it, that is perfectly acceptable. :p

Like I told BridgetFisher, one should not speak ill of GameStop saying they're "criminals" when one does not have any understanding of the methodologies.

Just my $0.02. Don't take it the wrong way. :)


Worry. It's bound to happen if this anti retailer movement continues :rolleyes:

I honestly have no reason to worry at this point. GameStop isn't worried - if they were, there's a lot of changes that would have been in effect the moment the rumours started.

pidipidi39
7th Jun 2013, 18:08
TBQH I'm tired of companies doing whatever they want to just because people keep buying their products...

People should NOT buy (Imo) Xbox One... that would be the only way to let Microsoft know that they can't ruin a console that much. Ok, maybe there's a financial (or stuff) reason behind it but I really don't care. What they're doing is ridicolous (still Imo). I really really feel like this generation will totally fail. And people will still buy those horrible consoles (who in case of XboxOne aren't even consoles anymore...) mostly not because they like them... but because they would buy everything Microsoft makes. This is what doesn't work IMO.

Valenka
7th Jun 2013, 18:42
People should NOT buy (Imo) Xbox One... that would be the only way to let Microsoft know that they can't ruin a console that much.

The fact of the matter is, there are people who will buy it because it appeals to them, regardless of the changes that others do not approve of. Compared to the Xbox 360, Microsoft isn't going in a completely positive direction with the Xbox One. Making it an all-in-one entertainment console is one thing, but changing to what a vast majority of consumers do not want is indeed foolish.


Ok, maybe there's a financial (or stuff) reason behind it but I really don't care. What they're doing is ridicolous (still Imo). I really really feel like this generation will totally fail.

With all due respect, if you can't be bothered to care about why they've changed what's been changed, you haven't a right to complain. It's perfectly acceptable to not approve of what Microsoft is doing, but if you're going to have the "I don't care why they're doing it, the Xbox One isn't the way I want it to be" mindset, then you've forfeited your right to judge; instead, take your business over to Sony who (if wise enough) will not follow in Microsoft's footsteps and herd a bigger consumer percentage. :) You can't make the assumption that the generation will fail before it's started just because Microsoft is not meeting your approval - Sony hasn't even dealt their hand yet. Wait and see what they have to offer with the PlayStation 4. :D


And people will still buy those horrible consoles (who in case of XboxOne aren't even consoles anymore...) mostly not because they like them... but because they would buy everything Microsoft makes. This is what doesn't work IMO.

People will always purchase what they like and what appeals to them. I've been singing that same tune about Activision and Call of Duty since Black Ops 1 was released, but nothing has changed. You know what I learned from that: steer clear of what does not interest you and live and let live. :) You can't control others, so make the decisions that work for you and let others make theirs. If people want to "waste" money on the console you deem horrible, let them. I'm sure you'll sleep better at night knowing that you didn't. :p

Rider
7th Jun 2013, 18:57
That's why i like PC the most!
I was always PC gamer and i am proud of that. Yes i had PS1, PS2 and Vita but that's all.

PC will imo always be better and more free, even though Steam and other services are ruining that. Maybe i will not be able to play every game out there (exclusives) but i don't really care tbh!

All this with One is TOO MUCH imo, and i can't understand this, i am trying believe me, i am giving my best to understand but... i just can't! If Sony do same or similar thing than i will be very mad and pissed but at the end it doesn't bother me that much because i am not buying any of these consoles.

Do you wanna know why was Xbox 360 so successful last few years?? Because of the piracy! Yeah you read it right, every Xbox 360 game leaks week(s) before the release and it's SO easy to play it on your console, just few simple steps. Some Xbox 360 games are most downloaded illegally, and they blame PC for that! That's why Xbox 360 was successful mostly in USA.

At the end i can totally agree and understand ppl that are confused, frustrated, mad, pissed... over this! I hope that they flop, i hope that One flops and i hope that no one buy Xbox One!

http://www.technobuffalo.com/2013/06/07/xbox-one-unless-microsoft-changes-their-policies-im-out/

Valenka
7th Jun 2013, 19:38
PC gaming has always and will always be the top contender, but I refuse to deal with Steam so I don't get into PC gaming any longer.

pidipidi39
7th Jun 2013, 20:16
The fact of the matter is, there are people who will buy it because it appeals to them, regardless of the changes that others do not approve of. Compared to the Xbox 360, Microsoft isn't going in a completely positive direction with the Xbox One. Making it an all-in-one entertainment console is one thing, but changing to what a vast majority of consumers do not want is indeed foolish.

That's not totally true, and you know it. There are some really die-hard fanboys of Microsoft outta there. They would probably buy XboxOne even if it was an empty cube (that's not real, but, get my point :p ). Then, there's obviously people who will buy it cause they actually like it. Those people I will never understand, but, yeah, their choice.



With all due respect, if you can't be bothered to care about why they've changed what's been changed, you haven't a right to complain. It's perfectly acceptable to not approve of what Microsoft is doing, but if you're going to have the "I don't care why they're doing it, the Xbox One isn't the way I want it to be" mindset, then you've forfeited your right to judge; instead, take your business over to Sony who (if wise enough) will not follow in Microsoft's footsteps and herd a bigger consumer percentage. :) You can't make the assumption that the generation will fail before it's started just because Microsoft is not meeting your approval - Sony hasn't even dealt their hand yet. Wait and see what they have to offer with the PlayStation 4. :D

First of all, you are pretty right :) Second of all, I don't care about PS4 since I am a PC player. And then, I was meaning that IMO what Microsoft is doing is not acceptable, even if behind the work there are some financial reasons.



People will always purchase what they like and what appeals to them. I've been singing that same tune about Activision and Call of Duty since Black Ops 1 was released, but nothing has changed. You know what I learned from that: steer clear of what does not interest you and live and let live. :) You can't control others, so make the decisions that work for you and let others make theirs. If people want to "waste" money on the console you deem horrible, let them. I'm sure you'll sleep better at night knowing that you didn't. :p
Here you probably don't get my point. I'm surely not going to buy XboxOne (and PS4 neither) but I think that if a lot of gamers will buy it... then Microsoft will win the match. But that's not my business, afterall :p

Weemanply109
7th Jun 2013, 20:25
Ok. Mess at the connection ever hour at a friends house and the console is basically "always-online" considering the fact that you need to connect online to be granted offline time which kills it's purpose, really. If servers go down, every Xbone console in the world remains unoperable which will COMPLETELY turn people off. If PS4 go the opposite direction, they're already going to win gamers.

I never read that when I first read the points, but aside from that. I'm not bothered about much else.

:/
PC gaming has always and will always be the top contender, but I refuse to deal with Steam so I don't get into PC gaming any longer.

Why?

Xbox One is basically doing the same thing now.

AdobeArtist
7th Jun 2013, 21:49
That's why i like PC the most!
I was always PC gamer and i am proud of that. Yes i had PS1, PS2 and Vita but that's all.

PC will imo always be better and more free, even though Steam and other services are ruining that. Maybe i will not be able to play every game out there (exclusives) but i don't really care tbh!

All this with One is TOO MUCH imo, and i can't understand this, i am trying believe me, i am giving my best to understand but... i just can't! If Sony do same or similar thing than i will be very mad and pissed but at the end it doesn't bother me that much because i am not buying any of these consoles.

Do you wanna know why was Xbox 360 so successful last few years?? Because of the piracy! Yeah you read it right, every Xbox 360 game leaks week(s) before the release and it's SO easy to play it on your console, just few simple steps. Some Xbox 360 games are most downloaded illegally, and they blame PC for that! That's why Xbox 360 was successful mostly in USA.

At the end i can totally agree and understand ppl that are confused, frustrated, mad, pissed... over this! I hope that they flop, i hope that One flops and i hope that no one buy Xbox One!

http://www.technobuffalo.com/2013/06/07/xbox-one-unless-microsoft-changes-their-policies-im-out/

I've been meaning to bring this up. But PC gamers have been playing with this model for years already, which Xbox is attempting to adopt. The majority of PC gamers download their games (mostly from Steam) not buying box copies. And even those retail games require being tagged to the players Steam account to work.

There are some exceptions of course, but for the most part PC games can't be resold or loaned out to friends. Once bought the game is only playable on your PC/account and that's the end of that.

So what's the PC communities outlook on this approach on XBO, or any console for that matter?

Weemanply109
7th Jun 2013, 21:55
I don't specially follow PC communities in a way such as forums dedicated to such thing, etc. :p but I've generally seen a negative reaction all over gaming forums from all different kinds of people.

I do think however, that an average PC-centric gamer who buys a Xbox One probably won't be as bothered by the DRM as other people might be.

That's just my opinion, though.

Elliot Kane
7th Jun 2013, 22:16
I've been meaning to bring this up. But PC gamers have been playing with this model for years already, which Xbox is attempting to adopt. The majority of PC gamers download their games (mostly from Steam) not buying box copies. And even those retail games require being tagged to the players Steam account to work.

There are some exceptions of course, but for the most part PC games can't be resold or loaned out to friends. Once bought the game is only playable on your PC/account and that's the end of that.

So what's the PC communities outlook on this approach on XBO, or any console for that matter?

It's the reason why I don't get any games which absolutely require Steam or any other system like it.

For all the supposed compensations Steam offers, none come close to making up for the fact that they are in essence depriving gamers of rights that should be absolute.

If you buy a copy of the game, you should own that copy of the game. Anything less is not acceptable.

Valenka
8th Jun 2013, 02:28
That's not totally true, and you know it. There are some really die-hard fanboys of Microsoft outta there. They would probably buy XboxOne even if it was an empty cube (that's not real, but, get my point :p ). Then, there's obviously people who will buy it cause they actually like it. Those people I will never understand, but, yeah, their choice.

I don't understand...? How is what I said not true? There are indeed people who will purchase the Xbox One because it appeals to them. Sure, there are others who would purchase the Xbox One even if it were a paperweight, but that does not make my statement false. :scratch:


Here you probably don't get my point. I'm surely not going to buy XboxOne (and PS4 neither) but I think that if a lot of gamers will buy it... then Microsoft will win the match. But that's not my business, afterall :p

Like I said, live and let live.


Why? Xbox One is basically doing the same thing now.

Jumping the gun, I see. ;)
I didn't give a reason in that post, nevermind for similarities between Steam and Microsoft. :p
Steam gives me issues connecting and it takes forever to download a game. I'd much rather have the physical copy and just install it in 5 minutes than wait two hours for it to download.

pidipidi39
8th Jun 2013, 07:36
I don't understand...? How is what I said not true? There are indeed people who will purchase the Xbox One because it appeals to them. Sure, there are others who would purchase the Xbox One even if it were a paperweight, but that does not make my statement false. :scratch:
Yeah, right. I didn't explain myself well. Sorry :p

Rider
8th Jun 2013, 12:37
http://i.imgur.com/5JmD2xD.jpg

:lol::lol::lol:

Weemanply109
8th Jun 2013, 12:48
^ Omg :lol:


Jumping the gun, I see. ;)
I didn't give a reason in that post, nevermind for similarities between Steam and Microsoft. :p
Steam gives me issues connecting and it takes forever to download a game. I'd much rather have the physical copy and just install it in 5 minutes than wait two hours for it to download.

You can buy Steamworks titles via retail and install them via steam using the disc too. But I understand, fair enough.

Elliot Kane
8th Jun 2013, 13:42
That's great, Rider! Though it does miss: "Number likely to be sold worldwide: ONE" :D

Weemanply109
8th Jun 2013, 13:48
:lol:

Even though it would be great lesson for M$ if there was ONE sale. :whistle: The chavs of the UK stan too hard for the Xbox brand to let it slide in the mud like that. This console will outsell PS4 in the UK, I'm predicting.

All you hear in the bus from Chavs sitting behind you are them yapping about Xbox games and mostly Call of Duty.

AdobeArtist
8th Jun 2013, 13:50
:lol:

Even though it would be great lesson for M$ if there was ONE sale. :whistle: The chavs of the UK stan too hard for the Xbox brand to let it slide in the mud like that. This console will outsell PS4 in the UK, I'm predicting.

All you hear in the bus from Chavs sitting behind you are them yapping about Xbox games and mostly Call of Duty.

quuuuestion; what are "chavs"?? :scratch::scratch:

Weemanply109
8th Jun 2013, 14:00
Google images might help you. :p

also: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=chav

pidipidi39
8th Jun 2013, 14:15
All you hear in the bus from Chavs sitting behind you are them yapping about Xbox games and mostly Call of Duty.Just... why? :(

Driber
8th Jun 2013, 14:53
quuuuestion; what are "chavs"?? :scratch::scratch:

Watch Shameless :D

Lord Martok
8th Jun 2013, 16:17
http://i.imgur.com/5JmD2xD.jpg

:lol::lol::lol:

:lol::lol::lol: indeed! :)


That's great, Rider! Though it does miss: "Number likely to be sold worldwide: ONE" :D

:lol::lol::lol: (almost choked on soda with this one.) :)


Google images might help you. :p

also: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=chav

...aaahhh.... another word for exists for them, but I will refrain from its use because it could be considered mildly racist.

Valenka
9th Jun 2013, 02:09
You can buy Steamworks titles via retail and install them via steam using the disc too. But I understand, fair enough.

I'm aware, but as I said I want nothing to do with Steam. I just want to install the game to my computer and play it. I don't want to have to go through a third party to do it. Plus, Steam rarely allows mods which is the whole point of PC gaming for the most part. :rolleyes:


http://i.imgur.com/5JmD2xD.jpg

I have never heard of nor do I see the need for more than one person in the same household to be playing the same game at the same time. I also do not see the need for more than one of the same console in the household. That's just foolish. :rolleyes:

Lord Martok
9th Jun 2013, 02:17
I have never heard of nor do I see the need for more than one person in the same household to be playing the same game at the same time. I also do not see the need for more than one of the same console in the household. That's just foolish. :rolleyes:

Well, my roomie and I both have Xbox 360s...that allows us to play multiplayer games without having to put up with the punks who tend to populate Xbox Live. :)

Valenka
9th Jun 2013, 02:43
Well, my roomie and I both have Xbox 360s...that allows us to play multiplayer games without having to put up with the punks who tend to populate Xbox Live. :)

I didn't consider room-mates. :p
I was more so thinking about a family.

SeanCordernay
9th Jun 2013, 06:34
Google images might help you. :p

also: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=chav

I can't with your life Weeman. :vlol:

Shaikh
9th Jun 2013, 07:14
https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/426728_10151687739092489_864901805_n.jpg



The first person to guess the name of our dog correctly will receive the above prizes. Just comment below what you think his name is and we'll be announcing the name/winner this Sunday June 9th.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151687739092489&set=a.10151005217102489.478262.92819932488&type=1

:lol:

Valenka
9th Jun 2013, 07:16
What's so funny? :scratch:

Shaikh
9th Jun 2013, 07:29
Everything. :lol:

Driber
9th Jun 2013, 09:28
I'm aware, but as I said I want nothing to do with Steam. I just want to install the game to my computer and play it. I don't want to have to go through a third party to do it. Plus, Steam rarely allows mods which is the whole point of PC gaming for the most part. :rolleyes:

Steam not allowing game mods? That's the first I hear of this.

All the recent PC games I've been closely following these past years that were on Steam had plenty of game mods, trainers, etc.


I have never heard of nor do I see the need for more than one person in the same household to be playing the same game at the same time. I also do not see the need for more than one of the same console in the household. That's just foolish. :rolleyes:

Not at all.

Plenty of households have more than just 1 TV. It's not uncommon that there's even 1 TV for every person in a household. Especially with families that have an above average income.

The parents have a TV in the living room and their bedroom, the kids each have a TV in their bedroom, etc.

Now, imagine if our world had a system in which every TV can only be tuned into 1 TV station at a time. Say, for example, the dad wants to watch ESPN, so all other TVs in the entire household will only be able to display ESPN. That pretty much renders having multiple TVs useless, right?

Well, with our actual technology everyone can watch whatever station they like. Kids watch their cartoons, dad watches his sports and mom watches Oprah, for example.

Now, imagine a world in where gaming consoles are not so incredibly expensive. I'm sure you'll agree that will lead to everyone in the household having their own console, right? And naturally everyone in the household would like to be able to play games on their own console and their own TV independently from what others in the family are playing at any given time.

In conclusion, multiple consoles per household does very much make sense. Is it going to happen widespread? Probably not, because consoles are expensive and the economy is in the crapper. But the idea itself is definitely not "foolish".


I didn't consider room-mates. :p
I was more so thinking about a family.

Heh, see above :)

Weemanply109
9th Jun 2013, 10:57
I think them using the dog as a mascot is quite funny. :lol: It's quite cute, actually. I wouldn't mind having the dog on the cover. :lmao:


I can't with your life Weeman. :vlol:

I can't with it either. :lol: :(

It's too classy.




Steam not allowing game mods? That's the first I hear of this.

All the recent PC games I've been closely following these past years that were on Steam had plenty of game mods, trainers, etc.

Ditto. I've never heard of Steam ever blocking any mods (except maybe if they somehow mess with important files that could be used to cheat in MP or something). :scratch: A LOT of steam games have HUGE modding communities, even non-valve games. Some games are harder to mod with because of Steam, but it's still moddable.

Daftvirgin
9th Jun 2013, 12:24
Nexusmod =/= Steam I guess

Elliot Kane
9th Jun 2013, 13:16
From what I gather there are some games on Steam that only allow modding via the Steam Workshop, but as far as I am aware most Steam games are moddable in the usual way.

A number of publishers don't like modders very much, but that's not Valve's fault.

There seem to be a number of people on the Nexus (Major modders' site for those of you who don't know it) who get games from Steam and then successfully mod them.

Shaikh
9th Jun 2013, 14:08
I think them using the dog as a mascot is quite funny. :lol: It's quite cute, actually. I wouldn't mind having the dog on the cover. :lmao:

Here's some point about that Dog on IGN Preview (http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06/08/e3-2013-call-of-duty-ghosts-diving-into-the-campaign?):


Your service dog accompanies you
More than just an AI companion, it's a remote recon scout
Can be controlled via a tablet-like viewfinder (based off real life Navy Seals)
In the real-world field, SEALS outfit highly trained dogs with periscope-like camera and specialized earpiece; allows team to see/hear everything dog does
You can control the dog in-game; can lunge at enemy's throats
You can bark to lure enemies into view


Waiting to see that in action. Plus underwater mission. 4 hours till the livestreaming. :)

Valenka
9th Jun 2013, 17:42
Steam not allowing game mods? That's the first I hear of this.

Four of my PC games had to be installed through Steam and I cannot install mods for them.

pidipidi39
9th Jun 2013, 18:02
Four of my PC games had to be installed through Steam and I cannot install mods for them.
Well, there are more than 4 games on Steam... :p
I mean, if 4 games don't allow mods on Steam, it doesn't mean Steam doesn't allow mods at all.

Valenka
9th Jun 2013, 19:13
Well, there are more than 4 games on Steam... :p
I mean, if 4 games don't allow mods on Steam, it doesn't mean Steam doesn't allow mods at all.

I know that, but I'm not going to waste money buying games on PC and can't mod them - I'd rather get the game on Xbox and be able to play with my friends.

pidipidi39
9th Jun 2013, 19:17
I know that, but I'm not going to waste money buying games on PC and can't mod them - I'd rather get the game on Xbox and be able to play with my friends.
Ok :)

Valenka
9th Jun 2013, 19:24
Ok :)

Is there a list of games that Steam allows mods for that you know of, perchance?

Driber
9th Jun 2013, 19:55
You can control the dog in-game; can lunge at enemy's throats


Now where have I seen that before. Hmmm......

pghxvi_250px-wolf_link_and_midna_artwork.png


Four of my PC games had to be installed through Steam and I cannot install mods for them.

I do not follow. You can't install mods for them? That implies that there ARE mods for them available, but Steam blocks them? :scratch:


Is there a list of games that Steam allows mods for that you know of, perchance?

- Just Cause 2

- Sleeping Dogs

- Tomb Raider 9

...just to name the first SE games that come to mind :whistle:

As said before by another poster - a game either has game mods available for it or not. You can't fault Steam for this. It's about how popular a game is (and hence, how big its potential modding community) and how difficult the game developers made it to mod a game.

Many devs purposely encrypt game data and write all kinds of anti-modding techniques in their game code. Nothing to do with Steam.

Valenka
9th Jun 2013, 20:17
I understand that, but the point I'm trying to make is that there are games with mods available, but they would have had to have been installed before Steam became mandatory. For instance, Hitman Blood Money. I can't install mods because I have the "Steam version." It seems the only games you can mod have to be "Steam approved" mods - a few of my friends have Hitman Blood Money installed and they didn't have to install it through Steam, but because I had to, the directory where the mods are supposed to go does not exist because Steam installed it through a different directory.

I'm not trying to mod games that don't allow mods. That's just foolish. :p

Driber
9th Jun 2013, 20:39
^ And that is why you criticize Steam? Sorry, but that's just silly.

That's like saying "I blame the publisher of the BD version of The Shining for disallowing me to play the disc on my old DVD player" :nut:

Yeah, Steam uses a different folder structure on your harddisk than the original pre-Steam version of the game. If that breaks game mods, you can't blame Valve for that. It's just how Valve organizes things. You need to contact the creators of those ancient game mods and ask if they can update it to make it work with the new version....or buy yourself an original copy of the game on eBay or something.

Game mods become incompatible all the time. When game devs release a new patch for their games, it often renders game mods useless and the creators of those mods have to update their code to make them compatible again.

Same thing with FireFox. Every new major milestone of FireFox breaks a whole bunch of add-ons. If the add-on creators can't or don't want to update their add-ons to work on the latest Firefox version, the only thing you can do is not upgrade if you NEED those add-ons. (I ran into this problem several times, myself, and that's why I'm stuck with using FireFox 3.6 - which is like, 3 years old now - on my netbook. But I never blamed Mozilla for it.)

Elliot Kane
9th Jun 2013, 21:01
Have you tried creating the folders you need yourself, Valenka?

The mod will presumably tell the program to look in 'Folder Y', and the program should not care whether or not it's a Steam approved folder or not.

Weemanply109
9th Jun 2013, 22:09
Four of my PC games had to be installed through Steam and I cannot install mods for them.

Which games, exactly?

Valenka
9th Jun 2013, 22:27
^ And that is why you criticize Steam? Sorry, but that's just silly.

No. :scratch:


Steam gives me issues connecting and it takes forever to download a game. I'd much rather have the physical copy and just install it in 5 minutes than wait two hours for it to download.

Driber
9th Jun 2013, 22:37
Was referring to the post where you said you want nothing to do with Steam because it "disallows game mods"....but nvm :)

Valenka
9th Jun 2013, 23:18
Was referring to the post where you said you want nothing to do with Steam because it "disallows game mods"....but nvm :)

OH :lol: apologies, I completely drew a blank.
Lord, no. To dislike a relatively good service for one inconvenience is certainly foolish and if I may go as far to say entitled. :p

I've had pleasant experiences with Steam in the past - only two or three out of many - but my only luck with PC games stems from being able to install it directly to my computer without interference. Even EA's Origin software is starting to annoy me with The Sims. Luckily, I can still incorporate manual updates, since Origin always messes them up during installation.

Weemanply109
9th Jun 2013, 23:32
Anyone watched the CoD: Ghosts reveal? you can watch it at the Callofduty website (relevant cause it's on xbox one, derp).

The graphics are SERIOUSLY disappointing for a "next-gen" title.

Valenka
9th Jun 2013, 23:35
When was the last time that any Call of Duty game had up-to-par graphics? Don't worry, I'll wait. :cool:

Lord Martok
10th Jun 2013, 01:29
When was the last time that any Call of Duty game had up-to-par graphics? Don't worry, I'll wait. :cool:

Hey, I loved CoD: Black Ops....fighting in Hue City was gorgeous! :)

Valenka
10th Jun 2013, 03:20
I thought Black Ops was a huge step down in graphics compared to Modern Warfare 2. :o

Daftvirgin
10th Jun 2013, 09:04
Microsoft's E3 press conference is today

Shaikh
10th Jun 2013, 09:18
Microsoft's E3 press conference is today
Yes can't wait. 7 more hours to go.

Daftvirgin
10th Jun 2013, 10:08
I wanna see if hey can salvage this trainwreck :whistle:

Xcom
10th Jun 2013, 13:20
Microsoft's E3 press conference is today

As is Sony's, I believe.

pidipidi39
10th Jun 2013, 13:21
I wanna see if hey can salvage this trainwreck :whistle:
I don't think so.

Daftvirgin
10th Jun 2013, 14:06
They still have a chance, if they manage to blow us away.

But I highly doubt this.

Shaikh
10th Jun 2013, 14:22
Xbox One ahead of PS4 in Amazon UK pre-order charts

http://www.vg247.com/2013/06/10/xbox-one-ahead-of-ps4-in-amazon-uk-pre-order-charts/

AdobeArtist
10th Jun 2013, 14:27
They still have a chance, if they manage to blow us away.

But I highly doubt this.

These are the games they need to show to pick up momentum;

New Killer Instinct (the first full 3D and HD iteration of this series)
New Perfect Dark (even a reboot, Joanna Dark needs a comeback)
New Conker (need I say more? :) )
New Crimson Skies (just imagine this picturesque flight combat with the new fidelity)

Driber
10th Jun 2013, 14:34
lol @ people pre-ordering without knowing what they're buying :p

Daftvirgin
10th Jun 2013, 14:39
Hey I guess unsuspecting casuals like DRM.

AdobeArtist
10th Jun 2013, 14:43
I've been meaning to bring this up. But PC gamers have been playing with this model for years already, which Xbox is attempting to adopt. The majority of PC gamers download their games (mostly from Steam) not buying box copies. And even those retail games require being tagged to the players Steam account to work.

There are some exceptions of course, but for the most part PC games can't be resold or loaned out to friends. Once bought the game is only playable on your PC/account and that's the end of that.

So what's the PC communities outlook on this approach on XBO, or any console for that matter?

Still wondering what the PC crowd has to say about this, considering their library is also based on this model.

Jurre
10th Jun 2013, 14:58
Xbox One ahead of PS4 in Amazon UK pre-order charts

http://www.vg247.com/2013/06/10/xbox-one-ahead-of-ps4-in-amazon-uk-pre-order-charts/

I don't know if that is true but if it is it's very bad. As consumers we should let Microsoft know by way of voting with the wallet that all this crap is not done. If the Xbox One would still do as well as the PS4 then Sony would probably start all of those terrible restrictions as well to keep competitive, and then the entire game industry lines up to screw the consumers...

Having said that, so far there is no reason for me to get a PS4; if it's not backwards compatible with PS3 games it can't function as a replacement for my PS3 library, I am not dissatisfied with current grafics and I'm quite sure upcoming games will be available for 3 as well as 4.

I am also not gonna spent another 60 hard earned euro's on the same Call of Duty that is being made every year for 6 years now - although if we can play as the dog I may give it another thought...

Driber
10th Jun 2013, 15:16
I don't know if that is true but if it is it's very bad. As consumers we should let Microsoft know by way of voting with the wallet that all this crap is not done. If the Xbox One would still do as well as the PS4 then Sony would probably start all of those terrible restrictions as well to keep competitive, and then the entire game industry lines up to screw the consumers...

It'll happen.

jgyudd_sheep.jpg

Jurre
10th Jun 2013, 15:24
jgyudd_sheep.jpg

So basicly what you're saying is that there should be more people like me: insusceptible to authority :D

Xcom
10th Jun 2013, 15:30
lol @ people pre-ordering without knowing what they're buying :p

Even more lol because the prices aren't even revealed yet so the these people don't know what they'll pay either.

Amazon UK sells both consoles for £599.99 with a nifty disclaimer stating the prices may be subject to change. :D

AdobeArtist
10th Jun 2013, 17:06
New Killer Instinct CONFIRMED :D :D

pidipidi39
10th Jun 2013, 17:07
Well, I'm watching the conference.

As of now, my face still is: ._.

Come on MS... come on...

a_big_house
10th Jun 2013, 18:06
Pfft, well... That sucked :lol:

Rider
10th Jun 2013, 18:08
It was ok, but all these games look the same to me! Boring and generic, fps, fps, fps... god no one wants to try something new!

pidipidi39
10th Jun 2013, 18:15
This was an horrible conference IMO.
The XBOX One was even worse than I expected and the games were all FPS...
Minecraft on XBOX One? :lol: Just LOL.

EA better show The Sims 4 at E3 or it will totally suck this year D:

AdobeArtist
10th Jun 2013, 18:25
"All FPS"??? So what about;

Ryse
Killer Instinct (about *bleeping* time!!!!)
Sunset Overdrive
Forza 5
D4 (kinda unclear about this one)
Project Spark
Dead Rising 3
Witcher 3
Below

BridgetFisher
10th Jun 2013, 18:26
Still wondering what the PC crowd has to say about this, considering their library is also based on this model.

I'm an avid steam user, speaking from my experience and as a console owner (Xbox 360 +wii). What steam does is have games dirt cheap often, which is nice, they are always there and I can download them as many times as I want, some have weird DRM outside of steam that limits activations but I never ran into any issues. Steam provides for me as a gamer, dirt cheap prices, the ability to reinstall my games anytime. Most games on steam though are garbage probably 98% are pure crap, either not worth playing, or flat out dont work, also many titles are on steam that have no support, or developers willfully decide not to support their own games on the computer platform with patches or updates saying its not cost effective for example as Activision claimed for a recent release.

On console its a different type of consumer, PC games are well usually personal, for example noone ever asked me to bring a computer game over to their house to play with pizza. Its too annoying pc games are too finicky and often require too much effort to ever get to work. Consoles were good for this, hey you got a Wii so do I, bring over the new Mario and lets get some pizza. Its a different customer base that way for consoles, but only xbox may be doing this DRM thing which is a consumer protection feature, and PS will later, their consoles are inefficient technojunk either way, so I just love watching them fail for refusing to hire real engineers, literally refusing, M$ can slide on that sorta, but Sony has no excuse they just refuse to let their best people work on the PS platforms instead putting them on other products which is understandable as the PS market is a very small part of Sony's overall revenue from other products.

Jurre
10th Jun 2013, 18:26
Ryse looked very pretty, but I'm not sure if al this QTE combat will be fun...

Daftvirgin
10th Jun 2013, 18:33
Decent line-up MS got there, they managed to salvage this, as I predicted.

AdobeArtist
10th Jun 2013, 18:35
Ryse looked very pretty, but I'm not sure if al this QTE combat will be fun...

Yeah, extensive use of QTE really turns me off. But... and I can't believe I'm about to say this, lol...

it's still better than kinect body controlling which is what last years E3 demonstrated

BridgetFisher
10th Jun 2013, 19:16
Decent line-up MS got there, they managed to salvage this, as I predicted.

Apparently the entire rest of the business world disagrees and use numbers not opinions to show their disdain... looking at the lack of improvement in MS stock we shall wait and see if it bumps sonys stock again, due to M$ botching yet another 100 million product demo.

Maybe M$ should go back to coming out and laying on the floor to show us how they are with todays swing kid youth, maybe they will sit on a chair backwards... trainwrecks so much fun, and better when they last years...

Their management still shows a lack of focus with an inability to use their capital in the gaming market wisely, their allocation of massive funds towards less than impressive demos is a sign of their poor management, lack of direction, and poorly developed business model to reach the modern consumer in the gaming marketplace.


(will now sit back and read peoples wild opinions on it one way or the other, as if it matters, because thats not how business works, its about moneh... which sadly there is more money in making MS fail in the console market than succeed.)

Weemanply109
10th Jun 2013, 19:19
Surprised by some of the indie developers being there, especially the 'Below' game (responsible for the Sword & Sworcery EP - the game was great ._.) THE ARTSTYLE IS AMAZING.

I'm not 100% impressed with this E3 conference from M$, but I'm satisfied enough to definitely consider purchasing their console. I'm surprised at a few titles cause usually Xbox has a complete generic exclusive catalogue, still is, but minus a few surprises.

However, I still think Sony will churn out the better quality exclusives.

I WAS EXPECTING Mirrors EDGE 2, tho! ;_;

Btw, I read that EA trademarked a domain for Mirrors Edge 2 and 3!

Next up is EA who's conference is in 40 minutes!

Rider
10th Jun 2013, 19:41
Will there be ME2 announcement?

Weemanply109
10th Jun 2013, 19:49
We'll be finding out when EA's conference starts.

I'm seriously hoping, though! :D

Also, Sims 4!!! asdfg

Driber (or any other mod) is this the main E3 discussion forum (since it will be relevant to the new console :p) or will we take this to Humble Abode?