The Verge: The Xbox One is the best console if you don’t care about exclusive new games

[Deleted member 26104]

The family sharing thing was vague at best. Again, they wouldn't give us any details on how it worked.

Click to shrink...

They might have had a web page (don't recall that) but they were still very vague and offered few details.

Click to shrink...

Like I said though, they did detail it. It wasn't vague. The website, and MS people, explained it. You choose 10 people on your friends list and they can share your library. You always have access to your full library, and any one person can be playing a game of yours at a time. 2 people can't be playing the same game, but 2 people can be playing different games. It was essentially physical loaning of games but digitally, only you also kept your game that you loaned out. And I saw someone up there say you had to be online for someone else to play your game? That's incorrect, never part of the plan.

They detailed all this, people just didn't want to listen because of all the outrage and FUD being spread around at the time.

 

[Mass Effect]

Yet here we are in mid-2018 and digital games still holding no value after you've finished them, so tell me again about how none of these plans benefited nobody.

Click to shrink...

How is this any different from any other form of media (music, movies/tv, books)

What's funny is I remember this argument going the complete other way at the time, where people were saying that used games were of so little value anyway, so what did it matter if they could only be traded in to certain retailers or the disc became useless under Microsoft's plan?

And to answer your question, I don't remember anything about being able to re-sell or trade in games you bought digitally (outside of a vague survey question months later), so your point is moot.

Oh right, and I forgot about this nugget: It was up to the publishers whether you could trade in or resell your physical games or not.

Going over all this info and news again makes me realize what a mess this whole fiasco was; Microsoft execs contradicting each other, poorly explained and/or nebulous features.

You get the idea then. Go talk to your grandma about the wonders of DNAT, and watch her eyes glaze over

Click to shrink...

Yeah I get what you're saying. I just thought it was funny that you used that specific example since that's what I'm going to school for.

 

[Jaxar]

It went like this iirc: press was excited about a digital future from 10 years in the future now. gamers revolt (imho out of ignorance). press changes the frame to echo "gamers". MS changes plans. Damage done.

Click to shrink...

Holy shit this is not even close to being true.

So in all honesty, I have forgotten most of the details

Click to shrink...

Ahh... clearly.

 

[Mass Effect]

Like I said though, they did detail it. It wasn't vague. The website, and MS people, explained it. You choose 10 people on your friends list and they can share your library. You always have access to your full library, and any one person can be playing a game of yours at a time. 2 people can't be playing the same game, but 2 people can be playing different games. It was essentially physical loaning of games but digitally, only you also kept your game that you loaned out. And I saw someone up there say you had to be online for someone else to play your game? That's incorrect, never part of the plan.

They detailed all this, people just didn't want to listen because of all the outrage and FUD being spread around at the time.

Click to shrink...

You're actually right on this one.

It was the physical loaning/giving of games that caused the confusion. And that was never expanded upon from what I see.

 

[khamakazee]

How is this any different from any other form of media (music, movies/tv, books)

What's funny is I remember this argument going the complete other way at the time, where people were saying that used games were of so little value anyway, so what did it matter if they could only be traded in to certain retailers or the disc became useless under Microsoft's plan?

And to answer your question, I don't remember anything about being able to re-sell or trade in games you bought digitally (outside of a vague survey question months later), so your point is moot.

Oh right, and I forgot about this nugget: It was up to the publishers whether you could trade in or resell your physical games or not.

Click to shrink...

The only reason why it's moot is because you don't want to admit it actually had some good points to it, but you and a lot of people were so upset with the very idea of having to check in once a day and the traditional way we buy physical games that you made everything else moot. I'm not saying we would have been better off going with their initial plans but I'm at least open to some of the ideas put forth. The fact is something would have been better than nothing which is better than how digital games are handled now once you finish them.

 

[khamakazee]

You're actually right on this one.

It was the physical loaning/giving of games that caused the confusion. And that was never expanded upon from what I see.

Click to shrink...

It was explained but again you don't want to hear it.

 

[Deleted member 26104]

You're actually right on this one.

It was the physical loaning/giving of games that caused the confusion. And that was never expanded upon from what I see.

Click to shrink...

There was no physical loaning of games, that was made clear. There was the ability to gift a game to a friend, but only if they had been on your friends list for 30 days, and a game could only be gifted once.

All of this was detailed pretty extensively, but like I said, people didn't want to listen because then they couldn't be outraged.

 

[melodiousmowl]

It was explained but again you don't want to hear it.

Click to shrink...

Completely off topic, but I had to put on some pink floyd.

 

[khamakazee]

Completely off topic, but I had to put on some pink floyd.

Click to shrink...

Is there anybody out there?

 

[Xenon]

What alternate reality are we living in where the xbox one was facing negative press when it and the DRM plans were revealed? I remember a ton of games press calling gamers entitled for not wanting a mandatory wiretap and draconian DRM. I remember how "revolutionary" it was, and how Sony was definitely going to do the same thing. The media lapped up the power of the cloud for months, until those benefits failed to materialize better than driveatars.

That was the US press, mind you, but anyone saying that the US press wasn't very much in MS's corner until Sony shamed them on all fronts (price, performance, DRM, reveal tone and focus on games instead of tvtvtvsportstv) is living in a fantasy land.

Perhaps it was a holdover from the Xbox 360 dominating the US mindshare for so long. I don't know. But they certainly didn't face much opposition until it became clear that they'd lost the support of many gamers with their DRM (and then reversed it).

Click to shrink...

I think you must mean the hour before MS's press conference. Because the press and the fans went for blood immediately after it. DRM, 499, TV TV TV being just a few of the low points pointed out.

The hysteria against the XBO was insane. I remember people seriously saying the Kinect was going to be used by the us US government to spy on you and Microsoft was going to help them. Even though most people at this time had smart phones with cameras.

 

[melodiousmowl]

I think you must mean the hour before MS's press conference. Because the press and the fans went for blood immediately after it. DRM, 499, TV TV TV being just a few of the low points pointed out.

The hysteria against the XBO was insane. I remember people seriously saying the Kinect was going to be used by the us US government to spy on you and Microsoft was going to help them. Even though most people at this time had smart phones with cameras.

Click to shrink...

That was one of my friends. He was anti-kinect, and now he has alexas all over the house. I pointed this out to him (his vehement position on kinect and spying), and he wasn't amused.

 

[Mass Effect]

The only reason why it's moot is because you don't want to admit it actually had some good points to it, but you and a lot of people were so upset with the very idea of having to check in once a day and the traditional way we buy physical games that you made everything else moot. I'm not saying we would have been better off going with their initial plans but I'm at least open to some of the ideas put forth. The fact is something would have been better than nothing which is better than how digital games are handled now once you finish them.

Click to shrink...

This has nothing to do with what you or I said. You asked how digital games having no value after being finished now benefits anyone. And I told you that Microsoft never mentioned anything about being able to resell digital games (as in you never bought it physically in the first place). Physical games have nothing to do with this point.

As far as I'm concerned, I never demanded MS to revert on their vision. I wanted to see how it played out. So I don't know why you're trying to frame me as this raging frother that was screaming at MS.

It was explained but again you don't want to hear it.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, you could give the game once. I got that part. But what about if that friend wanted to sell the game later on {say, to GameStop)? Did we know if that was possible. If we did, give me a link for it, because the Xbox page on it doesn't say. I always assumed it meant the disc "died" and became useless after it was given away once.

And I don't know why you're being so hostile. It's ridiculous. It's been 5 years, give me a break

Also, as a reminder: The details didn't fully come out until weeks after the reveal, so a lot of this information got (apparently) misreported.

 

[Xenon]

That was one of my friends. He was anti-kinect, and now he has alexas all over the house. I pointed this out to him (his vehement position on kinect and spying), and he wasn't amused.

Click to shrink...

That's awesome. Yeah I have a feeling a lot of people were just looking for another log to throw in the fire. But in the end eating that s*** sandwich is what led to the creation of the X. So it's all good

 

[khamakazee]

This has nothing to do with what you or I said. You asked how digital games having no value after being finished now benefits anyone. And I told you that Microsoft never mentioned anything about being able to resell digital games (as in you never bought it physically in the first place). Physical games have nothing to do with this point.

As far as I'm concerned, I never demanded MS to revert on their vision. I wanted to see how it played out. So I don't know why you're trying to frame me as this raging frother that was screaming at MS.



Yeah, you could give the game once. I got that part. But what about if that friend wanted to sell the game later on {say, to GameStop)? Did we know if that was possible. If we did, give me a link for it, because the Xbox page on it doesn't say. I always assumed it meant the disc "died" and became useless after it was given away once.

And I don't know why you're being so hostile. It's ridiculous. It's been 5 years, give me a break

Also, as a reminder: The details didn't fully come out until weeks after the reveal, so a lot of this information got (apparently) misreported.

Click to shrink...

I'm being hostile? Not at all, I'm just explaining to you that they were going to give you options that are still not available today for digital owners and you just want to ignore that and say it's moot.

This is what I dug up and as you can see anything is still better than what's being served to us now once you buy a digital copy. These ideas below had a lot more benefits attached to them than a few Play Anywhere titles we see now.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jul/17/xbox-one-family-sharing-microsoft

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jun/19/xbox-one-drm-second-hand-restrictions-abandoned

 

[Mass Effect]

I'm being hostile? Not at all, I'm just explaining to you that they were going to give you options that are still not available today for digital owners and you just want to ignore that and say it's moot.

This is what I dug up and as you can see anything is still better than what's being served to us now once you buy a digital copy. These ideas below had a lot more benefits attached to them than a few Play Anywhere titles we see now.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jul/17/xbox-one-family-sharing-microsoft

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jun/19/xbox-one-drm-second-hand-restrictions-abandoned

Click to shrink...

And I'm trying to tell you that they never said anything about reselling digital games. I understand that, technically under the original plan, physical games were the same as digital games. But if you bought a game from the Xbox store, you still wouldn't be able to resell or trade it in.

Actually, I think I see where the miscommunication is coming from; you're saying there would be value added to digital games because of family sharing. If that's what you mean, then there's no argument here. If that's what you've been meaning this whole time, then we were talking about two separate things. You we never talking about reselling/trading specifically(?) and I guess I misinterpreted your initial post.

Yeah, family sharing would have been one of the benefits; however, I still think this specific feature was never contingent on the original DRM plan, especially since Steam did it literally a year later with none of the baggage.

Regardless, you can't just instantly turn something on its head and not expect resistance. The shift to digital music, movies, books, and streaming services didn't happen over night, it took years. Same with PC gaming. The industry on the console side wasn't ready and Microsoft's approach was less than ideal.

We're way off topic at this point, so we should probably leave it at that. There were benefits, there were drawbacks. What's done is done.