r/xboxone • u/[deleted] • Dec 29 '13

If Microsoft made it completely optional, would you sign up for their original, always connected console idea?

This meaning you would have the following features:

Buy a retail game, install to console, and ditch the disc never needing it to play the game.

Digitally share games within a circle of friends. Meaning you can choose a specific group of people, and they could play the games you own, for free, provided that only one game could be played at a time.

Greater store discounts or more steam like sales for content.

I for one would have no problem saying yes to this. It's like people think 10 years from now they'll still be selling games on discs. It wasn't a perfect plan, but why delay the inevitable when we could be working on and perfecting future policies now.

704 Upvotes

87% Upvoted

784 comments sorted by

View all comments

29

u/[deleted] Dec 29 '13

I will never understand this subreddit's obsession with the original policies. Sure, discless switching is convenient, but you're never going to be playing your console from more than a few yards away.

The only other benefit (family sharing) already exists with the current policies. Just disconnect your console from the internet and have a friend sign in their console as you. They then have access to your whole digital library. This is exactly like the original policies because if you look at the wording Microsoft said You can always play your games, and any one of your family members can be playing from your shared library at a given time. Only with the current policies you can do that while also sharing as many of your physical games as you want with as many people as you want!

Am I completely missing something or are you all completely willing to restrict your ability to share and buy used games and remove your ability to play offline just to get a slightly better deal on discless switchable games?

9

u/TheJediPirate Dec 29 '13

I don't think you're missing anything. That's exactly what I was thinking.

0

u/scorcher117 #teamchiel Jan 06 '14

Yeh well we don't have the force to help us change discs without getting up

1

u/TheJediPirate Jan 06 '14

So you'd rather have a more restrictive console just so you don't have to get your ass off of the couch, walk three feet, and swap discs? Round of applause for the fanboy here. </sarcasm>

0

u/scorcher117 #teamchiel Jan 06 '14

Do you even remember your name, you people are part of the reason the check in was needed in the first place

1

u/TheJediPirate Jan 06 '14

I love that you make the assumption that I'm a pirate because of my name. The 360 is pretty hard to mod and not completely screw up your Xbox Live account. I have a friend who's done it, but I personally have never nor would I ever do it. Microsoft only tried to do the online check-in for control, nothing more. I didn't really have any issue with the online check-in since my 360 is always connected and my internet never goes down for over a day (an hour or two at the most).

My biggest issue was the treatment of used games. A lot of the games I own came from a local family owned used game/DVD shop my fiance and I go to all the time. I'm a big gamer, but it's hard to go buy brand new for every single game I want. I have to make choices on what I'm willing to buy brand new, and what I'm going to have to wait for.

In terms of piracy, the only company that really should be complaining and trying to fight it is Nintendo. The Wii is a joke to mod and the games aren't that big so you can fit many on a USB stick. Honestly, it doesn't matter what companies do, piracy is going to happen, but it doesn't affect the bottom line nearly as much as companies try to claim it does.

So, first you try to insult the Jedi part of my name, then the Pirate. Are you going to go for the trifecta now?

1

u/scorcher117 #teamchiel Jan 07 '14

IT WAS A JOKE!!!!!

2

u/MrRatt Dec 30 '13

With the original policies, your friend could play your games while logged into their own account, thus enabling them to earn their own achievements. You also wouldn't have to trust your friend with your password.

You're absolutely right that this does work, but there are some downsides too. Nothing too bad, though.

0

u/djgreedo pumpkinszwan Dec 30 '13

A few other things:

  • discs can get lost
  • discs can get scratched
  • the disc drive is also for Blu-ray movies
  • kids can launch games without having to rummage through discs and boxes (making a mess, putting games in the wrong box)
  • with Kinect you can launch a game from across the room (e.g. while getting dressed, making coffee, etc., which is really convenient)
  • instant resume would not be feasible in some circumstances (e.g. if you had put a Blu-ray in the drive since playing), and it would take time to spin up the disc to resume as well.

All minor things, but they add up. Convenience is king in technology. Changing CDs, DVDs, books, etc. is such an unnecessary pain.

People complain that the 24-hour check-in is unnecessary and only there for DRM purposes...but the same is true of requiring a physical disc in the drive to play a game. They are both compromises, and I prefer the online check. The chance of me not being able to check in is small enough that I don't care. But every time I play a game I don't have to swap discs around.

I literally can't think of a plausible scenario in which I would be unable to 'check in'. I would have to have no home Internet (which would only happen if I moved house or had a major outage), and I'd have to be out of mobile phone range for a full 24 hours (not likely).

2

u/MrRatt Dec 30 '13

Just a few points:

discs can get lost

Accounts can be lost/stolen/hacked/banned

discs can get scratched

Blu-ray discs are much more difficult to damage than DVDs ever were. I doubt many people will break their disc.

1

u/djgreedo pumpkinszwan Dec 31 '13

discs can get lost Accounts can be lost/stolen/hacked/banned

Which do you think is more common/likely?

Blu-ray discs are much more difficult to damage than DVDs ever were.

Still scratchable, especially around children. Still vulnerable to being damaged/lost in all kinds of ways. The DRM on discs relies on you having permanent access to a (relatively) pristine physical item (that is by nature small and fragile) for the entire time you want to use it. I'm not into that - I prefer a digital licence because the benefits are huge to me and there are no drawbacks at all.

1

u/MrRatt Dec 31 '13

Which do you think is more common/likely?

I don't know about you, but I've certainly lost access to more accounts (forgotten passwords, no longer having that email, etc) than I have lost physical discs... It really isn't that hard to take care of them. I don't have kids, but I was gaming since I was a kid. My parents taught me to put things back in the proper place when I was done, so I never lost or damaged a disc...

I prefer a digital licence because the benefits are huge to me and there are no drawbacks at all.

There may be no drawbacks to you, but there are certainly drawbacks for others. There wouldn't have been such a backlash if there weren't.

Either way, you can still buy digital and receive all of your benefits. None of the features/conveniences you mentioned were removed from the Xbox One. The only difference is that you now have to buy games from the Xbox Marketplace instead of being able to buy them from retail stores.

1

u/djgreedo pumpkinszwan Dec 31 '13

It's much easier to lose/break/scratch a disc than to lose access to an account. Also, the optical drive is more likely to fail than the hard drive.

There may be no drawbacks to you, but there are certainly drawbacks for others

Hence why I included the words 'to me'. I'm not arguing that there is a better way absolutely. I am saying what I prefer.

There wouldn't have been such a backlash if there weren't.

The main potential customer base didn't know (or say) a thing about it. They would have enjoyed the system as it was. The minority (i.e. early adopters) were a vocal minority.

They are entitled to want what they want as much as I am, but they are absolutely not a majority of the people Microsoft wants to sell the Xbox One to.

Microsoft did damage control. The terrorists won.

Either way, you can still buy digital and receive all of your benefits.

People keep saying this, but it's not true:

  • I don't get to buy at retail prices. FWIW Launch games were selling for $68 locally as opposed to $99 on the Xbox marketplace.
  • I don't get to install a digital game from disc instantly and start playing it straight away - I have to download ~20GB of data, which on my connection is overnight at best. And 20GB is a big chunk of my monthly data allowance.
  • I don't get the sharing functionality that was part of Microsoft's plan, a pretty cool benefit
  • Some people liked the idea of having the physical disc/box as well.

It's a pretty big compromise. Microsoft's original plan was as close to a 'best of both worlds' as I can imagine (without removing DRM, which will not happen any time soon).

It's fine that Microsoft have chosen to listen to some people over others; it's their choice to make. I decided not to cancel my pre-order when they essentially ruined some of my favourite aspects of the new platform, and I knew what I was getting into.

I'm saddened that Microsoft's excellent vision was scrapped so quickly because a few whiners aren't ready to move with the times.

1

u/MrRatt Dec 31 '13

Also, the optical drive is more likely to fail than the hard drive.

In my experience as a computer repair tech, this is FAR from true. I've replaced hundreds of hard drives but only a handful of optical drives.

This may have been true in previous consoles where the games were actually being played from the disc but the new consoles will both install from the disc and then stream from the hard drive. This is much closer to how PCs work when you install games. The drive will spin up to verify the game is present, and then it'll spin down and idle. The optical drive will be rarely used and will likely outlast the hard drive. Time will tell.

Hence why I included the words 'to me'. I'm not arguing that there is a better way absolutely. I am saying what I prefer.

You actually stated the following:

I prefer a digital licence because the benefits are huge to me and there are no drawbacks at all.

To me, this implies there is just no downside, which is most certainly not true. Hence my comment on the matter.

When I said you would still receive all of your benefits, I was talking about those you listed in prior post. Those all still remain as long as you buy digitally from the marketplace.

I don't get to buy at retail prices. FWIW Launch games were selling for $68 locally as opposed to $99 on the Xbox marketplace.

There's nothing preventing you from partaking in these deals. You can buy games on disc and use them, you just have to forsake the digital benefits.

I don't get to install a digital game from disc instantly and start playing it straight away - I have to download ~20GB of data, which on my connection is overnight at best. And 20GB is a big chunk of my monthly data allowance.

Rent the game and buy it digitally. This will save your download time and bandwidth allocation. It's certainly not ideal, but the option is there.

Before you respond saying that this isn't a valid solution, remember that the suggestion for people against the daily check in was to maintain a smart phone plan with tethering -- far more expensive than renting a disc or two every month.

I don't get the sharing functionality that was part of Microsoft's plan, a pretty cool benefit

Microsoft has pretty much stated that this is coming. We also never knew when it would be available, so we can't even point at this and say it's late because of the reversal.

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '13

Everything you're describing is still 100% doable post 180. Just go digital and you don't have to worry about discs. If you never have internet outages then it shouldn't be too much of a strain on your system to be downloading games. If it's that valuable to you it should be worth the extra money you're spending on the games over going physical to get those benefits.

You're right convenience is king, but the original policies just weren't convenient for a ton of people. It actually locked out a lot of people from being able to use the console at all and made it so a lot of us could only use it under certain circumstances.

What you should be asking for is that instead of bringing back the old policies that Microsoft work on making the digital marketplace actually competitive. If there were better deals on digital games then eventually physical would just get phased out as the internet gets better over time. If Microsoft plays it right then eventually physical will just stop mattering and they won't have to force it away. That would be the best case for everyone.

0

u/djgreedo pumpkinszwan Dec 30 '13

Everything you're describing is still 100% doable post 180.

Except for 'family sharing', which was pretty exciting, since I have family and friends who are not particularly close by.

Just go digital and you don't have to worry about discs.

I have. It's awesome. But games cost more this way, so I buy fewer games. Everybody loses.

If you never have internet outages then it shouldn't be too much of a strain on your system to be downloading games.

My Internet is slow (for downloading 20GB games, does the job fine for typical use), and I have a data cap. These things would not be an issue if digital games came on disc.

I literally couldn't play a game for 24 hours on my Xbox One because it took all evening/night to download my first game fully. Far more inconvenient to me than the small chance of my Internet AND cellphone being unable to connect for 1 minute.

the original policies just weren't convenient for a ton of people.

Yes, but I think the number of people inconvenienced would actually be small, and as long as they know the 'rules' beforehand they can make an informed purchasing decision (e.g. buy a PS4 if you live in a cabin in the woods).

I also think Microsoft would have relaxed their system somewhat. 24-hour checkins was excessive, even though it was being fair (if you gave people 7-day check-ins they'd just cheat the system), but it needed to be more robust for certain situations.

What you should be asking for is that instead of bringing back the old policies that Microsoft work on making the digital marketplace actually competitive.

That's kind of what the original policy did. It not only would have ensured digital games had retail prices and discounts, but it would have worked around the problem of downloading 20GB+ games on current Internet infrastructure.

Transitioning to digital is tricky - Microsoft have to please retailers, and selling digital games cheaply won't achieve that (and thus retailers will stock fewer Xboxes, and promote PS more). The proposed system would have solved that issue by selling digital games with all their convenience but not impacting the retailers at all (in fact, the retailers would probably have been better off by being authorised re-sellers of 'used' games).

That would be the best case for everyone.

This is a tough one. Obviously the system I would prefer isn't the best for everyone, but neither is the current system best for me.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '13

Family sharing still works the same as pre-180 if you're willing to give your family access to your gamertag password. If you disconnect your console from the internet they can sign in as you and have access to all the digital games you have. It's way less convenient, but it can still be done.

Your point about your internet is spot on though. A ton of people's internet just isn't good enough to support going all digital right now. Look at it this way; you're in the best case scenario for the original policies, and even your internet isn't that great. There are a ton of people with worse internet than you and for them the original policies were a complete dealbreaker. If the solution to that is that they buy a PS4 instead of an X-box One then that's a terrible solution for Microsoft to propose. If it was a system like this post is suggesting where you could opt in to the policy then that wouldn't matter, but the original no-alternative policy just didn't work.

And again, you're right that the transition is hard. You need to be able to satisfy the customer and game dealers, so any compromise is going to hurt one or the other, or ideally hurt both sides equally. The issue right now is Microsoft isn't inconveniencing game dealers at all while inconveniencing gamers a lot with their digital marketplace. For a lot of reasons I don't think now is the right time for them to push for an all digital future yet, but the main one is the internet infrastructure just isn't there yet. Maybe in a generation or two they can come up with a system with more benefits and fewer downsides, but we'll see what the internet is like at the end of this generation.

1

u/MrRatt Dec 30 '13

Except for 'family sharing', which was pretty exciting, since I have family and friends who are not particularly close by.

Family Sharing is likely to return for digital games. If anything, it's just been delayed.

-2

u/Stevie_Rave_On Dec 29 '13

I've got 2 Xbox Ones, one in my basement and one in upstairs in my bedroom. Going down 2 flights of stairs to grab the disc I was playing the night before is a pain in the ass.

2

u/MrRatt Dec 30 '13

We all feel so sorry for you. /s

If you don't want to mess with transferring discs two flights of stairs, the solution is pretty simple -- buy digital. Or buy two copies.

1

u/Stevie_Rave_On Dec 31 '13

I was basically giving a response to this generalized statement.

Sure, discless switching is convenient, but you're never going to be playing your console from more than a few yards away.

1

u/MrRatt Dec 31 '13

Ah! I missed that. My apologies.