Eurogamer Opinion - Microsoft kills game ownership and expects us to smile

8bit

Knows the Score
A fairly bleak piece from Eurogamer about the digital future.

Tom Bramwell said:
Almost exactly a year ago, at the end of an E3 press conference in which Microsoft heralded fitness software, Kinect, Internet Explorer, Bing and dying action games as the future of entertainment, I wrote that anyone who has paid attention to Microsoft's business over the years should not be surprised by its apparent lack of self-awareness.

"If we are entertained by what Microsoft chooses to do for its own gain," I suggested, "then that is simply a happy coincidence."

Guess what? The coincidence is over.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-06-07-microsoft-kills-game-ownership-and-expects-us-to-smile
 
Finally the media isn't kissing their ass anymore. Yassss
clap.gif
 
Excellent, good on eurogamer for not playing along with this shit.

.

Edit:

And to all Steam and iTunes and Google Play comparisons.
How often do you buy $60 games on those platforms?

If MS sells the next Halo for $9.99 then of course this is fine and dandy.
 
Why is no one bashing Steam, they are doing the same thing for years.

Is Steam selling psyhical copies and then fucking you over?

Steam is plagued by the new digital world, where ownership turns into lincesing. That is a huge problem across many industries.

What MS and friends are doing is different and worse.
 
Remember in the early days before the Xbox launch, it was like "M$ making a game console? Do not want from that evil corporate machine ..."

But then they killed us with kindness. OG Xbox was thoughtfully designed with hardcore gamers in mind. 360 was similarly a great piece of kit (red ring, aside). The games and messaging were amazing.

But I feel like over the past few years.... They have become M$ again :P
 
I don't know why people are comparing it to Steam.

We're NOT OK with Steam.

There are cases going ahead in the EU and Australia challenging the legality of Steam's practices.

But Steam is more tolerable because games are cheap and the service is good. You don't HAVE to go with Steam either, it's a closed system on an open platform. We can most of the time get non-Steam versions of the games.

That's not an option with the X1.
 
Why is no one bashing Steam, they are doing the same thing for years.

I think the big issue with Steam is that without it we wouldn't have PC gaming due to piracy (debatable). PC gaming had been going that way for a long time though (forcing CDs to be in the drive, CD-Keys, accounts etc.)

Steam have also built up nearly ten years of trust (again, debatable) and don't detract from the user (amazing sales, ease of use). It is also the De Facto standard for PC gaming.

On the other hand consoles are not supposed to be easily piratable. I know that it exists but it is definitely the exception rather than the norm.

What is being introduced with the Xbox is completely anti consumer with no noticeable benefits (used games, always on, mandatory Internet, Doritos)
 
Why is no one bashing Steam, they are doing the same thing for years.

2 reasons.
First, Because the average amount I pay for a game on steam is around £7. As opposed to somewhere in the 20-30 range for console games.

Second, the resale market for pc games was already dead when steam became big, it just made the best of a bad situation. That isn't even close to the case on consoles.
 
Great read.

Every time I hear more about this whole mess I'm reminded of Microsofts statement to the Australian IT pricing parliamentary hearing.

"So ultimately, our customers have choice, and at the end of the day, if we priced our products too high, then our customers would vote with their wallets and we would see our sales decline."

http://www.zdnet.com/au/microsoft-australians-think-our-pricing-is-fair-7000012978/

So basically "we'll just keep raising prices and screwing consumers until we see sales decline and then we might do something"
 
I would be all for no-used-games if that meant we would get amazing games, ya know, cause they would get more money. I doubt it though. What would we get is lame 4-6 hours, tacked on dlc, disc locked content, the only diffrient thing, is that we won't be able to get rid of it .... yey.


I really want to believe that this is going to benefit us gamers in the long run.
 
Hopefully a lot of consumers know a lot of this stuff through genuine articles by the press to make a substantial dent on Xbox One's Sales and let the publishers and MS know, how it feels to be butt hurt.
 
I don't think this is entirely on MS though; as the GB guys talked about they were probably under pressure from Publishers to integrate some Anti-used game stuff.

But yeah, I kinda seriously hope this flops and Sony reconsiders any DRM policy they might have.

On the otherhand, though, an all-digital future is probably inevitable at this point. Not to justify them or anything, but a shoe had to drop some time or another.
 
Just curious. But what is the difference between a disc and buying a digital download card from a retailer? Aren't they both simply a mechanism to deliver the content that is licensed to you?
 
To save you skimming large tracts of condescending prose about how much Microsoft loves and respects you as a human wallet, here is a summary:

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.

.
 
Why is no one bashing Steam, they are doing the same thing for years.

There is a difference between being sold files that will be sitting on a single hard drive in a computer Vs being sold those same files on media designed to be portable.

MS is trying to sell me an optical disk that I couldn't even give away to someone on the street and have them be able to play it without paying for the game again (in some form).
 
I don't think this is entirely on MS though; as the GB guys talked about they were probably under pressure from Publishers to integrate some Anti-used game stuff.

But yeah, I kinda seriously hope this flops and Sony reconsiders any DRM policy they might have.
If MS and Sony didn't want this they could tell Publishers to shove it.

You want this EA? How about we don't allow you to publish on our platforms any more. This includes 360, PS2 & PS3.

You think EA wouldn't bulge?

Stop giving them an out. They are the platform holder.
 
Excellent piece, here's hoping more of the international media (especially in the US) will follow suit and take the side of the consumer for once.

Why is no one bashing Steam, they are doing the same thing for years.
This is the worst bunch of juniors we had in a while.


Wish bish would post his background research thread on some of these people (not accusing you in particular Soviet, just saying).
 
Just curious. But what is the difference between a disc and buying a digital download card from a retailer? Aren't they both simply a mechanism to deliver the content that is licensed to you?
From what I'm reading off of news.xbox.com , there's absolutely no difference. The actual delivery mechanism is different (disc vs. download), everything else is the same (licensing, DRM, ...).
 
If publishers pushed for this (and who knows how used games will work on PS4), is it legitimate to put all the blame on Microsoft?

Yes, publishers have no real power. They are going to bring their games for Xbone/PS4 anyway, it´s not like they have a choice.
 
Although unfeasible because money I think it would be amazing if sites went in together on a SOPA-like refusal to review any game on the One. Even if it was only one site, it's early enough that it might make someone at MS a little jumpy.
 
Why is no one bashing Steam, they are doing the same thing for years.

Because steam had to compete with gog, amazon, origin, greenman gaming and other digital storefronts driving prices down. We can also play our games offline for quite a long time without having to do a check in. These things offset the inability of the consumer to resell or trade software. Microsoft and the publishers are literally offering the consumer nothing in exchange for the invasive DRM they want as standard on these consoles.
 
Steam has physical disks? Cool.

Yes, yes it does. You can go into stores and buy Steamworks games that only activate once on a Steam account. Half-Life 2 had this and now hundreds of other games do too and MS is even giving the option of trading games, something you can't do with these Steamworks enabled discs. It was the exact same reason I didn't buy into Steam, until:

When I can buy blockbuster games from XBL for $5-10 after a certain amount of time, I'll get back to you on that.

There we go. That's what let me accept Steam. I'm not buying some digital shit I can't trade in unless I get something in return and that's what Steam (and lot of CD key sites now) deliver. They deliver massive savings.
 
If MS and Sony didn't want this they could tell Publishers to shove it.

You want this EA? How about we don't allow you to publish on our platforms any more. This includes 360, PS2 & PS3.

You think EA wouldn't bulge?

Stop giving them an out. They are the platform holder.

I'm not saying MS isn't guilty of collusion, but they sort of have an imperative to be on a good working relationship with Publishers; and if one does collude that could potentially put them in a lucrative position with publishers, which would then force the other to as well, at least to some extent.

MS doesn't know what the fuck it is doing, that's certain. But I think a lot of this has to do with having good working relationships, as much as it fucks us over.
 
maybe I was wrong about gaming sites not having the balls to do this, good job eurogamer.



I'm sick of explaining what others will, it's not the same situation.

well to be fair this is a Euro site, ill be interested to see if any of the US sites are willing to take MS to task on this. I doubt it.


I have always been curious about the possible ties to patriotism that seems fairly prevelent in US games "journalism".
 
Yes, yes it does. You can go into stores and buy Steamworks games that only activate once on a Steam account. Half-Life 2 had this and now hundreds of other games do too and MS is even giving the option of trading games, something you can't do with these Steamworks enabled discs. It was the exact same reason I didn't buy into Steam, until:



There we go. That's what let me accept Steam. I'm not buying some digital shit I can't trade in unless I get something in return and that's what Steam (and lot of CD key sites now) deliver. They deliver massive savings.

Not only that, but you only need to connect to steam to download the title.

After that you can play offline for the rest of your natural born life.
 
well to be fair this is a Euro site, ill be interested to see if any of the US sites are willing to take MS to task on this. I doubt it.


I have always been curious about the possible ties to patriotism that seems fairly prevelent in US games "journalism".

The US? The country with the freest and fairest press in the world? With a long standing journalistic tradition of taking absolutely everyone to task?

I highly doubt it....
 
Top Bottom