-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Just got my console (and I assume my account) banned from Live for playing Halo 4.
- Thread starter Skel1ingt0n
- Start date
You mean online passes, on-disc DLC, etc.. right? Microsoft payed $1,000,000,000 to deal with the RROD and offers a 3 year warranty for it, including free shipping. I got a free month of live out of being without an XBOX for two weeks, and one of my friends got a free game. Not that it excuses the RROD, but their response wasn't just "things break". That's being blatantly disingenuous.
If I were you, based on the OP's experience, don't play. I wouldn't expect Frank to vet every GAF user and ensure you don't get caught up in the bannings.
I was banned for playing my copy of ODST I pre-ordered and received about a week early. A mod on the forums said it was pirated, but a quick email with xbox support and a proof of a receipt sorted things out.
That really, really sucks...
I have a copy right next to me and its basically taunting me that I can't play it without the fear of a ban
Uno Venova
Banned
So stupid that they do this to players.I have a copy right next to me and its basically taunting me that I can't play it without the fear of a ban
I have a copy right next to me and its basically taunting me that I can't play it without the fear of a ban
You can play the campaign offline, as long as you don't log in with that Xbox until after the game is released. You can also play multiplayer on Xlink Kai.
pretty sure Xbox still logs offline activity on separate accounts :|
Even that is problematic, as the console will take a snapshot of the date/time of any achievements earned. This has been used in the past to track down pirates/modders.
well I would delete the temp account but like I said I am pretty sure Xbox still takes logs of that stuff.
element
Member
Yes, that is exactly what we are saying.
Look at is this way. 99% of the time, you will never be in this spot. There might be two or three games a year where there is a strict street date AND shipments to stores arrive extremely early.
If he bought any other game in the store he would have a proof of purchase either in his hands or in the stores inventory. If you walked into a store and the clerk said "hey I can sell you this game, but I only accept cash, and i can't ring it up because the register won't let me actually sell it. Is that cool?", then you might want to take a step back.
This is a rare instance. Most retailers are following the street date rules, and most other games wouldn't be doing bans on players.
Like we discussed yesterday in this thread, they can't use timestamps because there's no way to guarantee a valid timestamp. One can just set the clock back. The console does log various disc data such as DMI, title ID, security sector, and PFI, but as long as the disc is authentic there's no way this data can elicit a ban flag.
On the other hand, playing a pirated game before release can get a pirate banned, since the scene doesn't release the proper 'stealth' data until the day of the game's release. Therefore, the data they do collect from the disc very clearly indicates the disc is not authentic.
B For Bendetta
Member
Geez hardly any pity for the store at all in here. I know I've bought from local game shops who have broken street dates before. They know the risks but choose to take them on the mutual trust between them and their loyal customer. Little did they know that their whole business would get thrown under the bus for their customer's screen name and achievement points. I recognize that they are the ones who fucked up legally, but I can't say that I think this mom and pop store deserves to potentially lose their livelihood dealing with Microsoft's litigation because their supposedly loyal customer, who somehow doesn't know not to play a game on Xbox Live prior to its release date, told on them.
TheGreyHulk
Member
The one guy offering to help him said the copy wasn't legitimate. OP bought it from a mom & pop store, so there's chances that that store bought counterfeits and that's why the OP was banned.
As long as he's being taking care of, it's all good. If it were a legit copy from a reputable retailer, then i'd be worried. There's always some risk when dealing with mom & pop stores.
Hope you get unbanned soon OP!
Time to borrow my bro's xbox 360 cuz i really really really really really need to play Halo 4.
edit: just read more posts. if they really are banning for broken street dates of legit copies, that's just unfair. maybe they should just not allow access to multiplayer for the general public until the release date occurs? Wouldn't that be better than to just ban anyone playing the game?
The store didn't buy 'counterfeits', if you kept reading a few posts after that you could see that he didn't consider it legitimate because the store broke street date. That's it. Pretty shady way to word it, imo.
The OP was never compelled to give the store's name, and never did so.
B For Bendetta
Member
My mistake and negligence. Disregard
faceless007
Member
Legally, what's the difference? In both cases money is exchanged for goods. Are you saying the law doesn't consider that a sale if the item is used or comes from a "shady" dealer (whatever that means)? If so, citation needed.
There are no laws for software licenses, that's the point. They don't have the force of law behind them. Even if they did, there's no precedent that licenses apply to retail software that runs off the disc like video games.
If what you were saying is true, then he committed a crime by playing the game without a proper license. But as many many people have already explained, there is no such law. If we're all wrong and there is such a law, please cite it.
Well, it would probably be illegal to crack the game's encryption under the DMCA, so that's not an appropriate comparison to make to a retail game that doesn't need a crack. Although I would argue that that law is unconscionable and you legally should be allowed to do that.
There's no crime. Microsoft is well within its legal rights to ban people from its network.
Zombie James
Banned
Users shouldn't be punished if a store breaks a street date.
Yeah. I just confirmed I'm going to have a copy later tonight. BOOOO.I have a copy right next to me and its basically taunting me that I can't play it without the fear of a ban
faceless007
Member
I don't see anyone who disagrees that Microsoft is legally within its rights. The disagreement is over whether what they did was ethically right.
The part of your post I quoted had nothing to do with ethics.
faceless007
Member
Right, that part was about the law...which you agree with me about. So I don't know what your point was?
Yeah they finally paid up to sort it out....mid 2007. Thats like a year and a half of constant hardware issues and denial. They were sending those consoles out just as broken as they were sent in. Getting a refurb that lasts 2 weeks? Lol. I had 4 failures in 4 months, totalling 8 weeks of repair time. Sure I got a month free of live everytime.....in fact one of those repairs took 5 weeks, so as it was over a month I got two cards! Yay go me. So generous of microsoft, was totally worth losing my recently bought £300 console for over a month.
This isn't just an attack on microsoft though, it goes to any corporate ass-kissing. Like u said on disf dlc etc etc but I dont think ive ever seen anyone defend that junk. It's only "tge big three" sony, ms, and Nintendo that have some people defend them to the death.
PapaEmeritus
Member
I wouldnt even do that. I had a copy of Gears 2 that got me banned because cheevos were from before release. So if you really need to play it make sure its with an acct thatll never ever go online. After I got my box banned from that I never bought another Xbox. That was the end of that for me.
You claimed his statement implied the OP had committed a crime. Then, in the next sentence, you said no crime was committed. I disagree that his statement implied a crime was committed.
Again, timestamps can't be used in this sense to issue bans. You could unplug your ethernet cord and set your system clock to the year 2100. How would Microsoft know when those achievements were actually issued? You probably logged into Live before the game released, therefore proving the achievements were issued before the game's release. Also, as I've explained multiple times on here, profile data isn't the only thing that's uploaded to Xbox Live every time you log in. It also transmits data from every disc inserted into the console, which is stored on non-volatile RAM rather than the HDD.
neoism
Member
the store did something "wrong"<-(lol) the customer did not its his decision to not rat on the store, he my buy there often he got fucked because he bought a game early and then played it....this thread is hilarious with people defending M$...smh....
test_account
XP-39C²
Thanks for the info
Good point, i didnt think of that. I was thinking more of that a person who was active online. Also based on previous/recent unlocked and timestamped achievements.
Nobody likes to feel like they've made a poor purchasing decision. It's only natural that users invested in a platform holders' ecosystem will want to defend it. Sucks, but that's just how it is.
faceless007
Member
Fair enough. It was not a civil violation either, as there is no contract or legally binding agreement that the OP can be said to have broken. So the statement "When you buy software you buy a license," though one might agree with it in principle, does not have legal backing, at least with regard to video games.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
IISANDERII
Member
It was for a long time. By the time they owned up to their failures and faults, a friend of mine went through 11 xboxes, 2 destroyed games and an unlimited amount of grief.
I haven't trusted them since and by this account and a dozen others before, I've been right not to.
I wasn't saying it was perfect. They paid out the ass for their mistake and handled the situation to the best anyone could reasonably expect outside of a total recall of the system. You claimed it was people's attitudes that let Microsoft get away with the RROD, and I replied that they didn't get away with anything when they paid $1,000,000,000 for it.
The RROD hurt the XBOX brand and still affects it to this day, years after the issue has been "resolved". It really wasn't just a "things break" and a quick band-aid, while everyone bent over and grabbed their ankles for Microsoft.
His point was that Microsoft got away with the RROD because of people letting Microsoft walk all over them/corporate worship. I was just pointing out that that was not the case.
Your friend must have been ecstatic when he got that check in the mail for ~$1500.
test_account
XP-39C²
In some cases maybe, but this is not the only reason, and it is not like all the defending is blind defending. Generally speaking, i've seen several of complaints that i feel is unfair. I can see why people point things out/defends things in those situations. It is of course kinda subjective to what one find to be fair or unfair, and sometimes bias might play a role, but some of the defending isnt just based on people who own the systems. For example, have you ever defended anything because you felt it was unfair even though you didnt have any or little personal connection to what you're defending?
What an impressively thought out reply to the salient points that have been raised.
Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc. (9th Cir. 2010) would apply.
It basically gutted first sale for software. When the USSC declined review, that became standing precedent for the US.
Interestingly enough, it was this summer that the EUCJ determined that first sale did apply to software, even software purchased digitally.
In short, case law is diametrically opposed between the two.
In this case, Microsoft (well, 343 Industries...but essentially Microsoft) IS the dev. They absolutely deserve to be punished (in a completely legal manner) for handling situations like this the way they have. This thread has made it clear that for every case like the OP's, there's 10 more we don't hear about.
bigdaddygamebot
Member
I have a copy right next to me and its basically taunting me that I can't play it without the fear of a ban
Jesus...just play offline.
Problem solved.
Somehow I think they'll be okay.
bigdaddygamebot
Member
The devs aren't the ones banning people.
faceless007
Member
You're right, I forgot about that case and worded my statement too broadly.
Are console video games considered licensed like PC software? I would think not since the user is not confronted with an EULA like PC software is.
neoism
Member
As much as I love Halo it doesn't punish the devs 343 is micro$oft they are not independent I was getting the LE but the added cost plus this thing that didn't even happen to me... the op even kept his cool I would be so fucking mad I'd be green..if you know what I mean. I will be getting this for free now at gamestop a company I really dislike to support. But this is unacceptable...
They really need the get there shit together for the next console there is no reason for them to not be able to tell if is a legit copy or a fake....
that shit breaks thing is right on my 6th fucking XBOX I will never by another system by M$ without an instore warranty of 3 years or more.
Goodacre0081
Member
is it really that hard to wait until christmas morning to open your gifts?
They should have called back every unit that was released before the Falcon revision. These things were ticking time bombs, and were still being sold when Falcons were already available.
Sure, MS paid a high price for the RROD. But they still didn't do the right thing, which would have been admitting that the Xenon and Zephyr units should never have hit store shelves and should have been called back.
When its open and sitting right in front of you knowing you can play it? Yes it is a bit hard.