Nextbox infinity anticipation station

[Merusk]

Hade$oft.

[Modern Angel]

Just a note: Just because a company patents something, it doesn't mean they plan to use it. It just means they want to lock down the concept in case they want to use it, and so they can charge anyone who does.

Except that there's a PR dude talking about how rad TV achievements are.

[eldaec]

Well, this is.........different.

"Update: You, the shopper, won't have to pay the activation fee for a used Xbox One game - the shop will. Therefore, the price you see on a second-hand Xbox One game in a shop is the price you'll pay to be able to play it."

You buy a used game and it's somehow guaranteed to be activated? Is it somehow in the TOS or something that the shops can't sell games that are not (re)activated? 

I think they are saying the only people who can move a game off of your xbox account to another are registered retailers.

This is going to get stuck in the courts in europe for months.

Some countries over here, right of first sale is still an actual thing.

[Kageru]

That seems entirely logical. The key to own the game is largely disconnected from the physical media. They're fine with you letting your friend install from the media but he'll be buying his own license (at full price) or you can sell your license and media to a reseller with microsoft getting their cut / making it less rewarding. It also means the reseller and consumer won't have to deal with "has this key been activated" and the payment to microsoft will be hidden since it will just be a part of the shop price.

They can also make the addition of a new key to your system a trigger for the box needing to call home.

Win for everyone... well, as long as you are microsoft or a big game company, and that's all that matters.

Incidentally it was this sort of activity that earned them the moniker micro$oft a long time ago. They are a terrible tech company but really good at cutting deals where they get a healthy slice of the trade.

[Teugeus]

Bare in mind they did also say that you would be able to trade games digitally online somehow (even if you bought them on a disc), something that has been tried before, albeit unsuccessfully, with other media.

[Kageru]

Microsoft has all the pieces. The license for the game is tied to your account. Your account is tied to your other games, your xbox and possibly even your biometrics (thanks to the kinect) so you won't want to transfer. Like an MMO the install media means nothing, it's whether or not it has a valid activation key attached to it that gives it value.

I would think online transfer of the license would be trivial, especially if it's microsoft running the online shop. And apparently even gamestop will have to process re-sales (and maybe even sales) through microsofts services, so they never risk losing control of the license.

On further thought I think this is inevitable. How are the producers going to support huge budgets for glossy, but often short, triple-A games? This is a large part of the answer. And Sony will toe the line or face loss of access to big name titles. In theory it might even allow for the price of games to be re-considered or sales extended, though in practice I expect them to just leave it as is and take the profit.

[Sky]

This is going to get stuck in the courts in europe for months.

Probably just make region-blocked content, so something enabled for europe would conform to EU law.

[Phred]

This is why I still hate Microsoft and mock those who tear up and put on the white armor whenever they see the dreaded M$.

Even if Microsoft were literally Satan, typing M$ would still be fucking stupid.

How do you keep that armor so shiny and white?

[KallDrexx]

That seems entirely logical. The key to own the game is largely disconnected from the physical media. They're fine with you letting your friend install from the media but he'll be buying his own license (at full price) or you can sell your license and media to a reseller with microsoft getting their cut / making it less rewarding. It also means the reseller and consumer won't have to deal with "has this key been activated" and the payment to microsoft will be hidden since it will just be a part of the shop price.

You know, that's an interesting point.  Right now right of first sale doesn't hurt software because the key is largely detached from the physical media (usually on a piece of paper you get with the media).

However, a lot of reports indicate that the key could be on the media itself (embedded digitally or rfid type of system) and if that's the case, then does that bring right of first stale back as a legitimate argument?

[rattran]

This is why I still hate Microsoft and mock those who tear up and put on the white armor whenever they see the dreaded M$.

Even if Microsoft were literally Satan, typing M$ would still be fucking stupid.

How do you keep that armor so shiny and white?

I'm much more reasonable than Samwise, so I'll just point out that you're being a cock.

[Phred]

I'm much more reasonable than Samwise, so I'll just point out that you're being a cock.

I appreciate that. It just baffles me the need to leap to the defence of a multi-billion dollar company.

[Kageru]

However, a lot of reports indicate that the key could be on the media itself (embedded digitally or rfid type of system) and if that's the case, then does that bring right of first stale back as a legitimate argument?

I wouldn't think so. Mostly because they argue the software is a license and not a product already. But also because I doubt the "right to play" will be integrated in the disk itself. The only thing the disk needs to do is securely communicate it's identity to microsoft so they can see it's state in their database.

[eldaec]

I'm much more reasonable than Samwise, so I'll just point out that you're being a cock.

I appreciate that. It just baffles me the need to leap to the defence of a multi-billion dollar company.

Who is defending Microsoft? I only see people telling other posters to stop being a juvenile cock.

[Teleku]

I'm much more reasonable than Samwise, so I'll just point out that you're being a cock.

I appreciate that. It just baffles me the need to leap to the defence of a multi-billion dollar company.

Making fun of people typing M$ is in no way defending the company in the slightest.  Its making fun of people typing out one of the most incredibly overplayed, juvenile, nails down chalk board cringingly bad 'insults' on the internet.  Even if I was running a Mac fan site I'd make typing that a ban offence.

[Bzalthek]

I did find the trying to double down with a white knight claim pretty funny though.

[Sky]

It just baffles me the need to leap to the defence of a multi-billion dollar company.

Do you put it in your coffee?

[Ingmar]

I'm much more reasonable than Samwise, so I'll just point out that you're being a cock.

I appreciate that. It just baffles me the need to leap to the defence of a multi-billion dollar company.

They're leaping to the defense of the English language. (Speaking of which, your second sentence could use a little work.)

[HaemishM]

I'm much more reasonable than Samwise, so I'll just point out that you're being a cock.

I appreciate that. It just baffles me the need to leap to the defence of a multi-billion dollar company.

No one is leaping to Microsoft's defense. They just feel the use of dollar signs for the S looks really fucking stupid and juvenile. Like screaming "SELLOUT!" while wearing clothes bought at Old Navy.

[Pennilenko]

I appreciate that. It just baffles me the need to leap to the defence of a multi-billion dollar company.

[Paelos]

Does the used games market even exist if they stop selling crap on disks?

Because I see that market as dying anyway as we go digital download only. The key at that point will be how stupid they are about DRM on their own box.

[Sky]

Yes, the poor and rural shouldn't play video games.

[Paelos]

Yes, the poor and rural shouldn't play video games.

You're thinking today. I'm saying what if we look 5-10 years down the road in terms of broadband adoption? Where is the market then?

[Merusk]

The same as today.

Just like 5-10 years ago when people were expecting broadband to have more than a 29% adoption rate today.

ed: Hell, if anything the adoption of 4g and smartphones/ tablets eating the PC market alive means there will probably be even less wired broadband penetration in 5 years. 

[Paelos]

So your point is we're still using console disks in 10 years?

[Morat20]

Yes, the poor and rural shouldn't play video games.

You're thinking today. I'm saying what if we look 5-10 years down the road in terms of broadband adoption? Where is the market then?

Not much better than today. Because broadband in the US is basically being strangled at the root level. The providers are TV, phone, and cable people --- all of whom want to give you the slowest possible speed at the most they can squeeze out of your ass, and all of them drooling over Netflix, Google, and YouTube, all basically feeling they SHOULD be able to dip their wick in those revenues.

I forget how big a chunk of those who actually CAN get broadband have only one provider. I've got two here in Houston -- I can go with Comcast or ATT. Not exactly highly competitive. (In fact, until ATT got U-verse up and running, Comcast's internet was right up there with Comcast's pre-U-verse cable -- shitty fucking overpriced service on crappy hardware that died every six months).

[Merusk]

So your point is we're still using console disks in 10 years?

Some sort of physical medium, yes.   Unless:
1) There's a TVA-like federal push to get broadband in to rural locations
2) There's a revolution in the wireless market so you're not paying-per-bit
3) You're choosing to ignore the poor and rural US markets

While 3 is the most likely of the scenarios to happen, digital-only content also fucks places that are not the US. Australia, for one, has a data cap on even wired connections. I'm sure they're thrilled at the idea of a console patching when it feels like it in addition to only being able to download their games.

[HaemishM]

To pile onto that point, the broadband market is SO strangled right now in the US, it's dying in its crib. And the ones killing it are the assholes who stand to make the most out of it long-term if it grows but can't see past the short term benefits of their monopoly positions as to allow it to happen. They are too concerned about next quarter to bother spending money to upgrade their infrastructure, but then want to bitch at the government for not spending government money to upgrade the infrastructure (or pay them to do it). Comcast, ATT, Time-Warner Cable, Cox, all the big players are killing their own markets and ignoring the places where it's difficult to run a line.

[Sky]

Discs? Doubtful. Optical is dead. Long live flash memory.

The new macs dumped optical drives, I panicked for all of 3 seconds after opening the first one. Then I just used disc images for all the optical media and the last few things I bought came on flash drives.

And I live in a place with acceptable broadband and I can afford it. But I remember not having access to broadband at all and being homeless. So it puts a certain perspective on these kinds of discussions. Not to mention one of my primary job functions it to serve people without access to broadband or computers.

edit to counterpoint Haemmy for a sec: In fairness to Time Warner (the fuck did I just say), they're starting to make a serious push into the rural areas around here. My mother finally got cable last year for the first time, after they swore up and down for years that it wasn't feasible to do so.

[Kageru]

Does the used games market even exist if they stop selling crap on disks?

The used game market is living on borrowed time mostly because the producers  and platforms want that money.

They might keep disks around for a bit as an alternative to download for those who are bandwidth starved, but you'll still need internet to actually register and be able to play it.

[UnSub]

Yes, the poor and rural shouldn't play video games.

They aren't the target market though. They probably don't even have iPads.

[Flinky]

Australia, for one, has a data cap on even wired connections. I'm sure they're thrilled at the idea of a console patching when it feels like it in addition to only being able to download their games.

You remembered us! 

[Maledict]

From what everyone is saying here it sounds like Microsoft have created a console purely for the American market but that it needs a European level of broadband infrastructure to run.

Seems like a good idea?

[Jeff Kelly]

Well there is another issue. Just as game publishers want the used game market to disappear (or at least to get all of the money made by used game sales) broadband providers want a huge piece of the revenue Google and Co. make with their broadband infrastructure.

So they intentionally limit your bandwidth or put a data cap on your connection so that they then can sell you additional bandwidth or force you or the internet companies to pay for managed services (additional fee so that certain services don't come off your data allowance)

Germany's biggest broadband provider for example just introduced a 75 GB data cap on all broadband connections. Go over and your internet gets either throttled to 384 kBit/s or you have to pay an additional fee for a few gigabytes more. Since it's the largest IP doing that most of the others will surely follow eventually.

This will become more common because all providers are envious of the money Google, Amazon and Co. make and they want a piece of the action.

If this gets more common than even a great internet connection (I have a 50/10 MBit/s connection for example) will not automatically mean that you can download games. The 75 GB cap is probably just a single Blu Ray game before my monthly allowance is up.

No, if you want to sell games even in broadband country, there will probably need to be discs or flash storage of some kind involved for the foreseeable future.

Most broadband contracts around the world already include caps as part of the fine print even if they are not enforced right now. It may just be a passage like "we reserve the right to throttle you if you excessively use your internet connection" but I'm positive that even some of you who think they have unlimited internet have such a clause hiding somewhere in your contract.

The equipment with which IPs could enforce bandwidth caps across the board has been available for some time now and it sells like hot cakes. IPs don't want to just be "dumb pipes" and in their quest to either extort more money out of Microsoft, Google, Apple, Amazon and Co. or their customers (pay a fee and XBox live will not be deducted off of your monthly data allowance e.g.) shit like this will become more common, even in places where you nominally have great internet.

If I were Sony or MS I wouldn't bet on discs vanishing any time soon.

[edit: typos and grammar]

[Teugeus]

It's a bit like a cable provider saying you have a limit on the number of shows you can watch a month. Imagine if someone tried that, the outrage that would cause. Why is internet usage any different ?

[Merusk]

Because it made sense when bandwith was costly due to limited pipes and having to ship across copper cable phone lines.  Now it's seen as the standard so nobody questions it.