Internet is the killer app and it's your ISP who is holding you back

[jasondefaoite]

That was the only restriction MS talked about up to that point, so that is the only restriction you are aware of.

 

My question was, once one of the 10 people from the list were playing say game A from your library, could one of the other 9 play another game from your library, say game B, at the same time? This was never answered by Microsoft despite your assertion it was.

 

Do you honestly believe MS would allow 11 people to fully play and complete a single player game from only 1 sale?

 

I complained about the additional DRM microsoft were planning with the xbox. 24 hour check ins, limitations on resale. I didn't gain anything from this, MS did.

You replied saying but you get family sharing, ability to play at your friends place, no disk swaps by living with the DRM.

 

I agreed no disk swaps was nice, but wasn't worth the loss of the ability to sell the game as before. However I wanted to point out I could still play at my friends place by bringing the disk. So this wasn't a gain for me. I did not complain about the ability to do so online. I complained about the additional DRM which for me had no pay off.

[xWhiplash]

Why didn't MS make a middle-ground decision?

 

By default, no internet is required at all.

 

If you want to share game X through family sharing, game X needs the 24-hour check in for you and everybody else playing your game.

 

If game Y is not shared, do not require internet.

 

Seems like a good idea to me.

 

But anyway, I do not plan to share my games with 10 other people.  So why was I FORCED into the always online BS?

 

And really, downloading a game at a friends house is more convenient than taking the disk with you?  Really?  Okay what if your friend has slower internet?  I doubt you can start playing before the first MB is downloaded.  It is probably like WoW where you need to wait for the core data to be downloaded (I think it was 5 GB for WoW?).

 

Taking a disk to a friends house is the easiest.  You do not need to navigate to the store and initiate a download.  You put the disk in and hit play.

 

And you guys must be horrible about your disks.  Even my old Playstation 1 disks that have been beaten up over the years still work.  What do you guys do, play with knives around the disks?  Not to mention Blu-Ray has extra coating to protect against damage.

 

No, it is not the ISP's fault.  They are a business just like Microsoft.  Is it beneficial to offer internet to every single house in the country?  Sometimes wires go bad, sometimes a driver crashes into the pole or whever the main internet line comes in the neighborhood.  Sometimes storms knock your internet out for a week.  

 

So let me ask you this.  If somebody gets a Xbox One that does not want to use ANY of the "online" features, you think it is STILL okay to FORCE an always-on connection?  I get a damn game console to play games.  I choose to purchase the games on a disk and play it offline.  "Why not use a 360 then?"  What about all those new Xbox One games?  What about better graphics?  What about the possibility of new game franchises starting and are only available on the newer consoles?

 

If you played both Playstation 1 and Playstation 2....why?  Just stick with Playstation 1!

 

You do know that there are still some of us gamers that appreciate advancements in gaming like faster hardware which offers better graphics, physics, and more.

 

When did we become a group of people that just accepted anything a company does?  This is the same thing with Windows 8.  People keep saying Microsoft can do whatever they want....uh no they cannot.  If Microsoft announced Xbox One and it was ONLY able to play games directly from Microsoft, would that be okay?  A company cannot just do whatever they want.  Why do companies reverse their decisions if a petition is made and popular?  Why do businesses change when people protest?

[JonnyLH]

That was the only restriction MS talked about up to that point, so that is the only restriction you are aware of.

 

My question was, once one of the 10 people from the list were playing say game A from your library, could one of the other 9 play another game from your library, say game B, at the same time? This was never answered by Microsoft despite your assertion it was.

 

Do you honestly believe MS would allow 11 people to fully play and complete a single player game from only 1 sale?

 

I complained about the additional DRM microsoft were planning with the xbox. 24 hour check ins, limitations on resale. I didn't gain anything from this, MS did.

You replied saying but you get family sharing, ability to play at your friends place, no disk swaps by living with the DRM.

 

I agreed no disk swaps was nice, but wasn't worth the loss of the ability to sell the game as before. However I wanted to point out I could still play at my friends place by bringing the disk. So this wasn't a gain for me. I did not complain about the ability to do so online. I complained about the additional DRM which for me had no pay off.

Answer me this, hows that any different to if 1 person buys a game and lends it out to 10 people? 

 

You made a claim which showed no understanding of family sharing, I never said everything was answered.

[Showan]

Take it like a little bitch, you mean? No thanks, that's not how I roll. I will "kick and scream" all ****ing day long if that's what it takes to invoke change.

 

People are currently busy overthrowing their governments, and you don't even have the strength of character to stand up and be counted over something like this!?

 

I will not brush it off and go elsewhere, I will make clear what I want for my hard earned money.

 

You think Microsoft whats me to go else where? They have made it quite apparent that they do not.

 

I take it you did not read my post...

I never once said what you are saying...

I'm saying do what you have to do, because they are going to do what they have to do...

There are worse things in the world, going on...

 

 

[jasondefaoite]

Answer me this, hows that any different to if 1 person buys a game and lends it out to 10 people? 

 

You made a claim which showed no understanding of family sharing, I never said everything was answered.

 

MS specifically added DRM to prevent this kind of lending of games, or reselling of games. Yet you believe after locking that down with DRM, they would then go and allow 11 people to play and complete a game from 1 sale. Squirt away.

 

 

Actually, that's exactly what you said.

What? Did you even read the documentation around family sharing? The information was released on Xbox Wire, Majornelson etc.

 

When 1 person was playing that game, no-one else could play it. The original owner of the game could always start playing their game. Simple rules which make the platform highly beneficial.

 

 

That was the only restriction

[FiB3R]

 

Take it like a little bitch, you mean? No thanks, that's not how I roll. I will "kick and scream" all ****ing day long if that's what it takes to invoke change.

 

People are currently busy overthrowing their governments, and you don't even have the strength of character to stand up and be counted over something like this!?

 

I will not brush it off and go elsewhere, I will make clear what I want for my hard earned money.

 

You think Microsoft whats me to go else where? They have made it quite apparent that they do not.

 

 

I take it you did not read my post...

I never once said what you are saying...

I'm saying do what you have to do, because they are going to do what they have to do...

There are worse things in the world, going on...

 

 

Of course I read your post, I replied to it directly.

 

 

"People need to accept this is a 2way street and not a 1 way deal..." - Take it like a little bitch, you mean? No thanks, that's not how I roll.

 

"But don't kick and scream that they putting them in place..." - I will "kick and scream" all ****ing day long if that's what it takes to invoke change.

 

"Brush it off and go where the rules are to your liking" - I will not brush it off and go elsewhere, I will make clear what I want for my hard earned money.

 

Did you read mine?

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

I want to know how anyone can still say the XBox One Family Sharing plan was going to let 11 people play the same copy of one game. This has never been proven as fact, and in fact, a few pretty damn reputable sources say quite the opposite.

 

The truth is, the exact facts of the details still remain a mystery and probably always will. The only people that are making it out to be something special are MS related sites and employees. Of course they are going to do that. it is their job to make everything seem better than it actually is. That is called good marketing.

 

So please, stop referencing The Family Sharing Plan like it is known exactly what is was going to be. It has never been stated as fact what it is and is not. That is what we do know for sure.

[JonnyLH]

MS specifically added DRM to prevent this kind of lending of games, or reselling of games. Yet you believe after locking that down with DRM, they would then go and allow 11 people to play and complete a game from 1 sale. Squirt away.

 

 

Actually, that's exactly what you said.

There's one thing which is stopping you from having some sense regarding this conversion. DRM = Digitial Rights Management. DRM <> Copy Protection.

I want to know how anyone can still say the XBox One Family Sharing plan was going to let 11 people play the same copy of one game. This has never been proven as fact, and in fact, a few pretty damn reputable sources say quite the opposite.

 

The truth is, the exact facts of the details still remain a mystery and probably always will. The only people that are making it out to be something special are MS related sites and employees. Of course they are going to do that. it is their job to make everything seem better than it actually is. That is called good marketing.

 

So please, stop referencing The Family Sharing Plan like it is known exactly what is was going to be. It has never been stated as fact what it is and is not. That is what we do know for sure.

What even?

 

It was announced and publicly mentioned and potentially is a system which we could see watered down at launch. One person at a time could play a game belonging to one other person, how is that any different to any use case now? Minus the transport/delivery to get the physical copy to the house. The family sharing idea is NO DIFFERENT.

[jasondefaoite]

Why didn't MS make a middle-ground decision?

 

....

 

And you guys must be horrible about your disks.  Even my old Playstation 1 disks that have been beaten up over the years still work.  What do you guys do, play with knives around the disks?  Not to mention Blu-Ray has extra coating to protect against damage.

 

What they could have done was kept the disks as they were in the 360, with the same freedom to lend, sell the disks on as before.

 

Then for those wanting to have diskless games, allow them to purchase those online from XBL store. Then those have the additional DRM of 24 hr check ins, limitations on reselling, lending, but then have the other features those people wanted like family sharing and the ability to go round to a mate's place and play there without a disk.

 

But I guess the reason was they felt very few would opt for the additional DRM limitations if given a choice.

[+Anarkii Subscriber²]

I blame Microsoft for not giving the money to our government to get our national broadband service happening faster. Fibre to the home here is still a couple of years off, as someone who pays my bills to my ISP, I would think Microsoft should give Optus (my ISP) money so I can play my Sony PS4 at decent speeds when its released.
So yep, totally agree with OP

[jasondefaoite]

There's one thing which is stopping you from having some sense regarding this conversion. DRM = Digitial Rights Management. DRM <> Copy Protection.

 

Again, read back on what I posted.

 

The 360 has DRM. The license is tied to the disk and there is copy protection.

 

What I said was the Xbox one has is ADDITIONAL DRM. For no benefit to me but plenty of benefit to MS.

I want to know how anyone can still say the XBox One Family Sharing plan was going to let 11 people play the same copy of one game. This has never been proven as fact, and in fact, a few pretty damn reputable sources say quite the opposite.

 

If I were to be kind, I would say they were optimistic. If I were to be unkind, I'd say they are ****ing delusional.

 

As for the rest of what you posted... spot on.

[JonnyLH]

Again, read back on what I posted.

 

The 360 has DRM. The license is tied to the disk and there is copy protection.

 

What I said was the Xbox one has is ADDITIONAL DRM. For no benefit to me but plenty of benefit to MS.

Sharing your games with 10 friends and a full digital library with Steam like sales isn't a benefit to you?

 

Also, please inform me why adding the online check-in benefits MS?

[jasondefaoite]

Sharing your games with 10 friends and a full digital library with Steam like sales isn't a benefit to you?

 

Also, please inform me why adding the online check-in benefits MS?

 

Why are you going in circles. Family sharing would not have been what you think it was going to be. It's clear. Only you appear blind to it.

 

Online checks ... prevents the game being lent or sold on 2nd hand. The publishers feel they are losing out some $ from 2nd hand sales, and want this locked down.

 

You do realise MS is a publisher of games too? :pinch:

[JonnyLH]

Why are you going in circles. Family sharing would not have been what you think it was going to be. It's clear. Only you appear blind to it.

 

Online checks ... prevents the game being lent or sold on 2nd hand. The publishers feel they are losing out some $ from 2nd hand sales, and want this locked down.

 

You do realise MS is a publisher of games too? :pinch:

Because you're too dumb to look behind your reasoning to understand anyone elses.

 

There was one thing certain and confirmed regarding family sharing. You could share one game with a group of 10 people and only one person can play it once at a time. Why is that so ****ing hard to believe? Your clouding fact with your own opinion that every corporation is out to make it worse for the consumer. Family Sharing does not create any scenario any different to physical game sharing. So why is it such a big thing that MS was doing this? It isn't.

 

You still could trade your game in with the check-in? Don't see your point. 

 

The publishers feel they're loosing out? You really don't have a clue about business do you. Most of the cut from games which are sold in stores goes to the retailer. Nearly a whopping $30 of the $50. If you take that away from the retailer and put more power in the publishers and MS's hands you have a much more flexible market where you can drive prices down with no hesitation. The publisher and MS get most of the cut, but that means more to the consumer because they invest that money back in the market where it came from. Sense, you have none.

 

Microsoft <> Microsoft Studios

 

Do you think they all just sit in one big room? Jesus.

[jasondefaoite]

Because you're too dumb to look behind your reasoning to understand anyone elses.

Pot ... say hello to Kettle.

 

There was one thing certain and confirmed regarding family sharing. You could share one game with a group of 10 people and only one person can play it at a time. Why is that so ****ing hard to believe?

 

Did they say if the person could play enough of the game to actually complete it, negating the need to purchase it themselves. No? Really? Wow, I wonder why that was.

 

You still could trade your game in with the check-in? Don't see your point. 

 

Yes I know you don't see the point. I understood your blindness from a few posts back. Trade your game in. Really? And without the publishers ok to do so. Oh wait a minute...

 

The publishers feel they're loosing out? You really don't have a clue about business do you. Most of the cut from games which are sold in stores goes to the retailer. Nearly a whopping $30 of the $50. If you take that away from the retailer and put more power in the publishers and MS's hands you have a much more flexible market where you can drive prices down with no hesitation. The publisher and MS get most of the cut, but that means more to the consumer because they invest that money back in the market where it came from. Sense, you have none.

 

Microsoft <> Microsoft Studios

 

Do you think they all just sit in one big room? Jesus.

 

You are really dreaming if you feel this would result in lower prices. Between this and family sharing, I can see you are a glass 3/4 full kinda guy. Just as well for you MS did a 180 here, coz come November you would have been sorely disappointed.

[TheGhostWalker]

This post was suppose to be about, how a company (no matter if we think if it were right or wrong to do so) who had a vision and based it around always being connected to the web, no matter what... And how people kick and scream not fair because their ISP's lack of infrastructure isn't up to snuff or they just don't have Internet at all is blaming the company for this...

Where they believe the Internet is that killer feature...

And guess what? In parts of the world it is your ISP who is holding you back, from seeing the vision a company is trying to head towards... Rather you like their vision or not.

Nothing more... Nothing less...

People are not screaming and kicking because of the lack of infrastructure of their ISP's. People are screaming and kicking because of the lack of freedom they get on something they pay a lot for...

 

The always-on feature of the X1 is a restriction feature. The no games-disc-sharing, is a restriction feature, the kinect-needs-always-a-connection is a restriction feature...

[JonnyLH]

Pot ... say hello to Kettle.

 

 

Did they say if the person could play enough of the game to actually complete it, negating the need to purchase it themselves. No? Really? Wow, I wonder why that was.

 

 

Yes I know you don't see the point. I understood your blindness from a few posts back. Trade your game in. Really? And without the publishers ok to do so. Oh wait a minute...

 

 

You are really dreaming if you feel this would result in lower prices. Between this and family sharing, I can see you are a glass 3/4 full kinda guy. Just as well for you MS did a 180 here, coz come November you would have been sorely disappointed.

My points still stand. Since you never countered my arguments and was just simply obnoxious. 

 

One thing I missed out was trade-ins as you know were based on publishers discretion. Doesn't mean you can't trade in. I only can imagine EA doing it, but that's EA.

 

I'm not dreaming, I'm using business knowledge to explain an idea for how the market could of been. You've taken out the retailer which means more margins to the provider and publisher, which means better quality games and hardware. Also means retailers pricing more competitive. I just don't see how you can be so narrow minded.

[Showan]

I never wanted this post to become so heated...

 

I wanted to point out that a company made a product...built it around the web...

and how us the consumer complained about our respective internet connection sucks and we can't go along for the ride

and are blaming Microsoft for it...

And how the consumer should do what they have to do... 

As in, push your ISP to step their game up, go where needs/demands are met...

 

 

 

Never about DRM...

Just being online at all time... rather home or not...

 

They are still focused on an online world...

Just because DRM is gone... XB1 is still built around being online basically at all times rather you are home or not...

 

 

I did not expect any rage to kick in on this topic...

But passion does breed it sometimes... LOL...

I guess if the rage is valid... COOL...

But if its Blind...well we all know how blind rage goes...

[Nick H. Supervisor]

I wanted to point out that a company made a product...built it around the web...

and how us the consumer complained about our respective internet connection sucks and we can't go along for the ride

and are blaming Microsoft for it...

And how the consumer should do what they have to do... 

As in, push your ISP to step their game up, go where needs/demands are met...

I have no words for this. You have boggled my mind, and not in a good way. :no:

[jasondefaoite]

My points still stand. Since you never countered my arguments and was just simply obnoxious. 

 

One thing I missed out was trade-ins as you know were based on publishers discretion. Doesn't mean you can't trade in. I only can imagine EA doing it, but that's EA.

 

I'm not dreaming, I'm using business knowledge to explain an idea for how the market could of been. You've taken out the retailer which means more margins to the provider and publisher, which means better quality games and hardware. Also means retailers pricing more competitive. I just don't see how you can be so narrow minded.

 

What points exactly?

 

Family Sharing? Feature for the gullible. MS specific refusal to answer questions on the details of how this would work should tell you all you need to know here.

 

No disk swapping - Yes, nice, but not worth giving up the ability to lend or resell games as we currently can

 

Playing at a friends house - Can do that now with a disk.

 

Those points?

 

Let me ask you something Mr Business man. MS came out and say the Xbox one games will sell at the same price as 360 games. They locked down the 2nd hand market and the ability to share games. Publishers could demand a fee for the ability to sell the games on, getting more money than they could under the 360 scheme. Question I want to ask, why can't the games be cheaper now. Why should you agree to all this BS on some vague promise of how it would be in the future?

 

I guess MS wasn't as confident in this business plan as you seem to be. Do they know something you don't?

[TheGhostWalker]

I never wanted this post to become so heated...

 

I wanted to point out that a company made a product...built it around the web...

and how us the consumer complained about our respective internet connection sucks and we can't go along for the ride

and are blaming Microsoft for it...

And how the consumer should do what they have to do... 

As in, push your ISP to step their game up, go where needs/demands are met...

 

 

 

Never about DRM...

Just being online at all time... rather home or not...

 

They are still focused on an online world...

Just because DRM is gone... XB1 is still built around being online basically at all times rather you are home or not...

 

 

I did not expect any rage to kick in on this topic...

But passion does breed it sometimes... LOL...

I guess if the rage is valid... COOL...

But if its Blind...well we all know how blind rage goes...

Have you actually READ my post? https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1162338-internet-is-the-killer-app-and-its-your-isp-who-is-holding-you-back/?view=findpost&p=595796104

No one complains about their internet connection, it's about the draconian restriction measures.

 

 

 

Just because DRM is gone... XB1 is still built around being online basically at all times rather you are home or not...

 

Always online = DRM

no way of sharing a gamedisc for testing a game =  DRM

Kinect HAS TO BE CONNECTED = DRM

 

DRM won't and never will be gone. It's just getting worse and worse. That's the whole point of the consumers kicking and screaming about the X1.

[JonnyLH]

What points exactly?

 

Family Sharing? Feature for the gullible. MS specific refusal to answer questions on the details of how this would work should tell you all you need to know here.

 

No disk swapping - Yes, nice, but not worth giving up the ability to lend or resell games as we currently can

 

Playing at a friends house - Can do that now with a disk.

 

Those points?

 

Let me ask you something Mr Business man. MS came out and say the Xbox one games will sell at the same price as 360 games. They locked down the 2nd hand market and the ability to share games. Publishers could demand a fee for the ability to sell the games on, getting more money than they could under the 360 scheme. Question I want to ask, why can't the games be cheaper now. Why should you agree to all this BS on some vague promise of how it would be in the future?

 

I guess MS wasn't as confident in this business plan as you seem to be. Do they know something you don't?

A official and announced feature is a feature for the gullible? I'm not even going to expand on that. You just sit in your bubble.

 

The 2 points which you made are more convenient with digital and gives you no chance to actually break the disc. Why the hate?

 

Family Sharing was what made online check-in, that with digital game library. So you are excluding the main point to why an online check-in was there in the first place and disregarding it as a feature for the gullible? Enough said.

 

Also regarding the 360 games market. The games on-demand feature isn't a requirement for games and games get selected to go on there a long time after games release. Whereas with the X1, its a requirement for every game to be featured as a digital download as day one. This will drive sales away from the retailer which will drive more competition due to downloading online being more convenient. With power away from the retailer and with MS having more control over of the actual sale of games, publishers will be more leveraging in regarding deductions to their sales online since they don't have to think about the distribution, production and the actual physical copy with the margin of the retailer. Simples.

[MikeChipshop Member]

But we've already covered this above. It's not the ISP's fault for not having the technology in place. It would be Microsoft's fault for assuming that the technology is in place and moving forwards with their idea. Ultimately it would end up hurting them. Not the customers, not the ISP's, but Microsoft.

 

But surely someone has to make the first move? If it was left up to ISP's we probably wouldn't have gone beyond dial-up.

 

 

Always online = DRM

no way of sharing a gamedisc for testing a game =  DRM

Kinect HAS TO BE CONNECTED = DRM

 

DRM won't and never will be gone. It's just getting worse and worse. That's the whole point of the consumers kicking and screaming about the X1.

 

You're just holding on to the fallacy that all DRM is bad, well i hate to say this and it's not going to make me any friends around here but, all DRM is not bad.

 

DRM = Digital Rights Management. The continued use and expansion of the digital world relies upon a solid implementation of digital rights, fact.

[fusi0n]

Ever since the Xbox One reveal, all I could do is daydream of the possibilities.

People complained about DRM, and how it was pure evil.

People laugh and tease how the cloud is a gimmick.

And people cried that their Internet sucks, and that it wouldn't be fair to them.

Well guess what people?

Is this Microsofts fault your ISP sucks?

Let's face it, the Internet has been the killer App for console gaming, ever since the Sega Dreamcast days.

Microsoft has taken that vision and set a bar with Xbox Live.

Broadband Connection only on the OG XBOX was the best thing Microsoft ever did for console gaming.

If they didn't, bother then, we would probably still have a dial up modem on the back of our consoles.

Now Microsoft is trying to show us an even better Online World (or Universe, I should say) with the Xbox One. And all I hear is complaints about how the Internet sucks where you live.

If a ISP takes your money, you have a right to demand better service.

If the Internet can complain that much about Micorosfts policies and get them overturned, why can't that same energy and effort be used to get your ISP to step their game up?

I use to think "Cloud" was a gimmick too, until I met an engineer a few years back who showed my class how cloud computing works. And the benefits if used right. Borrowing resources from another machine to boost performance of your machine is amazing.

Of course a lot of this depends on bandwidth. But let me ask this, does anyone honestly think today's bandwidths and bottlenecks gonna be the same for the whole 10+ years that the XB1 is out?

There are ISP's that are trying to get fiber from the node all the way to the house here where I live, instead of just stopping at the pole, and coppering out to the house.

Google is already showing a better way for internet. We should be cheering this on, and calling your ISP, and demanding better. If a company that isn't even an ISP can do it, what's your ISP's excuse?

Don't settle people.

Remember the Internet is the Killer feature.

You obviously have never had windstream before.  

 

I would love to enjoy all the extras.. but when you pay for 12Meg and only get 2-3Meg.. not much you can do.. You can call and they can send someone out but it never gets fixed.. Hell the the State of GA is actually investigating Windstream for ###### speeds..

 

I will get Charter in a month(if it is finished out here) and all my internet issues wil go away... 

[TheGhostWalker]

But surely someone has to make the first move? If it was left up to ISP's we probably wouldn't have gone beyond dial-up.

 

You're just holding on to the fallacy that all DRM is bad, well i hate to say this and it's not going to make me any friends around here but, all DRM is not bad.

 

DRM = Digital Rights Management. The continued use and expansion of the digital world relies upon a solid implementation of digital rights, fact.

I'm not trying to say that ALL DRM is bad. But some parts of the DRM in X1 is too much. I was trying to prove a point that because of these measures people are kicking and screaming about the X1, and not because of their ISP's.

I understand DRM is necessary, but not too much or people will see it as the devil in the end (sort of speaking).