Xbox One

[PaperBoyx703]

Re: Xbox One

It's funny how before the switch people were complaining and saying MS needs to drop the DRM etc..
now that they did it they are getting slammed for changing their "vision" to make a buck.

Seriously looks like no matter what they would have done, some would be anti MS all the way.

Honestly I think that roots from the same belief that they shouldn't have implemented DRM, used game policy, etc. in the first place and then to make matters worse of how they, certain key reps of MS, poorly handled the backlash and consumer feedback. It comes off as if they didn't have the interests of the community, MS fans or whatever from the start and then once the pre-order figures and polls starting coming in, they want to back down from what they felt so strongly about where they wanted to take their system in the blink of an eye.

I don't think switchers or any gamer should be upset about them changing their policies,because I think it sent a powerful message about the community. Yes there are anit-MS guys, Sony Fanboys and etc but I think its more along the lines of ones not being able to fully wash out the bad taste MS may have left from a short time ago.

[kingkilla56]

Re: Xbox One

Im glad they flipped. I never really hated on them for doing that. Its smart of them; now I plan on getting an X1 way sooner than I had before. But Im still annoyed that they tried to pull this off in the first place. The concept of it all is still mind boggling to me.

[Lieutenant Dan]

Re: Xbox One

When I first heard the original 'final' details at E3 about the X1, I was a bit letdown with the DRM/no used games thing, no more trading in my games at Gamestop. All that was going to do was make me buy less games for X1 because I couldn't offload games anymore. I'd have to make VERY careful choices.

I also wasn't keen on having to have Kinect being integral to the operation of X1. I just want to relax with a controller and game; not talk to my console or wave my arms around to navigate screens.

As to the always online thing they had proposed, didn't care about that too much either really. DirecTv probably always knows what I'm doing too LOL.

Now, with the 'new' news, I'm happier as a consumer that I can still do game-trading with GS or BB if a game doesn't work out for me or I just don't need it anymore.

But that Kinect is still there, LOL.

Right now I have funds for neither, but PS4 is first in line. I'm sure I'll get a X1 next year sometime, though. I will be following the X1 to see if any changes happen with the Kinect but based on what you guys are saying I shouldn't expect any.

[AUChase]

Re: Xbox One

It seems Microsoft wasn't as keen on being front runners for new technology and a new way to game as some on here would have had you believe with early impressions of this console, especially if it meant taking a hit in Sales.

The defending of it started after E3 and then when they flipped their policies upside down, people are still fighting to defend Microsoft's vision for gamers.

If it's the console for you, that's fine. I don't think anyone is losing sleep over what you purchase with the money you earn, but is it that hard to acknowledge that Microsoft was really just out to get the most they could out of gamers ? It's that very naive mentality that gave Microsoft the confidence to try pulling this **** on us gamers in the first place.

At the end of the day, I think I'm glad they changed their policy and I hope everyone who gets this console enjoys the hell out of it. Sony isn't innocent either, but at least they aren't blatantly slapping gamers in the face and expecting to get away with it. They would be burned at the stake for trying to pull something similar.

I feel guilty just going home and playing my 360 at night now

Just my thoughts on the situation and most of it is very opinion driven so I don't expect everyone to agree.

[mestevo]

Re: Xbox One

When I first heard the original 'final' details at E3 about the X1, I was a bit letdown with the DRM/no used games thing, no more trading in my games at Gamestop. All that was going to do was make me buy less games for X1 because I couldn't offload games anymore. I'd have to make VERY careful choices.

I also wasn't keen on having to have Kinect being integral to the operation of X1. I just want to relax with a controller and game; not talk to my console or wave my arms around to navigate screens.

As to the always online thing they had proposed, didn't care about that too much either really. DirecTv probably always knows what I'm doing too LOL.

Now, with the 'new' news, I'm happier as a consumer that I can still do game-trading with GS or BB if a game doesn't work out for me or I just don't need it anymore.

But that Kinect is still there, LOL.

Right now I have funds for neither, but PS4 is first in line. I'm sure I'll get a X1 next year sometime, though. I will be following the X1 to see if any changes happen with the Kinect but based on what you guys are saying I shouldn't expect any.

Trading in retail games was never off the table and would have been available either way, likely at Gamestop and almost certainly at BB (who just entered into a big agreement w/ MS). The only caveat was an undefined 'participating retailers' is all.

is it that hard to acknowledge that Microsoft was really just out to get the most they could out of gamers ?

Are we still pretending MS is the exclusive profiteer of gamers? Have you seen the prices on the unnecessarily proprietary Vita memory cards? The proliferation of online passes, season passes, day 1 DLC, etc. There's nothing unique about what they were doing, they're a business. They tried to innovate and were met with backlash that caused them to take a step back. At least they are agile enough to make these moves.

[bigfnjoe96]

Not to mention no more free multi player via PS+. Yet that get's glossed over because JT announced NO DRM & sell your games @ will

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4 Beta

[ubernoob]

Re: Xbox One

Trading in retail games was never off the table and would have been available either way, likely at Gamestop and almost certainly at BB (who just entered into a big agreement w/ MS). The only caveat was an undefined 'participating retailers' is all.



Are we still pretending MS is the exclusive profiteer of gamers? Have you seen the prices on the unnecessarily proprietary Vita memory cards? The proliferation of online passes, season passes, day 1 DLC, etc. There's nothing unique about what they were doing, they're a business. They tried to innovate and were met with backlash that caused them to take a step back. At least they are agile enough to make these moves.

The trading of games never was, but selling your games on eBay/Craigslist (where you get the best money back on them) and possibly Mom&Pop Shops (though this one is just a guess) was. Almost every game I've purchased non-digitally is from the little local stores, so seeing something that could hurt them was relevant to my interests.

Agreed on the second part. There is also pushback against all of those practices, though. If there wasn't, EA wouldn't have been voted "Worst Company in America" in (what equates to a meaningless and somewhat biased) poll.

I can't speak about the Vita and if they received any pushback because I have no real interest in the Vita at all so I haven't ever really read news on it aside from that it's been labelled a flop by plenty of people.

Props to MS for changing things for the better, but even they had to realize that the flip-flopping and blatant money grabbing would turn some people off.

Edit:

Not to mention no more free multi player via PS+. Yet that get's glossed over because JT announced NO DRM & sell your games @ will

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4 Beta

Just saw this. I don't think it's being "glossed over because they announced no DRM and selling your games @ will." People with PS+ know the value they get.

A) It's cheap. 50 dollars for a year.
B) You get much more in return. Here's a list of some of the games you get for free when you have PS+. Sleeping Dogs, Uncharted 3, X-Com: Enemy Unknown, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Saint's Row: The Third, Plants Vs. Zombies, Tomb Raider: Underworld, Far Cry 2, Super Street Fight II The who cares XTREME edition. Heck, the EU PSN is getting Battlefield 3 next month for free.

So yeah... Does it suck that free online play is gone? For some, yes. For most, Sony did enough in return with their PS+ in the last few years that it really doesn't matter to them.

[VDusen04]

Re: Xbox One

Honestly I think that roots from the same belief that they shouldn't have implemented DRM, used game policy, etc. in the first place and then to make matters worse of how they, certain key reps of MS, poorly handled the backlash and consumer feedback. It comes off as if they didn't have the interests of the community, MS fans or whatever from the start and then once the pre-order figures and polls starting coming in, they want to back down from what they felt so strongly about where they wanted to take their system in the blink of an eye.

I don't think switchers or any gamer should be upset about them changing their policies,because I think it sent a powerful message about the community. Yes there are anit-MS guys, Sony Fanboys and etc but I think its more along the lines of ones not being able to fully wash out the bad taste MS may have left from a short time ago.

Pretty on point. There can definitely be a sense of principle involved. In my case, I initially figured I'd just stick with XBox (I have only a 360 right now). Then, a lot of the information on the new console seemed to include many things of which I was personally not in favor. The releases, the interviews, the snide comments, it felt altogether misguided, as if XBox was trying to pull something on me.

Anyhow, when change was made that I favored, on one hand the feeling was, "Oh, nice. That's a move in the right direction." But on the other, I admit there's still a heaping load of unease and distrust (and some remaining aspects of the system I'm still not in favor of).

Maybe it's like if LeBron James made his decision to leave for Miami in '10 and did his little pre-party and his "it's gonna be easy" stuff but eventually decided shortly thereafter that he somehow wanted to come back to Cleveland immediately (impossible, but this is merely hypothetical). I think it'd be totally understandable if Cleveland fans didn't automatically just re-cherish and embrace him back with open arms simply because they ultimately got what they wanted. They'd likely warm up to him with time, but it's not always a clear "If-Then" situation.

I think it's the same with Microsoft. A lot of people will be forever alienated while some are likely to stay a little salty for a while before re-emerging as supporters. And of course, some still may just not like their direction and opt for an alternative.

[PAPERNUT]

Re: Xbox One

It seems Microsoft wasn't as keen on being front runners for new technology and a new way to game as some on here would have had you believe with early impressions of this console, especially if it meant taking a hit in Sales.

The defending of it started after E3 and then when they flipped their policies upside down, people are still fighting to defend Microsoft's vision for gamers.

If it's the console for you, that's fine. I don't think anyone is losing sleep over what you purchase with the money you earn, but is it that hard to acknowledge that Microsoft was really just out to get the most they could out of gamers ? It's that very naive mentality that gave Microsoft the confidence to try pulling this **** on us gamers in the first place.

At the end of the day, I think I'm glad they changed their policy and I hope everyone who gets this console enjoys the hell out of it. Sony isn't innocent either, but at least they aren't blatantly slapping gamers in the face and expecting to get away with it. They would be burned at the stake for trying to pull something similar.

I feel guilty just going home and playing my 360 at night now

Just my thoughts on the situation and most of it is very opinion driven so I don't expect everyone to agree.

Excellent post and I agree 100%. I work retail, so I understand trying to make a profit, accesorizing, and all that, but there is a point in the sale when you can go beyond providing a product to fit a need to nickel and diming someone. MS crossed that line in my mind and became that used car salesman that everyone hates on stage. They basically said give us your money now, we will give you the details on everything later. Our way or the highway pal. We don't care what you gamers want, we know better....

I felt the same after all this as you did. I had three 360s and sold them all as I just could not support them anymore. If it was Sony I would have done the same.

[AUChase]

Re: Xbox One

I just said Sony wasn't innocent either. They just weren't BLATANTLY coming out and slapping gamers in the face. I didn't mean to imply that Microsoft is the root of all evil with methods to get extra money out of gamers, just that they are extremely obvious about it.

Online passes are certainly a form of controlling gamer's purchases, but season pass and first day DLC is all optional, right ?

Not to mention no more free multi player via PS+. Yet that get's glossed over because JT announced NO DRM & sell your games @ will

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4 Beta

One of the three or so major complaints a lot of people have about the PS3 is how the online service isn't up to par with the 360, yet it's always been free.

$5/ mo or $60/ year is easy to overlook IF the service is significantly better. That's yet to be seen, but just worth thinking about IMO, especially if your'e all ready a PS+ subscriber that's getting the standard online services everyone else is.

+ People are more inclined to overlook that $5.00 if they know they are going to be receving countless free titles.

Again, all of this has yet to be seen and we won't know until it gets here.

They were smart by advertising it as a monthly subscription, rather than using the full $60/ year amount. It looks a lot more appealing that way.

[PaperBoyx703]

Re: Xbox One

Not to mention no more free multi player via PS+. Yet that get's glossed over because JT announced NO DRM & sell your games @ will

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4 Beta

I'm sure it was glossed over because of what was offered along with multiplayer service(live streaming, recorder, share features, party chat and etc.) which obviously isn't all new or unheard of but welcomed and apparent would come with a price. It was an expected move for me and another thing is that I along will numerous people on my friends list already had that little PS+ icon next to their name because of how good value it was.

It also doesn't hurt to have that extra money will be coming in to help support the PS network that always had numerous maintenance periods that lasted for several hours to half a day at times. Also, when it comes to the console wars of course Sony users would always use the "free multiplayer" over MS users because...who wouldn't? But you'd have to be completely ignorant or blinded by fanboyism(as a sony user) to not acknowledge that because of that "free" service PSN wasn't even comparable to the XBL service. It is also not a big deal when you break it down to paying less than $5 a month for it, even if it was the same as XBL service which is exactly $5 still wouldn't be a bad thing.


Coming from someone who has owned only PlayStation consoles and never once purchased an Xbox I envied the XBL service, but hey...who complains about something free


It's gone, but I don't mind at all.

[Skyboxer]

Re: Xbox One

Honestly I think that roots from the same belief that they shouldn't have implemented DRM, used game policy, etc. in the first place and then to make matters worse of how they, certain key reps of MS, poorly handled the backlash and consumer feedback. It comes off as if they didn't have the interests of the community, MS fans or whatever from the start and then once the pre-order figures and polls starting coming in, they want to back down from what they felt so strongly about where they wanted to take their system in the blink of an eye.

I don't think switchers or any gamer should be upset about them changing their policies,because I think it sent a powerful message about the community. Yes there are anit-MS guys, Sony Fanboys and etc but I think its more along the lines of ones not being able to fully wash out the bad taste MS may have left from a short time ago.

I get that.. but.. They basically did a 180 while people bashed them for doing it in the first place and saying they needed to drop it.
They did the 180 and now they "copped out"...

I know people were upset (as well as I) but they changed it and get faulted for that.

I'm just glad they did do the 180 but until the Kinect isn't needed I am not 100% happy.

[Skyboxer]

Re: Xbox One

One of the three or so major complaints a lot of people have about the PS3 is how the online service isn't up to par with the 360, yet it's always been free.

$5/ mo or $60/ year is easy to overlook IF the service is significantly better. That's yet to be seen, but just worth thinking about IMO, especially if your'e all ready a PS+ subscriber that's getting the standard online services everyone else is.

+ People are more inclined to overlook that $5.00 if they know they are going to be receving countless free titles.

Again, all of this has yet to be seen and we won't know until it gets here.

They were smart by advertising it as a monthly subscription, rather than using the full $60/ year amount. It looks a lot more appealing that way.

If they were newer titles I would be happier. Most during my PS3 days were games I already had played or bypassed due to not being for me. I liked the discounts more as you got to kep them if you dropped PS+.

I will gladly overlook the $ as long as PSN is faster.

[ubernoob]

If they were newer titles I would be happier. Most during my PS3 days were games I already had played or bypassed due to not being for me. I liked the discounts more as you got to kep them if you dropped PS+.

I will gladly overlook the $ as long as PSN is faster.

That's the pains of being an early adopter and is relevant to any industry. You buy your games on release day and play them, I got them for free and played the same game. Plus they had some sweet PS Classics they'd give away as well.

I may buy a 2000 dollar TV but you can wait and have the same TV for half price a year later.

Obviously they can never get the licenses to give out brand new games for free (publishers would stomp all over them, and rightfully so) but the games they've been offering have been above and beyond what I would have thought they would offer.

Hopefully their servers are up to the task, or there is gonna be a whole bunch of Sony bashing going on. They'll deserve it too, if they are charging and the service is crappy. By crappy, I don't mean an unexpected hiccup every now and then either.

[AirLobo23]

Re: Xbox One

X1 was designed around new Kinect. One of the features is being able to instantly switch from game to game, TV to game etc. With having to have the disc in the drive it takes away from this feature.

Is it really so hard to believe that was a big reason why MS went the DRM route? Why does it have to be about MS is trying to screw us? Do you really think MS didn't know they would have a fight on their hands with Sony? If MS was the only player then I could understand this mentality. We may never know the true plan with family sharing, but clearly they felt some of the other things they were bringing to the table would help offset the restrictions that come with DRM.