How will you choose between MS & Sony's new consoles?

Grumpypants

FlyingIrishMan wrote: »

That isn't DRM, that is a method of distribution.

Games on demand requires a PS+ subscription, you can be offline or online.

Amazing, I think you should take your own advice and read up on what DRM is as you continually make basic errors.

The disk contains the licence. That is why you need it to be in the console, the console looks for the licence, it checks on the disk, it says "oh he owns the original disk" and lets you play the game.

If it was just purely a method of distribution once the game has been distributed to the console you should be able to play without the disk. Turns out you can't.

On a PC where the disk is a method of distribution, you don't need it in the PC once the licence is linked to your account.

If you are confident of your understanding then feel free to install your PS3 games to the hard drive then sell/trade in the disks as it is clear from what you are saying they are no longer required.

Ill let you off with the second bit as you might not realize that Games on Demand is on Xbox360 is it would be very odd if they looked for a PS+ subscription.

shreddedloops

Grumpypants wrote: »

The disk contains the licence. That is why you need it to be in the console, the console looks for the licence, it checks on the disk, it says "oh he owns the original disk" and lets you play the game.

I think you may be over thinking things.

The disc IS the product. Its the delivery method of the game. If you don't have the product you can't play the game.

It's like saying that the N64 cartridges were a form of DRM. No, they weren't. They were the actual product.

stevenmu

shreddedloops wrote: »

It's like saying that the N64 cartridges were a form of DRM. No, they weren't. They were the actual product.

Try copying a PS3/Xbox disc and see if it works.

_Puma_

Here we go again....

Grumpypants in all your posts you ignore the fact that Digital based distribution and all of its benefits are available on both the Xbox 360 and the Playstation 3 already. You can have the benefits of Digital based based distribution if you buy from the online store, albeit in a more restrictive way than Steam.

The redistribution of this software is managed by a layer of online digital media DRM ie) Logging into your account and activating the content. This ties your license to your account. Can now use it offline if you wish, or log in using the same account on a different machine to install it there. In this way Digital distribution can be better than disc based because you only need to go through the DRM check once.

Since the days of the betamax, Disc based DRM has been used to prevent the redistribution of disc based media by linking the license to the disc and is built into the discs themselves. It has worked perfectly fine for the past 20 years and will remain to be the case for the next generation's Disc based media.


This is Not what the original Xbox one system was.


The original proposed Xbone system was to introduce another layer of online DRM on both disc based and digital media to manage their new system of second hand game trading. It had nothing to do with the benefits of digital based media because that option is already there. In fact they were forcing this new DRM system on top of existing Digital and disc based DRM and removing it's benefits so it would have worked nothing like steam. All in the name of the now infamous family sharing plan, which don't fool yourself, was nothing like what they were portraying it or Publishers would have a fit due to lost sales and would more than likely be given the boot if it was. ie) Online Terms and Conditions of use can be changed at any time.

They were removing the benefits and choice of Disc based media to manage their new second hand trading policy and shoe horning it into the digital media ecosystem to allow for second hand trading. If they truly wanted Digital distribution then they should have removed Disc based media altogether or have a way to convert the disc based media to digital based media that stopped the redistribution of the disc, but of course this was not the real reason for the online check in every 24 hours. It was simply a way for them to enforce the new second hand games policy so they can get a slice of the second hand games market.

Now the nut that has not being cracked yet is the second hand sales of digital based media. Always online is not the answer to that and never will be.

Of course there is layer of DRM to prevent the redistribution of Disc based media. Otherwise we are talking about open source software, but when you buy your disc you are getting the license and the software. The Xbone system was removing the license element and tying it to an online system. However you can still not copy the disc so it is just an additional layer of DRM. This is what the backlash was about... it was the additional online DRM checks that people were annoyed with, and what will inevitably punish the paying customer more than any software pirates.

Cannot spell it out more clearly than that for you.

Grumpypants

shreddedloops wrote: »

I think you may be over thinking things.

The disc IS the product. Its the delivery method of the game. If you don't have the product you can't play the game.

It's like saying that the N64 cartridges were a form of DRM. No, they weren't. They were the actual product.

It is actually three things, it is the delivery method, it is the software and it is the licence. When all three combine in the correct system you can play the game.

shreddedloops

stevenmu wrote: »

Try copying a PS3/Xbox disc and see if it works.

Try copying an N64 cartridge!

Why would I want to copy a disc? Thats not within my rights.

My point is, disc based games can hardly be considered "restrictive". It's the most simple and most fair system for all parties.

shreddedloops

Grumpypants wrote: »

It is actually three things, it is the delivery method, it is the software and it is the licence. When all three combine in the correct system you can play the game.

But in most systems the licence doesn't matter. You still need the disc to access the software, so the license issue never really comes into effect. Except maybe when it comes to copying discs, but like I said that is a very understandable precaution to have and doesn't effect the typical user.

AlmightyCushion

shreddedloops wrote: »

Try copying an N64 cartridge!

Why would I want to copy a disc? Thats not within my rights.

My point is, disc based games can hardly be considered "restrictive". It's the most simple and most fair system for all parties.

I'd disagree. I have 212 games in my Steam library and a few more in Origin. I can install them right now with he click of a button. Over the years I have bought quite a few PC games on disc. I couldn't tell you where any of those discs are now and a lot weren't activatable on Steam or Origin so are pretty much gone. Steam/Origin type of activation is far handier than carting around a load of discs and finding the one you want when you want to play it.

Obviously, Steam has disadvantages like no trading in or lending/swapping games but Microsoft's system did allow for this. How well it would have worked, we won't know though.

Also, the family sharing thing being a demo/trial was posted on 4chan and taken from pastebin. Not exactly a reliable source. It doesn't even make sense why they would do this. Surely, they'd just have every game on the Xbox live store have a trial version instead of relying on someone in your family list having a copy of it.

Grumpypants

_Puma_ wrote: »

Here we go again....

Grumpypants in all your posts you ignore the fact that Digital based distribution and all of its benefits are available on both the Xbox 360 and the Playstation 3 already. You can have the benefits of Digital based based distribution if you buy from the online store, albeit in a more restrictive way than Steam.

You don't even make it to the second sentence without contradicted yourself. How can you have all the benefits on a restricted system ?

But lets start. In pretty much none of my posts have I ignored that digital based distribution is available on PS3 and Xbox360. In fact I mention it not only once but twice in my main post. I also pointed out that digital downloads are not currently viable for me as I don't have the network to handle downloading the content so I need to get the disks. Never mind the price difference.

Grumpypants wrote: »

When I want to play my games on one (PS3) I need to bring the disks with me and put it in the system (Unless I have downloaded them from the PSN

After explaining the method of using an account to control the licences ala Steam i added PSN/Games on Demand use similar systems but PSN restricts you to 2 consoles and Games on Demand afaik requires you to be always online but maybe someone who uses it can clear that up.

_Puma_ wrote: »

The redistribution of this software is managed by a layer of online digital media DRM ie) Logging into your account and activating the content. This ties your license to your account. Can now use it offline if you wish, or log in using the same account on a different machine to install it there. In this way Digital distribution can be better than disc based because you only need to go through the DRM check once.

Never said it wasn't

_Puma_ wrote: »

Since the days of the betamax, Disc based DRM has been used to prevent the redistribution of disc based media by linking the license to the disc and is built into the discs themselves. It has worked perfectly fine for the past 20 years and will remain to be the case for the next generation's Disc based media.

Ill skip that Betamax was not a disk, as the point re disk based media is generally correct and exactly what I have said. Traditional disk based media has the licence on the actual disk and this is the "DRM" for disk based media. I also pointed out that disk based media on PC has now advanced to a newer hybrid system. You can now buy your disk then activate your code on Origin or Steam and the licence will transfer from the disk to Origin/Steam. This is again great for me as I can't download large files in a timely manner So I need this mix.

_Puma_ wrote: »

This is Not what the original Xbox one system was.


The original proposed Xbone system was to introduce another layer of online DRM on both disc based and digital media to manage their new system of second hand game trading. It had nothing to do with the benefits of digital based media because that option is already there. In fact they were forcing this new DRM system on top of existing Digital and disc based DRM and removing it's benefits so it would have worked nothing like steam. All in the name of the now infamous family sharing plan, which don't fool yourself, was nothing like what they were portraying it or Publishers would have a fit due to lost sales and would more than likely be given the boot if it was. ie) Online Terms and Conditions of use can be changed at any time.

Again not sure where you are going with this. It was a new layer of DRM (the 24 hour check in) I never said it wasn't. The licence was on the disk but when you installed it the system transferred it to the Gamertag. So you could install the game to your system once you logged into your Gamertag and then removed the disk you could still play the game (you did not need the disk in the console). This again was great for people who could not download large files online a point you seem keen to ignore. (also Steam works like this too)

As you say though it is not totally like Steam, as unlike Steam it allowed you to trade/sell that game disk and its licence to someone else who could use it. Steam unfortunately does not allow this transfer of licences (but please correct me if you are now able to use 2nd hand PC games). The 24 hour check in ensured that once your XboxOne game was installed on someone else's Gamertag your licence on your Gamertag stopped working. It is simple yet effective.

_Puma_ wrote: »

If they truly wanted Digital distribution then they should have removed Disc based media altogether or have a way to convert the disc based media to digital based media that stopped the redistribution of the disc, but of course this was not the real reason for the online check in every 24 hours. It was simply a way for them to enforce the new second hand games policy so they can get a slice of the second hand games market.

But they didn't want purely digital they wanted a transition. something to ease the move to digital, something where you could either download the game or install from disk and have the same exact experience.

_Puma_ wrote: »

Now the nut that has not being cracked yet is the second hand sales of digital based media. Always online is not the answer to that and never will be.

Of course there is layer of DRM to prevent the redistribution of Disc based media. Otherwise we are talking about open source software, but when you buy your disc you are getting the license and the software. The Xbone system was removing the license element and tying it to an online system. However you can still not copy the disc so it is just an additional layer of DRM. This is what the backlash was about... it was the additional online DRM checks that people were annoyed with, and what will inevitably punish the paying customer more than any software pirates.

Again you could actually copy the game to your system, the licence was linked to your gamertag this was proposed at the very start. As taken from the link below I have put the important bits in bold for you. They also had a system that allowed users to gift a digital licence. Not sell but do a once off gift.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_One

A digital rights management system would tie all game purchases (regardless of whether it was purchased digitally or physically) to the user's Xbox Live account and their Xbox One console. The system would allow a user's games to be accessed locally by any user on their Xbox One, through a cloud-based game library on any other Xbox One

_Puma_ wrote: »

Cannot spell it out more clearly than that for you.

No need to be clearer just accurate.

shreddedloops

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I'd disagree. I have 212 games in my Steam library and a few more in Origin. I can install them right now with he click of a button. Over the years I have bought quite a few PC games on disc. I couldn't tell you where any of those discs are now and a lot weren't activatable on Steam or Origin so are pretty much gone. Steam/Origin type of activation is far handier than carting around a load of discs and finding the one you want when you want to play.

Thats very true. And I love Steam for that but I always consider PC and consoles to be two completely different systems and I think discs/lending/swapping/trading in just suit consoles better.

But I suppose its down to personal preference.

Grumpypants

shreddedloops wrote: »

Thats very true. And I love Steam for that but I always consider PC and consoles to be two completely different systems and I think discs/lending/swapping/trading in just suit consoles better.

But I suppose its down to personal preference.

Imagine someone came up with a brand new system. One that mixed the best bits from both, it took the ease of access of having a digital library, even gave you the option to install from disks in case you can't download large files and if you didn't like the game you could sell it to someone else and the system would automatically know you sold it to them and remove your game and add it to their digital library.

Would you like a system like that? Or would you say no way I like having a disk in my console. Because that is pretty much what happened.

C14N

Grumpypants wrote: »

I've spent the last year gaming on pc and have got used to the freedom of steam and origin where you install from disk then you can just play any game installed at the press of a button.

I do too, but realistically, how often are you juggling various games? On my PS3, unless I'm swapping in movies or I have someone around for local multiplayer, the same game tends to be in the console for more than a few game sessions. Even if it wasn't, it's not much of an inconvenience to take a different game off the shelf and put it in.

Grumpypants wrote: »

So for example I have 3 PC's I have steam and Origin installed on all of them and I just need to log in to play my games, all my disks can sit at home on the shelf. (This method is less restrictive)

A lot of people find preventing the lending or resale of their games to be more restrictive than not being able to play them without the disc.

Besides, you're coming up with more obscure narratives. Very few people will have 3 systems that they want their games installed on and who really don't want to take a disc out and put it in another console.

Grumpypants wrote: »

Imagine someone came up with a brand new system. One that mixed the best bits from both, it took the ease of access of having a digital library, even gave you the option to install from disks in case you can't download large files and if you didn't like the game you could sell it to someone else and the system would automatically know you sold it to them and remove your game and add it to their digital library.

Would you like a system like that? Or would you say no way I like having a disk in my console. Because that is pretty much what happened.

No it is not. To say that it keeps the best of both is misleading at best. The entire idea of second hand games was being made redundant by MS fixing the price. The whole appeal of the second hand market is not only that you can sell your games, but that you can buy them at competitive prices decided by retailers based on supply and demand. The proposed system had all second hand games sold as a fixed proportion of their "new" price on the XBLM. It required any sellers to have permission first and completely prevented selling directly to another person like on an ads website. In addition, you couldn't give the game to anyone. If you gave it to a friend, they would have to pay the activation cost.

By the way, do you consider books to have DRM built-in because you have to be holding it in your hand to use it? Because that's what current gen DRM is.

Retr0gamer

The only way the disk based method is more restrictive is if I wasn't Richie Rich and wanted my 5 PS4's on at the same time playing the same game.

How dare MS and Sony deny my right to say **** you to the oil reserve and ozone layer. ****ing peasants should be paying me to take their console. My daddy owns their asses!

Grumpypants

C14N wrote: »

I do too, but realistically, how often are you juggling various games? On my PS3, unless I'm swapping in movies or I have someone around for local multiplayer, the same game tends to be in the console for more than a few game sessions. Even if it wasn't, it's not much of an inconvenience to take a different game off the shelf and put it in.

A lot of people find preventing the lending or resale of their games to be more restrictive than not being able to play them without the disc.

Besides, you're coming up with more obscure narratives. Very few people will have 3 systems that they want their games installed on and who really don't want to take a disc out and put it in another console.

No it is not. To say that it keeps the best of both is misleading at best. The entire idea of second hand games was being made redundant by MS fixing the price. The whole appeal of the second hand market is not only that you can sell your games, but that you can buy them at competitive prices decided by retailers based on supply and demand. The proposed system had all second hand games sold as a fixed proportion of their "new" price on the XBLM. It required any sellers to have permission first and completely prevented selling directly to another person like on an ads website. In addition, you couldn't give the game to anyone. If you gave it to a friend, they would have to pay the activation cost.

By the way, do you consider books to have DRM built-in because you have to be holding it in your hand to use it? Because that's what current gen DRM is.

But if you wanted to use the disks in your console there was nothing stopping you. You could put in your disk play it until you got sick of it and then traded it in.

I could install the disk and put it away, and still played from the hard drive we both are happy.

A book isn't digital so doesn't require any digital management of the content, unless you mean for a kindle. In which case the DRM is linked to your amazon account.

Grumpypants

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The only way the disk based method is more restrictive is if I wasn't Richie Rich and wanted my 5 PS4's on at the same time playing the same game.

How dare MS and Sony deny my right to say **** you to the oil reserve and ozone layer. ****ing peasants should be paying me to take their console. My daddy owns their asses!

Or say if you live here then had to travel abroad for work. Then you can just bring your console with you without the stack of twenty odd games you want to play while your away.

Just as one example.

FlyingIrishMan

Grumpypants wrote: »

Or say if you live here then had to travel abroad for work. Then you can just bring your console with you without the stack of twenty odd games you want to play while your away.

Just as one example.

What's stopping you from doing this with the PS4 or even the PS3?
Just download it the game and play it offline whenever you want.

The fact is, at E3 Sony gave players the choice of going digital with all content available day one, and even the ability to play games whilst they downloaded.
However they also didn't try and revoke their right to play physical discs, and do what they like with those discs.

MS tried to force a system upon players that people aren't ready for yet.

For the average consumer, the system set in place on the PS4 and PS3 is far far better, easier, and user friendlier than MS's original policies.

Grumpypants

FlyingIrishMan wrote: »

What's stopping you from doing this with the PS4 or even the PS3?
Just download it the game and play it offline whenever you want.

The fact is, at E3 Sony gave players the choice of going digital with all content available day one, and even the ability to play games whilst they downloaded.
However they also didn't try and revoke their right to play physical discs, and do what they like with those discs.

MS tried to force a system upon players that people aren't ready for yet.

For the average consumer, the system set in place on the PS4 and PS3 is far far better, easier, and user friendlier than MS's original policies.

As mentioned earlier I can't download that much data in a timely manner, Crysis 3 took a week and that was on PC. Until I get a fiber connection (fingers crossed that is soon) installing disks is the only real option. That and I don't fancy paying €69.99 for a digital game on the PS3 that is €45 on disk.

FlyingIrishMan

Grumpypants wrote: »

As mentioned earlier I can't download that much data in a timely manner, Crysis 3 took a week and that was on PC. Until I get a fiber connection (fingers crossed that is soon) installing disks is the only real option. That and I don't fancy paying €69.99 for a digital game on the PS3 that is €45 on disk.

Well then that's your fault, Sony has given you a perfectly good system to play all your games without ever needing a disc, if you're internet isn't up to standard then nothing they can do about it. I'd almost guarantee my internet is worse than yours but I'll always take physical media, and the option to download stuff over being forced to check in every 24 hours.

C14N

Grumpypants wrote: »

But if you wanted to use the disks in your console there was nothing stopping you. You could put in your disk play it until you got sick of it and then traded it in.

I could install the disk and put it away, and still played from the hard drive we both are happy.

A book isn't digital so doesn't require any digital management of the content, unless you mean for a kindle. In which case the DRM is linked to your amazon account.

Just to clarify: using discs in the console wasn't the appeal. Having zero restrictions on resale was. With the current system, once you've bought a license it is up to you to decide who you want to give it to and for what price. This part was what was missing. The disc functioned only as content and came with a single-use license to use that content.

Regarding the book: I know it's not digital, but it still has much the same restrictions. If you have a pen-and-ink book, in order to use it you need to actually have it on your person. You don't buy a copy and then get to leave it at home an use it wherever you want but that book isn't tied to you forever, you can give it to someone else and then they can use it. This is basically how strict the "DRM" of tying a license to a disc instead of an account is.

Grumpypants wrote: »

Or say if you live here then had to travel abroad for work. Then you can just bring your console with you without the stack of twenty odd games you want to play while your away.

Just as one example.

This is also a strange example. I'm assuming you mean like on some sort of business trip which would probably take two weeks, maybe a month at a real stretch. Besides the fact that bringing a video game console with you for your hotel is slightly odd, you won't be needing 20 games to keep you going in that time. I'm currently on summer holidays and I can't come close to ploughing through 20 games in a month, I'd say 3 or 4 is more normal. Even if you did want to bring a large pile with you, just bring one of these things:



Honestly, I get that the old X1 plan would work better for you as someone who isn't particularly interested in second hand games, likes putting all their games on an HDD and doesn't have fast broadband but you do need to realise that your situation puts you in a small niche and that far more gamers like having the DRM work on a basis of license-tied-to-disc and not license-tied-to-account.

Grumpypants

C14N wrote: »

Honestly, I get that the old X1 plan would work better for you as someone who isn't particularly interested in second hand games, likes putting all their games on an HDD and doesn't have fast broadband but you do need to realise that your situation puts you in a small niche and that far more gamers like having the DRM work on a basis of license-tied-to-disc and not license-tied-to-account.

And isn't it great that we can have different views and are able to chat back and forth about them in a civil manner.

I'm not totally against disks, I am a collector and I always like buying a game in a store. There is something about going into town browsing the shelves and coming home with something in your hand. I have a much greater connection to games I buy than ones I download. For no particular reason bar it's what I have been doing for around three decades.

But it would have been good to have the option, lots of us wanted what was proposed and i felt it was a positive step forward and gave the best of both world. A mix between disk games you can install into a digital library or trade and sell.

Sure it could have been improved and there might have been bumps initially but I am all for trying new things. Nothing is set in stone and chances are in 2-3 years it would have been very different. Look at Steam there was a huge campaign against it initially, now everyone is pretty happy with it. But it took time to get right. Look at PS+ I remember a huge backlash with people arguing over whether you got free games or you paid for them with your sub. Yes it was a bizarre time yet now everyone think PS+ is a great idea. Xbox Live there was a huge backlash against it too as it required a broadband connection and not everyone had one, but that turned out to be liked by lots of people.

But hey maybe this is a good thing, MS could be hurting and really want to push digital gaming and the best way to do that is to reduce the price. If you can buy a new game in store for 59.99 and a used one right next to it for 54.99. Then make the digital copy 49.99 that can be pre installed and ready to play at midnight it would be a viable alternative. I know fat chance, but we can dream.

sarumite

Grumpypants wrote: »

Or say if you live here then had to travel abroad for work. Then you can just bring your console with you without the stack of twenty odd games you want to play while your away.

Just as one example.

Interestingly I travelled abroad for work recently and for 2 weeks I did'nt have internet access while outside of the work environment. The original design required that I have internet access. That said, at most I would have brought one or two games. I think the stack of 20 is a little unrealistic.

_Puma_

Grumpypants wrote: »

The PS4 uses a disk based drm system which is pretty robust and restrictive. 1 disk, 1 player on 1 console.

The Xbox had a more relaxed system of 1 player, all your games at any time on any console. But the internet felt this was anti consumer and forced them to change it.

This is because most people don't understand what drm is how it works and why it is needed. They seem to attach being online to some kind of drm.

Ok this is what you said to start off this argument again. What you are describing here is traditional Digitally distributed content(License -> Account) PSN, GFWL, steam(The most similar system as there is no limit to installs), origin etc... It is highly disingenuous to portray the now defunt Xbox system as this. What you neglected to include is the new system was doing an additional DRM check to ensure your license was still tied to your account every 24 hours and locking you out of your games if you do not check in.

There still is the one time activation that ties your license to your account but there was now an additional 24 hour check to ensue the license is still tied to your account as you can give the disc to someone else. That was the only reason for the 24 hour check. You said the license is transferred from the disc to your account. This does not happen. There is no write's to the disc to remove the license. A link between the license and the account is made. The original license is still there on the disc so there is nothing stopping you handing it to another person and them in turn re linking the license to their account(To allow for there new money making exercise of the second hand market system). But that wouldn't work because 1 person still has access to the content if the console was kept offline. Like how you play games in offline mode in steam.

You say I contradict myself in my first sentence, please explain how? When I said you have all the benefits of digitally distributed I mean the license is tied to your account, can access your games as long as you have access to your account, can play in an offline mode etc... The benefits of Digital content over disc based content and what I went to pains to spell out for you in my post. When I say it is done in a more restrictive way on the console marketplaces I mean that there is a limit to the amount of consoles you can install the game to. Not a contradiction, a restriction.

You have then continued to portray this new system as simpler even though there is now an extra set of online DRM checks. To justify this you are using a niche case of someone who has a Stable internet connection but does not want to download games.

The reality is that for the majority of consumers the online Checks are more restrictive. It is also anti consumer as they are taking away your right to a working license when you purchase a disc. You say it was because the internet started whining that Microsoft removed this system. I can assure you that was not the reason. People saw this system and decided it was not for them. This in turn effected pre-orders, which was the reason why Microsoft changed it to the traditional system. The hybrid did not work because it was removing consumer choice. They either go fully Digital or come up with something similar to how steam works with disc based content.. Not introduce extra barriers to ensure the hybrid system works.

Let me ask you this, if you only used Digitally distributed content, like Steams On-line store, would you be happy if they brought in a system similar to the defunct Microsoft system. Even if they allowed free transfers of the games to another account(Of course Microsoft were going to have a nominal fee)?

Otacon

Grumpypants wrote: »

Or say if you live here then had to travel abroad for work. Then you can just bring your console with you without the stack of twenty odd games you want to play while your away.

Just as one example.

sarumite wrote: »

Interestingly I travelled abroad for work recently and for 2 weeks I did'nt have internet access while outside of the work environment. The original design required that I have internet access. That said, at most I would have brought one or two games. I think the stack of 20 is a little unrealistic.

Not only that, but if the country in question didn't have access to the XBL network, though you may have had perfectly good Internet access, you could not play them either, even if you had the disks with you.

Grumpypants

_Puma_ wrote: »

Let me ask you this, if you only used Digitally distributed content, like Steams On-line store, would you be happy if they brought in a system similar to the defunct Microsoft system. Even if they allowed free transfers of the games to another account(Of course Microsoft were going to have a nominal fee)?

That is a loaded question, because you move the goal posts. In a purely digital world there is no need for a 24 hour check in so it would be totally unnecessary.

But to answer it anyway. Would I like if Steam introduced a used games market and let me gift my finished PC games to a friend?

Yes I think I would enjoy that.

I think it would add some "pro consumer" features to the PC market. At the moment once a game is on my Steam account it is there forever. I can't trade it in or I can't lend it to a friend, it is kind of a dead game in a manner of speaking.

It could work like this. You could log into your Steam account and go online. Transfer the licence to your friend, because you are online Steam can quickly delete the licence from your account and connect it to your friends account. It would take a few seconds.

I think you would be hard pushed to find people against a option like that.

In a purely digital world there is no need for a 24 hour check because you need to go online to transfer the licence in the first place. You would not be able to move digital licences when you are not connected to the internet.

But lets just play this out for the sake of answering your question even though it is a different scenario than the proposed MS one.

Would I mind if I got all the features above and the only inconvenience was that when I went to log into Steam while typing in my password it checked the licences were working so by the time I typed in my password and logged in everything worked?

Yea I think I would like that too.

Lets take it a step further and compare it to the MS system (because that's fair).

If this check in gave me the benefits above and then also allowed me to trade in my PC disk games at a store then I would also think this was an improvement.

I would be getting a lot of benefits, "pro consumer features" and extra control over my games and licences for something I will most likely never even know is happening.

I would buy a disk game, activate the code once (first layer of DRM) when I log in it checks again (second layer of DRM just so you don't wrongly accuse me again of ignoring the layers of DRM) and I play the game without any interruptions over the current system. That would be great.

If it happened that my internet was down for over 24 hours and by some stroke of terrible luck my mobile network was also down for over 24 hours even though that has never happened to me once in the last 15 years and I was restricted to just playing my digital games that I purchased directly from steam and had to wait a few days to play the disk game I would be a little bit put out but not to any great degree. (Remember if the 24 hour check in failed you could still play your digital games on your Xbox)

Let me ask you a question in return. How would a company let you install a disk to a hard drive and let you trade that disk to a total stranger and ensure that digital licence transferred correctly to them without any issue, without having both parties go online?

Backfire

Well if Team Xecuter and C4eva continue to do good work with the xbox one, I'll be getting one of them

But I can see myself getting a ps4, probably only end up purchasing good exclusives only.

Grumpypants

Looks like the Xbox is now set for 5th November Launch. Or maybe even a bit before.

http://www.xbox.com/en-GB/xbox-one/games/call-of-duty-ghosts

COYVB

Grumpypants wrote: »

Looks like the Xbox is now set for 5th November Launch. Or maybe even a bit before.

http://www.xbox.com/en-GB/xbox-one/games/call-of-duty-ghosts

that's the cod multi format launch date, wouldn't necessarily read too much into that particular link TBH. Not saying it's not accurate, just that that particular bit of information is lazy web page design and not anything more important

_Puma_

Grumpypants wrote: »

That is a loaded question, because you move the goal posts. In a purely digital world there is no need for a 24 hour check in so it would be totally unnecessary.

But to answer it anyway. Would I like if Steam introduced a used games market and let me gift my finished PC games to a friend?

Yes I think I would enjoy that.

I think it would add some "pro consumer" features to the PC market. At the moment once a game is on my Steam account it is there forever. I can't trade it in or I can't lend it to a friend, it is kind of a dead game in a manner of speaking.

It could work like this. You could log into your Steam account and go online. Transfer the licence to your friend, because you are online Steam can quickly delete the licence from your account and connect it to your friends account. It would take a few seconds.

I think you would be hard pushed to find people against a option like that.

In a purely digital world there is no need for a 24 hour check because you need to go online to transfer the licence in the first place. You would not be able to move digital licences when you are not connected to the internet.

But lets just play this out for the sake of answering your question even though it is a different scenario than the proposed MS one.

Would I mind if I got all the features above and the only inconvenience was that when I went to log into Steam while typing in my password it checked the licences were working so by the time I typed in my password and logged in everything worked?

Yea I think I would like that too.

Lets take it a step further and compare it to the MS system (because that's fair).

If this check in gave me the benefits above and then also allowed me to trade in my PC disk games at a store then I would also think this was an improvement.

I would be getting a lot of benefits, "pro consumer features" and extra control over my games and licences for something I will most likely never even know is happening.

I would buy a disk game, activate the code once (first layer of DRM) when I log in it checks again (second layer of DRM just so you don't wrongly accuse me again of ignoring the layers of DRM) and I play the game without any interruptions over the current system. That would be great. (You are glossing over the fact that this DRM check-in has to be done consistently, whereas on something like steam there is the option to play ofline and there is only one-time DRM on activating the license)

If it happened that my internet was down for over 24 hours and by some stroke of terrible luck my mobile network was also down for over 24 hours even though that has never happened to me once in the last 15 years and I was restricted to just playing my digital games that I purchased directly from steam and had to wait a few days to play the disk game I would be a little bit put out but not to any great degree. (Remember if the 24 hour check in failed you could still play your digital games on your Xbox)

Let me ask you a question in return. How would a company let you install a disk to a hard drive and let you trade that disk to a total stranger and ensure that digital licence transferred correctly to them without any issue, without having both parties go online?

What I asked is if the same system as MS's one was brought to steam(ie Microsoft solution of online DRM of 24hr check-ins to allow you to trade games), Digital content and all, would you be in favour. This means no more offline mode whatsoever for steam unless you check in every 24 hours.

Of course what you describe is entirely possible on steam without 24 hour check ins. This would in turn not allow any offline mode to be workable until both users can activate/Deactivate the license by logging in.

Now for the Disc based media that you can activate on steam this would not be possible and is probably the reason we have not seen it yet. Alternatively Valve are just waiting until disc based media dies out. But again that is a problem that remains to be addressed, and what I already pointed out in my previous post, which ties in to answer your question.

Theoretical you would need some way to void the disc and its license once you tie it to your account. Then another way to re-enable the disc once you pay the fee and reactivate the disc. But this is not what MS proposed and their solution was far more restrictive, and introduced more barriers in on-line DRM Check ins.

The bold part of your quote comes down to the crux of the matter. I can still access my steam games on my hardrive without having to log into steam. The whole reason for the offline mode and one of the main benefits of digitally distributed content, no more DRM once I go through the initial layer. MS solution would have seen this removed for the this quasi Digital content/licenses system that is created for discs. So to say you are getting the benefits of Digital content is untrue.

Grumpypants

COYVB wrote: »

that's the cod multi format launch date, wouldn't necessarily read too much into that particular link TBH. Not saying it's not accurate, just that that particular bit of information is lazy web page design and not anything more important

They have updated it, they had the xbox one version with the release date above it, but now its been changed to coming soon and the date is abpove the 360 version. I guess it was meant for a Gamescom reveal

Varik

Has the One shown up at the FCC or any other counties equivalent.