New consoles/E3 2013 thread

Nintendo just need to rethink their region locking. Now the only console doing it.

  On 6/19/2013 at 11:44 PM, jasondonervan said:

Nintendo just need to rethink their region locking. Now the only console doing it.

And their account system.

It's so stupid beyond belief. They tie your downloaded games to your console/handheld's serial number and not an account. So if you if lose or break the console/handheld, your games are gone and you can't re download them.

ugh...

I think the damage is done. For me personally at least. I highly doubt I'll be getting the Xbox One unless they dangle some seriously attractive exclusives.

  On 6/19/2013 at 10:48 PM, data said:

so this just happened ..

 

• No more always online requirement
• The console no longer has to check in every 24 hours
• All game discs will work on Xbox One as they do on Xbox 360
• Authentication is no longer necessary
• An Internet connection is only required when initially setting up the console
• All downloaded games will function the same when online or offline
• No additional restrictions on trading games or loaning discs
• Region locks have been dropped

 

http://kotaku.com/microsoft-is-removing-xbox-one-drm-514390310?utm_campaign=Socialflow_Kotaku_Facebook&utm_source=Kotaku_Facebook&utm_medium=Socialflow

!!

repost for the shock of it and to illuminate residents of the new page.

We're still getting a ps4, have preordered. But that decision was made long ago, when we realised that xbox wasn't for us., (halo, give a toss). Plus the ps4 has more power, which is muy importante, and better games. (can play titan fall on the PC) and is cheaper.

Would love to have been a fly on the wall in some of the damage control meetings at Microsoft over the last week or two.

It's still gonna flop, right? I was looking forward to seeing how hard this was going to fail.

Making such drastic changes so late, and considering there was talk about how the DRM was a ground-up concept for the Xbone, it's going to have some serious technical problems now, right?

As in, I'm expecting the first gen to be a pile of confused garbage.

There's a long marketing road ahead and just Forza and Halo are enough to convince a lot of people to stick to Microsoft. I'd rather keep this duopoly (I think we can consider Nintendo a separate market segment by now) than to see the market go to one dominant platform. Sony is no angel either and the power of consumer rage is limited to what the competition is willing to deliver.

Microsoft pretty much shat their pants in public and had nothing to wipe so they used their hands. Their ass in clean but none will shake their hands because they are full of shit.

microsoft and sony are both lying. accountants will definitely start doing all the things customers hate 1 or 2 years from now. business is business. money is money. ;-D

xbox has better looking exclusives at the moment, a better controller and better motion controls, but sony has the public support behind it, which hopefully means a massive user base and maybe developer preference this time around. i'm excited.

  On 6/20/2013 at 11:53 AM, AcrossCanyons said:

xbox has better looking exclusives at the moment, a better controller and better motion controls, but sony has the public support behind it, which hopefully means a massive user base and maybe developer preference this time around. i'm excited.

Sony also has the better console from a specifications perspective.

Good that MS dropped that whole DRM thing, but honestly, the damage has already been done.

The fact that they were even considering something like it to begin with, shows how far they are willing to push the people that have been supporting their brand for years now. I'm still a bit sad about leaving the XBL account that I've had for almost nine years behind, of course, but I'd rather do that, than giving my money to a company that clearly doesn't trust me.

Also, the always-watching/listening Kinect 2.0 is still there..

Even though specs may be better on paper for one system or the other, as has always been the case, it all boils down to the developers. Also, consoles usually have their best games released towards the end of their lifespan. On both points, just look at what Naughty Dog have achieved on the ageing PS3 hardware with The Last of Us.

  On 6/20/2013 at 12:44 AM, Ego said:

There's a long marketing road ahead and just Forza and Halo are enough to convince a lot of people to stick to Microsoft.

World of Tanks, you forgot World of Tanks!

  On 6/20/2013 at 11:53 AM, AcrossCanyons said:

xbox has better looking exclusives at the moment

World of Tanks.

I liked the trailer, especially the part where it went boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom, etc. World of tanks is for the 360 though isn't it? Boom.

Anyone played that new download zombie game on Xbox?

I think publishers should just be responsible for managing their own DRM. What EA and others have put in place may ruffle feathers in its own right, but it is fair and better than a locked down console. A code or pass for online play or DLC or a fee if the game is bought used. Simplest way for a publisher to get some revenue from a used game.

  On 6/22/2013 at 2:10 AM, Rubin Farr said:

Anyone played that new download zombie game on Xbox?

State of Decay? Look like 1-3 pages back or so.

i think xbox one will do alright but for my money ps4 is the easy winner.

ps4 has waaaay better indie support. even just showing don't starve at their conference was huge imo. most of the games i play these days are indie, because the AAAs are boring and not trying anything new. and they're fucking easy and hold your hand.

xbox one may have better exclusives now, but i'm sure that ps4 will, going forward. the next naughty dog games. tons and tons of niche jrpgs and other japanese games.

according to some snappy chart that may or may not have been posted in this thread, xbone showed 8 exclusives at E3 to ps4's 5. but ps3 had 5 exclusives at E3 and xbox360 had 0. sony has always had the more consistently interesting exclusives imo. fucking team ico, who, even if they're dead, give so many points to sony. demon's souls is another great example. dark souls may have gone multiplatform, but it would not be so if it weren't for demon's souls being so sick.

and ps4 is 100 bux less. and idgaf about motion controls or TV.

  On 6/22/2013 at 2:40 AM, glasse said:

Simplest way for a publisher to get some revenue from a used game.

why the fuck should a publisher get ANY revenue from a used game sale?

  On 6/22/2013 at 2:43 AM, AdieuErsatzEnnui said:

 

  On 6/22/2013 at 2:10 AM, Rubin Farr said:

Anyone played that new download zombie game on Xbox?

 

State of Decay? Look like 1-3 pages back or so.

 

In the video games thread.

I've played a lot of it and I love it.

  On 6/22/2013 at 10:34 AM, oscillik said:

 

  On 6/22/2013 at 2:40 AM, glasse said:

Simplest way for a publisher to get some revenue from a used game.

why the fuck should a publisher get ANY revenue from a used game sale?

 

Well their argument seems straight forward, but let me describe a new business venture that puts the different concepts of copyright and licensing we have into perspective, depending on what media it is distributed on and so forth.

I want to find a wholesaler for itunes gift cards and get them at the rate retailers do. Then I am going to buy albums on itunes that are rare, out of print, imports and so on. I am going to burn each single purchase to CD and print out the artwork on super nice glossy paper, after which I will delete all of the files from my computer. (If necessary I will create an itunes account for each bulk purchase and then deactivate the account so there is no situation where I have redownload access, although I don't think you can do that anyway.) Then what will be left will be my one physical copy that I purchased and should be mine to resell at the rate of my choosing.

Will they let me get away with that? Of course not, it is copyright infringement, but what is the actual difference between it and selling a physical copy of content that is also available as a digital download where the same rules as above would apply? It is the same content but operates under philosophy A when burned to this disc and sold in a store but under philosophy B when saved to a HDD. If I bought my XBOX, and I bought all of my XBLA games why shouldn't I be able to hack and mod it, again buy Microsoft points cards at bulk somehow, download collections of XBLA games, delete them from the HDD (create temp account for bulk downloads and deactivate to remove redownload access) and sell them to other people with modded Xboxes for a little cheaper than the arcade and in convenient bulk collections. Whatever their license argreements or terms of service are, who cares it is my property once I buy it they can write down whatever they want, I have the right to modify and resell my own property so long as I retain no copy from the original purchase. Right?

  On 6/22/2013 at 7:51 PM, glasse said:

 

  On 6/22/2013 at 10:34 AM, oscillik said:

 

  On 6/22/2013 at 2:40 AM, glasse said:

Simplest way for a publisher to get some revenue from a used game.

why the fuck should a publisher get ANY revenue from a used game sale?

 

Well their argument seems straight forward, but let me describe a new business venture that puts the different concepts of copyright and licensing we have into perspective, depending on what media it is distributed on and so forth.

 

I want to find a wholesaler for itunes gift cards and get them at the rate retailers do. Then I am going to buy albums on itunes that are rare, out of print, imports and so on. I am going to burn each single purchase to CD and print out the artwork on super nice glossy paper, after which I will delete all of the files from my computer. (If necessary I will create an itunes account for each bulk purchase and then deactivate the account so there is no situation where I have redownload access, although I don't think you can do that anyway.) Then what will be left will be my one physical copy that I purchased and should be mine to resell at the rate of my choosing.

 

Will they let me get away with that? Of course not, it is copyright infringement, but what is the actual difference between it and selling a physical copy of content that is also available as a digital download where the same rules as above would apply? It is the same content but operates under philosophy A when burned to this disc and sold in a store but under philosophy B when saved to a HDD. If I bought my XBOX, and I bought all of my XBLA games why shouldn't I be able to hack and mod it, again buy Microsoft points cards at bulk somehow, download collections of XBLA games, delete them from the HDD (create temp account for bulk downloads and deactivate to remove redownload access) and sell them to other people with modded Xboxes for a little cheaper than the arcade and in convenient bulk collections. Whatever their license argreements or terms of service are, who cares it is my property once I buy it they can write down whatever they want, I have the right to modify and resell my own property so long as I retain no copy from the original purchase. Right?

 

tl:dr

my point is, music publishers, book publishers, movie publishers, etc do not get nor expect revenue from second hand sales, so why should game publishers also expect this?

the above publishers are not entitled to a revenue from Amazon, eBay, Discogs, flea markets, car boot sales, etc. it is ludicrous that game publishers think they're owed any money for second hand sales.

the only way around it is to ensure that people cannot sell their games in the first place, which is something that Steam has done for years in the PC world, and the vast majority of PC gamers are fine with it (mostly because they're not fickle enough to buy a game, play once, and then sell...but that's a different conversation). The same model will be coming to consoles, just not quite yet. The public backlash over XBONE has proven that the buying public are not ready for that model, but it is inevitible.

you read it don't lie.

what i was saying is for now individual publishers have a way to recoup some revenue without it technically being royalties or licensing fees through online pass or dlc bonus content. movie publishers do this to an extent with rentals by not including bonus content, and if the wifi capabilities of bluray players was sophisticated enough they probably could do it with second hand copies too. Second hand movies just aren't a significant market share for them to care though, they worry about piracy first followed by rentals in far second. Gamestop has put small publishers out of businesses though, a game gets a cult following and has great used sales but never gets a second pressing because the same thousand copies are just circulating around. Same publisher with the same game might make it by making their game a download only release though. Does this seem fair for the exact same content and service?

Don Mattrick 'leaving' Microsoft to go and head up Zynga instead. Hmm... wonder what could have prompted that sudden move...