So, New Xbox Reveal In About 14 Hours.

[Vendetta]

Meanwhile, third party publishers distance themselves from used game controls.

Everyon shuffle back from the expanding brown cloud in the swimming pool....

[Lagmonster]

An interesting thing I'm noticing among casual system owners in my peer group (read as, 30s - 50s professionals who have a system in the house but aren't the primary user) is bias due to their perception of the brands as a whole.

Almost all of them had held a consistently low opinion of Microsoft due to the near-omnipresence of Windows PCs in their lives (and the subsequent problems with same), but admitted that since at least Windows 7 their perception of the company had improved significantly. Whereas the moment they're told the PS is a Sony product, I hear, "Well, Sony has really gone downhill over the past few years", referring to their entire product line of televisions, video players, phones, etc. as a whole and basing their opinion on whether they'd be more likely to buy a "Sony product" or a "Microsoft product" just now. This public opinion shift I've seen is just another one of the reasons that I said that although I'm not willing to predict a winner, I think that it's Microsoft's game to lose if they can't sell their idea or deliver on their features.

[Losonti Tokash]

I'm fully aware of what he was responding to. Quit freaking out at people over video games.

[Losonti Tokash]

Figured people might be interested in this: http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/micro ... 1100-4673/

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
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

[Sea Skimmer]

I'm getting a 500 server error on that entire site. It might be being crashed by this news, as it appears all other sources are linking too it.

Heres another link that seems functional, and cites the above. However nobody seems to be sourcing this specific origin of this or the 'updated' confirmation.

http://www.videogamer.com/news/rumour_m ... olicy.html

UPDATE: "As a result of feedback from the Xbox community, we have changed certain policies for Xbox One," Microsoft confirms.


UPDATE: Microsoft has confirmed the report. "As a result of feedback from the Xbox community, we have changed certain policies for Xbox One". More to follow...

ORIGINAL STORY: Microsoft is to announce changes to Xbox One's controversial DRM policy and 'always-online' requirement "later today", according to separate reports from tech review site WhatHiFi and specialist games site GiantBomb.

The rumour, which first appeared on WhatHiFi earlier this evening, claims that Microsoft is set to announce that it will "remove DRM restrictions on Xbox One games" and the requirement for users "to have the new Xbox 'always online'".

The site claims that Microsoft "is set to announce the changes later today, with games developers being informed first".

GiantBomb's report, meanwhile, backs up WhatHiFi's claims, stating that it's heard from its own sources that Microsoft is set to pull a "complete reversal on Xbox One DRM policies".

The changes, the site alleges, will mean that the console "no longer has to check in every 24 hours," and "all game discs will work on Xbox One as they do on Xbox 360".

The site also suggests that Microsoft has pulled a 180 on its pre-owned policy, stating that "authentication is no longer necessary" and that there will be "no additional restrictions on trading games or loaning discs".

Microsoft has faced widespread criticism from the community for its approach to DRM on Xbox One. But could the backlash have finally forced Microsoft to act?

VideoGamer.com has contacted Microsoft for comment.

Source: whathifi.com, giantbomb.com

Personally I've been expecting Microsoft would backtrack at some point, at least on the always online requirement because it was a very real problem for far too many people; throwing it all out the window suggests that the insider claims that PS4 preorders were running at over twice the number of Xbox One preorders were entirely true.

[Sea Skimmer]

Here we go, this is the source.

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/update

Last week at E3, the excitement, creativity and future of our industry was on display for a global audience.

For us, the future comes in the form of Xbox One, a system designed to be the best place to play games this year and for many years to come. As is our heritage with Xbox, we designed a system that could take full advantage of advances in technology in order to deliver a breakthrough in game play and entertainment. We imagined a new set of benefits such as easier roaming, family sharing, and new ways to try and buy games. We believe in the benefits of a connected, digital future.

Since unveiling our plans for Xbox One, my team and I have heard directly from many of you, read your comments and listened to your feedback. I would like to take the opportunity today to thank you for your assistance in helping us to reshape the future of Xbox One.

You told us how much you loved the flexibility you have today with games delivered on disc. The ability to lend, share, and resell these games at your discretion is of incredible importance to you. Also important to you is the freedom to play offline, for any length of time, anywhere in the world.

So, today I am announcing the following changes to Xbox One and how you can play, share, lend, and resell your games exactly as you do today on Xbox 360. Here is what that means:

An internet connection will not be required to play offline Xbox One games – After a one-time system set-up with a new Xbox One, you can play any disc based game without ever connecting online again. There is no 24 hour connection requirement and you can take your Xbox One anywhere you want and play your games, just like on Xbox 360.

Trade-in, lend, resell, gift, and rent disc based games just like you do today – There will be no limitations to using and sharing games, it will work just as it does today on Xbox 360.

In addition to buying a disc from a retailer, you can also download games from Xbox Live on day of release. If you choose to download your games, you will be able to play them offline just like you do today. Xbox One games will be playable on any Xbox One console -- there will be no regional restrictions.

These changes will impact some of the scenarios we previously announced for Xbox One. The sharing of games will work as it does today, you will simply share the disc. Downloaded titles cannot be shared or resold. Also, similar to today, playing disc based games will require that the disc be in the tray.

We appreciate your passion, support and willingness to challenge the assumptions of digital licensing and connectivity. While we believe that the majority of people will play games online and access the cloud for both games and entertainment, we will give consumers the choice of both physical and digital content. We have listened and we have heard loud and clear from your feedback that you want the best of both worlds.

Thank you again for your candid feedback. Our team remains committed to listening, taking feedback and delivering a great product for you later this year.

Mass outrage actually matters when billions of dollars are on the line. Go internet!

[Lord Relvenous]

The first thing that went through my mind was "mission accomplished". Honestly, this surprised me. It shouldn't, as a company modifying policies as a result of customer feedback should be the norm, but I really expected MS to let the One crash and burn due to DRM.

[Jub]

Looks like all this cloud based processing showed for the steaming pile it was if they can go back on the always on in spite of just days before touting the reasons why they were using an always on system. So either they just crippled their system (unlikely) or they were lying to begin with. Either way it makes you wonder what they hoped to gain by all this at the outset.

[Lord Relvenous]

Looks like all this cloud based processing showed for the steaming pile it was if they can go back on the always on in spite of just days before touting the reasons why they were using an always on system. So either they just crippled their system (unlikely) or they were lying to begin with. Either way it makes you wonder what they hoped to gain by all this at the outset.

The great part is that a MS exec in an interview at E3 told Angry Joe that DRM features were complex systems built into the system at the group floor and that they couldn't be turned off "with the flick of a switch". Then this happens. :Lol:

[Jub]

Looks like all this cloud based processing showed for the steaming pile it was if they can go back on the always on in spite of just days before touting the reasons why they were using an always on system. So either they just crippled their system (unlikely) or they were lying to begin with. Either way it makes you wonder what they hoped to gain by all this at the outset.

The great part is that a MS exec in an interview at E3 told Angry Joe that DRM features were complex systems built into the system at the group floor and that they couldn't be turned off "with the flick of a switch". Then this happens. :Lol:

Yeah, I saw that interview as well.

We'll have to see how much of his holds true and how much they go back on at the last minute.

[Admiral Valdemar]

I don't know which would be more delicious: them screwing up their system by flipping off DRM and always on controls that are necessary, or said systems being said to be compulsory and actually being, well, anything but.

Does anyone have a source on the pre-order numbers?

[Anacronian]

Seems like Microsoft have decided to remove all DRM and Region locks from the Xbox One.

Linky

[DaveJB]

I get the feeling that the pre-order numbers caused Microsoft finally realise they really weren't in a position to be saying "Don't like our policies? Then you can go fuck yourself!" - it's not like the situation we had, for instance, when they introduced product activation to Windows XP, and the only alternatives (beside sticking with 9x/2000) were OS X, which was tied to expensive, non-x86 hardware, or Linux, which wasn't very user friendly and tended to explode spectacularly if the slightest thing went wrong in installation or configuration.

[bilateralrope]

I thought that both consoles sold out of preorders. Making the limiting factor the number of preorders each company offered for sale, not how much the public liked them. Which makes me think that there is some other reason for this sudden change.

Especially since none of this outrage should have been a surprise for MS.

[Lord Relvenous]

I don't know which would be more delicious: them screwing up their system by flipping off DRM and always on controls that are necessary, or said systems being said to be compulsory and actually being, well, anything but.

Does anyone have a source on the pre-order numbers?

http://global.christianpost.com/news/ps ... ers-98052/

However, apparently the preorder numbers for the One have been "strong". Which I'm surprised not-at-all about. The people who buy a console 5 months before its release are the same people that aren't going to care about bad publicity.

I thought that both consoles sold out of preorders. Making the limiting factor the number of preorders each company offered for sale, not how much the public liked them. Which makes me think that there is some other reason for this sudden change.

Especially since none of this outrage should have been a surprise for MS.

I would suspect this has less to do with the preorder numbers, and more to do with the overwhelmingly negative portrayal of the One online. Preorders are always going to b your most strident fans, so basing decisions off of them would be silly. I'm sure they are much more worried about the brand's reputation at release. They may have predicted some of the negative responses, but I am quite sure that MS believed they would be the minority response. They were horribly ill-prepared to handle a negative response, which indicates to me that they truly believed gamers would respond well.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Incidents like this always make me re-evaluate just how much a company believes their own spiel. We see this often with EA, but it's quite another to see it with MS for a whole console launch. When you outdo Sony in dicking people with DRM and locking in, you're going to have a bad time.

[Vehrec]

From what I've heard, it was the DoD that told Microsoft to cut it out with the always online requirement. They would have lost the ability to take the 'Box out with the troops with that intact, though it was likely the stars aligning against the entire thing.

And to boot, this will probably invalidate a lot of the features and mechanics of the thing that have been revealed to date. Like, no more family sharing, or switching instantly between games or other things, I haven't been following the tags.

[Lagmonster]

In the end, the publishers were too dickless to decide to be the first one to take advantage of the 'lockout option'. I would not bet a penny that "the Internet" made a difference, and I don't think their investors would have been happy if it had.

It would have been nice to see Microsoft stick to their guns, because a publisher who feels a little more secure seems more likely to take risks on new ideas. There were also a few arguments out there that if Sony/MS had been willing to hamstring the used/trading market, it would have helped keep the purchase price of games at their current low level, especially in the case of AAA blockbusters with huge budgets.

[Melchior]

There were also a few arguments out there that if Sony/MS had been willing to hamstring the used/trading market, it would have helped keep the purchase price of games at their current low level, especially in the case of AAA blockbusters with huge budgets.

The idea - apparently entertained by most publishers - that prices should be dictated not by supply/demand considerations and other market forces, but by how much it costs them to make the games is frankly bizarre. They should learn to keep budgets under control instead.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Like, no more family sharing

This has been confirmed. Link

[Vendetta]

It would have been nice to see Microsoft stick to their guns, because a publisher who feels a little more secure seems more likely to take risks on new ideas.

It's amazing that people say things like this despite the fact that there's something like 20-25 years of evidence that innovation does not come from major publishers in the vast majority of cases, but comes from smaller developers who don't need massive returns in order to break even.

[Lagmonster]

It would have been nice to see Microsoft stick to their guns, because a publisher who feels a little more secure seems more likely to take risks on new ideas.

It's amazing that people say things like this despite the fact that there's something like 20-25 years of evidence that innovation does not come from major publishers in the vast majority of cases, but comes from smaller developers who don't need massive returns in order to break even.

We aren't talking about the small fries with a PC and a dream. We are talking about the people who are willing to pay money to turn innovative ideas into products you can walk into a store and buy for a living room gaming console. We're talking about investors taking risks to get bigger budgets for new ideas rather than produce an endless stream of slightly shinier clones and sequels.

[Vendetta]

Ahhh, leprechauns.


I get you.



Newsflash, even when publishers do take a risk on untried concepts they do it at arms length with smaller development studios, smaller budgets, and lower expectations.

And then if it turns out to be successful only then do they turn up the budget, but because they've turned up the budget they also change the product to "appeal to a broader audience" (ie remove all the risktaking elements and make it as much like some other successful thing. See: Mass Effect, Dead Space, Battlefield, Everything else EA has turned into as fawning a copy of CoD as possible). And they do this precisely because the big publishers are risk averse by nature.

Jumping up and down on the second hand market would not have lead to innovation, it just would have made it easier for Activision to squeeze Call of Duty every year.


Major publishers (the people who would be in a position to benefit most from controlling the second hand market) are the force which drains innovation out of gaming, not the one that puts it in.

[Admiral Valdemar]

I'm going to categorically state that every single new, innovative and interesting game I've bought in the last twelve months has come from an indie studio on a shoestring budget, whether from Steam, PSN or the App Store

[Lord Relvenous]

It would have been nice to see Microsoft stick to their guns, because a publisher who feels a little more secure seems more likely to take risks on new ideas.

It's amazing that people say things like this despite the fact that there's something like 20-25 years of evidence that innovation does not come from major publishers in the vast majority of cases, but comes from smaller developers who don't need massive returns in order to break even.

We aren't talking about the small fries with a PC and a dream. We are talking about the people who are willing to pay money to turn innovative ideas into products you can walk into a store and buy for a living room gaming console. We're talking about investors taking risks to get bigger budgets for new ideas rather than produce an endless stream of slightly shinier clones and sequels.

And if they had stuck to their guns, the Xbox One would be a financial failure and the innovations introduced would die with it anyways.