This week on Gamertag Radio: Godfree & Parris talks about why this is a great time to be a gamer, why people should be patient with the new next gen consoles during E3 and why gamers are afraid of changes with the whole DRM controversy.
Afraid of change and not wanting money grabbing restrictions on their consoles are two different things.
So if someone was stealing from you... you wouldn't try to stop it? I know I would.
with a shotgun and some canyen pepper to rub into the bullet wound edit: to the disagrees. i dont support ms console, i dont believe used games or lending your games to your friends is stealing was just making a joke to the above users comment
I'm a little confused as to how your reply factors in to what I said.
Pure nonsense if you are trying to say used games = stealing.
Buying something used is not stealing, trading games with your friends is not stealing, giving games you have already played to family members is not stealing.
So people who buy used games should go to prison
The used game thing is nonsense... since it's been stated that the games can be sold back to the retail and the sold used. And to the game producers and publishers it is stealing.
So if one person steals, everyone else has to pay the consequences as well?
Tell me where you think buying a used game or giving a game your done with to someone is stealing... cause if it is... then millions of people and thousands of game stores are going to jail. Stealing is taking something that you didnt pay for or wasnt given to you by someone that paid for it. I get what your trying for there, but your wrong... and so are the game makers. There are better ways to go about getting people to buy games new. Like maybe adding in extras that make spending the extra $5 to $10 dollars worth it. Without the used games market... forget being able to go back and play games you missed out on. Or in 15 to 20 years when you want to go back and play some old games just for nostalgia or to show your kids or gran kids... you cant. Wikkid666 "And to the game producers and publishers it is stealing." Oh no... its not stealing to them, but its also not making them money either so why would they support it. I used to think like you... then I grew up.
you mean me putting up my old car in part exchange for a new one is stealing? M$ are simply trying to control gaming pure and simple,If anything it is M$ trying to steal our rights, don't accept it people!!!!!!
I'm not sure how consumers who purchase your product are considered thiefs. Only the software industry tries to dictate what u can do with their product once u purchase it. Digital downloads are sonewhat understandable but for a consumer to spend over 60 on a hard copy of a disc and for a company to tell that I can only allow one friend to use it or that I can use it at a friends house but that is monitored/restricted as well is completely unacceptable.
So just how much piracy has there been on the PS3 exactly??? There has been absolutely no need to force an always internet connected gaming system and lock out 2nd hand games. It should be like most other changes in that it becomes a user instigated direction if it works. i.e. how many gamers are playing Grid 2 on their console and how many are playing the SP with their console connected as the game features other friends SP best times etc - it's not forced rather a feature but should you want to you could play the SP without being connected and that is exactly how it should work. If MS want always on then let them pay for our internet service. I too very rarely buy 2nd hand but there has been occasions when I wanted an old game BUT I also very rarely buy 2nd hand books too (of course if 2nd hand games gets blocked then maybe book publishers will start burning any 2nd hand books so they too can get cash on every sale). It's very easy for greed to be put across in such a way that it sounds reasonable but we live in a world where huge amounts of 2nd hand items are traded all the time whether it be houses, cars to a game and at no time is the original seller granted profit from it. If you start to analyse who should get what then the publisher is quite a long way down the chain - surely the programmers are the only ones who should get extra payments but hang-on - no, surely it's the developer of the computer language used as without them there wouldn't have been a game - you could them micro analyse the computer language as really shouldn't the guys that developed the silicon IC's get the profit - this is why we don't have this type of economy; you bought it, you are the new owner to do as you please including selling it END
"to the game producers and publishers it is stealing." I see. It's stealing because they say it is. Gotcha. (Horrible point)
Well anyone who thinks this change is only coming to X1 is crazy, I dont care how sony words it if you think publishers are going to charge 2nd hand fees on 1 and not on the other without a major loss of support for the 1 that doesnt compensate them then you are being very foolish. microsoft loves money so for them to admit publicly they dont receive any cut of these fees is very telling= "not our fault blame the publishers" and I'm sure if it wasnt true publishers would be out in force, notice their silence.
... it should be an 'improvement'! The announced 'changes' CLEARLY are the complete opposite of 'improvements': we lose our consumer rights, and it inflicts our privacy. Plus it forces crap upon us that we DON'T WANT, like mandatory Kinect. We're not afraid of change. When they're improvements, like dual-analogue sticks, or triggers, or a service like PSN+, we WELCOME it! Because those are changes for the better. WE BENEFIT FROM THOSE CHANGES! We won't benefit from the announced 'changes' MS wants to force upon us. And I'm certainly not going to buy their vision of 'change'.
Godfree My wife knows more about gaming than you do. Why you bother recording your opinion to share with others boggles my mind. On topic: Why anyone tries to defend the direction DRM is headed is nonsensical at best and infringing on the rights as a consumer. No other entertainment industry does this and they are all doing fine even with the existence of used sales and rentals of their product. This has NOTHING to do with fear and everything to do with GREED. The nickel and diming started with MS charging to play online (XBL) and continued with MS having Epic charge for the 1st DLC for Gears of War. Which Epic was against doing. After that the snowball turned into an Avalanche and soon they were charging us for horse armour. Which is kind of fitting now that they (Avalanche) are the primary mouth piece for MS right now. These restrictions, which will lead to even additional fees, are completely unwarranted and (IMO) out of control. If consumers give into this nonsense the industry wont survive it. That's not lunacy, it's simply common sense. People need to understand that the masses don't purchase DLC but it's the minority of gamers that do. It's as if these manufacturers and developers don't care about actual numbers but how much money they can squeeze out of each piece sold by tacking on extra fees and restrictions. Doing away with rentals and greatly restriction used games sales wont warrant more new units sold. Not at full MSRP. Trust me when I tell you games won't drop in price nearly as fast as they do now once these tactics of their fall into place. This is not moving the industry forward. That is why consumers disapprove of these restrictions. It has NOTHING to do with fear. Learn of which you speak or do us a favor and don't.
They aren't being robbed. Your logic is wrong. They manufactured a game and someone purchased the game. They were paid for their product. Book publishers don't do this. According to you, libraries and Gamestop are breaking the law.
this isnt change. Its taking away rights. We might as well be in a country that gives no rights to its citizens, the same way apple does for its users. Dear Microsoft - You are not Apple, stop trying to be like them, otherwise you will backtrack the same way you did with the windows 8 start button!!!!!!!
^this. These are unneccesary restrictions that just hurt their loyal fans people who were never going to pay for games will always find a way to circumvent it but proper consumers wont be able to. The 500gb hdd in the xb1 is unchangable too which means after a dozen or so games it will be full esp if you like open world games like gta or elder scrolls
I had an argument on here about that with someone a while back. I think we made an argument about how much will be applied to the hdd. I stated the best answer, which in my opinion was 500gb. The other individual stated that it would be 1-5tb, if I am not mistaken. All I remember was that it was in the terabyte range. Either way, I had to make the claim to the user that it made no sense for MS to add that amount of hdd space because it could get expensive. I also stated that if there would be mandatory installs, which in this case it looks like there will be, Each game published to the Xbone could eat up hdd space fast. To me, looking from the inside out, they are expecting users to play only at least 10 games in their console life time at once. Now that doesn't include downloads extras and space for the operating system. Granted, I know the cloud environment exist and most likely you can delete unused information but it still eats up a lot of memory fast. For now on I am going to refer to the Xbone as rented hardware.
You see that's the problem with some gamers today. They think everything is theirs and want stuff for free, and only see things from a consumers perspective. Not saying i agree with all the DRM stuff but why are people so pissed about this when the music, movie, and clothing/fashion industry take steps to protect their investments/products, there isn't all this rage. If someone was stealing from you (like Gamestop does every day to customers and publishers/devs) you would be pissed and want to do something about it too. I remember when people were shitting bricks when they found out the music industry was going digital and HDTV was replacing analog. Also when MS wanted to put a internet connection to xbox people thought that was stupid saying things like, "consoles don't need the internet". Look at it now, hardly anyone purchases CDs and analog tv is gone and consoles with internect connection is a standard. I would much rather have a small inconvenience than to help put devs out of work and bring down the industry. You dinosaurs need to get with the times. Lets see how all this plays out before we bash it to death.
Um... except that you can still buy and sell used Music CDs, movies (Bluray and DVD) and clothing... So your argument is meaningless. (Edit)Sure if you buy it digitally then you can not resell it and thats expected and understood. But they are taking away our rights with PHYSICAL property. Us dinosaurs (as you so ignorantly put it) have every right to fight back against this kind of control. If they want to go purely digital and really take out the used games market, fine... do it. But see, they cant yet cause they wouldnt last, we arent far enough along in digital games for them to do that yet. So instead they take this path which I hope fails, because if it doesnt, it could set a dangerous precedent to other entertainment industries, like movies. Imagine not being able to take your movies to friends houses, or being able to rent them. Imagine if you had to BUY at full cost, every movie you wanted to watch. Would you support that?
"Not saying i agree with all the DRM stuff but why are people so pissed about this when the music, movie, and clothing/fashion industry take steps to protect their investments/products, there isn't all this rage." You are saying you agree with all the DRM stuff. How are you not? Funny, but I see used music, movies, and clothes in many places. Why does the original maker deserve more money when the original buyer sells what they bought to someone else? "If someone was stealing from you (like Gamestop does every day to customers and publishers/devs) you would be pissed and want to do something about it too." So the way to get GameStop to do the right thing is to punish the consumers? Give me a break. "I remember when people were shitting bricks when they found out the music industry was going digital and HDTV was replacing analog. Also when MS wanted to put a internet connection to xbox people thought that was stupid saying things like, "consoles don't need the internet". " Not even remotely similar. This "some gamers are afraid of change" argument is really ridiculous, but I'm not surprised to see you jump on board. The bottom line is the publishers want more money, whether they deserve it or not, and you agree with them for some reason. I still haven't seen anyone explain why they deserve it.
@mystic I think we all know what the reason is why belking agrees with this.
I don't ask for stuff for free, but if it's offered I don't mind taking it. I think the games I purchase in the store with my money is mine. Call me crazy I guess. Dunno why I'd think that way since it's only been like that for the 30+ years I've been gaming. GameStop is a red herring. They don't steal from their customers. Customers choose to use the services they provide, and while it may not be oconsumer friendly, it's not against consumer rights. If they are stealing from the publishers then why do publishers support them so much? Answer me that smart boy. Publishers could have shut down GameStop long ago. People weren't shitting bricks over music going all digital. You know why? because it didn't go all digital. You can still buy physical CD's, and to say almost no one buys physical anymore is just wrong. It was only last year where digital sales JUST BARELY passed physical sales. The key to that transition was choice. The adoption happened because of the convenience and the price. Price is something I don't put much trust in publishers of games to go the same route. HDTV hasn't replace analog...or I believe you mean SDTV. SDTV is still widely available, and in fact is more ubiquitous in people's homes than HDTV's. HDTV doesn't even have a 50% adoption rate in the US, it's not expected to reach that point until 2016. Another fact, a vast majority of programming delivered is still in SDTV, with HDTV being a premium charged addition. Try using google before making up facts. I'm sorry if we look at things from a consumer prospective. I'm sorry if that's an inconvenience for you. But last time I checked, we are consumers. I imagine you are one as well.
So much agree with this post. It is not about the consoles features it is about WHY the consoles have the features that they do. This is "for the love of money" features not to improve gaming in any way shape or form. Why are people so blind these days? What is happening to people these days? Are people watching to much Glee or The Office or Parks and Rec to dumb you down to a sheep?
What im trying to figure out how come Microsoft doesn't do this with windows or office the 24 hour checks. So why should gamers be find with it. They just using gamers as lab rats to see if its a success.
We aren't afraid of change for the better, we don't like change for the worse though. We are open to change, hence us embracing the next gen of gaming...duh.. Just because we aren't ball licking Microsoft doesn't mean we don't appreciate change. The "changed" games have to be good though and you can't JUST change the box, you have to give us games to play on it, and not just crap games, games that we like and appreciate and remember for years to come. The problem is that the people with final say/making decisions at a lot of these companies are so far removed from being a gamer that they just can't relate and so they make horrible choices that no gamer would obviously make and they just to always put a spin on it with some BS talk and what not. We are aware of these All show, no substance kind of people now and those people are now butthurt that they can't trick people as easily anymore. Microsoft could have spent $400 million on creating 5-7 of the best games ever, but instead they invest that in kinect 2.0 and TV.
What is the point of change if its change if its change for the worse...
There's good change and bad change out there Some of the things these companies do only benefits themselves rather than making the consumers( the people who buy their consoles) happy
Nobody wanted Microsoft to require a broadband connection for gameing online when the standard was 56 k modems.
not the same thing @ downloading games is nice but unless the game prices actually change and reflect age of games etc like steam it wont take off on consoles esp on the xb1. Thats the main reason it has done so well on pc to the point of people abondoning their disc drives. Blu ray, blu ray xl etc can hold massive amounts of data as long as they continually give devs the ability to store as much as they want there really isnt a problem with them at all.
Really is... change is change. The future is in digital distribution. Physical media is dated and eventually gone.
You would be surprised how many people won't by big games if they don't have a hard copy. Maybe one day it will be ok but we are nowhere near that yet. i'm shocked some of you would even try to defend it. I'm guessing you have more money then sence.
It's actually kinda weird to me, see I'm an animator and thusly work with plenty other animators and the like. We've dealt with modern age digital licensing for the longest time now (Try to buy a license of Maya and re sell... let me know how well that goes for you) so to see games finally adopt the individual licensing policies so late is just kind of natural. People are attached to the idea of them buying the physical and tangible product that it's now THEIR property an they can do with it as they see fit. But what you're really doing is buying a license to operate it. Pretty damn sure it would sound insane if I were to ask my friend to come over so we can both use his copy of Marmoset Toolbag :P
Some countries have a law that allows you to pass on the license to operate it. If I purchase something, I can give it to some one else. License or physical copy.
Wrong.... When you buy/rent a "program" like PhotoShop or Maya, you're buying a license to use it. Those programs grants you access to a "service" that you can use from the comfort of your home or office without having to go directly to the said company's physical location to use the service. A video game on a disc is NOT a SERVICE, the same way a movie on DVD or BluRay is not a service. They are end products sold on a market, hence there should be digital licensing on attached with it, unless you bought a Digital Copy instead of a physical one. Get it right buddy.... Sh!!!!!!t, even your car insurance is transferrable to whomever you let borrow your car, and insurance companies are known to be evil. So let that sink in for a bit.
So let me get this straight... games... with their after launch patches, continued multiplayer server support. Are not a service. Ok just wanted to make sure. Basically games ARE indeed a service and are based on a license system, buying the physical disc doesn't mean you can rip the art assets from it and use them in your game or some shit, the 60$ is a basic owner/operator license.
@Winter If games were made correctly no patches would be needed. Intellectual property is still the right of the creator I can not rip it and use it as my own whether it is ART from a game or WORDS from a book or MUSIC from a song. yet I can trade movies, music, and all my old games. One other point to mention just because this licensing of Maya and other products have laws defending the resale of the license doesn't mean we all agree with that either. To be perfectly honest I hate licensing laws that protect the resale of any product that is purchased (digital or not).
>>with their after launch patches, continued multiplayer server support. The original product is just that, a product. Updates and server support are a "service." Owning a car isn't a "service." Dealer maintenance, OnStar, etc, are services. If I want to use a game as-purchased, as-is, with no "services" attached to it, I should be allowed to do so without further charge or restrictions on use or reselling. The Xbone policies infringe upon that.
Completely different area IMO. Going back to gaming and not PC software licenses, I dunno about you but I've never taken a pc game over to a friend's house so we can do co-op, or to simply play it for a while and go home, leave with a friend for awhile, etc. I don't even think I've ever had a group of friends sitting around a single PC playing games together. Consoles on the other hand, yes. All the time, yes. All this has done is make this harder and more inconvenient to do, not to mention other problems that are bound to appear for some people. What if you end up somewhere without internet? That happens to more people than you realize. Oops? Tough luck? SOL? How about gamers that don't have decent internet? Hard Drive failure? Guess you'll to install all those games again just to play one instead of simply popping the disc in.(Mandatory install right?)Add the fact that 500gigs would be gone QUICK considering all the games I own. I guess that means I'd just have to spend more money on an external drive. BS. Back to the used game issue, something that isn't clear to me is what do you do when you want to sell to an individual? I have only seen talk of selling to "participating retailers". I figured(and even mentioned) that Gamestop would be partnered with this somehow, and you all should know how they just LOVE giving you decent prices/credit on the games you sell them. Gamers as a whole are really being bent over a barrel on this, the sad thing is some don't even realize it.
If we are paying only for licensing right to use a game then game price should be lower not more then $20 because we are basically renting a game license ,but $60 for so call renting "license" is unacceptable.
@WinterSoldier "Basically games ARE indeed a service and are based on a license system, buying the physical disc doesn't mean you can rip the art assets from it and use them in your game or some shit, the 60$ is a basic owner/operator license." So by your logic I could buy a bag of Cheetos and then have rights to use its logo royalty free because it's a product and not a service?
We are not afraid of change...we are just afraid of being ripped off
To me all of this is happening because of GameStop and other companies alike, If this companies gave a percentage back from selling used games just like they do with new games I don't think we would be having this conversation. I also believe some game companies would be doing a lot better and some would probably be still alive and running, and the gaming industry would be in a better shape.
In what other industry does the producer receive returns from second-hand sales of previously-purchased products?
Everything they said is true. If Sony dont want to do Drm they would have held a press conference yesterday and announced that they aren't doing any of this stuff. Sony knows if they dont do Drm 3rd party publishers will not release there titled on the ps4 fear of losing ,omey on trade ins and rentals. @above well said. @below you still don't get it do you. If Sony don't do DRM and outsold x1 it will be more money lost for them. Publishers have shareholders to impress they will not allow more losses on a non DRM console.
& if Sony doesn't go with DRM and out sale Microsoft because of that 3rd party publishers will be left with a choice of loosing out on a whole lot of money.
At last count we're looking at around 50 game announcements for the ps4 at E3 so clearly they've got plenty of support without the draconian XB1 DRM. I expect the DRM was instigated by Microsoft because of the rampant piracy on the 360.
if less people or no one buys a xbone you think pub will still flock and do games to that box? why would they need to impress shareholders are they the one who buys games?
>> If Sony dont want to do Drm they would have held a press conference yesterday and announced that they aren't doing any of this stuff. "Wait until E3!" If Sony comes out at E3 and announces/confirms what we've been hearing so far in terms of no online requirements, no baked-in DRM (leaving it to publishers), and no PS4Eye requirements, the place will f'ing explode with applause. (if not... well, we'll need to reassess the situation in light of the information provided) I just can't wait to see if MS gets booed at their conference.
i dolnt like the psn or the controller on playstation at all but i guran tee u this if they dont do the used game shit an the 24 hr check in then im all for it i will find a way to make a xbox controller work on it an deal with the psn... sony shouldnt budge casue if the gamers back them an dont buy the xbox1 then the 3rd party companys wont be able to not come to sony stand strong sony
The only thing I`m afraid of is that I might need to upgrade my PC soon depending on what Sony does. Well I still have my current gen consoles and Wii U.
I think Sony will be more reasonable than MS, and while I've been a Playstation fan since PS1, I won't stand for any BS. If it all goes bad, then just consider me retired from current gaming...there are still worlds of old games that I still need to try, and I really do think I could be quite content with going in that direction.
I hope so. I love the games that Sonys 1st party studios make, but I`m not willing to put up with that shit to play them and I was happy to buy a PS3 on launch for 600 bucks and had no regrets. But all that DRM and blocking of stuff like lending friends a game is utter and complete crap, especially if the game prices don`t change.
Here come the smears. Always the same, any objection to DRM dismissed as luddism. I buy games new at full price on a fairly frequent basis. My favorites I keep, the others I sell on. The money I receive from selling games I choose not to keep I put towards the purchase of my next NEW game. Remove that revenue stream from me and guess what? I'll buy fewer games. I simply won't buy into any console that is as restrictive as the Xbrick is promising to be.
Exactly. As much as I've loved my Playstations, and look forward to PS4, if Sony follows MS's lead I'll do something I haven't done in over twenty years. I'll buy a Nintendo console.
Exactly and if I were to develop a game I would do my best to make sure it has either infinite replay value or forms an emotional attachment with buyers. Make good games... limit used sales. Not that selling used sales are all that bad because as you said they often go toward funding buying new games while the buyers get to play games they were on the fence about and may be more likely to buy a future game in that series day 1 if they liked it.
Eventually even games journalists will realise how empty that phrase now is. Any real adult knows there's a distinction between good change and bad, and that it's possible to mistrust just the latter.
Change for the sake of change BS. Change is only good if it benefits the majority not a few greedy companies. WAKE THE F UP journalists...your job is also on the line. This induced 'change' will kill the gamer community and our culture. NO culture NO Journalists. Microsoft just tries to buy everyone out including the Journalists and then destroy everything with these measures in THEIR CONSTRUCT. Read the art of war before making such retard quotes. MS doesn't give a f about the gaming culture, it wants to hijack our culture for it's own benefit. Never has there been a more important moment in the history of videogames and their evolution. There is so much more to do on the creative side than imposing Draconian DRM and superficial innovation with the pathetice datamining & surveillance device Kinect. F all those proposals. MS leave the gaming realm and focus your attention on other things, but don't use gaming to be cool and lure people in your shameless restrictions and pathetuc vision for the future where there are more implications beyond gaming such as for example the enforing of inequality/discrimination. I detest how they act like they own the gaming world and know what's best for us.
Online trolls are not going to change the gaming industry. But I bet your wallet will.
Video game publishers don't seem to understand the throwaway - or should I say giveaway - nature of the product they are making. The used game market is as much about getting rid of games you don't want as much as it is about getting bargains. Also by stopping people from being able to gift games to friends and family - and to stop those people doing the same, they are creating less reasons to get a game - less reasons to risk buying a flop.
Change for the better is good. I just don't like being stuck up without a gun.
Just don't take away our rights completely, give us a choice between physical and digital like we have with movies and music.
Some of you guys are trying to compare this to the movie and music industry fighting pirating of movies and music.. and your wrong. The movie industry and music industry isnt fighting used movie or music sales. They are fighting the illegal copying and selling of movies and music via downloads or bootleg copies. But, for the games industry, you cant just download and app on your console to be able to play free games.. (not that I know off anyway) What MS is doing is actually taking away your rights as a consumer with the physical media you buy. Get it straight... those industries have no problem with used products that are resold, only illegally created and sold products. Theres a big difference.
There is going o be a physical and digital,no one has said any different,i prefer ms way of doing things,at least they have showed way way more than sony,sony have been all talk and showed us nothing,i respect sony but they seem way behind on this.
Video game industry is killing they customer. They want to increase the price to $70 ,they want to limited us what we do with our game,they cut original game to dlc. what next ? we paid $70 for a free to play game that we need keep paying to finished the game ? Enough is enough reward your customer not Punish your customer.
Afraid of change: No Afraid of having my rights taken away and being monitored: Uh, Yea!