LeCreuset

Member
CRank: 5Score: 31390

Leaving it up to developers whether they want to put restrictions on their games is a lot different than designing your system to allow publishers to control the used game market.

If you are a developer and you put an unpopular restriction in your game, okay—but that's a pretty bold move to make when there are going to be other developers—the competition—that don't have those restrictions.

Developers/Publishers don't really have the stones to ma...

3994d ago 2 agree1 disagreeView comment

No biggie, right? I mean, who would want to ask questions of a company caught up in a scandal in which they're accused of allowing the government to access users' data directly from their servers who are planning to shove a continually connected device with an always on camera into every living room?

http://www.businessinsider....

3994d ago 3 agree0 disagreeView comment

:)

3998d ago 0 agree0 disagreeView comment

Optional as in an accessory you buy separately, or optional as in always on?

4006d ago 0 agree1 disagreeView comment

1) You have other options to digitally downloaded games, like their physical counterparts in most cases.

2) Can't speak for Xbox, but with Playstation some of the cons of a digital game are balanced by the pros. One example I can think of is a friend who bought Borderlands 2 digitally so that he and his wife can play on separate PS3s at the same time, without having to buy two copies of the game. What's the benefits under the Xbone system? We've already been told ...

4006d ago 3 agree3 disagreeView comment

Except Microsoft is asking for a lot of trust with this always on camera. Even if the patent is never used, it reveals two things:

1) It reveals how problematic an always on-camera can potentially be to those MS is asking to trust them and not worry about having an always on camera in their homes.

2) It shows that the party asking for trust (MS) has thought of ways in which the camera could be used against the consumer for the benefit of MS and its partners....

4007d ago 3 agree0 disagreeView comment

1) I'm not hiding from my own machine in my own home.

2) I wouldn't be surprised at this point if the little snitch machine squeals to M$ if it detects it's being tampered with, resulting in some violation of their T&C, leading to the ban of your account and all of those games tied to it that you never really owned but were borrowing from Xbox despite paying full price for them.

4007d ago 5 agree0 disagreeView comment

Block the movie? Nah. That would give you a CHOICE of deciding whether to pay an additional fee to continue the movie. That's not the Xbone way. There will probably be some fine print in the terms and conditions which you accept when renting the movie that allows them to automatically charge an additional fee if your girlfriend drops by. Of course, MS will spin this as being designed "to provide our consumers with an uninterrupted viewing experience."

4007d ago 6 agree0 disagreeView comment

Screw it. I have some bubbles left and I just read Jek's follow up.

Jek, we already know that a friend borrowing your game will have to PAY for the activation code if not using your account. You've chosen to believe Polygon's sources over logic and all of the other information out there. Now from a logical standpoint—if what Polygon's sources say is true—why would your friend have to pay an activation fee to play the game you loaned him if authentication can j...

4007d ago 4 agree0 disagreeView comment

http://www.polygon.com/2013...

That's his link. "Sources" that told Polygon. LOL. I could go in on how illogical that is, but he's too far gone to even bother.

4007d ago 1 agree0 disagreeView comment

And how much do you think they will be giving gamers in return now that they have to pay MS and company for every used game sold?

4008d ago 3 agree0 disagreeView comment

Here's a novel concept: Put out a quality product at an affordable price for your target audience. Whatever happened to making money that way? I'm so sick of this entitled attitude that developers/publishers (honestly, it's probably more the publishers) should be raking in GTA money with every game they put out (looking at you Tomb Raider).

I'm tired of this flawed argument that sales from used games are sales that should have gone back to the publisher. To ha...

4008d ago 4 agree0 disagreeView comment

Guess what? I can read. I just read. I disagree.

Nothing has changed?

1) Microsoft and publishers will take a cut of the money from retailers sells of used games. One report has that cut leaving the retailer with only 10%. Retailers current slice from selling used games is 100%. Who do you think is going to end up taking the hit from this? It's the customers trading in their used games that are going to see the trade in values for their games drastically ...

4008d ago 24 agree4 disagreeView comment

LOL. Desperate click bait gonna be desperate.

4008d ago 4 agree0 disagreeView comment

Just as "wait for E3" will become "wait until launch."

4008d ago 6 agree1 disagreeView comment

He is like The Boss. His name will forever live in infamy, but behind the scenes he was a true hero.

4008d ago 3 agree0 disagreeView comment

At this rate, Xbox users will be flooding the arcade to play the games they own on their console, just to save money.

4008d ago 1 agree0 disagreeView comment

They act like the Xbox One is introducing gaming to the internet. Gaming and the internet are nothing new. It's their approach we have a problem with.

4010d ago 2 agree1 disagreeView comment

The statements coming from MS post reveal have been disingenuous. It's not an either or proposition. Does the PS4 ignore the web? He's intentionally trying to obscure the nature of the criticism being leveled at MS.

4010d ago 5 agree1 disagreeView comment

Your first sentence said it all. I do a lot of that stuff on my PS3, but that is not what made me buy my PS3. Confusing that distinction may prove fatal for Xbox One.

4010d ago 3 agree2 disagreeView comment