[Megathread] Xbox One Discussion

[Collegeguy]

Xbox One also didn't "restrict games to be played only online", so why are you bringing that up? You also can't resell games on Steam. Nor can you share games on Steam. These two forms of DRM were not on the original Xbox One. So yes, Steam is full of DRM. You need to be online to add a game. DRM. Everything is DRM.

I've already explained why the 24 hour check-in is necessary at the end of Section 1. Go read it. In fact, read the whole thing.

24 hour check for a single player game is essentially the same thing as only online. You couldn't resell digital distribution before steam.
No, I'm not going to read your wall of text as I have never seen them logical in the past. You just regurgitate the same things over and over. Only difference here is you're not siting yourself as a source.

[mvaliz]

24 hour check for a single player game is essentially the same thing as only online. You couldn't resell digital distribution before steam.
No, I'm not going to read your wall of text as I have never seen them logical in the past. You just regurgitate the same things over and over. Only difference here is you're not siting yourself as a source.

Not to mention his viewpoint seems incredibly insular... like he forgets there's this place out there called "the rest of the world" outside of America.

Many people base this idea on Steam, but they forget there are a) other countries with not-so-great internet and b) most importantly, Japan.

Japan - there IS practically no market for PC gaming. How well did World of Warcraft do in Japan... it did nothing, because it's not out in Japan. People in Japan generally do not play games on PC. They play them on Consoles and use PCs simply for their internet/home needs.

So while that happens in Japan, and while Sony/Nintendo remain Japanese companies, you can bet your bottom dollar that will stay console-based and media-based for a long LONG time to come.

[Deleted]

Yet it's somehow acceptable that this archaic, ancient DRM mechanism survives into the next generation of consoles? Xbox One would have got rid of this, but now it's back.

Let people install from CD.
CD doesn't need to be in drive to play.
???

The main reason that DRM is acceptable is because you can crack it, you can't on a console.

Indeed, WoW is DRM. You can't play WoW offline. DRM! Twitter is DRM. You can't tweet without access to the internet. DRM! Oh, but some people have argued that WoW is a MMO, as if that semantic argument relieves WoW of being DRM. Being online is intrinsic to WoW and Twitter, whereas it is not necessary for Xbox One to have a 24 hour check-in, so the argument goes, therefore, the online requirement of WoW and Twitter is not DRM. But this is completely wrong. The online requirement for WoW is just as much of a free choice by Blizzard as the 24 hours check-in is by Microsoft. Blizzard didn't have to make WoW an online game. They could have put in an offline mode, making the game more like Skyrim. It's also not necessary that Twitter requires the internet. It could have used the cell phone system, like SMS. By this sort of flaky logic, WoW and Twitter are DRM, just like Xbox One, and therefore should be boycotted, and internet rage should be directed by internet users on Blizzard and Twitter for requiring an internet connection to use their service.

W-H-A-T

The second part of the argument is also wrong--Xbox One does necessarily require a 24 hour check-in. It is necessary. Without it, it would be possible to have your friend login with his account on your Xbox One, then download all his games on your console so that you have access to them forever. It would also be possible to resell a physical game, but still play the game by staying offline so the console does not know that you've sold the game.

And the world explodes and piracy runs rampant and kills the gaming industry.

The argument essentially boils down to DRM is OK on Steam because Steam has sales, but it's not OK on Xbox One, because Xbox Live doesn't have sales.

It's not okay but Steam provides enough valuable service to be worth the trade-off, the DRM is also far from as intrusive. (I think you can be offline for a week if you want to? I saw some guy say he fiddled with some files and he could play offline indefinitely)

If you're against Xbox One for DRM, yet subscribe to this argument, you're a sellout. You're selling out your anti-DRM values for cheaper games. No one has been able to articulate why digital games, such as those on Steam, should have DRM, whereas physical games, like discs, should not have DRM.

DRM is okay digitally because it is the only way in which sales can be controlled in any way. A sold disc is one sold disc, sure you could go share it with your friend but you're not gonna share it with your entire city like you would, with ease, digitally.

you're a massive hypocrite selling out your values.

Except nobody really has absolute values when it comes to DRM. Steam is okay because it provides a good service and is less restrictive.

Gaben is the devil

What draconian DRM policies? What values? You speak as if everyone is either entirely for or entirely against DRM. We're not. I'm willing to give up certain things if the service is:
Good.
Non-intrusive.
Not redundant.

Steam happens to do all of these things well, ye olde xbone does not.

Another is disc-based games, which are essentially dead on PC. But on consoles, they survive, these are games without the convenience of being linked to an online account and all the above-listed benefits that brings, and comes with the cumbersome need to screw around with inserting, ejecting, switching and storing discs. Discs are obsolete. Stuffing about with discs is a tedious exercise that is simply unnecessary in PC gaming. Moreover, clinging to this outdated relic, as opposed to going 100% digital distribution, leads to a pointless and unnecessary increase in production costs that either needlessly increases developer’s expenses or leads to higher prices for consumers. Discs are an anathema. Consoles need to get over discs. PC already has.

Do you know the reason I buy games digitally? Because I have no need for anything else, my internet is great. Does everyone? No. Even in a country like Sweden, top 10 in the world on average internet speed, everyone doesn't have the option to.

They are all online games. And yet we have people, on these forums, the forum of an online PC game, arguing that they cannot handle a 24 hour internet check-in or that they cannot effectively download games via the internet.

"These games are popular" =/= "Everyone in the world plays these games."

The sooner consoles realize, as the PC has a decade ago, that online games are the future, the better all our gaming experiences will be, and the more value for money we get out of buying video games.

Do you know why those games are so popular to play? It's simple, the one reason is longevity. If you could play those games only for the average time a singleplayer game takes you, their popularity would crumble. Maybe it's just me but even having over a thousand hours clocked on DotA 2, I don't even consider it to be in my top 20. I'll always prefer good games over long games. To act like our "gaming experiences" will automatically get better is silly.

Despite the drama, this will not be a problem, millions of people seem to be fine with downloading games on Steam currently or playing online games on PC.

Yes, because most of the time, people have choices. On the top of my head, about 5 or 6 of the 200+ games in my Steam library require Steam to run, the rest I could've bought elsewhere. Doing everything you can to please the majority is not always the best business decision.

-Major emphasis on online games, online accounts and social networks: Similar to PC, games on the same platform should always be tied to an online account. There is no outrage about Battle.net accounts or Steam accounts, yet when Microsoft proposes this, it’s suddenly a scandal.

2 of the 3 "big games" on Battle.net require internet to run, period. The third is heavily based around multiplayer. To act like having to be online for Alan Wake and WoW is the same thing is ridiculous.

There should be a greatly increased emphasis on online play and online games which are the most popular on PC and have the greatest longevity.

For the love of Christ, no.

And for all the flaws and compromises Xbox One originally had, it was moving in the right direction,

I can name very few desirable features that would absolutely require the DRM features that Microsoft decided not to implement. Most of the reasons people say it would've been great could've easily been achieved by being optional. If anything, Xbone was running terribly askew.

[Deleted]

Seems a couple people are not up to date on what happened since E3 so just posting this to inform you. Microsoft went back on a couple of their policies.
1: The XBox One will NOT check in every 24 hours. You do however need to be online for 1 time when installing a new game.
2: You can share/resell any disc based game similar to how it works today. (But it is no longer possible as was originally planned to share/resell a digital game)
3: Because of 1, the game disc will need to be in the drive to play a disc based game, even if the game is entirely installed on the HDD.

[Repefe]

I don't know why you still have to be reminded the obvious, but steam does not restrict games to be played only online. Steam does not make you authenticate 24 hours. You don't even need to login to play games, and yet you're still comparing the two...

I don't even think that's the main problem. MS Xbox1 presentation so far was almost void of positive features. When they want to release this kind of dodgy stuff, they have to start with a lot of good features to set the mood. That way they can go, "Guys, we know you won't like this, but after all this goodness there are some not so comfortable features we will implement to support developers ..." Something like that.

But what did they do. The talked over and over about TV. Who the fuck gives a fuck about TV. Maybe if I was 55 years old waiting for retirement I would be happy about Xbox focusing on TV, but I am not. Then they talk about non exclusive exclusives + Halo and GoW ... impressive ? Not. Then kinect that most players are not convinced is useful for anything besides dancing games or making games horrible UI experience. Honestly the kinect presentation ... it's nice to see muscles and heart beat and ppl in room how the kinect sees them, but it's not a great game, is that ... how many hours will you spend measuring your heart beat with kinect.

And then the there are the negative features ... with nothing really to offset them.

I mean honestly as as Xbox fan what is there to be happy about. You get slower console with extra restrictions that alienates indie developers. Be amazed pls.

[paralleluniverse]

Let people install from CD.
CD doesn't need to be in drive to play.
???

The main reason that DRM is acceptable is because you can crack it, you can't on a console.


W-H-A-T


And the world explodes and piracy runs rampant and kills the gaming industry.

It's not okay but Steam provides enough valuable service to be worth the trade-off, the DRM is also far from as intrusive. (I think you can be offline for a week if you want to? I saw some guy say he fiddled with some files and he could play offline indefinitely)


DRM is okay digitally because it is the only way in which sales can be controlled in any way. A sold disc is one sold disc, sure you could go share it with your friend but you're not gonna share it with your entire city like you would, with ease, digitally.





Except nobody really has absolute values when it comes to DRM. Steam is okay because it provides a good service and is less restrictive.



What draconian DRM policies? What values? You speak as if everyone is either entirely for or entirely against DRM. We're not. I'm willing to give up certain things if the service is:
Good.
Non-intrusive.
Not redundant.

Steam happens to do all of these things well, ye olde xbone does not.



Do you know the reason I buy games digitally? Because I have no need for anything else, my internet is great. Does everyone? No. Even in a country like Sweden, top 10 in the world on average internet speed, everyone doesn't have the option to.


"These games are popular" =/= "Everyone in the world plays these games."


Do you know why those games are so popular to play? It's simple, the one reason is longevity. If you could play those games only for the average time a singleplayer game takes you, their popularity would crumble. Maybe it's just me but even having over a thousand hours clocked on DotA 2, I don't even consider it to be in my top 20. I'll always prefer good games over long games. To act like our "gaming experiences" will automatically get better is silly.

Yes, because most of the time, people have choices. On the top of my head, about 5 or 6 of the 200+ games in my Steam library require Steam to run, the rest I could've bought elsewhere. Doing everything you can to please the majority is not always the best business decision.


2 of the 3 "big games" on Battle.net require internet to run, period. The third is heavily based around multiplayer. To act like having to be online for Alan Wake and WoW is the same thing is ridiculous.


For the love of Christ, no.







I can name very few desirable features that would absolutely require the DRM features that Microsoft decided not to implement. Most of the reasons people say it would've been great could've easily been achieved by being optional. If anything, Xbone was running terribly askew.

Your first statement is incomprehensible. I cannot decipher what it's meaning is.

Then you quote by WoW argument, but offer no counterargument.

Then you talk about Steam DRM. You say that digital DRM is OK because it's the only way to control digital distribution. But this doesn't answer the question. For example, it says nothing about why it shouldn't be possible to resell or trade digital licenses. You talk about Steam's DRM not being restrictive. Not being able to resell or share games (which would have been possible on Xbox One) is far more restrictive than requiring a 24 hour check-in, which is no inconvenience at all. It's something that could be done on a 56K modem connection. But most importantly, you completely dodge one of my central points:

If you're against DRM, the fact that Steam has cheap games does not imply that Steam's DRM should skate past without scrutiny. Why not take Steam's cheap games and still boycott and rage against Valve for their oppressive and draconian policies that outright stops you from reselling games and sharing games? Is it because you're scared that without such DRM policies that Steam games wouldn’t be so cheap?

From: http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...1#post21584714

Then you ask me whether I know that online games are popular because of the longevity, when I said exactly that. In fact you quote me saying that. So you didn't read what you're quoting?

Next you talk about choices and crappy internet. Well you do have a choice. Get a PS4. As for crappy internet, I'm from Australia. We have amongst the crappiest internet in the world, yet it's still good enough to be always online (even though it's not required), download lots of games, and play online games: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/tec...718-22azx.html

Then you talk about online requirements on Battle.net, making the same argument that I've already debunked on the "WoW is DRM" argument, which you quoted, but didn't address.

Finally, you talk about Xbox One not requiring it's DRM. Except I proved why it was required and you even quoted it. Without it, people could get every single game for free, another point you didn't really address. The idea that there's nothing good with the original Xbox One is nonsense. As my long post argues, the point is that the future is the PC model, the current console market is the PC market from a decade ago, it's stuck in the past, and the backlash against the Xbox One is completely wrong, because Xbox One moves towards the PC model, which is the better, more efficient, not overpriced, and far more convenient and user-friendly model.

[Deleted]

Then you quote by WoW argument, but offer no counterargument.

Because it's so mind-blowingly "I can't actually be reading this can I?" that I find it hard to collect my thoughts.

You talk about Steam's DRM not being restrictive. Not being able to resell or share games (which would have been possible on Xbox One)

Which was about as final as the new Steam feature for giving games to friends that was found in a bunch of code.

If you're against DRM, the fact that Steam has cheap games does not imply that Steam's DRM should skate past without scrutiny. Why not take Steam's cheap games and still boycott and rage against Valve for their oppressive and draconian policies that outright stops you from reselling games and sharing games? Is it because you're scared that without such DRM policies that Steam games wouldn’t be so cheap?

I don't think you seem to get it so let me tell you again.
If something is overall good, I can overlook flaws.
Xbone wasn't.

Then you ask me whether I know that online games are popular because of longevity, when I said exactly that. In fact you quote me saying that. So you didn't read what you're quoting?

I'm trying to tell you that online games are terrible 95% of the time whereas singleplayer games are only terrible about 85% of the time.

Next you talk about choices and crappy internet. Well you do have a choice. Get a PS4.

Butmahexclusives.

As for crappy internet, I'm from Australia. We have amongst the crappiest internet in the world, yet it's good enough to be always online (even though it's not required), download lots of games, and play online games: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/tec...718-22azx.html

How is "21 out of 34" crappiest?

Then you talk about online requirements on Battle.net, making the same argument that I've already debunked on the "WoW is DRM" argument, which you quoted, but didn't not address.

Because it was quite possibly the most backasswards thing I've read in ages.

Finally, you talk about Xbox One not requiring its DRM. Except I proved why it was required and you even quoted it. Without out, people could get every single games for free

But people already can (for the most part) for PC and the industry hasn't died.

, another point you didn't really address. The idea that there's nothing good in Xbox One originally is nonsense. As my long posts argues, the point is that future is the PC model and the backlash against the Xbox One is completely wrong, because Xbox One moves towards the PC model, which is the better model.

Except the PC model is far from what they were going for. A person with a PC can in most cases, find the games he wants and play them without needing an internet connection while playing. If he has an internet connection now but not later, he can usually download it and then play it whenever. He has a choice of being provided better service if he is able to maintain an internet connection but it is far from necessary.

You could say that buying an Xbone is a decision to waive your choices but, really, why would you?

[Deleted]

I just can't decide if I should get the Xbox One or not. I'm really excited for Titanfall, but I don't know if I can justify buying a console for the sole reason of that game. Decisions...

[Jtbrig7390]

Is this really necessary to post this in an xbox one discussion thread? Why not post it in the PS4 thread, video's like this bring nothing new to the discussion.

Yes it was the XboxOne is apart of it "even tho it did lose" so it was necessary to post it because to me it still shows people are still pissed about the XboxOne and Microsoft.

---------- Post added 2013-06-27 at 04:41 PM ----------

I just can't decide if I should get the Xbox One or not. I'm really excited for Titanfall, but I don't know if I can justify buying a console for the sole reason of that game. Decisions...

Titan Fall will also be on PC so if you got a gaming pc there is no point in throwing out 500$+60$+Tax for just one game.

[Faldric]

I just can't decide if I should get the Xbox One or not. I'm really excited for Titanfall, but I don't know if I can justify buying a console for the sole reason of that game. Decisions...

If its just for that one game just buy it on PC.

[Deleted]

Yes it was the XboxOne is apart of it "even tho it did lose" so it was necessary to post it because to me it still shows people are still pissed about the XboxOne and Microsoft.

---------- Post added 2013-06-27 at 04:41 PM ----------

Titan Fall will also be on PC so if you got a gaming pc there is no point in throwing out 500$+60$+Tax for just one game.

Yeah I guess, I just don't like playing the recent FPS games on PC. I find really fastpaced FPS games like Quake or Wolfenstein Enemy Territory way more fun to play on PC than the recent 'slowpaced' modern shooters. I had BF3 on Xbox 360 before I sold it, and I liked it a lot. About a year ago I bought the PC version and didn't like it at all.

[Jtbrig7390]

Yeah I guess, I just don't like playing the recent FPS games on PC. I find really fastpaced FPS games like Quake or Wolfenstein Enemy Territory way more fun to play on PC than the recent 'slowpaced' modern shooters. I had BF3 on Xbox 360 before I sold it, and I liked it a lot. About a year ago I bought the PC version and didn't like it at all.

If controls was the problem just use a Xbox360/XboxOne controller and I can agree a bit about BF3 on pc. I hate how I got to go to a webpage to play the game because of there crappy DRM on it.

[draykorinee]

Snip

Did anyone actually read all this? I really hate biased blinkered posts, got halfway through and gave up. You may well have posted the longest post on mmo to which hardly anyone will read or agree, well done.

We won, we havent lost anything.

[paralleluniverse]

Did anyone actually read all this? I really hate biased blinkered posts, got halfway through and gave up. You may well have posted the longest post on mmo to which hardly anyone will read or agree, well done.

We won, we havent lost anything.

Perhaps I should stop responding to people like you who don't even bother reading my posts. There's no point talking to people who are incapable of engaging with my arguments because they haven't bother to read to find out what those arguments are.

If you have something to say on the substance of the post by reading the post, then I'm happy to discuss it, otherwise, there's no point.

[draykorinee]

I said I read half of it but was stopped from reading anymore due to the biased nature, if you're going to engage people in conversation dont A) act like a know it all B) write such a one sided piece C) Act like a fortune teller.

As someone else said, its a very insular post, focusing on one stance only, and everyone else is being told they are wrong. That is not a way to engage people in intellectual debate.

It truly is one of the worst posts Ive read on mmo for bias.

utter nonsense

valueless hypocrites

you're a sellout

The haters

your misguided outrage.

loud outrage of a regressive, short-sighted, entitled and hypocritical mob

Yeah I want to discuss anything with you. Lets just agree that your post was a waste of your time, and personally quite a bit shit.

[paralleluniverse]

Because it's so mind-blowingly "I can't actually be reading this can I?" that I find it hard to collect my thoughts.

Which was about as final as the new Steam feature for giving games to friends that was found in a bunch of code.



I don't think you seem to get it so let me tell you again.
If something is overall good, I can overlook flaws.
Xbone wasn't.



I'm trying to tell you that online games are terrible 95% of the time whereas singleplayer games are only terrible about 85% of the time.

Butmahexclusives.


How is "21 out of 34" crappiest?


Because it was quite possibly the most backasswards thing I've read in ages.


But people already can (for the most part) for PC and the industry hasn't died.


Except the PC model is far from what they were going for. A person with a PC can in most cases, find the games he wants and play them without needing an internet connection while playing. If he has an internet connection now but not later, he can usually download it and then play it whenever. He has a choice of being provided better service if he is able to maintain an internet connection but it is far from necessary.

You could say that buying an Xbone is a decision to waive your choices but, really, why would you?

You continue to say that my "WoW is DRM" argument is mind-blowingly dumb, yet have been unable to articulate a coherent counterargument.

You seem to be in denial that Xbox One would had allowed you to resell and share digital games. They were confirmed, with details on the latter yet to be fully released. Now they're dead.

You say that Steam's DRM is OK, because Steam is overall good. But this is still a dodge of my question. You haven't directly addressed my argument, which is why you don't complain to have Steam's oppressive DRM that limits digital rights removed. Even if Steam is currently good, surely removing these DRM will make it even better? So why not do that? So why not call for all Steam's DRM to be removed to make it better?

If you're against Xbox One for DRM, yet subscribe to this argument, you're a sellout. You're selling out your anti-DRM values for cheaper games. No one has been able to articulate why digital games, such as those on Steam, should have DRM, whereas physical games, like discs, should not have DRM. Why is it OK that a digital game cannot be resold, but it's not OK if a physical game cannot be resold? As you rail against Microsoft's rather weak DRM, why don't you complain about Steam's DRM? Because Steam has cheap games? This is a non-sequitar. If you're against DRM, the fact that Steam has cheap games does not imply that Steam's DRM should skate past without scrutiny. Why not take Steam's cheap games and still boycott and rage against Valve for their oppressive and draconian policies that outright stops you from reselling games and sharing games? Is it because you're scared that without such DRM policies that Steam games wouldn’t be so cheap? Unless you're harshly criticizing Valve, which no one in these arguments is, for their outrageously restrictive DRM policies, you're a massive hypocrite selling out your values.

Next, I'm trying to tell you that online games are better. They have more longevity. Online games are the future. Hell, even Tomb Raider, a traditionally single player game felt they needed to add online play.

Australia's internet, 21 out of 34 is "amongst" the crappiest. I said "amongst". And it is.

No, people can't just play any PC games for free. Where on Steam can I get a free copy of Bioshock Infinite? This isn't like piracy. This is building a system that would allow games to be pirated officially into console. If we're going to do that, why charge for games at all? Let's just make it all free.

I never said that this was the PC model exactly. Let me underline, it so that you can read it. I said it's similar to the PC model in many ways. No discs required, the liberating convenience of having all your games on a single account, restricting resale to some extent, a major emphasis on being online. It's not perfect, it's a moving in the right direction. That's means it's a move against the horrible status quo that you're defending:

This is the glorious future that consoles could have had. PC gaming currently is almost there. But now it’s been derailed by mad idiots on the internet, Microsoft’s spinelessness, and Sony’s utter lack of imagination and vision. PC gaming has paved the way forward, and yet the solution of the mob of Microsoft haters is to ignore this fact. And then to rage at Microsoft so that console prices can remain forever overpriced, physical stores like Gamestop and EB can continue to be parasites on the industry, the console market can remain stuck in the past, and the horribly inefficient status quo can be maintained. They have no solution and no vision, just illogical rants and fallacious arguments.
[...]
We need to drag this console market into the future that PC has achieved. And for all the flaws and compromises Xbox One originally had, it was moving in the right direction, while PS4 was planted firmly in the past. People have the bandwidth to download games on Steam, to play online games like WoW and LoL. The world is ready for the online future. And if you’re not, you have a choice: go buy a worthless PS4. The problem now is that there is no longer a choice for a forward-looking console. You might think you’ve won, but Gamestop has won. You’ve lost and ultimately Microsoft’s flip-flop will hurt gamers by perpetuating this shitty system.

From: http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...1#post21584714

---------- Post added 2013-06-27 at 05:36 PM ----------

I said I read half of it but was stopped from reading anymore due to the biased nature, if you're going to engage people in conversation dont A) act like a know it all B) write such a one sided piece C) Act like a fortune teller.

As someone else said, its a very insular post, focusing on one stance only, and everyone else is being told they are wrong. That is not a way to engage people in intellectual debate.

It truly is one of the worst posts Ive read on mmo for bias.



Yeah I want to discuss anything with you. Lets just agree that your post was a waste of your time, and personally quite a bit shit.

Everyone else is being told they are wrong because they are wrong. Most pieces of writing are designed to argue the writer's case, that's why writer's write, so I don't know what you were expecting. This isn't the news section of The New York Times.

[Katchii]

Do you realize all the features that are now gone becuase of the qqing about drm. No more sharing library with friends or family, no more cloud gaming, no more downloading your entire library to a new xbox, no more reselling digital games. But pretty much that pic linked above sums it all up

Not sure how removing the requirements for DRM and always online, no longer makes it possible to do that stuff.

When I bought my PC, there was no always online requirement given to me by the company I bought it from, no DRM implemented that I had to adhere to to be able to play ANYTHING. However, if I want to play World of Warcraft, I need to have an internet connection and abide by Blizzards rules.

Removing the REQUIREMENTS from the system itself doesn't mean the developers who make the games can't use those features, it just means that if people want to play those games, they have to use those features.

[Jtbrig7390]

I think something people who are defending Microsoft don't realize is that the Game Sharing and everything else they talked about could still be done with no problems.

It would push people to buy digital if you buy digital you get the game $$$ cheaper and can share it with family members. But Microsoft acting like a much of spoiled brats got mad because the game was not being play'ed there way so they took there ball and went "Xbox Home". As I said everything they wanted to do can still be done its if Microsoft want's to.

Why can we not have the best of both worlds. Ether buy a hardcopy of the game and you can share it with friends that way and resell it or buy digital for cheaper "if they are cheaper" and get the cloud and family sharing.

---------- Post added 2013-06-27 at 05:48 PM ----------

Not sure how removing the requirements for DRM and always online, no longer makes it possible to do that stuff.

When I bought my PC, there was no always online requirement given to me by the company I bought it from, no DRM implemented that I had to adhere to to be able to play ANYTHING. However, if I want to play World of Warcraft, I need to have an internet connection and abide by Blizzards rules.

Removing the REQUIREMENTS from the system itself doesn't mean the developers who make the games can't use those features, it just means that if people want to play those games, they have to use those features.

It don't people who Defend Microsoft and there DRM try to use that as a argument and as I just proved in my post it is still possible to do everything without the drm.

Like I said before why can we not have the best of both worlds.

[Dasffion]

You continue to say that my "WoW is DRM" argument is mind-blowingly dumb, yet have been unable to articulate a coherent counterargument.

There's no counter argument because it's a completely ridiculous argument. If they had made it into a single player game like Skyrim then there would be no need to connect to the servers, there wouldn't even be any servers, so it wouldn't require you to be online. Having to be online to access the servers for a online game isn't the same thing as having to have internet connection to play a single player game. If you can't understand the difference here then you have serious problems.

[Edge-]

Not sure how removing the requirements for DRM and always online, no longer makes it possible to do that stuff.

It doesn't. They can always just make those features require a constant connection (or a frequent check in) while normal use of locally stored games attached to your account and disk based games can continue to function offline.

And before the, "OH! BUT PIRATES/HACKERS WILL CRACK THAT!!!!!" They'll crack whatever Microsoft or Sony puts on to restrict them in the first place. Screwing over honest consumers because of issues with hackers/piracy is never acceptable.