DRM is the killer feature

[MikeChipshop Member]

$60 bucks for a game is hardly free.  Yea, if I buy something I want to use/sell it the way I want and without it having to "phone home".  DRM does nothing to combat piracy and only places restrictions on those people who legally obtain the product.

 

I said people want everything for free, i did not say "Computer games are free".

In future, stop, count to ten, think about your reply then close the browser window instead.

[Nagisan]

Legal stuff aside, you can't.  I buy a disc copy of a game on the PC, I have a cd key to use.  Once I use it then it's used, as far as I know I can't reuse it.   Other games also tie into other services, you can buy a disc copy and tie it to your steam account and then, what?   Sure you can give the disc away but honestly, for the longest time now PC games have been install once and done.    There's no used PC games market for this reason.

I never claimed there was a market for used PC games, I simply said it can be done. As an example, I could let my friends use my Guildwars 2 account, or even sell it to them if I wanted....and unless ArenaNet has a way of tracking everything you do, they would never know I sold it to him.

 

You CAN lend out and sell used PC games, it's just very uncommon because it's often tied to an account that's connected to other things. I personally have let my best friend onto my game accounts before, because I know him well enough to know he wouldn't intentionally do anything bad with my account, and he has done the same with me. There is no market for this, but it is entirely possible to lend out/sell used PC games even if it's tied to an account used for other things. And it is not illegal at all, only sometimes against the EULA (it is typically only against the EULA because companies don't want to deal with the backlash of what could happen if you lend your account out and the person you lent it to steals it).

[Jim K Global Moderator]

I said people want everything for free, i did not say "Computer games are free".

In future, stop, count to ten, think about your reply then close the browser window instead.

 

Once again...people do not want restrictions on what they PAY for.  Your "people want everything for free" comment isn't relevant.

[MikeChipshop Member]

Once again...people do not want restrictions on what they PAY for.  Your "people want everything for free" comment isn't relevant.

 

My comment was regarding the internet culture of download for free, open source software and piracy. The way that this has embedded itself in our culture meaning everyone wants something for free or unrestricted these days.

So yes my comment was very relevant but of course don't let that get in the way of your inane replies, i could do with a good giggle.

 

The fact is, the restrictions in most DRM is the same as has always existed in licence agreements right back to vinyl records but everyone still kicks up a stink on some crazy crusade on something they know nothing about.

[George P Global Moderator]

I never claimed there was a market for used PC games, I simply said it can be done. As an example, I could let my friends use my Guildwars 2 account, or even sell it to them if I wanted....and unless ArenaNet has a way of tracking everything you do, they would never know I sold it to him.

 

You CAN lend out and sell used PC games, it's just very uncommon because it's often tied to an account that's connected to other things. I personally have let my best friend onto my game accounts before, because I know him well enough to know he wouldn't intentionally do anything bad with my account, and he has done the same with me. There is no market for this, but it is entirely possible to lend out/sell used PC games even if it's tied to an account used for other things. And it is not illegal at all, only sometimes against the EULA (it is typically only against the EULA because companies don't want to deal with the backlash of what could happen if you lend your account out and the person you lent it to steals it).

 

You're kinda going off into something else, that's giving your account away.  That's fine, because that account is tied to that game itself.  What if your account is tied to all your games?  Like Steam, Origin, PSN, XBL etc?   You going to give it away to?  In the end while what you say is possible it's not the same thing as getting a game disc, playing it, then giving it away without any account worries and cd key issues.  That's something consoles have had going for them till now but the PC stopped being able to do long ago.

 

I remember when games just had a cd key, then came the cd key and needing to have the "play" disc in the drive.  Now we have cd keys, account tie-ins, online requirements and so on.  If anything the PC is the most DRM infested gaming platform out there. 

[efjay]

Thing is, same game on the PS4 wont be restricted in any way and can be played totally offline if  you want to. If someone's friends cant afford to buy the game themselves to play with you they probably shouldnt have bought the console in the first place. I think its funny the way the X1 is being defended so much, anyone who's not a MS fanboy will just get the alternative that doesnt make you jump through hoops to play your games. Anyway you look at it, the PS4 is the better buy.

 

And for some perpective I am currently fully in the MS ecosystem with a 360, Lumia 920, various Windows 8 devices and dont use a single apple or google service. But even I can see the PS4 is the most sensible choice if you want to just sit down and play a game without worrying about doing anything other than inserting a disc in your console.

 

And here's more food for thought, MS's current mobile platform, WP8 has no way to access your purchased content from Xbox video. When the OS was first being pitched MS made a big thing about "3 screens and the cloud" but now make no mention of Windows Phone in those scenarios. This is how MS works, ignoring certain sections of its userbase when it suits them and denying them access to their content from certain devices. So if you think you will be able to access your digital games forever, be prepared for the day when MS says that is no longer possible.

[Nagisan]

You're kinda going off into something else, that's giving your account away.  That's fine, because that account is tied to that game itself.  What if your account is tied to all your games?  Like Steam, Origin, PSN, XBL etc?   You going to give it away to?  In the end while what you say is possible it's not the same thing as getting a game disc, playing it, then giving it away without any account worries and cd key issues.  That's something consoles have had going for them till now but the PC stopped being able to do long ago.

 

I remember when games just had a cd key, then came the cd key and needing to have the "play" disc in the drive.  Now we have cd keys, account tie-ins, online requirements and so on.  If anything the PC is the most DRM infested gaming platform out there. 

Pretty much all of my PC game purchases over the last 5 years have been Digital so I admit I have been somewhat ignoring the physical disc side of things. I think the problem is physical discs for PC games are simply on their way out because PCs typically have an internet connection.

 

Anymore when you buy a disc it installs the game service (origin/steam/etc) and the base game, then the game service takes care of attaching it to your account (usually via cd-key) and updating the game.

 

As I said you can give away/sell the account if you wish to lend/sell the game in question, the problem with PC games (and why there is no used game market on the PC) is the cd-keys are one-time use anymore. Blizzard with Diablo II was the last physical game I recall that you were able to lend out or sell your CD-key....if you've never played it, basically the way it worked was you had a CD-key to install the game, and that copy of the game could be played offline as much as you wanted (you could install it on 100 computers and play them all offline or lan). You could then create as many accounts for the online service (Battle.net) as you wanted. But you could only use 1 cd-key at a time on battle.net....if one of those 100 installs was on battle.net, the other 99 could not connect simultaneously....but as soon as it logged off, one of the others could connect.

 

Basically the way it worked was the cd-key had to be unique on the battle.net service. It wasn't tied to an account but was only allowed to be logged in from a single installation at a time.

 

Unfortunately, PC games have moved beyond that, I personally don't like it but it doesn't bother me as much because my PC has a connection more often than my game consoles. The thing that scares me about the DRM the Xbox One has, is it is a single point of failure (admittedly so is Origin, Steam, etc)...if the service goes down you may not be able to access ANY of your games. Luckily for PC many games use different services so it is not a single point for ALL of your games.

 

And while I do agree that the PC is the most DRM-infested gaming platform, it is also the most lenient on its DRM policies depending on the service. I know Origin has offline mode but I do not know how it works and I know it won't work with SimCity and possibly so of EAs other games. Steam on the other hand also has offline mode, which allows you to stay offline potentially for months playing single-player games. Xbox One is nowhere close to that level of freedom with its current DRM policies.

[MikeChipshop Member]

...anyone who's not a MS fanboy will just get the alternative that doesnt make you jump through hoops to play your games. Anyway you look at it, the PS4 is the better buy.

 

Which is where you are very wrong. I'm by no  means an XBox fan boy, i've made my feelings on this clear in many threads so wont drag it all up again. However your assumption that only MS fanboys will buy the XBox One is just flawed and wrong.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

My comment was regarding the internet culture of download for free, open source software and piracy. The way that this has embedded itself in our culture meaning everyone wants something for free or unrestricted these days.

So yes my comment was very relevant but of course don't let that get in the way of your inane replies, i could do with a good giggle.

 

The fact is, the restrictions in most DRM is the same as has always existed in licence agreements right back to vinyl records but everyone still kicks up a stink on some crazy crusade on something they know nothing about.

Only point I'm trying to make is that DRM is not where it should be and only causes problems for legitimate users while trying to distinguish them from illegitimate users.  DRM is over complicated, doesn't protect the industry and only hurts/impairs legitimate users.

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

So Person 1 in California has 9 other "family" members designated, and they are all across the US of A in various locations.

People really think those 9 other people are going to be able to play the 1 license for the digital download of the game that Person 1 purchased?

People really and sincerely think that is going to be the case??

 

That just goes against common business sense, never-mind so much of the other features they are implementing are in the exact opposite vein.

 

So I cannot help but think a whole, whole lot of people are going to be terribly disappointed once they find out just exactly how this whole "Family" option does work.

If people seriously think they can have 9 other people under their "family" list, and those 9 people can all play the same 1 game whether at the same time or not at the same time at all and all one at a time, I really believe they are going to be terribly, terribly let down. 

 

Perhaps I will be proven wrong, and Microsoft is now the most giving video game console developer ever known to man. However I cannot feel due to the nature of the other policies they are introducing with the One, that there is no way in hell this is how this feature is going to work. None.

 

Now 9 other "family" members as sub accounts under one primary account? Sure, I can see that. But there is no way that Primary account is going to be able to be logged into more than one console at a time. So that will render all these dreams that people have of mass game sharing almost useless.

[vcfan]

So Person 1 in California has 9 other "family" members designated, and they are all across the US of A in various locations.

People really think those 9 other people are going to be able to play the 1 license for the digital download of the game that Person 1 purchased?

People really and sincerely think that is going to be the case??

 

That just goes against common business sense, never-mind so much of the other features they are implementing are in the exact opposite vein.

 

So I cannot help but think a whole, whole lot of people are going to be terribly disappointed once they find out just exactly how this whole "Family" option does work.

If people seriously think they can have 9 other people under their "family" list, and those 9 people can all play the same 1 game whether at the same time or not at the same time at all and all one at a time, I really believe they are going to be terribly, terribly let down. 

 

Perhaps I will be proven wrong, and Microsoft is now the most giving video game console developer ever known to man. However I cannot feel due to the nature of the other policies they are introducing with the One, that there is no way in hell this is how this feature is going to work. None.

 

Now 9 other "family" members as sub accounts under one primary account? Sure, I can see that. But there is no way that Primary account is going to be able to be logged into more than one console at a time. So that will render all these dreams that people have of mass game sharing almost useless.

 

 

oh really?

 

 

I brought up the family sharing feature of the Xbox One during my recent conversation with Microsoft's Phil Spencer, and I stated that it's one of the nicer aspects of the console that not many people are talking about.

?You?re going to help us with that?? he asked. I'd love to, but trying to pin down exactly how the system will work has proved tricky.

Multiple people, but at the same time?

The idea is that ten people in your family group can all share your games. Think of it like a loaning system, but you're not loaning anyone a phyiscal product. If you're in my family group, you can play my games, and vice versa. 

?I think the policy makes sense,? Spencer said. ?It?s not ten different people all playing the game concurrently, but when you think about a real usage scenario, and we thought about it around a family, and I know certain people will create a family group of people that aren?t all part of the same family, and I do think that?s an advantage, and people will use that. I saw it on NeoGAF instantly, the Xbox Family creation threads, where people said 'Hey be a part of my family.'?

?No birth certificates will need to be sent in!? Spencer said when I asked if the service required a blood test. ?I do think that?s an advantage of the ecosystem that we have.?

So that answers one question: Microsoft doesn't seem to care whether or not the ten people in the group are actually family members. They can be friends, roommates, boyfriends, girlfriends, your dog's groomer? you pick ten people, and you share games with them. 

The question is how many people can play the game at the same time. Spencer told me he believed that two people can play one copy of a game concurrently, but he urged me to check Microsoft's official wording on the matter to be sure. This is what the licensing page states:

Just like today, a family member can play your copy of

Forza Motorsport

at a friend?s house. Only now, they will see not just

Forza

, but all of your shared games.  You can always play your games, and any one of your family members can be playing from your shared library at a given time.

So one family member can play a game at a time, but can I be playing the same game? If I buy one copy of a multiplayer title, can I play it in co-op with my son if I own two Xbox One systems?

?The only limitation, it seems, is that only one person can be playing the shared copy of a single game at any given time,? Ars Technica reported after speaking with Microsoft Xbox Chief Marketing and Strategy Officer Yusuf Mehdi. ?All in all, this does sound like a pretty convenient feature that's more workable than simply passing discs around amongst friends who are actually in your area.?

Still, the ability to pool your games with up to ten ?family members? is a geniune advantage of the Xbox One ecosystem. Even if only one person can be playing the game at a time, you gain access to every game the people on your family list own, allowing you to jump into new releases the second they get done with the game.

On the other hand, I'd hate to think that I need to call a friend or family member to tell them to stop playing a game I just bought so I can play my title. Many of these usage cases and limitations may not be explained clearly until the system is released and we can test these services for ourselves, but we'll keep digging to try to figure this one out.

 

 

http://www.penny-arcade.com/report/article/xbox-one-allows-you-to-share-games-with-ten-family-members-but-some-details

 

so at least,based on all this info, the original purchaser will always be allowed to play his copy whenever, and the pool of friends will only be allowed to play that same game one at a time.

 

 

Give your family access to your entire games library anytime, anywhere: Xbox One will enable new forms of access for families. Up to ten members of your family can log in and play from your shared games library on any Xbox One. Just like today, a family member can play your copy of Forza Motorsport at a friend?s house. Only now, they will see not just Forza, but all of your shared games.  You can always play your games, and any one of your family members can be playing from your shared library at a given time.

 

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

[Woelfel]

So Person 1 in California has 9 other "family" members designated, and they are all across the US of A in various locations.

People really think those 9 other people are going to be able to play the 1 license for the digital download of the game that Person 1 purchased?

People really and sincerely think that is going to be the case??

 

That just goes against common business sense, never-mind so much of the other features they are implementing are in the exact opposite vein.

 

So I cannot help but think a whole, whole lot of people are going to be terribly disappointed once they find out just exactly how this whole "Family" option does work.

If people seriously think they can have 9 other people under their "family" list, and those 9 people can all play the same 1 game whether at the same time or not at the same time at all and all one at a time, I really believe they are going to be terribly, terribly let down. 

 

Perhaps I will be proven wrong, and Microsoft is now the most giving video game console developer ever known to man. However I cannot feel due to the nature of the other policies they are introducing with the One, that there is no way in hell this is how this feature is going to work. None.

 

Now 9 other "family" members as sub accounts under one primary account? Sure, I can see that. But there is no way that Primary account is going to be able to be logged into more than one console at a time. So that will render all these dreams that people have of mass game sharing almost useless.

 

Uhm, that is how it has been portrayed. I believe that, after the interviews that has been shown and the wording of the license that yes, you will have 9 other "family" members that can share games in their library. I'm sure it will be a 1 at a time thing but the benefit is still there.

[MikeInBA]

I believe the "Any where, any time" portion, but what it leaves out is for "how long".  I am willing to bet there is where the restriction will come in.  Those 9 other people will be restricted to X amount hours/minutes per day i bet.  Which would be fine with me as long as its not less than an hour  :D

[George P Global Moderator]

I believe the "Any where, any time" portion, but what it leaves out is for "how long".  I am willing to bet there is where the restriction will come in.  Those 9 other people will be restricted to X amount hours/minutes per day i bet.  Which would be fine with me as long as its not less than an hour  :D

 

 

Heh, that would be funny, I actually bet there is a time limit, but it's when there is no internet connection of course.  So if you start playing and the internet goes out you probably have some set time period to reconnect or it'll stop.  Which, to be honest, I think is reasonable seeing how they're going to be letting you make large sharing pools.

[Woelfel]

I believe the "Any where, any time" portion, but what it leaves out is for "how long".  I am willing to bet there is where the restriction will come in.  Those 9 other people will be restricted to X amount hours/minutes per day i bet.  Which would be fine with me as long as its not less than an hour  :D

 

I think the limit is as long as you own the game. it would be funny if you, as primary owner of said game can impose restrictions to it...like if you were a parent and the game is rated M, you may not want your child to play that game but you want to share the rest of the games with them.

[0sit0]

Lot of boohoo about DRM.

That's the problem with the world today everyone wants everything free with no restrictions. Truth of the matter is, in order to progress new forms of management have to come in to practice so quit whining because it's happening and there's nothing you can do about it and for the sake of the industry there's nothing you should do about it.

 

 

I know where you're coming from but nothing has changed there. You're still purchasing a right to use licence.

 

So in other words, bend over and take it? Well that's no fun... or maybe it is for you, who knows lol.

 

There's one thing I can do:

 

Not buy the Xbox One. As of now my group of friends are deciding and we are all leaning towards PS4. Sucks but that's how business works. No one can force you to do something you don't want and if they try, you can show them you are not willing to take it. 

[MikeInBA]

 

There's one thing I can do:

 

Not buy the Xbox One. As of now my group of friends are deciding and we are all leaning towards PS4. 

 If we like it or not, the market cannot support its current model for much longer.  Tech, development, and talent all cost a lot of money, and Steam-ish model is the best thing for the industry (that i can see).  If the DRM model on X1 fails, and publishers and developers are not able to recoup more profit, then days of games with $10millon+ budgets are gone.  

[jerzdawg]

It's a killer feature alright, if killing trust, faith, good will, loyalty, mind share and sales is a "feature".

 

Well played.

As for people that think this sharing with 10 other people is such a great idea, I think you are deluded.

 

Who are these 10 great people that you are going to want to share with?

 

Are they going to have the games you want, when you want them?

 

Or are you the one with all the games?

 

It's just as it is now, apart from being more convenient for broke cousin johnny to leech from your collection. Only now, he can only borrow it once, so that is a bonus, right? :rolleyes:

Right, but if the PS3/PS4 had sharing it would be the best thing since sliced bread.  Were you not a PS3 owner when the PSN games could be shared across 5 consoles?  Me, Larry and 2 other people managed to work out a great system for PSN games while it lasted.  I got to check out games that I normally would not have purchased (Fat Princess, Pixel Junk Shooter (still one of my fav PSN games) and im sure a few others).  The family sharing may not be for everyone but until we know the details of its limitations you cant just write it off as a feature.  I certainly dont agree with all the DRM stuff but non of it applies to me, so being able to share some games with my friends is a great feature that I can say is because of DRM...

[HawkMan]

Thing is, same game on the PS4 wont be restricted in any way and can be played totally offline if  you want to. If someone's friends cant afford to buy the game themselves to play with you they probably shouldnt have bought the console in the first place. I think its funny the way the X1 is being defended so much, anyone who's not a MS fanboy will just get the alternative that doesnt make you jump through hoops to play your games. Anyway you look at it, the PS4 is the better buy.

 

 

Can You point out all those hoops I have to jump through ont he Xbox one ? 

Alternative 1: insert disk, start install, start playing a few seconds after the install starts. play the game whenever I want

Alternative 2: buy game online on release day. download and play whenever I want. 

[Spike2013]

Interesting been reading all the posts seems like nobody really knows what going to happen yet with DRM an the xbox one can't see it being as good as the OP thinks or as bad other posts have implied it may be somewhere in between I hope.

I'm planning on buying the PS4 anyway an maybe a Xbox one a year later.

[0sit0]

Can You point out all those hoops I have to jump through ont he Xbox one ? 

Alternative 1: insert disk, start install, start playing a few seconds after the install starts. play the game whenever I want

Alternative 2: buy game online on release day. download and play whenever I want. 

 

Well, I worked in a cruise. I can tell you they are not going to buy the Xbox One for entertainment purposes anymore since I doubt they will want the Xbox connected the whole time. When I travel sometimes I take my Xbox and guess what? It won't work since I won't connect it to an expensive international data plan. Yes, I understand no one cares about the few that it will affect, but the fact you guys don't care is why companies get away with anything. So to summarize, there just wont be any hoop jumping because there will be no hoop.

[Ultravires]

This is my basic understanding of how the family sharing will work. From what i have read up and if they stay true and go through with this family sharing feature.

 

First of they said there will be a limit of 10 people being able to join this family sharing, they also stated that you do not have to be a real family member, so you could add your friends to this sharing list. Now just say there was a group of four friends each person owning there own X1, live in different parts of the city and all four joined the family sharing. Now just say the 1st person bought Halo and MG5, the 2nd person bought COD, the 3rd person bought Forza and the 4th person couldn't afford to purchase any games at the moment. Whoever purchased any game title, will always have access to the game they bought 24/7. Now just say, the 1st person was playing Halo, now player 2 has access to player 1's shared games library, he would be able to play Halo or MG5 as long as the shared slot is open, so player 2 decides to play Halo, since no one else was playing it. Now lets just say player 3, didn't feel like playing Forza and  decided he wanted to access player 1's shared library and wanted to play Halo, he wouldnt be able to since, player 2 is activly playing the shared copy of Halo; however, he would still be able to play MGS5, since no one else was playing the shared slot. Player 4 who has no games, is able to access any one of those games as long as they are not being actively played. Since player 2 is playing the shared copy of Halo and player 3 is playing the shared copy of MGS, player 4 wouldn't be able to access any of those games; however, since he is on players 2's  and 3's shared list, he can decide to play the shared copies of COD or Forza.

 

Now picture this scenario, just say a new must have game just came out. Lets say player 4 just bought the new BF4 game, now since he purchased it, he could access the game anytime, however players 1,2 and 3 all want to try it out. Lets say player 1 manages to get access to the shared slot first, so he got to play it for an hour, before stopping and leaving to go to work, with the BF4 shared slot open, player 2 manages to access the shared BF4 game and stays on it all day. So 8 hrs later player 2 comes home all excited and can't wait to get home and load up and resume his game in BF4 when he realized someone is still on the ****en game! He will get a popup message saying, Sorry player 2, but BF4 is being occupied by another player, however if you would like you can purchase the game right now for this amount and you can continue on your awesome journey through BF4. Player 2 can't stand waiting and has very little patience and gives in and purchases the game on impulse. Since he was already playing it earlier, he doesn't need to download it, since it is already there from the first time, so now player 2 has full ownership of BF4 as well.

 

Now i am not sure if this sharing will be applied only to single player  or multiplayer portions of these types of games, also i believe all players will require a gold membership to access this feature. Also maybe publishers would be able to have say in this feature as well and could possible block it? So this feature could have marketing benefits with increased sales, but could it also be exploited as well?

So this is one of the reason for all this DRM, forced online checks, mandatory installs. This feature also has some benefits that a physical copy couldn't provide. With a physical copy you could only pass it on to only one of your friends at a time and only that person would be able to play, plus there would be the risk of getting it scratched. It would also be much harder to give the physical copy to someone who lives far away. 

 

Having said all that, I do understand why the market is all in a frenzy, MS did do a shabby job at presenting all this DRM stuff and with some of these restrictions are alienating a fairly sized portion of fans. Hopefully they can resolve some of these issues and make good use of this family sharing feature to make the console more worthy.

[srbeen]

The only way this DRM will be successful is if games are $59.99 on the PS4 and they are $37.99 on the Xbox 1. My $60 game for the PS4 can be easily resold in a weeks time for $40, no ifs or buts. Xbox 1 games are only good for as long as MS keep those servers running.

 

My $37.99 game can't be sold unless I/the buyer pays a relicensing fee, which could be $1, $10, or $30 and thus taking another cut of the games price. The fees seem to be at random depending on every single factor MS wants to base it on, and seemingly could literally change by the second... I'd prefer the ease of just selling the game on craigslist with up-front pricing rather than having to meet up with a buyer at gamestop so the disc can be relicensed to their xbox live account. Congradulations MS for making something simple a hassle.

 

Lets not even discuss the mess that will happen if accounts get killed/banned/revoked, or when MS shut down the xbox one servers. Will my disc games still work? what about my DLC games? can they be relicensed once the servers are shut off?? If I get banned, do I need to pay again to relicense my games to my new account, or do I have to use two accounts for my library? Maybe I can continue to buy license games on my banned account - cause thats fun!!

 

Theres a lot of questions. I watched the 'reddit interview' with larry and chloe and when she asked 'what happens when the servers shut down...' and he dodged it saying, 'the consoles not even out yet, so lets launch it and revisit this question after you bought one' don't sit well with me.

 

The killer feature you are talking about is not DRM, but rather family sharing.

[0sit0]

 

Theres a lot of questions. I watched the 'reddit interview' with larry and chloe and when she asked 'what happens when the servers shut down...' and he dodged it saying, 'the consoles not even out yet, so lets launch it and revisit this question after you bought one' don't sit well with me.

 

 

yeah I agree. I don't want to pay for it if I don't know what I'm getting into. I think the main problem is that Microsoft doesn't know how to handle questions or they probably dont know what's going on internally.

[Ultravires]

The only way this DRM will be successful is if games are $59.99 on the PS4 and they are $37.99 on the Xbox 1. My $60 game for the PS4 can be easily resold in a weeks time for $40, no ifs or buts. Xbox 1 games are only good for as long as MS keep those servers running.

 

My $37.99 game can't be sold unless I/the buyer pays a relicensing fee, which could be $1, $10, or $30 and thus taking another cut of the games price. The fees seem to be at random depending on every single factor MS wants to base it on, and seemingly could literally change by the second... I'd prefer the ease of just selling the game on craigslist with up-front pricing rather than having to meet up with a buyer at gamestop so the disc can be relicensed to their xbox live account. Congradulations MS for making something simple a hassle.

 

Lets not even discuss the mess that will happen if accounts get killed/banned/revoked, or when MS shut down the xbox one servers. Will my disc games still work? what about my DLC games? can they be relicensed once the servers are shut off?? If I get banned, do I need to pay again to relicense my games to my new account, or do I have to use two accounts for my library? Maybe I can continue to buy license games on my banned account - cause thats fun!!

 

Theres a lot of questions. I watched the 'reddit interview' with larry and chloe and when she asked 'what happens when the servers shut down...' and he dodged it saying, 'the consoles not even out yet, so lets launch it and revisit this question after you bought one' don't sit well with me.

 

The killer feature you are talking about is not DRM, but rather family sharing.

 

 

The Publishers will have the final say whether the game will be sellable or not regardless of what console you purchase the product on. They could just implement some DRM scheme into the game. Also there was an interview with MajorNelson and he stated that if players were to be banned from the console, all our purchased items would still work. As for the Servers shutting down, yah i did not like how he dodged around that question, but i am sure they could just send an update that would remove all licensing restrictions if they chose to retire the service and no longer would force activation checks.

Now in order for the Family sharing for it to work the way they mentioned, then yes some form of DRM is required, however i don't think it needs to be as restrictive as the way they have it.