Early Kinect Games Kill Buyers' Access To Xbox Live

Stoobalou writes "Microsoft's Kinect motion controller isn't due to ship until November 4th, but one retailer has jumped the gun, leaving a number of gamers with a bit of a quandary. The un-named distributor has sent what Microsoft describes as 'a very small number' of Kinect systems to lucky buyers who might not consider themselves quite so lucky if they try to use the device and its bundled games. Installing the games will require a firmware upgrade, which is nothing out of the ordinary, but in this case the upgrade hasn't yet been released. Attempting to install the non-existent update seems to fool the console into thinking you are trying to play a pirated game and locks the user out of Microsoft's Xbox Live on-line service."

Comments

Just another reason

[0123456]

Not to buy locked down hardware or software, particularly if it requires the permission of a remote server in order to be allowed to function.

Re:Just another reason

[contra_mundi]

Well gee whiz.

I had no idea I was being a purist or an extremist for not liking DRM and/or other people being able to delete my games that I bought with hard cash.

Furthermore, multiplayer games have worked just fine without DRM.

Re:Just another reason

[MoonBuggy]

Although the summary and linked article blame DRM (and I'm not one to defend that restrictive crap), the original joystiq article implies that it's just grabbing an incomplete update which doesn't have proper Xbox Live support yet. Nothing to do with DRM or copyright, simply that MS haven't set up a final version of the new firmware yet because they thought they had another few days to do so.

Re:Just another reason

[bhcompy]

Have you played CODMW2 on 360? Plenty of cheaters. No admin tools. DRM'd up the ass. Conversely, my TF2 server has an active admin, built in admin tools plus expanded ones built by the community, and has a simple unobtrusive DRM platform.

Re:Just another reason

[dangitman]

and has a simple unobtrusive DRM platform.

Is that something like a condom with only three razor-sharp titanium spikes, rather than six?

Re:Just another reason

[kdemetter]

I don't know who told that DRM is needed to prevent cheating , but i must admit , it is a clever way of getting people to support DRM : If you don't support it , you are branded a cheater.

Great news!

[Anonymous Coward]

The more honest buyers get hurt by any form of DRM, including these forms of draconian measures, the better.

Re:Great news!

[yotto]

That's the point. Innocent people whose only "crime" is thinking DRM isn't a bad idea need to get hurt by DRM, or they'll never know why we think it's such a bad idea.

Oh Noes...

[Nethemas the Great]

How terrible, XBox live has a system built in to prevent unauthorized firmware that may well be used for things like hacked games, game trainers and other things that would ruin the experience for other players who have not similarly modified their systems. I know people want to spin this as another "DRM is evil" type story but to use this would be over-reaching. Open platform or not it would be in the best interest of gamers to not have some people with the ability to cheat while other do not. Sure the unauthorized firmware bit can be used to hamper piracy but it's not the only reason to have such a system in place.

The retailers were told not to release the games until a specific date so that shipments could be assured to all stores at the same time for reasons I'm sure include preventing the usual mayhem involved in too few for too many. Microsoft was under no obligation to push the prerequisites to the servers until the date they told everyone the games could be sold. Yes, Microsoft may do a lot of things that aren't appreciated by the open/free software community but this really isn't ammunition for that cause.

Re:Oh Noes...

[Hatta]

So why should customers suffer for the retailers mistake?

Re:Oh Noes...

[wh1pp3t]

So why should customers suffer for the retailers mistake?

Then the retailer should make it right. Perhaps provide an extra year of XBox Live for the inconvienence.
It's not like the accounts are blacklisted; the users cannot log into XBox Live until Microsoft releases the updated dashboard.

Re:Oh Noes...

[tlhIngan]

What do you mean why should they? Who says they should? The retailer and Microsoft made a mistake. This is not much different than if Microsoft had pushed empty boxes through retail outlets and customers got screwed over. Go return the thing to the retailer, ask for money back, and complain to Microsoft support. The particulars of DRM are insignificant here, and the only thing that matters is how the retailer and Microsoft responds, and if they do it again. Same as if they'd done anything else to inconvenience you.

I can tell you that Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo and publishers get VERY interested in a retailer that breaks street date. Microsoft can't really be blamed for providing an incomplete update as no one other than beta testers are supposed to have it (and they are warned to NOT move their hard drive around because the update will mess up Xbox360s not in the beta)

Retailers are deathly afraid of breaking street date. Individual stores get fined for breaking it (lots of money - 10s of thousands of dollars easily), and even worse, entire chains can get put on industry blacklists that basically mean they never, ever receive product ahead of time - the product they ordered would be shipped on the release date which means their customers only get the product a few days afterwards (plus the lowered margins since they have to pay for overnight shipping back and forth, and the obvious loss of business when customers leave them because they can't get product on time).

That's why stores breaking street date tend to be rare - I think the last case involved some Atari game that a publisher bought retail from another retailer who broke street date for the publisher only. And the publisher refused to identify who sold it to them which is why Atari blamed them for pirating a game - no one should have a copy. I think the last time it happened resulted in people having to wait for the activation servers to come alive - they had the game, but were locked out from playing it. And gamers often find themselves banned for piracy if playing unreleased games online.

Microsoft's mistake is having a beta update available - but that's a given, since they have people with beta Kinect hardware. The only people who should be getting that update are those in the beta program. To demand that the consoles have the latest firmware available isn't an unusual request - you'll find Sony does the same thing, as does Nintendo, as does Steam should you want to play online to prevent cheating.

This is a rare circumstance - beta testers are warned about moving their hard drives around would screw with Xbox Live connectivity, and this retailer seriously messed up. At the very least, Microsoft would be very interested in talking to those people and would probably pay not only to have those Xboxes and Kinects returned back to Microsoft (and exchanged with new ones), but the retailer is going to pay Microsoft for it all.

It's also interesting that most big-name titles have "DO NOT SELL BEFORE xx/xx/xxxx" printed on the stickers on the game itself too - I would presume Kinect hardware and games have similar markings so it's not as if the retailer didn't know.

My guess is, that retailer or chain is now in some very hot water. Usually these things are handled very quietly, but once it starts hitting the news big-time, heads will roll...

Questionable conclusion in summary

[Mike610544]

Attempting to install the non-existent update seems to fool the console into thinking you are trying to play a pirated game

It's likely that the XBox update is working properly, but the production servers aren't set up to communicate with the new firmware yet. Unless the affected systems don't start working properly on the release date, this is just dumb antimicrosoftism.