Slashdot Mirror
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."
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.
So why should customers suffer for the retailers mistake?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
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...