Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Confirms Xbox One's Phone Home Requirement, Game Resale Rules
Following the confusion surrounding Microsoft's announcement of the Xbox One, the company has now clarified many of the hot-button issues in a set of posts on their official site. First, they confirmed that the console will need to phone home in order to continue playing games. On your primary console, you'd need to connect to the internet and check in once every 24 hours. They also announced that you'll be able to access and play any of your games by logging in on somebody else's console, but the internet connection will be required every hour to keep playing that way. Other media don't require the connection. Microsoft also explained how game licensing will work. On the upside, anyone using your console will be able to play your games, and you can share your games with up to 10 members of your family for free. The downside is the news about used games; Microsoft says they've "designed Xbox One so game publishers can enable you to trade in your games at participating retailers." The key word there is can, which implies that you can't without the publisher's express permission. Finally, the company made a set of statements about how Kinect's audio and video sensors will collect and share your data. "When Xbox One is on and you're simply having a conversation in your living room, your conversation is not being recorded or uploaded." They also say data gathered during normal use won't leave the console without your explicit permission.
This article on Penny Arcade Report provides some detail that the OP lacks: http://penny-arcade.com/report/article/microsoft-outlines-their-system-for-used-games-licenses-and-family-sharing
Yep, good thing the Wii U does 1080p, has mature content, has effectively the same controller setup, doesn't have a monthly subscription, and doesn't require me to put up with ANY of this bullshit.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
But in the meantime maybe you can brush up on your coding skills, make some really cool games and give them out for free like you think everyone else should. Tell us how that goes for you.
If that's what you as an industry are hearing from us then you're missing it entirely.
We are willing to pay for quality consoles and games, but:
+ we want to "own" the console and have full control over it's use.
+ we want to "own" the games we buy and be able to loan them, give them away or sell them like any other piece of property we've purchased.
If you are going to control how we play, when we play, what we play and who we can loan/trade/sell to then drop your fucking prices and call it "console and game rentals", not "sales". Your greed, and your contempt for your customers, seem to be affecting your hearing and your judgement. If you want to make more money then make it easier for your customers to enjoy themselves with your products.
Just like publishers of e-books CAN allow you to lend out a kindle-book to someone.
They don't though.
Granted, I haven't bought many kindle books, but as far as I can see none of my books are lendable.
Harald
Adobes licensing matters not if it conflicts with the law of the land.
Some nations have actual consumer protection.
Backward compatibility:
The Atari 7800 is backward compatible with almost all Atari 2600 games.
The Game Boy Color is backward compatible with all Game Boy cartridges.
The Game Boy Advance line, except for the Game Boy Micro, is backward compatible with all Game Boy and Game Boy Color games.
The Nintendo DS and the Nintendo DS Lite are backward compatible with all Game Boy Advance games.
The Nintendo 3DS and the Nintendo 3DS XL are backward compatible with most of the Nintendo DS and Nintendo DSi software. However, the 3DS and its predecessor the DSi lack the Game Boy Advance slot found on the DS and DS Lite, causing certain titles to lose functionality when played on the systems. The Guitar Hero: On Tour series is incompatible with the DSi and 3DS because of this.
Initially, the Nintendo Wii was backward compatible with all games from the Nintendo GameCube, due in large part to its PowerPC CPU and ATi graphics architectures being evolved versions of those from the GameCube. However, a "Family Edition" model released in North America and Europe in late 2011 removed GameCube support, and all Wiis manufactured thereafter also lack backward-compatibility.
The Wii U is backward compatible with all Wii games and peripherals.
The PlayStation 2 is backward compatible with most of the original PlayStation library.
Initial PlayStation 3 models are backward compatible with most PlayStation and PlayStation 2 games. This is provided by the inclusion of the original Emotion Engine chip that is built inside the PS2. However, subsequent models removed this and the "Graphics Synthesizer" GPU, thus removing support for PS2 titles, but still able to play most original PS games.
The PS Vita is backward compatible with PSP games, Minis, PlayStation and Neo Geo games downloaded from the PlayStation Store. The Xbox 360 is backward compatible with some Xbox games via software emulation.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
They don't even have to do that. MSFT has now said that it's up to the developer if they will allow games to be resold or not. They don't need any sort of a fig leaf, they just say the game is only licensed for 1 xbox live account.
To me, the thing that sucks even more is that the console has to phone home once a day, or you can't play anything.
Look at all we've read in the press lately about the government deciding they own all phone records, and they've been compiling this data without our knowledge for some time.
Why should we believe the console which is phoning home won't be collecting information about us and reporting it to anyone who has access to use/abuse the system?
Sure, they say the Kinect isn't going to record you. But we pretty much know the government collects first and asks permission later (if ever). They don't even need suspicion to get your phone records anymore.
Maybe the Xbox One should be called the Telescreen instead?
Specifically, the European Court of Justice ruled last year on a case involving Oracle and UsedSoft, with the latter wanting to resell used Oracle software. The court found that licences could be resold, notwithstanding a claim to the contrary in Oracle's licence agreement. Interestingly, they also ruled that if Oracle was offering free maintenance updates to the original purchaser then they must continue to offer the same to the purchaser of the used software licence.
Obviously with any legal case you have to look at the specifics and not assume too much of a precedent, but still, this seems a clear shot across the bows of Big Software that they don't get to close down the used software market through either blunt legalese in the licence agreement or trying to tie related services to the original purchaser only.
For anyone wondering, yes, this ruling is sharply at odds with the US Ninth Circuit's view in the Autodesk case.
(I'm not a lawyer, just an interested observer, so don't read any legal technicalities into the above.)
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Sony confirms 'you can play used games on PS4'
Shuhei Yoshida confirms: no 'always-on' requirement for PS4
This was all news in February, now it should be fairly common knowledge.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese