[Boboff]

Really?

No, No I shall not be doing that!

[bmstinton93]

Go through and get all possible collectibles if there are any?

[Topher]

Or just put it down to experience and don't play the infernal thing again.

[Boboff]

Thanks Toph, that is good advice. This is what I will do!

[bmstinton93]

So Microsoft have already reversed the entire DRM policy.

[DevilsDuck]

Smart move by Microsoft to do it early. They have done the "we listened to you" thing and people will have forgotten by the time it launches.

[R94N]

Shame EA can't do the same. HEYOOOO

[Jacqueline]

Thing is, Sony didn't do it in the first place. From what I'm reading, that'll be remembered

The only person I've known on Microsoft's side before the 180 was my brother, who was claiming that Steam was doing the same thing years ago...

My brother's opinion, not mine. My brother doesn't seem to get the difference between hard copies and downloaded copies...

Although chances are I've misunderstood this whole thing...so what's new...?

[bmstinton93]

I've been rethinking this and I think Microsoft have made the wrong decision to reverse it. These DRM policies were needed in order to implement the family sharing system, which sounded like an ace idea. It was also an ace idea to not need the disc to play the game which now won't be able to happen. We would have been able to trade any games in anyway to participating retailers like Game as normal I'm sure of it.

[Jacqueline]

Um, you've been able to play games without discs for years...that's what the PlayStation Network store did, as well as the XBOX store

so I don't think their 180 on their decision is that big a deal...you've been able to download games onto your system since the 30/PS3 first came out, haven't you? Or not so long afterwards?

I may have got the Xbox wrong because I've only seen people using it, not used it myself...

And the way I saw it on the E3 announcement, you wouldn't be able to trade in your disc based games at all before their turnaround, because they didn't specify to begin with that you could trade them in anywhere...

Besides, I think the whole thing came from the fact that we own the hard copy of the games- as long as video game shops have existed, we've been able to do what we want with our hard copies before now, as long as it wasn't illegal...

[bmstinton93]

But they usually cost more that way and you can't buy them at a reduced price really as a download. And you don't get any sort of physical product.

[Jacqueline]

Yes...and that's exactly why their turnaround was a GOOD idea...

because yes, you can download games, and yes, they do cost the same as a brand new physical copy

So why do you disagree with them going back on their plans? Now you can get cheaper preowned games, and you get the game to sit on your shelf at a reduced price

The point that Microsoft were making was that (in their original statement) you couldn't trade in your old games. That is what they said

Wired asked Microsoft if installation would be mandatory. “On the new Xbox, all game discs are installed to the HDD to play,” the company responded in an emailed statement. Sounds mandatory to us.

What follows naturally from this is that each disc would have to be tied to a unique Xbox Live account, else you could take a single disc and pass it between everyone you know and copy the game over and over. Since this is clearly not going to happen, each disc must then only install for a single owner.

Microsoft did say that if a disc was used with a second account, that owner would be given the option to pay a fee and install the game from the disc, which would then mean that the new account would also own the game and could play it without the disc.

But what if a second person simply wanted to put the disc in and play the game without installing – and without paying extra? In other words, what happens to our traditional concept of a “used game”? This is a question for which Microsoft did not yet have an answer, and is surely something that game buyers (as well as renters and lenders) will want to know. (Update: Microsoft called Wired after this story was originally published to say that the company did have a plan for used games, and that further details were forthcoming.)

Source: http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2013/05/x ... -analysis/


So basically, before they turned on their announcement, what they were saying was basically, you would have to pay twice had you bought a preowned game.

And as you said:

We would have been able to trade any games in anyway to participating retailers like Game as normal I'm sure of it.

Yes, maybe we would have, but before they changed their minds, at least the way I read it, you could buy preowned games, but you would still have to pay a registration fee, had you not bought the original game.

I think that this is a better way. This is my opinion, not fact.

[bmstinton93]

See, that was the thing. I don't think they made the whole preowned thing clear. Everyone kicked off because they thought you would have had to pay a fee but in reality I think Game would have just deauthorised the game and sold it on with no party paying any extra cost. I definitely like what they were trying to do.

[Jacqueline]

However, they still made clear that the user would have to pay a fee to install said game- yes, they didn't make it clear for preowned games, but when asked, they said that the user trying to install a game already used on another console would have to pay an additional fee.

And they pretty much said that installing would be mandatory to play

Evading the question or answering it, from what I read the answer was the same.

As for what I quoted, the "plans for used games" seems to be the way they went back on their plans. One kinda wonders whether that was their plan all along...it certainly got them column inches...

[chrysostom]

Fickle gamers who mouthed off about how awful Microsoft's DRM policies were, are now saying that actually they were a good idea. Idiots.

[The Deadly]

Went to the effort of borrowing my brothers PS3 to play the Last of Us. It is a good game but nothing groundbreaking. With all the hype I was expecting a bit more.

[The Deadly]

Don't get me wrong it's really good, graphics are incredible but it's not a great deal different from every other zombie game. It's all finding items, build special items etc. if I had played this game hearing no hype beforehand I'd be raving about it. Just like most things in life it just doesn't live up to the level of hype it has received.

[Bonanzoid]

My word. I tried to avoid the hype, but I'm getting that.

[The Deadly]

I take back anything negative about the Last Of Us. If it isn't made into a film I'll eat patè.

[Topher]

Pâté is bloody lovely, you'd better hope it's not made into a film... whatever it is.

[Bruvva]

Heh, the stock exchange in GTA is called BAWSAQ. Hurrah for slightly rude Scottish game developers.

[The Deadly]

Not sure I like the idea of the stock exchange feature. Seems like a bit too much on top of a the missions and the amount of exploration on offer.

[dimtimjim]

Oh.. my... god... Grab some Kleenex and watch this vid, FPS fans! CoD? Pah! This rocks:

[The Deadly]

Oh.. my... god... Grab some Kleenex and watch this vid, FPS fans! CoD? Pah! This rocks:

I would love to have time to play this but GTA V is going to be so huge I have to cancel any other game purchase.

[dimtimjim]

GTA-V will indeed be great. Someone I know (not me) has booked a week off work for it..! Jeez!

GTA-V and BF4 are the only two games I will be still buying on the PS3, before investing my hard earned in to the PS4! Whoop!