So, today I am announcing the following changes to Xbox One and how you can play, share, lend, and resell your games exactly as you do today on Xbox 360. Here is what that means:
- An internet connection will not be required to play offline Xbox One games – After a one-time system set-up with a new Xbox One, you can play any disc based game without ever connecting online again. There is no 24 hour connection requirement and you can take your Xbox One anywhere you want and play your games, just like on Xbox 360.
- Trade-in, lend, resell, gift, and rent disc based games just like you do today – There will be no limitations to using and sharing games, it will work just as it does today on Xbox 360.
In addition to buying a disc from a retailer, you can also download games from Xbox Live on day of release. If you choose to download your games, you will be able to play them offline just like you do today. Xbox One games will be playable on any Xbox One console -- there will be no regional restrictions.
These changes will impact some of the scenarios we previously announced for Xbox One. The sharing of games will work as it does today, you will simply share the disc. Downloaded titles cannot be shared or resold. Also, similar to today, playing disc based games will require that the disc be in the tray.
Tumbler wrote on Jun 19, 2013, 19:50:
The xbox one eighty. Good lord that is stuck.
Fantaz wrote on Jun 20, 2013, 13:04:
Didn't EA pressure Microsoft to do the DRM thing? So EA is a publisher that wanted it at least...
nin wrote on Jun 20, 2013, 11:10:Creston wrote on Jun 20, 2013, 11:07:
All over the internet, I see Microsoft fans lamenting the fact that everyone else has "cost" them the ability to share their library on day one.
I wonder if you'd really been able to do so, however, since there was that (ridiculous) "30 day on the friends list" requirement.
Creston
I love it. The backtracking is like this awesomely delicious cake, and the fans disappointment is the tasty icing on top.
Never mind that MS claimed it was coming - did even one publisher (outside of MS themselves) agree to it?
InBlack wrote on Jun 20, 2013, 10:19:
Im by no means advocating something like that, just pointing out that very few PC gamers would even consider buying a console if the same selection of games was available to them.
Creston wrote on Jun 20, 2013, 11:07:
All over the internet, I see Microsoft fans lamenting the fact that everyone else has "cost" them the ability to share their library on day one.
I wonder if you'd really been able to do so, however, since there was that (ridiculous) "30 day on the friends list" requirement.
Creston
InBlack wrote on Jun 20, 2013, 09:22:
How many of those games that you play on your console (rather than on the PC) are console exclusives, or made their debut on the consoles before they were ported to the PC? If I were to wager a guess Id say that number approaches 100%.
InBlack wrote on Jun 20, 2013, 09:22:
I stand with my original statement. The 'exclusivity' of the content is an artificial advantage of the platform over the PC. And apart from ease of use Id say is the only one.
Verno wrote on Jun 20, 2013, 08:44:
Eh I don't know, there are plenty of games I still play on the console. Steam Big Picture is great but there is some clunkiness to PC stuff on the TV. Something steals focus, game crashes, etc. There are also some great console games you simply can't get on the PC. Consoles and PCs both have their place. I'm actually much more worried about where the PC market is headed with hardware sales down each quarter and companies like Intel starting to refocus on mobile.
Cutter wrote on Jun 20, 2013, 00:41:
Why would you choose a 360 over a PS4? That's insane.
Prez wrote on Jun 20, 2013, 03:50:
There couldn't be a better textbook example for why competition is a good thing, no ... a GREAT thing for consumers. If Sony didn't exist, would Microsoft be backtracking like this? Probably not. More likely we'd be reading more arrogance about Microsoft knowing what's best for you and becoming even more anti-consumer. This is why we PC gamers need AMD to stay around. Intel needs to be kept honest the way Sony is causing Microsoft to behave.
As far as what this means for the console war, I leave that to people who know more about the console industry. All I know is that I haven't wanted to see a company get trounced as badly as I want Microsoft to get clobbered by Sony in a long time.
Prez wrote on Jun 20, 2013, 03:50:
There couldn't be a better textbook example for why competition is a good thing, no ... a GREAT thing for consumers. If Sony didn't exist, would Microsoft be backtracking like this? Probably not. More likely we'd be reading more arrogance about Microsoft knowing what's best for you and becoming even more anti-consumer. This is why we PC gamers need AMD to stay around. Intel needs to be kept honest the way Sony is causing Microsoft to behave.
As far as what this means for the console war, I leave that to people who know more about the console industry. All I know is that I haven't wanted to see a company get atrounced as badly as I want Microsoft to get clobbered by Sony in a long time.