New Xbox basically kills off used games

[Mise]

I think it's more for fairly affluent people in their late 20s, 30s and 40s, who have lots of disposable income, who will pay full price for games or are willing to wait a few months until it comes down. These are the people who will be streaming Netflix and flicking back and forth between TV and games and using Kinect to Skype Grandma etc etc. I think this is the segment they're aiming at.

I don't think it's for casual gamers in their early 20s or teens, who don't have much disposable income and thus rely on used games.

 

[tonberry]

That's what puzzled me about this. Wouldn't a more casual gamer be far more likely to utilize the used game economy than a hardcore guy?

Not really, casual gamers will buy used games of course but gamers will buy many more. Since the rentail market have gone down, many gamers have used the second-hand market to be able to play lots of games. It’s sometimes a problem for developper when a good but short game is release and GameStop have used copies to sell after 3 days.

Take also games like Call of Duty who have yearly release. Fan of those buy them at release and sell their old copies at the same time.

Since Sony already annouced that they won’t do the same (the PS4 was kind of disappointing in a way since it’s really just a more powerful PS3 but now it’s familiarity look reassuring), it seem that Microsoft will downsize there market alot. No used sales mean no rentail, no lending copy to your friend for an evening, etc. They must see something I’m not because it look like they’re just giving the next generation to Sony and Nintendo.

 

[illram]

Frustrated with the Xbox One? That’s okay, because Microsoft isn’t building its next system for you.



Basically, if you're a "gamer", then you should buy a PS4, but if you want your console to be an "entertainment hub" as well, then buy an Xbox.

Didn't Sony try this already? The PS3 utilized superior hardware too, albeit difficult for anyone to take advantage of. Although some tech articles I read point out that this time around the x86 architecture is the same on both consoles, so technically making the PS4 game look better will be easier, developers will still cater to the lowest common denominator and MS's huge market share is going to make all the big developers make all their titles for both systems anyway.

And inevitably Sony will probably price its PS4 way above what most people will want to pay when they first come out, since this is Sony we are talking about. If I remember correctly this sort of screwed them last time around too. Anecdotal, but when I was in the market for the previous gen of consoles, I was a staunch Sony fan of the pS1 and ps2, but I jumped ship to the Xbox 360 due to how expensive the PS3 was.

I think in the long run Xbox's idea to be an entertainment hub is the right idea, they are centering themselves to cash in on the coming ubiquitousness of streaming content via the internet. The Xbox 360 has itself sort of turned into an entertainment hub in the past few years with netflix and other "apps." As an aside, it worries me that the days of building my own little cool HTPC media center to stream everything to my TV via the internet might be numbered. Maybe that's for another thread though, I could go on and on about where TV & movies via the internet looks to be headed.

 

[bhsup]

I really don't see how this will help Microsoft crack the market on online streaming for Netflix, Amazon, etc. That stuff comes with practically everything now. My Bluray has it, my Tivo has it, and if I get a new TV it will probably have it. So what is MS doing to set itself apart from those things? Making it less appealing as a gaming platform? Doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Not really, casual gamers will buy used games of course but gamers will buy many more. Since the rentail market have gone down, many gamers have used the second-hand market to be able to play lots of games. It’s sometimes a problem for developper when a good but short game is release and GameStop have used copies to sell after 3 days.

Take also games like Call of Duty who have yearly release. Fan of those buy them at release and sell their old copies at the same time.

Since Sony already annouced that they won’t do the same (the PS4 was kind of disappointing in a way since it’s really just a more powerful PS3 but now it’s familiarity look reassuring), it seem that Microsoft will downsize there market alot. No used sales mean no rentail, no lending copy to your friend for an evening, etc. They must see something I’m not because it look like they’re just giving the next generation to Sony and Nintendo.

If by giving the next generation to Nintendo, you mean the Wii U, I think you are mistaken. I love Nintendo, but the Wii U is a disaster and I don't see them recovering from that. I would say that the PS3 came back from a terrible start, but the difference is that the PS3 had games people wanted to play on it and developers who were willing to develop those games on it. The Wii U doesn't outside of in-house Nintendo titles. Though at least playing used games isn't an issue on the Wii U and it's backward compatible with the Wii (and the Wii was backward compatible with the Gamecube)

I really don't see how this will help Microsoft crack the market on online streaming for Netflix, Amazon, etc. That stuff comes with practically everything now. My Bluray has it, my Tivo has it, and if I get a new TV it will probably have it. So what is MS doing to set itself apart from those things? Making it less appealing as a gaming platform? Doesn't make much sense to me.

You have a point there in that all new devices and TV's do have those kinds of apps. I guess Microsoft is counting on people only wanting to have to use one device for their various entertainment needs, though for me and a lot of other people, that one device is just the TV itself with all the apps - no need for a console. Maybe they will do some interesting Xbox exclusive or Kinect exclusive stuff.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Thing is, though, in the UK, a new game was around £40-45 in 1993, and is around £40-45 today, while if they kept up with inflation they would be around £80. What's happening in the UK that the cost of games can reduce almost by half, that isn't happening in Australia?

Hholy mother of god, I thought I got ripped buying N64 games for $70 in 1998 - but you people really got ripped.

 

[illram]

I really don't see how this will help Microsoft crack the market on online streaming for Netflix, Amazon, etc. That stuff comes with practically everything now. My Bluray has it, my Tivo has it, and if I get a new TV it will probably have it. So what is MS doing to set itself apart from those things? Making it less appealing as a gaming platform? Doesn't make much sense to me.

I believe the Xbox has an HDMI pass through so you can conceivably hook your cable box up to it and use it as a channel guide. Other than that... don't know. I don't think they are as much about stealing away those of us who already have the ability to do what the Xbox does, as making it more mainstream and tapping into the market of people still "in the dark ages" of 2-3 years ago.

 

[Farm Boy]

Channels <shudders>. Man I don't miss cable. I think I missed commercials and knowing what movies were coming out for about a year, which I wouldn't have predicted. Wish VCR repair was a thing still though. Well not really but kinda. Gotten relatively decent at splicing back up eaten tapes. Don't really like it though. Even Redboxing something makes the remote control feel like a chore after you've gotten used to using a mouse for everything.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

They still sell cheap DVD/VCR combos at Wal Mart for $50. I got one so we could fire up Fantasia on VHS and some of my old Bond movies. Though on a flatscreen it sucks to watch something in 4:3 and have half the screen wasted. #firstworldproblems

 

[illram]

I cut the cord to cable about 13 years ago, went totally streaming for all my needs about 7 or 8 years ago. It gets better every year. However this is sort of a little golden age for us cord cutters as the industry is actively trying to force us back into the cable subscription buying fold. I am not quite sure where MS wants to steer things in that regard other than they want to make the Xbox and Windows in general the central hub for people's entertainment lives. My fear is that in their effort to do that they make deals with cable companies and content providers to push people like me out, by severely limiting streaming content that is not tied to some other package. Like what Intel tried (and failed) to do with "Intel Insider."

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Our old apartment included cable and this one doesn't, so we lost extended basic cable when we moved. It only cost $5/mo to get basic cable with all the local channels and since I'm big into watching local news and weather forecasts, it is worth it. It's extremely frustrating though how there may be 5-6 channels you actually will watch but to get them you are forced into a package of 50 worthless (to me) channels. Hopefully in a few years you will be able to buy them a la carte as cable faces falling subscribers or you can just stream them online. We've taken to hooking up an old laptop to the TV to stream stuff over the internet and that's largely replaced what we actually cared about from extended basic cable.

 

[Mise]

It's waaaaay easier to use Kinect with hand gestures and voice commands than a crappy TV or Bluray remote. But the barrier for me would be.... actually turning the thing on in the first place. I hear it's going to be always on and always listening, so I guess that makes it easier.

 

[bhsup]

I hear it's going to be always on and always listening, so I guess that makes it easier Orwellian.

Fixed that for ya.

 

[Mise]

Yeah, I don't much like it either...

 

[Farm Boy]

I cut the cord to cable about 13 years ago, went totally streaming for all my needs about 7 or 8 years ago. It gets better every year. However this is sort of a little golden age for us cord cutters as the industry is actively trying to force us back into the cable subscription buying fold. I am not quite sure where MS wants to steer things in that regard other than they want to make the Xbox and Windows in general the central hub for people's entertainment lives. My fear is that in their effort to do that they make deals with cable companies and content providers to push people like me out, by severely limiting streaming content that is not tied to some other package. Like what Intel tried (and failed) to do with "Intel Insider."

I can't imagine I am alone in the thought that if they make shows/movies harder and drastically more expensive to get I'll simply consume less and possibly torrent more(which is really uncommon now).

 

[illram]

I hope you're right! Cable companies are desperately trying to remain relevant though.

 

[Farm Boy]

I hope you're right! Cable companies are desperately trying to remain relevant though.

I think that underestimates the absolutely enormous appeal of live sports. Or is that still mostly dominated by broadcast TV? I actually had broadcast until the digital switchover rendered by antenna inadequate. And I just don't care enough to spend any money at all to make it work. Doesn't cable dominate most internet service providing? I have DSL to go along with my home phone line but that seems to be relatively abnormal anymore.

 

[Antilogic]

Bingo. Its also your own fault. You'll buy the newest games without considering the policy of companies that produce them. You don't "vote with your wallet", you don't organise gamer "consumer unions". Therefore companies will do whatever they want. Enjoy

EDIT: I mean the collective "you", not you you

Don't worry, got it.

This is also why I don't have any ebook readers and insist on buying old-fashioned paperbacks (either online or at bookstores)--cheaper, and Amazon can't rescind my license to view the material and force me to accept their arbitration, waive my right to sue them, etc.

I am really only busting your arse over weather those licenses can be considered a form of property or weather being licenses they by definition are no property.
As has become apparent by now, licenses seem to (at least according to the 9th circuit) exclude the first-sale-doctrine. In turn, this doctrine only applies to property (like a car I buy). That software-licenser as you say nevertheless complied with said doctrine at first was then in effect only a matter of convenience increasingly obsolete by now due to the advancement of technology.
That is how I understood Traitorfish and that is what I felt you tried to differentiate / blurry the line to property by making use of the first-sale-doctrine which we can now assume to be irrelevant to a software-license.

also
is always a great things to say, great meaning it calls for me honoring you for it (yeah maybe a bit over the top but such apparent leaps for mutual understanding are something to be cherished on the Internetz IMO)

I guess I don't get why my ass is being busted. My comments should be taken as a more general take on where we are headed and why I'm disappointed by what Microsoft's decision here implies for used goods, product ownership in general, etc. It's not limited to software. So put this smiley after my prior posts if it helps to see where I'm coming from: .

But even in the software case, I think this kind of user-license restriction policy was only previously applied to corporate software deals (i.e. Microsoft is furnishing the operating systems for an office environment). Its application to the individual is new, hence my disappointment.

As of the last time I looked into it, auto-update occasionally turns itself back on.
IMO it's the only major problem with Steam - I wish I'd mentioned it above.

OTOH, if you wait awhile to buy a game it's not as much of an issue.

As best as I can tell (because this issue frustrates me as well), whenever Steam downloads an update for itself, it resets your auto-update settings. So the Steam update updates your update settings, if that makes sense.





I'm considering cutting the cable/satellite TV subscription when I move to a new place (probably within a year or so) and going all-online. The only thing I watch on television now are comedy shows or news during treadmill workouts, but there are ways around that. I do so much more online viewing now than I used to.

 

[Mise]

Before I forget, here's another article on the diverging visions of Microsoft and Sony: http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/21/4...living-room-hub-or-streaming-cloud/in/4116279

But if we look at that long-term vision, new Xbox and PlayStation fans could find themselves in very different places down the road. Microsoft wants its box to be the center of your living room in every way, while Sony is promising a future where you theoretically might not even need a powerful box in your home.

...

Assuming that neither Sony nor Microsoft manage an outright coup with a better price, a better release date, or sufficiently compelling exclusive games, this is the choice you'll make: do you bet on the company who wants to let you take a traditional gaming experience anywhere you'd care to be, or the one that demands you stand still in exchange for increased immersion and functionality?

 

[illram]

I think that underestimates the absolutely enormous appeal of live sports. Or is that still mostly dominated by broadcast TV? I actually had broadcast until the digital switchover rendered by antenna inadequate. And I just don't care enough to spend any money at all to make it work. Doesn't cable dominate most internet service providing? I have DSL to go along with my home phone line but that seems to be relatively abnormal anymore.

Cable internet is still popular (I have it) but most companies offer internet only plans, which I have. Sports is still a big draw but MLB has been streaming online for years and it seems all the professional leagues now have their own channel full of their own content that they want to maximize; I am sure if the right opportunity presented itself, the NFL would, for example, love to sign a huge bajillion dollar deal with, say, Apple or Google (or both) to offer them ala carte access to the NFL network, for example.