News - Sky TV Xbox One bundle offer rumours are quashed

[CK_1985]

...But, if I don't want or get the loan back for three months, I don't need to connect every day to verify that, because I can only sell. give or lend when I'm online to do it...

Fair point, hadn't thought of it from that angle.

Although if you're going to have a console that has to connect to the internet every time you install a new game (even if you're never planning to play it online the console still needs to check you haven't bought it / borrowed it from someone else) then is it such a big leap to have it check once a day?

Of course, if your view is that consoles shouldn't need to be connected to the internet ever then fair enough, but the inexorable march of 'progress' would appear to be against you there

[crossy]

[snipped]
Besides, not everybody want to sell, give or lend games anyway. They just want to play, and in my case, play offline. My current XBox has NEVER been used for any online play. I just buy games, and play them, locally and offline.

In that case you're not the kind of customer (sounds better than "sucker" doesn't it) that Microsoft - and probably Sony - really are targeting for their consoles. The whole point with modern games seems to be around selling you DLC and MP gaming. And while I see the sense in the former (as long as it doesn't get out of hand - cough, cough, EA) the "ooh, you just MUST play CTF, deathmatch, etc" gets right up my nose.

As to the XBone, I don't have a big deal with the "connect once a day" restriction although - like many - I can't see why straight single player gaming is also blocked. The "recommendation" that you need a 1.5Mps connection is worrying - even though I've got many times that, I'd be concerned what would happen if your connection dropped speed. And also that it's a further barricade against those who wish to operate "offline".

Although I'm going to wait and see, all these restrictions - along with the lack of XB360 compatibility - is inclining me to keep my £399 to spend on something else.

[PmanUk]

Ironically this gives people a reason to pirate software, to avoid such measures being imposed upon them.

A good example is Assassins Creed, where you were forced to be online all the time, within a couple of weeks it had been cracked and people could play off line easily. So the only people being bugged by the DRM is the actual paying consumer.

I could understand a company wanting a chip off the 2nd hand sales of games if they werent so expensive to start with! £45 brand new? ack, dont they make enough millions already?

I have an Xbox360 and a PS3 at the moment but the minute I have to have it online or need to buy a license for 2nd hand games I simply wont bother

I will buy the same game with better graphics for half the price for the PC

[HalloweenJack]

I am one of the few people that does read EULAs .... and contracts, and trading T&C's. That argument has three flaws. First, none of the games I've checked say that. Second, a friend is a copyright lawyer, but he also runs a small software company. I had one of his products for a review, and his EULA was quite restrictive. So I asked him about it, pointing out that I don't get to read the EULA until after I've bought and paid for the software, so what about the "ticket" principle? Does he think that his restrictions are legally binding? His answer ... we don't know, and won't until a case goes through the courts, up to the end of any appeals process and (at that time) it had not. But, he said, it can't do any harm to bung them in. There have been a couple of famous cases about EULAs, not necessarily even about software, or about customised business software, but they've been on business to business contracts, negotiated in advance, where the buyer certainly has sight of the EULA before agreeing the contract.

And third, EULA restrictions are subject to over-riding consumer laws, so one grey area is over reasonableness. For instance, a court might (presumably would) hold a EULA as being able to prevent a buyer hacking the code, modifying it a bit and selling it as their own, and it'd be a copyright breach anyway. You don't "own" the code in that sense, just the media. But that same court might well hold that attempting to prevent a buyer from selling the goods on, as used, disc and all, is not reasonable. We won't know until such a case travels the court process. Last time I looked, none had.

Many companies, over the years, have attempted to put all sorts of restrictions into contracts, and quite a few have been thrown out as unenforceable. So, even if such a term is in a EULA, it does not necessarily mean it is enforceable. Consumer law very directly tackles that, and you'll also see clauses in most contracts pointing out that if any individual terms is held unenforceable, the rest of the contract still applies, precisely because of that possibility.



EDIT: The ticket principle derives from a very well-known consumer law case, where exclusion of liability was printed on the back of the ticket for (IIRC) a beach deck chair. But you don't get the ticket entitling you to the chair until you've already paid for it, by which time, it's too late to unilaterally impose conditions on a contract, because the contract is already formed. Thus, the exclusions don't apply .... and the council renting the chair were liable when the punter sat on it, and it collapsed underneath him. If you buy software, when do you, a consumer, get to read the EULA? After you open the sealed packet, after buying it.

steam is 1 example where you are renting a service , same with origin (when you make an account to play BF3) - the EULA`s have been changed to reflect that aspect of the `contract` , and how the own the physical media only.

[Saracen]

Fair point, hadn't thought of it from that angle.

Although if you're going to have a console that has to connect to the internet every time you install a new game (even if you're never planning to play it online the console still needs to check you haven't bought it / borrowed it from someone else) then is it such a big leap to have it check once a day?

Of course, if your view is that consoles shouldn't need to be connected to the internet ever then fair enough, but the inexorable march of 'progress' would appear to be against you there

Agreed on the "march of progress".

My XBox does not have a net connection, and I used wired ethernet, not Wifi. I do not have a net socket near the XBox, nor do I need one.

I could run a temporary cable, connect it, validate a new install, and disconnect again, if I have to, but I'm not lifting floorboards, etc, to run a permanent cable to where the XBox is, just because MS want to validate every 24 hours.

So yes, you're right, march of progress, etc, but that march will take place without me. See, I'm not that bothered whether I have a new XBox or not. And frankly, the above aside, I wouldn't pay £400 (as predicted) anyway. The current one cost me not much over half that, with half a dozen premium (at the time) games. So given what the One us, I'll just stick with the current 360 until/unless it croaks, and if it does, maybe I'll buy a used 360 (probably for 3p and s bit of used chewing gum by then), or maybe, I'll just do without.

I'm not an avid gamer. Not any longer, anyway. Various things over the years have cured me of that, DRM and obnoxious attitudes from many games companies among them. And a friend (on here) introduced me to GOG, where I can pick up a shedload of games I'd missed for a few quid each. It's FAR cheaper than buying them at premium prices when new, and DRM free, too. So, if need be, I'm content to be an XBox-free zone. What I'm NOT doing is putting in one that needs to connect every 24 hours. Sure, most people probably will. I won't, any more than I will use Steam.

[Saracen]

steam is 1 example where you are renting a service , same with origin (when you make an account to play BF3) - the EULA`s have been changed to reflect that aspect of the `contract` , and how the own the physical media only.

Indeed. That's one reason why I don't have a Steam account, and a major reason I stopped buy new (new releases, I mean) games .... it got to be too much of a pain working out which games I fancied enough to spend £30, £45, or whatever, only to then find it needs Steam. I will not buy a game that requires Steam.

I know Steam has advantages, benefits a lot of people love. Fair enough, but for me, the downside exceeds those benefits sufficiently that I'm not prepared to agree to it. And, other similar services, like Origin, EA, etc, fall into the same category, because they strike me as branded versions of the same principle and, frankly, much less appealing than even Steam.

[HalloweenJack]

and a lot of game publishers are going that route , which is why I mentioned steam - the account you make means you agree to the EULA or renting the game service and you only `own` the physical disk,

[Saracen]

In that case you're not the kind of customer (sounds better than "sucker" doesn't it) that Microsoft - and probably Sony - really are targeting for their consoles. The whole point with modern games seems to be around selling you DLC and MP gaming. And while I see the sense in the former (as long as it doesn't get out of hand - cough, cough, EA) the "ooh, you just MUST play CTF, deathmatch, etc" gets right up my nose.

As to the XBone, I don't have a big deal with the "connect once a day" restriction although - like many - I can't see why straight single player gaming is also blocked. The "recommendation" that you need a 1.5Mps connection is worrying - even though I've got many times that, I'd be concerned what would happen if your connection dropped speed. And also that it's a further barricade against those who wish to operate "offline".

Although I'm going to wait and see, all these restrictions - along with the lack of XB360 compatibility - is inclining me to keep my £399 to spend on something else.

No doubt you're right, I'm not the target 'customer', and while I'm far from alone in my attitude, I'm sure we're a small enough proportion of the market that our objections won't make any difference at all.

But here's another scenario, akin to Blademrk's.

We (wife and self) regularly visit the mother-in-law. She's elderly, on her own and absolutely NOT interested in anything online, whatever. So, not net connection.

We visit every few weeks. Often, just a long weekend. Periodially, a week to 10 days. The longest visit, for a very specific purpose, was nearly 6 weeks. When we go for a longer trip, I take a computer. Sometimes, a laptop, but I have been kniwn to take a full tower system, CRT monitor, laser and inkjet printers and even a flatbed scanner.

And .... the XBox.

It's one of the reasons I got it.

So, what do I do with one that needs to connect every 24 hours? Get her to install and pay for broadband, to satisfy MS?

I know this is not a typical situation, but it's partly why I reject the requirements of the XB One out of hand, because it is MY situation.

[MrCanzine]

Actually there is - so it can check you're not playing a game that you already re-sold to someone else. Not saying that I'm a massive fan of the system, but they have at least thought these things throgugh logically.

I thought the disc was still required in the drive in order to play?

[Saracen]

and a lot of game publishers are going that route , which is why I mentioned steam - the account you make means you agree to the EULA or renting the game service and you only `own` the physical disk,

Indeed they are .... sadly, from my point of view, but it's the way of things. I'll take your word for it on Steam's EULA, as I don't have, and never have had, an account. It's rather more grey than that, though, for boxed games, old-style.

[butter30]

Tbh I wont be getting any next gen console what gaming console can do a gaming pc can do better

[miniyazz]

No doubt you're right, I'm not the target 'customer', and while I'm far from alone in my attitude, I'm sure we're a small enough proportion of the market that our objections won't make any difference at all.

But here's another scenario, akin to Blademrk's.

We (wife and self) regularly visit the mother-in-law. She's elderly, on her own and absolutely NOT interested in anything online, whatever. So, not net connection.

We visit every few weeks. Often, just a long weekend. Periodially, a week to 10 days. The longest visit, for a very specific purpose, was nearly 6 weeks. When we go for a longer trip, I take a computer. Sometimes, a laptop, but I have been kniwn to take a full tower system, CRT monitor, laser and inkjet printers and even a flatbed scanner.

And .... the XBox.

It's one of the reasons I got it.

So, what do I do with one that needs to connect every 24 hours? Get her to install and pay for broadband, to satisfy MS?

I know this is not a typical situation, but it's partly why I reject the requirements of the XB One out of hand, because it is MY situation.

You could use your phone as a wireless hotspot once a day
(And then have it try to download big updates over that).
Or.. just not buy it, which seems to be the sensible option here, I agree.

[HalloweenJack]

Indeed they are .... sadly, from my point of view, but it's the way of things. I'll take your word for it on Steam's EULA, as I don't have, and never have had, an account. It's rather more grey than that, though, for boxed games, old-style.

http://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/


have a read - steam `subscriber`