This pretty much sums up my thoughts on the matter.

http://gizmodo.com/the-xbox-one-just-got-way-worse-and-its-our-fault-514411905

Now we basically get a 360 that is a little bit faster. Next Gen indeed.

Here's the for real source: http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/update

But seriously, super surprised they listened and then did something about it. What is this, a free market?

I like how they took away the proposed new features while giving back the old features. I wonder if they did that out of spite or they really didn't know how to have the two coexist properly.

Here's the for real source: http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/update

But seriously, super surprised they listened and then did something about it. What is this, a free market?

I like how they took away the proposed new features while giving back the old features. I wonder if they did that out of spite or they really didn't know how to have the two coexist properly.

I don't know if it'd be possible for the two to co-exist. if u allow no disks, it means u at least need internet to do checks everyday to ensure their's no duplicate copys floating on people's game librarys.

At the end of the day, too many people were complaining about it being practically an always on product, and we just do not have the infrastructure to support it yet imo.

I like how they took away the proposed new features while giving back the old features. I wonder if they did that out of spite or they really didn't know how to have the two coexist properly.

They probably could have done but it likely would have meant a change from 'online every 24h' to 'always online if you want to play a game without the disk' and can you imagine the reaction to that? *shudders*

No, the masses have spoken (apparently) so it's 7 years of slightly faster slightly prettier hardware for us...

This pretty much sums up my thoughts on the matter.

http://gizmodo.com/the-xbox-one-just-got-way-worse-and-its-our-fault-514411905

Now we basically get a 360 that is a little bit faster. Next Gen indeed.

Because Gizmodo are *known* to be an unbiased, very-well respected news source...

I love that they make it sound like the One is going to suck by listing all of the new features that everybody hated, that Microsoft have since fixed and that's been the standard since gaming has existed (sharing games, offline usability, etc.,).

"Oh no, I have to use a disc!". A real shame, that.

"Oh no, I can sell my games back to Gamestop! What a terrible travesty as that's going to wreck the industry!" said no one ever, who enjoyed getting at least something for a used game they didn't play anymore.

"Oh no! I have to share games by sharing the disc, instead of the terrible limit of one share per friend per account! What sort of hell is this?!" A pretty good peak into heaven, me thinks.

You all can say what you want about the Xbox One's reversal being a horrible move, but seriously, it's a HUUUGE step in the RIGHT direction. They fixed a TON of problems by reversing their stupid policies. I cannot fathom how anyone on this forum can say "DRM is good, it's good to only have the ability to share the game with friend FOREVER, and it's good to have an almost always-online console...". Yeah, good, that's why everyone cried out in agony over this. But now that Microsoft's fixed it, people like that Gizmodo author have to go and complain about a console with updated everything that suddenly works just like the previous generations, in that you can play offline and share games? SERIOUSLY!? What the heck kind of sense does that make?

And how come nobody complained that the PS4 was offline-ready and able to share game discs, but now that MS have reversed their stance it's a bad idea and made the console "worse"?

Gotta love double-standards...

"Oh no, I have to use a disc!". A real shame, that.

"Oh no, I can sell my games back to Gamestop! What a terrible travesty as that's going to wreck the industry!" said no one ever, who enjoyed getting at least something for a used game they didn't play anymore.

"Oh no! I have to share games by sharing the disc, instead of the terrible limit of one share per friend per account! What sort of hell is this?!" A pretty good peak into heaven, me thinks.

1) People have complained THIS GENERATION that having to have a disk in the machine to play in installed game is dumb.
2) You could still sell your games except the plan was instead of Gamestop pushing used copies over new (so more $$$ for them) the people who made the thing would get a kick back instead. This in turn could have been reinvested and better games come out...
3) It was never 'one share per friend per account', yes you can only share the game with one friend at a time (much like now with disks) but if you want to share the game with a friend who lives on the other side of the country you have to send 'em the disk; with the system was it was going to be they could have downloaded a copy and played locally.

Even living in the UK if I wanted to share a game with a friend it would have taken a day or more to get to him assuming I sent it on a week day and would have cost me money. With the proposed system I could have digitally lent it to him whenever and he could have downloaded and started playing right away.

You all can say what you want about the Xbox One's reversal being a horrible move, but seriously, it's a HUUUGE step in the RIGHT direction.

It's not a step at all, that's the point.. it's a continuation of the status quo.

And how come nobody complained that the PS4 was offline-ready and able to share game discs, but now that MS have reversed their stance it's a bad idea and made the console "worse"?

Because there was no discussion over this issue on the PS4 which was a loud. A few of my friends expressed a desire to get the Xbox over the PS4 because of things like no disk in the machine while playing so for them it's a step backwards.

The PS4 was what it was, a faster PS3-style console.. MS tried something new, people moaned, so now we have a faster XBox360.

If that's what people want then that's what people apparently want.. but they HAVE stripped out features and some selling points which does, in a real way, make the Xbox worse than if it had had those features.

I like how they took away the proposed new features while giving back the old features. I wonder if they did that out of spite or they really didn't know how to have the two coexist properly.

They probably could have done but it likely would have meant a change from 'online every 24h' to 'always online if you want to play a game without the disk' and can you imagine the reaction to that? *shudders*

No, the masses have spoken (apparently) so it's 7 years of slightly faster slightly prettier hardware for us...

So obviously, I don't understand how all of this works exactly. If you have a game from disc, then you shouldn't be able to lend digitally. If you've downloaded a game from the cloud, then you should be able to. So if you digitally lend the game to your friend, then you should be effectively locked out from the game, until your friend gives it back. Why can't this work without (the check-in once a day) DRM?

The PS4 was what it was, a faster PS3-style console.. MS tried something new, people moaned, so now we have a faster XBox360.

MS tried something new, but completely failed to understand their current audience/ early adopters, and therefore communicate any of the advantages of their way vs their competition. Instead, we got a goddamn TV guide/Skype commercial, which set the tone of "Microsoft doesn't care about gamers" which they only exacerbated at E3 by again failing to communicate the upsides of their distribution model.

Their PR sucked, and then proceeded to completely blow it, which is no fault but their own.

Wow, people complaining about upgraded hardware with more expanded features. Kind of ridiculous. :P

"Oh no, upgraded hardware! Egads, it's not evolutionary at all! Oh no! No more DRM, can't have that!".

Wow, people complaining about upgraded hardware with more expanded features. Kind of ridiculous.

"Oh no, upgraded hardware! Egads, it's not evolutionary at all! Oh no! No more DRM, can't have that!".

When did upgraded hardware become as bad as DRM?