Sections

Xbox One: online check-in justified by prominence of online multiplayer today, says Spencer

Thursday, 13th June 2013 09:31 GMT By Dave Cook

Xbox One’s 24-hour authentication procedure is justified by the popularity of online multiplayer today, according VP at Microsoft Game Studios, Phil Spencer.

Yeah I know, these articles are getting boring to write now too. Bear with us folks, it’s E3.

Speaking with Polygon, Spencer said, “What we’re seeing in games … is online community gaming is becoming a predominant way that people play.

“You see so many of these large games that are out there that rely on and are kind of made by the connection people have with their friends, and how they play cooperatively and competitively with the millions of people on Xbox Live and other ecosystems. It’s a predominant form of gaming today.”

Spencer’s rationale is that most of us are playing online with our mates instead of playing single players games, and added that the online check-ins aren’t that big a leap from what we see on services like iTunes or Steam authentication today.

He said earlier today that the check-ins take kilobytes, rather than megabytes, so won’t drain your mobile tethering if you need to use it.

Well, I know personally for me that bit about everyone playing multiplayer is bollocks as I prefer single-player games, but what about you folks?

Breaking news

56 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. dex3108

    If i want to play MP part i will connect console if i don’t want to play MP part i don’t want to connect console. I want to be able to play games where i want and sometimes those places doesn’t have internet connection.

    #1 1 year ago
  2. mkotechno

    Is justified by the need of send kinect data to NSA periodically.

    #2 1 year ago
  3. KAP

    @1 Haven’t you heard? There’s a 360 for offline play.

    #3 1 year ago
  4. Lengendaryboss

    So thats why, embrace the online community and fuck the offline community, makes sense.

    #4 1 year ago
  5. viralshag

    I think they should have made it once a month or something. Daily seems extreme.

    But I do agree with the thinking. FOR ME PERSONALLY, my 360 and PC are always connected. I guess I find it hard to imagine a gaming life without being constantly connected. ;)

    #5 1 year ago
  6. polygem

    this is all about having options. if they do not get that basic simple point. they do not get it at all.

    #6 1 year ago
  7. Aullah

    It is confirmed in my country that xbox one will not be available in any form this year. From middle europe…

    #7 1 year ago
  8. orakaa

    Ok, so they REALLY have no justification to force mandatory Internet connection (except greed).

    People love multiplayer. True. But have you seen the amount of sales of single player games? If I don’t subscribe to Xbox Live Gold, then I won’t be able to play online… so why the heck would I need to have my console do an online check?
    If my Internet goes down (which does happen) or if Microsoft servers go down (oh boy, I REALLY hope Anonymous will go after them), it means I couldn’t play the games I (am supposed to) own? I couldn’t play games like Bioshock Infinite for instance?

    I bought more games this gen than any other one before (over 100 games). Guess what, almost none of them are multiplayer. Look at those 100 games and the price of your console. That is the amount of money you won’t get from me because of your dumb decisions, Microsoft…

    #8 1 year ago
  9. Samoan Spider

    The word of the day is: Consequentialism

    The ends justify the means. Maybe they’re right. I certainly got dragged into a digital future kicking and screaming by Valve and look at me now. 345 games at this mornings count. But I think it just leaves a bad taste when people who would be willing to spend enormous amounts of money are being told “thanks but this isn’t for you and we don’t want your money”. I realise the world is full of products that have limitations that disagree with certain people or groups, but no company wilfully imposes such a restriction when for all intents and purposes they are offering something that someone else is offering without the restrictions for similar or less money.

    #9 1 year ago
  10. G1GAHURTZ

    I probably wouldn’t game at all if there was no online.

    I was pretty much bored of it before the 360 released. I honestly don’t see the challenge in trying to beat poor, predictable AI. It bores me so much.

    Collecting stuff/ranking up/completing simple objectives isn’t that boring, offline, but I wouldn’t want to pay for a whole console just to do it.

    I think most people would agree with me on that. That’s why you see such huge numbers in online games, but so called 10/10 SP games selling so much less.

    The money for devs/pubs is mostly online these days, and the SP only players, noisy as they are on the internet, don’t hold as much sway.

    #10 1 year ago
  11. dOoKxZr

    So what happens if i go on holiday ?? My gaming experience will be ruined because i wont be there to sign in once every 24 hours ??? This is a joke and there really is no need for it. I am going to stick with a ps4 and my pc. If they made something people like then they will defo buy it , I mean my graphics card alone for pc is worth more than an xbox one but hey I enjoy it

    #11 1 year ago
  12. manamana

    It totally depends, sometimes I love to be alone, with headphones and play a singleplayer game for hours. And I had months where I came from work and first thing was to jump in a squad of three chaps in BF3. Best fun is together in the same room with splitscreen, though.

    I just don’t want SP games to go away, as I think that they have greater immersion. Most SP games that tack-on MP feel exactly like that – tacked-on. I prefer games that have a focus on MP to play online. The rest of the time, I don’t connect, as I hate to have pop-ins of who is ‘online now’ or get game invitations, while I’m in a boss fight …

    #12 1 year ago
  13. TheBlackHole

    @8

    Can someone please explain how making people connect every day is GREED?

    I know there are reasons not to like always-on, but where on earth does greed come into it?

    #13 1 year ago
  14. TheBlackHole

    @8

    Also, how many of those games did you buy second hand :)

    #14 1 year ago
  15. Joe Musashi

    @10 I’m sure many would agree with your sentiment. However, it doesn’t serve as valid justification for the methods employed here by Xbox One.

    JM

    #15 1 year ago
  16. Christopherftw

    added that the online check-ins aren’t that big a leap from what we see on services like iTunes or Steam authentication today.

    Steam doesn’t require you do ‘check-in’ once every 24 hours to play a offline game.

    #16 1 year ago
  17. NeutralBlade

    The restriction is to their benefit only. It serves no purpose, other than to monitor and control consumers’ data and usage, and we game online just fine without it. We simply don’t need it, so they can keep their restricted console while we look elsewhere.

    Two major differences between steam and the Xbox One, is that you own your pc, and it works on or offline. And steam offers games at considerably cheaper rates, several times per year.

    Buying steam games at near-rental prices, is very attractive; most don’t mind buying digital games at very cheap rates. But spending hundreds on the Xbox One, along with spending hundreds or even thousands on games, (as it currently stands), that you’ll never own, is simply unacceptable.

    I’m sure we’ll hear more and more “convincing” statements from Microsoft reps before launch, on why we should just be cool, and give in to their “friendly” DRM. The best everyone can do for gaming, is to simply reject the Xbone. Positive change will only come, when the negative is consistently rejected.

    #17 1 year ago
  18. viralshag

    @15, While I agree I’m trying to look at the bigger picture and pure speculation would suggest to me that this is maybe the go-between of trying to create a disc-less gaming future while buying discs is still an option. I don’t really know how or why though so it’s just my thinking.

    I think if next gen was say purely digital distribution, like Steam, these requirements might not exist.

    #18 1 year ago
  19. dOoKxZr

    @17 It is also our choice to have steam on our computers we could get games else where easily , xbox one are trying to crowd control

    #19 1 year ago
  20. viralshag

    @17, It’s more of a requirement than a restriction. You might have Steam but without the internet you can’t get games. The major difference is a one-time activation vs a daily check.

    @19, They don’t need to crowd control, it’s a closed system like all consoles. Can you buy Ninty games from PSN and PS4 games from Live? Nope. Can you buy games from any retailer? Sure. Different situation.

    #20 1 year ago
  21. orakaa

    @13: It is greed in the sense of blocking the system so they can control the prices. If second hand market is blocked or has to go through their system, it means:
    - I can’t give a game to a friend easily (or at all). Sometimes I lend games and get them back afterwards, many weeks after, which is not possible with Xbox One. They do this just so that my friends, in this case, would each have to pay for the game. So yes, greed.
    - If prices on second-hand market are controlled through them (meaning they can have a control on the sale price) then it will not get the prices down, but quite the opposite (look at the prices of the retail games available digitally on Xbox Live and compare them to retail… go ahead and try: Microsoft is not Steam). So yes, greed

    And yo answer your comment on 14, most of the games I’ve bought were new. I’d say about 2/3 of them. Amongst the ones I’ve bought at second hands shops or on eBay were Japanese games that were too expansive new (but with Xbox One and its region locking you can’t even play games from another region) or games that I might have been interested in, but not at full price and finally caught at 5 or 10 euros at my GAME store.

    For the new games, I’ve bought most of them on Amazon or through physical stores, and waited until it reached 20-40 euros, depending on how much I wanted the game. I’ve also bought a few collector edition day one (Hitman Absolution, Metal Gear Rising, etc.) for 99 euros.
    So I don’t feel like I haven’t given any money to developpers, or that I only got second hand games. I’ve given money. Plenty of it.

    The thing is, there’s no reason to FORCE a mandatory Internet check everyday (otherwise your system can’t work). Even Microsoft can’t justify it.

    #21 1 year ago
  22. NeutralBlade

    @19 I agree that on the pc platform, we have freedom to choose steam or not, and our PC is separate hardware without said restrictions. With the Xbox One, MS is the man behind the curtain that monitors and control everything you do with their product; that you’re only licensed to use.

    Paying $500 to take home a product that’s not even yours, is just ridiculous. We’re only being told about some of the DRM that’s featured on the Xbox One. Believe me when I say, there is surely more to come, which most we won’t know about, until consumers began to take it home. I feel a little sorry for rule breakers already. MS will likely brick their console. They have the power to do it already, (it’s built in), which is much worse than suspending a person’s Live account.

    @20 Steam is just one of many services, on a platform you own. With your PC, you can easily purchase games on disc as well, which you can avoid any products with draconian DRM. That’s the beauty of choice. But we lose the right to choose, to have that freedom, due to MS’ new console policies. It’s a good thing that we still have the choice to go with their competitor, so we can keep the rights no one has the right to take.

    @21 Yes, eliminating the used game market, so they can take 100% profit while dividing it up amongst their “participating partners”, is certainly the primary reason for the Azure system. MS don’t care whose business they hurt in the process, and if you a partner, you will be paying up to MS in order to join the club.

    The system is designed so no matter how, when, or where games are transferred from one person to another, the money will always go back to MS and their gang. Price fixing galore, and no, they certainly won’t be giving us cheaper rates after they rake in all the profits either. It’s just sickening.

    #22 1 year ago
  23. Llewelyn_MT

    Smartphones are increasingly popular these days. Let’s ban all other phones, because people obviously don’t want them anymore.

    Everyone in the right mind prefers to have a choice even if they choose not to use it. Deal with it, Microsoft.

    #23 1 year ago
  24. dOoKxZr

    @22 Yes , on pc we can near enough do what we want no matter if its for work , gaming or just casually using it for browsing/listning to music . This freedom is most awesome

    #24 1 year ago
  25. G1GAHURTZ

    @15:

    To be perfectly honest, they don’t need to justify a single thing.

    Gaming is a 1st world luxury, where people who don’t live in war zones, or places where food and water is scarce, can spend their time playing out a life/scenario that doesn’t exist, from the warmth and comfort of their homes.

    It’s Microsoft’s product to do what they like with, but people are going on like the ability to play whatever games exist on the X1 is a human right.

    It’s not a human right, it’s something that MS can offer to whoever the want to offer it to.

    Did you see that McLaren on stage during the X1 presentation? There are only two of those in the world, and I can pretty much guarantee you that 99.99999999999999999999% of the people in the world today would never be able to afford one.

    Yet we don’t see car enthusiasts throwing their arms in the air, complaining that McLaren are keeping us from our human rights by making a product for the tiny minority.

    I’m not saying that we should look at MS in the same light as a supercar manufacturer, but people need to remember that MS or any other game company is free to do what it wants in this regard.

    If they want to make a complete failure of a console, they can do it.

    You know, it’s kind of fascinating at times, and I think a psychology post grad could easily write an entire PhD thesis on it, that there are people who claim to love the single player experience, yet they still want everyone else to experience it with them.

    It makes no sense.

    If there’s anyone who should be going around trying to persuade people to buy or not buy a console, it’s people like me, who need their online communities to be as big as possible.

    If I like an online game, but nobody else plays it, my game simply doesn’t work any more.

    That’s not the case for SP gamers, yet they’re the ones making all of the noise. They don’t want to buy an X1, and they don’t want others to buy an X1.

    It seems pretty obvious that Sony isn’t going to put any 24 hour checks into the PS4 at this stage, yet you still see people acting as though anyone who owns an X1 jeopardises their chances of sitting in a dark room on their own, playing uncharted 4.

    I repeat, MS don’t need to justify anything here. If they want to do online checks and ignore customers, they can do it. Playing X1 is not a human right. People should concentrate on what they want, rather than campaigning against what they don’t want.

    #25 1 year ago
  26. Bomba Luigi

    Oh, c’mon, they are really gettin Crazy. No one ever complained that he has to go Online to Play Online Multiplayer, theres no one havin a Problem with that. Thats not the god damn Problem here, its to be forced to get online to let MS controll you if you were not bad, its about Single Player Games always and ever should be playable Offline, and not just for 24 Hours. FOREVER.

    There are People who Play offline SP. And not just 1 Guy somwhere in Botswana, there are a lot of them.

    #26 1 year ago
  27. viralshag

    @22, But there’s no difference between the PS4 and X1 in that regard. You either buy from retail or you buy from PSN/Live. That IS the choice you have.

    #27 1 year ago
  28. polygem

    @G1GA: you really should play Dark Souls

    #28 1 year ago
  29. polygem

    @TheBlackHole#14:

    http://www.vg247.com/2013/06/12/miyamoto-explains-long-development-cycles-isnt-concerned-with-used-games-financials/#comment-495484

    thing is, there´s just no point. the whole “online check-in justified by prominence of online multiplayer today” argument stinks.

    sure mp gaming is big these days. i like mp gaming too…FORCING things on me is something i don´t like though. that´s just a natural reaction. it´s that simple. if they think all this has a huge advatage then finally tell us which these are. right now it´s only restrictions, restrictions, restrictions, excuses, excuses, excuses. of course people don´t buy into that stuff yet and tbh, why should they?

    #29 1 year ago
  30. NeutralBlade

    @25 You’re right that Microsoft can do whatever they please. But, they are in the business of selling products to consumers. If a business makes policy changes that upset the consumer, then they just have to pay the consequences. People get pissed off when they feel betrayed, especially if it’s a product they enjoyed.

    It’s just how things are. And yes, people don’t have to campaign against Microsoft. If they don’t like the Xbone, just buy something else, as that’s what should be done when you’re unhappy. But you can’t expect people to stay quiet about it. They never do when they’re mad.

    @27 The difference goes back to the DRM discussion. People just want to be able to keep, trade, rent, sell, and share games in any way they please, along with the fact that they want a console that works no matter what; not one with that permanently shut down, whenever someone like MS says so. It’s freedom versus restrictions.

    #30 1 year ago
  31. zinc

    Their argument is bullshit. I go to the shops to buy my food, I can eat said food anytime I like. The shop will not stop me eating my food, if i fail to call them once every 24 hours.

    No shop could justify that. MS can’t justify that, apologetic fanboys can’t justify that & thats that.

    You can preach digital future, you can sermonise online play, but you can’t spin 24 hour mandatory check-in as a “good thing” for the consumer.

    Its total bollocks.

    #31 1 year ago
  32. viralshag

    @30, But again though to use Steam as an example of “friendly DRM”, if you do buy the majority of your games through that service you can’t trade, rent, sell or share your games either.

    Obviously though, they have had years to perfect the service to what it is today but it’s not been done on consoles. These are growing pains in my opinion

    I agree with you on the pointlessness of a console that could potentially become useless without a connection but then I have the same fears if I lost my Steam account or for whatever reason something happened to Valve as I have A LOT of money invested in my Steam library.

    #32 1 year ago
  33. polygem

    ooops double post! look at post #34. sorry.

    #33 1 year ago
  34. polygem

    @32:
    the difference is with steam you still have other options. it runs on a pc, steam is a service on your pc. you can use non steam games too. xboxone is all about xboxone, the restrictions are there for every single product it offers. also look at the digital product pricing of microsoft, look at games on demand pricing, look at dlc pricing, compare that to steam too.

    i would be ready for a subscription modell that allows me to rent games, not owning them, something like ps+ today…but again, the point is, at least imo : it MUST be optional.

    #34 1 year ago
  35. viralshag

    @33, But you can’t compare Steam and only the X1, it’s easily comparable to the PS4 too. The PS4 is just as “controlled” in the sense of where and how you get your games.

    The difference is how you’re allowed to play in that one needs a check in and the other doesn’t. Choice of who you buy your games from and where is pretty much irrelevant as all consoles are the same. Which is really the whole point of a console in the first place, it’s pretty much been the defining characteristic of all consoles ever.

    #35 1 year ago
  36. Samoan Spider

    @34 and 35 The thing is, we don’t know if the only channel to buy games will be through the consoles respective stores. Digital download codes stoking up some competition among online retailers could be an option with this new future they’re ramming down our throats. That would even the score with Steam a little do you not think?

    #36 1 year ago
  37. NeutralBlade

    @33 People compare Microsoft’s policies to Steam often, but as it stands, we’re not in an all-digital console age yet; so it really make comparisons to Steam irrelevant. Fortunately for us, we still have freedom of choice, which is one benefit consoles have enjoyed over PC games for a long time now; that is, until MS decided they wanted to change that.

    Yeah, I understand your concerns about Steam. As far as my use of steam, I usually buy during 50% – 75% off sales. If I’m getting stuff dirt cheap, then it doesn’t concern me no where near it would if I was paying the usual prices for console games. Some people do pay regular rates for games on Steam, but again, we have the freedom to choose a platform that offers better ownership rights at any time.

    There is always the PS4, Wii U, and PC games with no online requirement DRM, etc, if other services are insufficient for them.

    #37 1 year ago
  38. Citrus raptor

    Suddenly everone is a nomad.
    /halfjokingly

    #38 1 year ago
  39. harr0w

    @25 ha to true, and you know something else the XB1 is still going to sell millions.

    The second hand gaming/DRM issue has been pushed to the publishers by both MS & sony so why is everyone not assaulting EA’s or ubisofts forums, its because noone has said its happening and if it does it will only be them to blame.

    This whole online/off-line checking does need to be done away with. If it does not its because of security and pirating id guess and not the checking for updates which it would do either way when you connected to online so.

    #39 1 year ago
  40. viralshag

    @36, That’s very true. I wouldn’t have a problem with that if it lowered the price of console games. I don’t see any reason why digital purchases on consoles are not similar to PC digital prices. I think that’s the change I most want to see next-gen.

    #40 1 year ago
  41. zinc

    Why all the comparisons too Steam? Does Steam require a 24 hour check-in, so you can access your product?

    No, as that would be bullshit.

    The real question is why some are so keen to sweeten the bullshit MS are making them swallow ?

    Its not good for you guys!!

    #41 1 year ago
  42. The_Red

    @GIGA
    You are ABSOLUTELY wrong if you think Gaming is a 1st world luxury. There are MANY people in 3rd world countries enjoying games, even console ones. The PS2 for example has sold millions of units in middle east and 360 has done the same. Even a lot of PS3s are there and they are NOT just for the rich families.

    Of course there are also millions of PC gamers in 3rd world countries. A lot of both PC and console gamers in those countries are middle class so, please don’t try to justify disgusting MS policies with “It’s a 1st world problem” logic.

    #42 1 year ago
  43. manamana

    I decide, when and which of my devices are online or not. Makes a huge difference to me. But that’s not what turns me away from Microsoft. It’s the arrogance with their DRM/no renting/1h check@friends/24h call. I don’t want those restrictions. I want to have freedom to take my console wherever I like to play. And do what I want with retailed packaged goods.

    That makes a difference, no matter what.

    #43 1 year ago
  44. manamana

    Doublepost. Edit: while I was posting, I encountered three internal server errors. I know, has nothing to do with it and yet it tells the whole story ;-)

    #44 1 year ago
  45. Gheritt White

    From another place:

    “FUCK SOCIAL INTERACTION. If i want social interaction i will go out of my house to find it and not in games.”

    #45 1 year ago
  46. karma

    Wow, how much more BS are they gonna spill forth this E3?

    They WANT online gaming to be the predominant form of gaming because that way every gamer has to pay them a live subscription to play any game, even single player ones. But the vast majority of gaming has always been done offline and will likely continue to be done offline. Multiplayer is just another flavour like any other genre. Depends what your in the mood for.

    #46 1 year ago
  47. salarta

    Spencer is being stupid. Online is popular, so therefore everyone should be required to be online? What if they don’t give a damn about online? This is the equivalent of saying “Coffee shops are popular, therefore everyone is required to go to coffee shops once every 24 hours,” completely disregarding the fact that not everyone wants to go to a coffee shop at all let alone once per day.

    Or hey, let’s use a much more flattering example for Microsoft. It’s like saying “going outside is popular, therefore everyone is required to go outside once every 24 hours.” Sometimes you just want to stay in, and deciding not to go outside shouldn’t do the equivalent of locking your refrigerator so you can’t eat as a way of forcing you to go outside.

    #47 1 year ago
  48. ps3fanboy

    look at all the hate :D i just sit back and read and enjoy vg247 now days… i dont have to do anything, mickey$oft is stabbing them self and shoting their own foot all day long, LOL!… anyway i must say this: XBONE SUCKS AND I TOLD YOU SO MONTHS AGO!

    #48 1 year ago
  49. viralshag

    @41, The check-in thing isn’t like Steam, that’s for sure.

    But the purchase and activation is very similar. It’s almost exactly like buying a PC game at retail and then activating it on Steam, where it’s stored on your library. The only difference I can see so far is you can still trade-in and gift the X1 games.

    @47, Actually, it’s more like “hey you go outside everyday, one of the requirements is that you need to acknowledge you’re outside but as you’re outside anyway, that’s not a problem!”

    And if it was a problem, here’s the shocker, you don’t buy an X1. Simple.

    #49 1 year ago
  50. Gheritt White

    @47: Oh gosh, I do *so* like it when I agree with you.

    @48: If/when I get a PS4, I will never be like you, you filthy fucking maggot. NEVER.

    #50 1 year ago
  51. DSB

    @50 Hahaha. I fucking loved that.

    #51 1 year ago
  52. Mad-elph

    The gripe I have is beyond the fact that I simply don’t want it, nor that I can’t use it if my internet fails. But rather, the average gamer is young, and young people tend to move a lot, say annually if you are in college etc. Now I can only speak from experience but every time I move it takes 3 weeks to a month to have the internet set up at the new place. This is just the way of the world in Canada I guess. Canada the most internet connected country in the world, (not the faster, just the most connected, based on a fact I read three years ago).

    So say I move… I have a shiny new game machine, I have no internet so I can’t surf to kill time, I can’t watch porn, etc. I accept that I can’t play online, but the fact that I CANT PLAY OFFLINE AT ALL, is the real deal breaker. No I have grown up a bit and will be a bit more stable in life, not moving all the time, but I am still sensitive to the issue for others.

    #52 1 year ago
  53. pukem0n

    @53

    well, the daily check in is just some kilobytes, you could easily tether that with your phone.

    that doesnt change that the check in thing is plain stupid, but its possible ;)

    #53 1 year ago
  54. jkcm725

    they just have to remember that most citys and people dont have the great internet like most. i still running dail up at 56kbps. so for digital age my town running behind. been promissed broadband and dsl for 2 years. so u see i play more one person games, the only time i am able to play online is when at a friends that live 30 miles away. or when we have lan partys even then not connected to the internet then.

    #54 1 year ago
  55. NeutralBlade

    @43 Blocking rentals is apart of the Azure plan to funnel all funds back to MS and their gang. Obviously, they don’t want anyone using their titles, unless you’re paying up for them. I enjoyed renting myself, as it was a way to save a lot of money, while also enjoying titles you may wanted to try first, or didn’t want to purchase; because not every title is worth its asking price.

    They don’t care who’s business is negatively affected, and if a service like Gamefly decides to play along, they’ll have to pay a lot to MS in order to setup Azure in their facilities, which by no means will be cheap. In the past, all they had to do was buy games, and issue them out.

    With the Xbone, MS would have to setup Azure, train them on it, special issue DRM-laced rent-able titles, and continuously pay MS a fee for using Azure. When you factor all that in, suddenly, it costs a whole lot more to do business with Microsoft, and many businesses will look at it, as it’s simply not worth doing. Squeezing out the competition, will just lead to price fixing, and such a thing is never good for the consumer.

    What it comes down to, is that MS wants to turn their side of the market into a money machine designed to kill competition while considerably reducing consumer rights. This issue is much bigger than fans realize, and it will reveal itself even more in due time.

    Just like the terrorism excuse was abused, they’ll use excuses like piracy, to take your privacy and other rights away, reduce competition, while lining their pockets with more and more money. The only people that win in this situation, are the man behind the curtain, (MS), along with his pals.

    #55 1 year ago
  56. coloredlense

    @49 re: @47 No. No it’s not like what you said at all. In your analogy there is no penalty if you fail to tell them your outside.

    A more realistic analogy would be, “We expect you to tell us when you want to play monopoly. And if you don’t tell us whenever you bring out the monopoly box, we’re going to prevent you from playing any game, including solitaire.”

    Regardless of why you can’t inform them that you will be playing(be it their servers are down, your internet is down, or you’re stuck on a sub somewhere with no access, or garden gnomes stole your hookup hardware) they are going to take your legally purchased/rented/traded/shared games away. Your scenario would still be a problem, because if you don’t put that Call of Duty in first, you’re not going to be allowed to play Skyrim.

    Which is completely different from your “I’m gonna tell you I’m outside when I’m outside” scenario.

    Are you really missing that point?

    #56 1 year ago