By Jeremy Hannaford (Contributor) – Email
Print Edition: June 19, 2013
In the past three weeks, there has been a fairly large response to Microsoft’s next generation console, the Xbox One, and a large portion of it has been quite negative. By implementing a constant online requirement and restricting used games, Microsoft has figuratively slapped their entire fanbase in the face. Feeling betrayed and insulted, the internet has been alight with nerd-fueled rage.
This congregation of online fury started when the Xbox One was revealed several weeks ago. A short reveal featured integrated television (probably only available for the United States for a considerable amount of time), advanced Kinect features and a Halo television show in the making. What Microsoft Games president Don Mattrick and his fellow presenters failed to do at both the console reveal and the Microsoft E3 press conference was go into detail about the system itself. This was revealed in an online press release that, although short on specifications, outlined exactly what gamers did not want to hear.
Microsoft stated that their system has to be constantly connected to the internet. The system could only play games for one hour offline before shutting down. This single feature has been the centre of the controversy amongst others such as used-game restrictions and an always active Kinect.
What is most concerning about this issue is that Microsoft has not stated why it needs to be always online. They mentioned features like constant updates for games and systems, but that hardly justifies it. What much of the gaming community believes it to be is a Digital Rights Management (DRM) function. This function prevents gamers from using hacked or illegal copies of games on the system. But such a system has never been approved by the gaming community or even fully worked. A prime example was Ubisoft’s DRM for their PC games. Ridiculed by the public for its lack of use and its troubling functionality, Ubisoft finally scrapped it from all of their PC titles.
Despite this and other obvious indications, Microsoft is continuing on with this feature. When Geoff Keighley from GTTV asked Mattrick what gamers who have little to no internet access are supposed to do, Don simply stated, “Fortunately, we have a product for people who aren’t able to get some form of connectivity, it’s called the Xbox 360.”
After announcing a $499 price tag, Microsoft ended their presentation. Then came Sony’s turn. After showcasing the system, they announced the system would have no used game restrictions, no constant online connectivity and a $399 price tag. The conference hall was full of resounding applause and with one fell swoop, Twitter feeds were full of Xbox owners announcing their conversion to the PS4. Afterwards, certain things were brought up, such as the fact that Sony could only confirm that their exclusive titles wouldn’t have used game restrictions, not those created by third party publishers. But this hardly deters the fact that they gave the community what they wanted – a system with no online restrictions and, for the most part, the ability to play used games.
For the past few years, gaming publishers like EA, Ubisoft and the former THQ were attaching online passes to their games. These “codes” obtained from brand new games allowed players full access to online multiplayer or features. Without it, you had to pay an additional fee to use them. This was the beginning of things to come. Obviously, this tactic has heavily affected shops that sell used games like Willow Video or EB Games. Making trade-ins is now more selective and problematic; I myself have not bought a used game in over a year. So when Microsoft announced their used game restriction, it wasn’t a surprise, more of a disappointment. It is uncertain what lies in store for gaming stores or services like Gamefly, but one can only think it isn’t in their best interests.
Details about how much the reactivation fee for used games will cost are still uncertain. Microsoft had the chance to try and clear the air during the conference. They could have gone into detail about the Xbox One allowing multiple family members sharing the same game over multiple consoles or even how it works. But instead they essentially tried to buy off their angry fans with lots of games. Despite Mattrick saying they respect and listen to their fans, Microsoft seems to have abandoned their fans for profit and enterprise. And as more of my friends convert over to PS4, I only wonder how long I will last until I make the change.
