Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by drivebyacct2 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

drivebyacct2

>There is absolutely no technical reason why the terms had to be so anti-consumer

Yeah, actually, there are plenty.

Step 1: Buy XBONE game.

Step 2: Load it on your console.

Step 3: Loan it to hundreds of friends and they load it on their console.

And now hundreds of people are playing one copy of the game with no way of preventing them from doing so. It would make the "piracy" scene on day one, the worst of any console experience ever, ever.

So how are you going to prevent that without requiring online connections?

View on HN

With about 30 seconds of thought.

You can still play the game without uploading so each game represents 2 copy's. Require an activation code to "load" the game which you can get automatically online or with a phone call. Require someone to unload the game which spits about a 6 digit code before you can upload it again. Make a fast online check to see if anyone registered the game via a partial code on the outside of the box for the used game market.

Don't let the disk play online content while "loaded" on a separate XBOX. Allow someone to declare an Xbox as broken, lost, or stolen.

Or register the game to your account and then be able to share it immediately, wirelessly across the country with 10 "family" members and being able to resell the digital copy.

But noooooo, codes and short codes and registration verification sounds way better. >_<

I guess this is so frustrating for me because I worked on a licensing system and had to deal with the hundreds of little places it could be attacked in ways that aren't obvious if you haven't worked in the problem space before.

That's probably because you were trying to come up with a system this is more restrictive than the traditional physical media system (where you could share or sell a single physical item), but with concessions.

There is a very simple and obvious solution - internet connection required on activation or deactivation (for trade). I have not read a single good argument against this system anywhere.

I dont think you understood what i said. The codes are transparent if someone is connected to the Internet. The reason I added them is to add functionality. Also, I would suggest a pure digital copy shuld probably have more permissive digital lending features as a selling point, but there is no reason not to add them for a "loaded" game.

Just put a code into the game case that allows for discless play, and require an online connection to install the game to the hd and unlock it for discless play. Not rocket science.

Okay, so now it's just two-for-one.

Now I get to buy and play Halo5 and then give the disc to my brother.

And? Some people will take advantage of it, most won't because it's too much of a hassle.

Look at netflix back when it was just a disc-based service. Just get as many DVDs delivered as possible, rip them to your HD and then pop them back in the mail. Some people did that.

Most didn't.

Also, the Xbox One HD is only 500 GB, you can't install quite so many games (delivered on blu-ray) before it gets full.

You're being rational about DRM, that's not going to get you anywhere.

The difference is that ripping a DVD continues to be a pain in the ass for most people, while "ripping" the game disk will presumably be something the XBox makes seamless.

>Just put a code into the game case that allows for discless play, and require an online connection to install the game to the hd and unlock it for discless play. Not rocket science

It is rocket science apparently

Person A does what you said and goes on a cruise ship playing the game before giving the disc to Person B.

Person B takes his disc, installs the game with an online connection. The server has no way of telling that Person A is still playing the game on his cruise.

Person B finishes installing, goes to a camping trip before giving the disc to Person C....

Person C installs the game, unplugs the network from the Xbox and gives the disc to Person D...

Person A puts disc in, phones home, and installs. Person B puts disc in, phones home and finds out that the game is already registered.

Person B can't install unless Person A phones home to de-register. Person B can use a partial code to check if the game is registered.

Not rocket science.

Maybe you missed the point entirely.

Person A installs the game. Then goes on a cruise ship, playing the installed game, giving the disc to Person B.

Person B takes the disc and can't install it because the code that came with the game has already been used. If he or she wants to play it without the disc then they need to buy a new code.

Person B plays the game as much as they want then lends the game to Person C. Person B can no longer play the game because they don't have the disc, but Person C can play the game as much as they want.

Not rocket science.

I am confused here.

>If he or she wants to play it without the disc then they need to buy a new code.

From who? A used game code? Or a new one? How is that any different from the rules announced at E3 with no used games?

>Person B plays the game as much as they want then lends the game to Person C. Person B can no longer play the game because they don't have the disc, but Person C can play the game as much as they want.

So the disc is required to play? Like in the new rules?

Disc is required for disc-required play. Code is required for discless play.

They'd buy the code from the people that made the game, of course. If you want to install the game to the console and play it without a disc present then it's trivial to process that through a workflow that requires some sort of purchase.

You can have the best of both worlds if you like.

If it makes it any simpler just think of it as downloaded vs. disc-based games. You can pay to download the game to your console or you can play the game off of a disc. For convenience you could include a free download code in each new game, or even just provide a discount.

Except that publishers won't agree to such a deal, meaning that any console implementing such a policy would lose third-party support resulting in significantly decreased sales units, and ultimately billion dollar loses for the console manufacturer.

But now you have Person A and Person B playing the game at the same time with only 1 purchase of the game.

No, it should be that every time you load it on the console it phones home. So only 1 person can ever activate it.

Phone home on activation is infinitely better than phone home every day.

No. That's not true. That's true as of today with the new change. Before, that's absolutely not.

This just goes to prove that most of the ignorant internet rage was from people that didn't bother understanding just how much MS was really giving us with the previous setup.

You can't "phone home" with optical media, it's not serializable.

I'm saying that's the way it should work. Give the user a disc and an activation code. Activation code becomes tied to the account until traded. Problem solved.

> Activation code becomes tied to the account until traded.

So, like: I should be able to just directly say "Give my Halo 5 license to bornhuetter" and then my disc stops working because my console doesn't have a license and yours can then download the digital copy or put the disc in and have it "unlocked" with the license.

I think that could work, still would require an online connection for any NEW games though, which I think MS is trying to avoid rather specifically (the blowback from overseas guys playing consoles, etc)

> Unless you're implying that... my disc stops working because my console doesn't have a license

That's exactly what I'm saying. The console has to phone home every time the game is installed or de-activated.

The requirement to phone home every day, or for additional payment is completely unnecessary from a technical standpoint.

Let's say you install the game on two consoles. You put console 1 offline, then go online with console 2 and de-activate the license (by reselling, giving, etc. the game). How does console 1 know that the license has been de-activated?

drivebyacct....

http://www.techspot.com/news/51227-sony-applies-for-rfid-drm...

Oh, cool. That's very interesting. I curse it because it seems even more insidious and because I can't believe the next gen of consoles is even shipping with an internal optical drive... but I digress. Thanks for the link!

I can't reply to you drivebyacct... no idea why.

But the games for the Xbox One MUST be serializable, how else would it know the difference between a install of a disc on one console and another?

Put in disc. Installs to hdd, checks in with MS. Take out disc.

Something stops you just putting that disc in to a mates Xbox One. So obviously they do have something similar to Sony's patent. Or every disc has a unique serial written to the small inner sector of the disc?

It doesn't work that way. You have to have the disc in the tray.

No, only as of today.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com