

Xbox 720 to use always-on DRM? - derpenxyne
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/147776-xbox-720-to-use-always-on-drm-it-would-doom-the-console

======
knowaveragejoe
> "If false, the rumor is nuts because of just how much of a stretch it is.
> The developer of a platform that runs a multitude of software unrelated to
> each other — and software that, on the whole, focuses primarily on offline
> play — would never create such a barrier to entry."

Does anyone else think the author is being a tad bit naive here?

~~~
Hansi
I think that this is generally true about a lot of the opinion articles on
extremetech.com

------
victoknight
So, rumors like these are pretty typical before a major platform announcement,
right? Intentionally leak a negative rumor in the months leading up to a
release and either let the public get used to the idea (if true) or overlook
an actual marginally better new practice (if false) because "well, at least
they didn't do that first thing..."

~~~
pandaman
I don't recall similar rumors for any other major platform announcement.

~~~
PJones
There were rumours the PS3 would use single use discs that locked themselves
to a particular PS3 before it launched.

[http://www.joystiq.com/2005/11/08/playstation-3-wont-play-
us...](http://www.joystiq.com/2005/11/08/playstation-3-wont-play-used-games/)

~~~
pandaman
By "similar" I meant a reputable entity being confident. Edge has reputation
to care about and inside sources as well so this rumor is very different from
a random blogger's speculation.

------
talmand
As long as it works and doesn't create a barrier to play, most people will not
care. Most of the past always-on DRM has caused public outcry because it
created problems for people to play the game they paid for.

But over time people will just get used to it and accept it much like they go
along with almost everything else. I remember a time in the PC gaming world
that if a game didn't work once installed then all hell would break out in the
company's forums and in the gaming news. These days? Several games that
require always-on connections such as MMOs have had outages the first week of
release and most have just shrugged their shoulders. That kind of thing is
almost expected these days and not many care. Sure, there's a vocal few that
complain about it but once the problems are sorted out then people tend to
forget they couldn't play their game for the first two or three days after
paying for it.

My thought on why this is likely not true is because even today it would be
quite a stretch to expect enough of the market to be able to provide an
always-on connection. Take the US for instance, how many people who currently
have a 360 couldn't get the next console simply because they don't the proper
connection to support it?

Plus, why is always-on DRM necessary for consoles when we've heard from the
industry for years that the reason they focus on consoles is because piracy is
almost non-existent on those platforms?

Is it to prevent used game sales? I understand the thinking since not only do
publishers not get a piece of the used game sales transaction but the console
manufacturer doesn't get a piece of it either like they do from new games
through licensing fees. But they might as well hold up a sign that says, "Hey
customers! Please sue us!" Plus Gamestop, and others, would likely get
involved since it would hit their bottom line quite severely. It's great for
the publishers that somehow they've convinced enough of the courts that a EULA
allows them to cancel out people's first sale doctrine rights but if they
prevent used game sales on such a scale then I guarantee that people will buy
less and rent more. I expect publishers to go after rental companies next.

~~~
knowaveragejoe
> people will buy less and rent more. I expect publishers to go after rental
> companies next.

Or they'll partner with rental outlets, and we'll see digital game rentals
similar to digital movie rentals. We already see pseudo-rental DLC in free-to-
play games.

~~~
talmand
Why would console manufacturers agree to partner with a rental outlet for such
a thing? If the digital rentals come from the console's network then there's
no reason to share anything with a third party.

On the same thought, if a publisher somehow gets around the console
manufacturer's wall and offer rentals themselves, somehow, then why would they
share with a third party?

------
jiggy2011
Is piracy a big issue on Xbox? I assume anybody who is running pirate games on
the Xbox360 is using a modified console anyway.

~~~
bdisraeli
I don't think piracy is the reason for including always-on DRM. Console makers
are trying to kill the used game market in this generation.

[http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/01/examining-sonys-
intern...](http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/01/examining-sonys-internet-
free-method-for-blocking-used-game-sales/)

~~~
jiggy2011
Possibly, though I assumed they were just going to get around that by removing
the optical drive from the next generation consoles and selling all of the
games via xbox live.

~~~
ghurlman
Too many people with slow (by today's standards) internet connections, or no
high speed internet connection at home at all.

------
tomkin
This is inevitable. I know most won't want to hear that, but like any
contention like this, it will be resolved by adding more cloud computing
power. "Costs less because 90% of the OS/processing is in the cloud!" will
become a selling point and a financial incentive soon. Not sure if this round
of consoles will see this DRM style, but it's definitely coming.

Remember that time, way back in the 90s/00s, when you said you wouldn't want a
device that could track you anywhere? Using iCloud's Find my iPhone?

------
djrogers
Maybe this is just a terminology gap here, but it seems to me the real issue
isn't that the DRM is 'always-on', rather that the DRM model would require one
to be 'always-online'.

That's a rather disturbing trend. I'd be rather upset if I couldn't play any
console games at my remote cabin for example, or in an RV while traveling, or
to kill time while my comcast connection is down.

------
px1999
Completely unsourced FUD, and probably the result of some guy just fucking
around and sending some "journalist" an anonymous email ala
[http://x-surface.tumblr.com/post/41282771026/x-surface-
dont-...](http://x-surface.tumblr.com/post/41282771026/x-surface-dont-believe-
everything-you-read..). if there was any source at all.

------
chucknelson
This how PC gaming has worked for a while now through Steam and other popular
platforms, and console owners will eventually warm up to it as well.

This is just a typical "DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING!@#$" reaction. In 5 years we
most likely won't care, and the vocal minority will continue to talk about how
gaming is ruined.

~~~
bilalq
Steam at least offers an offline mode. You're not locked out of your games if
your cable modem breaks.

~~~
dj2stein9
This may in fact be the case for this new Xbox. That at least would be
reasonable.

------
Major_Grooves
wrt to the whole 'always-on' thing for DRM - is it not more likely that it
would use the Spotify model - i.e. you have to go online at least once every
30-days to verify that you still hold a licence/subscription? That would be
more practical than requiring a permanent Internet connection.

~~~
DannyBee
There are two distinct original rumors. One is that it will require a
permanent internet connection. One is that it will not allow used games to be
played.

Some of these articles have combined these two rumors to form a new rumor:

It will require a permanent internet connection to play games.

At least the original reasons given for always on were not DRM related.

The DRM/used game blocking was going to be implemented by one-time-use codes
for _every_ game that served no purpose but to activate the game.

------
nextparadigms
If this is true no one will buy the console, no matter what bells and whistles
they add on top to make it "feel right". It's not right.

~~~
mrcharles
People said that about Diablo 3, and it went on to be one of the best selling
PC games ever made.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_3#Sales>

~~~
brador
Only because of pre sale hype. Not many still playing compared to what could
have been.

~~~
knowaveragejoe
I'm sure the number of people who continue to play the game is at the
forefront of their thoughts at Activision-Blizzard, not the piles of money
they're busy counting.

~~~
larrik
Well, one could argue that Diablo 3 did well because people played Diablo 2
for so long. Diablo 4 is going to be in a much weaker position.

Blizzard is one of the few companies who cares about that sort of thing.

------
ceeK
Apart from killing the used games industry, which would benefit MS, I wonder
also what would happen to video game rental businesses.

~~~
rheeseyb
The hardware video game rental business is already (almost) dead. I'd imagine
we will soon see digital rentals much the same way we currently have digital
film rentals.

~~~
Ralz
Downloading 16 GB games would pretty much cap out most peoples BW limit.

~~~
jiggy2011
So Microsoft makes a deal with broadband providers so that game downloads
don't count towards your download limit in exchange for some % of the sale
price going to the carrier.

The big games companies will then all make these contracts but include clauses
that prevent them from making similar deals with smaller distributors.

~~~
Ralz
I think that's a great idea if MS/Sony were to get such a deal set up with
ISPs.

~~~
jiggy2011
It would be a great deal for Sony/MS , not such a great deal for other
distributors like Steam, Ouya etc.

Probably not great for the consumer in the long run either if it leads to an
effective monopoly in online games.

~~~
jerf
At the moment, it seems the cost of bandwidth is sinking faster than new games
are growing in size. And making the games yet bigger again is hitting some
economic limits on the game maker's side. If you've got broadband, you've
_probably_ got enough bandwidth even without special deals. (And yes, I know
that's not 100% true, which is why I said _probably_ , but we've got at least
another year and maybe two or three before this is even remotely a big deal
for the XBox720, during which the bandwidth situation should continue to
improve.)

~~~
jiggy2011
I don't know , I haven't noticed bandwidth caps getting much better.

Making games bigger does not have to be that much more expensive , especially
if you start adding stuff like 1080p video.

~~~
jerf
"I don't know , I haven't noticed bandwidth caps getting much better."

Yes, a lot of people have gotten so cynical they haven't noticed, no sarcasm,
but many consumer internet connections over the past few years have simply
gotten better, without much fanfare. I believe right now my mid-grade Comcast
connection is now primarily speed limited by my wireless router, rather than
the Internet connection itself. This was not true when I signed up for it four
years ago. I still have a 250GB/month cap (which I still only come about 33%
of the way to using) but I wouldn't be surprised that grows sometime before
the XBox720 gets out there.

It seems like games have been shipping less video as the in-game engines
become more and more capable. Game companies were already straining to fill
the disk in _this_ generation, I think in the next generation it is very
likely to be game company resources that are the limiting factor rather than
bandwidth concerns.

------
meaty
Until someone breaks it that is. Then there will be two independent markets
appearing: legitimate and cracked.

~~~
jerf
Online DRM can't always be "cracked", because the "DRM" may in fact be that
significant chunks of the game actually live in the cloud. For instance, if
the levels can be randomized, that's easy code to put in the cloud. You can't
"crack" that; you may be able to _re-implement_ it, but that's a whole new
level of effort and skill.

~~~
meaty
Everything is cached on the device. It's only a matter of time.

~~~
jerf
Uh, no it's not. Code that lives in the cloud, lives in the cloud. Can you
"crack" an MMORPG to work without a server? No. You might be able to
_reimplement_ a server, and people have for various MMORPGs, but it's not a
"crack", it's a full, real software project, with all that implies.

I suspect you're just chanting the Standard DRM Cant. It does not apply here.
The Standard DRM Cant has a prerequisite, which is that _all the content is
local_. DRM on movies doesn't work, because the act of consuming a movie
requires that it be in front of you, in its totality. That is not true of a
program; arbitrary amounts of it may live in the cloud. It is true that they
can't stop you from recording your playthrough of the game, or recording the
results of whatever algorithms they left in the cloud, but they darned well
can stop you from having a full, real copy of the code in the cloud, and by
the nature of it being in the cloud, they will control access to it. You may
briefly fool their auth systems, but the balance of power is actually on their
side, not yours. Just as DRM doesn't work on movies because the content in
question must somehow be in your hands, your "crack" isn't going to work
because the content is still in _their_ hands.

------
fwr
Are we seriously calling it Xbox 720?

------
fserb
Speculation. Betteridge's law.

------
speeder
I never understood, why companies think that software must not follow the
first sale doctrine, I am not only talking about games...

We have things like always on DRM to block used game sales, various softwares
that phone home, dongles, and lets not forget of the infamous lawsuit of
Autodesk against a guy that sold some copies of their software that he had
legally obtained.

Of course, this is one of the main reasons behind the cloud push, making
software become a service instead of a product.

But I don't trust it, I prefer a world where software, is a product, not
necessarily tangible, download only is fine, but you should be allowed to
truly own it, otherwise you are vulnerable to it being yanked from you, like
Amazon yanked books from Kindles.

~~~
jiggy2011
It's because of the fundamental physics involved.

When you give somebody is a paperback book it is fundamentally a "move"
operation. When you give somebody a software program it is fundamentally a
"copy" operation so the original owner still has it.

The only way to simulate a move operation is to follow the copy operation very
shortly with a delete operation on the original media. Of course if you are
copying data from a device that you own then the manufacturer or media owner
has no way of knowing if that delete operation really happened.

So they try and work around this with increasingly sophisticated methods to
force a delete operation. However these are usually not effective against a
determined attacker, so the easiest thing to do is simply to disallow the move
operation altogether.

