Sick of "big brother" watching over my stuff.

I just noticed this when i removed my hard drive to take to my friends house the other day.

Everything except for like 2 demos and my music was accessible because i was not logged into live. I.E. Microsoft could not keep an eye on me.

All of my stuff was locked. My videos, fear 2 demo, even my ****ing arcade games were set to "trial versions" even though i purchased them in full because i had to download the licensing on another xbox. Im sick of this and its becoming a bigger and bigger problem.

Im suddenly reminded of STEAM and those 20'000 accounts that got destroyed because of past violations. Even if you bought things legally. We no longer buy the things we play.. its like we only lease or rent them anymore. It just really bothers me that i have to have an eye kept on me, for me to do anything.

What happened to just having a saved game? Profiles are no longer individuality tags, they are locked into place and stored on a specific xbox so ****ing microsoft can keep an eye on you and your content.

What do you guys think about this? I mean in all seriousness, this whole licensing issue to battle piracy is getting out of hand and we the consumer are paying for it hardcore. The only reason the companies come up with to justify it is that of a cops reason to search your car. Privacy is a thing of the past.

Its like the "If you have nothing to hide then let us search your car" Yeah you may not have anything illegal but its just the fact that your privacy is not being respected anymore.

I know it sucks. I lost 5 xbox live arcade games because of a RROD issue just because I saved my hard drive for a new core system. What can I do about it? Nothing, they got me, I'll keep buying their games and systems.DPhunkT

wait, can't you redownload them?

I know it sucks. I lost 5 xbox live arcade games because of a RROD issue just because I saved my hard drive for a new core system. What can I do about it? Nothing, they got me, I'll keep buying their games and systems.DPhunkT

They do have an option to transfer all your licenses to a new system if you changed your console. Those XBLA games are not lost. Go to www.xbox.com/drm to transfer your licenses to your new system and get your games back.

if you do not like how microsofts xbox360 works i advise you to get a different system and stop complaining about the 360, the threads comlaining about MS are starting to get old2pac_makaveli

[QUOTE="2pac_makaveli"]if you do not like how microsofts xbox360 works i advise you to get a different system and stop complaining about the 360, the threads comlaining about MS are starting to get oldguthwulf_de

if you do not like how microsofts xbox360 works i advise you to get a different system and stop complaining about the 360, the threads comlaining about MS are starting to get old2pac_makaveli

You agreed to it when you purchased the console and every service that goes along with it.

If it bothered you then you shouldn't have used the services or even the console. These are the features that Microsoft has chosen to protect themselves and if it was going to be an issue then you should have chosen another platform.

You agreed to it when you purchased the console and every service that goes along with it.

If it bothered you then you shouldn't have used the services or even the console. These are the features that Microsoft has chosen to protect themselves and if it was going to be an issue then you should have chosen another platform.

You agreed to it when you purchased the console and every service that goes along with it.

If it bothered you then you shouldn't have used the services or even the console. These are the features that Microsoft has chosen to protect themselves and if it was going to be an issue then you should have chosen another platform.

I just get extrememly annoyed when I go over to a friend's house with MY hard drive and am unable to play my DLC songs from Rock Band or even my Mass Effect or Oblivion expansions just because I am not hooked up to Live. I mean seriously, I payed for them, they are on MY hard drive why for all that is holy can I not play these things? skinny_man_69

[QUOTE="sharpshooter188"][QUOTE="raahsnavj"] exactly... and this isn't 'big brother', this is the license owner, which is different than the government watching me. I personally don't care how much big bother watches me seeming I'm not breaking the law... when they try to pin crap on me, that's when I'll get my gun.raahsnavj

if you do not like how microsofts xbox360 works i advise you to get a different system and stop complaining about the 360, the threads comlaining about MS are starting to get old2pac_makaveli

[QUOTE="raahsnavj"][QUOTE="sharpshooter188"] Big brother is usually a term given to those who are trying to keep an eye on the stuff you purchase from them. Even after you purchase it, it still is not yours. As much as i want to call you a tool, you are indeed entitled to your opinion. However there is no recourse in just selecting another system as i mentioned before because all systems and the majority of programs now incorporate this type of "licensing".sharpshooter188

I just get extrememly annoyed when I go over to a friend's house with MY hard drive and am unable to play my DLC songs from Rock Band or even my Mass Effect or Oblivion expansions just because I am not hooked up to Live. I mean seriously, I payed for them, they are on MY hard drive why for all that is holy can I not play these things? skinny_man_69

The DLC that you buy is connected to your xbox live account, this means that you can delete content and re-download it at no extra cost, or if your hdd broke or was stolen you would still be able to download content you had bought again at no extra cost. This is good for us, I had my xbox stolen but could re-download it to my new console when I got a replacement.

The reason the product license is linked to your account is because if it wasn't you could log into your account and download content on someone elses console and then as they had the content on their hdd they would be able to play it without paying for it. Microsoft obviously doesn't like people being able to get free content rather than buying it. What they are doing is not in anyway wrong and it would be madness for them to do it any other way.

Having said that, to the people saying things along the line of "if you don't like it don't buy their products", you are stupid. There is nothing wrong with complaining about a problem you have with a company or it's products. The world genereally isn't black or white where you either love or hate a product, you may well really like a product but have a few things you would like to see changed and if you want anything to be done about it you should complain.

[QUOTE="sharpshooter188"][QUOTE="raahsnavj"] Nice try... Big Brother - or another definition... I can keep up with these all day. so it turns out one of us knows the definition and the other is just spouting what they 'thought' it meant... Call it DRM if you want, but pinning this crap on the government is incorrect.raahsnavj

Actually I never once wasnt connected to the net when I tried playing Orange box but I think if your arent connected on PC you cant play that is garbage for a single player game (Then again its just what I heard.)_Kikode_

read above statement. All systems are incorporating this type of technology. A LOT of programs and hardware do this now which is a problem in itself, I got fed up with it once this became an issue on the 360. The "last straw" as it were. I really dont understand why you go out of your way to defend the people that are constantly trying to keep an eye on the things you "bought" from them.sharpshooter188

Because they have a right to protection

The idea that "I bought it so nah nah!" can't be used in the real world.

Yes you DO own it and part of owning it is following how the maker/developer wants you to use it.

It's silly to say that a company can't protect itself from losses. Having the ability to do "whateva I want" with everything leaves the company wide open to all sorts of theft. That's not fair.

If you're going to deal with technology then you have to deal with how the industry chooses to protect itself. Plus Microsoft is about as user friendly when it comes to how they protect themselves. They allow hard drives and content to be moved. They allow games to be copied right to the hard drive. They allow numerous ways of it's Live service to be billed to a credit card or just used directly from Live account cards.

You can't fault them for wanting to protect their investment, it's wrong to think otherwise.

I flipped out when I took my hard-drive to my friends house to play four-player Castle Crashers, only to find the trial version. There's no reason you should have to use your hard-drive with your 360 if you want to play stuff YOU'VE ALREADY PAID FOR. I'm not redistributing it, I'm not copying it, I just want to play the damn thing where I please.MrDziekuje

It knows that how?

Contra el systema baby! The only way to avoid 'big brother' is to drop off the grid, and the system has made damn sure you can't succeed without their approval. American Revolution II is in the not too distant future.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=706520527765921912

Yep, this sucks, pretty soon we'll all have to get government/corporate chips implanted under our skin for "our own protection." JS0123456789

[QUOTE="skinny_man_69"]I just get extrememly annoyed when I go over to a friend's house with MY hard drive and am unable to play my DLC songs from Rock Band or even my Mass Effect or Oblivion expansions just because I am not hooked up to Live. I mean seriously, I payed for them, they are on MY hard drive why for all that is holy can I not play these things? sharpshooter188

Everyone I know has the internet so having to log on to the internet to access stuff is a zero factor for me. I guess its a benefit of not living in the boondocks.Senor_Kami

I was, in fact, a victim of the Steam deletions, several years ago due to "account inactivity and illegal modding" oh yeah, and cracking versions of the game. Now while I don't partake in any of those things, I don't even know how to mod or crack games, I do believe that it is important for a company to keep track of their clients. Whether theyre right or wrong it doesn't necessarily matter, they have to keep purchasing up, and if that means not allowing you to use something at a friends house it's simply a way for them to squeeze more money out of people. IF it was as simple as bring a hardrive places I could just install whatever and take it whereever and give it to whomever, they just won't let this happen. It's not as free of a country as everyone would like.

Even with the secu-ROM on Spore, it's a little absurd that one is only allowed to install Spore on 4 or five computers, I personally am routinely on several different computers and would like to have it installed on every single one, however, I sadly cannot. I completely agree with you that this stuff is getting a little out of hand, profiteering can only get a company so far, and if their fan base starts to realize that theyre more after the profit instead of customer service, they will begin to lose customers at an alarming rate.

Everyone I know has the internet so having to log on to the internet to access stuff is a zero factor for me. I guess its a benefit of not living in the boondocks.Senor_Kami

Seriously not everyone's mommy and daddy pay for XBL. Especially in this economy when 50 dollars is much better spent on food or gas instead of a year subscription to intangible goods and services.

yeah... I hate that I need to be online to play some DLC for rockband I downloaded with my first 360 (I didn't know about the licensing process at that time and I mean, I downloaded that 65 songs 2 times now... I don't plan doing it again :evil: )San-Frodenzo

Without trying to sound cute, I think both sides have a point here.

1) Absolutely if we, the consumer, think something is wrong or undesireable in a product, we should make our disatisfication known. It's the only way to change the system.

2) Unfortunately, the loudest voice we possess is our refusal to buy products. In that sense, we SHOULD refuse to purchase something we find objectiionable.

The reality is DRM exists today as the result of the prisoners dilemma. People desire a product for free, and they desire to use it wherever they like. Companies don't really give a damn where we use a product as long as we pay for it, but because there are people who commit piracy, they're forced to enact protocols to guard against theft. DRM and internet-mandatory games are the inevitable result.

If you ask me, we shouldn't be blaming Microsoft and Steam - they're simply looking to protect themselves and their products, as they have every right to do. I say, blame the people who force companies to enact those annoying anti-theft measures. You have the 2 million people who pirated Spore (literally, 2 million) to thank for your Arcade troubles, sharpshooter188. Feel free to bug Microsoft about it, but in the end you'll either have to refuse to buy their products or help combat the culture that makes it socially acceptable to steal in the first place.

edit: someone needs to learn to use a spell checker

[QUOTE="raahsnavj"]

Big Brother

sharpshooter188

Big Brother

I haven't put a whole lot of thought into this, but here goes...

I think the term "Big Brother" is misused or exaggerated here (and that's not just because I know raahsnavj...Hi raahsnavj). "Big Brother" came from 1984 (or was at least popularized by it), and refers to a gross encroachment on personal privacy. Originally, the perpetrator was the government, though this could apply to a corporate entity. I don't think that's the case here, though. Big Brother was about underhandedly monitoring every second of peoples' lives with the intent of interferring with their basic human rights and modifying their behavior. DRM is about businesses protecting their property.

Microsoft has the right to make people jump through hoops to use their property because it's their property. They're under no moral obligation to provide anyone with any content, just like you're under no obligation to buy any of their content. If they want to make you perform a five minute rain dance to play a game as a form of DRM, they can do that; the market will adjust accordingly. I think DRM can be a major pain in the ass, but comparing DRM to a violation of your civil liberties is silly. There's a point where DRM becomes so cumbersome it either reduces sales, encourages piracy, or both. That's obviously a problem for businesses and consumers, but it's not a moral problem.

Saying it's to prevent piracy is just idiotic. Do you really think people who want to pirate the games are being affected? Nope they could care less. Same way with them banning all the 360 consoles that were modded. Guess what, you just gave them a system they can't get online with, but can still play pirated games. Think they will stop? Only people they are hurting by "combating piracy" is the legit consumers.

TheSylntChamber

If Microsoft can prevent pirates from playing on Live, then that will cut into piracy. Unless, you for some reason believe that--in spite of the popularity and significance of multiplayer gaming--people who pirate games don't want to play online. That makes no sense.

[QUOTE="TheSylntChamber"]

Saying it's to prevent piracy is just idiotic. Do you really think people who want to pirate the games are being affected? Nope they could care less. Same way with them banning all the 360 consoles that were modded. Guess what, you just gave them a system they can't get online with, but can still play pirated games. Think they will stop? Only people they are hurting by "combating piracy" is the legit consumers.

Palantas

If Microsoft can prevent pirates from playing on Live, then that will cut into piracy. Unless, you for some reason believe that--in spite of the popularity and significance of multiplayer gaming--people who pirate games don't want to play online. That makes no sense.

Please explain this logic. Microsoft wants to help combat piracy so they ban 360's that are found to be modded. Now what does this accomplish?

1) The person now has a system that can't get online, so they are going to just keep that system as one to play all their pirated games on that are offline games.

2) They go out and buy another system (which they will in turn probably just mod again to play burnt games)

3) There was a sudden flood of trade in and used 360's on the internet for sale that got pawned off on innocent people.

In the end who was helped? Micro$oft, they sold more systems.

Who was hurt? The legit gamer who faces stiffer rules and possibly got screwed on a used banned system.

Who was untouched? The ones pirating to begin with. They either got a system to keep playing illegal games or a new 360 and pawned the old off to the innocent. Think about this if they played 10 illegal games at $60 a pop that's $600 they "saved". If they in turn had to go buy a cheap system because theirs got banned for $200 they have in turn still saved $400. They will in turn probably mod that one and play another 10 games at $60 a pop again.

Now who is Micro$oft protecting? Supposedly the consumer and the game companies. Yet the game companies don't see any extra sales, but Micro$oft does. In the end it's about Micro$oft making themselves more money. They could careless about the consumer or the game developers.

***My post is in NO WAY condoning modding or piracy. It's very illegal and hurts developers from producing better quality games in the future. I just don't agree with Micro$ofts flawed logic and the sheep that follow it.

1) The person now has a system that can't get online, so they are going to just keep that system as one to play all their pirated games on that are offline games.

TheSylntChamber

Right. Pirates can't play online now.

2) They go out and buy another system (which they will in turn probably just mod again to play burnt games)

TheSylntChamber

Okay, so a pirate who has a modded Xbox that he can't play online is going to go out and buy another Xbox...and also mod that one. Why?

3) There was a sudden flood of trade in and used 360's on the internet for sale that got pawned off on innocent people.

TheSylntChamber

That's 90% a dishonest seller's fault and 10% a naïve buyer's fault. Microsoft has nothing to do with it.

Who was hurt? The legit gamer who faces stiffer rules and possibly got screwed on a used banned system. (Et cetera.)

TheSylntChamber

And pirates who can't play downloaded games online. Your post completely fails to rebuff the issue I raised, so I'll just post it again:

If Microsoft can prevent pirates from playing on Live, then that will cut into piracy. Unless, you for some reason believe that--in spite of the popularity and significance of multiplayer gaming--people who pirate games don't want to play online.

I

My post never addressed whether or not DRM is a pain in the ass for legitimate users. In fact, I said as much in another post on this thread. I want to know why you think that banning pirates from Xbox Live will not interfere with their activities.

Wait...Unless that's what this was about:

Who was untouched? The ones pirating to begin with. They either got a system to keep playing illegal games or a new 360 and pawned the old off to the innocent.

TheSylntChamber

Are you being serious here? You think that pirates will keep buying Xboxes, modding them, selling them when they're banned...repeat? Where exactly are pirates going to get a "cheap system"? Your entire rant about this harming the "innocent user" was based on the fact that second hand Xboxes are likely to be banned. The only way this would consistently work is if pirates buy new systems, or used systems that are verified not-banned (which would be more expensive than a random eBay Xbox). There is no way this would be profitable. The pirate would lose money every time he does this, to the point where it would eventually just be cheaper to buy a legit system.

And should I even touch this next part?

Think about this if they played 10 illegal games at $60 a pop that's $600 they "saved". If they in turn had to go buy a cheap system because theirs got banned for $200 they have in turn still saved $400.

TheSylntChamber

Jesus Christ... Just because I've "saved" money on stolen intellectual property doesn't mean I'm any richer, nor does it affect my cash flow. Let's go with your 10 games per ban, and -$200 net for the Xbox swapout (which is very conservative). So we come up with your "$400 saved" figure. Let's do this for the most of the library, we'll say, 500 games.

::runs numbers::

Wow, our pirate has saved $20,000! Sweet! Oh wait, guess what? He's spent $10,000 in cash. So great; he's dropped out of community college, can't make the payments on his Honda, and he's had his plasma TV repossessed...but damn if he doesn't have a lot of stolen games he can't play online. "Savings" does not equal cash. This is the sort of mentality that has someone thinking if they buy a Sam's Club-worth of "buy one, get one free" bulk ramen noodle specials, that they'll be a millionaire. And even that's better than your piracy idea, as crates of second-hand ramen noodles are at least worth something, whereas burnt Xbox games are worth nothing.

In the end it's about Micro$oft making themselves more money.

TheSylntChamber

You're stating this like it's supposed to be a shocking revelation. It's... Whatever, this is another discussion. Just get back to me on the points above.

I think the privacy problem is more serious every year.

Here, in Argentina, 90% of the videogames are pirate copies. The mayority of consoles, (except PS3, for now, at least, because the blue-ray) comes "tunned" with the ability lo read copies. This hurts a lot the industry, but if what i´m reading here is truth, then the consumers who buy original products are the ones who take the worst part. I agree that the prices are one big factor in the promotion of ilegal ways to play.

I mean, the lack of liberty and violation of privacy that some of you comment, for me, is unacceptable. Stopping piracy is very difficult, but that´s not excuse to punish those who do the right thing.

The pirates here just download the games on their PCs, put it on dual layer dvd, and play on his tunned console. The consumer paid 60 bucks for a game and obtain restrictions and problems for that? Insane. Something´s not right in the measures they found to combat piracy.

Oh, and pirates DO play online in the xbox360. I know.

Sometimes they are banned, but there are still a few ways to solve that problem too. I saw that happen too.

So, the difference i see is that the person who do the right thing, gets to pay 60 bucks and lose freedom, but the people who download game torrents do it for free, and gets just a complication (maybe).

Man, it makes you think. Pirates have a cool game, they do what they want, for free, and the persons who actually buy the games gets problems. Ironically, if all were pirates videogames will cease to exist as the great industry that is today.

So the videogame companies should thank their customers, and make them happy, and not give them trouble, and RRODs, etc.

The thing is, that the Jack Sparrow problem is almost impossible to solve. They tried different ways to stop piracy, but fail each time.

There are some ideas that they can still try, like lower the prices by doing advertisment inside games or make cool packaging with extras. But if i have to choose, i just ignore the pirates. The music industry had the same problem, and fail in every attempt. I´m beggining to think that it´s impossible to stop piracy.

The only hope it´s to think that in the end, good will prevail, and the people who do the right thing will be far more than the people who doesn´t.