Even if you would put a device online anyway, there is a difference between something that has the option of being online and something that is forced to be online. And that is the motivation behind the maker of the latter device.
Out of curiosity, has anyone seen a list of consumer devices that have to be connected to work at all? Even an iPhone can be a glorified iPod if it isn't connected, right?
You can't use the iPhone's primary function if you're not connected to its proper thing to connect to, but you can still play games, listen to music, or watch movies, etc.
Similarly, you won't be able to use the Xbox One's primary function (GAMES, for most), if you're not connected to its proper thing to be connected to, but you can still watch TV... unless your TV is tied to your internets too... then just watch blu rays or something idk.
Yeah, but the function that doesn't work when you're phone is disconnected is connecting to other devices. And so that's totally unavoidable.
I mean some device that disables itself when not online. Are there any? Is XBO the first? If so they can claim how they are innovating without fear of contradiction.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
the xbone is an online device. it won't work well, or in some cases, at all without an active internet connection
if you want or need to play a disconnected, not online device, don't get an xbone. get a 360 (or a ps4 i guess)
And THAT is the biggest thing MS should take flak for now. Their ability to communicate with the public on this system has been horrible. I don't know what's going on over there to make it such a mess.
But really.. your answer is go with the aging product you are replacing? And the obvious unspoken answer of your direct competitors?
Unacceptable, and I hope they fire whoever thought that was a good idea.
If they don't have an actual answer yet fine, there's plenty of market speak for, "we don't really know yet" that they could use... but they need to have an answer for it that isn't bullshit.
the point being that NOBODY is in a position to speak from authority. hence I am not dictating with absolution that you cannot turn off the system. The point is that we don't believe them when they tell us that, and the mere presence of concern is enough to turn me off. The potential that this could be tricky wording is enough for me to throw my hands in the air.
My disbelief isn't based off of tin foil hat theories. They're based off of the debate that is currently raging through the country.
I have no axe to grind with microsoft. I just reject their product. If Sony was doing all of this, I'd be just as critical of Sony.
Anywho, as I've done in the past, let's just agree to disagree. You know my stance - I don't believe microsoft. I know your stance - you do. Neither of us know for certain what the reality of Xbox One's privacy concerns begin or end. And Duck! already wants us to drop the discussion.
I just want a little bit more respect for my position. because I'm not uninformed and hysterical.
Would it not be a smarter position for you to say then that you are wary of what their not yet released product may actually entail?
Throwing up your hands and forswearing their product based upon speculation and, as you explicitly stated, information that NO ONE is able to speak to on authority other than MS themselves, seems like you are purposefully siding against them based upon speculation.
I personally am not a fan of some of the things they are saying, but I have no issues with the information released as of yet about my own personal security or privacy. Now, if MS releases a TOS and explicitly states int he fine print that the kinect is always watching you and logging every last minute of video and/or audio information to their servers to be used at their own discretion. (obvious extreme example)
Of course I would have an issue with that and wouldn't even concider a purchase of the system.
The debate currently going on has little to do with that other than making people question everything. I work in those circles, it wasn't news or a shock to me... but that kind of thing isn't a consumer issue, that's a government policy issue, and that is something WELL beyond the conversation of, "what does off mean to the kinect".
Privacy concerns are just one of the many problems I have with this system. Even if I ignore the very real privacy concerns I have, there is still enough that is solidly confirmed about the Xbox One to turn me off. No, microsoft telling me I can turn off the camera isn't going to sway me into their camp.
however:
"Now, if MS releases a TOS and explicitly states int he fine print that the kinect is always watching you and logging every last minute of video and/or audio information to their servers to be used at their own discretion. (obvious extreme example)
Of course I would have an issue with that and wouldn't even concider a purchase of the system."
From Microsoft's recently updated TOS:
The company claiming privacy is their top priority has a section in their TOS claiming users of Xbox have no expectations of privacy.
Here's the whole thing:
"You should not expect any level of privacy concerning your use of the live communication features (for example, voice chat, video and communications in live-hosted gameplay sessions) offered through the Xbox LIVE/Games for Windows-LIVE service. We may monitor these communications to the extent permitted by law. However, we cannot monitor the entire Services and make no attempt to do so. You understand that others can record and use these communications. Communications in live-hosted gameplay sessions may also be broadcast to others. Some games may use game managers and hosts. Game managers and hosts are not authorized Microsoft spokespersons. Their views do not necessarily reflect those of Microsoft.
When you use Voice Search, all voice commands are sent to Microsoft and stored to provide the Voice Search Service and improve Microsoft products. If you use Voice Search, you consent to Microsoft recording and collecting your voice input to provide the Voice Search Service and improve Microsoft products. We will treat any voice input according to the Privacy Statement (http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=259655)."
As I said elsewhere, what this actually means is "we reserve the right to listen in to your game chat in order to moderate it if you receive a bunch of complaints that you're calling people 'buttmunching queer bitch faggots' and threatening to 'rape your grandmother to death with my bong dong'."
No, what it actually means is they reserve the right to listen and record all live interaction. You assume they will only use that for ragers. The NSA leaks makes me skeptical to trust that they won't abuse this power.
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
Perharps but than someone would claims Phil Spencer or Dan Mattrick was lying. I don't know how it got this way. My X360 is always online at boot. I don't feel my privacy as been violated in any shape or form. Yes I do have the kinect 1 connect to.
Possibly, but a lot of the hesitancy regarding this device is inherently tied to not being able to get either consistent answers or any answer at all. I am with you though on the on/off thing as I think MS has mostly put that to bed. I would like confirmation from them as to what kinds of data it is going to track and whether that will be stored locally, for how long, and if MS will ever have access to it. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist - mind you - but because I like having reassurances.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
the point being that NOBODY is in a position to speak from authority. hence I am not dictating with absolution that you cannot turn off the system. The point is that we don't believe them when they tell us that, and the mere presence of concern is enough to turn me off. The potential that this could be tricky wording is enough for me to throw my hands in the air.
My disbelief isn't based off of tin foil hat theories. They're based off of the debate that is currently raging through the country.
I have no axe to grind with microsoft. I just reject their product. If Sony was doing all of this, I'd be just as critical of Sony.
Anywho, as I've done in the past, let's just agree to disagree. You know my stance - I don't believe microsoft. I know your stance - you do. Neither of us know for certain what the reality of Xbox One's privacy concerns begin or end. And Duck! already wants us to drop the discussion.
I just want a little bit more respect for my position. because I'm not uninformed and hysterical.
Would it not be a smarter position for you to say then that you are wary of what their not yet released product may actually entail?
Throwing up your hands and forswearing their product based upon speculation and, as you explicitly stated, information that NO ONE is able to speak to on authority other than MS themselves, seems like you are purposefully siding against them based upon speculation.
I personally am not a fan of some of the things they are saying, but I have no issues with the information released as of yet about my own personal security or privacy. Now, if MS releases a TOS and explicitly states int he fine print that the kinect is always watching you and logging every last minute of video and/or audio information to their servers to be used at their own discretion. (obvious extreme example)
Of course I would have an issue with that and wouldn't even concider a purchase of the system.
The debate currently going on has little to do with that other than making people question everything. I work in those circles, it wasn't news or a shock to me... but that kind of thing isn't a consumer issue, that's a government policy issue, and that is something WELL beyond the conversation of, "what does off mean to the kinect".
Privacy concerns are just one of the many problems I have with this system. Even if I ignore the very real privacy concerns I have, there is still enough that is solidly confirmed about the Xbox One to turn me off. No, microsoft telling me I can turn off the camera isn't going to sway me into their camp.
however:
"Now, if MS releases a TOS and explicitly states int he fine print that the kinect is always watching you and logging every last minute of video and/or audio information to their servers to be used at their own discretion. (obvious extreme example)
Of course I would have an issue with that and wouldn't even concider a purchase of the system."
From Microsoft's recently updated TOS:
The company claiming privacy is their top priority has a section in their TOS claiming users of Xbox have no expectations of privacy.
Here's the whole thing:
"You should not expect any level of privacy concerning your use of the live communication features (for example, voice chat, video and communications in live-hosted gameplay sessions) offered through the Xbox LIVE/Games for Windows-LIVE service. We may monitor these communications to the extent permitted by law. However, we cannot monitor the entire Services and make no attempt to do so. You understand that others can record and use these communications. Communications in live-hosted gameplay sessions may also be broadcast to others. Some games may use game managers and hosts. Game managers and hosts are not authorized Microsoft spokespersons. Their views do not necessarily reflect those of Microsoft.
When you use Voice Search, all voice commands are sent to Microsoft and stored to provide the Voice Search Service and improve Microsoft products. If you use Voice Search, you consent to Microsoft recording and collecting your voice input to provide the Voice Search Service and improve Microsoft products. We will treat any voice input according to the Privacy Statement (http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=259655)."
As I said elsewhere, what this actually means is "we reserve the right to listen in to your game chat in order to moderate it if you receive a bunch of complaints that you're calling people 'buttmunching queer bitch faggots' and threatening to 'rape your grandmother to death with my bong dong'."
No, what it actually means is they reserve the right to listen and record all live interaction. You assume they will only use that for ragers. The NSA leaks makes me skeptical to trust that they won't abuse this power.
You mean they'll keep an enormous database of every communication you make, even though that's nothing like any of the recent leaks about private monitoring of communication which were just about metadata?
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
the big problem is that, 6 months out, a lot of these details are still in flux, and their marketing people & executives can't talk to them with any real authority.
You're probably right about this, but to be honest with you, in this day and age if you're not forthcoming with information regarding your policies/product people will (for better or worse) assume that you're hiding something. And particularly in this case, where Microsoft is trying to radically alter the current digital landscape, every negative is seen with nefarious intent - regardless of whether or not there is any. With better messaging, I think the community might have been willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but their actions make them seem shy at best, and malicious at worst. An unfair perception, i'm sure, but the general perception nonetheless.
like, MS knows their intentions for the kinect device - that it will have an expected baseline of "on" but will have ways to actually fully turn it "off," though this may affect functionality on some games. they expect to give certain guarantees of privacy but don't know all the details the legal team will come up with to deal with, say, someone mailing out dick pics to strangers or running webcam porn businesses on kinect. they don't know all the engineering tradeoffs of some of the features at this point. they certainly don't know all the interface details of enabling or disabling features.
frankly, their messaging could have been a lot better in a lot of ways, but their key error has been this: they needed to say at about 200 feet higher than what they did and refuse to engage on details. as it stands, internet nerds are furiously picking apart edge cases that some fool at MS decided to open his stupid mouth about in spite of it not really being settled.
like that green image laying out all the use cases for the family plan that someone posted? there's no way that system has been formally defined yet. and yet, everyone, six months out, already has their expectations firmly based around it.
I guess for me, the big question then is: why debut a system when these policies haven't been sorted out yet? I understand not wanting to be beat to market by your biggest competitor, but it feels like microsoft is going through heavy corporate drag, and we're all getting whiplash in the process. If indeed they haven't figured all this out yet, they really should have held off on announcing any used game policy, family sharing, always-on, etc. Everything should have come as one complete package - though I guess we're both conceding that they botched the messaging, so I think we're actually in agreement on this.
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
Perharps but than someone would claims Phil Spencer or Dan Mattrick was lying. I don't know how it got this way. My X360 is always online at boot. I don't feel my privacy as been violated in any shape or form. Yes I do have the kinect 1 connect to.
Possibly, but a lot of the hesitancy regarding this device is inherently tied to not being able to get either consistent answers or any answer at all. I am with you though on the on/off thing as I think MS has mostly put that to bed. I would like confirmation from them as to what kinds of data it is going to track and whether that will be stored locally, for how long, and if MS will ever have access to it. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist - mind you - but because I like having reassurances.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
Do you own any devices that are disabled when not online?
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
0
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
Opinions are opinions and facts are fact. 2+ 2 = 4. That's a fact. You cannot dispute it.
So the fact is : Kinect and the console can be turn 100% off. Its a system feature - Microsoft.
Opinion : I don't believe it's true. I don't trust them
See where I am going with this. We are not trying to dissuade you out of anything. We are merely stating a fact. You can chose not to believe but the fact still remains true. Regardless of your believe or opinion.
Like your opinion that MS is more secure?
That's my opinion as a user. Xbox live was never hacked. Sony was. That's a fact. settle difference here.
And yet my cc info was only stolen off of Microsoft's service.
Yeah, Sony locked things down to fix them. Whereas there's a long history of Microsoft flat out ignoring the problem:
Nothing was done, it was likely down to social engineering or (as was revealed by one 'hacker') abuse of the reset password facility.
I'd trust Sony who got smacked in the face hard by this and took the time to rebuild things stronger, over MS who refuse to even acknowledge there's an issue.
It genuinely doesn't bother me though, I use credit cards on both services and any time i've ever had an issue my provider has been more than swift at sorting it out.
With that in mind, when I just recently went and signed up for PS+ for a few months (despite not actually owning any Sony hardware at the moment) to get the shitload of free games offered, I paid for the service, then just went into the account settings and deleted the CC info. So, yeah, there's that potential issue dealt with, one way or another.
Ahahaha, so it turns out I can't even remove my CC info from Microsoft's stuff without contacting customer service because I have an active Live account. So even though I've disabled auto-renew and already have another year of Live paid for, I would have to contact customer support to remove my current CC info without adding another credit card in the place of the first.
Hardly new stuff, but the foot-dragging on letting me out of the system when the Sony stuff let me do it in a few clicks is pretty sad, given all this silly business with the Xbone.
the point being that NOBODY is in a position to speak from authority. hence I am not dictating with absolution that you cannot turn off the system. The point is that we don't believe them when they tell us that, and the mere presence of concern is enough to turn me off. The potential that this could be tricky wording is enough for me to throw my hands in the air.
My disbelief isn't based off of tin foil hat theories. They're based off of the debate that is currently raging through the country.
I have no axe to grind with microsoft. I just reject their product. If Sony was doing all of this, I'd be just as critical of Sony.
Anywho, as I've done in the past, let's just agree to disagree. You know my stance - I don't believe microsoft. I know your stance - you do. Neither of us know for certain what the reality of Xbox One's privacy concerns begin or end. And Duck! already wants us to drop the discussion.
I just want a little bit more respect for my position. because I'm not uninformed and hysterical.
Would it not be a smarter position for you to say then that you are wary of what their not yet released product may actually entail?
Throwing up your hands and forswearing their product based upon speculation and, as you explicitly stated, information that NO ONE is able to speak to on authority other than MS themselves, seems like you are purposefully siding against them based upon speculation.
I personally am not a fan of some of the things they are saying, but I have no issues with the information released as of yet about my own personal security or privacy. Now, if MS releases a TOS and explicitly states int he fine print that the kinect is always watching you and logging every last minute of video and/or audio information to their servers to be used at their own discretion. (obvious extreme example)
Of course I would have an issue with that and wouldn't even concider a purchase of the system.
The debate currently going on has little to do with that other than making people question everything. I work in those circles, it wasn't news or a shock to me... but that kind of thing isn't a consumer issue, that's a government policy issue, and that is something WELL beyond the conversation of, "what does off mean to the kinect".
Privacy concerns are just one of the many problems I have with this system. Even if I ignore the very real privacy concerns I have, there is still enough that is solidly confirmed about the Xbox One to turn me off. No, microsoft telling me I can turn off the camera isn't going to sway me into their camp.
however:
"Now, if MS releases a TOS and explicitly states int he fine print that the kinect is always watching you and logging every last minute of video and/or audio information to their servers to be used at their own discretion. (obvious extreme example)
Of course I would have an issue with that and wouldn't even concider a purchase of the system."
From Microsoft's recently updated TOS:
The company claiming privacy is their top priority has a section in their TOS claiming users of Xbox have no expectations of privacy.
Here's the whole thing:
"You should not expect any level of privacy concerning your use of the live communication features (for example, voice chat, video and communications in live-hosted gameplay sessions) offered through the Xbox LIVE/Games for Windows-LIVE service. We may monitor these communications to the extent permitted by law. However, we cannot monitor the entire Services and make no attempt to do so. You understand that others can record and use these communications. Communications in live-hosted gameplay sessions may also be broadcast to others. Some games may use game managers and hosts. Game managers and hosts are not authorized Microsoft spokespersons. Their views do not necessarily reflect those of Microsoft.
When you use Voice Search, all voice commands are sent to Microsoft and stored to provide the Voice Search Service and improve Microsoft products. If you use Voice Search, you consent to Microsoft recording and collecting your voice input to provide the Voice Search Service and improve Microsoft products. We will treat any voice input according to the Privacy Statement (http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=259655)."
As I said elsewhere, what this actually means is "we reserve the right to listen in to your game chat in order to moderate it if you receive a bunch of complaints that you're calling people 'buttmunching queer bitch faggots' and threatening to 'rape your grandmother to death with my bong dong'."
No, what it actually means is they reserve the right to listen and record all live interaction. You assume they will only use that for ragers. The NSA leaks makes me skeptical to trust that they won't abuse this power.
You mean they'll keep an enormous database of every communication you make, even though that's nothing like any of the recent leaks about private monitoring of communication which were just about metadata?
You realize that they can mine metadata from that communication you make, right? Metadata is data about data. It's a loophole to get around the law.
the point being that NOBODY is in a position to speak from authority. hence I am not dictating with absolution that you cannot turn off the system. The point is that we don't believe them when they tell us that, and the mere presence of concern is enough to turn me off. The potential that this could be tricky wording is enough for me to throw my hands in the air.
My disbelief isn't based off of tin foil hat theories. They're based off of the debate that is currently raging through the country.
I have no axe to grind with microsoft. I just reject their product. If Sony was doing all of this, I'd be just as critical of Sony.
Anywho, as I've done in the past, let's just agree to disagree. You know my stance - I don't believe microsoft. I know your stance - you do. Neither of us know for certain what the reality of Xbox One's privacy concerns begin or end. And Duck! already wants us to drop the discussion.
I just want a little bit more respect for my position. because I'm not uninformed and hysterical.
Would it not be a smarter position for you to say then that you are wary of what their not yet released product may actually entail?
Throwing up your hands and forswearing their product based upon speculation and, as you explicitly stated, information that NO ONE is able to speak to on authority other than MS themselves, seems like you are purposefully siding against them based upon speculation.
I personally am not a fan of some of the things they are saying, but I have no issues with the information released as of yet about my own personal security or privacy. Now, if MS releases a TOS and explicitly states int he fine print that the kinect is always watching you and logging every last minute of video and/or audio information to their servers to be used at their own discretion. (obvious extreme example)
Of course I would have an issue with that and wouldn't even concider a purchase of the system.
The debate currently going on has little to do with that other than making people question everything. I work in those circles, it wasn't news or a shock to me... but that kind of thing isn't a consumer issue, that's a government policy issue, and that is something WELL beyond the conversation of, "what does off mean to the kinect".
Privacy concerns are just one of the many problems I have with this system. Even if I ignore the very real privacy concerns I have, there is still enough that is solidly confirmed about the Xbox One to turn me off. No, microsoft telling me I can turn off the camera isn't going to sway me into their camp.
however:
"Now, if MS releases a TOS and explicitly states int he fine print that the kinect is always watching you and logging every last minute of video and/or audio information to their servers to be used at their own discretion. (obvious extreme example)
Of course I would have an issue with that and wouldn't even concider a purchase of the system."
From Microsoft's recently updated TOS:
The company claiming privacy is their top priority has a section in their TOS claiming users of Xbox have no expectations of privacy.
Here's the whole thing:
"You should not expect any level of privacy concerning your use of the live communication features (for example, voice chat, video and communications in live-hosted gameplay sessions) offered through the Xbox LIVE/Games for Windows-LIVE service. We may monitor these communications to the extent permitted by law. However, we cannot monitor the entire Services and make no attempt to do so. You understand that others can record and use these communications. Communications in live-hosted gameplay sessions may also be broadcast to others. Some games may use game managers and hosts. Game managers and hosts are not authorized Microsoft spokespersons. Their views do not necessarily reflect those of Microsoft.
When you use Voice Search, all voice commands are sent to Microsoft and stored to provide the Voice Search Service and improve Microsoft products. If you use Voice Search, you consent to Microsoft recording and collecting your voice input to provide the Voice Search Service and improve Microsoft products. We will treat any voice input according to the Privacy Statement (http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=259655)."
As I said elsewhere, what this actually means is "we reserve the right to listen in to your game chat in order to moderate it if you receive a bunch of complaints that you're calling people 'buttmunching queer bitch faggots' and threatening to 'rape your grandmother to death with my bong dong'."
No, what it actually means is they reserve the right to listen and record all live interaction. You assume they will only use that for ragers. The NSA leaks makes me skeptical to trust that they won't abuse this power.
You mean they'll keep an enormous database of every communication you make, even though that's nothing like any of the recent leaks about private monitoring of communication which were just about metadata?
You realize that they can mine metadata from that communication you make, right? Metadata is data about data. It's a loophole to get around the law.
Opinions are opinions and facts are fact. 2+ 2 = 4. That's a fact. You cannot dispute it.
So the fact is : Kinect and the console can be turn 100% off. Its a system feature - Microsoft.
Opinion : I don't believe it's true. I don't trust them
See where I am going with this. We are not trying to dissuade you out of anything. We are merely stating a fact. You can chose not to believe but the fact still remains true. Regardless of your believe or opinion.
Like your opinion that MS is more secure?
That's my opinion as a user. Xbox live was never hacked. Sony was. That's a fact. settle difference here.
And yet my cc info was only stolen off of Microsoft's service.
Yeah, Sony locked things down to fix them. Whereas there's a long history of Microsoft flat out ignoring the problem:
Nothing was done, it was likely down to social engineering or (as was revealed by one 'hacker') abuse of the reset password facility.
I'd trust Sony who got smacked in the face hard by this and took the time to rebuild things stronger, over MS who refuse to even acknowledge there's an issue.
It genuinely doesn't bother me though, I use credit cards on both services and any time i've ever had an issue my provider has been more than swift at sorting it out.
With that in mind, when I just recently went and signed up for PS+ for a few months (despite not actually owning any Sony hardware at the moment) to get the shitload of free games offered, I paid for the service, then just went into the account settings and deleted the CC info. So, yeah, there's that potential issue dealt with, one way or another.
Ahahaha, so it turns out I can't even remove my CC info from Microsoft's stuff without contacting customer service because I have an active Live account. So even though I've disabled auto-renew and already have another year of Live paid for, I would have to contact customer support to remove my current CC info without adding another credit card in the place of the first.
Hardly new stuff, but the foot-dragging on letting me out of the system when the Sony stuff let me do it in a few clicks is pretty sad, given all this silly business with the Xbone.
I eventually just let the fucking card expire, this was easier than getting MS to let it go.
We decided to talk to a few Marines, Sailors, and Soldiers about what this will mean for gaming in the military. It's worth noting the military is comprised mostly of males, ages 18 - 35, the key demographic for video games.
"I predict a major shift to PlayStation Marine Corps-wide," said a former Marine who's done two tours aboard a carrier strike group at sea and who has beta-tested games for various companies. "Xbox is going to tank in the military."
...
"Xbox was the previous favorite," the Marine said. "'Halo' has always been an essential team LAN game aboard ship. It was almost a standard. Lots of people had it so easy to link Xboxes for 4 on 4," said the Marine. "Xbox was king of social gaming aboard ship."
...
A group of gaming Marines, Soldiers and Sailors broke down some numbers for us, and it turns out that somewhere around 25 to 30,000 troops do duty aboard ship at any given moment. Another Navy Sailor pointed out to us that there's at least 6 to 7,000 troops aboard those submarines Mattrick so flippantly referenced. Not to mention the majority of the stateside military living in barracks rooms, where random room changes occur regularly.
Counting the Coast Guard, the number of active duty military, most of which lives in barracks housing, rests at around 1.4 million. That's a lot of units sold or not sold — [take our POLL] — even more of a reason Mattrick might want to step tenderly around the subject of uniformed members.
We contacted Microsoft for a statement about Mattrick's punchline and its implications. In specific, we wanted to know if there was any consideration at all for troops serving in austere conditions.
This was the Microsoft response we recieved:
“With Xbox One you can game offline for up to 24 hours on your primary console, or one hour if you are logged on to a separate console accessing your library. Offline gaming is not possible after these prescribed times until you re-establish a connection. Although we’re very excited about Xbox One, we remain dedicated to Xbox 360 now and for years to come. In fact, we are expecting some of the greatest blockbusters of 2013 and 2014 to come out on Xbox 360 such as ‘Grand Theft Auto V,’ ‘Call of Duty: Ghosts,’ ‘Madden NFL 25’ and ‘FIFA 14.’”
For almost eight years I have served my country in the United States Navy. Initially, I enlisted as an Operations Specialist, but after two years I was picked up for a commissioning program and the Naval Aviation training pipeline to become a Naval Flight Officer (NFO – think Goose from TOPGUN, but a different aircraft). In that time I’ve served on three Nimitz class Aircraft Carriers, been on two combat deployments in support of Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in Afghanistan, and been on countless other detachments away from home for training and exercises. In the last two and a half years I have either been deployed or detached for a total of 18 months. From these experiences I would like to impart to you conversations that I have either been a part of or witnessed during my time away from home.
...
Their surprising decision to require the Xbox One to receive a message from the “mother ship” every 24 hours has already been lighting up the internet for a myriad of reasons. But, the reason that I am so infuriated about it is that I, and my brothers and sisters in arms, will not ever be able to play Xbox One when deployed or on detachment...Microsoft has single handedly alienated the entire military, and not just the U.S. military, the militaries of the entire world.
...
This next point is for the developers. Although the PS4 will not have an online requirement to run, developers will still be able to make games that require persistent online authentication. Do not do this to us. The video game industry has made a fortune breaking not just video game records, but entertainment records as a whole, with properties that simulate what my brothers, sisters, and I do on a daily basis. Don’t alienate us with online requirements for games. It will cost you money and respect. This is a lesson that Microsoft is, tragically, about to learn.
Navy Lt. Scott Metcalf was eagerly awaiting the arrival of the new Xbox One. Now he’s not even sure if he’ll buy one. Metcalf called that a “showstopper” for any service members who rely on their Xbox for off-duty diversions downrage, in the field, or at sea. Which is to say, just about everyone. And it gets worse for on-the-go troops. The Xbox One:
Can play only in Xbox One-friendly countries. Even if you’re lucky enough to have a regular, reliable Internet connection while overseas, you’ll have to be in one of 21 countries included in Microsoft’s server network. So, if you’re stationed in, say, Germany, Italy or Great Briatin, you’re good to go. But if you’re based in Japan, Kuwait or Afghanistan, you’re out of luck.
Will have region-locked games. Games bought in the U.S. can be activated only in the U.S. That means no more ripping open the latest title that just arrived in a care package from home while you’re deployed. And forget about buying games locally when overseas — if your Xbox Live account isn’t tied to the region when you activate a game, it won’t play.
Serious security concerns. Even when the Xbox One is in sleep mode, its built-in microphone can always listen in. It’s a feature developers say will provide quick voice-command access to games and apps — but that could spook commanders who might worry the always-connected device could also capture more than just idle chit-chat among troops.
OFFduty asked Microsoft officials if that empathy might translate into practical workarounds for the military.
“I don’t have additional details to share and can’t speculate on workarounds at this time,” wrote Xbox rep Danica Stickel in an emailed response to questions, repeating the suggestion that troops could just use the 360 instead. “Although we’re very excited about Xbox One, we remain dedicated to Xbox 360 now and for years to come. In fact, we are expecting some of the greatest blockbusters of 2013 and 2014 to come out on Xbox 360.”
She did offer some encouragement for Xbox One hopefuls, however, saying the regional lock restrictions aren’t much different from other content protections.
“Similar to the movie and music industry, games and other content must meet country-specific regulatory guidelines before they are cleared for sale — which means that games will work in the broad geographic regions for which they have been cleared, much as today with Xbox 360,” Stickel wrote.
“While the console itself is not geographically restricted, a user’s Xbox Live account, content, apps and experiences are all tied to the country of billing and residence,” she wrote.
“Military personnel will be able to take their Xbox One and play their games with them without an issue as long as the game has been ‘activated’ once in the U.S. Your games go with you and play, no issues,” she says.
...
“This is shameful, says Joel Hruska, a writer for Extreme Tech website. “Telling troops that you ‘empathize’ with them is both embarrassing and hands Sony perfect ammunition.”
“Do I think Microsoft is going to change?” writes Hruska in a recent post. “Honestly, no. The remarks that’ve come out to date paint a picture of a company that’s so drunk on its own Kool-Aid, they aren’t listening to outside criticism or commentary any longer.”
Opinions are opinions and facts are fact. 2+ 2 = 4. That's a fact. You cannot dispute it.
So the fact is : Kinect and the console can be turn 100% off. Its a system feature - Microsoft.
Opinion : I don't believe it's true. I don't trust them
See where I am going with this. We are not trying to dissuade you out of anything. We are merely stating a fact. You can chose not to believe but the fact still remains true. Regardless of your believe or opinion.
Like your opinion that MS is more secure?
That's my opinion as a user. Xbox live was never hacked. Sony was. That's a fact. settle difference here.
And yet my cc info was only stolen off of Microsoft's service.
Yeah, Sony locked things down to fix them. Whereas there's a long history of Microsoft flat out ignoring the problem:
Nothing was done, it was likely down to social engineering or (as was revealed by one 'hacker') abuse of the reset password facility.
I'd trust Sony who got smacked in the face hard by this and took the time to rebuild things stronger, over MS who refuse to even acknowledge there's an issue.
It genuinely doesn't bother me though, I use credit cards on both services and any time i've ever had an issue my provider has been more than swift at sorting it out.
With that in mind, when I just recently went and signed up for PS+ for a few months (despite not actually owning any Sony hardware at the moment) to get the shitload of free games offered, I paid for the service, then just went into the account settings and deleted the CC info. So, yeah, there's that potential issue dealt with, one way or another.
Ahahaha, so it turns out I can't even remove my CC info from Microsoft's stuff without contacting customer service because I have an active Live account. So even though I've disabled auto-renew and already have another year of Live paid for, I would have to contact customer support to remove my current CC info without adding another credit card in the place of the first.
Hardly new stuff, but the foot-dragging on letting me out of the system when the Sony stuff let me do it in a few clicks is pretty sad, given all this silly business with the Xbone.
It's because the terms of use require you to have an active credit card account attached to your account while your subscription is active. Though I think game cards allow for an exception there.
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
Perharps but than someone would claims Phil Spencer or Dan Mattrick was lying. I don't know how it got this way. My X360 is always online at boot. I don't feel my privacy as been violated in any shape or form. Yes I do have the kinect 1 connect to.
Possibly, but a lot of the hesitancy regarding this device is inherently tied to not being able to get either consistent answers or any answer at all. I am with you though on the on/off thing as I think MS has mostly put that to bed. I would like confirmation from them as to what kinds of data it is going to track and whether that will be stored locally, for how long, and if MS will ever have access to it. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist - mind you - but because I like having reassurances.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
Do you own any devices that are disabled when not online?
Its an ONLINE CONSOLE. Why is so freaking hard to understand. It was design to be ALWAYS ONLINE. That's the deal. If you cannot live with this requirement, than don't. You can always buy a Wiiu and wait forever before a game comes out or buy a PS4. its up to you.
0
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
No, what it actually means is they reserve the right to listen and record all live interaction. You assume they will only use that for ragers. The NSA leaks makes me skeptical to trust that they won't abuse this power.
If you use Skype, AOL, anything Google, anything Apple, anything Yahoo, anything Facebook... its all going in.
Sony has almost the exact same boilerplate on their console EULA. In fact some of their stuff is downright frightening if you let things like this bother you:
This, just like the legal clauses protecting corporations from class action lawsuits, is just the way of the world, and railing on one company for doing it without making similar noise about the guys you preordered a console from, despite them tracking your physical location with the vita and reserving the right to monitor everything you say and do on their services, and use whatever security software and tools as they see fit to monitor activity on their network...
I mean, you have to see why picking on Microsoft alone looks silly to me.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
Perharps but than someone would claims Phil Spencer or Dan Mattrick was lying. I don't know how it got this way. My X360 is always online at boot. I don't feel my privacy as been violated in any shape or form. Yes I do have the kinect 1 connect to.
Possibly, but a lot of the hesitancy regarding this device is inherently tied to not being able to get either consistent answers or any answer at all. I am with you though on the on/off thing as I think MS has mostly put that to bed. I would like confirmation from them as to what kinds of data it is going to track and whether that will be stored locally, for how long, and if MS will ever have access to it. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist - mind you - but because I like having reassurances.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
Do you own any devices that are disabled when not online?
Its an ONLINE CONSOLE. Why is so freaking hard to understand. It was design to be ALWAYS ONLINE. That's the deal. If you cannot live with this requirement, than don't. You can always buy a Wiiu and wait forever before a game comes out or buy a PS4. its up to you.
Symtex, you really need to calm down. Maybe you think you're the Last Man That Likes The Xbox One in the thread or something, but yeah. These responses don't really lead to further meaningful discussion about the subject at hand... they know they don't have to buy the device.
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
+10
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
Opinions are opinions and facts are fact. 2+ 2 = 4. That's a fact. You cannot dispute it.
So the fact is : Kinect and the console can be turn 100% off. Its a system feature - Microsoft.
Opinion : I don't believe it's true. I don't trust them
See where I am going with this. We are not trying to dissuade you out of anything. We are merely stating a fact. You can chose not to believe but the fact still remains true. Regardless of your believe or opinion.
Like your opinion that MS is more secure?
That's my opinion as a user. Xbox live was never hacked. Sony was. That's a fact. settle difference here.
And yet my cc info was only stolen off of Microsoft's service.
Yeah, Sony locked things down to fix them. Whereas there's a long history of Microsoft flat out ignoring the problem:
Nothing was done, it was likely down to social engineering or (as was revealed by one 'hacker') abuse of the reset password facility.
I'd trust Sony who got smacked in the face hard by this and took the time to rebuild things stronger, over MS who refuse to even acknowledge there's an issue.
It genuinely doesn't bother me though, I use credit cards on both services and any time i've ever had an issue my provider has been more than swift at sorting it out.
With that in mind, when I just recently went and signed up for PS+ for a few months (despite not actually owning any Sony hardware at the moment) to get the shitload of free games offered, I paid for the service, then just went into the account settings and deleted the CC info. So, yeah, there's that potential issue dealt with, one way or another.
Ahahaha, so it turns out I can't even remove my CC info from Microsoft's stuff without contacting customer service because I have an active Live account. So even though I've disabled auto-renew and already have another year of Live paid for, I would have to contact customer support to remove my current CC info without adding another credit card in the place of the first.
Hardly new stuff, but the foot-dragging on letting me out of the system when the Sony stuff let me do it in a few clicks is pretty sad, given all this silly business with the Xbone.
It's because the terms of use require you to have an active credit card account attached to your account while your subscription is active. Though I think game cards allow for an exception there.
Yes, but why? There's no good reason for that if you have the thing paid for; credit cards are for paying for things, not collateral to prove I've got the finances to maintain a paid-for Live subscription. Well, no good reason for the consumer, anyway.
An old issue, granted, but it certainly does jive with Microsoft's fresh turn into batshit insanity for trying to control what consumers can do. Annoying, but it finally makes some sense.
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
Perharps but than someone would claims Phil Spencer or Dan Mattrick was lying. I don't know how it got this way. My X360 is always online at boot. I don't feel my privacy as been violated in any shape or form. Yes I do have the kinect 1 connect to.
Possibly, but a lot of the hesitancy regarding this device is inherently tied to not being able to get either consistent answers or any answer at all. I am with you though on the on/off thing as I think MS has mostly put that to bed. I would like confirmation from them as to what kinds of data it is going to track and whether that will be stored locally, for how long, and if MS will ever have access to it. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist - mind you - but because I like having reassurances.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
Do you own any devices that are disabled when not online?
Its an ONLINE CONSOLE. Why is so freaking hard to understand. It was design to be ALWAYS ONLINE. That's the deal. If you cannot live with this requirement, than don't. You can always buy a Wiiu and wait forever before a game comes out or buy a PS4. its up to you.
Yeah, but no one has made an ONLINE TV that only works when it's connected to wifi and it's smart TV features are enabled. I wonder why?
Zero people are complaining about the XBO's ability to to connect to the internet so I was just wondering why you thought that your TV connecting to the internet would be relevant.
And again, if the XBO is actually the first bit of consumer electronics that actually disables itself when it isn't connected, that might be interesting, no?
[edit] no one tried to make a music player that always phoned home? Seems like an idea someone would have had.
lowlylowlycook on
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
Perharps but than someone would claims Phil Spencer or Dan Mattrick was lying. I don't know how it got this way. My X360 is always online at boot. I don't feel my privacy as been violated in any shape or form. Yes I do have the kinect 1 connect to.
Possibly, but a lot of the hesitancy regarding this device is inherently tied to not being able to get either consistent answers or any answer at all. I am with you though on the on/off thing as I think MS has mostly put that to bed. I would like confirmation from them as to what kinds of data it is going to track and whether that will be stored locally, for how long, and if MS will ever have access to it. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist - mind you - but because I like having reassurances.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
Do you own any devices that are disabled when not online?
Its an ONLINE CONSOLE. Why is so freaking hard to understand. It was design to be ALWAYS ONLINE. That's the deal. If you cannot live with this requirement, than don't. You can always buy a Wiiu and wait forever before a game comes out or buy a PS4. its up to you.
I think the main point of contention is that it doesn't necessarily have to be. There is usually a very large gap between "always online" and "online when I choose to be". For every use case I've seen so far, always online has been used a restriction - not a benefit. This is partly what colors people's perceptions of the device. The other issue is that "online when I choose to be" often covers every benefit to be gained by the cloud, without actually negatively impairing the user experience in the event of a mishap, or if you're in the military. I think Microsoft went too far on this front. A decent compromise would be if you physically have the disk on hand, the XBOX should be able to play that game. Any digital media that you download can be subject to the connectivity policy.
That would be a fair policy that would give consumers choices when purchasing content without alienating anyone. I do hope that they adopt something similar to this in the future.
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
Perharps but than someone would claims Phil Spencer or Dan Mattrick was lying. I don't know how it got this way. My X360 is always online at boot. I don't feel my privacy as been violated in any shape or form. Yes I do have the kinect 1 connect to.
Possibly, but a lot of the hesitancy regarding this device is inherently tied to not being able to get either consistent answers or any answer at all. I am with you though on the on/off thing as I think MS has mostly put that to bed. I would like confirmation from them as to what kinds of data it is going to track and whether that will be stored locally, for how long, and if MS will ever have access to it. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist - mind you - but because I like having reassurances.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
Do you own any devices that are disabled when not online?
Its an ONLINE CONSOLE. Why is so freaking hard to understand. It was design to be ALWAYS ONLINE. That's the deal. If you cannot live with this requirement, than don't. You can always buy a Wiiu and wait forever before a game comes out or buy a PS4. its up to you.
Symtex, you really need to calm down. Maybe you think you're the Last Man That Likes The Xbox One in the thread or something, but yeah. These responses don't really lead to further meaningful discussion about the subject at hand... they know they don't have to buy the device.
I don't mean to be rude. Its only the same fear mongering useless argument :
First person : Xbox one cannot be play in Poland !!1 It sucks
2nd person : Do you ever plan to go to Poland ?
First person : no
2nd person : so why do you care ?
First person : In case I want too.
Look at the previous post. Its all about Microsoft hates the military. Is Blizzard also hating the military because they cannot play World Of Warcraft?
the point being that NOBODY is in a position to speak from authority. hence I am not dictating with absolution that you cannot turn off the system. The point is that we don't believe them when they tell us that, and the mere presence of concern is enough to turn me off. The potential that this could be tricky wording is enough for me to throw my hands in the air.
My disbelief isn't based off of tin foil hat theories. They're based off of the debate that is currently raging through the country.
I have no axe to grind with microsoft. I just reject their product. If Sony was doing all of this, I'd be just as critical of Sony.
Anywho, as I've done in the past, let's just agree to disagree. You know my stance - I don't believe microsoft. I know your stance - you do. Neither of us know for certain what the reality of Xbox One's privacy concerns begin or end. And Duck! already wants us to drop the discussion.
I just want a little bit more respect for my position. because I'm not uninformed and hysterical.
Would it not be a smarter position for you to say then that you are wary of what their not yet released product may actually entail?
Throwing up your hands and forswearing their product based upon speculation and, as you explicitly stated, information that NO ONE is able to speak to on authority other than MS themselves, seems like you are purposefully siding against them based upon speculation.
I personally am not a fan of some of the things they are saying, but I have no issues with the information released as of yet about my own personal security or privacy. Now, if MS releases a TOS and explicitly states int he fine print that the kinect is always watching you and logging every last minute of video and/or audio information to their servers to be used at their own discretion. (obvious extreme example)
Of course I would have an issue with that and wouldn't even concider a purchase of the system.
The debate currently going on has little to do with that other than making people question everything. I work in those circles, it wasn't news or a shock to me... but that kind of thing isn't a consumer issue, that's a government policy issue, and that is something WELL beyond the conversation of, "what does off mean to the kinect".
Privacy concerns are just one of the many problems I have with this system. Even if I ignore the very real privacy concerns I have, there is still enough that is solidly confirmed about the Xbox One to turn me off. No, microsoft telling me I can turn off the camera isn't going to sway me into their camp.
however:
"Now, if MS releases a TOS and explicitly states int he fine print that the kinect is always watching you and logging every last minute of video and/or audio information to their servers to be used at their own discretion. (obvious extreme example)
Of course I would have an issue with that and wouldn't even concider a purchase of the system."
From Microsoft's recently updated TOS:
The company claiming privacy is their top priority has a section in their TOS claiming users of Xbox have no expectations of privacy.
Here's the whole thing:
"You should not expect any level of privacy concerning your use of the live communication features (for example, voice chat, video and communications in live-hosted gameplay sessions) offered through the Xbox LIVE/Games for Windows-LIVE service. We may monitor these communications to the extent permitted by law. However, we cannot monitor the entire Services and make no attempt to do so. You understand that others can record and use these communications. Communications in live-hosted gameplay sessions may also be broadcast to others. Some games may use game managers and hosts. Game managers and hosts are not authorized Microsoft spokespersons. Their views do not necessarily reflect those of Microsoft.
When you use Voice Search, all voice commands are sent to Microsoft and stored to provide the Voice Search Service and improve Microsoft products. If you use Voice Search, you consent to Microsoft recording and collecting your voice input to provide the Voice Search Service and improve Microsoft products. We will treat any voice input according to the Privacy Statement (http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=259655)."
As I said elsewhere, what this actually means is "we reserve the right to listen in to your game chat in order to moderate it if you receive a bunch of complaints that you're calling people 'buttmunching queer bitch faggots' and threatening to 'rape your grandmother to death with my bong dong'."
No, what it actually means is they reserve the right to listen and record all live interaction. You assume they will only use that for ragers. The NSA leaks makes me skeptical to trust that they won't abuse this power.
If the NSA wants to listen to you, I promise you, they are going to listen to you regardless of whether or not you have a Kinect in your house.
the point being that NOBODY is in a position to speak from authority. hence I am not dictating with absolution that you cannot turn off the system. The point is that we don't believe them when they tell us that, and the mere presence of concern is enough to turn me off. The potential that this could be tricky wording is enough for me to throw my hands in the air.
My disbelief isn't based off of tin foil hat theories. They're based off of the debate that is currently raging through the country.
I have no axe to grind with microsoft. I just reject their product. If Sony was doing all of this, I'd be just as critical of Sony.
Anywho, as I've done in the past, let's just agree to disagree. You know my stance - I don't believe microsoft. I know your stance - you do. Neither of us know for certain what the reality of Xbox One's privacy concerns begin or end. And Duck! already wants us to drop the discussion.
I just want a little bit more respect for my position. because I'm not uninformed and hysterical.
Would it not be a smarter position for you to say then that you are wary of what their not yet released product may actually entail?
Throwing up your hands and forswearing their product based upon speculation and, as you explicitly stated, information that NO ONE is able to speak to on authority other than MS themselves, seems like you are purposefully siding against them based upon speculation.
I personally am not a fan of some of the things they are saying, but I have no issues with the information released as of yet about my own personal security or privacy. Now, if MS releases a TOS and explicitly states int he fine print that the kinect is always watching you and logging every last minute of video and/or audio information to their servers to be used at their own discretion. (obvious extreme example)
Of course I would have an issue with that and wouldn't even concider a purchase of the system.
The debate currently going on has little to do with that other than making people question everything. I work in those circles, it wasn't news or a shock to me... but that kind of thing isn't a consumer issue, that's a government policy issue, and that is something WELL beyond the conversation of, "what does off mean to the kinect".
Privacy concerns are just one of the many problems I have with this system. Even if I ignore the very real privacy concerns I have, there is still enough that is solidly confirmed about the Xbox One to turn me off. No, microsoft telling me I can turn off the camera isn't going to sway me into their camp.
however:
"Now, if MS releases a TOS and explicitly states int he fine print that the kinect is always watching you and logging every last minute of video and/or audio information to their servers to be used at their own discretion. (obvious extreme example)
Of course I would have an issue with that and wouldn't even concider a purchase of the system."
From Microsoft's recently updated TOS:
The company claiming privacy is their top priority has a section in their TOS claiming users of Xbox have no expectations of privacy.
Here's the whole thing:
"You should not expect any level of privacy concerning your use of the live communication features (for example, voice chat, video and communications in live-hosted gameplay sessions) offered through the Xbox LIVE/Games for Windows-LIVE service. We may monitor these communications to the extent permitted by law. However, we cannot monitor the entire Services and make no attempt to do so. You understand that others can record and use these communications. Communications in live-hosted gameplay sessions may also be broadcast to others. Some games may use game managers and hosts. Game managers and hosts are not authorized Microsoft spokespersons. Their views do not necessarily reflect those of Microsoft.
When you use Voice Search, all voice commands are sent to Microsoft and stored to provide the Voice Search Service and improve Microsoft products. If you use Voice Search, you consent to Microsoft recording and collecting your voice input to provide the Voice Search Service and improve Microsoft products. We will treat any voice input according to the Privacy Statement (http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=259655)."
As I said elsewhere, what this actually means is "we reserve the right to listen in to your game chat in order to moderate it if you receive a bunch of complaints that you're calling people 'buttmunching queer bitch faggots' and threatening to 'rape your grandmother to death with my bong dong'."
No, what it actually means is they reserve the right to listen and record all live interaction. You assume they will only use that for ragers. The NSA leaks makes me skeptical to trust that they won't abuse this power.
You mean they'll keep an enormous database of every communication you make, even though that's nothing like any of the recent leaks about private monitoring of communication which were just about metadata?
You realize that they can mine metadata from that communication you make, right? Metadata is data about data. It's a loophole to get around the law.
That's not at all what you claimed though.
It's what I've been claiming for two topics now. If you've misunderstood, you understand now.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online.
It's pretty simple. Some people don't always want to be connected and accessible 24/7. If you do, great. That's a valid opinion. Not everyone shares your point of view though.
What 'always-on' benefits does the Xbox One offer that you can't get with a console where online is optional? Other consoles have cloud features, digital distribution, online play, social features, media features, etc, without the same restrictions.
Opinions are opinions and facts are fact. 2+ 2 = 4. That's a fact. You cannot dispute it.
So the fact is : Kinect and the console can be turn 100% off. Its a system feature - Microsoft.
Opinion : I don't believe it's true. I don't trust them
See where I am going with this. We are not trying to dissuade you out of anything. We are merely stating a fact. You can chose not to believe but the fact still remains true. Regardless of your believe or opinion.
Like your opinion that MS is more secure?
That's my opinion as a user. Xbox live was never hacked. Sony was. That's a fact. settle difference here.
And yet my cc info was only stolen off of Microsoft's service.
Yeah, Sony locked things down to fix them. Whereas there's a long history of Microsoft flat out ignoring the problem:
Nothing was done, it was likely down to social engineering or (as was revealed by one 'hacker') abuse of the reset password facility.
I'd trust Sony who got smacked in the face hard by this and took the time to rebuild things stronger, over MS who refuse to even acknowledge there's an issue.
It genuinely doesn't bother me though, I use credit cards on both services and any time i've ever had an issue my provider has been more than swift at sorting it out.
With that in mind, when I just recently went and signed up for PS+ for a few months (despite not actually owning any Sony hardware at the moment) to get the shitload of free games offered, I paid for the service, then just went into the account settings and deleted the CC info. So, yeah, there's that potential issue dealt with, one way or another.
Ahahaha, so it turns out I can't even remove my CC info from Microsoft's stuff without contacting customer service because I have an active Live account. So even though I've disabled auto-renew and already have another year of Live paid for, I would have to contact customer support to remove my current CC info without adding another credit card in the place of the first.
Hardly new stuff, but the foot-dragging on letting me out of the system when the Sony stuff let me do it in a few clicks is pretty sad, given all this silly business with the Xbone.
It's because the terms of use require you to have an active credit card account attached to your account while your subscription is active. Though I think game cards allow for an exception there.
Yes, but why? There's no good reason for that if you have the thing paid for; credit cards are for paying for things, not collateral to prove I've got the finances to maintain a paid-for Live subscription. Well, no good reason for the consumer, anyway.
An old issue, granted, but it certainly does jive with Microsoft's fresh turn into batshit insanity for trying to control what consumers can do. Annoying, but it finally makes some sense.
Yea, you can actually get (temporarily?) banned from Live if you let your credit card account expire and don't update the details while it's active too... it happened to somebody on the forums, I forget who. That's not common to Microsoft either... I vaguely recall some people who ate bans on their WoW account for not keeping that up to date and then when it charges there's a rejection. It sucks and it's kinda knee-jerk dumb, but we do kind of agree to that term when we sign up.
“I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
the point being that NOBODY is in a position to speak from authority. hence I am not dictating with absolution that you cannot turn off the system. The point is that we don't believe them when they tell us that, and the mere presence of concern is enough to turn me off. The potential that this could be tricky wording is enough for me to throw my hands in the air.
My disbelief isn't based off of tin foil hat theories. They're based off of the debate that is currently raging through the country.
I have no axe to grind with microsoft. I just reject their product. If Sony was doing all of this, I'd be just as critical of Sony.
Anywho, as I've done in the past, let's just agree to disagree. You know my stance - I don't believe microsoft. I know your stance - you do. Neither of us know for certain what the reality of Xbox One's privacy concerns begin or end. And Duck! already wants us to drop the discussion.
I just want a little bit more respect for my position. because I'm not uninformed and hysterical.
Would it not be a smarter position for you to say then that you are wary of what their not yet released product may actually entail?
Throwing up your hands and forswearing their product based upon speculation and, as you explicitly stated, information that NO ONE is able to speak to on authority other than MS themselves, seems like you are purposefully siding against them based upon speculation.
I personally am not a fan of some of the things they are saying, but I have no issues with the information released as of yet about my own personal security or privacy. Now, if MS releases a TOS and explicitly states int he fine print that the kinect is always watching you and logging every last minute of video and/or audio information to their servers to be used at their own discretion. (obvious extreme example)
Of course I would have an issue with that and wouldn't even concider a purchase of the system.
The debate currently going on has little to do with that other than making people question everything. I work in those circles, it wasn't news or a shock to me... but that kind of thing isn't a consumer issue, that's a government policy issue, and that is something WELL beyond the conversation of, "what does off mean to the kinect".
Privacy concerns are just one of the many problems I have with this system. Even if I ignore the very real privacy concerns I have, there is still enough that is solidly confirmed about the Xbox One to turn me off. No, microsoft telling me I can turn off the camera isn't going to sway me into their camp.
however:
"Now, if MS releases a TOS and explicitly states int he fine print that the kinect is always watching you and logging every last minute of video and/or audio information to their servers to be used at their own discretion. (obvious extreme example)
Of course I would have an issue with that and wouldn't even concider a purchase of the system."
From Microsoft's recently updated TOS:
The company claiming privacy is their top priority has a section in their TOS claiming users of Xbox have no expectations of privacy.
Here's the whole thing:
"You should not expect any level of privacy concerning your use of the live communication features (for example, voice chat, video and communications in live-hosted gameplay sessions) offered through the Xbox LIVE/Games for Windows-LIVE service. We may monitor these communications to the extent permitted by law. However, we cannot monitor the entire Services and make no attempt to do so. You understand that others can record and use these communications. Communications in live-hosted gameplay sessions may also be broadcast to others. Some games may use game managers and hosts. Game managers and hosts are not authorized Microsoft spokespersons. Their views do not necessarily reflect those of Microsoft.
When you use Voice Search, all voice commands are sent to Microsoft and stored to provide the Voice Search Service and improve Microsoft products. If you use Voice Search, you consent to Microsoft recording and collecting your voice input to provide the Voice Search Service and improve Microsoft products. We will treat any voice input according to the Privacy Statement (http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=259655)."
As I said elsewhere, what this actually means is "we reserve the right to listen in to your game chat in order to moderate it if you receive a bunch of complaints that you're calling people 'buttmunching queer bitch faggots' and threatening to 'rape your grandmother to death with my bong dong'."
No, what it actually means is they reserve the right to listen and record all live interaction. You assume they will only use that for ragers. The NSA leaks makes me skeptical to trust that they won't abuse this power.
You mean they'll keep an enormous database of every communication you make, even though that's nothing like any of the recent leaks about private monitoring of communication which were just about metadata?
You realize that they can mine metadata from that communication you make, right? Metadata is data about data. It's a loophole to get around the law.
That's not at all what you claimed though.
It's what I've been claiming for two topics now. If you've misunderstood, you understand now.
No, I've not misunderstood you. I've read what you wrote:
they reserve the right to listen and record all live interaction
It's about 3 posts up from this one.
Which is insane and not at all in line with the PRISM program or the Verizon phone metadata stories you keep referencing when bringing this up. None of the recent leaks support this kind of recording being done.
Now metadata? Yeah, MS likely records that. So does every single other tech company out there. Google's entire business model is based on recording all your metadata and selling it to people.
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
Perharps but than someone would claims Phil Spencer or Dan Mattrick was lying. I don't know how it got this way. My X360 is always online at boot. I don't feel my privacy as been violated in any shape or form. Yes I do have the kinect 1 connect to.
Possibly, but a lot of the hesitancy regarding this device is inherently tied to not being able to get either consistent answers or any answer at all. I am with you though on the on/off thing as I think MS has mostly put that to bed. I would like confirmation from them as to what kinds of data it is going to track and whether that will be stored locally, for how long, and if MS will ever have access to it. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist - mind you - but because I like having reassurances.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
Do you own any devices that are disabled when not online?
Its an ONLINE CONSOLE. Why is so freaking hard to understand. It was design to be ALWAYS ONLINE. That's the deal. If you cannot live with this requirement, than don't. You can always buy a Wiiu and wait forever before a game comes out or buy a PS4. its up to you.
I think the main point of contention is that it doesn't necessarily have to be. There is usually a very large gap between always online and online when I choose to be. For every use case I've seen so far, always online has been used a restriction - not a benefit. This is partly what colors people's perceptions of the device. The other issue is that "online when I choose to be" often covers every benefit to be gained by the cloud, without actually negatively impairing the user experience in the event of a mishap, or if you're in the military. I think Microsoft went too far on this front. A decent compromise would be if you physically have the disk on hand, the XBOX should be able to play that game. Any digital media that you download can be subject to the connectivity policy.
That would be a fair policy that would give consumers choices when purchasing content without alienating anyone. I do hope that they adopt something similar to this in the future.
The console has been market and design that way. It not because they have something against the military. They have internet there too you know. I don't think they went too far. They are trying to move the industry forward.Not everyone is ready for it and that might be why there is a push back. This is 2001 all over again. (Original Xbox)
Look at the previous post. Its all about Microsoft hates the military. Is Blizzard also hating the military because they cannot play World Of Warcraft?
Wow. After all these pages.
Just Wow.
[oh shit. that pun was 100% unintended but I'll leave it.]
I can't believe we are basically back to comparing Sim City to WoW.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
No, what it actually means is they reserve the right to listen and record all live interaction. You assume they will only use that for ragers. The NSA leaks makes me skeptical to trust that they won't abuse this power.
If you use Skype, AOL, anything Google, anything Apple, anything Yahoo, anything Facebook... its all going in.
Sony has almost the exact same boilerplate on their console EULA. In fact some of their stuff is downright frightening if you let things like this bother you:
This, just like the legal clauses protecting corporations from class action lawsuits, is just the way of the world, and railing on one company for doing it without making similar noise about the guys you preordered a console from, despite them tracking your physical location with the vita and reserving the right to monitor everything you say and do on their services, and use whatever security software and tools as they see fit to monitor activity on their network...
I mean, you have to see why picking on Microsoft alone looks silly to me.
This is literally, without hyperbole, the 4th time I'm telling you this, verbatim, word for word:
"That one product violates my privacy does not mean I will welcome an always online, always connected camera into my home with open arms."
And complaining about microsoft in a microsoft thread isn't silly, it's on topic. Now then, you don't ever have to bring up that my privacy is violated ever again.
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
Perharps but than someone would claims Phil Spencer or Dan Mattrick was lying. I don't know how it got this way. My X360 is always online at boot. I don't feel my privacy as been violated in any shape or form. Yes I do have the kinect 1 connect to.
Possibly, but a lot of the hesitancy regarding this device is inherently tied to not being able to get either consistent answers or any answer at all. I am with you though on the on/off thing as I think MS has mostly put that to bed. I would like confirmation from them as to what kinds of data it is going to track and whether that will be stored locally, for how long, and if MS will ever have access to it. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist - mind you - but because I like having reassurances.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
Do you own any devices that are disabled when not online?
Its an ONLINE CONSOLE. Why is so freaking hard to understand. It was design to be ALWAYS ONLINE. That's the deal. If you cannot live with this requirement, than don't. You can always buy a Wiiu and wait forever before a game comes out or buy a PS4. its up to you.
Symtex, you really need to calm down. Maybe you think you're the Last Man That Likes The Xbox One in the thread or something, but yeah. These responses don't really lead to further meaningful discussion about the subject at hand... they know they don't have to buy the device.
I don't mean to be rude. Its only the same fear mongering useless argument :
First person : Xbox one cannot be play in Poland !!1 It sucks
2nd person : Do you ever plan to go to Poland ?
First person : no
2nd person : so why do you care ?
First person : In case I want too.
Look at the previous post. Its all about Microsoft hates the military. Is Blizzard also hating the military because they cannot play World Of Warcraft?
Not to be snide, but are you suggesting that Polish people do not have a legitimate right to be upset if the console doesn't work in their country? I personally, do not plan on traveling to Poland anytime soon, but I think for anyone currently living in Poland the matter is of some importance.
Have you ever been online with your Playstation or Nintendo product? If you have been are you accepting that you're ok with this?
You don't see the difference between voluntarily going online, and being forced online?
I've never been forced online, if I didn't want something that was online I wouldn't buy it? Thankfully that's not an issue for me as I don't mind being online with things.
Well there you go.
But there's no argument there is there? I think we can both agree if you don't want something you won't buy it. That's my point, Microsoft have clearly said you need to be online with this, so you're not going to forced into it, you have a choice. My earlier point still stands as anecdotally I don't know anyone who stayed offline with their Wii, Xbox 360 or PS3 due to privacy concerns.
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
Perharps but than someone would claims Phil Spencer or Dan Mattrick was lying. I don't know how it got this way. My X360 is always online at boot. I don't feel my privacy as been violated in any shape or form. Yes I do have the kinect 1 connect to.
Possibly, but a lot of the hesitancy regarding this device is inherently tied to not being able to get either consistent answers or any answer at all. I am with you though on the on/off thing as I think MS has mostly put that to bed. I would like confirmation from them as to what kinds of data it is going to track and whether that will be stored locally, for how long, and if MS will ever have access to it. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist - mind you - but because I like having reassurances.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
Do you own any devices that are disabled when not online?
Its an ONLINE CONSOLE. Why is so freaking hard to understand. It was design to be ALWAYS ONLINE. That's the deal. If you cannot live with this requirement, than don't. You can always buy a Wiiu and wait forever before a game comes out or buy a PS4. its up to you.
Symtex, you really need to calm down. Maybe you think you're the Last Man That Likes The Xbox One in the thread or something, but yeah. These responses don't really lead to further meaningful discussion about the subject at hand... they know they don't have to buy the device.
I don't mean to be rude. Its only the same fear mongering useless argument :
First person : Xbox one cannot be play in Poland !!1 It sucks
2nd person : Do you ever plan to go to Poland ?
First person : no
2nd person : so why do you care ?
First person : In case I want too.
Look at the previous post. Its all about Microsoft hates the military. Is Blizzard also hating the military because they cannot play World Of Warcraft?
I'm sorry but I don't see anywhere that it says Microsoft hates the military? Alienate =/= hate.
No one is "fear mongering" we are bringing up a legitimate concern that this is the first device where if you cannot connect to the internet, you cannot use it. I would hate to think that if for some reason I could not connect to the internet, some of my other devices would stop working. I have a very reliable internet connection right now but I would hate to take the chance that if it did go down for some reason, none of my stuff would work.
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
Perharps but than someone would claims Phil Spencer or Dan Mattrick was lying. I don't know how it got this way. My X360 is always online at boot. I don't feel my privacy as been violated in any shape or form. Yes I do have the kinect 1 connect to.
Possibly, but a lot of the hesitancy regarding this device is inherently tied to not being able to get either consistent answers or any answer at all. I am with you though on the on/off thing as I think MS has mostly put that to bed. I would like confirmation from them as to what kinds of data it is going to track and whether that will be stored locally, for how long, and if MS will ever have access to it. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist - mind you - but because I like having reassurances.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
Do you own any devices that are disabled when not online?
Its an ONLINE CONSOLE. Why is so freaking hard to understand. It was design to be ALWAYS ONLINE. That's the deal. If you cannot live with this requirement, than don't. You can always buy a Wiiu and wait forever before a game comes out or buy a PS4. its up to you.
I think the main point of contention is that it doesn't necessarily have to be. There is usually a very large gap between always online and online when I choose to be. For every use case I've seen so far, always online has been used a restriction - not a benefit. This is partly what colors people's perceptions of the device. The other issue is that "online when I choose to be" often covers every benefit to be gained by the cloud, without actually negatively impairing the user experience in the event of a mishap, or if you're in the military. I think Microsoft went too far on this front. A decent compromise would be if you physically have the disk on hand, the XBOX should be able to play that game. Any digital media that you download can be subject to the connectivity policy.
That would be a fair policy that would give consumers choices when purchasing content without alienating anyone. I do hope that they adopt something similar to this in the future.
The console has been market and design that way. It not because they have something against the military. They have internet there too you know. I don't think they went too far. They are trying to move the industry forward.Not everyone is ready for it and that might be why there is a push back. This is 2001 all over again. (Original Xbox)
They are trying to push the industry forward in the same way a man can try to push a sheep through a fence.
There are very real barriers to the sheep moving forward at this time, and if the man keeps pushing all he's going to get for his trouble is sheep crap on his hand.
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
Perharps but than someone would claims Phil Spencer or Dan Mattrick was lying. I don't know how it got this way. My X360 is always online at boot. I don't feel my privacy as been violated in any shape or form. Yes I do have the kinect 1 connect to.
Possibly, but a lot of the hesitancy regarding this device is inherently tied to not being able to get either consistent answers or any answer at all. I am with you though on the on/off thing as I think MS has mostly put that to bed. I would like confirmation from them as to what kinds of data it is going to track and whether that will be stored locally, for how long, and if MS will ever have access to it. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist - mind you - but because I like having reassurances.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
Do you own any devices that are disabled when not online?
Its an ONLINE CONSOLE. Why is so freaking hard to understand. It was design to be ALWAYS ONLINE. That's the deal. If you cannot live with this requirement, than don't. You can always buy a Wiiu and wait forever before a game comes out or buy a PS4. its up to you.
Symtex, you really need to calm down. Maybe you think you're the Last Man That Likes The Xbox One in the thread or something, but yeah. These responses don't really lead to further meaningful discussion about the subject at hand... they know they don't have to buy the device.
I don't mean to be rude. Its only the same fear mongering useless argument :
First person : Xbox one cannot be play in Poland !!1 It sucks
2nd person : Do you ever plan to go to Poland ?
First person : no
2nd person : so why do you care ?
First person : In case I want too.
Look at the previous post. Its all about Microsoft hates the military. Is Blizzard also hating the military because they cannot play World Of Warcraft?
That is a terrible analogy. Blizzard doesn't kick you from the servers if you try to play in Iraq.
Not to be snide, but are you suggesting that Polish people do not have a legitimate right to be upset if the console doesn't work in their country? I personally, do not plan on traveling to Poland anytime soon, but I think for anyone currently living in Poland the matter is of some importance.
v1: This, after all is what we fought the Console War for.
v2: What? Are they all Poles?
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online.
It's pretty simple. Some people don't always want to be connected and accessible 24/7. If you do, great. That's a valid opinion. Not everyone shares your point of view though.
What 'always-on' benefits does the Xbox One offer that you can't get with a console where online is optional? Other consoles have cloud features, digital distribution, online play, social features, media features, etc, without the same restrictions.
You can have the game install and run completely off the hard drive. I can share my game with 10 friends and I can give 1 games (digital or physical) to a friend. The later part has never been on any digital distribution system. I think that's alone is worth it.
0
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
Perharps but than someone would claims Phil Spencer or Dan Mattrick was lying. I don't know how it got this way. My X360 is always online at boot. I don't feel my privacy as been violated in any shape or form. Yes I do have the kinect 1 connect to.
Possibly, but a lot of the hesitancy regarding this device is inherently tied to not being able to get either consistent answers or any answer at all. I am with you though on the on/off thing as I think MS has mostly put that to bed. I would like confirmation from them as to what kinds of data it is going to track and whether that will be stored locally, for how long, and if MS will ever have access to it. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist - mind you - but because I like having reassurances.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
Do you own any devices that are disabled when not online?
Its an ONLINE CONSOLE. Why is so freaking hard to understand. It was design to be ALWAYS ONLINE. That's the deal. If you cannot live with this requirement, than don't. You can always buy a Wiiu and wait forever before a game comes out or buy a PS4. its up to you.
I think the main point of contention is that it doesn't necessarily have to be. There is usually a very large gap between "always online" and "online when I choose to be". For every use case I've seen so far, always online has been used a restriction - not a benefit. This is partly what colors people's perceptions of the device. The other issue is that "online when I choose to be" often covers every benefit to be gained by the cloud, without actually negatively impairing the user experience in the event of a mishap, or if you're in the military. I think Microsoft went too far on this front. A decent compromise would be if you physically have the disk on hand, the XBOX should be able to play that game. Any digital media that you download can be subject to the connectivity policy.
That would be a fair policy that would give consumers choices when purchasing content without alienating anyone. I do hope that they adopt something similar to this in the future.
the bet they're making is that allowing a baseline expectation of available online resources will open up developers to create experiences that are so good that it's worth losing the customers who can't or won't go online, even for single-player experiences.
and it won't be at first, for certain. the current model of development of AAA titles is lowest common denominator multiplatform.
but who knows, five years out, if this will end up paying off. i think they're playing a long game here.
You yourself have said that you kill the power to the thing when you're not gaming
Unless you're afraid MS snuck a battery backup in there I really do not understand why you have a problem with this
Even if I don't have to have the camera rolling when my game is off, it sure as hell will be rolling when any game is on. I mean, you're making a great argument for me as to why I should never turn an xbox one on to begin with. Which is sort of my point.
0
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
You know what would have helped clear up a lot of the confusion about privacy, the system, its on/off state, and a number of other matters? If MS has been willing to do round-tables and journalist interviews after their presser.
Perharps but than someone would claims Phil Spencer or Dan Mattrick was lying. I don't know how it got this way. My X360 is always online at boot. I don't feel my privacy as been violated in any shape or form. Yes I do have the kinect 1 connect to.
Possibly, but a lot of the hesitancy regarding this device is inherently tied to not being able to get either consistent answers or any answer at all. I am with you though on the on/off thing as I think MS has mostly put that to bed. I would like confirmation from them as to what kinds of data it is going to track and whether that will be stored locally, for how long, and if MS will ever have access to it. Not because I'm a conspiracy theorist - mind you - but because I like having reassurances.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
Do you own any devices that are disabled when not online?
Its an ONLINE CONSOLE. Why is so freaking hard to understand. It was design to be ALWAYS ONLINE. That's the deal. If you cannot live with this requirement, than don't. You can always buy a Wiiu and wait forever before a game comes out or buy a PS4. its up to you.
Symtex, you really need to calm down. Maybe you think you're the Last Man That Likes The Xbox One in the thread or something, but yeah. These responses don't really lead to further meaningful discussion about the subject at hand... they know they don't have to buy the device.
I don't mean to be rude. Its only the same fear mongering useless argument :
First person : Xbox one cannot be play in Poland !!1 It sucks
2nd person : Do you ever plan to go to Poland ?
First person : no
2nd person : so why do you care ?
First person : In case I want too.
Look at the previous post. Its all about Microsoft hates the military. Is Blizzard also hating the military because they cannot play World Of Warcraft?
Not to be snide, but are you suggesting that Polish people do not have a legitimate right to be upset if the console doesn't work in their country? I personally, do not plan on traveling to Poland anytime soon, but I think for anyone currently living in Poland the matter is of some importance.
to be fair, almost every console in history has had a staggered release. it sucked, i guess, that japan got their ps vita before me, but it's not exactly an insult to all americans or something.
The console has been market and design that way. It not because they have something against the military. They have internet there too you know. I don't think they went too far. They are trying to move the industry forward.Not everyone is ready for it and that might be why there is a push back. This is 2001 all over again. (Original Xbox)
How is it anything like the original Xbox? The original didn't have significant restrictions not seen on the competition. It was a great system that my friends and I got plenty of entertainment from. Same with the 360.
You have to understand, just because you want this sort of thing and are capable of using it, that doesn't mean the same goes for everyone else. There are a lot of people who had 360s who just wanted to be able to play some next-gen Xbox games, who literally won't be able to. There are also a lot of people who don't want things to go this way at this time.
Honestly, MS may have actually been better off if they had just made the Xbox One 100% digital with no physical media option, and been much clearer with their messaging. Yes, they would have lost a chunk of consumers (probably including myself), but there probably would have been less backlash and vitriol.
With 'moving the industry to all digital', I'll refer to the old adage; "Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should". Not every change is progress.
Posts
Yeah, but the function that doesn't work when you're phone is disconnected is connecting to other devices. And so that's totally unavoidable.
I mean some device that disables itself when not online. Are there any? Is XBO the first? If so they can claim how they are innovating without fear of contradiction.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
And THAT is the biggest thing MS should take flak for now. Their ability to communicate with the public on this system has been horrible. I don't know what's going on over there to make it such a mess.
But really.. your answer is go with the aging product you are replacing? And the obvious unspoken answer of your direct competitors?
Unacceptable, and I hope they fire whoever thought that was a good idea.
If they don't have an actual answer yet fine, there's plenty of market speak for, "we don't really know yet" that they could use... but they need to have an answer for it that isn't bullshit.
No, what it actually means is they reserve the right to listen and record all live interaction. You assume they will only use that for ragers. The NSA leaks makes me skeptical to trust that they won't abuse this power.
That's a legitimate request. I understand that. We have to leave the assumption and speculation of PRISM/NSA using Kinect out of it. I would be interested too. Just for curiousity.
I am having a hard time understand the reluctance of users to be online. We are in 2013. Even my TV connects to the internet. Next thing we know, my toaster will have firmware update....I don't know what it is about living room and online that makes people go crazy. I love being online. Being 100% online is not detriment is a feature for me. So this is the part where gamers that are not comfortable with that will buy a PS4. I have nothing against that. I might buy one myself down the road. (I have an X360, PS3 and Wiu at home). I am gamer at heart. I don't care about company allegiance, I just love gaming. I've been doing it since the days of Vic 20 and Commodore 64. I look toward the future, Cloud computing is where it at. Blending single player and multiplayer into 1 experience is only going to get stronger.
You mean they'll keep an enormous database of every communication you make, even though that's nothing like any of the recent leaks about private monitoring of communication which were just about metadata?
You're probably right about this, but to be honest with you, in this day and age if you're not forthcoming with information regarding your policies/product people will (for better or worse) assume that you're hiding something. And particularly in this case, where Microsoft is trying to radically alter the current digital landscape, every negative is seen with nefarious intent - regardless of whether or not there is any. With better messaging, I think the community might have been willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but their actions make them seem shy at best, and malicious at worst. An unfair perception, i'm sure, but the general perception nonetheless.
I guess for me, the big question then is: why debut a system when these policies haven't been sorted out yet? I understand not wanting to be beat to market by your biggest competitor, but it feels like microsoft is going through heavy corporate drag, and we're all getting whiplash in the process. If indeed they haven't figured all this out yet, they really should have held off on announcing any used game policy, family sharing, always-on, etc. Everything should have come as one complete package - though I guess we're both conceding that they botched the messaging, so I think we're actually in agreement on this.
Do you own any devices that are disabled when not online?
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
Ahahaha, so it turns out I can't even remove my CC info from Microsoft's stuff without contacting customer service because I have an active Live account. So even though I've disabled auto-renew and already have another year of Live paid for, I would have to contact customer support to remove my current CC info without adding another credit card in the place of the first.
Hardly new stuff, but the foot-dragging on letting me out of the system when the Sony stuff let me do it in a few clicks is pretty sad, given all this silly business with the Xbone.
You realize that they can mine metadata from that communication you make, right? Metadata is data about data. It's a loophole to get around the law.
That's not at all what you claimed though.
I eventually just let the fucking card expire, this was easier than getting MS to let it go.
From one man serving
Armytimes: Xbox's sin against all military service members
It's because the terms of use require you to have an active credit card account attached to your account while your subscription is active. Though I think game cards allow for an exception there.
Its an ONLINE CONSOLE. Why is so freaking hard to understand. It was design to be ALWAYS ONLINE. That's the deal. If you cannot live with this requirement, than don't. You can always buy a Wiiu and wait forever before a game comes out or buy a PS4. its up to you.
If you use Skype, AOL, anything Google, anything Apple, anything Yahoo, anything Facebook... its all going in.
Sony has almost the exact same boilerplate on their console EULA. In fact some of their stuff is downright frightening if you let things like this bother you:
http://www.sonyentertainmentnetwork.com/privacy-policy/
http://www.scei.co.jp/ps3-eula/ps3_eula_en.html
I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo did too.
This, just like the legal clauses protecting corporations from class action lawsuits, is just the way of the world, and railing on one company for doing it without making similar noise about the guys you preordered a console from, despite them tracking your physical location with the vita and reserving the right to monitor everything you say and do on their services, and use whatever security software and tools as they see fit to monitor activity on their network...
I mean, you have to see why picking on Microsoft alone looks silly to me.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Symtex, you really need to calm down. Maybe you think you're the Last Man That Likes The Xbox One in the thread or something, but yeah. These responses don't really lead to further meaningful discussion about the subject at hand... they know they don't have to buy the device.
Yes, but why? There's no good reason for that if you have the thing paid for; credit cards are for paying for things, not collateral to prove I've got the finances to maintain a paid-for Live subscription. Well, no good reason for the consumer, anyway.
An old issue, granted, but it certainly does jive with Microsoft's fresh turn into batshit insanity for trying to control what consumers can do. Annoying, but it finally makes some sense.
Yeah, but no one has made an ONLINE TV that only works when it's connected to wifi and it's smart TV features are enabled. I wonder why?
Zero people are complaining about the XBO's ability to to connect to the internet so I was just wondering why you thought that your TV connecting to the internet would be relevant.
And again, if the XBO is actually the first bit of consumer electronics that actually disables itself when it isn't connected, that might be interesting, no?
[edit] no one tried to make a music player that always phoned home? Seems like an idea someone would have had.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
I think the main point of contention is that it doesn't necessarily have to be. There is usually a very large gap between "always online" and "online when I choose to be". For every use case I've seen so far, always online has been used a restriction - not a benefit. This is partly what colors people's perceptions of the device. The other issue is that "online when I choose to be" often covers every benefit to be gained by the cloud, without actually negatively impairing the user experience in the event of a mishap, or if you're in the military. I think Microsoft went too far on this front. A decent compromise would be if you physically have the disk on hand, the XBOX should be able to play that game. Any digital media that you download can be subject to the connectivity policy.
That would be a fair policy that would give consumers choices when purchasing content without alienating anyone. I do hope that they adopt something similar to this in the future.
I don't mean to be rude. Its only the same fear mongering useless argument :
First person : Xbox one cannot be play in Poland !!1 It sucks
2nd person : Do you ever plan to go to Poland ?
First person : no
2nd person : so why do you care ?
First person : In case I want too.
Look at the previous post. Its all about Microsoft hates the military. Is Blizzard also hating the military because they cannot play World Of Warcraft?
If the NSA wants to listen to you, I promise you, they are going to listen to you regardless of whether or not you have a Kinect in your house.
It's what I've been claiming for two topics now. If you've misunderstood, you understand now.
It's pretty simple. Some people don't always want to be connected and accessible 24/7. If you do, great. That's a valid opinion. Not everyone shares your point of view though.
What 'always-on' benefits does the Xbox One offer that you can't get with a console where online is optional? Other consoles have cloud features, digital distribution, online play, social features, media features, etc, without the same restrictions.
Yea, you can actually get (temporarily?) banned from Live if you let your credit card account expire and don't update the details while it's active too... it happened to somebody on the forums, I forget who. That's not common to Microsoft either... I vaguely recall some people who ate bans on their WoW account for not keeping that up to date and then when it charges there's a rejection. It sucks and it's kinda knee-jerk dumb, but we do kind of agree to that term when we sign up.
No, I've not misunderstood you. I've read what you wrote: It's about 3 posts up from this one.
Which is insane and not at all in line with the PRISM program or the Verizon phone metadata stories you keep referencing when bringing this up. None of the recent leaks support this kind of recording being done.
Now metadata? Yeah, MS likely records that. So does every single other tech company out there. Google's entire business model is based on recording all your metadata and selling it to people.
The console has been market and design that way. It not because they have something against the military. They have internet there too you know. I don't think they went too far. They are trying to move the industry forward.Not everyone is ready for it and that might be why there is a push back. This is 2001 all over again. (Original Xbox)
Wow. After all these pages.
Just Wow.
[oh shit. that pun was 100% unintended but I'll leave it.]
I can't believe we are basically back to comparing Sim City to WoW.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
This is literally, without hyperbole, the 4th time I'm telling you this, verbatim, word for word:
"That one product violates my privacy does not mean I will welcome an always online, always connected camera into my home with open arms."
And complaining about microsoft in a microsoft thread isn't silly, it's on topic. Now then, you don't ever have to bring up that my privacy is violated ever again.
Not to be snide, but are you suggesting that Polish people do not have a legitimate right to be upset if the console doesn't work in their country? I personally, do not plan on traveling to Poland anytime soon, but I think for anyone currently living in Poland the matter is of some importance.
But there's no argument there is there? I think we can both agree if you don't want something you won't buy it. That's my point, Microsoft have clearly said you need to be online with this, so you're not going to forced into it, you have a choice. My earlier point still stands as anecdotally I don't know anyone who stayed offline with their Wii, Xbox 360 or PS3 due to privacy concerns.
Unless you're afraid MS snuck a battery backup in there I really do not understand why you have a problem with this
I'm sorry but I don't see anywhere that it says Microsoft hates the military? Alienate =/= hate.
No one is "fear mongering" we are bringing up a legitimate concern that this is the first device where if you cannot connect to the internet, you cannot use it. I would hate to think that if for some reason I could not connect to the internet, some of my other devices would stop working. I have a very reliable internet connection right now but I would hate to take the chance that if it did go down for some reason, none of my stuff would work.
PSN: rlinkmanl
They are trying to push the industry forward in the same way a man can try to push a sheep through a fence.
There are very real barriers to the sheep moving forward at this time, and if the man keeps pushing all he's going to get for his trouble is sheep crap on his hand.
That is a terrible analogy. Blizzard doesn't kick you from the servers if you try to play in Iraq.
v1: This, after all is what we fought the Console War for.
v2: What? Are they all Poles?
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
You can have the game install and run completely off the hard drive. I can share my game with 10 friends and I can give 1 games (digital or physical) to a friend. The later part has never been on any digital distribution system. I think that's alone is worth it.
the bet they're making is that allowing a baseline expectation of available online resources will open up developers to create experiences that are so good that it's worth losing the customers who can't or won't go online, even for single-player experiences.
and it won't be at first, for certain. the current model of development of AAA titles is lowest common denominator multiplatform.
but who knows, five years out, if this will end up paying off. i think they're playing a long game here.
Even if I don't have to have the camera rolling when my game is off, it sure as hell will be rolling when any game is on. I mean, you're making a great argument for me as to why I should never turn an xbox one on to begin with. Which is sort of my point.
to be fair, almost every console in history has had a staggered release. it sucked, i guess, that japan got their ps vita before me, but it's not exactly an insult to all americans or something.
How is it anything like the original Xbox? The original didn't have significant restrictions not seen on the competition. It was a great system that my friends and I got plenty of entertainment from. Same with the 360.
You have to understand, just because you want this sort of thing and are capable of using it, that doesn't mean the same goes for everyone else. There are a lot of people who had 360s who just wanted to be able to play some next-gen Xbox games, who literally won't be able to. There are also a lot of people who don't want things to go this way at this time.
Honestly, MS may have actually been better off if they had just made the Xbox One 100% digital with no physical media option, and been much clearer with their messaging. Yes, they would have lost a chunk of consumers (probably including myself), but there probably would have been less backlash and vitriol.
With 'moving the industry to all digital', I'll refer to the old adage; "Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should". Not every change is progress.