Just in case there were some who still felt the hatred towards the XBONE was unwarrented...

[Something Amyss]

"If you want backwards compatibility, you are backwards"

Yeah, this is a much bigger deal than the UELA, both because of the practice and the borderline hostility of the company. Even companies like Wal-Mart PRETEND to give a shit about the customer.

 

[Easton Dark]

Spoiler: This is the most embarrassing thread I've seen in awhile

I prefer to herald fact and understanding over rumor and bias...

ten of my friends, at one time. Do that with a disc...

ten of my friends, at one time. Do that with a disc...

Microsoft has been clear as mud about this but I was under the impression that the game could only be shared to one person at a time?

From this article Here

''The only limitation, it seems, is that only one person can be playing the shared copy of a single game at any given time.''

no you've got it. Still cant do that with a disc. Unless you're roomates or something.

I dunno about you but I'm gonna be hard pressed to come up with 10 people I would even share my library with,

FM5 can be played beyond the 24 hours, even if the console is not online. Straight from the dev.

Bullshit it can.

It says right on the xbone's website that after 24 hours without a connection, the console can only be used to watch tv or Blu-ray/DVD films.

I don't think Forza is a film or television program, do you?

When the devs are talking about an 'offline mode', they're probably meaning that you can play the game without it being connected to the cloud.

Well, being that I only lurked these forums until people got all crazy biased,

OT:

This is becoming the standard for EULAs, I'm not surprised. I'm more concerned about how anti-consumer their representatives have been being lately.

 

[lacktheknack]

I suppose you've forgotten the mess that went down when Valve and Sony did the same thing?

It subsided, because people realized that EULAs are not that powerful.

 

[ghostrider9876]

Damn jago sounds like a fanboy

or maybe just someone who's not paranoid, and understands that DRM probably not going anywhere, and that this DRM isnt really any worse than he gets all the time anyway.

You just registered yesterday and in that time have done a large amount of posting to the tune of "XBone will be awesome and you're wrong if you disagree," you change the wording emphasis in your arguments to create a moving target when someone challenges your position, you make statements in support of the XBone which are not supported by facts, you ignore/fail to respond to opposing statements which ARE backed up by facts, and opinions that don't match yours are labeled biased and paranoid.

But you're not a fanboy, right?

 

[clippen05]

I'm pretty sure Steam has this and so does Origin... Regardless, I don't hate the xbox one, I just think that I've moved away from console gaming, dislike motion control, dislike always-on spying kinect, and don't like paying for online. I guess you could say that's why I don't plan on purchasing one.

 

[FalloutJack]

This is standard in most user agreements now. Sony has a similar clause in their user agreement.

So, you get a million individual cases instead. That actually spreads your legal department over too thin to actually handle them. There's no manpower to handle it. A mob doesn't have to be organized to still be a mob.

 

[thanatos388]

The Supreme Court has already held that class-action waivers are legal [http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/04/scotus-rules-att-can-force-arbitration-block-class-action-suits/]. That ruling trumps any jurisdiction in the US.

Ah, well in the EU we don't let corporations fuck over their customers.

Of course I doubt anyone outside the US would be buying an xbone. We have to pay more, even when half of the advertised features are US only.

You fucking serious? That's some major bullshit on Microsoft's part.

 

[Genocidicles]

You fucking serious? That's some major bullshit on Microsoft's part.

Yup. Practically everything related to the tv features that Microsoft wouldn't shut up about is only for the US, with us non American plebs maybe getting them at a later date if we're lucky.

And if we do get them? It won't just be like an update for the console or something we have to download. No, We have to buy a physical add on and hook it up to the xbone.

 

[Vylox]

lol yes, it IS THE SAME... FM5 dev stated so in an interview. FM5 has same capability offline.

The console doesn't have an offline capacity for more than 24 hours though. So good luck playing your 'offline' game on a console that needs to be online.

Not sure how I can make this more clear for you. And still you cannot provide me with one thing that will be different about owning each game, aside from being easier to share.

Well with FM4, it's yours for as long you can look after the disc and your console. Whereas with FM5, Microsoft can just take it away from you because they longer want to support the xbone.

Wrong.

FM5 can be played beyond the 24 hours, even if the console is not online. Straight from the dev. There is no difference. And seeing as how you're wrong on this one, and have failed to give me another, I'm going to accept that as your concession that you can't make an argument that owning FM5 has less rights than owning FM4. Invalidating your argument that ownership rights are tossed by buying that game.

Absolutely incorrect. Straight from the console developers, as in Microsoft, without that constant 24h check-in, you CANNOT play any games on your XBoxOne, until it has completed it's login check with MS's servers.
Just as, if your turn off the Kinect, your XBox one itself will be turned off (they are linked)
Just as, you will no longer actually own a physical copy of FM5, so if your HDisk fails, or your data gets corrupted, you can not play. However with FM4, if your data fails or is corrupted or your 360's HD fails, you can still play the game,
Hwever, you are missing the broader aspect, and continuing to see things from a small window. Its not about how owning a copy if a game vs having access to the data (b/c that's the situation, you own FM4, you will only have permission and access to FM5), its actually about other things. But, I won't bother to enlighten you, feel free to go n and keep enjoying the same game with a different number on the end of it, because you have already failed at being intelligent, just by virtue of the fact that you are comparing 2 games that are essentially identical to each other in the first place, just a few superficial changes. God I hope your also not one of those Madden or CoD or Halo fans, b/c they get an even worse stick.

Did I miss anything ¿
Oh yea..
OT
This kind of thing has been around for a long time, some if the more recent games for the SNES and Genesis had those clauses in the EULA, its fine actually... its a corperate protection against class action suits which can be particularly devastating to a company as they would have to pay not only those listed within the class-action group, but every purchaser. Individual litigation is much easier for companies to handle, are a lot quicker, and generally don't reach court-rooms where judges and juries can issue enormous sums of awards to either party.

 

[Vylox]

This is standard in most user agreements now. Sony has a similar clause in their user agreement.

So, you get a million individual cases instead. That actually spreads your legal department over too thin to actually handle them. There's no manpower to handle it. A mob doesn't have to be organized to still be a mob.

Ahh, but its easier to handle individuals than a mob. With the preventing of class-action suits, they can just toss a few bucks at the guy during them and sweep it under the rug, instead of having to give a few bucks to every single person who has made the same purchase. Plus individual cases can be handled without lawyers, class actions always have to use them. Dusts down on legal costs in the long-run

 

[FalloutJack]

This is standard in most user agreements now. Sony has a similar clause in their user agreement.

So, you get a million individual cases instead. That actually spreads your legal department over too thin to actually handle them. There's no manpower to handle it. A mob doesn't have to be organized to still be a mob.

Ahh, but its easier to handle individuals than a mob. With the preventing of class-action suits, they can just toss a few bucks at the guy during them and sweep it under the rug, instead of having to give a few bucks to every single person who has made the same purchase. Plus individual cases can be handled without lawyers, class actions always have to use them. Dusts down on legal costs in the long-run

What you're saying is a bit confusing to me. It sounds like 'Microsoft still has to settle every single person's grievance', which is the point. People who are wronged and demand satisfaction get what they want. The idea is that making it not class-action takes much longer (as long as individuals are complaining, which is long) and still has them take a loss, but now they have to pay more people TO pay off the people who are angry, and it is - as I would define it - a clusterfuck if say a million people (just as an example) don't like what they got. It solves nothing, no buds actually nipped at all, and makes them look dishonest because their product is dishonest.

 

[Vylox]

This is standard in most user agreements now. Sony has a similar clause in their user agreement.

So, you get a million individual cases instead. That actually spreads your legal department over too thin to actually handle them. There's no manpower to handle it. A mob doesn't have to be organized to still be a mob.

Ahh, but its easier to handle individuals than a mob. With the preventing of class-action suits, they can just toss a few bucks at the guy during them and sweep it under the rug, instead of having to give a few bucks to every single person who has made the same purchase. Plus individual cases can be handled without lawyers, class actions always have to use them. Dusts down on legal costs in the long-run

What you're saying is a bit confusing to me. It sounds like 'Microsoft still has to settle every single person's grievance', which is the point. People who are wronged and demand satisfaction get what they want. The idea is that making it not class-action takes much longer (as long as individuals are complaining, which is long) and still has them take a loss, but now they have to pay more people TO pay off the people who are angry, and it is - as I would define it - a clusterfuck if say a million people (just as an example) don't like what they got. It solves nothing, no buds actually nipped at all, and makes them look dishonest because their product is dishonest.

With it being individual suits instead of a full class action, they only have to pay those that actually sue or complain, instead of every single person who purchased the product. Its not that they aren't paying either way, its about who they "have" to pay. A class action suit would mean that instead of only paying those who complain, they have to compensate every single person who had ever purchased the product. Ever. So if 10 million people bought the XBox One, and 400 people filed a class action, Microsoft would be forced to pay-out to the 10 million people who purchased the system, and not just the 400 listed as claimants. With the EULA injunction against class action suits, they only have to deal with those that actually complain or file against them. Its much cheaper and considerably faster to handle, and doesn't require a whole team of lawyers and other people. It can be handled easily... assign 1 person on staff to just toss checks to those that file suit, and move on, instead of having to pay everyone who purchased the system.
It makes a huge difference.

 

[ATRAYA]

Here in Canada, there is no legal document known to man that can waive your rights as a consumer. So... yeah. Good luck with that, USA.

 

[FalloutJack]

zoop

I know those are just example figures and all, but aren't you being just a little optimistic there? This might be a good example for people complaining about Windows 8, because the camps are more evenly divided there, but this one... I don't think the Xbone's gonna be quite so well-received. The response to Windows 8 ranges from lukewarm to irritated sprinkled with varying flecks of outright hate. The more I hear about the Xbone, the more I think that that division is in severe danger. Now, the Escapist doesn't speak for the whole internet, but in the gaming community, it's a pretty good slice and possibly a good example by microcosm. From it, plus any outside sources I hear from, I feel that we're getting a fair picture, an it isn't pretty. Perhaps in other cases, Microsoft might do fine. This one's going to hurt really bad if they don't do something, like a total 180 on their policies. They've alienated whole countries of gamers, anyone whose net connection is not pristine, and more. You might have a point for other occasions, but I think it's still a useless thing for the ones that really matter.

 

[Vylox]

zoop

I know those are just example figures and all, but aren't you being just a little optimistic there? This might be a good example for people complaining about Windows 8, because the camps are more evenly divided there, but this one... I don't think the Xbone's gonna be quite so well-received. The response to Windows 8 ranges from lukewarm to irritated sprinkled with varying flecks of outright hate. The more I hear about the Xbone, the more I think that that division is in severe danger. Now, the Escapist doesn't speak for the whole internet, but in the gaming community, it's a pretty good slice and possibly a good example by microcosm. From it, plus any outside sources I hear from, I feel that we're getting a fair picture, an it isn't pretty. Perhaps in other cases, Microsoft might do fine. This one's going to hurt really bad if they don't do something, like a total 180 on their policies. They've alienated whole countries of gamers, anyone whose net connection is not pristine, and more. You might have a point for other occasions, but I think it's still a useless thing for the ones that really matter.

I just used some example numbers true, but it illustrates the point for the waiver.
Ican't really speak for windows 8, except that the folx I know who have purchased systems with it have either downgraded or returned the system. So they are taking a hit there, however, they have so many handshake deals with other companies that it doesn't make enough difference.
I myself have moved on from windows based systems and pretty much use android (more specifically Linux based systems) and I suggest Linux systems to everyone anyhow.

I am also aware that this site provides a very good representation of the gamers around the world instead of what others would consider a small selection of them.

These clauses are fairly common in the US, and have been around since the 1980s, maybe even earlier. It won't stop a person from filing a complaint or sueing, just stops a class action. In the larger scheme of things and within businesses, it really doesn't do a whole lot.

 

[Amir Kondori]

XBox-One User Agreement Includes waiving your rights to class action lawsuits against Microsoft [http://www.ibtimes.com/xbox-one-users-must-waive-right-class-action-suits-against-microsoft-experts-weigh-1306797#]

Have at it internet...

While I think the Xbone is terrible in multiple respects this clause is the fault of the US judicial system, which ruled several years ago that such clauses were enforceable, an opinion many lawmakers and citizens feel is not correct. So now just about all large service providers include such clauses. Valve has the same thing, and I am a huge fan of Steam.

If you REALLY want something to get mad about, how about the fact that a Microsoft rep on twitter said that if your Xbox Live account gets banned you lose access to all your games?

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

I don't forsee an incident where Microsoft will directly impact my life enough to warrant a class action lawsuit.
I'm not the type of person to sue for buying something and finding out it isn't what I wanted. And I doubt they're making a product that will harm, maim or kill me or my family.
Funny, it seems as if the OP has an agenda. "Here's something to hate about XBone." There's legit reasons to hate, and there's reaching. This is reaching since a lot of folks, Sony included do this already.

 

[FoolKiller]

...Of course I doubt anyone outside the US would be buying an xbone...

Do you understand just how right you are [http://www.gamespot.com/twitter-battle/xbox-vs-ps4/]?

Apparently not too many in the US want one either.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Pretty typical fare.
Everyone (even the oh-so-beloved Steam) does that.

On one hand, Class action suits rarely result in anyone benefiting except the lawyer, on the other hand, binding arbitration only works when the arbiter is unbias. And you can imagine how unbias the arbiter will be when Microsoft (or whoever made the EULA) is also the entity who picks and pays the arbiter.

In short: Unless the EULA holder flagrantly breaks the law* vs the user(like with fraud), the user is legally at their mercy.

(*fat chance; even if the company willfully breaks the law for profit, they can and will just pin it on an individual within the company)