Support NeoGAF

[Steel]

This is the worrying part. I am sure the DRM thing will be rectified by launch. But thats not what is causing some people to freak out.

Currently a 360 ban means you can still play your games offline. All your discs etc function fine. With a X1 does that change?

The thread says: None of the above. Pennello basically said that the DRM is not in the OS and the Day 1 update doesn't remove it because it's not there, but the console ships without a full functional OS, so you need the update to do anything. The current patches being sent out have a limited life so that all testers only use a patch until the next one comes out and they're testing the latest build. A new patch came out that's 700 MB for testers, and banned console guy can't get that update, so his console is bricked until unbanned. Granted Albert didn't finish checking with the programmers before he said all of this.

Whether or not we should be concerned that 12 days before launch they're still adding 700 mb updates, I dunno, but that appears to be where we stand.

 

[EventHorizon]

My understanding is that it caches and doesn't permanently install.

I remember this being brought up and I have no idea what the final consensus was but I have a hard time believing that the PS4 would have a one game cache. If it uses a cache method then I would expect that the PS4 would cache something like your last 5-10 games used. It'd be stupid to automatically erase your last installed game simply because you put a different disk in the drive. Instead when you play a new disk, the OS would zap your least recently used install and use its space for the new game.

 

[0xCA2]

.

 

[soul creator]

Ok, but thats not really the question people have or are freaking about.

The guy with a retail unit early has said that he can't do anything with his system SP or MP due to his console being banned. No options menu access, no dashboard, no single player....

The question is can Microsoft remotely disable hardware? (Not just ban you from LIVE, but turn your $500 piece of sexy console hardware into a non-working paper weight because of X).

Every company that manufactures an internet enabled device can "remote disable hardware". The whole point of automatic firmware updates is to be able to change hardware features remotely, so yes, a company can hypothetically do so.

Of course, whether a company actually does that on a product that has been officially released to consumers is a different story. There's pretty much no motivation to do so, unless it's an OtherOS situation I guess.

 

[GANGSTERKILLER]

Because the Day 1 update give the device its OS.

Without the day one update there is no OS at all? And therefore you can't play offline games right out of the gate?

So without a internet connection you buying a brick on November 22.

How can you sell a product in this state? That's crazy.

 

[Garrett 2U]

Without the day one update there is no OS at all? And therefore you can't play offline games right out of the gate?

So without a internet connection you buying a brick on November 22.

How can you sell a product in this state? That's crazy.

We've known about a mandatory day one update since a few weeks after the announcement of the console.

 

[FuturusX]

We've known about a mandatory day one update since a few weeks after the announcement of the console.

Known or not is not the question. The question is why would MS invite the scrutiny in shipping a product that doesn't function at all....without an update,

The perception is not a good one.

 

[hoos30]

Is there a thread wide summary or are you the guy who expected everyone to read 1000's of posts? What other console shipped without the ability to play physical game?

The OP is a good start...it's been updated twice and even has a funny ass joke.

Many devices these days (phones, tablets, set top boxes) are required to phone home before activation. Only on a video game forum do we pretend that it is a sign of the Apocalypse.

 

[iammeiam]

Without the day one update there is no OS at all? And therefore you can't play offline games right out of the gate?

So without a internet connection you buying a brick on November 22.

How can you sell a product in this state? That's crazy.

It's bizarre, but kind of makes sense in context of all the 180 flip-flopping that went on. Not that long ago. The OS that was originally supposed to go on these things made them useless without the Internet, and a few months before launch they 180'd and totally changed how the OS was going to function. Given that the original, DRM-infused OS was likely targeting a November launch, it's not shocking to think they wouldn't have been able to strip out DRM in time for the initial production runs so they just slap a stub on there.

It's a shitty situation, but I imagine their choices were this or push back launch, and they've been pretty open about repeatedly stating you need the Internet for day one functionality. Dumb, but understandable.

 

[GANGSTERKILLER]

We've known about a mandatory day one update since a few weeks after the announcement of the console.

Yeah, I know that. But what I didn't know is that you can't do anything with the console console without the day one update. Even not playing your games offline.

Believe it or not, but there are still people without a internet connection.

 

[Nori Chan]

Has nothing come out for this as of last night?

 

[Barzul]

Where did this 700MB patch info come from?

 

[Ludicrous Speed]

Yeah, I know that. But what I didn't know is that you can't do anything with the console console without the day one update. Even not playing your games offline.

Believe it or not, but there are still people without a internet connection.

It's a mandatory install, not optional

 

[Moneal]

Known or not is not the question. The question is why would MS invite the scrutiny in shipping a priduct that doesn't function at all....without an update,

The perception is not a good one.

they had no choice. they were building a completely different system than what they are releasing now. they had to construct an OS almost from scratch in about 4 months.

 

[SeaOfMadness]

Has nothing come out for this as of last night?

people are still determined to make this non-story into a story I guess.

 

[ironcreed]

I knew it had to be due to the guy having the system two weeks early and not having the required updates. Good news.

 

[Moneal]

The OP is a good start...it's been updated twice and even has a funny ass joke.

Many devices these days (phones, tablets, set top boxes) are required to phone home before activation. Only on a video game forum do we pretend that it is a sign of the Apocalypse.

can you name one other video game console that needs to "phone home" before playing games offline?

only the xbox one. ps4 doesn't, wii u doesn't, ps3 didn't, 360 didn't, wii didn't.

 

[FuturusX]

they had no choice. they were building a completely different system than what they are releasing now. they had to construct an OS almost from scratch in about 4 months.

Please cite a source for that info. Or we'll have to file it under wild speculation.

 

[Steel]

Where did this 700MB patch info come from?

Apparently one of the other people who got an xbox early(But did not get banned?) saw it. Also Albert himself mentioned getting a new update the same day so...

Has nothing come out for this as of last night?

Other than the updated summary in the OP? Yeah pretty much nothing but a bit more from Albert that he couldn't fully confirm with the programmers because they weren't contactable on sunday at 11 pm.

 

[Moneal]

Please site a source for that info. Or we'll have to file it under wild speculation.

any gaming site on the net. the os was designed around having an internet connection at least 24 hrs. they only decided to change that after e3.

 

[jond76]

Hmmm. Seems like the thread title needs an update, otherwise its purposely spreading misinformation.

 

[WAR recon zero]

People is defending this?

 

[Steel]

Hmmm. Seems like the thread title needs an update, otherwise its purposely spreading misinformation.

To be fair, Bish stopped by and decided not to do so. But yeah.

 

[SeaOfMadness]

People is defending this?

in this case, its justified. Read the OP.

 

[FuturusX]

any gaming site on the net. the os was designed around having an internet connection at least 24 hrs. they only decided to change that after e3.

Unless you are privy to the development process, which you are clearly not, the 24 hour DRM change did not necessarily require a complete overhaul of the software. Perhaps it did or maybe the change was arbitrary. You have no idea the work that was required to make the change. So stop speculating.

 

[Walshicus]

People is defending this?

Do you even know what's going on?

 

[tfur]

Without the day one update there is no OS at all? And therefore you can't play offline games right out of the gate?

So without a internet connection you buying a brick on November 22.

How can you sell a product in this state? That's crazy.

Do we have any other precedents where a console or consumer electronic device is shipped to the consumer in a bricked state? I can't think of any at this moment.

 

[MIlky1985]

Known or not is not the question. The question is why would MS invite the scrutiny in shipping a product that doesn't function at all....without an update,

The perception is not a good one.

I mentioned this before in another thread but its actually worse imo, as its not just a perception thing but it could be bad legally. Sales of Goods act in the UK says that the goods sold must be fit for purpose.

A console that out of the box cannot play games could be seen as not fit for purpose, and as such can not be sold. It doesn't matter about the update, its all about how it is when you purchased the item. Be interesting to work retail and have to deal with the returns desk over the next few weeks.

They might get in some issues with the initial shipment in the UK.

[EDIT] The funny thing is that you can see MS'es reason for banning the guy who had the Xbox one. They didn't want him posting stuff about the state of the console that might give them bad press, so they ban him till launch, seems fair, make sure he doesn't brick his console with a dodgy update and cause bad news to get out.

Its the ban that triggered the game not working , regardless of what the actual reason is (if its OS then the ban stopped it from being updated etc) ... which has given them a lot of bad press!

 

[SeaOfMadness]

I mentioned this before in another thread but its actually worse imo, as its not just a perception thing but it could be bad legally. Sales of Goods act in the UK says that the goods sold must be fit for purpose.

A console that out of the box cannot play games could be seen as not fit for purpose, and as such can not be sold. It doesn't matter about the update, its all about how it is when you purchased the item. Be interesting to work retail and have to deal with the returns desk over the next few weeks.

They might get in some issues with the initial shipment in the UK.

I'm thinking MS knows a thing or two about selling things in retail and has already worked this out.

 

[Stone Ocean]

Wait, correct me if I'm wrong, but basically beyond the update that makes the console work another update is necessary to run it fully offline? That it?

 

[MIlky1985]

I'm thinking MS knows a thing or two about selling things in retail and has already worked this out.

I'm thinking this is new ground for them, as i've worked electronics retail and can't think of anything that has been sold before that does not work out of the box

Well anything that's not faulty anyway, there were a couple of USB missile launchers that didn't launch that obviously we refunded. We saved them from the bin and fixed them up and fired them around the office

I've heard a few things in the past about MS having some blind spots when it comes to regulations and laws!

 

[iammeiam]

Wait, correct me if I'm wrong, but basically beyond the update that makes the console work another update is necessary to run it fully offline? That it?

On November 22nd, everyone with an Xbone will need to download a Day 1 patch. This will make the console work, and should enable offline play from then on according to Penello.

The things people with early consoles are downloading now are not the Day One patch, they're pre-release patches which apparently expire (or something). Since this guy's banned right now, he can't get the new patch and his old one has expired so he's SOL for the moment. The update he downloaded will never be seen by people who get the console on launch because it's not really the day one patch.

 

[oneida]

Wait, correct me if I'm wrong, but basically beyond the update that makes the console work another update is necessary to run it fully offline? That it?

no, the day one update has no more to do with playing games offline than it does playing games at all. it was never about pre-180 policy and instead is about patching an incomplete OS on a console that hasn't yet launched.

 

[todahawk]

We've known about a mandatory day one update since a few weeks after the announcement of the console.

There's a bit of a difference between a day 1 mandatory update and buying a console that essentially doesn't have a functional OS out of the box.

 

[Steel]

There's a bit of a difference between a day 1 mandatory update and buying a console that essentially doesn't have a functional OS out of the box.

The difference is semantics. It's effectively the same thing. Only thing to be concerned about here is that they're still making major changes 11 days before launch.

Edit: And maybe Cboat's post, which still is a bit of a mystery.

 

[Alec]

So the implications are that this could be a real scenario:

1) Microsoft bans your console for whatever reason.
2) Publisher requires an online connection for single player on particular game.
3) You can't play your single player game offline because you are banned from Live.

Granted, this scenario is not Microsoft's fault...but it should be Microsoft's responsibility to ensure that this scenario can never happen. It should be a mandate, in the same way that achievements are mandated.

Thread blew up so I scanned as much as I could, my apologies if this has already been covered.

 

[Goodacre0081]

we're two weeks from launch, isn't this going to be happening at an increasing rate when street dates are broken? if MS banned this guy fro playing early, how many more bans are we going to see before Nov22nd?

if this happened on a mass scale, MS would really have a shit storm on their hands

 

[Steel]

So the implications are that this could be a real scenario:

1) Microsoft bans your console for whatever reason.
2) Publisher requires an online connection for single player on particular game.
3) You can't play your single player game offline because you are banned from Live.

Granted, this scenario is not Microsoft's fault...but it should be Microsoft's responsibility to ensure that this scenario can never happen. It should be a mandate, in the same way that achievements are mandated.

Thread blew up so I scanned as much as I could, my apologies if this has already been covered.

Check the OP and Albert pennello's response. The ban was not the direct cause of the issue, it was the fact he couldn't download a new pre-release patch and his old pre-release patch expired.

 

[oneida]

we're two weeks from launch, isn't this going to be happening at an increasing rate when street dates are broken? if MS banned this guy fro playing early, how many more bans are we going to see before Nov22nd?

if this happened on a mass scale, MS would really have a shit storm on their hands

It has already been stated that this is not a result of the ban.

 

[todahawk]

The difference is semantics. It's effectively the same thing. Only thing to be concerned about here is that they're still making major changes 11 days before launch.

If the day 1 mandatory included things like a music player, Netflix, etc, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

But no argument there, I'm just beside myself that 11 days out and we're hearing stuff like this from Albert.

I have a feeling some consumer (or group [i.e. class action lawyers]) is going to take MS to task on this. As litigious as the US is, I'll be surprised if it doesn't happen. I'm not saying it's right or wrong (the legal action part) but I think it's gonna happen.

 

[imt558]

The thread says: None of the above. Pennello basically said that the DRM is not in the OS and the Day 1 update doesn't remove it because it's not there, but the console ships without a full functional OS, so you need the update to do anything. The current patches being sent out have a limited life so that all testers only use a patch until the next one comes out and they're testing the latest build. A new patch came out that's 700 MB for testers, and banned console guy can't get that update, so his console is bricked until unbanned. Granted Albert didn't finish checking with the programmers before he said all of this.

Whether or not we should be concerned that 12 days before launch they're still adding 700 mb updates, I dunno, but that appears to be where we stand.

So, why Microsoft told us a few months ago that will be a Day One patch that removes DRM? There was no word before about it will be a patch for installing OS. Suddenly : Hey, it's a Day One update for downloading the XO OS! Fuc* yeah!

 

[Alec]

Check the OP and Albert pennello's response. The ban was not the direct cause of the issue, it was the fact he couldn't download a new pre-release patch and his old pre-release patch expired.

Sorry, I was more referencing this part:

'Patches' are not going to be the thing that prohibits this potential behavior in the future.

 

[FaintColt388301]

we're two weeks from launch, isn't this going to be happening at an increasing rate when street dates are broken? if MS banned this guy fro playing early, how many more bans are we going to see before Nov22nd?

if this happened on a mass scale, MS would really have a shit storm on their hands

I'm not sure exactly but wasn't his ban just for posting a bunch of videos and whatnot? Would he have been banned had he kept it to himself?

 

[Walshicus]

So, why Microsoft told us a few months ago that will be a Day One patch that removes DRM? There was no word before about it will be a patch for installing OS. Suddenly : Hey, it's a Day One update for downloading the XO OS! Fuc* yeah!

They didn't say that, I'm pretty sure. They said your launch machine would need to download a patch but after that could function offline, which is exactly what is happening.

So it's: "You can play offline but you still need to download a launch patch"
Rather than: "The launch patch is required to play offline"

And the two aren't the same thing. The patch doesn't remove anything, it's a prerequisite for usage.

 

[Steel]

So, why Microsoft told us a few months ago that will be a Day One patch that removes DRM? There was no word before about it will be a patch for installing OS. Suddenly : Hey, it's a Day One update for downloading the XO OS! Fuc* yeah!

Yeah, well, that's the official line now anyway. *shrug*

Sorry, I was more referencing this part:



'Patches' are not going to be the thing that prohibits this potential behavior in the future.

I think CBoat was referring to DRM on a game to game basis and not the ban itself. Then again, that can easily be interpreted differently, so who knows.

 

[iammeiam]

They didn't say that, I'm pretty sure. They said your launch machine would need to download a patch but after that could function offline, which is exactly what is happening.

So it's: "You can play offline but you still need to download a launch patch"
Rather than: "The launch patch is required to play offline"

And the two aren't the same thing. The patch doesn't remove anything, it's a prerequisite for usage.

I went and looked up 180 articles to be sure. Kotaku initially reported a DRM removal patch, but corrected with a note from Microsoft PR saying the download wasn't DRM removal but enabling features that wouldn't be in the box. which is turning out to be everything. But, yeah, MS has been consistent on it not being a DRM patch.

 

[Alec]

I think CBoat was referring to DRM on a game to game basis and not the ban itself.

Yes, I think so too. Which is why I said Microsoft should mandate that this can not happen, ever. =)

 

[oneida]

I went and looked up 180 articles to be sure. Kotaku initially reported a DRM removal patch, but corrected with a note from Microsoft PR saying the download wasn't DRM removal but enabling features that wouldn't be in the box. which is turning out to be everything. But, yeah, MS has been consistent on it not being a DRM patch.

good so let's stop returning to this notion every page. this is NOT some unpatched pre180 drm.

 

[jond76]

good so let's stop returning to this notion every page. this is NOT some unpatched pre180 drm.

Its the perfect example of people repeating bullshit so much that they end up believing it. Been happening a lot lately.

 

[Lunzio]

So I stopped looking at the thread after cboat first posted. Anything new?!