[chez17]

>On a more serious note, I don't like this rollback. It only goes to show how the witchhunt and echo chamber on Reddit worked.

It seems like you haven't considered that the echo chamber is right on this one. DRM is a cancer on the industry and every attempt to fight it back is worth it. You make points that the DRM could lead to potential benefits, no one is disputing that. Simply put, with the way it was, I was never going to buy an Xbox, now I might consider it. I can't stand the trend these days where the consumer owns nothing and controls nothing. This is capitalism at work, nothing else. It seems like a win for consumer rights and a win for Microsoft. Your post seems like a reactionary post lambasting the reactionary posts on reddit.

[zamalek]

In certain cases the "landscape" of a feature means that what we would see as DRM is simply just a part of that feature. Steam is effectively a DRM platform, but the convenience of my games being backed up for me (and being able to transfer those games across machines when e.g. upgrading) means that the DRM becomes a feature that actually helps me (a good example of DRM being a feature is MMOs). I guess that's where I draw the line - some types of DRM protect the rights of both the consumer and the developer.

Let me put it to you this way, if I were to ever buy a console, I might have considered the XBox One. Microsoft has a history of being partly a benefactor (especially with the 360 and XNA); and things can be changed and improved over time (just like Steam was). We might not have liked the first iteration of the DRM, but it could have been changed (require both devices to be connected to the internet when changing ownership? The horde would have still torn them apart for that).