One thing some people don't realize, if you've sent in for repair, having the same hard drive won't make it the same XBox 360, if that isn't what happened here I can't say, I know i've played offline and seen only the titles assigned to other XBox 360s revert (after I transferred they didn't do it anymore). Most people who have your complaint, however, can resolve it by visiting the link I posted.

I'm interested to see the Wii2 and the Mario game for the 3DS. I hope to see more of Battlefield 3, Max Payne 3, and Twisted Metal. Aside from that I look forward to any surprises.

I'm not sure what you're counting as activation here, downloading the game from MS doesn't count as activation to me anymore than downloading a game from my GOG account does (though in the former case, there IS DRM, just not activation). Certainly the XBox 360 version of Bioshock doesn't ever need to connect to an outside server to be played which cannot be said for the PC version at launch. As for Steam, I think we've discussed the flakiness of Offline Mode many times on here, I obviously have no personal experience with it, but I feel safe in assuming you do have to contact Steam again to both play on another machine or even on the same machine should your hardware change enough (I'm not sure how much).

I think I already discussed, disc DLC has no DRM on your XBox 360, none, zip, nada. You never have to put the DLC disc back in again, just the main game disc. If you download DLC it is locked to your machine just like Arcade titles, or Live will let you play it anywhere on another XBox 360 so long as you're logged in (like Steam).

If PC ever gets its act together and offers superior games again (and what RTS has come out that's worth a crap besides SC2 which, also, isn't worth a crap imo?) I'd be happy to buy PC games again, as it is I end up with worse DRM and no better gameplay if I buy PC. In addition I may have to mess with crap to get it to work right, something I'd be happy to do except, oh yeah, it's not better than the XBox 360 version (doesn't even cost less half the time now) and has worse DRM.

I am not talking about disc games, I am talking about DLC and downloaded games. They certainly do activate and tie a license to the machine you buy them on. When you attempt to play the games on a different machine it requires a constant internet connection.

Disc games do not have any inherent DRM you are right, but since DLC and patches are all tied to the Live service through accounts it's a sort of backdoor DRM. Like I said, how are you going to patch New Vegas in 20 years when Live is no longer supported on the 360 if it's even around at all? It will be pretty much impossible, meanwhile the PC version will be easy to patch and play no matter what.

You're not really addressing the core issue either, which is you being a hypocrite, to be blunt. It sounds like you're not that into PC gaming anymore and use DRM as a reason. You can't support DRM and account-based ownership on the Xbox and then bash Steam, it's complete hypocrisy. You can't come at me for buying DRM protected games when you do the same exact thing on another platform.

Not to be a prick or a pain to either of you guys. But what does this have to do with the title of the thread?

Maybe you two should either start a debate of your thoughts in a new thread or just PM each other.

Again just my thoughts and by no way I am jumping on you guys. Just maybe another thread would be better?

The only reason I criticized you was that you weren't okay with the DRM that you are paying for, thus sending the wrong message. I am indeed okay with the DRM on the XBox games I buy (well, not truly "okay", I find it tolerable). I am ideally against all DRM but in practice will tolerate some DRM implementations. I will not tolerate activation, Steam titles include activation, XBox games, even Arcade titles, do not contain what I consider to be activation (unless you consider needing to download the game to be activation). Ideally I wouldn't support any DRM at all, as it is I support the least onerous DRM, which happens to generally be console.

As for being able to play my games in the future, I can play the XBox games until my box is gone and there's no emulator. If the developer/publisher didn't see fit to provide a working game and it needs patch to even work and I can't find it online, I guess I'll be playing the same "liberated" copy you will be playing on whatever passes for my PC at the time.

I've always bashed activation, I don't see any difference between account based ownership and a CD key, ideally to the developer they mean one copy playing at a time (or per person), they pretty much are the same thing. I don't need permission from anyone to play either one. Steam games will always need Steam servers to say you get to play. Yes, you can treat Live stuff like Steam and move your stuff around, that is account based, but the game I bought isn't, I guess the account shit is a value add, Steam and Live could both exist as services, offer that as value add (as they both do now, using a session key generated off your account, or whatever) and neither have any kind activation DRM on the main copy. But right now, only Live doesn't have activation on that copy.

I like console gaming these days pretty much because consoles actually are getting a lot better and more pleasant year by year. Trying to play PC after that is like having sex with the ugly girl that you don't really like and has bad breath. The only thing I can think of that PC still has on consoles at this point is they haven't managed to completely destroy modding yet, though they seem to be trying hard to control or eliminate it (gee, thanks Blizz, score another one for you guys!).

How is it not an activation? I don't get what you are saying at all. Your purchases are tied to an account, just like Steam. The game ties itself to your current hardware, just like Steam. If you try playing it in the future on different hardware you have to ask for permission again, just like Steam. The only real difference is in Steam's favor, which is that on Xbox you have to be constantly online when playing on a different machine than your "home" machine.

On top of that the Xbox is a closed system, making piracy more difficult. So please, pleasssseeee, tell my why Steam is much worse? Why Xbox is acceptable and Steam is not? Because I really have no idea what you are talking about and you have given no satisfactory explanation.

So then the difference between my method and your method is... what? Nothing?

And that's your opinion. In my opinion PC gaming is still very much superior because of much better graphics, much better controls, mods and tweaks when available and perhaps most importantly because it is an open platform.

Besides that abortion, DA2, exactly which PC game has come out with better textures on PC lately? Better graphics is really pretty academic at this point (it should not be, but in practice it is). Can you apply more AA horsepower on PC? Maybe, if the engine supports it and it's needed.
Nothing, except in the meantime I don't support something I consider to be activation.

Also, recall, I was under the impression you were immediately crack the games after buying them, in order to play them. You said this was not the case in a later thread.
Okay, I get it, you can't see how it's not. It's basically a fancy CD key to me (again, it IS DRM to me). I don't consider it activation, which is why I buy some Arcade titles. If I did consider it activation, I assure you I would not buy any at all. Since the alternative to get said titles is normally Steam, which definitely includes activation, I'll support Live or just avoid the game.

As well, PC seems to be moving more and more towards client only DLC (I don't think Borderlands GOTY has actual DLC content included, just codes to download it - I hear this is becoming common), patches may not be far behind. Again, one of the few things PC had going for it will probably be taken away soon.

Hey look, I buy every DRM free PC game I can get my hands on, whether I intend to play it or not. I'll fight the fight however I can, but I will not support Steam, EA's general bullcrap, Ubisoft's always online crap (which I know is canceled). It's sad that a company like MS, which used to be synonymous with anti-consumer, manages to provide a better gaming experience with less DRM.

Higher resolutions with AA and AF always makes games look a LOT better. On top of that many games have even greater advances above that. Also visuals was one thing on a longer list.

It's amazing you wrote all that without giving one reason why XBLA DRM is "not activation" or better than Steam DRM. Not one word or reason, not even a hint as to one.

The reality is you're a big hypocrite.

In case anyone in here is still talking GAMES(YES, I mean YOU TWO. :p :D...)....I posted some newish trailers up for DNF....including a shrink trailer that was just upped tonight. :)

http://www.gog.com/en/forum/general/duke_nukem_forever_balls_of_steel_edition_announced/post174

It's not activation because you can back up your game and put it back on your wiped XBox 360 over and over again without ever contacting MS, even after they ban me, even after the service goes down, note how you can't do this with backups from Impulse or Steam. You don't have any trouble distinguishing logging into GOG to download your games from activation, do you? I didn't say anything about it because trying to convince you seems rather pointless, we could go around endlessly, like TW2 updater threads, and never get anywhere. I do have actual, technical reasons for distinguishing, you think it's the same, good enough. I can't really convince you on this point, you asked why I'd accept XBox DRM, the answer is as follows, "To the best of my understanding, it is not activation." There ya go, it's that simple.

If I wanted to be a hypocrite I'd fucking load up a Steam account with about 1000 bucks in games and never tell anyone.

You guys are silly......but I like the interesting convo and some of the points brought up on both sides.

I'm not sure what backup policy has to do with activation. You still activate the game on the console you purchase it on when you buy an XBLA game and obviously you still tie it to your account. You're reaching for a specific instance where Steam might require an activation and the Xbox does not, but there are cases where Steam does not (offline on a second machine) and the Xbox does. It's all pretty outside of the actual issue which is you're making purchases that tie to a machine and account and for which future access if your current install is lost is dependent on a corporation allowing you that access.

In any case I'm never going to listen to your DRM rants again. Whatever semantics you might find to justify supporting Xbox DRM and not Steam DRM just ring hollow to me, as does your anti-Steam rhetoric.