Support NeoGAF

[farisr]

If Sony implemented these DRM policies everyone would be okay with it. Right guys... right?

So many people are accepting paying for online multiplayer right now afterall so that's proof.

Yeah... I'll just forget that Sony eased people into it and showed the great value PS+ offers over the course of the last 3 years. Microsoft coming up with these restrictions all of a sudden is the exact same thing.

And of course I'll ignore all the people that are legitimately pissed off at Sony for requiring PS+ for online multiplayer on the PS4 now, but whatever. It's clear there's a Sony bias at work here and EVERYONE is okay with sony charging for multiplayer, and wouldn't have had as big a reaction as there was if it was Sony that implemented these policies instead of Microsoft.

 

[Cynar]

I clearly felt the benefits (family sharing, instant access anywhere, not swapping discs) outweighed the negatives (24 hour check-in, complicated used sell).

That's much better than steam imo.

I'm glad you were in the very small minority.

 

[params7]

I really want Steam to take the hint and introduce some sort of family plan in their system. My brother and I would start gaming on PC if we didn't have to spend upwards of 100 Bucks on release of games we want to coop in. With digital releases on Ps3, we just need to buy a single copy from one account and download it to both the ps3s.

The fact that 5 ps3s can be activated for one psn account to which all the bought digital games can be downloaded, which in turn, can be played by any psn account on each Ps3 already makes for a pretty stellar family plan already. And we can all play the same game at the same time. Xbox Ones family plan was interesting but not as good as it already is for ps3 which hopefully will carry to ps4.

 

[bobbytkc]

Allowing only one instance at a time is a significant handcuff limitation that you can't even make the claim that having 5 legit full anytime access licenses is the same. Heck all five could play online together if they wanted. The number of allowed instances is a HUGE difference.

You have not addressed the main concern I pointed out, that 10 people can access your entire game library at the same time. Just because 2 people can play a game at a time means little, when collectively, these 10 people will have so many games between themthat they can simply choose to play another game. This will definitely be abused, I was already thinking of doing it myself.

 

[SRTtoZ]

If Sony implemented these DRM policies everyone would be okay with it. Right guys... right?

So many people are accepting paying for online multiplayer right now afterall so that's proof.

Yeah... I'll just forget that Sony eased people into it and showed the great value PS+ offers over the course of the last 3 years. Microsoft coming up with these restrictions all of a sudden is the exact same thing.

And of course I'll ignore all the people that are legitimately pissed off at Sony for requiring PS+ for online multiplayer on the PS4 now, but whatever. It's clear there's a Sony bias at work here and EVERYONE is okay with sony charging for multiplayer, and wouldn't have had as big a reaction as there was if it was Sony that implemented these policies instead of Microsoft.

Thats a perfect example of how to market your product. Sony showed off the value for a while now and then said 'hey, we want to charge you now but hey! its gonna be less than $5 bucks a month and we will still give you the free games and all that. We also want to use the money to give you a better multiplayer experience". They are even giving us 3 free indie games and Driveclub PS+ edition on launch!

MS comes out of the wood works and says "here is this $500 dollar box with all these restrictions, trust us! It will be really good!"

 

[Yellowflashdude]

If Sony implemented these DRM policies everyone would be okay with it. Right guys... right?

So many people are accepting paying for online multiplayer right now afterall so that's proof.

Yeah... I'll just forget that Sony eased people into it and showed the great value PS+ offers over the course of the last 3 years. Microsoft coming up with these restrictions all of a sudden is the exact same thing.

And of course I'll ignore all the people that are legitimately pissed off at Sony for requiring PS+ for online multiplayer on the PS4 now, but whatever. It's clear there's a Sony bias at work here and EVERYONE is okay with sony charging for multiplayer, and wouldn't have had as big a reaction as there was if it was Sony that implemented these policies instead of Microsoft.

Oh come on, let go of this victim mentality. Sony are not immune to criticism like some xbox fans would like to think. Did you forget 2006 to 2009? Sony was absolutely shat on. It took them awhile to recover from it. If anything MS got it easy, even with the drm measures there were still many xbox defence forces.

The comment about the paywall is especially ironic considering how 360 fans started the process.

 

[weevles]

No one should ever pay for multiplayer no matter how much it costs companies for servers, bandwidth, maintenance, etc etc etc. Sony is Evil with their forced PSN+ for PS4. Microsoft with their Xbox Live and whatever else they have in store too for that matter.

 

[quest]

I really want Steam to take the hint and introduce some sort of family plan in their system. My brother and I would start gaming on PC if we didn't have to spend upwards of 100 Bucks on release of games we want to coop in. With digital releases on Ps3, we just need to buy a single copy from one account and download it to both the ps3s.

The fact that 5 ps3s can be activated for one psn account to which all the bought digital games can be downloaded, which in turn, can be played by any psn account on each Ps3 already makes for a pretty stellar family plan already. And we can all play the same game at the same time. Xbox Ones family plan was interesting but not as good as it already is for ps3 which hopefully will carry to ps4.

It is not 5 any more it is 2 thanks to the abuse. Publishers were pissed at poor digital sales and got it changed.

 

[plagiarize]

No one should ever pay for multiplayer no matter how much it costs companies for servers, bandwidth, maintenance, etc etc etc. Sony is Evil with their forced PSN+ for PS4. Microsoft with their Xbox Live and whatever else they have in store too for that matter.

clearly people do not feel as strongly about this in general as they do DRM, or as you do.

 

[entremet]

I'm glad you were in the very small minority.

We just weren't as vocal lol.

I've never cared about reselling media to fund new purchases or having a mandatory connection. I never buy used. I respect others wishes to keep their rights in that regard and they could by eschewing the XB1 and choosing a PS4.

 

[njean777]

If Sony implemented these DRM policies everyone would be okay with it. Right guys... right?

So many people are accepting paying for online multiplayer right now afterall so that's proof.

Yeah... I'll just forget that Sony eased people into it and showed the great value PS+ offers over the course of the last 3 years. Microsoft coming up with these restrictions all of a sudden is the exact same thing.

And of course I'll ignore all the people that are legitimately pissed off at Sony for requiring PS+ for online multiplayer on the PS4 now, but whatever. It's clear there's a Sony bias at work here and EVERYONE is okay with sony charging for multiplayer, and wouldn't have had as big a reaction as there was if it was Sony that implemented these policies instead of Microsoft.

Really? Sony has been shat on for years. You need to stop acting like everybody is bias for Sony. Do you remember 06-09? Sony was the industry whipping boy.

 

[Eurocult]

At times forums are ridiculous. All we ve read for weeks is 'PS4 day one' 'MS lost my custom' they have listened and there was gonna be
Sacrifices.
I was happy with the new system and the family plan. Now its just cost me more . I share games or buy 2 copies of say COD or FIFA with my kid . Now I Definetly have to buy 2 copies. Give with one hand and take with another . The power of the fanboy strikes again.

I have a feeling it was publishers, not fanboys.

 

[soldat7]

People asked for it.

He never did.

 

[Andalus0880]

You realize that it doesn't have to be an all or nothing situation right? You can like some aspects of something and hate the rest.

It clearly was all or nothing for M$. They attempted to incentivize a poorly received policy by dangling a carrot (family plan) in front of prospective buyers. Once they backpedaled on their policy, the carrot in turn disappeared.

 

[Rebel Leader]

About the xbox family share:
I was talking about PSN sharing in another thread(which is locked now):

Sony tried a similar thing with game sharing and that was exploited in every way known.

Strangely enough, PS3 has had digital game sharing for years and there were never any problems with it. The only innovation MS added with the 180's new DRM was being treated like a convicted felon 24/7.

and then once in a while the lowered the limit by 1


Now only 2 or 3 ps3's can share

Before the sharing limitations, our sales on PSN were half of what they were on XBLA. After the changes they are roughly equal. Draw your own conclusions.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Personally I'm more bummed about not having the instant access to my games. I would have liked being able to queue up things like multi and hop in and play or play a different game and get queued up and go right into the game I queued up for now I have to go put a disc in...looks like I'm going digital this time around.

Hopefully that feature still works. If not ill be very displeased.

I agree. It really blows to lose these features.

 

[entremet]

It clearly was all or nothing for M$. They attempted to incentivize a poorly received policy by dangling a carrot (family plan) in front of prospective buyers. Once they backpedaled on their policy, the carrot in turn disappeared.

"M$" is kinda juvenile and hard to take you seriously using that moniker.

 

[Marty Chinn]

You have not addressed the main concern I pointed out, that 10 people can access your entire game library at the same time. Just because 2 people can play a game at a time means little, when collectively, these 10 people will have so many games between themthat they can simply choose to play another game. This will definitely be abused, I was already thinking of doing it myself.

I have a collection of games that I can loan out to all my friends right now. It's not that big of a difference. Multiplayer is much more prevalent these days which is what I think would be the driving force for people to be buying up their own copies instead of abusing this and Microsoft and publishers would know this. While abuse is possible, if you want to call it abuse, I think it would not be as common as you think because of the restrictions imposed.

 

[plagiarize]

We just weren't as vocal lol.

I've never cared about reselling media to fund new purchases or having a mandatory connection. I never buy used. I respect others wishes to keep their rights in that regard and they could by eschewing the XB1 and choosing a PS4.

and you still aren't as vocal as the people celebrating Microsoft's 180 because you're in a smaller group than the people who were against the DRM policies. if you weren't, Microsoft wouldn't have reversed course.

 

[devotedgmr17]

Wow, I honestly can't believe most of this outrage. It's like only 12 hours ago, everyone was bitching about how shitty M$ is with their DRM bullshit, how they're going PS4 so they can lend their games to their friends, and resell games at their leisure. Then M$ changes their policy to respond to that outcry and eliminate all that terrible DRM crap that ruined games like Sim City and now people are pissed about the family sharing plan being gone?

Think about it, there is no way that DRM could be eliminated and Family Sharing kept in place. The DRM was the only thing making Family Sharing sensible and fair. It wouldn't make sense that now since no games will be tied to your account, you'd be able to share it with 10 other people.

Maybe I'm not the right person to voice my opinion on this since I preordered both consoles (equality ftw) but I certainly anticipated people to be jumping with joy after M$ announced this change today.

 

[Jarmel]

They should add it in as an optional feature. It would require the 24-hour check in, but it wouldn't be mandatory for all games.

I would be more than willing to accept that. That's a good solution.

 

[FrankNitty]

Why not just go digital only?

I plan to. Just sucks because sometimes there are benefits to getting a physical copy like le, ce etc

 

[SPDIF]

It clearly was all or nothing for M$. They attempted to incentivize a poorly received policy by dangling a carrot (family plan) in front of prospective buyers. Once they backpedaled on their policy, the carrot in turn disappeared.

I'm amazed that people still do this.

Edit:

Wow, I honestly can't believe most of this outrage. It's like only 12 hours ago, everyone was bitching about how shitty M$ is with their DRM bullshit, how they're going PS4 so they can lend their games to their friends, and resell games at their leisure. Then M$ changes their policy to respond to that outcry and eliminate all that terrible DRM crap that ruined games like Sim City and now people are pissed about the family sharing plan being gone?

Think about it, there is no way that DRM could be eliminated and Family Sharing kept in place. The DRM was the only thing making Family Sharing sensible and fair. It wouldn't make sense that now since no games will be tied to your account, you'd be able to share it with 10 other people.

Maybe I'm not the right person to voice my opinion on this since I preordered both consoles (equality ftw) but I certainly anticipated people to be jumping with joy after M$ announced this change today.

Hey, there's another one. Three in one post, been seeing it a lot lately.

 

[dengatron]

Sucks that it's gone but after hearing their stance for everything else so far, I'm sure it would have the option to be opted out of by pubs or something else to make it nearly useless as a tradeoff for not being able to lend.

 

[Zoe]

You have not addressed the main concern I pointed out, that 10 people can access your entire game library at the same time. Just because 2 people can play a game at a time means little, when collectively, these 10 people will have so many games between themthat they can simply choose to play another game. This will definitely be abused, I was already thinking of doing it myself.

Most signs were pointing to the rest of your library going offline once one family member started playing one of your games.

 

[TheChewyWaffles]

Most certainly this has been eliminated as well. Discs are just discs now. You'll have to make the choice to go digital on a game by game basis.

You do know it works exactly like this right now on the 360 right?

 

[entremet]

and you still aren't as vocal as the people celebrating Microsoft's 180 because you're in a smaller group than the people who were against the DRM policies. if you weren't, Microsoft wouldn't have reversed course.

True. I'm fully aware I'm in the minority. I'm pretty open to the full digital future and MS was making some interesting strides in that arena via family sharing.

My question is this. How else could MS enforce family sharing without some sort of check to verify use?

Maybe if they have an opt in for all digital buyers to do the family share?

 

[farisr]

Oh come on, let go of this victim mentality. Sony are not immune to criticism like some xbox fans would like to think. Did you forget 2006 to 2009? Sony was absolutely shat on. It took them awhile to recover from it. If anything MS got it easy, even with the drm measures there were still many xbox defence forces.

The comment about the paywall is especially ironic considering how 360 fans started the process.

Really? Sony has been shat on for years. You need to stop acting like everybody is bias for Sony. Do you remember 06-09? Sony was the industry whipping boy.

Read the whole post more carefully guys, or better yet check my posting history.

 

[trixx]

Oh wow that's how trading worked, damn that seemed a lot better and much more of an incentive to go fully digital
The always online policy sucked though

 

[DocSeuss]

Why are people still acting like this isn't happening?

Mattrick clearly indicated it wasn't happening at launch, inferring it would still happen in the future. Can we get a thread title change or someone explain to me why I'm mistaken?

 

[Loofy]

God damn internet whiners bitching about DRM... Might as well stay with the PS3 and 360 because the next Gen now advances NOTHING. Leave it to GAF to cut off its nose to spite its face.

I doubt this has anything to do with the drm thingy.

Heres how it probably went.

MS: "Lets put in drm, no more used games and it makes buying through our digital store look more appealing."
"Oh shit consumers hate the idea of drm what are we gonna do omg.."
"Ok lets do a sharing plan, let them share their digital copy with 10 other people"
...
Publishers: "Are you retarded digital sharing is 10x worse than second hand game sales"
MS: "Shit"

 

[Mesoian]

Never forget...

Haha. This was never going to happen. Ever. EVEEEEEEER. Why did people think that this would be the way it would work? Publishers pitched a fit when the PS3 could do this for 4 people, and these dimwits expected 10?

Come on.

 

[TheLaughingStock]

That is what it comes down to. The internet was on fire and gamers wanted nothing to do with the X1. Too many people were saying "I'm not going to buy this thing" and Microsoft had no choice, but to change their gameplan.

He's probably annoyed about folks voicing their negative opinion in every thread. I get annoyed too with Windows, but you have no control over it. And if enough people feel a certain way, then the company makes changes. See IOS 7, Windows 8.1, Xbox One, size of iPad/iPhone, etc.

 

[Andalus0880]

I'm amazed that people still do this.

Edit:



Hey, there's another one. Been seeing it a lot lately.

Perhaps you should tackle the argument, rather than rushing in to defend Microsoft's honor? They tarnished their image with grandiose levels of hubris and pompousity over the past several months.

 

[Rebel Leader]

Haha. This was never going to happen. Ever. EVEEEEEEER. Why did people think that this would be the way it would work? Publishers pitched a fit when the PS3 could do this for 4 people, and these dimwits expected 10?

Come on.

Look at my post, it's a few posts above yours

 

[Fox Mulder]

Haha. This was never going to happen. Ever. EVEEEEEEER. Why did people think that this would be the way it would work? Publishers pitched a fit when the PS3 could do this for 4 people, and these dimwits expected 10?

Come on.

I never got the whole thing anyways. If used games are so evil, why is letting 10 people borrow the same game somehow better for the industry?

The same people defending the DRM and poor developers being robbed by GameStop and entitled consumers got all excited by a plan that let them get games for free.

 

[iammeiam]

Why are people still acting like this isn't happening?

Mattrick clearly indicated it wasn't happening at launch, inferring it would still happen in the future. Can we get a thread title change or someone explain to me why I'm mistaken?

It's definitely not happening for any physical in-store purchases. So if you buy a game from a retailer for exclusive DLC or whatever, or want to use a giftcard/take advantage of a sale, or want to buy the Fallout 4 LE in lunchbox with a bobblehead, you won't be sharing that game online. Part of the arguable hook was that it didn't matter how you got the game, it all ended up in this portable digital library.

The other half, digital only, will hopefully be coming--but given they just shitcanned a bunch of their previous announced digital policies it'd be nice to get more details from MS on this (will it allow sharing of games purchased digitally prior to the sharing launching? are they for-serious doing it digitally or are they just saying that? etc)

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

I've got to admit it's a fantastic way to try and spin the company reputation. Microsoft was only trying to bring us flexibility and the future but in the end we were just too short sighted and stuck in the past. Makes me wonder if they didn't make the whole family plan up just to be able to create this narrative.

 

[Ponn]

I doubt this has anything to do with the drm thingy.

Heres how it probably went.

MS: "Lets put in drm, no more used games and it makes buying through our digital store look more appealing."
"Oh shit consumers hate the idea of drm what are we gonna do omg.."
"Ok lets do a sharing plan, let them share their digital copy with 10 other people"
...
Publishers: "Are you retarded digital sharing is 10x worse than second hand game sales"
MS: "Shit"

The hypocrisy of it all, on both MS and the people that defended their DRM with the "b..b..but the poor developers aren't getting money" getting their jimmies in a wad over this is astounding me.

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

Never forget...

?

 

[Steve Youngblood]

I never got the whole thing anyways. If used games are so evil, why is letting 10 people borrow the same game somehow better for the industry?

We'll probably never get the whole story, but it seemed pretty clear to me that they've just been flying by the seat of their pants here and didn't really have a solid gameplan.

 

[Imm0rt4l]

I wonder if publishers said to MS, "this family sharing plan is worse than used games"!

I can't see how they wouldn't.

 

[farisr]

I never got the whole thing anyways. If used games are so evil, why is letting 10 people borrow the same game somehow better for the industry?

It's not. It wasn't going to happen. The vague family sharing plan was formulated as a response to the initial backlash they were getting to quell the "vocal minority" on the internet. If they were going through with the DRM they would've either found a way to come up with severe restrictions on it, not to mention they had stated that it was entirely up to publishers to allow these features in this case and guess what the publishers would choose to do?

People thinking it was really going to work like that were living in LA LA Land.

 

[GetemMa]

They don't have to dump these features.

They just have to offer something that MS seem oddly adverse to with the Xbox One: Options.

They could give the consumer the choice to engage the Xbox One in the way it was initially designed. If you want to participate it in an all digital setting where family share is an option then you have to be online.

If you don't care about these options and want an offline option, you can buy the disc and it has to be in your machine to work. Obviously family share is out the door here.

But they've created an all or nothing philosophy with this system. Bizarre. They have successfully deflated one of the few potentially positive distinguishing features it had when compared to PS4.

 

[blackflag]

Publishers would've killed that feature pretty quickly anyway. Just look at what happened to the PSN share feature that ended up being reduced because publishers were getting upset about people being able to buy one copy of a game and then spread it out to multiple people for free.

This. Seriously it wasn't going to last. ps3 had this at 5 and they were forced to kill it.

 

[Mesoian]

Look at my post, it's a few posts above yours

Ah. Well then yes, I agree with you.

 

[von zipp]

What a fucking shame.

i felt like this was perhaps the best feature of the XBOne, pushing gaming forward into the next Gen. it was a feture that no-one else was doing on any system, pc or console. Hopefully MS provide an option to opt into this, but as it stands now the XBOne just lost a defining feature.

 

[SPDIF]

Perhaps you should tackle the argument, rather than rushing in to defend Microsoft's honor? They tarnished their image with grandiose levels of hubris and pompousity over the past several months.

Defend their honour? No. My post was simply an observation of how certain posters, despite the fact they're probably adults and should have some decent level of maturity, still behave like some 13 year old on a forum in the year 2000.

In short, I guess it boils down to a simple question; Why do it? Is it because they "tarnished their image with grandiose levels of hubris and pompousity over the past several months."?

You could be making a decent point, yet as soon as I see that, I stop taking you, and your point, seriously.

 

[SRTtoZ]

What a fucking shame.

i felt like this was perhaps the best feature of the XBOne, pushing gaming forward into the next Gen. it was a feture that no-one else was doing on any system, pc or console. Hopefully MS provide an option to opt into this, but as it stands now the XBOne just lost a defining feature.

MS to allow USED GAMES and Family sharing?

highly doubtful.

 

[fertygo]

Why the fuck these people angry, its not ever confirmed how its worked.
MS site said A, PR dude say B, other PR dude say C. What the fuck you angry for then.

I don't understand why they can't keep it only for digital download game either, must because its just bogus from the start.