Support NeoGAF

[malboroking]

I'm on the same boat as you and I feel like most people in this day and age would have actually had a better experience with the proposed changes. Internet mob mentality handily prevented any possibility of innovation. It sucks that Microsoft is getting bashed for trying to make this the last console you will ever have to buy while Sony is praised for repressing the evolution of entertainment.

What the hell are you talking about? Why would Microsofts terrible DRM make this the last console you would ever have to buy? There's no reason Microsoft couldn't still implement Family Sharing with digitally purchased titles, but it was bullshit the entire time.

And how is Sony repressing the evolution of entertainment? Is this a joke post? I can't tell anymore

 

[NullPointer]

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/license. ? seems clear to me. Can share out your game, you can always play and one of your family members can play a game too.

So simple there was only a 60+ page GAF thread trying to figure it out.

And to reiterate a previous post:

All we've heard about is the specter of used games. About how a game can be bought once, but then offered back up to several others who would've presumably bought the game new, and thus, lost sales, studios shut down, devs on the street, etc etc. We've been told that this DRM box was a necessary solution to that problem.

But then we start hearing about this family plan, and how it would enable you to buy a game once, and then share it with up to 10 others, who would, presumably, share your copy rather than buying new.

So how does any of this make sense? How do you solve the used games problem AND have family sharing?

Its just another contradiction in the Xbone's messaging.

 

[tafer]

Afraid of getting banned, actually. It has been that bad around here.

Well, at least we now know that Microsoft isn't paying them, so they are just what they are.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Serious question. If you and 4 friends chip in for Titanfall, how the eff is anyone gonna get a chance to play it? You cant play it at the SAME time. Its gonna be like piranhas trying to get dibs on it over 4 friends...

Or what? you're gonna take 20 minute turns? Id rather just go out and buy a copy so I dont have to deal with that shit.

This is why this isn't as abusive as people seem to think it is. They're banking on that you're going to want to play with your friends and that they're going to need to each have a copy to do so. This really is just a digital incarnation of a physical disc where in both cases only one can be used at a time.

 

[bishopcruz]

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/license. ? seems clear to me. Can share out your game, you can always play and one of your family members can play a game too.

But again, no real info on how a family member is designated, what the requirements are, what the limitations are, anything like that. Those details are important, and MS just ignored the fuck out of them. Clarity of message was needed, and MS not only didn't deliver, every time someone opened their mouths if became more and more muddled.

 

[King Tubby]

I'm on the same boat as you and I feel like most people in this day and age would have actually had a better experience with the proposed changes. Internet mob mentality handily prevented any possibility of innovation. It sucks that Microsoft is getting bashed for trying to make this the last console you will ever have to buy while Sony is praised for repressing the evolution of entertainment.

They can still do ALL of those things for digital titles only. In fact, it would make perfect sense for them to do so because they want people to start buying digital more often. It would be a great incentive, and it's exactly what they should've done from the beginning. They'd be encouraging a digital games marketplace without taking away consumer rights to physical purchases.

 

[SRTtoZ]

So simple there was only a 60+ page GAF thread trying to figure it out.

Exactly so simple that even Major Nelson said only 1 person could play at a time (angry joe interview). Then later said, wait maybe hes wrong? hes not sure. SO CRYSTAL CLEAR!

 

[Marty Chinn]

But again, no real info on how a family member is designated, what the requirements are, what the limitations are, anything like that. Those details are important, and MS just ignored the fuck out of them. Clarity of message was needed, and MS not only didn't deliver, every time someone opened their mouths if became more and more muddled.

Microsoft gave details on that afterward when it came into question. They said you could add anyone.

 

[LightofRohan]

What a shitty trade off. Internet kids that probably wouldn't even bought an xbone regardless ruined it.

I know...

I'm so bummed. It was funny, if you observe my post history I was sort of going over to the Xbone side. The more I thought about it, the more intriguing it seemed and it felt more like a NEXT-GENERATION instead of Sony. I liked how they were changing the entire landscape of the console... and it really made it feel different from the PS4, so it would have been more interesting to own both for different things. Now they feel too similar, so fuck X1.

 

[Windu]

So simple there was only a 60+ page GAF thread trying to figure it out.

heh, well not sure what else needs to be added on that page. Seems straight to the point.

 

[Ollie Pooch]

I'm on the same boat as you and I feel like most people in this day and age would have actually had a better experience with the proposed changes. Internet mob mentality handily prevented any possibility of innovation. It sucks that Microsoft is getting bashed for trying to make this the last console you will ever have to buy while Sony is praised for repressing the evolution of entertainment.

What?

 

[SRTtoZ]

What?

I believe thats what Microsoft said. They want this to be the last console you have to buy.

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

I'm sorry but there was no way that was ever going to happen. You do know this whole thing was a cheap ploy to eliminate people renting games on Redbox/Blockbuster/Gamefly and to eat into GameStop's profits, right? Why would they actively let you get games for essentially $15 on release? That's even more "lost revenue" than used games.

I don't wanna give money to these people. Gamestop doesn't make my games. Gamestop just has games sitting on the shelf.


If I buy Rememeber Me, and I sell it again, and it's resold 5-10 times, then that is that revenue stream lost 5-10 times over!


With a family sharing you could at least more effortlessly share the game online, and perhaps incentivize the value in sharing with others when you where done.

If you don't believe that would work over the internet, just look at the steam gifting threads. hundreds of people have gifted games games away for free in trade giving unpresedented value.

you and me set up a family sharing along with 8 other people, and the games we buy for the system can go on a reach around after others are done. if you want the online multiplayer, you can then buy your own copy and we can play together at the same time, meanwhile with the rise in DLC, there is a much bigger pool of consumers able to take advantage of DLC on one title, as opposed to the Remember Me which has ONE physical copy that travels from one person to the next.



It could have been cool IMO. It could also have been a disaster. The point is that we can't know, and people should talk about it like they have seen the future. They said they wanted to be the Steam of console gaming. I would be on board for that, because Steam is value Steam cares more about my consumer rights than sony, microsoft or Nintendo EVER have.

 

[SRTtoZ]

I don't wanna give money to these people. Gamestop doesn't make my games. Gamestop just has games sitting on the shelf.


If I buy Rememeber Me, and I sell it again, and it's resold 5-10 times, then that is that revenue stream lost 5-10 times over!


With a family sharing you could at least more effortlessly share the game online, and perhaps incentivize the value in sharing with others when you where done.

If you don't believe that would work over the internet, just look at the steam gifting threads. hundreds of people have gifted games games away for free in trade giving unpresedented value.

you and me set up a family sharing along with 8 other people, and the games we buy for the system can go on a reach around after others are done. if you want the online multiplayer, you can then buy your own copy and we can play together at the same time, meanwhile with the rise in DLC, there is a much bigger pool of consumers able to take advantage of DLC on one title, as opposed to the Remember Me which has ONE physical copy that travels from one person to the next.



It could have been cool IMO. It could also have been a disaster. The point is that we can't know, and people should talk about it like they have seen the future. They said they wanted to be the Steam of console gaming. I would be on board for that, because Steam is value Steam cares more about my consumer rights than sony, microsoft or Nintendo EVER have.

I understand what you're saying but lets take Gamestop out of the equation. Fine you hate them, so sell it on ebay/craigslist/locally/best buy/amazon, hell GIVE IT AWAY to a stranger or friend. I completely get the cool thing about having a digital library that you can share instantly but there are other options and they dont all revolve around Gamestop.

 

[bishopcruz]

Microsoft gave details on that afterward when it came into question. They said you could add anyone.

One exec of many said that, during a time when it appeared that no one could get their stories straight when it came to the feature. Xbox Support said one thing, Major Nelson said another, Harrison something else, Mattrick something else. And not just on the family plan, on a whole mess of things.

So no forgive me if that's not what I consider clear information on the family sharing plan.

This should have been out at the reveal, or at the latest out during E3, but nope, they cancelled their interviews, they cancelled their roundtables, and they got burned. You can't be THAT tone deaf and succeed. It doesn't work that way.

 

[Gokurakumaru]

This is why this isn't as abusive as people seem to think it is. They're banking on that you're going to want to play with your friends and that they're going to need to each have a copy to do so. This really is just a digital incarnation of a physical disc where in both cases only one can be used at a time.

First, not every game is a multiplayer shooter. Second, I don't see many GAF threads organising disk swap clubs because the exchange process is onerous and/or costs money. By contrast I remember a couple of prominent GAF threads for PSN game sharing and XBox One "families." You have to remember that digital sharing has basically no cost, geographic, or time barriers. Why wouldn't you establish a "family" of people in 4 different timezones for example?

 

[NullPointer]

If I buy Rememeber Me, and I sell it again, and it's resold 5-10 times, then that is that revenue stream lost 5-10 times over!

With a family sharing you could at least more effortlessly share the game online, and perhaps incentivize the value in sharing with others when you where done.

Why is the first example bad but not the second example? They both achieve the same end result: One copy of the game bought and played by several people instead of several copies bought.

 

[Ollie Pooch]

I believe thats what Microsoft said. They want this to be the last console you have to buy.

Ah, ok. Seems weird to say that - tech marches on, after all.

 

[GQman2121]

People are delusional as shit if they honestly believe any of that sharing nonsense was actually going to happen. They crafted that system and had everything in place, and then bam, just like that its gone? I think not.

Besides, they could still offer that policy for digital games if they wanted to, but they're not. And they're not because that whole system was so obviously bullshit.

 

[Ollie Pooch]

People are delusional as shit if they honestly believe any of that sharing nonsense was actually going to happen. They crafted that system and had everything in place, and then bam, just like that its gone? I think not.

Besides, they could still offer that policy for digital games if they wanted to, but they're not. And they're not because that whole system was so obviously bullshit.

It never really made sense - so militant about stopping other sharing, but somehow allowing this branching access between libraries so everyone can access a huge list of games without paying? Seemed made up to me.

 

[charsace]

People are delusional as shit if they honestly believe any of that sharing nonsense was actually going to happen. They crafted that system and had everything in place, and then bam, just like that its gone? I think not.

Besides, they could still offer that policy for digital games if they wanted to, but they're not. And they're not because that whole system was so obviously bullshit.

The system was built around all the games being played without a disc and the extra DRM. Now that you can't play without a disc and the extra drm is gone they are gonna remove them. Just like they are removing the ability to have multiple games running at once. Most likely anything that was tied to the DRM won't be back until consoles are digital only.

 

[devilhawk]

But now we have to physically give them a disc and we can't play it with them if we wanted to.

JK, but seriously that was an awesome benefit of the sharing system.

I don't know if the JK part of your post refers to your entire first sentence or not, but you were never going to be allowed to play online with anyone you were sharing the game with. They had already even stated that.

 

[travisbickle]

The system was built around all the games being played without a disc and the extra DRM. Now that you can't play without a disc and the extra drm is gone they are gonna remove them. Just like they are removing the ability to have multiple games running at once. Most likely anything that was tied to the DRM won't be back until consoles are digital only.

So downloaded games won't have this now because reasons?

 

[xbhaskarx]

They never said there was a time limit.
http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/license

Incidentally, that was posted nearly a week before E3. The same time they posted their DRM rules, iirc. This feature was not an attempt at damage control after the backlash. It was there from the beginning. It was just... missing a lot of important details.

.001% of the people spouting nonsense across dozens of threads will read these two comments...

 

[fertygo]

Why they not even keep it for XBLA game is beyond me, unless its not ever gonna work that way.

 

[beastworship]

The system was built around all the games being played without a disc and the extra DRM. Now that you can't play without a disc and the extra drm is gone they are gonna remove them. Just like they are removing the ability to have multiple games running at once. Most likely anything that was tied to the DRM won't be back until consoles are digital only.

good riddance? we aren't at the ray kurzwell transcendental man stage microsoft seems to believe.

heh, well not sure what else needs to be added on that page. Seems straight to the point.

Xbox One will enable new forms of access for families. Up to ten members of your family can log in and play from your shared games library on any Xbox One.

You're right, it is clear. Ten family members can share your game, not xbox live friends, not xbox live strangers, not random people you met on the street nor friends from school. Ten DNA verified blood relatives and very likely geolocated to ensure you're not gaming said system. Pretty much useless unless you come from a very big family I guess which is more and more uncommon across USA/Canada except for immigrants that probably have little to no interest in flashy new tech as opposed to just staying alive.

 

[Striek]

.001% of the people spouting nonsense across dozens of threads will read these two comments...

The backlash started a fortnight earlier after the reveal, if not even before then.

 

[xbhaskarx]

Never forget...

Victory for gamer's rights!!1!

 

[IHaveCandy]

I still don't get why it needs to go online just once when you get the console. Is it to patch out the DRM? I wouldn't think that was it since they aren't made yet.

 

[Windu]

good riddance? we aren't at the ray kurzwell transcendental man stage microsoft seems to believe.



Xbox One will enable new forms of access for families. Up to ten members of your family can log in and play from your shared games library on any Xbox One.

You're right, it is clear. Ten family members can share your game, not xbox live friends, not xbox live strangers, not random people you met on the street nor friends from school. Ten DNA verified blood relatives and very likely geolocated to ensure you're not gaming said system. Pretty much useless unless you come from a very big family I guess which is more and more uncommon across USA/Canada except for immigrants that probably have little to no interest in flashy new tech as opposed to just staying alive.

Well since there is no way for Microsoft to prove if people are related i thought it was obvious that it was a group of people.

 

[Demoncarnotaur]

Im sure Family Sharing can easily be applied to the digital only versions of the games. If MS doesn't do that don't blame the pro-consumer crowd, blame MS.

 

[devilhawk]

.001% of the people spouting nonsense across dozens of threads will read these two comments...

It was in response to the backlash after the May unveiling. Microsoft had officials discussing their DRM 2 weeks before Family Share was even known about.

 

[Seik]

Never forget...

Because my closest friends are all over the world and not in the same city as me.

Lesser of 2 evils.

.

 

[IrishNinja]

wow, Shogmaster is gonna be a huge loss for this community, no doubt.

I highly doubt you can name them.

Pretty sure he's talking about the fact that the PC is an open platform whereas the Xbone is not. There's a lot of choices when it comes to where you can get your PC games, On the Xbone, Microsoft is the only game in town.

If so, it is retarded way of thinking.

1) I doubt Steam Box will have origin/uplay or disc support.
2) Xbox One - whole package as a Steam, if you want alternative, buy Wii U, PS4 or PC. Why you want feature from device, clearly not supported by design, and MS clearly says so. Who forces you to buy it?

first up, there's really no need for your tone.
second - who here was talking about a steam box? i said steam, a storefront that, as malboroking pointed out, exists within the wide spectrum that the thankfully open platform that is PC gaming provides: those who don't care for valve's concessions on DRM have GOG amongst other options, varying across publishers & their demands, etc.

with all due respect: nothing you said refuted malboroking's points. "whole package as steam" literally doesn't fit that analog, being a venue vs a sole, closed option. there is literally no reason to believe that the many benefits consumers enjoy via steam - huge discounts, full BC, control over their content via patching/modding etc (granted, there are notable exceptions but once again PC format means workarounds exist) - that serve as a reward for the tradeoffs DD calls for, regarding ownership, first sale, trading etc.

all this before we look at valve's work over the years that has flourished into something which, greenlighting aside, has continually improved & responded to community requests. the entire nature of DD hinges on consumer faith/trust, and MS has done nothing here - arguably, in my eyes, they've actively undone some of what they garnered with me this last gen - to warrant any of that.

these situations are very much night & day, again for reasons i believe quite obvious. if you'd prefer to move the goalposts towards a steambox instead, that might be a more accurate analogy but my last paragraph still very much applies (though i respect the subjective nature of that bit).

you're welcome.

Last console you'll ever have to buy? Are you serious?

I still have no idea where this blind faith comes from. And I preferred 360 for the bulk of this gen.

And possibility of innovation? Microsoft gave us no real info. So all we were left with was 'possibilities' that didn't look too good.

very much this. as an aside: i hate that my replies feel so verbose on things that a) strike me as so very self-evident b) stumpkapow and posters on that tier can remind people why with fewer words.

.001% of the people spouting nonsense across dozens of threads will read these two comments...

if that's the case, it's even dumber the way MS sat on that info where it should've been sung from the heavens to soften the blow.

not even gonna indulge your "gamers rights!!1" nonsense though

 

[krae_man]

I still don't get why it needs to go online just once when you get the console. Is it to patch out the DRM? I wouldn't think that was it since they aren't made yet.

My guess is that by the time they have updated the firmware, it will be too late to have it pre installed on every system and make the already announced launch date.

Now that I think of it, that could be why Sony hasn't announced a release date yet.

Not sure why this future with better digital rights(that were still not good enough), required a significant loss of retail rights. Yet it's our fault for over reacting and not Microsofts for trying something so ridiculously stupid.

 

[Lupin3]

playing disc based games will require that the disc be in the tray.

*sigh*

 

[beastworship]

Well since there is no way for Microsoft to prove if people are related i thought it was obvious that it was a group of people.

It says family. And only vaguely touches on how it can be used. You just went ahead and extrapolated the rest like everyone else is doing. Nobody really knows what it means and are acting like carnival marks entering the turnstiles of Microsoft HQ with a white streak on their back to indicate easy money. The misrepresentative graphic is good viral advertising, but well after the fact and now rendered impotent. All in all a quality blunder, perhaps something that will be referenced in academia textbooks for what not to do when pitching product.

 

[not psycho]

The bottom line is that not only was family sharing a last minute, unworkable response to backlash, it wasn't even within Microsoft's power to offer it.

If you believed it, you are lying to yourself. Microsoft can't give away other publishers games, they were never given that power. At most it could have been 1st party games.

The very fact that they tossed it all out should help you realize it was never a possibility.

 

[Windu]

It says family. And only vaguely touches on how it can be used. You just went ahead and extrapolated the rest like everyone else is doing. Nobody really knows what it means and are acting like carnival marks entering the turnstiles of Microsoft HQ with a white streak on their back to indicate easy money. The misrepresentative graphic is good viral advertising, but well after the fact and now rendered impotent. All in all a quality blunder, perhaps something that will be referenced in academia textbooks for what not to do when pitching product.

Yeah I extrapolated, but it is a very obvious deduction. Having Microsoft actually put the tools in place to make people prove they are related is laughable.

 

[Reallink]

People are delusional as shit if they honestly believe any of that sharing nonsense was actually going to happen. They crafted that system and had everything in place, and then bam, just like that its gone? I think not.

Besides, they could still offer that policy for digital games if they wanted to, but they're not. And they're not because that whole system was so obviously bullshit.

It honestly blows my mind that so many people believe this system was going to exist as described. A modicum of common sense should tell you this would have turned out to be a hundred times more damaging than an open used/rental market. If such a system ever existed at all (I personally think it was a knee jerk reaction to all the initial negative PR that no one actually sat down and thought through), there is NO WAY it would have realistically continued beyond the first 6/mo - 1/yr (which also could have been their plan from the start, a too good to be true system to ease people into DRM that they planned to shut down in short order). I mean shit, Sony couldn't even handle 5 people sharing throw away $5-$10 PSN games through an unofficial hassle of an exploit that relatively few people abused. How in the flying fuck do you think sharing $60 games with 10 people through the click of a button was going to work out? This would have absolutely murdered everything but the biggest multiplayer games.

 

[beastworship]

The bottom line is that not only was family sharing a last minute, unworkable response to backlash, it wasn't even within Microsoft's power to offer it.

If you believed it, you are lying to yourself. Microsoft can't give away other publishers games, they were never given that power. At most it could have been 1st party games.

The very fact that they tossed it all out should help you realize it was never a possibility.

And this is where I go to sleep, good summary. Amazed people actually feel like they missed out on something. I kinda wish I was in the business of business, so much money out there ready to be scooped up with a money scooper upper apparatus.

 

[Demoncarnotaur]

Fuck, I was really looking forward to the family sharing feature.

If I also have to swap discs to play different games like it's fucking 2005, then all you so called core gamer douchebags can die from chronic gonorrhea.

Fucking holding progress back like goddamn ass backward Republicans...

Fuck. This isn't a Permaban is it?

I still had questions about your work with Jurassic Park toys, damnit!

 

[JackDT]

Microsoft never went into the guts of how family sharing worked. It was just a dream.

What is stopping MS from still offering any kind of innovative sharing options with their digital stuff? It would make digital purchases more attractive. It would make the entire platform more attractive than competitors.

Supporting offline disc games is one mode. If they want to offer an awesome new model that takes away the ability to resell or play offline than DO it -- but SELL us on it by making us want all the associated features that come with it. Don't shove it down our throats.

If family sharing is their best new feature then go ahead and offer it as an alternative alongside the old model. If it really is awesome I'll gladly buy into it.

 

[larvi]

People are delusional as shit if they honestly believe any of that sharing nonsense was actually going to happen. They crafted that system and had everything in place, and then bam, just like that its gone? I think not.

Besides, they could still offer that policy for digital games if they wanted to, but they're not. And they're not because that whole system was so obviously bullshit.

This. My guess is what was originally in place was what you have now with 2 licenses for digital content 1 for the console and 1 for the gamer tag that bought it. Based on all of the negative press they got about no used games they crafted this idea of extending that 2nd license to a group of 10 gamers and the publishers came back to them and said no way in hell. So we are back to where we are with the 360.

What amazes me is the complete failure of MS to do any market research on this. For a company of their size that's inexcusable. They have those monthly gold surveys they do all of the time which I'm sure they get a good response from their core gamers. How hard would it have been to ask about some of these things in those surveys to guage reaction before designing the xbone feature set?

 

[beastworship]

Yeah I extrapolated, but it is a very obvious deduction. Having Microsoft actually put the tools in place to make people prove they are related is laughable.

If you say so, not obvious to me or others who aren't deeply invested in any particular outcome. But I do think it's wishful thinking, and as another person said...the fact it's not happening now indicates it was never going to, that's a too good to be true offer.

 

[Windu]

It honestly blows my mind that so many people believe this system was going to exist as described. A modicum of common sense should tell you this would have turned out to be a hundred times more damaging than an open used/rental market. If such a system ever existed at all (I personally think it was a knee jerk reaction to all the initial negative PR that no one actually sat down and thought through), there is NO WAY it would have been allowed to continue beyond the first 6/mo - 1/yr (which also could have been their plan from the start, a too good to be true system to ease people into DRM, that they planned to shut down in short order). I mean shit, Sony couldn't even handle 5 people sharing throw away PSN games through an unofficial hassle of an exploit that relatively few people abused. How in the flying fuck do you think sharing $60 games with 10 people through the click of a button was going to work out?

Well it was obviously up to the publishers. Some would do it, some would not. Still better than what we have now.

 

[IHaveCandy]

My guess is that by the time they have updated the firmware, it will be too late to have it pre installed on every system and make the already announced launch date.

Now that I think of it, that could be why Sony hasn't announced a release date yet.

Not sure why this future with better digital rights(that were still not good enough), required a significant loss of retail rights. Yet it's our fault for over reacting and not Microsofts for trying something so ridiculously stupid.

I guess it could require more work than simply changing a Boolean valuable. I think Sony isnt saying anything about dates because they don't want to give Microsoft an opportunity to undercut them.

 

[kittens]

I don't see why MS couldn't just limit digital sharing like they were going to limit physical sharing. They could also make digital shares require internet checks -- but ONLY digital shares, not physical games or digital games you bought yourself. They didn't need to cut the feature entirely just because they cut DRM.

 

[IHaveCandy]

That 10 person sharing idea sounds like a nightmare for publishers. Far worse than used games.

 

[Deleted member 1235]

Nah MS never talked this feature up or made it clear enough how it would work. can't mourn something that never existed I guess.

Sony needs to squeeze in some shared library action and make a sweet ad about it..