• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Some potential clarification on Family Sharing with Xbox One

Originally posted by Smerfy in the Phil Spencer thread:

I know we are all confused about the details of this policy, and I hope this doesn't add any more confusion...I'm cross-posting this from another thread because it MAY answer some of the questions that are circulating in this thread. I went to the Microsoft store today and pre-ordered. There was a Microsoft representative there, since it's in Bellevue, so I decided to talk to him about some of the concerns and hopefully clarify a few things. I summarized what he said, but it was about a 20 minute convo and I asked him a bunch of different scenarios to try to nail down some specifics. Here's the points that I posted in the Hype thread:



Quote:


I talked to the 'on-site' Microsoft representative there about some of the issues, here's a rundown of some of the interesting things he said:

1. In the family/friend circle, concurrent play is allowed on the same game. Say I get battlefield 4 and put it in my share. 1 person can play it with me, single player and/or multiplayer.

2. The other 9 people no longer have access to my shared library until that person is done playing.

3. Every person within the group can make their shared games available, so if 5 people in the group buy battlefield 4, the other 5 can play concurrently through other 'shared libraries' in the group. This way, everyone gets to play.

4. (this one tidbit was REALLY interesting) Let's say you have battlefield 4 in your family share circle, and you pick up halo 5 when it drops. no one in that circle is really interested at all in that game. you can have OTHER circles that you can share games with. You CANNOT have the same game in multiple circles, however. So if you put Halo 5 in one, it cannot be in another unless you remove it from that circle. No word on how many circles you can have, however.

5. The trade-off with this system, as I know a lot of people on GAF were saying there HAD to be one, is already known. It's the 24-hour check. In order to make sure that this system isn't exploitable, they needed a way to ensure that games weren't being passed around physically to be pirated/exploited. So that's the trade-off, to get this type of sharing system between friends/family and keep devs/pubs happy.

There were other things, but I got stuck in traffic and this is all that I one-noted. If I explained something in a way that you don't get, I'll try to rephrase it for you. I'm paraphrasing most of this because our conversation was probably 20 minutes and I had to go through MULTIPLE scenarios and analogies to get exact info from him.

I'm still looking forward to Major Nelson laying it out in plain english, but there were some good tidbits. This is what the Microsoft stores are being trained with from the reps, so take that as you will.

This helped me wrap my head around how the system (potentially) works. Ironically, it does offer a major advantage over sharing disks in that sharing a game with family doesn't mean that you lose access to it. However, #2 seems to conflict with existing reports.
 

Iacobellis

Junior Member
Not buying into it. Every feature of the One has turned into a conflicting report inside Microsoft. Their PR department is a complete mess.
 
PR really needs to get their act together, it is disgusting.
I won't believe any word of mouth anymore, I want to see it on the website.
The story just changes too much.


I think this feature could be awesome, need concrete details from Microsoft though.
 

Freki

Member
If we'd knew for sure these statements were indeed Microsoft approved policies then yes - it would provide some clarification...
Sadly we don't know.
 
D

Diggeh

Unconfirmed Member
The flow-chart for this crap is getting REALLY complicated.

Can someone make an actual flow chart of the copious spin and false statement about the XBONE? That would be the greatest thing.
 

K.Jack

Knowledge is power, guard it well
So only one other person can be simultaneously playing a game in the entire library. That's what I got from #2, anyway.
 

ElTorro

I wanted to dominate the living room. Then I took an ESRAM in the knee.
When they referred to "Rocket Science" during the Xbone's reveal, they must have had the complexity of their family sharing system in mind.
 

The Crimson Kid

what are you waiting for
Major Nelson contradicted the first point in one of the interview videos being discussed today.

Also, if the family sharing system worked as described in the OP, I could easily see publishers being more concerned about the damage to new game sales from this sharing plan then they are from used games.
 

AnnSwag

angry @ Blu-Ray's success
PR really needs to get their act together, it is disgusting.
I won't believe any word of mouth anymore, I want to see it on the website.
The story just changes too much.


I think this feature could be awesome, need concrete details from Microsoft though.

This isn't a PR problem. All this information has been out there for weeks, its just gets lost in translation.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
This is incredibly contradictory to everything else we've heard. Why would an "MS Rep" know more than the execs?
 

Iacobellis

Junior Member
Where is Ballmer during all of this? Despite being CEO, Kaz has spoken out on the PS4 and hasn't left it entirely to the PlayStation division.
 
This is actually a semi cool feature. I'm starting to see where MS is trying to go with this. Still doesn't completely justify the always online bs. I think if they waited another generation to whip out a service like this it probably would have been better.
Still not getting an XB1 tho.
 

spwolf

Member
so basically they confirmed what we suspected all along due to ambiguous wording they had in the PR - only 1 person can access your library at a time.
 

sephi22

Member
Watch this get contradicted a week from now.
Not buying any of this unless they put it in a press release or the official website
 
okay this is CONFUSING everyone is saying something different there needs to be one place with a definitive answer, that is well written and detailed beyond belief and written in such a way that even animals get it.
 

smerfy

Banned
So only one other person can be simultaneously playing a game in the entire library. That's what I got from #2, anyway.

That's what I got as well.

But the MS rep appears to be conflicting with what Major Nelson said in that interview with Angry Gamer.

He gave me a specific example, iirc it goes like this: "Say my friend Steve over there is in my circle and I buy COD: Ghost. With the Family Circle that he's in with me I can share access to it. He can play it with me through my shared copy and we can enjoy it together."

I then asked about the other 9 people and he said, "They still have access to the other shared libraries in the group, but not mine while Steve is playing."

Don't shoot the messenger, but this is what I got from him. I took some notes but he was a pretty fast-paced talker and I had to summarize a lot of what he was saying. I made sure to get the points that stuck out the most, however. Apparently this is what MS stores are being trained to answer with, so take that as you will.
 

Duji

Member
This isn't a PR problem. All this information has been out there for weeks, its just gets lost in translation.

This is a PR problem. Different Microsoft employees are saying different things all the time. Pair this with the fact that MS hasn't posted an official document or anything detailing this feature.
 

GK86

Homeland Security Fail
These threads need to stop until MS releases a press release detailing how it will work.
 

1upmuffin

Member
Assuming this is all true, it seems there actually is an advantage to consumers for having a 24 hour check, though they should have made this more clear.

I think the "family/friend circle" stuff is the best thing about the One so far, it seems like it could save you a lot in the long run even though the One is 100 dollars more than PS4.

Still not enough to get me to buy a One though, required Kinect and my experience with Xbox 360 are my biggest reasons not to want One.
 
This is a PR problem. Different Microsoft employees are saying different things all the time. Pair this with the fact that MS hasn't posted an official document or anything detailing this feature.

http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/license

Give your family access to your entire games library anytime, anywhere: 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. Just like today, a family member can play your copy of Forza Motorsport at a friend’s house. Only now, they will see not just Forza, but all of your shared games. You can always play your games, and any one of your family members can be playing from your shared library at a given time.

This is consistent with the information in the OP.
 

synce

Member
This sounds like a great feature if you don't like owning games. Personally I'd rather just Gamefly
 

syko de4d

Member
I dont see how this can work

If it´s cool people will just abuse the shit out of it -> MS will implement restrictions

If it´s not cool it´s already has alot of restrictions

So at the end i only see restrictions

Who the hell would buy all the, specially SP focus, Games he/she wants? E.g. i want Dark Souls2, Witcher3 and Dragon Age3 next year. I will get 2 other rpg fans in my "Family" Plan and at the end we buy 3 games instead of 9. Nice for me but i cant see it working in a long run. Yes you could do the same at the moment with lending games but with Family Plan is less complex, you dont need to be afraid that the other guy break/lose your CD and it works around the world.
 
This whole family plan stuff seems really fishy to me. What publisher would ever agree to this? In what world does it make sense to have 1 copy equal 10? Even with the limitations, there's so much potential lost revenue that you would have to be crazy to let this happen as a publisher.
 

DBT85

Member
So if I got it right, 10 dudebros get in a family, 5 of them buy COD, they all play online together. This is BETTER for the industry than used games?
 
This whole family plan stuff seems really fishy to me. What publisher would ever agree to this? In what world does it make sense to have 1 copy equal 10? Even with the limitations, there's so much potential lost revenue that you would have to be crazy to let this happen as a publisher.

Read carefully, that's not what is being said. At most, one copy equals 2 (when the original buyer and a family member play concurrently). Otherwise, you limit the number of "uses" of a given license to 10. Compare that to a traditional disk, which can be passed around an indefinite number of times. The advantage to publishers is that you more or less limit how many different persons can use a single sold copy of the game. The more I think about it, the more it makes sense even from the perspective of the publisher.
 
So if I got it right, 10 dudebros get in a family, 5 of them buy COD, they all play online together. This is BETTER for the industry than used games?

Yeah I have my doubts this is going to happen even close to this given the level abuse this will have. You'd think this would give publisher's an ulser if MS was actively promoting people to put their friends in their family list so they can avoid buying more copies of games.
 
Top Bottom