• 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.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

MS eliminates its best new feature: 10 person, 60 min Family Sharing plan for Xbone

Feb 17, 2010
6,723
0
710
CT
www.doddscientifics.com
I've been the recipient of quite a bit of anger from people who are convinced that the NO DRM people ruined what was going to be this amazing thing. While I made the argument that they don't need to shy away from digital innovations - I am a bit perplexed by why people are so convinced that the Family Share was going to be good.

Here's what we know.

PR said one thing (two people at a time, but not the same game, think of it as a library and checking books out)

Execs said another thing (two or more people at time, people playing MP games together)

And support said a third thing (6 people at once. MS twitter support is basically the new pastebin).


So that's all we knew. But there's another thing to consider... Major Nelson said late last week he was working on a detailed explanation of what the Family Plan was. That never came. This week he didn't respond to a single person asking him about it. And, as we know, they then changed policies.

So that, to me, says whatever the Family Share was - was not going to be enough to turn the tide against Microsoft. They didn't even have enough faith in it to fully explain it. So those of you who do - why? What info does anyone have that clarifies that it was going to be worth a shit.


And, of course, they could always continue it with digital sales as a way to incentivize us buying directly from them. But as of now there's not even that.


They had 12 days between announcing it and shitcanning it to fully explain it. They never did. I don't understand for a second the optimism that people feel given that MS wouldn't even bother to explain it. Like it was some secret awesome thing that microsoft was hiding?!??!
 

avaya

Member
Oct 3, 2007
10,663
0
0
London
I've been the recipient of quite a bit of anger from people who are convinced that the NO DRM people ruined what was going to be this amazing thing. While I made the argument that they don't need to shy away from digital innovations - I am a bit perplexed by why people are so convinced that the Family Share was going to be good.

Here's what we know.

PR said one thing (two people at a time, but not the same game, think of it as a library and checking books out)

Execs said another thing (two or more people at time, people playing MP games together)

And support said a third thing (6 people at once. MS twitter support is basically the new pastebin).


So that's all we knew. But there's another thing to consider... Major Nelson said late last week he was working on a detailed explanation of what the Family Plan was. That never came. This week he didn't respond to a single person asking him about it. And, as we know, they then changed policies.

So that, to me, says whatever the Family Share was - was not going to be enough to turn the tide against Microsoft. They didn't even have enough faith in it to fully explain it. So those of you who do - why? What info does anyone have that clarifies that it was going to be worth a shit.


And, of course, they could always continue it with digital sales as a way to incentivize us buying directly from them. But as of now there's not even that.


They had 12 days between announcing it and shitcanning it to fully explain it. They never did. I don't understand for a second the optimism that people feel given that MS wouldn't even bother to explain it. Like it was some secret awesome thing that microsoft was hiding?!??!

People too emotionally invested in a platform have a hard time dealing with reality.
 

Eidan

Member
May 23, 2012
13,249
2
0
I'm so upset by this. Took away family sharing digital games, which is the future, and also kept the need for disc in tray. Gave me no internet connection needed - I'm on 24/7 as it is, that's not a benefit.

This helps almost no one. Anyone upset by the initial MS offering jumped to PS4 and will be too proud to jump back. Anyone who is a PS fanboy is already getting PS4.

All it's doing it hurting people who were going to buy and were excited about the new future features.

 
Jun 11, 2010
4,107
61
845
And Cboat was the closest thing we got to legitimate information. There's no denying their PR was a mess. It just would have been nice to get solid information from the source. Ugh.

Fair enough. I wouldn't mind CBoaT coming back to clarify the family plan for us; I'm not sure how I feel about that pastebin "leak"'s authenticity, as much as I want to believe it to fuel my fanboyism.
 

bishopcruz

Member
Dec 6, 2006
3,739
217
1,375
Miami, FL
PC - Console Market
Steam - Xbox One
PS4 - Disc from retailer
Wii U - Origin
etc.

Is it really that hard to understand?
Also, I don't see answer to my question:
Why you want feature from device, clearly not supported by design, and MS clearly says so. Who forces you to buy it?

It is seems you just against any changes and want to live in static word. You may not trust MS, but Sony don't even trying, how you will get steam with online sharing and discounts, when you don't make even one step towards it?

But the PSN store has had great sales over time, so I don't see where people who are saying Sony has made no steps toward a digital future are coming from. Hell the VITA shows that Sony has great ability to move things digitally, and the fact that 60% of Vita game sales are digital, despite the fact that their memory cards re hell expensive shows this as well.

And once again, no one was forcing anyone to buy anything, but MS saw that a lot of people WEREN'T going to buy their system, and hence they made the change.
 

fertygo

Member
Jun 24, 2012
19,119
1
0
Again, they not even show it in frigging E3. So from where all of these blind faith?

I doubt they even have the system yet, like made it to UI level. So they can't show us shit.
 

BadWolf

Member
Apr 15, 2010
26,125
6
0
I've been the recipient of quite a bit of anger from people who are convinced that the NO DRM people ruined what was going to be this amazing thing. While I made the argument that they don't need to shy away from digital innovations - I am a bit perplexed by why people are so convinced that the Family Share was going to be good.

Here's what we know.

PR said one thing (two people at a time, but not the same game, think of it as a library and checking books out)

Execs said another thing (two or more people at time, people playing MP games together)

And support said a third thing (6 people at once. MS twitter support is basically the new pastebin).


So that's all we knew. But there's another thing to consider... Major Nelson said late last week he was working on a detailed explanation of what the Family Plan was. That never came. This week he didn't respond to a single person asking him about it. And, as we know, they then changed policies.

So that, to me, says whatever the Family Share was - was not going to be enough to turn the tide against Microsoft. They didn't even have enough faith in it to fully explain it. So those of you who do - why? What info does anyone have that clarifies that it was going to be worth a shit.


And, of course, they could always continue it with digital sales as a way to incentivize us buying directly from them. But as of now there's not even that.


They had 12 days between announcing it and shitcanning it to fully explain it. They never did. I don't understand for a second the optimism that people feel given that MS wouldn't even bother to explain it. Like it was some secret awesome thing that microsoft was hiding?!??!

Tbh I just think its bullshit MS came up with to try and sway opinion, there is no concrete Family Plan.
 

bishopcruz

Member
Dec 6, 2006
3,739
217
1,375
Miami, FL
Ever heard of Valve?

Valve didn't FORCE the digital transition. It happened due to a lot of things over time, no one publisher decided that NOW WE ARE DIGITAL ONLY. And steam started out as shit, for YEARS. In fact it wasn't until they started doing the sales and getting the word out on how convenient it was that people really started jumping on.

That's the difference. Microsoft said, screw your physical copies, lending, used games outside of specific retailers, and offered NOTHING of substance in return. They didn't even try to sell the digital future, they just assumed everyone was on board.
 

KukicAdo

Neo Member
Feb 28, 2009
40
0
0
Not sure if this was posted yet.. but Family Sharing was just a glorified 15-45 minute demo according the MS dev.
http://pastebin.com/TE1MWES2

"When your family member accesses any of your games, they're placed into a special demo mode. This demo mode in most cases would be the full game with a 15-45 minute timer and in some cases an hour. This allowed the person to play the game, get familiar with it then make a purchase if they wanted to. When the time limit was up they would automatically be prompted to the Marketplace so that they may order it if liked the game."
 

aristotle

Member
Nov 15, 2009
2,408
0
0
Texas
I've been the recipient of quite a bit of anger from people who are convinced that the NO DRM people ruined what was going to be this amazing thing. While I made the argument that they don't need to shy away from digital innovations - I am a bit perplexed by why people are so convinced that the Family Share was going to be good.

Here's what we know.

PR said one thing (two people at a time, but not the same game, think of it as a library and checking books out)

Execs said another thing (two or more people at time, people playing MP games together)

And support said a third thing (6 people at once. MS twitter support is basically the new pastebin).


So that's all we knew. But there's another thing to consider... Major Nelson said late last week he was working on a detailed explanation of what the Family Plan was. That never came. This week he didn't respond to a single person asking him about it. And, as we know, they then changed policies.

So that, to me, says whatever the Family Share was - was not going to be enough to turn the tide against Microsoft. They didn't even have enough faith in it to fully explain it. So those of you who do - why? What info does anyone have that clarifies that it was going to be worth a shit.


And, of course, they could always continue it with digital sales as a way to incentivize us buying directly from them. But as of now there's not even that.


They had 12 days between announcing it and shitcanning it to fully explain it. They never did. I don't understand for a second the optimism that people feel given that MS wouldn't even bother to explain it. Like it was some secret awesome thing that microsoft was hiding?!??!

I agree with you. MS never even mentioned the family share allowed you access to the entire full game. They just said you could play it, even with another person. Hell if it's a MP game and you have up to an hour to play it, you can play together online or co-op. MS never lied, they just never gave specifics. People inferred that you got access to people's entire full game library. The 15-60 minute "trial" makes perfect sense when you leverage it against everything that MS has officially released and the "leaks" from GAF ;)
 

bishopcruz

Member
Dec 6, 2006
3,739
217
1,375
Miami, FL
That's what happens when the internet deems something 'unconstitutional' and starts screaming about digital rights.

No, that's what happens when you have no idea what your customer actually cares about and make no effort to incentivize the changes on which they took issue.
 

Guevara

Member
Jul 27, 2009
24,814
3
0
Not sure if this was posted yet.. but Family Sharing was just a glorified 15-45 minute demo according the MS dev.
http://pastebin.com/TE1MWES2

"When your family member accesses any of your games, they're placed into a special demo mode. This demo mode in most cases would be the full game with a 15-45 minute timer and in some cases an hour. This allowed the person to play the game, get familiar with it then make a purchase if they wanted to. When the time limit was up they would automatically be prompted to the Marketplace so that they may order it if liked the game."

Posted already and I'm 50/50 if it's satire or real. It's feels real anyway.
 

willow ve

Member
Jul 9, 2012
3,793
0
575
Why would a 45 minute timed demo be revolutionary? Why would this require a sharing library between family? Couldn't they just do this with every single game?

If this is truly the system he could just let anyone download any full game, play for 45 minutes, then prompt then to purchase. Keep achievements behind the paywall.

If this leak is true it's essentially their existing demo system with a fancy PR name and a social twist.
 

Kagami

Member
Oct 3, 2006
2,044
0
0
Why not? I used to buy PC games on floppy disk and then one day that stopped. Eventually physical disks are going to die, it wont be this gen but maybe the next. Some company is going to have to be the one to kill this shit off.

So long as copyright laws work the way they currently do, authorized physical copies will continue to have meaning and value.
 

remnant

Banned
Feb 7, 2011
5,248
0
0
That's what happens when the internet deems something 'unconstitutional' and starts screaming about digital rights.

lol what. People choose what they thought was the better console.

Why do people act like MS is entitled to our money?
 

King Tubby

Member
Feb 22, 2013
6,000
0
385
Blaming the internet for not buying MS' new console is ridiculous. We were offered a choice and we made our decision. MS didn't market their system well at all (if there were that many positives to market). They were going to lose. They decided to get out ahead of it and keep themselves from falling way behind this gen.

MS can still do all of these wonderful things people are imagining for digital games. It wouldn't be that hard. They have an interest in doing so. Digital benefits them more than retail. They may end up still doing some of those things.

Another thing people are missing: PC is an open platform. If someone wants to compete with Steam it's not difficult. How the hell do you compete with XBL marketplace if MS doesn't want you to? Gamestop and other retailers like that? MS was damn near trying to put them out of business. Were they going to slash prices and cut into their low margins on new games even more?
 

Socreges

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
42,467
0
0
Polygon writer says that what was on pastebin was false, but that said, it was a Polygon writer and when asked for proof, he simply replied "believe me or not."

@aegies: "the xbox one game sharing thing was real. it was not demos. they had arrangements with publishers in place."
Unverified Pastebin post vs Arthur Gies. Pretty much a toss-up.
 

PapaJustify

Member
Dec 11, 2011
2,194
0
0
Seriously? As cool as this feature sounds, sharing any games with 10 random friends without any hassle would have been worse than used games. So that time-limited demo thing makes sense in some way.
 

Elaugaufein

Member
May 11, 2013
7,790
0
0
Yeah. I'm no Xbone fan but I don't believe the pastebin thing. It'd take a special kind of crazy to say "no strings attached" to a 15-45 minute demo mode, the only reason there'd be no strings attached is because the entire thing is made out of string. Also we used to have 15-45 minute demo modes and we called them Demos and they were usually free.

I do think something was up though because PR should have been trumpeting that from the rooftops if it was exactly as it sounded. I mean it justified some form of internet check in (though not to the point you couldn't play games, more like you check in ever 24 hours or other people can't share your library) or used game control. It would be really really hard to do that without one or the other.
 

Incognito

Troll
Jun 6, 2004
14,588
5
1,735
LOL @ folks believing the pastebin post. It's so obviously anti MS that I can only believe those regurgitating it as fact are part of the SDF. As for the removal of family sharing: sigh. I guess this is the result of the strident and vocal anti-DRM minority wishing that all consoles stop evolving and advancing over time.
 

Mihos

Gold Member
May 10, 2009
8,072
4,443
1,350
steamcommunity.com
LOL @ folks believing the pastebin post. It's so obviously anti MS that I can only believe those regurgitating it as fact are part of the SDF. As for the removal of family sharing: sigh. I guess this is the result of the strident and vocal anti-DRM minority wishing that all consoles stop evolving and advancing over time.

I can't help but notice you decided that anti-DRM people are the minority.....
 

DragonSworne

Banned
Aug 23, 2011
12,539
1
0
LOL @ folks believing the pastebin post. It's so obviously anti MS that I can only believe those regurgitating it as fact are part of the SDF. As for the removal of family sharing: sigh. I guess this is the result of the strident and vocal anti-DRM minority wishing that all consoles stop evolving and advancing over time.

No one told MS to remove the family sharing plan. They just wanted DRM on discs removed.

They can still implement the family sharing plan if they want without touching the disc DRM. Nothing is stopping them. People need to redirect their disappointment at MS for not advancing consoles, not the consumers. Sigh
 
May 13, 2008
40,304
1
0
Markham, Toronto
People who believe the family sharing was going to work anywhere like MS' PR promised are delusional.

LOL @ folks believing the pastebin post. It's so obviously anti MS that I can only believe those regurgitating it as fact are part of the SDF. As for the removal of family sharing: sigh. I guess this is the result of the strident and vocal anti-DRM minority wishing that all consoles stop evolving and advancing over time.

Looks like...you're the vocal minority now.
 

Z3M0G

Member
Jan 16, 2012
9,748
41
585
Why would Microsoft care how many people are simultaneously playing a 15-45 min demo? Why would they limit you from "trying" the game from anyone at any time?

MS didn't give us many details, but some that they did directly address (# of simultaneous players) fly directly in the face of this "timed demo" rumor.
 

DragonSworne

Banned
Aug 23, 2011
12,539
1
0
Why would Microsoft care how many people are simultaneously playing a 15-45 min demo? Why would they limit you from "trying" the game from anyone at any time?

MS didn't give us many details, but some that they did directly address (# of simultaneous players) fly directly in the face of this "timed demo" rumor.


Why are there limits to how many times you can play a demo on Wii U? Same logic applies to why MS would care how and when people can play demos.
 
Mar 16, 2011
6,492
0
680
It's amazing how people are treating the pastebin as fact.....

pubs/developers said the 5 person ps3 gamesharing was a total disaster zone for them (with capcom going as far as to put always online drm in a couple of their psn games to stop it), you think they would make a system that is even more convenient and with 10 people? are you kidding me?

edit: i mean this even if the pastebin isn't real, because it probably isn't.
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
Jan 24, 2007
19,100
0
0
Nashville, USA
Why are there limits to how many times you can play a demo on Wii U? Same logic applies to why MS would care how and when people can play demos.

Indeed. The final plan could have been something like this: everyone gets a 30 minute period, but people in your family can get an additional 30 minute period.

So everyone with Live can play a bit of a game (demo it), but the benefit of being in a family with someone who bought it is that you get to play more of that game before you decide to buy (longer demo).
 

ShinUltramanJ

Member
Jan 21, 2011
20,233
10
545
Pennsylvania
Seriously? As cool as this feature sounds, sharing any games with 10 random friends without any hassle would have been worse than used games.

I found it very amusing that you'd find people claiming they were for Microsoft because they were trying to help publishers out of lost money from used sales...but you could share your game with up to 10 people on your friend's list.
 

Socreges

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
42,467
0
0
LOL @ folks believing the pastebin post. It's so obviously anti MS that I can only believe those regurgitating it as fact are part of the SDF. As for the removal of family sharing: sigh. I guess this is the result of the strident and vocal anti-DRM minority wishing that all consoles stop evolving and advancing over time.
The Original XBot! Good to see you going strong, man
 
Mar 5, 2012
1,009
0
0
No one told MS to remove the family sharing plan. They just wanted DRM on discs removed.

They can still implement the family sharing plan if they want without touching the disc DRM. Nothing is stopping them. People need to redirect their disappointment at MS for not advancing consoles, not the consumers. Sigh

This completely. There is no reason why the benefits of physical goods and digital goods cannot co-existence. I doubt the 'family sharing plan' was actually a coherent plan, but rather just a desperate response to the criticisms of MS anti-consumer DRM.
 

Polk

Member
Feb 28, 2008
4,068
0
0
Why are there limits to how many times you can play a demo on Wii U? Same logic applies to why MS would care how and when people can play demos.
Wait so are you implying it's MS equivalent of "if people can play demo every time they want, some of them become bored/satisfied before they buy the game"?
 

ultron87

Member
Jan 15, 2008
26,429
3
0
www.gamingshenanigans.blogspot.com
So that's all we knew. But there's another thing to consider... Major Nelson said late last week he was working on a detailed explanation of what the Family Plan was. That never came. This week he didn't respond to a single person asking him about it. And, as we know, they then changed policies.

I don't think there is anything to read into this part except that he obviously found that the 180 was coming at some point after promising to follow up. So putting out a detailed explanation that would be instantly obsolete would just confuse the message more.