come to think of it, maybe DRM would not be such a bad thing. without the option of getting money back on traded in games, this guy would not be developing games to begin with, BECAUSE NOBODY WOULD BUY A 60$ CRAP PRODUCT FROM A MORON LIKE HIM.

OK, let's try to say something positive about Cliffy B...
...
...
...
...
Great comedian?
...
...
...
...
...
He must be smoking great stuff?

he needs a new job.....

sorry to burst your bubble

http://www.gamesreviews.com/news/06/microsoft-clarify-family-sharing-wasnt-only-demos/

Who is he talking to? Microsoft added DRM and this "family plan" and MS took it away. Go tweet to your bosses Cliffy B.

lolololol now they can say whatever, do you really think developers would let you borrow their games with 10 person no string attached but bitch and moan about reselling it to 1 individual

According to other sources it was more like a "Pandora for Xbox" where you can play for an hour, have you progress saved, then you're prompted to buy. But you can not buy and go back to playing. Idk why the family share haters always cry out "bububu u can play 10 games off one copy any time u want why would anyone buy any games??//??". There were restrictions announced already and more to come. Imagine it like playing a free version of a mobile game compared to the paid version. The only people who really seemed to believe you could play any game any time "no strings attached" are people who wanted a reason to belittle guys excited about Xbox One. This thread is a prime example of that and there are countless others here and on NeoGAF.

Exactly. I have been posting this very fact every place I have argued with stupid people over this topic. For some reason they think MS came up with this type of thing and that for them to do it they absolutely had to give up physical discs and put up with draconian DRM.  My family shares several PS3 and we shared CoD map packs, rockband tracks and games all the time over the last 7 years.

The best part for me is that people actually believe that after they went along withe the MS sharing deal for no discs no ownership that they'd actually get lower prices instantly and that the number would stay at 10. Sony reduced the number of systems you could share your digital purchses from 5 to 2 in 2011 and MS would inevitably have done the same with its plan at some point.

Sony has been doing this while supporting physical media without the heavy handed DRM so why can't MS? If the family share is so great (and I think it is a nice feature if it isn't saddled with provisos) then why scrap it just because they scrapped 24 hour check-ins?

This also begs the question, how is this different than having used games or rentals? If you network with a group of gamers you could between you conceivably purchse fewer games as a collective and just share games thus reducing the number of sales for developers. Yet somehow this is better than used games? The only difference is MS had control over it and could again, reduce the number of allowable shares at any time or reduce play time etc.

Glad it went down the way it did, otherwise gamers (consumers) lose. Screw Cliffy and his millionaire tears.

link, I had no internet for the past 3 days, I 'm out of the loop