Copy and pasted from NeoGaf

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.

Major Nelson confimed the exactly oposite.

Now which is the truth?

Sounds cool if true

I dont see how an on site rep is any more reliable than the other sources we have heard from. Im not going to take anything seriously until the company releases an official description of the policy. Hopefully that is something hey will do soon, as this is potentially the only real upside to the whole drm stuff. Could be pretty cool.

The article here is right... Major Nelson made a mistake... AngryJoe confirmed that in the next video.

Edit - The article is partly right.

From GAF.

It is 2 people at the same time. But when 2 people at the same time its for singleplayer only. Also the other 8 people are not locked out from playing other games in the shared library. DLC is also shared.

So only in single-player can two pleople play at the same time. 

They should really do a live video demonstration or post a youtube video or something.

This is just far too confusing for the average user. Conflicting PR isn't helping either.

Let's be honest, people are interested in this because they think they might get full access to games that their friends bought and they didn't. If that is in any way not true, the feature's meaningless to the wider debate on XBOne.

"The other 9 people no longer have access" means that this only works for 1 person freeloading on 1 game per 10 people, unless a person can be in multiple circles?

Therefore:

1. Can the same PEOPLE be in multiple circles?
2. Under what circumstances and how fast can PEOPLE or GAMES be moved between circles?

I posit that the limitation is that the nominated "family" group must be the same for all ten accounts: Bob's in Alice's family, therefore Alice is in Bob's family. Also I posit that one can't hop between "families", as implied by the title "family". This is a reasonable tradeoff for a flexible system IMHO.

Then only one game in one person's library can be freeloaded upon by one person out of the ten, making this a much less persuasive counterpoint to the necessary DRM.

Also, can this friend play BF4 when you are not? The OP sounds like "No" to that as well. In which case it's basically Spawn-mode like for Warcraft III back in the day.

Oh I'd assumed that the concurrent thing meant that you could only have two people playing at one time (as in the exact same minute) but you think it means you have to assign "this person is the one I'm sharing with at the moment" and only you two can play the game until you switch who you're sharing it with.  I guess you're probably right if I'm being realistic.