This is the biggest PR spin i have ever seen to make someone the mass that actually fought against them try and feel guilty for getting rid of their wrong doing.

Better return on used games my ass. Sharing digital downloads with "family".....when you can i dunno....let your family use the disc.

I can almost garuntee microsoft had no plans for cheaper games. This is all promises and speculation of crap they would have never given us.

I don't think it was a fair trade-off as I had no problem with the original system. I wish there was at least an option for the people that didn't care about the DRM. I just told my aunt the news and she's pissed because she thought the new features were really cool. Some of the complaints confused me. For instance people claimed they preferred physical copies yet physical copies still would exist. They claimed they wanted to sell the personally and you could still do that, plus you could even sell digital games! However that wasn't good enough because many complained that it sounded as if you couldn't resell what was sold to you. Now to me that is a fair trade off for the simple fact they were allowing us to resell digital games, which as far as I know, no one does!

Trust me all the features they were talking about were not as good as they made them out to be. This is much better.

That was confirmed false by Major Nelson.

This article reads oddly like the person just doesn't quite get it. There was never a mention of being able to resell your games digitally, if there was people might have made less of a fuss.

New games will never be cheaper, we already pay for a game, then many pay for DLC, are games cheaper because of the extra cash DLC makes the games company? No.

Better return? That's bullcrap, Gamestop and alike would have had to get their 'lost profits' from somewhere and that is by giving the customer a worse deal.

Digitally Sharing games is a nice idea but not thought out right, 3 people could share a game, yet only 1 person buys it. This is actually worse than used games were 1 person buys a game, sells it and another buys it. The same amount of people have bought the game. Can you imagine if someone came to me and said "I've found this great indie game on XBox Live, you should play it." I'll say back "Cool, can I play your version through sharing?", they say yes and before you know it, 7 people have played and enjoyed a game, yet the indie develop is going out of business because only 1 person bought it.

WoW is an MMO, don't connect to server you don't play, bad example. 

Physical games would exist, but nowhere even close to what they are today. Yeah they had a system in place to allow you to "possibly" resell them. Here was the issue with it though and so many continue to choose to ignore this.

Those games can only be traded in to "approved retailers". Who these retailers are we have no clue, but it could have been Gamestop, Bestbuy, Amazon, etc... Now, people already bitch about Gamestop being cheap on prices for trade ins. With them being one of your only avenues for trading in a title, expect those prices to drop since it isn't like you could just go on eBay or Craigslist and get $40 for your used title as opposed to Gamestop giving you $15-$22.

Publishers would need to "allow" these trade ins to happen to begin with, so if they choose not to, then your disc is nothing more than a digital copy and is 100% useless after you install your title.

The current setup allows the seller to get the best return and the buyer to get the cheapest price. $40 as opposed to $20 when selling and $40 as opposed to $50-$55 when buying.

Yes, they had a system to sell your digitial games. Here was the catch.

If you buy a game new, you could sell it digitally (If publisher allows it). Not sure if this system was even 100% up though, can't find a link to it. I can only find references about being able to "gift" the game to a friend, after they have been on your friends list for 30-days.

If you recieve the game digital from a friend or random stranger online then that game is 100% tited to your account forever and you cannot resell if god forbid you do not like the title. Also, the one who sells the game gets a chunk of the sale taken from them to pay publishers and microsoft.

I don't see what you were really going to be gaining other than being able to share games with up to (9) other people after a 30-day grace period and having those games checked out (similar to a library.

You would also be giving up the option of renting titles and trading physical titles between friends. Yes, they had no true lending plan set up yet. I believe that was said only a few days ago.

Actually it wasn't. Mjr. Nelson only dodges the issue by saying "This gen hasn't even begun, so why are we talking about this?" and saying "This isn't how we do things".

We had no true clear cut idea of how they are going to do things, which in itself was a big part of the issue for people.

What? Didn't he say absolutely? One of us is thinking of something else and who'd blame us with the PR mess lately! 

yer tell me about it, I was so confused what was happening with eh xbox one lol.

Hell I even said if they come out and jsut say that at the end of the gen we will role out a patch to disable DRM and obviously some games on disc with the latest patch to do so if I ever buy a second hand replacement I would be cool with the DRM.

Problem with the Vision

1. For the most part upon launch a game costs just as much Online as it does at retail stores.. and the prices would continue to go up.. so no it would not have been as much of a savings for gamers as you think...

2. Even for the most part when games do go onsale if they are newer.. there is very little differance in price between the Online price and the Used Games Market price for the most part.

3. Like setting down and waiting hours for downloads... what is ignored in the vision.. is the fact that it is not as conveninat as it sounds

4. Problem... if you buy say.. a buidling.. from a company.. and you want to resell it... do you think the company that sold you that building should have a stake in you selling it?? Or How about Movies?? or just about anything?? I mean geez in the time of Big Budgets even Hollywood.. and Television has learned their lessons... they come up with a lot of movies/shows done on a reasonable budget for a reason. For the publisher to get money from your sells... is wrong.. once you do bussiness with said publisher.. the item is yours.. the same could be said about any form of entertainmant or art.. Publishers either need to tone down their budgets or just make a fewer titles a year.. and take time to focus on their products and make them the best they can so the game does not end up on the Used Game Market so readily... (I won't say it won't wind up there at all.. pends on the person who buys it of course)

5. You would also damage the rental market.. and sometimes Demo's even if it close to the finalized product.. just does not get the job done.. people need to be able to see more... unless of course you do an online rental thing.. (Which is possible) But I don't think it would be as popular.. (Though actually if Publishers are that desperate for money they may want to try something like this.. if they can)

6. Ignores the fact that DRM is indeed an issue still.. a lot of sites that release games with no DRM are becoming more and more popular for a reason... (Some Newer.. Some Older..)