Funny how this guys calls us idiots meanwhile he can't even get his facts straight, lol!

I'm sorry.... What!? Wasn't the sharing thing works this way,

-> you have it in your library

->your family member(in the family list) can use it when you're not playing it

->no two members can use the same game at the same time.

->when you are playing it, no other people can play it.

I refuse to believe that MS is that lax with this rule.  You are entitled to 1 copy which belongs and is registered to the only one who purchased it. Isn't this what they're pushing with their policies?

Unless I'm mistakening, this guy already is spewing bullshit in the article and calling people idiots.

I disagree but Microsoft needs to slash price

In many ways, it does suck. I guess Microsoft was just too ahead of it's time with their vision.

One of the great things about the X1 that will take a turn for the worse as a direct result of this reversal, is the instant game switching. Before, you could have installed a game to the HDD and play directly from there. Without the disc. This meant that you could have commanded the console to go from game to game instantly. Now, it will require the disc in the tray, pretty much sabotaging that feature. Of course, I presume the feature won't be totally gone provided you buy the games digitally from XBL, in which case the disc won't be required. But even so, it will no longer be a seamless, across the board experience.

Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't the 10-person share program have been more lethal for publishers than used/lending games?

Consider this : I don't necessarily have 10 friends near me to lend games to, but if people can share games via the xboxlive, wouldn't they be organizing themselves on forums/websites so that only one person out of ten has to purchase the game? This would be an instant disaster on software sales!

The whole family sharing thing seemed like something they just latched onto after the bad press started to take hold.  None of the Microsoft executives or PR folk seemed to understand how it actually worked, and even the worst incarnation (i.e. one person can play at a time) would likely have been more harmful to publishers than used games.  They were probably glad for an excuse to get rid of it.

kitler53 did a good job tearing down most of his individual points

Why would MS change their stance if they were getting brilliant pre-orders? 

I believe the "family plan" works like this.

You can have 10 people in your 'family group'.

They can be ANY 10 people who agree to join up in a group, period.

You can only be in one Family group(no details on how/if you can leave and then join another).

When one person in this 'family group' purchases a game, they get a license, and a 'share copy'.

That one person who bought the game always has access to said game, as they are the ONLY holder of the original purchase license.

The other 9 people in the 'family group' can use the 'share copy', just not concurrently with each other.

But any one of the 9 playing the 'shared copy' CAN play concurrently with the original license holder.

If one of the 'Family group' is using the shared license, then all other 'family group' members who do not own an original game license must wait until that person is done playing before being able to access the shared copy.

If the original license holder trades the game in at a store, or gifts the game to someone outside of the 'family group', then access to the 'share copy' goes away with it.

I also read somewhere that unless you are playing with the original owner you cannot access the online portions of the "shared" version. When playing alone it is strictly for the single player portions.

Overall it was a really cool feature and I am sure they will find a way to make it work without the 24-hour checkup or destroying the 2nd hand market.

The more I notice users here mention it, the more I think publishers and developers noticed it and shall we say 'had words with MS'. There was no reason to remove the feature for downloaded digital games only, it would be easy to recognise those over disc games, so why remove it? Unless there was a sudden amount of pressure from developers.

I have no idea how this ruined anything. They STILL have the capability to implement this a few years from now AND they can STILL do it on the Xbox One. It was just the way they basically said F consumers and choices you WILL take this and DEAL WITH IT....and if you can't then stick with a 360. That there was a SLAP in the face plain and simple.

Me personally I am glad they changed their policies it was for the better. Later on down the line when things settle down and digital is even more relevant than it is now ESPECIALLY in gaming then bring it in slowly. Don't just jump right in...Well time will tell what happens.