By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - Microsoft Clarify Family Sharing, Wasn’t Only Demos

badgenome on 23 June 2013
J_Allard said:
Like I said when this rumor first appeared.. it makes no sense whatsoever. The only excuse the people bitching could come up with is MS wanted a feature to kind of make you forget about DRM. So how are they going to do that with a worthless demo share feature LOL. And that's after they'd spent weeks marketing and talking it up as if it's a full game share LOL. Yeah, people are going to be perfectly ok with the ability to share demos.

A more likely scenario is the one described on multiple websites since this rumor surfaced. You can share full games just like MS described, there are just restrictions. A limit on how long you can play a title per day. A limit on how much of it you can access. A limit on how much of it you can play before being prompted you buy it. Things that would make publishers happy. But demos.. LOL.

Too bad we'll never know since some gamers are afraid of change.

So, just to be clear, you are calling Greenberg and Whitten liars while mocking people for calling them liars? I believe that's called cognitive dissonance.

Accusing people of being afraid of change is always a cop out. People like change they perceive as good and hate change they perceive as bad, and the Xbone was almost universally perceived as bad. Even if you'd like to dismiss "some gamers" as if they were just a vocal minority, there is no way Microsoft is ripping out the heart of their new system to please some vocal minority. Whatever they saw in terms of preorder numbers and whatever Gamestop told them scared the bejeezus out of them.



Around the Network
slowmo on 23 June 2013
ironmanDX


Not here in this thread... MS confirmed the demo sharing was not the case, that it was full title sharing yet people here desperately cling to it as fact.

Indeed.  



slowmo on 23 June 2013
Madword said:
slowmo said:
Perhaps those clinging to the vain hope this isn't true are the same posters who made themselves look silly in other threads by jumping the gun to try and mock XBO fans. Face it, you've nobody to blame but yourselves.

Don't want to come across as rude, but the only people who are coming across as silly as those who actually believed that MS would allow you to buy 1 copy of a game but share it fully with 10 other people. I know you are a massive MS fan (can tell by how you defend them regardless of what they do).... but you need to try and take the blinkers off.

Publishers would *NOT* have done this. There should be no argument on this point.... and if you agree with that point, then I'm afraid i dont see how this would have ever worked.

Perhaps taking your blinkers off might have helped then too.  Announcing a restricted way to share "demo's" was pointless, why restrict who you can entice to play demos of games, its stupid.  Time to face up, this was the real deal, hopefully they'll find a way to implement the feature on digital sales in the future to prove it was.



g911turbo on 23 June 2013
Figgycal said:

I feel like its Microsoft giving the middle finger to the consumer. "Oh you wanted this really awesome feature and you wanted us to take away DRM and let you play used games? Too bad- it was really going to be awesome too. I mean we didn't actually clarify anything about it, but believe us it was going to be great and thanks to you guys, we'll never see it."

If Microsoft really had any faith in this feature, they'd still allow it for digital downloaded games. It makes no sense to take this feature out because they gave up on a vision that most consumers didn't share.


Your post does have a point?  Why don't Sony and Microsoft try to drive us to all digital games  if that is what devs want?  Instead they give us no incentive to go all digital.  WEAK.



g911turbo on 23 June 2013
ItNetPro said:

So therefore anything they say is a Lie and you can't believe anything they say? Give me a break, its because they were honest that got them in trouble in the first place with the DRM issue. If they had remained elusive on the issue nobody would have known any better until release day. Think for just 30 seconds, if Xbox One offers demos for all their games including AAA release titles then what is the logic of them offering more demos for people in your family plan. Part of the requirement to share the games in the first place was 30 days part of the family. Why the hell would people wait 30 days to just play a demo for 30-60 minutes when they can do that without being part of a Family and having to wait 30 days. This was the real deal from day one period...


Could be they were going to help developers get rid of seperate demos that are alpha builds, or locked down, etc.

This way they could just release the retail copy of the game and have people try the final product.

 

My opinion?  Microsoft reversed their policies, so we should all just let it go.



Around the Network
g911turbo on 23 June 2013
badgenome said:
Just_Rocco said:
What part of that did you not understand exactly?

The part where used games are supposedly killing the industry but you could apparently go to a Microsoft Approved Retailer™ and buy a used game and put it online to share with NINE other people.

The part where Sony originally did this with mere five consoles sharing one digitally downloaded game on the PS3 and still had to bust it down to two consoles due to publisher complaints, but Microsoft was going to get away with ten people sharing one copy of a game.

The part where I'm supposed to be gullible enough to think that such a feature as Microsoft wants you to believe they were implementing would ever in a million years be allowed to exist in this industry.

I don't understand those parts.

So true.  Just didn't seem to add up.  Maybe they were banking on not many gamers having more than a friend or two.  Or not being able to coordinate who pays for what, etc.?



g911turbo on 23 June 2013
Just_Rocco said:
badgenome said:
Just_Rocco said:

Well im happy to clarify. Instead of Sony's bootleg way, you see, Microsoft had actual agreements with publishers and certain retailers in place. Couple that with the DRM and online check in, and you would've had some actual transparency to the game sharing. Everyone knew exactly how many times a game had been shared or traded in. This allows you to set pricing accordingly, maybe offer promotions (among other benefits) and everyone got a cut. Retailers happy. Publishers happy. Gamers happy.

How is Sony's method bootleg? It's not an exploit when they told you outright that you were allowed to do it before the launch of the system. Publishers knew it existed and could block it with DRM if they chose. To date, only Capcom has done so, but ultimately enough of them complained so as to get it nerfed from five to two.

So, the idea that they were all on board with ten people playing a game for the price of one is rather far-fetched. Incredibly so. What good is knowing how many times a game is shared when there's a 9:1 ratio of freeloaders to paying customers? What special promotional offer is going to beat FREE UNLIMITED GAMING? I mean, you know... if you're naive enough to believe that such a thing was going to happen in the first place.

Everything you just questioned..again...was already addressed in previous reply. This is not a myth or legend. Its a fact. You just refuse to believe because you hate M$. 

Sounds more like you refuse to question it because you love Microsoft lol.

I own all 3 systems, and even I thought the sharing feature seemed far fetched.  They must have been banking on people not being able to coordinate who buys which game, and groups being no where near 10 people.

You realize if 10 people bought the game shared, thats the equivalent of each person paying 6 bucks for the game.



g911turbo on 23 June 2013
badgenome said:
VGKing said:
That's a lie. Sorry but if you believe anything Microsoft says at this point, you're way too loyal.

Depends on what it is. If they say, "On second thought, we're going to implement this after all for all digitally sold games, and it will be unlimited and it will be there at launch," then sure, I'd believe them.

If they can just pretend they were going to do this incredibly awesome thing but everyone fucked it up by caring too much about ownership rights, and now they don't have to deliver on it, but it was all going to be super sweet, they promise, and maybe that will teach you to stand up for yourselves... no.

I want to be friends with you and your logic.



g911turbo on 23 June 2013
Zappykins said:
It’s really sad we, as gamers, lost so many cool new features. The way people are attacking Microsoft reminds me of how fundamentalist attack science. They just want to out yell and out scream to 'prove' they are right.

Never bothering with facts, ideas, or that they don't have to sacrifice their ideas, but may need to adjust them a bit.

Using logic, answer this.

 

If used games are a problem, then how is potentially reducing sales BY A FACTOR of 10 a better thing for developers?   Even If I buy a 60 dollar game new, then sell for 40, and then that guy sell for 20 before it ends up in his collection - that is still 3:1 worst case scenario.  How is the ability of 10:1 going to help!?!??!?!?



happydolphin on 23 June 2013

The main problem is that people are talking about this in detail after it was reversed, rather than talk it through before anything happens due to massive bitching.

This is the real problem for gamers. Gamers won the battle, but are losing the war on their own stupidity.