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

Forums - Microsoft - Xbox One's Digital Sharing Will Return "When the Time is Right"

theprof00 said:
disolitude said:
theprof00 said:

Actually I had already thought about that, and contractual dependancies were something I personally argued about at announcement. What kind of contract would require EVERYTHING to be completely shared? What you're saying makes no sense. Gamestop would be adamantly against such a policy as it would destroy game sales in the retail environment, both new and used.

And now you're arguing that instead of using a modified attempt, they INVALIDATED the contracts completely? Listen to yourself. If there were contracts in place, then MS broke all of them by removing it.

No.

The contracts most likely weren't in place but were being worked on and finalized. As far as we know, Gamespot could have kaiboshed this whole deal as it gives them the shit end of the stick.

Also no one invalidated any contracts, they just removed a feature from the Xbox Ones set of features. You can't breach the contract if a feature is no longer available. 

Regardless though, people can make up all kind of shit but unless you were directly involved in the Xbox One family sharing plan deployment, its just nonsence and speculation. No one on these forums has the slightest idea what is involved to bring something like this to market... Its not as easy as re-writing a few lines of DRM code. 

Good, I'm glad we agree that family share is nonsense and speculation.

Nah, try reading that again...It's not what we agree upon at all. 

We're agreeing that any discussion about why we don't have this feature after DRM removial is nonsence and speculation. 



Around the Network
badgenome said:
"We'd love to figure out how to bring that back. I still think it was a good idea. Maybe it was a little too soon for some people, but I still think there were a lot of good ideas in there. And we'll bring it back when the time is right."

Too soon? Earth to dumbass: it wasn't family sharing that people had a problem with.

There is already zero chance that family sharing worked like some of the more gullible folk around thought it would, and without always on DRM there is actually a negative chance that this thing will ever materialize. It's dead, Jim.

Gotta love this guy, gets it right almost every time.



PS One/2/p/3slim/Vita owner. I survived the Apocalyps3/Collaps3 and all I got was this lousy signature.


Xbox One: What are you doing Dave?

Spam replaced with a cat waiting for the time to be right - Kresnik.




It´s absolutely fascinating that there are people out there believing that:
Despite Microsft wanting to control you through their diabolical DRM (one time check in per day, no used game sales, no lending/rentals, region locking etc.....basically everything we take for granted)....they would have given you and up to 10 people the chance to play a single legally bought game.
laughable !



arcelonious said:

@ Captain Tom

Didn't Sony already have game sharing (albeit to lesser extent)?


Some of my friends shared a couple games on PSN and could play them at the same time.  However it wasn't technically "Legal."  It required them having each others accounts registered on their PS3's so they could log in as each other and download, and then they would log in as their own account and play it.

It was cumbersome and sometimes they would get locked out of an account for an hour, but most of the time it worked flawlessly.  Thus it is more an oversight by Sony than it is an advertised "Feature."



Around the Network
Zappykins said:
bananaking21 said:
Zappykins said:
Cool, hopefully people will understand it this time.

But VanGogh only sold one painting in his life. Most people have a hard time with innovation and innovators.

"But we want to stay in the caves" cried the cave people.


DRM has been done before, nothing innovative about it

Of course there is a car full of clowns of DRM in every HDMI device.  People hated it at first, but now everyone wants it. 

Please hated DRM Steam when it launched, but now people love it.

Now the DRM is either on your digital game or the disk.  What was innovated was how they were using it so that a digital purchase or a physical purchase could be used by the consumer in exactly the same way.

I think they should have offered two operating modes.  But now more people will just buy digital to have the best experience with instant switching, not having to hunt for game disk, or having your sweet but clumsy sister step and break your disk.

The problem with DD is this. In 15 years, when servers go down, your 250 games are gone. Until they let you back up your games physically and play offline, there's always going to be that problem.



Captain_Tom said:
arcelonious said:

@ Captain Tom

Didn't Sony already have game sharing (albeit to lesser extent)?


Some of my friends shared a couple games on PSN and could play them at the same time.  However it wasn't technically "Legal."  It required them having each others accounts registered on their PS3's so they could log in as each other and download, and then they would log in as their own account and play it.

It was cumbersome and sometimes they would get locked out of an account for an hour, but most of the time it worked flawlessly.  Thus it is more an oversight by Sony than it is an advertised "Feature."


I was actually referring to the PSP game sharing (the one limited to multiplayer between two PSPs), not the multi-console authorization one.  Ultimate point being that Sony has already experimented with game sharing in the past.



disolitude said:
theprof00 said:

Good, I'm glad we agree that family share is nonsense and speculation.

Nah, try reading that again...It's not what we agree upon at all. 

We're agreeing that any discussion about why we don't have this feature after DRM removial is nonsence and speculation. 

I know we didn't agree. What? Did you really believe I thought that?

I'm just pointing something out which has been omitted from the argument, that being that the entire share function is nonsense from the start. Just watch what this "let's see how we can get it to work" changes from the family share to whatever system they come up with. Meanwhile they dangle this "10 people can play one game" in front of you right here right now, when it isn't even a feature, and let's face it. This isn't an interview, this is a paid fluff piece. This is marketing, and you're falling for it.



It was just a demo mode, nobody cares.



WrathofTank said:
Zappykins said:
WrathofTank said:
Sharing and gifting games should have never left for digital games policy. There is literally no reason they had to take it away.

It need the daily DRM check in to work they way they had it set up.  Otherwise one person could buy a game, and gift it to everyone.

To gift a digital game requires an internet connection.  So DRM should already be in place for digital games.  I don't see any reason why they got rid of it.

I agree wit the concept, but there are a bunch lawyers behind all sort of licensing changes that we can't see.

It's why you can't stream Netflix in the UK the same as in Canada or the USA. The companies license there media to specific markets.

It's like DriectTV, you can a USA signal in both Canada and Mexcio, but DirectTV works hard to make sure people can't do that.  Not to be mean, but they have to honor the contracts they have signed to broadcast the shows, movies and music they show.

If they do not, they are violating international laws.

It's not that the concept can't be done, it's the legal aspects that get in the way.



 

Really not sure I see any point of Consol over PC's since Kinect, Wii and other alternative ways to play have been abandoned. 

Top 50 'most fun' game list coming soon!

 

Tell me a funny joke!