Wickerbasket
Member
How is giving them what they want being a dickhead?
There's a petition for asking Microsoft To Bring Back Xbox One's DRM
- Thread starter artist
- Start date
Septimus Prime
Member
Was Turkey even a Tier 1 country?The funniest ones are the serious ones.
To allow my friends acess to the game by up to 10 people ms would have to insure obly one other person is playing at once. Thus they need to require internet.
The other feature which is no disc required to play a game needs internet acess to make sure you are the legal owner of the disc and its not being used by someone else at the same time. An easy exploit would be for me to come to your house and sign in. Download all my games and sign off line and allow you to continue playing them till you beat them. Theb I can go home and acess the same game.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
Totally signed. Too hilarious not to.
:lol
Moral Panic
Member
It's a parody
Krusenstern
Banned
That's the joke I think.
FranXico
Member
Exactly. To this day, Sony still is suffering the consequences of all their BS with the PS3.
The funniest ones are the serious ones.
Turkey is quite arid. Perhaps he just wants more rain and was willing to do his bit to make it happen. Family sharing, background downloads and bountiful harvests are just three advantages the AWESOME AND INFINITE POWER OF THE CLOUD can bring.
No it's not.
SwiftDeath
Member
RedNumberFive
Banned
OMG yes
I realize glove was kidding
That image is pretty much the perfect response to this family sharing nonsense.
King Tubby
Member
The most pointless petition in the history of petitions. Do they even know how much negative word-of-mouth it took to make MS reverse their position in the first place?
RedNumberFive
Banned
But with these changes Microsoft made the infinite power of the cloud a bit more finite.
DualX
Member
I don't believe that was the reason. Gamestop stopped taking pre-orders for Xbox One.
Hitokiri03
Member
LOL this gif is amazing.
So many illuminating posts. Bgamer90 who before were telling everyone to be so skeptical and DONT TAKE A HUNDRED PR INDIVIDUALS SAYING THE SAME THING as gospel in the Mark Cerny topic:
link
And now he's saying this about the Family Share Plan:
Link
Why so 100% positive? Because of Arthus Gies - the most disreputable member of the gaming press, confirmed over and over - said so and because Microsoft made allusions to the fact that it was full games after they no longer had anything to lose.
In contrast, Sony's PR reps made a thousand fucking statements confirming the PS4 was not online required, and BGamer90 was like "I JUST KNOW HOW PR PEOPLE ARE YOU CAN'T TAKE THEM AT THEIR WORD"
No, BGamer90, I'm sorry but it's not two different things. It's the exact same thing. It has nothing to do with being a console warrior - you were being intellectually dishonest and now this proves it. I'm a little disappointed that I engaged you back then on this subject. And now "Oh I just happened to prefer 360, last gen before that it was PS2, therefore I'm not a fanboy! Play whatever!" Yeah, and racists have black friends.
Ah, persecution complex. I seriously eat it up unlike any other refreshing drink on Earth.
BGamer90 said:
link
And now he's saying this about the Family Share Plan:
BGamer90 said:
Link
Why so 100% positive? Because of Arthus Gies - the most disreputable member of the gaming press, confirmed over and over - said so and because Microsoft made allusions to the fact that it was full games after they no longer had anything to lose.
In contrast, Sony's PR reps made a thousand fucking statements confirming the PS4 was not online required, and BGamer90 was like "I JUST KNOW HOW PR PEOPLE ARE YOU CAN'T TAKE THEM AT THEIR WORD"
No, BGamer90, I'm sorry but it's not two different things. It's the exact same thing. It has nothing to do with being a console warrior - you were being intellectually dishonest and now this proves it. I'm a little disappointed that I engaged you back then on this subject. And now "Oh I just happened to prefer 360, last gen before that it was PS2, therefore I'm not a fanboy! Play whatever!" Yeah, and racists have black friends.
Ah, persecution complex. I seriously eat it up unlike any other refreshing drink on Earth.
lionkitten
Banned
If I had the option of one version of the console or the other, based on the still limited info we actually have on both "versions' of the X1, I'd still take the first one.
The implementations didn't bother me then and they don't bother me now. And I really did want some of the stuff they are taking away because of it (disc swapping, instant on/off games and input/between title switching, sharing plan, etc.) I was excited to see what this path would actually bring and what the benefits could be. Or not be. Maybe Xbox would implode. Whatever. It would have been fascinating. And now it's not. At least it's way more boring than it could have been.
None of the inconveniences were inconvenient for me, and I lost features I wanted. For me personally, that version would have been better. I get that it's not a popular viewpoint, but I never was the popular kid and I turned out ok. At 40, I certainly don't care whether I run with the herd, unlike a lot of the cattle on gaming sites.
Yes, I'm giving up certain freedoms for other freedoms, and you might judge that freedom from something like disc swapping and load times between games isn't worth being able to get your GameStop credits or whatever, but to me it was well worth it.
The implementations didn't bother me then and they don't bother me now. And I really did want some of the stuff they are taking away because of it (disc swapping, instant on/off games and input/between title switching, sharing plan, etc.) I was excited to see what this path would actually bring and what the benefits could be. Or not be. Maybe Xbox would implode. Whatever. It would have been fascinating. And now it's not. At least it's way more boring than it could have been.
None of the inconveniences were inconvenient for me, and I lost features I wanted. For me personally, that version would have been better. I get that it's not a popular viewpoint, but I never was the popular kid and I turned out ok. At 40, I certainly don't care whether I run with the herd, unlike a lot of the cattle on gaming sites.
Yes, I'm giving up certain freedoms for other freedoms, and you might judge that freedom from something like disc swapping and load times between games isn't worth being able to get your GameStop credits or whatever, but to me it was well worth it.
Delusibeta
Banned
ITT: people demonstrating why AAA gaming has gotten as bad as it is. They'll bend over and get screwed by their favourite company without questioning it.
No chance in hell. Turning 10 potential sales into 1 sale split amongst 10 folks sharing the same library?
Anyone who believes that this something publishers would sign on to willingly is high on illegal drugs. Period.
The 60 minute time limit is far more plausible, and has already been confirmed by people with a better track record for accuracy on these boards. Use some common sense.
famousmortimer
Banned
I'm totally gonna sign it.
Parapraxis
Member
So when MS did the 180 you lost the ability to save yourself from swapping discs and also lost the family sharing plan right.
The disc swapping is not a big enough deal to mention really..is it?
And the family sharing plan could not possibly have been what some people think.
A console/company railing against used games is not going to set up a system where effectively through sharing would make publishers almost certainly lose 10 sales per each game sold.
Publishers would never have released a game for a platform that set up such a huge risk in sales...ever.
The Xbox One would have been dead on arrival.
The funniest thing is how directly it destroyed the heart of the whole reason they were doing what they were doing in the first place.
'We need to make the environment more fair for developers and publishers, so they always get a cut of all game sales. It is important that our partners and our consumers both feel like they're getting a benefit.'
Cut to... a family share that allows 10 people on your list indiscriminately share games for as long as they want, at least one of them at a time? This shit is like a trillion times more abusable than the alternative system. What logical reason would they do this, after they nearly destroyed their entire brand in the name of trying to appease publishers/developers and themselves?
How is this any different than how it is now? You can currently lend your games to ANYONE not just the 10 limit that MS had in play.
Oh you!
Crafty people and their super fast edits!
Very different - you didnt need anything, not even the disc. Just be part of this family, magic and cloud (with a healthy dose of cow dung) made all the games available to you and 8 other family members.
Parapraxis
Member
Lending physical copies actually requires some effort to be honest.
Setting up a system where you don't even have get off your couch to lend the game, to 10 different people would be infinitely more damaging to game sales than the random person lending physical copies to a friend (only one copy at a time)
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
More than 1% of Nintendo's sales are digital and Microsoft already built the infrastructure
Yo Microsoft you can reach me by PM, I'm available for relocation.
Family Sharing without Always Online:
- When a user buys content, they get two licenses.
- One is attached to their home console. This license works online or offline no matter who is playing.
- The second license is called a "roaming" license. This license works on any console in the world as long as not just the console but also the user's account is online when the game is launched. The account is validated if it is the original purchaser or one of the delegated family share accounts.
(This, by the way, is a copy-paste of the Xbox 360 system with the addition of the text "or one of the delegated family share accounts")
If you don't want to discuss the topic, don't discuss the topic. That's your point here. Your point is literally "gawsh us mere mortals couldn't hope to understand the complexity of this stuff." Okay, so let's not talk about it at all.
Why years? People have been claiming that GAF is biased against Xbox literally right back to the year 2001, we're talking decades man. When Sam Kennedy was in the womb he was literally dreaming of the day he'd be able to defeat the Evil Microsoft and Praise Sony-Sama.
Hey, want to be part of my family? You're probably in another state making it difficult to loan you a physical copy, but I'd be willing to let you be part of my Xbox circle of amazingly close friends.
Just paypal me 30 bucks and we'll split the difference on the game. If I get more people involved, the cost for you goes down!
Heretic, you're more apt to lend your physical copy to someone that you know personally.
With a digital library shared with whoever you choose, the opportunity for abuse is increased significantly. That's why the time limit makes infinitely more sense - the person playing the game gets a real taste of the full title, maybe earns some achievements, and then is primed to upgrade to a full price copy in order to continue. They are now invested. The other description where people can just play forever? Makes no sense at all in comparison.
Don't get salty at me because you miss Bobby Ryan, man.
With a digital library shared with whoever you choose, the opportunity for abuse is increased significantly. That's why the time limit makes infinitely more sense - the person playing the game gets a real taste of the full title, maybe earns some achievements, and then is primed to upgrade to a full price copy in order to continue. They are now invested. The other description where people can just play forever? Makes no sense at all in comparison.
Don't get salty at me because you miss Bobby Ryan, man.
razgriz417
Member
Yup, its the convenience factor that would totally make publishers lose sales and vehemently oppose the feature. Being able to automatically share your games with 10 other people with little to no effort on either parties' part would have made this feature amazing for consumers but devastating for publishers. Currently, yes you could technically mail or physically deliver your 1 paid copy to 10 other friends but most wouldn't really go through the hassle to do so (at least I know I wouldn't be mailing my discs to my friends) unless you know them really well
While I agree that it's loads easier, it's still the same idea.
Here was the way I was hoping this would work at its worst:
You get 10 family slots.
They can't be easily changed out without some fee or restriction
You and only one other person can play from your library at any given time now matter the game
You can only be in ONE person's Family Share. (So if I have you as a member, no one else can have you but you can still have your 10)
You can play one hour at a time then you can continue later from where you left off.
The wound is still fresh...
razgriz417
Member
Thats all well and good, but what can MS offer the publishers for them to agree to this plan? What's in it for them? I'm guessing that's the reason why there were no real clear details and examples given before it was scrapped, I doubt they had any publishers on board
They need to change it back so I can only pay $6 per game. I'm sure I can find people on GAF which taste aligns with mine well enough that even if we collectively decide to buy games I have no interest in my average buy price for a game copy over the course of a console generation will not go past $10 for day one copies.
Alas, only crazy people believe the family plan was like this.
Alas, only crazy people believe the family plan was like this.
lastflowers
Banned
My guess, based on pokes and prods at people, is that it is full-game access...but time limited. Now, whether that is time-limited to 'play once, and done' or 'play a 1 hr trial each week' I don't know. No one either knew or wanted to tell me. My assumption is that it might have been a publisher thing where activision could specify the 'cool-down' time between trials.
Family share plan aside, my biggest problem with the DRM was just the inadequacy of the time-period. 24 hour check-in with no ability to specify off-line is carrrazy. They didn't specify an online auction-house/craiglist where you could sell your titles. Add in a manual 'opt-offline' period for X amount of days, and an online auctionhouse where you can sell your digital licenses...and boom I'm 100% down for it.
We won't know their true intentions with this plan. If they came out and said it worked like we all hoped it would nobody would believe them.
It's unfortunate that we'll never know the full details of this plan. But your ideas about this plan and how it worked are just as valid as mine.
Yeah, I remember that thread. Watching BGamer90 do a complete 180 in attitude when it comes to MS PR and trying to explain it away has been entertaining.
I think you suffer from the false notion of democracy where one man's ignorance is as good as another man's knowledge.
Or in different less Asimov terms: Some whack shit is not as valid as well reasoned arguments to the contrary.
We're trying to replicate their shit without knowing what the shit was so your shit is as good as my shit.
Glass half full. Glass half empty.
SwiftDeath
Member
Hmm if a publisher came out and said something new about it I think it would have some weight
Likely they're under NDA's galore though
At the very least they wouldn't want to step on MS's toes
Would love for someone to leak internal MS docs about family share
Where's wikileaks when you need them?
lionkitten
Banned
A. Your preferences are not everyone's preferences. Just because it's easy/quick/unirritating for you to change inputs or swap discs doesn't mean it's the same for everyone. Why is it preferable to install everything on a PC or a phone or a tablet and run without media swapping, but for a console, it's "HEY, Let me stop everything and use this piece of outdated physical media for no reason. That'll add to my enjoyment!" Just stupid.
B. You don't know what would have happened with sharing, and aftermarket and retail prices or publisher deals or any of it. And now we won't. Oh, I know, all the interweb Nostradamuses had it all figured it out instantly. Just like they knew Home wasn't gonna make any money and that Live would never work if it required broadband and that the Wii was a low-res disaster waiting to happen.
Just like this thread and the Sony fanboys and the PC Master Race-rs rushing to sign the petition as a farce, a good proportion of the screaming and moaning and whining on the web was fueled by people that weren't going to buy the damn thing anyway, which is what irritates me more than anything.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked