DragonSworne
Banned
Master Chief can go invisible.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
MS eliminates its best new feature: 10 person, 60 min Family Sharing plan for Xbone
- Thread starter Horse Armour
- Start date
Master Chief can go invisible.
Silly.Mikey
Banned
For like 13 seconds.
Just_myles
Member
I don't really need it. The price for DRM is too high for me. Plus I had something like that in ps3 (less sophisticated) which I didn't really use anyway.
shinra-bansho
Member
My favorite new narrative now is "Sony wanted the same DRM and blocking used, but couldn't implement it like Microsoft could."
Except it's not.
They intended to remove ownership rights of physical goods.
You can close your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears and pretend that isn't what they tried to do. As you seem to be insistent they were making no change to the status quo on ownership and trade-in.
They were free to "evolve" digital goods. They could have made an all digital console if they wanted. They can still implement their fantabulous sharing game system for digital purchases. They can still implement systems for digital resale. They can price their digital games at half the price of retail if they want.
But they aren't.
Because none of this was about that, it was about control of the secondary games market and your physical purchases after you purchase them. And they backed down.
This wasn't mean PlayStation fans on the internet screwing you out of the ability to pay 1/11th the price of a game and share it with your friends. This is Microsoft's fuck up, through and through.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
Electronics Boutique accepted and sold used PC games just like consoles games up until the early '00s.
The lack of just good old common sense is pretty shocking. Yes, the publishers who forced Sony to lower sharing from 5 consoles to 2 are going to allow Microsoft to enable it on 10, that makes perfect sense.
It's quite simple actually.
the 21st, post-conference (because that's where the negatives really started to come out) they reacted to questions instead of preempting them.
They waited for people to ask about 24-hour check ins and always online before really addressing any of it.
This issue with their first conference was that it wasn't centered toward the gamer. So they promised that their e3 conference would be basically all about games. 90 minutes chocked full of games. Which it pretty much was.
The post-conference q&a was their misstep. They weren't proactive in acknowledging that people would ask those questions and they didn't head it off at the pass, so to speak. They allowed those issues to become the message.
After that, everything seemed like a PR promise of justification, because they didn't lead with the justification. They had higher-ups screwing up platform features, which their PR team had to clear up. They had rumor after rumor to address in seemingly every interview.
They really only got on message with most of the issues at e3. Then the family share questions started, but it was mixed with 80% questions about DRM and why why why.
They screwed their messaging post-reveal. Plain and simple. After that it was all downhill.
I would, except CBOAT commented and he's proven to be far more credible than most suits from MS. CBOAT's track record > suit. 90%+ rate of accuracy at the WORST, not best. He is legit no matter how many doubters try to discredit him (hilarious, considering the mods know he's legit and everyone can see his track record in his post history).
You can choose to believe him or not, none of us care and neither does CBOAT. What's irksome is that you're trying to convince everyone that CBOAT isn't credible, when in fact his track record is there plain as day for everyone to see and shits all over your baseless discrediting. He's gotten stuff wrong, who hasn't? Compare his wrong info to the rest of his leaks that are correct. You'll ignore that of course, because no matter how many times people show you his right/wrong ratio you'll plug your fingers in your ears and scream to drown out the very likely possibility that he's right.
The mods don't take leaks lightly. If someone isn't a legitimate insider, they get banned. CBOAT has proven time and again that he is very legitimate. That's that. There is of course a chance that he's wrong - but he doesn't post unless he's verified with his sources, so the more likely scenario is that he's right. In this case, it isn't a prediction about the future, it's a fact about a plan that was just scrapped - the info he's posted is therefore up to date, and can be considered true.
Considering you joined just before the Xbox One reveal, your curious defense of MS's policies, and your constant attempts to discredit CBOAT, you are quite suspect yeah
you obviously have no idea how GAF works and why CBOAT is respected, even among the other insiders.Dave Meltzer
Banned
Because digital games are a rip off and cost more than retail. I was looking forward to the glorious future of being able to buy a new game in a supermarket for £30 and link it to a digital account and play without a disc.
There's no way the next consoles have a disc drive. Maybe Nintendo, I guess. I'll bet my account on it, if I'm wrong in 8 years get me banned from the NeoGAF.
I'm not discrediting at all.
And I haven't said that CBOAT isn't an insider.
I just think that it's foolish to say that since he says something it's 100% correct/change thread titles/cling to his every word.
It just baffles me that there is such a hunger on this board from some people to cling to CBOAT's posts.
Even you are saying "the more likely scenario is that he's right." and then you follow up that it's a "fact". That's a big leap.
You can take his word for gold. It just makes no sense that when there is doubt about the validity of everything being said on a subject, that people would shut off any other possible reason/comment/opinion because one insider says something that differs from what other people say.
One had DRM the other didn't.
all those 5 people could play the game at the same time couldn't they?
Were talking about online digital games sharing bro! (Sony's was only for online games on PSN, that in itself is a type of DRMish thing because its not like those games can be traded in).
CadetMahoney
Member
ppl will believe and defend what they want to.
Uno Venova
Banned
Anyone on the forum is welcome to not believe cboat, just understand why 99% of the others do.
I believe that what he said about the timer is a fact, yes. You're free to believe whatever. The reason his words are usually taken over what MS's execs say - first off, they have a record of lying and spinning, second, CBOAT only posts when he has info to share, and is almost always right. That's proven by his post history. Again, you clearly don't understand -why- he has the reputation that he does, and you haven't listened to a word I said in my post above either.
Jake Tower
Banned
"Cortana, you're soft, unlike sand, Milady..."
Killing_Joke
Member
DD only next gen? Can't wait to download 100GB+ 4K games/movies. lol
Yet again, I point out that I DO understand why he has the reputation he does. I've been reading these forums since 2006.
And I'm not saying that you have to not believe him. I'm just pointing out that for there to be some form of discourse, it's a little presumptuous to change thread titles to suit something that he comes out with.
It's great to enjoy his posts, and he is correct on most occasions. Why the thread title change if we don't know for certain? The OP didn't write that title in. There has been no other confirmation on what he has said on this matter, other than a posting on pastebin.
Now we have microsoft representatives coming out and saying, in no uncertain terms, that it's false. I'm not saying they're right. I'm saying that we should take it into consideration and maybe hold back on changing thread titles. Once it's changed to that, it's taken as fact.
IlludiumQ36
Member
Preponderance of the evidence built up over the past 4 weeks through interviews, leaks, & insider info - not to mention past precedent with how MS did sharing on the Zune and XLive arcade. Everything adds up with far more weight than two known PR puppets on Twitter.
shinra-bansho
Member
The Verge has corroborated this with their sources.
The same representatives who in no uncertain terms have lied through their teeth, because they have to. It's their job.
In the end it comes down to who people are going to believe over another. The discourse that remains beyond that is now all speculation. I get what you're saying, but for many of us the pieces fit that the sharing plan couldn't have been what MS was implying, not without fierce publisher resistance. By itself the pastebin is worthless, but CBOAT bothered to comment on it so it carries weight. It does look rather silly to believe just on his word, but for me at least I've read his post history and have come to the conclusion that he's reliable.
famousmortimer posited that MS may have changed the plan late in its development in an attempt to make it an actual game sharing plan and not just demos, so both greenberg and CBOAT could be right; they'd just be talking about different stages of it. If that was the case then the reason it was scrapped would likely be not enough publishers agreed to it.
Puppet Shadow
Member
Why do you care about this so much? I might disagree with thread titles sometimes, but it doesn't bother me as much as this seems to upset you. Let people read through the thread and decide if they agree.
Do any of you really believe the family sharing plan would've been unrestricted in the sense that there would be no time limits or max amount of playable sessions? Please, explain to me, why publishers would ever agree to this? How is this realistic for a business? How does purchasing one copy of a game and sharing it with 10 other people increase revenue for said game?
Edit: and the other thing is, with the amount of threads dedicated to discussing the X1 features, such as family sharing and DRM, why do people keep making a steam comparison with X1? I'm beginning to think many people don't bother reading comments.
Edit: and the other thing is, with the amount of threads dedicated to discussing the X1 features, such as family sharing and DRM, why do people keep making a steam comparison with X1? I'm beginning to think many people don't bother reading comments.
that's where this discussion that i've been in began on that subject, so I'm keeping it consistent.
It doesn't upset me, I just like to stay "on topic" with what began the topic discussed. It began with the tweets from executives, which then turned into a conversation on changing the thread title (to which I got involved at that point), to talking about CBOAT in relation to validity.
Puppet Shadow
Member
Fair enough. So, what about The Verge's sources?
Garrett 2U
Member
I don't disagree with a lot of what you said.
Yes Microsoft did pretty much remove the right to ownership of the game on the physical disc.
The discs were basically an unlock key and a fast download for people who have bad internet.
They did make a change to status quo by allowing publishers to block used games if they wanted, but Sony went along with that too.
They made a digital console, but also made it accessible to people who have poor internet.
Yes they can still implement a lot of digital bonuses, and they will.
I adamantly disagree that their DRM was to kill the secondary game market, because they allowed used games on their system as much as Sony did.
The secondary game market is going to die either way from an emphasis on digital games from both consoles.
The only thing Microsoft didn't offer that Sony did was sharing of physical discs.
But in my opinion they created a better system to share your games with your friends.
It is a shame that they didn't talk about it more, and I hope we'll see it come back soon.
It is Microsoft's fault for not communicating properly, I'm not arguing against that.
But to deny that they designed their systems to allow for digital sharing is ignoring the facts.
I think all Microsoft really needed was an offline mode and the Internet would have been quicker to accept it.
(Funny how the Internet was so vocally against an Internet requiring device)
I'd like to read about it, hadn't heard it. Could you link me?
Their digital sharing feature was vapourware, this is why they back-peddled.
Not everything should require being connected to the internet.
Gokurakumaru
Banned
Not only is the joke old, the comic doesn't even make sense. How were they doing it beforehand?
You know whats really disturbing is while most people would like to argue that MS had a terrible message game on the issue of DRM and/or "They had so much time to prepare a PR strategy" everyone is glossing over or can't seem to see the awful truth.
You weren't suppose to know.
Everything we learned came from early leaks of their strategy plans and the leaked SDK docs from superdae. They have a PR mess because they had no plan to address to the public something they never wanted them to know.
You weren't suppose to know.
Everything we learned came from early leaks of their strategy plans and the leaked SDK docs from superdae. They have a PR mess because they had no plan to address to the public something they never wanted them to know.
ThatGuy707
Member
https://twitter.com/aegies/status/347748309550645249 Works at Polygon.
For those people saying why did they get rid of it, in a recent interview with Marc Whitten, he said they will likely bring it back for Digital content only in the future.
For those people saying why did they get rid of it, in a recent interview with Marc Whitten, he said they will likely bring it back for Digital content only in the future.
https://twitter.com/aegies/status/347748309550645249 Works at Polygon.
For those people saying why did they get rid of it, in a recent interview with Marc Whitten, he said they will likely bring it back for Digital content only in the future.
Gies word is worthless. He has lost any credibility before even E3 started.
LiquidSolid
Member
https://twitter.com/aegies/status/347748309550645249 Works at Polygon.
For those people saying why did they get rid of it, in a recent interview with Marc Whitten, he said they will likely bring it back for Digital content only in the future.
Trying to use Gies as proof of anything, especially something Microsoft related, is fucking ridiculous.
Dirtyshubb
Member
As others have said you can't take pro's statements at face value, Microsoft's back tracking prove this.
I think the 1 hour game sharing was real and if that's so it just means that Microsoft were just doing what Sony are doing with the trails of every game on their store, except making someone buy a copy of the ame and limiting it to only 10 people, pretty crappy if true.
I think the 1 hour game sharing was real and if that's so it just means that Microsoft were just doing what Sony are doing with the trails of every game on their store, except making someone buy a copy of the ame and limiting it to only 10 people, pretty crappy if true.
Has he actually come out and said that though? Because Giant Bomb also claimed that Prince of Persia was to be shown so it might've just been pulled from the show.
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
https://twitter.com/aegies/status/347748309550645249 Works at Polygon.
For those people saying why did they get rid of it, in a recent interview with Marc Whitten, he said they will likely bring it back for Digital content only in the future.
Posting a gies twitter here is not a good idea.
There is no way that family share would be the hole damn game with a potential loss in says of $540 per game sold
Apeopleman
Member
You must be new to this message board.
People often read article titles and then load their gun with ammo and pull a Rambo on the thread.
I don't believe MS would allow you to share a full game with several people. Theoretically, 10 people could chip in 6 bucks each to buy a game and pass it around.
The 60 minute trial sounds like something they would do.
They really didn't. And the fact that they had no backup plan shows just how arrogant the leadership is at that company.
Why is that guy still working at Polygon? He is such a liability and traffic repellant.
Indeed, the believers need to ask themselves this :
- Out of all the used copies of a popular game how many manage to get resold 10 times?
- Other than the 20MS points for your birth day, when has Microsoft ever given you something for free?
Yeah, MS really isn't known for their desire to make customers happy. People in the know like Pachter/Fish/Notch/Blow/CBOAT make jokes/comments about how MS' greed and arrogance is unmatched in gaming.
Elaugaufein
Member
The reason why people will trust negative things MS says and not the positive things MS says should be obvious.
Corporations have every possible reason to lie and say things that make them look good. Our societal reprimand for corporations behaving badly largely doesn't even manage to be a slap on the wrist to the big players most of the time. Its like trying to discourage stealing by charging you 1% of the market value of what you steal.
Conversely corporations have no incentive at all to lie and say things that make them look bad. The incentive just isn't there.
Corporations have every possible reason to lie and say things that make them look good. Our societal reprimand for corporations behaving badly largely doesn't even manage to be a slap on the wrist to the big players most of the time. Its like trying to discourage stealing by charging you 1% of the market value of what you steal.
Conversely corporations have no incentive at all to lie and say things that make them look bad. The incentive just isn't there.
That is more applicable to banks and oil corporations with massive government interests/lobbying power. Tech companies that sell consumer goods can be swayed by consumers especially now in the social media age. We all just witnessed it (also see Apples antennagate).
semiconscious
Gold Member
& they've basically acknowledged this:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/124970-Microsofts-Yusuf-Mehdi-We-Need-To-Educate-Consumers
while the article is titled 'Microsoft's Yusuf Mehdi: We Need To Educate Consumers', it contains this money-quote:
their marketing campaign was basically premised on the assumption that, aside from some core complainers, there was really no need to explain anything, because their true target audience would blindly go along with whatever they were (or were not) offering. iow, they were simply banking on consumer ignorance to put them over the top
...& they've basically acknowledged this:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/124970-Microsofts-Yusuf-Mehdi-We-Need-To-Educate-Consumers
while the article is titled 'Microsoft's Yusuf Mehdi: We Need To Educate Consumers', it contains this money-quote:
their marketing campaign was basically premised on the assumption that, aside from some core complainers, there was really no need to explain anything, because their true target audience would blindly go along with whatever they were (or were not) offering. iow, they were simply banking on consumer ignorance to put them over the top
This is why I think it's going to be a very close race now. Sure, word started getting out about the used game policies, but I'm willing to bet the majority of game players still didn't know/don't know about it.
Now the only obvious advantage ps4 has is price.
What Sony needs to do is make sure they get the word out there about their system. I turn on my Xbox and I'm slammed with Xbox 1 ads. Turn on my ps3 and I see a little ps4 box off to the side, if I even bother going to the side.
Similar threads
- Poll