Not necessarily. The biggest reasons MicRosoft are doing this is to A) get a cut of used games sales B) hasten the rate at which their platform becomes a digital platform and C) ensure that everyone is online, which increases the chances of the consumer contributing to the revenue stream that Microsoft sees with Live. Well, that and being on the publishers good side. All of those things remain true, even if this policy works as advertised.
-
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.
Phil Spencer: You can share your Xbox One games with any 10 people
- Thread starter Kuno
- Start date
- Status
Not necessarily. The biggest reasons MicRosoft are doing this is to A) get a cut of used games sales B) hasten the rate at which their platform becomes a digital platform and C) ensure that everyone is online, which increases the chances of the consumer contributing to the revenue stream that Microsoft sees with Live. Well, that and being on the publishers good side. All of those things remain true, even if this policy works as advertised.
maquiladora
Member
As long as somebody else isn't playing it.
It's the same thing you can do right now with game discs except faster and limited to 10 people.
No. Their example was that it could be a "family" member 3000 miles away.
But only one person can play a disc. This way, two people can play a shared game.
It's not a loan. It is a shared game library. You can see all the games anyone in you group of 10 have purchased and play any pf those games for as long as you want as long as 2 of the other people on the list are not currently playing that game.
Monty Mole
Member
The benefit of this system is that you don't have to even be in the same room to share your games. No disc swapping necessary. Your 'family friend' would have access to your entire shared game library instantly because it's all in the cloud. Also you can still play your game concurrently whilst one other of your 10 family members does, something you can't do with a single physical copy of a game.
So, it sounds fucking awesome. But also too good to be true. Anxious to find out the catch.
?? This policy was already on their site before E3.
SanguineShark
Member
Let's say for a second this works decently without any major hiccups.
How many publishers would actually enable this feature, realistically?
How many publishers would actually enable this feature, realistically?
Surface of Me
I'm not an NPC. And neither are we.
The thing that makes this not so bad for Microsoft and other publishers is that there are tons of next-gen games that are multiplayer focused and/or have multiplayer fully integrated into the solo experience. So, your "family member" would never get to play along with you unless they bought the game. And that's no fun.
I don't believe that Xbox support tweet about being able to play the same game at the same time.
I don't believe that Xbox support tweet about being able to play the same game at the same time.
LukasTaves
Member
from Bgamer90 in another thread:
If it works as they are implying it does (You + one of your sharing playing the same game) then fuck the restrictions, this is much more interesting than being able to resell or share physical copies.
entremet
Member
At the same time, though? You can't. You only have one disk!
Khalifa Jayy
Banned
Probably beaten, but you would never get to play that game at the same time as anyone else in your group. Why would you want that?
Edit: hmmm ms support is saying you can play at the same time as someone else? Whoa. Publishers aren't gonna like that lol.
Not true. Since the launch of your PS3, you've been able to share your PSN games with up to 5 other people.
lionkitten
Banned
If I only have to buy one copy of Halo 5 and COD 12 ( or whatever) instead of 2 every year so my partner and I can play together on separate boxes, that pays for the 2nd Xbox easily. We have multiple copies of at least 20 games this gen, most at full price. 20 games x $50 average = $1000 saved.
It pays for BOTH X1's.
It pays for BOTH X1's.
LifEndz
Member
Maybe I'm reading this the wrong way then:
"You can always play your games, and any one of your family members can be playing from your shared library at a given time."
http://kotaku.com/xbox-one-lets-you-share-your-games-with-up-to-10-famil-511767763
Seems like it's only one member of your "family" at a time. Am I wrong?
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
This is absolutely hilarious if this happens the way they're stating.
Publishers will be absolutely infuriated when scores of people online have a group of 10 people sharing games between them. There's going to be a huge backlash.
Publishers will be absolutely infuriated when scores of people online have a group of 10 people sharing games between them. There's going to be a huge backlash.
H_Prestige
Banned
Sony and Nintendo allow infinite game sharing.
This. Ten people can now split the cost of a $60 game disc and all have access to it.
This. Ten people can now split the cost of a $60 game disc and all have access to it.
That's very generous. It's understandable to have only one playing at a time, which requires a constant connection (that's why they came up with 1 hour check)...
That said, this is way too generous, and a vastly different approach from PS3's digital download DRM, where you have to have your account installed on someone else's PS3, so that person would rather be a trusted person, but with this, you can have a nice family of people you don't know. Even with PS3's approach, I remember sony dropping activated account limit on consoles from 5 to 2 because of excessive game sharing. If this is the case, this may have worse effects than what they claim second hand market did.
I wonder how this will play out... This is way too generous to be true, and I don't understand how they did not make a very big deal out of it. (I also remember Jack Tretton giving the impression that the system was designed to share with friends, it turned out it only allowed it for personal use, in TOS)
Edit:
That said, this is way too generous, and a vastly different approach from PS3's digital download DRM, where you have to have your account installed on someone else's PS3, so that person would rather be a trusted person, but with this, you can have a nice family of people you don't know. Even with PS3's approach, I remember sony dropping activated account limit on consoles from 5 to 2 because of excessive game sharing. If this is the case, this may have worse effects than what they claim second hand market did.
I wonder how this will play out... This is way too generous to be true, and I don't understand how they did not make a very big deal out of it. (I also remember Jack Tretton giving the impression that the system was designed to share with friends, it turned out it only allowed it for personal use, in TOS)
Edit:
Agreed...
paperboywriter
Member
$6 a Game sounds way to good. 4packs on steam save you maybe $5
Flip cause an effect around--You're MS. You want to build your next console as a digital distribution powerhouse with more freedom than typical game DD. you want to be able to have your users lend out digital games, give them to friends, all that shit. How do you convince publishers to let you do this? You give them a piece of used game sales. You do away with renting. And you lock shit down to make sure the only people sharing follow the description you gave publishers.
Onion_Relish
Member
To be fair, there is a finite amount of humans on the planet earth.
Now ORGANISMS, that we can work on.
Sounds great. I feel like I would get to play 20-30 games for $60-80, if each person bought a couple games each.
Not exactly sure how publishers will make money like this, but the hell if I care. Since there are no used games that will make up the sales!
Sarcasm aside, I don't see how this would make more money. If anything it makes me want to find 10 other people that buy lots of games. As long as you get people to buy different games each you will be rolling in games without having to pay more than the price of 1 game.
Not exactly sure how publishers will make money like this, but the hell if I care. Since there are no used games that will make up the sales!
Sarcasm aside, I don't see how this would make more money. If anything it makes me want to find 10 other people that buy lots of games. As long as you get people to buy different games each you will be rolling in games without having to pay more than the price of 1 game.
Angelus Errare
Banned
So I can't buy used games or trade games because developers don't get revenue....but I can simply play my friend's game if he marks me as family member and I don't have to pay the developer for that experience? And that makes sense? What the hell Microsoft?
chickdigger802
Banned
Everything makes no sense.
I wonder how EA feels about 10 people just needa buy a game once for $60 to enjoy it.
I wonder how EA feels about 10 people just needa buy a game once for $60 to enjoy it.
dragonflys545
Member
ROFL. How nice of you... Yeah right gtfo MS.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
This is how I'm understanding it as well:
1) The person who paid for the game plays it any time.
2) Any one of the 9 people on that person's share list can play it but never at the same time as the other people on that share list.
dragonelite
Member
No they have been clear about this.
But i think most were to negative about it and it sounded to good to be true it still is.
This should have been the point they should have clarified at E3 with a movie kinda like sony share movie.
LukasTaves
Member
Assuming that they will track exactly how much time each player spent on each game and that info will be at most 24h late, which it means they can share a portion of the live gold revenue of the user to the publishers, i would say all of them?
That's actually pretty generous. Steam doesn't even do that.
Right. But since people can't access a shared game at any time, if they like it, then they're more likely to buy it. I'm assuming that's the theory they're running with.
cebri.one
Member
PS3 supported something similar back in the day.
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/10/20/ps3-drm-downloads-support-five-systems/
Publishers didn't like it and they took it off. It will be a very restrictive policy if it's implemented.
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/10/20/ps3-drm-downloads-support-five-systems/
Publishers didn't like it and they took it off. It will be a very restrictive policy if it's implemented.
Monty Mole
Member
It's been 2 since 2011. And isn't that more account sharing than game sharing?
I can't just share my PSN game library with my friend without sharing my full account details. Unless I'm doing it wrong.
shinobi602
Member
I still can't go on to Amazon and just buy a game used, therefore, still a bunch of bullshit to me.
This is no way teh way is going to work, if its is then is a fucking huge thing, like megaton of epic proportions huge.
- Status