@mourne: Again what the heck does loading a game digitally without the need for discs has anything to do with a system-wide DRM policy. Sony and Microsoft have already set this up currently on the current generation of consoles and they will be even more evident on the PS4 and Xbox One. Why does Microsoft HAVE to have this DRM policy in place for ALL forms of gameplay if they believe so heavily in digital gaming? Again, if you set up your digital marketplace so that it is easy to use, very convenient for the consumer, and the consumer finds value above buying a disc copy, they WILL buy it digitally. Why force them to do it? Sony knows this....Sony is banking on digital sales too, however, they do not have to shove it down people's throats. You think if digital sales take off that Xbox has an edge over Sony? How? The PS4 has the same digital playing ability and cloud gaming service as Xbox. You don't think that Sony can't institute their marketplace to also take advantage of digital sharing too? Those restrictions/benefits can be instituted on Sony's end (that is how Steam does it).

Noone knows what the future holds. It is about being flexible to what your consumers want.

@the_laughing_man said:

Are you really trying to argue this point? My NES, N64, Gamecube, PS2, and Xbox are all hooked up at my dad's house. I play them regularly every time I'm there, which is every summer and every Christmas.

In case you're confused about the math, the NES came out almost 30 years ago.

Seems like they didn't define "family" in the initial release to leave themselves a little wiggle room. But this just seems insane. Like way too far in the other direction. Share a game with 10 people? How the fuck are publishers going to get on board with that? Unless they have the ability to restrict shares as well?

I wish we could all just skip ahead a month to when Microsoft figures out what the fuck they are doing. This is just maddening.

@mourne: Why'd I need to trust them? If that's all there is to it, I don't see why I wouldn't add whoever has the games I want to play.

What I'm interested in is this: can I add you as a family member? Is it easy to remove you afterwards? If yes, that's fantastic and insane (and will absolutely hurt sales), but why am I hearing this on a forum thread? If not, what are the restrictions they're not talking about? They don't go into how adding accounts works at all, so it's not specific enough.

It's good that there's a solution for multiple Xbones on a single household, I don't think anyone's disputing that, the argument is in how it works outside of that single household.

Since when does less competition equal better pricing? If Steam stops sales, people will (and many already do) instead buy from Amazon, GMG, GOG, GG, etc. Since currently you cannot trade away digital copies, shouldn't that be a big incentive to offer more competitive pricing on the XBLA? When they get rid of lower priced options, why would anyone suddenly start offering their products for less?

Digital is the future. Optical discs are backwards. There's no arguing the inevitable. From this post of yours, it is abundantly clear that you are completely oblivious and the exact person I was describing in my original post as being simply unable to discern information due to being swallowed by outrage. You need to understand that, for the Xbox One, it is not a question of which end (physical or digital) will sale more or less at the onset. Right now, people are conditioned to get games in physical form. What Microsoft is doing is allowing that to still happen while having those physical games become digital copies as well when you buy them.

Your strawman here is bending over backwards for itself. I explained all of this in my original post. Right now, Microsoft is creating a system that allows for a transition between physical and digital. The physical media still has a purpose for this system, but the digital side is obviously being prepared as the successor. There is no feasible way to have both digital games and all of its benefits (see other posts) as well as being able to trade in, sell, or exchange those games at a retailer like GameStop without a regular online check-in so that the service may disable content that you have elected to remove from your account in exchange for money/trade-in value/whatever. This is the simple fact of the matter. If gamers want trade-ins, they have to accept that there is going to be a checking system of some sort. The reason it is 24 hours is so that you can't trade-in a game and still play it for a week, since at that point, you would no longer own the game but would still have it for a week. Digital offers plenty of advantages over physical so long as the service stays online, and judging from Microsoft's track record, that's unlikely to be a problem. If people didn't want any sort of trade-in functionality, there would be no need for online checks. However, knowing people would demand it, they implemented it in the only way that it can really be done.

The PS4 is not nearly as well-equipped when it comes to its digital infrastructure as far as what they have shown thus far. All indications show that it will be very close to the PS3, which was not as well-equipped as the Xbox 360 at digital content (believe me, I own tons of games on both as well as DLC, and it's obvious that the 360 is far better at managing digital content of all sorts). Microsoft's digital infrastructure is better and it's better prepared. The entire next system is based around it being digital-ready as more and more people prefer to consume their content in that manner. Sony will be playing catch-up the entire next generation if your hypothetical scenario came true, which again I point out isn't even the point. Microsoft is equipping themselves so that you can trade not just physical games but digital games as well. That's an unprecedented prospect, and if the future is indeed digital, that is a huge get and headstart on what's to come.

The future is digital. When the 360 launched in 2005, how many people were buying TV shows digitally versus buying them on DVD? How many were streaming on services like Netflix? How are CD sales doing these days compared to iTunes? All the fickle and whiny gamers in the world won't be able to change the direction things are going. Ask anyone in the business. Ask any analyst. Ask anyone on Giant Bomb's staff. The optical drive days are done after this generation.

Adding a family member will likely be semi-permanent. You will need to trust the people you add to your family plan. I wouldn't count on being to cheat the system at large like that, as you'll not be able to. You'll need to be selective in how you (ab)"use" it.

For the latter point: Publishers are in control of those games, and directly benefit from every single sale. That isn't the case right now on consoles. On PC, the publishers get their cut of every sale. It's not about just Steam--Steam is just used as the hallmark because it's #1. All of the others are tied to the same situation. Right now, for consoles, every time the publisher lowers the price on a physical copy, they are immediately competing with themselves because the used game market that they have no hand in whatsoever is also dropped to 10% of the price they reduce to. Every new copy they sell has the potential to take away business from them in the future as a used game in GameStop's cache. This is why publishers want a piece of that pie, and they're going to get it on Xbox One. This will be good for gamers and publishers in the end, and especially for single player games that get tossed about left and right without the publishers or studios getting any of it.

This whole issue seems to be too confusing. Even Microsoft execs and PR don't seem to fully understand how it works. Most people seem to be talking like this is not locked to a single IP address but I'm not so sure. Why would the wording make it evolve around the term family if they weren't thinking within the same household. It just doesn't make sense.

I don't think it's impossible that they mean for two people to be able to play the same game at the same time but I find it unlikely unless there are some other hidden restrictions (like someone else pointed out). This is in fact possible with the PS3 right now but the fact that 10 people could be playing the same copy at different times is not a very smart business decision. If this is, in fact, true I highly doubt it will stay that way as it will be massively exploited from day 1.

Considering the Sony was having backlash from publishers sharing out to 5 consoles and had to dial it back to 3 (I think it's 2 now), this seems like something that will quickly be revised/debunked/denied over time.

@krakn3dfx said:

Or, MS gave publishers the millions in profit they lose in used games so publishers agreed that if families(room mates, etc) are going to be sharing discs in home anyway then why not just take control of the process and be able to account for it. Not like they're down income they had before anyway. I've got several friends who all own multiple xboxes for siblings and significant others and such, They almost never buy two copies of a game though, and that's a real pain because it's great to be able to play with everyone in a group of friends, not just half of us. This is a perfectly logical and fair answer to that scenario.

@zfubarz: I'll believe it when I see it, until then I think this is some serious spin to try and water down the largely negative press MS is getting right now across the board.

I guess only time will tell if publishers are really willing to give up potentially 2-9 new game sales in exchange for the cut of a restricted used game market.

I don't get it. It really doesn't make any sense in the context of their DRM and used game restrictions purportedly being about protecting publishers from the ravages of the used game market, because this has the opposite effect.

@krakn3dfx: I dunno they wording of that original press release between E3 and the xbox one press event made it pretty apparent that this was possible, why is it suddenly spin now when they confirm it? The Bomb Crew even talked about it at length in that video they did going over it all. Vinny talking about his brothers playing off the same disc/licence at the same time.

Ok think about it like this. Creating couch co-op/competition takes resources from the developer. Man hours, programing, testing, it's much more intensive graphically, frame rate takes a hit, split screen is pretty garbage usually, etc. etc. fair enough? Developers don't have to create that if more people just have access to the game in a given group. Again subtract the small portion of people that will actually do this, Add the new revenue from used game restrictions, maybe toss in increased microtransactions for each user in that 'household', Hey 2 bucks here and there adds up, look at farmville.

MS has said over and over that the Xbox One is a centre for entertainment, every living room could use one. I'm sure they mean every TV could use one though, Why not make that an easy possibility and sell multiple boxes to each house? There's literally no downside to them for that scenario. I mean at $499 I doubt they're selling it at a loss like in previous generations. So if they've given publishers enough other incentive to play along (which they certainly have according to the internet screamers) Why not implement something this cool?

I've worked in Telecom stores before (Rogers for any Canadians reading) and the huge push lately has been whole home PVR's, watch your recorded content and favourite channels and all that from any TV in the house, Doesn't it make sense for MS to want to make a whole home entertainment and media solution since they're already embedding themselves in that market?

Of course it's all speculation in either direction, but the math can very easily add up. and let's be honest, microsoft has mentioned many times how much they've been doing the math and tracking statistics when making this thing.

@zfubarz: You're talking about sharing games within the same household but this clause from the Xbone document baffles me:

Give your family access to your entire games library anytime, anywhere: Xbox One will enable new forms of access for families. Up to ten members of your family can log in and play from your shared games library on any Xbox One. Just like today, a family member can play your copy of Forza Motorsport at a friend’s house. Only now, they will see not just Forza, but all of your shared games. You can always play your games, and any one of your family members can be playing from your shared library at a given time.

Implying that ten people could conceivably share a game library without being in the same house.

@mourne: That family system sounds more plausible, but still too easy to abuse. Trust shouldn't be an issue, as long as they keep buying games it's all good. Worst case scenario (which is that they stop buying stuff I guess?) you can still just remove the friend, even if it's not with the press of a button.

I'm not talking physical copies (Also, you're saying publishers are the ones that control retail pricing?) but XBLA as it is now. Publishers are in control of the digital games already. Everything you've listed are incentives to have more discounts for digital games now. On the Xbone, digital has less of a reason to compete with retail. Again, why would they suddenly start doing more sales when it's benefiting them less this time around?

If the digital future is inevitable, that's one more reason why Microsoft's going at it the wrong way. Instead of directing the consumer towards digital because it's cheaper and more convenient (like Steam and Sony), they're forcing it and unsurprisingly causing resistance. To suggest that because Sony isn't doing the same they'll be somehow less prepared is nonsense unless you can back it up with something. (Trading back digital copies is not unprecedented and should hardly be impossible to add into the PS4 if it's not already in)

@halfdeaf said:

That seems to be the case. "I could name a friend that lives 3,000 miles away as one of my "family members" Mehdi said." The specifics are unclear, but that's what he says. http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/06/microsoft-defends-the-xbox-ones-licensing-used-game-policies/

But not at the same time, and we're moving more and more into this connected universe, games having online components leaking into single player, Look at The Division and Watchdogs as obvious examples. Autolog type things, all that. Since the launch of Xbox Live MS has always pushed gaming as a social experience more than anybody (even if it means socializing with 11 year old boys calling you a cock squeezer) It's probably their biggest contribution to the industry, no?

I don't know about you but I sure as hell don't want to wait for somebody across the planet to finish playing my game just so I can get in, I'll probably buy the game myself eventually anyway. Sure I'll add a friend to my family so he can test out a game while I'm out for the night, or at work, but when I come home I wanna play the damn thing so he can get the hell off. but say it's a good game and he enjoyed it, you've just marketed to him without even needing to make a demo. Since everything can be picked up digitally, he can jump in the store and pick it up for himself right away, and hell say this Steam style market actually pans out and we get reasonable pricing, it makes a whole lot of sense to make people want the convenience of owning their own licence. My many hundreds of games Steam library can attest to the power of reasonable pricing.

Microsoft isn't going to let this become "Multiple people can take turns buying games on one account to make a super account"

There's no return in it for microsoft and it'd terrify publishers and lose them all the good will gained by the DRM tools they put in place.

Also, they've already said games are going to be 60$, so there's going to be no discounts for digital either.

Any of this is subject to change of course, they know they're actively on fire, I look forward to seeing how they try to sweeten the pot for consumers.

Somehow this still leaves me with questions. I hate Microsoft as much as the next guy, but I hate beating someone when they're down, so not to look like an apologist, but I think this family system could potentially be pretty cool. Unfortunately I'd have to know multiple people with XBox One's for it to make a difference, and my friend's reactions to their news has been extremely negative. I hope they clarify some of this a little bit more, and announce some other cool unique features so both consoles are awesome. One baby step in the right direction.

@zfubarz: They did say that two people can be playing a game at the same time so that makes it a little bit more exploitable. I think that a lot of people would in fact take advantage of this if they could just like the did with the 5 system limit of PS3 back in the day but I do think that all is not what it seems and MS will have some kind of system in place to prevent people from exploiting the system.

I do agree that the Steam model is awesome but I don't think MS is going about the right way. They are setting themselves up for the shitstorm when they could be enticing people to want that future instead of trying to force it on them.

@halfdeaf: Sure, two people, but that's a far cry from 10 people playing 1 copy of far cry 4 at the same time. This isn't to say you're wrong but what's your perspective on that 5 person PS3 thing, as a fairly avid gamer? Sure I knew about it, only did it like once though. I worked at a blockbuster for 4 years though man, Not one customer ever knew about that though, even the guy who was such a cheapskate that he managed to buy an entire elite x360 on credit alone from working the trade in system between us and other retailers for deals. I'd say 5-10% max would make real use of exploits like that, which might be considered acceptable loses.

Sure the steam model won't exist anytime soon, but in 2 years, when MS has a hefty back catalog and can port of bunch of old games onto the storefront? Sure then sales galor, Buy Assassin's Creed 6 and get 1-3 for 20 bucks! All that stuff. Totally plausible.

Publishers probably want them to not promote it that way. Kind of like when publishers bitched about how you could share your PSN account on 5 systems. Should be interesting to see how it actually works(how many people can actually play and how the account/profile stuff works) but we probably won't know until the system launches because Microsoft apparently forgot how to convey a message properly to consumers.

@mourne said:

Digital is the future. Optical discs are backwards. There's no arguing the inevitable. From this post of yours, it is abundantly clear that you are completely oblivious and the exact person I was describing in my original post as being simply unable to discern information due to being swallowed by outrage. You need to understand that, for the Xbox One, it is not a question of which end (physical or digital) will sale more or less at the onset. Right now, people are conditioned to get games in physical form. What Microsoft is doing is allowing that to still happen while having those physical games become digital copies as well when you buy them.

Actually, I am not "swallowed by outrage". I am objectively pointing out to you, for the third time, that Xbox One does not decide the future of gaming, the consumers do. AND the only way to influence that decision is to provide a service that consumers want, not what you tell them you want. Again, if Xbox wanted to push towards their "all digital future" they would make their digital sales more compelling. There is NO Benefit from a system-wide DRM. They could (man I hate repeating myself), implement their "fantastic sharing policies" via the X-Box Live marketplace instead system-wide, and let those fantastic policies influence digital game sales over traditional sales. THIS CAN BE DONE. Steam does not institute their system DRM policies on the hardware level. They don't sell you a computer with a them already implemented.

It is unbelievably foolish to think that Sony hasn't prepared for this digital future. The signs are there that they have (etc. Cloud Gaming, required PS+ for multiplayer) . Yoshida has said they are excited about implementing and offering various digital services via the PS4. All PS4 games will be available via digital distribution etc. etc. Sony has proven to be very flexible in adapting to future trends. they did it with the Playstation 3 (Playstation + membership, copying Microsoft's A\achievement system with trophies, vastly improving their online experience while maintaining a free-to-play model).

The difference is X-box One took the consumer's right to choose on their platform, and alienated an entire group of gamers. That is not a smart business practice. From a digital perspective, their policies can be great (and easily copied/improved), however, they FORCED the consumer, if they purchase an X-Box, to give away their rights first as a consumer and their right to choose the best medium for themselves.

Thing is Digital is all ready here. Steam has been doing it forever.

In a week it will blow over and the line between the two systems will go back to which games you want to play and what you mostly do. Then it will boil down to "Which I bought first" The systems seem to be back in a price range where many people could afford both within the first year of release.

I am gonna guess MS will back off a bit on their online stuff and DRM stuff between now and the system release. And later on Sony will get some of the exclusives X1 started with. This gen will bubble down to last gen. Personal controller preference.

ITT: I can't understand something... It must not be true.

iTunes allows application sharing, and people share shit like HBO Go and Netflix all the time. The deterrent against massive sharing cartels is that the original account owner's credit card is often exposed, which leads to a financial risk. No one is going to give some asshole on GameFaqs a blank check, just so that they can save a few bucks and go halfsies on Halo 5.

People were saying things similar to "In a week it will blow over" since the anti consumer Xbox One policy rumors and then again once Microsoft made it official. Then people said to wait till E3 before passing judgement. E3 is now over and the Xbox One is now in a pretty bad situation.

Do you honestly think people are simply going to stop being upset by the BS policies? I rent most of my games from Gamefly and Redbox. The games I buy I lend out in exchange for other games. The Xbox One literally prevents me from playing games. That isn't going to change. People with bad/slow internet can't buy the Xbox One. Time isn't going to change that. People have a right to be upset if they were looking forward to getting an Xbox One until they were driven away.

Dismissing the so called "internet rage" as a passing fad is a pretty big insult to everyone who has a legitimate concern about how the Xbox One's new policies will affect gaming in the future.

I meant as in blow over with MS changing their polices. I really do think they will back off before release. That or sweeten the deal so much people will ignore that online stuff. AKA games on X1 cheaper or something else.