{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by Butane:
6/21/2013 12:42:57 AM
60
So this was how Family Sharing was going to work.
[url=http://www.heyuguysgaming.com/news/12507/heartbroken-xbox-one-employee-lets-rip-must-read]This guy works for Microsoft and details how the sharing would work[/url]. Its a good read, and it sucks for the guy because he was excited about seeing the new system implemented.
[quote]First is family sharing, this feature is near and dear to me and I truly felt it would have helped the industry grow and make both gamers and developers happy. The premise is simple and elegant, when you buy your games for Xbox One, you can set any of them to be part of your shared library. Anyone who you deem to be family had access to these games regardless of where they are in the world. There was never any catch to that, they didn’t have to share the same billing address or physical address it could be anyone. When your family member accesses any of your games, they’re placed into a special demo mode. This demo mode in most cases would be the full game with a 15-45 minute timer and in some cases an hour. This allowed the person to play the game, get familiar with it then make a purchase if they wanted to. When the time limit was up they would automatically be prompted to the Marketplace so that they may order it if liked the game. We were toying around with a limit on the number of times members could access the shared game (as to discourage gamers from simply beating the game by doing multiple playthroughs). but we had not settled on an appropriate way of handling it. One thing we knew is that we wanted the experience to be seamless for both the person sharing and the family member benefiting. There weren’t many models of this system already in the wild other than Sony’s horrendous game sharing implementation, but it was clear their approach (if one could call it that) was not the way to go. Developers complained about the lost sales and gamers complained about overbearing DRM that punished those who didn’t share that implemented by publishers to quell gamers from taking advantage of a poorly thought out system. We wanted our family sharing plan to be something that was talked about and genuinely enjoyed by the masses as a way of inciting gamers to try new games.[/quote]
-
Edited by Sapid: 6/21/2013 3:28:39 AMThe guy goes into this whole vision that is actually very exciting. He should of talked about that instead of family sharing. It sounds like he wants everything to shift to digital markets. If consoles had that, money would go to developers instead of stores like gamestop, meaning cheaper, higher quality games. Imagine steam on consoles (steam might still be a middle man but to me its a lot cheaper then going to gamestop)! Plus, even PC would benefit. PC has been dragged down by the old consoles we have now, and a modern game market could bring things one step closer to faster growth in consoles. (The only one not benefiting are game stores. Think of what happened to Blockbuster when redbox and Netflix become popular) Too bad greed and people afraid of change are slowing the industry down. Instead of shifting the consoles to digital (which would remove the need for tons of DLC and things like online passes, because developers would be getting more money), everyone is clinging to the old (Used games, disc sharing). Digital DOES have its downsides though. >Because you can't share games. Microsoft realized this and decided to make a compromise. Developers aren't going to let them just hand out games for free. So they made the family sharing system. You can't have everything for free people, and while family sharing wasn't the best system, it was a good step forward. If we let them invest time it in, and introduce it to others to tinker with, I guarantee we would have gotten an amazing system from someone at some point (even if it wasn't Microsoft who thought of it). So if Microsoft made family sharing for digital games, its fine. If it was just supposed to be its own things, it kind of sucks. >Used games are cheaper. Sure, add up all the DLC, online passes, etc, and they aren't anymore. Whether you like it or not, used games hurt developers, and while we still have them developers aren't going to get rid of online passes and tons of expensive DLC that should have just come with the game. You don't want the extra stuff, and only the base game? Well without a middle man driving the price of games up the base game could have been a lot better. Yeah, sometimes used games will still be cheaper, but I think its worth getting rid of used games to get rid of all the gimmicks and add-ons we have now. Even though I'd love these changes and it seems I am mad people are bashing on xbox....I honestly agree with what seems to be the general opinion. Used games are not dead yet. Its just not the right time for digital to be pushed yet. It sucks, but next gen is just at an awkward timing (and it been so long since this gen came out it can't wait). We have all these awesome new generation ideas, but not the ability to implement them. Or, the people currently in the industry are just bad at making a good system and swaying the public's opinion. Plus, always-online can't work right now, internet isn't that widely available and being able to play offline is awesome. Next generation is going to be this one, just a lot more expensive and better hardware :/ Can't say I really wanted or excepted more though. TL;DR Used games are inferior, and these new ideas are nice, but I just don't think its time yet. People have showed they don't want change, they want their used games, so meh, guess things will stay the same way. Things are not advanced enough, and the people who should be pushing the new ideas are blowing it. Microsoft is stupid.
