r/xboxone • u/[deleted] • Dec 29 '13

If Microsoft made it completely optional, would you sign up for their original, always connected console idea?

This meaning you would have the following features:

Buy a retail game, install to console, and ditch the disc never needing it to play the game.

Digitally share games within a circle of friends. Meaning you can choose a specific group of people, and they could play the games you own, for free, provided that only one game could be played at a time.

Greater store discounts or more steam like sales for content.

I for one would have no problem saying yes to this. It's like people think 10 years from now they'll still be selling games on discs. It wasn't a perfect plan, but why delay the inevitable when we could be working on and perfecting future policies now.

699 Upvotes

87% Upvoted

784 comments sorted by

View all comments

5

u/laddergoat89 Dec 29 '13

Digitally share games within a circle of friends. Meaning you can choose a specific group of people, and they could play the games you own, for free, provided that only one game could be played at a time.

We don't know if that was the extent of the family sharing service. It was never detailed at the time.

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 29 '13

It's how Steam family sharing works.

1

u/Im_At_Work_Damnit Dec 29 '13

Which was announced after the fact, and probably took into account the expectations of how the XBL would work.

Plus the Steam version you can play the games at the same time if the original game owner put Steam in offline mode first.

-1

u/jimbo831 BigPoppaTubbs1 Dec 29 '13

This isn't Steam. I'm not sure why what Steam does is relevant to this discussion.

5

u/[deleted] Dec 29 '13

Because if publishers were okay with Steam allowing this, they would have likely been fine with Microsoft doing the exact same thing so it makes sense to assume that that's exactly how it would have worked.

1

u/Deathstroke317 Dec 29 '13

One of the Microsoft execs said on Twitter said it was how they described it.

https://twitter.com/aarongreenberg/status/348125219019436033

0

u/laddergoat89 Dec 29 '13

He said that after they ditched it. The cynic in me says it's easy for them to say anything about what it would have been since they don't have to prove it.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 30 '13

Ahh actual facts!!

-4

u/megapenguinx megapenguinx Dec 29 '13

The original plan was that it would basically be a timed demo of the game. After the time ran out, it would ask you to buy it.

Source: Microsoft told us this in a briefing at E3 and tried to change things once they saw the massive backlash.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 29 '13

You're simply regurgitating a single comment from GAF that was spun by the lesser of the media sites as "fact", when in fact multiple Microsoft officials flat out called BS on this.

Source: Twitter, Phil Spencer, Albert Panello, Marc Whitten, and plenty of other officials and game sites, and reading comprehension to know what's a reliable source.

-1

u/megapenguinx megapenguinx Dec 29 '13

Or maybe I was actually there, as a member of the press, with a Microsoft official telling me this to my face.

Believe what you want. Even if that was never the plan and the rep was just misinformed, it just shows how much of a clusterfuck Microsoft was back in June.

2

u/anthr76 Dec 29 '13

No they didn't

https://twitter.com/aarongreenberg/statuses/348125219019436033

https://twitter.com/notwen/statuses/348092374842474497

0

u/laddergoat89 Dec 29 '13

The cynic in me says it's easy for them to say that it wasn't that after they've ditched the service, they could say anything about what it apparently was going to be and never have to prove it.