Ok, someone else ask them:
Is it clear?
Much better answer. Accepted.
Same game on different family member, different console, at same time seems to be still up in the air I guess.
Ok, someone else ask them:
Is it clear?
I'm still not sure about this gifting idea. My reading of Microsoft's statements is that the 30 day friend one-time transfer only applies to physical game discs. I've not seen anything to say that applies to DD games.
I read that as "we don't want to share revenue with other industry players, and we would like the middlemen out so we can take a larger portion of the revenue".
Oh please. They can Fking accomplish what this engineer is saying by giong DD without doing any of the DRM to physical based games. What an excuse.
Just price your DD games cheaper on Xbox Live and you'll take these middlemen out.
Mission Accomplished.
There's absolutely no need to fiddle with the disk based DRM.
You're confusing 2 different things. Understandable because this is all new & Microsoft hasn't been as clear as they should be.
Anyway, there is way to _GIVE_ your _DISC_ game to another person(not lend, loan, rent,etc). That person has to be on your friends list at least 30 days & it can only be given once.
The other thing is you will be able to share your games library(remember once you install a disc game to the hard drive you have a digital version that is now part of your library. You'll be able to share this library with up to 10 "family members". These can actually be anybody on your friends list, not just family & not just in your home. But only 1 game from your library can be shared at a time. If you have 10 games & somebody is already playing one of your games, nobody else can play any of the other games in your library.
I hopeful Microsoft will continue to be transparent about how this whole system will work. It will just take a bit of time to flesh it all out.
Tommy McClain
@Tommy - can the disk then be given away by the new holder? I am still confused by the wording.
Just to add on: family members apparently also need to be on friends list for 30 days until you can add them.
Much better answer. Accepted.
Same game on different family member, different console, at same time seems to be still up in the air I guess.
WHAT? No it isn't.
You can't play the same game at the same time on the One. You only have ONE COPY of the game.
How friggin difficult is this for you people to understand? Sure, I understand there's a little bit of confusion as to whether or not the person is actually PHYSICALLY at your house and playing on YOUR console or not, but really.
No, I can't be playing Halo5 and have shared my game with NavNuc and he's also playing Halo5 because there's only a single copy of the game so we can't both be playing it at the same time.
But, if NavNuc comes to my house, he can play Halo5 with me and doesn't even need an Xbox Live Gold account in order to do so.
Now, if he leaves my house (I don't know why he would, because I've got all the good snacks), and goes back to his place, he can play Halo5 if he's on my "family" list and I've passed out and are no longer playing.
This isn't a really difficult concept.
You do mean if the game has split screen multiplayer right?But, if NavNuc comes to my house, he can play Halo5 with me and doesn't even need an Xbox Live Gold account in order to do so.
Sounds like the Twitter guys are just as confused as everybody else. I don't think they've been consistent. One moment only one game from your shared library can be played at a time, the next all 10 of your family members can be playing 10 different games at the exact same time. Personally I find the former more believable than the latter.
Just to add on: family members apparently also need to be on friends list for 30 days until you can add them.
Phil Spencer, Microsoft Studios' corporate vice president, says that while current Xbox One DRM plans are set in stone changes could be made in the future.
Spencer went on to talk about how products change over time, using Xbox 360′s integration of Netflix, a service that simply didn’t exist when the console was released.
“We will be as attentive to that feedback on Xbox One as we were through 360. So what Larry’s saying is that these systems evolve. We’re a software company. If you think about the amount of times we changed the operating system on 360…”
In essence Spencer is saying that the rules can change, but it won’t happen in the short term. If you’re waiting for an Xbox One policy change between now and release then you may well be left wanting.
The Xbox One’s DRM policies have been a huge issue for Microsoft over the last week and they’ve been taking fire from all angles over the past week. It’s good to know that the system can change...
As ever we can simply hope that Microsoft pays close attention to criticism.
Nothing. Except the One was designed from the ground up, and has numerous resources devoted specifically to take advantage of the fact that all of the content on the system is stored in the cloud.
I really hate it when Sony fans keep saying that the One is a gimped console because it has so many resources devoted to doing things other than gaming, and yet when those advantages are pointed out they believe that Sony can simply switch gears mid-stream and introduce those same features and functionality.
They can't. Can they offer a PS4 with no optical drive that is strictly DD? Sure. But is there an end benefit to the consumer in how the console deals with that media? Nope. Because the PS4 wasn't designed to perform that way, or offer that functionality, or have so much RAM reserved for the OS and media and entertainment functions that allow the multitasking and instant switching, etc. The only benefit of the PS4 removing the optical drive would be (perhaps) a cheaper console.
There's no experience benefit to the consumer for Sony doing that.
Well if they have passed on physical disk their policies may have been perceived differently. In my opinion, if they moved to digital download then the Live subscription fee would no longer have made sense aka, the Xbox UI/front end (whatever really costs money not online gaming) could get profitable by self as MSFT would get its money from the sales of games, apps, etc. instead of letting some margins to retailers.So, I just realized something about Microsoft's DRM approach that seems incredibly obvious in retrospect, but that didn't hit me until just now.
That is, Microsoft's DRM policy has nothing at all to do with preventing used games sales to benefit the publishers. Instead, they're doing it to deliberately devalue the physical disk.
It shouldn't be a big deal if they allowed potential owners to create an account on xbox.com without actually having the hardware, but it seems unlikely.Just to add on: family members apparently also need to be on friends list for 30 days until you can add them.
You're confusing 2 different things. Understandable because this is all new & Microsoft hasn't been as clear as they should be.
Anyway, there is way to _GIVE_ your _DISC_ game to another person(not lend, loan, rent,etc). That person has to be on your friends list at least 30 days & it can only be given once.
The other thing is you will be able to share your games library(remember once you install a disc game to the hard drive you have a digital version that is now part of your library. You'll be able to share this library with up to 10 "family members". These can actually be anybody on your friends list, not just family & not just in your home. But only 1 game from your library can be shared at a time. If you have 10 games & somebody is already playing one of your games, nobody else can play any of the other games in your library.
I hopeful Microsoft will continue to be transparent about how this whole system will work. It will just take a bit of time to flesh it all out.
Tommy McClain