Update: MS: GAF Share threads OK! Your library. Any 10 gamers. Dogs too!

UPDATE: SOLD!

The idea is that ten people in your family group can all share your games. Think of it like a loaning system, but you're not loaning anyone a phyiscal product. If you're in my family group, you can play my games, and vice versa. 

I think the policy makes sense, Spencer said. Its not ten different people all playing the game concurrently, but when you think about a real usage scenario, and we thought about it around a family, and I know certain people will create a family group of people that arent all part of the same family, and I do think thats an advantage, and people will use that. I saw it on NeoGAF instantly, the Xbox Family creation threads, where people said 'Hey be a part of my family.'

No birth certificates will need to be sent in! Spencer said when I asked if the service required a blood test. I do think thats an advantage of the ecosystem that we have.

So that answers one question: Microsoft doesn't seem to care whether or not the ten people in the group are actually family members. They can be friends, roommates, boyfriends, girlfriends, your dog's groomer you pick ten people, and you share games with them.

http://penny-arcade.com/report/article/xbox-one-allows-you-to-share-games-with-ten-family-members-but-some-details 

So that means if 10 hardcore gamers on a forum buy 10 games a year, we have a library of 100 games to share amongst each other as much as we want? With the only downside being we can only play it 1 at a time, or in this case 5 at a time? Which makes sense, considering that's what happens when you lend out your games. 

It's a "family" affair

Since its announcement, there has been some confusion over the details of sharing your Xbox One game library with up to ten "family members." Mehdi couldn't give comprehensive details but he did clarify some things.

For one, a family member doesn't have to be a "blood relative," he said, eliminating the extremely unlikely possibility that the Xbox One would include a built-in blood testing kit. For another, they don't have to live in the primary owner's houseI could name a friend that lives 3,000 miles away as one of my "family members" Mehdi said.

You'll be able to link other Xbox Live accounts as having shared access to your library when you first set up a system, and will also be able to add them later on (though specific details of how you manage these relationships is still not being discussed). The only limitation, it seems, is that only one person can be playing the shared copy of a single game at any given time. All in all, this does sound like a pretty convenient feature that's more workable than simply passing discs around amongst friends who are actually in your area.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/06/microsoft-defends-the-xbox-ones-licensing-used-game-policies/

 And they don't mind it? How?

That means they are encouraging share threads. That means they are encouraging us to abuse the system. That means they are encouraging us NOT to buy individual copies of new games.

Then why the fug would they go out of their way and do all this check-in, DRM, no used games bullshit? Why would they let us do this? How is this not legalized piracy and why wouldn't publishers go apeshit?

I mean I only have 1 hardcore gamer friend in real life and we rarely lend each other games. So this would be better than that.  I know I wouldn't mind sharing my game library with just about anyone on here. The only downside would be some of us wouldn't get to play it day 1.....unless we befriend people in a different time.

Does. Not. Compute.

There WILL probably be some sort of a procedure for adding someone as a "family member" (that's why they're not talking about it yet, you'll probably need to know some personal information) and I'm guessing once you designate 10 people as such, you won't be able to change it afterwards.

Still, if this works as advertised, then it's going to be f***ing awesome.

There WILL probably be some sort of a procedure for adding someone as a "family member" (that's why they're not talking about it yet, you'll probably need to know some personal information) and I'm guessing once you designate 10 people as such, you won't be able to change it afterwards.

Still, if this works as advertised, then it's going to be f***ing awesome.

UpInFlames

All I know is if Microsoft really means this....

PS: So what if I have to give you some personal information? I wouldn't mind for something like this if it was someone I would trust. Anyone with Facebook has to give out some personal information. I have to give Blockbuster my credit card too to rent games. You're right though, it sounds too good to be true. There has to be a freaking catch to this. It's too good.

sounds stupid as hell to meThe_Last_Ride

Why?

[QUOTE="The_Last_Ride"]sounds stupid as hell to meUpInFlames

Why?

So it's like three kids splitting the cost of one comic book, then trying to decide who gets to keep it on what days. Doesn't sound like a very good idea to me at all. I'd much rather have no DRM and the traditional way of doing things, like Sony is doing.Randolph

No. The original person gets to keep it, you just let your friends read it too after you are done with it. Why does that sound like a bad idea?

[QUOTE="Randolph"]So it's like three kids splitting the cost of one comic book, then trying to decide who gets to keep it on what days. Doesn't sound like a very good idea to me at all. I'd much rather have no DRM and the traditional way of doing things, like Sony is doing.alexwatchtower

No. The original person gets to keep it, you just let your friends read it too after you are done with it. Why does that sound like a bad idea?

[QUOTE="alexwatchtower"]

[QUOTE="Randolph"]So it's like three kids splitting the cost of one comic book, then trying to decide who gets to keep it on what days. Doesn't sound like a very good idea to me at all. I'd much rather have no DRM and the traditional way of doing things, like Sony is doing.Randolph

No. The original person gets to keep it, you just let your friends read it too after you are done with it. Why does that sound like a bad idea?

Can you and I play your copy of any PS3 game at the same time now? That would be called straight up piracy. Why would they do that? They obviously count that a lot of people would want to still buy new, especially a lot of multiplayer games.

But why does it have some to be some trashy game? Why can't it be something like Okami, or Little Big Planet, which I would NEVER buy but I see so many people on forums go crazy for and I would love to try. Or something like Shenmue which I love, and a lot of people would never buy but would still want to try.

Seriously, now it just seems like you are trying to find something bad about this, but if this is true, there really isn't anything bad about it. This would be unbelievably awesome.

And considering it can be done with hardcore gamers you meet on forums, why does it even have to be dudebros? I would want to share my library with a hardcore gamer with different tastes than me so I can try stuff I don't normally buy or set up a friendly agreement with a group of hardcore gamers of what everyone wants to buy.

I think it sounds epic. 

The downside is you will probably have to give out like a universal password for the family acc. so you really need to trust them. But besides that, very cool stuff.

I also missed a few more interesting things in that article:

 Those digital "benefits" will be available at launch, but Mehdi hinted that the digital rights management transition might unlock some more interesting game access and distribution methods later on. "In the future, you can imagine the capability to have different licensing models, different ways that people have to access games. This all gets unlocked because of digital." He wouldn't get drawn into details, but when I suggested ideas like an "all-you-can-play" Netflix for games or purely digital game rentals, he didn't shoot me down. "Sure. It could be a variety of ways."

"a diversity of business models" for publishers to take advantage of, from free-to-play titles to $60 AAA games to Xbox Live Arcade games somewhere in between. "As you go into a digital world, what's happening is publishers are choosing to have different business models and consumers are saying 'hey, if I can't resell the title, provide for me a different way to get value to get into your game.' And we think the market will be efficient in finding good models that work for consumers." In essence, Mehdi said, consumer demand for good value from games will drive prices down, even if a publisher decides to fully cut off the market release valve of used game resale.

"Within that, we've tried to optimize, and I think we've found a great balance across all of those dimensions," Mehdi said. "But there are tradeoffs. We do want to support everyone in that system, beginning with the consumer. But we want publishers to get paid for the great IP they work on. We want retailers to be able to drive and sell our products and make a profit. So we are trying to balance across all those."

My bitching worked?:P What the FUG took you guys so long to say that? 

I also missed a few more interesting things in that article:

 

 Those digital "benefits" will be available at launch, but Mehdi hinted that the digital rights management transition might unlock some more interesting game access and distribution methods later on. "In the future, you can imagine the capability to have different licensing models, different ways that people have to access games. This all gets unlocked because of digital." He wouldn't get drawn into details, but when I suggested ideas like an "all-you-can-play" Netflix for games or purely digital game rentals, he didn't shoot me down. "Sure. It could be a variety of ways."

"a diversity of business models" for publishers to take advantage of, from free-to-play titles to $60 AAA games to Xbox Live Arcade games somewhere in between. "As you go into a digital world, what's happening is publishers are choosing to have different business models and consumers are saying 'hey, if I can't resell the title, provide for me a different way to get value to get into your game.' And we think the market will be efficient in finding good models that work for consumers." In essence, Mehdi said, consumer demand for good value from games will drive prices down, even if a publisher decides to fully cut off the market release valve of used game resale.

"Within that, we've tried to optimize, and I think we've found a great balance across all of those dimensions," Mehdi said. "But there are tradeoffs. We do want to support everyone in that system, beginning with the consumer. But we want publishers to get paid for the great IP they work on. We want retailers to be able to drive and sell our products and make a profit. So we are trying to balance across all those."alexwatchtower

My bitching worked?:P What the FUG took you guys so long to say that? 

Seems like an overly complicated way to share your games.chrisrooR

I add 10 GameSpot forum members to my "friends and family list" and they have access to play any game in my library I am not playing.  I also have access to theirs. Why the hell is that overcomplicated? I mean if you're a monkey maybe...

"Yo Upinflames, you getting K.I.?"

"Yeah dude. Day 1! How about you?"

"Nah man, I never buy fighters. Can't wait for Crimson Dragon. Would love to try it out though."

"You like that Kinect shit?"

"Hell yeah. You can check it out after I'm done with it if you wanna see what it's about. It'll be in my library".

"Yah you're more then welcomed to K.I. after I get my fix in. Heck I gotta work tonight. You can try it then!"

"Sweet!"

It's not only less complicated, but in my case, impossibleto find 10 hardcore gamers where I live to share every single game I own with them. Been living in this town for 20 years and I only know 1. Bad part is, we almost always buy the same games too. So this is literally 10 times better and if I'm smart enough to add the right friends, it fixes my rental issue.

*If this is for real.

I can't believe people are hating on this. You guys are trying too hard.

The already marginal objectivity you had was lost in this thread. You are now trying to defend MS in a coy manner. Its disturbing how loyal you are.Pedro

Maybe you should take off your hate glasses for a second, because if all this is true, this is freaking awesome. There is literally nothing needed to be defended about this if it's true. This doesn't need a defense. This is a huge selling point!

And what that shows is you have no objectivity if you are so blinded you can't see that. I didn't have a problem seeing a shitty policy. I saw it. It's you that have a problem now seeing a great one!

This is a huge lie. It would be much worse than used games, think about it: how many times does a physical copy change hands? Twice maybe? Say 3 people play with a single copy of a game as things are today. Why in hell would microsoft go to great lenghts to prevent 3 people from sharing a game and later allow you to share every game with NINE other people?

Use that head meat, peeps.

Maybe you should take off your hate glasses for a second, because if all this is true, this is freaking awesome. There is literally nothing needed to be defended about this if it's true. This doesn't need a defense. This is a huge selling point!

And what that shows is you have no objectivity if you are so blinded you can't see that. I didn't have a problem seeing a shitty policy. I saw it. It's you that have a problem now seeing a great one!

alexwatchtower

Hate glasses? Hmmm more like foresight. You and your "LITERALLY NOTHING IS WRONG WITH ____________" seems to be a reoccuring statement of your tube vision. What would prevent MS from reducing the number of friends/family in the future? What would prevent MS from removing the system all together or having more restrictions in the future? Who has control over these features? The consumer or MS? The system requires reliance on MS for ALL of your gaming. You cannot game without MS being part of the equation beyond 24 hours. Its a nice feature but it comes at the cost of other restrictions and is a heavily controlled and mandated system. I personally don't care about "sharing" my games at the cost of hefty DRM and internet dependency. It maybe fine with you but not to me. At the moment you are trying your best to do damage control for MS, knock yourself out buddy.

This is a huge lie. It would be much worse than used games, think about it: how many times does a physical copy change hands? Twice maybe? Say 3 people play with a single copy of a game as things are today. Why in hell would microsoft go to great lenghts to prevent 3 people from sharing a game and later allow you to share every game with NINE other people?

Use that head meat, peeps.

Black_Knight_00

MS cares about the gamers and they are now allowing gamers to share their games with other gamers. You obviously cannot see the benefit of this because you are blinded by your bias against MS. Can you share your games like this with Sony? Let me save you the trouble...NO!. The system is money saving and extremely flexible. I don't understand why anyone would be against a system that is geared to gamers especially with this feature, its a no brainer.

Its so easy to switch sides. :twisted:

The problem with this is that MS reserve the right to change the service that they provided. How l;ong can a system like this last?

Welcome to seven years ago when Sony did this. The only difference was that it was 5 people who can share an account not 10 and for many of those purchases you can even play them simultaneously. We had a share group going on here at the GGD, I remember splitting on Siren with Rag for example. Over time they limited it to 2 people those but this feature has been around since 2006.

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"]

This is a huge lie. It would be much worse than used games, think about it: how many times does a physical copy change hands? Twice maybe? Say 3 people play with a single copy of a game as things are today. Why in hell would microsoft go to great lenghts to prevent 3 people from sharing a game and later allow you to share every game with NINE other people?

Use that head meat, peeps.

Pedro

MS cares about the gamers and they are now allowing gamers to share their games with other gamers. You obviously cannot see the benefit of this because you are blinded by your bias against MS. Can you share your games like this with Sony? Let me save you the trouble...NO!. The system is money saving and extremely flexible. I don't understand why anyone would be against a system that is geared to gamers especially with this feature, its a no brainer.

Its so easy to switch sides. :twisted:

I know you're kidding, but actually Sony allows you to share everything you download and purchase off the PSN store with another person (it used to be 5 people until last year)Black_Knight_00

MS can do the same thing without the use of DRM. Make all digitally downloaded games sharable and disc games non sharable. Slowly coerce gamers into digital downloads while maintaining a DRM free disc based system. The transition would be easier and less controversial. But instead MS decided to go in brute force and vaseline free. 

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"] I know you're kidding, but actually Sony allows you to share everything you download and purchase off the PSN store with another person (it used to be 5 people until last year)Pedro

MS can do the same thing without the use of DRM. Make all digitally downloaded games sharable and disc games non sharable. Slowly coerce gamers into digital downloads while maintaining a DRM free disc based system. The transition would be easier and less controversial. But instead MS decided to go in brute force and vaseline free. 

But they'll keep it as long as there are those who think it's right and are willing to pay for them/ I think it's you who said that was it? A large number of people who frequent Kotaku thinks MS did the right thing. 

[QUOTE="Pedro"]

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"] I know you're kidding, but actually Sony allows you to share everything you download and purchase off the PSN store with another person (it used to be 5 people until last year)gamingqueen

MS can do the same thing without the use of DRM. Make all digitally downloaded games sharable and disc games non sharable. Slowly coerce gamers into digital downloads while maintaining a DRM free disc based system. The transition would be easier and less controversial. But instead MS decided to go in brute force and vaseline free. 

But they'll keep it as long as there are those who think it's right and are willing to pay for them/ I think it's you who said that was it? A large number of people who frequent Kotaku thinks MS did the right thing. 

Whatever way you go about looking at it or what they actually mean, it seems like its a lot of complicated effort just to do what we are doing now. 

[QUOTE="chrisrooR"]Seems like an overly complicated way to share your games.alexwatchtower

I add 10 GameSpot forum members to my "friends and family list" and they have access to play any game in my library I am not playing.  I also have access to theirs. Why the hell is that overcomplicated? I mean if you're a monkey maybe...

"Yo Upinflames, you getting K.I.?"

"Yeah dude. Day 1! How about you?"

"Nah man, I never buy fighters. Can't wait for Crimson Dragon. Would love to try it out though."

"You like that Kinect shit?"

"Hell yeah. You can check it out after I'm done with it if you wanna see what it's about. It'll be in my library".

"Yah you're more then welcomed to K.I. after I get my fix in. Heck I gotta work tonight. You can try it then!"

"Sweet!"

It's not only less complicated, but in my case, impossibleto find 10 hardcore gamers where I live to share every single game I own with them. Been living in this town for 20 years and I only know 1. Bad part is, we almost always buy the same games too. So this is literally 10 times better and if I'm smart enough to add the right friends, it fixes my rental issue.

*If this is for real.

One small question. I know you have to connect to the internet every 24 hours to play a game you bought yourself. But what about this game sharing? Will someone playing a shared copy have to check in every 2 hours? MonoSilver

Yes because if that wasn't the case, then two people could play the same copy simultaneously. That would be piracy. You can't do that in real life so if they are really doing this, then it actually make sense.

[QUOTE="alexwatchtower"]

[QUOTE="chrisrooR"]Seems like an overly complicated way to share your games.chrisrooR

I add 10 GameSpot forum members to my "friends and family list" and they have access to play any game in my library I am not playing.  I also have access to theirs. Why the hell is that overcomplicated? I mean if you're a monkey maybe...

"Yo Upinflames, you getting K.I.?"

"Yeah dude. Day 1! How about you?"

"Nah man, I never buy fighters. Can't wait for Crimson Dragon. Would love to try it out though."

"You like that Kinect shit?"

"Hell yeah. You can check it out after I'm done with it if you wanna see what it's about. It'll be in my library".

"Yah you're more then welcomed to K.I. after I get my fix in. Heck I gotta work tonight. You can try it then!"

"Sweet!"

It's not only less complicated, but in my case, impossibleto find 10 hardcore gamers where I live to share every single game I own with them. Been living in this town for 20 years and I only know 1. Bad part is, we almost always buy the same games too. So this is literally 10 times better and if I'm smart enough to add the right friends, it fixes my rental issue.

*If this is for real.

Where is the complication? I can share my games with 10 friends for FREE! Any friends. Even you. What's complicated about it? If you're one of my 10 friends and family you can play any game I own(as long as publishers participate in this*).

I can't do that in real life. I don't have 10 gamer friends. I can't do that with physical copies. This is NOT limiting it for me. This is giving me 9 extra people to share with that I can befriend right here on thsi forum, that I don't have in real life! 

I can't believe people are hating on this. You guys are trying too hard.

UpInFlames

[QUOTE="UpInFlames"]

I can't believe people are hating on this. You guys are trying too hard.

Sparky04

Yep. And I think that's in essence what they are saying, except if I'm understanding this correctly, it's better than even 5 free games. You get access to 10 free libraries of games.

It honestly sounds too **** good to be true. I'm sure there will be some publishers that will want to opt out, or some sort of limitations. 

[QUOTE="alexwatchtower"]Where is the complication? I can share my games with 10 friends for FREE! Any friends. Even you. What's complicated about it? If you're one of my 10 friends and family you can play any game I own(as long as publishers participate in this*). I can't do that in real life. I don't have 10 gamer friends. I can't do that with physical copies. This is NOT limiting it for me. This is giving me 9 extra people to share with that I can befriend right here on thsi forum, that I don't have in real life! Black_Knight_00

Do you not see me repeatedly saying IF this is true?

But shit, why is it we automaticallly believe the bad stuff, but none of the good stuff? 

The man said I can add anyone , even 3000 miles away and they have access to my games library. What do you want me to do? Ignore it?

PS: And you damn right I will freaking yell if they are lying. Wouldn't you?

It's just the overwhelming presence of playstation fans on this site. Microsoft could announce that you get 5 free games with the system and they would talk like they are desperate and terrible. Anyway if the family sharing turns out to be true, then I and absolutely back on board with the Xbone.

Sparky04

You do realise that the hate towards MS stems from the DRM and the always online requirement? Free games would not change that fact. Until they change their policies the reaction of the public would differ. 

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"][QUOTE="alexwatchtower"]Where is the complication? I can share my games with 10 friends for FREE! Any friends. Even you. What's complicated about it? If you're one of my 10 friends and family you can play any game I own(as long as publishers participate in this*). I can't do that in real life. I don't have 10 gamer friends. I can't do that with physical copies. This is NOT limiting it for me. This is giving me 9 extra people to share with that I can befriend right here on thsi forum, that I don't have in real life! alexwatchtower

Do you not see me repeatedly saying IF this is true?

But shit, why is it we automaticallly believe the bad stuff, but none of the good stuff? 

The man said I can add anyone , even 3000 miles away and they have access to my games library. What do you want me to do? Ignore it?

PS: And you damn right I will freaking yell if they are lying. Wouldn't you?

[QUOTE="Sparky04"] It's just the overwhelming presence of playstation fans on this site. Microsoft could announce that you get 5 free games with the system and they would talk like they are desperate and terrible. Anyway if the family sharing turns out to be true, then I and absolutely back on board with the Xbone.

Pedro

You do realise that the hate towards MS stems from the DRM and the always online requirement? Free games would not change that fact. Until they change their policies the reaction of the public would differ. 

[QUOTE="Pedro"]

[QUOTE="Sparky04"] It's just the overwhelming presence of playstation fans on this site. Microsoft could announce that you get 5 free games with the system and they would talk like they are desperate and terrible. Anyway if the family sharing turns out to be true, then I and absolutely back on board with the Xbone.

Sparky04

You do realise that the hate towards MS stems from the DRM and the always online requirement? Free games would not change that fact. Until they change their policies the reaction of the public would differ.

Sure, some of them can and have done that recently. But the truth is, there are also gamers that are completely undecided in it and how Sony and Microsoft spill the news, that's up for them to judge and so far, it seems like the majority of either fan or non-fan of either company seem to be more pleased with Sony than they are with Microsoft. I can totally understand why. It's stuff like what's in here, the whole "buy one game and share it with ten others" that piss people off big time. In short, it's not that we are trying to make it look bad at all, it's already been done by the developers themselves and all we are doing is adding more fuel to the fire in both truth and facts.

[QUOTE="Pedro"]

[QUOTE="Sparky04"] It's just the overwhelming presence of playstation fans on this site. Microsoft could announce that you get 5 free games with the system and they would talk like they are desperate and terrible. Anyway if the family sharing turns out to be true, then I and absolutely back on board with the Xbone.

Sparky04

You do realise that the hate towards MS stems from the DRM and the always online requirement? Free games would not change that fact. Until they change their policies the reaction of the public would differ. 

[QUOTE="alexwatchtower"]

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"] Can't believe you are buying into this stuff. I can already see you making 5 threads to yell at microsoft when this latest bubble inevitably pops. Moths to a flame aren't this blindly optimistic -__-Black_Knight_00

Do you not see me repeatedly saying IF this is true?

But shit, why is it we automaticallly believe the bad stuff, but none of the good stuff? 

The man said I can add anyone , even 3000 miles away and they have access to my games library. What do you want me to do? Ignore it?

PS: And you damn right I will freaking yell if they are lying. Wouldn't you?

Not impossible. Unlikely sure, and I agree but...they did say not every publisher has to support it.

But I wonder if there's a different logic behind it.

If they realize people would be sharing games another person would only buy used or rent, what would they really lose? If I buy it used, what's there to gain? If I share a new game,  especially a multiplayer game, and they like it, there's a good chance they would buy it new so they can play it online with me.

And then the other thing is this. I read some stats that The Witcher, by CD Projekt Red who is very anti-DRM,  sold somewhere along the lines of 5 million units. Despite them being "kind" to gamers of fighting anti-DRM, at the same time, roughly 4.5 million were pirated.

If you had a service like this, what would be the incentive to pirate games anymore? That is a hassle. It's no easy thing to do. It's also illegal and unethical. If you were to convert even 10% of pirates who never buy your game anyway, because this makes it a no brainer for them, and probably easier to do, not to mention legal, that's an additional 450,000 in sales for CD Projekt Red. 

[QUOTE="alexwatchtower"]

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"] Can't believe you are buying into this stuff. I can already see you making 5 threads to yell at microsoft when this latest bubble inevitably pops. Moths to a flame aren't this blindly optimistic -__-Black_Knight_00

Do you not see me repeatedly saying IF this is true?

But shit, why is it we automaticallly believe the bad stuff, but none of the good stuff? 

The man said I can add anyone , even 3000 miles away and they have access to my games library. What do you want me to do? Ignore it?

PS: And you damn right I will freaking yell if they are lying. Wouldn't you?

Im fairly sure only one person will be able to play each game at any given time, with the original owner having priority. If they both want to play they likely both have to buy the game. Im just assuming how it works by common sense. They aren't giving away 9 free games here...

Oh yeah Black Knight...one more thing. If Microsoft is so stupid for doing this how dumb is Sony for doing it with movies?

They let you share movies with 5 people with a similar system as MS is describing.

How many people can share my UltraViolet account?
You may share your UltraViolet account with up to 5 other people (Account Members), and each Member can have their own username/password log-in information.

http://www.sonypictures.com/homevideo/ultraviolet/faq.html#FAQ-2

And I know I sure as hell wouldn't purchase a movie I already watched. A game, I still might if I like it and I want to play it right away. This is the same exact system. 

But I know that in this forum, only Sony can tell the truth, and nothing but lies come from Microsoft.

[QUOTE="Sparky04"][QUOTE="UpInFlames"]

I can't believe people are hating on this. You guys are trying too hard.

alexwatchtower

Yep. And I think that's in essence what they are saying, except if I'm understanding this correctly, it's better than even 5 free games. You get access to 10 free libraries of games.

It honestly sounds too **** good to be true. I'm sure there will be some publishers that will want to opt out, or some sort of limitations. 

[QUOTE="Pedro"]

[QUOTE="Sparky04"] It's just the overwhelming presence of playstation fans on this site. Microsoft could announce that you get 5 free games with the system and they would talk like they are desperate and terrible. Anyway if the family sharing turns out to be true, then I and absolutely back on board with the Xbone.

Sparky04

You do realise that the hate towards MS stems from the DRM and the always online requirement? Free games would not change that fact. Until they change their policies the reaction of the public would differ. 

[QUOTE="Sparky04"][QUOTE="Pedro"]

You do realise that the hate towards MS stems from the DRM and the always online requirement? Free games would not change that fact. Until they change their policies the reaction of the public would differ. 

MonoSilver

Well I'm not a doctor, but I can without certainty say that at least as far as this thread is concerned. it's not your hearing that's the issue. It's reading comprehension.

[QUOTE="MonoSilver"][QUOTE="Sparky04"] I understand that. I'm just saying there are a lot of Sony fanboys that will take any Microsoft news, even very good news, and try to make it sound bad.alexwatchtower

Well I'm not a doctor, but I can without certainty say that at least as far as this thread is concerned. it's not your hearing that's the issue. It's reading comprehension.