Poll: Xbox One or PS4

[Luis_GT]

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

I don't agree with his assertion that "we took all this away from you, but look, here's family sharing!" Then chastize them for taking the new features away. When in reality, those new proposed features WILL NOT WORK without a persistent internet check. And his Major Neslon comment probably was more along the lines of "You can't just turn off DRM (without losing half the things we announced at the unveil event)". He also further repeats the incorrect info that you couldn't lend, rent, or sell used games. Classy.

Other than that, I guess he's happy that this has been pushed off till the next generation, where digital formats will be king and discs may be long gone.

Maybe I should complain how useless my phone is when I don't have a network signal.

Why would family sharing not work without the 24 hour checkin? There is no reason why it would not work without that restriction.

[cfusionpm]

Originally Posted by Luis_GT

Why would family sharing not work without the 24 hour checkin? There is no reason why it would not work without that restriction.

Because how would they check? As the policy was, it was limited to one person at a time, unless playing a co-op game, then I believe it was limited to two. If family sharing were enabled, it would require an internet connection to check (which is all the scary DRM stuff everyone hated). Without that internet check, what's to stop one person from buying a game, sharing it with all 10 people in the family circle, then disconnecting from the internet and playing indefinitely?

Two possible outcomes from that:

1) No internet check is in place, no DRM, no verification, all people can play unlimited while offline. Essentially, you could only buy one copy and all 10 could use without restriction when offline.

2) Internet check is required for family sharing, but only accessible while connected to the internet (and all the evil DRM) to unlock unlimited use. If offline game restricted by arbitrary time limit.

Option 1 is what would happen with no internet check, no DRM, and would cause chaos to game sales. Option 2 is a fantastic choice, and hopefully they have the balls to actually do it. But because people have said DRM is the work of the devil, and they would sooner have their eyes gouged out than force require internet for anything, it will probably never happen.

[EAGLE5]

Originally Posted by n2oinferno

You play racing games and action/adventure platformers with a keyboard and mouse? If so, more power to you, but I can't do it. Batman, DMC, Grid, etc.. I love the PC as well, but I have a spare 360 controller that stays attached to it for a lot of games now. IMO Xbox controller integration into the PC gaming market is one of the better things that has happened for PC gaming.

I don't play racing games anymore, but if I did, I'd do it with a steering wheel and pedals, which I have only ever owned for a PC. Platformers? I don't think I've played one in a decade, but if I did, it would be in MAME using the USB PC gamepad I own and never use. Batman? DMC? Grid? Yawn. Crap games. I think Arkham Asylum came out for the PC, though I never played it. Xbox controllers are crap. I can't understand how people would want to play an FPS with them. Laughably, they put autoaim on to make FPS playable.

In other words, first person who says gamepad>keyboard in an FPS is using autoaim.

For the record, my first console was an INTV. Then NES. Then PSX. Then PS2. Then Wii. Then PS3. I haven't truly enjoyed a console game since Tekken 2 Tournament on the PS2, and that would have looked 10 times better on real 3D hardware on a PC.

[cfusionpm]

I remember my hand cramping and my wrist building callouses from resting and rubbing when I used to play Unreal Tournament about a decade ago. I'll take a controller and a comfy seat on the couch any day over being hunched over a keyboard with my fingers cramped into wasd position. Hardware aside (which is incredibly expensive to keep up with), I'm not a fan at all of mouse and keyboard for games anymore. Not to mention all the cheaters and hackers in PC games....

[EAGLE5]

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

I remember my hand cramping and my wrist building callouses from resting and rubbing when I used to play Unreal Tournament about a decade ago. I'll take a controller and a comfy seat on the couch any day over being hunched over a keyboard with my fingers cramped into wasd position. Hardware aside (which is incredibly expensive to keep up with), I'm not a fan at all of mouse and keyboard for games anymore. Not to mention all the cheaters and hackers in PC games....

Just depends what you play. I play standing up at a standup desk on a mechanical keyboard. I used to play on a PC hooked up to the TV. Both ways are fine. I did have better accuracy sitting, but now I'm back up to 33%+ in insta on Sauerbraten. Can't complain.

[Shagaliscious]

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

I remember my hand cramping and my wrist building callouses from resting and rubbing when I used to play Unreal Tournament about a decade ago. I'll take a controller and a comfy seat on the couch any day over being hunched over a keyboard with my fingers cramped into wasd position. Hardware aside (which is incredibly expensive to keep up with), I'm not a fan at all of mouse and keyboard for games anymore. Not to mention all the cheaters and hackers in PC games....

Plus for me I am sitting at a computer probably 75% of the time I am at work. The last thing I want to do is come home and spend another 4+ hours in front of another computer.

[Luis_GT]

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

Because how would they check? As the policy was, it was limited to one person at a time, unless playing a co-op game, then I believe it was limited to two. If family sharing were enabled, it would require an internet connection to check (which is all the scary DRM stuff everyone hated). Without that internet check, what's to stop one person from buying a game, sharing it with all 10 people in the family circle, then disconnecting from the internet and playing indefinitely?

Two possible outcomes from that:

1) No internet check is in place, no DRM, no verification, all people can play unlimited while offline. Essentially, you could only buy one copy and all 10 could use without restriction when offline.

2) Internet check is required for family sharing, but only accessible while connected to the internet (and all the evil DRM) to unlock unlimited use. If offline game restricted by arbitrary time limit.

Option 1 is what would happen with no internet check, no DRM, and would cause chaos to game sales. Option 2 is a fantastic choice, and hopefully they have the balls to actually do it. But because people have said DRM is the work of the devil, and they would sooner have their eyes gouged out than force require internet for anything, it will probably never happen.

You do realize that the check is worthless for that... the check means you check in once every 24 hours, the go offline... if its meant to be played only by one person at a time, it would require that the console be connected 24/7, not once every 24 hours, the moment the sharer looses connection, it means no one can play, so it would have been retarded in the first place to offer such a thing, if on the other hand it's meant to be played as co-op, then the check is still unnecessary as both of you are going to be online either way...

Having the DRM stuff would not allow you to share the game so your family member could play while you're away.

[cfusionpm]

Originally Posted by Luis_GT

You do realize that the check is worthless for that... the check means you check in once every 24 hours, the go offline... if its meant to be played only by one person at a time, it would require that the console be connected 24/7, not once every 24 hours, the moment the sharer looses connection, it means no one can play, so it would have been retarded in the first place to offer such a thing, if on the other hand it's meant to be played as co-op, then the check is still unnecessary as both of you are going to be online either way...

Having the DRM stuff would not allow you to share the game so your family member could play while you're away.

So then by your own admission, it won't work without full DRM implementation? Which is exactly what I said.

Usage for family sharing would require being connected while playing a digitally-downloaded and shared game unless you were the original buyer. All offline play of shared games by anyone but the original buyer could/would be limited to say, 1 hour.

I have no problem with them doing this, but as a number of people said, including our friend Angry Joe, they would rather dig their organs out with a rusty spoon than implement any kind of "restriction" DRM.

It would be like saying: "I wish I could just use pandora and spotify and youtube without being forced, FORCED! to connect to the internet!!"

[Luis_GT]

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

So then by your own admission, it won't work without full DRM implementation? Which is exactly what I said.

Usage for family sharing would require being connected while playing a digitally-downloaded and shared game unless you were the original buyer. All offline play of shared games by anyone but the original buyer could/would be limited to say, 1 hour.

I have no problem with them doing this, but as a number of people said, including our friend Angry Joe, they would rather dig their organs out with a rusty spoon than implement any kind of "restriction" DRM.

It would be like saying: "I wish I could just use pandora and spotify and youtube without being forced, FORCED! to connect to the internet!!"

It works without DRM... you, the buyer can play it without connecting to the internet... by your definition of the family share you're saying that the family member can only play the game while the original buyer is playing the game... the original buyer has no drm restriction... the member you shared it has a limitation, and that is that the game only has co-op mode, basically a demo version of the game which it has nothing to do with drm... and if thats the case... family sharing is a complete waste of time

[cfusionpm]

Originally Posted by Luis_GT

It works without DRM... you, the buyer can play it without connecting to the internet... by your definition of the family share you're saying that the family member can only play the game while the original buyer is playing the game... the original buyer has no drm restriction... the member you shared it has a limitation, and that is that the game only has co-op mode, basically a demo version of the game which it has nothing to do with drm... and if thats the case... family sharing is a complete waste of time

Let's make this more simple:

I buy a digital copy of a game. I can play that game however long I want whenever I want, connected or not.

I then share that copy with 10 people on my family list. They could only play it when connected to the internet AND if no one else is playing UNLESS they are playing co-op (using the best definition given before policy change). If they were not connected, they would be limited to 1 hour, but leave me unaffected.

If I wanted to play offline and they wanted to play while connected online (two people playing the same copy of a game, but not in co-op), that would have to be a sacrifice made by MS in order to allow the feature to work as described. I'm sure MS doesn't want to lose all their game sales by selling 1 copy and having 10 people get unlimited use simultaneously.

But this is all irrelevant wishing at the moment.

But let's stop talking hypotheticals and start doing what Angry Joe in the video said: get back to real discussions about differences in the console hardware, controllers, and exclusive games since DRM is out of the picture now.

[Luis_GT]

Originally Posted by cfusionpm

Let's make this more simple:

I buy a digital copy of a game. I can play that game however long I want whenever I want, connected or not.

I then share that copy with 10 people on my family list. They could only play it when connected to the internet AND if no one else is playing UNLESS they are playing co-op (using the best definition given before policy change). If they were not connected, they would be limited to 1 hour, but leave me unaffected.

If I wanted to play offline and they wanted to play while connected online (two people playing the same copy of a game, but not in co-op), that would have to be a sacrifice made by MS in order to allow the feature to work as described. I'm sure MS doesn't want to lose all their game sales by selling 1 copy and having 10 people get unlimited use simultaneously.

But this is all irrelevant wishing at the moment.

But let's stop talking hypotheticals and start doing what Angry Joe in the video said: get back to real discussions about differences in the console hardware, controllers, and exclusive games since DRM is out of the picture now.

Even with the 1 hour restriction you so heartedly defend, the players could check in with a minute of each other in secession and all 10 would en up playing the game at the same time. The restriction itself is more of an annoyance than limiting usage.

I could log in at noon, another member log in at 12:05, and so on, and we would all be playing offline at the same time during that 1 hour check in limitation... makingit unlimited as it would check in a noon again, and do the whole process again... so the limitation end up jus being an annoyance rather than a so called way fro ms to limit gaming

[cfusionpm]

I'm done repeating myself in this thread. Especially about things that don't exist. Please re-read the several posts I've already made.

[Luis_GT]

The post I expected of a fanboy that lost the argument

[jshadeck]

From what i understood they 10 shared people were playing a cloud installed copy. There for they would have to be connected 100% to play as the game is not on their xbox hdd. So i could play my disc copy 24/7 regardless of internet or 10 friends. Of the 10 friends, only 1 could play at a time off the cloud copy.

Just cause u cant understand how something works doesnt make everyone else a fanboy. Gtfo.