{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
6/19/2013 11:12:13 PM
104
Are you happy Microsoft changed their policies?
If yes, that means you're happy that they removed DRM, and the used games restriction.
If no, that means you're unhappy how they got rid of family sharing
-
-
2 RepliesNo...it woulda have made our games cheaper
-
Considering the backlash it was the most strategically sound choice to make in a business sense.
-
Edited by Xzen: 6/20/2013 10:14:14 PM[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcXdWRJ-xb4[/url]
-
1 ReplyEdited by ToastyWaffles: 6/20/2013 8:50:26 AMThe only thing I'm sad about is that we can no longer share games digitally with our 'inner circle' of friends. A necessary sacrifice I suppose. Edit: I'm seeing comments like "Microsoft only changed their policies because of the backlash. They don't really care about the consumer, they only care about profits!" Let me be frank; why do people give a damn? And what makes Sony any better? Sony is not your pal; your bro; your gaming buddy. They're a company just like MS. But they just won the PR battle at E3. The core gamer is their demographic and Sony told us exactly what we wanted to hear, but that doesn't mean they "care" about us. It doesn't make them the Jesus of video games;it makes them a smart company who knows how to appeal to their demographic. No matter what publisher, developer or manufacturer you can think of, money is [i]always[/i] the bottom line. Every time.
-
10 RepliesEdited by CaptKrunch: 6/20/2013 3:42:34 PMWe just delayed the inevitable for no reason. Games are going to go digital guys, if its for good or bad we'll see, but I for one would have loved to see a Family Sharing System. In the future games could have been cheaper too.
-
Edited by halo: 6/20/2013 8:14:24 PMHappy? That's ridiculous. They brought the console back up to normal standards. You all sound retarded saying shit like "THANK YOU SO MUCH BASED MICROSOFT FOR LETTING ME PLAY USED GAMES WITHOUT A FEE AND LETTING ME PLAY OFFLINE, AND LETTING ME LET MY FRIENDS BORROW MY GAMES THAT I OWN YOU'RE SUCH A GREAT COMPANY" People saying shit like that are the epitome of xbots. I'm thinking, ok Microsoft, now that you brought the console back to mediocrity instead of being the worst -blam!-ing console (which you obviously were aware of since you pulled a complete 360 on your draconian methods), could you please now ADD some features that would benefit gamers, instead of taking away features that you already announced would not benefit them? I'll consider getting an Xbox once they make that 100 dollar kinect an optional feature, and they reveal better exclusives other than CoD with mechs, Halol, Forza and all those other games I have NO interest in at all. "BUT IT HAS SO MANY EXCLUSIVES". Well so did the 360 at launch, but now it has no damn games compared to the PS3.
-
MS changed their mind because what they thought would be the "perfect" no one liked it and besides the competition doesn't have anything similar which makes MS in a huge disadvantage.
-
Yep, and I'm getting it.
-
Happy, but still not buying one.
-
I am happy about it but I'm still not getting an Xbox One.
-
Oh yeah!!!!
-
>Family sharing plan is just a specialized demo and you couldn't actually share the whole game >DRM restricted how available gaming is >Games now can still be bought and downloaded online for seamless gaming >Used games and lending games are accepted now So how was Microsoft "moving forward" before? Their setup was nothing like Steam.
-
3 RepliesMicrosoft had a bold idea of the future and went back on it in about a week. They really have done -blam!-ed up.
-
I'm happy. But nervous that it showed how French-Revolution-y Microsoft is when dealing with their persnickety community.
-
4 RepliesEdited by Plain Ben: 6/20/2013 4:20:07 PMThey could have implemented the original one for online downloaded games, and keep the standard policies we're all used to with disc sales. If they gave good incentive to get the downloaded/on-demand versions, like decent pricing and sales I'm sure the on-demand service would be successful, but Microsoft hasn't built much trust with their current pricing of games and DLCs. Family sharing sounded good until I found out it may not be sharing the full game, instead merely a way of demoing games to purchase. (Full game access, but limited time to play it) I wouldn't be interested in that. [quote]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. [b][u]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. [/u][/b][/quote][url=http://www.heyuguysgaming.com/news/12507/heartbroken-xbox-one-employee-lets-rip-must-read]Source[/url].
-
Repost from another thread to update my answer: I can't say I'm pleased about this switch. Yea the XB1 had some inconvenient policies, but I feel that it was moving the gaming industry forward in a good direction. If it didn't happen now, it would have happened 2-3 years from now. Instead of changing the invasive always-on Kinect, they removed bold new ideas like family sharing, and now we're basically back to Gen 7 with 1080p and 60fps. Besides, I don't think they did this because of "fan feedback". More of "we need more pre-orders so we have to sweeten the deal". Either way, Microsoft wins no points from me.
-
You're right. No because of the family sharing. They think that they can make up the difference by giving people what they want an in return charging $60 a head. That's all well and good for the single people, but as a family of 4 gamers, we'll feel the hurt as they discontinued the family gold pack. Season passes are a nightmare too. The kids both want the exclusive content, but it's tied to one gamertag. We have them switch off getting it. The OG ideas were very refreshing to me, as when the kids take a game to a friends house I'm stuck without it. Usually because they leave it there. Now I have to figure out what to do since it'll be the same for my 360. I can't afford to be paying $240 a year. Yes I know there are sales, but it's still up there. Maybe ill go get a PS3 and we'll work through that catalog. I still love my 360. I'm not deserting the brand. It's just disheartening.
-
Yes, still not getting an Xbox One for a [i]very[/i] long time though.... or a PS4 Sucks to be broke and starting college, at least I have a PC and my old consoles.
-
Edited by CeremonialSnips: 6/20/2013 3:10:15 PMYes, but also no. I am in favor of the changes, as they are keeping things the same (used games), not trying to be super innovative and alienating a large group who may not have the greatest internet connection. These are all good things, but unfortunately are not cause enough for me to be pleased with a next gen system from Microsoft. There are other issues with X BOX ONE. One feature I would like to add is to be able to play my 360 discs on the One, you know so I don't have to have my 360 next to it, I can sell my 360, keep my old games and play them on the One as I see fit. This feature alone would make it nearly impossible for me to not upgrade. Secondly, I would like to see Microsoft back off the accessory market, I know that they are coming out with new headsets, but a lot of people already have ones that they enjoy. That being said, as of current restrictions, my headset is now useless for gaming on the One and is relegated to a accessory for my ipod, and watching movies. I would like to see them work hard to develop a adapter that can work with older gen headsets (3.5mm) to if not allow the stereo communication, keep it mono (as is). So in summary, while this is a step in the right direction, it is only that a step. Microsoft and One have many more in front of them if they want to realize the same or greater success then they did with the 360. O and one more thing, make the Kinect OPTIONAL! This may lower your cost of production and thus lower the MSRP. If the console dropped in price to be only $50USD greater than the PS4 I can see it luring many more customers, who are concerned about real "value". Go ahead, offer it as a bundle for your current price, and produce a system/bundle with out the kinect. See which one will sell better ,please.
-
4 RepliesAnyone voting no is a hypocrite. Simple as that Wanting to be able to sell your games is being entitled ...but crying over a one week old program which announced that you "play games for free" (which is actually not even that great of a program with the perks of it) is fine Used games are evil and hurt developers ...playing games for free is better
-
Of Course
-
18 RepliesYes for no restrictions and the fact that my physical disk now has value. No because of family sharing, and if so, could anybody explain why we cant have both offline and ect. as well as family sharing.
-
I couldn't have cared less.
-
3 RepliesI don't see why they don't just reach a middle ground and not keeping being dumb asses. For the physical copies make it just like the previous generations with sharing and price, then if people download the game (go digital) they get it for $10-$20 cheaper and get the family sharing through the cloud. Who ever you loan the game to has to connect once every 24 hours with the DRM management shit or they can't play THE BORROWED GAME until they reconnect.
-
2 RepliesBoth. They should be able to implement family sharing with these new policies.
