Jump to content

193 posts in this topic

Posted

Yes. Because he said don't believe "EVERYTHING", and I chose to believe what he says compared to what a random pastebin said.

 

So if he said "Yes, it is true. Don't believe everything you read online." would you believe him or no?

 

I think I have a little bit more faith in someone who exposes his true self online instead of being an anonymous person.

 

But... BUT... BUT... YOU ARE DELUSIONAL MAN! Someone probably hacked their Twitter accounts! Or better yet, they are lying and trying to save their asses (and you are a fool for believing them)! No, no... I just think it's unrealistic to think the Family Sharing feature worked this way, so I'll say it's impossible it could have been this way! :woot:

 

I think this deserves its own thread, I don't doubt this confirmation will get lost somehow in the following days' discussions.

 

I hope they ban this CBoaT guy now. :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

case closed ...now lets wait for next rumour

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Told you so.

 

Now maybe idiots will stop posting stupid rumours that were found on Pastebin, i mean FFS, we're supposed to be grownups. 

A few users on here are turning the site in to the tech worlds version of 'Hello' magazine.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So, not true then.

 

I still think there was more to the family sharing than we know though. Microsoft are the last company I'd expect to give away something for nothing, and the gaming industry as a whole is perennially greedy. Just didn't add up to me as a good enough deal  for developers and Microsoft for it to function as many here were believing it to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

40gb is a completely random number you pulled out of thin air, but if it was true, wouldn't you have to download the shared game anyway? If it was cloud based, it would be prohibitive for anyone without a fast enough connection rendering the function useless for a lot of people.

 

Yes. 40gb is random. 10-20gb is more realistic, but the point is I'd like the digital features like family sharing while being able to install it fast with disc (since I, unlike my family, paid for the game :-)  ).  And as I said in the same post: did anyone say that the family couldn't install from disc too? The game license is shared using the cloud (requires internet) and you could download from the cloud. However, I didn't see anyone specify that downloading was the ONLY option for the family members. Also, for me personally, every one I share with has 25/25 mbit/s or faster, so it would be a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Yes. 40gb is random. 10-20gb is more realistic, but the point is I'd like the digital features like family sharing while being able to install it fast with disc (since I, unlike my family, paid for the game :-)  ).  And as I said in the same post: did anyone say that the family couldn't install from disc too? The game license is shared using the cloud (requires internet) and you could download from the cloud. However, I didn't see anyone specify that downloading was the ONLY option for the family members. Also, for me personally, every one I share with has 25/25 mbit/s or faster, so it would be a problem.

 

Yeah well, you and everyone you share with, aren't the rest of the world.

 

I have 5mbps internet, and no, 40gb game sizes isn't random. Games are large now since they need to be on BluRay discs, which hold up to 50GB. Max Payne 3 was closer to 20gb on consoles than it was to 10gb.

 

And this is only on PS3/Xbox. Newer games are going to be larger. I am not going to spend 2 days to download 1 game. Screw that.

 

I only have ONE ISP in my town. They only offer ADSL. And they only offer speeds "Up to 7Mbps".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Yeah well, you and everyone you share with, aren't the rest of the world.

 

I have 5mbps internet, and no, 40gb game sizes isn't random. Games are large now since they need to be on BluRay discs, which hold up to 50GB. Max Payne 3 was closer to 20gb on consoles than it was to 10gb.

 

And this is only on PS3/Xbox. Newer games are going to be larger. I am not going to spend 2 days to download 1 game. Screw that.

 

I only have ONE ISP in my town. They only offer ADSL. And they only offer speeds "Up to 7Mbps".

 

Did you even read my post, and the guy I was replying to, or were you too busy getting fired up to attack me for no reason? I said I WANTED discs, but still being able to play DISCLESS. I DIDN'T want to download the games, and I said that from what I could remember family sharing was NOT said to be download only.

 

I said 40gb earlier, then the guy replied saying that it was way too high and I revised the size just to make him shut up.

 

We're on the same side ffs! Get some sleep, you look tired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Yeah well, you and everyone you share with, aren't the rest of the world.

 

I have 5mbps internet, and no, 40gb game sizes isn't random. Games are large now since they need to be on BluRay discs, which hold up to 50GB. Max Payne 3 was closer to 20gb on consoles than it was to 10gb.

 

And this is only on PS3/Xbox. Newer games are going to be larger. I am not going to spend 2 days to download 1 game. Screw that.

 

I only have ONE ISP in my town. They only offer ADSL. And they only offer speeds "Up to 7Mbps".

 

 

If game downloads worked lik disc installs and as on most modern PC games, you didn't need to download the whole game to start playing. 

 

And in most of the world DSL works so that you don't need to buy the service from your towns local supplier (I do), but generally the phone lines are owned by the old former government monoply telecom company of the country, and all the DSL providers in the country can deliver to you. generally local companies only deliver to the local town they are in, while you have a few larger nationwide companies who deliver to everyone that has a phone connection. In my case I use the local one because I get better speeds with them since they know the system and that despite living out in nowhere I live very close to the closest sentral so I can get the 20Mbp plan, which gives me 16-18Mbps. whereas most big national companies would just say you can get max 10. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

so now it's proven that ANOTHER bad rumor about the xbox one got decimated. 

that pastebin post the OP talked about is a 100% lie.

there were no time limits on the family share. the family share was sharing the FULL game to 10 people you designated as family on xbox live.

 

http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-xbox-one-family-game-share-was-never-time-limited

 

in any case as i've said I will be buying all digital in hopes that somehow Microsoft will bring back these features, even to make it opt in. and only those who opt in can access the family share.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

 

in any case as i've said I will be buying all digital in hopes that somehow Microsoft will bring back these features, even to make it opt in. and only those who opt in can access the family share.

 

Me and you both.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If game downloads worked lik disc installs and as on most modern PC games, you didn't need to download the whole game to start playing. 

 

And in most of the world DSL works so that you don't need to buy the service from your towns local supplier (I do), but generally the phone lines are owned by the old former government monoply telecom company of the country, and all the DSL providers in the country can deliver to you. generally local companies only deliver to the local town they are in, while you have a few larger nationwide companies who deliver to everyone that has a phone connection. In my case I use the local one because I get better speeds with them since they know the system and that despite living out in nowhere I live very close to the closest sentral so I can get the 20Mbp plan, which gives me 16-18Mbps. whereas most big national companies would just say you can get max 10. 

 

Kind of impossible to not buy service from the only ISP in town, since they're also the phone company who owns a monopoly on the telephone lines. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Kind of impossible to not buy service from the only ISP in town, since they're also the phone company who owns a monopoly on the telephone lines. 

 

Phone lines are owned by national companies not local town companies. and pretty much all over the world the owner of the phone grid is required to rent it out at competitive prices to those that want to provide services on them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Phone lines are owned by national companies not local town companies. and pretty much all over the world the owner of the phone grid is required to rent it out at competitive prices to those that want to provide services on them. 

 

I didn't say it was owned by a local company. I'm saying the national company IE: Bell, own's all the lines here and are the only provider in my town. We're technically a village of about 3000 people, and the nearest town is over 150km away. There will never be competition in this village I live in. The speeds will never be faster until they install FiberOp, IF they ever do.

 

This is why going 100% digital distribution is a terrible idea and that discs are going to be around for a long while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I didn't say it was owned by a local company. I'm saying the national company IE: Bell, own's all the lines here and are the only provider in my town. We're technically a village of about 3000 people, and the nearest town is over 150km away. There will never be competition in this village I live in. The speeds will never be faster until they install FiberOp, IF they ever do.

 

This is why going 100% digital distribution is a terrible idea and that discs are going to be around for a long while.

theres no rogers infrastructure? how do you get cable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

theres no rogers infrastructure? how do you get cable?

 

We get cable through a local company, just a crappy little cable box with like 15-20 channels or something... 

 

old-cable-box.jpg%3Fw%3D120

 

That's the closest I can find to a box that we have.. but ours doesn't have a remote, it's smaller, and it has like plastic push buttons...

We can also get Satellite TV from Bell or from Shaw. 

We have a satellite internet provider that is local, but that is so crappy it's not even worth mentioning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

you're not fit to be xbox one users, upgrade your town.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I didn't say it was owned by a local company. I'm saying the national company IE: Bell, own's all the lines here and are the only provider in my town. We're technically a village of about 3000 people, and the nearest town is over 150km away. There will never be competition in this village I live in. The speeds will never be faster until they install FiberOp, IF they ever do.

 

This is why going 100% digital distribution is a terrible idea and that discs are going to be around for a long while.

 

Other national DSL providers rent Bell's lines and provide nationwide DSL service. they may not advertise there, but I'm sure there are some that provide. they probably won't give any better speeds though, but who knows. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Other national DSL providers rent Bell's lines and provide nationwide DSL service. they may not advertise there, but I'm sure there are some that provide. they probably won't give any better speeds though, but who knows. 

 

no there are none. I would know. There is only Bell here or else other people would use the others.

 

Believe it. There are a lot of places like mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

OK. If this has been proven false, leaving this topic open is asking for trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I note, no reply from those gloating earlier in the thread.

Always quick to believe the FUD but never quick to accept they're wrong
6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Most of the discussion went into the front page article regarding the debunking of this rumor. But reading the comments there just tells you that some people either think it's just Microsoft trying to save their ass, or that it still doesn't make sense. I suppose it's too hard to believe in something good from the competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I note, no reply from those gloating earlier in the thread.

Always quick to believe the FUD but never quick to accept they're wrong

 

 

I still think it would have been incredibly restrictive. Just because it wasn't restrictive in this particular way doesn't prove it would have been some open and free system others have been suggesting it will be.

 

The bottom line is we'll never know now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I still think it would have been incredibly restrictive. Just because it wasn't restrictive in this particular way doesn't prove it would have been some open and free system others have been suggesting it will be.

 

The bottom line is we'll never know now.

Given how actively Microsoft has updated 360, I won't be surprised if family sharing rises from its ashes in future.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Given how actively Microsoft has updated 360, I won't be surprised if family sharing rises from its ashes in future.

 

Well the official statement said "not at launch at least", and all the developers who's chimed in on the oh so credible pastebin has pretty much confirmed "still being worked on". 

 

Which leaves an interesting question, did they drop full online because the sharing and such wouldn't be ready for launch or because of the complaints ?... honestly it shouldn't take them that long to make the system though so I don't see that, but The testing and verification to make sure it can't be hacked or man in the middled do take time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I still think it would have been incredibly restrictive. Just because it wasn't restrictive in this particular way doesn't prove it would have been some open and free system others have been suggesting it will be.
 
The bottom line is we'll never know now.


Based upon what though? They were clear the sharing was restricted to 10 people unlike the current ability to share your disc with as many people as you like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.