Jump to content



Photo

Rumour: Xbox One family sharing was a "45min demo"


  • Please log in to reply
192 replies to this topic

#46 OP Audioboxer

Audioboxer

    Hermit Arcana

  • Joined: 01-December 03
  • Location: UK, Scotland

Posted 21 June 2013 - 11:22

This is why I very much doubt this rumor. With a time limit of how long you play the game, why the hell do you need to check in every 24hours? You don't. Which in turn, simply means this rumor is false. 

This sounds like a clear belittle of the family sharing program before it even came to light, because we probably never will see it.

 

We were toying around with a limit on the number of times members could access the shared game (as to discourage gamers from simply beating the game by doing multiple playthroughs). but we had not settled on an appropriate way of handling it.

 

 

If you were going to be able bound to a limit of the number of times you could reset the timer, that has to be phoned home to HQ does it not?




#47 MindTrickz

MindTrickz

    That's no way to treat a lady!

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 18-September 03
  • Location: Europe:

Posted 21 June 2013 - 11:32

You can't share someone else's game. That would be pure stupid and bring up the use case which you mentioned.

 

We're probably never going to find out what family sharing would of become.

 

No, I'm not talking about sharing someone else games. I'm talking about 10 people sharing their respective games with 100 people, those 100 people then sharing their respective games with others 1000 etc.



#48 ViperAFK

ViperAFK

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 2
  • Joined: 07-March 06
  • Location: Vermont

Posted 21 June 2013 - 11:33

This is why I very much doubt this rumor. With a time limit of how long you play the game, why the hell do you need to check in every 24hours? You don't. Which in turn, simply means this rumor is false. 

This sounds like a clear belittle of the family sharing program before it even came to light, because we probably never will see it.

I'm sure people would have tried to find ways to exploit the timer etc... the checkin may have been necessary to prevent that.



#49 MindTrickz

MindTrickz

    That's no way to treat a lady!

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 18-September 03
  • Location: Europe:

Posted 21 June 2013 - 11:34

This is the first time I am hearing about sharing on PSN without sharing account. Why didn't anyone mention this before?

 

I'ts been a part of the PS+ for a very long time now. 2 years. But no one mentioned it because Microsoft's family sharing, which we now discovered is the same as the PSN's version, was tauted as something else. Being able to share your full games with 10 people.



#50 OP Audioboxer

Audioboxer

    Hermit Arcana

  • Joined: 01-December 03
  • Location: UK, Scotland

Posted 21 June 2013 - 11:46

I'ts been a part of the PS+ for a very long time now. 2 years. But no one mentioned it because Microsoft's family sharing, which we now discovered is the same as the PSN's version, was tauted as something else. Being able to share your full games with 10 people.

 

Well it wouldn't be exactly the same, on the Xbox One it seems every game would've been able to be shared, where as on PS+ it's full game trials of what Sony chooses to offer to you. Mechanics seem to have worked the same though (some sort of time limit, trophies/acheivements and save game files can carry over to full game unlock).



#51 +FiB3R

FiB3R

    aka DARKFiB3R

  • Tech Issues Solved: 6
  • Joined: 06-November 02
  • Location: SE London
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Enterprise
  • Phone: Lumia 930

Posted 21 June 2013 - 12:14

This is why I very much doubt this rumor. With a time limit of how long you play the game, why the hell do you need to check in every 24hours? You don't. Which in turn, simply means this rumor is false. 

This sounds like a clear belittle of the family sharing program before it even came to light, because we probably never will see it.

Don't you think it's bit of an overly elaborate hoax, just to discredit something that doesn't even exist anymore. What would be the point in that?

 

Unless of course, it is actually a Microsoft employee, trying to soften the blow/prevent further backlash.

 

Conspiracy theories ahoy!!!



#52 Andrew G.

Andrew G.

    Once More 'Round the Sun

  • Tech Issues Solved: 9
  • Joined: 14-September 03

Posted 21 June 2013 - 12:17

Rumor. I don't believe it. Somone writing on pastebin or whatever is not a good source. I could've written it, pretending to be a MS employee. The last one looked like it was written by an angry 14 year old..

 

 

 

Why would we want to download 40gb if we could install from disc in 15 mins or whatever?  It's a difference between playing with disc and installing from disc.

 

Family sharing required you to download the game when you played it from any other console than the one you own, i.e a friend's. So yes, you would have had to download the 20+ GB game without the disc. The only positive in the scenario was you could begin playing before the download complete. Same goes for installing games from the disc, even after the policy changes iirc.



#53 JonnyLH

JonnyLH

    I say things.

  • Joined: 15-February 13
  • Location: UK
  • OS: W8, W7, WP8, iOS, Ubuntu
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 920

Posted 21 June 2013 - 12:25

I'm sure people would have tried to find ways to exploit the timer etc... the checkin may have been necessary to prevent that.

One thing that was very well known about the mysteries of the X1 was that the check-in just sent the UID of the disc to somewhere for it to check you was still the rightful owner or you are allowed to play it. If there's a limit to the time you're allowed to play the game, then there's no way you can exploit the concept of family sharing, and all the checking can be done locally. It means no-one else can own your game, and even if you took your game to a friends house, its still linked to your account.

 

 

Don't you think it's bit of an overly elaborate hoax, just to discredit something that doesn't even exist anymore. What would be the point in that?

 

Unless of course, it is actually a Microsoft employee, trying to soften the blow/prevent further backlash.

 

Conspiracy theories ahoy!!!

I've seen crazier things.

 

Honestly, if it was only a 60 minute demo, why would it be just restricted to the games your friends own and not all the games library of the console like it currently is on PSN+. That makes no business/logical sense.

 

Thinking about it more just pokes more holes.



#54 OP Audioboxer

Audioboxer

    Hermit Arcana

  • Joined: 01-December 03
  • Location: UK, Scotland

Posted 21 June 2013 - 12:26

One thing that was very well known about the mysteries of the X1 was that the check-in just sent the UID of the disc to somewhere for it to check you was still the rightful owner or you are allowed to play it. If there's a limit to the time you're allowed to play the game, then there's no way you can exploit the concept of family sharing, and all the checking can be done locally. It means no-one else can own your game, and even if you took your game to a friends house, its still linked to your account.

 

 

I've seen crazier things.

 

Honestly, if it was only a 60 minute demo, why would it be just restricted to the games your friends own and not all the games library of the console like it currently is on PSN+. That makes no business/logical sense.

 

Thinking about it more just pokes more holes.

 

It's not like that on PSN+, never has been, never was, no idea why you think that.

 

You only get full game trials for games Sony offer you and it's very few titles at that, and I believe mostly 1st party. Xbox One solution sounds like it was mandatory for ALL games.



#55 JonnyLH

JonnyLH

    I say things.

  • Joined: 15-February 13
  • Location: UK
  • OS: W8, W7, WP8, iOS, Ubuntu
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 920

Posted 21 June 2013 - 12:28

It's not like that on PSN+

 

You only get full game trials for games Sony offer you. Xbox One solution sounds like it was mandatory for ALL games.

Its still the same principle.

 

Technically, if the game has a time limit there is no need for an online check-in because there is no way to exploit the system. The only reason the check-in was there was to check these things. 



#56 OP Audioboxer

Audioboxer

    Hermit Arcana

  • Joined: 01-December 03
  • Location: UK, Scotland

Posted 21 June 2013 - 12:31

Its still the same principle.

 

Technically, if the game has a time limit there is no need for an online check-in because there is no way to exploit the system. The only reason the check-in was there was to check these things. 

 

Yes there is for the reason I quoted you just posts ago

 

We were toying around with a limit on the number of times members could access the shared game (as to discourage gamers from simply beating the game by doing multiple playthroughs). but we had not settled on an appropriate way of handling it.

 

 

If certain games were going to have different numbers of retries, the reset mechanism needs to be server side or it could well be exploited.

 

As I posted a few pages ago, MS already confirmed when you went around to your friends the 24 hour check in became 1 hour. Piece things together, it's not rocket science.



#57 Andrew G.

Andrew G.

    Once More 'Round the Sun

  • Tech Issues Solved: 9
  • Joined: 14-September 03

Posted 21 June 2013 - 12:32

If you were going to be able bound to a limit of the number of times you could reset the timer, that has to be phoned home to HQ does it not?

 

And you can play offline on a secondary console via Family Share for only 1 hour.

 

All matches up tbh.



#58 JonnyLH

JonnyLH

    I say things.

  • Joined: 15-February 13
  • Location: UK
  • OS: W8, W7, WP8, iOS, Ubuntu
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 920

Posted 21 June 2013 - 12:38

Yes there is for the reason I quoted you just posts ago

 

 

If certain games were going to have different numbers of retries, the reset mechanism needs to be server side or it could well be exploited.

 

As I posted a few pages ago, MS already confirmed when you went around to your friends the 24 hour check in became 1 hour. Piece things together, it's not rocket science.

You're not listening to me. I'm saying TECHNICALLY, as in there is no technical requirement. I could draw you up a flowchart if you wanted disproving you. The X1 would have local limits to stop the user playing the game which can't be surpassed, why would it need to check in every 24 hour aswell? There's no point. It would make the DRM invalid, everything just falls apart because its essentially the same business model. It'd just be a single added feature of playing trial full games. It'd be the same concept if you could buy XBLA games on disc currently. You get me?

 

Basically, if the X1 needs a 24 hour check-in with a partial libary of full game trials, so would the PS3.

 

EDIT: The only reason it would be needed would be for the complete digital game libary. Then again, there's solutions around that like you see in Steam for example, you can't play the game without the disc if you're not connected to live. That by itself isn't a reason to eliminate a big chunk of your market.



#59 BajiRav

BajiRav

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 15-July 04
  • Location: Xbox, where am I?
  • OS: Windows 8.1, Windows 8
  • Phone: Lumia 920

Posted 21 June 2013 - 12:50

No it's not the same as a demo. A demo is typically a segment of a game (can be from anywhere, start, middle, end) that you are restricted to play, everyone can only play the same amount of content. The demo doesn't even have to be from the final build of the game.

 

This is a full game download of a gone gold/retail title that you get a 45min-1hour timer on, so if you're good at games you could get further into the game than someone who sucks. Your achievements/save games are kept, and to keep playing you can buy the game after your time limit is up.

Xbox Live demos are from final builds I don't know why you think they are not. Demos are full downloads for XBLA and you pay to unlock full game and still get to keep achievements, progress etc. There is nothing new in this pastebin.

I had a doubt that family sharing wasn't fully fleshed out and even Microsoft didn't know what they could do (for whatever reasons including publisher agreements) but this pastebin just doesn't add up.

 

If you were going to be able bound to a limit of the number of times you could reset the timer, that has to be phoned home to HQ does it not?

You don't need online connection to limit trials, see any trial wares on PC. Sure it could be exploited when XB1's security is breached but then at that time you would hardly care about sharing games. :)

 

Family sharing required you to download the game when you played it from any other console than the one you own, i.e a friend's. So yes, you would have had to download the 20+ GB game without the disc. The only positive in the scenario was you could begin playing before the download complete. Same goes for installing games from the disc, even after the policy changes iirc.

You didn't need to download games if you had access to the disc.



#60 OP Audioboxer

Audioboxer

    Hermit Arcana

  • Joined: 01-December 03
  • Location: UK, Scotland

Posted 21 June 2013 - 12:50

You're not listening to me. I'm saying TECHNICALLY, as in there is no technical requirement. I could draw you up a flowchart if you wanted disproving you. The X1 would have local limits to stop the user playing the game which can't be surpassed, why would it need to check in every 24 hour aswell? There's no point. It would make the DRM invalid, everything just falls apart because its essentially the same business model. It'd just be a single added feature of playing trial full games. It'd be the same concept if you could buy XBLA games on disc currently. You get me?

 

Basically, if the X1 needs a 24 hour check-in with a partial libary of full game trials, so would the PS3.

 

EDIT: The only reason it would be needed would be for the complete digital game libary. Then again, there's solutions around that like you see in Steam. That by itself isn't a reason to eliminate a big chunk of your market.

 

On the PS3 you aren't sharing anything with your friends/family, full game trials on the PS3 are tied to you having a PS+ account, and if you do EVERYONE with a PS+ account can access them on their OWN account. Without a PS+ account you cannot access them.

 

You should probably do some reading into how PS+ and PSN full game trials work, you're making quite a lot of wrong assumptions about the service.





Click here to login or here to register to remove this ad, it's free!