matgrowcott

Why are people paid to actually hand out food in a restaurant? Why are people paid to sit at a computer all day, watching spreadsheets? Why are people paid for anything?

Because there's a demand there.

@Tkato

It's pretty well established by this point that publishers literally can't outprice themselves at retail. When GAME was on the brink of shutting down, several PC-only developers came out of the woodwork accusing them of threatening to not sell games that had Steam DRM because of the ability to drop the price so quickly and easily.

I don't have stats readily at hand, but I'm guessing if that's a problem for a format that is 70% digit...

You'd have seen unparalleled sales (for consoles, anyway). Reduction of new games isn't going to happen until we go full digital though.

The problem here is that the people who were complaining about DRM have largely said "Good move Microsoft, now get rid of Kinect and drop the price and we'll talk."

On the other hand, people who had pre-ordered based on features included in the Xbox One, now removed, are saying "so now what are we supposed to do?"

From a general standpoint, it seems Microsoft have done a good thing, but I think people are generally unsure if it's h...

So you've never heard someone say they're going to check something out of a linrary? Do you know how libraries work? I've never heard of a place ripping out the back 100 pages to get you to buy something.

I knew what you meant. You were wrong.

@StuffofLegend

Thanks! Best presume that's completely fake at this point. Came from a random anonymous PasteBin.

@Rainslacker

They get nothing from second hand sales and everything from digital sales. I mean, aren't people generally arguing that used sales are good for the industry because it generates interest and long term revenue?

Same here. Someone who thinks they'll hate Call of Duty plays it, enjoys it, pres...

Very confused. It was a PR disaster. What made the difference is that the mainstream media began reporting things that Microsoft had never said or announced as news.

When someone who has no interest in gaming reads in their daily international newspaper that Microsoft is releasing a console that requires you be always-connected (despite the fact they aren't and never were), there's no coming back from that. It's time to admit you've gotten off message, people ...

"They may have said that, but they had no intention of doing it."

And therein lies the issue. We don't know what they will or will not have done. All we know is that, from what we can tell, they intended to.

It was also mentioned multiple times across multiple publications and by people at different levels in the company, which leads me to think there's probably something somewhere that explains this in detail. We'll never see it.

Day one, after the very first conference, Microsoft revealed that for extreme circumstances - such as for those in the army - they could release codes that would allow for offline play.

I can't find the original story (it was a throwaway line in an interview on Kotaku), but it was mentioned more recently in The Army Times.

"Military personnel will be able to take their Xbox One and play their games with them without an issue as long as the game has b...

You're going to use a word like gullible when discussing a source you 100% believe, that was taken from an anonymous tipster on pastebin?

And more than that, you're going to take the word of said anonymous tipster over published materials explicitly explaining the family share feature?

Are you interested in buying a bridge?

@insomnium2

People keep saying this, seemingly looking over the fact that that's exactly what Microsoft announced they dropped.

I understand a healthy amount of cynicism, but the shared game list was described in exactly that way. It seems people are justifying the service being dropped by saying "well, it would never have happened anyway."

From what we can tell, it WAS happening, and people campaigned against it. Don't blam...

"it would matter if two or more can game at once"

You always have access to your games, plus one other person can play any other game on your list at a time.

So, let's say you have 10 games. You can pick any one of those games and play to your heart's content. Your 10 friends can each take one of those games (but not if someone else is already playing). As soon as a game comes free, your friends can swap around and choose something else fro...

It's not at all credible. It was an anonymous thing left on pastebin.

AS opposed to the new system, which means one person can play at a time... Or nothing.

@ILovethePS4

I've read through all of Microsoft's official material and not heard the demo thing. DO you have a source?

I'm not going to argue about the quality either way here, but I'm honestly not sure what you didn't understand.

From the official MS website:

"Xbox One will enable new forms of access for families. Up to ten members of your family can log in and play from your shared games library on any Xbox One. Just like today, a family member can play your copy of Forza Motorsport at a friend’s house. Only now, they will see not just Forza, but all of you...

@Witness

"with 10 people"

This was a little hazy, whether you could have 10 people total share all of your titles, whether you could set it for individual titles or whether you can add and delete people as and when you wanted.

It's very unlikely that very many people are sharing games across 10 different accounts. Unless you live in a communal house, maybe, or you're part of a very big family, or you have a lot of friends wi...