4 ms·

Im probably going to lose what little karma I have for saying this, but the XBox One's licensing model is more attractive to me than the PS4's model. I'm getti

Im probably going to lose what little karma I have for saying this, but the XBox One's licensing model is more attractive to me than the PS4's model. I'm getting all of my information from here: http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/license http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/license These are the points I find interesting: - Access your entire games library from any Xbox One ... while you are logged in at your friend’s house, you can play your games. From this, i can see that I will not have to carry around discs at all when I go to a friend's house. I can play any game that I own from any console. - Share access to your games with everyone inside your home .. Anyone can play your games on your console--regardless of whether you are logged in or their relationship to you. On my console, anyone can play my games, whether I take the disc to a friend's house or not. This is hugely beneficial for me and my brothers who, until this point, have been sharing a single console. - Give your family access to your entire games library anytime ... Up to ten members of your family can log in and play from your shared games library on any Xbox One. The key word there for me is that people can play my games, once I've shared then, from any console. So I can be in another city to my friends, buy a game, and immediately say to them "This game is awesome, check it out in my shared library." and immediately they can download it and start playing. This will be even more impressive if they can play online with me. Consider the case that I buy a game that has co-op play. This means that I can coop with my friends (almost) anywhere in the world even if they havent bought the game! I think this will be a huge feature. Ofcourse, there is the limitation on reselling games. But honestly, I have had an xbox 360 and ps3 for years, and I have never sold a game, and only bought one or two pre-owned games. This limitation also hasnt stopped me from pouring many hundreds of dollars into Steam-distributed content. So, from my perspective, I admit that I am giving up a few advantages of the traditional game disc distribution method, but what I get in return is an amazingly powerful licencing model, and I cant wait to see how it works in the real world. edit: i have no idea how to format comments

kryten 13y ago
I think that idea probably works well... ...until you have to drag an entire BluRay disc over the Internet before Halo 14 will start.
- mattchamb 13y ago
  I agree, but that that is a problem with the distribution method, not the licencing model. The most reasonable answer to this would be that the game disc can be used to install on any console, but only allow that disc to confer a licence once. I do not know how it will actually work, but I am actually excited to see what happens. edit: actually, thinking about it now - I think this is where the always online requirement comes from. If i was implementing this feature, I would allow the console to install the game content and have it associated with a unique ID for that disc. But I would have to check with the servers to see if that specific disc ID was already used elsewhere. If this is correct, then I think the always-onlne "feature" could be relaxed in the case where there are no unchecked games installed. This is just pure speculation, however.
  - inthewind 13y ago
    That's just annoying though. It's like not being able to move your music freely around your devices. Granted that you probably will probably only have one Xbox one, but it's still a pain. MS don't seem to have sorted the licensing model, to make it convenient with their OS, I have a copy of Windows 8, that I want to move from one machine to another at some point, and I'm sure it will be non-trivial. Not to mention that I'll loose Windows media centre most likely in the process. Even the install for Windows 8 for me was an incredibly convulted process at the time. When DRM impinges upon usability, and convenience - it's just a complete pain in the backside.
    - kryten 13y ago
      Moving windows 8 around is trivial. Most of the time it just activates. Occasionally it makes you phone them which takes about 3-4 mins. However when you have a VLK and you don't notice that the KMS server has fallen over, shit hits the fan on an epic scale...
      - inthewind 13y ago
        Idiots guide to moving it from one machine to another?
tehwalrus 13y ago
Sounds interesting, and a lot like Steam (which, like you, I've spent a fair bit of money on over the years now.)
- Alphasite_ 13y ago
  Ah, but PC game retail prices are much lower than on consoles, which is why most people tolerate the insanely restrictive Steam licensing conditions. Frankly, if they took licensing condition form anyone, i wish they'd stolen it form one of the app stores (which is closer to what they've done than steam), where you can have 10 simultaneous installs and users per purchase.
  - tehwalrus 13y ago
    Price-wise I believe you, but that makes no sense IIRC the economic arguments for consoles, since developing for a single specific platform is supposed to be cheaper than debugging on a hundred different processors. Presumably those days are long gone, now that games aren't written in assembly anymore, which is what made Xbox/PS/PC releases plausible (which begs the question, why would anyone buy a console system anyway? Exclusive titles are the only reason I can think of.)
  - hackinthebochs 13y ago
    Who's to say console game prices won't go down in the era of all digital? If publishers make more money on their games there will be downward price pressure.
- venomsnake 13y ago
  On the PC you have easier time pirating so buying a game is proactive choice - I like the game that is why I buy it. So it give the user the feeling that he is in control of the situation and is not feeling ripped off. They tacled the problem of piracy (the equivalent of second hand sales in consoles) not by going berserk control freaks but by just making steam giving so much value that even with the restricted licensing it just makes for better experience than the alternatives. Also Valve are generally pushing gaming for the better. Every addition to steam was something that the community needed or wanted - big screen, linux ... the Greenlight is the only weird thing but there they just have the problem with tuning the execution and not the idea. the current Microsoft don't get gaming. The first XBOX was brilliant. Cheap PC hardware with MS quality sdk. X360 was acceptable and the team in the beginning had good ideas XBLA. And then came GFWL and the later part of the 360 lifecycle. So it is a lot like Steam doesn't matter because everything else is unlike steam.
inthewind 13y ago
While there is an air of convenience to being able to pull your games from thin air, it's not really that difficult to carry around your games. Perhaps being able to store them on an SD card would be a pretty good comprimise. I like the idea of not having a load of plastic - but it's no great hardship plugging in a cable, or carrying a TV from one room to another. I keep my gamecube (yes gamecube,) packed away, if I want to use it - I just pull it out. If I want to listen to music in another room, I carry a music player through to it. But these days we are sold overly technical solutions to problems, like wireless music systems (with klunky interfaces), and such, which don't really give you much back. I was still watching an old school CRT tv back in December before it died on me, and once I was ingrossed in what I was watching, I didn't care what I was watching it on. Same goes for SSD's on computers, sure they increase boot and load times - but who cares about 2mins vs 40seconds? It doesn't really matter. I'm not following the sharing idea - can you share a title at no expense? Can you lend a title? That sounds great. Don't get me wrong, I'm up for a little added convenience - but as other's have said - downloading a few Gigs to play a game - is currently more difficult (and probably wasteful,) than just copying the game onto another medium and walking somewhere with it.
- mattchamb 13y ago
  I agree with you about carrying around discs being easy. I am based in New Zealand, and carrying around a disc is alot easier and cheaper than always downloading the game. I think downloading games is an incidental feature when the game licencing is centrally controlled with cloud-based distribution. I think Microsoft's biggest failure is the marketing around the Xbox One and their failure to explain how the game sharing works. Just from my personal understanding of the link I posted, it seems to me that you can let up to ten people play any game that is owned by your account. So, once you buy a game, any of those ten people can play it without purchasing it themselves.
  - Mythrl 13y ago
    Only one person of the 10 with whom you share can play at a time. This will not restrict you from playing though. It's not clear whether you can play a co-op game together on a single copy. To me this seems better than actually lending a disk to someone since you can still play your game while you lend it out. I have no idea why Microsoft are saying outright you can't lend games, since you can share them. I think their messaging has been absolutely awful.
plainhold 13y ago
It may be obvious but to clarify only one of your family members can be playing from your shared library at a given time.
- w0utert 13y ago
  Exactly, the OP is completely glossing over the fact that it is not possible to 'share your game with a friend in another city', because that implies that he a) has to sign in using your XBL account, and b) you can not be playing the same game at the same time. This also holds for the whole 'family' sharing 'feature', which I don't really get anyway. If the XBox One is supposed to be the center of the living room media experience, I don't think many households will buy multiple, and even less so, play them at the same time. One thing that MS apparently does allow you to do is lend the game disc to a 'friend' (someone who has been on your XBL friend list for more than 30 days) and play the game as long as the disc is in the console, and it can phone home every hour for some kind of DRM check I don't understand... I don't blame the OP for getting confused by the ToS on the Microsoft site, which obviously have been carefully crafted to make them sound more reasonable. The whole licensing model of the XBox One is one big, crazy and hard-to-follow mess. What I understand from it, is that it doesn't allow you to do anything the PS4 doesn't allow, except going over to someone's house and play a game without having to bring the disc with you (yay, big deal!).
  - marcosdumay 13y ago
    > except going over to someone's house and play a game without having to bring the disc with you (yay, big deal!). I doubt it'll allow that, simply because it's not practical. You'll still need all the data at the disk, and MS probably won't add a very expensive network service to make it easier for you to not buy a game. That portion of the ToS probably means that the XBox won't refuse to play your game once you put the disk in a console and log with your account, even if the console isn't yours... Maybe restricted only to a friend's machines, but the part about any XBox One implies that they won't check it. Anyway, you can't just make that kind of assumption from MS licensing terms, the word "any" there could mean anything and we'll only know the exact meaning once somebody tries it.
- 13y ago
DanBC 13y ago
> - Share access to your games with everyone inside your home .. Anyone can play your games on your console--regardless of whether you are logged in or their relationship to you. > On my console, anyone can play my games, whether I take the disc to a friend's house or not. This is hugely beneficial for me and my brothers who, until this point, have been sharing a single console. That's hugely depressing. I have a DVD. I can lend it to anyone in my home to play. I have a book. I can lend it to anyone in my home to play. Why is it different for a game? > Give your family access to your entire games library anytime ... Up to ten members of your family can log in and play from your shared games library on any Xbox One. > The key word there for me is that people can play my games, once I've shared then, from any console. So I can be in another city to my friends, buy a game, and immediately say to them "This game is awesome, check it out in my shared library." They use the word "family", so I wonder what they mean? I guess they mean "people in the same house", but I could be wrong. > Ofcourse, there is the limitation on reselling games. But honestly, I have had an xbox 360 and ps3 for years, and I have never sold a game, and only bought one or two pre-owned games. Well, that's great for you. Unfortunately, it sucks for other people. Ann is not as wealthy as you. She loves buying new games, and knowing that she can sell games she doesn't like gives her power and confidence. She can risk $40 on a new game that she might not like. Bob is not as wealthy as Ann. He buys most of his games second hand. None of that money goes to the game devs - just as when he buys a second hand car none of the money goes to the car manufacturer, or when he buys a second hand book none of the money goes to the publisher, or when he buys a second hand chair none of the money goes to the carpenter. Except, the money does go back, indirectly, through Ann. Being able to buy cheap games means that Bob can buy more accessories, or spend money on online play, or on Indie games. $GAMESHOP sells new and second user games. They love Ann for buying new games. They love Bob for buying second hand games. They make a bit of money off each of them. Having more customers makes it easier for them to stay in business. I dunno, maybe MS hates $GAMESHOP and only wants to sell games through an XBOXONE[1] web-tv-interface-app-store thing. Perhaps I'm just too old for video games. I got depressed when Nintendo added region locking to 3DS.
- mattchamb 13y ago
  >That's hugely depressing. I have a DVD. I can lend it to anyone in my home to play. I have a book. I can lend it to anyone in my home to play. Why is it different for a game? The link I referenced before also mentions that on your Xbox, any user can play any game: >Your friends and family, your guests and acquaintances get unlimited access to all of your games. Anyone can play your games on your console--regardless of whether you are logged in or their relationship to you. So anyone in your household can "borrow" a game from you just by using your Xbox. I guess this also introduces the idea of someone having a "main console" that is particularly linked to them. >They use the word "family", so I wonder what they mean? I guess they mean "people in the same house", but I could be wrong. I also saw this, but restricting it to "people in the same house" doesn't make sense in light of the previous points. Regarding the issues you raised about Ann and Bob, they are completely valid points. I guess the most honest response I can have to that is that they, for better or for worse, just don't seem to be Microsoft's target market for the Xbox One. Luckily for them, however, the PS4 looks like it will be able to suit their needs much better.
easytiger 13y ago
> - Access your entire games library from any Xbox One ... > > while you are logged in at your friend’s house, you can play your games. This applies for all PSN games also. > - Share access to your games with everyone inside your home .. Anyone can play your games on your console--regardless of whether you are logged in or their relationship to you. Interesting. But I'm not sure the value. How many homes have > 1 unit. > Give your family access to your entire games library anytime ... Up to ten members of your family can log in and play from your shared games library on any Xbox One. How does one define family? How do they prove it
- mattchamb 13y ago
  >How does one define family? How do they prove it That is something I am also wondering. The worst case would be that they ask for proof of a familial relationship of any form. That is something even I am not prepared to give Microsoft.
  - ben336 13y ago
    When companies make restrictions like that they almost always mean people in general with an upward limit on how many people to prevent abuse (a very generous 10 in this case)
  - Mythrl 13y ago
    They have explicitly said that it can be anyone. It can be a friend across the country. It can be your cousin. It could be a sibling. You could even add your enemies and limit the sharing folder to only include awful games.
- mynameisvlad 13y ago
  > Interesting. But I'm not sure the value. How many homes have > 1 unit. I don't see how that has any relevance to what you quoted. What you quoted says that there's a console license for the game (as well as an account-license for the whole play at a friend's house) and that anyone can play the game on the console it's licensed to, regardless of if you're signed in or not.
ecdavis 13y ago
> This means that I can coop with my friends (almost) anywhere in the world even if they havent bought the game! I think this will be a huge feature. Everything else you've said is correct, but this is not true. Unfortunate, but understandable. "The only limitation, it seems, is that only one person can be playing the shared copy of a single game at any given time."[1] [1] http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/06/microsoft-defends-the-xbox-ones-licensing-used-game-policies/ http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/06/microsoft-defends-the-...
- mattchamb 13y ago
  Thank you for correcting me

kryten 13y ago

I think that idea probably works well... ...until you have to drag an entire BluRay disc over the Internet before Halo 14 will start.

mattchamb 13y ago
I agree, but that that is a problem with the distribution method, not the licencing model. The most reasonable answer to this would be that the game disc can be used to install on any console, but only allow that disc to confer a licence once. I do not know how it will actually work, but I am actually excited to see what happens. edit: actually, thinking about it now - I think this is where the always online requirement comes from. If i was implementing this feature, I would allow the console to install the game content and have it associated with a unique ID for that disc. But I would have to check with the servers to see if that specific disc ID was already used elsewhere. If this is correct, then I think the always-onlne "feature" could be relaxed in the case where there are no unchecked games installed. This is just pure speculation, however.
- inthewind 13y ago
  That's just annoying though. It's like not being able to move your music freely around your devices. Granted that you probably will probably only have one Xbox one, but it's still a pain. MS don't seem to have sorted the licensing model, to make it convenient with their OS, I have a copy of Windows 8, that I want to move from one machine to another at some point, and I'm sure it will be non-trivial. Not to mention that I'll loose Windows media centre most likely in the process. Even the install for Windows 8 for me was an incredibly convulted process at the time. When DRM impinges upon usability, and convenience - it's just a complete pain in the backside.
  - kryten 13y ago
    Moving windows 8 around is trivial. Most of the time it just activates. Occasionally it makes you phone them which takes about 3-4 mins. However when you have a VLK and you don't notice that the KMS server has fallen over, shit hits the fan on an epic scale...
    - inthewind 13y ago
      Idiots guide to moving it from one machine to another?

tehwalrus 13y ago

Sounds interesting, and a lot like Steam (which, like you, I've spent a fair bit of money on over the years now.)

Alphasite_ 13y ago
Ah, but PC game retail prices are much lower than on consoles, which is why most people tolerate the insanely restrictive Steam licensing conditions. Frankly, if they took licensing condition form anyone, i wish they'd stolen it form one of the app stores (which is closer to what they've done than steam), where you can have 10 simultaneous installs and users per purchase.
- tehwalrus 13y ago
  Price-wise I believe you, but that makes no sense IIRC the economic arguments for consoles, since developing for a single specific platform is supposed to be cheaper than debugging on a hundred different processors. Presumably those days are long gone, now that games aren't written in assembly anymore, which is what made Xbox/PS/PC releases plausible (which begs the question, why would anyone buy a console system anyway? Exclusive titles are the only reason I can think of.)
- hackinthebochs 13y ago
  Who's to say console game prices won't go down in the era of all digital? If publishers make more money on their games there will be downward price pressure.
venomsnake 13y ago
On the PC you have easier time pirating so buying a game is proactive choice - I like the game that is why I buy it. So it give the user the feeling that he is in control of the situation and is not feeling ripped off. They tacled the problem of piracy (the equivalent of second hand sales in consoles) not by going berserk control freaks but by just making steam giving so much value that even with the restricted licensing it just makes for better experience than the alternatives. Also Valve are generally pushing gaming for the better. Every addition to steam was something that the community needed or wanted - big screen, linux ... the Greenlight is the only weird thing but there they just have the problem with tuning the execution and not the idea. the current Microsoft don't get gaming. The first XBOX was brilliant. Cheap PC hardware with MS quality sdk. X360 was acceptable and the team in the beginning had good ideas XBLA. And then came GFWL and the later part of the 360 lifecycle. So it is a lot like Steam doesn't matter because everything else is unlike steam.

inthewind 13y ago

While there is an air of convenience to being able to pull your games from thin air, it's not really that difficult to carry around your games. Perhaps being able to store them on an SD card would be a pretty good comprimise. I like the idea of not having a load of plastic - but it's no great hardship plugging in a cable, or carrying a TV from one room to another. I keep my gamecube (yes gamecube,) packed away, if I want to use it - I just pull it out. If I want to listen to music in another room, I carry a music player through to it. But these days we are sold overly technical solutions to problems, like wireless music systems (with klunky interfaces), and such, which don't really give you much back. I was still watching an old school CRT tv back in December before it died on me, and once I was ingrossed in what I was watching, I didn't care what I was watching it on. Same goes for SSD's on computers, sure they increase boot and load times - but who cares about 2mins vs 40seconds? It doesn't really matter. I'm not following the sharing idea - can you share a title at no expense? Can you lend a title? That sounds great. Don't get me wrong, I'm up for a little added convenience - but as other's have said - downloading a few Gigs to play a game - is currently more difficult (and probably wasteful,) than just copying the game onto another medium and walking somewhere with it.

mattchamb 13y ago
I agree with you about carrying around discs being easy. I am based in New Zealand, and carrying around a disc is alot easier and cheaper than always downloading the game. I think downloading games is an incidental feature when the game licencing is centrally controlled with cloud-based distribution. I think Microsoft's biggest failure is the marketing around the Xbox One and their failure to explain how the game sharing works. Just from my personal understanding of the link I posted, it seems to me that you can let up to ten people play any game that is owned by your account. So, once you buy a game, any of those ten people can play it without purchasing it themselves.
- Mythrl 13y ago
  Only one person of the 10 with whom you share can play at a time. This will not restrict you from playing though. It's not clear whether you can play a co-op game together on a single copy. To me this seems better than actually lending a disk to someone since you can still play your game while you lend it out. I have no idea why Microsoft are saying outright you can't lend games, since you can share them. I think their messaging has been absolutely awful.

plainhold 13y ago

It may be obvious but to clarify only one of your family members can be playing from your shared library at a given time.

w0utert 13y ago
Exactly, the OP is completely glossing over the fact that it is not possible to 'share your game with a friend in another city', because that implies that he a) has to sign in using your XBL account, and b) you can not be playing the same game at the same time. This also holds for the whole 'family' sharing 'feature', which I don't really get anyway. If the XBox One is supposed to be the center of the living room media experience, I don't think many households will buy multiple, and even less so, play them at the same time. One thing that MS apparently does allow you to do is lend the game disc to a 'friend' (someone who has been on your XBL friend list for more than 30 days) and play the game as long as the disc is in the console, and it can phone home every hour for some kind of DRM check I don't understand... I don't blame the OP for getting confused by the ToS on the Microsoft site, which obviously have been carefully crafted to make them sound more reasonable. The whole licensing model of the XBox One is one big, crazy and hard-to-follow mess. What I understand from it, is that it doesn't allow you to do anything the PS4 doesn't allow, except going over to someone's house and play a game without having to bring the disc with you (yay, big deal!).
- marcosdumay 13y ago
  > except going over to someone's house and play a game without having to bring the disc with you (yay, big deal!). I doubt it'll allow that, simply because it's not practical. You'll still need all the data at the disk, and MS probably won't add a very expensive network service to make it easier for you to not buy a game. That portion of the ToS probably means that the XBox won't refuse to play your game once you put the disk in a console and log with your account, even if the console isn't yours... Maybe restricted only to a friend's machines, but the part about any XBox One implies that they won't check it. Anyway, you can't just make that kind of assumption from MS licensing terms, the word "any" there could mean anything and we'll only know the exact meaning once somebody tries it.
13y ago

DanBC 13y ago

> - Share access to your games with everyone inside your home .. Anyone can play your games on your console--regardless of whether you are logged in or their relationship to you. > On my console, anyone can play my games, whether I take the disc to a friend's house or not. This is hugely beneficial for me and my brothers who, until this point, have been sharing a single console. That's hugely depressing. I have a DVD. I can lend it to anyone in my home to play. I have a book. I can lend it to anyone in my home to play. Why is it different for a game? > Give your family access to your entire games library anytime ... Up to ten members of your family can log in and play from your shared games library on any Xbox One. > The key word there for me is that people can play my games, once I've shared then, from any console. So I can be in another city to my friends, buy a game, and immediately say to them "This game is awesome, check it out in my shared library." They use the word "family", so I wonder what they mean? I guess they mean "people in the same house", but I could be wrong. > Ofcourse, there is the limitation on reselling games. But honestly, I have had an xbox 360 and ps3 for years, and I have never sold a game, and only bought one or two pre-owned games. Well, that's great for you. Unfortunately, it sucks for other people. Ann is not as wealthy as you. She loves buying new games, and knowing that she can sell games she doesn't like gives her power and confidence. She can risk $40 on a new game that she might not like. Bob is not as wealthy as Ann. He buys most of his games second hand. None of that money goes to the game devs - just as when he buys a second hand car none of the money goes to the car manufacturer, or when he buys a second hand book none of the money goes to the publisher, or when he buys a second hand chair none of the money goes to the carpenter. Except, the money does go back, indirectly, through Ann. Being able to buy cheap games means that Bob can buy more accessories, or spend money on online play, or on Indie games. $GAMESHOP sells new and second user games. They love Ann for buying new games. They love Bob for buying second hand games. They make a bit of money off each of them. Having more customers makes it easier for them to stay in business. I dunno, maybe MS hates $GAMESHOP and only wants to sell games through an XBOXONE[1] web-tv-interface-app-store thing. Perhaps I'm just too old for video games. I got depressed when Nintendo added region locking to 3DS.

mattchamb 13y ago
>That's hugely depressing. I have a DVD. I can lend it to anyone in my home to play. I have a book. I can lend it to anyone in my home to play. Why is it different for a game? The link I referenced before also mentions that on your Xbox, any user can play any game: >Your friends and family, your guests and acquaintances get unlimited access to all of your games. Anyone can play your games on your console--regardless of whether you are logged in or their relationship to you. So anyone in your household can "borrow" a game from you just by using your Xbox. I guess this also introduces the idea of someone having a "main console" that is particularly linked to them. >They use the word "family", so I wonder what they mean? I guess they mean "people in the same house", but I could be wrong. I also saw this, but restricting it to "people in the same house" doesn't make sense in light of the previous points. Regarding the issues you raised about Ann and Bob, they are completely valid points. I guess the most honest response I can have to that is that they, for better or for worse, just don't seem to be Microsoft's target market for the Xbox One. Luckily for them, however, the PS4 looks like it will be able to suit their needs much better.

easytiger 13y ago

> - Access your entire games library from any Xbox One ... > > while you are logged in at your friend’s house, you can play your games. This applies for all PSN games also. > - Share access to your games with everyone inside your home .. Anyone can play your games on your console--regardless of whether you are logged in or their relationship to you. Interesting. But I'm not sure the value. How many homes have > 1 unit. > Give your family access to your entire games library anytime ... Up to ten members of your family can log in and play from your shared games library on any Xbox One. How does one define family? How do they prove it

mattchamb 13y ago
>How does one define family? How do they prove it That is something I am also wondering. The worst case would be that they ask for proof of a familial relationship of any form. That is something even I am not prepared to give Microsoft.
- ben336 13y ago
  When companies make restrictions like that they almost always mean people in general with an upward limit on how many people to prevent abuse (a very generous 10 in this case)
- Mythrl 13y ago
  They have explicitly said that it can be anyone. It can be a friend across the country. It can be your cousin. It could be a sibling. You could even add your enemies and limit the sharing folder to only include awful games.
mynameisvlad 13y ago
> Interesting. But I'm not sure the value. How many homes have > 1 unit. I don't see how that has any relevance to what you quoted. What you quoted says that there's a console license for the game (as well as an account-license for the whole play at a friend's house) and that anyone can play the game on the console it's licensed to, regardless of if you're signed in or not.

ecdavis 13y ago

> This means that I can coop with my friends (almost) anywhere in the world even if they havent bought the game! I think this will be a huge feature. Everything else you've said is correct, but this is not true. Unfortunate, but understandable. "The only limitation, it seems, is that only one person can be playing the shared copy of a single game at any given time."[1] [1] http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/06/microsoft-defends-the-xbox-ones-licensing-used-game-policies/ http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/06/microsoft-defends-the-...

mattchamb 13y ago
Thank you for correcting me