13 ms·
I'm a bit disappointed at this change - on one hand, it's nice to know that I can share my disc games if I want to. On the other hand though, this effectively m
by imilligan 13y ago
I'm a bit disappointed at this change - on one hand, it's nice to know that I can share my disc games if I want to. On the other hand though, this effectively means they're killing off their disk-less approach to owning/installing games. This means that instead of having all my games tied to my account on any device I own, I have to lug my games around with my everywhere I go. This also means picking my vegetative self up off the couch when I want to switch what I'm playing.
- mynameisvlad 13y agoSucks to be you. That's what happens when people shortsightedly complain about things over and over again. It just goes back to the status quo. Without the 24 hour check, there's no way to guarantee that the games tied to disks are still owned by you and you didn't just give them to someone.
- GVIrish 13y agoHow was Microsoft's plan any better than the status quo. Having to take your physical discs somewhere is not some huge burden that will break the backs of people who want to play games at someone else's house. Fact of the matter is that someone would have to sit there and wait for a multiply gigabyte download to finish in order to play a game at someone else's house without the disc. Forget trying to play more than one game unless you've got a couple of days to burn downloading. Meanwhile, with MSFT's old plan you couldn't lend a game to anyone, couldn't rent a game from anyone, and it seems like you could only sell your game back to a retailer. People keep saying, "The games would've been cheaper" but there were no indications that was going to happen. If games were going to be cheaper, don't you think Microsoft would've touted that as a benefit at least ONCE since they unveiled the Xbox One?