Even though this is an annoying DRM layer, I do like the innovation attempted here.
Back in the day, you’d hand your disc to your friend and then they’d hand it back to you some time later. Digital has given us a lot more freedom in how we game, but the ability to share had been removed. This at least seems to be offering a solution, at least for those who either don’t want to or are unable to just Arr! the games.
All they need is to remove the asinine local connection piece, and make the timeframe longer.
It depends on how it works, 14 days and then the friend has to buy it or renewed every 14 days. If it is the latter and if it eventually goes online (which I think it will with the online subscription) it is a way, not the best way but a way, to stop scammers from building up massive stolen libraries because, unlike piracy, these games would actually be getting stolen from whoever lent it out since they can’t play them. If it is 14 days and then the friend has to buy the game, it’s a stupid limit.
you should be able to use games within your family completely unlimited anyway.
I would understand the local connection requirement if that was for sharing with people outside your family. that would make it similar to sharing a game with a friend you know in person. without that the floodgates would be open to sharing games with literally anyone online.
How would you make it so you can only share games with your family? As in what technical definition of “family” would you use that can’t include your friends?
apple does it, and i think Google too. everyone you add to your “family” must share the same payment method. so naturally you will limit that to only people you highly trust.
For child accounts the trust might extend to blocking purchases in the general case and having the kids send purchase requests to the parent for approval.
Of course this leaves the child account restricted is such a manner it would be unappealing if there wasn’t an actual parent-child relationship IRL.
Interesting, does that mean there is just one primary account and to be part of a family group with it you essentially can’t have your own account or purchases?
the family manager is over 18 and has a payment method on file (they manage the family wallet).
the family members are in the family managers country, (and if under 13 the account is created by the manager).
I only have direct experience with managing a kid under 13, in that case I have created the account for him and never entered a payment method on his account. For any purchases he wants to make via the “family wallet” it needs my direct approval, which can be granted by using an app on my device or directly entering my password onto his. After either of us has made a purchase we have a “share with family library” toggle that can share the title with the other family member. Note that this only applies to direct title purchases from the store, if a feature is locked behind IAP it can’t be shared. We have his accompanied locked so he needs my approval for any purchases (including free apps) but this is not required by the platform.
For child accounts the family manager can choose between requiring approval for each of the following on each child account:
All content
All purchases using the family payment method
Only in-app purchases
No approval required
I presume the for adult family members the family manager only has control of the Family Wallet but I don’t have direct experience to confirm.
Bro how is this the way I find out there’s a Switch Direct, and that there’s a new Rhythm Heaven, AND a new Tomodachi Life??? Next year is gonna be so fucking peak holy shit 😭🥹😩
The two weeks are only for sharing across accounts in a family, if you’re using the same account across two devices there isn’t a time limit. You could already play your games on both but before the secondary device needed to connect to the Internet every time you launched the game, and now it’s just when loading.
Hey, I’m sure it solves a problem for people, but the easier solution is still just the absence of DRM, as much as Nintendo would not like to do it, and it introduces exactly the kind of complexity that Sony mocked 12 years ago.
Serious question: What makes Dragon Quest special? I’ve played turn based RPGs from that era and there never really seems to be any distinguishing characteristics between them
This, and it’s THE big traditional JRPG franchise in Japan itself, as big as or bigger than Final Fantasy. FF just happened to have more worldwide appeal.
I like both, Final Fantasy IV and Chrono Trigger are still good. Recently did some digging in the videogame history RPG’s and Mother(Earthbound) was one of the first if not the first in this style looking back it does look like a template game.
I admit I haven’t played too much of either Dragon Quest or FF. I have a bit more experience with FF (I’ve at least started playing 1, 7 and 10). I’ve only played Dragon Quest III, currently going through its HD-2D remake and enjoying it decently enough. If I like it enough when I finish it maybe I’ll pick up I and II as well.
It’s comfort food. Never pushing the envelope much, but always high quality.
Note that the first game came out in 1986. These remakes will look great and put some modern conveniences on… But it will still be a game from 1986. If you want a modern DQ then 11 is great.
youtube.com
Gorące