For example, does anyone really know how family sharing is going to work? I've read the statement from Microsoft that says "You can always play your games, and any one of your family members can be playing from your shared library at a given time." So if I try to read this literally, to me it sounds like if I buy a game, I can always play it when signed in with my account, and only one of my family members can be playing games from my shared account on another console at the same time. Now I don't think that's what MS means. I suspect that all of my family members could potentially be accessing the shared library simultaneously, so it should read 'any of your family members...", not "any ONE..." but who knows for sure.
It IS worded a little oddly. I think that is (from what we're somewhat being told through Twitter) is this: Any of those in the group can access the library at a time. However, only the primary licensee and one other can access the SAME GAME at a single time. However, we don't have concrete facts on it yet, so we shall see. Your re-wording doesn't fix it, it creates the issue of making it sound like everyone can be on the same game at once. They really should have used 2 sentences-- "any can used the library," and "you and any ONE can access one game."
Also how many simultaneous copies can be played from a single purchase? 'One' seems like the most likely answer, but there are a couple of things that make me wonder, First, it appears that Xbox 360 downloads can be played on up to two consoles simultaneously. I'm not absolutely sure about that, but I've tried a couple of games I downloaded (including Call of Duty 4) with my son playing under his account on the primary console and me playing under my account on a secondary console, both connected to my network, at the same time and it worked. Second, from the MS quote above, it states that "you can always play your games..." so what happens if one of my 'family members' is playing one of my purchased games on his console and I decide to start it up on mine? If I'm not allowed to play it because someone else is, then I can't "always play" my game, can I? What if I have 5 games and 5 family members, and each of them is playing one of my games, so I can't play anything? So is it that there can be up to two copies in use at one time? (The master account and 1 family account can play simultaneously, but two family accounts can't play simultaneously?)
Again, we THINK that the policy is the primary licensee and one other person. The hypothesis for one person at a time is this: Any single person In the group can play a single game at a time. 10 players can be on 10 games, but 10 cannot be on 9 or fewer. In this instance, we think that (since it's unlikely everyone would freely give up playing a game because you want to play) the primary licensee will essentially get a "Boot from Game" option for those sharing his license. That would lead to a quick-save on the other person's console (maybe multi-tasking it to the background until you are offline and that person is allowed to play again), and then free the game up for you.
Regardless of the number of copies allowed, what happens if that's exceeded? Say one of my family members is playing one of my games, and another one tries to play the same game and can't? Will the second person get a message saying who's using it so he can contact the first about getting a turn? What if the first person pauses the game and goes off for hours? (My sons are bad about this.) I assume that would tie up the license. Is there any way to bump a person after a while? Maybe just from the primary account?
We don't know the UI's inner workings, so we'll find out for sure later. My guess would be that whenever you enter the library, you'll see a list of games. Under each, the users who are currently using that game, maybe with the primary licensee in gold (or with a crown next to his name, like the Party chat leader on LIVE), and all others in white. That, or it might list all allowed players under each title, and have those offline or in another game in black and those playing that game in white (same theoretical gold/icon for the primary licensee). You could also have it black when offline, white when online but in a different game, and a third color (gold?) for being online and in that game (which would mean you have to choose the icon option for the primary licensee, if you make the third color gold--so maybe you make it green for the secondary licensee(s) in that game). Point being, there would be a number of UI options to sort that.
Additionally, you could make it so there are different backgrounds for games you can and cannot play at a given time. It could be black or white if you can play, and grey/faded if you cannot (with the names of the current users still underneath). It could be green if you may play and red if you may not. It could be your theme color if yes and a faded version of it if not. Maybe you use that two-color system for secondary licensees and make it always show up as gold (or another color) for the primary licensee, so he can see which are his game and which are shared with him. They could also have it auto-sort games currently in-use to the bottom of the list, or have it in tabs, where you have to press the bumper to see the in-use games, and the usable ones in the primary screen. Again, lots of UI implementations that could exist to solve this, using colors and sorted lists or tabs.
That second issue is a little trickier. The primary licensee option could work, but it's not perfect, either. Say your sons are at college, and you're all still sharing the licenses, with you as the primary licensee. your oldest boy leaves the game running and goes to class for 4 hours. your youngest son (who is in another dorm or at another school, point being he cannot access his older brother's console) wants to play that same game, but his brother is logged in. He asks you to free up the license, but you are at work and cannot. The problem cannot be resolved in that instance (though maybe allowing booting from a smartphone would be possible).
There are two MAIN solutions to this, I think, beyond letting the primary licensee dictate the action (which I don't think is a great idea, because it basically lends itself to dragging the primary licensee into a bickering between the other two). you could either make it a "too bad" system, where if the person leaves his console on, then the license cannot be freed up, plain and simple. There could also be a "Request License" option. you would probably want to put a once-per-hour limit on that, so one person isn't spamming the other with requests until he gest his way. All you do if send a request for the license. The license has a timeout (make it something like 30 or 60 minutes though, so it cannot time out during a quick run to the kitchen or bathroom). If it times out or is accepted, it'll quick-save for the current user, move that game to the background (or shut it down entirely), then pass the permission on. If the request is rejected, then the current user keeps playing, with the person requesting permission unable to send another request for 60 minutes (again, to prevent spamming).
A third, more-involved solution: You could make secondary licensees work within a time block. Say when you play a shared game, you get one hour to play. If no request is sent to you within that hour, you get another hour. It stay like that until that first request comes, at which point it alerts you that you have a request. You may then accept the request and pass the permission, or you may reject it, at which point you get something similar to the "Windows Update" alert on windows 8. you get a timer of 60 minutes, and a message stating that the game will be shut down (to pass the permission) after that 60 minutes has passed. It would probably give small reminders with 30, 15, and 5 minutes left as well. The issue there being if a person requests the game, is rejected, then decides to play something else instead. You, of course, ask that person who wanted the permission to verify that he still wants to play that game when the timer is up (or maybe at the 5-minute window, alert him that he is about to get permission and tell him to verify that he still wants to play; it not, kill the timer on the current player). The problem with this system REALLY comes from multiple permission requests though, and I'm not sure how to handle that beyond a queue system or something.
Here's another question: Is it possible to be in multiple families? Can I be the head of one and a member of another? Can I be a member of two or more?
We have no idea. I could argue for allowing and disallowing that.