They dont think, they want it to. It's so transparent.People are still thinking ps4 will require always on Internet connection? Wow.
IMO publishers are going to learn very quickly that DRM hurts sales more than it helps recoup money later from used games.
Nice catch Ami, that Game Informer quote says it all; it's like Microsoft don't plan on selling this console overseas and smaller countries. They seem so stupid with this outlook. It's all America America USA USA, it's slightly infuriating the way this is being planned...
I dunno. I thought that about horse armor too. And retailer exclusive pre-order bonuses. And day 1 DLC, and online passes, and micro-transactions in $60 retail games... gamers are weak. If Activision launches CoD with that shit people will just deal with it and it'll become the standard. The publishers simply can't be allowed to have that kind of power.
It's a giant mistake and i can't believe they probably don't think its a huge advantage for Sony.
Hey bro, chill out with this nonsense, I have a distortion field to construct around myself so I can get my Halos next year
I skipped a new SimCity game because I knew the DRM was going to actively harm my enjoyment thanks to this invention called laptops being a great way to play that series. I have been there, Halo fans, and it doesn't feel good but neither does paying $60 for a product that is designed to annoy you. I played some Tropico 4 and some Crusader Kings 2 and I made it through to the other side.
Sorry OP
"
More relief... At a roundtable this morning, Sony's game studios chief, Shuhei Yoshida, told reporters that any requirement for users to register a game online in order to play it would be left to game publishers. Sony won't require that."
To me that is unacceptable.
The PS4 is Sony's, if they want my money it is THEIR RESPONSIBILITY to keep bullshit like that off of their system. Big publishers aren't going to freeze out the wiiU and the Ps4.
Sony needs to nut up or not see my gaming dollars.
They said in february that it didn't require online. That's not news.
The used game DRM they have is RFID-ish and doesn't require an internet connection. The system as described to me was somewhat convoluted sounding but basically each new user of the game has more of it locked behind a paywall. Not sure if it can even be looked up... so if you buy used you have no idea if you are the 2nd or the 10th.
I'm glad they clarified again that it doesn't require online but we already knew that. And I already knew it from the february comments and the people I talked to which gave me the info spurring me to make the #ps4nodrm thread in the first place.
In other words: Baller, chill Everyone else, this isn't really news.
And letting third parties require people to make accounts isn't new. I had to make an account to play Defiance. Most MMOs require that. I'm fairly certain that's all that Yoshida was getting at... that they can still do that.
Sorry OP
"
More relief... At a roundtable this morning, Sony's game studios chief, Shuhei Yoshida, told reporters that any requirement for users to register a game online in order to play it would be left to game publishers. Sony won't require that."
To me that is unacceptable.
The PS4 is Sony's, if they want my money it is THEIR RESPONSIBILITY to keep bullshit like that off of their system. Big publishers aren't going to freeze out the wiiU and the Ps4.
Sony needs to nut up or not see my gaming dollars.
Sorry OP
"
More relief... At a roundtable this morning, Sony's game studios chief, Shuhei Yoshida, told reporters that any requirement for users to register a game online in order to play it would be left to game publishers. Sony won't require that."
To me that is unacceptable.
The PS4 is Sony's, if they want my money it is THEIR RESPONSIBILITY to keep bullshit like that off of their system. Big publishers aren't going to freeze out the wiiU and the Ps4.
Sony needs to nut up or not see my gaming dollars.
Sorry OP
"
More relief... At a roundtable this morning, Sony's game studios chief, Shuhei Yoshida, told reporters that any requirement for users to register a game online in order to play it would be left to game publishers. Sony won't require that."
To me that is unacceptable.
The PS4 is Sony's, if they want my money it is THEIR RESPONSIBILITY to keep bullshit like that off of their system. Big publishers aren't going to freeze out the wiiU and the Ps4.
Sony needs to nut up or not see my gaming dollars.
So the pay-to-play-used games is still on the table?
imho, good.
devs need to make their cut from used game sales somehow. gamestop profits are in the billions each year from used game sales, who knows how much bigger the used game market is when you take into account other retailers and craigslist...it's hurting bottom lines big time just for a bunch of middlemen.
just curious how it will work if the system doesn't have to be online...i guess they will be able to buy "used game codes" from retailers that unlock used games for a fee?
IDK.
To some winning the US and the UK is all that matters.
My guess is that MS doesn't give a shit about the rest because to them it was a lost cause. Japan obviously was (hell the PS4 may not even take off over there) but letting the rest of Europe go?...Kinda stupid.
Who knows tho...maybe their gambit will pay off...especially if they can get some big exclusives.
The thing is that they need to DESTROY Sony in the US and UK. Let's see if they can.
I am also glad that famousmortimer has cleared up the always online stuff it seems.
1/3 Sony...1/3.
I disagree. EA/Activision miss out on 50% of their sales. 10 Million units is not something to sneeze at.
It hurts Acti/EA because they can be replaced.
Sony PS4 does not require an internet connection. Ever*. Seriously. Listen. Read.
Ok:
Consider publishers who release games that are 100% online driven (Defiance, Heroes, Dust etc.)
Is it Sony or MS's policy to to force the publisher to provider an off line version? or block the publisher/developer if they don't?
In short guys:
The console should be a conduit for our gaming pleasure. Regardless of their corporate affiliation (Sony, Nin or MS). It's the services and/or restrictions that add value or disdain to their product.
Outside of this, all blame must fall to the publisher/developer.
It's more than just regions though. There are people in the us and uk who wont buy the system on principle.
It's not good. IT'S NOT GOOD!!!!!
Those are the two biggest third party publishers, they absolutely cannot be "replaced".
PS4 would be dead on arrival if both Activision and EA snubbed it. No CoD, FIFA, Madden, Battlefield, and tons of other stuff - these are among the biggest gaming franchises. Sony would never allow that to happen.
* unless the publisher decides to require it
Which pretty much means if EA are doing it with MS you can be certain EA will do it with PS4
Sony may appear to be backing off but in reality they are simply passing on the blame
Clever way to do PR but the reporters should simply ask "Are EA games on the ps4 going to require an internet connection?"
the other benefit is that buying a retail disc would allow you to install the game on the hard drive and then discard the disc.
I think there's ultimately advantages here outside of just the profit incentive
i never buy used games, so it's not really a big deal to me. if used game buyers have to pay an extra fee, good, the publishers should get some sort of kickback, which would mean a healthier environment for studios to produce more games or take on more risk.
Which pretty much means if EA are doing it with MS you can be certain EA will do it with PS4
Sony may appear to be backing off but in reality they are simply passing on the blame
Clever way to do PR but the reporters should simply ask "Are EA games on the ps4 going to require an internet connection?"
The beauty of Sony leaving things the way they are is that people can just choose not to buy those games. If first party titles and other 3rd party games don't have required connections then people will be more likely to buy those.
If it was done on a system-wide level ala the Xbone, people have no choice.
I got a question...
Is it confirmed that PS4 games won't require activation? If so, does that mean that even the physical games I buy won't be added to my digital game library like what happens with Steam or the One?
I actually hope that isn't up to the publisher like it's been rumored. That would mean some games would get added to my library, while others wouldn't. I want all games, regardless of whether I purchased them digitally or at retail to be added to my account so I never need to put in its disc, even if I go to a friends house (where I could just download it if its in my game library).
I just think that if Sony leaves these sorts of big decisions up to the publisher, it just will end up being a messy solution for the consumer because every game will be different. If games require activation, there is still a way to make a used game market work, it will just require a bit more effort from Sony (for example, it would be awesome if you could lend, sell and trade games directly to gamers over PSN).
The xbone, reportedly, does that.
The ps4 won't. That functionality requires online check ins. The PS4's used thing is entirely offline. It doesn't get tracked, it sets a condition built into the disc, if I understand it correctly. Which I may not... because what was described to me was goddamn confusing sounding.
the other benefit is that buying a retail disc would allow you to install the game on the hard drive and then discard the disc.
I think there's ultimately advantages here outside of just the profit incentive
i never buy used games, so it's not really a big deal to me. if used game buyers have to pay an extra fee, good, the publishers should get some sort of kickback, which would mean a healthier environment for studios to produce more games or take on more risk.
Bullshit. By even allowing the option (if they even do this) Sony is supporting it. Saying "They can do what they want!" and shrinking into a hole would be bullshit. If the PS4 is truly for the gamers, they will say "No, we will not allow any of this shit on our system. Period."
The beauty of Sony leaving things the way they are is that people can just choose not to buy those games. If first party titles and other 3rd party games don't have required connections then people will be more likely to buy those.
If it was done on a system-wide level ala the Xbone, people have no choice.
They said in february that it didn't require online. That's not news.
The used game DRM they have is RFID-ish and doesn't require an internet connection. The system as described to me was somewhat convoluted sounding but basically each new user of the game has more of it locked behind a paywall. Not sure if it can even be looked up... so if you buy used you have no idea if you are the 2nd or the 10th.
I'm glad they clarified again that it doesn't require online but we already knew that. And I already knew it from the february comments and the people I talked to which gave me the info spurring me to make the #ps4nodrm thread in the first place.
In other words: Baller, chill Everyone else, this isn't really news.
And letting third parties require people to make accounts isn't new. I had to make an account to play Defiance. Most MMOs require that. I'm fairly certain that's all that Yoshida was getting at... that they can still do that.
Then how are people suppose to pay to get past these paywalls if a game is borrowed? Go to the store? If the system doesn't require the internet then there won't be any system wide DRM aka no RFID chips on discs. Publishers will simply just use whatever method they choose(activation codes, online passes, etc...) if they want to block used games. So far, it seems the system is the exact same as PS3.
I agree that its a better way to leave it up to publisher but i bet most 3rd parties will try and do that. It is going to suck if it happens to be for a 3rd party game you wanted but then find out it has drm.
the other benefit is that buying a retail disc would allow you to install the game on the hard drive and then discard the disc.
I think there's ultimately advantages here outside of just the profit incentive
i never buy used games, so it's not really a big deal to me. if used game buyers have to pay an extra fee, good, the publishers should get some sort of kickback, which would mean a healthier environment for studios to produce more games or take on more risk.
They said in february that it didn't require online. That's not news.
The used game DRM they have is RFID-ish and doesn't require an internet connection. The system as described to me was somewhat convoluted sounding but basically each new user of the game has more of it locked behind a paywall. Not sure if it can even be looked up... so if you buy used you have no idea if you are the 2nd or the 10th.
I'm glad they clarified again that it doesn't require online but we already knew that. And I already knew it from the february comments and the people I talked to which gave me the info spurring me to make the #ps4nodrm thread in the first place.
In other words: Baller, chill Everyone else, this isn't really news.
And letting third parties require people to make accounts isn't new. I had to make an account to play Defiance. Most MMOs require that. I'm fairly certain that's all that Yoshida was getting at... that they can still do that.
I don't know. I haven't seen the tech working. The people Ive talked to haven't seen the tech working. They were described how it worked and told me. It has something to do with RFID. Which is also backed up by a patent they made last year or the year before. I have no clue how it works. But the basics of it, as described to me, are that each successive user gets less. I would assume it's like an online pass, if you want to unlock that stuff you go onto the store and buy it.
Until the PS4 and XB1 are in gaffer's hands I will remain skeptical but this is encouraging news. I really hope PS4 remains independent of online.
I don't know. I haven't seen the tech working. The people Ive talked to haven't seen the tech working. They were described how it worked and told me. It has something to do with RFID. Which is also backed up by a patent they made last year or the year before. I have no clue how it works. But the basics of it, as described to me, are that each successive user gets less. I would assume it's like an online pass, if you want to unlock that stuff you go onto the store and buy it.