-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Sony PS4 does not require an internet connection. Ever. Seriously. Listen. Read.
- Thread starter Amir0x
- Start date
WrenchNinja
Member
They dont think, they want it to. It's so transparent.
Baller. PhD
Banned
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.
Syphon Filter
Member
It's a giant mistake and i can't believe they probably don't think its a huge advantage for Sony.
famousmortimer
Banned
I guess i'm just more optimistic than you.
I wouldn't mind if it was left up to the publisher. Because that would give us a choice. There were a few capcom PSN games that didn't work if your internet was out on the ps3. I own a completely absurd amount of PSN games... I don't own those. I didn't mind that they existed but I wasn't about to give them money.
COD could force this stuff on people but honestly while I think activision in favor of system wide DRM where they wouldn't be the bad guy for using it... I don't think they want to rock the boat of their COD supermoney train otherwise. I mean they had the opportunity for years to add online passes and didn't. I don't think they are in a hurry to agitate their fanbase... I think they are just happy playing it safe and raking in mountains of COD money.
Knux-Future
Banned
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.
DC1
Member
Lol! I sincerely hope MS pulls a 180 on this.
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.
"
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.
Freezie KO
Banned
It's sad that we're at a point where this has to be news. But it's definite a positive for Sony.
Knux-Future
Banned
so you better sell your PS3 and 360 then.
and stay off the PC.
This wouldn't be anything new...you just gotta avoid those games. Not every publisher is built to create their own systems and Sony,who used online passes themselves, is not going to tell them what they can't do...this was always going to be the best case scenario.
Just going off the idea of the system needing to access internet only the first time you play a game. That seems so fucked up to me. I know it's crazy to think there are people without internet but they are out there. Basically that means they can not play console video games. I mean even it it only has to access once; they can't access internet to begin with so it doesn't matter. Having all these generations in the past where they could play all the console video games they want without having to access the internet to completely being locked out of this generations of console video games. Just fucking sad and depressing. If I'm thinking that idea through right.
(this is again only going off the idea of the game needing to access the internet one initial time then it would be able to be played offline forever - idea was in the first couple of pages)
(this is again only going off the idea of the game needing to access the internet one initial time then it would be able to be played offline forever - idea was in the first couple of pages)
James Sawyer Ford
Member
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, chillEveryone 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.
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?
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
Devs can put DRM now on the PS3, there were the PSN games from Capcom that needed to be connected, sounds like the policy simply hasn't changed; leaving it open.
famousmortimer
Banned
Have you owned a PS3, PS2, PSP, Vita or 360? Because that's allowed on those systems as well.
DC1
Member
Really?
and where will you go?
If a publisher applies a restriction to MS, Sony and the PC, where will you buy the product?
or will you just not purchase the product at all?
If you won't buy the product because of a publishers forced DRM restriction, why are you placing the blame at Sony's feet.
The primary distinction regarding DRM on consoles at this time is as follows:
MS = Consoles level restrictions (Primarily because of architecture/mildly confirmed with a chance of positive changes by E3)
Sony = No Console level restriction
Ninity = No Console level restriction
If MS can deliver a platform that closely resembles the 360 and/or limits console installs for those who agree to the 24 hour check, they might find the light at the end of the tunnel ..and get themselves out of this mess.
famousmortimer
Banned
Syphon Filter
Member
It's more than just regions though. There are people in the us and uk who wont buy the system on principle.
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.
F0rneus
Tears in the rain
Sony has now sold me on the PS4, and Xbox lost a Gold subscriber. The online connection is my main problem with the One. I just don't want a brick when the Live servers go down in the future. I am a collector, and the idea that everything I'd buy, would have an expiration date is infuriating. PS4 might not be ideal thanks to the bloody DRM on used games but at least, I will never lose my purchases on it.
Perfect. Well said
This. and i expect this is why sony has been silent... they probably dont intend to drm anything for their in house games but they can hardly speak for 3rd party developers or publishers. There is not much they can do if a 3rd party's stance on the issue is decided and will be doing it on the XBone
Small minority I'd imagine , majority of games this generation will require online being hooked up to WiFi automatically isn't a huge issue. Inconvience after 24 hours? Yes. Consoles basically are bricks without online 99% of the features will be useless without .
James Sawyer Ford
Member
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.
DC1
Member
Activision and EA will not forfeit 50% of their profit for what is expected to be a very marginal gain through used game recoupment. The losses would be catastrophic.
captainraincoat
Banned
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?"
DC1
Member
That's not passing the blame. Isn't placing it right where it belongs?
famousmortimer
Banned
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.
ShroudOfFate
Member
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.
Iced_Eagle
Member
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).
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).
DC1
Member
Yes! Choice is a wonderful thing!
famousmortimer
Banned
Yes, you will still have to change discs in order to retain the right to sell your games. If you don't want to change discs, buy digitally.
So ps4 used games are tied to the console?
Brawly Likes to Brawl
Member
I am incredibly skeptical of the idea that a restriction on used games would somehow cause developers to take more "risks". What if gamers ended up being more careful with their wallets instead? Its entirely possible that riskier titles could suffer. I can't imagine quite as many people feeling cool with purchasing something out of their comfort zone when they can't make as much money back through secondhand sale.
H_Prestige
Banned
What's your opinion on the ps3 and WiiU?
Syphon Filter
Member
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.
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
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.
famousmortimer
Banned
I'm telling you guys... this online sign up system that yoshida is talking about has absolutely nothing to do with their used game DRM. Their used game DRM is offline and is based off of RFID tech. All he is talking about is the ability of online only games, like say... Destiny, to have you create a login.
I'm not guessing this. I knew the day I made the posts in the keighly thread and then started the the campaign against this shit that it was an offline tech. Nowhere in my OP do I mention online only. It was never going to be that.
I'm not guessing this. I knew the day I made the posts in the keighly thread and then started the the campaign against this shit that it was an offline tech. Nowhere in my OP do I mention online only. It was never going to be that.
gutterboy44
Member
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 can only suspect that a lot of the "well we are all online most of the time anyway so what's it
matter?" were not part of D3 or Sim City launches. I was unfortunately part of both and I can't imagine the frustration of those weeks being carried across an entire console and not just a single title. I don't even want to think what the PSN hacking fiasco would have been like if all PS3s were essentially bricked for over a month.
I can only suspect that a lot of the "well we are all online most of the time anyway so what's it
matter?" were not part of D3 or Sim City launches. I was unfortunately part of both and I can't imagine the frustration of those weeks being carried across an entire console and not just a single title. I don't even want to think what the PSN hacking fiasco would have been like if all PS3s were essentially bricked for over a month.
famousmortimer
Banned
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.
ShroudOfFate
Member
That is very possible. I feel like if they have the choice though, if they see it negatively affecting their games they can stop adding it in. It's just like it has been toward the end of this generation. Most games didn't have online passes even though it was an option for all of them.
I am Michael Bolton
Banned
Just because you are not affected doesn't mean the practice will be acceptable. Publishers and developers do get paid for their games. They get paid when someone buys their products. What the person does after they buy said product shouldn't be influenced or dictated by a publisher or developer. If I buy a game for $50-60, beat it, and then choose to give my game to my friend, sell it on Craigslist, or trade it back in to Gamestop, that should be MY business and my RIGHT.
Movie studios haven't behaved as draconian as publishers and many developers are attempting to behave. First sale doctrine shouldn't be treated differently just for games.
I can buy a book, read it, and sell it.
I can buy a CD, listen to it, and sell it.
I can buy a car, use it, and sell it.
I can buy a TV, watch it, sell it.
I can buy a refrigerator, use it and sell it.
I can buy an oven, cook on it, and sell it.
GAMES ARE NO DIFFERENT NOR SHOULD THEY BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY.
If publishers want to make more money then stop spending $50-100 million on games that don't have a chance in hell to make the money back.
If publishers want to make more money then be more creative, take more chances with lower budget games.
If publishers want to make more money than sell games at $40-50 with 1/4th the budget and they'll have a great chance of making their money back.
Publishers need to stop blaming other forces for their misfortune. THQ deserved 100% of the blame for their bankruptcy. Mismanagement, trying to release games that never had a chance of success.
Shame on you for supporting something as draconian as this just because you are not affected by it. Shame on you.
LiquidSolid
Member
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
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.
According to Eurogamer, the RFID patent has nothing to do with PS4, which isn't surprising in the least given how many patents Sony files.
Anyway, this is good news (though old, fanboys were just willing to ignore it because they're desperate to equate the two systems) but I still think there's the risk of a DRM. There's two different approaches I can come up with:
1) They expand upon online passes and make it a feature of the system. Offline parts of the game play perfectly fine offline but to access online features, you need an online pass.
2) They leave the choice up to the publishers. They can make their games always online if they want but they risk the public backlash by doing so.
Still, given the backlash towards Microsoft and focus on gamers, I'm relatively confident Sony will back down and not bother with any kind of DRM. I don't expect Microsoft to do the same though, as it seems like the Xbone was designed around their DRM and I don't think they could suddenly redesign it in 6 months.
That's my point though. You would need online to unlock the RFID and pay with Credit Card over the internet. The fact that they said you can use the PS4 without internet makes me think they couldn't implement the RFID system at all without requiring all changes in disc ownership to occur in some kind of certified brick and mortar store.
IHaveCandy
Banned
Kotaku update should be in OP
UPDATE: 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.
UPDATE: 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.
Rhazer Fusion
Member
baphomet
Member
They're not going to have any sort of RFID based system for used games.