Support NeoGAF

[Knux-Future]

im 99% it will not but maaaan this thread if it does

Yeah....which is why I am not celebrating yet.

That fall would not be pretty.

Luckily GAF servers have been ass otherwise E3 would look like this

RAAAAAAAGGGGEEEE

FUCK EVERYTHING

FUCK SONY

THIS IS ALL MICROSOFTS FAULT

I TOLD YOU GAAAIIISSSS

IT'S NOT THAT BAD GUYS

DID YOU SEE THAT NEW HALO

DRM IS LIKE CANCER...BUT WORSE

ITT: I COMMIT SUICIDE

HOW COULD THIS HAPPPEN TO MEEEEEE

MEH.


Not gonna be pretty

 

[disastermouse]

I don't know who is going to sell more globally, it is bias to think one will outsell the other easily with out evidence

Microsoft came off a complete failure in the original xbox, the xbox 1.5 one year head start didn't do anything didn't create any "mindshare" either. they also ran into the RROD issue which was a billion dollar loss as well as bad PR. the Xbox 360 sales didn't really turn up until the slim revision same with the ps3. controversy sells

Wait, what? This isn't how I remember it at all. The 360 was doing pretty well way before the slim version. Even after the RROD happened, I bought a new one to play Mass Effect 2 and Forza 3 (circa spring 2010 before ME2 went on PS3 and before the slim). The day I decided to not purchase Xbox games was when, during the PSN outage I went to watch Netflix on my Xbox and my Gold Live had expired and it wouldn't let me. I just couldn't BELIEVE the balls required to lock my paid-for Netflix behind a paywall when EVERYTHING already has Netflix.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

Shuhei clarified again eh?? Good.

Or not, article in the locked thread was from the 21st

 

[famousmortimer]

This isn't the DRM.


Making online accounts has nothing to do with the DRM. We've known since February that the system wasn't going require online.



All he is saying is that if a developer wants to make you sign up for an account.... which already exists on the PS3, 360, Wii, Gamecube (PSO says hi), PSP, Vita and PS2.... they can.


Could they use this system to create DRM? Of course. But if they wanted the heat to be on them about this why didn't they ever do it before now? They want a system wide solution so they aren't the bad guys for participating.

 

[Sendou]

This isn't the DRM.


Making online accounts has nothing to do with the DRM. We've known since February that the system wasn't going require online.



All he is saying is that if a developer wants to make you sign up for an account.... which already exists on the PS3, 360, Wii, Gamecube (PSO says hi), PSP, Vita and PS2.... they can.


Could they use this system to create DRM? Of course. But if they wanted the heat to be on them about this why didn't they ever do it before now? They want a system wide solution so they aren't the bad guys for participating.

Were there games last gen which you couldn't play at all without creating an account? I don't recall...

 

[SlipperyFishes]

Q: Is the PS4 console is designed to be connected in a 'permanent' way? What I'm asking is it will need to be connected all the time? And if so, how will this affect plans for PSN?

A: PlayStation 4 is not a permanent connection system in that sense, but the experience is much richer if you are connected.

Sounds like an occasional connection is required to me.

 

[hodgy100]

Were there games last gen which you couldn't play at all without creating an account? I don't recall...

all these
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_downloadable_PlayStation_3_network_games

and all these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Xbox_Live_Arcade_games

 

[Llyrwenne]

This isn't the DRM.


Making online accounts has nothing to do with the DRM. We've known since February that the system wasn't going require online.



All he is saying is that if a developer wants to make you sign up for an account.... which already exists on the PS3, 360, Wii, Gamecube (PSO says hi), PSP, Vita and PS2.... they can.


Could they use this system to create DRM? Of course. But if they wanted the heat to be on them about this why didn't they ever do it before now? They want a system wide solution so they aren't the bad guys for participating.

We've indeed known that since February; However, these quotes will keep showing up because some members insist that Sony will be requiring an internet connection just like Microsoft will, despite how all these statements seem to deny that.

 

[~~Hasan~~]

One thing i want them to confirm honestly with no word twisting.( sorry ami. But to me its still not clear) can i play my ps4 games while my system offline forever ?

The only reason i am avoiding xbox one is because of this. I do not want to connect every 24 hours. Down the road when xbox 3 comes out and MS decide to shut down the xbox one servers ( like they did with the original xbox ), then all my games are useless. All the games i spent 100s are useless. And that is not acceptable to me. I do t care much about used games. Sure its important to others but not a dealer breaker. But the connect online from time to time? Yeah no. F@@@ that

 

[Templar_Dante]

If Sony let publishers decide..
Truth be told.. if "certain" publishers instituted DRM like Xbone (on PS4)... I would label them "scum" and think twice before purchasing a game from them
Ever..Again.

Sorry, I love my games, but I wont help them break down the industry. I also stuck it to the man by NOT purchasing the horse armor for Oblivion.

 

[Sendou]

all these
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_downloadable_PlayStation_3_network_games

and all these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Xbox_Live_Arcade_games

I thought we talked about game specific accounts here. So like EA account, Uplay account etc. Not Gamertag and PSN account.

If Sony let publishers decide..
Truth be told.. if "certain" publishers instituted DRM like Xbone (on PS4)... I would label them "scum" and think twice before purchasing a game from them
Ever..Again.

Why not label Sony as scum then They're allowing this.

 

[kingocfs]

Can someone clarify to me how we're expecting pubs to apply DRM on the PS4 on their end if this console won't require an internet connection? Is that patent I keep seeing floating around intended to be optionally used by the pubs or something?

Because if they're going to allow it, I'd almost rather Sony take initiative and do it at the system level in a way less convoluted way than I'm sure these third parties will apply it.

 

[Uno Venova]

Sounds like an occasional connection is required to me.

Denny says not at all. In the OP.

 

[Kyoufu]

Sounds like an occasional connection is required to me.

Maybe you should read the rest of his sentence?

 

[TacticalFox88]

Are the deniers basically denying on the basis of playing semantics?

 

[Fi Fo Nye]

EA, the backseat console manufacturer, even when Activision is taking their lunch on that console anyway.

 

[BigDug13]

I don't know who is going to sell more globally, it is bias to think one will outsell the other easily with out evidence

Microsoft came off a complete failure in the original xbox, the xbox 1.5 one year head start didn't do anything didn't create any "mindshare" either. they also ran into the RROD issue which was a billion dollar loss as well as bad PR. the Xbox 360 sales didn't really turn up until the slim revision same with the ps3. controversy sells

This is revisionist history if I ever heard it. Original xbox was a success. Online gaming became the norm. First person shooters became popular on consoles again. Oblivion and Skyrim came from Morrowind on Xbox. Bioware gained console prominence due to KOTOR and Jade Empire. Nvidia bent MS over a barrel on their video chip pricing which is why they were forced to kill the console early. It never made money because of the rush job it was, but it was a fantastic system that introduced 720p gaming and dolby digital sound to the PS2 generation.

Xbox 360 had RROD issues, but it also gained an incredible following due to how complete of a package their online ecosystem was, packaging a headset with every console and having games with full online multiplayer capability right out of the box while Sony was just figuring out how to do it. They also provided an easier to develop platform that allowed their system to simply have better ports of third party titles.

BUT, I do think they're relying on what they did early in this generation too much. Now PSN is a beast and is free. Now XBLA isn't the only game in town for indie devs and Sony has at the very least caught up here. PS+ offers greater value for your dollar than XBL gold now. Kinect was a great counter to the Wii-mote and they will provide that "grandmother approved" gaming experience to replace the Wii, but they're overloading the XBO with the Kinect priority. Now Sony doesn't have the system that is too difficult to squeeze power from. Instead they have the easiest system to squeeze and its also the beefiest in hardware.

And then add on top of this the anti-consumer focus and you end up with a history in which Microsoft really helped shape current gaming, but is in danger of squandering all of its good will by alienating the people they should be catering to.

 

[famousmortimer]

Were there games last gen which you couldn't play at all without creating an account? I don't recall...

Off the top of my head... Defiance, Free Realms, DCUO, the online portion of MGS4, wasn't required to play but EA pushed their Origin sign in and attached it to content.


And there were also PSN games that didn't work when the system was offline... from capcom.

 

[BRocknRolla]

Could they use this system to create DRM? Of course. But if they wanted the heat to be on them about this why didn't they ever do it before now? They want a system wide solution so they aren't the bad guys for participating.

Because in this brave new world of gaming MS will have a baked in system, Steam already has convinced people it's fine on PC, and certain publishers are already toeing the, "We built it from the ground up to use an always online connection," line regardless of whether it's actually necessary (Read: SimCity and I suspect Watch_Dogs). Publishers will claim it's their right and that this is just the way things are now, or maybe even claim the game experience isn't the same without being connected (As though they're doing you some kind if favor by requiring it). Negative press for a lot of these companies has had very little effect, and short of the whole process backfiring and gamers not picking up their games, companies like EA and Ubi are going to be more than willing to require a sign in to play if it means knocking out the used games market.

The new gen gives pubs a clean slate to make new policies, and most people will be willing to accept them without question; or at least I expect most people will. I just hope Sony keeps their hands out of the cookie jar, tempting though it may be.

 

[Eusis]

And there were also PSN games that didn't work when the system was offline... from capcom.

Fortunately that was not only abandoned after I think two games but it came 1. when they still allowed 5 activations, and 2. before the PSN outage. I suspect Capcom won't be doing it again, not on Playstation anyway unless we get surprised with some system wide crap.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

Sony will never require an internet connection but they will allow publishers to require it.

 

[Mokubba]

I don't know if it's been mentioned in the thread already but the guys from Blizzard did say that you could play Diablo 3 offline on the PS4 in the gametrailer stream after the reveal conference.

So isn't that proof from a third party.

 

[WrenchNinja]

I thought we talked about game specific accounts here. So like EA account, Uplay account etc. Not Gamertag and PSN account.

Why not label Sony as scum then They're allowing this.

Probably because they already allow this on the PS3 and its easy to ignore games on a game to game basis.

 

[Sendou]

Probably because they already allow this on the PS3 and its easy to ignore games on a game to game basis.

Scummy then and scummy now. I don't see the difference. I wouldn't be surprised if they took it further. Actually they probably will with EA dropping online passes and all.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

Probably because they already allow this on the PS3 and its easy to ignore games on a game to game basis.

It may not be so easy to ignore this gen for multiplat titles.

 

[famousmortimer]

Because in this brave new world of gaming MS will have a baked in system, Steam already has convinced people it's fine on PC, and certain publishers are already toeing the, "We built it from the ground up to use an always online connection," line regardless of whether it's actually necessary (Read: SimCity and I suspect Watch_Dogs). Publishers will claim it's their right and that this is just the way things are now. Negative press for a lot of these companies has had very little effect, and short of the whole process backfiring and gamers not picking up their games, companies like EA and Ubi are going to be more than willing to require a sign in to play if it means knocking out the used games market.

It's a fair topic to argue because obviously we have no idea how it would play out. But to me it seems like if publishers thought they could get away with this they would have done it already. This quote from Yoshida is basically saying that the system is no different than any other modern device in that you can have an online sign in if you want. Which is required for MMOs to be on the platform.


Also, if you look at certain cases... like Capcom coming up with the awesome idea to make it so there's only one profile on their resident evil 3ds game and you can't delete it... the internet went nuts and I believe someone in the know posted in the NPD thread that month that it totally bombed (i kinda remember them saying less than 40k sold... but my memory is crap). The next month they started shipping the carts without that restriction.


The publishers don't want to be the bad guys. They don't want a #ps4nodrm type thing, with tons of media attention, popping up about them. This is why they want console wide solutions (which Sony has, btw... it has nothing to do with online. And that's what we are fighting against).

 

[Pristine_Condition]

Let's hope all our questions are answered the 10th.

As it stands, I'm considering buying the PS4 though. Xbone doesn't really stand a chance at the moment. Everyone has said it but I'll repeat it: the games will make or break these consoles, imo. All the crappy features of the Xbone could evaporate—for me at least—with the slightest mention of great gaming titles.

With such a low bar you've set up, it sounds like you've already created your own self-fulfilling narrative.

Why not just say "I'll buy XBone no matter what" and be honest with yourself?

 

[Monmin]

The last quote from kotaku directly contradicts the thread title.

 

[gutter_trash]

Off the top of my head... Defiance, Free Realms, DCUO, the online portion of MGS4, wasn't required to play but EA pushed their Origin sign in and attached it to content.


And there were also PSN games that didn't work when the system was offline... from capcom.

Final Fight Double Impact and Bionic Commando ReArmed 2

 

[famousmortimer]

Sony will never require an internet connection but they will allow publishers to require it.

They have to allow publishers to require it or you can kiss the entire online-only game market goodbye. No F2P online shooters, no MMOs....

And in those games you will be signing up and making an account with them. Just like you do in those games this gen.

This quote is the biggest nonstory ever but it's had incredible legs like what he said means anything about the issues we've been bothered by,

 

[RobotMafia]

It may not be so easy to ignore this gen for multiplat titles.

It will be easy for me.

 

[BRocknRolla]

I don't know if it's been mentioned in the thread already but the guys from Blizzard did say that you could play Diablo 3 offline on the PS4 in the gametrailer stream after the reveal conference.

So isn't that proof from a third party.

Proof of what exactly? That Sony won't have system wide DRM? I think it certainly suggests that.

It may not be so easy to ignore this gen for multiplat titles.

Why is that? A multiplat title on Xbox may well have DRM on Xbox, but if Sony doesn't get involved, then the pub has to make their own solution. It may or may not be more trouble than it's worth, but either way, you as the consumer still have the choice if whether or not you want to support the company's DRM strategy.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

It's a fair topic to argue because obviously we have no idea how it would play out. But to me it seems like if publishers thought they could get away with this they would have done it already. This quote from Yoshida is basically saying that the system is no different than any other modern device in that you can have an online sign in if you want. Which is required for MMOs to be on the platform.


Also, if you look at certain cases... like Capcom coming up with the awesome idea to make it so there's only one profile on their resident evil 3ds game and you can't delete it... the internet went nuts and I believe someone in the know posted in the NPD thread that month that it totally bombed (i kinda remember them saying less than 40k sold... but my memory is crap). The next month they started shipping the carts without that restriction.


The publishers don't want to be the bad guys. They don't want a #ps4nodrm type thing, with tons of media attention, popping up about them. This is why they want console wide solutions (which Sony has, btw... it has nothing to do with online. And that's what we are fighting against).

You don't think activation codes are more likely this gen since the Xbone will have them? Think about it this way, would you buy the next <fill in multiplat game> on the Xbone with activation codes or the PS4 without activation codes?

It seems very unlikely that such a choice would even be given.

 

[famousmortimer]

You don't think activation codes are more likely this gen since the Xbone will have them? Think about it this way, would you buy the next <fill in multiplat game> on the Xbone with activation codes or the PS4 without activation codes?

It seems very unlikely that such a choice would even be given.

I think they might try. I don't think they will be happy with how apeshit everyone goes on them.



Edit: I would ask this question back. If two big games come out on the same day and you are the the type of person who sells their games when they are done... are you buying the game with online DRM or the one without it? I think once publishers with DRM start losing sale they will drop it with the quickness. And that's if they even try. Publishers are well aware of the negative press that MS and Sony are taking right now and they don't want anything to do with it. Which, again, is why they want a system wide DRM scheme.

And, again, because people keep thinking that no online required means no DRM. The DRM system they have is RFID-like and doesn't require online to work. They haven't decided whether to use it or not, but if they do... this is the system they have in place. Online has ZERO to do with it.

 

[Enjay]

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.

Multiplatform games are probably gonna all require this.

 

[IHaveCandy]

You don't think activation codes are more likely this gen since the Xbone will have them? Think about it this way, would you buy the next <fill in multiplat game> on the Xbone with activation codes or the PS4 without activation codes?

It seems very unlikely that such a choice would even be given.

If Sony says "You guys will have to handle your activation crap", you may not see it happen often. Lots of third party studios don't want to have to handle a long term investment like that for such a small problem.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

I think they might try. I don't think they will be happy with how apeshit everyone goes on them.

Like when people went apeshit over Project $10 and Online Passes? I can only hope people go apeshit.

If Sony says "You guys will have to handle your activation crap", you may not see it happen often. Lots of third party studios don't want to have to handle a long term investment like that for such a small problem.

Well, some publishers like EA and Ubisoft already handle their own activation codes on PC so....

Edit: I would ask this question back. If two big games come out on the same day and you are the the type of person who sells their games when they are done... are you buying the game with online DRM or the one without it? I think once publishers with DRM start losing sale they will drop it with the quickness. And that's if they even try. Publishers are well aware of the negative press that MS and Sony are taking right now and they don't want anything to do with it. Which, again, is why they want a system wide DRM scheme.

Well, as I am vocally against activation codes you already know what my answer is. I am not the majority though because the majority obviously didn't give a shit about online passes this gen.

 

[BRocknRolla]

The publishers don't want to be the bad guys. They don't want a #ps4nodrm type thing, with tons of media attention, popping up about them. This is why they want console wide solutions (which Sony has, btw... it has nothing to do with online. And that's what we are fighting against).

We're generally on the same page in all this. I think we just differ as to the effect we think these drm strategies will have on sales and to the degree publishers would be willing to weather the PR storm. I'm definitely pulling for Sony to have no system wide DRM solution (Hardware based or otherwise), and specifically so we can see this play out with pubs, but I'm not hopeful on the eventual outcome. Still, it's a fight worth fighting.

 

[famousmortimer]

Well, some publishers like EA and Ubisoft already handle their own activation codes on PC so....

But PC gamers have already accepted that the second hand market doesn't exist for them. Console gamers have not.



Seriously, look at the #PS4NoDRM thing. In a week it's gotten coverage on over 175 websites in over 20 languages. Do you really think if sony drops their offline system wide DRM that EA will want to chance that type of outrage? Can they afford to? It's not like they are doing particularly well....

 

[Syphon Filter]

But PC gamers have already accepted that the second hand market doesn't exist for them. Console gamers have not.



Seriously, look at the #PS4NoDRM thing. In a week it's gotten coverage on over 175 websites in over 20 languages. Do you really think if sony drops their offline system wide DRM that EA will want to chance that type of outrage? Can they afford to? It's not like they are doing particularly well....

EA wouldn't be the only one doing it so there wont be a specific company to target.

 

[famousmortimer]

EA wouldn't be the only one doing it so there wont be a specific company to target.

Well we have no idea. It might be just ea. It might be everyone. it might be no one. It's a whole bunch of hypotheticals.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

But PC gamers have already accepted that the second hand market doesn't exist for them. Console gamers have not.



Seriously, look at the #PS4NoDRM thing. In a week it's gotten coverage on over 175 websites in over 20 languages. Do you really think if sony drops their offline system wide DRM that EA will want to chance that type of outrage? Can they afford to? It's not like they are doing particularly well....

My point was that bigger publishers who already deal with their own activation code system won't find it hard to carry that system over to the PS4.

 

[Fi Fo Nye]

Sony will never require an internet connection but they will allow publishers to require it.

That is still better, because now the publishers, if not discouraged by the massive overhead, can deal with the headaches of implementing used games DRM themselves. I would love to see EA try to survive without gamers who can't share their games. The future of indie, episodic, and F2P content is going to kick them in the ass so hard.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

That is still better, because now the publishers, if not discouraged by the massive overhead, can deal with the headaches of implementing used games DRM themselves. I would love to see EA try to survive without gamers who can't share their games. The future of indie, episodic, and F2P content is going to kick them in the ass so hard.

I hope you are right but I fear this could become the dead PC used games market 2.0.

 

[BRocknRolla]

Do you really think if sony drops their offline system wide DRM that EA will want to chance that type of outrage? Can they afford to? It's not like they are doing particularly well....

Question for you, since you seem to have more insight than most on the existence of an RFID based DRM system:

Is the system reversible? As in, can I use my system to reverse the DRM on the disk if I no longer want to play the title? Or is this possible, but a decision hasn't been made? I know ideally it would be neither, and the system just wouldn't be used, but I'm curious if you know if anything ever came if this rumor, or if it's all patent speculation.

 

[Syphon Filter]

I hope you are right but I fear this could become the dead PC used games market 2.0.

It's going to get worse down the road, probably cloud consoles.

 

[IHaveCandy]

Like when people went apeshit over Project $10 and Online Passes? I can only hope people go apeshit.



Well, some publishers like EA and Ubisoft already handle their own activation codes on PC so....



Well, as I am vocally against activation codes you already know what my answer is. I am not the majority though because the majority obviously didn't give a shit about online passes this gen.

Yeah, I expect larger studios to do it, but not smaller ones. And you might see larger backlashes against it. There will be lots of people around the world that want to play Fifa 15 on the PS4, but don't have internet. Is EA just going to drop that support? The online pass system worked a lot better than just losing a sale completely.

 

[Vane_MagicCity]

It's going to get worse down the road, probably cloud consoles.

As for me, cloud only consoles can stay in the cloud. They won't be in my living room.

 

[IHaveCandy]

Imagine you are making a game on PS4 that doesn't require internet access. You simply put on the box "NO INTERNET CONNECTION REQUIRED!" and grab attention. People play your game and realize the other games are blocking you for no good reason. They get your business before the others do. Sure some games are so big they can deal with the bad PR, but a lot of games aren't. Can Bethesda get away with making Elder Scrolls 6 online-required if Witcher 3 doesn't?

 

[Eusis]

Imagine you are making a game on PS4 that doesn't require internet access. You simply put on the box "NO INTERNET CONNECTION REQUIRED!" and grab attention. People play your game and realize the other games are blocking you for no good reason. They get your business before the others do. Sure some games are so big they can deal with the bad PR, but a lot of games aren't. Can Bethesda get away with making Elder Scrolls 6 online-required if Witcher 3 doesn't?

Given Skyrim pulled figures that actually came close to CoD? Probably.

But can BIOWARE get away with it? Not as likely I suspect.