Support NeoGAF

[Replicant]

Pretty sure it would just have to have something on the box saying 'online required' or something and they'd be in the clear. Thats not really anything completely new.

Then people will be free to avoid them. Those who buy it, will find out the truth, spread the news like SimCity debacle and I hope whichever publisher does this ready to get lynched hard.

Also to Edge and MS, if you don't like having fud made about you, then try not to spread fud.

 

[jjasper]

Is this a surprise to anyone when they have both said we leave it up to the publisher.

As I've said over and over there is zero difference in this policy stance.

I am not sure how. Even if publishers manage to implement the DRM there is still the whole having to connect to the cloud every 24hrs to authenticate and dictating who I can resell my game to that MS has implemented.

 

[hesido]

Having Xbox one style DRM on PS4 needs the following:

1) Giving games access to unique blu-ray id to tie with accounts.

2) Online activation and periodic license refresh. (Xbox does this at the OS level for publishers. But PS4 won't. Developer still could implement such DRM if PS4 allows item no: 1. Publishers will need to declare this requirement clearly on the box.) If Sony really would like to avoid second hand blocking DRM, all they would have to do would be to limit access to disc information. But I don't think they'd limit it.

 

[Road]

A lot of people shooting the messenger.

It seems to me it's a case of Edge's contacts (aka people who work for devs and pubs) sad Sony hasn't implemented a system wide anti-used DRM they had in mind. Edge is simply relaying their feeling.

If you read the article, it says "Several development sources have told us that they expect game publishers to implement similar DRM policies across Xbox One and PS". Publishers will implement it, not Sony, which is what Sony has been saying. The article is actually confirming it.


That said, don't fool yourself thinking it's just online passes. Any game can suddenly become an online game with DRM as we've seen with Diablo 3 and Sim City.

 

[Chû Totoro]

A little off topic but do you think having architectures closer to PC will lead to more piracy on PS4 / Xbox One? (maybe not as easy on Xbox One thanks to DRM).

 

[Uno Venova]

Odd to see some publications still push for the narrative of both consoles having similar drm after so many clarifications. Before and after E3.

 

[Kyon]

A lot of people shooting the messenger.

It seems to me it's a case of Edge's contacts (aka people who work for devs and pubs) sad Sony hasn't implemented a system wide anti-used DRM they had in mind. Edge is simply relaying their feeling.

If you read the article, it says "Several development sources have told us that they expect game publishers to implement similar DRM policies across Xbox One and PS". Publishers will implement, not Sony, wwhich is what Sony has been saying. The article is actually confirming it.


That said, don't fool yourself thinking it's just online passes. Any game can suddenly become an online game with DRM as we've seen with Diablo 3 and Sim City.

yes of course they can but they are saying it will be "similar to MS policy" which is misleading because its actually the same exact way that it is with PS3.

 

[Miletius]

My common sense would say that this rumor is likely true. DRM in console games is clearly something consumers wanted and clearly something Sony was investigating for next generation. Because of the drm backlash they ended up feeling uncomfortable taking the lead but I'm sure there are plenty of publishers willing to step up.

I know people are happy about Sony's announcement but I would recommend a wait an see approach. It would be cold comfort to me if only 1st party games were drm free and everything else ended up working just like the XBO, or even worse from in the end.

 

[alexandros]

Why are people surprised by this?

 

[Corto]

A lot of people shooting the messenger.

It seems to me it's a case of Edge's contacts (aka people who work for devs and pubs) sad Sony hasn't implemented a system wide anti-used DRM they had in mind. Edge is simply relaying their feeling.

If you read the article, it says "Several development sources have told us that they expect game publishers to implement similar DRM policies across Xbox One and PS". Publishers will implement, not Sony, wwhich is what Sony has been saying. The article is actually confirming it.


That said, don't fool yourself thinking it's just online passes. Any game can suddenly become an online game with DRM as we've seen with Diablo 3 and Sim City.

DRM approach is different at system/OS level. Any messenger that says it will be the same on both consoles is spreading bullshit.

 

[Raist]

A lot of people shooting the messenger.

It seems to me it's a case of Edge's contacts (aka people who work for devs and pubs) sad Sony hasn't implemented a system wide anti-used DRM they had in mind. Edge is simply relaying their feeling.

If you read the article, it says "Several development sources have told us that they expect game publishers to implement similar DRM policies across Xbox One and PS". Publishers will implement it, not Sony, which is what Sony has been saying. The article is actually confirming it.


That said, don't fool yourself thinking it's just online passes. Any game can suddenly become an online game with DRM as we've seen with Diablo 3 and Sim City.

Calling it a PR play and to expect the same policies is quite the stretch bordering on a lie.
The only information here is that 3rd parties will do whatever they want. Something that has been openly stated by Sony ever since the PS4 was unveiled.

 

[Bunta]

So, Sony says this on the biggest stage of gaming, and clarifies this countless times in the last 24 hours, but they're lying? Yeah, ok.

 

[Stripper13]

Expected.

We'll see - but I imagine outside of the 24 hour check - most 3rd party games will require online DRM.

 

[Shayan]

Why are people surprised by this?

because this is more of a BS to make MS look better

 

[Htown]

Odd to see some publications still push for the narrative of both consoles having similar drm after so many clarifications. Before and after E3.

it's double weird, because when Microsoft was originally saying this stuff, the narrative was "wait for confirmation, we don't really know," even when Phil Harrison was out there saying exactly what was about to happen.

Then when it was confirmed, the narrative changed to "well Sony is going to have the exact same thing." Now that Sony has come out and said "nope, Microsoft is on their own", we're supposed to think it's STILL the same thing even though they've explicitly said it's not?

Why the hard push from these outlets to try to make Microsoft look better (or at least, not any worse than Sony)?

 

[Road]

yes of course they can but they are saying it will be "similar to MS policy" which is misleading because its actually the same exact way that it is with PS3.

We will see similar policies from publishers, not from the platform holder. That's what the article is saying, in my understanding.

 

[FeiRR]

Now, you could say, the retailer could check if a disc has been deactivated before accepting it, but that would require a greater logistical burden on retailers. They'd have to process games on MS's system up front, they'd be unable to do it if their network was down etc. The way it's done, with deactivation being assured by MS, means retailers can accept discs without any fuss and process them at their convenience later en-bulk for deactivation etc., and keep accepting discs if the network goes down etc. etc.

So the user being always-on is not a burden but an authorized retailer (who makes money from sales) would be? Do you know that CC transactions require online? Do you know that any preorder, purchase, sale, etc. you do at a retailer requires online for registering your transaction, removing or adding a game to stock? Nowadays all chain operators work online. Do you think that servers which keep track of stock are in every branch you visit? Just one additional check for activated/deactivated game is a trivial thing for a company like GameStop. If Microsoft really wanted just DRM control, it would be the most logical, cheapest and convenient way to let retailers control the system. What they introduced with family accounts (10 users and all that) is so much more complicated and prone to abuse than this model I presented.

Apart from that, why would they care about potential cheaters who would trade-in used games? The games won't install anyway, no money lost for Microsoft. Of course, retailers would suffer but before you say that Microsoft cares about them - check their stock ratings after MS conference.

 

[Kyon]

Expected.

We'll see - but I imagine outside of the 24 hour check - most 3rd party games will require online DRM.

which means you can easily avoid these games thats the difference. XBone gives you no choice for any game

 

[Hoho for breakfast]

A lot of people shooting the messenger.

It seems to me it's a case of Edge's contacts (aka people who work for devs and pubs) sad Sony hasn't implemented a system wide anti-used DRM they had in mind. Edge is simply relaying their feeling.

If you read the article, it says "Several development sources have told us that they expect game publishers to implement similar DRM policies across Xbox One and PS". Publishers will implement it, not Sony, which is what Sony has been saying. The article is actually confirming it.

You're probably right about this. If you read it carefully it just comes across as the author relaying the message from the devs. Looking at it carefully (including the title) the sources are mentioned 6 times. It's all "our sources said" type of thing. There's never an opinion or declaration or anything really by the author himself.

 

[ChosenPredator]

remember awhile back everyone was praising edge for how accurate they are so who knows if this is going to be the case or not but I guess we'll wait and see...just can't wait to play the games personally.

 

[Omnistalgic]

Christ some people are dense, there is no way Sony back track on this.

The only ones that can implement DRM are third party publishers, just like last gen ............ Sony is not making it a system wide policy.

Everything isn't a conspiracy.



The article claims there is some sort of secret conspiracy to mislead customers. And now reaction in this thread is that the EDGE is part of some moneyhat microsoft PR team.



#truthfacts


1. Sony is VERY clear about how the DRM works. It's online passes and service based games. That's it


2. This isn't part of a larger plot by microsoft, this is just one singular awful and shitty article by edge.



Both sides need to chill.

this is what I've taken away from it all as well..

 

[the nightman cometh]

It's questionable whether a regime like this will make pubs more money. There was one study out there that laid out the issues, it's not black and white.

As for pubs asking for this control, if you listen to their public messages it sounds like they didn't, but will work within the rules first parties lay down. Now that might be just PR, but as I said earlier, even if they wanted 'DRM parity' between the systems, that wouldn't be possible if PS4 has a policy around singleplayer and offline disc content being off limits.

I think the bigger publishers see this control as a benefit now though. If they are able to implement used game drm for all of their games but Sony first party titles don't, you will be able to trade in Sony games for their games but not vice versa.

 

[GetemMa]

hog wash.

PS4 leaves it up to publishers to purchase, setup and maintain their own network of servers to enforce DRM. Microsoft does this for them.

It won't happen. Online passes may return but at least PS4 puts it on publishers so we can say which publishers are being shitty and which aren't.

 

[RobbieH]

it's double weird, because when Microsoft was originally saying this stuff, the narrative was "wait for confirmation, we don't really know," even when Phil Harrison was out there saying exactly what was about to happen.

Then when it was confirmed, the narrative changed to "well Sony is going to have the exact same thing." Now that Sony has come out and said "nope, Microsoft is on their own", we're supposed to think it's STILL the same thing even though they've explicitly said it's not?

Agreed. I don't know what else Sony could say to convince people their system is fundamentally different to the Xbox One. "You can play your single-player games offline indefinitely." They said that. "You can do whatever you want with your disc-based games without restriction." Said that too. "Publishers can put systems in place for online used games only." That too. "PS4 will not have to check in online and your games will not stop working if you don't connect every 24 hours." And that.

 

[RadarScope1]

Example of just how effective PR can be.

You don't think a company like Sony would lie to you?

Jesus fuck.

Yes, sure, but PR plays and corporate double-speak =/= lying. PR speak dances around issues and uses tricky language to obfuscate what's really happening as the consumer would percieve it, ie "publishers can allow you to do x" versus "you can't do x unless we let you."

What Jack Tretton said on stage and what other Sony people have said in the last 24 hours were very straight-forward and factual. If this is true (which I can't figure how that would work) then it is a 180-degree, straight up LIE, live on stage.

 

[flatearthpandas]

Sony would never do this to us!

But really, it is out of their hands. The kind of DRM we're talking about now is something that publishers can implement on any platform. They can just as easily do it on Wii U or PC.

It is impossible for the PS4 to have the same DRM mechanics as the Xbone right now. I don't have any faith or devotion to Sony but the backlash would be insane if the Xbone policies were implemented on a system level. The way the bone works now, even the nicest publisher can only allow customers to trade the game once. On the PS4, the nicest pubs can allow game trading and DRM to work how it is today. That's an important difference.

 

[SeanR1221]

The absolute worst I could see is a publisher with huge balls making you use an activation code for the entire game.

 

[Miletius]

because this is more of a BS to make MS look better

Doubtful. It's weird how critical thinking can completely fly out the window as soon the article is talking trash about your own team.

 

[ShogunDarius]

Everything isn't a conspiracy.



The article claims there is some sort of secret conspiracy to mislead customers. And now reaction in this thread is that the EDGE is part of some moneyhat microsoft PR team.



#truthfacts


1. Sony is VERY clear about how the DRM works. It's online passes and service based games. That's it


2. This isn't part of a larger plot by microsoft, this is just one singular awful and shitty article by edge.



Both sides need to chill.

this needs to be quoted more

 

[Paracelsus]

Why are people surprised by this?

But I'm not surprised Edge would say something like this.

 

[Projectjustice]

At least MS has the balls and respect to tell you to your face. If this is the case with Sony, expect a even bigger backlash. Straight up lies to everyones face.

 

[Steroyd]

Most of this isn't completely new if you were ever a PC gamer(product keys to block resale, online registration/authentication). Consoles are just catching up in this increasingly digital age.

MS is more less taking two steps sideways and one step back.

Consoles are closed systems, that don't install the whole game onto the harddrive so it's not requiring you to use a disc to play, this alone kills off one aspect of piracy that ran rampant on the PC.

Why MS introduced this feature into the X1 for sake of "not needing to switch discs" I'll never know, when they could have just leaned heavily towards full digital downloads, and make them a more attractive proposition the physical producing the same result.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

We will see similar policies from publishers, not from the platform holder. That's what the article is saying, in my understanding.

It's impossible for that to happen with certain types of games .
Take a single player game on PS4 it has to work the same way as PS3 meaning you ca play offline forever , can sell it to who ever you want etc etc .
On MS system you still have to check in online to play single player games , you still can't sell it how you like because the DRM is system wide .
Just some fact checking would tell you it can't be the same .

 

[Hoho for breakfast]

The kind of DRM we're talking about now is something that publishers can implement on any platform. They can just as easily do it on Wii U or PC.

Or even the PS3. And what do you know, it very rarely happens. It's not going to suddenly change just because MS is adding all this system DRM.

 

[alexandros]

because this is more of a BS to make MS look better

I highly doubt it. First, EDGE is a reputable source and I generally trust them not to print bullcrap. Second, the fact that Sony has left the DRM decision to the publishers means that they are free to do as they please. Third, publishers are more likely than not the ones who asked Microsoft to implement strict DRM in the first place.

Yeah, I know, "but Sony said" and "but EA said". I don't believe them. Regardless of Sony's intentions, if say Activision comes and says "Destiny requires an online connection and we forbid you to resell your account" then Sony can't do a damn thing about it.

 

[MusicGangATL]

At least MS has the balls and respect to tell you to your face. If this is the case with Sony, expect a even bigger backlash. Straight up lies to everyones face.

.

 

[fertygo]

I just realize the article actually not claim anything, man.. hate this kind of shit.

 

[Bunta]

Everything isn't a conspiracy.

The article claims there is some sort of secret conspiracy to mislead customers. And now reaction in this thread is that the EDGE is part of some moneyhat microsoft PR team.

#truthfacts

1. Sony is VERY clear about how the DRM works. It's online passes and service based games. That's it

2. This isn't part of a larger plot by microsoft, this is just one singular awful and shitty article by edge.

Both sides need to chill.

Yep.


http://www.destructoid.com/did-sony-confirm-drm-on-ps4-after-all-not-quite--256052.phtml

Sony has outright confirmed my initial interpretation. As reported by GameFront, Sony has stated that Tretton's use of the term "DRM" referred only to playing used games online. Essentially, they're talking about letting publishers use online passes, and no other kind of restrictions. This also sounds like Sony is scrapping its own online passes, which makes sense if PS Plus is the new online standard.

http://www.gamefront.com/sony-third-party-drm-refers-to-playing-used-games-online-only/

“The Online Pass program for PlayStation first-party games will not continue on PlayStation 4,” he said. “Similar to PS3, we will not dictate the online used game strategy (the ability to play used games online) of its publishing partners. As announced last night, PS4 will not have any gating restrictions for used disc-based games. “When a gamer buys a PS4 disc they have right to use that copy of the game, so they can trade-in the game at retail, sell it to another person, lend it to a friend, or keep it forever.”

http://allthingsd.com/20130611/five-questions-about-the-ps4-for-sonys-jack-tretton/

AllThingsD: First off, people seemed really excited at last night’s [Sony PlayStation] event when you announced the no-DRM policy, which would allow for freer sharing of games. But this morning there was still confusion, and some countered that there are restrictions on game sharing. Can you offer a simple explanation for how this will work with the PS4?

Any game that is made for PS4 that is physical goods, whether first-party or third-party, can go into a PS4 and play regardless of where it came from. The first player will play it, no problem, the second player will play it, no problem. What I was referring to was the online proposition. [The example was later given to me: If you buy a used disc from GameStop, you’ll have no problem popping that disc in and playing it from your PlayStation 4. The issue may arise when you try to jump online and play with other players. At that point, a third-party publisher may impose a fee or not allow that.]

The easiest way to explain it is — if you understand how it works on PlayStation 3, then that’s the same way it will work on PlayStation 4. No changes there. We’ve been out for six and a half years. It’s the same experience.

 

[Corto]

At least MS has the balls and respect to tell you to your face. If this is the case with Sony, expect a even bigger backlash. Straight up lies to everyones face.

That's not ballsy or respectful of Microsoft. It's only greed and disrespectful of the most basic consumer rights. Shut up with that shitty spinning.

 

[Slayven]

it's double weird, because when Microsoft was originally saying this stuff, the narrative was "wait for confirmation, we don't really know," even when Phil Harrison was out there saying exactly what was about to happen.

Then when it was confirmed, the narrative changed to "well Sony is going to have the exact same thing." Now that Sony has come out and said "nope, Microsoft is on their own", we're supposed to think it's STILL the same thing even though they've explicitly said it's not?

Why the hard push from these outlets to try to make Microsoft look better (or at least, not any worse than Sony)?

MS has better swag bags.

 

[Prezhulio]

Sounds great if all you want is small/indie games and Sony 1st-party titles. Me? I'm a huge fan of 3rd-party AAA games. I want games like Watch Dogs, GTA, The Division, Destiny, Battlefield, Madden, FIFA, Elder Scrolls, Fallout, etc etc. This affects me very much.

...in which case you were already dealing with attempts to limit used games?

whether they spin it as "continuing support through dlc" or online passes, you've been subject to AAA titles trying to retain retail value for years, and only a fool would think sony could mandate what publishers are going to do or not do.

all i was arguing was that the "exceptions" (like indie games or companies trying to foster consumer good will rather than squeeze every cent out of you) can continue on ps4, where as the xbone is going to put EVERYTHING under their umbrella DRM.

i suppose the point is moot for resale value of digital games that indies will rely on for distribution. blady blah everyone is fucked.

 

[Seanspeed]

Yes they have

It sounds reassuring, but I'd like them to clarify that publishers CANNOT initiate any 'always online' DRM. Like I said, if a publisher puts single-player under the 'online aspect' of a game, then it suddenly falls out of the umbrella of whats being said there.

 

[flatearthpandas]

It's impossible for that to happen with certain types of games .
Take a single player game on PS4 it has to work the same way as PS3 meaning you ca play offline forever , can sell to who ever you want etc etc .
On MS system you still have to check in online to play single player games , you still can't sell it how you like because the DRM is system wide .

Who ever said that?
Publishers could put online passes on singleplayer games today. They just don't.

Just because system policies are the same doesn't mean pubs will behave the same way they did this gen.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

I take it as a given that the PS4 is going to have extremely stringent and draconian online passes that lock away more and more of the game (as well as plenty of games that need to stay connected all the time even if there is no good reason to do so), but it's up to the market not to buy those games.

The ball is in the consumer's court now. You're being given a choice not to be swayed by marketing and hype when buying games. Let's see how hard you fuck it up.

 

[Hoho for breakfast]

http://allthingsd.com/20130611/five-questions-about-the-ps4-for-sonys-jack-tretton/

AllThingsD: First off, people seemed really excited at last night’s [Sony PlayStation] event when you announced the no-DRM policy, which would allow for freer sharing of games. But this morning there was still confusion, and some countered that there are restrictions on game sharing. Can you offer a simple explanation for how this will work with the PS4?

Any game that is made for PS4 that is physical goods, whether first-party or third-party, can go into a PS4 and play regardless of where it came from. The first player will play it, no problem, the second player will play it, no problem. What I was referring to was the online proposition. [The example was later given to me: If you buy a used disc from GameStop, you’ll have no problem popping that disc in and playing it from your PlayStation 4. The issue may arise when you try to jump online and play with other players. At that point, a third-party publisher may impose a fee or not allow that.]

The easiest way to explain it is — if you understand how it works on PlayStation 3, then that’s the same way it will work on PlayStation 4. No changes there. We’ve been out for six and a half years. It’s the same experience.

It really cant be much clearer than that.

Edit: Sorry Bunta I meant to quote your post but apparently I don't know how.

 

[AppleSmack]

Are you serious right now?

Absolutely. It read like it, not necessarily means that it is. This sounds like Edge trying to downplay the significance of what occurred at the Sony conference to make Microsoft look better.

 

[Hex]

It is mind numbing that this is confusing for intelligent people.
Not so surprising that this is being used by those with a grudge as a rallying cry.

 

[Screaming Meat]

Absolutely. It read like it, not necessarily means that it is. This sounds like Edge trying to downplay the significance of what occurred at the Sony conference to make Microsoft look better.

To what end, though?

 

[Kyon]

Who ever said that?
Publishers could put online passes on singleplayer games today. They just don't.

Just because system policies are the same doesn't mean pubs will behave the same way they did this gen.

ummm MS's DRM is system wide for single player. It literally goes online even for a single player game to check for its authenticity.

This is for every single game

 

[Rourkey]

I guess for pblishers that decide you will have a one time activation key and need the disc in the drive.

If this is the case than for me MS's DRM is the better option because i'd rather have check-ins and not have to swap the disk