Support NeoGAF

[mrklaw]

publishers cannot enact DRM or block used sales for offline titles. The most they can do is their own online passes, but it doesn't look like Sony is supporting that so they can't even use Sony's PSN for that, they'd need their own systems for payment etc.


TBH with the response they got, I expect the big publishers to move away from restricting trading in on xbox one. You'll still be restricted to specific retailers becuase they need to be tied into MS's system, but I think most won't block it now

 

[panda21]

that seems like a sensationalist article to me. all they are saying is that it will be like things are now, publishers can do some stupid stuff with online requirements/passes/serial numbers if they want.

microsoft is forcing every game to have 24 hour online checkins with the 'bone. if publishers try to do the same shit on ps4 then people will be mad with them, but its not really anything to do with sony

 

[kitch9]

I thought Edge was a chill bro, what happened?

They appear to think people want to read printed bullshit all of a sudden.

 

[DBT85]

It's so bad that it almost makes me like Polygon.

Don't talk like that man. We'll save you.

 

[Steroyd]

People saying ”its just like the PS3" are technically correct but missing the point.

Multiplatform publishers are NOT going to release a locked down version of their game on the Xbox and an open version on the PS4.

Microsoft's policy is going to influence what publishers do on the PS4.

Only if it sells significantly more than the PS4, and given the PS360 generation... that's very unlikely.

 

[NingenJanai]

The only DRM publishers can implement is with restricting online gamplay with used games.
It's the exact same system that currently exists.

Agreed, also Sony certification process probably requires the game to be playable with no internet connection ( except for online multiplayer only games )

 

[FoxSpirit]

In gaming? Who is more reputable?

GAF and sources.

EDGE's reputation is to be controversial and opinionated and not as bad as the rest. Good?? No.

 

[Replicant]

I just realised that even the heading is ridiculous. For Sony to have similar policy, they'd need always online check mechanism and not allowing buyers to sell games to whomever they want. Neither of which they have.

 

[Team Filler]

Man, some of these people in the enthusiast press are just downright bitter that Sony messed up the narrative they were building these last few months.

 

[Nikodemos]

Why couldn't it be the other way around? Publishers surely wouldn't want any part of this PR disaster MS have gotten themselves into.

Don't think so. Pubs like EA and Ubi aren't suddenly going to say "LOL GTFO with your daily online checks" to MS. There are two antithetical options they could choose:

1. Release PS4 games with some form of DRM (forced multiplayer component, a la Sim City or similar) since we know Sony will accept third-party online DRM schemes.

2. Release PS4 games without DRM, letting the market sort it out, but potentially angering MS in the process (due to sunk costs in the whole online infrastructure).

 

[Durante]

Man, some of these people in the enthusiast press are just downright bitter that Sony messed up the narrative they were building these last few months.

Just think how bitter the publishers and their PR departments are! I love this.

 

[Kyon]

That article is insane. I mean not only is there no proof but it doesn't even explain how it would magically become similar.


This is one of the grossest clickbait articles i've ever seen. It's so bad that it almost makes me like Polygon.

Polygon actually ran the same type of article earlier so nope

http://www.polygon.com/2013/6/11/4419476/playstation-4-third-party-publishers-can-dictate-their-own-drm-terms

 

[famousmortimer]

The burden of proof is on edge. That article provides zero. It's nonsense.

 

[Hoho for breakfast]

People saying ”its just like the PS3" are technically correct but missing the point.

Multiplatform publishers are NOT going to release a locked down version of their game on the Xbox and an open version on the PS4.

Microsoft's policy is going to influence what publishers do on the PS4.

Only time will tell, but I believe that's not going to be the case. They may try to release restricted games on the PS4, but those games won't sell well enough because of that DRM to justify the DRM...and so they'll stop doing it.

Microsofts policy is terrible and people aren't going to put up with it and so it's not going to influence anything except to persuade devs/pubs that draconian DRM is a bad idea.

 

[Taiser]

People saying ”its just like the PS3" are technically correct but missing the point.

Multiplatform publishers are NOT going to release a locked down version of their game on the Xbox and an open version on the PS4.

Xbone DRM is system based... publishers don't have to do anything.

 

[strikeselect]

Man, some of these people in the enthusiast press are just downright bitter that Sony messed up the narrative they were building these last few months.

This could just be some MS ninjas behind the scenes trying to spread misinformation.

 

[Deraj]

Their sources are developers talking about what they think their publishers are planning.. so this isn't coming from Sony.

 

[Xpliskin]

1. Write article about how Sony is lieing
2. Get hits / create mayhem on boards
3. ??????
4. Profit

Spoiler

this thread and article is a joke

 

[travisbickle]

They do realise that MS has an enacted a policy that restricts the sale of used games completely or at best only through certain retailers? How are Sony going to implement that?

 

[FeiRR]

Hi guys, it's my first post here though I've been lurking for a while. I'd like to add my thoughts on the DRM issues.

Microsoft says they want DRM because of the digital library and, consequently, piracy issues since you can throw away a disc after you install a game. In other words - what will stop you from giving the disc to somebody else after installing.

If you're familiar with PC games, you know that a retail game you buy has an activation code. Same with many network passes/DLC incentives and all that stuff on consoles. You should also know that every time you enter such a code, it's used and gone. Nobody else will be able to use it, hence add a game/content to their library.

This is a model Steam follows on the technical level (in legal terms they're a rental service but that's another story). This is the model current gen consoles follow with additional downloadable content and digital purchases. It doesn't matter if it comes down your ethernet/wifi or from a disc. It's really not important on the technical level.

So my question is - why does X1 require connection every 24 hours, not every time you install a game (or sell it through Microsoft, if anyone believes it'll work some day)? Some people buy games once in a while, like 2 a year. I know people who've been playing only BF3 since they got their PS3s and nothing else, at all.

My only answer is: datamining, spying, info collecting. Some will say this is a tinfoil hat theory, some will just google PRISM. Anyway, I smell something foul here. Very foul. To be honest, my biggest concern with X1 is always-on Kinect, not DRM policies. My Internet is fine and I have a 3G backup for my work anyway. I could live without selling my games, I'd just buy a lot less day 1. But I refuse to be spied on. With Windows, Google services and so on, I can always chose what to communicate over them. I can encrypt my data with strong algorythms. I can install a watchdog to monitor Internet packages and at least see who they are sent to. X1 is a closed platform that won't give me any control over my data. Should I hide from the camera in my own house? And what if they implement this technology? I've always thought that Orwell's 1984 is more scary than any horror story I've read.

 

[Renesis]

you guys heard the crowd when they said noDRM? Yeah, NO.

 

[Igo]

They cannot do:
-check every 24h
-block access to used games

So, what will they do?

They can for online games, which is why so many of these games are melding single and multiplayer these days.

It would be as simple as packaging cd keys with discs and requiring players to register those one time use keys in their uplay or origin services.

 

[Shayan]

Are you kidding?! Since when? A 7/10 in EDGE actually means 7/10 unlike... well, unlike just about every other publication that uses a ten point scale. You do recall that they gave The Last of Us one of their coveted 10/10s, right?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not blindly believing the article, but give one of the more esteemed publications in this corrupt hell-hole we call 'gaming' a little credit.

When an x360 game which gets 7 from others get an 8/9 from EDGE , then its fine right? But not when it comes to the PS3 games? 7 for R1/KZ2/Infamous and so on

LOU was made by a British dev studio . maybe they gave it 10/10 because of that and LOU got 34 perfect scores from numerous publications including IGN

 

[The Chef]

Oh what a load of bullshit.
You can't get any more specific than what was stated at the conference. Zero online required. Used games galore etc etc.
can't believe we're still talking about this.

 

[gofreak]

They do realise that MS has an enacted a policy that restricts the sale of used games completely or at best only through certain retailers?

Judging by the article, they don't seem to have realised that, no. They seem to think pubs can opt out completely of Xbox One DRM etc.

 

[Raist]

Jeez Edge. That's some spin.

Technically, can Sony FORBID 3rd parties to implement DRM or other forms of restrictions, otherwise games wouldn't get greenlit on their platform? Absolutely. But seriously it would be suicide to do this for them.

Sony's position is the smartest they could take. They got good press out of this, and now that the overall sentiment out there does not want that kind of stuff, they won't implement it on their own games or at a global, HW level.

So can 3rd parties implement what the fuck they want? Sure, they've done that before (always online on a few PSN games) but they will be the one suffering the consequences. Not to mention that a few of them got burned really hard when they tried to implement such restrictions on their own (Sim City says hi), so this might make them think twice.

So at the end of the day, 3rd parties should just give it a shot I think, and they'll easily see if the lack of DRM on PS4 is more beneficial to sales on that platform than Microsoft's.

 

[Man-is-Obsolete]

Reading this thread is weird. It is almost as if some users here want DRM more than publishers.

 

[famousmortimer]

Polygon actually ran the same type of article earlier so nope

http://www.polygon.com/2013/6/11/4419476/playstation-4-third-party-publishers-can-dictate-their-own-drm-terms

Yeah but that was Polygon misunderstanding what was even being talked about. Which is sad that their comprehension levels are so low. But edge is literally just making shit up, with no proof, and passing it as fact.


Ok... yeah, I was a little overboard to say polygon was ok in comparison. That alarmist article yesterday was pretty bad.


Sony has said there is no system wide DRM. They said online passes can happen again. There's no freaking conspiracy going on here, journalists. You were wrong about DRM being universal this gen. #dealwithit

 

[RobbieH]

"We've already come right out and said we're not going to allow online pass. And the word "allow" is key there. Specifically with online, with PS+ requiring a charge to play online, we would not want any publisher [to charge.] In general, we're all businesses. Sony or Microsoft is never going to be able to tell EA or Activision exactly what they can do. What we like to say at PlayStation is that we set the precedent. The way we are approaching this is that we want this to be extremely consumer-friendly, extremely retailer-friendly, and extremely publisher-friendly. My personal opinion is that it's hard for me to believe that any major publisher is going to put an extra set of used DRM onto game titles because that wouldn't put them in a good spot, right?" - Scott Rohde

"The Online Pass program for PlayStation first-party games will not continue on PlayStation 4. 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." - Dan Race

"What he talked about is with the offline portion there's no difference from PS3 in that every game is playable on PS4. In terms of just getting access of multiplayer online, it's now taken care of at a platform level by PS Plus. So our first party titles had the online pass on PS3 and Vita. That we are not doing on PS4 because of that platform level. It's the same for third parties; when it comes to just giving you access to online multiplayer, it's PS Plus going forward." - Shu Yoshida

"In general free-to-play games will not require PS+ but it is up to the publishers. Subscription based games will not require PS+." - Scott Rohde

Seems pretty clear to me. Online passes for first-party? Gone. Online passes for third-party? Up to the publisher but hope they won't implement. Used games? No restriction. Lending and trading? No restriction. Private sales? No restriction. Mandatory online check-ins? No restriction. Offline games? No restriction.

It'll be the same as Xbox One, though.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

I am kind of unhappy I don't know who to believe anymore because every company in my hobby is a sack of shit.

All I can say is that Sony was and continues to be unambiguous on this and any backtracking will result in an unprecedented blowback.

Edit: off topic, but edge was not really right on the 8gb of ram. They claimed Sony was telling developers it was aiming to hit 8 gb. Sony later revealed nobody knew at all, even first party. I think it was honestly a lucky coincidence.

Sony is not being unambiguous at all it's the same as PS3 .
Pubs can do what ever they want with DRM but Sony has not put any system wide DRM .
Of course pubs back tracking like crazy since they can't hide behind Sony did so they have to use it .

 

[Jasper Avenue]

Sources = other shitty "journalists"

 

[casmith07]

The spin control is amazing. This article runs directly in controversy to everything else being reported or clarified.

 

[Kyon]

Yeah but that was Polygon misunderstanding what was even being talked about. Which is sad that their comprehension levels are so low. But edge is literally just making shit up, with no proof, and passing it as fact.


Ok... yeah, I was a little overboard to say polygon was ok in comparison. That alarmist article yesterday was pretty bad.


Sony has said there is no system wide DRM. They said online passes can happen again. There's no freaking conspiracy going on here, journalists. You were wrong about DRM being universal this gen. #dealwithit

sadly many many people are going to believe this and its just sad

 

[sonicmj1]

When an x360 game which gets 7 from others get an 8/9 from EDGE , then its fine right? But not when it comes to the PS3 games? 7 for R1/KZ2/Infamous and so on

LOU was made by a British dev studio . maybe they gave it 10/10 because of that and LOU got 34 perfect scores from numerous publications including IGN

Naughty Dog is British?

Someone should let them know so they can move out of California.

 

[8bit]

When an x360 game which gets 7 from others get an 8/9 from EDGE , then its fine right? But not when it comes to the PS3 games? 7 for R1/KZ2/Infamous and so on

LOU was made by a British dev studio . maybe they gave it 10/10 because of that and LOU got 34 perfect scores from numerous publications including IGN

Naughty Dog are an American studio.

 

[Zekra Dezivad]

Realistically, publishers could only use online passes for the PS4, right? Or is there another method available to them?

And EA said thay they won't have online passes. They were sure that also PS4 would have drm... but they just got owned. :lol

 

[BurnOutBrighter]

3rd party devs wont do jack shit. They love the Xbone since the blame on the measures used goes straight to MS whereas they try to do the same shit on PS4, they get put in the spotlight and every media outlet will blow them up for it.

Exactly. They have the option. But no one is going to take it when it means gamers will hate you.

 

[Boogalogist]

Even EA distanced themselves from MS after the DRM fiasco. Where's this guy sources?

 

[Osiris]

Reading this thread is weird. It is almost as if some users here want DRM more than publishers.

Some console warriors do want that, so that any perceived advantage of the "other side" is negated.

Mad, isn't it?

 

[Sorc3r3r]

That article is insane. I mean not only is there no proof but it doesn't even explain how it would magically become similar.


This is one of the grossest clickbait articles i've ever seen. It's so bad that it almost makes me like Polygon.

OT hey Demon Soul 2 is in the works?

 

[gofreak]

So my question is - why does X1 require connection every 24 hours, not every time you install a game (or sell it through Microsoft, if anyone believes it'll work some day)? Some people buy games once in a while, like 2 a year. I know people who've been playing only BF3 since they got their PS3s and nothing else, at all.

I really don't think it's about privacy. I was talking to staff in GameStop yesterday while preordering a PS4 and their eyes were wild with warnings about Kinect privacy etc. and I was - shockingly - left to try to defend MS on that front.

The reason you connect every 24 hours is because MS needs to be able to remotely deactivate a game. If they couldn't do that, the trade in system wouldn't work. With MS's system, when you go to trade in a disc at retail, you'll bring the disc, it'll get registered by the retailer through an online system, and that system will deactivate the game on your machine. Otherwise you could keep playing your installed copy after you traded in the disc. If you're not connected at least once a day, or whatever, an installed copy would remain activated indefinitely after you gave up ownership of a disc. (Or should I say 'ownership', since it's a very different concept on Xbox One...)

 

[Stealth_Cobra]

Sony has been pretty clear. They haven't made it easy for devs, they won't enforce it themselves... But they can't stop a dev for putting a server check on his games and stuff like online passes/etc. They also believe since people are choosing PS4 because of it's used games policies, most publishers won't risk backlash in introducing said features, whereas on Microsoft consoles, since Microsoft themselves will enforce said policies and they have the hardware checks to make it possible, it will probably be the norm.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Sony's not doing half the crazy shit Microsoft's doing.

 

[sleepykyo]

Why couldn't it be the other way around? Publishers surely wouldn't want any part of this PR disaster MS have gotten themselves into.

Guess it depends on how the consoles and more importantly the software sells relatively. If the Xbone outsells the PS4 and the multi-plat sales skew toward the Xbone, then they'll just take it (the PR disaster) as meaningless noise.

 

[DBT85]

Reading this thread is weird. It is almost as if some users here want DRM more than publishers.

All things must be the same as the thing I like.

 

[USC-fan]

drm is built into the xbone. The only thing up to publisher is if they support used games.

Saying drm is up to publisher is misleading at best on xbone.

Article is fud.

 

[Somnid]

I expect most games to migrate to the Destiny/Diablo/Sim City model anyway. So in some ways they are right.

 

[Snowden's Secret]

Sony first party games will not have DRM.

Didn't all Sony first party games have online passes, which is a version of this DRM?

 

[apesh1t]

Honestly if you think no DRM and no used game fees is going to last the entire next generation, you're probably wrong. We never started this gen with online passes and a huge amount of day 1 DLC, but look where we are. My guess is Sony is going to get a lot of pressure from publishers to enable their own (publisher's) drm measures. I think it'll slowly roll out over the curse of a few years.

You have to look at it from the standpoint of a publisher. Which place do they potential stand to make more money? A console where they can closely control who and how their games are played.

What if the major publishers simply don't support the PS4, because of this measure? Then there will be no 3rd party games. Look at the Dreamcast and lack of EA games on the console. Not saying it killed it, but it certainly didn't help.

 

[Man-is-Obsolete]

Guess it depends on how the consoles and more importantly the software sells relatively. If the Xbone outsells the PS4 and the multi-plat sales skew toward the Xbone, then they'll just take it (the PR disaster) as meaningless noise.

Well that's not going to happen. Especially if you factor in production yield problems and worldwide sales.