More DRM Discussions *spinoff*

Nesh said:
8
The question is flawed.
My utility from having rights as a consumer to do whatever I want with a product and the utility I get from benefits from update-able connected consoles are unrelated and thus are "untradeable". It is obvious that I CAN have full access to my disks AND have a connected, updateable console without one affecting the other NOW. Any change departs from the current optimum point.

This is why when MS DID try to impose similar controls on physical media, it caused an uproar (since it removed from the consumer) and it was retracted (at no cost for the consumer). If and when a company does exercise this ability of course I ll not accept it. Any argument using "technological progress" as an excuse for such an exercise is simply irrational as we can have a cake and eat it too. Funnily such arguments did exist when MS announced their initial plans.

As long as things stay as they are I am happy
Click to expand...

I asked, because when I tried to present you with a hypothetical scenario whereby not only are there market realities (consumers would revolt) but iron-clad consumer protections are in place to create a comparable level of ownership rights for digital media as there is for physical media you said you couldn't consider that because digital ownership as restricted by DRM allows additional control by the platform owners over your purchased content.

The connected/update-able console paradigm allows platform owners additional control over the content you have physical ownership of that didn't exist before. This is the grounds you used to reject even *considering* the hypothetical I presented.

So, let me try this. If, prior to the Xbox 360/PS3 generation, you had been presented with the concept of connected/update-able consoles along with the idea that this could potentially allow platform holders to block access to your purchased discs would you have been opposed to this paradigm on those grounds?
 
mrcorbo said:
I asked, because when I tried to present you with a hypothetical scenario whereby not only are there market realities (consumers would revolt) but iron-clad consumer protections are in place to create a comparable level of ownership rights for digital media as there is for physical media you said you couldn't consider that because digital ownership as restricted by DRM allows additional control by the platform owners over your purchased content.

The connected/update-able console paradigm allows platform owners additional control over the content you have physical ownership of that didn't exist before. This is the grounds you used to reject even *considering* the hypothetical I presented.

So, let me try this. If, prior to the Xbox 360/PS3 generation, you had been presented with the concept of connected/update-able consoles along with the idea that this could potentially allow platform holders to block access to your purchased discs would you have been opposed to this paradigm on those grounds?
Click to expand...
You are trying to make me consider hypothetical future scenarios that add uncertainty and ignore the current situation where physical provide conveniences and certainty that the digital do not, where the benefits of both physical non-DRM content and digital co-exist, in order to agree with your fixation that there should be only digital, DRM-controlled content.
With digital you know there is DRM and will always be, with physical it is only potentially that DRM can be applied and as I said earlier, I would oppose DRM imposed on physical content equally as the digital, because for me there is no difference between the two.
I would have opposed the concept of DRM on physical not the concept of a console that has access to online services and gets updated.
 
Last edited:
Nesh said:
You are trying to make me consider hypothetical future scenarios that add uncertainty and ignore the current situation where physical provide conveniences and certainty that the digital do not, where the benefits of both physical non-DRM content and digital co-exist, in order to agree with your fixation that there should be only digital, DRM-controlled content.
With digital you know there is DRM and will always be, with physical it is only potentially that DRM can be applied and as I said earlier, I would oppose DRM imposed on physical content equally as the digital, because for me there is no difference between the two.
I would have opposed the concept of DRM on physical not the concept of a console that has access to online services and gets updated.
Click to expand...

I don't actually have any interest in an end to physical media as an absolute. Part of the reason I upgraded to an Xbox One S because it has an UHD BluRay player in it! If physical media is offering something that digital media is not than I am perfectly willing to purchase content in that format. I have a stack of Xbox One games in disc format because both times I bought an Xbox One I got them free or heavily discounted. I'd have preferred download codes, but if you're going to give them to me, I'll take them and use them. I've already said this once, but I guess I need to repeat it. If the market moves enough towards digital distribution to allow for physical media distribution to no longer be a thing, I'm OK with it and if the market continues to make it necessary, I'm OK with that too.

I am clearly comfortable in investing in content in digital form as it is today. This is my due to my own preferences and situation. I'm asking you if it's possible for the things that are making you uncomfortable with digital distribution, and the necessary DRM policies that come along with that paradigm, to be addressed to make you comfortable with it or if there's some benefit that could be attached to it that would make you willing to overcome that discomfort to obtain that benefit. I'm asking you because I know you have different preferences and are in a different situation and therefore have a different perspective than I do. I'm asking you because I'm trying to see if I can learn something from you beyond the fact that you don't like DRM.
 
Davros said:
And have sony given assurances that your games will always be available for download ?
Click to expand...


No. But common sense tells me it would be a bad idea for a company that wants to continue to sell games to consumers digitally to stop making games consumers have bought available as that would destroy consumer confidence in their service. You can still buy and d/l PSP games on PSN, so I'm not too worried about my PS4 games, TBH.
 
There will come a point when sales of ps4 games reach near zero when people are playing ps7 games for example,
will they still be offering those games for download then, weve seen many publishers shut down multiplayer services when the player base diminishes
so I dont share your optimism
(a pet peave of mine since e.a shut down the multiplyer servers for mercenaries world in flames 2 a week after I bought the game)
 
Davros said:
There will come a point when sales of ps4 games reach near zero when people are playing ps7 games for example,
will they still be offering those games for download then, weve seen many publishers shut down multiplayer services when the player base diminishes
so I dont share your optimism
(a pet peave of mine since e.a shut down the multiplyer servers for mercenaries world in flames 2 a week after I bought the game)
Click to expand...

Maybe you should buy games before they're in the bargain bin with multiplayer servers circling the drain, like maybe on release day?
 
Davros said:
There will come a point when sales of ps4 games reach near zero when people are playing ps7 games for example,
will they still be offering those games for download then, weve seen many publishers shut down multiplayer services when the player base diminishes
so I dont share your optimism
Click to expand...
I expect they'll still sell them because there's no reason not to. Just a bit of space on the server HDD. In fact it's more effort to remove the content than leave it on there. But it'd be stupid buying a multiplayer game years after everyone's moved on, so there's reasons to remove content for the benefit of consumer.

Warhawk is still available on PS3, released 2007. You'll barely find anyone to play with making it a fairly daft purchase. So is Sony good to sell it, or are they misleading consumers offering what's in effect a game past its best before date?
 
Davros said:
There will come a point when sales of ps4 games reach near zero when people are playing ps7 games for example,
will they still be offe ring those games for download then, weve seen many publishers shut down multiplayer services when the player base diminishes
so I dont share your optimism
(a pet peave of mine since e.a shut down the multiplyer servers for mercenaries world in flames 2 a week after I bought the game)
Click to expand...

With backward compatibility, people who have a PS7 could still buy and play PS4 games. If the PS7 can't play PS4 games, what are the odds that I still have access to a working PS4 and would be willing to go out of my way to connect it just to play them? And, as I said, terminating access would be a PR disaster.

In short, I don't think it will happen unless Sony exits the business. If it does happen, the practical effect to me is minimal. If it did happen, and Sony hadn't left the business, I would probably stop buying digital content from them on principal.

In the meantime, I will continue to enjoy the convenience of not having to deal with discs, which, on the PC, I've been enjoying for over a decade.
 
I'm not as optimistic as you, running a multiplayer server for a handfull of players would cost buttons (I could do it on my own p.c) and publishers still dont do it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
How do you feel about next-gen gaming? *remodelled
2
Replies
32
Views
8K
AlNom
A
B
  • Locked
Full Q/a With Tommy Tallarico Ps3 And 360
4 5 6
Replies
112
Views
20K
blakjedi
B
Back
Top