XBox One, PS4, DRM, and You

[DrJay24]

We all understand MMO style games require connections and servers. That is part of the ToA. We don't need people pulling out tired fallacious arguments to support MS's decision. Should I need a connection to a server in 10 years to play my offline SP game?

Sony has yet to say that used game sales can not encumbered by them or pubs.

How can you post this which literally contradicts what I quoted?

As announced last night, PS4 will not have any gating restrictions for used disc-based games.

 

[AlphaWolf]

@davros

He's saying that continuing to support every online game ever made throughout the future will not be possible without those things. EA isn't going to bother supporting online play for the dozen guys that still want to play bf2 when they release bf25.

 

[3dilettante]

Remember when gamers used to be able to run their own multiplayer servers?

 

[dobwal]

1st off a console that requires online does not need data centers with unlimited storage, processing capacity and support staff,
or you are saying the xbone requires online therefore (by your definition) microsoft must have data centers with unlimited storage, processing capacity and support staff,

second we are saying that yes if your company chooses to make its products dependent on it running servers it should
a) run them indefinitely
b) if you not prepared to run them indefinitely dont make it a requirement
c) if you do shutdown the servers release a fix so server dependance is no longer required.

if i sell a product that requires me to stand on my head for it to work I should be prepared to stand on my head, If i dont want to stand on my head i wont make it a requirement

They don't have to run them indefinitely just a commitment to strip out the online DRM and allow the user to manage their own library. Where when the servers are scheduled to go offline the userbase is timely notified that they must provide local storage to host their own library.

 

[dobwal]

We all understand MMO style games require connections and servers. That is part of the ToA. We don't need people pulling out tired fallacious arguments to support MS's decision. Should I need a connection to a server in 10 years to play my offline SP game?



How can you post this which literally contradicts what I quoted?

Because your quote says the PS4 hardware doesn't gate used game sales. It doesn't mean that pubs can't gate used game sales with an online function.

“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.

To ensure no pub rolls an online DRM to stop used sales, Sony would have to dictate a pro used policy to its pub partners.

 

[Scott_Arm]

I didn't realize people were under the illusion that they'd be able to unpack their PS3 twenty years from now, throw in Uncharted 3 and do some matchmaking.

No matter what. The hardware and the infrastructure on the Internet side will not last forever. How long is long enough? This is not a DRM issue. This an issue that can be discussed on its own.

Edit:

Anyway, can we all go back to disagreeing about the seriousness of DRM on Xbox One and PS4?

 

[wco81]

So what you're saying is no one should make any games that have online features, or any kind of connectivity, because in the distant future it will not work anymore? Until someone can design data centers with unlimited storage, processing capacity and support staff, the industry should just not use any features that rely online, because it cannot be supported forever?

Do you think most online console games need to connect through a data center?

When you're playing NHL against someone, why do you need to connect through XBL or PSN?

There's no technical reason because these games are peer to peer. MS and now Sony are charging you for chat, friends list and matchmaking.

They could have left it to the developers to set those services up or better yet, let the developers support direct connections between consoles. But then they wouldn't be able to collect the XBL fee and now the PSN Plus fees.

And yeah, by making you connect through a service, they can build in obsolescence, so that you will have to upgrade to a newer version of the game sooner or later.

 

[Davros]

No matter what. The hardware and the infrastructure on the Internet side will not last forever. How long is long enough? This is not a DRM issue. This an issue that can be discussed on its own.

if it was true that in the future xbox1 will stop working because hardware to run it is all broken and the infrastructure is gone then it wouldnt be a drm issue. but the reason that one day xbox1 will stop working is because ms pull the plug so it is a drm issue ms will not allways run their drm system(not because it becomes impossible but through pure choice) therefore its a drm issue

 

[DrJay24]

Because your quote says the PS4 hardware doesn't gate used game sales. It doesn't mean that pubs can't gate used game sales with an online function.

To ensure no pub rolls an online DRM to stop used sales, Sony would have to dictate a pro used policy to its pub partners.

They are referring to online passes, playing used games online. It's what we have now on the PS3. You are either misunderstanding the text or make another conspiracy theory. I don't know how they can be more clear.

 

[Scott_Arm]

Do you think most online console games need to connect through a data center?

When you're playing NHL against someone, why do you need to connect through XBL or PSN?

There's no technical reason because these games are peer to peer. MS and now Sony are charging you for chat, friends list and matchmaking.

They could have left it to the developers to set those services up or better yet, let the developers support direct connections between consoles. But then they wouldn't be able to collect the XBL fee and now the PSN Plus fees.

And yeah, by making you connect through a service, they can build in obsolescence, so that you will have to upgrade to a newer version of the game sooner or later.

Actually, NHL uses dedicated servers for all OTP matches and EASHL games. They also have a backend that allows you to have persistent players and statistics, plus all of the team functionality that allows you to create and manage teams and compete for monthly trophies in an organized league. On top of that there are all of the web features built around EASHL for team stat pages.

Now you're arguing matchmaking is bad, because it requires data centers, and that somehow developers would be better off setting up those services on their own. Let's hold gaming back forever. The Internet is evil, scary and unstable. Everyone should go back to using direct connections over dialup, because it isn't reliant on the Internet at all.

 

[Scott_Arm]

if it was true that in the future xbox1 will stop working because hardware to run it is all broken and the infrastructure is gone then it wouldnt be a drm issue. but the reason that one day xbox1 will stop working is because ms pull the plug so it is a drm issue

The online functionality for some games will have the plug pulled before MS pulls the plug on DRM authentication. EA already shuts down service to old games no one plays anymore.

 

[dobwal]

Do you think most online console games need to connect through a data center?

When you're playing NHL against someone, why do you need to connect through XBL or PSN?

There's no technical reason because these games are peer to peer. MS and now Sony are charging you for chat, friends list and matchmaking.

They could have left it to the developers to set those services up or better yet, let the developers support direct connections between consoles. But then they wouldn't be able to collect the XBL fee and now the PSN Plus fees.

And yeah, by making you connect through a service, they can build in obsolescence, so that you will have to upgrade to a newer version of the game sooner or later.

No one has been advocating P2P over dedicated online servers from a standpoint of longevity. People push for dedicated servers because they provide better performance along with the expectation those servers won't be online forever.

How does an accepted and desired reality suddenly become undesirable when discussing online DRM?

 

[Davros]

They don't have to run them indefinitely just a commitment to strip out the online DRM and allow the user to manage their own library. Where when the servers are scheduled to go offline the userbase is timely notified that they must provide local storage to host their own library.

as i said in part C)

 

[Davros]

No one has been advocating P2P over dedicated online servers from a standpoint of longevity. People push for dedicated servers because they provide better performance along with the expectation those servers won't be online forever.

How does an accepted and desired reality suddenly become undesirable when discussing online DRM?

it doesnt,
1 ) people certainly have been adviocating p2p over dedicated from the standpoint of longevity
2) people dont push for dedicated servers at the expense of p2p they should compliment each other
3) I can and do run a dedicated server for unreal tournament theres no reason end users cant run dedicated servers
ucc.exe if you have unreal tournament (best to use runserver.bat)

 

[dobwal]

They are referring to online passes, playing used games online. It's what we have now on the PS3. You are either misunderstanding the text or make another conspiracy theory. I don't know how they can be more clear.

Yes, PSN pass which is Sony's own online pass system. But if you are not going to dictate a used game policy to pubs then there is nothing to stop them from rolling their own.

 

[MrFox]

Sony gave us everything we asked for. The big cheer at E3 was warranted.

I'm a collector, I own about 500 blurays/dvds, a hundred books. I bought roughly 200 console games and resold maybe 50 of those (didn't like, or didn't consider them of value). Just like my books and films, my games would have no value if I didn't have ownership, control, and longevity.

It's very simple. Sony protected that value. Microsoft didn't.

 

[Nesh]

So what you're saying is no one should make any games that have online features, or any kind of connectivity, because in the distant future it will not work anymore? Until someone can design data centers with unlimited storage, processing capacity and support staff, the industry should just not use any features that rely online, because it cannot be supported forever?

No. But what you are saying is that since the industry invented online games and online modes and can function only with the internet, single player games that didnt have to deal with such inconvenience since forever now MUST become online games and adopt the inconveniences of the internet. Why? Because we didnt have the internet before and now we have it

What kind of logic is this?

 

[Tap In]

hey tell me, how many was locked out when PSN was hacked?
Tell me, how many will be locked out of their games in 5 years?
How about 10 years?
15 years, do you expect the activation servers to run in 15 years?

20 years.. in the year 2033, will the games bought on the XBONE still work, can i still trade them? can i buy classics like TITAN FALL on Ebay and play them in my old console?

25 years, tell me will my XBONE work just as good as a SNES does today..

30 years, 1983 was the year of the NES, lets play some Mario.. ehh? how about in 2043 lets play a game of HALO.. the classic reinvented, it took the world by storm.. nothing online works, cloud AI is gone, but there is still the single player game that brought Halo back into life.. we hooked up an old HDTV (hard to find working ones..) and we booted the Console (solid build from Microsoft RROD was a thing of the past)

And it didn't work.. who would cheer for such a stupid solution to "used games". The idea that every one is the center of the universe is depressing, think more, think broader think of the next generations.

I believe that the Xbox One running games in VM will allow them to have backward compatibility going forward and is creating a situation where games become part of the same eco-system as apps and music etc. so I think long term this is a solution to your problem (linked to digital licenses rather than hardware) so you can play these games on many devices in future and at LEAST on next next gen consoles

MS is basically using force to eradicate the used market.

What? no. you cans still buy sell trade and play USED games , just have to do it at a retailer not ebay or friend

 

[Scott_Arm]

Anyway, instead of arguing over and over, I'll just summarize my feelings and bail.

Both X1 and PS4 will have some DRM hoops to jump through. Microsoft has a centralized DRM system. They have knowingly limited their target audience to broadband Internet users. That is their target customer, and it is probably the customer that provides them with the most money through media consumption anyway. Sony dishonestly suggested their disc-based games would be free of restrictions yesterday, but we now know publishers are free to implement whatever management systems they feel are necessary. They crowned themselves a champion for consumer rights to win a PR battle overnight, and it seems to have worked.

Publishers have wanted a way to make money off used games, or limit the used game business for a long time. X1 provides them with ways they can handle either of those things. PS4 allows them to do it on their own. I believe each publisher will pursue both of those goals to varying degrees on both platforms. That could mean activation keys or other types of online registration on the PS4. People who believe the status quo will continue over the next five to ten years are kidding themselves.

Neither of these situations are ideal for me. I believe that games should be bought and sold like any other good. A game I cannot sell or trade, or can only sell in limited capacity, is worth less to me. It is unfortunate that Microsoft and Sony are bowing to publisher pressure and implementing or allowing DRM. Unfortunately it is the reality of the business where developers and publishers are struggling financially. My personal opinion is that they should change their own financial management, and spend less money on each game. Blockbuster games are a huge gamble considering the market is not likely to grow where sales records are constantly being broken, allowing for stability. Unfortunately, being the most fickle people in the world, I don't believe gamers would accept the products of smaller budgets for the same price tag.

The issue of DRM killing the life of games is moot, because as games become more and more online oriented, they will inevitably have their servers, web hosting and online infrastructure killed, whether there is DRM or not. It is not possible to support the infrastructure for all online games made from this point forward forever. You can argue whether a game should last ten or twenty years, but the reality is that games will not last forever. Even if they could, the hardware will not.

And on that note, I'm out of here.

 

[dobwal]

it doesnt,
1 ) people certainly have been adviocating p2p over dedicated from the standpoint of longevity
2) people dont push for dedicated servers at the expense of p2p they should compliment each other
3) I can and do run a dedicated server for unreal tournament theres no reason end users cant run dedicated servers
ucc.exe if you have unreal tournament

Where? Gamers obviously like the notion of having privately ran dedicated servers, which allows a community to have online multiplayer even when the pub ends official support. But dedicated servers aren't P2P, private or not.