XBox One, PS4, DRM, and You

[-tkf-]

I know right , why should I have to be online to play candy crush. I should be able to play without a connection to the web.

No idea what you are trying to say

If your son is on your family account he can play the game as much as he wants as long as your not playing it at the same time. Its no different than it is now with a disc.

Actually with a PS3 DD 2 persons can play the same game on the same account, but again we have no idea what is planned for the future XBONE and PSFOUR. The games might as well be locked on one account with no family option.

As for friends , I've been gaming on pc for a long time and since the late 90s when they started tying games to a cd key , I haven't felt the loss of lending to a friend.

I would suggest you borrow them more than just the disc, for example include the CDKEY, just a suggestion. And a tip, this is the Console Forum, i have had no problem with CDKEYs on my PS1 PS2 PS3 XBOX XBOX360 WII N64 DREAMCAST because it wasn't friggin needed thanks to a solid copy protection.

 

[eastmen]

I can't explain it better if you can't take more than 5 minutes to read my posts, and read up on the history which I'm talking about.

Think about the difference between renting and buying, and how they always existed in parallel throughout the history of all these media. And that online DRM for ownership didn't work. It only works for renting or live streaming.

And think about what I'm saying to you. The majority of the content your talking about is switching to streaming as the primary revenue stream. Purchasing with drm or not is becoming a thing of the past

 

[eastmen]

No idea what you are trying to say

Gaming already comes with always online requirements.

Actually with a PS3 DD 2 persons can play the same game on the same account, but again we have no idea what is planned for the future XBONE and PSFOUR. The games might as well be locked on one account with no family option.

MS has already said you can play the games on other xbox ones in the same house.

I would suggest you borrow them more than just the disc, for example include the CDKEY, just a suggestion. And a tip, this is the Console Forum, i have had no problem with CDKEYs on my PS1 PS2 PS3 XBOX XBOX360 WII N64 DREAMCAST because it wasn't friggin needed thanks to a solid copy protection.[/QUOTE]

Yea about that dreamcast. Great system to bring up as it died out due to huge amounts of piracy on the system. The xbox and xbox 360 both have large amounts of piracy also.

As for letting a friend borrow a disc , I rather not , most of my games are on steam and I don't want to give anyone acess to my credit card or my gaming library

 

[Tap In]

why do people keep saying there is a fee for buying a used game?

any money that exchanges hands between the console maker/pub/retailer will be invisible to us. There is no fee.

You can argue well they'll just add it in the cost! so what, it's called economics and it still is a business of supply and demand. They always have sales and trade in boosts up tp 50% bonus. I doubt it will add or subtract more than $2 to a game transaction and the new gen would redefine costs anyway.

But please stop with there is a fee. it's wrong and based on poor comprehension and over reaction. I keep hearing people spreading this rumor and it's bullshit

 

[eastmen]

they will also be limited by the cost of a new game. They can't charge more than that ever.


Right now a few days after release you see $55 used copies. So where do they pass the cost to a consumer ?

 

[MrFox]

And think about what I'm saying to you. The majority of the content your talking about is switching to streaming as the primary revenue stream. Purchasing with drm or not is becoming a thing of the past

There are 3 tiers in most of these markets. Think about Radio/TV, film renting, and bluray/DVD. The Radio/TV is hopefully being replaced by streaming services (netflix). The Renting market is hopefully being replaced by online services (playstation store). The Bluray/DVD is the top tier, which is ownership.

DRM is succeeding only for streaming tier and renting tier. The ownership tier isn't moving. The fight is to make sure they don't try to eliminate the existence of the top tier by lying to the public, until it's too late to backtrack.

Ultraviolet provides you with a non-DRM physical copy, a bluray (copy protected, not DRM'd). It gives you both, the online is convenience, and the physical is ownership. I applaud this because it makes everyone happy.

DIVX goal was to start early while DVD is in it's infancy, and try to kill it before it becomes mainstream, doing it by lying about the ownership aspect. That was the issue. The general public didn't have the technical knowledge to understand the implication. Once DVD and bluray are widespread, that market will not go away, they cannot add DRM to it, the standard cannot change, nobody can make a power grab.

Music DRM was used to sell you fake ownership, but retain planned obsoloscence and a vendor locking that's built-in. It was anti-consumer and monopolistic. It would never have transitioned this way if there was still DRM. The idea is that it's a bad comparison for games, because games require copy protection.

Books is an ongoing issue, and Tor is the test market to prove once again that online DRM doesn't work for ownership. If Amazon would give me a physical hardcover copy with all my DRM books, I wouldn't make a fuss about it. Once again, bad comparison for games, because games require copy protection

I have nothing against online DRM for streaming and renting, quite the opposite. As long as there's an alternative for ownership. I also have nothing against copy protection, as long as the owner is the one with the key. I also have nothing against online DRM for the $10 indie games, economically it's unreasonable to ask for a physical copy, and anyway the price isn't high enough for me to care about it.

 

[Tap In]

they will also be limited by the cost of a new game. They can't charge more than that ever.


Right now a few days after release you see $55 used copies. So where do they pass the cost to a consumer ?

exactly, it will mostly come out of GS pile.... people are spreading FUD when they call this a fee.

I look at it more like GS has been profiting and not sharing it with the service provider and are now being forced to share some of the spoils... about damned time I say

If I were providing that service I'd want my cut.... it's not like a book or music, it is a service built for a CLOSED system. They do it that way on purpose... they take all the risk to bring us the machines that ONLY run those games and they add services and R&D at considerable expense (compared to music or a book where there is no closed system for consuming it -except for Kindle digital etc with DRM)


do we really think Sony MS or Nintendo does it because they love the gamer?

They want a Return on that investment and GS is cutting into that

 

[eastmen]

There are 3 tiers in most of these markets. Think about Radio/TV, film renting, and bluray/DVD. The Radio/TV is hopefully being replaced by streaming services (netflix). The Renting market is hopefully being replaced by online services (playstation store). The Bluray/DVD is the top tier, which is ownership.

I just bought a movie DD on xbox the other day. So its not as clear cut as you say. Also bluray is still a fraction of the user base dvd had.

DRM is succeeding only for streaming tier and renting tier. The ownership tier isn't moving. The fight is to make sure they don't try to eliminate the existence of the top tier by lying to the public, until it's too late to backtrack.

Once again You can purchase movies on Google play / ios / xbox live / psn and they all have drm and are restricted by platform

Ultraviolet provides you with a non-DRM physical copy, a bluray (copy protected, not DRM'd). It gives you both, the online is convenience, and the physical is ownership. I applaud this because it makes everyone happy.

ultraviolet uses widevine , marlin , cmla-oma v2 , playready and adobe flash acess. So once again what you applaud is DRM'd

DIVX goal was to start early while DVD is in it's infancy, and try to kill it before it becomes mainstream, doing it by lying about the ownership aspect. That was the issue. The general public didn't have the technical knowledge to understand the implication. Once DVD and bluray are widespread, that market will not go away, they cannot add DRM to it, the standard cannot change, nobody can make a power grab.

The power grab would be to stop supporting it. Which is going to happen soon since DD and streaming are becoming more and more popular.

Music DRM was used to sell you fake ownership, but retain planned obsoloscence and a vendor locking that's built-in. It was anti-consumer and monopolistic. It would never have transitioned this way if there was still DRM. The idea is that it's a bad comparison for games, because games require copy protection.

music still has drm and more and more people are going to streaming music not owner ship. Its a lot cheaper to pay $8 for unlimited Pandora streaming than it is to buy every track at $1

Books is an ongoing issue, and Tor is the test market to prove once again that online DRM doesn't work for ownership. If Amazon would give me a physical hardcover copy with all my DRM books, I wouldn't make a fuss about it. Once again, bad comparison for games, because games require copy protection

And what is Tor's market share vs Nook and Amazon ?

I have nothing against online DRM for streaming and renting, quite the opposite. As long as there's an alternative for ownership. I also have nothing against copy protection, as long as the owner is the one with the key. I also have nothing against online DRM for the $10 indie games, economically it's unreasonable to ask for a physical copy, and anyway the price isn't high enough for me to care about it.

your going to be in the minority and be limited to older tech as time goes on

 

[-tkf-]

I'm not following you

Music - Yes DRM free music exists but the masses are moving towards streaming music ala iheartradio , spoitify , Pandora . Infact some song just beat a record by using the amount of times it was streamed as purchases..

The masses? Tell us that record companies are earning the most of their money from streaming and you have a case for "streaming games". His point was the he still bought CD's, just as me btw, DRM free music that i can enjoy for ever, or at least long than can enjoy the games i will buy for my PS4/XBONE if they go along with this.

Movies - Bluray is still a fraction of what dvd was back in the day. DRM schemes like xbox or amazon prime or movies on google play / psn and the likes are all a step back to drm. So you didn't win anything there as even ultra violet has drm on the downloaded copies.

The size of the Blu-Ray market doesn't matter if we can buy the movies on a DISC. It's still growing btw, just so you know the world isn't always what one might imagine, and it's been growing and growing since the first day you told us all it wasn't going to be as big as DVD, as if it mattered . His point was he can buy a Disc and get the best of both worlds. A Disc that will always play as long as he has the disc. Incredible tech!

ebooks - amazon and nook are getting a bigger and bigger piece of the pie squeezing out things like tor . Both feature DRM

And here is the trick, i can buy the books on paper, DRM free books, i have a choice.

Consoles have had DRM games since the last generation.

They have had it since forever, you can't copy them. But put them in a console.. and they can be played.. awesome! Sell them to a friend.. and he can play it.. buy it with 20 friends and all of them can play it.

You need to send me a pair of the rose color glasses you've been using cause I see us moving more towards a constant subscription based world and DD only world .

When books,music,cars etc are subscription and DD only then we will need those glasses until then you just need to understand that the world is NOT subscription and dd based. And unless we let them do it, neither does the console world need to be.

 

[-tkf-]

Gaming already comes with always online requirements.
MS has already said you can play the games on other xbox ones in the same house.

Some games come with ODRM, not all. And MS said a lot of stuff so lets see about that one shall we.

Yea about that dreamcast. Great system to bring up as it died out due to huge amounts of piracy on the system. The xbox and xbox 360 both have large amounts of piracy also.

As for letting a friend borrow a disc , I rather not , most of my games are on steam and I don't want to give anyone acess to my credit card or my gaming library

Piracy has nothing to do with me borrowing games or letting friends borrow my games. And by that i mean games on discs of course.

 

[MrFox]

Blah

Ok obviously you don't read anything I say about the difference between streaming, renting and ownership. And the split market. I'll just agree to disagree.

(I'm sorry about your DRM film purchases on the xbox store, I don't know anyone around me who made that kind of mistake, but we sure have different preferences)

 

[Tap In]

And here is the trick, i can buy the books on paper, DRM free books, i have a choice.
.

I said this above but here is the distinction that is being missed in these coparisons...

The software is built to be consumed for a CLOSED system. They invest in the technology, services and spend millions bringing us the services, software, hardware and features... and they don't do it because they love gamers... they want Return on investment.


No publisher of a book or music needs to invest that kind of money into the consumption of their product. We have gotten spoiled as gamers by the current trade system and by old fashioned out dated methods.

the gaming industry was nearly destroyed once when Atari di not have the foresight to block out software that would run on their machine without a license and Activision closed them down with their games.

Selling software for a closed system that someone invested billions into and not paying the royalty when selling that ability to consume the game is illogical IMO

 

[eastmen]

The masses? Tell us that record companies are earning the most of their money from streaming and you have a case for "streaming games". His point was the he still bought CD's, just as me btw, DRM free music that i can enjoy for ever, or at least long than can enjoy the games i will buy for my PS4/XBONE if they go along with this.

sigh people buy records too. But each year fewer and fewer people buy cds. The value isn't there for the majority of people. I can stream 40 hours of music (which is about what I listen too) for free vs having to buy a $15 cd for a fraction of the music.

The size of the Blu-Ray market doesn't matter if we can buy the movies on a DISC. It's still growing btw, just so you know the world isn't always what one might imagine, and it's been growing and growing since the first day you told us all it wasn't going to be as big as DVD, as if it mattered . His point was he can buy a Disc and get the best of both worlds. A Disc that will always play as long as he has the disc. Incredible tech!

Its growing but growing slowly and some point in the near future it will stop growing and start shrinking just like cds are.

And here is the trick, i can buy the books on paper, DRM free books, i have a choice.

and the market doesn't care and is buying books full of drm. What is Tor's market share ?

They have had it since forever, you can't copy them. But put them in a console.. and they can be played.. awesome! Sell them to a friend.. and he can play it.. buy it with 20 friends and all of them can play it.

You can copy , ps1 , ps2 , dreamcast , xbox , xbox 360 and a slew of other games and play them on the consoles too. That is why drm exists.

When books,music,cars etc are subscription and DD only then we will need those glasses until then you just need to understand that the world is NOT subscription and dd based. And unless we let them do it, neither does the console world need to be.

Cars are already subscription only. Music is heading that way quickly .

You and MR FOX act like Subcription and DD are bad things. They all provide huge benfits over physical copies.

I enjoy being able to preorder a game on steam and then the day it releases its already on my pc ready to play. No having to go to a store and buy the game or have it shipped from some where. Its nice and easy. I also like not having to constantly change discs as I want to play other games.

I also like that all my games all of them fit on a single 3.5 inch drive an don't take up huge amounts of space in my house.

I like Netflix becaue I no longer need to have 21 discs for how I met your mother and then 21 discs for big bang and so on an so forth. I no longer need to get up and change discs either. That is a huge benfit for me.

I like that my nook fits thousands upon thousands of books in the size of a paper back vs the shelf space i'd need for my collection .

Now here is the thing. I don't need to sell any of this stuff . I haven't sold a game in years and I have never sold a book before in my life. I made the great purge of dvds a few years ago and will never buy discs again aside from a few Disney classics

 

[MrFox]

I said this above but here is the distinction that is being missed in these coparisons...

The software is built to be consumed for a CLOSED system. They invest in the technology, services and spend millions bringing us the services, software, hardware and features... and they don't do it because they love gamers... they want Return on investment.


No publisher of a book or music needs to invest that kind of money into the consumption of their product. We have gotten spoiled as gamers by the current trade system and by old fashioned out dated methods.

the gaming industry was nearly destroyed once when Atari di not have the foresight to block out software that would run on their machine without a license and Activision closed them down with their games.

Selling software for a closed system that someone invested billions into and not paying the royalty when selling that ability to consume the game is illogical IMO

The used game impact is imaginary. You can't sell at a higher price with the premise of ownership, and then turn around and try to make the ownership tier pay the same price for a lesser privilege (unless they lie, and I'll be there to fight if they do). Used games market appear because the retail price of this top tier is high enough to creates a lower tier which helps popularize the game. There are people ready to pay $60 for a game, which won't anymore if it doesn't look like they actually own the game. It's a zero sum or less.

The solution is to sell games ownership at it's proper value without cheats, without ties, and sell the DD version at a lower price, the market will spread in the most profitable way. Sony is experimenting with it, (with day 1 digital, downloads cost less than physical), and we'll know what their conclusion is. And who the heck pays $60 for a game and sell it back for $30, 3 days later? That would be the perfect client for renting games on the playstation store. I expect that to happen and it will make first week used games market almost disappear.

 

[Tap In]

The used game impact is imaginary. You can't sell at a higher price with the premise of ownership, and then turn around and try to make the ownership tier pay the same price for a lesser privilege (unless they lie, and I'll be there to fight if they do). Used games market appear because the retail price of this top tier is high enough to creates a lower tier which helps popularize the game. There are people ready to pay $60 for a game, which won't anymore if it doesn't look like they actually own the game. It's a zero sum or less.

The solution is to sell games ownership at it's proper value without cheats, without ties, and sell the DD version at a lower price, the market will spread in the most profitable way. Sony is experimenting with it, (with day 1 digital, downloads cost less than physical), and we'll know what their conclusion is. And who the heck pays $60 for a game and sell it back for $30, 3 days later? That would be the perfect client for renting games on the playstation store. I expect that to happen and it will make first week used games market almost disappear.

I hope all that does happen. Lower dd costs and ms has already said you will be able to trade your dd content for some credit. im all for discs going away but realize some people don't have the bandwidth yet

As for rental dd? Do a search as I made a thread supposing that and hoping for it back in like 2006.

 

[-tkf-]

I said this above but here is the distinction that is being missed in these coparisons...

The software is built to be consumed for a CLOSED system. They invest in the technology, services and spend millions bringing us the services, software, hardware and features... and they don't do it because they love gamers... they want Return on investment.

They will have 10 years on the PS3 and XBOX360 to earn back their investment, how much is enough? As i said somewhere else, as long as money is the excuse it's as everything is allowed, including taking away basic rights from consumers. And developing a closed system is costly, so is cars, tv's etc.. it's the same.

Build a closed system that doesn't take away my rights and i will spend the money.

 

[-tkf-]

You and MR FOX act like Subcription and DD are bad things. They all provide huge benfits over physical copies.

I enjoy being able to preorder a game on steam and then the day it releases its already on my pc ready to play. No having to go to a store and buy the game or have it shipped from some where. Its nice and easy. I also like not having to constantly change discs as I want to play other games.

I also like that all my games all of them fit on a single 3.5 inch drive an don't take up huge amounts of space in my house.

I like Netflix becaue I no longer need to have 21 discs for how I met your mother and then 21 discs for big bang and so on an so forth. I no longer need to get up and change discs either. That is a huge benfit for me.

I like that my nook fits thousands upon thousands of books in the size of a paper back vs the shelf space i'd need for my collection .

Now here is the thing. I don't need to sell any of this stuff . I haven't sold a game in years and I have never sold a book before in my life. I made the great purge of dvds a few years ago and will never buy discs again aside from a few Disney classics

I want the choice, and i don't want some stupid ass DRM system that makes my games unplayable at the whim of some greedy publisher.

I use netflix, music unlimited, steam, uplay, buy DD etc. But i fight for my right to have a choice and i still buy the important stuff that i want to keep on discs, out of the hands of any stupid DRM scheme. If i want to see TinTin, i can do it, i don't have to rely on Netflix having the license, right now etc etc.. Choice and rights, they have to be mine for me to spend the money.

 

[dagamer]

I'm not following you

Music - Yes DRM free music exists but the masses are moving towards streaming music ala iheartradio , spoitify , Pandora . Infact some song just beat a record by using the amount of times it was streamed as purchases.

Movies - Bluray is still a fraction of what dvd was back in the day. DRM schemes like xbox or amazon prime or movies on google play / psn and the likes are all a step back to drm. So you didn't win anything there as even ultra violet has drm on the downloaded copies

ebooks - amazon and nook are getting a bigger and bigger piece of the pie squeezing out things like tor . Both feature DRM

Games - The biggest ways to get pc games are all filled with DRM . Consoles have had DRM games since the last generation.


You need to send me a pair of the rose color glasses you've been using cause I see us moving more towards a constant subscription based world and DD only world .

There's a difference between DRM on games and other forms of media, games are only designed to work on one system, such that DRM is only for piracy. Also, I'd state that not all DRM is evil, as that's what allows for new business models like Spotify, Rdio, and Netflix to get licenses from content providers. What we all hate is idiotic DRM that only let's you install a game 5 times. Besides, the reason why streaming music services work is that I really doubt many people were spending $120/year on new music CDs instead of maybe $15/year on random new 99 cent tracks (which in the end will make those companies more money).

The reason we have all of this angst is that we live in a world of limited Internet today where Microsoft and Sony have to build a box for tomorrow that has to last 10 years. Plus, they really only get to negotiate contracts with retailers once, I'm sure they'd love to just ditch them and go digital only.

 

[Cyan]

my opinion is I am done with discs, could not care less if they disappeared...
I am used to digital content on my ecosystem, phone Computer etc and now Game console..

I can see why for some people "sharing discs" is important to them and not having to keep a disc in the tray to play is important to me..

equating this with some consumer rights thing is understandable to a point but let's be honest... most of the point of this (if true) protocol is to prevent more than one person playing a game that was only purchased ONCE by more than one person at a time; while not having to keep a disc in tray.

There has to be a middle ground... eventually all discs will most likely be gone forever and this is the first step.

Talking to some teenagers I am finding that their big deal is how to buy one game and have as many people play it as possible, it's all about getting it for free or scamming the system or some corporation who "can afford it". Why in the world would I care if MS or Sony or a dev is protecting his work from being stolen when I'd rather the teenagers learn how to make more money and work hard to earn enough to support the hobby they have chosen.

the fact that I can share my game in my house with my kids if I want is a great deal and trading in discs and MS giving trade value for digital content on Xbox is a great deal, all things which are positives in this "Potential" DRM scheme being floated...


that being said, I'm sure they will find a good middle ground for all this where most (but not all) people can live with it. as I told my young teenagers I was speaking with... the old school gaming system that you pack up in your backpack and take with you days are over... the model is dead... portable gaming has killed it... this is the new model, change with the times

I don't want physical discs to disappear. Online copies have abusive prices in some cases, as there aren't cheaper alternatives.

There is no rivalry, the competition doesn't exist, so you have to pay whatever the people behind the digital download market decide.

I have quite a few games that are fully digital content. I am not unhappy with the idea of not having to switch discs, so having a few is fine with me.

The problem is my X360 Slim -250GB HD-, if I count installed games, Arcade games, etc, is at its limit already. I had to uninstall some games in order to free some space up just to play some new games.

I think that you are going to run into the same problem with the Xbox One, especially when I expect future games to take up to 15-20GB on average, and sometimes up to 50GB of HD space.

We are ignoring many factors that contradict the argument. Are digital sales rising? Yes, of couse. Will they overtake physical sales in the next few years? Nope. imho

Cheers

 

[Cyan]

As a pc gamer I personally don't see the problem with these drm trends or hampering the second hand sales market. It has been like this in the pc realm for quite some time and a considerable benefit from it is the cost of pc titles. Pc game sales and discounts are considerably higher and more frequent than their console counterparts (granted the royalties aren't as high), additionally a pc title will drop in price much sooner than its console counter part.

Now if it is more of an issue of consumer rights, then I am inclined to agree. Though when games went up to 60usd per title nearly every gamer cringed. Surely we have to admit that piracy and the second hand game market have at least had some affect on the increasing cost of titles. Ultimately I would like to see some middle ground to ensure consumer rights as well as benefit the gaming industry, but honestly at this point there doesn't seem to be much common ground that isn't being readily taken advantage of by one side or the other.

I think the differences in the price of games are mostly due to royalties, which are almost inexistent in the PC gaming world, as far as I know.

Besides that, there has been some turmoil because of DRM policies in the PC Gaming side of things, which had some PC titles crumbling.

As for the common ground you mention, I prefer dedicated video game retailers because while obviously they have their issues, digital is not the ideal means for everyone.

Developers could make their digital copies more enticing to the buyers. They could discount digital 5€ or 10€ below the disc.

This is workable because some of the expense of disc would be gone with digital. But they don't.

Halo 4 is 60€ online for instance, when you can actually find it cheaper elsewhere.

Besides that, if the online servers don't exist anymore or the console disappears, and physical copies are non-existent, then you are losing your games forever.

Well, either that or you can only play them til your console decides to stop working one fine morning.

There should a physical copy of every game somewhere, in my opinion.