XBox One, PS4, DRM, and You
- Thread starter mrcorbo
- Start date
- Status
People trade CDs, DVDs all the time.
No degradation and these certainly have IP value.
Record companies tried to put out special CDs for awhile with DRM. There was unanimous opposition to such measures, even probably by a lot of the people here trying to defend Xbone's DRM.
What's changed? Other than their favorite console/corporation is now imposing DRM?
No degradation and these certainly have IP value.
Record companies tried to put out special CDs for awhile with DRM. There was unanimous opposition to such measures, even probably by a lot of the people here trying to defend Xbone's DRM.
What's changed? Other than their favorite console/corporation is now imposing DRM?
Well, the idea of self-degrading original have nothing to do with IP and Copyrights. Copy... rights...
Maybe my painting I have on the wall should disintegrate after a few months and I shouldn't be able to resell it without authorisation from the dead artist which wasn't successful enough to have a foundation. It's like abandonware, abandonpaint?
Laserdisc is analog, they should make a composite signal to encode a full game on laserdisc. IP averted !!! They said analog is fine !!!
Maybe my painting I have on the wall should disintegrate after a few months and I shouldn't be able to resell it without authorisation from the dead artist which wasn't successful enough to have a foundation. It's like abandonware, abandonpaint?
Laserdisc is analog, they should make a composite signal to encode a full game on laserdisc. IP averted !!! They said analog is fine !!!
Billy Idol
Legend
Interesting read:
http://www.vg247.com/2013/06/13/online-pass-is-not-coming-back-its-dead-says-ea-labels-president/
http://www.vg247.com/2013/06/13/online-pass-is-not-coming-back-its-dead-says-ea-labels-president/
EA labels president said:
That just opens up crazy abuse cases if you can just freely add and delete people from the list. I doubt Microsoft will allow that.
Sure there is. A disc with scratches on the back is worth less than a disc that's brand new shrink wrapped with slip cover packaging. The two are not the same. Especially back I the day, games were very prone to disc read errors, I have a copy of Final Fantasy X that's unreadable right now, making the value of it zero.
Personally, I'm of the strong belief that if the DRM is terrible, they'll make less money and ultimately have to start doing Steam-type sales (which again, Steam has no used games). It will get to the point that games are cheap enough that no one cares about lending to a friend meanwhile publishers now make money off of every single purchase instead of being front-loaded in the first week. You eventually get to a point where you buy games just because there on sale because you might want to play them in the future (again, more revenue for the publisher) Isn't that a better system for all of us?
Honestly, the only reason why this system is so messed up is because you have to think about GameStop which Microsoft and Sony need to sell a $399-499 retail box and nothing else. The world is clearly moving to digital distribution and GameStop isn't going to have ANY part of that, but they still sell most of the games in the US (and I'm guessing there are similar sized mega-retailers in other countries who would be unhappy losing that kind of revenue).
Welcome back EA !!!
It's fun to read this thread from the beginning now.
I got everything I could wish for. Even EA is back
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Uh, what? It's not about chosing Windows over other platforms, it's about 95% the existing Windows market disregarding Windows 8. Somebody was calling it a "success", which would only be the case if Microsoft had very low expectations.
The "special CD's" secretly installed software on your computer to track the DRM, that was the uproar. Even though you have zero data to support any overlap between those people and the people here, it's quite a big difference.
I read that as "the incremental income from online passes was less than what it was costing us in administrative overhead of the system in the first place, so it didnt make business sense"
It's binary. The disc either works or it doesn't regardless of scratches. If the disc works, its a perfect replica. If the disc doesn't work, Gamestop replaces it.
Similarly, an opened game is worth less, even if the disc and packaging and manual are in pristine condition.
Hell even on eBay or Craigslist, you can't get full retail price for an unopened game. Because why should they pay the same price to some stranger that they would at a store?
Yet if the data can be read, the gaming experience will be the same.
Hell even on eBay or Craigslist, you can't get full retail price for an unopened game. Because why should they pay the same price to some stranger that they would at a store?
Yet if the data can be read, the gaming experience will be the same.
I don't think they all worked that way. Some tried to prevent being ripped in some ways but had problems with compatibility with all players and drives.
In any event, no there's no poll of the Xbone DRM apologists about such and such CD DRM scheme.
They'd be real shills for industry if they defended such schemes though.
scooby_dooby
Legend
Presumably EA also puts value in their own brand, and damages to their reputation or image are certainly worth something. Marketing is expensive!
whoa you are quoting extremetech... ha!
i had a much longer response but this isnt where that convo should go and i dont need to see BRiT in my farking inbox
As far as DRM is concerned, i think the lending issue is blown out of proportion. even amongst kids, they more than adults could understand the power of social networking... well MS just implemented social DRM.... I get to access the games library of my ten best friends and then they get to access the libary of of their ten best and so on... Its a master stroke in a lot of ways.
I still HATE the 24hr check it... its bollocks
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes I agree but in the end, if this was something that contributed in a meaningful way to their bottom line, they'd have kept doing it, regardless of who was upset by it. (and to your point the two are probably directionally linked) I'm just not buying that it was all about, or even mostly about, not pissing people off.
Listening to the 30 minute Scott Rhode interview on giantbomb, it doesn't seem that Sony thinks online passes will make a return, not even for third parties.
So, best case scenario I see; we're paying the same for the games.
But Sony is also getting paid on PSN+ for online play now, so it dosn't make sense to ask for payment once more, even if you buy the game used.
I assume that means that Sony will put aside a certain percent of the income from PSN+ to pay the content providers, like they do with other content providers currently.
Sony probably know wich players are playing wich games - and can give publishers kickback of a certain amount of PSN subscriptions paid depending on how much traffic goes to that publishers game, wich again will hopefully pay the developers depending on their own agreements with them.
That should mean that even if a player bought a game used, and went online - he/she would still pay the publisher each month if he played the game.
If the online part is good, we'll probably play their games more or loan it away to a friend when he comes around asking to loan a good game - and the publishers would receive payment longer.
So, best case scenario I see; we're paying the same for the games.
But Sony is also getting paid on PSN+ for online play now, so it dosn't make sense to ask for payment once more, even if you buy the game used.
I assume that means that Sony will put aside a certain percent of the income from PSN+ to pay the content providers, like they do with other content providers currently.
Sony probably know wich players are playing wich games - and can give publishers kickback of a certain amount of PSN subscriptions paid depending on how much traffic goes to that publishers game, wich again will hopefully pay the developers depending on their own agreements with them.
That should mean that even if a player bought a game used, and went online - he/she would still pay the publisher each month if he played the game.
If the online part is good, we'll probably play their games more or loan it away to a friend when he comes around asking to loan a good game - and the publishers would receive payment longer.
upnorthsox
Veteran
Now they'll Kinect tape you along with your biometrics to prove you were in "thief mode" when you did it.......
It's a copy of Tokyo Jungle !
Somebody do something, games IP should be protected !
So, I just realized something about Microsoft's DRM approach that seems incredibly obvious in retrospect, but that didn't hit me until just now.
That is, Microsoft's DRM policy has nothing at all to do with preventing used games sales to benefit the publishers. Instead, they're doing it to deliberately devalue the physical disk.
If game buyers decide that there's no longer any advantages in buying the physical product, they will more and more just go ahead and download their games.
Result? Microsoft takes the retailer cut for all those game sales, just like Apple. The revenue that GameStop and BestBuy and Amazon take from game sales vanishes, and instead all goes to Microsoft.
No wonder Microsoft isn't bothering with taking a vig when participating retailers take a user's game in for resale. That's not what they're after at all.
And no wonder GAF is talking about GameStop managers trying to convince everyone to go PS4 instead of XBox One for their pre-orders.
That is, Microsoft's DRM policy has nothing at all to do with preventing used games sales to benefit the publishers. Instead, they're doing it to deliberately devalue the physical disk.
If game buyers decide that there's no longer any advantages in buying the physical product, they will more and more just go ahead and download their games.
Result? Microsoft takes the retailer cut for all those game sales, just like Apple. The revenue that GameStop and BestBuy and Amazon take from game sales vanishes, and instead all goes to Microsoft.
No wonder Microsoft isn't bothering with taking a vig when participating retailers take a user's game in for resale. That's not what they're after at all.
And no wonder GAF is talking about GameStop managers trying to convince everyone to go PS4 instead of XBox One for their pre-orders.
I think it just simply allows them to come out with a version of the XBO without an optical drive during this generation or the next. Sony will be tied to an optical drive for this entire gen, and next if they happen to offer BC but MS is free to make a drive-less version from day one because every disc includes an online license as well.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
