Slashdot Mirror
PlayStation 4 'Orbis' Rumors: AMD Hardware, Hostile To Used Games
silentbrad writes "Kotaku reports some 'details' about Sony's next console given to them by a 'reliable source.' They say that the console's codename is Orbis, and it is planned for release by the 2013 holiday season. Developers are reportedly being told to plan for an AMD x64 CPU and AMD Southern Islands GPU. Further on, they mention that there will be no PS3 backwards compatibility and, like rumors about the next Xbox, will have anti-used game DRM. Specifically, 'new games for the system will be available one of two ways, either on a Blu-Ray disc or as a PSN download (yes, even full retail titles). If you buy the disc, it must be locked to a single PSN account. ... If you then decide to trade that disc in, the pre-owned customer picking it up will be limited in what they can do. ... it's believed used games will be limited to a trial mode or some other form of content restriction, with consumers having to pay a fee to unlock/register the full game.'"
...Sony cooks up another draconian DRM scheme....
Another brilliant example of not understanding your audience. Used games are part of the lifeblood of the hobby. Make me pay full retail for every game and I will skip the platform.
Color me unsurprised. And also not buying.
Um... Yeah, and this far out in the PS3 dev cycle we thought we'd be stuck with those horrible boomerang controllers too. So I'll take it with a grain of anti-Sony-bias salt. Not that I'd put it past them, just that it's too early to start shitting myself with worry.
If they're planning on limiting the resale value of games, then they better plan on lowering the price. I know a lot of people who justified spending $40 or $50 on a game because they knew they could sell it for $20 or $30 in 6 months when they got tired of it, making the end cost a reasonable $20 or so. A move like this might end up hurting sales in spite of forcing more people to buy directly from Sony (or Sony's retailers) because a large segment of the market can no longer use the money from selling older games to buy newer ones.
Big companies seem to think that consumers have an endless supply of money to spend on anything and everything they want... no concept of a consumer has $100 to spend on games this year. If titles are $50 each, then only two get sold. If titles are $50, but they can resell each for $25 then three games get sold.
I think it was only two weeks ago someone told me consoles have less restrictive DRM than PC's on slashdot. Excuse me while I go chuckle.
This hostility to used games is *exactly* why you don't buy consoles.
Not only will retailers revolt...but they're straight go out of business. Gamestop makes the vast majority of its money off of used game sales.
When a large percentage of their income evaporates...it won't bode well for them.
On the flip side, if MS doesn't put this limitation on the next XBOX, sony can probably kiss their console goodbye before it even launches...
Wow, this will cause an uproar with families I would think!
Example: Buy game for 2+ children, but each child has own account as they don't want to have their saves touched / overwritten. Find out that game can only be used on child(a) account. Child(b) cries foul, wants his own saves and doesn't want to share etc. Fight breaks out as parent can't game to work on child(b) account.
Now I don't think this will be extremely COMMON to be honest, but I could certainly see some backlash from it! I don't like having other people in the house using my account to play games, as I fear that someone would accidentally mess up my saves etc. I'm sure a self entitled child will throw complete fits over it.
Practice Static Safety - Hack Naked
$60 games with no resale means i buy one or two awesome games per year
Seems that that many manufacturers and game studios fail to grasp this concept. Many buyers of new titles only pay top dollar for the game because of the resale value. I'm sure that no secondary market will hurt the sales of new games, the game studios will of course claim the decline in numbers is due to piracy.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law - Aleister Crowley
Why, because there's a rumor that the next generation of consoles might have the same restriction that's been standard on PCs for a decade? Seriously, when was the last time you legally bought or sold a used PC game? And now Steam and Origin have closed up the vast majority of those fringe cases, and even the all mighty, for the gamers, indie gem Minecraft is unsellable and untradeable.
THIS!!!! The DRM steam imposes is okay for several reasons:
1. It's EASY. My games stay updated, without intervention (in contrast to Sony's Playstation Plus - which charges me a fee to NOT sit through updates every time it turn the damn thing on.)
2. It drives prices of PC games DOWN. There's healthy competition here. The console makers seem to be colluding to get $60 per player, no matter what. Hell, both MS and Sony charge money for *demos*, when you think about it
Steam ADDS value, so a purchase feels like a fair exchange, and not a shaft. Others tend to feel like a cash grab coupled with even MORE drm. (That includes Origin!)
Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
Look at all this from Sony's perspective - what has been one of the wilder gaming successes in recent years?
The iOS platform.
There people cannot trade or otherwise share games. But it ends up not really mattering because in the iOS world there are so many developers vying for purchasers that the real world has actually had an impact on pricing - pricing is quite low per title.
Or you could even come at it from the PC side and note the only model that is really growing there very well is Steam - again no sharing of games, but lower prices.
So I would submit it's you who are out of touch with what modern gamers accept.
Of course it remains to be seen if Sony REALLY understands that for the no-sharing model to work, prices must also come down substantially for each title. They are adopting the DRM protected no-sharing model because it's innately what they desire anyway, but can they unclench the greed fist just a little? Hard to say. All I know is I have a PS3 but am pretty unlikely to get an Orbis, even if it supports Vorbis...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Sony probably will not prevent used games from playing... AT LAUNCH (of PS4). They even did this before:
Their first PS3 allowed the user to play PS2 games. Subsequent PS3s dropped that feature.
The PS3 had an "other OS" option... Then they took it away.
It would be a PR nightmare to release the PS4 with a catchphrase like "now only new games can be played", so they will allow the used games to be played initially, then, once they have sold enough consoles to get some serious market share, they will make an update that screws us all.
Even with steam you can send games to friends. This all smacks of trying to profit off piracy, has nothing to do with used game sales. Used games, in this day and age, mean profit in DLC. If you never paid for the game, you're less likely to pay for DLC (free to play titles not withstanding).
It really does seem like console makers are trying to squeeze the market without thinking of the consequences. I own both PS3 & Xbox 360, but if this crap comes in, I won't be buying the new systems.