Slashdot Mirror
Sony's PS4 To Have Less Stringent DRM Than Microsoft's Xbox One
Tackhead writes "E3 is turning into Bizarro World this year. Sony has not only promised that the PS4 will support used games without an online connection, they trolled the Xbox folks hard with this Official PlayStation Used Game Instructional Video. Compounding the silliness, and hot on the heels of the political firestorm surrounding Donglegate, Microsoft went for rape jokes during their Xbox presentation."
Similarly, onyxruby writes "The Verge covers how Sony has crafted policies explicitly to make the PS4 consumer friendly to the public. They make the case that the PS4 will be superior in nearly every way [to the Xbox Next] by not requiring an Internet connection, not restricting used games, supporting indie developers and selling for $100 cheaper than the Xbox One." And if you're interested in the guts rather than the policies or the politics, Hot Hardware has a comparison of the internals of both of these new offerings.
The real problem is, it can change any time. PS4 can become more stringent, and XBox One could become less (well, in theory).
I'm not sure I trust Sony not to be an asshole regarding DRM. It doesn't have that good a track record. It is a good bet the moment the marketing hype dies down, and the stock holders start pressing, they will tighten their DRM.
morcego
So far, it looks like the PS4 hardware is better, it's got Elder Scrolls Online as an exclusive (a big deal for me), there is less of that authentication/DRM drama (amazing coming from Sony, who have always been the worst control freaks in the past), and it's $100 cheaper too!
I've been a fan of Xbox since the Xbox 1. But MS is making all the wrong moves on the Xbox One. And looks like Sony is making all the right ones on the PS4. I may have to cross the line on this next generation.
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
For decades now Microsoft has been bizarrely obsessed with being a media distribution company. I can't even count the number of failed "set top" box initiatives and purchased properties (Like webtv) they've made along the way. Also there was that media center thing that sucked.
And now they've got the XBone, where they turn the 'ha ha fuck you consumer' up to 11 in an attempt do do what? Prove that they're the biggest whore so they can strike the best deals with content producers? "Hey look! We've done away with that pesky right of first sale for retail games! What else do you want us to do?"
Sigh. And just today I see that there's a new Panzer Dragon game, and a rogue-like from superbrothers that are XBone console exclusives.
Shit.
Elder Scrolls Online will be available for both PS4 and XB1.
It's funny watching my Xbox fanboy friends making ridiculous apologetic statements for Microsoft.
"You have to pay for online access for the PS4 now as well!" As though that's actually a supportive argument for the Xbox One.
"I'm glad there is always-on DRM so that I can download and play my games on other people's consoles while signed in!" As though MS is incapable of making the 24 connection requirement only necessary for digitally purchased games, and allow you to only play disc-purchased games when you have the disc.
"I always have internet, so this isn't a problem for me!" As though Xbox Live has never been down for several days at a time before (or been weird about not letting large numbers of people sign in while others have no problem)
I've never been a Sony fan, and I still don't know if I can trust the company that pulled the rootkit scandal. What I do know is that I am absolutely not going to a be a Microsoft customer this next generation. I will probably get a Wii U to play 1st party Nintendo games, and do the rest of my gaming on PC. Sony still has a shot at convincing me to get a PS4, but Microsoft has already lost me.
Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
My next console will be a PS4. Vote with your money, if the Xbox One sells poorly and the PS4 sells record breaking amounts than the point will get across to the middle managers who come up with this junk.
I got an XBox 360 a few months ago. My first one. I also got 7 games from the used/discount bin and paid less than $50 for them, combined. The system has provided me with hundreds of hours of fun so far, and I know there are lots of other great games awaiting me.
You can wait one, two, even three years and see which way the wind blows for the next generation of consoles. Is the PS4 getting better titles? Is the XBox One as prone to hardware failures as the 360? Did Sony remove features or add DRM to used games? Is either console molesting children?
Wait and see, and your decision will be much easier. Your wallet will also thank you.
In the meantime, play on the current systems.
But as far as I'm aware there's still another platform that offers far higher technical capability, zero DRM, much more flexibility as a media center if that's your thing, and can even be upgraded when parts break or become obsolete. Call me back when the PS4 gets all that, too.
Wouldn't a mandatory software update require an internet connection? Can't really mandate an update if I don't connect it to the network.
New games could have a firmware update embedded and force you to update the system in order to play it (the Wii did something similar, although it just installed middleware -- think drivers and extra APIs -- that the game can use to interact with the hardware). The online store can refuse connections if you don't have the update, matchmaking servers can refuse service. It might encourage you to pair up your phone or tablet to it for some neat feature, and enable tethering. New Blu-Ray movies can be required, as part of the terms to license the logo and compatibility marks, to have a few tracks set aside for just-in-case-he-runs-it-on-a-PS4. The damn thing isn't even out yet, there could yet be some kind self-expiring key with a requirement to phone home once a year that we don't know about yet.
Hell, with how advanced consoles are these days, they could even embed firmware updates in hardware accessories. Buy a new controller? Plug it in, it mounts the internal flash, updates the system.
Sure this is conjecture and it might be possible for a dedicated person to avoid updating, but they're going to be working off a reduced feature set until they do.
As much as Sony wants to play up the idea that the PS4 is an island onto itself so you can enjoy entertainment on your terms, those days are long gone. Ultimately, as with any closed source anything, you have no way to know what it wants to do and, ultimately, you don't own the hardware.
More Twoson than Cupertino
True, but the only reason they removed it is because people used it to pirate games.
So, your reasoning is that if Sony modifies their supposedly more open system to make it more closed after launch to fight piracy,
then we should not worry about Sony modifying their supposedly more open system to make it more closed after launch to fight piracy?
Well, A.C. at least you have maintained the reputation of your noble collective name.
Uh the info was in the presentation. On giant slides. And in the words that were spoken. Not sure how much more clear you want it. Sony specifically said "does not need to check in every 24 hours" "you can play offline" "eye camera is $59" The details are there clear as day check any gaming news site. Want examples of those? Joystiq and Kotaku are two big ones.
...there is less of that authentication/DRM drama
Out of the frying pan and into the fire. After Sony updated the PS3 so that is won't play video files it suspects are pirated, it would be foolish to buy more from them thinking they have better DRM policy. Remember, they can update the PS4 ANYTIME to withdraw anything they say now, and you know they will.
I had to look at it this way: With the PS4, you get one more. With the Xbox One, you get 359 less. It's a no-brainer!
Microsoft: Surprisingly good on the games front, with Forza looking fairly neat and a good number of titles to announce. Elsewhere it felt like damage limitation. They'd realised by now that people hate the call-home and used-game restrictions and were desperately trying to show that it wasn't as bad as people had assumed. Might have been more convincing if it felt like they even understood it themselves.
Sony: Actually, a surprisingly glitchy presentation in many ways. Some of the game demonstrations were pretty poor and unpolished. However, none of that matters. They picked the wrong music for the section of their presentation that talked about the PS4 itself; they should have gone with The Rains of Castamere. Sony's presentation was the Red Wedding with Microsoft as the Starks. And oh my word it worked. They've been trolling Microsoft into going down the anti-consumer route for more than a year, hinting that they were going to do the same. Yesterday, they sprang the trap. They clearly enjoyed their own presentation and, to be fair, they deserved to.
Nintendo: The weakest of the three. Their big announcement was... delays! Lots of delays. A very thin holiday season, supported by a 3d Mario Game that looks like a rushed, resolution upscaled DS game, a remake of a decade-old Zelda game and a Donkey Kong that nobody seemed to be particularly excited about. Things are a little better over on the 3DS front, but Nintendo were sending off a definite message that they're struggling to keep up.
And predictions based on that?
Sony probably have the Christmas season sewn up. Barring an RROD-level fiasco, they'll go into the first few weeks of sales with a massive stock of consumer enthusiasm. This is a very different Sony to the one that did the cack-handed launch of the PS3.
Microsoft need an urgent rethink. Their current strategy looks set to see them take a significant but nevertheless declining share of the US market (consumer loyalty being a significant factor), but completely abandon Asia and - more shockingly - probably get annihilated in Europe and the emerging markets as well. They've invested a shitload of money to get the marketshare they currently have in the home console market, so don't rule them out yet, but unless they revisit some of their fundamentals over the next 6 months, they could face disaster.
And I suspect Nintendo may already be starting to plan for a post-Wii-U world, where they focus on the handheld business going forward while they decide whether to have another throw of the dice in the home console market or go another direction. The speculation had been that Nintendo's big throw of the dice would be this Christmas, when they'd throw game releases and massive price cuts at the Wii-U to snatch the rug out from under the XB-One and the PS4. In theory they could still do the price cuts, but it's clear now that they don't have the games lineup in position to make that strategy work.
Choosing what products to buy based on which one has the fewest deplorable anti-features rather than best actual features. Great.
Because the connection doesn't benefit me, and is mostly used for Microsoft to act like douchebags and collect marketing information, as well as starting out with the premise that I must be pirating therefore I need to be closely monitored.
Last year, when Microsoft rolled out an Xbox update, they started putting ads into the games and the home screen. That was the point at which my XBox was permanently disconnected from the network. I'm not paying to buy the game, and then paying for a fucking advertising channel for them. And I'm sure as hell not giving the right to make arbitrary updates to a device I purchased any time they like just because they've updated the TOS and want to.
Then you are completely missing the point -- the ONE compelling reason isn't piracy, it's privacy, and the right to control how I play games.
Right now I can play, and Microsoft will never know about it. I can go over to a friends with my disk, and Microsoft will never know about it. I can sell the game, and Microsoft will never know it. Now they expect to be able to have a device in my house which can report on what I do (and do you trust Microsoft after they rolled over for the NSA?), and I will need to ask permission to run a game over at a friends. And if I sign in as my account, they now have even more information about me, and can associate it with my friends.
My line of thinking is that right now I can game how and when I choose, without asking Microsoft for fucking permission. Right now I don't need to see their ads. Right now, I know damned well my game console isn't reporting back to the mothership. Right now, Microsoft doesn't need to know who the hell I am and I can live without an XBox Live account.
I don't want this because it's ramming crap down my throat that I don't want. I don't play games on-line, I don't want to buy the extra shit in their store, I don't want to rent movies from Microsoft -- I want to play a fucking video game, randomly and intermittently, and entirely offline. And there is nothing in that scenario which requires an internet connection, so this mostly just forces me to use it 'their' way.
So I don't care if you think I sound like a luddite, because you sound like someone who is too unaware of the issue to understand. So you buy it, you hand over all of your data to Microsoft, you ask for permission to take a game to a friends place. You ask for permission to sell your used games. There's simply no benefit to me to be forced to change how I play video games in order to satisfy Microsoft's business strategy or DRM wishes.
As described, that platform is pretty anti-consumer, and pretty much says "it's our way or the highway". I'm just taking them up on it.
Why are you so willing to have these things dictated to you by Microsoft? Why are you so willing to cede your right of first sale? Why are you willing to give up your privacy? Because you're 19 with ADHD and can't live without something shiny and have no clue? Or because you think these are awesome things that somehow benefit you??
Because other than being a snide little prick who is insinuating I'm both a luddite, incompetent, and living in the past, you've failed to say anything other than "we should totally just do this because I'm incapable of understanding why it's a bad idea". You're about 2 steps behind "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear".
Lost at C:>. Found at C.