Third Party Publishers Could Bring Restrictions to PS4

[GAunderrated]

How about mentioning the rest of that quote, huh?
"Quite frankly it would be pretty surprising to me to see a third party come up with some way to set a new set of DRM rules that were able to act on top of that," Rohde said. "[Jack's] just being crystal clear, technically they could do something, but it's the standard we're setting that we believe is the right standard and I believe that's the way it's going to work."

Rohde added that while publishers may be attracted to the policies presented by the Xbox One, they also have to recognize the intense fan backlash against them.

"All those publishers were sitting in [our] press conference last night," Rohde said. "When Jack, punch after punch after punch, and the house almost came down with all the cheers, they heard that. They heard it loud and clear and they saw the reaction to what our friends in green talked about. I think it's pretty clear that we've set a nice precedent."

Or, you know, scare mongering for page views. That's cool. Half truths are always good press.


^ This is a quote from a user that saved me time.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Considering single-player games can be played offline, third-party publishers would have to do some pretty amazing magical tricks to block that part.

No, they would just have to code an online check into their game that would run everytime you start the game. Nothing amazing or magical about that.

 

[GodzillaGuy92]

How about mentioning the rest of that quote, huh?
"Quite frankly it would be pretty surprising to me to see a third party come up with some way to set a new set of DRM rules that were able to act on top of that," Rohde said. "[Jack's] just being crystal clear, technically they could do something, but it's the standard we're setting that we believe is the right standard and I believe that's the way it's going to work."

Rohde added that while publishers may be attracted to the policies presented by the Xbox One, they also have to recognize the intense fan backlash against them.

"All those publishers were sitting in [our] press conference last night," Rohde said. "When Jack, punch after punch after punch, and the house almost came down with all the cheers, they heard that. They heard it loud and clear and they saw the reaction to what our friends in green talked about. I think it's pretty clear that we've set a nice precedent."

Or, you know, scare mongering for page views. That's cool. Half truths are always good press.


^ This is a quote from a user that saved me time.

How was any of that different from what the article said?

 

[jnixon]

Are you just trying to cause a shit storm or something? this isn't news this has always been around the ps3 and xbox 360 are running this policy right now.

 

[lacktheknack]

http://www.destructoid.com/did-sony-confirm-drm-on-ps4-after-all-not-quite--256052.phtml

Please read this. It really clarifies a lot.

Whelp, that wrecked the story a bit.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

wouldn't be surprising; devs have a hardon for trying to get as much money out of used games as possible and I doubt Sony wants to sour relations with those devs by banning any form of restrictions.

 

[NiPah]

Isnt this exactly what Xbox is doing? "Oh, you can have used games, but its up to the publishers if they are going to allow it."?

So that means that there should be just the hostility towards Sony as there is to Microsoft... lets hope this so called equality that is talked about in R&P is used here to.

So yeah, just to clear up your misunderstanding, no this is not exactly what Microsoft. Your cute little persecution complex about the Xbox One is also thusly wrong, like it or not Microsoft has fucked up repeatedly on multiple fronts (educate yourself by reading any number of new stories on the Xbox One) and so people are justly hostile towards it. On the other hand, as much as you want them to have Sony has not fucked up, I would recommend you read up on equality over in the R&P section to see what you're completely at fault here.

 

[Something Amyss]

This is to be expected. Online Passes were console DRM, after-all.

Of course, consoles are closed systems with DRM anyway. That's why you can't play copied games without violating the Terms of Service, your warranty, and if they had it their way, the law (Microsoft has championed attempts to make such mods completely illegal, don't know about Sony or Nintendo, though Nintendo did some dickish things in the 80s and 90s).

However, additional restrictions can already be applied. Like online passes. Effectively, all they're really saying is "nothing has changed." And they may be right. Between the one-two punch of EA dropping online passes because they actually LOSE money and users and the response to Sony's George HW Bush impression (read my lips: no new DRM), I'm thinking that publishers might decide this is a suicidal route to go, even if you get butthurt assholes like the guys at Volition or Cliff Badonkadonk upset that they don't get to double dip like special snowflakes.

Not to mention....

Considering single-player games can be played offline, third-party publishers would have to do some pretty amazing magical tricks to block that part.

And that's part of the crux of the issue with the One anyway. Nobody gives a shit if you have to be online to play online. Why? Because that's kind of like saying you need access to a game system to play the bloody game system.

Of course, some games have had "online passes" for offline content. Rage, Kingdoms of Amalur, Batman.... If publishers don't learn, this could still be a problem.

It's just not a guaranteed problem. You know, like it is on the ONE.

Isnt this exactly what Xbox is doing? "Oh, you can have used games, but its up to the publishers if they are going to allow it."?

So that means that there should be just the hostility towards Sony as there is to Microsoft... lets hope this so called equality that is talked about in R&P is used here to.

Last I checked, you don't need to go to qualified retailers to sell your games or buy new ones, you don't need to check in every 24 hours, and you can play games offline fine. Yes, this is EXACTLY what Microsoft is doing.

 

[Something Amyss]

Considering single-player games can be played offline, third-party publishers would have to do some pretty amazing magical tricks to block that part.

No, they would just have to code an online check into their game that would run everytime you start the game. Nothing amazing or magical about that.

Especially since EA's already pulled that with a few console games. It's not quite SimCity Big Brother Edition, but still.

 

[SteewpidZombie]

So...nothing has really changed? That's not a bad thing really. If I still have to use a stupid lil EA type code to activate my Multiplayer, or buy a $4 code if I got the game used, than I'm STILL getting a better deal than Microsoft's ALWAYS online policy that they're pushing.

 

[mokes310]

But don't you see? This gives the consumer a choice! This is not an imposed restriction. If the developer chooses to do this, I don't have to purchase their game. It's the forced adoption of an unwanted and unnecessary technological philosophy that upsets me with what Microsoft is doing.