Is Sony exploiting the fact that they cannot match a feature for developers?

[radnomguywfq3]

I have come to realize this:


Sony is now encouraging the sharing of video games, which is a huge slap in the face to developers - and they do this not because they particularly want to, but rather because it is a solid point against Microsoft and more importantly because they don't have the ability to offer the developers any features against the sharing (which undoubtedly leads to loss in profits to developers.)


It's a sort of a gamble I suppose. Microsoft is betting that by implementing these security features for developers they will get more developers to tag along with them hoping as well that this and the gained profits of encouraging users to purchase their games rather then lend them will counter-act and possibly overcome the loss of profits to a smaller share of the market.


On the flip-side, Microsoft is getting a smaller share to the market and Sony is getting a greater share of the market (because obviously, the DRM turns off consumers). Consequently though, Sony will lose more money to the sharing of purchased products.


So the question is: Will Microsoft lose more money from the smaller share of the market than they will make money by preventing the unfair trading of purchased games and appealing more to developers?

[Gray]

There's always ways around all of that though.

[radnomguywfq3]

There's always ways around all of that though.

True. The DRM is _never_ unbreakable. Time and time again, we see it broken in a matter of months (sometimes less.)

That has been the case so far. However, when you add networking into the mix of DRM - you can do TONS of very tricky things to protect your products. Further, DRM implemented with a client and server portion is very unexplored territory relative to client-only DRM. This is why MS is pushing the networking portion of DRM so much - it is the difference between a virtually impenetrable DRM - and a difficult DRM. Look at, i.e, sim-city - which has proven all its content all client-side yet still with the networked DRM it proves incredibly difficult to break into (AFAIK, still hasn't been broken into.)

[Snowkip]

Meanwhile in PC Gaming land...

[Tide]

There is always going to be a work around.

[[MPGH]arunforce]

Catering to developers only works if they can profit from the release. Most games are multi-platform to begin with, few aren't. Indie developers really don't affect people's choice of consoles.

Developers can always implement control of the sales of games via software DRM, EA did it for online access (serial keys essentially). However if you buy a disc with a game on it, it's your property, a company shouldn't be able to tell you what you can do with it.

Supporting publishers and developers who do crap like that only enables them. Trading games doesn't take that much away, is a free form of advertising, etc. Sony isn't encouraging it, it's been a feature that's been there since DAY 1 of gaming, and Microsoft wants to take it away.

[radnomguywfq3]

Sony isn't encouraging it, it's been a feature that's been there since DAY 1 of gaming, and Microsoft wants to take it away.

Not only are they supporting it, they're rubbing in our faces.

[[MPGH]arunforce]

Not only are they supporting it, they're rubbing in our faces.

They're mocking Xbox and their bullshit. You're coming off as an Xbox fanboi, amirite?

[[MPGH]Doc]

I thought I already went over this with you. It is illegal to market a purchasable physical item as a license or a leased item. Every item that is purchased can be rented out, resold, or lent. Developers know this which is why they don't care for Microsoft's anti-used games stance. Even if they chose to side with Microsoft and didn't allow anyone to give out their games, all it takes is a lawsuit for them to lose out big bucks and for Microsoft to lose every single potential developer. The only thing that can be done is always online DRM with unique authentication, but a move like that would also spell the death of them.

[radnomguywfq3]

I thought I already went over this with you. It is illegal to market a purchasable physical item as a license or a leased item. Every item that is purchased can be rented out, resold, or lent. Developers know this which is why they don't care for Microsoft's anti-used games stance. Even if they chose to side with Microsoft and didn't allow anyone to give out their games, all it takes is a lawsuit for them to lose out big bucks and for Microsoft to lose every single potential developer.

That's an entirely different argument, it being illegal or not (and I am not entirely convinced that it is legal - hence why I haven't replied to your response yet, I'll look into it on my own a little later) is entirely irreverent to the argument I state in my initial post. It being illegal or not has no meaning to the argument - is it fair to the developers is maybe a relevant question.

The only thing that can be done is always online DRM with unique authentication, but a move like that would also spell the death of them.

That is yet to be seen.

[[MPGH]Doc]

That's an entirely different argument, it being illegal or not (and I am not entirely convinced that it is legal - hence why I haven't replied to your response yet, I'll look into it on my own a little later) is entirely irreverent to the argument I state in my initial post. It being illegal or not has no meaning to the argument - is it fair to the developers is maybe a relevant question.


That is yet to be seen.

It is relevant when your question pertains to the unfair trading and reselling of games, particularly when such implication is false to begin with. But I'll try my best to digress and answer it in a different way.

As far as features against sharing, there were never any features to begin with. It was always open to developers whether or not they want their games to be resold or lent out, and it continues to be this way. Sony encouraging the sharing of video games (which isn't the case, they are merely keeping the practices that have always been in place) does not effect developers one bit. Only first-party Sony games will adhere to Sony policy, any other developer or publisher can do as they like in regards to DRM, always online, prohibition of used game sale etc. It has always been this way. That's why a question of fairness to developers is irrelevant. Developers always had it their way no matter which platform they chose.

In regards to Sony's conference and them "exploiting" a feature that was always in place is merely pandering to us gamers and increasing the general hype around the PS4. Developers give zero fucks about a platforms stance on used games demonstrated by a short video and a couple of bullet points at a conference, they care about which platforms will give them the most freedom, they care about which platform will do better, which console will we rather buy. Right now that's the PS4.

Sony aren't trying to cover up anything. They aren't lacking any security feature as such things were always in the developers hands. Microsoft are adding features that were never needed in the hopes that developers will think that they wont have to create their own policies and restrictions and shift towards the Xbone, which is proving to be a failure. Developers like to abide by their own rules, they don't like it when the platform they're releasing on has done all the work for them especially when such work will turn away a lot of potential buyers.

I think Microsoft has partially realised this and are trying make back lost ground. Damn straight they're going to lose more money from lost sales than they make with publishing deals and platform exclusives.

TL;DR Developers like being in control of their product and they won't like Microsoft doing the dirty work that the dev's have no control over.

[radnomguywfq3]

As far as features against sharing, there were never any features to begin with. It was always open to developers whether or not they want their games to be resold or lent out, and it continues to be this way. Sony encouraging the sharing of video games (which isn't the case, they are merely keeping the practices that have always been in place) does not effect developers one bit. Only first-party Sony games will adhere to Sony policy, any other developer or publisher can do as they like in regards to DRM, always online, prohibition of used game sale etc. It has always been this way. That's why a question of fairness to developers is irrelevant. Developers always had it their way no matter which platform they chose.

How does software level DRM (I.e one time CD key) regulate the trading and resale of games at all. All it does is make it impossible. What software DRM model would allow for this? I can't think of one implemented inside of the game itself and not the console. The only in-game system I can see working would be for each individual developer to host a server where they can track their games? That would be an incredible security risk to Microsoft.

Developers give zero fucks about a platforms stance on used games demonstrated by a short video and a couple of bullet points at a conference, they care about which platforms will give them the most freedom, they care about which platform will do better, which console will we rather buy. Right now that's the PS4.

You can't honestly believe that this is all Microsoft gives to major game development organizations. I think game developers _DO_ care about DRM, and that implementing it can lead to greater profit shares. Ofcourse game developers also care about where the market is (as you said) but they also care about a million other things, including my prior point.

Sony aren't trying to cover up anything. They aren't lacking any security feature as such things were always in the developers hands. Microsoft are adding features that were never needed in the hopes that developers will think that they wont have to create their own policies and restrictions and shift towards the Xbone, which is proving to be a failure. Developers like to abide by their own rules, they don't like it when the platform they're releasing on has done all the work for them especially when such work will turn away a lot of potential buyers.

They are lacking a real DRM that can regulate trading of games. As I said above, what kind of DRM model could be implemented inside of the game to manage this? One that wouldn't require each individual game developer to host a server of their own to track their products (which would be a security risk on its own)

[[MPGH]Doc]

How does software level DRM (I.e one time CD key) regulate the trading and resale of games at all. All it does is make it impossible. What software DRM model would allow for this? I can't think of one implemented inside of the game itself and not the console. The only in-game system I can see working would be for each individual developer to host a server where they can track their games? That would be an incredible security risk to Microsoft.


You can't honestly believe that this is all Microsoft gives to major game development organizations. I think game developers _DO_ care about DRM, and that implementing it can lead to greater profit shares. Ofcourse game developers also care about where the market is (as you said) but they also care about a million other things, including my prior point.


They are lacking a real DRM that can regulate trading of games. As I said above, what kind of DRM model could be implemented inside of the game to manage this? One that wouldn't require each individual game developer to host a server of their own to track their products (which would be a security risk on its own)

You've never heard of developers hosting their own auth servers? Really Jetamay?

[[MPGH]Ethereal]

Playstation should be exploiting it, it's a sure fire marketing tactic and even the rubbing it in Microsoft's face is good marketing.
Developer's would only lose money if they decided to go with good ole DRM Xbone, think of the profit loss if they only went with one platform.

[radnomguywfq3]

Playstation should be exploiting it, it's a sure fire marketing tactic and even the rubbing it in Microsoft's face is good marketing.
Developer's would only lose money if they decided to go with good ole DRM Xbone, think of the profit loss if they only went with one platform.

Consumers entertain exploitation in the market all the time - that is not a surprise to me or anyone else. It makes sense. I am just pointing out the insidious evil plot everyone seems to be falling for.

PC master race does not have to worry with such petty problems

Shouldn't they? Let me remind you. The XBox is the DirectXBox. Microsoft threw OpenGL into a corner and raped it 16 times over with their DirectXBox to thank (and a bunch of fumbling morons working over at OpenGL as well)

Let me also remind you that the Playstation, Mac and Linux all use OpenGL. Are you a PC user, or a Mac user?