Official - Xbox One Network Requirements

[Macethy]

Yes or you can pull up your pants, cry in the shower, and buy a PS4?

Yeah I will probably get that too, three years down the line. For now, trusty PC for me.

 

[Maverick Jester]

This article has some interesting info, however, I'm not sure I'd draw the same conclusion.

Sony now knows how bad the reaction is, but, that doesnt mean they wont do the same. Think about it - if they did, then both consoles are even in that regard. There will be heavy pressure from publishers to restrict or profit from used games, and MS and Sony might end up taking a cut in exchange for their participation in the program. So, the consoles would end up being equal in DRM, people will buy them because they are sheep, and the publishers are happy. Maybe Sony could have DRM but relax the always online requirement to curry some favour with consumers.

The other option is of course to go anti DRM. Doing so could cause problems with publishers, and could lead publishers putting all of their weight behind the Xbox in order to make it the more attractive platform. Think about it - as a publisher, you want more money. To get more money, you want control over used game sales. If they just make sure that more games are released for Xbox than PS4, gamers will gravitate towards the Xbox just because of a greater selection of games.

However, it could go the other way. An anti DRM stance may make the PS4 so much more attractive to consumers, that the Xbox simply gets outsold. If it happens badly enough, Sony can then dictate terms to publishers.

I dunno... always-on DRM has always been criticised, and a few publishers have moved away from it. With the SimCity fiasco still so fresh in the mind, I really don't think that Sony will go a similar route as Microsoft have chosen to.

 

[Maverick Jester]

For us it is used mainly for evening. After we have been out to dinner and retired back to our chalet for the evening, the XBox keeps my hyper 9 year old boy entertained until he is ready for sleep. I take a screen for him too, so he can do his thing and the family can watch a movie or something.

You are certainly a tech scout- always prepared

 

[AlphaJohn]

I dunno... always-on DRM has always been criticised, and a few publishers have moved away from it. With the SimCity fiasco still so fresh in the mind, I really don't think that Sony will go a similar route as Microsoft have chosen to.

Always-on is the reason avoid buying EA games.

Its sad when pirated versions give you more for less.

 

[mouks]

Sony.... The ball is in your hands what you decide will make or brake you..

 

[Maverick Jester]

Always-on is the reason avoid buying EA games.

Its sad when pirated versions give you more for less.

Well, I stopped buying EA games because they are generally crap. I have broken about four EA games, as well as my Dual Shock 3 controller over this. Oh, and it was an EA game that sent my first PS3 to the graveyard

 

[murraybiscuit]

snip.

Interesting point. Thing is that if Sony bows to drm, they lose users/sales. My thought is that if your hardware is the one people are using, developers will have to come round. You do what you can to drive trial and market share. If you don't take the opportunity, your competitor or vendors end up setting your strategy.

Problem is that the USA is a different market due to ubiquitous connectivity and entertainment services actually working on the xbox.

 

[Ancalagon]

I dunno... always-on DRM has always been criticised, and a few publishers have moved away from it. With the SimCity fiasco still so fresh in the mind, I really don't think that Sony will go a similar route as Microsoft have chosen to.

Why not?

You know what the Sim City fiasco proved? You can put always online DRM into your game, you can lie to consumers about it, and they will STILL buy your game, even though pretty much every single always online DRM game has had massive problems on launch and afterwards. StarCraft II, Diablo III, exact same thing. So consumers knew about it beforehand, and still bought it.

What that means is that it doesnt matter if you put always online DRM into a game, as long as your brand is big enough, stupid consumers will still buy it.

 

[Tekken]

Good insight I'm getting on these forums. Looks like I'm switching back to Sony and just getting a decent aftermarket control.

 

[prod]

I'm through defending MS and the Xbox, they can rot in pieces. One should have thought that after the huge backlash they received after the reveal that they would not want to upset the public any further, but alas, they seem to be retarded. I'm so out, I just hope Sony doesn't drop the ball as well, they seem very quiet.

 

[saffakanera]

I'm through defending MS and the Xbox, they can rot in pieces. One should have thought that after the huge backlash they received after the reveal that they would not want to upset the public any further, but alas, they seem to be retarded. I'm so out, I just hope Sony doesn't drop the ball as well, they seem very quiet.

Sony doesn't have to do a damn thing, Microsoft are Sony's best advertising agency in history.

 

[AlphaJohn]

I love how everyone is making Sony to be the good guys here. How easy is it to forget.

Sony remove backwards compatibility from PS3 after it was available and working.
Sony removed dual boot when it suited em. removing a feature that they used to boost sales.
Sony used rootkit's on music CD's to prevent piracy.

And you lot make em out to be hero's I will think twice before jumping in bed with the devil....

 

[prod]

I love how everyone is making Sony to be the good guys here. How easy is it to forget.

Sony remove backwards compatibility from PS3 after it was available and working.
Sony removed dual boot when it suited em. removing a feature that they used to boost sales.
Sony used rootkit's on music CD's to prevent piracy.

And you lot make em out to be hero's I will think twice before jumping in bed with the devil....

No, I'm all for bashing Sony as well! That's why I said 'they've been very quiet'.

 

[Maverick Jester]

Why not?

You know what the Sim City fiasco proved? You can put always online DRM into your game, you can lie to consumers about it, and they will STILL buy your game, even though pretty much every single always online DRM game has had massive problems on launch and afterwards. StarCraft II, Diablo III, exact same thing. So consumers knew about it beforehand, and still bought it.

What that means is that it doesnt matter if you put always online DRM into a game, as long as your brand is big enough, stupid consumers will still buy it.

Fair point, but given the uproar that has already swept the internet over Microsoft's take on DRM, I would be very surprised if Sony followed suit.

And to be fair- those three games were hugely popular on the PC front. I think that consumers of console games would be considerably less forgiving of the always-on DRM approach than their PC-gaming brethren.

 

[Maverick Jester]

I love how everyone is making Sony to be the good guys here. How easy is it to forget.

Sony remove backwards compatibility from PS3 after it was available and working.
Sony removed dual boot when it suited em. removing a feature that they used to boost sales.
Sony used rootkit's on music CD's to prevent piracy.

And you lot make em out to be hero's I will think twice before jumping in bed with the devil....

No, not forgotten at all... Just that MS are making Sony look like the good guys without Sony having to do anything...

 

[The_Ogre]

I love how everyone is making Sony to be the good guys here. How easy is it to forget.

Sony remove backwards compatibility from PS3 after it was available and working.
Sony removed dual boot when it suited em. removing a feature that they used to boost sales.
Sony used rootkit's on music CD's to prevent piracy.

And you lot make em out to be hero's I will think twice before jumping in bed with the devil....

Yeah, but Sony never put as retarded a method in place to prevent you from playing your already paid for games.

 

[MightyMuffinMan]

If you honestly still defend this thing right now, you are either an employee of Microsoft or someone with mental problems and need psychiatric help urgently.

I got to agree. I gave the PS3 a pass as the 360 got the job done but always online is a deal breaker. I sometimes go for 2 weeks without connecting the 360 because I'm to lazy to wake up and plug the lan cable in. Also just today ADSL went done for a few hours people.

You get some really awesome Ps3 controllers, designed off the Xbox controller. Am sure third party Ps4 controllers will come.

I hopeso. I just prefer the 360 controller layout and bulk.

This article has some interesting info, however, I'm not sure I'd draw the same conclusion.

Sony now knows how bad the reaction is, but, that doesnt mean they wont do the same. Think about it - if they did, then both consoles are even in that regard. There will be heavy pressure from publishers to restrict or profit from used games, and MS and Sony might end up taking a cut in exchange for their participation in the program. So, the consoles would end up being equal in DRM, people will buy them because they are sheep, and the publishers are happy. Maybe Sony could have DRM but relax the always online requirement to curry some favour with consumers.

The other option is of course to go anti DRM. Doing so could cause problems with publishers, and could lead publishers putting all of their weight behind the Xbox in order to make it the more attractive platform. Think about it - as a publisher, you want more money. To get more money, you want control over used game sales. If they just make sure that more games are released for Xbox than PS4, gamers will gravitate towards the Xbox just because of a greater selection of games.

However, it could go the other way. An anti DRM stance may make the PS4 so much more attractive to consumers, that the Xbox simply gets outsold. If it happens badly enough, Sony can then dictate terms to publishers.

Not really. Think about it. If a publisher chooses to alienate themselves from PS4 than they will lose all the money they could have made.

 

[Ancalagon]

Not really. Think about it. If a publisher chooses to alienate themselves from PS4 than they will lose all the money they could have made.

If all of the publishers boycott the PS4, the console will fail and it wont matter. Gamers will buy the XBox to make sure they can play all of the latest games. The question is, who has the greater bargaining power? Sony or the publishers?

And also remember - Sony is a publisher too, just like Microsoft. They also stand to "gain" (in their eyes) by restricting used game sales.

 

[Chevron]

If all of the publishers boycott the PS4, the console will fail and it wont matter. Gamers will buy the XBox to make sure they can play all of the latest games. The question is, who has the greater bargaining power? Sony or the publishers?

And also remember - Sony is a publisher too, just like Microsoft. They also stand to "gain" (in their eyes) by restricting used game sales.

There will always be games in a console. Even if EA and Activision decide to drop the PS4, if the PS4 sells 10million this Xmas and the One only 1million, they'll come crying back to get their sales.

 

[Ancalagon]

There will always be games in a console. Even if EA and Activision decide to drop the PS4, if the PS4 sells 10million this Xmas and the One only 1million, they'll come crying back to get their sales.

If.

Tell me, which console would you buy, if the PS4 could only play Sony games, but the XBox could play MS, EA, Activision and Ubisoft games?

You cant sell a console if there are no games for it.