Is the PS4 slowly becoming what the XB1 was going to be?

Ya know right, the BS ....for gamers by gamers is really for 500.00 DRM Eye Toy by Phony. :P

No. ...

In a way I can see it. I don't think they will go that far, but it is trending that way. Sony themselves said they were leaning towards the service end of things and it makes sense.

Expected a useless thread, got a useless thread.

1-Sony never had a show completely devoted to TV TV TV,unlike MS sony has always have shows an movies since the PS3 days,it was MS who pushed TV over gaming the PS4 still is push for gaming not for TV.

2-DRM based services.? PSN Now is a rental service you don't buy the games and sony never advertise it as so,when you pay for PSN Now you pay to rent the service not to own the games and you don't even need a platform for it as TV with PSN Now feature will work so again your wrong.

Comparing PSN now to extreme DRM MS wanted to do which didn't allow you even lend your friend a game is a joke and show how desperate you lemmings are to find something bad about the PS4.

No last i remember since the very first day DRM was leak people started to complain,they didn't want DRM or no used games that shit was leak more than 1 year before the xbox one was release and MS heard the noise people were making they were just to arrogant to make the changes,it wasn't until they saw how bad those pre-orders were after E3 that they decide to flip the switch,since the very first day of the leak people protest it i know i remember well.

NO they don't have the DRM MS had,and they are more focus on games than anything else like always and it shows the PS4 continues to get more games than the xbox one.

Hahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa....

PS Now began its Open Beta rollout on July 31, 2014 with game streaming rentals, which are now available on PlayStation®4 (PS4™), PlayStation®3 (PS3™), PlayStation®Vita (PS Vita), PlayStation®TV (PS TV), select Sony TVs, select Sony Blu-ray Players, and select Samsung Smart TVs in the US & Canada. On 1/13/15 the PlayStation Now game streaming subscription released first on the PS4 system, and is now also on PS3, PS Vita, PS TV, select Sony TVs, select Sony Blu-ray Players, and select Samsung Smart TVs in the US & Canada. Consumers will be able to choose to individually rent games from a catalog of hundreds of PS3 titles or subscribe to get access to a catalog of over 100 PS3 games with unlimited play.

https://www.playstation.com/en-us/explore/psnow/faq/

You are comparing a rental service with extreme DRM on the xbox one.?

You are officially grasping man,you don't own anything you rent so if you actually claim renting something is like extreme DRM then it is your fault not sony.

https://www.gamefly.com/#!/

Game fly is extreme DRM and i guess car rentals as well...lol

You just make the most down right pathetic argument to compare DRM on xbox one would affected the game you would have bough not rent,you could not lend a game to a friend,you could not sell the game,you need it to be connected online every 24 hours if not your machine would not work.

PSN now doesn't even require a console it work on some smart TV,on some Blu-ray players.

My god so you will continue to argue that a RENTAL service is the same as DRM.? Hahahahaa

Blackace you really loss it this time..

Steam didn't transform PC from physical to digital,piracy on PC has been raging on since before steam was here and online you could find any game,steam wasn't the first company to sell a digital game alto they have been the biggest,and PC has always been different all DRM are tied to PC it was born there in fact PC games were never mean to be share,once you install them with their key even on physical copies you were not suppose to copy the game or give it to a friend so he can install it,that is why PC game use to have a PC key each different for every copy.

DRM has been on PC before steam bro,it was just a different way to control games.

Before Steam the market already had DRM and you need it keys and what not to install a game and those games were not suppose to be share.

So again you are reaching here,PSN now is not even close to what MS wanted to do,since you don't own something you RENT.

That is because your dots don't connect at all.

XBO DRM = You bough a game,you install it after that you could discard the disc as it was useless,the game became attach to your account,and if you lend that game to a friend once he install it the game would be permanently his and you loss it,you could not take your game to gamestop and sell it or sell it to a friend or who ever you want,and you were require to check your games once every 24 hours so they could verify that the game install on your unit were your and not from a friend or already install on another console.

PSN Now = Rental service where you can stream games directly to your console,blu-ray player or even smart TV.

This ^^ has nothing in common with XBO DRM,other than require an online connection because dahh the game will be streamed to you.

@Samus3D said:

Actually if i want to play the PS3 game i already own i use my PS3,is not like my PS3 banish from my house when the PS4 came out..lol

And you are a fake boy..

HAHAHAHAAHAAHAAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.

You mean the way the copy what MS did for 2 generations before they did.?

hahaha

No..

PSN+ still is on PS3 and the PS3 and Vita still have free online play,it was done because Sony saw all the cash MS was making,not only that sony also saw how people like you defend paying for online for the last 2 generation,why do you think sites didn't say anything when sony announce pay to play online.?

They could not as many defended live back on day not all but many did,sony saw the opportunity to charge and took it after all by the time they started doing it MS already had 11 years doing so.

No i am sure that is MS would not have charge for online play we would be playing online free now,just like DLC took off on xbox 360 and then sony started to exploit it as well.

So did you even google the meaning of fakeboy yet? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Okay, since you quoted me, you know you will be having your required dose and it's something you can't do shit about. :D

Remain butthurt that the only current generation game that is subHD is a 900pStation exclusive even lower than WiiU and that too by the overhyped garbage Sony's First Party.........HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Remain salty that it's been only 1.5 years since the release of 900pStation and devs have already started cutting corners in order to fit games on 900pStation like removing shadows, baking lights, 20FPS, blur, 800p, on rails and what not........HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Remain butthurt that according to DF 900pStation is so weak that it forever try to reach a technical bar set by Crysis 2 - a game from 2011. Then again considering a cheap ass tablet CPU and 570 level GPU from 2010 can only do so much......HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA

LOL....The creme de le creme Sony devs, Naughty Duds couldn't get the last generation game TLOU to run at a constant 60FPS on 900pStation and cows hype them to produce graphics king........HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Remain jelly that all Sony onrails experiences have been downgraded from pre-alpha stage to release...........HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Lol, thread backfired because SW saw that TC is a pathetic lem grasping at straws, so now he disappears. Good, keep it this way, SW is better off without you, lemming.

We might need him for the NPD thread at this rate though.

@nyadc:

Ive been saying it for quite some time now. What Microsoft planned to do was likely an agreement between microsoft/sony/and 3rd party developers. 3rd Party developers need to release a consistent product. Sony saw the extremely negative reactions and probably backed out.

Conspiracy theorists have arrived lol.

I also would like to include that both Sony/MS wanted to help 3rd party with used games which is why they were lots of conspiracy coming from Sony if they agree to help 3rd party and MS went upfront first to try this and failed. There were conspiracy on Sony's case if DRM was also going to be on PS4 as well but since there's no actual truth to back that claim, we will never know.

@FoxbatAlpha: You can't put up a link because if you did we could read that Yoshida was talking about how the rejection of your malignant DRM policies were communicated, Justin. They announced there would be no anti-used games DRM at the PS4 reveal.

Why do you lems keep pushing that lie? Do you think we cannot see though it?

I'd say used games is a different issue, almost. Why exactly are there so many used games? Maybe it speaks more of the quality of the content than anything else.

funny my 45+ ps4 games and the games I am getting this fall beg to dfifer. Am getting in the next few months:

mgs5

Dragon Quest Heroes (excl.)

Until Dawn (excl.)

Disgaea 5 (excl.)

Fallout 4

Battlefront
Just Cause 3

AC Syndicate

Samaruri Warriors 4-2 (excl.)

Keep telling yourself we have to wait.... your just lying to yourself.

It's mind boggling to me, how businesses pay personnel for their theories and predictions, when they can just waltz down to the System Wars board and pick up expert analysis from people like NyaDC for free.

@FireEmblem_Man: Yet the PS4 has more games?

@nyadc: You honestly think Sony's main focus is PS Now? Lol really?

What I mean is by, 3rd parties lose money on used games from Gamestop and such, both Sony/MS wanted to help stop the used games economy but MS tried so hard with getting more 3rd party on board and come join MS when they talk about this for there Xbox One announcement back in 2013. Like I said, there's no evident's to Sony for going DRM on there PS4 so I can't confirm if they were going to help 3rd party but however, Sony did ask us the gamers if DRM was a good idea while PS4 was still in development.

So an optinal feature/service is the same as the mandatory DRM disc lock MS wanted to shove down your throats?

And did MS stop with the TV bull?

@davillain-:

Combating the used game market by intruding upon the consumer is not the way. IMO sony/ms should have opted for pushing larger hdd and offering a real cost advantage to buying digital. $59.99 retail vs $39.99 digital. People would jump on that I think

Yep, it's the worthy successor to the Xbox 360.

I have no idea what you're babbling about concerning TV services, you're way off-base, as usual.

Damn. Seems like I missed the party!

As of now, a used PS3 >PS4 with PS Now.

You'd think that PS Now would be great; every PS3 game on command. There'd be no need to track down rare (and still overpriced) used games at EB and on Craigslist. Yet the reality of PS Now doesn't fit with the ideal. PS Now only has a small selection of PS3 games, and they're often NOT the ones you want. PS Now also delivers lower resolutions and the inputs lag. Blame it on the current state of technology, blame it on Sony lacking servers. At any rate, it's just a mess, and playing PS3 games on PS3 at least means they run properly. PS Now couldn't even run Lumines 4/5ths of the time. Safe to say, I cancelled PS Now after one month.

PS4 as of now doesn't have much outside of TLOU Remastered, the baseball game, and the four early exclusives--Knack, The Order 1886, Driveclub, and Bloodborne. Bloodborne is the only good one.

No i still can play games without internet and can trade, buy and sell used games ps now and ps+ are optional.

Sony is focusing first and foremost on the gamers.

By gamers for gamers mantra matched with the Live, Learn and Love philosophy has propelled them to current gen 8 console leader.

It's really as simple as that.

What the hell did you do to this guy Tormentos? lol.

Dudes having a breakdown.

^Sony spokesperson

Concentrating on squeezing out extra revenues from PS network fees, and PS Now fees. That plus the vaunted "free" Driveclub for members who have already paid for the subscription fees--The same gimped Driveclub featuring two econoboxes going around a small number of tracks.

Focusing on extracting revenue from either very gullible or disproportionately wealthy gamers.

Lolz

Super Lolz

Lolzapalooza

LOL

Anyone who thinks that Sony totally overhauled their policies for the PS4 within less than 24 hours is a fucking dildo.

@frank_castle: While it's clearly a fairy tale with no actual backing printed by no-name sketchy websites; it does make for a fantastic story people can tell their kids at bed time in an effort to gain some sympathy for one of the companies that made a huge mistake with the initial anti consumer DRM reveal.

"A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away....

Episode 4.5

ANOTHER NEW HOPE

It is a dark time for the Rebellion. Although the Xbone DRM has been destroyed, Imperial troops have driven the Rebel forces from their hidden base and pursued them across the internet.

Evading the dreaded Imperial Starfleet, a group of freedom fighters led by Kaz Sonywalker has established a new secret base on the remote icy world of SW.

The evil lord Phil Vader, obsessed with finding Sonywalker, has dispatched thousands of remote probes into multiple game forums telling all that will listen about a deadly rumor. The rumor of Kaz's apparent dark DRM plan that never came to fruition but almost did!"

@frank_castle: Frank get your head out your ass. No one ever said 24 hrs. The rumors of Xbox Ones policies were known months before.

Oh come on dude.. we all knew that this gen was going to be about multiple features to include TV/Cable-like services. This isn't deceit.. it's progression.

I think they'll have similar DRMs in the long run. Oh yeah, I can see these companies trying that supposed DRM at some point even if not during the PS5/X2 era.

@lostrib: I personally wished they had of stuck to the original plan. I know ways online annoyed a lot of ppl but sharing games with 10 ppl for free and digital trading would have been great.

Ditto.

Months before?

So why did everyone get their titties in a twist after the XBone reveal at E3 if all of that stupid DRM bullshit was already known of?

If Sony already knew ahead of time that everyone would balk at the DRM and "always online" policies...then why the hell didn't Microsoft?

It doesn't take a genius to realize that the vast majority of gamers would thumb their noses at that stupid shit.

Why do people keep saying DRM like it's a pejorative for something awful? Most services have a form of DRM to control user rights, just some are intrusive and some are not. Say, GOG, who give there users a basic install file they can pass on to their friends who can then copy and pass on to others, on some basic level, they still require users that own the titles log into their account to acquire the install file; that's still a form of DRM (digital rights management).

Anyhow, I've reason to believe the only reason the Xbox One's became Orwellian is because they originally intended to have no used games (thus the discless play feature). No used games is a bad issue by itself, but it does not require any intrusive DRM to implement such a policy. It'd just require the same DRM we enjoyed last gen that allowed for offline play and online rights retention, we mostly enjoyed this with digital titles only like smaller XBLA games we couldn't get on disc.

I think what they wanted was game installs to be like PC game installs, with online needed only to register the game to the users account (kind of like you'd need online to buy an XBLA game which automatically registers it to your account), then from that point on it's be like a PC game that registers to Steam, that user doesn't need the disc (can just chuck it) because rights are tied to their account, and they can just download it in future since rights are tied to the account. Like Xbox 360 digital games, games could be played offline, only needing online for things such as playing online, updates, or if playing the game remotely on a system the rights are not tied to (like if you take your HDD to a friends house to play games).

The only reason I think we got the 24/hour check is simply because they reversed their no-used game policy in a fashion that still kept it's discless play feature. What that means is, they didn't want people to install games, play offline, and sell them to others. IMO they could have kept discless play without the manditory checks as people will likely log online anyways for other reasons, and the system can go through a verification of the rights status of the titles installed then.

IMO, the best way a company can control the gaming population is with incentive. For instance, want to fight used games, there either has to be universal approval across the board to prohibit them. This would require both MS, Sony, and Nintendo do this, of course since they're in competition with each other, nobody would do such a thing since one can benefit over the other by not doing this. However, there are other ways. The one way I feel is to incentivize digital sales, that would require doing it cheaper than physical retail. Thing is though, even though these companies can have good digital sales, are more often than not outbid by prices of physical media. There are many reasons this should be the exact opposite. For starters, each digital sale is one less used game on the market, it's a copy that requires none of the production or distribution costs, no retailer cuts, no MSRP price adjustement refunds to retailers on diminishment of inventory value, and publishers can keep them on digital stores longer, whereas retailers not keeping inventory can make games difficult and expensive or even seemingly impossible to acquire.

As for DRM, the most intrusive methods are mostly anti-piracy, and I really don't see that effecting consoles too much. Years back there was some controversy with the PS3's version of Final Fight because of the issue Capcom had with the 5 users sharing DRM feature on PS3 where one person buy it then share it with 4 friends, and to fight that made an always online requirement to make sure people weren't sharing. But we don't often see such things like this on consoles.

Anyhow, I remember a year before the PS3 came out there was talk Sony was thinking of prohibiting used games and a shit storm ensued and that was taken back pretty quick. Even when the PS4 was in development there was talk of the feature being possible given the technology, but then said it was up to publishers to take advantage of it. And given the Xbox One was already getting flack before it even revealed on prohibiting used game sales, I'm sure Sony could have easily saw benefit in not doing it themselves. Though I'm sure every big player in the industry wants to, they don't because it'd leave them too vulnerable to do it if their competitor doesn't.

@nyadc: it still has more exclusives

Yech! Moral equivalency.

I'm not one of those jerks that constantly rehashes the phrase "slippery slope", because I don't believe it's a fallacy by default. But your alleged period of slow development--by Sony--in a direction of hyper-regulatory, de-facto fascist enterprise is completely arbitrary. Your claim implicitly suggests that, by virtue of being introduced, their streaming service is a Trojan horse. But then you'd have to make that same claim of every other streaming service in existence--which is bonkers.

PS = Games first, other entertainments second

Xbox = TV first, sports second, gaming third

The PS4 already completed the gaming aspect so it's going for the second priority.

I don't think Sony is that stupid. They saw the destruction of the Xbox brand just for mentioning they were going to do that stuff. Data suggests that playstaion gamers don't want this stuff and Sony has been doing a decent job of listening to its diehard cow base.

If they even try it just because they're top of the food chain they will fall just like the PS2 to PS3 transition.

I think we can all agree this thread has backfired.

I remember the last user who posted ridiculous threads with little to back them and then bailed when they backfired.

We are not doing that again.