CloudStrife213's forum posts

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@LJS9502_basic said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

@CloudStrife213:

LOL dude. Did you even read your links? What does the world third party mean to you?

It means that Sony would ALLOW DRM on their console, instead of disallowing it. Both companies have disallowed DRM on both consoles now. You act as if every publisher is first party.

Third-party publishers are the majority not first-party developers/publishers. It would be a feast to behold for EA, 2K, Activision, Ubisoft, and many other publishers if DRM were to push through on both consoles.

Actually it meant Sony wasn't setting policies for third parties. But I doubt you understand the difference. Anyway....thanks to MS arrogance and the backlash.....we don't have to worry about that issue this gen. Which is a GOOD THING. And if you don't think the E3 reaction to Sony's announcement didn't change that.....I can't help you.

That is what I meant when Sony would allow DRM on their console. They wouldn't set policies, hence DRM or non-DRM was allowed.

They wouldn't tell publishers whether to use DRM or to not use DRM, hence they allowed publishers to do what they see fit.

To put DRM or to not put DRM. And we all know what most publishers want. Although MS was stupid enough to consider putting DRM on all games unlike Sony who only allowed third-party publishers to do what they see fit. Maybe because of publisher pressure?

Not setting policies for DRM is allowing. You just proved my point.

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@LJS9502_basic said:

@CloudStrife213:

LOL dude. Did you even read your links? What does the world third party mean to you?

It means that Sony would ALLOW DRM on their console, instead of disallowing it. Both companies have disallowed DRM on both consoles now. You act as if every publisher is first party.

Third-party publishers are the majority not first-party developers/publishers. It would be a feast to behold for EA, 2K, Activision, Ubisoft, and many other publishers if DRM were to push through on both consoles.

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@Shewgenja said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

Go read this and behold your ignorance.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/01/03/report-new-sony-patent-blocks-second-hand-games

If you are talking about infrastructure. They patented the DRM technology in December 9, 2012, read the article I linked. Enough time to tweak and fix the console for announcement and release. If you are still in denial, then it's up to you. Like they always say, "Ignorance is bliss."

Alright bro, now I know you're off the deep end and not even comprehending what I'm saying to you. BTW, you're not showing any of us stuff we haven't seen before.

So, I'm going to make this really cut and dry and then I'm going to have fun with you.

Sony didn't plan or implement the DRM. They may have had a contingency for it. They definitely have a patent for it. They are a technology firm, patents is their life blood. What I am saying is that they probably had both options on the table. Why wouldn't they? A proper engineer leaves their options open until they come up with the best solution. It's how the business works. It's how the world works.

Microsoft, on the other hand, had to put everyone on the cloud AND get their hands in Gamestops used sales pie. Their bean counters were all in. Sonys were not. They left the options on the table, that is ALL you can rationalize from any of your links.

Here's where the rubber meets the road, dude. Game, set, match.

Buy an XBox One. Buy a PS4. Fresh out of the box brand new, plug in the power and plug in the HDMI to your TV. Never connect to the internet.

Put a copy of.. oh, Need for Speed Rivals into the XBone. Put a copy of the game in the PS4.

Now, try to play.

GG no RE.

It's good that you finally admit that Sony considered DRM. That was basically the point of my argument. Thanks for agreeing with me you cow.

I have no qualms in stating that MS was more outspoken on DRM, and that their DRM policies were a disaster.

But I have no doubt in my mind that Sony was truly considering DRM. They just waited for MS to lay down the cards and show it to people to see the people's reaction, and when they found it to be negative, they did a turn-around. Perfect marketing strategy.

If you can assume that Sony wasn't planning to have DRM, I can assume that Sony was planning to have DRM because of the interviews and the patent. All you have is the assumption that Sony wasn't planning to have DRM when all evidence points otherwise. How do you truly know that Sony wasn't planning to have DRM, do you work for them? I on the other hand have evidence from the links I provided.

It's also funny how you assume that I'm going to buy an Xbox One. I will not buy an Xbox One. In fact, I'm buying the PS4. Fortunately I am not blind to facts, even negative. You cows can deny all you want if it makes you happy though. Case in point: Just because a person is a PS4 player or will be a PS4 player does not mean they have to be a cow.

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@tormentos said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

@tormentos:

OMG!!! Man I just can't stand your idiocy. My posts are all about how Sony considered blocking used games. They never pulled through with it, but never the less, they were considering it. I never said they blocked used games, and neither did Microsoft as they did not pull through with their policies. Both Sony and Microsoft were considering it.

Here, read the interview with Jack Tretton. Third-party publishers were considered to be allowed to decide whether to implement DRM. If you try and rationalize and deny it, I'm afraid your fanboyism level is a 10/10. Sony was considering it but when bad PR for Microsoft ensued because of their policies, they did a 180.

http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/11/playstation-4-drm-policies-third-party/

http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/11/4419566/sony-jack-tretton-publishers-can-choose-to-enforce-drm

What I don't like about you fanboys is that you like to deny facts when it's bad news for your beloved company. Remember, I'm buying a PS4, but I'm not in denial. I've noticed that more so with Sony fanboys than Xbox fanboys though.

"There's gonna be free-to-play, there's gonna be every potential business model on there, and again,

that's up to their relationship with the consumer, what do they think is going to put them in the best fit.

We're not going to dictate that, we're gonna give them a platform to publish on.

The DRM decision is going to have to be answered by the third parties, it's not something we're going to control, or dictate, or mandate, or implement."

Let me brake this up for your slow man,what this mean is that SONY will not block used games and that if Developers want to do that is up to them,in fact developers CAN DO THAT NOW without any help from sony,they just require you to have online and verify where ever the game was played on another console or just simply demand online connection for it.

NO. 3rd parties still allowed to do so,but 3rd parties doesn't = sony.

So yeah no one is doing it because they know people would skip games that get block,specially those who re sell them to gamestop all the time,which mean lower sales.

So yeah you proved nothing at all but Jack Treton saying hey if developers want to that their thing not ours..lol

You just owned your self DRM on MS was implemented and make by MS not 3rd parties,and in fact EA which was one of the accuse of such of thing claimed that it wasn't their doing.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/next-xbox-to-play-blu-rays-block-used-games-report/1100-6349165/

MS used games block goes back to early 2012 even lower when the very first rumors about the unit surface by that time only MS knew what it wanted to accomplish with the xbox one,not 3rd parties..

You assume as if every game developer works for Sony. The majority of game developers are third-party developers. Developers cannot do that now in consoles as DRM is not allowed in both consoles now. 2K, EA, Ubisoft, Activision and many other publishers would love to have DRM. Only a fool would deny that.

Tell me of a game on the last-gen console that implements DRM. Online passes from EA do not count. It has to be a game that restricts you from playing the game at all if it is a used game.

Yes, MS wanted to implement DRM, also many publishers wanted to implement DRM. Even Sony considered implementing DRM.

In fact, I admit to all the negative facts involving MS, they wanted to implement DRM on their console. I can't turn a blind eye to negative facts about Sony like you guys do.

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@ni6htmare01 said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

@Shewgenja said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

Go and try to rationalize, Sony was smart in not announcing DRM policies immediately, they let MS take the fall for DRM policies first. And when MS took the fall, they took this to their advantage and did a 180.. Perfect marketing strategy.

How am I criminally stupid? I posted evidence, all of you ponies are just speaking out of your asses. And Shewgenja, it is well known that you are a cow here in system wars that is blind to criticism when it comes to your beloved company. Now go and kiss Sony's ass some more.

Really? Because I have torched Sony for how they started out with the PS3 to the eery silence of the cows here. I don't pull a punch. This notion that Sony may or may not have had DRM is an utterly irrelevant argument of yours. Reason being, they would have to spend just as much time coming up with a firmware for the machine that does not implement it as much as they would implementing it. Then, they'd need to have an actual infrastructure for it and N-O-N-E of the articles everty ever mention a single goddamn hint that there was infrastructure in place to implement always-on DRM.

Then you have Microsoft who had to ship a goddamn console without firmware because they had to 11th hour take the shit out and push a new firmware on Day 1 to the machines.. Also, OBVIOUSLY pushing their timeline back on such things as GPU optimization amongst the other problems with the damn thing.

SO.. NIGHT AND DAY. #Dealwithit

Go read this and behold your ignorance.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/01/03/report-new-sony-patent-blocks-second-hand-games

If you are talking about infrastructure. They patented the DRM technology in December 9, 2012, read the article I linked. Enough time to tweak and fix the console for announcement and release. If you are still in denial, then it's up to you. Like they always say, "Ignorance is bliss."

once again patented don't mean shit dude.Companies patented all kind of stuff yearly just to be able to sue someone and collect money in the future. They never pull DRM in PS4 like the XB did.

If patents don't mean shit, then what are these interviews about DRM with Jack Tretton?

http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/11/playstation-4-drm-policies-third-party/

http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/11/4419566/sony-jack-tretton-publishers-can-choose-to-enforce-drm

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2013/06/11/jack-tretton-3rd-party-publishers-can-implement-drm-on-ps4-thats-up-to-their-relationship-with-the-consumer-we-wont-dictate/

http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2013/06/11/jack-tretton-says-third-parties-can-dictate-their-own-drm-policies-on-ps4/

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@ni6htmare01 said:

@CloudStrife213 said:
@gggoodboy said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

@tormentos:

Here comes the ultimate cow in denial. If you were literate you would have read the articles I linked. It wasn't only the patent, it was in the interviews. For example, Jack Tretton said Sony would leave it up to third-party publishers whether DRM would be implemented or not.

Does the fact that Sony was considering DRM disheartening to you? Poor tormentos, keep staying in denial. Keep kissing Sony's ass. If it makes you happy. LOL

Also, it's pretty pointless to argue with a cow like you. I may be buying a PS4 over an Xbox One, but I'm not a rabid blind fanboy like you.

Tormentos is 100% spot on though. Any rational human being can see that

You cant, because youre a delusional xboner

Not only did Tormentos refute each and every one of your points with ease, he made you look like the moron you are. Im keeping it real. Realise how much of an idiot xboner you are coming across as

BTW great posts Tormentos:) You truly are one of the best posters here my brother. Youre nickname should be the xbot troll slayer:)

Cloudstrife, you have to be a Microsoft shill because youre using the "Sony too" "arguement"

Before E3, when ever posters questioned Microsoft about the rumored DRM always online xbone schemes, the Microsoft shill talking point was "bu bu Sony is doing it too soo stfu"

Yet Sony NEVER DID do it....that talking point was defeated...I cant believe youre trying to bring it back...."bu Sont too"

Patents dont mean anything

From day one Sony SAID they would allow used game sales. From day one Sony said they would never implement awlays online like Microsoft was planning to

The signs were on the wall way before E3 that Sony was NOT going to do ANY of it....and then E3 came and Sony PROVED they never had any intentions of doing so

You xbot shills need to stop with that "Sony too" BS. Its never been true....its played out...it means nothing now

Typical fanboy.

All tormentos' points are conjecture. I have evidence that Sony was considering DRM in interviews and because they patented it. If you weren't a blind and biased fanboy, you would have read all the links I posted. Let me post them again.

http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/11/playstation-4-drm-policies-third-party/

http://ps4daily.com/2013/06/sony-changed-playstation-4-drm-policy-after-xbox-one-outrage/

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/02/sony-uk-exec-ps4-used-game-question-isnt-clarified-just-yet/

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/01/03/report-new-sony-patent-blocks-second-hand-games

If you read those and you are still in denial, then you are delusional.

If you were an intelligent human being then you will understand that I never said that Sony implemented DRM. Both Microsoft and Sony considered DRM, but never pushed through with it because of negative feedback. But since you are not capable of reading with comprehension, let me explain it to you in bold.

Sony considered DRM.

Link me to where Jack say we put DRM in PS4.. You talk about patented? are you for real? Company paternt tons of stuff a year and never get to use it. Didn't you see all the cray idea that Sony and MS patented for their consoles? where are they now? Patented don't mean shit dude

OMG. You cows are so stupid, go read all the links. I never said Sony put DRM in the PS4. All I ever said was that Sony CONSIDERED DRM. Look at the interviews and the patent. Unfortunately you butthurt cows don't even have basic skills of reading comprehension.

Again for more clarification.

Read this: http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/11/playstation-4-drm-policies-third-party/

You cows sure do like to change what I say.

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@Shewgenja said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

Go and try to rationalize, Sony was smart in not announcing DRM policies immediately, they let MS take the fall for DRM policies first. And when MS took the fall, they took this to their advantage and did a 180.. Perfect marketing strategy.

How am I criminally stupid? I posted evidence, all of you ponies are just speaking out of your asses. And Shewgenja, it is well known that you are a cow here in system wars that is blind to criticism when it comes to your beloved company. Now go and kiss Sony's ass some more.

Really? Because I have torched Sony for how they started out with the PS3 to the eery silence of the cows here. I don't pull a punch. This notion that Sony may or may not have had DRM is an utterly irrelevant argument of yours. Reason being, they would have to spend just as much time coming up with a firmware for the machine that does not implement it as much as they would implementing it. Then, they'd need to have an actual infrastructure for it and N-O-N-E of the articles everty ever mention a single goddamn hint that there was infrastructure in place to implement always-on DRM.

Then you have Microsoft who had to ship a goddamn console without firmware because they had to 11th hour take the shit out and push a new firmware on Day 1 to the machines.. Also, OBVIOUSLY pushing their timeline back on such things as GPU optimization amongst the other problems with the damn thing.

SO.. NIGHT AND DAY. #Dealwithit

Go read this and behold your ignorance.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/01/03/report-new-sony-patent-blocks-second-hand-games

If you are talking about infrastructure. They patented the DRM technology in December 9, 2012, read the article I linked. Enough time to tweak and fix the console for announcement and release. If you are still in denial, then it's up to you. Like they always say, "Ignorance is bliss."

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@ni6htmare01 said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

@Shewgenja:

I don't know. Ask Jack Tretton, did the president and CEO of Sony Computer Entertainment really think that he/they could dictate digital rights policy to third parties? We all know the answer to that unless you are in denial. Well he must of thought so judging from the interview.

http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/11/playstation-4-drm-policies-third-party/

http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/11/4419566/sony-jack-tretton-publishers-can-choose-to-enforce-drm

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2013/06/11/jack-tretton-3rd-party-publishers-can-implement-drm-on-ps4-thats-up-to-their-relationship-with-the-consumer-we-wont-dictate/

http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2013/06/11/jack-tretton-says-third-parties-can-dictate-their-own-drm-policies-on-ps4/

Reminder: Two of those websites are Playstation websites, would you really think PS fans would lie about that?

Good tactic by Sony though, to let MS take the fall for DRM policies first. They were able to turn around and absolutely outlaw DRM after letting MS take the negative feedback.

Sony might very well "thought" about put DRM in, but no one knows, is was all a speculation. But remember it was only speculation. Sony never "said" or actually apply it to PS4. MS on the other hand "Put" DRM in XB1 and openly "Said" they want DRM and 24 hours internet check in such! If it wasn't for Sony E3 MS would have not pull DRM out of Xb1 with a day 1 patch. Can you tell the different between "Thought about it" and actually "Done it" ? As far as allow 3rd party to decide block use game or not, is has been say since PS3 is not something new and which games has it block so far?

How is it speculation when it came out of the own mouth of Jack Tretton? Yes, MS was outspoken on its policies, especially because they announced it at E3, but Sony kept quiet and under the radar, as evidenced by interviews and patents. Unless you believe that Jack Tretton is lying in those interviews, then I can't see any other point of view. They let MS take the fall for it first before totally outlawing DRM.

"There's gonna be free-to-play, there's gonna be every potential business model on there, and again, that's up to their relationship with the consumer, what do they think is going to put them in the best fit. We're not going to dictate that, we're gonna give them a platform to publish on. The DRM decision is going to have to be answered by the third parties, it's not something we're going to control, or dictate, or mandate, or implement."

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@Farsendor1 said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

@Shewgenja said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

@Shewgenja:

I don't know. Ask Jack Tretton, did the president and CEO of Sony Computer Entertainment really think that he/they could dictate digital rights policy to third parties? We all know the answer to that unless you are in denial. Well he must of thought so judging from the interview.

http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/11/playstation-4-drm-policies-third-party/

http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/11/4419566/sony-jack-tretton-publishers-can-choose-to-enforce-drm

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2013/06/11/jack-tretton-3rd-party-publishers-can-implement-drm-on-ps4-thats-up-to-their-relationship-with-the-consumer-we-wont-dictate/

http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2013/06/11/jack-tretton-says-third-parties-can-dictate-their-own-drm-policies-on-ps4/

Reminder: Two of those websites are Playstation websites, would you really think PS fans would lie about that?

Good tactic by Sony though, to let MS take the fall for DRM policies first. They were able to turn around and absolutely outlaw DRM.

Dude, the difference between what Microsoft did and Sony did was night and day. You're like criminally stupid dude.

24 hour check ins. That is what everyone was freaking out about.

Go and try to rationalize, Sony was smart in not announcing DRM policies immediately, they let MS take the fall for DRM policies first. And when MS took the fall, they took this to their advantage and did a 180.. Perfect marketing strategy.

How am I criminally stupid? I posted evidence, all of you ponies are just speaking out of your asses. And Shewgenja, it is well known that you are a cow here in system wars that is blind to criticism when it comes to your beloved company. Now go and kiss Sony's ass some more.

Well its still up to the publisher with either the ps4 or x1 games released at retail that are online only is a form of DRM.

Which would have been bad considering that the titan publishers would love to implement DRM.

It's a good thing though that gamers fought these publishers so that they wouldn't practice DRM anymore.

2K Games, EA (sim city, lol), Ubisoft, and many other publishers would love to have DRM.

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@gggoodboy said:

@2mrw said:

@Suppaman100:

I don't really care so much about the X1 situation here.

The KZ:SF fiasco is enough to prove my point here. And nop, most games aren't 1080/60, aside from indies of course.

No ONE CARES about Killzone's MP resolution.

The ONLY ones making a big deal out of it are xbots like you whove been sitting at your computer chairs with shit in your hand just hoping and waiting for any little piece of negative Sony news you can find to blow up and run with...you know since the xbone legit has been complete and utter shit...

Seriously calling it a fiasco is straight up trolling.

If Killzone's 920x1080p MP resolution is a fiasco....then what do we call Ryse being 900p while being linear and scripted to the max....that must be a diaster

Killzone's 926x1080p resolution in MP (IF Digital Foundry is to be believed which they shouldnt considering their shady history) but just saying so for arguements sake.....If true that resolution still >>>>>>>>>>>>most xbone games.....so again whats the problem? There is none !

Such desperate and pathetic reaching from xbots

You xbots truly are the most delusional

It's funny that the same people who say they don't care about the resolution and framerate for KZ: SF, are the same people bashing the Xbox One for its resolution/frame rate. You can't have it both ways. Hypocrisy at its finest.