@Double-Ego I'm afraid you are mistaken. They did not just say that PSN+ titles would not be transferable, they said all titles are not transferable. As for Gaikai, they have said nothing about what they would do with it as far as old titles would go, except to say that it could be used to make them available. It is exceedingly unlikely that they will give you access to your old titles for free. At best, they will be adding a subscription tier to PSN+ that will allow you to stream some games through Gaikai, but if they are going to add any kind of backwards compatibility, it will be like the the PS2 Classics currently on PSN, as in, you will have to buy them again.
@Double-Ego Actually, they have already stated that PSN accounts/titles will not be transferable to the new PS4. You can still use your current PSN user name, but everything you bought for the PS3 is still PS3 only.
@c-robz The city and everything is running on your PC, not their servers. The servers just provide client to client communication, cloud saves and a few other features (most of which are currently disabled). It wouldn't take much to redirect the "cloud" locally, it just depends on how much info they can get through monitoring traffic. This may be a hard one to crack (I might even agree that it is the hardest so far), but nothing is impossible. I actually still occasionally play an old EA MMO, Earth and Beyond, which was completely shut down years ago... until the community completely re-created the entire server back end from scratch with no input whatsoever from EA or the developers.
@c-robz It won't connect to the servers at all. That's the point of a crack, to remove the DRM function, which is connecting to EAs servers. All they have to do is sniff the client/server traffic a bit and they can come up with a reasonable redirect that will point your traffic to a local source instead of EA. It's not really all that hard to do, provided you can actually connect to the servers in the first place. Certainly wouldn't be the first time the scene has accomplished something like this.
@c-robz Wow... just... wow. DRM has never once done anything to stop piracy. Maybe, rarely, it stops day one piracy, but in the end, the scene will always crack DRM and games will be pirated. In this case, it the only reason it is stopping piracy is because it is stopping everyone from playing the game, even those who didn't pirate. That is not an effective deterrent to piracy, it is an effective deterrent to legitimate consumers that also happens to accidentally be slowing down the pirates. If they ever get the almighty servers you keep harping on up and running and people can actually get in, it will be at most 24-48 hours before a working, if not perfect, crack becomes available.
@c-robz Maxis works for EA. EA paid for the development. EA is supplying the server infrastructure. Maxis may have carried out the act, but EA is ultimately responsible.
@c-robz OMG, are you really that naive? EA would put DRM on their shoes if they thought it would protect their almighty profits for their shareholders. They planned the online components from the beginning believing it would act to prevent piracy, not because it would be "cool" or because anyone ever wanted it. They didn't effectively test those components before launch like a rank amateur. They are bribing you with that free game and like far too many sheeple, you are falling for it.
@c-robz Not all DRM is the same. This DRM is special because of the method used, i.e. the always on connection, even in single player. If the game did not require that, not only would the server load be less for those that want to use the multiplayer features, those that only want to play single player would not be having any problems right now. Yes they screwed up when planning their servers, but that screw up would not have a been the gigantic problem it currently is if they did not require a constant connection for DRM purposes. The DRM is at fault.
@c-robz Sorry, but I already read that and it is just more BS. They are misdirecting people by calling it something other than DRM when they know full well that the always on connection, regardless of the additional features it also is supposed to support, is simply another form of DRM. They can sugarcoat it all they want, try to convince us that it is a "feature", but it's not.
cogadh's comments