PlayStation 4 - November 15, 2013

[I OU a Beatn]

Stemming fears of the always-online requirement still rumored strongly for the next Xbox, a Sony PR rep confirmed to Kotaku that: "PS4 games will be playable without an Internet connection."

I'm still hearing from at least one very good source who hasn't failed me yet that the next Xbox, codenamed Durango, will require an online connection, though that source isn't sure whether the console would tolerate spotty, dropped connections.

In an interview with Eurogamer at yesterday's big PS4 unveiling in New York, Sony's head of worldwide game studios, Shuhei Yoshida said, of PS4 gaming, "Oh yes, yes, you can go offline totally. Social is big for us, but we understand there are some people who are anti-social! So if you don't want to connect to anyone else, you can do that."

Sony is hoping that you would keep your machine online, though, so they can keep quietly patching games, updating games, sending games to you and all sorts of other stuff. This is a company, mind you, that painted a vision yesterday of a "psychic" online store that would learn your tastes and have the next game you might want to buy already downloaded to your machine before you even knew it existed—just waiting for you to click to pay.

Note: Last year, when we reported the PS4's codename—Orbis—we also reported that, while there probably wouldn't be an always-online connection for PS4, that we were hearing that users would need to register their games online. We're following up with Sony to see if that is at all part of the current PS4 plan. Even if it had been, things can change and we're trying to keep you as up to date as we can.

UPDATE: More relief... At a roundtable this morning, Sony's game studios chief, Shuhei Yoshida, told reporters that any requirement for users to register a game online in order to play it would be left to game publishers. Sony won't require that.

Source

[CLW]

Source

Isn't that pretty much what they have said from the beginning? I seem to recall Yoshida saying that right after their initial conference but maybe I'm dreaming.

[I OU a Beatn]

Not from what I've read. I've read numerous sources that said Sony's plan all along was to REQUIRE the game to be registered and it could only be registered to one owner. Only within the past week or so was it decided that Sony would not require this and would leave it up to the publisher of the individual game to decide whether or not to require the game to be registered.

[I OU a Beatn]

According to the video about the new controller, the camera will not be bundled (and as a result, not required for the console to work):

[bdoughty]

According to the video about the new controller, the camera will not be bundled (and as a result, not required for the console to work):

Video is well over a month old (released on April 25th)

They could be considering multiple SKU's. One with and one without. It is still featured prominently on the PS4 front page.

[CLW]

PS4 to allow used games (up to publisher to block)

http://www.vg247.com/2013/06/01/ps4-...k-drm-yoshida/

Interesting the article notes that this was in fact what Yoshida said back in February.

Also no Big Brother in my living room either.

http://www.digitalspy.com/gaming/new...h-console.html

[JBHuskers]

I highly doubt any publisher wants to block, or a shitstorm will follow.

[CLW]

I highly doubt any publisher wants to block, or a shitstorm will follow.

Yep smart move by Sony. Give the publishers the rope and see if anyone wants to hang themselves.

MS on the other hand makes the rope and puts it around its own neck.

[I OU a Beatn]

I highly doubt any publisher wants to block, or a shitstorm will follow.

Guarantee you EA and Activision will be more than willing. Ubisoft wont be far behind. I'd almost bet that Sony does it on their first party games, too.

[JBHuskers]

Guarantee you EA and Activision will be more than willing. Ubisoft wont be far behind. I'd almost bet that Sony does it on their first party games, too.

Dunno with EA. Why drop it completely to just pick it up again.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 4 Beta

[I OU a Beatn]

They said they were dropping the online pass. They didn't mention anything about requiring a game to be registered. In fact, they announced that they were dropping the online pass right around the time all this used games stuff started, so I think they and other publishers assumed Sony and Microsoft would both have their own systems. Sony, having seen the massive backlash Microsoft received, decided not to do it, IMO, but rather leave it up to the publishers (I also think Microsoft will go the same route). Now that it's back on the publishers, I'd imagine a lot of them would require a game to be registered.

Think about it; why wouldn't they? By allowing used games, what does the publisher gain? Okay, they get some good word of mouth, but what does that do for their bottom line? Virtually nothing. I'll be shocked if the vast majority of publishers don't adopt whatever system Sony or Microsoft implements.

[JBHuskers]

Pretty similar to an Online Pass though.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 4 Beta

[CLW]

Pretty similar to an Online Pass though.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 4 Beta

I'll admit I'm more in line with IOU on this one. Of course, EA thinks they were being coy/slick knowing it was a brief time and they would get a PR bump for announcing the decision only to go DRM with PS4/One. However, the backlash is going to be SEVERE EA will win "worst company in America" from now until eternity if they do in fact go that route.

[JBHuskers]

Remember, that vote was probably composed of mostly gamers, and not really a big named website even. Dude is still using the Wordpress default layout

[CLW]

Remember, that vote was probably composed of mostly gamers, and not really a big named website even. Dude is still using the Wordpress default layout

I don't necessarily disagree with at least part of the premise you have (vote being skewed). However, any website that gets a CEO of a publicly traded company to respond directly at you is doing something right.

[SmoothPancakes]

Remember, that vote was probably composed of mostly gamers, and not really a big named website even. Dude is still using the Wordpress default layout

Yeah. In any true vote for the worst company in America, no way in hell would a video game company win over banks and lenders and telecommunications companies, etc., that fuck people over every day with bullshit practices or seize their cars/homes from them and throw them to the curb.

[JBHuskers]

Yeah. In any true vote for the worst company in America, no way in hell would a video game company win over banks and lenders and telecommunications companies, etc., that fuck people over every day with bullshit practices or seize their cars/homes from them and throw them to the curb.

It's like TGT setting up a Forbes 500 list and calling it fact.

[CLW]

Yeah. In any true vote for the worst company in America, no way in hell would a video game company win over banks and lenders and telecommunications companies, etc., that fuck people over every day with bullshit practices or seize their cars/homes from them and throw them to the curb.

New Ameican definition for "Fuck people over" - following contract law which says if you don't pay a loan the bank can seize the property and sell it to someone else.

That "fucking people over" practice has only been in place since the dawn of lending.

In any event, carry on with your regularly scheduled communist manifesto.

[I OU a Beatn]

Pretty similar to an Online Pass though.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 4 Beta

It's just a play on words. I'm pretty sure they knew full well that Sony and Microsoft were going to implement systems that allowed publishers to require a game be registered before allowing to be played, so they went ahead announced the end of the online pass. Rest assured, they'll be first in line to use the system. I also believe that's why they're all of the sudden buddy-buddy with Microsoft, when they spent this entire generation making deals with Sony. Why the sudden change? Look no further than the reveals. Microsoft, at the beginning at least, came right out and said used games would require a transfer of license, fees, and whatever else... meanwhile, Sony never came out and committed to either situation. I personally believe that Microsoft was willing to commit to it, while Sony wasn't, and that's what got Microsoft the supposed EA exclusives (Mirror's Edge 2 and Respawn Entertainment's shooter...supposedly) and then timed DLC on a bunch of games (supposedly).

[SmoothPancakes]

New Ameican definition for "Fuck people over" - following contract law which says if you don't pay a loan the bank can seize the property and sell it to someone else.

That "fucking people over" practice has only been in place since the dawn of lending.

In any event, carry on with your regularly scheduled communist manifesto.

Fucking people over and seizing cars/homes were listed as separate things in my post. Some of the banks, credit card companies and telecommunications companies have time and time again been involved in some seriously shady shit that did nothing but fuck Joe Consumer over and line the pockets of the banks and companies. But yes, EA forcing you to enter a code for some online pass, yes, how fucking dare they, could have been the end of civilization as we knew it if it was allowed to continue.