Playstation 4 sneaks in spying and monitoring 4 days prior to launch through mandatory update.

[InformedIgnorance]

Well if I were to buy a PS4 (I am not going to after they BSed me with the PS3) I wouldnt be using the PSN...

Still... during the lead up to and post E3 you would have thought they would see what reactions to this sort of stuff would be. First Xbox and now Sony Entertainment... seriously who the hell is moderating the advise from the legal divisions to say "yeah, that ability might be nice from our perspective - but you know, our customers might not buy our **** if we do"

 

[Twilight Hue]

It's perfectly reasonable to monitor the chatter that goes on in multiplayer matches, much like we do here on RF, especially considering all the bullying and abuse that goes on there. But monitoring ALL online activities is just asking for trouble.

Plus the whole "licensed software" is just a bunch of crock. You can't copyright 2+2.

Thats the whole problem. Reasonable monitoring has gone way towards to being excessive to the point of corporate fanaticism where every little thing needs control and accounting for. It's turned from game ownership entailed with the classic freedoms of said ownership to a hideously revamped "rental" scheme masquerading as ownership without those freedoms we enjoyed in the old days when gaming was pure gaming and was enjoyed as such.

 

[Riverwolf]

Thats the whole problem. Reasonable monitoring has gone way towards to being excessive to the point of corporate fanaticism where every little thing needs control and accounting for. It's turned from game ownership entailed with the classic freedoms of said ownership to a hideously revamped "rental" scheme masquerading as ownership without those freedoms we enjoyed in the old days when gaming was pure gaming and was enjoyed as such.

Then again, as an aspiring indie developer who has no intention of including DRM built-in to the software (which means that even though it will be available on Steam which is itself DRM, there will be DRM-free versions purchasable elsewhere), AND who intends to keep his games open-source as much as realistically possible, I really shouldn't be complaining.

After all, their loss is my gain.

 

[Twilight Hue]

What is wrong with the Xbox One? Does it have some of the same problems as PlayStation 4? I was looking at some of the games for it the other day and they look awesome.

I think what is being presented gamewise is great as well. The issue revolves with the overzealous and possessive attitudes displayed over intellectual rights to a product they sell.


It seems over possesivness and plain greed has diminished the gaming experience to the point where dis-enchantment takes president over the actual enjoyment and ownership of the game itself that you payed a reasonable amount of money for. At least thats how I feel about it now.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

I find myself willing to spend less and less on games these days despite them costing more and more to produce in terms of the premier releases...

Like... anything with an online service required for registration is minus $20, online service for updates and mods etc is minus $40 and for one person play is minus $60... hmmmn actually maybe I should make a list of all the things that diminish the amount I am willing to pay for a game... that might be an interesting exercise...

 

[illykitty]

Huh? Don't they already do this on the PS3, 360, etc?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Huh? Don't they already do this on the PS3, 360, etc?

Not to the extent it is now compared to ps3 xbox 360 system launches.

Lot has changed since.

 

[illykitty]

Can someone tell me what the differences are?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Can someone tell me what the differences are?

Yes, there is one main difference: xBox One will be better.

In all seriousness, I don't know though. I do know the difference between the PS3 and 360 though, perhaps it'll be similar differences.

Most games look better on xbox 360 because it is easier to make games on it. Even 5 years into the PS3's life most developers still cannot get it right.

PS3 Online accounts were a lot easier to hack into, which is why xBox had people pay for online, the money from that would go to security purposes to keep your xBox LIVE account safe.

Some PS3 games were Playstation compatible only, the same with some xBox games - only xBox compatible.

Most people tend to find Sony's controller layout a lot easier than the 360's, but that also entirely depends on what you're used to. For example, I used to think that Sony's controller would be easier having owned a PS1 and a PS2 prior to this generation's consoles, but when I decided to get a 360 (most of my friends had that console and I wanted to play online with friends) I gradually got used to how to hold the controller and where the buttons were at. It took me less than a week to stop having to look down at the controller.

PS3 has a built in Blu-ray player, which provides HD output with great sound quality.

 

[Riverwolf]

Can someone tell me what the differences are?

PS4 = Kingdom Hearts 3
XBOX One = Killer Instinct 3

 

[The Sum of Awe]

PS4 = Kingdom Hearts 3
XBOX One = Killer Instinct 3

Well, I'm certainly glad some game developers can count to three

 

[Riverwolf]

Well, I'm certainly glad some game developers can count to three

Indeed. ^_^

Though apparently, Valve recently learned how to count to 3 themselves, as some journalists saw on someone's open computer a line that read "L4D3" some months ago.

'Course one must also remember that Killer Instinct is a '90s fighter, and Kingdom Hearts fans have been waiting for 3 since... well, I was still in high school when the second game was being talked about constantly by the nerds. So I guess it just takes a long time for some developers to count that high.

 

[illykitty]

That isn't what I meant, I know the difference between One and 4, I meant what changed in the "spying", what makes it worse than the monitoring they already do on the PS3 and the XBOXOne?

 

[Riverwolf]

That isn't what I meant, I know the difference between One and 4, I meant what changed in the "spying", what makes it worse than the monitoring they already do on the PS3 and the XBOXOne?

Far as I know, the PS3 and 360 keep only the information you give. But the Xbone's connect is always connected, and supposedly can't be turned off or disconnected from the main system. The PS4's current thing apparently isn't that bad, but still goes too far.

Either way, neither is anywhere near as bad as what the Xbone was originally going to to. (That poor console has the WORST marketing I've ever seen from this industry. ...except for the commercial for the TurboDuo, perhaps.)

 

[illykitty]

Yeah, really bad... So much so that MS gave away some, my husband was one of the few people who got that email and accepted (not going to complain about getting something for free).

Speculating here, but MS probably want to make it seem like more Ones are being sold on day one and they have left over stock. It's also "good" publicity, etc. The PS4 on release is sold out (people who pre-order now will get it before Xmas) so MS probably wants to boost the numbers to make it seem like they're competing.

 

[Curious George]

Spying and monitoring like this takes away security. It means they're collecting information, which makes those databases targets for hackers (and if a hacker wants in, they'll get in.)

They already collect information, the duty to reasonably protect that information stays the same. Their main duty is to the shareholders. Creating, running and profiting from a network where people can foreseeably take advantage of others creates a liability much worse. While the consumer can contract away information the company cannot necessarily contract all liability. But what type of information are we trying to keep the company from storing- stuff you load to the network, gameplay, what you say, and messages you send. Credit and personal information which identity thieves might target is regulated under specific guidelines. now I am not saying that a couple of hardcore gamers won't try to hack just for gits and shiggles, but all the damaging data most people gave freely to the companies even prior to these contract terms. I just fail to see what the potential damage is. Will this potentially increase the risk of punishment or prosecution for uploading naked pics, yeah probably. Will it increase the chance of your membership being terminated for cheating or bullying-yeah probably. I would think fairer, safer gameplay is better.

 

[Riverwolf]

They already collect information, the duty to reasonably protect that information stays the same. Their main duty is to the shareholders.

The bane of gamin and this industry.

I will never answer to shareholders. I make the game I want, and distribute it however I want.

Creating, running and profiting from a network where people can foreseeably take advantage of others creates a liability much worse. While the consumer can contract away information the company cannot necessarily contract all liability. But what type of information are we trying to keep the company from storing- stuff you load to the network, gameplay, what you say, and messages you send. Credit and personal information which identity thieves might target is regulated under specific guidelines. now I am not saying that a couple of hardcore gamers won't try to hack just for gits and shiggles, but all the damaging data most people gave freely to the companies even prior to these contract terms. I just fail to see what the potential damage is. Will this potentially increase the risk of punishment or prosecution for uploading naked pics, yeah probably. Will it increase the chance of your membership being terminated for cheating or bullying-yeah probably. I would think fairer, safer gameplay is better.

It's also got a higher risk of not being able to play the game you paid for because of a non-issue, or economic politics.

Like I said: monitoring certain things, like ingame chatter (which is technically public anyway), is okay. But monitoring EVERYTHING is a bad idea, especially in this current social environment. (Turns out the PS4 is also a very dodgy piece of hardware; reports of a "Red Line of Death" are coming in quite fast and hard.)

Granted, in retrospect, the guy in the video might be overreacting a bit, as the terms are not, again, anywhere NEAR as bad as the XBone was going to be. At least the PS4 can be kept offline, so people who prefer to play by themselves (such as myself) don't have to worry.

'Sides, I don't think the monitoring is really the problem; I think the biggest problem is the attitude of "software as service." THAT'S unacceptable.

 

[Curious George]

The bane of gamin and this industry.

I will never answer to shareholders. I make the game I want, and distribute it however I want.
.

That's fine, just don't have shareholders. things change once others are involved.

 

[Riverwolf]

That's fine, just don't have shareholders. things change once others are involved.

I won't allow it to get that big. A team of no more than five, that's all.

 

[Curious George]

The bane of gamin and this industry.

I will never answer to shareholders. I make the game I want, and distribute it however I want.

It's also got a higher risk of not being able to play the game you paid for because of a non-issue, or economic politics.

Like I said: monitoring certain things, like ingame chatter (which is technically public anyway), is okay. But monitoring EVERYTHING is a bad idea, especially in this current social environment. (Turns out the PS4 is also a very dodgy piece of hardware; reports of a "Red Line of Death" are coming in quite fast and hard.)

Granted, in retrospect, the guy in the video might be overreacting a bit, as the terms are not, again, anywhere NEAR as bad as the XBone was going to be. At least the PS4 can be kept offline, so people who prefer to play by themselves (such as myself) don't have to worry.

'Sides, I don't think the monitoring is really the problem; I think the biggest problem is the attitude of "software as service." THAT'S unacceptable.

I think if I had to choose between my kid not having as many buddies to play with vs. being solicited online, I would probably choose the former.

If I had to choose between playing a few legit gamers vs. a bunch of cheaters I would probably choose the former.

If there was a way to diminish online bullying, I'd want it.

I support the reduction of spam.

Though piracy doesn't affect me, I can't really get mad at a company for trying to enforce their rights and make a buck(or a million), that is what they do. I am sure people will still have ways to get around any company's effort to thwart piracy. When there is enough desire and intelligent, creative minds involved people usually find away around obstacles.