I think all this multitasking is more of a consequence rather than the cause.    I really dont think of anybody playing a movie, watch nfl, and play a game at the same time.   Skype and playing sure, it is kind of beneficial.      Also, if multitasking is so important, then why not copy the movie to the HDD too? It would make the experience smother.

so you think they just did it for multitasking?  I really dont think of it as a compelling reason, considering all the benefits people loose because of it.

Sounds like just another reason for the move in general.
Over the course of the gen, it would save a huge amount of money, but it's likely not the singular reason.
Remember that their drm gives them a huge amount of control over many sectors.
It pushes their proprietary software azure on used game retailers, gives them a cut of every used game sale, and controls market prices to some extent. It also incentivizes switching to digital distibution where overhead is lower and prices will remain the same.

Plus it has functional benefits.
Faster access times over bluray
Allows for the system to run programs without a disc making switching to other content faster
Monetizes hard drive sizes in terms of console value perception(One year in, no price drop, but disc size increase)

From a business standpoint, it's very smart.
The only negative is that it absoutely shits all over the traditional core gamer, but it's also unlikely that the traditional core gamer is the same as their new target core audience.

And the reason why I believe sony does not have such an integral drm is because
1. Their core IS the traditional core
2. Sony went directly to devs for input
3. Which is why the rumored drm is at the discretion of the publisher (most devs know drm is a mistake)
4. They own an even better drm patent (one that can write to the media. Which makes everything very simple and OFFLINE)

i don't really know what it would change if you would have to have the disc in the drive or not. that's what i don't understand. the console would still check the "code" (forgot how they called it) and that every 24 hours if you want to play the game in that timeframe.

if you have to have the disc or not, your disc is useless without the code being "free" for another console.

and why should it be necessary to use the disc if you can't do anything with the disc even if you don't need it anymore?

maybe i just didn't understand what the problem is.

Because of  the lack of disk you need to connect every 24hrs, and so far cant sell a game to friend so that he can play it too.  You can only sell the game to a retail store.

Those a re the things people are complaining about, and those are because of the lack of disk requirement to play games.

Hmm u have a valid point, coz after the whole DRM story broke out, my brother who is a lawyer and is in no way into gaming or computers, told me that Since the Days of PS3, Sony might have an exclusive right for running games off BR, and MS is just using BR as a software delivery medium for games therefore installation, along with playback rights.

Correct me if i m wrong are there any PC games on BR

Now his stupid statements makes sense.. So it seems Sony forced MS to have DRM. I mean sure Sony even their games will install, but i assume PS4 will require disk to be in the system to authentic unlike X1

I don't see why they would eliminate the disc entirely, it might save them a $ per game, but I reckon it would cost them customers in areas without internet or certainly poor internet. I know that this is a long term strategy, but I certainly don't see a reason for them to eliminate discs entirely this generation. Some larger games are going to be >20GB and lots of people are not going to want to download that much. But I am old fashioned, I buy as many of my steam games as possible as boxed copies then active them on Steam. I get the convenince of digital and have a nice physical collection

I think it is true that they want to push downloads from their store, as obviously they get a greater cut and are certainly anticipation a greater take up of digital downloads. It just makes it easier for developers to keep everything on a level playing field

If it really was all about ensuring that people don't sell their games while still having them installed, then why can't they just have offline mode where you have to have the disc in the console? To me that seems perfectly reasonable.

I wonder; how much space does a game installation take on HDD? I have about 100 games for the current gen console I have.

That is some nice interesting complement to my theory.