The writing on the wall is obviously developers and publishers are trying to push towards a way to block used games. However, there is no real proof it will be done any differently on the ps4 as is done on the current gen. Alternatively, MS built their device with DRM in mind and will require little to no extra cost for publishers to enforce DRM for its games. Furthermore, X1 has DRM built in to limit/micro manage all used games regardless of the publisher. Therefore, what happened was MS was most likely planning on utilizing that for monetization purposes, but due to consumer backlash realized they needed to add some extra features (NOT AVAILABLE AT LAUNCH) to try and appease the fan base, and not charge to make it look like they aren't the bad guy.

Prediction 1: Some EA games, and possibly other 3rd party games, will utilize the DRM that is already planned on the x1, and later on see what a failure it was and bitterly apologize to the consumers.

Prediction 2: Those same games on the PS4 will have some sort of limited DRM, more similar to current gen DRM, but will not feature the same level of control as the hardware does not natively support DRM for any game. So if EA wants that same level of control they will have to spend more time and money to develop it to work on the PS4. I truly doubt they already have something in place to do that when MS probably worked out a deal with EA for exclusives to be able to utilize their DRM native functionality.

First party games will have an online pass built into the system. When it comes to third party such as EA, Activision, Ubisoft, etc. you will have to connect online to play the game. If you don't have the internet you will not be able to play COD, Battlefield, etc.

Delete my quote please.

Come on, you can't be so naive.

Gamers will buy the next CoD, Battlefield, Fifa, Resident Evil, Madden etc. no matter what. They donjeopardise anything.
Some vocal cyber che guevaras won't change that.

I am sorry, why do I have to prove anything?

What logic have I put forward that is flawed?  Is there any evidence whatsoever that Microsoft is doing anything more than requiring online pass codes?  Indeed, Microsoft appears to be adopting much the same approach it has had with the Xbox 360, and Sony the same with the PS3. Microsoft's system comes with a couple of advantages and a couple of drawbacks.

Drawbacks: An internet connection will be required once per day.

Advantages of the system: All games can be designed with regular updates in mind, the potential for cloud computation (drastically improving game performance) and dramatically enhanced social connectivity.

Now for some people having to connect to the internet every day is an absolute deal breaker, and that is fine.  For those to whom this is not an issue, the Xbox One looks set to be a fantastic home entertainment system.  Just as with the PS4, we'll have to wait until after E3 to know whether or not it will be worth purchasing as a game's console.

What we know is limited for both consoles.  However what we can quite readily infer from both companies is that their DRM systems will be damn near identical.

tuscaniman99 6 minutes ago
First party games will have an online pass built into the system. When it comes to third party such as EA, Activision, Ubisoft, etc. you will have to connect online to play the game. If you don't have the internet you will not be able to play COD, Battlefield, etc.
-------------------------------------------------
I think that is a distinct possibility, but unlikely because the issue these people have with used games is they don't make money off of the game. So just blocking it with that method wouldn't serve as a way to monetize the used game market in their favor. So they would have to create some sort of database much like the one MS has built in the x1 for DRM.

So for example EA has said they aren't doing online passes anymore, but on the x1 they can easily monetize used game sales because MS is doing all of the grunt work for them on the management side of the digital rights. However, on the PS3 it would actually cost them money to develop and manage a similar system that could be utilized to monetize used game sales for them.

Now unless the Sony official mouth pieces have been lying about their part in the new coming wave of DRM, and actually did put a similar system built into the ps4, (what x1 has), then Sony would be doing the grunt work and they could monetize it easily. However, Sony has made every indication thus far otherwise and MS probably would sue them if they did.

prediction 3: E3 will not reveal the full details on these issues for either console, and it will not be known for sure until the products are actually released.

I love how every negative XBO rumour must be true yet every negative Sony rumour must be false. How about instead of telling everyone to not comment on rumours you actually all practice what you preach. The PS4 will have DRM just like the 360 and PS3 do, the question will be how restrictive the policies are. I think some of you need to learn what DRM actually means.

@starcraft: However what we can quite readily infer from both companies is that their DRM systems will be damn near identical.
------
We are inferring 2 very different things from the facts. While both have said the DRM is being left up to 3rd parties, MS has actually revealed how it will work on the X1. Alternatively, Sony has shown no indication of having a set up similar at all in regards to how DRM would work on the PS4. Now Sony could quite likely have set up a system (and that system could be very different) that would effectively be the same, but the evidence thus far does not support that such a system even exists on the PS4. Reportedly, there was a patent/copyright Sony was working on for basically watermarking blu ray discs, but have said that they won't be using that on the PS4, and for all we know could be for movies. Therefore we can infer that if Sony was in fact previously planning on using that type of system it would be vastly different in implementation, but effectively the same result.

So we have MS saying that DRM is up to the 3rd party games, yet they set up the system for them to enforce any DRM they might want easily and effectively.
Then we have Sony saying if a 3rd party wants to enforce DRM that's up to them to figure out how to do so.

That is the big key difference between the two in regards to DRM. X1 is already doing it, and PS4 is not (as far as we know and has been stated publicly)

So 3rd party games on X1 only need to figure out how much to charge, but for ps4 they need to figure out how to enforce such a system and charge for it.

I'm not sure what part of "We won't force customers to use Xbox One like authentication, and used sales fees, we're leaving that up to the publishers" is supposed to be particularly comforting.

I mean, we're assuming MOST publishers love those features right? That they won't want to be losing money via used sales sale on Playstation when they could be getting paid for uses sales on 360.

Nothing in what they said actually doesn't suggest that the PS3 won't have an Xbox one like authentication system. Just that sony won't force it on you. The individual publishers will. Instead of your PS4 not playing any games after 24 hours. Maybe just nearly every game except Sony games don't play after 24 hours. Maybe games come with good old CD Keys.

Logic dictates that the publishers are going to do SOMETHING to make up for that extra profit.  Either by some sort of similiar system for PS4 games... or by making Xbone games more appealing. (Tons of exclusive content, unpaid timed exclusives.)

Microsoft is essentially using a "trickledown" approach here.  Favor the publishers at the expense of the consumers, and your competitors have to match, or face issues with the publishers.

Since games are what move consoles... in the end, it could help via exclusive content more then negative backlash for being jerks.

It cuases a "race to the bottom."

Sony can not play, but then they might lose anyway.   Will it work?  Who knows.  Pretty diabolical though.  (Assuming MS and Sony were in on this from the start and sony is just playing dumb.)