Probably because Nintendo never gets multiplats, so the chances of the Wii U having DRM throw a 3rd party game is very slim, but the chance is still there.

its getting watch dogs and i'm pretty sure it will get other big games,its getting cod isn't it,batman(multiplay?),but anyway people are implying that unless you pay and pray to teh devil you won't be playing anything yet no mention of anything extra with nintendo,if this is the case then i'll  buy a WiiU,haven't done mario for a while,new zelda and plenty of other TP stuff

Isn't that whats the article is about? EDGE picking up stuff from developers that their PUBLISHERS ARE GOING to implement DRM.. Since the publishers haven't said a thing about it yet.. This is like the first info what 3rd party publishers are going to do.. unless you or another source talked to some developers saying that their publishers aren't going to do it.. which also could be true.. and please don't confuse me with the story from edge.. I didn't write it.. the thread title reflects the Edge article.. i just read it unlike 80% of the people in this thread who are overeacting and should read the article in a normal way.. If people would take a minute to just read it properly this thread could have been what publishers could be doing instead of these 9000 "but Sony said" responses..

ill believe Sony with this one.

If specific publishers put up restrictions how is it Sony's fault? This is exactly how it is on PS3. Nothing has changed on this matter between PS3 and PS4 and Edge runs this as a news article? Terrible sensationalist headline that creates confusion for people when Sony came out and said 100% they will not have forced DRM on their games and that only the publishers can limit their own online games in these ways.

While Sony didn't lied, if some publishers do come on with DRM for the PS4, then who do you think people are going to blame? Sony.

It's true that a publishers decision won't be Sony's fault, but I bet that if EA comes out with something like "offline passes", then people will point the finger to Sony and say "They lied to me!". Hopefully people are smarter than that, but most of the cases they aren't.

Except Sony didn't hide that publishers can put restrictions. They never said they were forcing 3rd parties to do what Sony wants on this. I can blame the government for a bad meal if I'm stupid enough, doesn't mean that makes them culpable. 

The other thing is on PS4 if a company is doing offline DRM then you know to avoid their games if you don't want to deal with that, it's up to you. On Xbox One you're forced to deal with it on every single game whether you want to or not so better to not even buy the console if you don't want that. 

This is completely made up conjecture with zero evidence whatsoever. Unlike Microsoft which has come out and openly handed the world shovels to burry the Xbox One because of its anti consumer policies. 

Exactly. But like I said people are stupid, and if publishers come out with DRM, they won't get the blame, the console manufacturer will. 

One thing doesn't imply the other. Whether or not EA and Ubisoft supported the DRM measures by Microsoft doesn't directly mean that their games are all going to be locked from second hand purchase and renting. If they do follow that path then people can decide to not buy their games and buy the games of their competitors on the system. There's already a backlash against Microsoft for their console choices, if EA and Ubisoft are the only companies blocking used games and rentals on the PS4, I'm sure that will result in a backlash of its own.