so AC4 released on Ps3 and x360 only? have a question i`m playing it rigth now on my WiiU...this fucking industry is making me sick.
34 years playing games.
ironmanDX said:
Go figure. |
You do realise if they didn't "bash the X1" their policies would never have been reversed right?
This must be the weirdest DRM I've ever heard. This is far worse than MS calling us all thieves. Even legitimate gamers, who have bought the game 2nd hand, are restricted from a part of the game that doesn't/shouldn't require online. I can understand them wanting to control online play as servers need paying for (even if I think that is wrong anyway, the original owner has paid but doesn't own the game anymore, so why should the new owner of that copy pay?) but this is just stupid. Maybe people should shout at Ubisoft a bit more.
However, not ever having bought an AC game, I don't care, and it's being up to the developer is neither MS or Sony's fault. Just a greedy money grabbing corporation like all the others.
Hmm, pie.
| J_Allard said: I seem to remember a Sony exec giving an interview first claiming that these bullshit "offline passes" won't be allowed on PS4, then later admitted that 3rd party publishers can actually do whatever they want. But, however, when stacked up against 1st party games not having any sort of used game DRM, the publishers would follow suit. Well so much for that idea I guess. |
This all happend in one interview.
Hes first paragraph was confusing then he later clarified. Its not like it was a seperate interviews and then a few months down the line they changed their tune. You making it seem as if Sony changed their stance over a period of time. This never happened. Im not sure why you trying to do that but anyways.
KylieDog said:
|
.... trolling?
34 years playing games.
KylieDog said:
|
ohh i see :)
LOL
34 years playing games.
J_Allard said:
Actually he did say they were not allowing it. But then said they can actually do whatever they want. It's right there in the quote. But that is irrelevant. I was referring to the speal about how 3rd party companies wouldn't dare put the passes in when Sony games don't have them. Obviously his line of thinking there was incorrect. |
I think you're misunderstanding this Sony representative. What he's saying is something like this: "PS4 will not be forcing DRM-shit unto customers. The situation on PS4 is actually just like on PS3: If publishers definitely want DRM - well, we won't stop them, but they'll have to implement it themselves, and somehow I don't think it will happen very often, because gamers will hate it and it will give the game bad press. But there's one thing we really don't want to allow: "online passes" - PS4 owners will have to pay for playing online anyway, they won't understand/tolerate paying twice just for playing online.
Shinobi-san said:
This all happend in one interview. Hes first paragraph was confusing then he later clarified. Its not like it was a seperate interviews and then a few months down the line they changed their tune. You making it seem as if Sony changed their stance over a period of time. This never happened. Im not sure why you trying to do that but anyways. |
You're joking. I made it abundantly clear in that post and a couple that followed that no, I was not doing what is bolded. And the post you quoted even says he said one thing and then later changed it in the same interview. It says it right there, "an interview". Not "interviews".
And again I am talking more to his idea that publishers will avoid using these passes just because Sony is getting rid of them. Obviously that is not the case.
J_Allard said:
You're joking. I made it abundantly clear in that post and a couple that followed that no, I was not doing what is bolded. And the post you quoted even says he said one thing and then later changed it in the same interview. It says it right there, "an interview". Not "interviews". And again I am talking more to his idea that publishers will avoid using these passes just because Sony is getting rid of them. Obviously that is not the case. |
You said "then later admitted" that later could have been whenever. Thats how i read your post. The guy clearly messed up his first sentence then clarified immediately after. I seriously dont get why you even brought it up though. I do however understand the second part of it..because he was clearly wrong in the whole "setting a precedent" thing.
Weird because Ubisoft dropped Online Pass forever.
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=171173
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
