Forums - Gaming Discussion - Changing lead platforms for the first time since 1998.

LudicrousSpeed said:
Kerotan said:

I didnt say that. But my point is they chosen to focus on awesome exclusives. Microsoft however haven't and one of their biggest focuses has been bc. The consumers are voting with their feet and choosing playstation. 

You said if instead of exclusives they gave you BC. It doesn’t have to be one or the other. They can do both. What MS has done or is doing is irrelevant to the discussion.

Hello? I'm saying that if this gen Sony hadn't been releasing lots of top quality games but instead were focusing on bc id be pissed. I want quality new games not old games i don't play anymore (for a reason). 



Around the Network
MrWayne said:

DonFerrari said:


And you can still play your games on the original console, I keep my consoles since NES gen, but rarely I play them. They are certainly classics and good to play from time to time, but on the broader view they are neglible on making listing war.

PC gaming is the most curious thing ever, I know to many people that put more than 1k USD in a rig to play DoTA. For me that is asinine use of money but they want some over 200fps even if the graphics will keep being terrible.

But that's my point, those PC-games aren't negligible, they are as important for PC-gaming as new releases like GoW, Spider Man or RDR2 are for Playstation.

Those are a less than a dozen games against regular releases. It doesn't really show any logic in counting the full catalog of PC games from the 80's until today as relevant. Let me ask this way but in percentage how many PC owners upgrade their grid to play a 90's game? People keep changing their consoles or updating their PC to play what is new not what is old, so pad list with ancient stuff is pointless. You may say you have a very big library all you want, but you won't even have the time or wish to play those games. I keep a lot of old consoles, but since there are new games releasing all the time I rarely go back to play old games.

DonFerrari said:

Nope it isn't kinda true. Digital Rights Management of the physical media is the part that can prevent you from pirating it, not the part that prevent you from using on a different console. Unless you want to call DRM the fact a cobol program can't run in access as is or that someone that reads english only can't read a document in swedish.

You have to look at it from the PC gamers perspective.
If a game needs the DVD in the drive to run, it prevents you from running the game on 10 pc's at the same time. that's clearly DRM because it means you and your friends have to buy more then more copy of the game..

This was obviously never a thing in the console space because games were not installed on consoles.

I don't have to look at anyone perspective. I'm looking at the ridiculous way Pema have tried to define DRM.

And I'm still to find any console game DRM that gave anyone any nuisance while playing legitimate, the most I can remember is the pass on some PS3 games if you wanted to play online you had to use the key that were in the game or buy a new one if you had the game second hand/shared. And on some games the keys put as bonus for pre-order. So nope, trying to push a narrative that the console is DRM because you have to buy a disc is ridiculous. This is on the level of "Sony is the devil because they don't let me pirate or play on my PC", business aren't charities.

 

flashfire926 said:
DonFerrari said:

PS3 had BC last gen until Sony saw that the extra cost didn't brought extra revenue and cut it out. So that pretty much show that listing BC games to pad list war is laughable. You may love some or even all of the previous gen games, but a very very very small number of people would buy new consoles for the intent of playing old games they already had console to play it on.


 

Not to take any sides, but the PS3 never really fully got rid of back compat. Every PS3 (even the slims) can play all PS1 disks.  And to make up for PS2 BC removed they released several game collections like ratchet and god of war.

Even during late last gen Playstation/Sony still valued their old games greatly.

Not say you are wrong, because you aren't, and I bought several collections/remasters as they were improved versions, with platinum of games I didn't play before. But considering how much they sold and how many PS1 CDs people played I would say it still wasn't the most relevant of things for PS3 or PS4. But ludicrous tried to portray that as hypocrisy from Sony fans even when he so much swear he doesn't do console war.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

I

Kerotan said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

You said if instead of exclusives they gave you BC. It doesn’t have to be one or the other. They can do both. What MS has done or is doing is irrelevant to the discussion.

Hello? I'm saying that if this gen Sony hadn't been releasing lots of top quality games but instead were focusing on bc id be pissed. I want quality new games not old games i don't play anymore (for a reason). 

Hello? It’s an irrelevant point to make because no one is asking for Sony to stop making their games and instead focus on BC. You can want BC and new games at the same time, it’s a wild concept but it works. It’s hyperbole you use to downplay BC. 



LudicrousSpeed said:

I

Kerotan said:

Hello? I'm saying that if this gen Sony hadn't been releasing lots of top quality games but instead were focusing on bc id be pissed. I want quality new games not old games i don't play anymore (for a reason). 

Hello? It’s an irrelevant point to make because no one is asking for Sony to stop making their games and instead focus on BC. You can want BC and new games at the same time, it’s a wild concept but it works. It’s hyperbole you use to downplay BC. 

Jesus you really missed the point. I know they can focus on both but i sure as hell know which one I'd rather they focus on. 



And you’re still wrong. lol why would working on BC software affect video game development at all?

Basically Sony is doing A, they could also do B with no effect whatsoever on A, but you’re just like “nah, stick to A!”

Until they come out with B, then I predict you’ll think it’s amazing. It’s crossplay version 2 lol



Around the Network
LudicrousSpeed said:
And you’re still wrong. lol why would working on BC software affect video game development at all?

Basically Sony is doing A, they could also do B with no effect whatsoever on A, but you’re just like “nah, stick to A!”

Until they come out with B, then I predict you’ll think it’s amazing. It’s crossplay version 2 lol

Resources are not created out of thin air. It takes time and money to add BC. Nobody is saying BC isn’t nice but it isn’t essential.



Meanwhile Microsoft are doing B very well but not doing a good job at A. I know which I'd prefer. And as sales suggest i know what the average consumer prefers too.



Edit: Sorry for the terrible formatting. Pema won't read my sources unless I put them here. 

Pemalite said: 
Cerebralbore101 said:

Pem and I have had that argument before. He wants to count every single PC game made since 1980, and then try to stack it up against a single console generation's library.

I can compare every Playstation console, be it fixed or handheld to the PC's game library and the PC will still have more games.

More =/= better. 

Cerebralbore101 said:

That's like an XB1 fanboy trying to argue that since XB1 is backwards compatible you have to count every XBO, 360, and XB1 game that isn't playable on PS4, when comparing libraries of the XB1 and PS4.

Every PC game is playable on the PC.

What's your point? 

Cerebralbore101 said:

Consoles have DRM, but there is still an option to have a physical DRM free version with almost all console games.

The Physical version is not DRM free.

See the bottom of this post for 4 sources that disagree with you. You can attempt to change the meaning of DRM all you want, but that doesn't stop the fact that most AAA games on PC can't be sold or traded to others. Remember when everyone was up in arms because MS wanted to charge a fee to resell your game? Remember when everyone was up in arms because MS wanted to do 24 hour check ins for a game? Even in some alternate reality where not being able to play a PS4 disc on your PC counts as DRM, nobody would care. What people care about is whether or not a game forces you to prove that you legitimately own a game. What people care about is the ability to sell or trade games freely. The sales results of this generation are a testament to that fact. 

Cerebralbore101 said:

Yeah I can see 1440p from a 1K build. But 4k? Not happening.

Older games should do 4k just fine.
The great thing about PC though is that when you buy/upgrade your PC... You can run all your older games at higher resolutions and settings.

Agreed. I pointed out logicalincrements.com's list of parts, as a source for my claim. You can see in their list, that they show that a 1K rig can play games like League, and less demanding games at 4K. Being able to play older games in 4K with a rig like that was never in doubt. 

I can stick my Steam games on an external HDD, plug it into a friends PC and start playing, no different from your physical games.

First you have to log into your steam account though, and that is when the DRM kicks in. It checks to see if your steam account has permission to play that game. And your steam game is still locked to your library. You can share it with your friends, but you can never sell it from your steam library without selling your entire steam account. 

And the reason why GOG games isn't DRM... Isn't because it won't run on a Playstation console... It's because Sony wouldn't allow it to run, that's the ultimate difference here.
The console itself is also DRM.

GoG isn't DRM, because... 

1. If I want I can sell my install file to somebody else. Sure, that would violate the TOS for GoG, but old N64 games used to come with similar TOS for physical versions, stating that you had no right to sell your physical copy. People ignored that, and anybody is capable of ignoring the GoG TOS. 

2. GoG gives you the option to download an install file that will never ask you to prove that you legally own said game. 

The Wii can't play all those Nintendo console released games over that entire time period.

It can play most of them, and that is enough to dismantle your argument. 

Your argument is ultimately irrelevant as I already stated that my tastes will differ from others.

When is the last time you sat down with a Sony or Nintendo exclusive and gave it a fair go?

That is a fundamental change in technology. It's a silly comparison.
The Playstation 4 is using x86, Graphics Core Next, *Nix derived OS, OpenGL and so on. - If it wasn't for DRM, it would be perfectly playable on a PC of similar build, natively.

Not all of my Steam games will run on my Linux computer. And it is identical to my Windows computer, except that it runs on Linux instead. Therefore DRM. Technological incompatibility =/= DRM. 

 

https://techterms.com/definition/drm

DRM stands for "Digital Rights Management." DRM refers to a collection of systems used to protect the copyrights of electronic media. These include digital music and movies, as well as other data that is stored and transferred digitally. For example, the Apple iTunes Music Store uses a DRM system to limit the number of computers that songs can be played on. Each audio file downloaded from the iTunes music store includes information about the owner of the file and how many times the file has been transferred. The protected files will not play on computers that have not been authorized to play the music.

Digital Rights Management is important to publishers of electronic media since it helps ensure they will receive the appropriate revenue for their products. By controlling the trading, protection, monitoring, and tracking of digital media, DRM helps publishers limit the illegal propagation of copyrighted works. This can be accomplished by using digital watermarks or proprietary file encryption on the media they distribute. Whatever method publishers choose to employ, DRM helps them make sure that their digital content is only used by those who have paid for it.

https://www.techopedia.com/definition/3986/digital-rights-management-drm

Definition - What does Digital Rights Management (DRM)mean?

Digital rights management  (DRM) is any access control technology used to protect and license digital intellectual property (IP). DRM is used by publishers, manufacturers and IP owners for digital content and device monitoring.

Digital media licensees benefit from an open and fair range of DRM licensing options, which balance the rights of IP owners and Internet users, translating to exponential profits for digital product  manufacturers and retailers.

 

 

 

 

DRM protects copyrighted digital software , music, films, TV shows, games and similar media.

Consumer advocacy groups argue that aggressive DRM protection denies fair digital media access. However, DRM continues to be a viable tool for managing digital privacy, averting piracy and fair compensation to IP owners

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/glossary/drm/

Digital Rights Management (DRM) A technology used to protect the interests of owners of content and services (such as copyright owners). Typically, authorized recipients or users must acquire a license in order to use the protected material — files, music, movies. DRM enables secure distribution and/or disables illegal distribution of the data. OMA DRM is a Digital Rights Management standard published by the Open Mobile Alliance. DRM writes to the Master Boot Record (MBR) and cannot be removed without a hard-drive reformat.
DRMnoun [ U ] 
UK  /diː.ɑːrˈem/ US  /diː.ɑːrˈem/

 abbreviation for Digital Rights Management: types of technology used to preventpeople from illegally copying softwaremusicfilms, etc.:

DRM can ensure that programs distributed by internet are legal copies for which the copyright holderis being paid a fee.
As you can see DRM has nothing to do with whether or not you can use a certain piece of media on a certain device. 
Conina said: 
Cerebralbore101 said: 

Shopkeeper: I have every fruit known to man! Come buy my wares!

Wiseguy: Lists a ton of fruits that are poisonous to humans. 

Shopkeeper: But why would I sell those? People don't want to eat inedible fruits. This is a market after all. 

Wiseguy: Ah, the "fruit x doesn't count" argument for shifting goalposts... how predictable.

I'm just gonna take a break from this thread for the rest of the day. I'm just arguing with the same three users that I've always disagreed with anyway. 

Phase 2: the straw man argument.

That's not a strawman. I'm comparing the structure of your argument to the structure of another argument, in order to point out the flaws. 

For example: "Only true Americans read the bible." "No true Scotsman eats porridge."

I didn't think I'd have to spell it out for you, but here goes. The shopkeeper is standing in a market selling fruit for consumption. He says that he has every fruit known to man, and everyone clearly understands that since he is in a market meant for selling food, he means every edible fruit known to man. But of course the wiseguy in my example utterly ignores the context in order to "be right". Its clear from my previous posts in this thread that I was talking about non-Indie games. A.K.A games that aren't on the eShop or PSN. 

 I know where you're going with this, and I agree to an extent. Yes, there is DRM on consoles, but the important thing is that consoles at least offer a DRM free physical version. GoG has a great library, but it is still missing about 80% of quality AAA multiplats. And as far as I know humble bundle just offers up a steam code, or some other DRM version. 

I agree with the bolded. The prices for digital versions of AAA games on consoles are a joke.  Consoles also have DRM, but they have way less than PC. I'd say there's about a 1 in 5 chance of a AAA game coming to GoG, while almost all AAA games on consoles are available at retail. If its on GoG I'll get it for PC for sure. But otherwise I'll be going for whatever version is DRM free. 

 

Last edited by Cerebralbore101 - on 18 September 2018

The sentence below is false. 
The sentence above is true. 

 

LudicrousSpeed said:
And you’re still wrong. lol why would working on BC software affect video game development at all?

Basically Sony is doing A, they could also do B with no effect whatsoever on A, but you’re just like “nah, stick to A!”

Until they come out with B, then I predict you’ll think it’s amazing. It’s crossplay version 2 lol

If you're spending that time and money on developing BC, you're not spending it on making another game. Even if they decided to increase overall funding specifically to work on it, some would still wish they'd instead increased funding to make even more games, and I don't see anything wrong with that position. It'd be one thing if we were discussing some basic, easy to implement feature (and there are certainly plenty of others that come under the list of "Sony have no good excuse for having not done this yet"), but as it stands it debatable if it's even possible on a practical level. ND went through self-described "hell" to just get TLOU running on a PS4 at all, and that was with them actually porting it over. I can barley imagine what'd be necessary to get a PS4 to be able to efficiently pretend it has the same wacky clown shit as the PS3. At minimum they'd have to find some way of the GPU being able to pretend it's a Cell, and personally curiosity alone puts me fully in favour of the proposal. Fuck more games, I want an in-depth GDC about it



Kudos to those who still find time for last gen gaming.  Personally for me, if I wanted to play my catalog of previous gen, I'd plug in my OG phatty and play away, but my backlog of current gen could last me through the middle of next gen at this point, and still more games will be released before next gen even starts.  How the crap people find time to game so much still blows my mind.. gamer since 89, but with work, family, and other things to take care of, I'm lucky to play more than a few hrs a week.  Crap took me almost 4 weeks just to finish God of War.

Anyways, OT.. do what you want to do.., personally for me, I'd rather browse and/or YouTube, exception being YouTube VR, off my phone, tablet, or laptop before I'd ever touch it on my ps4.  Same thing with other media.  Don't understand this whole multimedia narrative with consoles.  If I wasn't planning on gaming, then I'd do it elsewhere.  That's the point of a gaming console isn't it?  The games?



Man.. I hate it when your girl has to leave my place to come back to you..