Sony Still Vague About Third-Party Used Games

We double-checked whether Sony is being cute with its DRM plans and might actually be matching Xbox One in allowing publishers to block used games — despite not blocking used games itself. We asked: Can third-party publishers restrict used games on PS4 even if Sony won't?

Sony says: “Our used game position for PS4 is exactly the same as PS3, which publishers and consumers broadly support today. In fact, all publishers we’ve spoken to are in agreement with our position.”

Publishers can still do online passes to restrict multiplayer, although Sony has dropped that.

We would love Sony to flat-out say publishers can or can't block used games themselves, but it seems that this answer is the best we're getting right now.

Take a tour through Sony's statements on PS4 used game DRM here.


Comments

    I don't see how this is vague. Their policy hasn't changed; 3rd parties always were able to do it if they wanted.

      ^ this.

      It's pretty easy to kill used games right now on PS3/360 if you really want to. Put an online pass on it and charge $200 for the online pass, making it cheaper to buy a new copy than to buy the pass.

      Ditto the online check-in - you can make a game (even a single player game) that needs to check in with a server to be able to play. The difference is Sony are not supporting this or providing any kind of infrastructure for it or mandating it in any way. A company like EA who own a service like Origin may well be able to use it to implement such restrictions. Most other publishers don't have those kinds of resources, and so won't be able to implement it even if they want to.

        It's pretty easy to kill used games right now on PS3/360 if you really want to. Put an online pass on it and charge $200 for the online pass, making it cheaper to buy a new copy than to buy the pass.

        That is so horrible publishers are probably planning that RIGHT NOW.

          I doubt it, EA have stopped doing online passes and have started making old games no longer require them or the Online pass in question become free.

          Being hated by the people your hoping to sell to does not seem to be working, EA have taken notice of this and are changing tactics. If they ditch in game Micro Transactions than they will only be mildly disliked and can start working on being a company that gamers love.

          EA has made some great games in the past, if they could make me a new Road Rash that feels like Road Rash I'd be super happy.

      Exactly!!!! Far out Kotaku, are you not listening? They outright said that third parties CAN block their games if they want. They actually said it, in an interview with Geoff Keighly (however you spell it) among many other interviews. Do you not watch the E3 coverage?

      What's the big deal anyway?! Everyone had a problem with PS4 having DRM, so then Sony said okay we don't have DRM built in. Now everyone is complaining because Sony isn't dictating how third parties run their business models.

      NOTHING has changed from the PS3 model of used games.

      Fluff article much?

      Last edited 14/06/13 10:39 am

    Holy sweet jesus, a publisher can do whatever the fuck they want. They can do online passes or other shit that Sony cannot stop.
    Their is always going to be a way for a publisher to restrict it, regardless of what Sony do.

    Build a bridge people......

    Publishers can create online and passes and you "must connect to ea online servers". Nothing has changed.

    Trying to stir up controversy where there is none? Or just trying to get more page hits with fluff articles...
    The used game situation is the same as the PS3, that's what they've said. Move along now, nothing to see here.

    They aren't vague, they just don't know, they aren't providing the facilities so the don't know what publishers will decide to do software wise. Go ask Nintendo the same questions, see what answer you get. Click bait BS

    Same as it is now... seems simple to understand.

    If anything was to change, then it will be the publishers to blame... so EA might re-introduce the online pass for the PS4, which they could attempt to charge $50 for someone that purchased the game used, take the anger out on them... or just not buy their products.

      Please for the next mass effect you will need to pay to unlock companions and job class. Start with soldier only. Inventory slot needs to be purchased with dlc. Paragon dlc to Unlock paragon speeches and etc. Ea will not stop micro transactions

      I think they will just stick to season passes with dlc. Which I personally have no problem with.

    You people need to learn to read - it was vague BEFORE this clarification. They did not originally say that the position was the same as on the PS3, they vaguely alluded to the posibility that third party publishers might be able to block resales.

      They announced that their position was the same as on the PS3 during the conference.

    Actually they said almost exactly the same thing in the conference. This article is trying to say it's still vague:

    "We would love Sony to flat-out say publishers can or can’t block used games themselves, but it seems that this answer is the best we’re getting right now. "

    We can all see it's not vague at all :)

    Shuhei yoshida came out and spoke about this on an IGN podcast. there will be no online passes for games even with third parties as this is negated by the need to purchase a ps plus membership in order to play online. However if the game is service based such as dc universe online was in the beginning as a supscription based game.

    LOL. I feel like this article was written like weeks ago, then some drunk guy from Kotaku was like hey this will be funny.

    Seriously, nonsense article that has no weight. Sony clarified in exact detail how used games will work on the PS4.

    Sony isn't being vague, they just can't make statements on behalf of 3rd party publishers. If Sony said "Nope, no restrictions anywhere, ever." and then publishers start implementing DRM on their titles it makes Sony look bad, even if it is beyond their control.

    If Sony was to put DRM on titles which they publish (under SCEE, SCEA, etc.) then we could point to this and say "whoa, you said no DRM, guys".

    Why does it seem people want to make Sony look as bad as MS does? MS has embraced restrictive DRM with open arms, Sony hasn't.

    How many times and ways does Sony have to say "We don't control what third parties do. They can do what they want at their own financial peril as they have for the past 20 - 30 years."?

    Also, it seems sites haven't picked up on this quote from Scott Rhode:
    We've already come right out and said we're not going to allow online pass. And the word "allow" is key there. Specifically with online, with PS+ requiring a charge to play online, we would not want any publisher [to charge.] (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/194150/Further_clarification_on_Sonys_DRM_policies_No_more_online_pass.php)

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now