Sony Boss: Don't "Shove Something Down a Consumer's Throat"

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Sony Boss: Don't "Shove Something Down a Consumer's Throat"

E3 Used Games PS4

CEO Jack Tretton says the PS4's roll out and E3 presentation are the result of experience and discussions with consumers.

Even weeks later Sony's 2013 E3 conference is still arguably the talk of the town. In one fell swoop Sony set up the PlayStation 4 as the champion console of gamers and backed Microsoft's Xbox One into a corner that eventually forced the company to reverse new and unpopular policies. While many believe that the moves that won the day for Sony were last minute additions to the company's conference strategy however, the company insists that its E3 presentation was long in the making.

"We've really been planning [the Playstation 4 launch] since 2008," said Jack Tretton, CEO of Sony Computer Entertainment America. "The E3 press conference in the spring and the rollout was a culmination of that vision. The reaction is a testament that we got the strategy right. It's a long, ongoing process." One of the keystones of Sony's E3 victory, its $399 price point, was the result of both years of experience and months of planning. The company learned "a lot of lessons" from the hardships it experienced launching the PS3. "We came to the market at $599," said Tretton. "That's obviously not going to happen this time around."

While the PS4's sticker price was a big draw to many, its gamer-friendly policies were arguably more important. According to Tretton, these were also a result of the company's lengthy preparation. "We spent a lot of time talking to consumers," said Tretton. The company's discussions apparently led them to believe that what players value most in their hardware is "choice." "Never try to shove something down a consumer's throat that they don't have an appetite for," said Tretton. It was a message that resonated with E3 audiences, and one that seems to be doing well by the PS4 itself as the calendar ticks us closer to its eventual launch.

Source: CNN Money

Permalink

They were planning the launch since 2008 and nobody thought it was a good idea to suggest revealing what the console looked like upon it's announcement? That's kind of worrying really.

If Microsoft hadn't screwed their announcement up people would still be mocking the PS4's original announcement to this day.

Oh yes lets not shove things down consumers throats.

Unless its rip off micro transactions in F2P MMOs like 20$ guns, because those are obviously not the same thing. /sarcasm

Sony isn't doing anyone a favor or trying to defend gaming. Its only going to pretend to. Sony is in too deep to have a change of heart now. To much demand from the industry to follow its mentality as well.

If sony is defending gaming, it actions aren't showing it. They follow the same waves the industry does.

Since 2008? Really? I wonder if they're release a list like MS did with possible names. Honestly I think they can get away with just PS + # for only so long. Nothing wrong with it, but a corner of you mind wonders if they might have called it something goofy for awhile. Better yet I'd like to see some of the rejected designs. I'm sure everyone recalls those fan renderings of what the new consoles would look like. Some looked believable others made those pictures of Bigfoot look good. None the less Sony did a decent job in presentation (E3) now it's time for them to deliver on what was said, and prove themselves the better system. Who knows what rabbit MS or Nintendo might pull out of their hat. There was the tortoise and the hare analogy not long ago. They're in the lead atm, but doesn't mean the race is over. I think one point people have brought up is that the camera is sold separately for $59 since it's optional. Are the games that utilize the device going to be less that stellar? Or just figure to give the consumers a choice if they want to take part in them. Will other games use have subtle us of the video controls like when PS3 first started?

"Paid Schadenfreude" is pretty much the description of every single job in Sony's PS4 marketing department right now.

Yes, they are still talking about the XBone, even if they don't call it by name.

Ultratwinkie:
Oh yes lets not shove things down consumers throats.

Unless its rip off micro transactions in F2P MMOs like 20$ guns, because those are obviously not the same thing. /sarcasm

Sony isn't doing anyone a favor or trying to defend gaming. Its only going to pretend to. Sony is in too deep to have a change of heart now. To much demand from the industry to follow its mentality as well.

If sony is defending gaming, it actions aren't showing it. They follow the same waves the industry does.

I'm not sure I understand the logic here. We shouldn't support Sony's more consumer friendly policies on the grounds that they're only doing it to make money, and they've deviously figured out that the best way to make money is to give us what we actually want... ?

Should we rebel against their tricky manipulations by rushing headlong into Microsoft's tone-deaf, self-defeating nonsense? Am I supposed to view Microsoft's utter disdain for the consumer as a courageous demonstration of honesty?

The false equivalencies in this forum are starting to approach those of R&P.

I like how "We did really good" is the one thing they took out of their presentation as if it was their own planning. MS fucked up, Sony looked better by doing basically nothing. THEIR presentation of the console had NO console. No you're not "splendid" by your own merits, it is because you've done basically no advance, but by comparison some people think PS4 is the most amazing-est thing ever created. As a videogame console maybe, since the XBOX one is a fucking TiVO.

FieryTrainwreck:

Ultratwinkie:
Oh yes lets not shove things down consumers throats.

Unless its rip off micro transactions in F2P MMOs like 20$ guns, because those are obviously not the same thing. /sarcasm

Sony isn't doing anyone a favor or trying to defend gaming. Its only going to pretend to. Sony is in too deep to have a change of heart now. To much demand from the industry to follow its mentality as well.

If sony is defending gaming, it actions aren't showing it. They follow the same waves the industry does.

I'm not sure I understand the logic here. We shouldn't support Sony's more consumer friendly policies on the grounds that they're only doing it to make money, and they've deviously figured out that the best way to make money is to give us what we actually want... ?

Should we rebel against their tricky manipulations by rushing headlong into Microsoft's tone-deaf, self-defeating nonsense? Am I supposed to view Microsoft's utter disdain for the consumer as a courageous demonstration of honesty?

The false equivalencies in this forum are starting to approach those of R&P.

After E3 suddenly everything sony is suddenly consumer friendly and defending gaming, and they really want to push that image. Gamers keep eating that stuff up, hoping for superman to save them. Even if Sony's business practices are not of the same standard. The most obvious was with their online entertainment division and prices of upwards of 7-20$ weapons. They would then nerf the weapons and release new ones that perform exactly the same as the old ones. Not exactly consumer friendly, especially for an MMO that will be put on their console. A console that is seen as "consumer friendly."

The point is, Sony are not the "white knights" saving gaming that gamers want them to be. No amount of cheering or hopeful rhetoric hype from post E3 will change that. Every thread is the same, its always people cheering how Sony was saving gaming and how everything will be "ok."

Sony is a company first and foremost. They aren't a charity and they sure as hell won't bend over backwards to "protect" your "ownership." DRM will find a way sooner or later, and sony isn't going to stop it. They didn't before when DRM started seeping in this generation. They didn't stop then, they won't stop now.

*COUGH COUGH COUGH HACK COUGH*

image

And because a picture doesn't say a thousand words on this site, apparently...

I really don't care about this PR war, I'd still buy a PS4 (when it's cheap and I have excess cash, anyway) if it had all the restrictions and unwanted addons that the Xb1 had simply because..

Actually, now that I think about it, I don't know why I plan on getting a PS4. To the best of my knowledge, all the Final Fantasys, my only reason for buying a console in the first place, are multi-platform.

I'mma chalk it up to brand loyalty.

Legion:
They were planning the launch since 2008 and nobody thought it was a good idea to suggest revealing what the console looked like upon it's announcement? That's kind of worrying really.

If Microsoft hadn't screwed their announcement up people would still be mocking the PS4's original announcement to this day.

That's just about the most ridiculous attempt at criticism imaginable. You've got to have something better than that. Dig deeper.

The appearance of a console is the most irrelevant part of its package. Are you going to try and tell me that a PC case is at all important to its functionality?

This is, of course, where you're going to try and tell me that the appearance of some other kind of device like a phone or tablet is paramount in its function but that's irrelevant. A phone or tablets appearance means nothing either. It's the form, not appearance, that is important because they are tactile devices. The tactile portion of a console is absolutely important. What part of a console is tactile? The controller. What part of the console appeared in the original debut? The controller. Thanks. Come again.

A console has to look good in your living room, sure. But that's subjective at best. There's no point bringing in something subjective into your message that we can all disagree on and none of us be wrong. That just derails the conversation from what is truly important.

Ultratwinkie:
The point is, Sony are not the "white knights" saving gaming that gamers want them to be. No amount of cheering or hopeful rhetoric hype from post E3 will change that. Every thread is the same, its always people cheering how Sony was saving gaming and how everything will be "ok."

Sony is a company first and foremost. They aren't a charity and they sure as hell won't bend over backwards to "protect" your "ownership." DRM will find a way sooner or later, and sony isn't going to stop it. They didn't before when DRM started seeping in this generation. They didn't stop then, they won't stop now.

I'm confused. I feel like people are *supporting* (not worshiping) Sony because they are the only ones acting like an honest-to-god business. They're listening to consumers and providing a product that consumers might actually want to buy. That obviously doesn't make them white knights or saints or Jesus in corporate form. But wherever you slot them, Microsoft has to be slotted many, many rungs lower. They're the ones trying to force things on the consumer with nebulous, unspecified, or untrue promises of benefits down the road. Meanwhile, we can all see the obvious benefits to Microsoft's bottom line, and seemingly very few people are interested in helping with that.

It really is coming off like a false equivalencies. Feels like your lumping all the companies together with no regard for their specific and highly divergent behavior. It's entirely possible for Sony to be "neutral" or even "kinda bad", but that's still miles preferable to whatever Microsoft is.

Legion:
They were planning the launch since 2008 and nobody thought it was a good idea to suggest revealing what the console looked like upon it's announcement? That's kind of worrying really.

If Microsoft hadn't screwed their announcement up people would still be mocking the PS4's original announcement to this day.

Maybe because they wanted to save it for E3? You know, the big event where it would do the most good. It is after all, just the looks of the console, they had already given away the important info regarding system's capabilities.

wasn't these the same guys that are purposed some form drm for dvds/blu-ray?

Legion:
They were planning the launch since 2008 and nobody thought it was a good idea to suggest revealing what the console looked like upon it's announcement? That's kind of worrying really.

Grabehn:
THEIR presentation of the console had NO console.

Who the fuck even actually cares that they didn't show the console in February?

No, seriously; why do you care? It's a box you play games on. What it looks like and how soon you get to see it should amount to 0% of your interest or opinion of the console or company.

Ultratwinkie:
The most obvious was with their online entertainment division and prices of upwards of 7-20$ weapons. They would then nerf the weapons and release new ones that perform exactly the same as the old ones. Not exactly consumer friendly, especially for an MMO that will be put on their console. A console that is seen as "consumer friendly."

I honestly have no idea what you're actually talking about here.

But wouldn't that be the developer's decision, not Sony's?
I mean I guess Sony might be the developer...

You need to calm down and stop being so pessimistic. It sounds like you're just mad at the state of the industry, not Sony in particular.

OT: They're definitely still taking veiled jabs at Microsoft (namely, their insistence of a required Kinect), but it's good to see they learned a few things from the PS3's frankly abysmal launch.

FieryTrainwreck:

Ultratwinkie:
The point is, Sony are not the "white knights" saving gaming that gamers want them to be. No amount of cheering or hopeful rhetoric hype from post E3 will change that. Every thread is the same, its always people cheering how Sony was saving gaming and how everything will be "ok."

Sony is a company first and foremost. They aren't a charity and they sure as hell won't bend over backwards to "protect" your "ownership." DRM will find a way sooner or later, and sony isn't going to stop it. They didn't before when DRM started seeping in this generation. They didn't stop then, they won't stop now.

I'm confused. I feel like people are *supporting* (not worshiping) Sony because they are the only ones acting like an honest-to-god business. They're listening to consumers and providing a product that consumers might actually want to buy. That obviously doesn't make them white knights or saints or Jesus in corporate form. But wherever you slot them, Microsoft has to be slotted many, many rungs lower. They're the ones trying to force things on the consumer with nebulous, unspecified, or untrue promises of benefits down the road. Meanwhile, we can all see the obvious benefits to Microsoft's bottom line, and seemingly very few people are interested in helping with that.

It really is coming off like a false equivalencies. Feels like your lumping all the companies together with no regard for their specific and highly divergent behavior. It's entirely possible for Sony to be "neutral" or even "kinda bad", but that's still miles preferable to whatever Microsoft is.

You didn't see how big a deal people made Sony huh? Especially after E3? lot of it bordered on obsessive worship, coupled with overly optimistic visions of the future. Every thread ultimately devolved into it. Still does.

A company may give the consumer what it wants, but it also must give their business partners what they want. Their partners want DRM? Nothing you can do to stop them, and they will. They can't tell their partners to stop or risk losing all support like the Wii U did. Since sony has no backup plan and its other divisions are suffering, they are stuck doing the bidding of their business partners.

The reason I lump companies together in the console market is because the industry follows waves and fads. One company does it, and everyone else suddenly does the same. Its a repeating cycle of plagiarism, same reason we get so many modern warfare clones after COD became popular. You can't escape it unless you make your own path, and those are few and far between in the console market. Publishers demand what can sell, and risk is not always equal to sales.

And that's what it all boils down to, publishers get the final say. In the most probable scenario, they would want DRM. The industry will bring you to its level, it always does. So in actuality, Sony's promises of lack of DRM really mean nothing.

Keith K:
*snip*

The_Echo:
*snip*

I hate to use the term "fanboy", but I dread to think of how you would have reacted if I had actually said something bad about them.

I genuinely don't care what the console looks like. I was referring to the fact that they were planning the announcement five years before they did it and decided not to reveal the product. That's their choice, but it certainly takes the flair out of the thing.

Feel free to respond with more unnecessary rage, but I really have no interest in getting into an actual argument over an off-the-cuff response I made to an article. I didn't murder the guys puppies because he chose not to reveal the appearance of a console, so perhaps you ought to take a deep breath and relax.

RicoADF:
*snip*

This is true. E3 is a much bigger event, but it makes you wonder why they didn't save the whole thing for the event in that case, to give it more of an impact. From what I gather they were largely playing it cautiously and waiting to see what Microsoft did first. The general point I was making that was that Sony may have "beaten" Microsoft when it came to the consoles announcement, but it was largely due to Microsoft being idiots as opposed to Sony doing anything amazing.

Legion:
snap

I'm just a bit tired of seeing people harp on that is all. Since it's like... a dumb thing to make note of.

I'd imagine they had a reason not to show the console at the announcement. Might not have been finalized yet... might have been saving it for the bigger audience E3 would bring... So why people cared about it at all, let alone the amount of butthurt it spawned, kind of baffles me.

Legion:
They were planning the launch since 2008 and nobody thought it was a good idea to suggest revealing what the console looked like upon it's announcement? That's kind of worrying really.

If Microsoft hadn't screwed their announcement up people would still be mocking the PS4's original announcement to this day.

Let's face it. We all knew it was going to be a black box of some kind. The fact that it turned out to be some kind of black rhombus...trapezoid..thing does little to mitigate that.

And yeah, all it took for people to like the PS4 was for Sony to not screw up as badly as Microsoft.

Legion:

This is true. E3 is a much bigger event, but it makes you wonder why they didn't save the whole thing for the event in that case, to give it more of an impact. From what I gather they were largely playing it cautiously and waiting to see what Microsoft did first. The general point I was making that was that Sony may have "beaten" Microsoft when it came to the consoles announcement, but it was largely due to Microsoft being idiots as opposed to Sony doing anything amazing.

I agree that waiting for E3 would have been the smarter move, perhaps they wanted to beat Microsoft at revealing their console, or they wanted to debunk some of the rumours floating around at the time. We'll probably never know not that it's really important, actions speak louder than words after all.

I'm not sure how true the planning since 2008 claim is, but I'm sure it's been in the works for a long time.

I've heard plenty to support that they didn't make any last minute changes. Rumors that Sony execs were celebrating when Xbox One had it's price reveal. Interviews I saw where Jack has stated that they knew the price months ago. I'm inclined to believe them. The $600 rice tag hurt them before. They'd have to be stupid to not learn from that.

Ultratwinkie:

You didn't see how big a deal people made Sony huh? Especially after E3? lot of it bordered on obsessive worship, coupled with overly optimistic visions of the future. Every thread ultimately devolved into it. Still does.

A company may give the consumer what it wants, but it also must give their business partners what they want. Their partners want DRM? Nothing you can do to stop them, and they will. They can't tell their partners to stop or risk losing all support like the Wii U did. Since sony has no backup plan and its other divisions are suffering, they are stuck doing the bidding of their business partners.

The reason I lump companies together in the console market is because the industry follows waves and fads. One company does it, and everyone else suddenly does the same. Its a repeating cycle of plagiarism, same reason we get so many modern warfare clones after COD became popular. You can't escape it unless you make your own path, and those are few and far between in the console market. Publishers demand what can sell, and risk is not always equal to sales.

And that's what it all boils down to, publishers get the final say. In the most probable scenario, they would want DRM. The industry will bring you to its level, it always does. So in actuality, Sony's promises of lack of DRM really mean nothing.

Okay, you need to relax. Sony is a company. Everyone knows this. But they acted like a smart company and gave consumers what they wanted. This is a good thing.

Currently, the main DRM supporters are supposedly not going to use DRM anymore. It was bad press for them. I half suspect they will change that now, since Xbox has pulled a 180. But that is not on the console maker. That's on the Developer/Publisher. There's only so much Sony can do to prevent that. I don't think it's fair to complain about Sony because EA is an asshole company. Might as well complain about an entire state because this one guy cut you off in traffic and he had a license plate from that state.

And if you don't like shooters, don't buy them. I have virtually no FPS games, personally. Hell, that's one reason I like PS4. A lot of the games they have aren't just gray and brown FPS games. Infamous and Knack off the top of my head.

Oh bullshit.

Sony, I don't really have anything against you, but we both know that if you thought it would work then you'd have done the same thing as Microsoft.

We both know you touch yourself at night while thinking of DRM and a 100% digital market that precludes pre-owned sales.

"One of the keystones of Sony's E3 victory, its $399 price point, was the result of both years of experience and months of planning."

Except they were originally going to release it for $499 with an included Playstation Eye and then backtracked. Sounds like a lot of victory gloating wank to me

Cool story Sony... we talk again when you finalize your ideas for the 4k format.

Steven Bogos:
"One of the keystones of Sony's E3 victory, its $399 price point, was the result of both years of experience and months of planning."

Except they were originally going to release it for $499 with an included Playstation Eye and then backtracked. Sounds like a lot of victory gloating wank to me

You know they were planning for a $500 release how exactly?

Even then, what makes you think they did not have multiple plans in place depending on Microsoft's actions?

Good business. Good for the consumer. Sony should be praised, that is absolutely the right thing to do. They don't have to do anything incredible, merely cater to what the public want. Perhaps that is incredible in and of itself, a large multinational listening and adapting to the needs of the consumer not just the bean counters, bigwigs and shareholders. A happy medium has been reached and it seems to be working well for all involved so long may it continue.

Saltyk:
I'm not sure how true the planning since 2008 claim is, but I'm sure it's been in the works for a long time.

I've heard plenty to support that they didn't make any last minute changes. Rumors that Sony execs were celebrating when Xbox One had it's price reveal. Interviews I saw where Jack has stated that they knew the price months ago. I'm inclined to believe them. The $600 rice tag hurt them before. They'd have to be stupid to not learn from that.

Ultratwinkie:

You didn't see how big a deal people made Sony huh? Especially after E3? lot of it bordered on obsessive worship, coupled with overly optimistic visions of the future. Every thread ultimately devolved into it. Still does.

A company may give the consumer what it wants, but it also must give their business partners what they want. Their partners want DRM? Nothing you can do to stop them, and they will. They can't tell their partners to stop or risk losing all support like the Wii U did. Since sony has no backup plan and its other divisions are suffering, they are stuck doing the bidding of their business partners.

The reason I lump companies together in the console market is because the industry follows waves and fads. One company does it, and everyone else suddenly does the same. Its a repeating cycle of plagiarism, same reason we get so many modern warfare clones after COD became popular. You can't escape it unless you make your own path, and those are few and far between in the console market. Publishers demand what can sell, and risk is not always equal to sales.

And that's what it all boils down to, publishers get the final say. In the most probable scenario, they would want DRM. The industry will bring you to its level, it always does. So in actuality, Sony's promises of lack of DRM really mean nothing.

Okay, you need to relax. Sony is a company. Everyone knows this. But they acted like a smart company and gave consumers what they wanted. This is a good thing.

Currently, the main DRM supporters are supposedly not going to use DRM anymore. It was bad press for them. I half suspect they will change that now, since Xbox has pulled a 180. But that is not on the console maker. That's on the Developer/Publisher. There's only so much Sony can do to prevent that. I don't think it's fair to complain about Sony because EA is an asshole company. Might as well complain about an entire state because this one guy cut you off in traffic and he had a license plate from that state.

And if you don't like shooters, don't buy them. I have virtually no FPS games, personally. Hell, that's one reason I like PS4. A lot of the games they have aren't just gray and brown FPS games. Infamous and Knack off the top of my head.

I wasn't getting worked up, I have no dog in the fight. I couldn't care less about console DRM because it won't effect me. I am pointing out that nothing sony says will stop publishers from using DRM. So any chest bumping on DRM is meaningless, especially when their entire marketing is based off that.

Secondly, Publishers don't exactly care about PR when there are so few in the console space. They are known for being "greedy corporate pigs" but that didn't stop gamers from funding them.

Can you name a handful of publishers that is regularly on consoles that isn't the big 3? And how many gamers will stop buying DRM riddled games? In the day and age of this being more and more commonplace?

Ubisoft - Known for DRM.
Activision - Can't think of any right now. Rumored to be pushing for DRM.
EA - Wants DRM badly, has tried before.

Even Diablo 3 and Simcity got over a million sales, with simcity being closer to 2 million. So why should publishers care about a PR problem? Gamers haven't cared before. DRM riddled games have sold and sold well. This round was full of DRM gamers ate up, so why should this next round be any different?

Ultratwinkie:
You didn't see how big a deal people made Sony huh? Especially after E3? lot of it bordered on obsessive worship, coupled with overly optimistic visions of the future. Every thread ultimately devolved into it. Still does.

Are you talking about a subset? Legit fanboys? The people who will kiss Sony's feet no matter what they do? What percentage of the market is that? Doesn't Microsoft have roughly the same percentage also worshiping them without legitimate cause?

What I saw after E3 was the middle 90%, the people who own a PS3 or a 360 or both, and who don't particularly care one way or the other, deciding in overwhelming numbers that Microsoft was a joke. All Sony had to do was not shoot itself in the foot repeatedly, and they managed as much. That deservedly drew appreciation and support.

A company may give the consumer what it wants, but it also must give their business partners what they want. Their partners want DRM? Nothing you can do to stop them, and they will. They can't tell their partners to stop or risk losing all support like the Wii U did. Since sony has no backup plan and its other divisions are suffering, they are stuck doing the bidding of their business partners.

Except that we just saw an example of a company not giving in to the pressures of its partners and winning the day when consumers sided with that sentiment. Microsoft was making the Xbone for publishers first and consumers second. Consumers said fuck that, the preorders reflected it, and suddenly both Microsoft and the publishers were forced to realize that you can't ignore the people who pay for everything - not if they're practically united in their disdain for you.

The reason I lump companies together in the console market is because the industry follows waves and fads. One company does it, and everyone else suddenly does the same. Its a repeating cycle of plagiarism, same reason we get so many modern warfare clones after COD became popular. You can't escape it unless you make your own path, and those are few and far between in the console market. Publishers demand what can sell, and risk is not always equal to sales.

How does this apply at all? Sony didn't go the same direction as Microsoft. Most people, including Microsoft and (I'd wager) the publishers, expected Sony to reveal similarly restrictive DRM and used-game countermeasures. That would have been following the "trend" or the "fad". Sony didn't do this. They didn't play ball. They were rewarded with an outpouring of support. Not seeing why that's so hard to grasp.

And that's what it all boils down to, publishers get the final say. In the most probable scenario, they would want DRM. The industry will bring you to its level, it always does. So in actuality, Sony's promises of lack of DRM really mean nothing.

Except the publishers were put on notice by the response to Sony's E3 appearance. Have any of the publishers come forth with details about their DRM/used-game strategies for next-gen? Have any of them talked about always-on requirements? Of course not. They saw what happened to Microsoft, and they're not looking to paint a similar target on their own backs. Will some of them try these things on the next-gen systems? Of course they will. Many of them have tried this bullshit already, with varying degrees of non-success.

But there is a chasm of difference between publishers screwing us over on a per-game basis and a console manufacturer doing all the screwing for them. In the latter scenario, it's all DRM all the time. The only vote you can cast is whether or not to buy the console. In the former situation, where the publishers are the ones dicking us? We can cast more nuanced and targeted votes on a per-game basis. Rather than Microsoft's policies being the norm, we're given various choices within each console's "closed garden" market place. If people don't buy games with obnoxious features and policies, publishers won't use them.

I guess I see the Xbone outcry as a referendum on what the publishers are slowly trying to force on us. People have clearly stated they don't want a console doing all of that shit on behalf of the publishers. Why then are we going to turn around and let them do it on a per-game basis? Maybe we'll vote those games down (through non-purchase) just the same.

Whilst I'm sure the price tag was decided very early on, I sincerely doubt they had their DRM policies etc. worked out five years ago.

Again Sony is not really doing anything much... that means neither BAD nor GOOD. They are kinda waiting out what is going to happen and the are letting others like Microsoft make the big mistakes.

But are they defenders of gamers.. no far no! They only reason they are so "nice" right now is because they have looked at Microsoft.

Again the same people who wanted the Xbox One DRM in place [aka EA, Activision and I expect Bioware] also talked to Sony.

Just because Sony didn't give in doesn't means they are the heroes of gamers. Instead they just waited to see what the market was doing and how far they could push things.

Vivid Kazumi:
wasn't these the same guys that are purposed some form drm for dvds/blu-ray?

Keep in mind, Sony is a HUUUUUUUGE company. Right hand doesn't know what the left is doing. You can see that in a recent article where a Sony Movie exec stated that he wants "always on" internet verification for next generation movie disks to prevent piracy/used.

Gotta support the guys that "get it" and call to task those that don't IMHO. =)

Ultratwinkie:
snipped for size

Give it up for your own sanity, you criticized Sony? The only crime worse than that would have to been to acknowledge someone or something Microsofts XBox division had gone well.

Zhukov:
we both know that if you thought it would work then you'd have done the same thing as Microsoft.

My impression was they pretty much said that with "Never try to shove something down a consumer's throat that they don't have an appetite for," really the biggest thing I got from the article is that they've had a change of strategy over the last few years and have started interacting with the consumer more, asking what they want and trying to cater to them.

Though this is just my impression so take it with a grain of salt.

Well if the PS3 is anything to go by then Sony don't just shove things down the consumers throat. First they crow bar it in and then use a sledge hammer to ram it into every orrifice the consumer has. Everything the Xbone was going to do at launch the PS4 has the capability to do (In terms of the online DRM) it's just the PS4 won't do it right away but give it a few years and several firmware updates and the PS4 will have everything the Xbone originally said it would.

Companies always push stuff on consumers. Like new games are 55....i dont want that. Online gaming, i dont want that either. Hell even releasing a new console is pushing something at the consumer. But the thing is, as consumers, we vote with our wallet. We can just not pay for it because we are not forced to buy it. So Sony and MS can do whatever they want, you cant shove anything down our throat because we dont have to accept it. Now, if in a years time Sony decided to have DRM added through a patch, then that would be forcing something down our throats. Kinda like "accept this download for drm or your console will be bricked" that would cause problems. Cant change a product after the fact....for instance, SONY stopped backward compatibility, but they couldnt block that on consoles pre bought with BC.

FieryTrainwreck:

Ultratwinkie:
You didn't see how big a deal people made Sony huh? Especially after E3? lot of it bordered on obsessive worship, coupled with overly optimistic visions of the future. Every thread ultimately devolved into it. Still does.

Are you talking about a subset? Legit fanboys? The people who will kiss Sony's feet no matter what they do? What percentage of the market is that? Doesn't Microsoft have roughly the same percentage also worshiping them without legitimate cause?

What I saw after E3 was the middle 90%, the people who own a PS3 or a 360 or both, and who don't particularly care one way or the other, deciding in overwhelming numbers that Microsoft was a joke. All Sony had to do was not shoot itself in the foot repeatedly, and they managed as much. That deservedly drew appreciation and support.

A company may give the consumer what it wants, but it also must give their business partners what they want. Their partners want DRM? Nothing you can do to stop them, and they will. They can't tell their partners to stop or risk losing all support like the Wii U did. Since sony has no backup plan and its other divisions are suffering, they are stuck doing the bidding of their business partners.

Except that we just saw an example of a company not giving in to the pressures of its partners and winning the day when consumers sided with that sentiment. Microsoft was making the Xbone for publishers first and consumers second. Consumers said fuck that, the preorders reflected it, and suddenly both Microsoft and the publishers were forced to realize that you can't ignore the people who pay for everything - not if they're practically united in their disdain for you.

The reason I lump companies together in the console market is because the industry follows waves and fads. One company does it, and everyone else suddenly does the same. Its a repeating cycle of plagiarism, same reason we get so many modern warfare clones after COD became popular. You can't escape it unless you make your own path, and those are few and far between in the console market. Publishers demand what can sell, and risk is not always equal to sales.

How does this apply at all? Sony didn't go the same direction as Microsoft. Most people, including Microsoft and (I'd wager) the publishers, expected Sony to reveal similarly restrictive DRM and used-game countermeasures. That would have been following the "trend" or the "fad". Sony didn't do this. They didn't play ball. They were rewarded with an outpouring of support. Not seeing why that's so hard to grasp.

And that's what it all boils down to, publishers get the final say. In the most probable scenario, they would want DRM. The industry will bring you to its level, it always does. So in actuality, Sony's promises of lack of DRM really mean nothing.

Except the publishers were put on notice by the response to Sony's E3 appearance. Have any of the publishers come forth with details about their DRM/used-game strategies for next-gen? Have any of them talked about always-on requirements? Of course not. They saw what happened to Microsoft, and they're not looking to paint a similar target on their own backs. Will some of them try these things on the next-gen systems? Of course they will. Many of them have tried this bullshit already, with varying degrees of non-success.

But there is a chasm of difference between publishers screwing us over on a per-game basis and a console manufacturer doing all the screwing for them. In the latter scenario, it's all DRM all the time. The only vote you can cast is whether or not to buy the console. In the former situation, where the publishers are the ones dicking us? We can cast more nuanced and targeted votes on a per-game basis. Rather than Microsoft's policies being the norm, we're given various choices within each console's "closed garden" market place. If people don't buy games with obnoxious features and policies, publishers won't use them.

I guess I see the Xbone outcry as a referendum on what the publishers are slowly trying to force on us. People have clearly stated they don't want a console doing all of that shit on behalf of the publishers. Why then are we going to turn around and let them do it on a per-game basis? Maybe we'll vote those games down (through non-purchase) just the same.

Putting an awful lot of effort into this huh?

The Xbone DRM scandal means nothing. The reason people hated it is because a console itself did it. Gamers sure as hell don't care for DRM riddled games, been proven time and time again. Gamers will pay almost extortionate prices, this has been proven even by sony itself.

E3 didn't put anything on the spot. In fact, people talk about how at a certain age group, people just didn't give two shits about DRM or the Xbox One's data mining anymore. This is the age of facebook, google, and everyone else harvesting data on you. The data miners won. DRM Won.

And secondly, the waves and fad applies because if the console don't have DRM, the games will. DRM is the trend now, and nothing will stop it. Publishers literally OWN the consoles at this point. No publisher support means no console. You either do what they say or have your console be an expensive paperweight.

Try to boycott them? You boycott 99% of console games, and boycotts always fail in the end. Gamers just don't have the patience.

I said this before on the American Mgee thread, gamers want to hate on publishers but they are always the first to line up to buy things from them. Publishers literally can do whatever they want because of lack of competition. That isn't going to change any time soon.

I know you're the same guy saying how Gamestop was going to stop DRM by embargoing the consoles. Sorry to say, but DRM is here to stay. With how hard it is to strike it big then actually matter in Console gaming, there is no way out. The only thing you can hope for is a crash to wipe the slate clean.

I know I sound "mean and pessimistic" But that's just business sense. Publishers hold all the cards.

I'm still on Sony's side if I were forced to choose between them and Xbox but now their marketing seems to consist entirely off all the stuff Microsoft got wrong.

It was a fun strategy at first but it's time to say something other than "hey, at least we're not them"

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here