In the past few months, the rumor mill surrounding Sony’s next video game console has largely churned out details about the device’s architecture. Industry sources and prognosticators have turned their eyes towards the horsepower in the PlayStation 4, or Orbis if unnamed developers are to be believed about its name. At the beginning of the year, though, the rumors focused on what games Sony’s machine would play, not what they’ll look and sound like. The consensus then: Sony was trying to find a way to block used games from working on the console. Now a newly published Sony patent hints at how the next PlayStation will keep you from playing second hand games.
Sony’s patent, filed in September and published Thursday, describes the “Electronic Content Processing System and Use Permission Apparatus.” Here’s what it’s for:
“According to the present embodiment, realized is the electronic content processing system that reliably restricts the use of electronic content dealt in the second-hand markets,” reads the patent, “As a result, the dealing of electronic content in the second-hand markets is suppressed, which in turn supports the redistribution of part of proceeds from sales of the electronic content to the developers. Though in the following description a game application (AP) is exemplified as the electronic content, the present embodiment is similarly applicable to various kinds of electronic content such as an office suite, images, and music content.”
The technology described would not just block the use of many used game discs in a Sony console, it might even prevent players from bringing a game over to a friend’s house to play, because it would marry each individual game a user ID like a PlayStation Network account or even the RF identification in a specific console. In the case of a user ID, you would have to sign in each time you used the game disc in a new machine. In the case of an RF link, you simply couldn’t use the game on another machine.
If this seems impossible because it’s incredibly user unfriendly, remember that Sony is no stranger to such policies. The PS Vita is a prime example. Each Vita memory card, expensive proprietary technology on its own, can only be tied to a single PlayStation Network ID. Many Vita games like Uncharted: Golden Abyss, require a memory card to even function. If two people are going to share a Vita, they need multiple memory cards. This patent is a logical next step.
Source: NeoGAF
I think there should be another comment to this regarding the obsurdity of Sony going this route. This move will KILL their console business, there are other providers for consoles, there are new contenders making console hybrid computers, there are server based gaming where you don’t require a desktop at all being developed and finalized in the coming years, and Sony is just following Apple’s example.
This must be Sony’s admission that there’s nothing creative left in the tank. So now they’re afraid to compete with games they created only in the past. Sure there’s a profit incentive for these kind of shenanigans but there’s a penalty for not believing in your ability to come up with something compelling and its obsolescence. Then comes the new console or whatever it will be called that will wipe the name Sony from our lips and memories and this crazy little scheme here won’t even matter.
I still fire up the PS2 four or five times a month. The main reason? Because, ofver the years, I’ve built up an extensive (100+) game library of titles that I thoroghly enjoy returning to from time to time. As much as I enjoyed having a new Silent Hill title, Downpour cannot compete with Silent Hill 2 or 3. Most of the games I have were purchased second hand as prices dropped and some of the more obscure titles (like Obscure 2) became available. Making consoles that weren’t backwards compatible influenced my purchase decisions. Making consoles that CAN’T play used games just means that they’ve lost a customer. I’ll be surprised if they go forward with that agenda. Considering the drop in console/console game sales and the less than stellar sales of Nintendo’s latest entry, it would be a poor decision.
This is the reason I have a Steam account. $20 for games instead of $70 on a game I’ll play once and forget about, or find out I don’t like. I’ve owned the entire line of Playstation entertain consoles, if they take this route, I will unhesitantly pass. And oddly it’s not because I can’t buy used games, but because I tend to borrow games from friends to see if they’re worth purchasing.
Never the less, give it 6month and they’ll be a hack/work-around.
As much as I agree that a hack/work-around may be devised fairly quickly, the most recent changes in electronics laws not only make hacking or homebrewing YOUR console illegal, but actually gives those manufacturers tools they could theoretically use to retroactively charge you for any games you circumvented by such means. Sure that would be a huge slap in the face to consumer confidence, but this whole idea of restricting used content is even more so.
I expect this could actually be implemented in such a way that wouldn’t even start to erode user-base though. If the original new copy of the game comes with a code to either unlock full content or play at all, that code would have to be entered to access the game and would then be tied to that system. Trying to play the game without that code could simply require a small fee ($1-$10) to generate a new code tied to another system. This would put a small dent in used game sales, but still allow Sony to wet their beaks on every console that plays any game. Heck, this could be done with NFC or QR codes so that it is simply a matter of holding up the code to a camera or such making entry a fairly simple and intuitive process.
That said, I will NEVER buy a system with such restrictions enabled.
I’m sorry, but the laws that restrict hacking consoles are absurd. You purchase the equipment (without signing an agreement) with the understanding that it will play the games you buy. There was nothing prior to purchase or at purchase time that I signed agreeing to updating my systems firmware in order to play the most recent games. It’s only until after the fact that we are forced to sign these agreements. At which point, you already threw 300-600 dollars into the system. Secondly, we can already hack other hardware legally. Phones, tablets, computers, etc. There is absolutely no difference in the technology behind a tablet and a console. The only difference is the use. One is for gaming, the other is for computing. But here is where it gets slippery. The PS3 bragged about the option for computing. Until they took that part away. I ran my PS3 as a production server for quite a while, in an linux environment. I refuse to remove that aspect of my system, just to update the firmware in order to play new games. I also refuse to not be able to play new games on my current system. I am held hostage, unless I hack my system and allow it to be used as it was originally intended. This has nothing to do with pirating. I buy all of the games I own. It’s about principle. You can’t sell me a system, and then systematically take away features that I utilize and try to force me to comply if I want to continue to use a system that I already purchase! Firmware updates should be optional, not mandatory, and you shouldn’t have to update a game just to play it. If there are features that require the update, but you don’t have the update installed. Then you just go without that feature.
(I should have been a trial lawyer).
I might get a PS4… But I doubt it. Glad I am into computers and just got a great gaming rig! Sony has lost touch with reality. If they think core gamers will accept this move, they are severely mistaken.
Though I wont write it off completely. The hacking scene has been doing some great work lately.