Microsoft and Xbox One is taking a lot of heat for its online DRM. Microsoft may have done this as a cash grab but it does seem like, more and more, this DRM push is coming from the publishers. If this is true, and Sony will need DRM for publishers to put out games on the PS4, how could Sony's DRM look?

Let's look at what we do know. Sony has said the PS4 will not be always online and will not have an online DRM. So end of story, no DRM, we get used games and all is right with the world. Well as college football analyst Lee Corso would say, not so fast my friend! As we learned about early this year, Sony United States Patent Application US20130007892, Sony's technology would check a game disc's RFID tag, which is capable of remembering if that game had been linked to a different machine or account. This check is performed offline and before the game is played. So once a game is placed in a PS4, it is locked to that system and cannot be used in a different PS4.

If Sony has to have DRM in the PS4 because of the publishers, I would think this is how they plan on doing it. And if this is true will Sony have a system for used games at all? Any other ideas?

Considering Japan and how heads and/or pinky fingers would actually roll if the used market took a punch there, I'm sure it's going to be a per-publisher thing if it at all gets implemented. The big three publishers are large enough to force Sony to open up this possibility.

I assume it will be sort of like what MS has.

I'm 100% fine with RFID based DRM if;

• You can de-register the game from your account and thus re-validate the disk for other systems
• It is indeed 100% offline capable. (so combined with the above it essentially just becomes an anti-piracy measure)

If you can't re-validate it for other systems, it'll still be a huge loss of options for consumers. BUT being offline capable makes it much, much better than MS's solution.

So far they have said that you can play games offline and play used games. They have also said that they would leave it up to publishers. About all they have said.

They are keeping quiet but if they were doing a totally open system you would think they would be talking about it non stop and sticking the knife in to MS (even more than they are stabbing themselves).

Sony only said that there is no always-online requirement. So for all we know they could be doing the exact same 24 Hour check in thing that Microsoft is doing.

Unless they specifically said that they won't be doing this?

I don't know. All I really care about at this point is online subscription fees.

Based on what I know now about the PS4 and used games all I can hope for at this point is that they make the games link to your profile, not you console. Then they can handle the rest like they did with the PS3 by only allowing you to link a certain amount of consoles to your profile.

If I was an executive at Sony Computer Entertainment, I'd recommend going big, or going home. In the first minute of the press conference, have Jack Tretton clearly state:

1. The PS4 will support the buying, selling and trading of used games - just as you could in previous generations. Publishers do not have a say in this, we do.
2. You do not have to be online with your PS4, ever. There is no "hive-mind" checking in every 1-24 hours.

Seriously though, why not? It will draw a clear line right between the two console manufacturers. Sony is with the consumer while Microsoft stands with the publishers.

Ballsy, but go for it!

I agree with the hebrew hammer, and people say well all the big publishers will only put their games on the xbone. However, if all the consumer buy ps4's than the publishers will have no choice but to put their games on the ps4. The consumers hold all power, if they actually act like smart consumers. If you don't like what the system is requiring you to do DON'T BUY IT. I have no current plan of buying a next gen system till about this time next year. Millions of people though will be standing in line day one with little games and possibly no clear understanding of how things work or require.

The mass market consumer is the problem. If Sony tells the publishers they can't have restrictive DRM and they make COD: Ghosts, Madden, Assassins Creed, etc., Xbone exclusives, then everyone who wants those games will buy an Xbone. Sony cannot convince enough people to buy their console if all they have is a few first party exclusives and none of the third parties on board. Of course, Sony could take the gamble and hope third parties would still support the PS4, but that's one hell of a gamble, especially when they don't have much to lose by allowing DRM.

@cameron: THIS

We overestimate how informed the impulse-buying, holiday-shopping moms actually are.

They don't care nearly as much as we do, and unfortunately, the core gamer is the minority.

Point one would be the key, if people could manage the DRM of a PS4 game, I think it would be fine for Sony and the PS4

If it turns around and the PS4 also has a DRM system in place can we say that it was the Publishers who made the push for it? Not Sony or MS fully.

Actually publisher DRM need not be very complex or helped by Sony at all. Games are software that are written to use system resources. The publisher just make games which in their start-up sequence looks at the disc's unique code, looks at your linked "publisher account" ID, and the software decides if you can play it or decided that it will link the game to that ONE account The PS4 drive reads the disc, the internet connection links the game to your account ID, and then it is always checking. Its not as foolproof as the Xbox One method but it works about as well even without Sony's help.

All Sony said is "they" didn't require the system to be always online, but they can't make that claim for 3rd party software. They can't stop their system from reading disc IDs, linking to publisher databases, or even for publishers requiring their own IDs being linked to a PSN ID. If you play CoD today your PSN ID is linked to an Activision account ALREADY. In other words you made that link once in the far, far past and you never notice again. However, the checks do happen all the time, but it is happening it is just not as restrictive and is only used for online multiplayer.

Yep you're exactly right, but it's not even just the mass market that're only interested in FIFA and the like that'll influence this. I feel like as soon as Microsoft unveil some halfway decent exclusive games at E3 most of the people actively and loudly "boycotting" the Xbone are going to backpedal and immediately jump on.

Nah, impulse-buying, holiday-shopping moms didn't buy a Wii U. Impulse-buying, holiday-shopping moms are TOLD what to buy and what to return. Yes, mistakes are made, but not by the millions. Also, do not forget what little diva's kids can be, "You bought me a Xbone!!!?...you ruined Christmas.... I hate you!!!" In the modern world stores are open by 12 noon on Christmas to make the exchanges. All this bad blood is going to seep out to the mainstream press, believe me this isn't a 'containable' situation.

if Sony does the same or even something slightly less evil it will still look worst than what MS is doing right now, because at least MS had the balls, Sony is looking at the eye of the storm and has the opportunity to steer away from it, if they don't that will prove them to be even less trustworthy.

Hey, avatar buddy. *brofist*

Sony have had the chance to look at the massive shitstorm and back away, slowly. You can guarantee that any DRM will be less publicized and nowhere near as invasive. As for that Patent claim, aren't both MS and Sony guilty of being massive patent-hoarders? That was a while ago, before any speculation really started about publisher-backed DRM (it kicked off the discussion IIRC) and could have been a play earn some cash off of MS policy.

Although, imagine if Sony did hold some patent relating to the XBone DRM. Talk about having your cake and masturbating while slowly eating it and looking at the starving child in the eye too.