Sony "unreasonably" restricts PS3 software to two consoles only

[3volvedcombat]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

You made do with the smaller hard drive before, so why does it matter. Of course, if you are like me, you already have a 500GB drive in your PS3...

Of course, you can always put the older drive in, then use the built in backup function of the PS3 to backup the smaller drive to the larger if you really must have the larger drive.



If the content is really that important, $30 is nothing. Especially if you are talking $200-300+ in content. I think at that point, I'd be more pissed that I have to pay $200+ on a new console than I would be about the $30 to get my content back.



If they are so important to you, you should have the old consoles to play them. As I said. I've got a PS2 connected right next to my PS3, for when I want to play PS2/1 games.



You responded to my comment about going over to play $5 games on your friends consoles. You responded with PAIN is awesome! Yeah, if it is awesome, your friends should already have it, so you shouldn't have to worry about not being able to play it when you go over there.



Yes, and you did so in response to my comment about going over to your friends and playing them. If they are so great, your friends should already have them. They should rely on you installing them on their consoles.

Cant you just except someones opinion?
Maybe some people cant keep or have a working older PS system, and they want all in one simplicity for a better overall experience.
This is were designing some things takes a dive for the worst, focus on other opportunistic advantages, then to make it simple, sleek, understandable, and full-proof.

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

prevent piracy and give game developers/distributors peace of mind.

Game developers on consoles peace of mind?

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

the problem isn't in loaning the game to your sibling, it is dealing with people who like to redefine terms to suit their own mischievous behavior. pretty soon the guy you randomly met down the street is your sibling. why should you be denied the right to give it to people on "loan." lol

^^above^^ Apply above, Peace of mind only goes so far, and in the first place was perfectly fine before sony announced a cap. No? Why was there digital content still being developed or who said piracy was in issue with psn/account/digital content?
I agree with you though

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by qubit

I know you've answered this before for me on here, but I'd like to hear it again. Why can't it just work like Steam, where it checks over the internet with the Sony servers and logs off the first instance, thereby allowing only one system to play at any one time? They could also disable offline play, as that could get around it otherwise.

Because then you would have just made a Sony bashing article about their new DRM that requires you to be connected to the internet to use the content that you already paid for and how unreasonable that is...

Originally Posted by 3volvedcombat

Cant you just except someones opinion?
Maybe some people cant keep or have a working older PS system, and they want all in one simplicity for a better overall experience.
This is were designing some things takes a dive for the worst, focus on other opportunistic advantages, then to make it simple, sleek, understandable, and full-proof.

When the opinion has no logical backing, no I can't just accept it.

If the person can afford to have a huge library of DLC, and multiple PS3s, they surely can manage to have a $40 PS2 hanging around...

[qubit]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

Because then you would have just made a Sony bashing article about their new DRM that requires you to be connected to the internet to use the content that you already paid for and how unreasonable that is...

So, you don't bother answering my question and just bash me instead? Nice.

[crazyeyesreaper]

hes just trolling in his own way qubit its all good. im loving it

[qubit]

Originally Posted by crazyeyesreaper

hes just trolling in his own way qubit its all good. im loving it

NT is trolling? I'm shocked! qubit reaches for the vallium

[n-ster]

So now that the argument of crazyeyes is moot (back-up you old HDD onto the new PS3 for the games), I see no reason why this is so wrong?

Also, I wonder if you could just bring your HDD to a friends house to play the downloaded games, provided you both have the latest firmware? If so then I REALLY see no point of comp[laining, and we happy that it is 2 instead of 1! (I'm guessing because some people have 2 PS3s, ie 1 for downstairs on for the room)

[crazyeyesreaper]

the problem is the firmware on the older systems vs newer systems

aka if you take the older PS3 hdd and try and pop it into a newer system theres a likelyhood youll have to flash the firmware to allow it

so that requires a usb key set as fat32 with a folder named PS3 then UPDATE inside it with proper firmware files,

so while its doable most people wont figure that out or understand what any of that means. so keep that it mind, the common denominator is that people tend to be stupid so my points are still valid as the only way to deauthorize content on a dead system is to mail it off okay, but my buddy mentioned dead systems etc and yet sony still dicks him around so it comes down to the end user knowing once again as i stated before how to deal with tech support in a way to get the desired end result. most of us have no issues with this most normal people on the other hand good luck.

[n-ster]

Firmware is on the machine, not the HDD AFAIK, so if the HDD came from an older firmware, I think it should be fine, if it come from a newer one, then you MIGHT just have to update your firmware with the bigger HDD first...

You are trying to make excuses This stuff is simple

[crazyeyesreaper]

uh wrong read up on it when changing hdds on PS3 slims you need proper firmware updates to get the drive to be recognized.

http://community.eu.playstation.com/...s/td-p/8966745

the above was a 250gb larger capcity drive from a Phat PS3 swapped to a SLIM and problems ensued, the average end user from what ive seen can barely use google to get an answer let alone know what to google for find a fix. IF end users knew how to do this there wouldn't be people charging $100+ to remove viruses on PCs etc or as ive seen in local shops around here $100 labor charge to install larger capcity HDDs in PS3s for this very reason

The firmware while not on the HDD directly does directly influence HDD support and backups among other things.

Then again theres also PS3 branded HDD upgrades available for this reason alone to sucker the consumer but thats a different subject all together.

[n-ster]

Alright so if your old HDD didn't have firmware 3 or higher, then you'd have to do this if I understand correctly.

When you put it in it tells you that you need firmware 3, and on the sony website it tells you how to upgrade through a USB stick, so I see no problem. If the user doesn't want to bother then it is his fault

Also note we are talking about someone who's had 3 hardware failures. He bothered to buy other PS3s but not transfer an HDD? It is a very rare occasion, and if he has to go on the official sony site to upgrade his firmware, then he has to do that and not say OMG IT TELLS ME TO DO SOMETHING! I WONT DO IT CUZ I IZ STUPID

[3volvedcombat]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

Because then you would have just made a Sony bashing article about their new DRM that requires you to be connected to the internet to use the content that you already paid for and how unreasonable that is...



When the opinion has no logical backing, no I can't just accept it.

If the person can afford to have a huge library of DLC, and multiple PS3s, they surely can manage to have a $40 PS2 hanging around...

Wont be many ps2/ps1's around soon, a lot of them are starting get a little old hardware wise, but that's understandable.

But some people don't want another space hog in there setup. No need for conflict though, anyways nothing is going to change, because ps3 slims are not going to magically have ps2 game support again.

Originally Posted by n-ster

So now that the argument of crazyeyes is moot (back-up you old HDD onto the new PS3 for the games), I see no reason why this is so wrong?

Also, I wonder if you could just bring your HDD to a friends house to play the downloaded games, provided you both have the latest firmware? If so then I REALLY see no point of comp[laining, and we happy that it is 2 instead of 1! (I'm guessing because some people have 2 PS3s, ie 1 for downstairs on for the room)

You tell me how safe your going to feel lugging around a mechanical hard-drive around like an ipod basically, It does not matter how safe you transport it. There is always a possibility of major malfunction, then you will not have a hard-drive, to much risk involved in my opinion. Interference is possible with regular travel.

If they went any lower then 2, it would practically make psn digital market eat shit, there would still be sales, but this is not apple were talking about, and there the only people that generally get away with that.

Originally Posted by n-ster

Firmware is on the machine, not the HDD AFAIK, so if the HDD came from an older firmware, I think it should be fine, if it come from a newer one, then you MIGHT just have to update your firmware with the bigger HDD first...

You are trying to make excuses This stuff is simple

Firmware might be on anything, what will cause issue's is the way the information is stored on the drive.
Quick semi example,
XP/fat32 drive
Windows 7/ ntfs drive
Firmware might have coding to recognize different ps3's, but it might also be definitively writing information different on those drives, and examples are shown above.

Originally Posted by n-ster

Alright so if your old HDD didn't have firmware 3 or higher, then you'd have to do this if I understand correctly.

When you put it in it tells you that you need firmware 3, and on the sony website it tells you how to upgrade through a USB stick, so I see no problem. If the user doesn't want to bother then it is his fault

Also note we are talking about someone who's had 3 hardware failures. He bothered to buy other PS3s but not transfer an HDD? It is a very rare occasion, and if he has to go on the official sony site to upgrade his firmware, then he has to do that and not say OMG IT TELLS ME TO DO SOMETHING! I WONT DO IT CUZ I IZ STUPID

Again, that is slightly true. But Give the guy a break, seriously. Maybe their were definitive reasons, none of us know. Logical explanation breaks down after that..
Average user's are more average then anybody thinks, and this person already SOUNDS weird because he has an XBOX elite sitting in dust for 8 months perfectly functional.
Yet grabs faulty ps3 systems on the go.

Funny thing is, it should be RROD'ing 360's pissing him off instead of faulty ps3's back to back, nothing logical is coming from the first original story that was told about this person.

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by qubit

So, you don't bother answering my question and just bash me instead? Nice.

No, I did answer your question, both previously in the thread directly and in that post indirectly. And yes, while bashing you in the process for your completely unnecessarily negative news posts(and regular posts).

If you prefer a more direct answer, then fine. If they did that, then they would have people like you just bitch about how you have to be online to play the content that you've already paid for and downloaded to your console. And that is unacceptable. And personally, I'd rather have an install limit, then loose all of my DLC the instant my internet goes down, or if I take my PS3 to my vacation home that doesn't have an internet connection at all.

Originally Posted by crazyeyesreaper

the problem is the firmware on the older systems vs newer systems

aka if you take the older PS3 hdd and try and pop it into a newer system theres a likelyhood youll have to flash the firmware to allow it

so that requires a usb key set as fat32 with a folder named PS3 then UPDATE inside it with proper firmware files,

so while its doable most people wont figure that out or understand what any of that means. so keep that it mind, the common denominator is that people tend to be stupid so my points are still valid as the only way to deauthorize content on a dead system is to mail it off okay, but my buddy mentioned dead systems etc and yet sony still dicks him around so it comes down to the end user knowing once again as i stated before how to deal with tech support in a way to get the desired end result. most of us have no issues with this most normal people on the other hand good luck.

Actually most people figure it out just fine. I sell upgrade hard drives on ebay with instructions pulled directly off sony's site, in the ~100 drives I've sold, I have yet to get a single person that wasn't able to follow the extremely simple directions to update the firmware with the new drive.

[KieranD]

Did the thread title change or am i wrong?

[n-ster]

Much better title lol! Shouldn't it be PSN titles or PSN games instead of PS3 Software?

[RejZoR]

That's fail. Steam has this done better. You can have Steam on 100 computers, but you can use it on only 1 at once. If you try to use it on 2 different locations at once, you'll always sign out someone else. So 2 users cannot ever play at once. That's imo far better. I wonder why Sony can't do the same...

[n-ster]

Originally Posted by RejZoR

That's fail. Steam has this done better. You can have Steam on 100 computers, but you can use it on only 1 at once. If you try to use it on 2 different locations at once, you'll always sign out someone else. So 2 users cannot ever play at once. That's imo far better. I wonder why Sony can't do the same...

But sharing games is so easy

[qubit]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

No, I did answer your question, both previously in the thread directly and in that post indirectly. And yes, while bashing you in the process for your completely unnecessarily negative news posts(and regular posts).

If you prefer a more direct answer, then fine. If they did that, then they would have people like you just bitch about how you have to be online to play the content that you've already paid for and downloaded to your console. And that is unacceptable. And personally, I'd rather have an install limit, then loose all of my DLC the instant my internet goes down, or if I take my PS3 to my vacation home that doesn't have an internet connection at all.

I'm unnecessarily negative, huh? lol. From your viewpoint perhaps? I'm happy for you to have your view, now can I have mine? And thanks for answering again.

Well yes, any and all DRM is a bad thing in my view/opinion, so whatever they do is gonna have a downside, some less than others, therefore I'm never happy about it. Steam is just about ok, but it really gets my goat that I can't sell on my unwanted games, which by now, I have quite a few of.

By now you must have seen my Are The Days Of DRM Numbered? editorial (yes, I've actually written one! No accusation required) and I'm sure you must have something to say about that. Come on, I know we're gonna disagree, just make your disagreement interesting.

Originally Posted by KieranD

Did the thread title change or am i wrong?

Yes, I wonder which silly sod did that. It's supposed to say, "Sony unreasonably restricts PS3 software to two consoles only".

[digibucc]

Originally Posted by RejZoR

That's fail. Steam has this done better. You can have Steam on 100 computers, but you can use it on only 1 at once. If you try to use it on 2 different locations at once, you'll always sign out someone else. So 2 users cannot ever play at once. That's imo far better. I wonder why Sony can't do the same...

because that only works when you are signed into steam online. you can have 99 computers in offline mode and 1 online at once, but those 99 could all play any single player game they want as it's offline.

many if not most of PSN's titles would be at a great disadvantage with a system like this.

[3volvedcombat]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

No, I did answer your question, both previously in the thread directly and in that post indirectly. And yes, while bashing you in the process for your completely unnecessarily negative news posts(and regular posts).

If you prefer a more direct answer, then fine. If they did that, then they would have people like you just bitch about how you have to be online to play the content that you've already paid for and downloaded to your console. And that is unacceptable. And personally, I'd rather have an install limit, then loose all of my DLC the instant my internet goes down, or if I take my PS3 to my vacation home that doesn't have an internet connection at all.



Actually most people figure it out just fine. I sell upgrade hard drives on ebay with instructions pulled directly off sony's site, in the ~100 drives I've sold, I have yet to get a single person that wasn't able to follow the extremely simple directions to update the firmware with the new drive.

Anybody buying on ebay, has some tech experience because on ebay its a shady thing most of the time.
Only 100, 55.5+ million ps3's out in this world today.

Who say's there not going to restrict on both realms (internet/install-limits). I would love to see your ps3 malfunction now

There is nothing positive about limited installs. People generally do not share there ps3's considering how many are out there now.
The whole argument about college dorm rooms and DLC account sharing on 1 ps3, give them a break. There trying to survive and get education in this world, and there is no threat to DLC on ps3's well being.

DLC on ps3 was perfectly fine before they put this limit on, period. Unless there is proof otherwise, I believe they did this to push weight around and the only people that complained were partially having bad sales or bad karma with there release.

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by qubit

I'm unnecessarily negative, huh? lol. From your viewpoint perhaps? I'm happy for you to have your view, now can I have mine? And thanks for answering again.

Well yes, any and all DRM is a bad thing in my view/opinion, so whatever they do is gonna have a downside, some less than others, therefore I'm never happy about it. Steam is just about ok, but it really gets my goat that I can't sell on my unwanted games, which by now, I have quite a few of.

By now you must have seen my Are The Days Of DRM Numbered? editorial (yes, I've actually written one! No accusation required) and I'm sure you must have something to say about that. Come on, I know we're gonna disagree, just make your disagreement interesting.



Yes, I wonder which silly sod did that. It's supposed to say, "Sony unreasonably restricts PS3 software to two consoles only".

So I'm just getting this clear. You consider it insulting for me to say that if Sony instituted an always on DRM you would have just made this thread bitching about that instead. But then you just admitted that is the truth...

Ok, if you don't like the truth, change it and quit bitching.

Originally Posted by 3volvedcombat

Anybody buying on ebay, has some tech experience because on ebay its a shady thing most of the time.
Only 100, 55.5+ million ps3's out in this world today.

Who say's there not going to restrict on both realms (internet/install-limits). I would love to see your ps3 malfunction now

If my PS3 malfunctions I'm not going to care about my DLC, because I'm not buying a new one, I'd be far more pissed about loosing the $250+ to buy a new one than I would be about the minor hassle of moving my hard drive from the old to the new.

And no, the process isn't hard to flash a PS3's firmware when swapping hard drives, so if they can figure out how to download the DLC, they can figure out how to get the firmware on the machine.

[qubit]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

So I'm just getting this clear. You consider it insulting for me to say that if Sony instituted an always on DRM you would have just made this thread bitching about that instead. But then you just admitted that is the truth...

Ok, if you don't like the truth, change it and quit bitching.

What are you on? Your overall manner towards me is actually quite offensive and just because you disagree with my viewpoint doesn't give you a licence to be an ass, ok? Look back at my posts to you, they are quite respectful and grown up, despite me disagreeing with you strongly.

Whether I would have made a news article on it or not would depend on how newsworthy it was.

[ShiBDiB]

Originally Posted by crazyeyesreaper

the problem is the firmware on the older systems vs newer systems

aka if you take the older PS3 hdd and try and pop it into a newer system theres a likelyhood youll have to flash the firmware to allow it

so that requires a usb key set as fat32 with a folder named PS3 then UPDATE inside it with proper firmware files,

so while its doable most people wont figure that out or understand what any of that means. so keep that it mind, the common denominator is that people tend to be stupid so my points are still valid as the only way to deauthorize content on a dead system is to mail it off okay, but my buddy mentioned dead systems etc and yet sony still dicks him around so it comes down to the end user knowing once again as i stated before how to deal with tech support in a way to get the desired end result. most of us have no issues with this most normal people on the other hand good luck.

I might have missed something.. but what in the hell does this have to do with op...

This thread answers any questions in its title.. "Sony reasonably restricts PS3 software to two consoles only"

Move along now, fanboys and trolls galore up in heeeeeeeaaaaaa

[qubit]

Originally Posted by ShiBDiB

I might have missed something.. but what in the hell does this have to do with op...

This thread answers any questions in its title.. "Sony reasonably restricts PS3 software to two consoles only"

Move along now, fanboys and trolls galore up in heeeeeeeaaaaaa

Unfortunately some enterprising mod has changed my thread title from "Sony unreasonably restricts PS3 software to two consoles only" to "Sony reasonably restricts PS3 software to two consoles only" lol. This isn't normal practice at TPU, so I have no idea why this is happening.

There were comments about it by me and KieranD earlier on about it.

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by qubit

What are you on? Your overall manner towards me is actually quite offensive and just because you disagree with my viewpoint doesn't give you a licence to be an ass, ok? Look back at my posts to you, they are quite respectful and grown up, despite me disagreeing with you strongly.

Whether I would have made a news article on it or not would depend on how newsworthy it was.

Ok...

*Looks back at previous posts*

Oh look, the two posts up is you insulting me Mr. Holier-Than-Thou.

Next time, if you are going to make the "stop picking on me, I've been respectful to you" argument, try to make sure the post you made right before that isn't you insulting the other person.

[Easy Rhino]

i think we can close this now.