Larry Hryb recalls that the Xbox One was originally "very complex to explain."

At PAX EAST, Hryb took a shot at Sony's claim that it will ship 100 games in 2014. "Saying something and shipping something can be two different things," Hryb said. - Gamespot

[AngelicIceDiamond]

I'm pretty sure blocking used games is CRYSTAL clear to allot of people.

Yeah, we can comprehend that MS.

[zeee]

So true! They tried to screw us for sure. Those pre order numbers must have been really really bad and that's because gamers are not stupid and we have a very vocal community.

It is amazing how Larry still thinks that it's us, the users. who are not 'getting' it. It's actually the other way around.

[kreate]

Its trying to twist words so the anti-consumer policy 'sounds' good to the consumers is the 'very complex' part.

[TheGreatAndPowerful]

He's back to trash talking I see... and just a couple of months back he was crying about being picked on by the community and that people weren't giving the Xbone a fair shot and blah blah blah. What a d***!

[ZodTheRipper]

"Hryb took a shot at Sony's claim that it will ship 100 games in 2014"

Until today more games have been released and announced for PS4 than for XB1 ...lots of developers announced PS4 exclusivty without any exclusive contracts - meanwhile MS paid EA for Titanfall or PvZ to make it look exclusive.

[Kayant]

TF is a full MS platform exclusive. But you can add peggle 2, below to the timed exclusives list. They really do have an unprecedented partnership with EA.

Addressing the other thing of XB1 being very complex to explain. They sure as hell didn't try to explain it well during that time with different execs/people saying different things and them not bothering to clear it up with an official statement then just posting randomly on their news site the way some things will work going forward. Evading giving further information after E3 by cancelling the Post-E3 roundtable talks. So to me never seemed like they intended on explaining their *complex* plans during does times.

@Massacred

Oh shit looool...

[OrangePowerz]

That is true very unprecedented. No other company would willingly sabotage their own sales by delaying and hidding the game version that comes out on the console with the bigger userbase.

Let's see for how long that will last. Nintendo had a unprecedented partnership with EA until things didn't go the way EA wanted. Sure EA went with X1 because of the original used game block given that they dropped the online pass just around the time thr console was revealed and they most likely expected the PS4 to sell less. If the PS4 keeps outperforming the X1 in sales they will end their unprecedented partnership with MS unless MS pays enough to offset all lost revenue.

[Mankey]

Very Complex to explain? The fact that I could no longer play my console at a friends apartment who didn't have internet seems pretty straight forward.

[OrangePowerz]

Nope Larry we clearly understood that you wanted full control over the software and block out used games and always be in full control of what content people can access.

Don't make it sound like the consumers are too stupid to understand what the system is and was about because it's so complex, you know despite the claims it is not rocket science.

[hello12]

This is actually the problem with the internet. Do you realise lot of gaming companies around the world are struggling because of the used game market?

Microsoft but mainly gaming companies that make all those blockbuster games for millions wanted DRM.

Sony was implementing DRM too you know and still has DRM, http://couchjockeyz.com/yos... but removed most of the DRM features, by patch, and lied they had nothing like this to get one over on Microsoft.

Microsoft was straight with its fans it was bringing it in. Sony kept it secret.

[MasterCornholio]

Sony never planned on incorporating Microsoft's DRM system in the first place. The vice president of Sony Computer Entertainment confirmed to the world in February that you could play games on the PS4 without an internet connection. This means that it would have been impossible for Sony to implement the same system as Microsoft. What happened is that Microsoft wanted to implement barbaric DRM policies on their system and all Sony had to do was announce their policies at E3 to hurt Microsoft.

Your not fooling anyone. Sony did nothing and used Microsoft's DRM policies to hurt them. If it wasn't for that you would lose your right as a consumer to share games with your friends, sell used games or buy them.

Like Yoshida said Vita has DRM. Death Ray Manta.

[Kayant]

" but removed most of the DRM features, by patch, and lied they had nothing like this to get one over on Microsoft"

What? Loooooool so Sony all this time had a policy in place that stopped people playing games after 24 HRs, and didn't allow used games/rentals at launch.

Man I wonder what people have being playing all this time because it's surely not PS4's if they have to same DRM policy as MS was planning.

Of course DRM exists on PSN that's how they tie/verify your game license to your account. Literally almost every Digital based store has DRM. That doesn't mean they were going to have to same implementation as MS. They confirmed right after their reveal in Feb that no online connection was needed as wanted --> http://www.eurogamer.net/ar... http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

[hello12]

Master@

A video started circulating on March 30th, 2014 displaying an anonymous PS4 user irritated at his sudden discovery that his games could not be played without an internet connection. He attempted to play Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes, Sound Shapes, and Flower which indicated that these were all digital titles none of which were able to launch displaying a message stating “Cannot start the application. The PS4 is not connected to the internet and cannot verify the license for the application”

His answer excuses i thought the PS4 had no DRM full stop?
Shuhei Yoshida @yosp
Follow
@imJGott @sidshuman The E3 presentation was about disc based games, digital games have DRM since the beginning of PSN in 2006.

Really Master? He's admitting they were going to do it
SCE Worldwide Studios president Shuhei Yoshida admitted to Famistu magazine this week that Sony changed its stance on DRM after hearing all the negative feedback stemming from the Xbox One. Prior to E3 2013, Sony had remained withdrawn regarding that topic, whereas Microsoft laid it all out on the table. It wasn't until the Xbox Media Briefing during E3 that we saw the scope of Microsoft's DRM scheme.

Obviously, Sony saw Microsoft's wounds as a time to pounce. Yoshida said there were many people who gave their opinions on that issue directly to him through Twitter before Sony made its presentation at E3 2013. He then admitted that – even though Sony doesn't typically define its hardware policies based on feedback – the subject became a very useful source in regards to what Sony needed to convey about its new console and how to do it.

SCE Japan Asia president Hiroshi Kawano chimed in, saying that Sony is now getting a very positive response. "For this system, we made a list of what people expected from us, debating over each point, with user feedback forming the main basis for the list," Kawano said. "The software makers are also telling us that they feel like they really make some fun stuff with it. A new platform always provides the basis for new forms of play, so I'd like to see it connect to a revitalization of the marketplace."

system software update (version 1.50) when you got this patch for PS4 all media gaming outlets reported this was to remove DRM features from the PS4.

[OrangePowerz]

Second hand sales aren't loosing companies as much money as they claim and blocking used games isn't the way to go about it in the first place. They should try to get something worked out with Gamestop and the other retailers instead of trying the approach with the hammer. Besides if you product is a quality product and allows for enough replayabillity and you give consumers a game that they feel has enough value to keep you will see less copies as used games to buy.

As for Sony, I have both MGS and Flower and they launch without internet for me. Digital games have by nature DRM (except GOG) in order to make sure the user account who bought it plays it since all digital purchases are linked to an account. There is no other way to track digital content so if you expected digital stuff to not have any DRM at all you are foolish.

As for the firmware removing DRM, I know for a fact that this isn't correct.

Even if Sony was planning something I doubt it required people to have a person on the friends list for X amount of days before they could give away their disc based copy that they physically own to that person and only once before the disc is rendered completely useless.

[MasterCornholio]

Reported for trolling.

You didn't need the day one patch on the PS4 to play games without an internet connection. What Yoshida said was for digital copies not retail ones. Microsoft's DRM affected both retail and digital copies.

You can't even defend the Xbox One without making some absurd lie about the PS4. Sony never planned on incorporating DRM into retail copies of PS4 games.

Adam Orth "Deal with it"

[Kayant]

@KNWS

"system software update (version 1.50) when you got this patch for PS4 all media gaming outlets reported this was to remove DRM features from the PS4."

Loool you are so damn comical which is why does same outlets where magically playing games before the patch arrived also please provide links to such outlets.

You trying to connect dots to where their isn't they already said in Feb multiple times they didn't have the same policies as the rumored XB1's and not everyone listened to them.

"The E3 presentation was about disc based games, digital games have DRM since the beginning of PSN in 2006" - That right there proves what they said in Feb and what I showed above. They never had any initial of to adopting MS's always online/used games policies.

[Hicken]

Where is this video? And why would Sony SAY way back in February 2013 that they were NOT going to implement any sort of draconian DRM, LONG before Microsoft even revealed their console, and then have that feature somehow still in their system?

How do you believe this one supposed rumor when there are millions who have had no such issues? Does that even make sense to you?

Do you even care if it makes sense?

Will you keep going on, perpetuating this nonsense?

If any gaming companies struggle because of the used market, they're probably doing it wrong. In actuality, used games do a lot more to further and support the industry than they do to harm it. You only say that because it's the opinion that fits with Microsoft's DRM-laden vision for the future.

And given how vague they were about everything up until the last moment, that hardly counts as being up front and open.

[Geoff900]

@MasterCornholio

Ubisoft, EA, and several other publishers wanted to stop the used games market, why? because the likes of Gamestop, Wallmart, Game (UK), etc all make massive profits on them.

A lot of stores 'buy', and when I say buy I mean give you in-store credit which is worth nothing, for your game, they then sell the game for 200%+ profit*

Oh and of course Sony wanted to do it, the big publishers stated the year before they wanted to do something about the used games market, it was something Sony and MS had the intention of doing although it back fired for MS so Sony decided to go back on it.

[SaveFerris]

It may have been tough to explain, but it only required a flip of a switch to change it, huh?

[gamer7804]

Larry is right. It was hard for them to explain. No one knew yet exsctly how game sharing would work. That's seperate from what did them in. People don't want mandatory inernet connection and the insbility to buy physical used games.

[Samsara82]

Yeah a lot of their plans were not explained initially and they should have made it clear. i believe they should have continued to support disc based games the way it was and simply push digital more with agressive pricing and the 10 friend digital sharing they had (but did not explain outside of a little memo). That would be the best way to minimize the used game market. I loved that they talked only games at E3 but they should have adressed or take time to explain their idea which they didnt.

And the check in for digital purchases could have been longer...like 1-2 weeks..24h is a bit much.

[redcar121]

How dare he take a shot at sony

[e-p-ayeaH]

Because it was full of lies pretty much LOL

[Skate-AK]

And here we go again.