PS3 3.42 Firmware Update Stops Jailbreaking

[ntrceptr]

Does anyone know how much the cost of a game would differ if they didn't have to license and implement the DRM stuff?

 

[JPHD]

Piracy only hurts legit buyers. The majority of people who pirate games on consoles wouldnt buy official titles, PERIOD. In 3rd world countries I've seen loads of friends buy the 360 because they could run "backup" games. The simple reason is economics. They don't have much money to begin with, can't afford games that cost up to 3 or 4 times what they cost in the U.S., so they pirate. That was the reason the PS 1 destroyed the N64 around these countries. Sony made a killing selling consoles to ppl that wouldnt buy original games for the simple reason that they couldnt afford it. So, basically, the choice companies have in these parts of the world is this: make money on hardware or make no money at all. seems like a no brainer. I have a PS3 and wouldnt pirate if I could, but I also have a PSP with homebrew that allows SNES games to run. I have pirated games on the PC, but just like with mp3's, you download material, develop a taste for the product and then at some point give back money to the dev's by going to a gig or buying some kind of product from them. Also, Sony is not the angel here. Remember the infamous DRM trojan!

 

[dark_lord69]

I'm not gonna bother with the jailbreak because my wife and I use the PS3 to rent movies.

 

[COLGeek]

Remember the infamous DRM trojan!

Finally, a DRM fact that had a legitimate negative impact to computer/music users! The DRM rootkit fiasco turned into a huge public relations mess for Sony. They did mess that one up.

However, the feeling of entitlement to break laws (whether you agree with them or not) is disturbing. Especially when people try to "logically" make their opinion into fact.

The "fun" never stops!!!

 

[Guest]

From what I hear developers prefer xbox due to the lower cost and less complex programming. If this is true I wonder what effect this will have on game development. EX.. I'm a developer, I only care about profit, xbox makes me money, ps3 makes me less, now ps3 games can be copied, ps3 makes me even less. I wonder how this will effect sony as a company.

 

[apocalypseap]

[citation][nom]Mundus33[/nom]Lets see here:1. go back to pc and have to handle their own drm. This in turn drives people away from your games and increases piracy. It also costs money and development time to make these drm.[/citation]
Or just don't waste money on DRM because pirates will pirate. In fact, it'll actually raise the chances of piracy because people will feel more compelled to crack a harder-to-crack DRM, in turn wasting money for the company. You could get a case like Assassin's Creed 2, where people will feel obligated to crack it because of the ridiculous DRM they've implemented and in that case, causing trouble for them, making them literally lose out on sales by word of mouth. "Might as well pirate it since paying for it is a b**** anyway without the crack."
[citation][nom]Mundus33[/nom]Also have to deal with much more demanding, whiney, and entitled fan group.[/citation]
ROFL. Wait wait wait. Adult gamers are more demanding, whiny and entitled than 17 year old kids? Because that's most likely the average age of the xbox live gamer.
[citation][nom]Mundus33[/nom]If you don't create drm you will still lose a good deal of money to piracy[/citation]
Most of them wouldn't have bought 'em, anyway (mostly no lost sales), and DRM actually makes people pirate it in some cases. Some people try before they buy as well.

 

[alextheblue]

[citation][nom]HibyPrime[/nom]You know, the home-brew argument would be a non-issue if they opened up the PSN (applies to XBL) to people just writing apps at home. It's not unheard of at all, the iTunes app store and Android marketplace already allow it, why can't PSN/XBL?Not to mention the things we've been using for decades that allow unsigned code to be executed, yet somehow is on the absolute bleeding edge of gaming hardware innovation, and very alive in the gaming distribution market. PCs.[/citation]XBL has Indie games. Lots of stuff on there tossed together by just some guy. The only downside is that they have to charge at least $1 - but to be fair, since it's going through XBL Microsoft has to pay for the bandwidth.

Of course, all XBL Arcade games have mandatory demos, people who don't own one don't realize this. This feature also extends to the Indie games, so you can nab a demo and see if it's worth supporting the creator.

 

[tota]

If we didn't have robbers, we wouldn't have balls and chains (DRM).

The example of the "robber" can not be taken too far, because:
1) Sony is not an authority and
2) a pirate is not stealing any object or property. A pirate is just copying, so in the worst case a pirate can reduce the chance of profit, and that is not allways the case.
If you can call pirating a robbery, than you can also call DRM a robbery because DRM is reducing the ability of legitimate buyers to fully use what they've bought.
Or maybe Sony and other big corporates are above the law because they've have the money to buy the lawyers, and then use the law to gain power and more money against the poor Joes that can't defend themselves against the DRM attack.
But the worst case of all is that some people tend to defend this big guys because they are on the side of the law. That is sad because they tend to write the law when they get back the favours to the politicians they helped to the top. But morally they're not allways on the "good" side.

There are legitimate ways of making profit of the good work the game developers do, but DRM is not one of those.
If DRM had succeed on the music market we would lose all our music as soon as our devices died. Is that fair?
Long after the PS3 hardware is on a junkyard it would be interesting and fair to be able to use the game I bought in another type of machine, on an emulator.
Finally, this is a also a philosophy question:
- Is the right of individual property above all society benefit? Can I oblige my clients to do whatever I want just because I am the copyright holder?

 

[crus_russ]

[citation][nom]tota[/nom]What's "jb" in English, COLGeek, please?[/citation]

Not sure if you have been a PC gamer over the last 10 years and seen what piracy and consoles has done to PC gaming. Big game companies have moved away from the PC as a less profitable platform. Often PC games are just a port of the console version if we are lucky. There are a few quality PC houses left (Valve - although they are moving to consoles, Relic - but their lead guy just died, Blizzard - standard awesome) - sorry name me a quality 4th, 5th, 6th gaming house that makes top quality PC games? And don't say Infinity ward.

Some companies do the multi platform well, just DICE with BFBC2 but they are few and far between.

Why does someone get flamed on this forum as soon as they mention that piracy is hurting PC gaming? Either you guys are all too young to have seen what PC gaming used to be like before bittorrent became massive, or you are seriously confused about the market economics. Classic example - Crysis being one of the most pirated games ever, wow look now its coming to consoles. Does that diminish the PC experience? Sure. You are only lieing to yourself.

 

[crus_russ]

Fail cant edit. My post above is in response to back_by_demand, not tota.

 

[crus_russ]

[citation][nom]tota[/nom]The example of the "robber" can not be taken too far, because:1) Sony is not an authority and2) a pirate is not stealing any object or property. A pirate is just copying, so in the worst case a pirate can reduce the chance of profit, and that is not allways the case.If you can call pirating a robbery, than you can also call DRM a robbery because DRM is reducing the ability of legitimate buyers to fully use what they've bought. Or maybe Sony and other big corporates are above the law because they've have the money to buy the lawyers, and then use the law to gain power and more money against the poor Joes that can't defend themselves against the DRM attack.But the worst case of all is that some people tend to defend this big guys because they are on the side of the law. That is sad because they tend to write the law when they get back the favours to the politicians they helped to the top. But morally they're not allways on the "good" side.There are legitimate ways of making profit of the good work the game developers do, but DRM is not one of those.If DRM had succeed on the music market we would lose all our music as soon as our devices died. Is that fair?Long after the PS3 hardware is on a junkyard it would be interesting and fair to be able to use the game I bought in another type of machine, on an emulator.Finally, this is a also a philosophy question:- Is the right of individual property above all society benefit? Can I oblige my clients to do whatever I want just because I am the copyright holder?[/citation]

Piracy is stealing. Copying is not Piracy. You have fuxored your terms. You have always been allowed to make a copy of music/disc's for backup. It is when you DISTRIBUTE that to others that you are committing an act of piracy, likewise the guy downloading it for free UNLESS he has already bought it and holds the license to the software or music is also committing piracy.

Have you ever bought a piece of software and noticed the EULA? This is what you are paying for, not the software itself. With enterprise software you can go download it for free off the net, you need to pay the vendor a license to be allowed to use it.

I agree that DRM sucks, I hate it. It isn't the solution because it doesnt address the PROBLEM. The PROBLEM being that people like you think that Piracy isn't stealing, no amount of "tech" can solve a mindset problem.

Stealing is stealing, just accept it. If I pirated something, which I have in the past, Ill just admit it, "Yeah I CBF buying that coz the first game was crap, so ill pirate it to check it out... yeah I stole it".

Just admit it.

 

[kelemvor4]

Stealing is stealing, pirating games is not stealing. Nobody walked into ebgames and stole a game. The seller and retailer lost nothing.

 

[eddieroolz]

This is going to be another one of the Apple vs. Jailbreaker fights.

 

[crus_russ]

[citation][nom]kelemvor4[/nom]Stealing is stealing, pirating games is not stealing. Nobody walked into ebgames and stole a game. The seller and retailer lost nothing.[/citation]

God you are dense. It's got nothing to do with the seller or retailer, its got to do with the developer's royalties from missed sales. Same story with music.

 

[randomhero1]

You just cant stop hackers. They will always win. It may take awhile but they always find a way to hack something. Ps3 took 4 years but they still found out a way. Sony is insane if they think they can stop it.

 

[crus_russ]

[citation][nom]randomhero1[/nom]You just cant stop hackers. They will always win. It may take awhile but they always find a way to hack something. Ps3 took 4 years but they still found out a way. Sony is insane if they think they can stop it.[/citation]

Thats funny because online games that require CD key registration have not been hacked. No buy = no CD key = no play. The only way around this is to play on hacked servers which are a far lesser experience than playing against the main population.

 

[tota]

There's no confusion:
To pirate = to copy for others
Domestic copy =
1- a way to avoid accidents with media, or use the software in several devices
2- a way to allow access to the software to your family and friends (it can be considered "domestic pirating"...)
Comercial pirating =
Act of replicating software for proffit.
This last act is the most disfavorable to all the software industry. But technicaly it is not robbery. In the fisical world it would be something like trespassing. The pirates don't take away the terrain from it's owner. In some cases the owner is not fully profiting of the terrain because of trespassing and that's the harm caused. On the other hand, pirating may not be a real problem. Let me give you an example:
Some high priced items of Donna Karan, say a $600 t-shirt are copied and branded as Dona Caren (or whatever!...) - that is legal, by the way - and sold for $10 in low cost shops in some developing countrys or the next shop on the city center of a developed country. Normally, the people that can buy the original don't want the copy, and the ones that can't buy the original are never going to buy the original. Paradoxically (or not) this doesn't really harm the original maker because they don't loose clients. They earn free publicity has all this process is creating an halo of prestige to the anafordable items. With some luck the poor get rich and end up buying the real deal even if it is 20 years after using the copy!
The software industry is ruled by other laws and has more Intelectual Property. But big business is on the open and not so much on the closed source. In the end Sony would gain more by reaching a vaster public on a more open environment. It all depends on their wilingness to inovate and be on the lead. If they do that, the others will be just following with cheap copies...
Why can't they believe in people's imagination? See what we have in Linux. There is a lot of marvellous software in an open market. And I can guarantee you that there are people earning money! And anyone can create and contribute, even if is just an icon or a translation. Imagine that on a piece of technology like the PS3!
There are people using PS3 for scientific calculation and as a personal computer. Should this be forbidden?

 

[crus_russ]

[citation][nom]tota[/nom]Normally, the people that can buy the original don't want the copy, and the ones that can't buy the original are never going to buy the original. Paradoxically (or not) this doesn't really harm the original maker because they don't loose clients.[/citation]

This is wrong on so many levels. Sure the poor guy will never afford to buy the "real" version. But to say the real brand isnt losing money is rediculous. The real brand is being DEVALUED because of the fakes. The prestige of the product is because they are RARE and anyone wearing one is wearing a real one and hence is happy to pay the high price.

So where you logic is wrong is that the real brand loses money because the RICH CLIENTS stop buying the product because its prestige/brand is lowered because every tom dick n harry is wearing it.

The quality of argument on this forum is extremely low. You need to figure out some basics before you stupid arguments.

 

[COLGeek]

This is wrong on so many levels.

The quality of argument on this forum is extremely low. You need to figure out some basics before you stupid arguments.

This is why I have disengaged from the argument. This feeling that it is okay to take something, not paid for, and use for personal gain with no consequences is bizarre.

Some people feel entitled to do as they please, without considering the consequences. This thread had demonstrated that poorly conceived concept to its fullest and is, frankly, disappointing.

In this argument piracy is stealing and stealing is wrong.

 

[tota]

What is wrong or right concerning piracy is not the point here. The point is how to do a profit without doing wrong, and specificaly with DRM. Piracy is going to exist anyway. It's better to understand how it works and what to do to continue doing profit. To give you an extreme example there are companies like Google that move on to a Software as a Service. In that model piracy is irrelevant!
But concerning the argument about the copy of garments, I suggest a Ted presentation by Johanna Blakley that ilustrates the process.
Copy is going to exist wheter we think it's wrong or right. Some processes to discourage it are already there. For example, there is a lot of copy on the music industry. For the big supplyers that is very bad news. But new commers like Apple are doing quite well selling music. There is copy, but there is also buying.

We have to be carefull with this exageration about what is criminal or not. If we call any kind of copy "stealing" then the next step is sending to jail anyone that lends a game or gives a book to someone after reading it (without buying another copy). Maybe even arrest anyone that doesn't destroy the newspaper and just leaves it on the train for others to read. If people can read freely how are they going to buy the Newspaper?...
Convenience for the ones that are paying is also very important. I recall buying a $90 DVD enciclopedia and I couldn't use it properly because it took about 3 minutes to get to the copy protected DVD and put it on the tray and wait... After a while I looked on the net for a crack. There it was - I cracked the software I bought and that way I could use it in seconds because I was using an ISO installed on hard-disk - allways available! So the irony here is that pirates were already having a better experience paying nothing. And I had this lousy slow program annoying me as a gift for paying! In this case we see that DRM harms more the client than the pirate, because the pirate just distributes copies with no DRM (ie. better than the original).

 

[randomhero1]

[citation][nom]crus_russ[/nom]Thats funny because online games that require CD key registration have not been hacked. No buy = no CD key = no play. The only way around this is to play on hacked servers which are a far lesser experience than playing against the main population.[/citation]

Yea they have. You living in the stone age?

 

[COLGeek]

Stealing is stealing, pirating games is not stealing. Nobody walked into ebgames and stole a game. The seller and retailer lost nothing.

Taking something of value and using for personal gain without paying for it (or the right to use it) is stealing. This is part of this argument.

How would you feel if someone took something you worked hard to make/own without paying for it? Stealing/theft does not necessarily take a physical act. Hijacking someone's identity (identity theft) is certainly stealing and no one went into ebgames for that.

Think, people, think.

 

[jowunger]

My mommy always told me that there is always a better crack coming out then the best protection can handle