PS4 Digital Games Are Tied To Your Account, Playable On Any Playstation 4

[Sledgstone 8,672]

The Playstation 4 will be noticeably different in how digital games are handled compared to the current PS3:

Speaking at Develop, Neil Brown, Sony’s R&D senior team leader, outlined the process that lets you access your games on other machines at other people’s houses:

“You can visit your friends house you can log into your account and play any game from your digital library, which is good. But how useful is that if it takes half a day to download the game you want to play? With Play As You Download you get much quicker access to at least the first section of the game so you can start playing quicker. So this makes a digital library a practical option in the real world.”

.

It appears that the PS4 will try to emulate Steam's success in digital game management by tying your digital games to your specific account. With the games tied to your account you will be able to access your digital games on any PS4 you log into. This is very different compared to how the PS3 handles digital games. Currently the PS3 will allow you to have up to two PS3 consoles active for your digital games. Which means if you own two PS3 consoles you can log into each of those consoles and download any of your digital game purchases.

However, it is possible to log into any PS3 system and still access your digital games. By having 1 primary console for your account at your home, you can easily go to a friend's house, use their PS3, log into your PSN account and download your games and start playing. That system would then be considered the second active system for your digital game purchases. Of course, once you finish playing at your friend's house you must remember to not only log off, but also to deactivate your PSN account off their console (PlayStation Support). This is burdensome and many people do not know that they have to do that extra step. The PS4 simplifies this and allows you to log in to any PS4 to play your games. This is where the next major difference between the two systems take place.

On a PS3 you can purchase a digital game, download it and all users on that console have access to that game. If the PS4 will have all digital games tied to a specific account, then all users on any console could very well be locked out from having access to playing these games. If all you have for your game systems is a single user account, then this is not an issue. But if you have a family with multiple user accounts for everyone in the house, then this could become a large issue if the only way to play a digital game is to be logged in as the account that owns it.

Hopefully the PS4 will have a family sharing option that allows all users on a specific console to play games purchased, because if not, physical game discs will have another advantage over digital.

Source: OPM

Click here to view the article

[DeathscytheX 9,732]

And MS claims they need a 24hrs onilne check in for this. lol

[Myk JL 1,731]

But.... But.... "Family Sharing" was So Innovative with how it was going DRM The Hell out of Physical Copies of Games You Buy.... This way PS4 does it isn't Innovative at all since it doesn't punish the consumer.... And as any Xbox Fan Boy will tell you through Online Petitions The Consumers Want To Be Punished!....

 

/Sarcasm

 

This news is semi interesting to me since I doubt I'll ever use such a feature. I haven't even bothered with how PS3 does it.

[Sledgstone 8,672]

I think the only problem with PS4's DRM in terms of physical game discs will be DLC. If I buy a physical copy of BF4, play the hell out of it with my username, decide to play as a different username on my PS4, I'll be screwed when it comes to DLCs.. If I buy DLC on one account, then it would be a digital game purchase.. if that purchase is only accessible to the account it was purchased on, then even tho I can play the physcial game on any of my accounts, the DLC will be locked to only the account it was purchased on. Whereas on PS3, I have BF3 & all DLCs and I can play all the DLC maps on any account on my console. PS4 looks like it will be more restrictive. I just hope that with this Steam style approach, they'll have steam style sales. If I'd have to buy multiple copies of the same DLC for different accounts, that could be huge money, but if they have steam style sales, 75% off dlc could rake them in some money if people are willing to buy multiple copies of DLC for multiple accounts.

 

 

And MS claims they need a 24hrs onilne check in for this. lol

 

I think that was mostly because they were going to DRM all physical game discs and the 24 hour check in was to make sure they still owned the game. MS would have been better off saying all games are unsellable. It would have negated the 24 hour check in. When I bought my physical copy of StarCraft 2 for PC, the game is full DRM. I still have the disc but theres no way I could ever resell the game. I think that was what MS wanted to do, but too many kids play consoles. They don't have loads of money and being able to resell a game is too much of an incentive for the younger audience. I like how Sony is doing it. Physical games are just that, while digital will be DRM.

[Strider Hiryu 2,704]

I think the only problem with PS4's DRM in terms of physical game discs will be DLC. If I buy a physical copy of BF4, play the hell out of it with my username, decide to play as a different username on my PS4, I'll be screwed when it comes to DLCs.. If I buy DLC on one account, then it would be a digital game purchase.. if that purchase is only accessible to the account it was purchased on, then even tho I can play the physcial game on any of my accounts, the DLC will be locked to only the account it was purchased on. Whereas on PS3, I have BF3 & all DLCs and I can play all the DLC maps on any account on my console. PS4 looks like it will be more restrictive. I just hope that with this Steam style approach, they'll have steam style sales. If I'd have to buy multiple copies of the same DLC for different accounts, that could be huge money, but if they have steam style sales, 75% off dlc could rake them in some money if people are willing to buy multiple copies of DLC for multiple accounts.

 

That's how the current DLC system works for the 360 so I'm used to this, same goes for any games bought on their On Demand system. The only one who can access them is me with my account, if anyone wants to play them they can just use my account. Honestly I don't see a real problem with it since I don't see any need to have more then one account for myself on a console, just a waste of money (talking in 360 terms here since a Gold account is required for On Demand games and buying multiple instances of DLC is just a waste). I do see where you're coming from though, would be a real pain in the ass to have to buy multiples of everything.

 

Quite honestly I'm not hip on the digital thing, I'd rather have a physical copy then a digital one. That's why it took me so long to get used to the idea of Steam (I've been a member for 7 years but only recently started buying games off the service). The idea of owning a digital copy of something has just never set right with me.

[DeathscytheX 9,732]

Yeah thats def nothing new to us 360 users... and it make sense from a business standpoint. It prevents someone from playing their game, and then going to a friends house to freeload all the extra content, or even attempting to transfer it via flash drive. While some DLC is a rip off like extra characters and on disc locked content, A lot of DLC is pretty good stuff and it took man hours to create. Mass Effect's DLC was pretty good from the few I played, All of Borderlands 1 and 2 DLC were great seeing as they added almost 10-20 more hours of game play. BF Premium was well worth what I paid for IMO... Developers have to recoup their money and fund their next project... although I do disagree with the pricing from time to time... we all have COD to thank for that.

 

Then you have the Capcom and Nether Realm fighting series which keeps adding characters that basically have the same moves with different animations... the release them in packs of 4-5, and then release a remix game with all the DLC content on board. lol Thats the DLC I do not like.

[Strider Hiryu 2,704]

Don't get me started on that type of DLC. Never could understand why your would charge money for extra characters, why not just put them in the game to begin with (damn you fighting games, then again I'm the retard that bought Darth Vader for Soul Caliber 4).

 

With the exception of a few DLC all Mass Effect DLC has been fantastic (The Arrival for ME2 wasn't worth the money they charged, was greatly disappointed). If all DLC followed suit I'd have no problem paying for it.

[DeathscytheX 9,732]

Don't get me started on that type of DLC. Never could understand why your would charge money for extra characters, why not just put them in the game to begin with (damn you fighting games, then again I'm the retard that bought Darth Vader for Soul Caliber 4).

 

With the exception of a few DLC all Mass Effect DLC has been fantastic (The Arrival for ME2 wasn't worth the money they charged, was greatly disappointed). If all DLC followed suit I'd have no problem paying for it.

 

I think DLC is best suited for those types of games. Action/RPGs with +1 play through. Not only do they add a new chapter and set of missions to the story, but most of the time you can play through them in two different ways if the game has a light/dark paragon/renegade good/evil etc play options. For the most part you know effort was put into these because they have to not only build new areas, but pay people to voice dialogue... so it better be good enough to pass through the kotaku/joystiq critics to convince you to buy it.

[Sledgstone 8,672]

The best DLC I ever bought was Battlefield 3 premium. The over 100 hours of gameplay I put into that game and on all the DLC map packs was well worth it.

 

I never cared for digital games until I bought my first humble bundle. I played the hell out of World of Goo. And then about a year later I got Portal for free on Steam.. it was my first Steam game. Then I found out my humble bundles had steam keys.. After I saw how easy it was to use steam and how quickly I could access my game library, I became a fan.. then I saw their sales.. and I've been getting digital games almost exclusively ever since. Digital is way cheaper than buying a physical disc.

 

I'm surprised that xbox 360 has had digital restrictions like this the entire time. It'll be a pain for me at some point.. On my PS3 we have two main accounts, mine and Lady's. I bought Worms Armageddon digitally and we both played it a lot.. It was very convenient to be able to play it on all accounts on the console so we can have our own save games and trophy info.

 

If the PS4 doesn't let us share our digital purchases and doesn't have family / console sharing, then I'd like to see them give us an option like secondary users.. As in.. I could log into my account, then switch user to her account to play the game. Technically my account would still be signed in, but her username would be used for save info and trophies. If they did something like that, then we could play each other's digital games / DLC.

 

Being able to go to a friend's house, logging in and start playing your games sounds good, but if your friend wants to play your games, he'd be playing as your character. I'd rather login to access my games and then let the friend screw up his kill / death ratio on his own username instead of mine.

[Strider Hiryu 2,704]

Being able to go to a friend's house, logging in and start playing your games sounds good, but if your friend wants to play your games, he'd be playing as your character. I'd rather login to access my games and then let the friend screw up his kill / death ratio on his own username instead of mine.

 

My roommate and I did this all the time when COD4 first came out since I couldn't afford it. He actually begged me to play on his account just to up his K/D ratio (yea I was that good). I'd rather them do that too but for me I honestly just don't care much anymore. Most games (shooters excluded) come with the ability to have multiple different save files/characters so as long as they stick to their character/save file I don't mind. Sucks though that only I'd get credit for the achievements and they wouldn't get any for their account (only real downside for those who are achievement/trophy whores).

[Sledgstone 8,672]

I think trophies / achievements are interesting to look back at to see what I accomplished on my play through and what I might have missed.. It doesn't mean I'm interested in playing through every game again to get every trophy. Screw that. I do like to occasionally compare trophies to other users to see if they made the same choices in the campaign or if they found something I missed.

 

Here is something interesting:

 

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2013/06/11/one-playstation-plus-account-on-ps4-will-allow-other-accounts-to-play-online-on-same-console/

 

According to this, one PS plus membership will be required for online play for all accounts on a PS4 console. The PS Plus membership is a digital purchase tied to an account, but it does allow all accounts on the console to play online.. if thats possible, then I don't see why all digital purchases couldn't be played on a single console across multiple accounts. I hope Sony clarifies more on this at some point.