Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
PlayStation (Games) Sony Games

Final Fight Brings Restrictive DRM To the PS3 240

Posted by Soulskill
from the let's-blame-ubisoft dept.
Channard writes "As reported by Joystiq, the PS3/PlayStation Network version of Final Fight Double Impact features a rather restrictive piece of digital rights management. In order to launch the game, you have to be logged into the PlayStation Network and if you're not, the game refuses to launch. This could be written off as a bug of some kind except for the fact that the error message that crops up tells you to sign in, suggesting Sony/Capcom intentionally included this 'feature.' Granted, you do have to log into the PlayStation Network to buy the title but as one commentator pointed out, logging in once does not mean you'll be logged in all the time. Curiously, the 360 version has no such restrictions, so you can play the game whether you're online or offline. But annoying as this feature may be, there may be method in Sony's madness. "
Channard continues, "The key difference between buying titles on the 360's Marketplace and Sony's PlayStation Store is that buying a title from the Marketplace only usually entitles you to play that title on a single console. A PlayStation Network account, on the other hand, can be used to license up to five consoles, meaning any title purchased from that account can be played on five different consoles. And these consoles can be de-authorized and re-authorized at will, allowing gamers to switch licenses around. This has led to a practice known as PSN game sharing, whereby gamers can purchase a title together, thereby paying a fifth of the cost of the game, and still allowing anyone to play the game on their console. Whether this has had any direct impact upon Sony or Capcom's apparent decision to implement this forced sign-in system is unknown. [Though an email from a Capcom employee seems to confirm this.] But Final Fight is the first title to feature this system — it'd be interesting to know whether this was done at Sony or Capcom's request."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Final Fight Brings Restrictive DRM To the PS3

Comments Filter:
  • by assemblerex (1275164) * on Friday April 23, 2010 @02:40AM (#31952042)
    simple as that. Only by refusing to buy DRM laden product will we win.
    • by lowlymarine (1172723) on Friday April 23, 2010 @02:49AM (#31952090)
      In a perfect society, yes. But these idiots will see low sales and say "SEE? PIRATE'S SAPPIN MAH SALES!" And then they'll use that to justify even more restrictive DRM in future launches.
      • by Taco Cowboy (5327) on Friday April 23, 2010 @03:00AM (#31952180) Journal

        In a perfect society, yes. But these idiots will see low sales and say "SEE? PIRATE'S SAPPIN MAH SALES!" And then they'll use that to justify even more restrictive DRM in future launches.

        So ... in a totally imperfect society, that game with an even more restrictive DRM will see its sale tanked even more, and they will yell "SEE? EVEN MORE PIRATES'S SAPPIN MAH SALES!" ... rinse ... repeat ... until there is a game no one would buy.

        And the company kaput. Killed by "phantom pirates".

        • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

          by Anonymous Coward

          And the company kaput. Killed by "phantom pirates".

          With companies the size of Sony it's going to be more like: bailed out with tax payer money.

        • by _KiTA_ (241027)

          In a perfect society, yes. But these idiots will see low sales and say "SEE? PIRATE'S SAPPIN MAH SALES!" And then they'll use that to justify even more restrictive DRM in future launches.

          So ... in a totally imperfect society, that game with an even more restrictive DRM will see its sale tanked even more, and they will yell "SEE? EVEN MORE PIRATES'S SAPPIN MAH SALES!" ... rinse ... repeat ... until there is a game no one would buy.

          And the company kaput. Killed by "phantom pirates".

          We call them "Music Industry Execs who still haven't came down off their latest Cocaine High" instead of "Phantom Pirates", but yeah, you've pretty much got it spot on. It's happened in two major video game industry crashes so far, no reason to think it won't happen again.

        • by jimicus (737525)

          Actually, I can see that happening. Few of smaller games studios can afford to make a game which royally flops; it's not difficult to see a scenario where one is released with such harsh DRM that it winds up acquiring a reputation comparable to Windows ME within a week of release.

        • by shaitand (626655)

          You forgot the part where they buy politicians to pass laws outlawing 3rd party music and to fund them via things like cd-r and internet radio play taxes/fees.

        • 'And the company kaput. Killed by "phantom pirates".'

          Actually, once the sales get bad enough the howling about pirates gets loud enough, Congress or Parliament passes laws levying a tax on hard disks and DVDs to give to those companies. See the music industry for details.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Hatta (162192)

          Except when the majority sees *OOH PRETTY!* and buys anyway, thereby depriving those of us who care about our rights the only influence we have.

      • by zebslash (1107957) on Friday April 23, 2010 @03:14AM (#31952248)

        Well, that did work for MP3, didn't it ? After some time, consumers made interoperability between mp3 players prevail and vendors finally sold DRM-free mp3 music.

      • In this case, can you even pirate it? I mean it's the PS3 not a PC.

        • by Thansal (999464) on Friday April 23, 2010 @08:13AM (#31954106)

          Yes, RTFSummary?

          However it is mostly back to the old days of copying games for friends.:

          PSN games are tagged to an account.
          You can log into a PSN account from any PS3.
          Prior to this game you could download your PSN games and then sign off and play them as you saw fit.

          This leads to people sharing an account amongst themselves so that everyone can have the games but they are only payed for once. It is apparently fairly pervasive, and even works for MP games (you can be signed into a different account and still play the games, not sure if this works for this FF title or not).

          I haven't done this yet myself as PSN games fall under within my price range of "It is low enough that I am willing to take the hit if it isn't that great, especially if they offer a demo". Admittedly, I have also bought all of one PSN game (Fat Princess).

          • Just so it's known you can log into any 360 with any account as well and your licenses will follow, put your DLC on an SD Card and away you go. It seems the issue is the fact Sony let's one user account register on up to 5 separate PS3s.

            Reminds me of the old dail-up days; one account 5 people logged in, oh the savings!
          • by TrekkieGod (627867) on Saturday April 24, 2010 @12:59PM (#31968242) Homepage Journal

            This leads to people sharing an account amongst themselves so that everyone can have the games but they are only payed for once.

            The actual console you make the download with needs to register. Sony specifically allowed 5 different consoles to have the games, so that's not really "pirating." In fact, the reasonable DRM they used to have was the only reason that I actually decided it wasn't that bad, and bought playstation games. Other people I shared account with decided they needed to "pay me back" for the games I was allowing them to play, and bought additional games. All of this resulted in our sharing network buying more and more games, leading to more profit for Sony.

            In the end, I now realize that I was stupid for not realizing that any DRM, regardless of how permissive it appears to be, is still evil and unacceptable. They can always change how permissive they are after they already have your money, and then you're fucked. Now that Sony has gone back to their completely evil ways and are removing OtherOS support and allowing stricter DRM after a few years of being rather nice with their PS3 (you can easily replace your hard-drive with any laptop SATA drive, controllers are standard bluetooth, ports are USB, OtherOS support, etc.), they already got the money I used to purchase the PS3, AND the PS3 games I bought.

            Fuck me and my naivity. Oh well, lesson learned.

      • by mcgrew (92797) * on Friday April 23, 2010 @07:41AM (#31953682) Homepage Journal

        That's not what happened in the late '80s (or was it early '90s?) when gamers started getting pissed about the DRM at the time, which was nowhere near as restrictive. Back then, piracy was from sneakernet and BBSes and DRM was stuff like extra holes in the floppies, but the industry still cried "pirates are killing out business!"

        Gamers ignored their whining and ignored games with DRM. The DRM went away -- until a new generation of gamers willing to put up with corporate bullshit came along.

        DRM is one reason it's been a long time since I've bought a game. Piracy won't kil your company, but DRM can.

    • by radicalskeptic (644346) <tritone&gmail,com> on Friday April 23, 2010 @02:51AM (#31952108)
      Good idea. Don't forget to tell them why you didn't buy it.

      Here's a link to the developer's (Proper Games) contact page: http://www.proper-games.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=35&Itemid=55 [proper-games.com]

      And here's one to the publisher's (Capcom) contact page: https://shop.capcom.com/DRHM/servlet/ControllerServlet?Action=DisplayContactFormPage&SiteID=capcomus&Locale=en_US&Env=BASE&resid=S9FRGwoBAiMAAFFzqmEAAAAD&rests=1272009021063 [capcom.com]
    • simple as that. Only by refusing to buy DRM laden product will we win.

      Not if a whole shit-ton of people who don't care go out and buy it anyway. The only way we can win is if Sony starts noticing a drop in sales. Which, predictably, they'll attribute to piracy... and crank up the DRM even more. So, basically we all win if we sit around and make up our own games and play with each other for free.

    • by morari (1080535)

      Gaming consoles in and of themselves are DRM. This is just another, even more ridiculous layer.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by rxan (1424721)

      Unless you're OK with the DRM scheme. Requiring to have the disc/cartridge in the system while playing the game _IS_ a DRM scheme. Yet you were OK with that with the NES, SNES, Saturn, ..., PC, PS3, XBOX360.

      My point is that people are on a misguided tirade against DRM. When really what they want is to play a game without DRM getting in their way.

      DRM isn't wrong, it's just implemented in a way that hurts consumers most of the time. The sooner that customers realize DRM is OK, and the sooner that publishers r

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Requiring to have the disc/cartridge in the system while playing the game _IS_ a DRM scheme.

        You're thinking of just plain old copy protection, and you're still wrong. On almost all the systems you mentioned, the physical media was a technical requirment to play the game, not a matter of company policy. It's not like everybody was sitting around going "why do I have to have a cartridge to play may SNES?"

        My point is that people are on a misguided tirade against DRM. When really what they want is to play a game without DRM getting in their way.

        The only misguided bit I've seen is calling DRM and copy protection the same thing. It's not, but since DRM is being used so much now the difference usually isn't big enough to ause a confusing co

  • On PC games you have the option of cracking your games.

    On PS3 you have no other option, right? Once you paid the console, you're pretty much forced to accept whatever system Sony decides to create. They may decide tomorrow to force you to be permanently connected to play any game at all and the only alternative would be to sell the PS3.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by leuk_he (194174)

      Worse: if they decide this the resell value of your ps3 will decrease.

      Let me give sony an other idea: only allow blue rays disk to play if a title has a release in blueray and dvd.
      -Blueray give better screen qulaity.
      -They can sell the titles all over again.
      -DVD "security" is broken. it is not an effective DRM.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Svartalf (2997)

      Actually, you've one other option on either...probably the best one overall.

      You can opt out. You're not forced to do anything you didn't sign off on there. If you pay for it, now that the cat's out of the bag it's your own fault, not theirs- and you weren't forced to do anything. If you pirate it, you're giving them ammo to do WORSE things to everyone.

      Isn't it about time people quit doing the "ooh...shiny" or "but...it's shiny" stuff and stood up to them and let them know that you're not a consumer but a

  • by MC68040 (462186) <henric AT digital-bless DOT com> on Friday April 23, 2010 @02:49AM (#31952080) Homepage

    Well, its a funny thing actually.

    I've downloaded items (like game maps, etc) using my friends accounts on MY ps3.
    While I've not bought these items I've had access to them when the machine isn't logged in to their ps network account (nor mine, e.g. just logged in locally to my user).

    Which basically means free game extras.. (still, paying £40 for a game then £2-5 for 6-7 extra maps is a ripoff in my book, and yes I know, its entirely optional to purchase the extra content, no flames please)

    Note: The accounts aren't linked per say. I believe there's some "family" account thingy where you can share some (or all?) purchases between linked ps3 accounts.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 23, 2010 @06:20AM (#31953138)

      well, you've touched on the actual story here, which slashdot completely missed. Lots of PSN games require you to be signed in to play, that part is nothing new. What Capcom did with Final Fight is disable the ability to share the game between 5 accounts like you can with everything else on PSN. And it has nothing whatsoever to do with Sony, no matter how much everyone loves to hate them, the move was entirely Capcoms.

  • ...you know, Trusted Computing?

  • by syousef (465911) on Friday April 23, 2010 @03:14AM (#31952256) Journal

    These companies need to get it through their rotten skulls that we aren't all always connected to the Internet. Many, many people go through periods where they don't have a net connection at all. All these greedy fools are doing is shooting themselves in the foot by reducing their customer base. A customer only has to buy a small number of titles that don't work for them, for whatever reason, to conclude that all the games are junk and that they're better off to pirate or go without.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by neumayr (819083)
      You think they haven't thought of that?
      They only have statistics to go on, like what percentage of the population would buy games at all, what percentage has broadband access, how many of those can or would buy their games, and of those, how many are broadband subscribers.
      Following those stats, it's not hard to see how they would think a large enough amount of their potential customers has net access, especially in this case - it's a download title after all.
      Why anyone would buy any of those in the first
    • Re: (Score:2, Redundant)

      by mcgrew (92797) *

      These companies need to get it through their rotten skulls that we aren't all always connected to the Internet.

      The only way to make that happen is stop buying their games, and tell them WHY you stopped buying their games.

  • I don't accept you have to sign on just to counter game sharing. There are several PSN games that only install on one PS3 to start with. I think WipeoutHD is one example. If that their fear was game sharing then they could have added the restriction to their own game.

    Besides, who says you have to sign on with the same PSN id as the one that purchased the game? If you don't then that puts paid to that argument. Still, it's a highly annoying "feature" and unless the game has stuck this requirement in to ens

  • by cgenman (325138) on Friday April 23, 2010 @03:33AM (#31952356) Homepage

    Xbox 360: Everything you download is tied to your gamertag and your console. Either your gamertag must be logged in, or it must be running on the specific console that the content is licensed to. Microsoft provides a license transfer tool that you can use to migrate your licensed console in case of system death, which you can use once a year (more if you talk to the service agents). You can re-download content as much as you want as long as the purchasing gamertag is logged in.

      - Advantages: Very difficult to illicitly share content. For the most part, it happens behind the scenes without the user ever knowing. Content can follow you to other consoles with your gamertag.
      - Disadvantages: When the console breaks, licensing issues become very confusing and unexpected. License transfer & re-download is easy, but time consuming.

    PS3: You get 5 downloads, tied to the purchasing PSN account. This can be onto your console, or the consoles of bunches of friends. If you choose to download to the consoles of a group of friends, you won't be able to re-download in the future if your console dies. As the grandparent poster pointed out, this leads to sharing groups on PSN... groups of friends who buy once, share 5 times.

      - Advantages: Relatively straightforward. Easy to understand. Trusts the user. Can use content on friend's machines (afterward, so can they).
      - Disadvantages: Lots of cheating. Migration is a lot less streamlined. After a certain point, the user simply cannot re-download to new consoles.

    Wii & DSi: Downloads are tied to the system, not the account. If your system breaks, your content needs to be re-purchased on the new one.

      - Advantages: Extremely simple & hard to cheat.
      - Disadvantages: Any console failure means all of your digital items are lost.

    Steam (for comparison): Downloads are tied to the account, which must be logged in to the steam application to play. Additionally, steam may or may not require being online at the time of play. However, player can download and connect to as many machines as they install steam on, and can switch freely between them so long as they are only logged in once.

      - Advantages: Relatively easy to understand. Download anytime, anywhere. No need to keep old games on your HDD that can be re-downloaded later.
      - Disadvantages: Requires frequent network access. Some games install secondary DRM.

    • by RogueyWon (735973) on Friday April 23, 2010 @04:06AM (#31952516) Journal

      I wish I had mod points right now, because this is an excellent summary of the current state of play. To my mind, the Nintendo model is the worst/least ethical, due to the require to repurchase content if your console dies (and this does happen - I've had a Wii die on me). However, Sony do now seem to be engaged in a race to the bottom. It's ironic, given MS's usual reputation and the controversy that surrounded the launch of Steam, that these two systems are actually the least offensive of the current DRM systems for the end-user.

      Now if only Valve would finally put their foot down and ban 3rd party DRM from their network, mainstream PC gaming could be in for a serious resurgence.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by pizzach (1011925)

        So your console died and you didn't call Nintendo? They do have a replacement program the last I checked [gamefaqs.com] where they transfer your data to the new console...

        From Nintendo's website:

        How long is my warranty in the US or Canada and how do I check the warranty status?

        Nintendo systems carry a standard twelve-month warranty, which is one of the longest standard warranties in the video game industry. For more information and to look up your system's warranty status, click here.

        How can I pay for my repair

        • by RogueyWon (735973)

          I was outside of the warrenty, pretty sure the machine wasn't repairable, and the value of content I'd bought online was lower than the fee I was quoted to take a look at it. They do generally make these things more hassle than just getting a new machine (and they're not alone, MS require you to write off via snail mail for a transfer kit).

      • by salahx (100975) on Friday April 23, 2010 @10:58AM (#31956448)

        You should have called Nintendo to explain the situation.

        In my case, my Wii was was over a year old, and it wasn't damage - my apartment was burgled and my Wii stolen. (Fortunately I carry renter's insurance). I got a new Wii, called Nintendo explained the issues. I had not yet signed into the Wii Shop channel on the new Wii (which is good, becasue its important to NOT do so) They me send a letter with thep police report and the serial # of the old and new Wii. And sure enough, they moved all my old content to the new Wii.

    • by nicky_d (92174)

      I believe a Wii account can be moved by Nintendo - I've seen reports where people have had repaired Wiis returned with their games, saves and leftover store points intact. On Nintendo's UK site, at least, they advise against returning faulty or problematic consoles to the store for this reason (explaining that transactions are tied to the physical console).

      So if anyone has a problem with their Wii, Nintendo support is the way to go. I expect the same is true of the DSi.

    • by Zumbs (1241138)

      PS3: You get 5 downloads, tied to the purchasing PSN account. This can be onto your console, or the consoles of bunches of friends. If you choose to download to the consoles of a group of friends, you won't be able to re-download in the future if your console dies. As the grandparent poster pointed out, this leads to sharing groups on PSN... groups of friends who buy once, share 5 times.

      I would add a few extra advantages to this (from Sonys point of view). As the games (from the point of view of the user) are cheaper the more people you are to share, a PS3 user may try to convince friends to get a PS3 instead of an XBox. Cheaper games also mean a larger throughput. If a game cost $15, it is much easier to buy than if it cost $60. If five friends use this trick to get 6 games instead of one each (5 in all), Sony has still made an extra sale.

  • This would be a reasonably smart thing to do: require a user to log on to download content onto that console, giving it rights to play. This only needs to be once on that console, and if that user is on a different console, they can login in and activate that console (deactivating the other) to download and play their content. When they go back to the original console, they activate that one again.
  • This is actually a totally understandable response to the flawed user profile/content ownership system on the PS3. Really the only thing that surprises me is that it took this long to happen!

    Basically, on the 360 permissions work out such that your purchased content can be used by you or any other user on the console it was originally bought from and roams with you, but can only be used by you on other consoles. This means I can play SomeGame X with my friend at his home, but he can't play it once my acc

  • No, really this time. This particular title I wouldn't be getting anyway, but my young kids use the PS3 and I don't let them on to the Playstation Network - they're just not old enough yet.

    Now, if more titles start to insist on a connection to the network whilst playing then these will be titles my kids can't play. Final Fight...not too fussed. Other ones though would be a problem. Little Big Planet is their current favourite game, the middle one just went through Ghostbusters too. Had a connection been
    • by Xest (935314)

      Out of interest, how old are your kids and at what age would you deem them old enough to go on the PSN?

      • by mccalli (323026)
        8, 6, and 4. I think I'd be looking at about 10-12 (depending on how maturely they're handling things at 10) before allowing them on.

        Cheers,
        Ian
  • by SeaFox (739806) on Friday April 23, 2010 @04:17AM (#31952596)

    The summary says they mention adding this restriction to keep people from sharing a PSN account to share a game. But it also means that hacked or Linux-enabled PS3's wont be able to play it either, as those machines are not running the most recent firmware and are banned from the PSN.

    • by nicky_d (92174)

      As I recall the system update is mandatory to access the PSN store, so users who are banned from PSN won't be able to buy the game. Of course users who can buy it are then obliged to apply future updates if they want to keep playing it. That's sinister; if more games start using this system, users could well end up with a large library of games they don't want to lose, and have to weigh that against a system update they don't want to install.

      • According to Sony's new EULA/ToS it won't matter, they don't need the users permission to update the console anymore. As someone in the PS forums pointed out, that was probably a move so they can quietly remove features with out notifying people so they won't garner so much press next time the screw someone over. I did read the EULA/ToS when I updated my console to 3.15 and I don't remember the specific phrase they used to indicate they no longer need a users permission to update the console.

        Unless I can
  • Final Fight was the only arcade game that I *ever* completed in an arcade... my brother and I found one in a old arcade in a Butlin's holiday camp that took 10p's. It still cost us about £3 but we got there in the end. Those were the days.

    Similarly, seeing that same game boot up in a CPS emulator a few years ago brought back some memories.

    Oh, find the DRM restrictive? Don't buy it. Problem solved. I fail to see why that's worth an article, I was just hoping that there was some "new" Final Fight c

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by delinear (991444)

      Oh, find the DRM restrictive? Don't buy it. Problem solved. I fail to see why that's worth an article

      It's worth the article because I'm pretty sure Sony won't be trumpeting this new "feature" from the rooftops, and if it's not discussed, how will people even know it's happening (until they run up against the restriction, which might not be for a while if they're usually connected). I'm sure you read every last term and condition of every product or service you purchase so that nothing escapes your knowledge, but the average user who has bought games before will just click through the boilerplate (if, indee

      • by ledow (319597)

        Of course Sony won't be trumpeting. When was the last time that *any* DRM scheme was advertised as being a good thing? Never. And DRM has been around since the early 80's (in terms of home computer software, *much* longer than that in terms of corporate). If you're not already aware it exists, then that means you've never used a DVD from another region, never installed Windows or run WGA, never used iTunes with it's 5-computer limits, never struggled to copy a video or a CD onto a blank tape, never had

  • Oh hey! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) on Friday April 23, 2010 @05:13AM (#31952844)
    Look! It's a game which requires that you are logged in to PSN to play it, which will require you upgrade your firmware to the latest version which disables the "Other OS" feature!

    I DID NOT SEE THIS COMING.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by nacturation (646836) *

      To be fair, it requires you to be logged in to buy it, so you'd already have the Other OS option disabled. If you don't update your firmware, any game that already works and doesn't require you to be online will continue to work.

    • by bhamlin (986048)

      I DID NOT SEE THIS COMING.

      Just like the Spanish Inquisition?

    • It's a game which requires you to log into PSN to buy it. I don't think anyone's going to be caught out by that one.

    • You're...mocking us...aren't you?

      -JJS

  • I had no idea Final Fight operated this way and might have bought it and regretted it. This is unlike any of my other PSN games and it's extremely undesirable for me. Part of the beauty of PSN titles for me is that they go with the console. Sometimes I take my PS3 to a friend's house to watch movies (which I usually just plop down on the hdd as well) and it's nice having these games available. This system in Final Fight plainly goes against my usage habits and does so for no advantageous reason for the user
    • The Steam store notes which games available through it have additional DRM.

      There's a reason I didn't buy the PC version of Batman: Arkham Asylum through Steam when it was on sale...

  • We have seen this before. There is/was a game that was discussed with the requirement of having a live connection to the internet to play it. Within a short time after its release, the server(s) required were inaccessible for whatever reasons(s) and could not be played by thousands of angry users. I know. Vague and less than precise but it's 6:30am and I just woke up. Most people know what I am talking about.

    As Sony approaches this same colossal mistake, I can't help but wonder when there will be attac

  • I loved your OtherOS option
    you have turned to the dark side
    next chrismas no more sony

  • I'll give the developers the benefit of the doubt, since the Xbox 360 version works offline. I'm guessing that the game requires a PSN connection because it features drop-in, drop-out, cooperative gameplay, allowing you join in on someone's game and vice versa at any time. So maybe by default, the game assumes the PS3 is connected to PSN. Nothing a simple patch won't fix.
  • by Vanderhoth (1582661) on Friday April 23, 2010 @06:20AM (#31953144)
    Dear Sony,

    I now see that by removing the Other OS feature I paid for with my PS3 console you were intentionally trying to upset me so I would no longer be a customer for any Sony or related products. I see you did this for my benefit so that I actually might be spared enormous headaches down the road when playing games as I do not have a persistent connection to the net with my console. You truly are a noble and caring company.

    Your former, but grateful customer,
    xxxxxxx
    • by Errol backfiring (1280012) on Friday April 23, 2010 @07:25AM (#31953488) Journal

      Dear Sony,

      Could you please share your secret of making a profit by pissing off customers? I am very intrigued how you manage to do that. We are a company of people with a proud heart for our jobs. Time and time again you demonstrate that satisfying customers is not the way to go.

      But what is? What makes your customers want to buy products that will be crippled remotely after a while or even directly at sale? Is it some marketing trick? Do you select your customers for misplaced good faith? Is it some other twist of genius?

      Curiously,
      An honest craftsman.

      • LOL. That's going in my repository of sarcastic letters.
      • Dear Customer

        Thank you for inquiry into our profit methods.

        We cannot answer your question at this time. Please give 2-7 years for a customer representative to handle your query.

        Thank you
        Sonny Corp

  • (Disclosure) I admit I've been a corporate tool for the better part of 15 years now. As an IT consultant I've worked for over 10 years across the Twin Cities area and now currently retired from IT work. I work at a bank now as my personal gift for years of IT hell and I am happy. As I've been eye deep in corporate culture since high school I can easily see a possible reason.

    We here at Slashdot can readily accept that any game with DRM will lose some sales. By default, if a game performs poorly senior and ex

  • Doesn't the PSN-downloaded version of Warkawk, one of the oldest downloadable PS3 games, behave exactly the same? If I recall correctly, (I haven't run it in a year or so) I need to be logged in on the Playstation Network in order to run my downloaded version of Warhawk, even if I don't play "on-line" (such as, for the training scenarios).

    Or have I been missing something for the past couple of years?

  • with their points system. It's not a great system, but I just realized two things.

    1) I've bought stuff from Xbox Live Marketplace, using points.
    2) I've never purchased anything from PSN. Except freebies.

    The reason? I could get points "on sale" all the time (it doesn't take long to find someone selling MS point cards for 10% off , and Best Buy/Dell/etc. do run 25% off deals a few times a year). PSN cards have their value marked on them, so it's hard to find any retailer willing to discount a card with $50 ma

    • Oh well. At least the PS3 has gotten a slew of single player games lately. I'll reserve multiplayer and the like for my Xbox.

      Supposedly that doesn't matter. New games will require you to have the updated firmware.

      I've read FFXIII requires at least 3.15. I have FFXIII, but I also have 3.15. I've only read one comment in a PS forum were someone claimed they had returned the PS version of FFXIII for the Xbox version because the PS version said they needed 3.15. They weren't willing to update because their system was bricked when they had previously updated. They took their machine to an independent repair shop, which fixed the syste

Money is the root of all wealth.

Working...