 |
|
|
| |
Capcom Addresses Online-Only Final Fight PSN Sharing Protection
by Chris Remo [PC, Console/PC]
|
|
| |
|
April 23, 2010
|
| |
Capcom's PlayStation 3 version of the brawler compilation Final Fight: Double Impact comes saddled with restrictions that hamper PSN "sharing" capabilities and require online authentication to play, prompting fan frustration and a response by Capcom, which pledges to make such requirements more clear.
Every time the downloadable game is launched, it checks in with the PlayStation Network server; if it cannot establish that connection, the game cannot be played. And while most PlayStation Network games can be "shared" with up to five PSN accounts, Double Impact can only be played by a single account within a given 24-hour period, severely reducing the effectiveness of the sharing system.
This combination of authentication systems has previously been used in other PlayStation Network downloadable games, including Warhawk and SOCOM: Confrontation. However, those games were online-only, making the use of online authentication a trivial matter.
Fans have been particularly outraged by the lack of clear pre-purchase documentation of these restrictions. In an official statement, Capcom has apologized for not making the system more clear.
"Capcom would like to formally apologize for the issues consumers are having with the PS3 version of Final Fight: Double Impact," the company said. "Typically, the notification for a required PlayStation Network connection appears in the full game description when a game is downloaded from the PlayStation Store. Unfortunately when populating this content this detail was overlooked and wasn't included in the versions of the game that released in North America and Asia."
The company noted that "this protection mechanism has been implemented in numerous games offered on the PlayStation Store before." It said "a fix is on the way," referring to a clearer statement of terms on the game's PlayStation Store page.
Online reactions to the copy protection began to coalesce when an IGN forum user described his frustration when his wife and children were unable to play the game from their own separate accounts on the same PlayStation 3 console.
He followed that up with an alleged response from a Capcom web admin, who wrote, "This was employed to combat the rampant 'PSN Sharing' that has been going on over the last year," and said Capcom is "not committed to do this with all titles moving forward, but the only way to evaluate impact was to try it with one title first."
It is not clear if that response indeed originates from a Capcom employee; the publisher has not verified its authenticity.
|
| |
|
|
which means you will not buy any games at all, with the exception of an occasional DRM free indie game?
On not buying games with DRM: I'm mostly the same way. You can do DRM right and it won't prevent me from buying (see things like Steam for instance). As developers and industry professionals and also consumers (most of us are), we can guide the industry with our buying habits. The "green ballot" of money has always been the best way to vote in or out things that we have alternate views on. My buying habits now reflect no buying of games of companies that I do not believe in, no buying of games with overly restrictive DRM, no buying of games that are priced wrong, and buying of games that take good risks, promote fun and innovative designs, buying games that are produced by companies that are doing things right and or I know and appreciate the people that work there. I highly suggest you let those guidelines or similar ones influence your purchasing decisions.
It just has to verify when the game is launched, the connection can drop afterward, I think.
The simple solution for psn and xbox is sure you can copy all game saves but only 1 system with your profile can be active,for gaming,at 1 time as you might have a gaming ps3 and a bd ps3 that you can game on. You wouldn't need an internet connection at all times but your id would be in your profile and need to match the system master id to allow copying to another system. After this was done you could play back n fourth on the systems you own.
This would be simple enough as if i copied your save and installed it on my system it would say "this data can not be copied to a system without the original id on it as the master id" then we can back up our saves and play on as many systems as we own. Though there should be a temporary save that could be made until the system is turned off so if you were on an xbox or ps3 that wasn't yours but had your id on it you could still have word of mouth by being able to play at a friends house and it would only copy to a flash stick that had the save with your id present.
I really hope people can fix this because punishing me for playing doesn't make me want to play your games but avoid them.
I'm sure this feature has good intentions behind it. But as a game forum moderator, the only time "sharing" comes up in my circle of discussion is under the context of getting free goods. And it is blatent and frequent.
You can't blame developers for getting antsy about that.
If the way Capcom uses this DRM is anything like how the demos by Gameloft work on the PS3 then you do have to stay connected to play. As soon as the PSN account is logged out your given a disconnection message and sent back to the Main Menu. I'm not 100% sure that is how Final Fight works but it is how some game demos that (Tank Battles, Brain Challenge) work.
@wes bogdan
I find the copy protection on game save files annoying also. From my experience working in Sony Compliance the copy-protection is often applied to get around trophy sharing more then any other reason. There has been many titles I have worked on where you could transfer the save file to another user and they would unlock trophies they never should have gotten. The quick and easiest fix for this is lock the save file as copy protected. Not every game that has copy protected save files do it for this reason of course but some do.
In fact, I can guarantee you that many games that get bought on PSN due to sharing that would never be bought otherwise. For every Pixeljunk Monsters, Flower, SSHD, or even Everyday Shooter with tons of critical acclaim that are 'must buys', there are a couple dozen 'ho-hum' games that many/most people wouldn't give a chance for $10. Split that up some (even in half) during a gameshare, and people are more likely to pull the trigger for a low interest or mediocre-reviewed game.
I'm not really interested in where you draw your ethical lines; we all need to come to our own conclusions. I can say this, however - I gameshare with a friend. For the first year I owned a PS3, I bought one game on PSN. One, and it wasn't even for me (which is why I got it). Since I started splitting the cost with a friend, I've spent hundreds of dollars, and I'm not exaggerating.
Now, we can argue all day about what is piracy, or what is ethical, but I do know this - I consider myself a huge supported of PSN today - I send my money towards lots of little developers that, quite honestly, wouldn't have gotten my money if I couldn't split the cost. I think that's a good thing. My bet is the people that now have my money concur. And if they don't? Put stupid DRM mechanisms in place like Final Fight did, and watch people spend their money elsewhere.
PSN has always had gamesharing, and they obviously knew people would 'share'. Developers know exactly what they're getting when they put a game up on PSN. Gamesharing is a brilliant idea on the part of Sony, and I wish they stood by Jack Tretton's famed words supporting getting games in the hands of as many people as possible (during an interview with Wired). A sale is a sale.
I only gameshare on XBL because the money I would use on Arcade games I use instead to pay for Xbox Live. Multiplayer at minimum should be free. I swear I'm the only dev that thinks this way.
As a programmer for a gaming company, it doesn't bother me at all when a player goes and buys a used copy. It doesn't bother a lot of the devs at my workplace actually. That's one more player who is playing our game, and most of the time when they like our game, they will go out and buy the DLC or the sequel.
Except this isn't piracy. The game is being bought.