Quantcast

On November 18, PSN Games Can Only Be Activated On Two Systems

By Spencer . November 4, 2011 . 2:33am

On November 18, PSN Games Can Only Be Activated On Two Systems Sony Computer Entertainment is changing their digital game activation policy. Currently, games purchased over PlayStation Network can be activated on five different devices. Some publishers like Capcom created a work around to restrict games to one console, but titles like Final Fight: Double Impact are far and few between.

 

Today, SCEJ announced games purchased from PSN on or after November 18 can only be activated on two devices. Games purchased earlier will not be affected and can still be activated on say five different PS3s. This policy change spans all of Sony’s gaming devices – PlayStation 3, PSP (all models including PSPgo), and PlayStation Vita.

 

After the change is made users who want to install a game on a third device will have to deactivate it. Sony will make this process easier by allowing remote deactivations via a PlayStation Network account management website instead of having to deactivate the game from a console.

 

Sony’s reason for the policy change is to balance content creator rights and customer convenience.


Read more stories about & & on Siliconera.

  • http://twitter.com/Three_Leaf_Ivy Triplicity

    “Sony will make this process easier by allowing remote deactivations via a PlayStation Network account management website instead of having to deactivate the game from a console.”

    FINALLY! This is the most important line in the entire article.

    • malek86

      Does that mean, if let’s say I activate a game on the PSP, then keep that PSP offline all the time and deactivate the game through the PC, I can keep my games on one more system as long as it doesn’t connect to the PSN?

      • SeventhEvening

        Why do you own 3 PSPs and need the content on all 3 of them at once? Some kind of Monster Hunter Party?

        • malek86

          Nope, it’s just munchkin thinking. I once envised a way to play XBLA games on two systems, even though I only have one console and no friends of mine have the 360. It’s just that, when I hear of a limitation, I just have to wonder how it could be bypassed. PC gamer mentality, I guess.

    • Hexen

      Removing the other 3 will solve the problems? Horray for Sony!

  • https://twitter.com/#!/SplashdownTiger STiger

    …………

    Sony.  I’m very tempted to stop buying all of your products altogether, because you just went full retard.  “customer convenience” my ass.

    • http://twitter.com/Cudgeon Raji

      But you know that Nintendo don’t let you redownload your purchases on another device at all and that Microsoft is only a little better than nintendo.
      If you can deactivate them yourself, Sony still has the best download service of the 3. That’s probably why they changed it.

      Altough I see your point, they were the best by a margin and now they lower their service, probably just to please some greedy publisher that complained about that feature.

    • http://www.facebook.com/jazzlyn.lim Jazlynn Lim

      If they didn’t give a damn about “customer convenience”, they would’ve restricted it to one system instead of two.

      • https://twitter.com/#!/SplashdownTiger STiger

        They would have pulled a Nintendo and made you repurchase every bit of download content.  Want to play that PsOne Classic on your PSP AND PS3?  Buy two copies.

        • SeventhEvening

          Except that isn’t how it works. You can download that classic on 2 PS3s, 2 PSPs, and 2 Vita systems. Just not 3 different PS3s. It is two systems of each type, not 2 cumulatively. It isn’t really what I’d call “full retard”.

          • https://twitter.com/#!/SplashdownTiger STiger

            You do realize I made that comment before Sony officially announced anything, right?

          • SeventhEvening

            You do realize that Sony’s old policy was “5 devices” but that it meant 5 of each device, which means the interpretation of the new policy (which is worded the same) would likely function the same, right? At least, that what I would think. Failing that, Sony made clarification only a short time after this article was posted. 

            I mean, I understand being confused by the announcement (it isn’t worded very well) or being concerned if you owned a pile of sony devices, but generally speaking, I don’t go into full outrage mode, or threaten boycotts until I’m sure I’ve got all the facts. I also wouldn’t use the word “full retard” at all, but then again, my current job is to teach special needs children, so maybe I’m just sensitive.

    • KotaroInugami

      …That’ll show em… I’m sure they will go bankrupt without your money…

      • https://twitter.com/#!/SplashdownTiger STiger

        Haven’t they been selling PS3s at a loss though?  For the longest time?  And it’s the principle that matters.

        • KotaroInugami

          They probably are. Wouldn’t doubt it. But whatever you need to do to make yourself happy, you do. I didn’t mean to offend, it just grinds my gears when someone says that “boycott” line. Makes it sound as if thier $10 bill is worth more than anyone elses.

    • Nemesis_Dawn

      Whenever I see comments like this, it gives me the feeling you haven’t actually bought any Sony products in a while, and just like to talk badly about them online. Nobody else seems to have a problem with this and I couldn’t help but notice you didn’t specify exactly what your problem with this is, so I’m tempted to believe it’s just more anti-Sony bias than anything, especially considering they’ve now made it EASIER to deactivate a broken system.

      • https://twitter.com/#!/SplashdownTiger STiger

        So I didn’t buy Shadow of the Colossus/ICO HD when that released?  Because that’s a Sony Computer Entertainment game.  For that matter, I do own a PS2, PS3, and PSP which were purchased all in the same year two years ago, as well as a pair of Sony MDR-V700DJ headphones and another pair of $20 Sony headphones.  I have a broken pair of MDR-XD200s that I didn’t want to repair since I’d lose the autographs I got on ‘em.  Looks like I’m pretty anti-Sony.

        Anyway, after reading this comment (http://www.siliconera.com/2011/11/04/on-november-18-psn-games-can-only-be-activated-on-two-systems/#comment-355584140), it’s not so bad after all.

        • Nemesis_Dawn

          Well, glad to see you can admit you were wrong. Takes a big man to do that.

  • Go2hell66

    it should have been 3 instead of two, since i’ll have a ps3 a psp and a vita, what if i want that game on all 3 :(

    • zweii

      Remote deactivate the PSP while the games are still there and don’t go online with that one. Then you have an extra slot on the PSV.

      And since the new limit is not retroactive whatever you have on the PSP now will work regardless.

    • SeventhEvening

      That would be fine. This policy prevents you from activating it on three PS3, but not on 3 different consoles. You can have content active on 6 consoles at once: 2 PS3, 2 PSP, 2 Vita. 

  • malek86

    Not entirely unexpected, though for a while I thought they would do it sooner.

    Does a PS1 Archive game downloaded on both PS3 and PSP count as two different activations? If so, guess if you also buy a PSV, you’ll have to replace the PSP.

    • SeventhEvening

      No, it is two of EACH console. This allows for 6 totally systems: 2 PS3, 2 PSP, 2 Vita. 

  • 128bitigor

    That should make the prices cheaper imo. 

    • http://myfigurecollection.net/collection/DrakosAmatras DrakosAmatras

      I hope so.

  • heartless141

    yesss, now i can finally deactivate the PS3 that my friend broke :D

    anyhow, hmm 3 doesn’t sound that bad if you can disable it i guess.

    let’s just hope that PSP and PSV get separate count, i have 2 PSP, 1 PS3 right now, plus the PSV on preorder =/

    • http://twitter.com/FemmeFox Kitsune Miku

      They meant 2 as in ne on YOUR PS3/PSP/PSVita and one on one other. Not 3 in all.

      • heartless141

        “This policy change spans all of Sony’s gaming devices – PlayStation 3, PSP (all models including PSPgo), and PlayStation Vita.”

        hmmm but how it was before was practically 10 console since PS3 and PSP gets separate counts. at least that’s what i think.

        edit:
        The new terms of service will allow users to play PlayStation content on up to 2 activated systems. For example, PS3 games will be available on up to 2 activated PS3 systems; PSP games will be available on up to 2 activated PSP systems. Once the Vita releases, it will also adhere to the same restrictions.

        http://www.shacknews.com/article/70940/playstation-activation-limited-to-two-devices-beginning-november-18th

        sounds like i’m ok with this :P

  • zweii

    I hope when they said remote deactivations you are given a list of mac addresses of your console ID that you can choose to deactivate. My brother lost a PSP and so I can’t deactivate it because before it was I need to deactivate from that PSP or it must be connected to media go to work. If i can now, thats great. Not the two limit, though.

    • Kirbysuperstar2

      You can call Sony up and have them deactivate all of them at once, but of course then you have to download the stuff onto your working/existing systems again. 

      • zweii

        Now i wouldn’t have to, i hope.

        • Kirbysuperstar2

          Yeah, that’d be nice. I have five devices on mine right now due to two friends having their PS3 go belly-up.

  • danhese

    I think publishers put them up to this because Sony could care less how many of “their” devices you want to play on, as long as it is their device.

    • http://twitter.com/nikochanr3 niko

      SOny is the main publisher on their device.  So no, nice try though.

      • danhese

        Nice try though? wtf are you on about?. I’m simply saying what i think so if you don’t agree, i dont care its not like you can change it. Sony isnt the major publisher on PS3 or PSP or PS2, major publishers are 3rd party developers and indie devs.

        It use to be you can activate 5 PSPs and PS3s now it is 2 PSPs, 2 PS3s and 2 Vitas a total of 6 consoles. How many PS3, PSP and Vita do you plan on buying, 3 of each?

        • https://twitter.com/#!/SplashdownTiger STiger

          I do wonder where that leaves the PlayStation Certified devices, i.e. the Xperia Play and such.  Those can access some PSN content, so they’d need to be a registered device, yeah?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_472QBVARRYERRGHATSUGCVCTTA Ian

    NOOOOO ~~

  • zweii

    PS3: Users will be able to play the game on up to 2 activated PS3 systems
    PSP: Users will be able to play the game on up to 2 activated PSP systems

    So that means potentially 4 systems can be activated for PSone games and minis. I don’t know however if they will count the Vita for another 2 system or just consider it as a PSP.

    http://blog.eu.playstation.com/2011/11/04/upcoming-change-to-playstation-3-and-psp-game-content-on-playstation-network/

    • malek86

      But doesn’t that still mean you can’t have a PSP, PS3 and PSV with the same content at the same time?

      • danhese

        It means 2 PSPs, 2 PS3s and 2 Vitas can play the games instead of 5 of each devices at same time.

      • zweii

        Apparently, the current limit of 5 is actually 5 PS3s AND 5 PSPs which means thats 10 sysmtems can have the same content at the same time. Its now reduce to 2 PS3s and 2 PSPs. This is coming a game journalist link here;
        http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2011/11/04/psn-game-sharing-being-cut-from-5-to-2/comment-page-2/#comment-389306

        I’d never have 5 PSPs or PS3 so i always assumed it altogether 5. 

        • malek86

          Oh, I see. That’s not so bad, then.

        • https://twitter.com/#!/SplashdownTiger STiger

          That’s more reasonable.  What I had been reading was “You’re only allowed to have your account active on two PSN-enabled systems.”  Which would certainly have been a huge pain in the ass for someone that has say, an Xperia Play and a PSP or PSV.

        • http://myfigurecollection.net/collection/ashgail Ashgail

          Great news mate. I was cursing initially because I have more than 3 systems at the moment and was rather afraid that I would have to manage only 1 PS3 and 1 PSP at any given time. 

  • http://twitter.com/Xuiz enorka miho

    I know this policy will come one day… Games active for all 5 accounts seems like a loss to them…

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/Kamek20xxExtra?feature=mhee Michael Stevens

    I don’t find this so bad. Some PSone games run slowly on my PS3 (I think it happens to others too), such as Spyro: Year of the Dragon, so PSP and PSvita for me. Nothing to cry about, so I’ll still be buying games from PSN like I normally do. Besides, if I’m not mistaken, there isn’t many PSN games that are for both the PS3 and PSP with the exception of PSone games. Correct me if I’m wrong……or off topic.

    • SeventhEvening

      Well, you can actually activate (for example) Spyro the Dragon on two of your PS3s, two of your PSP and two of your Vitas with this new policy. The change makes it so it is two OF EACH system, as opposed to five of each system.

      • http://www.youtube.com/user/Kamek20xxExtra?feature=mhee Michael Stevens

        Oh I see. Thanks!

  • Nemesis_Dawn

    I never gameshare anyway, so I am not bothered by this.

  • badmoogle

    So if for whatever reason my current PS3 dies and the next one i buy dies too (before i manage to deactivate the games),does it mean that any game i’ve downloaded after November 18 will be lost forever?
    Sorry but i’m kinda confused by this.:/

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Сергей-Евстафьев/1813614148 Сергей Евстафьев

      No, you’ll be able to deactivate your PS3 with that “PlayStation Network account management website” mentioned in the news.

  • FireCouch

    Good thing I only have one brother…This still sucks though.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Pierre-Louis/667684607 Steven Pierre-Louis

    well, the silver lining is that they are at least making it easier to deactivate systems.  That was my only real issue with the old system.  I’ve broken 6 PSPs since launch and I had to contact Sony just to get access to games I thought I owned so I was a little worried by the headline.

    • http://www.falgram.com/ Falmung

      How did you break that many psps?!

      • Kitestwinblades

        I’ve broken like 4 in the past. Godda remember that the PSP went through a LOT of model changes too. My first 2 died from analog stick failure which would make menus go in an infinite loop unless i held a button(broke completely after a while)- and the next two had a screen outage and UMD read failure after a good long time.

        come on people its almost 2012 XD PSP was out for years and handhelds can be pretty hard to take care of growing up.

    • http://twitter.com/Linka13 Linka

      I agree. How /did/ you break that many PSPs?

    • http://twitter.com/Three_Leaf_Ivy Triplicity

      This is precisely the kind of good thing I was referring to in my own comment; remote deactivation of systems. It’s about time.

      Also yes, y u break so many PSP

  • http://www.facebook.com/clifford.michael Clifford Michael

    This news was tagged for Japan, does that mean this change won’t affect the NA products?

  • http://twitter.com/Megawarrior345 Elle

    Good thing I downloaded all of the Tales of Xillia DLC.

    • http://www.falgram.com/ Falmung

      Its alright . As long as you find people who bought them before Nov 18. Have to get mine. But i don’t have any other xilia dlcs to trade.

    • http://www.falgram.com/ Falmung

      Now that I think about it…..Couldn’t you download the dlc to the ps3, deactivate the account used to download the game and keep the dlc, and play as normal with your other account. Or does the other account need for it to be present for it to work? 

      • http://twitter.com/Megawarrior345 Elle

        No, I think once you download it, it’s tied to that profile on your PS3 and still works as long as you don’t delete that. At least that’s what happened when my best friend shares PSX Classics.

  • http://twitter.com/mistermeemee mistermeemee

    Wow, this sucks for me. 

  • Brandonmkii

    I wonder how many people actually have 5 ps3s or psps compared to people who just gameshare with their friends.

  • YarboroughSales

    Yay! No more gamesharing! Which means my friends can stop being lazy broke bums AND PAY FOR THEIR OWN PRODUCTS.

  • http://twitter.com/Linka13 Linka

    I’m just hoping this doesn’t impact things badly when it comes to the Vita. I still intend on using my PSP due to the fact that I have a large library of games on UMD, so I’d still like to keep some PSN downloads to there, as well.

    • http://www.falgram.com/ Falmung

      Have no worries. You will be able to have up to 2 PS Vitas, 2 psps and 2 ps3s activated with your account. If you have that many.

      • http://twitter.com/Linka13 Linka

        I’m hoping at least that you’re right, and that the Vita will be counted as a separate system entirely– it’d be annoying if they decide that what is portable is the same as anything else portable.

        • http://www.falgram.com/ Falmung

          Yeah. Because the xperia
          Is also a portable.

  • http://twitter.com/FaithlessMr Bruno Silva

    It honestly baffles me how pretty much everyone seems to be accepting this as the most wonderful thing in the world, and worse, immediately attacking anyone who might feel this move is bad and will hurt the consumer once more.

    Shouldn’t we as consumers feel some of our rights are being taken away? I know there are contracts and rules and regulations about the things we digitally purchase, but…shouldn’t the things we purchase be ours? I’d understand why they’d limit this to 5 downloads per purchase, so to not share the games with people who wouldn’t buy them, but still….taking that down from 5 to 2? Wow. Isn’t that a little excessive? I’d agree 5 may be “too much”, but 3 would be the racional choice here.

    But what I see is Sony slowly killing away our rights as consumers (first the psp to vita games having to be rebought, the lack of ps1 classics on the vita, now this), and everyone being “yay Sony ur the best”, and trying to ridicule everyone who might think differently.

    I’m sorry but as a consumer, I can’t help but feel this is a bad corporative decision that once again ends up hurting those who are actually giving them money for their  products. I always felt Sony was awesome, I’ve been with them ever since the PS1 days, but I won’t simply have that cloud my judgment and prevent me from speaking my mind when I feel they are hurting me and many others as consumers.

    Not that it matters much, because at the end of the day, they’ll keep on making profit out of their sales, and this will pass up as a mindless rant from someone on the internet anyway. It’s not a mindless rant, I can give you that.

    • SolidusSnake

      This criticism of Sony will not be tolerated, Comrade Gamer. Report to the gulag immediately!

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Pierre-Louis/667684607 Steven Pierre-Louis

      I suppose it IS a bit odd to seemingly “hurt” those that actually pay money for their products.  My buddies that pirate their PSP games laugh at me and my law-abiding ways that leads with occasional difficultly in accessing content I thought I owned.  Still if they make it easier to deactivate systems, I can’t see this policy doing all that much damage.

      As for the defenders… well, every company has them.  The discussion would be boring if everyone was in agreement, wouldn’t it?

    • malek86

      Most download services will only allow for one activation, so this still isn’t too bad.

      I think people are getting used to the idea of only having one activation anyway. I don’t really mind myself, as Steam has given me a whole lot of games for horrifically low prices, and in the end, I never really had that much trouble with DRM (unless they go for online-only, which is pretty annoying).

      • Ladius

        Thing is, for most people gamesharing was the only way to have a Steam-like price structure on PSN (aside from MinisPSOne classics and other budget contents), and they’re likely to avoid buying more games (or drastically reduce their purchases) if they have to pay full price.

        • malek86

          Well, even if only 1 out of 5 people keeps buying games, they are still making the same money as before.

          • Ladius

            Losing four customers out of five and still having the same money isn’t a sound business practice, though, and considering how widespread gamesharing was I think Sony could have done a big mistake.

            Only time will tell, though, but I think they will see some short-term results if the reactions I am seeing everywhere amount to something.

        • SeventhEvening

          But really, PSN games aren’t terribly pricy. No Steam of course, but 15 dollars isn’t too much to ask, and they almost never pass that unless they’re retail disk games. And if you want those, you should just get them on disk if you’re worried about price. On top of that, if you wait, virtually everything on PSN goes on sale sooner or later. Again, no Steam like 1.50 games or anything, but there is usually a sale in november that is a full half-off many popular titles. I always buy stuff then. I’ve got a good dozen PSN titles, and I think I’ve only paid more than 10 dollars once. And that was because I really wanted to own Tetris.

          • Ladius

            I think it’s all a matter of perception: I buy Japanese X360 import Cave shmup for 100$, but one of my friends, while enjoying them, said he would shell out no more than 5 EU for such titles. 
            In the same way, both you and me buy PSN games by ourselves without finding the usual prices problematic (on the contrary, I’m happy to see a game such as Corpse Party priced at 19$), but a lot of people out there don’t want to (or simply can’t) shell out that money for digital games they won’t be able to resell and need to have gamesharing partners to make the deal worthwile.

            There are many different kinds of customers, and taking all of them into account is always best than cutting them off or limiting their options.

          • SeventhEvening

            But you also can’t expect a developer to be alright with that either. Developers aren’t even thrilled with used games, but used games allow people to re-sell titles, thus buying more titles if they don’t have much of a gaming fund, and then that can inspire loyalty that leads to new game sales down the road (if I didn’t play Saints Row used, I wouldn’t have preordered it new). But you don’t really get that with downloadable content. Instead you get “I’ll buy this Sonic title, and you buy the other one, and we’ll just game share.” Gamesharing never really leads to loyalty or an eventual new purchase because there is no need for one. 

            And while gamesharing obviously exists, I don’t believe the “everyone does it” claims that some users are mentioning. I have a massive number of gaming friends and I used to work in a game retail store (and my roommate does now), yet I can count the number of people I know that gameshare on one hand. And none of those people “can’t shell out” they’re just people that like getting stuff for free. 

          • malek86

            On a side note, Corpse Party comes out after November 18. Will this affect its sales? I’m really not sure, although being a niche game, I don’t think it will matter too much to those who will buy it.

          • Ladius

            @malek86:disqus I really hope that won’t be the case. I may be wrong, but I think niche gamers interested in titles like Corpse Party would be less affected than the less focused audience that is used to practice gamesharing. Then again, it’s likely some sales will be lost even so.

            @SeventhEvening:disqus  I have no problem understanding why Sony and other publishers would try to eliminate gamesharing, what I’m saying is that I think they could be deluding themselves if they think a gameshared game split into five users will magically turn into five individual purchases (or even one, for that matter).

            I believe Sony could have addressed this matter in a smarter way if they tried to find some kind of compromise instead of simply removing an extremely popular option.

    • Ladius

      I never used gamesharing myself, but considering how many people I know buy their PSN games only that way I think Sony actually damaged their future PSN sales with this move.

      Oh, and I completely agree regarding “corporate defence force”-like reactions, especially seeing some absurdly insulting posts in this comment section (I imagine mods will remove them soon, though). 
      The fact that some people seem to be incredibly happy to resign their consumer rights (of course they will be really fast to point out they aren’t rights to begin with, and depending on the case they could be right) as if it was nothing is really baffling, and I say this being the first to defend little companies that actually risk going bankrupt if left unsupported.

      Then again, the sad truth is that we have limited options, as single consumers. People could boycott PSN for defending the gameshare principle, but it’s unlikely that those who never used it to begin with will actually do that, while those who used it will probably stop using PSN simply because they won’t be able to afford games anymore (or will have to buy less of them). Avoiding PSN could also damage other parties unrelated to the issue at hand, and as a lover of Japanese niche games I wouldn’t like that to happen (for example, I would never skip on Corpse Party simply because XSeed needs our money, regardless of Sony’s cut).

      Something similiar happened with 3DS’s region lock: I haven’t still bought one because I’m waiting to see how the localization trends go, but I know I will have to make a choice in 1-3 years since the platform is bound to have many games I would want to play (it already has, for that matter).

    • http://www.youtube.com/user/jodecideion?feature=mhum TheWon and Only

      I’m glad you said this because if I do I would be accuse of being a FANSLAVE*.
      I owned a PS3 at launch. Paid 600 dollars for the complete system with all the options. 2 years later Sony decides that I don’t deserve to have all the abilities my system came with. AKA Linux removal issue that caused Geohot to hack the system. As a consumer all I wanted was some kind of gesture from the company. You paid for this, and we want to take it away so here is a refund. Maybe some free games or at least an apology from them. Instead they force you to lose the feature or not play any games online every again. I didn’t like being forced into making a decision so I sold my PS3 out of principle. This generation Sony has done several things that have seem to infringe on costumers rights. Overall most people just say stop complaining, and don’t care about where this could lead too. Still this generation they keep finding ways to push what they can do to, and for their costumers. For example the new update and agreement that says “You can not sue them!”  Even after the entire Anonymous hack attack where they waited weeks to report the attack. Endangering people’s banking accounts since they didn’t warn them. All these things have happen, and no one seems to care. It’s just Sony being Sony right. Now look at Nintendo and their so called faults. These same people would cry bloody murder. Region Lock, can’t transfer your games to other system, and their online system. Nintendo’s online is limited compared to the other consoles. Still their online system is more open compared to the others. If Nintendo sends you a update for your Wii, and you don’t update. You can still play every game you already bought online. It only affects future purchases. Don’t do a update on the PS3, and all you have is a system that plays single player games. One company seems to do everything yet they take away from our rights, and are praised. The other doesn’t do everything so well, but still give consumers their rights. That company is seen as the devil.

      • Ladius

        I don’t see why Sony’s shortcomings should excuse Nintendo’s (or Microsoft’s, or anyone else’s). As a consumer, I criticize any company that damages me or fellow consumers and eliminates previously (or traditionally) available options, be it Sony with OtherOS’ removal or this 2-platform restriction (and I’m criticizing them even if it doesn’t personally affect me) or Nintendo with 3DS’s region lock.

        Moreover, each of those issues stem from a different context (for example, OtherOS was a marketed feature of PS3 and its removal actually damaged those who bought the console because of that feature, the 2-platform limit for PSN isn’t retroactive and it won’t damage anyone who bought till now and 3DS has been region locked since the beginning), and should be analyzed and criticized on a case by case basis.

        That said, turning every thread about hardware issues in an useless Nintendo vs Sony system war seems to be your main reason for posting here, so maybe answering seriously is naive on my part.

      • Nemesis_Dawn

        Was waiting for you to show up in this thread. Someone has something bad to say about Sony or Microsoft, you aren’t far behind.

    • http://www.falgram.com/ Falmung

      I honestly couldn’t imagine myself having 3 ps3s at my house or 3 PSPs. 2 should be plenty. You can always deactivate a broken system with their new website so it isn’t as bad as it sounds.

    • SeventhEvening

      I’m not jumping up to shout “yay, Sony is the best” in this situation, but for normal consumers who don’t gameshare, nothing has changed. It was the same when homebrew was removed. 

      Honestly, in many ways, I feel my consumer rights are being protected, rather than eroded. I bought a PS3, I buy PS3 games, I occasionally by PSN games. I don’t pirate games on my PS3, I don’t gameshare, I’m a straight laced consumer. The PS3 is online and connected to the PSN service and I have trophies and online support. It damages and erodes MY experience that I paid for when someone is illegally on a server of a game I play, or when they are cheating in a game I’m playing, and it cheapens my already fairly valueless trophies when someone can use a program to unlock them without trying. 

      This strikes me as the same thing. It is insulting to me, a paying customer, when someone can get something for free and then spit in my face. I feel like the value of something I paid good money for is decreased, and I feel like I’m the one getting shafted because I’m playing by the book.

      And this doesn’t harm me. I own one PS3 and two PSPs. Unless I buy a third PSP, or two more PS3s, this change won’t affect me at all. Even then, it just means I can’t play the same game on all systems at the same time. Which is fine too, I don’t have enough hands for that. 

      The irony, is that I’m actually supportive of homebrew. I even pirated games on the Sega Saturn and the PS2 because I wanted to get around region locks. But things have changed. If the console is online, like the PS3 or X360, then piracy affects and erodes the rights of everyone who isn’t pirating. 

    • Exkaiser

      Frankly, I can’t see how it’s a big deal.

      Does one normally own three PS3s or three PSPs? I find it a little hard to imagine anyone needing any more than two PS3s to one household.

      I don’t really think it’s anything to be concerned about either way. Even if you feel the need to install all of your games on four of your buddies’ PS3s, they can keep playing those games you’ve already installed anyways. It’s just that in two weeks you’ll have to pick and choose which one of those friends gets your stuff. How does this actually “hurt” people?

      “first the psp to vita games having to be rebought”
      What, you mean the PSN versions of games you never purchased digitally? PSP games you already own on the store can be redownloaded to the Vita at no cost, they aren’t removed from your account. It’s only UMD games which must be “re-bought,” and then because you don’t actually own a digital version of the game.

      the lack of ps1 classics on the vita
      Again, not even close to a “right” of gamers. A disappointment, certainly, but nothing anyone was ever entitled to or promised.

      but I won’t simply have that cloud my judgment and prevent me from
      speaking my mind when I feel they are hurting me and many others as
      consumers.
      Are you sure it isn’t the other way around, though? That, when you see a feature being “restricted,” you must criticize the decision and assume that it is “hurting” consumers, when it is something that most consumers won’t even notice.

      Perhaps it would be an issue if the “Two system limit” crossed platforms- i.e. a PSone classic could only be downloaded on ONE PS3 and ONE PSP – but as other posters have clarified, this is not the case. As it is, though, it’s possible to buy a PSone Classic and have it installed on fully ten different systems (actually, it’ll still be possible with the vast majority of them, or at least whatever ones people already own). I find it very difficult to believe that anyone would legitimately need ten different consoles running a copy of Alundra at the same time.

      You can always accuse me of irrationally defending Sony, though, if that makes you feel better. I assure you that, as untrue as it would be, it wouldn’t hurt my feelings.

      That said: No one ought to insult anyone else over this. No matter how opposite people’s opinions, we should at least try to remain civil here on Siliconera.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Olajide.L.H Olajide Oj Humphrey

    Balls

  • http://twitter.com/ChestnutBowl Chestnut Bowl

    I always hate getting less for my money, but I rarely buy games on PSN and I don’t have more than two Sony systems to play PSOne games on. I dislike this in principle, but it really doesn’t affect me.

    Just to be clear, only the number of concurrent installs is limited, right? The number of downloads (5) has not been changed?

    • http://twitter.com/TheRyusui Ryusui

      There’s never been a download limit.

    • http://www.falgram.com/ Falmung

      You can download as many times as you want in an activated ps3 with your account. What has been limited always is the amount of ps3s activated with your acount. This changes the total amount of ps3 systems from 5 to 2, psp systems from 5 to 2 and any other products. It does not affect ps3, psp and ps vita as a whole. This is to prevent game sharing.

  • ddh819

    hm i was thinking of buying 2 PSPs (i have 3 kids), so i could share psn games between the PS3 and PSPs.

    • http://www.falgram.com/ Falmung

      You will be using your 2 psp account limit and one single for the ps3. Its 2 limit for ps3, 2 limit for psp, and 2 limit for ps vita or any other psn products like the  xperia. This to counteract people sharing games to 4 friends. 

      • ddh819

        ah thanks!

  • http://twitter.com/TheRyusui Ryusui

    I hope that PS1 Classics get an exemption on this, assuming that the Vita’s lack of PS1 Classic support at launch is only a temporary issue.

    • http://www.falgram.com/ Falmung

      Since its 2 per console and not global you will be fine.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=512740433 Zubi Khan

    and i just got into game sharing, this sucks

  • thebanditking

    This is really unfortunate as I share my account with my younger brothers; both of whom have a PS3 and a PSP. Now I won’t be able to have all of our systems have active content on them, which considering that we split the costs is going to make PSN purchases even more difficult for me to justify. This is the primary reason that I never buy anything on XBL because you can’t share the content. Also means that people who own all three (PS3, PSP and PSV) will not be able to play their content without deactivating one of them. I am not a big supporter of digital distribution as it is and this is not going to help.

    • http://www.falgram.com/ Falmung

      This is incorrect. Its 2 per console. If you have psp, ps3 and ps vita you are only using one account per console. You can only have 2 ps3, 2 psp, and 2 ps vita active .

  • darkangelsv1

    Great. Now I won’t be able to share games with my friends that much.
    Nice job, Kusony. You somehow manage to piss off one of your loyal fans week by week.

  • http://www.falgram.com/ Falmung

    People you all misinterpreting the situation. The 2 activate systems doesn’t apply to ALL systems. It is individual depending on the console. 2 activated PS3s. 2 activated PSP. 2 activated PS Vita. It is not 2 activated platforms. Therefore If you have an activated PSP and an activated PS3 you are only using one per console. Check the PS Blog for details http://blog.us.playstation.com/2011/11/04/upcoming-change-to-playstation-3-and-psp-game-content-on-playstation-network/

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Phoenix-Ezra-Schwarz/1229376991 Phoenix Ezra Schwarz

      That’s cool. But, others have problems with this because they share games with their friends over multiple consoles or PSPs.

      • http://www.falgram.com/ Falmung

        That is the point of this update . People sharing games with their friends are lost sales. You can still share games though. Only to one friend though. Then deactivate it from the website.

  • SeventhEvening

    That really seems fair. 5 consoles seemed gratuitous in the first place. You can’t share XBLA games with anyone and no developer wants a downloadable title passed around for free. This change doesn’t affect normal, non-sharing customers at all. I can’t imagine why a single person would need to own 5 PS3s, 5 PSPs or 5 Vitas. Maybe in a family situation you’d have two PS3′s in your household, but I’m struggling on imagining a situation where one person owns three PS3′s and NEEDS a single title to be on all three of them at the same time. And then I can’t imagine a person who has the extravagant funds to purchase 3 PS3s, yet can’t afford to pay 15 dollars for a game. 

    I mean, if remote deactivation wasn’t possible, this would infuriate me. What if I need to buy a new PS3, my activation is stuck on my old dead one. But that concern is alleviated by the remote deactivation.
    It always strikes me as odd when people talk about “consumer rights” being taken away whenever Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo does something to protect themselves from Users doing Illegal things on their consoles. I really can’t see a normal user being affected.

    • Luna Kazemaru

      I have 3 PS3′s you don’t need ‘extravagant’ funds to get them.

      • SeventhEvening

        Were they gifts? Did you steal them? 3 PS3 would cost around 750 dollars on the lower end, if I’m not mistaken. A lot of people don’t have 750 dollars to blow on three of the same console. For the 500 dollars you spent on the extra two consoles you could have bought about 9 brand new games, or up to 50 used games, or almost the entire PSN library of games. 

        More my point is that if you have 750 dollars to spend just on consoles (which isn’t terribly common, although it is possible you bought them over time, which would lower the financial burden, but increase the price since they’ve gone down as time has gone buy), then surely you’d have a game budget that exceeds only 15 dollars. I know if I had 750+ dollars of electronics sitting under my TV, I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t be worried about a 10 dollar PSN title breaking the bank.

        • Luna Kazemaru

          One was a gift the last one I got new at a disk replay for about 100 bucks. I get your point in the matter trust me I’m just saying if you look hard enough or just have on as a gift you be surprised. Tho the one from dis replay was a 120 gb.

    • http://www.falgram.com/ Falmung

      There are two people who are angry by this move. People who game share and people who are misinterpreting the situation as only being able to activate two psn-related devices. There is literally no downside to this move and as you explained I can’t imagine anyone would have that many devices at once. 2 is enough in my opinion.

  • Luna Kazemaru

    I’m enjoying the comments  about people saying you are are in somewhat wrong for game sharing. I can understand if that person just leeches off a friend for every game I’d find something wrong with that. Every now and then is Fine but game sharing in no way makes you a pirate or wrong. 

    • SeventhEvening

      It isn’t the same as pirating, no, but it also isn’t what publishers intended either. And it isn’t that big of a loss either. Game sharing is impossible on XBLA and Nintendo’s policy is so strict you can’t even play games you own if your system breaks, you’re just out of luck. 

      Hell, this doesn’t even really end game sharing, it just means you can’t loan a game out to more than about one friend at a time. Which is the same as if you physically loaned a game out to friend that you had bought on a disk. Except you don’t have to worry about them returning it since you can just log onto your computer and take it back.

      • Luna Kazemaru

        This is true I’m not saying I’m not saying this is a bad Idea at all because it would put a end to people leeching I only share some games with my girlfriend so it doesn’t hurt us at all. I was just pointing out that the logic behind saying its the same as pirating is abit silly.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Michelle-Bennett/1122854388 Michelle Bennett

    This sucks for me big time. we have 3 ps3′s in our home which we have had to buy 3 copies of each game like the cod games but only had to buy any map packs once. This now means that unless i buy the map packs twice on seperate accounts which im not going to do, we are now unable as a family to all play on the same games together once the maps come out. 

  • http://twitter.com/Buuhan1 Buuhan1

    There’s nothing wrong with gamesharing. If you saw 5 people pulling their funds together to pay a single physical game in a store which they’d then take turns playing, would you say they’re doing something wrong?

    • SeventhEvening

      No. And you can still do that. This doesn’t prevent you from taking turns playing it. Just all 5 of you can’t play it at once. You don’t got to a store and say “Oh, I’m sharing this with my friends” and then get 5 disks do you?

  • http://myfigurecollection.net/collection/ashgail Ashgail

    I seriously don’t see a point in condemning Sony about this move. If it was 2 systems only, then I agree that this is a bit of a bold move, but like everyone said, Sony is nice enough to allow sharing compared to other companies. 

    I suspect that the actual outburst of rage is shown buy people who profit from gamesharing “business” in which a certain individual buys the game in his account, then sells it at a premium to 4 other customers who are willing to shell out some cash for a cheaper game but they forfeit their right to retain the game in case anything else happens to their system. 

    If anyone’s to blame, it’s the abusers of the system.

    • Luna Kazemaru

      You my good sir just won this battle.

  • darkraiders

    What i was the most scared when i first saw my account would only be able to be activited on 2 systems was what would happen if something happen to my psp or my ps3 die.
    But since i will have access to to remote desactivation all is fine.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Will-Jay/100001526135754 Will Jay

    I read that you can only have two PS3′s, two Vita’s, and two PSP’s.

    Seems I was wrong.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000958706776 Marc Lepagneul

    you are incorrect… official response in blog.us.playstation:
    In regards to your question about Vita, it will count toward your portable allocation, which is two systems across PSP, PSPgo and Vita.

Video game stories from other sites on the web. These links leave Siliconera.

Popular