• inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Not really.

    They’re waiving the requirement for this game, the upcoming Ghost of Tsushima still requires a PSN account to play the multiplayer DLC and we don’t know what the actually no requirement for PSN on Helldivers 2 is yet. My guess is that while we don’t have to sign up, cross play will be disabled, which will of course hurt PSN players more than PC players.

    I have no confidence in Sony or any AAA publisher to do the right thing when executives with MBA’s and shareholder profits tied to their bonuses are involved but I’ll take a win if for this one little battle, the consumers won out.

      • Z3R0faith@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Most likely because Sony wouldn’t have any recourse to take action (e.g.: ban) any players that are violating terms of use that PSN players are required to agree to (obvious examples would be harassment / offensive language that most services will minimally voice/chat ban for).

        • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          6 months ago

          This is a myth that I have no idea why it’s being passed around. Sony can just map steam id’s to a range of PSN id’s that are effectively throwaway. As an example: “Z3R0faith” steamID -> GoT1238976das76d98a7s6y7fgas7df698a7ysdf PSN ID. Slug it with the game name so you can’t run into duplicates. Or don’t slug it and just run the steamID through a hash… so a ban on one game will apply to every other Sony game. And just have the game represent you as that ID. Sony bans that ID and that’s it. They don’t need to have an actual PSN account.

          There’s no need to have an actual PSN account with any data. They just need to map it on their end when only a steamID is presented.

          • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            This! I don’t understand this whole schtick… as doing it on the background is probably just as easy. The problem for Sony is that this is considered PII as it is unique to a human being meaning in the EU it can only be processed for a good and explicit reason or with voluntary consent.

            Now using the argument it is required in order to provide the service might work… but then they (Sony) cannot use it for anything else without exposing them to liability of fines at a percentage or global revenue.

        • big_slap@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          really? I think I agreed to a terms of service when I started the game on pc, im sure there is language in there that keeps players in check. I’m gonna verify…

          • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I think I agreed to a terms of service when I started the game on pc

            They changed the ToS on their site, and EULA’s on the steam page in the past week.

            Finding anything now is moot. Was it there when you purchased?

              • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                Nothing in either version actually mentions anything about mandating a login to their platform either. So my argument with the EULA in specific is moot.

                But yes, a diff on BOTH EULA’s on the steam page show at least no change in the past couple of months. But that doesn’t prove anything about when this specific user purchased the game. A change could have been made, and they would have only agreed to that version. That’s the point though, that’s something you have to explicitly look out for.

  • Cyberspark@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    6 months ago

    We haven’t won until the region sales restrictions implementation to avoid legal issues of imposing PSN is rolled back. Fellow divers got refunds, we haven’t won until everyone can return to diving.

    As far as I’m concerned people are far too eager to call this a win and take Sony at their word without actually caring about the result.

    To head off obvious responses Steam doesn’t impose restrictions on their own, the publisher is in control on sales and it takes no time at all for Steam to update. So why hasn’t Sony done this trivial act already? Because they’ll try this again later when they legally can.

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’d be cool if yall could ask them to remove the rootkit too, but IK the average helldiver player is already too stupid to care about that issue.

      • Cyberspark@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        Unfortunately that’s just the way the industry is going. They’d rather just have overreach and excessive power than deal with the back and forth fight of countering hackers and cheats. I understand why they’d go that way, it’s disappointing and concerning, but it’s becoming more and more common.

        You could run such games on a separate machine (provided you had the funds), but that’s a big buy in for a single game.

        Different people have different tolerances or are ignorant, not stupid. Maybe don’t be so condescending to people and you’d get better responses.

        • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Lmao, I can think of exactly 2 publishers who do this and they’re getting shredded by critics, rn. Security experts think it’s a fucking joke for the company and the users alike. Hopefully not “the way the industry is going”, more likely to get banned in modern nations, soon.

          Ignorance, especially willful, is not only a good definition of stupid but also a form of evil itself.

          • Cyberspark@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            6 months ago

            Easy Anti-Cheat is Kernel level. Lots more than 2 publishers are using kernel level Anti-Cheat.

            I guess you’re evil now then? Oops.

                • Cyberspark@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  I guess you lose your sense of superiority if you actually listen to what other people say. Making others do their research for them must be the way they cling to their self-worth.

                • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Lmfao from the first name on this list I can tell you that 7 days to die is not running kernel level anti-cheat. You’ve illustrated you have no idea what you’re talking about.

                  Kernel Level anticheat requires that it runs at startup of your computer. Examples are Riot’s Vanguard and nProtect’s GameGuard (which Helldivers 2 uses).

          • all-knight-party@kbin.run
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            If you begin your comment with “lmao” it’s immediately condescending and you’re unlikely to convince anyone about what you’re saying.

            • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              From my perspective, they made an outlandish statement that I vehemently disagreed with, if anything my response was more civil than usual.

              EDIT: they not you

              • all-knight-party@kbin.run
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                I’m not even the same person you were originally responding to. Just saying, if your goal is to get ideas across it’s better to be nice. If you just want to dunk on people and sink to their level, then carry on.

                • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  Right, I’ll add an edit. Sometimes discussion aren’t meant for the other side, it’s for the viewers.

            • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              If you disregard facts because of emotion, that’s a you problem.

              • all-knight-party@kbin.run
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                I’m making a general statement, not really representing my opinion in this particular conversation. If you care about what you’re standing up for, you should do your best to get it across to people, the perception is as much the fault of the listener as it is on the conveyor of the information and how they do it.