this post was submitted on 06 May 2024
61 points (82.1% liked)
Games
16764 readers
1116 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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.
why would cross play be disabled?
Just a guess with Sony executives would try to save face and exert some perceived control over their PSN ecosystem.
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).
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.
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.
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..
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?
The early March version seems to match the current Steam page.
https://web.archive.org/web/20240304061048/https://store.steampowered.com/eula/553850_eula_0
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.