Is this saying that the PS3 has to connect directly to the net and that it can't go through a router?
I dunno if i should believe this or not because, you know, it seems like if we take everything they (not sony) say about the ps3 for cash, practicly no one will be able fully experience it, and i wouldnt believe who, in sony computer entertainement, thought and aprooved all that: Dedicated Internet connection, a new 1080p screen that works with ps3's protection, new games that werent played on any other console that the one you own, High price tag, ... I think it would be too stupid from sony. One or two of these things may be true, but all of these? Who the hell will be able to play with that machine? Not the kids of the soccer mom for sure.
I am thinking that this just excludes using a computer as a router. The broadband penetration in the US is just ridiculously low, so it would be stupid to think that people would be able to get a dedicated line just for the PS3. Of course with the direction that DRM is currently going, it will eventually become impossible to view movies at all. Soon it will require one dedicated connection for your BD/HDDVD player (to make sure that it is allowed to send the signal), one for your TV (to make sure that it is allowed to view the signal), one for the cable (to make sure that it is allowed to transmit the signal) and one for the remote (to make sure that it is allowed to modify the flow of the signal). Don't forget that each connection must have a unique IP address and have a dedicated hardware network path from the source equipment to the authentication servers. Of course, this service won't be free, so expect to pay $$ per month just to use equipment you own to watch movies you own.
This goes back to what I had said in a few ealier posts. Movies and videogames are going to be premium products only. The middle and low income customers are off the radar for future products. PS3 and xbox360 are just like "prada" and "coach" basically if you don't have the money don't come to the party. I wouldn't be surpised if sony pushed the "online only" buisness model for ps3. I know broadband penatration in the US is low and it won't be getting better anytime soon, but I think companies that sell movies and videogames ONLY want customers with boradband. Remember I am not saying we are in this postion today, but I expect in 3-5 years LOTS of "internet ludites" will be shocked that they cannot access new products because they are required to be online to activate or consistantly use the product. The interesting part will be which companies and products will not use "required online" models to get that demographic of "have nots".
Sony as a corporation, in my opinion, has been going downhill for years now. If they actually do require an internet connection for the PS3, maybe that will cause enough of a consumer backlash to push them out of the console market, if not, at least out of first place.
The way I'm reading that, it sounds like it will need a dedicated physical connection. As in, a splitter that nothing else connects to.
How would the PS3 know it was going through a router, switch or gateway anyway. I doubt this would be true because of the wide variety of Internet infrastructures and connection methods out there.
can you run TIVO through a router? Not including hacks or strange workarounds. If not then sony might think it can use a similar buiness plan.
I smell bullshit... and lots of it. A NIC that's aware that it's on a dedicated connection would be too pricey to make, and also too stupid of a move for anyone to use.
I guess a way to confirm or deny this would be to find out what are the current AACS rules actually and if this internet connection bit is in it.
If this is true, I will take a piss out of my window on a Sunday morning (I live on the 39th floor). C'mon people... use your heads. All companies know that 80% of the population of the world are morons. They're not going to make something more complicated than it has to be (like getting a direction connection).
Companies don't want this kind of customer anymore becaue its likley if they can't afford the product that they will also not be able to learn to use it. Like I said before TIVO needs a connection and now many PC games require a internet connection to activate and register. Isn't is possible that PS3 will be subject to the same buisness strategy? I wouldn't be suprised if in the future nexgen systems will need a credit check to purchase and activate. Low and middle income customers are not important anymore in videogames sales. They want the tech savy big spenders, everybody else can buy second hand last gen systems for all they care.
On the contrary -- that's the main customer they want. The less educated your target it, the more likely they are willing to pay for shit they don't need. Anyways, I think you're missing the point. It's not that the PS3 will require an internet connection. It's that it will require a dedicated one to play games online. IE -- can't go through a router and have your PC and other shit on it.
At the moment, only a small minority of PS2 owners play online - basically the hardcore and dedicated gamers. I doubt this would change much with the PS3, though there will be more adopters I am sure. Forcing a dedicated connection would scare off the hardcore gamers, so I can't see it happening. Unless the PS3 contains a router/switch within its hardware. Maybe this is the truth of the matter - the PS3 plugs into the broadband connection, then everything plugs into the PS3?
There is a difference between not being able to afford and learn to use an electronic device and being a impulse buyer who is too lazy/busy to learn how to use it. If your statement was correct electronics would have heavy marketing towards upper middle class retirees. They have disposable income, free time and are most likely very ignorant about choices. But they don't because to sell an electronic product successfully they buyer has to have disposable income, the "ability" to learn how to use it and the impatience to buy the next model based on "social obsolesence" If less educated customers were so important in the US, pre-pay cell phones and those who HAVE to buy them would be all the rage. However they are not becasue there is more money in getting customer with a decent credit rating, who pays thier bills every month and upgrades equipment every year. Believe it or not THIS is the future customer that videogame companies will be looking for.
It wouldn't be the first device that isn't comapible with a NAT'ing router. When NAT first came out, there were a number of devices that wouldn't work. These days the solution is fairly simple to implement, i would find it hard to believe that sony would develop a console that isn't compatible with the average user's home network. On the other hand, they are designing a console that won't be compatible with the average user's HDTV setup, so who knows... EDIT: NAT stands for Network Address Translation, it's a function of modern routers to hide multiple devices behind a single ip address.
Given that microsofts console is (presumably) happy behind NAT, I dont see sony making the mistake of not implementing the (simple) things required to support NAT on their console. Then again, this is sony we are talking about, the same company that decided that installing a trojan horse (in the form of the CD protection rootkits) on a users PC when they insert a sony music CD would be a good idea.
