Sony prohibits sharing of downloadable Warhawk
by James Ransom-Wiley 
{ Aug 28th 2007 at 11:15AM }
There's always been a catch when sharing downloadable PSN games: If it's an online multiplayer title, only one PSN account can use a particular license at any one time, though the license can be shared with any number of accounts across five consoles (so, you purchase and download the game, and then four of your friends can download the game for free onto their consoles using your account, but play using their own accounts). With nothing said leading up to its release, no one expected the rule to be changed for Warhawk, but it has been.It's not that Sony has lifted the limitation, but rather, Sony has reinforced it further. Each Warhawk license is tethered to one PSN account, the purchaser, and while the game can be installed on up to five consoles using that account (and only that account for playing), a single Warhawk license cannot be used on more than one console within a single day.
The rule change isn't unprecedented, but Sony could have been more transparent about its intentions ever since Warhawk was transformed into a downloadable multiplayer game (also available on Blu-ray). With undisclosed millions likely burned on a disastrous development cycle, during which a potential triple A single-player game was completely trashed, it's understandable that Sony wants to charge $40 to each and every PSN account holder that plays the downloadable version of Warhawk. Next time, just let us know the deal before release day, okay?
Here's the official fine print: "One time fee for download or use solely by the purchasing PSN account on up to five PS3 units, with no more than one activated PS3 unit within a 24 hour period. Content may not be used by any other account."
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
FrankTheCrank @ Aug 28th 2007 11:24AM
Not a dig, but people actually have more than one PS3?
I'll pick up the retail version with free bluetooth headset.
soulscreme @ Aug 28th 2007 11:26AM
Seems more like even on a single PS3, only the person who actually bought it can use their PSN account to play online. Maybe I read it wrong.
The Boo @ Aug 28th 2007 11:37AM
Isn't the retail version $60? I don't think that headset is exactly "free".
Travis @ Aug 28th 2007 12:46PM
The real issue here is that on a single PS3, only the account that was used to buy and download Warhawk will be able to play it. So if you share that PS3 with other family members, they will be unable to play Warhawk unless they use your account. In my opinion, this really sucks for an online multiplayer game. People want to play online with THEIR account, not their parent's or sibling's. And to tell people they need to buy a separate copy for each person who shares that PS3 is just insanity.
So if you want Warhawk and share your PS3 with others, then you should probably get the retail version. Or better yet, don't buy it so that Sony rethinks this idiotic policy.
FrankTheCrank @ Aug 28th 2007 1:55PM
The Boo...you are correct sir. My apologies.
If your lucky enough to live in the land up north(Canada), Best Buy has Warhawk for $39.99 with headset.
Hopefully BB will follow in the US.
bm @ Aug 28th 2007 4:04PM
"And to tell people they need to buy a separate copy for each person who shares that PS3 is just insanity."
To most corporate pricks, that's not insanity, it's genius!
soulscreme @ Aug 28th 2007 11:25AM
Well, I'm not terribly disappointed. Though my roommate might be a bit annoyed. The way it sounds, we can only play on my PSN account. Seems like I may have been better off with the disk based version. Meh, I get to play on my PSN account. So, whatever. He'll have to deal or pay $40.
GRANTED @ Aug 28th 2007 11:34AM
at least you got to play it already.
im still calling around trying to find a place that has it stocked. i don't feel like waiting till wednesday--and target straight up lied and said it was coming in friday. hopefully the sony style store around here will have it by the time i leave work today.
if anyone's picked up the retail version, where'd you get it? and more importantly, why aren't you playing it?
soulscreme @ Aug 28th 2007 11:35AM
Nope, haven't played it yet. Download didn't finish until 2AM and I have to work all day. Won't be playing until tonight.
Matt B @ Aug 28th 2007 11:45AM
You could play split screen with him.
soulscreme @ Aug 28th 2007 12:38PM
Matt B: I know, we just can't have separate stats.
Todd @ Aug 28th 2007 11:31AM
Eh, no real big deal. Just means everyone will have to pay more money to Sony. What's wrong with that?
joeyg @ Aug 28th 2007 11:34AM
kinda sound like anything else you buy...
you buy a disc, only one person can use it at a time.
ssuk @ Aug 28th 2007 11:44AM
Uh... Not quite what they mean. The licence is restricting just ONE account to use it... Ever. Not just while one person's using the game anther user cannot play it. You cannot just decide "Oh, I want a go", change profile and have it working, like a physical game disc would do.
loungemonkey @ Aug 28th 2007 11:59AM
Isnt that like Valve and HL2?
Phranctoast @ Aug 28th 2007 11:34AM
This doesnt seem like that big of a deal. Ill be going with the BR disc version to get the BT headset.
Does anyone know if the BR disc version could be copied to the HDD?
mrlogical @ Aug 28th 2007 12:02PM
The BR version will install the full 798 MB to your HD to play, but you'll still need the disc in to run it.
Phranctoast @ Aug 28th 2007 12:29PM
thanks for the reply. I understand why you still need the disc in the play it, I just dont like it.
Stubby Boardman @ Aug 28th 2007 11:34AM
well the 360 does lock content to the console it is downloaded to often times; premium content, that is. So if I buy an episode of South Park and bring my hardrive to a friends house so we can watch or play stuff there, I can't actually watch that episode unless I upload my gamertag to his system (about a 5 minute process. you just need your email address and password you created your account with)its free obviously. but yah, if that friend doesnt have an internet connection, preventing me from signing into Live, then we're shit outta luck.
Does stuff like this suck? yah, but Microsoft and Sony are just trying to protect themselves and the developers of downloadable content.
Stef Geiger @ Aug 28th 2007 11:34AM
I love how a completely reasonable business practice is going to get turned into a huge piece of negative spin. We've been lucky that Sony has been so good with it's DRM so far, now that they're not letting people share a full-fledged game, they're bad people?
Correct me if I'm wrong (maybe I am), but last time I checked, you can't share ANY paid-for DLC from Live with other users.
ssuk @ Aug 28th 2007 11:43AM
If this was a retail game, pressed to disc ($40 is a bit less than a usual game price, but it's 3/4 of it... What makes this so much more different than the licence you get when you buy a PHYSICAL DISC?). You could take it anywhere, use on any machine, use on any profile for ONE purchase of the game. Here, they're making you pay for the game, then pay for it again to play it on another console or another profile on the same console. And that's terrible. Sure, it's a 'reasonable business practise' it gets them money, but that's just kicking the consumer in the balls and then laughing at them while they're down on the ground.
And you're right to a certain extent. However, Live content is restricted to premium video content. For Live Arcade games, you can play them across all your profiles on the same console.
bl13 @ Aug 28th 2007 11:52AM
"the game can be installed on up to five consoles using that account (and only that account for playing)"
You can play on another console with your account, just not with another account (on any console).
If your PS3 is shared by multiple people then you should consider the disc version. If you're the only one that uses your PS3 and like the convenience of not having to load a disc first (like me), then this shouldn't be a dealbreaker.
copa @ Aug 28th 2007 12:51PM
"Correct me if I'm wrong (maybe I am), but last time I checked, you can't share ANY paid-for DLC from Live with other users."
I'm happy to correct you. As ssuk noted, you can share with any number of users on the console you originally downloaded to.
More to the point, however, is that Live doesn't have this 24-hour restriction on online play for multiple consoles. I can play Bomberman Live online on my console. Then I can go over to my buddies house, download onto his console under my account, and play online. And then I can do the same thing at my brother's house. All in the same day.
I think that approach is much more reasonable than preventing me from playing at home because I'm worried I might want to play elsewhere in the next 24 hours.
NATO_Duke @ Aug 28th 2007 1:05PM
I dont think it is reasonable at all that I can only use on account on my machine to play it. So if my GF wants to play it on her account we have to get another copy? If I want to play without using my normal name so I can be secret and not talk to folks - I need a new copy? If a guest comes over and I dont want them to use my account and make me look like a tard (if they are jerks or something) - then I need another copy.
That isn't reasonable to me at all. Thats a rip off. To me its taking policing a bit too far.
copa @ Aug 28th 2007 1:21PM
NATO_Duke, please don't aimlessly bitch if you have no idea what you are talking about.
For games like Bomberman that support multiple people playing online from the same console, you and your girlfriend can both log in and play. As long as one of you has the game licensed to your account, you can both play online at the same time.
So yes, it is very reasonable.
NATO_Duke @ Aug 28th 2007 1:46PM
Copa - WTF are you talking about. I didn't log in and aimlessly bitch. More to the point, I wasn't talking about bomberman live you defensive prick.
Re-read the comment I left and look to what post it was responding to. It was about Warhawk, not bomberman. Who the hell cares about that game - besides, Live wasn't a topic of discussion - PSN was.
Once more, let me point out, your attack was pathetic and ill conceived. Good luck with the internet bully lifestyle.
Zach @ Aug 28th 2007 5:04PM
Didn't you get the memo, Joystiq hates everyone/everything.
aggrocrag @ Aug 28th 2007 11:58AM
For the most part it seems fairly reasonable. Obviously it's no different from linking a Battlefield 2 key to an account or Valve games to one Steam account.
However this passage is particularly annoying, "a single Warhawk license cannot be used on more than one console within a single day."
Dan @ Aug 28th 2007 12:02PM
Erm... hello, ONLINE GAMES, havn't you played one before joystiq? You can never use a single account to play online with multiple copies of a game on different machines. How is this news? PS3 owners expected that if their friend downloaded this game that they could copy it and play it for free? Are you serious?
copa @ Aug 28th 2007 12:54PM
I think PS3 owners expected that if they paid for the game and played it, then went to a buddies house and logged in exclusively on their account, they wouldn't have to sit around and wait for 24 hours before they could play online again.
That's how Steam and XBox Live work.
Dan @ Aug 28th 2007 3:15PM
Fair enough, the 24 hour thing is a little bit useless, but the main complaint seems to be that it is account-locked at all, which is actually common practice.
Ajguy @ Aug 28th 2007 12:25PM
I think it's silly that they limit you to one account, but you can play on 5 different PS3s. Who on Earth has five PS3s? So you mean to tell me that in a household with more than one gamer, and they plan on downloading the game, they each need to download a copy if they want to be able to play on their own accounts?
I guess you can compare this to PC games like BF2, but the more apt comparison would be to how the 360 handles downloadable games. Each game is tied to both that particular console and to your gamertag. That means that as long as you stay on the console you downloaded the game too, any profile on that machine can play it. But if you want to take it to a different console, only you can play it. That makes a lot more sense to me.
I just hope their upfront about this in the download page for the game. It makes a strong case for multi-gamer households to just get the Blu-ray.
KsE 79 @ Aug 28th 2007 12:27PM
Who cares? This game is a disappointment anyways. It is mediocre and most people are only "happy" with it (more like settling with it) because everything else for our PS3s arent that impressive either. Dont waste 60 bux buying this game. Hell dont download it either, unless you are really really bored and dont have a 360.
Phranctoast @ Aug 28th 2007 12:32PM
were you in the beta at least?
Vidikron @ Aug 28th 2007 12:35PM
I doubt you've even played it. I was in the beta and the game is actually quite good.
Stef Geiger @ Aug 28th 2007 12:37PM
...Have you actually played it? Because you sound like a 360 troll. I personally don't care for this style of online game because I got bored of them in the days of Team Fortress Classic. However, I got into the beta and found the game to be EXTREMELY fun - and the beta had a LOT of issues. The retail version is probably stellar. It's a great game, and it's great that it can be had for such a good price.
FrankTheCrank @ Aug 28th 2007 2:01PM
Fanboy!
hvnlysoldr @ Aug 28th 2007 12:29PM
Like this will prevent night vision enthusiasts.
Donald @ Aug 28th 2007 12:59PM
Like pirates with eye patches?
Martin @ Aug 28th 2007 2:17PM
Shut the fuck up with the Night Vision crap. Contribute something to the conversation or move on to the next post.
Raikage @ Aug 28th 2007 2:41PM
Leave him alone you clown. He adds alot more than you do on this site.
So I suggest you go get yourself a big, tall, ice cold glass of SHUT YOUR MOUTH
On topic (hvnlysoldr's topic) I wonder if ninjas wear eye patches for night vision... or is it built in?!
hvnlysoldr @ Aug 28th 2007 3:22PM
The reason I posted before was to say this measure is to force as many people as possible to buy the game and prevent quasi legal mass sharing which Sony decries as leading to or is piracy.
@Raikage
Ninjas of course have night vision from before birth. It's dark and treacherous in a kunuichi's womb. A female ninja never gives up the goods and has to protect even that place. Plus it gives good training for ninjas to go through a gauntlet to birth and blocking the doctor's slap.
Raikage @ Aug 28th 2007 5:45PM
I bet they chew themselves out of the womb or something. I bet the night vision helps in there... Kinda how Chuck Norris round-house kicked out of the womb, his own womb...
TheGameM3 @ Aug 28th 2007 12:53PM
this means if you hav a sub accout that your sibling uses, like my bro. he cant play it. he can only play it on his name whic is bullsh*t. sony keeps screwing the pooch. i got to buy it again. well i feel ripped off
Vidikron @ Aug 28th 2007 12:59PM
It does seem overly restricted, but your brother could just play it on your account. I don't know why you would bother to buy it twice.
Sandy McArthur @ Aug 29th 2007 12:30PM
Call Sony's customer support and let them know what you think: (800-345-SONY) http://www.us.playstation.com/Corporate/ContactUs
TheGameM3 @ Aug 28th 2007 1:04PM
"itdoes seem overly restricted, but your brother could just play it on your account. I don't know why you would bother to buy it twice"
im not. me and my bro want to keep our own stats. this wouldnt happen on xbox live, i'll tell you that. and when we play together. we would sure like to be on our accounts, he doesnt want to be TheGameM3(2), its stupid. i guess this is why you pay for xbox live, which i have never complained about.
Vidikron @ Aug 28th 2007 1:15PM
Well, that's certainly a valid complaint about the stats.
umm....hello??? @ Aug 28th 2007 1:12PM
sooo, yeah, the licensing thing seems to be retarded. but what I'd REALLY like to see is a REVIEW? anyone play it yet? likes/dislikes? wouldn't mind buying a worthwhile game and a reason to dust off my PS3 aside from renting BD movies.
TheGameM3 @ Aug 28th 2007 1:22PM
if any body has contacted sony, post it, lets see what they are saying. i want a refund so i can get the bd disc, or at leat 20$ off the psn so i can dl on the sub account. makes sense, doesnt it? its not bad at all. 40$ may be a bit too much but its still fun to play.