To be fair, Totoki has a bit of a point when it comes to safety concerns, as PlayStation will be required to oversee interactions between players in its multiplayer games, but that doesn't really explain why single-player games force players to create PSN accounts.

What ever happened to "Online interactions are not rated by the ESRB" and "Online interactions may lead to a different or unintended experience" and other such concepts?

I mean, this is pretty rich coming from one of the most hackable companies in history. But still.

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I think “Disclaimer: Product may explode and take out your eye” only goes so far in terms of warning consumers. Better to actually have something protecting them.

EDIT: My tired mind when I wrote that was just specifically annoyed at the use of disclaimers to excuse a negative trait of software/products. Basically, I was reminded of when Cyberpunk hit the issue of seizure content, and all they did was add a generic warning to the game. But, I really should have added: Sony attempting to use consumer protection to excuse PSN is also stupid. Basically, I'd gotten off topic.

[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

No online interaction is going to be as harmful as a product exploding and taking out your eye. Except in the case of children and pedos, perhaps. But in that case, most responsibility (all, in my opinion) is on the parents to monitor their child's online gaming. Additionally, a system that doesnt require PSN accounts that monitors in game chat for words and phrases that flags for human interception could easily be implemented. Something like that could be caught quickly and dealt with easily before actual damage occurs.