I don't understand why people are getting so ruffled over XB drm vs Sony drm. Both companies have said they are putting DRM in the hands of the third party publishers. Xbox has a system that allows third party developers the option to block used games if they want, Sony is leaving the door open for third party developers to implement their own systems to block the resale of games via online passes, activation codes, or whatever else developers can think of. Sony in particular has a very bad track record with drming their customers without letting them know:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal
So it's sort of weird to wear a tin-foil hat for the xbox but not the ps4. While xb1 has the system in place at a console level, ps4 lets devs create whatever they want, and you could very well see what happened to the android market versus the iphone market. One is heavily regulated on a system level and results in a strict level of compatibility, the other lets devs run free, and results in a less restrictive market with a lot of compatibility problems.
At the end of the day neither company is actively forcing or stopping third party developers from blocking the use of used games, and I doubt much will differ from the way they are now (online passes to impede resale are not a new thing, especially to Activision)
The two big differences really are price and onlineability:
Either way you're out over 400 dollars, it's sort of odd to nitpick a little bit more beyond that, and a lot of the ps4 bundles come with the Eye which push it to 460. It's sucks for Microsoft to force the Kinect on people, but in a year both systems will no doubt be 250 anyways in Slim 1tb hdd models. They wouldn't be bundling the Kinect if it wasn't such a well selling item (Sadly, core gamers don't make up the market majority anymore, so I am sure a lot of people are very excited to pay the extra 100$, same as when xblive increased their fee from 50$ to 60$ to fund a deal with ESPN and Facebook)
The 24 hour check-ins are the biggest irk to me, it shafts active duty officers, or people who can't afford high end always-on internet as well as treating all customers like criminals. Microsoft's stance of "#getwiththetimes" is flippant, it's not for them to decide. However, as a primarily PC gaming person, I sort of get apathetic and complacent in accepting these things which are pretty standard in most modern big title PC games. Developers are in this mindset that no one wants to play single player games anymore, and assume everyone only plays multiplayer ever, so they can unlock "Teabagged 30 enemies" badges on facespace or whatever.
The only issue that matters to me are games. Xb1 has Titanfall which I am very excited for, and Ps4 has Destiny which I am also excited for. Halo4 made sure I had little interest in future Halo games, I'm siding with Bungie over 343. So when the systems come down in price and those games are available, I'll probably end up buying both, ps4 with the first paycheck.
PS2 proved people will pay a premium for a good system (100-150 more than the dreamcast), the PS3 proved people will NOT pay a premium for a good system (100-200 more than x360), the console wars will forever be a crossfire of people using underpowered systems to play games at lower graphics settings than a half-decent computer can, and defending their individual systems as if imbued with a holy fire. Because we all know there are NEVER pc gaming holy wars (NVidia/amd, intel/amd, mac/pc, desktop/laptop)
That's my stance, and in a week I am sure the entire world will have forgotten everything and just end up buying both systems so they can keep running the latest CoD game TWO TIMES AS MUCHES at least until the next game comes out in nine months. Sort of like all of the reasons we had before to NEVER buy such and such system (ps3 hackings, rrod, bsod, gsod(mac), no rumble packs in ds3 controllers). People tend to get up in arms for the first week or two, and then completely forget it and buy everything anyways.
