Originally posted by Ryowulf

Originally posted by Methos12
Every used copy that gets into circulation is pretty much one new sale denied AND companies don't see a dime from used game profits. I see their angle on this.

And your proof for this is?

Isn't just as likely that someone unable to buy a used copy won't go out any buy a new game? If that's the case then all these efforts only end up pissing people off and reducing sales.

I think there is a strong case to be made that all these years of anti-piracy efforts have done much more harm than good.

No he's correct.  When Gamestop gets used games and resells them, the publishers don't see a dime.  There's been a lot of grumbling and going ons in the industry over this.  They want to maximise their profits. 

However what this kind of thing does, is take the value of your purchases away from you.  There have been some games in the past (rarely) that I've decided I don't really care for anymore, and would rather trade in.  With this kind of measure I can't do that anymore.  I buy a game, I buy it for life with this kind of measure.  I can't loan my game to a friend either.  I would also wonder what this might do if I had more than one PS4 in the house, such as one for my kids. 

But regardless what this does is take value away from the consumer, hopefully to put it in the hands of the developers and publishers.  Personally I hate this kind of crap.  It's nothing more than greed. 

Originally posted by Nadia

dont agree w what sony is doing

but maybe they are trying to do something like Steam

This is every major gaming company atm. Everyone wants to have what Steam has. The main problem is they are all approaching it from the wrong direction. The reason Steam is what it is today, is because they focused on community, and have a damned smooth / stable platform before they began focusing on monetization.

EA, Microsoft, Sony are all focusing on the monetization, and think that if they have a platform that works well enough for them to sell stuff on, it'll work. Problem is, by doing this, they're competing directly with Steam. And Steam, hands down, blows all 3 company's attempts out of the water.

It's a lot like what's going on w/ Netflix right now. Netflix started a great idea a long time ago, and every other company held on vigorously to their status quo. Now that they see the opportunity they turned their back on, everyone wants a piece of that market, but have waited way too long to do it easily.

Originally posted by Corehaven

Originally posted by Ryowulf

Originally posted by Methos12
Every used copy that gets into circulation is pretty much one new sale denied AND companies don't see a dime from used game profits. I see their angle on this.

And your proof for this is?

Isn't just as likely that someone unable to buy a used copy won't go out any buy a new game? If that's the case then all these efforts only end up pissing people off and reducing sales.

I think there is a strong case to be made that all these years of anti-piracy efforts have done much more harm than good.

 

No he's correct.  When Gamestop gets used games and resells them, the publishers don't see a dime.  There's been a lot of grumbling and going ons in the industry over this.  They want to maximise their profits. 

 

However what this kind of thing does, is take the value of your purchases away from you.  There have been some games in the past (rarely) that I've decided I don't really care for anymore, and would rather trade in.  With this kind of measure I can't do that anymore.  I buy a game, I buy it for life with this kind of measure.  I can't loan my game to a friend either.  I would also wonder what this might do if I had more than one PS4 in the house, such as one for my kids. 

 

But regardless what this does is take value away from the consumer, hopefully to put it in the hands of the developers and publishers.  Personally I hate this kind of crap.  It's nothing more than greed. 

Whats funny is that they justify the high price of games primarily on this. With the removal of used games they aren't going to reduce the price even though what they used as a justification has been removed lol. 

Originally posted by Coxel
That is illegal in the USA.   They might be able to enforce that elsewhere but here we do have a right that protects us from such measure and has been upheld repeatedly by the supreme court.

Think again.  Fair use is all  you are allowed  - they have been going after used book and vinyl/CD stores - the DMCA allows this type of company system.

I see there angle too. They don't see a dime of the 20 dollars or so profit companies like gamefly get from second hand sales. So i like the idea. Its called copyright, 

I will support sony and any other game company that does this. my gf did buy me a couple second hand games once. but i perfer to buy them new, If i have to wait for them to come down to 30 dollar range so be it but still its there games. they have a right to make sure they see profit from every sale. 

I dont understand why software is different from any other material item.  If I buy a DVD player from Wal-Mart I get the rights to it and I can sell it to my neighbor.  Why should a console game be any different?  What makes a console game different from a music CD or a painting or any other material item?  I understand the thought process that we are only leasing the software but that is complete bullcrap. 

What is the difference between buying a console game and leasing a console game forever?  NONE!  It is just wording used by the software industry so they can control our rights to resell.  It is wrong and sadly, there is nothing we can do since the software industry pays so much for lobbiest's in Washington.

Originally posted by kalinis

I see there angle too. They don't see a dime of the 20 dollars or so profit companies like gamefly get from second hand sales. So i like the idea. Its called copyright, 

I will support sony and any other game company that does this. my gf did buy me a couple second hand games once. but i perfer to buy them new, If i have to wait for them to come down to 30 dollar range so be it but still its there games. they have a right to make sure they see profit from every sale. 

[mod edit] What about people that own multiple consoles? What about people who for one or another reason had to replace their console? It doesnt all revolve around second hand sales.

Originally posted by Talonsin

I dont understand why software is different from any other material item.  If I buy a DVD player from Wal-Mart I get the rights to it and I can sell it to my neighbor.  Why should a console game be any different?  What makes a console game different from a music CD or a painting or any other material item?  I understand the thought process that we are only leasing the software but that is complete bullcrap. 

What is the difference between buying a console game and leasing a console game forever?  NONE!  It is just wording used by the software industry so they can control our rights to resell.  It is wrong and sadly, there is nothing we can do since the software industry pays so much for lobbiest's in Washington.

Problem is, you get a lot more useage out of a DVD player, and you aren't likely to copy / duplicate that player. Not true of DVDs, Music, or Games.

Interesting you bring this up, because a lot of the problems games are having can be seen in the music & DVD markets as well. However, each seem to be going about it in different ways.

People...

If you dont like it, dont buy it. These companies will allways do what they can get away with. Last I checked they have all grown into multi billion dollar companies so I dont really see how the second hand sales have hurt they're business. They make blockbuster sales and Blockbuster profits on Good Games.

On a recent released game up here in Canada, EB will sell the game for about $5 less then new, which they always try to pawn on me and I always tell them to get stuffed as I think it's a joke to recieve anything less then a 30% discount on something thats been used.

Talk with your wallet...

To this day I refuse to buy an Xbox because making you pay to use it online and play with friends is Bullshit

edit:

And dont get me started about having to sit through 10min of fucking commercials after I've paid good coin to watch the damn movie. Which is the biggest reason I only go to see 1 or 2 movie's a year these days.

Only got 1 comment on this....

I think what the game making company got to realise is, if they sell their boxed game cheaper in the first place, this entire piracy and second mark thing would not have became popular.

Just look at music and movie sales now, songs are sold on iTune appstore for dirt cheap, not much people bother to bittorrent or download songs from some illegit sites anymore. Also, older movies you can get it on DVD for what, like 5 bucks? No one even bother to pirate them unless they really can't find it, as you won't hardly find anyone seeding them.

I think game producers has always shot themselves in the foot by selling their boxed games for anywhere beyond $69.95. There is a reason why Steam is so popular (mostly because it is convenient, on discount a lot of times, and often times CHEAPER). I think for games that people are NOT going to play for longer then a week a lot of people struggles to find a reason to buy it rather than obtain it through second-hand, rental or illegal means when it is priced at anywhere beyond $40.

It's a two prong problem.

If Game Publishers get their way, they'll be able to make substantially more money on their games.  This could argueably (but defintely won't happen) bring the prices of games back down.  This would also help "possibly" limit the number of crap games being release since publishers would have more money for development.

However, on the reverse side, stores like Gamestop (who the vast majority of their sales IS used software/hardware) would go under.

Realistically speaking, game rentals (while still out there) are a dying breed.  This is in part to failed business practices and philosophy of rental stores like Blockbuster or Hollywood Video.  They can't compete with Redbox and Netflix, and have failed to innovate.

If anything, Game Publishers could begin to require an internet connection to authenticate the software.  In the case of used software, a nominal fee to buy a key could be done.

There is no right or wrong answer.  PC gamers have been dealing with this for years now.  First we had CD authentication, which is easily cracked.  Now we have online authentication with the developers server, which is more dificult.  Once the "key" is used; its dead.  You can't really resell the game.  We know this, we accept this.

Microsoft and Sony have already screwed up with reverse compatibility of their previous system's games with their new system.  It would be the proverbial straw that broke the camels back if they block used software too.

They currently don't have this in any of the ps2 games or ps3 games. It would have to be on their end. To check through the psn network. This would hurt rentals, and resale places like gamestop and replay's.

I think it just about nuts.

SOE is not the only company trying to do this, many companies are.    Won't work though.    Just as it didn't work for books, toys, clothing, cars, etc, etc, etc, ....

everyone comparing games to materials things, cars, houses, dvd playerswhatnot

all of those have not a material side, houe plan, was needed to build a house, which cost a ton, and can never be used again

car had same plans + patents and another 200 plans and patents for every separeta part, you cant use or sell those, you dont even know them

same goes for every kinda  material thing, plans patents, that cost money and cannot be sold or used

but when its a game, and game is planted on dvd that costbarely 1$ , instead of a house where  work and materials makes 90% of the price

game is like 1% and 99% other way around, yet when selling a house, you include all those house plans, all those water and electricity permisions, which cannot be used again or sold and write them off, because you sell material part of a house, and not plans for a house which can never be used to build a new house, because new plan even if identical is needed, which will cost 

but when it comes to a game, you want to sell that unsellable part, that cannot be used for profits by others, erase dvd and sell  it for material part then.. because thats what you  own, not a game, not  plan or patent, or any copyright material , get your head around it

Originally posted by Smikis

everyone comparing games to materials things, cars, houses, dvd playerswhatnot

all of those have not a material side, houe plan, was needed to build a house, which cost a ton, and can never be used again

car had same plans + patents and another 200 plans and patents for every separeta part, you cant use or sell those, you dont even know them

same goes for every kinda  material thing, plans patents, that cost money and cannot be sold or used

 

but when its a game, and game is planted on dvd that costbarely 1$ , instead of a house where  work and materials makes 90% of the price

game is like 1% and 99% other way around, yet when selling a house, you include all those house plans, all those water and electricity permisions, which cannot be used again or sold and write them off, because you sell material part of a house, and not plans for a house which can never be used to build a new house, because new plan even if identical is needed, which will cost 

 

but when it comes to a game, you want to sell that unsellable part, that cannot be used for profits by others, erase dvd and sell  it for material part then.. because thats what you  own, not a game, not  plan or patent, or any copyright material , get your head around it

 

 

 

What the heck are you going on about?

I can legally sell my legally purchased copy of copyrighted material. I just cant sell a copy of my legally purchased copy of copyrighted material.

A book is a medium

A DVD is a medium

A downloaded copy is a medium

A board game is a medium

An automobile is a medium

I like the individuals who keep trying to justify used game sales as a right... it isn't, wrap your capitalist minds around the simple fact that used game sales+new game sales= total game sales, the math is retardedly simple for the profit too because on the publisher developer end they get 30-40$*new game sales (not the whole ~60$ mind you unless we're talking EA games over Origin or such) so in essence used game sales take money away from the people who brought you the game and gives it to people who found out they can screw them over by offering a buy back program for used game copies which incentivieses people to sell their copies back quick (if I am not mistaken you get around 20-30$ back this way if you sell the game back to the retailler used).

To put it bluntly this is wrong, anyone trying to justify its existence is either woefuly ignorant of the system or just plain doesn't care as long as he/she can be an irresonsibile gamer who can go pick out games, play them, bring them back and significantly reduce the impact of this habit on his/her own monthly expenses.

That being said I am neither a supporter of Sony ( I was rooting for the hacker who cracked open the PS3 when he got sued) nor any other publisher or developer for that matter, what I am is someone who sees what greed and narrowmindedness are doing to hurt people who ply their trade and bring you products which lighten your daily load through a few hours of shooty violence/conquest/whatever you fancy and it has to stop, these people can't bring you quality products if they can't make a living from it.

Edit:

Addendum: The only time used game sales are ok is when the game cannot be acquired anymore from retailers in which case go nuts, hell I doubt the devs/publisher would mind the 4-5 min it would take to patch that particular game out of an ID verification system (if it is a good one it would only really take a few modifications to a code at worse).

My own opinion (remember this)

consoles are suppose to be semi-portable, you can even find them in trunk of peoples vehicles hooked up to a LCD screen (for the rides that re pimped out). 

Honestly, the locking of game disk I do not like.. but then again it would make people purchase more products.. from a gamer point of view I don't like it but from a business stand point, it is a good action to take.. but in the middle is where they need to look.. Perhaps make the availability to sign in to your account and play the game on the persons console without the disk.. But in doing so would assume everyone has a 12+Mbps connection.. which isn't possible to state in this day in age since DSL is still around.

Either way I don't care since I never take my games to other peoples places anyways, why play your game when a game they have could open up your perspective to new genre of gaming that you would have other wise not of liked unless you played their game? 

It basically gives the purpose for that person to come over to your place to play one of your games and hang out, having a guy (or girl) night gaming. :)

There are better things to be worrying about than this.. Like the quality of games being produced starting to head south even more.

And the same argument can be made for the automobile industry or any other industry for that matter. Every used car sale takes away from the profits of the automobile companies who work so hard and employ so many people it should be ilegal to sell used cars.

A game should be no different then a book.  If it was ilegal to sell used games then retail outlets like EB would have their asses sued off.

Books are an intellectual media just like GAMES and they have been bought and sold second hand over the last 2 or 3 thousand years to this very day AND should set precidence over what these greedy corporations want.

Iirc there was a rumor that the next Xbox would have this sort of feature as well. Honestly, I hope it is true. I would rather the money for the games go to the developers / publishers then to Gamestop. But on the other hand the rentals getting nailed is what I don't like about this concept. I also don't want to see potentially thousands and thousands of people lose jobs over this. Gamestop would probably be fine since they still can sell Nintendo games, games for the other platforms,pc games,accessories,ect. but they would certainly have to cut down since a ton of the money they get is from used game sales. Gamefly would pretty much cease to exist which is sad because it is a great service. Blockbuster would be more screwed then they are now.. 

Maybe it won't be as bad as I think it is for those guys, but it would not suprise me if this had less effect on the industry then I am thinking. This could actually end up being an opportunity for PC gaming to rise to the occasion since most sales would start becoming digital. In the long run I think they just don't want Gamestop to sell used games anymore and this goal would most certainly be met if this was the case. Another thing to consider is that it is logical to assume that in 10 years we will be a completely digital industry anyways so why prolongue the inevitable?

The major issue that this would have immedietly is the idea of the "party" game. Basically, no more bringing your game to a friends house. Want to play Rock band and have a drunken shin-dig with your bros? Well, you have to bring your whole console to the party. 

One more issue that I don't think many people are considering is the impact this could have on entertainment in general. What if a system like this could be applied to physical media like movies? Imagine if you could only watch your movies on a certain player in the house and you could not buy them used..

And what if a game completely sucks? like many of them do. Where's your recourse? you cant even go pawn them off anymore. Will the publisher's have to offer you a refund for a lacking product? What make's them above other industries?