test_account
XP-39C²
Sorry, i ment the disc usage. Wouldnt you need multiply discs even with today's system if you're using multiply systems?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Sony has researched new tech for suppressing second-hand game sales
- Thread starter gofreak
- Start date
I never said that, that is why your 'argument' is known as a strawman.
My primary concern is not the technical feasibility but the commercial one.
There has already been ample evidence this generation of the Playstation brand condensing in to a very focused set of gamers with comparatively homogenized tastes (i.e. the most "hardcore" system).
A strategy like this would only accelerate this process. Less Playstations sold, but the consumers left spend more and tend to be densely populated around certain genres. It's not a recipe for long term growth.
There has already been ample evidence this generation of the Playstation brand condensing in to a very focused set of gamers with comparatively homogenized tastes (i.e. the most "hardcore" system).
A strategy like this would only accelerate this process. Less Playstations sold, but the consumers left spend more and tend to be densely populated around certain genres. It's not a recipe for long term growth.
I've actually wondered what happened there.
I know there was a strong push to ban resale of games in Japan in the late 90's, early 2000's.
Just about every Japanese game released in those years on PSone, Saturn, N64 and Dreamcast had the "no resale" emblem on the box. (never seen it on Neo Geo stuff though)
Yet it's been many years since I've seen one of these.
Heard about the legislation for it not passing or something, but that was all from 2nd hand information. (excuse the pun)
It's pretty simple. Used games are a huge part of the retail market in Japan. Many people are willing to pay full price for games and buy them day 1 because they know they can get a good resale value if they finish it quick. There are no game rentals in Japan, so the sales culture developed into one where resale is an option. Any sort of legislation outlawing game resale will never past because they're not going to cripple their own retailers, no matter how much the publishers and first parties want it.
Judging from how Sony has handled the PS3 and the Vita so far, it would be fairly accurate to say that the Sony brand is not really likely to be looking at growth at all in any region, regardless. I think they're pretty much doomed in the long term anyway unless they do something very drastic and it pays off. Not holding my breath!
I'm thinking each new system will come with the capability to dissociate the game disk from the system for a certain cost - likewise to activate we can have a licensed authority (Gamestop) to pay a cost to clear the tagging of the disc. The only user-benefit I can see from this is anti-theft from the consumer perspective. Someone is less likely to steal just your game if they know it's content is inaccessible.
If it's as described, it's basically overhead for the used game market to ensure feedback of money back to the developers/publishers. We've already seen some essence of this in some games where content is locked unless you purchased it new with an unused key to unlock.
If they cared for consumers, using the model I described - each subsequent unlock should be less and less costly. It should be a variable unlock value based on number of unlockings and age of media.
If it's as described, it's basically overhead for the used game market to ensure feedback of money back to the developers/publishers. We've already seen some essence of this in some games where content is locked unless you purchased it new with an unused key to unlock.
If they cared for consumers, using the model I described - each subsequent unlock should be less and less costly. It should be a variable unlock value based on number of unlockings and age of media.
This only works if the game is only resold once.
Which would actually be possible to implement with this system, and an interesting option.
Karak
Member
And this exact thing wasn't just Sony either. In one of the original 720 rumour threads I brought up some work I had heard about concerning a disk tied to a machine regardless of the internet. The same problem exists in both places. Used games are a massive deal to consumers, and various issues could cause problems. People owning various systems and so forth. Back then the worries were tied to things like the 360 rrod and how that would impact a game. Regardless this seems hard to implement and unfair overall.
Paying a small activation payment may work but it just seems heavy handed.
Another excellent point of a long term issue.
This is the exchange :
You better rephrase it better because it really look like you're saying no one paid the pubs ever for the games.
Why? Because I said they are more likely to buy used games?
That is quite a stretch. And a far one at that.
I think going from 'more likely' to 'no one paid the pubs ever for games' is beyond ridiculous.
The headache is growing. You guys do make it too easy though, kind of fun at the same time. Low hanging fruit I guess, but I would much rather have an educated discussion here.
EDIT: As I scroll up I see some great discussion, page 10 was just a disaster I think and that was the page I first started reading after the OP.
Why?
Are games so special that they should stop working when used once?
Actually I misread benny_a arguments.
Still it's quite a stretch to even think that most people reselling games only get more used games, that would mean no one actually buy new games in any number because retailers wouldn't be stocking them because they bring no revenue.
That makes no sense.
Makes games worth keeping, it's always the same answer
The best practice against used games, piracy, or plain old bomba, is to make a game which is valued by the community. Something people who are interested in would want to buy, own, and keep. The reality is that you're not going to keep every single customer, so if they do end up selling the game, that should be their choice. If a game is reasonably priced, compelling, and desirable, it should sell. If it isn't desirable, then try harder and make something desirable.
Works for every other entertainment industry. Don't see why games are so special.
DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
How about this:
1) Games will be available in stores on discs and online digitally. New retail disc copies come with a pass/code card that has to be entered to tie the game's ownership to both the system and, if that user has an online connected system, the system's owners online account.
2) Used discs can be sold to stores preserving the used game trade. Those discs can be sold just as they are today at a discounted price. However, in order to play the game, a code/pass has to be purchased at the retail location on a card or as a downloadable code online after the game is loaded up.
1) Games will be available in stores on discs and online digitally. New retail disc copies come with a pass/code card that has to be entered to tie the game's ownership to both the system and, if that user has an online connected system, the system's owners online account.
2) Used discs can be sold to stores preserving the used game trade. Those discs can be sold just as they are today at a discounted price. However, in order to play the game, a code/pass has to be purchased at the retail location on a card or as a downloadable code online after the game is loaded up.
Exactly!
The carrot is always better than the stick.
For example if they want people to buy digital games (and remove 2nd hand) they should make them more appealing (ie cheaper).
The fact that a digital game can cost as much as a physical copy is ridiculous.
DjangoReinhardt
Thinks he should have been the one to kill Batman's parents.
There's no way I'm going to spend more than $20-$30 on a new game if I don't have the option to sell it. Even then, I'm going to be more risk-averse with purchases and buy fewer games. That's a best-case scenario.
In practice, I'd probably just drop new games altogether. I have enough retro games and other hobbies to last me the rest of my life, anyway. If I'm really itching to play something recent, I'd just swoop in at the end of each generation and grab stuff at bargain bin prices.
In practice, I'd probably just drop new games altogether. I have enough retro games and other hobbies to last me the rest of my life, anyway. If I'm really itching to play something recent, I'd just swoop in at the end of each generation and grab stuff at bargain bin prices.
Are there incentive systems that worked? All I know of are 1984 inspired incentives which are cut from the game (multiplayer, extra character in party based EA games) or things that unbalance a game, like the monster-madness weapon of killering which gives +100 to everything and is useful until the mid-endgame.
It's all perspective.
I wouldn't like this per se but I would love the return of quality single player games. This would change the dynamic of games offered dramatically imo. No more me too shooters with treadmill MP to try and make you keep the game as long as possible. Back to the old days where skill reigned supreme. Kill used games, fine by me.
I get what you mean but it essentially boils down to make an absolutely amazing game OR pad your game/shoehorn MP. Which option will Devs take?
The problem is most developers take the easy way out and waste time making lame MP as opposed to a dynamic and unique SP. this also leads to pacing issues and padding of SP games. I can think of many many issues the used market has caused the game industry. RPGs are a classic example of a genre that can be murdered by used games. Platformers are another. Sure you might keep the best of the best but that's a crazy standard to have. Creat a Mario 64 classic type game or get screwed by used market?
I get what you mean but it essentially boils down to make an absolutely amazing game OR pad your game/shoehorn MP. Which option will Devs take?
Oh wow.
You are doing it again. Seriously man, go look up 'logical fallacy' online. Specifically Strawman. This is getting out of control.
It will actually help you a great deal. Making constant fallacious statements makes your arguments simple-minded and incredibly easy to pick apart.
Not bad, but I think it could backfire and you might end up confusing consumers.
My bad, sorry. I thought you were saying that everyone who buys something without the intention to share it was being selfish. I have no problem with sharing, and I like doing that if I can.
I think anyone who thinks that killing used games would automatically mean a return to that is seriously kidding themselves. Used games is pretty much non-existent on the PC market as it is. Hasn't changed anything.
Forsaken82
Member
My guess would be that the Disc will have some write capabilities that will enable the drive when prompted to write a specific ini file or something to the disc that lets it know the system ID each time its booted up.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
I don´t think either MS or Sony are dumb enough to implement this kind of shit policy. Retailers won´t stand for it.
Let's assume MS and Sony both do this. Let's also for the sake of argument it takes more than a year or two to get piracy onto the consoles.
Do you think big publishers such as Take-Two, EA, Ubisoft and Activision are still going to make PC ports of their games?
Rockstar has ignored the PC with RDR and it was still a huge success. GTA5 is not (yet?) announced for PC but I bet it will be still be a record breaker. COD doesn't need the PC at all to sustain itself.
Is is worth to make a port on a platform that gives you the same amount of money per-copy (PC MSRP with 30% DD) as what retail console games (current console retail price) but historically sells less copies for the kind of games I'm talking about. (The AC, R*, COD, Sports games)
But at the same time you risk a platform with historically high piracy rates which I think will only be boosted by disgruntled former console owners.
I thought it's just a battle between MS and Sony if either of them do it. But if they team up, the open PC platform might also be arsed. (At least when it comes to the types of games described above.)
Do you think big publishers such as Take-Two, EA, Ubisoft and Activision are still going to make PC ports of their games?
Rockstar has ignored the PC with RDR and it was still a huge success. GTA5 is not (yet?) announced for PC but I bet it will be still be a record breaker. COD doesn't need the PC at all to sustain itself.
Is is worth to make a port on a platform that gives you the same amount of money per-copy (PC MSRP with 30% DD) as what retail console games (current console retail price) but historically sells less copies for the kind of games I'm talking about. (The AC, R*, COD, Sports games)
But at the same time you risk a platform with historically high piracy rates which I think will only be boosted by disgruntled former console owners.
I thought it's just a battle between MS and Sony if either of them do it. But if they team up, the open PC platform might also be arsed. (At least when it comes to the types of games described above.)
Forsaken82
Member
No where in the original post did it confirm that NFC was the tech in use. That was the OP making some sort of speculation on his theory of how it would work.
Oh wow it actually happened.
I'm done. I can't keep this up anymore.
I seriously can't handle the stream of ignorance that is continuously is popping up in this thread.
The PC is home to all genres. Comparing the selection of PC to consoles is laughable when it comes to breadth of choice.
Of course it wouldn't AUTOMATICALLY happen. But I would hope over time we could get back to quality sp experiences and Devs being rewarded for making them.
I like you. Never posting any actual rebuttal to anything ever posted in here but continuously pointing out how easy it would be to do so. Makes one wonder.
SuperSonic1305
Member
Developers are the ones asking for it so yes? Why wouldn't they want their games on a platform where they know every purchase is new?
Sentenza
Member
I can't really get what point you are trying to make.
This rant doesn't just sound pointless, but also quite OT, to be honest.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
With all due respect, "the industry" has been screwing themselves with their own decisions for years.
Obviously yes, unless you could log on to your friends account on another PS4.
Sigh
I'll bite though, then I'm out of here. I'll link my first two posts in the thread farther down to show my responses and various arguments.
It could actually be argued that there were so many ignorant and uneducated statments that it would have been impossible and pointless to form a response.
Some of these things you guys are saying are just so far out there and fallacious that it is literally impossible to form an educated response.
Yep.
Anyways, here are my first two posts in this thread. I'm out. Pointless to stay in here.
Yep. the Tag would register the game to the specific system/account.
In order to let someone borrow the game you would have to potentially loan them your console or let them log into your account.
As consoles become more like a PC pirates will take that platform over too until everything is always online and the consumer has no ownership rights at all to software. Don't kid yourself that's where all this is headed. Id give it ten years max.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Except I can then sell those used games to buy new ones later on. Can't do that with Steam. Without that income, I won't buy the new games.
PC recently has received quite a lot of ports of games that constantly are referred to on here as console games.
Games that play better with a controller or primarily designed for a controller. Or have design decisions based on the limited hardware.
I don't think see why saying the PC is affected is more off-topic than saying the 720 is affected, which is discussed here as well.
Yes. It would tie a copy to the first console or account it's loaded up on. You could hypotethically lend your account as well and depending what they go with others could still play your copy.
Not so obvious as thewhole idea seems too ridiculous hence the question.
Thanks
I guess the price of games isn't dropping anytime soon.
Gives me more incentive to wait for the deals or just go full on PC gaming and not support the HD twins in their BS.
If you only want to play games for a small period of time and afterwards never play them again or at all and pay full price for this used or new doesn't matter - yes great idea. Otherwise it's stupid.
I think there are more possibilities with this kind of technology than simply turning off second hand sales completely.
You could have a $60 ($70?) copy that works exactly as it always has. Or one that is only possible to use with N systems/accounts. In addition, you could have a $40 copy that is not resellable.
You could have a $60 ($70?) copy that works exactly as it always has. Or one that is only possible to use with N systems/accounts. In addition, you could have a $40 copy that is not resellable.
Sony was toying with the notion of having product keys for PS3 games. This isn't really surprising. I fully expect the next systems to have this implemented. I've said it for years.
The only reason why I'm alright with Steam and PC gaming is because of the sales, deals and amazing bargains. I don't care if I can't sell a game if I got for 20 bucks or less. Skyrim and the Darkness 2 are the only PC games I've purchased at full price. Everything else I've managed to get at a discounted price.
The only reason why I'm alright with Steam and PC gaming is because of the sales, deals and amazing bargains. I don't care if I can't sell a game if I got for 20 bucks or less. Skyrim and the Darkness 2 are the only PC games I've purchased at full price. Everything else I've managed to get at a discounted price.
PapaEmeritus
Member
Ive researched my wallet and if this is true and it doesnt match STeam and PC prices, I've come up with a method to prevent used games on PS4. Not buy it.
Wasn't microsoft rumored to have looked into this back in January 2012? I'm sure there are plenty of links out there. With piracy, the xbox needs this more than sony, there are more pirated games on 360 than ps3.
Buy less games has been my solution.
Companies make too many games. 1 maybe 2 out 10 are good per publisher really not including internal exclusives. People buy so much crap that its saturated.
I walk in to a gamestop and there are hundreds of copies of a brand new released game at used price. Trade in value $5 and just released last month.
Why? people buy and trade in too much crap.
Buy less games has been my solution.
Companies make too many games. 1 maybe 2 out 10 are good per publisher really not including internal exclusives. People buy so much crap that its saturated.
I walk in to a gamestop and there are hundreds of copies of a brand new released game at used price. Trade in value $5 and just released last month.
Why? people buy and trade in too much crap.
Sentenza
Member
Yeah... So? How is that related to console manufacturers giving upon (or more properly: deliberately cutting out) the used market?
Did the huge differences between PC and proprietary consoles went over your head in some way?
Karak
Member
Yes indeed.
I would say a lot of things go over that guys head constantly. Just ignore him, there is literally no reason to have a conversation with him.
All this would do is accelerate the death of any unique games and make the COD's even bigger. If people can't get anything back from a game should they dislike it, they're going to be more risk averse. They'll stick to what they know they'll like and shun any game not like it.
To add to that.
In Germany the discs you get from a rental place are labeled "NOT FOR RENTAL", the same way some games come with "NOT FOR RESALE" if they are part of a bundle.
Of course you can't set restrictions like that and everyone can freely buy and sell everything that is legal in the country.
If a system was in place that allowed the platform holders to limit their game to be activated to 2-5 systems while having a premium-rental option for companies such as Redbox. Or selling specifically marked pre-owned GameStop copies to GameStop that works in their economy.
Or it's all just a deterrent to get GameStop to play a bit more ball than they already do. Sony and MS joining forces and saying "unless you cut us and the publisher in for x% per used copy sold" we're both going no-used copies playable and here is the patent that shows we have the tech that can do it without requiring an internet connection is probably a powerful tool for negotiations.
Dosnt the 360 typically sell more copys than the PS3 specially for games like COD. (maybe just in the US)
Also Sony must be hurting as they already put online passes in all of their 1st party multiplayer games. So they generally been combating used sales more than MS as I havent seen MS do anything like that with Halo or any other first party games.