NeoGAF

duckroll · (06-23-2010, 07:46 AM)

Dummy covers for White Knight Chronicles 2 on the PS3 have revealed something very interesting: To play the online mode in the game, players will have to activate a Geonet License on PSN. Each new copy of the game includes a single license code, and it is tied to a single PSN account. For gamers buying used copies, or those who want to use the online mode on more than one PSN account, they will have to purchase additional Geonet Licenses over PSN.

Suzzopher · (06-23-2010, 07:47 AM)

Publishers are cracking the whip hard on the used game market.

Nirolak · (06-23-2010, 07:48 AM)

To be fair to Sony, they actually did this before Online Pass was announced by having a $20 code for the newest SOCOM PSP. It's just that now this system has made its way to the PS3 as well.

spiderman123 · (06-23-2010, 07:49 AM)

Originally Posted by Suzzopher:

Publishers are cracking the whip hard on the used game market.

Fo shizzle, guess they want to get their money worth.

gundamkyoukai · 07:57 AM

It's only a matter of time before everyone does this. I buy my games new but this sucks for people that buy used game or people that borrow from friends.
Still people that buy used don't really mean much to the publishers so they don't care.

NemesisPrime · (06-23-2010, 07:50 AM)

Everybody will be doing that by next year.

Pity for the used game market and a bit unfair IMHO since other products do not do this. It is a bit against the definition of "second hand".

Rahxephon91 · 07:55 AM

Hmm and here I thought the used market crackdown was only in the US. I bet Square wishes it had done something for FFXIII.

Anyway, if this is done in the US it won't bother me. I really doubt I'll be getting the 2nd first hand or anywhere near release, but its the SP that only interests me.

And my feeling with buying second hand stuff is, you should know you may not get everything in perfect shape. So while this sucks this is just a part of buying games second hand now.

shidoshi · (06-23-2010, 07:53 AM)

Single console + single user is REEEEEEALLY shitty. I can't fault companies for trying to hurt the used game market (no matter if I like it or not), but screwing over the people who are buying the game new is BS. Games that do this need to be boycotted.

lightless_shado · (06-23-2010, 07:54 AM)

welp that confirms it for me, after this gen I'm done with gaming. Things will only get worse with time as production costs increase and publishers demand more money.

rhfb · (06-23-2010, 07:55 AM)

Sucks for people who buy the game used, but if I know I'll be playing the game online I'll just have to start buying the game new (or waiting for the price to drop so I'd be buying the game new for under $40 which seems to happen for most games this gen).

But this won't be too big of a deal since GAF already said they weren't going to buy this game in the first place since you have to have a completed save file from WKC1 to skip the WKC1 content :lol

spiderman123 · (06-23-2010, 07:58 AM)

Originally Posted by lightless_shado:

welp that confirms it for me, after this gen I'm done with gaming. Things will only get worse with time as production costs increase and publishers demand more money.

cough actvision....cough but to be serious it happened already in canada remember the days when games cost $59.99

Grampasso · (06-23-2010, 07:59 AM)

That's really sad and I don't get why this thefts are legally approved.
2nd hand market is legit and when I buy something used I expect it to be functional in every aspect. This way the sale is hindered by the developer itself putting limits on purpose to cut 2nd hand sales in unfair means. While I can see the thing differently from an EA perspective (PC gaming, piracy ecc...) I really don't get it on a console like PS3, which is far from being pirated nowadays.
It's just a way to try more cash-in with licenses fees, but I think the only thing they'll accomplish will be less people experiencing the game (or maybe only the online part of it).
Of all the developers I thought that Level 5 would have been the last one to attempt such a thing, but I was obviously wrong.

Vinterbird · (06-23-2010, 07:59 AM)

Originally Posted by lightless_shado:

welp that confirms it for me, after this gen I'm done with gaming. Things will only get worse with time as production costs increase and publishers demand more money.

There's nothing wrong with this at all. You will get a license if you buy the game new, and if you don't you get to pay. It's only fair for developers and publishers.

AAK · (06-23-2010, 08:02 AM)

Wait I'm confused why are people that are buying this game new screwed? It says in the OP that a licence is included with a brand new copy right? Looks like there no difference or am I missing something?

GDJustin · (06-23-2010, 08:02 AM)

Originally Posted by Vinterbird:

There's nothing wrong with this at all. You will get a license if you buy the game new, and if you don't you get to pay. It's only fair for developers and publishers.

SMH.

Literally.

Slightly Live · (06-23-2010, 08:06 AM)

Not liking this trend one bit.

ZealousD · (06-23-2010, 08:07 AM)

Originally Posted by AAK:

Wait I'm confused why are people that are buying this game new screwed? It says in the OP that a licence is included with a brand new copy right? Looks like there no difference or am I missing something?

Only one user gets the license, so you'll have to buy extra licenses if the copy is being shared.
Game loses value for a possible resell the moment the license is activated.
Requires spending the time to activate it, which is a nuisance.

And the only thing this trend is effectively doing is lowering the price of used games. Congratulations publishers, you just made used games more attractive for people who aren't playing your game online.

Toki767 · (06-23-2010, 08:11 AM)

Only thing I have a problem with is that the license is for one account and not for one system. That said, if it comes out here I'm probably going to buy it anyways.

onken · (06-23-2010, 08:14 AM)

Originally Posted by gundamkyoukai:

It's only a matter of time before everyone does this. I buy my games new but this sucks for people that buy used game or people that borrow from friends.
Still people that buy used don't really mean much to the publishers so they don't care.

Sad but true.

Vizion28 · (06-23-2010, 08:15 AM)

Well, you get the license when you buy it new but what if you want to lend it to a friend or trade it? They won't be able to have the full game experience unless they cough up some cash.

I can understand why they are doing this. They need the money to cover development cost otherwise they wouldn't have to resort to such policy. They are also doing it because they can. Video game companies are not charities, they are a business.

NEOPARADIGM · (06-23-2010, 08:16 AM)

Just popping in to say, if this is the future of online gaming, y'all can keep that shit. Online gaming is overrated to begin with. Give me quality AI (i.e., stop cutting corners w/ AI because "online is where it's at") and I'll never play online again anyway.

UFRA · (06-23-2010, 08:16 AM)

I only/always buy games brand new, although I suppose this would hurt me in the long run when I try to sell games on eBay.

Rahxephon91 · (06-23-2010, 08:19 AM)

Originally Posted by NEOPARADIGM:

Just popping in to say, if this is the future of online gaming, y'all can keep that shit. Online gaming is overrated to begin with. Give me quality AI (i.e., stop cutting corners w/ AI because "online is where it's at") and I'll never play online again anyway.

The thing is ounce this becomes the norm, I'm not sure whats stopping publishers from going the next step and putting limits on non online things.

arstal · (06-23-2010, 08:21 AM)

Originally Posted by NEOPARADIGM:

Just popping in to say, if this is the future of online gaming, y'all can keep that shit. Online gaming is overrated to begin with. Give me quality AI (i.e., stop cutting corners w/ AI because "online is where it's at") and I'll never play online again anyway.

How many companies really do quality AI anymore? Stardock, but who else?

kinoki · (06-23-2010, 08:25 AM)

I don't think there's anything wrong with this, I really don't. If the publishers want to make as much money as possible without punishing the people who just buy the game I can't hardly fault them. I know the used market is huge but I think that's mostly because the publishers dropped the ball with pricing and they're trying patheticly to pick it up again.

Vizion28 · (06-23-2010, 08:27 AM)

Originally Posted by NEOPARADIGM:

Just popping in to say, if this is the future of online gaming, y'all can keep that shit. Online gaming is overrated to begin with. Give me quality AI (i.e., stop cutting corners w/ AI because "online is where it's at") and I'll never play online again anyway.

I don't know, I think online is essential or at least enhances the value like tenfold for some games. Monster Hunter Tri is one game where online makes the game what it is. I can imagine Smash being played a lot more even today if it had robust online features.

However I do think developers should put more focus on the main game even if it is at the cost of online.

brain_stew · (06-23-2010, 08:27 AM)

Originally Posted by Nirolak:

To be fair to Sony, they actually did this before Online Pass was announced by having a $20 code for the newest SOCOM PSP. It's just that now this system has made its way to the PS3 as well.

There's a few of those "online pass" vouchers on the PSN, Modnation Racers is at least one other game that has one.

chicken_ramen · (06-23-2010, 08:31 AM)

Anyone who thought this wasn't going to become standard was deluding themselves. PC gaming has had single user keys for over a decade, this is the logical way to start bringing it into the console space.

It just makes sense from a publisher standpoint, and it hurts nobody. Second hand buyers can buy the code if they want, and the used game prices will be driven down accordingly. The market will sort it all out.

Not a big deal in this instance specifically or as an overall trend.

Zeouterlimits · (06-23-2010, 08:33 AM)

I loathe the current used game system but don't like this either. Wonderful.

DiscoJer · (06-23-2010, 08:37 AM)

Originally Posted by brain_stew:

There's a few of those "online pass" vouchers on the PSN, Modnation Racers is at least one other game that has one.

It's understandable on the PSP, as a way to fight piracy and it actually started with a Sega game, Phantasy Star Portable 2. Which got downloaded something like 5 million times, only bought 600,000 times Imagine what the servers would be like if they didn't have it?

But on the PS3, that's no longer an excuse.

Dresden · (06-23-2010, 08:40 AM)

I guess we're not too far off from the day when each game will demand its own fee for multiplayer gameplay.

spiderman123 · (06-23-2010, 08:41 AM)

Originally Posted by Dresden:

I guess we're not too far off from the day when each game will demand its own fee for multiplayer gameplay.

EDIT: beaten....thinking this exact same thing

shintoki · (06-23-2010, 08:50 AM)

This is most excellent. We can finally put the evil corporations and consumers no better than pirates in their place. Now only true gamers can play with true gamers.

Mojojo · (06-23-2010, 08:51 AM)

Originally Posted by duckroll:

. Each new copy of the game includes a single license code, and it is tied to a single PSN account. those who want to use the online mode on more than one PSN account, they will have to purchase additional Geonet Licenses over PSN.

That's my main gripe with this system when you share the PS3 with family members and have several PSN accounts.
Why can't they tie the game to the PS3 itself(don't they have a unique identification number that could be checked online?), instead of the pSN account?

kinoki · (06-23-2010, 08:54 AM)

Originally Posted by Dresden:

I guess we're not too far off from the day when each game will demand its own fee for multiplayer gameplay.

I can see certain games making a healthy profit with a free-download monthly-subscription based revenue. With having to buy a key or boxed version to get access to the single-player.

Cipherr · (06-23-2010, 08:54 AM)

So cdkeys?

Forgive me if this isnt even a big deal to me.... Shits been around forever.

Mistwalker · (06-23-2010, 08:56 AM)

Originally Posted by ZealousD:

And the only thing this trend is effectively doing is lowering the price of used games. Congratulations publishers, you just made used games more attractive for people who aren't playing your game online.

Good call, this will probably be me (if I even bother to buy part 2 at this point).

Wanted to see the story continue, but damn Level 5...WKC1 online was grindier than any MMORPG I've ever seen. Pick the most efficient quest for your Guild Rank, rush it to completion literally hundreds of times to reach the next Guild Rank, then repeat. And repeat. And repeat.

Still, will throw a wrench into the works for used game shops, needing to differentiate "License Used" and "License Available" copies.

Nirolak · 09:04 AM

Originally Posted by ZealousD:

And the only thing this trend is effectively doing is lowering the price of used games. Congratulations publishers, you just made used games more attractive for people who aren't playing your game online.

The trick is that they eventually extend this to making the entire game playable.

That or they can greatly divert resources to make the multiplayer the main focus and the singleplayer an extra, kind of like Modern Warfare 2 and Bad Company 2 effectively ended up being.

Edit:

Or they could be really crafty and essentially do the reverse. For singleplayer heavy games, they could allow the multiplayer to be played in used copies, but require an unlock for the singleplayer. This way, they're technically selling a playable game, but the main draw still requires an unlocks.

Callibretto · (06-23-2010, 09:01 AM)

Originally Posted by Mojojo:

That's my main gripe with this system when you share the PS3 with family members and have several PSN accounts.
Why can't they tie the game to the PS3 itself(don't they have a unique identification number that could be checked online?), instead of the pSN account?

what? and what happen when my console break, or when I'm upgrading from old ps3 to slim. I hate it that some of my singstar songs I bought cannot be re-downloaded because I upgrade to slim. tying anything to a hardware is just annoying imo.

Yagharek · (06-23-2010, 09:03 AM)

This will just kill the online community in these games. Once the game stops selling new, natural rates of attrition will see server use dwindle. With a required entry cost for used buyers, and no free trial to see if its worth it, online games that arent whatever the weekly FPS fad is will die in the arse after a month or two.

Captain_Spanky · (06-23-2010, 09:03 AM)

So what if I buy a copy and my spouse wants to play online on her PSN account? This is stupid. And as for hurting the second hand market...I'm not sure how much they'll be able to do in the UK, I believe there's some sort of law about the right of consumers to resell products.

BoilersFan23 · (06-23-2010, 09:07 AM)

Originally Posted by Nirolak:

To be fair to Sony, they actually did this before Online Pass was announced by having a $20 code for the newest SOCOM PSP. It's just that now this system has made its way to the PS3 as well.

ModNation Racers is the same way too on PSP.

I have a feeling those who play the game online are more likely to buy it new. Those who will probably trade it in and buy used (to beat it shortly) are probably those that will buy for single player only.

JWong · (06-23-2010, 09:07 AM)

I'm all for this. Money for good developers and publishers.

When you buy a game on Steam, it's tied to your account, so why is this any different?

AranhaHunter · (06-23-2010, 09:19 AM)

Originally Posted by DiscoJer:

It's understandable on the PSP, as a way to fight piracy and it actually started with a Sega game, Phantasy Star Portable 2. Which got downloaded something like 5 million times, only bought 600,000 times Imagine what the servers would be like if they didn't have it?

But on the PS3, that's no longer an excuse.

Used games. I see no problem with this actually, as long as the Online code is tied to my account and up to 5 consoles and yada yada yada like the DLC and PSN games DRM.

MidgarBlowedUp · (06-23-2010, 09:27 AM)

Originally Posted by JWong:

I'm all for this. Money for good developers and publishers.

When you buy a game on Steam, it's tied to your account, so why is this any different?

Steam is shit. My cousin who only has free dialup internet provided by the school where he works blocks Steam. He purchased Half Life 2 for the PC (which does NOT mention anywhere on the box that you need the internet to play the game offline) only to realize that he can't play the game at all. No single player, nothing.

Stupid idea is stupid idea.

It's like ordering a meal at a restaurant but, being forced to pay extra to take the leftovers home or share some french fries with the wife.

It's like if I buy a movie and my friends want to watch it with me I need to charge them a viewing fee.

Goldrusher · (06-23-2010, 09:31 AM)

Originally Posted by Nirolak:

~~Sony is inspired by EA -~~ White Knight Chronicles 2 requires license for online play

Fixed.

jorma · (06-23-2010, 09:33 AM)

Originally Posted by MidgarBlowedUp:

Steam is shit. My cousin who only has free dialup internet provided by the school where he works blocks Steam. He purchased Half Life 2 for the PC (which does NOT mention anywhere on the box that you need the internet to play the game offline) only to realize that he can't play the game at all. No single player, nothing.

Stupid idea is stupid idea.

It's like ordering a meal at a restaurant but, being forced to pay extra to take the leftovers home or share some french fries with the wife.

It's like if I buy a movie and my friends want to watch it with me I need to charge them a viewing fee.

tbh, this sounds more like a case of your cousing having shit internet rather than steam being shit.

Castor Krieg · (06-23-2010, 09:36 AM)

Originally Posted by Vinterbird:

There's nothing wrong with this at all. You will get a license if you buy the game new, and if you don't you get to pay. It's only fair for developers and publishers.

Originally Posted by JWong:

I'm all for this. Money for good developers and publishers.

You would think that the good publisher/developer would try to simply make a game that justifies its $60 price tag, as well as prevent its re-sale with stream of incoming DLC, instead of going the easy route and artificially blocking parts of the game for people who cannot justify spending $60 on a game.

This will only result in more people holding off with buying a game for 1-2 months, when the price will go down 5-10$. But then you will have developers moaning their games don't sell.

a1m · (06-23-2010, 09:39 AM)

I was damn excited for WKC2 and it was day 1 for me but now.. fuck you Sony. Won't buy just to rebel against this crap.

Vagabundo · (06-23-2010, 09:52 AM)

Originally Posted by MidgarBlowedUp:

He purchased Half Life 2 for the PC (which does NOT mention anywhere on the box that you need the internet to play the game offline) only to realize that he can't play the game at all. No single player, nothing.

I bought the orange box and it mentions in the requirements an internet connection. The requirements are required.