Support NeoGAF

[x-Lundz-x]

Not surprising.Game makers want to make more money.That is the only reason for a system banning used games.

If game makers think banning used games will make them more money they are in for a huge surprise.

 

[ULTROS!]

I don't think there will be system wide DRM, Sony already said the console will work offline. But it will be up the the publishers, and so
games with DRM will say "online required" and the boxed version will have a serial.

No problem

I think the ones who are really pushing DRM are EA, Activision, and Ubisoft. Even if Sony doesn't push through DRM, those 3 might still go for their own DRM.

Just wondering, did the PS2 "win" because of EA, Activision, and/or Ubisoft?

 

[XenodudeX]

So are they doing it or not?

 

[funkystudent]

I think the goal for Sony and MS should be not to eliminate used games but to get a cut of that money.

The only way I can think of that is ether paying a activation fee or getting a cut from the retailer.

Any better ideas?

 

[kuroshiki]

I think the goal for Sony and MS should be not to eliminate used games but to get a cut of that money.

The only way I can think of that is ether paying a activation fee or getting a cut from the retailer.

Any better ideas?

There is no better idea. Just don't do it period.

 

[grumble]

There is no better idea. Just don't do it period.

Okay if you were running Sony and were all about the money what would you do?

 

[Pennywise]

So are they doing it or not?

One rumor.
Until there aren't some more pointing in the same direction, there is still hope.

 

[The Jason]

If that helps you rationalize it, then so be it. I highly doubt it will work that way.

It is Sony who said that in many parts of the world, internet is not reliable/accessible and so always online would hurt sales

 

[RedRedSuit]

I think the goal for Sony and MS should be not to eliminate used games but to get a cut of that money.

The only way I can think of that is ether paying a activation fee or getting a cut from the retailer.

Any better ideas?

Getting a cut from the retailer, which may be tough to get them to agree to, seems like by far the best idea.

 

[Slime]

Wow, talk about a disingenuous paragraph. How much more crap can you pack in?

1.) The Root Kit was by a different division of Sony.
2.) Online passes were a bit more justifiable, since MS charged for Xbox Live. Also, saying "only first party" is hilarious, cause there was only one other first party that took online seriously.

There's a DRM culture within the company. You can rationalize it however you want, but this was always going to happen.

 

[10101]

If game makers think banning used games will make them more money they are in for a huge surprise.

I know I don't get their thinking here, it should be pretty obvious that people will become more picky and possibly spend less if they can't trade in. I guess they are hoping that buy forcing new sales a percentage will just buy new regardless, but it's not like everyone can or will do that. And there no guarantee it would lead to higher sales anyway. Mind you taking a percentage cut from the sale would make profit I'm sure.

 

[SolidsnackooFoxhound]

One rumor.
Until there aren't some more pointing in the same direction, there is still hope.

So. Geoff says something about the ps4 having DRM on a segment about the Xbox One when we already have confusion about that console. Smart GT you got some hits for that. Bravo. Enjoy the ad revenue.

 

[RedRedSuit]

There's a DRM culture within the company. You can rationalize it however you want, but this was always going to happen.

First of all culture can change. For example PS3 was the culmination of SCE's engineering culture... and PS4 is a complete about-face of that.

Secondly bringing up the rootkit thing at this point in time and in this context is completely absurd, period.

 

[funkystudent]

There is no better idea. Just don't do it period.

Well I guess we could just stick to what we have now. Make Online Passes more and more important and try and gouge used people that way while making the experience worse for people who buy there games news.

Yeah lets do that! Everyone loses!

 

[vpance]

A lot of what makes Microsoft's mooted DRM (seem) draconian is in that it turns a retail game into a disc-less game. It acts like retail purchases are the same as digital purchases.

All games must be installed to the hard drive, content is tied to an account and the disc is no longer necessary.

Because of that some sort of check is obviously needed to prevent you installing the game to dozens of systems.

Thus:

• online authentication
• no lending or gifting after use
• no private transactions

An RFID based system where the disc is still required wouldn't necessitate such outcomes - depending upon how it is implemented - while still reaping a cut of the "organised" trade through places like GameStop and still proving a very effective anti-piracy measure.

Isn't RFID too easily hackable?

How about only 1 time check on first install, but anyone else trying to play the same copy needs to pay up, which could be anywhere from retail price to super discounted depending how old the game is.

 

[Augemitbutter]

After all EA listened to the gamers and dropped it for us only 2 weeks ago.

nice.

 

[Freki]

HAHAHA FUCK SONY. LOVE LIVE XBOX

What is wrong with you?

 

[RedRedSuit]

I know I don't get their thinking here, it should be pretty obvious that people will become more picky and possibly spend less if they can't trade in. I guess they are hoping that buy forcing new sales a percentage will just buy new regardless, but it's not like everyone can or will do that. And there no guarantee it would lead to higher sales anyway. Mind you taking a percentage cut from the sale would make profit I'm sure.

Did I miss something? When did MS confirm they're "banning" used games? I thought this is currently unknown, and that they plan to make some sort of scheme to allow for tradeins and used game sales (but not necessarily seamless borrowing, renting, individual sales).

 

[Godslay]

It is Sony who said that in many parts of the world, internet is not reliable/accessible and so always online would hurt sales

Sure. I doubt they are going to leave it up to the publishers though. Create an account, install game, and then be able to play. This would work for offline. If you tried to sell or install another game, a login would be required. I can't imagine this form of licensing could work any other way.

 

[MikeE21286]

Just wake me when E3 starts.

Fireworks.gif

 

[I am Michael Bolton]

Isn't RFID too easily hackable?

How about only 1 time check on first install, but anyone else trying to play the same copy needs to pay up, which could be anywhere from retail price to super discounted depending how old the game is.

No. If I have purchased a game and want to let my family or friends borrow it I should have the freedom to do so.

 

[Corto]

So are they doing it or not?

Please be excited for E3 this year!

 

[10101]

Did I miss something? When did MS confirm they're "banning" used games? I thought this is currently unknown, and that they plan to make some sort of scheme to allow for tradeins and used game sales (but not necessarily seamless borrowing, renting, individual sales).

The post I quoted mentioned banning so my response was to that. I think if they are going to do it taking a percentage cut is far more likely as they can make a good bunce on that. But as you say it's all unknown & hypothetical ATM.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Has to be for it to work. At the very least you will have to connect to link a game to an account. Might not have to check in every 24 hours, but if you want to install anything going forward you will have to connect. It's just about the only way it will work.

I haven't yet read the full patent, but the introduction implies that no, the internet would not be necessary.

The development of electronic content including game applications (APs) is costly and therefore in a content business it is vital to redistribute part of proceeds from sales of the electronic content to the developers. On the other hand, the electronic content is being bought and sold in second-hand markets. In such a scheme where the electronic content is bought and sold in the second-hand markets or the like, the sales proceeds resulting therefrom are not redistributed to the developers. Also, since the users who have purchased the second-hand items are somehow no longer potential buyers of the content, the developers would lose their profits otherwise gained in the first place.

As a technique to suppress the second-hand sales and purchase, a user may be first required to send a password or the like to a remote authentication server from a reproduction device (game player) via the Internet and the reproduction of content may be permitted only for the device that has succeeded in authentication. However, where the reproduction device is not connected to the Internet, use of the content cannot be controlled. Also, where the connection to the Internet is an absolute requirement, user's convenience may be significantly reduced. Besides, users may communicate to share the password between them and therefore the second-hand sales and purchase cannot be eliminated reliably.

In view of the foregoing problems described above, according to the present embodiment, a recording medium and a radiofrequency (RF) tag storing the terms of use (use condition) are included in the same packet (package) of electronic content. Proposed is an electronic content processing system where a usage mode of the electronic content is determined based on whether a reproduction entity, such as a reproduction device or user of the electronic content fulfills the use condition or not.

 

[The Jason]

Sure. I doubt they are going to leave it up to the publishers though. Create an account, install game, and then be able to play. This would work for offline. If you tried to sell or install another game, a login would be required. I can't imagine this form of licensing could work any other way.

So the ps4 is omniscient? It would require the Internet for what you are saying.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

Okay if you were running Sony and were all about the money what would you do?

Well, sure you can please the game companies which is important, but at the same time piss off many of the consumers. Look at all of the responses on youtube, game forums, internet, etc.....Is it worth it? People will also be way more selective on game purchases, especially if they go up to $70 per game. They will sell less games I think and since it's a new generation with more expensive development, they will have to sell as many games as possible to make money.

 

[CrunchinJelly]

what do you mean? in terms of the drm and all these issues?

I found the post, it was the same guy who 'leaked' all the Nintendo Direct stuff, I believe.

This part is what got me:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=58760757&postcount=5783

-E3 is.....probably going to be a very very interesting and very turbulent reaction wise. All I can say there.

Initially that seemed Xbox One related but it kind of makes sense in this instance along with the rest of the post about DRM.

 

[Pennywise]

Well, sure you can please the game companies which is important, but at the same time piss off many of the consumers. Look at all of the responses on youtube, game forums, internet, etc.....Is it worth it? People will also be way more selective on game purchases, especially if they go up to $70 per game. They will sell less games I think and since it's a new generation with more expensive development, they will have to sell as many games as possible to make money.

Especially if you consider the markets where games are even more expensive.
60€ aka nearly 80$ , which is common for a new game for the current generation.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

Did I miss something? When did MS confirm they're "banning" used games? I thought this is currently unknown, and that they plan to make some sort of scheme to allow for tradeins and used game sales (but not necessarily seamless borrowing, renting, individual sales).

With the method they are choosing for "used games", they might as well ban it. It's not good at all for the consumer at all. Well, at least Gamestop, game companies and Microsoft will be making money, heh.

 

[ginger ninja]

Guys, what movie is that gif from ? i know it's a dark super hero movie and starts with the letter s or u..i wanna watch this tonight

 

[Zeth]

The worst part is that there's still the possibility that all of this BS is unclarified when E3 ends in a few weeks. :/

 

[Loudninja]

Guys, what movie is that gif from ? i know it's a dark super hero movie and starts with the letter s or u..i wanna watch this tonight

Watchman.

 

[Godslay]

I haven't yet read the full patent, but the introduction implies that no, the internet would not be necessary.

Maybe so. It would still be easier to use authentication servers. Which I bet they will do, if they do it at all of course.

So the ps4 is omniscient? It would require the Internet for what you are saying.

Yeah, how else are they going to control the licenses? I highly doubt an RFID system will work or will be cost effective or truly secure.

 

[grumble]

With the method they are choosing for "used games", they might as well ban it. It's not good at all for the consumer at all. Well, at least Gamestop, game companies and Microsoft will be making money, heh.

GameStop is kind of screwed actually. Gamers selling direct online might get a decent cut, depending. It would be pretty convenient, where you can click 'sell' and it's just gone.

Obviously still not a fan.

 

[ginger ninja]

thanks bro..

On topic:

You guys deserve this shit, were having too much fun shitting on m$ : /

it's a lose-lose situation though and frankly if it happens, than pc gaming is sure looking awesome by the minute

 

[Balb]

Interested to see the backpedaling/rationalization of the Sony fanboys after Sony announces their used game policies.

With that being said, what a disappointment if true. Console launches used to always be super exciting.

 

[Kyon]

On topic:

You guys deserve this shit, were having too much fun shitting on m$ : /

frankly if it happens, than pc gaming is sure looking awesome by the minute

WTF?

Also PC gaming has had the system for a while so idk what you mean

 

[Boke1879]

Interested to see the backpedaling/rationalization of the Sony fanboys after Sony announces their used game policies.

With that being said, what a disappointment if true. Console launches used to always be super exciting.

What backpeddling? Right now I see alot of people against this as well. Right now people are actually trying to do something. Best case scenario is nothing changes and it's the game as it is now.

 

[Bunta]

thanks bro..

On topic:

You guys deserve this shit, were having too much fun shitting on m$ : /

it's a lose-lose situation though and frankly if it happens, than pc gaming is sure looking awesome by the minute

Lolwut?

 

[DaBoss]

thanks bro..

On topic:

You guys deserve this shit, were having too much fun shitting on m$ : /

it's a lose-lose situation though and frankly if it happens, than pc gaming is sure looking awesome by the minute

Everyone deserves this shit because we were shitting on MS (who REALLY uses M$???) for doing this exact thing we don't want? Logic, how does it work?

 

[vpance]

No. If I have purchased a game and want to let my family or friends borrow it I should have the freedom to do so.

You can, but let's say only if you didn't install the full game. Otherwise you have to unlink it from your account/machine first.

 

[Kelegacy]

Sony doesn't get any special treatment from me. They go down the Microsoft path I won't be getting one, simple as that.

Not to single you out, but I have a feeling many people will be saying this for another 5 or 6 months, and then give in and buy the machines anyway no matter what. I have zero faith in my fellow gamers, as they are too impulsive and we've heard all of this before.

With Microsoft this is entirely expected for me as I haven't trusted them since they came into the console realm years ago. Then with Gold locking half a game out behind a paywall, I really despised that angle (thankfully zero competitors followed suit). So I'm not surprised with anything that effs over consumers when it's coming from Microsoft.

But if Sony does this too, good god, I still won't be surprised at all due to collusion but I hope the industry really takes a ginormous crater to the hull over it and the wounds are painful to all associated.

 

[x-Lundz-x]

I know I don't get their thinking here, it should be pretty obvious that people will become more picky and possibly spend less if they can't trade in. I guess they are hoping that buy forcing new sales a percentage will just buy new regardless, but it's not like everyone can or will do that. And there no guarantee it would lead to higher sales anyway. Mind you taking a percentage cut from the sale would make profit I'm sure.

I most certainly will be more picky, my game purchases will be limited to mostly first party and ill wait for sales drops on everything else. I buy tons of brand new games, funded in part by used game trade ins. If they take away or hinder that process in any way for me, it means less money I spend on gaming. It's as simple as that.

 

[I am Michael Bolton]

You can, but let's say only if you didn't install the game. Otherwise you have to unlink it from your account/machine first.

If that was the case that would be fine.

 

[-Plasma Reus-]

From what I am reading, they're still thinking about it? There's conversations going on right now in the background on whether to implement it or not. People should be letting their voices heard instead of saying 'I told you so! Sony is just as bad!'. Who cares.

I am not buying a single console that changes the way I purchase used games or for how much I purchase them.

 

[Uno Venova]

thanks bro..

On topic:

You guys deserve this shit, were having too much fun shitting on m$ : /

it's a lose-lose situation though and frankly if it happens, than pc gaming is sure looking awesome by the minute

Good on you for being upfront with that, because it's a more common mindset than it should be, unfortunately. Just a bit more subtle.

 

[The Jason]

Yeah, how else are they going to control the licenses? I highly doubt an RFID system will work or will be cost effective or truly secure.

Games that have DRM/require Internet will need a license but those that don't will work offline just like they do now.

 

[malfcn]

I'd love Sony and MS to change stance on this just to see EA desperately spin the PR with a return to online passes.

After all EA listened to the gamers and dropped it for us only 2 weeks ago.

EA dropped it because MS and Sony are probably doing it for them now.

 

[teiresias]

Interested to see the backpedaling/rationalization of the Sony fanboys after Sony announces their used game policies.

With that being said, what a disappointment if true. Console launches used to always be super exciting.

Judging by this thread your generalization about "Sony fanboys" are unfounded as rather than just accept it there's a concerted effort to make our displeasure known to Sony.

 

[somuchwater]

My guess: Activistion, EA etc. want to implement this, Sony doesn't. So third party titles will have a fee for used games, 1st party won't.

Only thing that makes sense (I hope).