It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
Because i can.I'm Hopeful For Every Game, Until the Fan Boys Attack My Games. Then the Knives Come Out.Logic every gamers worst enemy.
Originally posted by Rayshe Sorry to tell you that this isnt just Sony, XBox did the exact same thing but earlier. Sony was actually against it however Companyies like EA and Capcom pushed them into it saying that they are losing profits. even though they are reporting Record Numbers in sales in 2012.
There is nothing in the XBOX preventing people from playing used games. Microsoft hasn't applied for a patent to do this (yet) for future consoles either. So, I'm not entirely sure what you are talking about here. Thought it was rumored a while back that they were considering this, there hasn't been anything else mentioned and it definitely isn't in this gen.
Originally posted by niceguy3978 Originally posted by Rayshe Sorry to tell you that this isnt just Sony, XBox did the exact same thing but earlier. Sony was actually against it however Companyies like EA and Capcom pushed them into it saying that they are losing profits. even though they are reporting Record Numbers in sales in 2012.
Microsoft has several DRM methods on file actually.
That said; it does seem the consoles are just going to ofter an opt-in for publishers. A lil' research shows that many companies are on board to do what EA does. Require paid log ins for multiplayer access. Capcom's done this with a couple of games. Shouldn't be tough tech to share in the biz.
a yo ho ho
Originally posted by 3-4thElf Originally posted by niceguy3978 Originally posted by Rayshe Sorry to tell you that this isnt just Sony, XBox did the exact same thing but earlier. Sony was actually against it however Companyies like EA and Capcom pushed them into it saying that they are losing profits. even though they are reporting Record Numbers in sales in 2012.
I don't mind the online thing that many games seem to have now where you get a code to play online and/or get dlc. You can still play the game used but if you want to go online you have to buy a code (they seem to have stabalized around 10$). This is a good compromise to me, but I think any system that tries to prevent used games from being played at all is problematic from the consumers point of view. The thing that really drives me nuts is that most used game sellers charge the same for a used game that requires the online code as those that don't so for some games at gamestop, for example, you could end up paying more for a used game than a new one if you want to do anything online. I stopped buying games from gamestop when they started that crap.
Things like this are dumb, I understand they want to protect their rights but once a person buys it then its theirs. Trying to control it that much just forces people to find ways around it.
I don't have a console anymore preferring to play on my computer, but I can easily see more people modding their systems and just burning games to get around it. Hackers will always find a way around it, and all this trying to control things even more just seems to make things worse for them. I mean once people mod their systems to get around the getting second hand games thing, how long until they say screw it and just burn the new games that come out too?
Yes I know pirating hurts because that money doesnt go to develop more games, but other people aren't going to care about that if they are getting it free.
Won't effect first time buyers in the least. First time buyers are the ones that don't purchase used games. Sure, they get a very SMALL refund for trading in a used game, but it is so small that it rarely influences if that first time buyer will make another first time purchase. The game publishers don't see a dime of the second hand game sales. All they are concerned about are those first time buyers.
Now, from a totally pragmatic point of view, selling second hand games only HURTS those game makers. They may get the games they make into more hands but when the game is sold second hand the money does make it back to that game maker. So, you wish to see good games from a particular game maker, you need to pony up and PAY THEM and not your second hand game store.
For those complaining that it is "too expensive" to buy new, get a job. Or two if it is that important. Just because you can't afford something does not give you a right to demand that it be provided cheaper. The game maker will determine what they need to first, break even and second, to make a profit. Gaming is not a charity. It is entertainment. So, unless you can figure out a way to earn what it takes you will be limited to what you CAN afford.
Let's party like it is 1863!
It won't stop anything. The used game market will simply go underground.
It's already ridiculously easy to download any copyrighted material under the sun. So now instead of the creators and a few stores making a profit, now nobody will profit.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.-- Herman Melville
http://absoluteretribution.enjin.com/ Guild Website and Recruitment link
Originally posted by Johnie-Marz 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.
f I buy a car I can sell it second hand because it is mine, I bought it.
If I buy a book I can sell it second hand, because it is mine, I bought it
If I buy a home I can sel it second hand, because it is mine, I bought it.
But if I buy a game I can't sell it second hand, isn't the game mine I bought it?
I can't go to my friends house and play on his playstation?
If the game consule brakes (Because playstations are made cheap) I have to rebuy all my games?
Say thank you to the millions of customer who did support this issue by using STEAM. Most of them dont notice or dont think probably how they change the future, some kind of expropriation.
The next generation will probably not even download a game and just pay to USE it, since it all is in the cloud.
As i said. Its been in the Rumor mill for quite some time. This dates back to January 2012.
What pisses me off more, is that this will Kill EB games since the majority of their money comes from used games. which leaves me with wal-mart to buy games. and i hate wal-mart, i mean HATE literal Definition of the word wish to burn the building down. wal-mart.
So ive basically given the middle finger to PS4 and Xbox 720. maybe they will learn from their mistakes if less people buy their consoles.
Originally posted by Methos12Every 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.
I don't agree - that's the same argument they use for piracy, and it's baloney.
A person who buys a game second hand would not have necessarily bought the game first hand. So it's not a new sale denied - it's an opportunity to win a new customer when you come out with new product (DLC, 2.0, what have you).
I don't care if they don't see a dime on the sale - they have to plan to make enough on the first round. The people that complain about this the loudest are also the ones that have the most DRM, and the most DLC... so I feel absolutely no pity for them what so ever, and in fact, I almost despise them for it.
An online model doesn't suffer from these problems - because the software is essentially free and you pay for your account access... and I have no problem doing that for online games. I hate doing it for single player games though (ahem, D3).
Single player game usually has a story or so many levels, and once you beat the game, you have consumed the content. Sure, you can replay it or what have you, but the game is more or less static and won't change. It's not really that dissimilar from a movie or an album. The first-sale doctrine lets me sell pretty much anything physical that I own - but it doesn't allow me to transfer licenses or accounts - those are covered under different laws since you don't technically own them.
Originally posted by Ridelynn 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.
I agree with this. I wont buy a game new, Specially if it just game out. 60 bucks is Way to expensive for something ill likely have beaten the day i buy it. I DONT buy new games because they are extremely over priced.
Originally posted by cowhead To everyone saying that they should have the right to do whatever they want with the media they own, you're right. You have every right to do what you please with the disc because thats all you own. You really think that you owned the software? That 60 dollars amounts to a license to use the software. Almost all games are the property of either the company that made them or distribute them. None of us have ever actually "owned" a game. The companies in question have simply never truly enforceed it before.
What logic is this ?
People did buy music/film records, tapes cd/dvd´s and they always had the option to resell it. Do you think the production costs of many songs/films are just peanuts ?
What is going on in the gaming industry is just very questionable and many dont care or dont think about it if they slowly see some kind of expropriation. They will probably hold nothing in their hands at all in the future.
Originally posted by spizz Originally posted by Johnie-Marz 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.
Actually, I don't mind Steam. As far as distribution goes, they are more liberal than most. No, you don't own the software on Steam - you just purchase the right to use the software. But they offer additional value (in the form of letting you play them on multiple computers (publisher allowing - some tack on additional DRM), adding in a social layer (the overlay, the friends network, VOIP, etc), games auto-update, saves can be backed up in the cloud for certain titles, and the convenience of having your purchases be backed up in the cloud - no damaging/misplacing the DVD and being screwed out of playing. Most of the licensing/activation/registration crap is taken care of transparently, you just click "Buy", the game downloads, and it plays.
It's not without it's issues: I can't (legally) trade purchases on steam (you can technically trade accounts, but that's not legal, and Steam allows you to Gift licenees, but not those which you have used for yourself), there is no (legal) gray market for Steam games, if you get stuck offline without telling Steam to go Offline there can be activation issues, etc... but there are enough sales, and the other value-added items that Steam brings, makes it worth it for me to use over physically buying a PC game - given that the alternatives aren't any better.
For Console games - yeah I buy most of those second hand and trade fairly freely. That hasn't existed for PC's for a really long time. Steam is the "next" best thing I've found so far. Used games are usually discounted to some similar price on Steam by the time I get around to buying them (via some holiday event or just random sale event), so all in all, it doesn't really cost me any more money...
Originally posted by Ridelynn Originally posted by spizz Originally posted by Johnie-Marz 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.
I dont think there is anything best here or great when you dont hold anything in your hand for a product you payed for. Of course such services have advantages, but when it comes to the issue we all talk here ther is only one decision. Either you support this or not, we customer decide or should at least to try in the jungle of manipulation. But at the end you know the outcome when it comes to mass consumer.
You mean that the same company who got caught red-handed surreptitiously installing root-kits in your PC whenever you played one of their CDs in 2005 is still obsessed with one-copy-one-customer distribution? Who knew! Oh wait...
I think we should also close down all the public libraries and be done with it.
Oh I love it. Can't wait to see the chaos this causes. Like someone said earlier in thread, we are heading for another game market crash. Putting the people that sell your games out of business, is a very silly idea. People like Gamestop go out of business. Who's going to pick up the slack? Best Buy? lol They don't carry near as many games as a Gamestop. Wal-Mart? lol They carry even less games then Best Buy. Oh I know they think more people will start ordering online? lol Most people that don't like or are paranoid about online buying. Aren't suddenly going to start rushing Amazon's site. What about the non-chain brick and mortar stores that big chains have slowly been forcing out of business. Guess what most of them also rely on game resales.
Just a really bad idea in the end. If they actually intended to drop the price of games by doing this. They would have ground to stand on for this argument.
In War - Victory.In Peace - Vigilance.In Death - Sacrifice.
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.
Or a sale lost because people dont want to pay 60 bucks every time they buy a game.....Alot of people like the used route...take that away and they will most likely just find some other way, maybe even leaving consoles behind altogether....I stopped playing console games long ago and haven't looked back....Even used everything is too expensive and feels like a ripoff.