View Full Version : PS3 will not play used games?
mckmas8808
08-Nov-2005, 15:11
Originally posted by ikachii at IGN
"SCE has secured the patent for a new disc technology that, if used, would not allow the PS3 to read used games for that platform. The technology was invented by Kutaragi himself, as well as two others
Details regarding the patent are featured here: http://www.ipdl.ncipi.go.jp/homepg.ipdl (http://www.ipdl.ncipi.go.jp/homepg.ipdl)
It is indicated specifically that the technology is to prevent the use of used as well as pirated software
The technology involves actually rendering a authentication code originally encrypted on the game disk unreadable to other machines once the disk it is used
This would mean that Net-based and other such games will not be the only ones to be affected by the technology
Naturally third software developers would embrace this technology, and it would ensure sales of the inevitable "Best series" for the PS3, but used games shops would be put out of business if the PS3 were to become the primary platform in the next generation
While information regarding the patent does not specify outright that the technology will be used in the PS3, Kutaragi has gone on record saying that copy management is absolutely necessary in order to endure that no "Napsters" of the game industry create problems in the future "
Shamelessly copied from GA forums
Now I already know that there's no way this will be true. Sony is begging to lose most of their marketshare if they think of actually doing this. I'm putting this in the not going happen box.:wink:
What's a "used" game? That you can only play the game once or only after the first use on the console that it was first played on?
Either way, the used-bit doesn't make sense to me. The copy-protection bit on the other hand does...
valioso
08-Nov-2005, 15:15
if stuff like that would keep game price lower I am all for it.
PC-Engine
08-Nov-2005, 15:15
Sounds pretty fake, unless you can write to the disc there's no way to tell if a disc is new or used or unless you have some sort of online database that tracks disc serial numbers and even that is iffy at best.
Hardknock
08-Nov-2005, 15:22
Shamelessly copied from GA forums
Now I already know that there's no way this will be true. Sony is begging to lose most of their marketshare if they think of actually doing this. I'm putting this in the not going happen box.:wink:
Dosn't sound correct unless the Blu-Ray drive in PS3 is going to be a writer aswell and not just a player.
I highly doubt this would effect their marketshare though. They would still release "platinum hits" titles if you wanted budget games. From my experience "used" games have such a ridiculous mark-up that you might aswell buy the new game to begin with.
That will never happen. Imagine not being able to exchange your games with your friends, or take the game with you and play at friends place and sure not being able to sell the game once you played it, and truth be toled, I don't see them goign down with the prices because of this, so no, it will not happen...
Nite_Hawk
08-Nov-2005, 15:28
I don't think it'll be used for the PS3 either. There's too many nightmare scenarios for sony. What happens when peoples' PS3 breaks after 3 or 4 years and they have a library of 20-30 games that are now worthless? Not to mention the inconvenience it would cause people who bring their games over to friends houses.
The only way I can see Sony pulling it off, is if they make game prices so cheap that it offsets the bad will they would gain by putting this in place. Still, I bet they'd end up with a lot of complaints anyway, especially if the xbox360 doesn't have anything like it in place. Sony would be acting pretty recklessly to implement this with the PS3.
Nite_Hawk
Hardknock
08-Nov-2005, 15:29
Yeah and they wouldn't be able to rent games either.
Only thing that kind of peaks my interest is I remember Cliffy B. being all upset about stores selling used games, but the developers paying for the advertising... or something along those lines... so it is a concern...
The God of War developer also posted a big long (curse word filled) statement about used games a couple months ago. It is apparently a pretty big issue, especially with rumors of companies like Best Buy trying to get into the space.
london-boy
08-Nov-2005, 15:38
Well this system would only work if either the PS3 drive can write to disc, which is not gonna happen, or if PS3 registers the copy of the game online so that that one copy of the game will only work on that PS3, but that would need internet access which not everyone will have or if they have it they might not plug to the PS3.
The Bluray copy protection requires an internet connection, doesn't it?
PC-Engine
08-Nov-2005, 15:43
The Bluray copy protection requires an internet connection, doesn't it?
Nope.
blakjedi
08-Nov-2005, 15:44
Imagine if they did this with cars....
Exactly. As stupid as it sounds is as stupid as it is... if its even possible to do with physical media. Actually i take that back. It may be possible that there is "validation" of some sort that the user has to input before playing the game. If the user doesnt call, email blah blah the game wont work. It could happen...
Still stupid. Have a nice day.
Dr Evil
08-Nov-2005, 15:47
The God of War developer also posted a big long (curse word filled) statement about used games a couple months ago. It is apparently a pretty big issue, especially with rumors of companies like Best Buy trying to get into the space.
Yes Publishers and developers are really pissed at gamestores making more profit than them and I don't blame them, I'm sure that Sony and others are thinking real hard how they can avoid the current situation, but this proposed method is way too harsh, but I wouldn't be suprised if something like this would emerge.
valioso
08-Nov-2005, 15:48
funny you mention the thing about cars... gaming steve on his podcast gave his opinion on this used games thing because someone wrote him an email comparing it to the used car used home markets.. it was a good listen and he did explain why it was different.
PC-Engine
08-Nov-2005, 15:50
Future games will require online activation. :lol:
london-boy
08-Nov-2005, 15:50
Imagine if they did this with cars....
Exactly. As stupid as it sounds is as stupid as it is... if its even possible to do with physical media. Actually i take that back. It may be possible that there is "validation" of some sort that the user has to input before playing the game. If the user doesnt call, email blah blah the game wont work. It could happen...
Still stupid. Have a nice day.
I did imagine.... A DNA testing system, if you're not the owner you either get electricuted or shot out of the car seat from a hole on the roof.
PC-Engine
08-Nov-2005, 15:52
I did imagine.... A DNA testing system, if you're not the owner you either get electricuted or shot out of the car seat from a hole on the roof.
ROTFLMAO. :lol:
How about retina scans ala Minority Report?
ROTFLMAO. :lol:
How about retina scans ala Minority Report?
Of course! :shock: The true purpose of Cell's power and the next-gen eye-toy have been revealed!
In my best Robocop's ED-209 voice: "Please step away from the console; you have five seconds to comply..."
london-boy
08-Nov-2005, 15:56
Of course! :shock: The true purpose of Cell's power and the next-gen eye-toy have been revealed!
In my best Robocop's ED-209 voice: "Please step away from the console; you have five seconds to comply..."
Oh my god that is TOTALLY it!! That's why they're pushing the HD cameras thing... They'll scan us and if it's not us in front of the TV playing, the game won't run!!!11
This would mean that Net-based and other such games will not be the only ones to be affected by the technology
I tried to read the patent details but it is Japanese. I suspect from the quote above this would only affect internet multiplayer games if Sony chooses to use it. My best guess is that this is the next logical step of cd keys that we have become familiar with for pc games. But instead of a number you type in it is printed into the cd at the factory, combines that with a machine identification number from your PS3, and then sends that data the game server.
Shifty Geezer
08-Nov-2005, 16:10
Ahhh, but as a hacker I'll scan the origianl owner and use a Cell/EyeToy function to map their image onto my actions. Then with me as someone else playing the game, played on a Cell enhanced TV screen and watched by the PS3 EyeToy, the PS3 will be fooled into thinking I'm someone I'm not. Technology outsmarts itself once again.
Powderkeg
08-Nov-2005, 16:13
Did you know that every time Blockbusters rents a game the publisher gets $1?
Do you really think Sony would cut themselves off from that kind of easy income?
london-boy
08-Nov-2005, 16:14
Did you know that every time Blockbusters rents a game the publisher gets $1?
Do you really think Sony would cut themselves off from that kind of easy income?
At last some sense in this thread.
valioso
08-Nov-2005, 16:17
Did you know that every time Blockbusters rents a game the publisher gets $1?
Do you really think Sony would cut themselves off from that kind of easy income?
and when eb games resells a game for $40 how much does the developer get?
mckmas8808
08-Nov-2005, 16:29
Did you know that every time Blockbusters rents a game the publisher gets $1?
Do you really think Sony would cut themselves off from that kind of easy income?
No I actually didn't know that. What about Gamespy? I have a membership and I would like to feel better for not buying the games.
Powderkeg
08-Nov-2005, 16:39
No I actually didn't know that. What about Gamespy? I have a membership and I would like to feel better for not buying the games.
Any place that rents games gives part of their money back to the publisher. (Who in turn gives some to the developer) It's part of the licensing agreement they sign to allow legal rentals.
As for the sales of used games, publishers get nothing. But I seriously doubt Sony would make it so all of your games stop working if your PS3 has problems and you have to replace it either. Also, think of all of the kids at Christmas who are visiting relatives and put their new PS3 game in their cousin/uncles PS3 to play it on Christmas day and then get home and the game doesn't work anymore.
I don't think Sony would want to deal with the fallout from such a decision. I could see a lot of angry customers in Sony's future if they tried. It's just a bad idea to mess with the abilitiy for people to play their legally purchased game on multiple systems.
pegisys
08-Nov-2005, 16:42
and when eb games resells a game for $40 how much does the developer get?
so you think they should get paid for the same game twice, they already made 50 bucks off that game when it was new
Even if used games are a problem I don't see it going away, and if you think of it like books publishers and authors don't get paid for a resold book
london-boy
08-Nov-2005, 16:42
At the moment the second-hand market is hardly something they need to worry about, when they have REAL piracy to worry about, which loses them much more money than second-hand shops (or second-hand sales on ebay and whatnot) ever will.
They should (and i'm sure they will) worry about real piracy first. This article seems a bit out of touch with reality.
Another wonderful non-story for the PS3? These fear interjecting stories sure do pop up at the funniest of times.
Votes for a moderator to remove the offending word 'used' from the thread title? ;)
valioso
08-Nov-2005, 16:43
so you think they should get paid for the same game twice, they already made 50 bucks off that game when it was new
Even if used games are a problem I don't see it going away, and if you think of it like books publishers and authors don't get paid for a resold book
eb is getting paid twice...
Hardknock
08-Nov-2005, 16:51
Piracy is no where near as big as used game sales. Don't kid yourself. Pirating requires modchips and other means, which is to much work for the average mainstream gamer. Especially when they can hop on Ebay or go to a gamestore and buy a used game for relatively cheaper. And none of that money goes to the publisher or developer.
Powderkeg
08-Nov-2005, 16:54
Piracy is no where near as big as used game sales. Don't kid yourself. Pirating requires modchips and other means, which is to much work for the average mainstream gamer. Especially when they can hop on Ebay or go to a gamestore and buy a used game for relatively cheaper. And none of that money goes to the publisher or developer.
But used game sales is like used car sales. You couldn't sell these people a new one if you wanted to so you wouldn't generate extra money by taking away their ability to buy and play used games.
Also used games tend to be old games that are no longer in demand, and often times no longer in production. The only way you could get ICO in the US right now is to buy used. Is it really in Sony's best interest to keep their customers from being able to play these games?
I think the backlash from angry customers would cost them more money than preventing used game sales would save.
london-boy
08-Nov-2005, 16:54
Piracy is no where near as big as used game sales. Don't kid yourself. Pirating requires modchips and other means, which is to much work for the average mainstream gamer. Especially when they can hop on Ebay or go to a gamestore and buy a used game for relatively cheaper. And none of that money goes to the publisher or developer.
Well personally i don't pretend to have seen real figures of each (piracy and second hand), so you could be right.
Have you seen real figures or are you just saying second-hand is bigger because you happen to have seen more people buying second hand games than pirated games? Cause i could provide the same anedoctal experience which would be just as useless.
valioso
08-Nov-2005, 16:58
But used game sales is like used car sales. You couldn't sell these people a new one if you wanted to so you wouldn't generate extra money by taking away their ability to buy and play used games.
Also used games tend to be old games that are no longer in demand, and often times no longer in production. The only way you could get ICO in the US right now is to buy used. Is it really in Sony's best interest to keep their customers from being able to play these games?
I think the backlash from angry customers would cost them more money than preventing used game sales would save.
you can find a used game at the store a week after release... is not like used cars.. because games do not last that long.
I don't have a problem with buying used games, but developers should get some of that $$ as well.
Obviously developers would not be talking about it, if it was not a bigger problem that most people think it is.
Powderkeg
08-Nov-2005, 17:03
you can find a used game at the store a week after release... is not like used cars.. because games do not last that long.
What makes you so sure? I can find a used car less than a month odl with fewer than 1,000 miles on it.
I don't have a problem with buying used games, but developers should get some of that $$ as well.
Why? And does that mean if I wanted to sell my brother some of my old games I should ahve to pay the developers as well? What about garage sales? Shouldn't the person who trades the game into EB/Gamestop also have to pay the devs? After all, that's a sale that they are making money off of, surely they should be forced to pay the devs too, right?
Likewise the devs should replace my game if it's scratched or otherwise defective, even if it's a used copy right? I mean, if they are going to make money off the sale that means they are also still responsible for the product sold, right?
Obviously developers would not be talking about it, if it was not a bigger problem that most people think it is.
Developers aren't talking about it because it's not going to happen. Why would they talk about some anti-copy protection that they aren't going to use?
Hardknock
08-Nov-2005, 17:03
But used game sales is like used car sales. You couldn't sell these people a new one if you wanted to so you wouldn't generate extra money by taking away their ability to buy and play used games.
If people had no choice they would. Remember when games used to cost $70 a pop? Nobody was happy about that, but we did it because we had to.
Also used games tend to be old games that are no longer in demand, and often times no longer in production. The only way you could get ICO in the US right now is to buy used. Is it really in Sony's best interest to keep their customers from being able to play these games?
Not always the case though, I've walked in several times to buy a fairly new game and already see used copies on the shelf for only $5 less than the new game. Mind you, for those more obscure titles like ICO, they are very useful. I'm not disputing the validity of Used games at all.
I think the backlash from angry customers would cost them more money than preventing used game sales would save.
I agree. Let me state again that I don't think Sony would do this. It's fun to discuss the hypothetical though. :razz:
One thing I must say is I feel gamestores should give some of the money they make on used game sales back to the publishers (since they are the ones that pay for the advertising) similar to what rental chains do. I know at my local EB, the used game rack is the same size or bigger than the New games rack. Publishers can't be too happy about that. :wink:
Powderkeg
08-Nov-2005, 17:09
If people had no choice they would. Remember when games used to cost $70 a pop? Nobody was happy about that, but we did it because we had to.
And those people who couldn't afford it or didn't want to pay it didn't. Sales weren't increased by higher prices, and that's all forcing new game sales only would be, a higher price.
One thing I must say is I feel gamestores should give some of the money they make on used game sales back to the publishers (since they are the ones that pay for the advertising) similar to what rental chains do. I know at my local EB, the used game rack is the same size or bigger than the New games rack. Publishers can't be too happy about that. :wink:
As I just said before, if the developers are going to make money on the sale then they ahve a responsibility to replace the product if it was damaged or defective, just like they would a new game.
If I bought a new game and it was scratched I could return it for another copy at no cost because the developer/publisher would pay for the replacement. If they are going to be making money on used game sales as well as new, then they should offer the same product replacement as if the game was new.
Hardknock
08-Nov-2005, 17:11
As I just said before, if the developers are going to make money on the sale then they ahve a responsibility to replace the product if it was damaged or defective, just like they would a new game.
If I bought a new game and it was scratched I could return it for another copy at no cost because the developer/publisher would pay for the replacement. If they are going to be making money on used game sales as well as new, then they should offer the same product replacement as if the game was new.
Well of course they should! :smile: EBgames and Gamestop should likewise not buy back any games that have obvious scratches on them though :wink:
Hellbinder
08-Nov-2005, 17:21
if stuff like that would keep game price lower I am all for it.
Is that what you think?
Game prices have nothing to do with Piracy, or reselling of games from used games shops. That is almost a complete crock used as an excuse to raise prices *permanently*.
Heck they could actually raise prices because you would have no choice but to buy the game new from them.
Look at game sales figures. the big games that come out are still selling the same or greater numbers than they always have. While piracy has increased the market pool of people playing games has increased at a far greater pace.
Comfortably Lomb
08-Nov-2005, 17:35
Isn't this sort of thing exactly what might make some buyers twinge who are on the fence between buying a 360 or a PS3? I play a lot of games, so I'm used to shelling out larger amounts of money for them, but most of my console owning friends play more casually and buy a lot of used games because they aren't willing to pay $50 for a game fresh off the presses. Not only that but we as a group swap, lend, and play games at a different houses/consoles all the time (especially with Cube games) and this would immediately end that as each game could only be played in its owner's console. A lot of that game swapping and sharing can create a buzz for games that causes others to go out and get the game when they might otherwise not do so. I know I certainly rent games before buying them when I'm not sure if I want to shell out the money for it and if I couldn't do so then I might be even more frugal about purchasing them knowing that I wouldn't be able to sell the game to a place like Gamestop if I decide I don't like it. This all just seems a little silly to me.
wireframe
08-Nov-2005, 17:47
This is the most ridiculous thing I have read in a while.
This protection scheme (protection from a profitable business...) would make the platform useless. Consider this scenario:
You are a devoted console gamer. You purchse the Playstation 3. You make Sony very very happy by buying lots of games, a library of PS3 titles to be proud of. You play your games day in, day out until one day your Playstation 3 decides to die on you. "Bye old friend, you served me well!" Not thinking twice about it, you go to the store to pick up a new Playstation 3. You return home to find that your entire gaming library is now useless because every single title has been "registered" to your dead PS3 now spending retirement in a land-fill somewhere.
End of story.
PC-Engine
08-Nov-2005, 17:50
This is the most ridiculous thing I have read in a while.
This protection scheme (protection from a profitable business...) would make the platform useless. Consider this scenario:
You are a devoted console gamer. You purchse the Playstation 3. You make Sony very very happy by buying lots of games, a library of PS3 titles to be proud of. You play your games day in, day out until one day your Playstation 3 decides to die on you. "Bye old friend, you served me well!" Not thinking twice about it, you go to the store to pick up a new Playstation 3. You return home to find that your entire gaming library is now useless because every single title has been "registered" to your dead PS3 now spending retirement in a land-fill somewhere.
End of story.
Please call the 800 number to resolve your problem.
Nite_Hawk
08-Nov-2005, 19:49
Please call the 800 number to resolve your problem.
"Welcome to Sony! Please press one for sales, two for contracts, three to hear about our newest pop album releases, four for home electronics, five for computers and home office, or six for our entertainment division.
...
"I'm sorry, please pick one from our following options!"
"Please press one for sales, two for contracts, three to hear about our newest pop album releases, four for consumer electronics, or five for Sony Pictures."
0
"I'm sorry, that is not an option!"
"Please press one for sales, two for contracts, three to hear about our newest pop album releases, four for consumer electronics, or five for Sony Pictures."
4
"Wecome to Sony Electronics! If you know your party's extension please press pound followed by the number."
"Press one for Computers, two for Cameras and Camcorders, Three for TV and Video, or Four for Movies, Music & Games.
4
"Welcome to Games at Sony Style! To hear about our big sale on Playstation 3 accessories, press one. For information about special offers press two. For details about newly released games press three. To hear about Connect(tm) Music downloads, press four. For all other inquiries, press five.
5
"Your call is important to us! A customer service representative will be with you shortly!"
<cue cheesy music>
for (int minute = 0; minute < 20; minute++) {
"All customer service representatives are busy. Please stay on the line and your call will be serviced in the order in which it was received."
<cheesy music>
}
<ring>
"Sony Style, this is todd. Would you like to hear about our big sale on Playstation 3 accessories?"
"Er... no. I just bought a new Playstation3 to replace my old broken one and now none of my games work anymore."
"I'm sorry sir, you'll need to contact our consumer electronic customer support for that problem. I can transfer you..."
"ah... sure I guess."
"Welcome to Sony consumer electronics customer support! Please choose from the following options. Press one for computers, two for cameras and camcorders, three for TVs and Video. Four for Audio, or Five for playstation and PSP devices."
5
"For questions related to the PlayStation 3 system, press one. For questions related to the PSP(tm) press two, for questions related to the Platstation 2 System, press three. For questions related to the PS One(tm) System, press four."
1
"Your call is important to us! A customer service representative will be with you shortly!"
<cue cheesy music>
for (int minute = 0; minute < 20; minute++) {
"All customer service representatives are busy. Please stay on the line and your call will be serviced in the order in which it was received."
<cheesy music>
}
<ring>
"Welcome to Sony Electronics - My name is Steve - How can I help you?"
"I just bought a new Playstation3 to replace my old broken one and now none of my games work anymore."
"Are you sure that your unit is plugged in correctly and you've turn on the power?"
"Yes, of course!"
"Have you put the game you want to play into the Playstation System?"
"... yes."
"One moment."
<cheesy music>
"I just spoke with my manager. You'll need to send in your games to our customer care center for reprogramming with a copy of all receipts from time of purchase. After we have finished processing the request, you will recieve new disks back in the mail that can be reprogrammed to your new PS3."
"How long is this going to take?"
"Processing usually takes two to three weeks."
"I don't think I still have the receipts from when I bought my games, some of them are nearly 4 years old!"
"Well, send in the ones that you do have. I've been also told that I'm authorized to replace any of the other disks without receipts for half off the suggested retail price."
"Those games can be found in the bargain bins at best buy for under $20 now! It would cost me less to just buy them again!"
"I'm sorry, that's the best I can do for you sir."
<click>
Nite_Hawk
I can't see sony doing this as it would be stupid. I mean the part about not allowing used games. Stores like EB or any other place that sells used games would probably not carry the system if that was the case.
The God of War developer also posted a big long (curse word filled) statement about used games a couple months ago. It is apparently a pretty big issue, especially with rumors of companies like Best Buy trying to get into the space.
Where was that? That would be interesting to see.
Developers deserve support. I think GoW still is sellling for $50 at most shops brand new so it's held up well a year after release.
But a common complaint was about games being too short or not having replayability so people are going to sell games after they finish. Now developers and designers try things like having a lot of locked items and levels but really the challenge is to come up with compelling, addictive gameplay and fresh content, which keeps gamers subscribing to games like WoW.
A part of the reason why there is such a big used games market is the pricing of new games. And $60 for new games will only lead to more used games sales.
Magnum PI
08-Nov-2005, 20:52
every merchant who profits from the used market is a thief for the videogame industry.
they make a lot of money reselling used games while the creators gets nada.
used videogames market hurts the industry much more than piracy.
rentals would basicly die .
Then of course gamestop/eb (all one company) will go under as that is thier bread winner
The said patent is this,
http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=PAJ&&IDX=JP2004103239&F=0
which was published in 2004-04-02, and it's an updated version of this patent submitted in 1999
http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=PAJ&&IDX=JP2000306330&F=0
so it's an early PS2-era DNAS patent. ("Takeshi Kutaragi" represents Ken Kutaragi, probably the translator misread the kanji for his name as the Japanese documents list Ken Kutaragi as one of the inventors - you can browse his 94 patents (http://v3.espacenet.com/results?sf=a&FIRST=1&CY=ep&LG=en&DB=PAJ&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=sony&IN=kutaragi&IC=&=&=&=&=&=) including ones back at Sony since 1978)
Now, why this sudden dig up? It's because, there's a huge FUD fest by some fans in Japan before leading up to some next-gen console release you know :wink:
every merchant who profits from the used market is a thief for the videogame industry.
they make a lot of money reselling used games while the creators gets nada.
used videogames market hurts the industry much more than piracy.
Merchants are putting up the store space for used games. The publishers/creators/everybody else arn't. Markets for used items exist because they have a place. Are used DVDs killing the movie industry? If publishers wanted to make money from used game sales, why don't they buy back used games and resale them. Retarded managers and shitty games hurt the industry much more than piracy.
blakjedi
08-Nov-2005, 21:18
"For english press 1
Para espanol marque el dos!!!"
valioso i would really like to see that article if you have the link cause intellectually i cant find the difference between a car and a videogame in the used markets... any object with depreciating value should be considered the same when it comes to being used... in fact CD/DVD should have less value because it is single point engineering with no maintenance as part of its ownership unlike REAL assets like cars boats houses etc.
Picasso only got paid once for his paintings yet they are sold and resold without end with no more money for him or his heirs- which is more valuable?
MrWibble
08-Nov-2005, 21:21
It's a tricky one.
On one hand it's hard to see what's wrong with people selling on things they legitimately own but don't want anymore.
On the other hand major retailers are turning 2nd hand games into a source of income at the cost of the publishers who sell fewer copies into retail as a result. Retail already takes a big chunk of the profit from games, it's kind of hard for developers and publishers to see them take even more money in while paying out less.
So I'm not too surprised to see anyone looking into ways to limit or stop 2nd hand sales.
However I don't see cracking down on 2nd hand sales is really going to be terribly practical (or perhaps even legal) . Instead I'd expect to see the industry move towards a distribution model that cuts the middleman out just as soon as the marketplace will tolerate it.
We (as an industry) should be making it more attractive for people to keep buying new stuff, or less attractive to get rid of old stuff. Distribute games directly online (if bandwidth improves enough), release episodic updates... that kind of thing.
valioso
08-Nov-2005, 21:38
"For english press 1
Para espanol marque el dos!!!"
valioso i would really like to see that article if you have the link cause intellectually i cant find the difference between a car and a videogame in the used markets... any object with depreciating value should be considered the same when it comes to being used... in fact CD/DVD should have less value because it is single point engineering with no maintenance as part of its ownership unlike REAL assets like cars boats houses etc.
Picasso only got paid once for his paintings yet they are sold and resold without end with no more money for him or his heirs- which is more valuable?
it wasnt an article it was on the gaming steve podcast, someone wrote him with the same comparisson car vs game market and he gave his response. I just thought it was a funny
coincidence that's all.
I don't know how much used games affect developers, but for the last 10 yrs or close games have been steady at 50 bucks a game, while developer costs to make a game have sky rocket.
But volumes and revenues are much higher though aren't they?
EA stock is still around its all-time high so someone is making money, despite the used game market.
valioso
08-Nov-2005, 21:52
But volumes and revenues are much higher though aren't they?
EA stock is still around its all-time high so someone is making money, despite the used game market.
how many smaller companies has EA bought off in the last few yrs?
A ton.
But what does that have to do with games sales and revenues being much higher despite the same retail price of games?
They still had to get those studios to develop games which sell well, as well as market those games.
EA isn't the only ones who had record-selling games.
Take Two was a bit player before GTA.
Nor was Ubisoft particularly a big operation.
Inane_Dork
08-Nov-2005, 22:05
Now, why this sudden dig up? It's because, there's a huge FUD fest by some fans in Japan before leading up to some next-gen console release you know :wink:I don't think the tech will be used, but then again, I never thought a Sony CD would include a rootkit.
Here's the portion of the patent that details the technology.
[0069] An entertainment device which uses a CD-ROM type optical disk as the disk memory medium has been described above. The software used when executing a game by the entertainment device 1, which is a device for playback only (reproduction device), is directed towards the case where the game software including this optical disk, in terms of being recorded into this optical disk, is so-called used software or counterfeit software.
[0070] In order to prevent the reproduction and thus prevent the creation of the used software or counterfeit software, at least a specific code which is information specific to a disk, pulse data for generating a pulse sequence, and verification data applicable to a pulse sequence corresponding to the disk rotation are recorded in the optical disk. Thus, the protection of legitimate software can be achieved by registering these specific codes, determining whether or not matching has occurred, or determining whether or not the pulse data or verification data match.
[0071] As a typical protection mode, the following countermeasure for protection against this type of used software or counterfeit software is cited as one example. In the entertainment device, when an optical disk which is a disk recording medium in this example is played back by means of the reproduction device, i.e., the entertainment device 1, and a specific code recorded in this optical disk has already been registered in the reproduction device, since it can be determined that the specific code recorded on the optical disk and registered in the reproduction device match, this optical disk can be considered to be legitimate software.
[0072] Next, when the specific code of the optical disk has not been registered in the reproduction device in playback of the optical disk, verification data recorded in this optical disk and pulse data for obtaining a pulse sequence are generated, and it is determined whether the pulse sequence obtained by rotation and the verification data match. Since this pulse sequence and verification data will match in a new legitimate optical disk, this specific code will be read out and registered in the reproduction device. In other words, the disk can be registered as legitimate software.
[0073] After this registration, when the pulse data of the optical disk exists, since it is not subject to legitimate software protection, this pulse data is eliminated.
It looks like it is talking about used disks in the sense of counterfeit disks. It mentions "used software or counterfeit software" as if they two terms are interchangable or synonyms. The previous sentence was an example of that type of usage. Of course, the Japanese to English isn't done very well, so it's hard to say for sure.
Bobbler
08-Nov-2005, 22:13
It seems more that the patent is more about a "cdkey" embedded in the disc that can be read but cd copies won't have it -- so to make sure the disc is authentic and not a pirated/burned copy it checks the "cdkey". It doesn't seem like the actual cdkey gets registered to the console and then is somehow disabled on the disc (which seems to be the fear in this thread). I think someone mentioned something like this already, but that is what I got from that translation.
The player/console either has a list of valid codes or a way of figuring out if the code is valid. The code still remains on the disc, so a rented/legal disc could be used anywhere as long as the code was valid on the disc (i.e. you would be able to bring to a friends house or buy used copies).
Guden Oden
08-Nov-2005, 22:14
The God of War developer also posted a big long (curse word filled) statement about used games a couple months ago. It is apparently a pretty big issue
Oh noes, teh devs can't afford ferraris anymore, they'll have to settle with only a beemer! :roll: Cry me a river...
I don't think the tech will be used, but then again, I never thought a Sony CD would include a rootkit.Likewise, as MS already include an activation system in their OS, network-enabled Xbox 360 games may include an auth system.
Comfortably Lomb
08-Nov-2005, 22:28
every merchant who profits from the used market is a thief for the videogame industry.
they make a lot of money reselling used games while the creators gets nada.
used videogames market hurts the industry much more than piracy.
So are people who sell their used stuff on ebay scourges against the system? Is every grandmother who sells a rocking chair at a yard sale destroying the furniture industry? Is every used car sold destroying Detroit? Should used book stores be systematically shut down? How about the Salvation Army? Really?
These people are profiting from providing a service, not by cheating the gaming industry out of anything. The games aren't being copied and used by multiple people but rather just one individual at a time. Saying this is damaging behavior is absolutely ridiculous.
Magnum PI
08-Nov-2005, 23:16
Merchants are putting up the store space for used games. The publishers/creators/everybody else arn't.
What are you trying to prove here ?
Should publishers/creators/etc.. also pay the used games merchant ?
When a seller of new games puts up the store space to sell games, the merchant makes money, the publisher/etc.. makes money. It's a partnership.
A seller of used games is parasiting the publisher/developper investment in money and human resource.. He is the only one to make money, and he the added-value he's of was made by someone else.
For the publisher, piracy and used games have the same net result.
Markets for used items exist because they have a place.
What do you think you are proving with statements like that ?
This is no argument.
Are used DVDs killing the movie industry?
The same..
If publishers wanted to make money from used game sales, why don't they buy back used games and resale them.
Are you serious ?
Please say me no.
Retarded managers and shitty games hurt the industry much more than piracy.
Typical denial of pro-piracy argument.. When you want to give yourself the moral right to pirate videogames, there is never enough bad faith.
Comfortably Lomb
08-Nov-2005, 23:30
So you're saying that unless something is purchased new then the people involved in the transaction are some sort of pirates? Making copies is one thing but your position on this really is ridiculous.
fearsomepirate
08-Nov-2005, 23:35
I don't have a problem with buying used games, but developers should get some of that $$ as well.
No way. This completely undermines any notion of "ownership" that we assume as a basic right. Once you've sold a product, it's not yours anymore. It belongs to whoever bought it. He can use it, break it, pee on it, glue M&M's to it, or do whatever else he wants--including selling or loaning it to someone else (which is governed by commerce laws). If you don't like that fact, you'd better find another way of doing business. If that means coming up with some crazy scheme so that the media only works in one player, go for it...but don't be surprised when a competitor who isn't so openly hostile to consumers beats your pants off in the marketplace.
If fair use of your products keeps your business model from succeeding, it's the business model that's broken, not fair use. Fix your damn business model instead of lobbying the government to take away our rights (DMCA, I'm looking at YOU).
PARANOiA
08-Nov-2005, 23:45
I personally couldn't give a rat's ass about publishers wanting to double-dip on used game sales.
If games were made to last and make me want to play them again, there wouldn't be this problem, would there? Making quick games without longevity should be discouraged, not encourage the publisher to make more money out of a game than one which I want to hang on to!
If this model was encouraged, publishers would push for shorter games rather than longer games, since it would encourage used game sales which in turn would provide more revenue.
Theoretically it could then end up with a publisher forcing a developer to withdraw content on a game saying "this makes the game too long. I want them to finish it and sell it". A little dramatic, but you get the idea.
Actually, software licensing agreements may prohibit transfer to a third party or anyone other than the original owner.
But who reads these things these days.
Still, can software really be set apart from any other commodity, which is traded many times over?
Publishers and anyone else who produce software take advantage of high-margins and virtually zero incremental production cost to be able to leverage volume. Yet they don't want the used software market to encroach on these dynamics?
This news gave me flashbacks about DIVX at the beginning of the DVD launch. There's a reason why DIVX died and I hope that Sony's short term memory won't blind them to this same bad idea.
If the publishers and/or developers are feeling the burn from the lack of revenue from used game sales then they need to do something about the pricing of their products. I'm sure a free marketplace will eventually level everything out for what's best for consumers and companies.
Tommy McClain
Magnum PI
08-Nov-2005, 23:56
So are people who sell their used stuff on ebay scourges against the system? Is every grandmother who sells a rocking chair at a yard sale destroying the furniture industry? Is every used car sold destroying Detroit? Should used book stores be systematically shut down? How about the Salvation Army? Really?
If you happen sell a car it it is because you didn't use it in full, and you sell its residual value which represents the remaining usage potential.
If you happen to buy an used car you won't use it you won't be able to use it as long as if it was new.
When you finished the videogame you used it in full. But for someone else its usage potential remains full.
The so-said used videogames are'nt used at all.
Similarly, if each time an used car (even almost exhausted) was sold it would magically become as good as a new car, the car industry would not last for long..
These people are profiting from providing a service, not by cheating the gaming industry out of anything.
They provide the exact same service as a reseller of stolen videogames provide.
They use a minimal financial and human investment and parasite a value created by other people.
The games aren't being copied and used by multiple people but rather just one individual at a time.
These games are sold N times. During the first sale, the publisher and the console manufacturer made some money . But for the remaining N-1 sales the reseller of used games makes more than 15 $ each time, and these is N-1 times the publishers and co makes nothing.
Saying this is damaging behavior is absolutely ridiculous.
Unless you prove your point, this somewhat insulting statement is gratuitous.
To sum it up:
For the piracy you can argue that the prejudice is not that clear, arguing that the pirate wouldn't have bought the game anyway, so there is no loss for the publisher.
Each dollar made by a used game reseller is a dollar from the gaming budget of some people. Once it is in the reseller pocket, it won't be used to buy some original game, and it won't profit to the industry at all. Given the scale of the used videogame business this is a massive diversion of money which should go to the industry.
The prejudice is clear.
If you really love videogames, please support the industry by buying original games.
Magnum PI
09-Nov-2005, 00:01
EA stock is still around its all-time high so someone is making money, despite the used game market.
For each EA, how much bankrupted developpers ?
Do you want an industry only with giants like EA ?
What about used books, records, movies, etc.?
These are commodities which have been established for decades, if not centuries.
I can understand the publishers and developers feeling ripped off as others make money selling their creations over and over again but those resellers do risk some money in buying a used product because there's no guarantee that they will get back what they paid for it or enough to cover their overhead.
I think pricing is a big issue too. Some of the people who buy used games can't pay full price or need to extract savings as much as they can.
Another issue is that games are often discounted weeks after release. The used games market may exert some downward pressure on the discounting. Falling average sales prices for games is a big concern.
Yeah I can see publishers and developers wanting to move to online distribution as soon as possible. Will they price the products to better reflect their costs in this case?
Inane_Dork
09-Nov-2005, 00:14
Likewise, as MS already include an activation system in their OS, network-enabled Xbox 360 games may include an auth system.Absolutely. I don't see MS as being any better in this regard. Most every big and powerful company simply cannot get enough DRM. If it weren't for consumers, they'd have it. But then again, without us they wouldn't exist, so... :p
Given that the companies are the ones who make the tech and distribute it, I'm sure we'll have several failed attempts at this or that shot down by consumers hating its DRM.
For each EA, how much bankrupted developpers ?
Do you want an industry only with giants like EA ?
No but consolidation is happening everywhere so it's probably inevitable in this industry as well.
Don't most of the employees of these bankrupted developers go on to work for other companies?
Perhaps in some of these cases, they just didn't produce games which were good enough?
Or are you saying the used games market made the difference between economic viability or even profit and bankruptcy?
Comfortably Lomb
09-Nov-2005, 00:18
The so-said used videogames are'nt used at all.
Of course they are. They're no longer in the original wrapping, have been handled, could be scratched marginally enough so that they still run but are no longer in mint condition, and usually are purchased used further away from their original release than most new games.
If you really love videogames, please support the industry by buying original games.
Or the industry could accept the fact that it's like every other consumer industry on the planet and realize that once they've sold the product the consumer can do whatever they'd like with it short of intellectual property infringement.
BTW, just to be clear, I rarely buy used games. I remember maybe one game off the top of my head that I bought used and only because I couldn't find it locally.
But I do sell my old games. Hate the idea of leaving old game cases lying around collecting dust. Plus recouping some of these costs makes it easier to justify new game purchases, although I can afford new games without these transactions.
I've also given games and consoles away, which I did with the PSX and a couple of games because I didn't want to store it. I'll probably do the same with my PS2 and whatever PS2 games I have at the time, unless I can sell them for enough to be worth the effort.
Where was that? That would be interesting to see.
I was wrong, it wasn't long. He does comment as well, though.
http://davidjaffe.modblog.com/core.mod?show=blogview&blog_id=753323
YeuEmMaiMai
09-Nov-2005, 00:23
this is just another example of corporate greed.
Magnum PI
09-Nov-2005, 00:25
What about used books, records, movies, etc.?
These are commodities which have been established for decades, if not centuries.
These industries are suffering from this at various levels.
But I guess these market are more easy for them:
There are more consumers of CD and DVD than consumers of videogames.
Movie industry have other sources of income than DVDs.
Books need lower investments.
The videogame industry suffers from a crisis that none of these market have to deal with, so the loss can only make them more damage.
but those resellers do risk some money in buying a used product because there's no guarantee that they will get back what they paid for it or enough to cover their overhead.
The used game resellers do know what they are doing and do not buy anything at any price, so the risk is very low especially if you look at the margins they do.
They are not entrepreneurs, they are opportunists.
I think pricing is a big issue too. Some of the people who buy used games can't pay full price or need to extract savings as much as they can.
If games where cheaper, used games would be even cheaper.
Used games buyers would have more money to spend for other things, or to buy more used games.
People are cheap, and often they don't realize they're hurting the industry, eventually they don't want to know.
Yeah I can see publishers and developers wanting to move to online distribution as soon as possible. Will they price the products to better reflect their costs in this case?
Of course, publishers will do as much profit as they can, and sell the games for a price as high as possible.
What are you trying to prove here ?
Should publishers/creators/etc.. also pay the used games merchant ?
When a seller of new games puts up the store space to sell games, the merchant makes money, the publisher/etc.. makes money. It's a partnership.
Yes they have a partnership. A partnership to sell games. Stores don't make that much money on new items. Thats why they push used items so much. If publishers wanted stores to stay out of used games, maybe they should give retailers a bigger slice of the pie.
A seller of used games is parasiting the publisher/developper investment in money and human resource.. He is the only one to make money, and he the added-value he's of was made by someone else.
No.....I don't know where to start to tell you how wrong you are.
For the publisher, piracy and used games have the same net result.
No. If one person buys a new game and then sells it later to another person. The first person has only spend NewCost - SellPrice while the publisher has their cut of NewCost. The first person now has more money to purchase another new game, therefore allowing the publisher to get more money. In Piracy the second+ owners have given nothing to the previous owners.
This is no argument.
You're right :)
Typical denial of pro-piracy argument.. When you want to give yourself the moral right to pirate videogames, there is never enough bad faith.
I'm glad you avoided putting words in my mouth and suggesting that I pirate my games. I never said pirating games was "ok". I only said that horrible decisions by management and shitty games do worse things for the industry than piracy currently does. What hurts a game company more. Somebody who pirates the game out of the hundred thousand or so that purchase it or the shitty game that only a few hundred buy because its so horrible. If you don't believe me then why are game companies so in love with sequals.
These industries are suffering from this at various levels.
But I guess these market are more easy for them:
There are more consumers of CD and DVD than consumers of videogames.
Movie industry have other sources of income than DVDs.
Books need lower investments.
Your excuses for other industries are bullshit. There are millions of consumers for video games. GTA games sold more copies than almost any CD.
The game industry doesn't just rely on sales to consumers. They also profit from rentals.
Books can take just as more time if not more to write and still take an upfront cost and I'd bet that they make less per copy sold than most other media since its not cheap printing dozens or hundreds of pages (on good paper no less) compared to pressing cds.
The videogame industry suffers from a crisis that none of these market have to deal with, so the loss can only make them more damage.
What? You need to pass some of that dope my way, it must be great stuff.
The used game resellers do know what they are doing and do not buy anything at any price, so the risk is very low especially if you look at the margins they do.
Do no buy anything at any price? If you are complaining about the low price you get when you sell used games to stores then quit selling them to stores, sell them on ebay or to friends where you'd get more money.
They are not entrepreneurs, they are opportunists.
Whats the difference? Entrepreneurs take advantage of opportunities.
If games where cheaper, used games would be even cheaper.
Used games buyers would have more money to spend for other things, or to buy more used games.
People are cheap, and often they don't realize they're hurting the industry, eventually they don't want to know.
Used games wouldn't necessarily be cheaper if games were cheaper. Also, if the people you want to sell items to CANNOT AFFORD THEM THEN YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING WRONG. Its only "hurting the industry" because they have realistic expectations. If you argument was valid, I'll go in and tell my boss that he is "hurting my industry" by not paying me more money, therefore lowering the average wage of a programmer. I can't believe that bastard is hurting the industry.
Of course, publishers will do as much profit as they can, and sell the games for a price as high as possible.
No shit. Publishers are greedy bastards. Consumers will in turn pay the least amount they can for a game. If consumers don't want to spend 50-60 bux on a new game then they won't. If stores arn't allowed to sell used games, then consumers will get the used games from their friends and your precious developers and publishers will continue to not profit from used game sales.
blakjedi
09-Nov-2005, 01:03
These industries are suffering from this at various levels.
But I guess these market are more easy for them:
There are more consumers of CD and DVD than consumers of videogames.
Movie industry have other sources of income than DVDs.
Books need lower investments.
The videogame industry suffers from a crisis that none of these market have to deal with, so the loss can only make them more damage.
Im all for fair use but these statements are far off the mark.
Books are not suffering from resales... they suffer because mofos dont want to read!!! And/or prefer watch tv or listen to the radio/cds for entertainment.
CD sales suffer from piracy not resales. The real culprit is that most CDs are filler and people would prefer to make their own CD from music they want as opposed to what the publisher/record company wants to sell.
DVDs form the base of the rental market and return a pretty penny to the hollywood videos and blockbuster videos companies... these companies also sell used movies (ie movies that have been rented repeatedly to thousands of consumers) who i guess "use up" the content of the dvd or videogame while its rented... see why the argument is kinda silly?
Hardknock
09-Nov-2005, 01:06
Magnum you've made some great posts so far. :smile:
The point still remains. We are not faulting people for selling their videogames, say on ebay or a yard sale. We're faulting large scale retailers that are selling used games(that the publisher gets ZERO money from) that directly compete with New games. Just like the rental industry, used videogames should give some small kick-back to the publishers. The publishers are the ones that pay for advertising(which brought whoever it was into the store to get the game) and pay for the development. It doesn't effect me either way, but it just seems right.
OK I read some of Jaffe's blog. Yeah he's telling publishers to try to craft restrictive policies or conditions under which games are sold. Also lobby Congress to place limits on used game sales and he's not blaming gamers for taking advantage.
I'd have no problem with the publishers trying to enforce restrictive policies. They may even get away with it because in this generation for instance, consumers can no longer return opened games. So if you pay $50 and it is underwhelming, you're stuck (and no doubt, this situation also feeds the used and rental markets).
If they bribe Congress, then I won't be so happy. But every other industry is doing it so maybe the games industry will line up and get Congress to pass anti-consumer policies.
The games industry has done a great job of moving units at $50. The record companies and movie studios envy it. But that price is probably higher than a lot of people can bear so the used market will continue to have momentum.
YeuEmMaiMai
09-Nov-2005, 01:25
Magnum you've made some great posts so far. :smile:
The point still remains. We are not faulting people for selling their videogames, say on ebay or a yard sale. We're faulting large scale retailers that are selling used games(that the publisher gets ZERO money from) that directly compete with New games. Just like the rental industry, used videogames should give some small kick-back to the publishers. The publishers are the ones that pay for advertising(which brought whoever it was into the store to get the game) and pay for the development. It doesn't effect me either way, but it just seems right.
What if the major auto makers tried a policy like this would you be happy. You buy a used car and it won't run because you are not the original owner?
Hardknock
09-Nov-2005, 01:35
What if the major auto makers tried a policy like this would you be happy. You buy a used car and it won't run because you are not the original owner?
Like has been stated already, I don't support a "only can be played on one system" fix. And I don't think Sony would go that far. But I do think publishers should get a kick-back from the retailers.
Also this comparing used games to used car sales is retarded. For one when you buy a used car it's life expectancy(depending on how old) is much lower than a new car. When you buy a used game it plays the exact same as a new game. The average consumer doesn't care if the manual is mint condition or not. Plus with a used car the manufacturers still make a lot of money from car parts for these used cars when something goes wrong. Publishers are getting zero from used game sales, but footing the bill for all the advertising and development.
EricVonZipper
09-Nov-2005, 01:42
Excellent posts Magnum.
Im all for fair use but these statements are far off the mark.
Books are not suffering from resales... they suffer because mofos dont want to read!!! And/or prefer watch tv or listen to the radio/cds for entertainment.
Creating a book is much,much less expensive than a video game, video game has 50-200 authors that need to be paid....... books usually have *one* author and very little overhead, unlike video games.
CD sales suffer from piracy not resales. The real culprit is that most CDs are filler and people would prefer to make their own CD from music they want as opposed to what the publisher/record company wants to sell.
Music groups have very little ovehead, video game companies have little choice but to $spend$ and try to recoup the losses, I doubt recording artist have very much R&D or development costs, most recording artists make their money from touring and concerts, CD's are cheap advertising.
DVDs form the base of the rental market and return a pretty penny to the hollywood videos and blockbuster videos companies... these companies also sell used movies (ie movies that have been rented repeatedly to thousands of consumers) who i guess "use up" the content of the dvd or videogame while its rented... see why the argument is kinda silly?
Movie studio make their money from the Box Office, DVD sales are icing on the cake, movie studios are already double, maybe tripple dipping. video games have NO such luxury.
YeuEmMaiMai
09-Nov-2005, 01:53
Like has been stated already, I don't support a "only can be played on one system" fix. And I don't think Sony would go that far. But I do think publishers should get a kick-back from the retailers.
Also this comparing used games to used car sales is retarded. For one when you buy a used car it's life expectancy(depending on how old) is much lower than a new car. When you buy a used game it plays the exact same as a new game. The average consumer doesn't care if the manual is mint condition or not. Plus with a used car the manufacturers still make a lot of money from car parts for these used cars when something goes wrong. Publishers are getting zero from used game sales, but footing the bill for all the advertising and development.
Saying that a company should get a cut of each sale of the same item is retarted. They sold it new and it becomes my lisence. If I sell it to my friend for a few $ or trade it in for a new game, why should the publisher get a cut? They did nothing to faclitate the subsquent sale(s) of the item.
Hardknock
09-Nov-2005, 01:55
Saying that a company should get a cut of each sale of the same item is retarted. They sold it new and it becomes my lisence. If I sell it to my friend for a few $ or trade it in for a new game, why should the publisher get a cut? They did nothing to faclitate the subsquent sale(s) of the item.
I've already addressed these points:
The point still remains. We are not faulting people for selling their videogames, say on ebay or a yard sale. We're faulting large scale retailers that are selling used games(that the publisher gets ZERO money from) that directly compete with New games. Just like the rental industry, used videogames should give some small kick-back to the publishers. The publishers are the ones that pay for advertising(which brought whoever it was into the store to get the game) and pay for the development. It doesn't effect me either way, but it just seems right.
I guess we'll just agree to disagree.
Seems like you guys are saying games should be exempt from a used market because of the unique conditions under which games are developed and sold.
Can you really argue for an exception that way?
If games development costs are so much higher than other media, maybe that argues for the fact that the current model isn't sustainable?
Maybe the industry should adapt rather than expecting consumers and retailers to adapt (i.e. not participate in the used market)?
Hardknock
09-Nov-2005, 02:01
Maybe the industry should adapt rather than expecting consumers and retailers to adapt (i.e. not participate in the used market)?
How many times must it be said that we don't want the used market to go away? I only expect a videogame store that sells Used games that directly compete(and take away from new game sales) to give something back to the publishers. It's a win-win situation for everybody, I don't understand how anybody would want otherwise?
YeuEmMaiMai
09-Nov-2005, 02:03
I've already addressed these points:
I guess we'll just agree to disagree.
It still does not make your point of view the correct one. They sell it to me and I am free do what I want with it within the limits of the EULA. EB or whom ever sells used games has to pay for a lot of things regarding thier stores and I do not see the publisher helping them with that when it comes to used games. And since a lot of the games are at a fixed point (ie $50) as dictated by the publishers, I can see and uderstand why they want to sell used when they can.
I buy all of my games new but I am smart and wait until they reach the price point that I am willing to pay ($20)
How many times must it be said that we don't want the used market to go away? I only expect a videogame store that sells Used games that directly compete(and take away from new game sales) to give something back to the publishers. It's a win-win situation for everybody, I don't understand how anybody would want otherwise?
That would only make used games more expensive.
If as you say the renters are paying publishers a portion of rental revenues, that must be why games cost about $8 for rental.
Hardknock
09-Nov-2005, 02:13
That would only make used games more expensive.
If as you say the renters are paying publishers a portion of rental revenues, that must be why games cost about $8 for rental.
Okay I can see where you're coming from now, but I don't think that will be the case. First off Used games have a ridiculous mark-up. I would be more on the retailers side if they were giving better deals, but they're not. Say I buy a new game, I come in a couple weeks later for trade-in and they only want to give me $15 for it. They then have the audacity to turn around and sell it for $45. That's high-way robbery. Not only are they ripping publishers off, they're ripping consumers off aswell. They could give 10% of the profit of used game sales to the publisher I think.
Sounds pretty fake, unless you can write to the disc there's no way to tell if a disc is new or used or unless you have some sort of online database that tracks disc serial numbers and even that is iffy at best.
Why not have a small inner ring that can be written to only once? Something maybe even only a few bytes in size?
Bobbler
09-Nov-2005, 02:41
Why not have a small inner ring that can be written to only once? Something maybe even only a few bytes in size?
Thats what the patent is talking about. Either allowing for a sector to be written to with the laser or have some sort of magnetic portion of the disc (which can be demagnetized in a patterned pulse based on a set disc speed, or some crazy mumbo-jumbo). The patent of course was filed in 2000 in the US and 1999 in Japan -- not something I'd be worried about actually being implemented now. It has about a dozen patents related to it almost describing the exact same things, some dating back 20 years. If Sony wanted to, they could have tried to implement this type of thing a long time ago -- It seems less likely that they'd do so now (with rental/used game business as big as it is).
Patent (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=/netahtml/search-adv.htm&r=1&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=ptxt&S1=%28Kutaragi.INZZ.+AND+Sony.ASNM.%29&OS=in/Kutaragi+AND+an/Sony&RS=%28IN/Kutaragi+AND+AN/Sony)
Inane_Dork
09-Nov-2005, 03:43
I would likely go for this if it made games cost as much as DVD movies. Yeah, I might get shafted later on, but oh well. Of course, publishers would want to price games even higher than before on top of having this tech working. But if they debuted games at $20, I would pick the game up anyway.
PC-Engine
09-Nov-2005, 12:56
Why not have a small inner ring that can be written to only once? Something maybe even only a few bytes in size?
Because you cannot mix different R/W dies that easily or cheaply on a optical disc. It'd be easier/cheaper to make the whole disc writeable.
You can't say the retailers of used games are benefiting from the money spent from advertising simply because that money will be spent on advertising if a game is sold used or not! If games were never sold used guess what....developers would still spend millions on advertising so that point is completely mute.
While a game is playable forever as long as the media it is released on is readable; it doesn't mean it is going to be played all the time. While an owner of a used car might drive it for 3 to 4 years after they purchased it, I highly doubt anyone here plays every game they own 200 days out of the year for 3 to 4 years! If you don't resell a game that your done playing it sits and sits until you either give it away or throw it away. The real difference is games are entertainment, although they don't have a set expiration date when they no longer work they do have an expiration date when they are no longer played/wanted.
If I was a developer I would rather give people the opportunity to buy my game "Used" as compared to having them buy a Pirated Copy. At least I would know that the game "little jimmy" has in his console was originally paid for..I got something from it at least.
The smart way!
If the developers really want a kick back from used game sales then they should partner up with the console manufactures and setup a "buy back" program. One big conglomerate between the developers and each individual console maker. They offer consumers a way to sell their used/unwanted games to them, in which they resell to others at a profit.
How its done
Have the consumers setup an online account through these newly internet ready consoles in which the console will tell you how much your game is worth (its in the drive). They credit an online account with the set amount of money that game is worth as long as the game is post marked/shipped by the date corresponding to their requests. They offer the consumer the ability to receive actual money from the game once received or the ability to have a game shipped to them from the current stock of used games available. The consumer could then place a "wanted" list of games they are interested in buying used and when available the console could give them a message saying so. If someone sends in 3 games and has over $50 credit then they could "pre-order" newly released games(or have CC information stored securely as well).
The payoff?
With thousands of people doing this every day, everyone would have a better chance of getting a game they really want used then they would by going to their local retailer. The conglomerate would generate the revenue they were missing from retailers selling used games. They would offer a service the gaming community is already supporting. They would receive even a higher profit by selling pre-orders of games cutting out the middle man. They would put great use to the online features of the newer consoles. Games that may not have made much because they sucked by initial sales could still generate revenue from other idiots buying the crappy game...and they would know more then ever that the game sucked.
The knowledge gained
With just basic information from the consumer that is buying/selling used games they can gather an enormous amount of statistical data they could offer developers to help them make better games. They would be able to show them why game A was sold X times but resold Y times and how it differs from "Great" selling titles. Using this very simple survey they could further their knowledge.
Your selling this game because?
Please check all that apply
[ ] You finished the game
[ ] You found the game too challenging [ ] Too easy
[ ] You were unhappy with the controls, story, graphics
[ ] You were unhappy with the game entirely
All of this could be taken care of right from the consoles themselves and set them up for content delivery over the internet when that stage is here. They could have so much information available at the consumers fingertips with these new consoles being internet ready if they just did the work themselves. Think about the advertising costs that could be reduced if they allow the consumer to use the console itself for receiving "wanted" advertisements of games they are searching for.
Too bad when this does happen some people are going to make millions off of it and I'm going to beat my head on pavement for not doing it myself :evil:
london-boy
09-Nov-2005, 13:01
Wow check that first post out!! Welcome! We need more newbies like you around here.
Shifty Geezer
09-Nov-2005, 13:05
While a game is playable forever as long as the media it is released on is readable;Or follow many other industries and have built-in lifespan limits. How's about game discs that gradually wear out over time and use, so after a couple years or 5 playthroughs you gotta buy another one? That's more in keeping with the way consunmers are ripped off :cry:
MrWibble
09-Nov-2005, 13:42
This is my 256th post, and that makes me happy. Anyhoo...
I still think the key is for developers to find ways to convince people not to sell games off rather than to find ways to enforce it.
Trying to have some kind of sponsored resale service will really just encourage the current players in the market to undercut whatever margins are being made and do the same thing cheaper. Being on the high-street and just taking my games away from me for cash is likely to be a big win.
As a developer, if I was in a position to do so I'd be giving a lot more thought to how I can get people to keep putting my game into their console for a number of months, rather than play it for a few days or weeks and resell it.
That quiz game that Sony just brought out - asisde from the fact that it comes with a peripheral that will no doubt be required to play add-on versions (like with Eyetoy and the singing one), imagine if it had some kind of very cheap online-subscription (or for that matter, free). Ever time you play it downloads new questions. You'll never be in a position of knowing all the answers. It doesn't matter if you don't play it all the time, you'll keep the thing around because you dig it out occasionally when friends are around. A game like that would rarely be resold - only when the person selling it genuinely never plays it at all.
Make a game where the content expands or varies over time, or make games that aren't a case of sitting down and completing it, but something you want to dip into now and again. Those titles won't be making their way to the 2nd hand shelf...
crystalcube
09-Nov-2005, 14:15
For lot of people a good way is to buy second hand games and a lot of people who sell games would use the money they gain to buy more games. There are people whose buying decision is based on their ability to sell games. if they know that their game is going to be useless to others and they cant sell it they are going to think much harder and slow down their purchasing habits.
This is my 256th post, and that makes me happy. Anyhoo...
I still think the key is for developers to find ways to convince people not to sell games off rather than to find ways to enforce it.
Trying to have some kind of sponsored resale service will really just encourage the current players in the market to undercut whatever margins are being made and do the same thing cheaper. Being on the high-street and just taking my games away from me for cash is likely to be a big win.
As a developer, if I was in a position to do so I'd be giving a lot more thought to how I can get people to keep putting my game into their console for a number of months, rather than play it for a few days or weeks and resell it.
That quiz game that Sony just brought out - asisde from the fact that it comes with a peripheral that will no doubt be required to play add-on versions (like with Eyetoy and the singing one), imagine if it had some kind of very cheap online-subscription (or for that matter, free). Ever time you play it downloads new questions. You'll never be in a position of knowing all the answers. It doesn't matter if you don't play it all the time, you'll keep the thing around because you dig it out occasionally when friends are around. A game like that would rarely be resold - only when the person selling it genuinely never plays it at all.
Make a game where the content expands or varies over time, or make games that aren't a case of sitting down and completing it, but something you want to dip into now and again. Those titles won't be making their way to the 2nd hand shelf...
Although I all for making games last longer, being able to download episodes and stuff, fr the industry as a whole, that might not be all to good, as then games might be bying less games, including new ones. The other thing is that although by selling a used game the developers/publishers suffer, on the other hand I can imagine that many gamers reinvest the money they get from selling a game into bying a new game, benefiting some developer/publisher, that might have not gotten that money otherwise. People will need to keep buying new games, otherwise there will not be any used ones to sell. It is an autoregulatory market...
Shifty Geezer
09-Nov-2005, 14:58
There's like 7,000 PS2 games or something, and I've seen about a couple of dozen, maybe 50, across mine and my friends collections. I own a handful. Personally I could happily accomodate only 100 titles a year if they were diversity and all of fantastic quality. So much choice means trying to pick the good stuff from amongst the dross.
To much choice does my head in. Like I was in town today looking for an opticians. There's over half a dozen within spitting distance of each other in town. I wondered round seeing the same types of glasses for the same types of prices. There's hundreds of frames to choose from, but very few styles. I've a very narrow bridge to my nose and so most specs don't fit, so despite hundreds of frames, there's very little variation and little to choose between them. Same with like shampoo or toothbrushes...there's loads to choose from, all of which do pretty much the same thing, so how on earth can you make a choice? Try them all and find the one that works best?
There's too many games. Too make generic run-of-the-mill games. LEss games, more diverse, with more choice and higher quality, would suit me fine.
MrWibble
09-Nov-2005, 15:51
Although I all for making games last longer, being able to download episodes and stuff, fr the industry as a whole, that might not be all to good, as then games might be bying less games, including new ones. The other thing is that although by selling a used game the developers/publishers suffer, on the other hand I can imagine that many gamers reinvest the money they get from selling a game into bying a new game, benefiting some developer/publisher, that might have not gotten that money otherwise. People will need to keep buying new games, otherwise there will not be any used ones to sell. It is an autoregulatory market...
In a lot of cases it's less the minor exchange of money that's bothering developers, and more the thought that increasing amounts of shelf space that could be occupied with their latest title is being taken up with anything else.
Like I say, I don't think it's a matter of making games last longer exactly, so much as extending their lifespan.
I doubt you'd be able to sustain content for a game to last indefinitely while being played all the time (online stuff being slightly different in this regard), but instead for games to be played only occasionally, but you keep going back to them.
In that way people would still be buying new games, getting enough stuff to keep them occupied all the time and maybe also paying for new content.
It doesn't have to be every title - just enough for the publishers and developers to be able to recoup anything they think they're losing.
The game industries distribution model will have to adapt sooner or later in the same way that music has already been forced to, and TV and movies look likely to follow.
Magnum PI
09-Nov-2005, 17:44
If games development costs are so much higher than other media, maybe that argues for the fact that the current model isn't sustainable?
Yes they should just stop making games.
Maybe the industry should adapt rather than expecting consumers and retailers to adapt (i.e. not participate in the used market)?
The industry is in fact adapting:
* off-shore dev
* licence games (less financial risk)
What else the industry can do ?
Of course you all know what the industry should do: lower the price of the games. Sorry that's very simplistic:
* gamers does not have infinite ammount of time, if game were cheaper i wouldn't buy more games => loss
* people are cheap, as long as they can buy an used game cheaper most will buy used => loss
* they are not guaranteed to sell that much more units because of the price lowering, and they would have a lower income from the game sales => loss
Publishers have very competent people in the economical/financial/marketing field, if this was an appropriate answer it would have be done for long.
If the current model isn't sustainable, it's logical to make it evolve.
If they find a way to prevent used games being resold they will do it, and i'm all for it, I just hope it won't be too late.
Nintendo claim that the revolution will be a safer plateform to develop for, because of the budgets that are supposed to be lower, it could help too, and if it helps lower publishers to survive and allows for some interesting original lower-budget titles i think it's great too.
It's the little companies that are suffering the most.
Magnum PI
09-Nov-2005, 17:47
There's too many games. Too make generic run-of-the-mill games. LEss games, more diverse, with more choice and higher quality, would suit me fine.
You should have bought a GC ;)
Shifty Geezer
09-Nov-2005, 17:58
Don't have CON on GC. Or PES. Or SotC.
Yes they should just stop making games.
Nobody is forcing them to make games in the first place. So yes, if they don't make as much money as they want, then they can quit making games and do whatever else they want to make money.
Of course you all know what the industry should do: lower the price of the games. Sorry that's very simplistic:
* gamers does not have infinite ammount of time, if game were cheaper i wouldn't buy more games => loss
Money is not infinite (especially that of consumers). Stores will do their best to sell items that make them the most profit or close. Consumers will buy items they like but only for a certain cost. If games were cheaper then consumers would have the ability to purchase more games.
* people are cheap, as long as they can buy an used game cheaper most will buy used => loss
[quote]
Here is where you are wrong depending on what type of used game you are refering to. Is this a "new" used game where the game is less than a month old. In this case the price of a used game is usually barely less than that of a new game and most people will go for the new game on teh shelf and there are only a limited number of used games on the market (unless the game sucks).
If you are talking about games that are > 1 year or so then if the price of a "new" game isn't lowered (singnificently) then people will purchase a used game because people don't want to spend a lot of money on "last year's" game. The publishers already made a majority of their money and if they want to make more money then they should lower the price of the game.
[quote]
* they are not guaranteed to sell that much more units because of the price lowering, and they would have a lower income from the game sales => loss
Welcome to the real world. There is no guarantee that they will gain money if they force stores to give them a slice of the profit. There is even less reason for stores to sell new games from that publisher or any games from that publisher at all. Stores arn't forced to buy or sell used games, nor are they forced to buy or sell new games.
Publishers have very competent people in the economical/financial/marketing field, if this was an appropriate answer it would have be done for long.
You could clean a mansion in a single minute with a sweeping generalization like that. Guess what, companies make mistakes.
If the current model isn't sustainable, it's logical to make it evolve.
We finally (sort of) agree on something.
If they find a way to prevent used games being resold they will do it, and i'm all for it, I just hope it won't be too late.
Either you are extrememly ignorant/stupid, work for a publisher, or like having somebody take more money from you (which is exceedingly similar to the first item). Also, since you arn't thinking of everything, what are people going to do with games they don't want anymore? Hey, lets make more trash to throw away. (PS: CDs/DVDs are made of plastic which is strangely enough made from oil. Which, last time I checked, isn't a non-renewable resource and is in great demand (strangely enough raising the prices).)
Nintendo claim that the revolution will be a safer plateform to develop for, because of the budgets that are supposed to be lower, it could help too, and if it helps lower publishers to survive and allows for some interesting original lower-budget titles i think it's great too.
Safer? How will it be "safer", less piracy? Piracy has nothing to do with used games (unless you think everybody who sells used games first copied the disc and then resold it). Oh shit, if publishers spend less money making a game then they'll have more of it? I think you finally see how publishers need to change to survive.
It's the little companies that are suffering the most.
Won't somebody think of the children.
Your excuses for other industries are bullshit.
What? You need to pass some of that dope my way, it must be great stuff.
No shit. Publishers are greedy bastards.
Either you are extrememly ignorant/stupid
This is a way too agressive manner to discuss things, a688.
Those remarks are unnecessary, even if you're vehemently disagreeing with what Magnum PI says, please try to keep the discussion "clean".:wink:
On topic, the whole original claim in the first post is dubious at best, I don't see the need to discuss this, really.
But we all know that unfounded rumors based on pure speculation never stopped anyone from discussing a subject around here, so...
Magnum PI
09-Nov-2005, 19:28
a688's :
Instead of just yelling your convictions and insulting people couldn't you develop some reasonning ? You could be more convicing.
Your post above shows no respect for the intelligence of other forumers.
fearsomepirate
09-Nov-2005, 21:54
This is my 256th post, and that makes me happy. Anyhoo...
I still think the key is for developers to find ways to convince people not to sell games off rather than to find ways to enforce it.
That's the only way to think. There was a recent presentation to M$ about how DRM is doomed, both because it's always crackable (you must provide the user with both the encrypted data and the key for him to be able to see anything on his TV), and because a superior business model that doesn't rely on strict DRM to make a profit and gives the customers what they want will always kill the crappy DRM'd product that keeps consumers from doing what they want.
In the case of losing profits off used games, you need incentives to keep games. Some thoughts and examples:
-Online multiplayer and user mods have kept various PC games alive through whole console life cycles. Xbox Live instantaneously made Splinter Cell 2&3 and Halo 2 keepers for anyone who had those games and online. The ability to create user content could extend product life even further.
-Make games that are fun to play for a long time. Animal Crossing, RPG's, and racing sims like Forza and Gran Turismo accomplish this handily.
-Sequelitis: why do you think EA updates their franchises yearly? Release a new game, and you'll reduce demand for the used copies of the old one.
-Stores make huge profits off used games. Buying back a game for $5 and selling it for $20 is a sweet deal. This is both anti-publisher and anti-consumer. Cut out the middle man and offer consumers more than the store does if they trade in a game you published toward one of your new titles. Cut deals with local competitors to Gamestop and EB to keep them stocked with used games/get breaks on new games/whatever if they give you kickbacks on used titles.
-Offer to let customers trade in games directly to you (by mail or through the store) for cool limited edition gear, like t-shirts, duffel bags, hats, figurines, etc. Then repackage them in shiny new cases and sell them as "like new" at a 20% discount to the store, who passes that discount along to the consumer (hmm...I like this, it's very "everyone wins").
The company that gets creative with marketing and sales strategy will win. The company that relies on DRM will fail. You'd be surprised at how thick marketing people can be. They're all too often prone to looking at a problem 1-dimesionally (i.e. used games hurt sales of new games, so we must figure out how to stop sales of used games), or even if not, creative proposals get axed by accountants or VP's who aren't accustomed to thinking out of the box.
This is a way too agressive manner to discuss things, a688.
Those remarks are unnecessary, even if you're vehemently disagreeing with what Magnum PI says, please try to keep the discussion "clean".:wink:
I would say that post was mean, with a personal attack but not "overly" agressive. But I'll stand by everything in there as true :wink:.
-Online multiplayer and user mods
-Make games that are fun to play for a long time
-Sequelitis: why do you think EA updates their franchises yearly? Release a new game, and you'll reduce demand for the used copies of the old one.
-Stores make huge profits off used games. Buying back a game for $5 and selling it for $20 is a sweet deal.
-Offer to let customers trade in games directly to you
The company that gets creative with marketing and sales strategy will win. The company that relies on DRM will fail. You'd be surprised at how thick marketing people can be.
While I agree over all with what you said, I'll disagree somewhat with calling the act which stores go through buying/selling used games anti-consumer/anti-publisher. The prices they charge are unfair to consumers but nobody is being forced to purchase them or sell them in the first place. Stores are providing a service that consumers want and are willing to pay for. If publishers were willing to do the same thing and offer a compelling reason for consumers to switch over to them, then the publishers would get the money, not the stores. Since nothing is stopping the publishers from doing this, I don't believe what the stores are doing is "anti-publisher".
fearsomepirate
10-Nov-2005, 01:57
[QUOTE=a688 Stores are providing a service that consumers want and are willing to pay for. If publishers were willing to do the same thing and offer a compelling reason for consumers to switch over to them, then the publishers would get the money, not the stores. Since nothing is stopping the publishers from doing this, I don't believe what the stores are doing is "anti-publisher".[/QUOTE]
By that logic, almost nothing any business does anywhere ever is anti-consumer, since no one forces you to buy anything except maybe food...right down to all the crap that MS products (such as WinXP) do, since no one makes you buy them, either.
Gamestop/EB have a virtual monopoly on the used game market. They leverage this to basically cut everyone a pretty bad deal. Most people don't see any point in hanging on to games they'll never play again. Might as well sell them back for $10, so that someone else can buy them for $44.95, because you might as well save 5 bucks, right? The fact that no one gets a good deal means the market is ripe for someone to move in and do something creative. Best Buy could seriously conquer if they sold games for less and gave users more for their old games.
Don't ever assume that if corporations would and could do something, and it would benefit them, then they would already have done it. I can find hundreds if not thousands of counterexamples. Think of corporate leadership as being a big, dysfunctional family of blind, deaf, retarded trolls. Then everything will make sense.
If sony could stop used games from working it will help the devs but hurt them greatly .
Used games have become a huge deal now .
However if used games didn't exist on sonys platform but did on the xbox then people with less money will go to them .
At gamestop players choice games are traded in less often than any other type of game . Why ? Because we offer so little for them and they sell less used as there isn't much price diffrence.
IF games were to drop down to 30$ the used market would be cut in half if not greater . Gamers would most likely get 10 or sofor a used game and we would sell them at 20$ only a 10$ savings and with that many people will rather buy new .
If sony could stop used games from working it will help the devs but hurt them greatly.
Used games have become a huge deal now.
Used games has the same effect as piracy, Its not as big of a problem in US, but it is a big problem in Japan, and its even blame to increase software prices too. No doubt it'll hurt Sony more but they do get more royalty too I suppose.
However if used games didn't exist on sonys platform but did on the xbox then people with less money will go to them.
If Developers and Publishers really want such thing (I hope not), 3rd parties will simply boycott platforms that don't have such technology. It'll be like copy protection or region protection. Something that is expected as standard by Devs and Publishers. I don't think Sony can enforce it alone. But the industry can definitely flex its muscle to do it.
threepac3
10-Nov-2005, 10:56
Has anyone even considered that if this feature does exist that this would make PS3 automatically incompatible with PS4 when it is released?
Used games has the same effect as piracy, Its not as big of a problem in US, but it is a big problem in Japan, and its even blame to increase software prices too. No doubt it'll hurt Sony more but they do get more royalty too I suppose.
Speaking of which. Remember this controversy?
http://www.arts.or.jp/judge/judge_tokyo/t_17.html
(It's in English)
crystalcube
10-Nov-2005, 11:06
Has anyone even considered that if this feature does exist that this would make PS3 automatically incompatible with PS4 when it is released?
thats in distant future ... but in near future it would make backward compatibility with PS2/PS games useless ;)
Mefisutoferesu
10-Nov-2005, 11:25
I always wondered why videogames companies didn't open their own used games system. That way they'd at least get a piece of the pie and possibly be able to control the ebb and flow of used software sales...
london-boy
10-Nov-2005, 11:40
I always wondered why videogames companies didn't open their own used games system. That way they'd at least get a piece of the pie and possibly be able to control the ebb and flow of used software sales...
Something like Blockbuster's system of sending DVD's home for "rent" and let the customer keep them for as long as they like, then send them back when they're finished with it, would be just COOL.
Some companies do that already i think (personally i only ever used the DVD system), but a system like that from Sony themselves (or MS or Nintendo) would provide them profits directly so they couldn't complain really.
Titanio
10-Nov-2005, 12:00
Sorry if posted already?
But here's the patent:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=/netahtml/search-adv.htm&r=1&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=ptxt&S1=%28Kutaragi.INZZ.+AND+Sony.ASNM.%29&OS=in/Kutaragi+AND+an/Sony&RS=%28IN/Kutaragi+AND+AN/Sony
The important bit: this was originally filed for in Japan before PS2's release, in Apr 1999. PS2 and PSP have been developed and released without any such system being implemented. PS3 likely also will - not sure why people might suddenly expect Sony to start using this patent 3 systems later.
This thread should really end here. This thread might have been more relevant before the PS2's launch when this patent was actually filed, but even then nothing came of it.
Used games has the same effect as piracy, Its not as big of a problem in US, but it is a big problem in Japan, and its even blame to increase software prices too. No doubt it'll hurt Sony more but they do get more royalty too I suppose.
Used games are great for the retailers they make a crap load off it .
As for it hurting sony , it would hurt them because the used game market is huge. It would cut off a) a cheap supply of games for the consumer and b ) a quick cash flow when a new game comes out that a gamer wnats
If Developers and Publishers really want such thing (I hope not), 3rd parties will simply boycott platforms that don't have such technology. It'll be like copy protection or region protection. Something that is expected as standard by Devs and Publishers. I don't think Sony can enforce it alone. But the industry can definitely flex its muscle to do it.
It will all depend on the market .
For sony it be a bad move esp since they have 2 generations of games now where a majority of the psone and a good size chunk of the ps2 games are now unavalible new .
Used games are great for the retailers they make a crap load off it .
Pirated games are great for Pirates too, they make crap load of money off it. Developers and Publishers don't see a dime from those pirated games sold, same with the sell of used games great for retailers, heck even for consumers, but developers and publishers don't get any money of them.
It will all depend on the market.
In Japan they had a No Resale campaign before the court ruling. Say if you buy Dreamcast games from back then, they would have No Resale stamp on the case. Sega was one of the strong supporter of No Resale, especially Yu Suzuki spoke strongly about it, so are big companies like Square, Enix, Konami, Capcom, etc.
For sony it be a bad move esp since they have 2 generations of games now where a majority of the psone and a good size chunk of the ps2 games are now unavalible new .
I don't think its up to Sony, its most likely that publishers are pressuring companies like Sony to do something about it. If implemented it will be mostly be Japan only. In the US, it isn't a big problem yet.
Pirated games are great for Pirates too, they make crap load of money off it. Developers and Publishers don't see a dime from those pirated games sold, same with the sell of used games great for retailers, heck even for consumers, but developers and publishers don't get any money of them.
this is just a naive comment .
When a game is pirated a dev makes no money off it . When a game is sold used the developer was payed for the inital sale. After that the owner cand do whatever he pleases with it . When he sells it back to the retailer the retailer makes money . They make money too keep the store open and sell the new games that they recieve a very small fee for and the developer or publisher is payed well for it .
And yes retailers do make little off the actual games .
In Japan they had a No Resale campaign before the court ruling. Say if you buy Dreamcast games from back then, they would have No Resale stamp on the case. Sega was one of the strong supporter of No Resale, especially Yu Suzuki spoke strongly about it, so are big companies like Square, Enix, Konami, Capcom, etc.
Sadly stoping used games will kill off most game retailers . Now if the industry wants us to go back to the days of toys'r'us being our supplier of games and kill off almost 3 thousand gamestops / ebs and all the other small gamestores out there , then that is fine . However thier sales will not go up by much . They may actually just go down . People who would buy used will still not buy new .
I don't think its up to Sony, its most likely that publishers are pressuring companies like Sony to do something about it. If implemented it will be mostly be Japan only. In the US, it isn't a big problem yet.
Gamestops sales are 60% used since 2004 . When will it be a big problem ? when its 90% used ?
blakjedi
10-Nov-2005, 13:51
The smart way!
If the developers really want a kick back from used game sales then they should partner up with the console manufactures and setup a "buy back" program. One big conglomerate between the developers and each individual console maker. They offer consumers a way to sell their used/unwanted games to them, in which they resell to others at a profit.
How its done
Have the consumers setup an online account through these newly internet ready consoles in which the console will tell you how much your game is worth (its in the drive). They credit an online account with the set amount of money that game is worth as long as the game is post marked/shipped by the date corresponding to their requests. They offer the consumer the ability to receive actual money from the game once received or the ability to have a game shipped to them from the current stock of used games available. The consumer could then place a "wanted" list of games they are interested in buying used and when available the console could give them a message saying so. If someone sends in 3 games and has over $50 credit then they could "pre-order" newly released games(or have CC information stored securely as well).
Too bad when this does happen some people are going to make millions off of it and I'm going to beat my head on pavement for not doing it myself :evil:
Great Idea and post. If you get EA, Nintendo, Sony, MS, Take-Two, Ubisoft, and THQ in a room and pitch it... It just might sell... Good Luck!
blakjedi
10-Nov-2005, 14:05
I always wondered why videogames companies didn't open their own used games system. That way they'd at least get a piece of the pie and possibly be able to control the ebb and flow of used software sales...
Actually I know why. As a publisher I'm not going to pay you for your part time use of my new game. So you finished the game? "Play it again!"
With EB as the middle man they pay the consumer then attempt to resell the product. The entire original profit the dev/publisher made stays with them but EB had to give back part of their profit to the seller... in the hopes that they could sell it again (which might not be true). All the risk and profit loss is with EB after the original sale is completed. *That* model does not interest publishers.
Pirated games are great for Pirates too, they make crap load of money off it. Developers and Publishers don't see a dime from those pirated games sold, same with the sell of used games great for retailers, heck even for consumers, but developers and publishers don't get any money of them.
Huge difference. The pirate needs only one copy of the game, which I guess he doesn't even buy to then copy it and sell it in the hundreds, so he makes loads of money and at the same time "robbing" the devs/pubs of many many sold copies. The used game market is different, one old game will only "rob" devs/pubs of only one sale. I doubt a used game wil be resold 100s of times...
Actually I know why. As a publisher I'm not going to pay you for your part time use of my new game. So you finished the game? "Play it again!"
That is the kind of stifness that might kill the industry. They have to be more flexible and follow the flow so to speak. The world is changing and they might have to change to, you can't use 100s of years of old practises in an extremely fast evolving economical scene, with global markets and what not. But sure it awlays so much easier to just forbid stuff than come up with new interesting ideas and adapt to the changes...
Powderkeg
10-Nov-2005, 14:52
With EB as the middle man they pay the consumer then attempt to resell the product. The entire original profit the dev/publisher made stays with them but EB had to give back part of their profit to the seller... in the hopes that they could sell it again (which might not be true).
I can assure you about half of the Xbox games I traded in will never be resold.
Anyone interested in a used copy of Apex?
MrWibble
10-Nov-2005, 17:13
Gamestops sales are 60% used since 2004 . When will it be a big problem ? when its 90% used ?
That's an interesting factoid - I didn't realise the numbers would be that high (though I'm not familar with the chain myself so I don't know if that's typical or not).
I still have mixed feelings about it. I'd love it if everyone always bought shiny new copies of the games and never traded used stuff just because of the positive effect it would have on smaller publishers. But trying to stop it in any kind of official way would be horrible thing for consumer rights and I can't see any legitimate justification for it. It's something some people *want* not something that's intrinsicly right.
Oh - anyone moaning about game prices - try to remember that the distribution chain takes the biggest cuts for probably lower risks than the developers and publishers. I'd be quite happy to cut them all out of the loop if possible - in fact I only very rarely buy anything from a shop these days, but even online sellers buy from distributors and have sizeable markups. If you want cheaper games, then costs have to be cut from the distribution side, and that means that side of the business taking a smaller slice and dealing less used stuff. Buying used games will help push the price of new stuff up.
I usually rake through the used bins whenever I'm in a shop - not because I'm looking to buy something but because I want to see if any of my old games are in there, and if they are, how much they're worth 2nd hand... last time I found one it was going for a pretty good price which was actually quite nice to see. I don't think there were any new on the shelf (though I know for a fact that had the shop wanted to stock some, there as some unsold copies sat in a warehouse somewhere... ) but even if there were I wouldn't begrudge someone picking up a cheap copy.
Here's another wrinkle to the used games or second hand games debate.
A lot of people are already lining up sales or swaps of many of the Xbox 360 games (and accessories) they are forced to take in order to get the console as a part of a bundle.
They may sell or trade them unopened or may sell them after trying them briefly.
Now, publishers/developers benefit from these bundles, do they not? The bundles guarantee them certain sales of their games?
Do they give deals to the distributors and stores to get in those bundles or are the stores just picking certain games?
london-boy
10-Nov-2005, 17:27
For one, i would think that if Sony (or anyone else) was able to make games completely secure, and no one were able to play pirated or second hand games, i would surely expect prices for those games to be much lower than they are today, seen how their "loss making evil doers" would be defeated.
Will that ever happen? ... err......
mckmas8808
10-Nov-2005, 17:42
For one, i would think that if Sony (or anyone else) was able to make games completely secure, and no one were able to play pirated or second hand games, i would surely expect prices for those games to be much lower than they are today, seen how their "loss making evil doers" would be defeated.
Will that ever happen? ... err......
No because of what Titanio posted earlier.
The important bit: this was originally filed for in Japan before PS2's release, in Apr 1999. PS2 and PSP have been developed and released without any such system being implemented. PS3 likely also will - not sure why people might suddenly expect Sony to start using this patent 3 systems later.
This thread should really end here. This thread might have been more relevant before the PS2's launch when this patent was actually filed, but even then nothing came of it.
That's an interesting factoid - I didn't realise the numbers would be that high (though I'm not familar with the chain myself so I don't know if that's typical or not).
I still have mixed feelings about it. I'd love it if everyone always bought shiny new copies of the games and never traded used stuff just because of the positive effect it would have on smaller publishers. But trying to stop it in any kind of official way would be horrible thing for consumer rights and I can't see any legitimate justification for it. It's something some people *want* not something that's intrinsicly right.
Oh - anyone moaning about game prices - try to remember that the distribution chain takes the biggest cuts for probably lower risks than the developers and publishers. I'd be quite happy to cut them all out of the loop if possible - in fact I only very rarely buy anything from a shop these days, but even online sellers buy from distributors and have sizeable markups. If you want cheaper games, then costs have to be cut from the distribution side, and that means that side of the business taking a smaller slice and dealing less used stuff. Buying used games will help push the price of new stuff up.
I usually rake through the used bins whenever I'm in a shop - not because I'm looking to buy something but because I want to see if any of my old games are in there, and if they are, how much they're worth 2nd hand... last time I found one it was going for a pretty good price which was actually quite nice to see. I don't think there were any new on the shelf (though I know for a fact that had the shop wanted to stock some, there as some unsold copies sat in a warehouse somewhere... ) but even if there were I wouldn't begrudge someone picking up a cheap copy.
Gamestop sells used dvds and games . Its our cash cow .
Its so big that now othre chains like coconuts (movies and music) are now doing trade ins
Master-Mold
10-Nov-2005, 20:40
All I have to say is that any console that has a system that only allows the playing of new games on said console will never be purchased by me. Imagine the headaches this would cause :cry:
The problem is far too many games come out that are over-hyped and wind up sucking. I am not buying a $50 game only to realize I dont like it then I am stuck with it. At least trading it back in will get you some money back.
Same goes for renting. If I cant try before I buy on a game I am uncertain about or have quality issues with then I wont buy it until it hits the $20 bin. If Sony wants to do this then start charging $25 for all your new games or shut-up.
Until every single game that comes out is a quality 9/10 rated piece of software this system wont work. (at least for me)
Bobbler
10-Nov-2005, 20:53
I don't really understand what would make anyone think that all of a sudden Sony would implement a thing that they designed 5 years ago (and based off similar things dating back 10+ years). What evidence is there and what made a 5 year old patent make people assume such a wildly stupid thing would be implemented?
Even if the patent was new, what makes anyone think they would do it? Do you guys not realize how many patents are taken out on things that are never used? Dare I say, a majority of patents are like that. Its frivolous patenting; patent something that you might use someday or someone else might use. Companies come up with ideas and patent them, often with no intention of using them.
Currently there is no evidence that Sony would pull off something this silly with the most important product they have. Especially not SCE, which has shown no intentions of ridiculous actions like this in the past.
Brodda Thep
10-Nov-2005, 21:19
While the patent is rediculous, the idea seems to have some merit.
Let me preface this by saying that I do not think it could ever happen. But if you could guarantee that everyone was connected online you could attach games to user accounts with cdkeys. This would allow you to take your game to a friends house and play it by logging onto your account, but you would be unable to resell it.
They could even limit the resale by allowing up to two or three of the cdkeys to be in their database at any single time. After that, the game would be no good to anyone.
Master-Mold
10-Nov-2005, 22:05
(Slightly off topic)
Brodda Thep were you, or are you in Conquest?
Maybe its just a similar screen name:???:
Brodda Thep
10-Nov-2005, 23:22
Yes been with them for many years. Probably a bit longer than I have been lurking here!
YeuEmMaiMai
10-Nov-2005, 23:24
I don't really understand what would make anyone think that all of a sudden Sony would implement a thing that they designed 5 years ago (and based off similar things dating back 10+ years). What evidence is there and what made a 5 year old patent make people assume such a wildly stupid thing would be implemented?
Even if the patent was new, what makes anyone think they would do it? Do you guys not realize how many patents are taken out on things that are never used? Dare I say, a majority of patents are like that. Its frivolous patenting; patent something that you might use someday or someone else might use. Companies come up with ideas and patent them, often with no intention of using them.
Currently there is no evidence that Sony would pull off something this silly with the most important product they have. Especially not SCE, which has shown no intentions of ridiculous actions like this in the past.
Go take a look at the DRM thread in the software section and then come back and tell me if you still think the same way
Master-Mold
10-Nov-2005, 23:33
Yes been with them for many years. Probably a bit longer than I have been lurking here!
Thought so.
Before myself and alot of my old guild quit playing WoW do to its uber-sucky end game I used to peruse the Conquest forums. We used your map of Molten Core like 8 months ago on our first few tries to know when bosses were coming up. :D
It took me awhile to place where I had seen that name then it came to me out of no where.
mckmas8808
10-Nov-2005, 23:37
Go take a look at the DRM thread in the software section and then come back and tell me if you still think the same way
Again why do you think Sony would do this after the patent has been out for 5 to 6 years. They didn't do it with the PS2. And they didn't do it with the PSP either.
YeuEmMaiMai
11-Nov-2005, 02:49
Sony wants to get as much money as they can and that is why they will go to any lenghts nessescary to get it. Please read the DRM thread as they will even potentally screw up someone's PC to accomplish their goal.
Bobbler
11-Nov-2005, 02:49
Go take a look at the DRM thread in the software section and then come back and tell me if you still think the same way
I surely hope you don't believe that's a valid reason for making wild assumptions about a 5 year old patent being put into use when there has been ample opportunity to pull a stunt like this all the way back to PS1 (look at the patents this one is based on, they explain very similar things and date back 10+ years).
Not only has there been plenty of opportunity to implement it already, Sony is notorious for having situations where "the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing" -- Different divisions at Sony may as well be different companies... Because Sony BMG is being retarded doesn't mean SCE is going to. I'm pretty sure Sony would be a bit more careful about its Playstation than to try to pull something like this, its laughable to suggest such a thing -- some of you guys must really hope SCE is that stupid, otherwise there would be no reason to even pander to such a thought. SCE hasn't given any reason to believe they'd do anything like this.
If it turns out true, hurray for SCE being as dumb as some of you hoped, but assuming straight away this is true (even if Sony BMG is being absurd at the moment) is silly at best.
YeuEmMaiMai
11-Nov-2005, 17:42
I surely hope you don't believe that's a valid reason for making wild assumptions about a 5 year old patent being put into use when there has been ample opportunity to pull a stunt like this all the way back to PS1 (look at the patents this one is based on, they explain very similar things and date back 10+ years).
Not only has there been plenty of opportunity to implement it already, Sony is notorious for having situations where "the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing" -- Different divisions at Sony may as well be different companies... Because Sony BMG is being retarded doesn't mean SCE is going to. I'm pretty sure Sony would be a bit more careful about its Playstation than to try to pull something like this, its laughable to suggest such a thing -- some of you guys must really hope SCE is that stupid, otherwise there would be no reason to even pander to such a thought. SCE hasn't given any reason to believe they'd do anything like this.
If it turns out true, hurray for SCE being as dumb as some of you hoped, but assuming straight away this is true (even if Sony BMG is being absurd at the moment) is silly at best.
It didn't take long for their software to be used to try and hose up a PC
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/11/10/sony.hack.reut/index.html
A computer security firm said Thursday it had discovered the first virus that uses music publisher Sony BMG's controversial CD copy-protection software to hide on PCs and wreak havoc.
Powderkeg
11-Nov-2005, 17:46
I laughed at that when I read it, but I don't see how it's relevent to this discussion at all.
Bobbler
11-Nov-2005, 17:46
It didn't take long for their software to be used to try and hose up a PC
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/11/10/sony.hack.reut/index.html
A computer security firm said Thursday it had discovered the first virus that uses music publisher Sony BMG's controversial CD copy-protection software to hide on PCs and wreak havoc.
I'm still quite unsure what this has to do with the patent or Sony's intention of using it on the PS3, no matter how big and bold you type it out.
YeuEmMaiMai
11-Nov-2005, 18:02
If SOny is willing to install software that infringes on your rights what makes any of you believe that they would not for a second try to limit the used game market to make money.
There is a lot of BS discussion about patents being 5 years old but you are overlooking one simple aspect. The technology was not cheap enough to use in mass production until now with simple DVD writers retailing for under $40 and CD writers for about $20.
Now they have the patents and the technoligy at a cheap enough price point to impliment it.
Bobbler
11-Nov-2005, 18:09
If SOny is willing to install software that infringes on your rights what makes any of you believe that they would not for a second try to limit the used game market to make money.
There is a lot of BS discussion about patents being 5 years old but you are overlooking one simple aspect. The technology was not cheap enough to use in mass production until now with simple DVD writers retailing for under $40 and CD writers for about $20.
Now they have the patents and the technoligy at a cheap enough price point to impliment it.
I don't suppose you're ready to drop the belief that Sony will do this anytime soon, so the discussion is entirely moot. You keep on believing that, and we'll see what happens.
macabre
15-Nov-2005, 21:34
Update:
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/games/archives/2005/11/15/sonys_clampdown_on_secondhand_games_updated.html
Bobbler
15-Nov-2005, 21:45
Update:
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/games/archives/2005/11/15/sonys_clampdown_on_secondhand_games_updated.html
Nice. At least it is confirmed (even though it hardly needed to be).
YeuEmMaiMai
16-Nov-2005, 03:46
I don't suppose you're ready to drop the belief that Sony will do this anytime soon, so the discussion is entirely moot. You keep on believing that, and we'll see what happens.
Well so far it would appear that I would be a lot closeer to being right based upon their current actions...........
london-boy
16-Nov-2005, 09:37
Uhm... Confirmed that this whole thing was bullshit. Finally we can drop this nonsense.
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.