Exclusive games that can't be sold as 2nd hand but is 25% cheaper.. could be a potential killer. hmm on the other hand it also takes away the possibility to actual buy used games.. hmmm
DRM Implications *spin*
- Thread starter -tkf-
- Start date
Exclusive games that can't be sold as 2nd hand but is 25% cheaper.. could be a potential killer. hmm on the other hand it also takes away the possibility to actual buy used games.. hmmm
Do you think its possible that EA games would be $60 on Durango and Origin, but $70 on PS4 with Sony allowing used games?
I doubt they do, whoever is buying your used games most likely purchases the DLC and the online pass if there is one.
Don't see the fuss of not allowing used games, although I don't buy them, or sell my own (this is down to my need to be the only one to play my games, bit of OCD lol)
So when the game goes budget and has all DLC included and an online pass, publishers are actually losing money, well not maximising their profits at least.
Don't see the fuss of not allowing used games, although I don't buy them, or sell my own (this is down to my need to be the only one to play my games, bit of OCD lol)
So when the game goes budget and has all DLC included and an online pass, publishers are actually losing money, well not maximising their profits at least.
I don't think EA would do that. It will be a perceived negative to the ps market and probably hurt their sales more there than help durango.
It's quite possible EA will have no used games on both platforms imo. Online pass and Origin requirements have been mostly accepted after the usually wailing and gnashing of teeth on the forums.
(((interference)))
Veteran
http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1825118/xbox_720_to_block_used_games_eidos_head.html
Even the Eidos president is saying no used games and no offline for 720.
And I'm going to be extremely pissed off if BF4 is a timed 720 exclusive thanks to MS's moneyhatting.
Even the Eidos president is saying no used games and no offline for 720.
And I'm going to be extremely pissed off if BF4 is a timed 720 exclusive thanks to MS's moneyhatting.
(((interference)))
Veteran
MS are not going to buy EA.
Having the most powerful system might be the most important thing for me but that doesn't mean other things are unimportant.
Of course Gamestop are a bunch of profiteers, but you should try eBay, by cutting out the middle man you can make a decent amount of money back selling used titles and buying used titles is also cheaper than Gamestop.
I guess it also depends on where you live, in the US new games are pretty cheap, here in Australia new AAA titles can cost $100 or more, why pay that much when you can buy the same used game for half that (do you want to reward regional price discrimination by greedy publishers?)
Most of my games are bought new (from online retailers in the UK or Asia, rather than Aus retailers), except for older titles that I want to play - selling used games on eBay definitely lets me buy more new games though.
Plus it'll mean I can't borrow or lend titles to my friends.
And how are game returns going to work?
Blocking used games is on the whole a loss for consumers, despite individuals not buying used games and claiming it doesn't matter to them.
It's ridiculous anyway, you can resell DVDs, Blurays and music CDs - what makes games special.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mainly because of my son I now no longer trade my games, that along with never getting any real value from the trade. So I am ok with no used games along as it means say a $49.99 retail new, or even more casual type games for much much less. (thinking those Rare games at $39 for example)
From a consumer friendly stance I don't like it, especially if a publisher can keep prices high and won't drop them based on demand. Used game are important to the overall market, regardless of the bottom line to the developers. I buy new to support the work, but I remember when I had to scrape the couch for change and then console gaming was all used games for me.
Double edge sword this all is, if we are to see the rumors pan out to be true. No used game helps the content providers, should lessen black market sales, hurts the consumer and therefore could lead to overall console sales in general. Lower attach rates, etc. If this is true, maybe there is an end-game that makes sense that we do not see yet. $1 to transfer a used license, etc.
What worries me the most, is how will mutiple console households be handled? I have 4 Xbox and I use the family plan, and what bugs me is that my XBLA content is not easy to move around. I can't play Dust in the living room and then switch to my computer desk if the wife wants to watch AIV. I was (erm am) really hoping that MS works this out so I can easily move around the house with my content. Having a disc already works! I can have it installed on each console, using the cloud save I just move to another room. Really would like to see this improved for XBLIG, GoD, and XBLA for sure!
Always online for me is fine, even my thermostat is online so my house is already fully wired. Seems a bit odd to me though to make this required, yet again this makes your mass market product less consumer friendly and harder to use. No longer is it just plug and go. So I have to wonder if this rumor is really true, and if it is how they actually think it will work out for them. I have to guess it might work in one market and then be none existent in another market - maybe they know this and have worked it all out. I just don't see the gains to be less consumer friendly, is this due to the used game/piracy and is the lost sales of consoles and content that much larger?
Kinect is great, but we only use it for VC for streaming videos, and I really like it Skyrim and Mass Effect. Dragon shouting at night when the wife is sleeping is great! ;p Motion controls can stay away from my view, only game that my son will play is Kinectimals though he really loves it. I do worry that if a Kinect mic is built into the console that it will be rather worthless in my case, it would be in most all of my installs too far away from the screens to be useful.
Been great to read these forums over the years, hope to actually contribute.
I used to have a retail store, so I know how horrible the markup is for a low volume retailer on games and consoles, if you want to stay open as a store you make it off used. New just gets the customer in the doors, the $5 markup just hurts after you paid shipping anyway.
It is such an interesting problem this all is, if the rumors are true for either party or both, I can't see how it helps the overall market. I know why the publishers want it, but what is the breakeven of lost sales vs used game only sales? What is the breakeven to less consoles in the market to sell content to. And please keep the micro-transactions away from me I have stopped playing any game that has gone from a monthly fee to free with micro transactions. So if EA is doing that and it hurts my experience with the next ME game, well honestly I am not sure I will even buy it.
From a consumer friendly stance I don't like it, especially if a publisher can keep prices high and won't drop them based on demand. Used game are important to the overall market, regardless of the bottom line to the developers. I buy new to support the work, but I remember when I had to scrape the couch for change and then console gaming was all used games for me.
Double edge sword this all is, if we are to see the rumors pan out to be true. No used game helps the content providers, should lessen black market sales, hurts the consumer and therefore could lead to overall console sales in general. Lower attach rates, etc. If this is true, maybe there is an end-game that makes sense that we do not see yet. $1 to transfer a used license, etc.
What worries me the most, is how will mutiple console households be handled? I have 4 Xbox and I use the family plan, and what bugs me is that my XBLA content is not easy to move around. I can't play Dust in the living room and then switch to my computer desk if the wife wants to watch AIV. I was (erm am) really hoping that MS works this out so I can easily move around the house with my content. Having a disc already works! I can have it installed on each console, using the cloud save I just move to another room. Really would like to see this improved for XBLIG, GoD, and XBLA for sure!
Always online for me is fine, even my thermostat is online so my house is already fully wired. Seems a bit odd to me though to make this required, yet again this makes your mass market product less consumer friendly and harder to use. No longer is it just plug and go. So I have to wonder if this rumor is really true, and if it is how they actually think it will work out for them. I have to guess it might work in one market and then be none existent in another market - maybe they know this and have worked it all out. I just don't see the gains to be less consumer friendly, is this due to the used game/piracy and is the lost sales of consoles and content that much larger?
Kinect is great, but we only use it for VC for streaming videos, and I really like it Skyrim and Mass Effect. Dragon shouting at night when the wife is sleeping is great! ;p Motion controls can stay away from my view, only game that my son will play is Kinectimals though he really loves it. I do worry that if a Kinect mic is built into the console that it will be rather worthless in my case, it would be in most all of my installs too far away from the screens to be useful.
Been great to read these forums over the years, hope to actually contribute.
I tend to hold on to games until they have no trade value even though used they are still $40 or $50. For me I would be ok with no used games (I don't buy them anymore) and seeing lower retail prices that still benefit myself and the publisher. However, I don't think no used games is the right thing for consumers, and at this point until I know "if" and "how" it will work I think it will be harmful to both the developers/publisher and console makers.Originally Posted by bkilian
Yes, going into gamestop actually makes me angry. I took some games back once, and they gave me about $6 a game, and then turned around and sold them for ~$54. A 10% discount does not scream "used" to me. Nowadays I pre-order my games online, and usually get either the same 10% discount, or extras with about that value. Gamestop is dead to me.
I used to have a retail store, so I know how horrible the markup is for a low volume retailer on games and consoles, if you want to stay open as a store you make it off used. New just gets the customer in the doors, the $5 markup just hurts after you paid shipping anyway.
It is such an interesting problem this all is, if the rumors are true for either party or both, I can't see how it helps the overall market. I know why the publishers want it, but what is the breakeven of lost sales vs used game only sales? What is the breakeven to less consoles in the market to sell content to. And please keep the micro-transactions away from me I have stopped playing any game that has gone from a monthly fee to free with micro transactions. So if EA is doing that and it hurts my experience with the next ME game, well honestly I am not sure I will even buy it.
I could see a lot more people rushing to piracy if they're unable to purchase used games. And then that would make the cracking of the new Xbox that much more enticing for those that would be able to profit from it. Thus the system gets cracked earlier in its time (possibly due to more people trying to crack it over the goldmine they could make in the black market) and then piracy runs rampant and then devs are really screwed because even more people would pirate games.
Or maybe MS will introduce a new pricing scheme based upon the length of time the game has been on the market. Full price first 6 months and then a $10 - $15 decrease every 6 months thereafter until a base price of $20 - $30 is reached. That wouldn't be so bad, and would be a boon for gamers entering this generation later in the life of the console, which is the majority of them. They could end up buying a lot of games when purchasing the console so there'd still be money to be made. I quite like this idea, maybe the length of time should be increased to a longer interval, but still not as nice as being able to purchase a used game.
I don't sell my games ever so I'm not in that part of the market./ But many friends of mine do sell their games because they're either cheap bastards or not in the financial position to do so. So I get that there's a market for used games and taking that away from some of these people could be a big deterrent from purchasing a new console. And these are people that, IME, tend to purchase consoles later along. Something like a price reduction over a certain period of time would be highly beneficial for both these consumers and also the console manufacturer that disallows the selling and purchasing of used games.
Or maybe MS will introduce a new pricing scheme based upon the length of time the game has been on the market. Full price first 6 months and then a $10 - $15 decrease every 6 months thereafter until a base price of $20 - $30 is reached. That wouldn't be so bad, and would be a boon for gamers entering this generation later in the life of the console, which is the majority of them. They could end up buying a lot of games when purchasing the console so there'd still be money to be made. I quite like this idea, maybe the length of time should be increased to a longer interval, but still not as nice as being able to purchase a used game.
I don't sell my games ever so I'm not in that part of the market./ But many friends of mine do sell their games because they're either cheap bastards or not in the financial position to do so. So I get that there's a market for used games and taking that away from some of these people could be a big deterrent from purchasing a new console. And these are people that, IME, tend to purchase consoles later along. Something like a price reduction over a certain period of time would be highly beneficial for both these consumers and also the console manufacturer that disallows the selling and purchasing of used games.
Advantages of no used games with always online DRM:
- We gets a small instant rebate compared to a completely arbitrary price.
Advantages of physical media without online DRM:
- You can lend/borrow/give/receive games from friends, family members or coworkers.
- You can still find the game when the company stopped selling it. It still exists.
- When a well reviewed games falls short of expectations, you can sell it back, or sell it to a friend, family member or coworker who likes that kind of shitty game. You didn't instantly lose $60.
- You don't have to hold on to your hardware/password with your dear life because it has $1000 worth of games in it.
- You can play now, whether you have a working internet connection or not, of if there's maintenance, or you just moved and internet will only be installed in the next two week.
- You can play later even if there's not enough people to justify keeping the auth servers online.
- Once they shut down the servers, which will happen eventually, you won't lose instantly $1000 worth of games.
- There's isn't a critical single point of failure in the system that would be a major target of anarchist hackers to ddos.
No used games will turn gaming into an ephemeral fast food consumption of games. It will take away the value of owning a game and will reduce it's long term artistic value to something as cheap and forgettable as reality shows. You want to claim games are Art? Good luck. It will slowly kill the industry. I'm all for Copy-Protection, but online DRM is the devil incarnate and anti-consumer.
- We gets a small instant rebate compared to a completely arbitrary price.
Advantages of physical media without online DRM:
- You can lend/borrow/give/receive games from friends, family members or coworkers.
- You can still find the game when the company stopped selling it. It still exists.
- When a well reviewed games falls short of expectations, you can sell it back, or sell it to a friend, family member or coworker who likes that kind of shitty game. You didn't instantly lose $60.
- You don't have to hold on to your hardware/password with your dear life because it has $1000 worth of games in it.
- You can play now, whether you have a working internet connection or not, of if there's maintenance, or you just moved and internet will only be installed in the next two week.
- You can play later even if there's not enough people to justify keeping the auth servers online.
- Once they shut down the servers, which will happen eventually, you won't lose instantly $1000 worth of games.
- There's isn't a critical single point of failure in the system that would be a major target of anarchist hackers to ddos.
No used games will turn gaming into an ephemeral fast food consumption of games. It will take away the value of owning a game and will reduce it's long term artistic value to something as cheap and forgettable as reality shows. You want to claim games are Art? Good luck. It will slowly kill the industry. I'm all for Copy-Protection, but online DRM is the devil incarnate and anti-consumer.
If MS bites the bullet and disallows used games, publishers will be coming to _them_ and suggesting timed exclusives. Publishers, in general, have been pretty down on reselling without a new license for a while now.
The way I'd do it would be that everyone licenses post purchase, all the disc does is save your bandwidth. So say you pay $10 to gamestop for the disc and manual, and then $30-$40 online for a license for the full game. Having only the disc puts you into a demo mode where you can only, say, play the first level.
Now you've solved the used game problem, people can resell their disc all they like, it's worth about $10. You can lend it to a friend, and they can determine if the game is one they want to play, and removing the gamestop middleman allows you to reduce the licensing price. Want to save an extra $10? Download it, assuming you have bandwidth/download available on your internet plan. Also, if you decide you don't like the game after all, you're only out $10, or less if you sell the disc back.
I think its far more likely that the platform holders will leave the decision up to the publishers than just banning used games on a platform, it's pretty much the way region locking works now.
IMO it's a somewhat moot point long term, if you believe that online distribution is going to be dominant eventually then it seems like a bad plan to alienate consumers today.
IMO it's a somewhat moot point long term, if you believe that online distribution is going to be dominant eventually then it seems like a bad plan to alienate consumers today.
The way I'd do it is similar to the way it is now on the Vita.
Physical media works anywhere, used or not. Copy protection is part of the disc.
Digital downloads are linked to account, but are discounted to compensate for the lower value and it's ephemeral quality.
Choice.
Collectors and other people like me will pay extra for the disc version. The Vita has a higher price for the cart version and people still buy the cart despite the major inconvenience of swapping carts to play. They could allow to play offline with the disc, and require to be online to play noCD (either downloaded or installed version). It's the best of both worlds. It's not anti-consumer anymore.
The people who allow this kind of travesty to happen get what they deserve. Blaming other companies because they managed to shovel this down their consumers' throat and make more money is a sleazy excuse. Might as well revive DIVX, it's pure genius!!!
Physical media works anywhere, used or not. Copy protection is part of the disc.
Digital downloads are linked to account, but are discounted to compensate for the lower value and it's ephemeral quality.
Choice.
Collectors and other people like me will pay extra for the disc version. The Vita has a higher price for the cart version and people still buy the cart despite the major inconvenience of swapping carts to play. They could allow to play offline with the disc, and require to be online to play noCD (either downloaded or installed version). It's the best of both worlds. It's not anti-consumer anymore.
The people who allow this kind of travesty to happen get what they deserve. Blaming other companies because they managed to shovel this down their consumers' throat and make more money is a sleazy excuse. Might as well revive DIVX, it's pure genius!!!
(((interference)))
Veteran
Yes, I think this is something one of the GAF insiders hinted at - that the API for blocking used games is there but it is up to the publishers to decide.
However from the comments of various executives and knowing how the publishers work, most will take up the option and block used games on the 720
True, hope that doesn't happen.
I don't mind if they extended the $10 online pass to being necessary to activate all used games (including single player titles). That would be pretty fair I think.
What I don't understand is why game publishers think their particular industry should ban used sales of physical media, when even the music and film industry, who are far more aggressive on IP and copyright issues haven't been campaigning for this.
I'm betting it's more of outrage at the profiteering of the likes of Gamestop rather than anything else, if used game sales were restricted to eBay, classifieds, between friends etc they would care far less.
It's just seeing used new releases sold for just $5 less than the new games on adjacent shelves - of which Gamestop is pocketing 100% and they're not getting a dime from, that must raise the bile of the publishers.
It will be funny to see how EU reacts if used games are banned...
http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-07/cp120094en.pdf
http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-07/cp120094en.pdf
It won't work. They still allow the game to be sold, it's only a small demo, while the original owner gets a bonus content which is... the whole game. They're doing this right now with bonus DLC that cannot be transfered and online pass which enables "bonus" online multiplayer. They are above the law now. Thank the lawyers and lobbyists.
I think the thread's title is aptly named. You're all crazy. j/k LOL I can't remember the last time I bought a used game. Yes, I used to buy them all the time. It was the only way I could afford some titles, but then something happened: I decided to quit wasting time & money on crap titles & saved up for titles that were worthy of paying for at full price. Yes, I spent more at front, but in the long run I got more time & value out of the ones did buy: quality over quantity. Personally I will probably continue this next gen. Buying very few high quality games either at launch or near launch for full price & possibly with pre-order incentives. I will also continue to buy a hand-full of small digital indie titles at $5 or less.
But here's the kicker, I don't think the next-gen system(s) will have the same kind of ecosystem if used titles are no longer allowed. There will be new ways to play & enjoy titles. There will be more incentives to buy new games. More DLC, more custom content, more swag. After a game is out there will probably be all kinds of discounts available over the life of the system. There will probably be opportunities for free timed play(demos) & rentals for those that don't want to buy a title outright. There will probably be even free to play games with micro-transactions.
Guys, these companies are not stupid. They're not making rash decisions with no research to back-up their decisions. They know full well that people are not going to take too well to having used games taken away from them. They are going to try to sweeten the pot to try ease everybody into this no-used game market. And they're going to do it whether we like it or not. So there is no need to get all hysterical over it. Let's see what they have in store first. It might not be as bad as you think. If it is, then you can go all ape. LOL
Tommy McClain
I can't remember the last time I bought a used game. Yes, I used to buy them all the time. It was the only way I could afford some titles, but then something happened: I decided to quit wasting time & money on crap titles & saved up for titles that were worthy of paying for at full price. Yes, I spent more at front, but in the long run I got more time & value out of the ones did buy: quality over quantity. Personally I will probably continue this next gen. Buying very few high quality games either at launch or near launch for full price & possibly with pre-order incentives. I will also continue to buy a hand-full of small digital indie titles at $5 or less.But here's the kicker, I don't think the next-gen system(s) will have the same kind of ecosystem if used titles are no longer allowed. There will be new ways to play & enjoy titles. There will be more incentives to buy new games. More DLC, more custom content, more swag. After a game is out there will probably be all kinds of discounts available over the life of the system. There will probably be opportunities for free timed play(demos) & rentals for those that don't want to buy a title outright. There will probably be even free to play games with micro-transactions.
Guys, these companies are not stupid. They're not making rash decisions with no research to back-up their decisions. They know full well that people are not going to take too well to having used games taken away from them. They are going to try to sweeten the pot to try ease everybody into this no-used game market. And they're going to do it whether we like it or not. So there is no need to get all hysterical over it. Let's see what they have in store first. It might not be as bad as you think. If it is, then you can go all ape. LOL
Tommy McClain
How are pc games handled now and why would console games be any different ?
