Online Activation Codes or why there will be no second hand games (deja-vu) *SPAWN*

Another great question is are we supposed to believe Twisted Pixels now? They are pretty ridiculous themselves with out of control speculation,

Well, the guy is right at some level, feb 20th is near and we have read only "good things" for PS4 and a lot of "bad things" for Durango.
 
I always thought it was something natural, associate the license to play a game to an account and nothing else, like on steam...

still, if the console is always connected to the Internet, why sell physical copies?
There's a whole thread on alternative distribution, and it's clear that physical copy is still essential. Heck, a 50 GB game would exceed my monthly BW by 25%! MS are obviosly aware of this as they've included an optical drive (driveless SKU later?), so the rumoured always on connection would be for policing and services.
 
I always thought it was something natural, associate the license to play a game to an account and nothing else, like on steam...

still, if the console is always connected to the Internet, why sell physical copies?

Blocking copies linking them to a single account for me makes sense.
Play/be always online is from my point of view pointless with physical copies because if you ask/demand that form customers then you might just make the console digital delivery only.
Being digital delivery only was considered and dropped by both Sony & MS because it is not yet feasible for the reason listed by patsu so the most plausible solution for Sony & MS is to devise ways to lock games without the need of an internet connection.

Either that or just make digital delivery a better more appetizing option/choice for players which can be achieved in one easy move: significantly lower the prices only for digital delivery games.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blocking copies linking them to a single account for me makes sense.
Play/be always online is from my point of view pointless with physical copies because if you ask/demand that form customers then you might just make the console digital delivery only.
Infrastructure isn't there for digital delivery only. Digital only wasn't an option. But always-on can be evaluated in an age of numerous always-on devices, like mobiles and smart TVs. As a means to tackle 2nd sales and piracy, if you feel your market is going to be comfortable with always on, it's a fair option with plenty of merit. I'm just not sure that always-on is going to be well received, especially among early adopters who I expect to be a little more informed and probably know of some of the headaches always on has dumped on PC gamers. People buying games and not being able to play them due to server issues would be one more nail in the coffin of the concept of the games console.
 
We need concrete info, and I dont think Sony will talk about PS4 DRM on the 20th.

Not the DRM per se, but they might talk about PS+ and your buying experiences. DRM is just the enabling technology underneath. It's the business policies that will be more interesting.
 
It's been said a million times before, if you want to combat "used games pirating" which is what some people consider it, then add some freaking value to your game over time. See burnout as an example.

Add online pass, add vaule to 2nd 3rd and 4th playthrough, unlockable characters, hidden lvls, add Co Op
Release new content, for free!

And no matter what is done, there will be some people that just buys the game, goes through it as fast as possible, get the highest possible used price, gets more new games and does the same.

The "anger" issue seems to be that there is a 3rd party involved that earns money on selling used games, well dear industry, take away the 3rd party by stepping in his place. Buy our used games for credits in your online store, give us discount on new games, open up a used market online for our Digital Purchases so we can trade them around. If needed they could put a limit on how often DD game could be sold and how soon after a purchase. The same with physical games, there is a wealth of options to be explored.

And take a cut on everything, earn money twice on your products.
 
I assume you could bring your Xbox Live Profile over to a friends house on a USB and log in there and play any game associated to your profile? The disc wont be worthless, you'll play the game off it or use it to install the game on your friends' xbox.

I believe the way it works with movies XBLA games now is there is one 'console' that is linked to your account and anyone who logs into that machine can play those games -or- wherever the XBL owner logs in to can play those games.

I don't see what we are reading as a much of a departure from that?
 
Thing to note is how restrictive this policy would be compared to content purchased for mobile devices.

Charge a very high price and load it up with all kinds of restrictions. Meanwhile there are other electronics toys which have a more relaxed DRM scheme. You can't sell the apps and games but they're a fraction of the price to begin with.
 
You can't sell the apps and games but they're a fraction of the price to begin with.

Mostly because they have a fraction of the value.

Xbox and PS already have digital sales that can't be sold. Online Pass is a reality for many EA and Activision games and probably many more of them in the future. Always online would be annoying and probably entirely unnecessary, not sure I see that coming to pass.
 
I don't care , maybe it will stop people from impulse buying crap games .

I've been buying pc games like this for the last decade and a half and I don't spend less than I used too. In fact I might be spending more than ever.
 
Always on Internet will kill market on school / university dormitories.

From my experience, the only online service that works behind lucid/squid proxy is just origin.

And it's not perfect too. The origin just able to connect and download but online play is unavailable.
 
This news really make me think..

Sony has genkai,MS onlive.

Sony has an 8core CPU with AMD GPU,MS has an 8core CPU with AMD GPU.

MS is say to block second hand games,Sony actually has a patent on blocking second hand games.

Is it me or MS and Sony appear to be some who synchronize.?

In fact if both actually do this Gamestop will have no choice but to carry both consoles,after all Gamestop also make money on new games and that is how in the old days most of the money was made.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This can get legally problematic in Europe. They would need to establish some kind of rent/service contract to avoid the selling of the product. If they sell the product the owner must be able to resell it and that would open a lot potential for lawsuits. But if they get into rent contracts they are liable to remove bugs for instance.

I can understand that game producers are frustrated with used copies but the film industry lived with the same problem. Imagine they would restrict you from being able to resell your bought DVD/Bluray. Nobody would accept that.

used copies of movies don't exist until the secondary revenue stream kicks in. That's how they do it.
 
This rumor has been going around for what, a year now? Just because it has a new "source" doesn't make it any more viable than it was. I'll believe it when I see it.

Frankly, it doesn't actually bother me in the slightest, since I don't support the used game market in any way. (my feelings are more against the used game retailers than for the developers), but I fail to see how they'll really be able to pull this off.

If it's made official at the announcements, there will probably be such an outcry that it will be removed before launch. And even if both of them try to do it, if one removes the feature, the other will have no choice but to follow suit (neither can afford to be the one that can't run used games).
 
This doesn't bother me at all.

However, there should be a selling tool/real money auction house built into the service with kickback to the developer and console maker.

You sell a game for $20. You get $10. Dev/pub get $8. Console maker gets $2.

I'd be in for that.
 
Killing off the used games market I'm not commenting on.

Forcing people to be online to play is a huge can of worms.
What happens when a player is playing single player and their router decides to take a nap?
What happens when Xbox Live is under maintenance?
What happens when the whole console is discontinued after 10~20 years and somebody wants to play an old game?
 
I imagine the concept is more of an online authorization rather than always-on connection like you'd see on a PC. Like some PC games will call home when you first start it up, then go offline for the remainder of your playtime, or how a HDD-installed X360 game will spin up the disc at launch to make sure it's legit, then play the rest of the game off the HDD.

Always-on simply won't work for a console. Half the Xboxes in the country are probably in kids' rooms where there's no active internet connection. And I personally know people who live in areas where there is no internet, period. They have to rely on cell networks or satellite for internet, which have extremely strict bandwidth caps and latency that makes gaming impossible. It's enough for them to be able to hook up and download updates or DLC, but that's it. By instituting this sort of DRM, you're effectively telling all those people that they just can't buy your console. Most people probably won't know about this restriction ahead of time, and will only find out Christmas afternoon when little Johnny tries to hook it up. Not exactly good press.
 
One thing I wondered about used games was on the impact on smaller, perhaps single player only titles. Perhaps the thing which is preventing a lot of the mainstream console games from innovating is the fact that a small number of copies of short lived games can exchange between quite a few hands without any developer/publisher remuneration. A lot of these titles seem to have moved towards direct download perhaps because of this fact a change in this market dynamic could help us see a greater variety of games released on disc.
 
Back
Top