Support NeoGAF

[Nealand Liquor]

:lol

Article is bullshit. No way does MS, or Sony, try to kill the second had game market, at least not next gen. And always needing to be online? :lol Talk about wanting the console market to crash again.

Nah. I'm not buying this 'news' at all.





You mean because GAF prefers Sony?

Agreed 100%. Everything you posted is exactly what I think about this rumor.

No 'Gaf' doesn't prefer Sony, but the sheer amount of Sony supporters on Gaf heavily outnumber their MS counterparts. The way I see it is that just because there are more of one than another, that doesn't automatically mean Gaf as a whole prefers Sony.

 

[Mr Swine]

I hope this is true, I never sell my games. Last time I did it was like3 years ago. Doesn't scare me one bit at all

 

[Ace Harding]

Bad moves. Does this mean I cannot, say, take my game over to a friend's to play? What if I don't want to be online all the time and want to play in private silence?

If this is true, I'm sure you'll be able to sign in under your GT and play the game as long as you're signed in. If not, yeah that would be pretty terrible.

Forever alone.

 

[Gee]

Guess I will skip this box if true.

 

[LyleLanley]

Buy now, yay or nay?
If this turns out to be wrong, gamestop shares are bound to go up again. If it's true, gamestop is fucked.

If this is true Gamestop is fucked, if it's not true then Gamestop will continue to do what it's currently doing while more and more games are being sold online. Either way I wouldn't buy shares in Gamestop.

 

[Eric C]

Stock is down today and analysts seem to be blaming the Edge report:



But a Piper Jaffrey analyst doesn't believe the rumor makes a lick of business sense:

This NeoGAF thread caused a 5% drop in GS stock a few weeks ago.
Sony has researched new tech for suppressing second-hand game sales

Sony's tech wouldn't even require an internet connection to stop used sales.

 

[Tyrone_Biggums]

Bad moves. Does this mean I cannot, say, take my game over to a friend's to play? What if I don't want to be online all the time and want to play in private silence?

Why would being online prevent you from playing in private? You can appear offline to friends so as not to receive messages or notifications. Is it just the idea that bugs you?

 

[DRG]

If this is true, I don't see why people would go out and buy the next Xbox. Lack of really any exclusives, paying for Xbox Live, more focus on advertisements, Kinect features, and now this crap?

 

[PastorOfMuppets]

Wasn't there a similar rumor about Orbis?

This isn't a surprise. They see what Steam and other online PC game "retailers" are doing and are copying it.

Can someone explain to me why this is different from a PC?

Is it just the "always online" piece? Because yeah that shit sucks.

Steam is different in that:

1. Your games are tied to your account, not your device. You can run Steam from any computer that meets the system requirements and play your games anywhere. Whenever I go visit my parents for instance, I log into Steam on their computer to play some old school games. If I want to buy something, I buy it there and when I leave and go home, it'll be waiting for me to download on my home computer.

2. There is a trade off for not being able to resell games; you can buy them much cheaper. During the recent Christmas sale for instance, you could have bought THQ's ENTIRE catalog of games for $30. I picked up Sleeping Dogs and XCOM - both games released in 2012, for a combined price of $16. Right now on Steam, you can buy the entire Alan Wake franchise for $10. What's the trade off on consoles? Seems to me like you pay the same for less features.

3. There is competition to Steam. Green Man Gaming, Origin (ha ha, just playing), GOG, Gamers Gate, Desura. There is no competition to Xbox Live or PSN.

4. There is no universal DRM. Some games don't have any (any game sold on GOG), some games have an always online requirement (Diablo 3) and a lot of games have limited forms of it like Steamworks. Most games generally speaking allow for offline play.

 

[NBtoaster]

Dat next gen hubris.

 

[KittyKittyBangBang]

What a bitch move MS

I will still buy it, but a bitch move none the less

 

[Manbig]

i only buy second hand, so f them. your turn, Sony.

Not that I'm taking their side here, but isn't the whole point of them doing this to get away from consumers like you?

I bring that up because that's why I could totally see them making a move like this.

 

[MiKeD]

Beautiful. There goes my 3% of thinking about switching to Xbox.

 

[cdevl]

1. I don't think Microsoft can afford to block second hand games. Not with Sony AND Steam breathing down its neck.

2. I definitely would like my 360 games to be playable on 720. I have a huge backlog. Do I want to have 2 consoles to deal with that backlog? No. Specially that games are still coming out on 360. Well, all of these arguments were already made and counter-made last generation. Sigh.

 

[Lothars]

It's amazing Microsoft found a way to kill the next xbox without it even being released online only and killing second hand game sales are two huge mistakes.

 

[SpecX]

Wow this sucks if true.

 

[scar tissue]

If this is true Gamestop is fucked, if it's not true then Gamestop will continue to do what it's currently doing while more and more games are being sold online. Either way I wouldn't buy shares in Gamestop.

Seems like reasonable advice, but then again, you're the guy who sold springfield the monorail.

Spoiler

You're right.

 

[bon]

Maybe I'll stick with the Wii U for next gen. I'll just play Mario all day and pretend the game industry isn't falling apart.

 

[NullPointer]

Bring on the video game crash of 2014, fuck this shit.

Pretty much.

 

[ezekielpacman]

Of course they're in a strong negotiating position. EA/Activision could decide to not release Madden and Call of Duty on whichever console decides to allow second hand sales.

See that was my point. If they pull Madden they essentially half their sales. You think EA can afford that hit to their revenue stream? Where else would the sales come from?

 

[Baby Milo]

Your move Sony

make the right choice

 

[Zeal]

Does MS and Sony really think anyone will let this fly?

Because people will literally stop buying any games. I assure you.

Hell Gamestop will launch warheads themselves.

 

[Vol5]

I hope this is true, I never sell my games. Last time I did it was like3 years ago. Doesn't scare me one bit at all

It'll scare you when you see the prices MS will inevitably charge for a game via their storefront.

I'll wager MS will offer a rebuttal or comment before the weekend.

 

[shinobi602]

I hope this is true, I never sell my games. Last time I did it was like3 years ago. Doesn't scare me one bit at all

You hope it's true? Why the fuck would you hope that?

 

[pvpness]

Honestly, I don't support punishing second-hand owners or people who torrent for the exact reason you state. This hobby is too expensive to keep up with for the average person, and I love letting others borrow/sample my stuff. I have even been known to give a way stuff I don't want to those that aren't as well off.

But here's the thing, the creators do deserve some money from second-hand sales. They have a life and job as well. If they want to keep doing what they love to do their games will need to turn a profit, this is becoming harder to do for studios that don't have the acclaim studios such as Naughty Dog, Rocksteady, Valve, Bioware, and Bethesda have.

This alternative will hopefully bring down the cost of games. We might see new releases reach as low as $30-40 if sales improve... hopefully. I know how greedy companies can be, so I wouldn't bet on it, but there is a chance.

What I would like to see in the future is a way to rent games for the singleplayer or multiplayer digitally for a couple days at an extremely low price, so people can decide whether or not they'll buy in later.

I want devs/pubs to make money too, but not at the cost of all my rights. There are companies like Nintendo that don't suffer the same fate at used retail as some of the other companies out there, and there's a good reason for that. Yet pubs largely like to look at those companies, throw their hands in the air, declare them anomalies and continue forward. What they should be doing is closely examining these companies to find out what it is they are doing that makes their products retain long term value in the market. I suspect they're aware of how it happens are are actually uninterested in the model itself. If they want to operate a broken business model while they coexist with competitors that have working models, then that's their business and I'm fine with it (unless I'm specifically invested). When they try to sacrifice my rights as a consumer to attempt to prolong said broken model, I'm not fine with it and have zero sympathy for them. Killing the second hand market to ensure the continued existence of a broken business model will do serious damage to the industry over-all, and I can't get behind it.

I'd prefer that the companies that can't adapt to market conditions and remain profitable burn right to the ground, as they would in all other industries in all the history of business.

I like the idea of seperating mp/sp and offering choice in theory, and I think we'll ultimately see that down the road but if things continue the way they are we'll probably be given the option to choose sp at $60 or mp at $60. I zero reason to believe that prices will ever fall simply because costs have lowered (or profits have increased) and every reason to believe that companies will max-monetize everything as long as they can get away with it.

 

[LyleLanley]

Seems like reasonable advice, but then again, you're the guy who sold springfield the monorail.

Spoiler

You're right.

I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook, and by gum it put them on the map!

See that was my point. If they pull Madden they essentially half their sales. You think EA can afford that hit to their revenue stream? Where else would the sales come from?

If either MS or Sony announce at any point that Madden is only coming to their console then the other one is screwed. Madden not being on one console would be a lot more painful for the other console manufacturer than it would be for EA as I imagine Madden, and other games like it, is a gigantic selling point for the coveted casual consumer.

 

[Incendiary]

The second-hand game part I can take or leave, but the "always connected to the internet" crap will be what keeps me from getting another console if true. Playing offline should be an option, and if Microsoft is a big enough idiot to make a console that A) requires you to be online and B) charges you for the online component like they did this generation, I'm out.

They're trying entirely too hard to squeeze out the used game market and considering how many other products have used markets I honestly don't see why they are so concerned about it.

 

[killbox]

...and yet we had a massive support thread for a steambox. which would have NO USED GAMES.

 

[Takuya]

Does MS and Sony really think anyone will let this fly?

Because people will literally stop buying any games. I assure you.

Hell Gamestop will launch warheads themselves.

Why are some people grouping Sony into this?

 

[Vitacat]

...and yet we had a massive support thread for a steambox. which would have NO USED GAMES.

Yeah... because full priced physical games and low priced digital games are the same thing. >_<

 

[volturnus]

Your move, Nvidia.

 

[Deleted member 22576]

...and yet we had a massive support thread for a steambox. which would have NO USED GAMES.

There is a tangible difference between packaged goods and digital copies. Don't pretend like there isn't.

 

[LyleLanley]

...and yet we had a massive support thread for a steambox. which would have NO USED GAMES.

That might be because on Steam you can buy the entire Square Enix Collection for $79.99.

 

[Voice of Reason]

Why are some people grouping Sony into this?

Already discussed. Patents, fear of third party exclusion, etc.

 

[Orayn]

...and yet we had a massive support thread for a steambox. which would have NO USED GAMES.

A Steambox would be an extension of an ecosystem that didn't have used games in the first place, so it's not like Valve would be taking away a privilege that Steam users currently have. Also, DD prices on PC generally reflect that limitation.

 

[Vinci]

Man, I hope this is true. It would be absolutely fascinating to watch how something like this would turn out. What an experiment it would be!

 

[Alcoholikaust]

Why are some people grouping Sony into this?

the Sony patent

 

[ezekielpacman]

If either MS or Sony announce at any point that Madden is only coming to their console then the other one is screwed. Madden not being on one console would be a lot more painful for the other console manufacturer than it would be for EA as I imagine Madden, and other games like it, is a gigantic selling point for the coveted casual consumer.

That is true, but heavily based on the assumption that customers will prioritise a yearly franchise over outrageous shafting. There is a limit and I feel we are near that point already.

 

[rakkadakka]

Can someone explain to me the difference between Steam and not being able to play used games?

Because Gaben.

 

[Ace Harding]

Steam is different in that:

1. Your games are tied to your account, not your device. You can run Steam from any computer that meets the system requirements and play your games anywhere. Whenever I go visit my parents for instance, I log into Steam on their computer to play some old school games. If I want to buy something, I buy it there and when I leave and go home, it'll be waiting for me to download on my home computer.

2. There is a trade off for not being able to resell games; you can buy them much cheaper. During the recent Christmas sale for instance, you could have bought THQ's ENTIRE catalog of games for $30. I picked up Sleeping Dogs and XCOM - both games released in 2012, for a combined price of $16. Right now on Steam, you can buy the entire Alan Wake franchise for $10. What's the trade off on consoles? Seems to me like you pay the same for less features.

3. There is competition to Steam. Green Man Gaming, Origin (ha ha, just playing), GOG, Gamers Gate, Desura. There is no competition to Xbox Live or PSN.

4. There is no universal DRM. Some games don't have any (any game sold on GOG), some games have an always online requirement (Diablo 3) and a lot of games have limited forms of it like Steamworks. Most games generally speaking allow for offline play.

How do you know #1 won't be the way they go? Did they say its tied to your console not your account?

#2 same thing, although somehow I doubt they will match the level of sales on Steam

#3 - great point.

#4 - I think I was really talking about Steam, since realistically if you are a big PC gamer and want to play the majority of releases you pretty much need to use Steam. Steam is DRM.

So far, I'm assuming they will just try to replicate what Steam does (in terms of DRM, accounts, buying games, etc.). Of course they could mess that up really, really badly.

I do think that if this rumor holds it will be a serious, serious blow to Microsoft. I kind of can't imagine they would do this if Sony doesn't. Too much is at stake for them this gen.

 

[sixghost]

1) Skyrim is still $60 on Steam. Sure, you can get it on sale on rare occasions but the regular price is higher than a used copy on console.

2) Steam is DRM. There is no need to for publishers to add their own DRM but some still do.

PC gamers have been locked out of used sales for years now and it's starting to happen to console gamers. These days, physical copies of PC games are useless because they activate and DRM-maintained on Steam.

http://www.steamgamesales.com/Yj4qH/the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim

#1 is a bunch of crap. Skyrim has been $30(or less with the GMG 20% and 30% coupons) tons of times since July.

 

[Corto]

Steam is different in that:

1. Your games are tied to your account, not your device. You can run Steam from any computer that meets the system requirements and play your games anywhere. Whenever I go visit my parents for instance, I log into Steam on their computer to play some old school games. If I want to buy something, I buy it there and when I leave and go home, it'll be waiting for me to download on my home computer.

2. There is a trade off for not being able to resell games; you can buy them much cheaper. During the recent Christmas sale for instance, you could have bought THQ's ENTIRE catalog of games for $30. I picked up Sleeping Dogs and XCOM - both games released in 2012, for a combined price of $16. Right now on Steam, you can buy the entire Alan Wake franchise for $10. What's the trade off on consoles? Seems to me like you pay the same for less features.

3. There is competition to Steam. Green Man Gaming, Origin (ha ha, just playing), GOG, Gamers Gate, Desura. There is no competition to Xbox Live or PSN.

4. There is no universal DRM. Some games don't have any (any game sold on GOG), some games have an always online requirement (Diablo 3) and a lot of games have limited forms of it like Steamworks. Most games generally speaking allow for offline play.

This post should be quoted every time someone says that if Microsoft does indeed decide to use the always on/no used games lock system it's just the same as what happens currently on the PC. Great summation of the advantages of the PC that counter balance the no second hand games and always on requirements, that are not universal in the first place.

 

[kingkitty]

I intended to buy the next xbox but if this is legit, I guess I'll be going the PS4 route.

If they both make it impossible to buy used games then...

fuck.

 

[Odrion]

Bring on the video game crash of 2014, fuck this shit.

Yup, LET"S RIDE THIS SHIT INTO THE FUCKING GROUND.

 

[Takuya]

Already discussed. Patents, fear of third party exclusion, etc.

the Sony patent

Well aware of the patent, but there is no rumor or insider tip about Sony implementing it.

 

[73V3N]

I hope this is true, I never sell my games. Last time I did it was like3 years ago. Doesn't scare me one bit at all

It's ok to not care, but HOPING is true?

wtf

 

[Lombax]

Because Gaben.

pretty much.

 

[AllIsOneIsNone]

I guess this means that collectors/limited editions would mean nothing now? Whats the point of collecting a game that only works on your system? Why even still have physical copies of games?

 

[Hyperion Dark]

LOL, will go with PS4 only if this is true. Making the choice even easier now.

 

[alr1ght]

I hope this is true, I never sell my games. Last time I did it was like3 years ago. Doesn't scare me one bit at all

You'll be paying more for your games with no used games market to put pressure on pricing.