-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
EDGE: The next Xbox: Always online, no second-hand games, 50GB Blu-ray and new kinect
- Thread starter Hanmik
- Start date
It also takes away any incentive for retailers to drop the price of new games.
Tricky I Shadow
Banned
I highly doubt that. Let's not get carried away now.
MS got away with an entire generation of charging a monthly fee for what is basically a free service everywhere else. While I personally hope that there would be a huge backlash, I feel the reality of the situation is that there will be a lot of noise at first, but then consumers will mostly just adapt as they always have, with reduced rights and less benefits, just to play the casual entertainment they want.
This is exactly what would happen. It's sad but thats the breaks.
Aquamarine
Member
I really don't see that happening.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
I think Gaf places more emphasis on this change than the world will. If MS/Sony do this and price games better (ala Steam) in 2 years no one will care that they can't sell their game (like the PC market).
Games on Steam/PC are much times cheaper too. Anti-used games tech can't work with 60$ USD standard games.
You mean like how the PS3 created a ton of goodwill among the enthusiast gamers who make up the majority of early adopters who would flock to Sony by offering free online multiplayer, region-free gaming, full backwards compatibility, and the option to install linux? Did that create enough momentum to make the PS3 the console of choice for the mainstream brogamers? I think not!
599 kills momentum.
Yeah, that's what makes me doubt it. Not the preventing used sales, I think everyone knows there are large segments of the industry that want to do that, but requiring a permanent internet connection just makes no sense.
Hey if we get awesome deals like on PC I am all for it.
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
I've been on the fence about a new MS console for a while now.
I haven't used my 360 for anything in the last 2 years but multiplatform titles that look better or perform better than they do on PS3.
I can learn to adapt sure, but the fact that I have no vested interest in any MS exclusives, the kinect focus, and the general attitude towards consumers made this a hard sell for me to begin with. The potential issues with requiring always being online would be a new major turn off even ignoring the anti-used reason behind it.
I have no illusions that Sony may not eventually choose to implement their own anti-used methods, but Sony has managed to sell me on PS+ in a way that MS never even tried to sell me on XBL.
All I think of when I think of XBL is the annoying process of cancelling it. You could argue that I'm being unreasonable, but it's the principle of the thing for me. I've already decided I'm not subbing to XBL again until they offer more that I care about than PSN does for me for free.
If I am forced to pay a monthly fee just to play anything at all when I want to on this thing, I'm going to pass on the whole console.
It's taken a while, but PS+ has made me a lot more comfortable about a future with games provided as a service. If MS offers me something comparable, I'd gladly reconsider. But combining what we know so far and taking these rumors at face value, I think I'll be choosing the future Sony is offering me.
I haven't used my 360 for anything in the last 2 years but multiplatform titles that look better or perform better than they do on PS3.
I can learn to adapt sure, but the fact that I have no vested interest in any MS exclusives, the kinect focus, and the general attitude towards consumers made this a hard sell for me to begin with. The potential issues with requiring always being online would be a new major turn off even ignoring the anti-used reason behind it.
I have no illusions that Sony may not eventually choose to implement their own anti-used methods, but Sony has managed to sell me on PS+ in a way that MS never even tried to sell me on XBL.
All I think of when I think of XBL is the annoying process of cancelling it. You could argue that I'm being unreasonable, but it's the principle of the thing for me. I've already decided I'm not subbing to XBL again until they offer more that I care about than PSN does for me for free.
If I am forced to pay a monthly fee just to play anything at all when I want to on this thing, I'm going to pass on the whole console.
It's taken a while, but PS+ has made me a lot more comfortable about a future with games provided as a service. If MS offers me something comparable, I'd gladly reconsider. But combining what we know so far and taking these rumors at face value, I think I'll be choosing the future Sony is offering me.
And yet Blizzard did it with a game that would easily work offline (Diablo 3) and most games on Steam require a online connection.
Granted you cannot compare PC games that sell to few millions of PC gamers to consoles that are supposed to be sold to 50-100 million people worldwide
I hope it is not true, always online would stop the next Xbox instantly from succeeding in many places around the world.
I don't care, mainly because I like to buy games/movies/music/books digitally. I can see why others would be upset though.
fastford58
Member
Always on line? Whelp, I'm out.
Hopefully Orbis doesn't try to pull that shit.
Hopefully Orbis doesn't try to pull that shit.
They would probably tie it to each account.
ACH1LL3US
Member
So if both PS4 and Xbox next do it, you won't play next gen games??
I think everyone is saying extreme stuff in this thread saying they are out etc.... I don't believe even 1% of you will refrain from next gen because of these new rules.
We knew both companies were more concerned with used game sales then piracy... this really should come to no suprise to any of you.
I disagree. This isn't a matter of "consumer rights" anymore. 99% of people don't give a shit about consumer rights or think about them when it comes to games. The reason why this could fuck everything up is because people simply won't buy them because they know their kids or friends can't borrow their games anymore, or that their games hold no value anymore after first-use.
I know it probably did a lot of hurt, but as a kid I could only play games either by renting them, or trading in a bunch of games to get like a single games. I've never been big on replaying games, so it never bothered me, and I bet there were (and still are) a ton of kids who did the same thing. This not only is going to ruin that, but it's going to hit in a lot of places people don't think about. While we like to think we've all moved to the fully online, fully digital age, I know way more people who play sports games locally with each other, so that cuts into those markets too.
Like I said, it just doesn't make enough sense for Microsoft and Sony right now, so it's not going to happen.
EdibleExplosives
Member
wat.
Yeah, I love the idea of being unable to take my games to my friends or relative's house to play. Great idea Microsoft!
Looks to me like Sony has researched into blocking/suppressing second-hand games, but there is no confirmation about them actually implementing such a system. However, this current rumor/leak suggest that Microsoft will go ahead and implement a second-hand suppression measure in its upcoming console.
CadetMahoney
Member
Notice the last two sentances. . .
"
Sonys next-generation console camera system is said to have a similar set of features, and is expected to be discussed at the companys PlayStation event on February 20.
You can read more about how Sonys next generation console compares in last weeks story, PlayStation 4 revealed.
"
Reads very promotional to me. Watch this rumor be complete BS. Always online pfft.
When the barrier to entry is so low for PC games it kind of makes it literally worthless to trade in games.
My average purchase price is somewhere in the $5-$10 range.
What? Steam requires you to be online once to activate a game.
PoweredBySoy
Banned
I'm fine with that. Now Xbox just needs to change their pricing structure to match. There's no fucking way I'm paying $60 for every game I'm interested in trying.
It could be tied to your account.
Well this is hardly surprising. Not only is no used games bullcrap but now you also have to deal with getting screwed over if you lose control of your account or wish to bring a game to a friends house to play. Console have turned into such a joke this past generation. Good riddance to all of them.
What drugs do you take? Serious question.
Microsoft likes what Steam is doing.
So if Microsoft goes the Steam route, with weekly massive discounts, constant massive sales, and lower priced digital download.....do you people still have a problem with it?
I love Steam, and have hundreds of games on it for a reason. I've seen nothing that says there is NO offline "gaming" mode.
I like how the crap hits the fan for so many. Yep, just ignore all other possibilities and flip out people. derp
So if Microsoft goes the Steam route, with weekly massive discounts, constant massive sales, and lower priced digital download.....do you people still have a problem with it?
I love Steam, and have hundreds of games on it for a reason. I've seen nothing that says there is NO offline "gaming" mode.
I like how the crap hits the fan for so many. Yep, just ignore all other possibilities and flip out people. derp
Sapphire Dreams
Member
That's no true, a guy buying a game second handed is nothing like a guy who distribute it to thousands upon thousands of pirates.
Not to mention, if he ever bought a used one instead of pirating it, there is a huge possibility that he'll buy the avaliable DLCs too instead of pirating it.
Always online? So what, I'll be forced to pay for XBL? And no second-hand games, like those borrowed from/to friends? If so, sry but thankyou M$./fuck
You can play single-player games with Silver, so no.
Glass Rebel
Member
Unless console licensing costs go down, it most likely won't happen.
It's why I said it'd be something akin to a crash. Well, I suppose more accurately it'd be a western AAA(A[A!?]) crash: this time around at least A console survives versus the console market being gone, but it'd a shell of itself.
Actually, it's plausible that if Sony doesn't play ball with this and Microsoft REALLY screws up it could have the same effect anyway: Sony was more popular for western development, but it seemed consoles only became the option for most of the best western titles with the Xbox's arrival, throughout the entirety of the 90s the best western games were on PC.
This is what I fear here: that they apply the mobile contract model here and it works, either without a non-contract model or the regular model hampered by contract necessities Microsoft deems necessary.
This is also a good point. That is why i fear it. It gives way more power to the retailer to control prices and keep them high. They can't make money on second hand anymore so they got to make it elsewhere. One thing to do is to keep prices high.
Bumblebeetuna
Member
That sucks too because my two sons like to play on their own account.
As long as you don't hurt anyone, physically or mentally... you can do whatever the f*** you want with the product. What age are you from? This is the 21st century. There is no one that can take your rights away from you if you don't allow it.
The license bs is companies just trying to convince you that it's not your right, but it is. If i sold a painting, i would get my money and that's it... my part of it is over. I've handed the rights and ownership of the painting to someone else in exchange for money. Now he can't tell me what i should do with the money, and i can't tell him what he should to with the painting.
That's it.... It's nothing more. No bs licensing or whatever.
IF i said, "you can't do this... this and this... will you still buy it?" then it's a contract more than a trade. If he still chooses to buy then that's his choice. But the last time i checked, games are still sold as trades for money, and no contract obligations are required to buy them.
End of story...
LOL it does kinda read like a FUD piece. Guess we wait and see.
While this is a valid point, the more I think about it, the more I realize that if Sony does swing this way, even Japan would be held ransom. The non-Nintendo Japanese developers who are really relevant in terms of HD console development are all looking internationally. They're not just "Japanese" developers anymore because they cannot survive on Japan alone. These developers pretty much all make both PS3 and 360 games. If MS goes anti-used, and Sony goes anti-used, and the PC is already anti-used, then it means Japanese HD console developers have no choice but to pick one of those anyway. The WiiU isn't a serious option at all in a power play like this. It's an interesting thought I think.
Tricky I Shadow
Banned
ACH1LL3US
Member
They are closing 400-500 stores this year.. they see the writting on the wall and I am sure are privy to whats going on.
If you're just looking at a single second-hand buyer and assuming that he might have bought a new copy, it looks like a lost sale. But in total, over the life of the system and the game, there are no lost sales. The creators produce N copies of the game, and N copies are paid for at retail, and whether they are traded or resold or not, N people have the game in their hands at any given time.
If anyone who once sold the game to someone else and has lost the ability to play it wants to play it again, they have to go and reacquire a copy, either buying new -- raising total sales to N+1 and raising the creators' profits to whatever their margin is times (N+1) -- or buying used, which would keep the total at N but deprive someone else of their copy. The profit on that copy was made when the game was made: whose hands it's in today does not change that.
Proponents of anti-used policies and of online "passes" that require successive users to pay the creator again even though the previous user can no longer use the product are expecting us consumers to not notice that last fact. That's consistent with paying for a license and not a product. If we consumers are buying licenses and not products, why do we lose the ability to play the game when we sell the disc? The anti-used position seems to consider games to be both licenses and products at the same time, but with the producers taking the beneficial parts of both paradigms.
Diablo 3 is forgiven in my eyes due to the real money auction house.
If Microsoft does this (unlikely), I would be all for it. Bring on the games that are 6 months - 1 year old that are priced low enough that they fall into the impulse purchase category.