Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[lordcooper]

Incase you forget they limit the number of PS4s you can do that on.

Where exactly does it say that?

The PS3 does this already, except in their case it is for downloadable content.

I have a PS3 and frequently download games from my account on to other people's consoles.

Read the bloody patent.

[Neonivek]

Incase you forget they limit the number of PS4s you can do that on.

Where exactly does it say that?

The PS3 does this already, except in their case it is for downloadable content.

I have a PS3 and frequently download games from my account on to other people's consoles.

Read the bloody patent.

When?

[Seraphim342]

I've noticed the number of games I buy for consoles to be steadily declining.  When I got my first NES, I got over a hundred games for it.  Jumped to PS1, had about 40 for that.  PS2, a dozen.  PS3, six.  Not going to buy a PS4.  In the same time, the number of PC games I buy has been increasing in an almost inverse proportion.  Long story short, fuck consoles.

 

[alexandertnt]

I'm okay with this.  No second hand sales equals more first hand sales which probably equals more games getting made to a higher quality.  THQ might be in a lot less trouble if this had been done a few years ago.

Couldn't the same argument be applied to anything, eg cars?

More money does not mean better products per se. THQ are in trouble because no one wants to buy their games, not because people are reselling them (it would be quite hard for a second hand market to exist in a significant without a reasonable number of copies first sold first-hand).

Also for some people with less money, for example myself, this equals less games of probably lower quality. Those budget games tend to not be very good.

I have a PS3 and frequently download games from my account on to other people's consoles.

That just means you are breaking the EULA, it is not at all a (legal) solution to Neonivek's concern.

[Putnam]

I accept and welcome this development.

[lordcooper]

Incase you forget they limit the number of PS4s you can do that on.

Where exactly does it say that?

The PS3 does this already, except in their case it is for downloadable content.

I have a PS3 and frequently download games from my account on to other people's consoles.

Read the bloody patent.

When?

I'm not sure what you're actually asking me.  If you're asking when I've last done this, the answer is last Wednesday.  If you're asking when you should read the patent, before you misrepresented its contents would have been a good time, but I guess now would suffice.

I'm okay with this.  No second hand sales equals more first hand sales which probably equals more games getting made to a higher quality.  THQ might be in a lot less trouble if this had been done a few years ago.

Couldn't the same argument be applied to anything, eg cars?

More money does not mean better products per se. THQ are in trouble because no one wants to buy their games, not because people are reselling them (it would be quite hard for a second hand market to exist in a significant without a reasonable number of copies first sold first-hand).

Also for some people with less money, for example myself, this equals less games of probably lower quality. Those budget games tend to not be very good.

I disagree with your first point, but short of running an indepth simulation of a world where this change is made vs on where it isn't, it'll be pretty damn difficult to prove either way.  I will say that the last three console games I purchased were all THQ, and all of them were preowned.  It also seems likely that a higher return on each game (which there would be, I'm sure nobody is disputing that) could lead to less draconian release schedules and possibly even a greater inclination towards experimentation.  It's all not quite the same as cars.  Most drivers buy a vehicle every few years at best, most gamers buy games a hell of a lot more frequently than that.  I'd say the average gamer stands to benefit more from increased prosperity in the gaming industry than the average driver in the automotive industry.

Your second point may well be true.  This would likely benefit me a lot more than you, and at the risk of sounding like a Tory, I'm okay with that.

I have a PS3 and frequently download games from my account on to other people's consoles.

That just means you are breaking the EULA, it is not at all a (legal) solution to Neonivek's concern.

His concern seemed to be that such a thing is physically impossible.  I would have thought that my literally doing (on a regular basis, even) the exact thing he is claiming cannot be done ought to alleviate said concerns.  By the way, EULAs are not legally binding whatsoever.  Bit of a schoolboy error there

[alexandertnt]

It's all not quite the same as cars.  Most drivers buy a vehicle every few years at best, most gamers buy games a hell of a lot more frequently than that.  I'd say the average gamer stands to benefit more from increased prosperity in the gaming industry than the average driver in the automotive industry.

Your second point may well be true.  This would likely benefit me a lot more than you, and at the risk of sounding like a Tory, I'm okay with that.

A car if effectively a required tool in modern life. Most people will need one as opposed to want one. If second hand sales are prohibited for both then the cost of buying either increases signifcantly with the lack of a cheaper second-hand option. The difference is you need a car and you will have to purchase one at first-hand costs. A game you can just not buy if it is too expensive. So it would seem that the automobile companies would profit more from such a decision. But what does the average gamer stand to benefit that outweighs what an average driver would gain? Given the choice between better games or lower fuel consumption, I would not have to think for very long before deciding what one to pick. However in either case it would seem unlikely that the large increases in cost would not justify the probably superficial gains.

This would likely affect me more than it would you, but given the probably superficial changes in game quality I would think that there would likely be overall a drop in gains when considering every consumer. I am also actually somewhat concerned about other people, and about the fact that it should be a right to resell these games.

His concern seemed to be that such a thing is physically impossible.  I would have thought that my literally doing (on a regular basis, even) the exact thing he is claiming cannot be done ought to alleviate said concerns.  By the way, EULAs are not legally binding whatsoever.  Bit of a schoolboy error there

EULA's are supposed to be legally binding (they are a contract), however they are frequently found to be invalid in law due to various reasons. I highly doubt that installing a game licenced to you on all your friends console's would be one of those reasons, and if taken to court would probably be upheld.

It would not alleviate my concerns very much given this move by Sony if it is any indication of the direciton they are taking.

[itisnotlogical]

For everybody who dislikes the policy, I bet there's 20 more people nationwide who don't know and won't care until they've already given Sony their $600 (or however much the PS4 will cost). A lot of dumb teenagers I know (dumb teenager myself here) want the next Medal of Modern Warfare: BattleHalo game, and their computer isn't good enough to handle it.

I realize that it's highly unlikely since videogames are a multibillion-dollar industry now, but I think the console market needs something like the Crash of 1983. If the major corporations start hemorrhaging cash from lost trust, it might get them to finally think about what they can do better. When Atari went under, Nintendo came in a few years later and virtually rebuilt the industry by establishing trust with the customers.

As others have said in this thread, I have no reason to buy a PS3/4 or Xbox 360, because most of the exact same games are available on the PC. I can buy a WiiU on the other hand, and get something unlike PC game or console I've seen before.

[miauw62]

imho, the PS2 was the last good console.
(Then again, it was my FIRST console).

[Alkhemia]

Incase you forget they limit the number of PS4s you can do that on.

Where exactly does it say that?

The PS3 does this already, except in their case it is for downloadable content.

I have a PS3 and frequently download games from my account on to other people's consoles.

Read the bloody patent.

Same my buddy has PSN plus so I get all the free stuff that comes with it.

[fenrif]

The concept that completely killing the second hand sales market will somehow be a massive boon to the video games industry is really kind of absurd. Setting aside the fact that historically the game publishers and console makers really don't ever pass along any sort of savings to their customers and any move made to increase profits in the industry just means the CEOs and shareholders get a bigger payout at the expense of everyone else involved... The second hand sales market is vital to the first hand sales market.

People are willing to spend £40 on a brand new game on launch day because they know that they can recoup some of their money back by reselling it. If you take that away then suddenly a whole lot of people are going to be a lot more gunshy about throwing that money down, especially considering the notoriously untrustworthy nature of the gaming press and media surrounding the industry.

I actually think this would hurt the state of gaming as a whole tremendously. Its a shortsighted and greedy move made by buisnessmen who wont be happy untill its mandatory to buy their games, which coincidentally will last only 2 hours, most of which will be advertisments, and will cost £200.

[Kaje]

This isn't just about people buying and selling pre-owned games, but companies that rent games will likely lose an awful lot of business too.

I can't see Sony ever being able to implement this as it would pose far too many legal issues regarding the ability for markets to stay competitive.

[Alkhemia]

This isn't just about people buying and selling pre-owned games, but companies that rent games will likely lose an awful lot of business too.

I can't see Sony ever being able to implement this as it would pose far too many legal issues regarding the ability for markets to stay competitive.

oh your right what about Game Fly and Hollywood Videos or Red Box

[itisnotlogical]

I imagine Sony would have special rental-only, not-for-resale discs. Although it wouldn't be the first time a big developer has done something stupid (recall the CD-I games).

[fenrif]

I just can't wait for Sony's PR machine to wind up to defend this. Anyone remember the whole "well of course the PS3 is super expensive, you should be glad. You should go out and get a second job so you can afford it, and be thankfull for us for even letting you buy it."