Print

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

[ExKirby]

This whole DRM thing pisses me off so much, I want to grab a megaphone and a large box, stand in front of a video game store and speak to the unintelligent masses to get some kind of sense into people. People only want a PSWhatever because it's cool and shit, and I admittedly got an XBox for similar reasons, but the other half of the reasoning behind it is that I could get a decently large library of good games at my disposal second hand for good prices. If people do DRM on consoles, they lose games after six months and nobody can get them because the companies will have started producing the next game in whatever. Then it all goes to shit when the companies release Teapot 2: Now The Teapot Is Made Of Diamond, people realise that it's shit but they can't go for the cheaper alternative so they buy the new and shit thing, then the companies get ideas and keep releasing shit games which people are forced to buy-

Basically, things are going to shit. I reckon a mass cross-continent speech giving is in order. Probably an insane idea but we could probably make it happen anyway.

[Shadowlord]

I wouldn't say people are 'forced' to buy the new stuff, especially if (for new systems) they still have the old stuff because they can't trade it in (or now, for certain things, the stores may offer very little for some things).

Some old console games are easier to find than others.

[fenrif]

This whole DRM thing pisses me off so much, I want to grab a megaphone and a large box, stand in front of a video game store and speak to the unintelligent masses to get some kind of sense into people. People only want a PSWhatever because it's cool and shit, and I admittedly got an XBox for similar reasons, but the other half of the reasoning behind it is that I could get a decently large library of good games at my disposal second hand for good prices. If people do DRM on consoles, they lose games after six months and nobody can get them because the companies will have started producing the next game in whatever. Then it all goes to shit when the companies release Teapot 2: Now The Teapot Is Made Of Diamond, people realise that it's shit but they can't go for the cheaper alternative so they buy the new and shit thing, then the companies get ideas and keep releasing shit games which people are forced to buy-

Basically, things are going to shit. I reckon a mass cross-continent speech giving is in order. Probably an insane idea but we could probably make it happen anyway.

The interesting thing in this instance is that the video game stores themselves will probobly end up doing this. The attack on second hand sales is pretty much a direct attack on video game stores themselves, since they make a lot (maybe most) of their money through second hand sales. I certainly don't think they make a whole load of money on actual console sales, which may mean the next generation wont actually be available in Game, Gamestation, (insert your countries video game retail chain here), etc.

At the very least it's in their own interests to tell their customers "hey this bullshit is lame, you shouldn't stand for it."

[Tilla]

To keep things fair and balanced and play devil's advocate:

Sony haven't actually announced this is in their console. Sony owns hundreds or thousands of patents, and few are actually in active use. I think with the second-generation Devkits already in the wild for PS4, it's a bit too late to implement newly patented copy protection.

It also sounds like this mostly functions like an Online Pass - so the game itself will still work used the same as when you buy a game and it comes with a key. Still not good, don't get me wrong. But it's being waaaaaay overblown.

[Eagleon]

Sony is kind of ignoring the little fact that $60 is a tremendous amount of money to risk on a brand new game, for some people. Realistically it would take six weeks for me to be able to afford that and still have things like an emergency fund, food, rent, internet, electricity, bus fare, etc. That's if I didn't want to spend anything on any other luxury in that period. $30 or $20 is a lot more manageable.

Now, you'd think people like me wouldn't have game systems, except that we also have roommates, and those roommates have christmas bonuses, parents, grandparents, whatever, that they've used to get consoles. One way or another, poor people will find ways to entertain themselves But this means that, in addition to sinking that wad into a game I may or may not even like (and which I can then probably no longer return), one of us is going to have to give access to an account to use it on. Or just keep our own games to ourselves, nyah nyah. No, most people are just going to use a single account per system, so that means that if I leave, I can't take my games with me.

I know I'm probably not their intended market or whatever, but it kind of ruins the whole system for shared households. It's not going to change the amount of money I can give them if they eliminate the used games market. I mean, unless they pay me to play, that'd be swell. Or slash price points, but why wouldn't they just do that to begin with? Just a guess, but I'm betting their sales aren't going to jump much if Gamestop and the like disappear. All that will happen is their brand will get less exposure, less interest, fewer games, collapse.

[MorleyDev]

On the topic of used sales, personally I wholly support it. For single-player games with no online content.

Anything that requires you to use online content which requires them to maintain servers to use, they can lock that out on used copies and require you to buy that on the online store. Some games do this for their multiplayer components for example.

[Neonivek]

On the topic of used sales, personally I wholly support it. For single-player games with no online content.

Anything that requires you to use online content which requires them to maintain servers to use, they can lock that out on used copies and require you to buy that on the online store. Some games do this for their multiplayer components for example.

Not all multiplayer games actually requires them to maintain servers. In fact quite a few do not.

[Tilla]

On the topic of used sales, personally I wholly support it. For single-player games with no online content.

Anything that requires you to use online content which requires them to maintain servers to use, they can lock that out on used copies and require you to buy that on the online store. Some games do this for their multiplayer components for example.

Not all multiplayer games actually requires them to maintain servers. In fact quite a few do not.

On consoles this is rarely the case, though.

[webadict]

On the topic of used sales, personally I wholly support it. For single-player games with no online content.

Anything that requires you to use online content which requires them to maintain servers to use, they can lock that out on used copies and require you to buy that on the online store. Some games do this for their multiplayer components for example.

Not all multiplayer games actually requires them to maintain servers. In fact quite a few do not.

On consoles this is rarely the case, though.

Isn't that part of the problem? They could simply just require you to be online to justify doing that. Then, they don't have to worry about secondhand sales. It doesn't matter if the game is entirely single player if they require you to be online for it, using their server space.

I think secondhand sales are, well, good. It gives people outside firsthand sales access to your product. There are several reasons why someone wouldn't buy firsthand, and not many of them would actually buy it firsthand if they have to. You're probably pulling a small percentage out that will by forcing sales to be firsthand. And, as it's been said, secondhand sales go toward more game sales indirectly. Many of these secondhand sales go to people who played it firsthand and need money to buy another one.

It's not wrong. It's selling to someone something you don't want that you've fully enjoyed already. It doesn't matter that it's a video game. Movies can fall under the same category, yet nothing stops them from being sold. Could you not say that if you change movies to be downloaded from your servers, that it's your right to make sure that you cannot trade that movie away? It's the change in medium that allows for this. You stop selling CDs and start selling data, but because data isn't physical, it can't be owned by the consumer. It doesn't matter that it's the same product in most respects.

I think to remove secondhand sales is wrong. It shouldn't matter that you change the format of your product.

[SalmonGod]

So we finished ordering my kid's computer parts.  Final total was almost exactly $300.  This includes brand new RAM, CPU, motherboard, case, power supply, network adapter, and video card.  Everything else will be old extras we already have around the house.  I expect this rig to play any modern game at lower mid-range settings, which already looks better than what a PS3 can handle.  In a couple years, we can upgrade the core components for 1/3 of that price.  What's this bullshit people are always spouting about PCs being more expensive, again?

[Matz05]

Exactly webadict.

Infringing upon the right of first sale to a finished product is always, without exception morally wrong; and infringing upon the right of first sale in the case of mixed services and products is, at best, jerkish.

[Neonivek]

So we finished ordering my kid's computer parts.  Final total was almost exactly $300.  This includes brand new RAM, CPU, motherboard, case, power supply, network adapter, and video card.  Everything else will be old extras we already have around the house.  I expect this rig to play any modern game at lower mid-range settings, which already looks better than what a PS3 can handle.  In a couple years, we can upgrade the core components for 1/3 of that price.  What's this bullshit people are always spouting about PCs being more expensive, again?

If you are running gaming rig then videogames that push what a PC can do will keep comming out with screenshots that are only possible with the latest hardware and everything else will look like total crud.

Boarderlands 2 specifically tried to push a graphics card. I thought it was neat but on the otherhand it was clear that it was somewhat of an afterthought.

[SalmonGod]

So we finished ordering my kid's computer parts.  Final total was almost exactly $300.  This includes brand new RAM, CPU, motherboard, case, power supply, network adapter, and video card.  Everything else will be old extras we already have around the house.  I expect this rig to play any modern game at lower mid-range settings, which already looks better than what a PS3 can handle.  In a couple years, we can upgrade the core components for 1/3 of that price.  What's this bullshit people are always spouting about PCs being more expensive, again?

If you are running gaming rig then videogames that push what a PC can do will keep comming out with screenshots that are only possible with the latest hardware and everything else will look like total crud.

Boarderlands 2 specifically tried to push a graphics card. I thought it was neat but on the otherhand it was clear that it was somewhat of an afterthought.

A high-end pc can make a mid-range pc look like crud.  A mid-range pc can make a console look like crud.  So why does it matter?

[Neonivek]

Hey you asked the question.

If you don't know why people may want to actually experience games like they look in the screen shots I don't know how I could explain it.

[SalmonGod]

Hey you asked the question.

If you don't know why people may want to actually experience games like they look in the screen shots I don't know how I could explain it.

No, that's perfectly understandable.  What I don't understand is the logic behind "I could have a 5... but because I can't have a 10, I'll go for a 1."