Sections

Sony “mindful” of industry’s “issues” with used games, says Denny

Tuesday, 26th February 2013 13:59 GMT By Stephany Nunneley

Sony has previously stated PS4 will play used games, yet it is still “mindful” of the “issues” raised on the subject by the publishing and development communities.

Speaking with CVG, SVP of worldwide studios, Michael Denny, said the firm plans to “do the right thing” by both consumers and developers.

“It’s a massively important issue and I understand why it’s one that keeps coming up and will keep coming up, because people want to know what the exact stance is,” he said. “Of course we’re mindful of what the game development community wants and what the wider industry issues are with those things.

“It’s not something that I feel I have any further announcement or comment to make on, other than to acknowledge with you that it’s a massively important issue and of course we are going to do the right thing.”

It was rumored before PS4′s reveal that it would block used games when a patent featuring such tech popped up in January.

The rumors, however, are more prevalent with the next Xbox console.

Latest

53 Comments

  1. BraveArse

    I think there’s more to come from this. Their language has been very vague. I’m guessing some kind of unlocking charge for s/h games, or a license transfer fee.

    Not something I agree with tbh, as a keen buyer of second hand books for decades now, but there’s something not right here.

    #1 2 years ago
  2. Samoan Spider

    @1 Agreed, its been very ambiguous language used when this issue comes up. Watch this space, but I can see one time activation codes with a charge for 2nd activations being prevalent very soon. I’ve no doubt that whatever one console does, the other will do. I just hope that the patents both sides have are defensive patents and not a roadmap to the future.

    #2 2 years ago
  3. ps3fanboy

    why the hell should i activate the sp on a used game??… what if my console dies, then i will have to buy new… oh shit… it was only released 10 years ago. the activating file i bought for the used game ain’t on their servers anymore…. wake up and sniff the butt hole SONY IDIOTS!. if you do this there is no reason to buy your ps4.

    we already have something called online passes, its more than enough.. it have already ruin the online part of the older games.

    its a fact less people buy these online passes as time passes. because they don’t want to risk paying for something that they ain’t sure gonna be there or not. so now no one plays the online after two years of release anymore… so why bother buying the online passes at all… also look at ea, they dont help the matters. they shut down the game servers after 1.5 years… fucking idiots.

    you want to keep earning money on the older games you keep it fresh and comes with some free updates and some new mp maps or something people can buy. but i guess that is to much to ask for…. and you say used games hurt you financial. it is only you that hurt your self in the end with your own greed.

    #3 2 years ago
  4. YoungZer0

    I’m getting so fucking sick of this industries greed. It’s absolutely disgusting.

    #4 2 years ago
  5. Dragon246

    @4,
    Is it too much to ask something for which they spent years of their life?

    #5 2 years ago
  6. SplatteredHouse

    “So they’ve gone halfway,” [Ian Livingstone] added, giving the example of Microsoft’s supposed next-gen approach, “With the next Xbox, you supposedly have to have an internet connection, and the discs are watermarked, whereby once played on one console it won’t play on another. So I think the generation after that will be digital-only.” http://www.mcvindia.com/news/read/ian-livingstone-talks-next-gen-hints-at-always-on-used-game-blocking-xbox/0111409

    #6 2 years ago
  7. YoungZer0

    @5: Don’t give me that strawman bullshit.

    They are asking for too much. 60 Dollar game with 4 hour gameplay. Overpriced DLC, like costumes, extra level. Pre-Order Bullshit, like new weapons, one more quest. Day-1 DLC that should’ve been in the game. Fucking Micro-Transaction. And it’s ALWAYS the huge companies that do and that ask for MORE, MORE AND MORE!

    The industry back then didn’t have any of those things, yet it did just fucking fine.

    It’s a perverted shithole now and I can no longer stomach this foul treatment of its consumers. Why are they always the first to questioning our loyalty when they are ALWAYS the ones that want to fuck us over?

    Just ask yourself: WHY are companies like CDPR doing so well, when they are giving away their DLC for free? When their games cost about half the price in half a year. They keep on giving and yet they get bigger.

    They don’t abandoned their loyal fanbase, they communicate with it. They ask: What do you want, without compromising their identity.

    #7 2 years ago
  8. salarta

    If a console sets it up that I can’t play my physical game without an activation code or some other means that blocks used games, I am not going to buy that console. Simple as that. I do not intend to go along with games I paid my money to buy staying locked up like that.

    I think the best solution is that if these video game companies want to block used games so badly, let them create the mechanics to disallow used games. Let them shoulder the cost, time and energy if they think it’s such a threat to their bottom line that they need something in place. That way it’s on them to bear any consequences, not on the company that merely made the platform to support them.

    #8 2 years ago
  9. DSB

    @7 We all agree that there are huge problems in general, but the argument against used sales isn’t so stupid.

    Unlike cars, coffee makers or other commodities, a game doesn’t actually lose value over time. It’s not like your installation is shittier than the last guys installation, so by buying used you’re getting the same value for less.

    That is a real problem in any economy, and for any market, because no matter what else the games industry is up to (and it is a lot of dirty shit) they do actually make an honest profit from the sales of new games.

    You can be competitive against a used car because it will absolutely never be as nice as a new car, but you really can’t be against a used game. Not unless it’s something like three years old.

    #9 2 years ago
  10. Samoan Spider

    ^ well said.

    #10 2 years ago
  11. SplatteredHouse

    @7: applause. See also, New gen, Old bs: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/6905-New-Generation-Old-Bullsh-t
    I don’t agree with that view, entirely. But, still I think he has a point.

    @9: “so by buying used you’re getting the same value for less.”
    I agree with 10, but I would ask whether the alternative of the sale not having taken place, the game not having been played is any better? What is the solution, if the “Gamestops” and the publishers cannot sort things out sensibly and amicably amongst themselves? They don’t seem to realise that they both have the same intent, and if that intent isn’t fulfilled then everybody gets harmed. But, it’s easier to lean on consumers, so that’s what they do. That band-aid needs tearing off.

    #11 2 years ago
  12. OlderGamer

    Well boys, you can always buy a WiiU.

    I fully agree with YoungZ here, for the record.

    The only way I see it working is if every single game purchase is tied into your account. And that account(and purchases) will follow you across different hardware purchases and generations(something that SHOULD happend for digital content purchased this gen). And lastly the prices must come down. We have 60usd games, with 30usd “Season Passes”. And I am sorry but that is too much. And it is likly to get worse next gen(despite what platform holders/pubs are trying to say now).

    I am walking away from MS next gen because I feel over monitized and exploited. If Sony looks to make me feel the same way, then I am out there too. I will buy my games on WiiU. Tablet. And PC.

    The consoles that many of you grew up with are gone. Those days are over. Make your choice carefully, because you are voting with your purchases and are greenlighting more consumer abuse. What did you think buying overpriced DLC and jumping all over the preorder stihck was going to get you? Enjoy.

    #12 2 years ago
  13. OlderGamer

    Also as for DSB post, sensible. However, if the industry has an issue with retailers, why take it out on consumers? Without the industry, retailers don’t have a product. Surly there is leverage to be found?

    I always wanted legislation stating that a portion of used sales should go to the liscence holder. I am not for used games. But I think they are often used as an excuse to exploit gamers. And research does find that alot of used game trade ins fuel new game purchases.

    #13 2 years ago
  14. orakaa

    Wow… so, the next consoles are going to be more expensive than the current ones (which is logical as they’re “next gen”/newer)… without significant graphic leap… and even more restrictions? Wow… what reason would we buy a new console with all this again?

    I sincerely hope that Sony is bluffing to lure Microsoft to block used games but that they’ll chicken out. If Microsoft goes “always mandatory connected” and other DRM, activation pass crazy ideas, they’ll lose next gen (casual don’t make a wide and loyal audience enough, not anymore, especially with tablets and smartphones).

    Whoever (Sony or Microsoft) is going to block used games or limit customers’ use of their games is going to pay the price.
    Until now, you’ve paid for a software and could use it even in 10-20 years (I still play my old NES games from time to time), not “only” a licence. You could do almost whatever you wanted with the game once bought (selling it, destroying it, etc.).
    If they really do this, I won’t buy a next gen console.

    #14 2 years ago
  15. DSB

    @12 In terms of the initial pricepoint, it’s been worse than that in my lifetime, so I’m guessing you were there too.

    I remember paying something like 80 bucks for a videogame in the 90′s, and none of it was as convenient as it is today. I basically had to save forever, or wait for my birthday so I could wish for money… Or for someone to copy that floppy.

    I’m no friend to the suits, but the honest money does come from the sales of new games, which we obviously want.

    I agree that they should stop nickle and diming people for imaginary products, and I think it’s incredible that so many gamers go along with that, but we can’t expect to starve the industry and be served by it at the same time. It is a mutual relationship to that extent.

    It is long overdue to question why the industry isn’t more profitable than it is though. Obviously something on the back end is eating the profits. Whether it’s retailers, research or something else, it’s just not working.

    #15 2 years ago
  16. Joe Musashi

    @7
    They are asking for too much. 60 Dollar game with 4 hour gameplay.
    Generalising and gross exaggeration

    Overpriced DLC, like costumes, extra level.
    Optional

    Pre-Order Bullshit, like new weapons, one more quest.
    Optional

    Day-1 DLC that should’ve been in the game.
    Optional

    Fucking Micro-Transaction.
    Optional

    And it’s ALWAYS the huge companies that do and that ask for MORE, MORE AND MORE!
    Generalising and gross exaggeration

    Anyone with common sense has little time for this type of diatribe. It’s clear you want to position yourself as a victim, you blur facts, assume too much and exaggerate for effect.

    The industry back then didn’t have any of those things, yet it did just fucking fine.

    And many gamers today would never go back to ‘back then’ and forfeit all the advances, conveniences, and improvements to gaming. Expecting more and more and more and then crying that such things may cost is simply unrealistic.

    And you have the audacity to bark about ‘straw man bullshit’ before spitting out your little rant? The greed and narrow-mindedness of some people is absolutely staggering.

    Industry doesn’t pander to selfish crybabies. Your demands will not be met. Ever. You may as well quit gaming now.

    JM

    #16 2 years ago
  17. YoungZer0

    @9: ” a game doesn’t actually lose value over time”

    So do movies, and yet you don’t see the film industry pull any of that bullshit. I still get the FULL PRODUCT from a used copy.

    As you said, something’s not working here. Dunno what it is, but it’s messed up and it hurts the industry and especially the consumers.

    #17 2 years ago
  18. OlderGamer

    One of the things I think the industry needs to address are the big budget mentalities. If you have a game that has to sell two million copies to break even, you need a rethink.

    I think the franchise trend needs to stop too. Why do I need FIFA 13 if FIFA 11 or FIFA12 offer the same experience? Same goes for most games. So older, used games at cheaper/reasonable prices become a real option. And a real threat. Esp where Single Player games are concerned. Again why spend 60usd on Uncharted 3 when I can buy a used Uncharted 2 for 25usd. Imo, it is a problem. It is also why so many games today are online centric. Buying a 3 year old used game that doesn’t let you play online with your friends(the industry hopes) won’t be as appealing as playing the latest, greatest release(for 60usd +30usd or more for a season pass).

    Like I said I often feel exploited.

    I have zero problem buying new, and zero problem paying the working people what they are due.

    I have a problem with over priced products. Outdated biz models. Closed eco systems. Gready publishers and platform holders. I even have a problem going to gamestop, looking for a new copy of a game a few months old, but HAVING to settle for a used copy, because the store refuses to carry a new one and is instead pushing mega profitable used ones.

    Also, renting? I have purchased several games over the years that I had rented first.

    Just a sticky mess all of the way around. But i have to strongly agree, removing second hand playability from your hardware will drive away purchasers.

    #18 2 years ago
  19. Joe Musashi

    “Why do I need FIFA 13 if FIFA 11 or FIFA12 offer the same experience?”

    You don’t need it. So don’t buy it. It’s optional.

    But those titles in particular are exceptionally strong sellers. You probably couldn’t have chosen a worse example to use.

    You are free not to buy whatever game you feel you don’t need. But who are you to dictate what games a publisher may or may not make?

    They have every right to make whatever product they believe is worthwhile to them, just as you have every right not to buy it.

    JM

    #19 2 years ago
  20. OlderGamer

    JM, your an idiot man. You have been an idiot on your other accounts too. I guess you always will be.

    Here is one for you:

    Buying a next generation console that blocks used games.

    Optional.

    People have the right to voice their opinons and concerns over video game related issues on a GASP, video game website. Ofc you can have a different opinon. Even if you come across like an idiot voicing it.

    And that is some real FUD for you to enjoy ;)

    #20 2 years ago
  21. YoungZer0

    @16: “They are asking for too much. 60 Dollar game with 4 hour gameplay.
    Generalising and gross exaggeration”

    Then let’s take a look at all the big FPS releases and the recently released REVENGEANCE which didn’t even had a multiplayer.

    “Overpriced DLC, like costumes, extra level.
    Optional”

    Still something that should’ve been there in the first place and it’s overpriced. Not to mention On-Disc DLC and color palettes that you have to pay for. Worst offender: Capcom

    “Pre-Order Bullshit, like new weapons, one more quest.
    Optional”

    Why pay for something that has obviously been cut out and later will be released as a DLC? What’s next, cutting the games ending and asking for 10 Euros more whenever you actually want to complete the game? What’s your argument then? “Optional”?

    But hey, we all know, nobody would do something like that …

    Oh right, Asura’s Wrath.

    “Day-1 DLC that should’ve been in the game.
    Optional”

    Not getting my point, are you?

    “Fucking Micro-Transaction.
    Optional”

    Again, not getting the point. It can only get worse if we let something like this slide.

    “And it’s ALWAYS the huge companies that do and that ask for MORE, MORE AND MORE!
    Generalising and gross exaggeration”

    EA, Activision, Sony, Microsoft, Ubisoft, CAPCOM.

    “Anyone with common sense has little time for this type of diatribe. It’s clear you want to position yourself as a victim, you blur facts and exaggerate for effect.”

    Can I say the complete opposite about you?

    “Expecting more and more and more and then crying that such things may cost is simply unrealistic.”

    Who said that?

    “The greed and narrow-mindedness of some people is absolutely staggering.”

    Absolutely agree. Too bad so many of them end up working as CEO’s for the games industry.

    “Industry doesn’t pander to selfish crybabies.”

    So how do you explain the current industry?

    “Your demands will not be met. Ever. You may as well quit gaming now.”

    I disagree.

    #21 2 years ago
  22. Joe Musashi

    “JM, your an idiot man.”

    Good to see a paragon of the community setting such a fine example. Well done. (The only offence is in the gammar ;))

    And nobody is vetoing your right to express your opinion. Least of all me. (It’s not like I try dismiss opposing views with wishy-washy excuses such as “if you don’t own a Wii-U then you can’t comment on it”). So your attack based on such logic is a sham. You’re trolling and trying to disguise it as a response to something that didn’t even happen. And you’re derailing too.

    JM

    #22 2 years ago
  23. YoungZer0

    “Well, if you don’t like the current situation, stop playing right now, it will only get worse, you greedy asshole.

    JM”

    #23 2 years ago
  24. Joe Musashi

    “Then let’s take a look at all the big FPS releases and the recently released REVENGEANCE which didn’t even had a multiplayer.”

    Buying a game is OPTIONAL. Nobody is forcing you to. You are not a victim. You are not owed multiplayer. (And even if you think you are, you may still be charged to play multiplayer anyway). In the case of MGR:R, I’d much prefer a well-crafted compact game (with some rock-hard VR missions) than a padded-out one that doesn’t excel at anything. But that’s me.

    “Still something that should’ve been there in the first place and it’s overpriced. Not to mention On-Disc DLC and color palettes that you have to pay for. Worst offender: Capcom”

    You’re assuming and making yourself out to be the victim. You have NO IDEA what is meant to be ‘there in the first place’ or not. You don’t make the games so you can’t possibly say what is going on here.

    Also, understand what you are buying when you OPTIONALLY spend your money. You buy access to the software as per the software licence. Strictly speaking, if code is on the disc that the software licence doesn’t entitle you to then you’re not entitled to access it. And if you want access, you can pay for the OPTIONAL content. If you want. Nobody is forcing you.

    “Why pay for something that has obviously been cut out and later will be released as a DLC?”

    Who says it ‘has obviously been cut’? The glass-half-empty woe-is-me victim gamer making assumptions again? Why pay? Then don’t pay. Don’t buy it. Don’t buy the DLC. It’s your CHOICE. Nobody is FORCING YOU TO.

    I’m not going to deconstruct the cry-baby logic of the rest of your blather because you’re too selfish and narrow-minded to care about anything other than your own personal gain.

    To summarise: YOU have the power. You can CHOOSE to buy a game or not buy it. You can CHOOSE to buy a console or not buy it. You can CHOOSE to buy DLC or not buy it. NOBODY IS FORCING YOU. YOU ARE NOT A VICTIM.

    Now ask yourself why such practices persist? Why would a business keep doing this? My guess is because it is worthwhile to them. For all those vocal crybabies like you there are enough consumers out that that pre-order FIFA 13, buy the game, pay for DLC, pay to play it online and will pre-order FIFA 14. It persists because it works.

    You have all the choices and power you could possibly want. But you’re not entitled to freebies. THAT is greed. And if you refuse to acknowledge anybody’s interests in this scenario other than your own then THAT is selfishness.

    Continue expressing your opinion. But I can promise you this: your demands will not be met and nothing will change to please you. Either way, your are not a victim and you are not powerless. But the industry doesn’t revolve around you. And once you understand the reality of the situation, you’ll find such tantrums are pointless.

    Enjoy your gaming.

    JM

    #24 2 years ago
  25. Dragon246

    I think the franchise trend needs to stop too. Why do I need Super Mario Bros/Kart/”insert name here” if Mario3212 or Mario3213 offer the same experience? Same goes for most games. So older, used games at cheaper/reasonable prices become a real option. And a real threat. Esp where Single Player games are concerned. Again why spend 60usd on Zelda 30 when I can buy a used Zelda29 for 25usd. Imo, it is a problem. It is also why so many games today are online centric. Buying a 3 year old used game that doesn’t let you play online with your friends(the industry hopes) won’t be as appealing as playing the latest, greatest release(for 60usd +30usd or more for a season pass).

    Like I said I often feel exploited.

    Well boys, you can always buy a WiiU.

    @JM,
    +1

    @YZ,
    Don’t buy next-gen console then. Simple as that. Although I doubt used games will be blocked as a whole.

    Also, one last thing. Did none of your salaries increased in past 7 years? Earn more, pay less, classic double-talk.

    #25 2 years ago
  26. Joe Musashi

    I don’t think used games will be actively blocked.

    But over the course of the next generation, things will simply go increasingly digital delivery. Which will ultimately have the same effect without the sensationalism.

    JM

    #26 2 years ago
  27. Gheritt White

    @26: Joe, firstly I agree with everything you’ve said. Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts, I for one have appreciated it. Secondly, I wouldn’t be so sure if the first-parties don’t take the online pass mechanic and apply it to all second-hand games.

    I understand why they’d think it’s necessary to do so (and it isn’t out of greed), but I do think they risk alienating real gamers (as well as us hardcore fanatics and industry-types).

    Either way, it won’t stop people from playing games. After all, nobody hears PC gamers whining about this whole used-game issue as they’ve grown used to Steam and its zero trade-ins model.

    So, ultimately, it’s all moot.

    #27 2 years ago
  28. JB

    @9 “Unlike cars, coffee makers or other commodities, a game doesn’t actually lose value over time. It’s not like your installation is shittier than the last guys installation, so by buying used you’re getting the same value for less.”

    That`s nonsense – I`m guessing you mean that it doesn`t physically decay like physical products, but a game lose value over time – due to relevancy, technical issues and other factors. Any multiplayer game will have it`s value drastically lowered if there`s no servers available.

    A newer and shinier sequel will decrease the value of the original in most cases, Fifa 2007 wil be near worthless in comparison with 2013.

    Your game might be the hottest thing in july, but near worthless 6 months later.

    And so on…

    #28 2 years ago
  29. Cobra951

    @5: Not at all. They get $50-60 per new copy (less later–most things drop in value over time). After that, they aren’t entitled to jack shit. Is Toyota entitled to make a profit if I sell a used Corolla? No. Is Toyota entitled to block the sale of a used Corolla, so they can sell more new ones? No. Same here.

    #29 2 years ago
  30. DrDamn

    I can see both sides here. There is some greed on the side of the publishers and horrendous entitlement on the side of the gamers.

    Games in general are more complex, higher featured (without any of the optional DLC), and more costly to develop than they ever were. Compare the feature set of SNES and PSOne games to those expected and demanded by gamers today.

    That said the current situation is already trying to take into account the issue of second hand games. DLC, online passes, $60 game prices for a standard game.

    I’d not have a problem with them controlling second hand sales *if* there is some balance in the approach. Digital providing lower prices – not fleecing you for the convenience, digital being used to offer the consumer options to buy games piecemeal – if I am just interested in single player let me buy just that, if I want just multiplayer let me buy just that.

    My point is this situation isn’t black and white and the solution isn’t either.

    #30 2 years ago
  31. Dragon246

    @30,
    Point is, they wont need to block used game sales,as it would eventually be mostly digital. But demonizing company just because they want to earn profit *gasp* is just hypocrisy.

    #31 2 years ago
  32. Gheritt White

    @ 30: Hmmm… piecemeal, you say…

    Interesting… most interesting…

    #32 2 years ago
  33. Joe Musashi

    @27 I think the vocal reaction to these things is usually a lot more alarmist than the ensuing reality. Ultimately, if the perceived pros outweigh the cons then things will gain traction.

    Steam is a great example. On one level it’s nothing more than a big DRM implementation. But it’s been marketed well and offers genuine advantages to gamers and has become widely accepted in spite of the limitations it imposes.

    None of this is new:

    People were raging in 2006, before the PS3 launched, about a used-game-blocking patent filed by Sony. Sound familiar?

    Day one DLC isn’t as black-and-white as some people assume.

    And DLC occurs because, by jingo, it keeps on selling..

    Interesting stuff!

    JM

    #33 2 years ago
  34. DrDamn

    @32
    Some titles have already done this to an extent. Starhawk was split so the SP was available on PS+, seems like Uncharted 3 might have the MP section available on PS+ too.

    They need to be a lot more creative with pricing and the flexibility digital gives you. We are already seeing some of that with XBLA/PSN and full priced retail. We should see much more where game prices cover the full range from a couple of quid to £50+.

    @31
    Sure but they need to take consumers with them too. If you take something away which consumers currently enjoy (being able to sell on games s/h) then you need to give something back.

    #34 2 years ago
  35. Cobra951

    @30: I stopped reading at “entitlement”. Worst, most overused word in gaming conversations, and almost always misplaced. Everyone is *entitled* to not have the rug pulled out from under their feet. Changing the rules of the retail game for the benefit of a few and the detriment of most is something we are all *entitled* to rally against.

    #35 2 years ago
  36. YoungZer0

    @31: But going digital on consoles is not a smart investment. The games still cost around 60 Euros, most of them are HUGE and it will be abandoned ASAP as PROVEN by Sony themselves.

    Do you really want to re-buy every game on the PS4 you bought on PSN/PS3? Tell me this isn’t just greed holding them back. Why is there no option to link your PSN/PS3 account to your PSN/PS4 account?

    Remember how EA complained that online stores still charge the same amount of money for digital games and went on to do the same thing? That’s totally not greed.

    #36 2 years ago
  37. DrDamn

    @35
    You used the word yourself in the post before me. Presumably you stopped reading that too because it made very little sense.

    #37 2 years ago
  38. Da Man

    What’s that, Shatner having usual fun alongside 12 years olds Sony123456789s who have literally nothing better to do all day?

    This is new.

    #38 2 years ago
  39. YoungZer0

    @24: Okay, okay, enough apologies for the greed of corporations in one thread.

    btw. I never said I was a victim. So I don’t understand why you would cry so much about it.

    YOU’RE. NOT. A. SQUIRREL!

    #39 2 years ago
  40. Gheritt White

    “The greed of corporations” LOL.

    Videogame devs and pubs are not banks and the vast majority of videogame industry workers are not very rich.

    #40 2 years ago
  41. DSB

    @28 Annualized games like FIFA and CoD are the exception, not the norm, as much as EA and Activision may try to change that.

    You’re right in that a lot of those games do lose value in the case of multiplayer and service, but I don’t see a lot of evidence that publishers are truly worried about used games cannibalizing their legacy sales.

    Most sales are gonna be made within the first six months in most cases.

    My assumption is that they’re worried about a socalled “indian” buyer who picks up a game, keeps it for a month, and then sells it back to Gamestop so they can charge for it a second time, for what? 5 dollars less than they did when he bought it? 10 dollars tops?

    #41 2 years ago
  42. Joe Musashi

    @36 Product pricing is based around not what you want to charge, but what you believe people are willing to pay. Which is why a company may elect to sell a product, such as a console, at a loss. Pricing of games works the same. So, logically, something must be telling these vendors that people are willing to pay the price they are setting. What do you think that could be?

    “Why is there no option to link your PSN/PS3 account to your PSN/PS4 account?”

    It’s a bit early to be jumping to such conclusions. But, of course, you’re wasting no time in assuming those evil corporations are out to get you. I guess, by your logic, because no price has been announced for PS4 it must retail for free. With no information to the contrary, that must be the only plausible conclusion, yes?

    @39 Your so-called argument persistently presents yourself as a victim of so-called corporate greed. You make out that you are powerless because things are being withheld from you or taken from you (when neither is the case). Your stance is classic gamer-victim.

    JM

    #42 2 years ago
  43. YoungZer0

    @40: “the vast majority of videogame industry workers are not very rich.”

    Never said they were. The money is usually always at the top.

    @42: A lot of assumptions. Keep at it.

    #43 2 years ago
  44. Gheritt White

    @43: These decisions are very rarely made by the people at the very top, though – they’re usually just presented with them.

    #44 2 years ago
  45. nollie4545

    Well time will tell how gamers will react to this. Given that they will want more of our money for the next Xbox or PS console, as usual, and more money for a game which is usually considerably cheaper on PC, now they throw this idea into the works. We pay for the games fair and square, and part exchanging them as pre-owned games is how many gamers fund their purchases of brand new games when newly released. Personally I hope gamers vote with their feet and abandon any company that try this very very underhand tactic.

    This is about corporate greed, its about squeezing very last cent from you and me. That dog isn’t going to hunt.

    #45 2 years ago
  46. YoungZer0

    @44: You’re telling me that the CEO of EA doesn’t make any decisions?

    #46 2 years ago
  47. Joe Musashi

    @43 Assumptions? No. Observations.

    JM

    #47 2 years ago
  48. Gheritt White

    @46: Don’t be silly; I’m just saying that it’s not usually them who come up with all the ideas in the first place.

    EDIT: Ack, yes my original comment could have been worded *much* more clearly. I’m sorry. Please. Forgive me. PLEASE.

    OH MY GOD I’M SO FUCKING SORRY ;)

    #48 2 years ago
  49. Dragon246

    @Yz,
    Really? ps4 and ps3 accounts won’t be separate. You just can’t download ps3 games on ps4 and vice versa.
    I hope used game supporters here also hate steam and don’t use it, because that would be very hypocritical of them.
    Enjoy your gaming. Just don’t use next-gen systems (although Sony has said ps4 won’t block used games) and steam from now on. Not that the sales would be affected in any way.

    #49 2 years ago
  50. YoungZer0

    @47: Won one match at Cluedo and suddenly you think you’re Sherlock Holmes, Mitt?

    @48: Doesn’t matter, they are the ones pushing for it, they are the ones who greenlight it, so it’s their responsibility.

    @49: You can’t play games you bought on your PSN store period. Not the PS2 games, not the PSO games.

    #50 2 years ago
  51. nollie4545

    Err, you can be a used games fan and a fan of steam? I mean the older games on steam are often sold dirt cheap, and you can often find them cheaper in stores anyway? One surely complements the other? How are they mutually exclusive?

    #51 2 years ago
  52. ManuOtaku

    I dont buy second hand games and neither i do sell my games, but i do like having the option, i think this is not the primary reason for going all digital, but is used as one of the many scapegoat for doing so, it gives them a resonable and an amicable reason at that, one that we can relate and give the benefit of the doubt, at least something that might look worht considering, i think the more options we have as consumers the better; i believe the problem with this, going all digital is the lack of a legal system that defines the boundaries of this disttribution media, or a body that overwatchs this kind of transactions just to give equal treatment for all parts involve, the end user and the provider, as it stands now is not the case, quite the opposite , and the most important aspect is that we as consumers do not demand this prior the estblishment of this type of distribution, in order to this become the norm.

    This Generation we have two main example of this trend, the Other Os Issue and the steam change of terms, both of which didnt gave the user or end consumer an OPTION, you do it as i said when we say it, that was the mindset behind this, if not the end user will lose all the content, purchases, etc, because they hold the key, this of course was possible because of the lack of a body or an updated legal system, that watch this transactions or force things in to be in equilibrium in equal rights,that it is a very worrying mindset, a one that we are headed in the future, thats what they like holding the control at their leasure.

    Also i like to add the ambiguity of this type of transaction,i mean digitall, in physical we know its a sale with all the legal boundaries, our responsabilties and all our obligations as consumers, they are very clear, but in digital we dont know there is a blur, the providers state it is a license, but this definition is one sided,and it was not done by all the parts involved or done by a comitee, they only want to establish the grounds to their likings and advantage without taking in consideration the other part, this is also very worrying, not having clear what this is.

    I just hope eventually consoles will keep making relevant physical things, like always have been the case in the past in order for both, physical and digital to co exist together like stairs and elevators, one should not eliminate the other, i think it can work here too, and just as well and good.

    #52 2 years ago
  53. ps4fanboy

    If Sony has learnt something from its mistakes, it better not be blocking used games or putting a re activation fee

    #53 2 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.