Goodbye Sony if they actually do that.
Printable View
Goodbye Sony if they actually do that.
maybe but what if Sony and its arch nemesis MS combine forces and BOTH together with the 720 and the PS4 ban used games? Consumer no choice to revolt other than to not buy ANY console. Not going to happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
MS has the EXACT interest Sony does here. I think they are probably both developing the technology and then waiting to see if the other is going to do it too.
Last I heard, MS wants to do the same thing.
Eh, I pretty much already buy all my games new. You just about have to to avoid paying the extra $10 for the online pass that companies almost universally are incorporating in their games. If there's a game that I might not be sure about or don't want to pay $60 for, I'll just wait until the price drops or it goes on sale on Amazon or someplace else.
the world only needs one system and a massive game libary and all would be good. just don't charge 50$ a game ha kidding. But a combined system better have wifi built in so I don't have to go out and buy an adapter. Because finding for the old xbox elite ( currently looking ) Is dam hard to do. I'm trying to snag one on ebay for under 40 $ but the little dumb sellers bumb the price pass 45$ when 2 mins are left. gosh I hate ebay sometimes.
Yeah, mine are probably 50/50 from Amazon new or Gamefly used. I'm guessing the price will drop quicker for new titles if this is implemented. It already drops fairly quick now. There will always be the built in crowd that has to have it right away (and some games warrant it), and there are the thrifty dudes like us who wait on most titles til it hits a good price. I.E. I got WWE 13 today for $30. That game isn't even 3 months old.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmoothPancakes
It's just a patent. Nothing worth panicking over .... yet.
Nintendo has no interest in doing that so if Microsoft and Sony both try this, it would feed into Nintendo's hands.
Well, even worse, it gets rid of the opportunity of sharing a game with a friend by coming over to their house and playing it on their system. If it's linked to a specific gamertag, it's a pain in the ass to do anything with that.
In the end, the only true way to prevent used game sales is to completely do away with physical media. Until they do that, any other way of getting rid of physical media is asking for another DRM issue like EA had with some of their PC games being unplayable brand new out of the box because of broken DRM software (at least, I think it was EA, I could be wrong on the company).
I honestly don't see how eliminating the secondary market is really going to help their bottom line anyways.
I honestly doubt they would. They don't even have online passes with most of their exclusive games. Sony seems hellbent on it. Virtually every exclusive PS3 game I've bought has some stupid online pass. Plus, with the Vita, unless you do a workaround, you can't even earn trophies with used copies of games, so this news doesn't surprise me a bit. You would think they'd be more focused on the next generation of consoles and actually finding a way to sell the dying Vita as opposed to worrying about used games sales.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
Sucks cuz I actually like the Vita compared to the PSP.
Yep. Pretty much the only games I buy brand new on release day are NCAA Football, FIFA, Assassin's Creed, Halo, Tiger Woods, etc, the ones I buy year after year. The rest, I keep them in the back of my mind until I eventually come across them in a store or on Amazon for cheap and decide to buy.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
I know, I really like mine. It's what I've always wanted in a handheld. It just sucks because Sony is basically screwing themselves over with ridiculous memory prices($100 for 32GB, LOL) and the huge lack of marketing. It also doesn't help that they have virtually nothing coming out because 3rd party studios are basically ignoring it until it gets a bigger user base. Oh well, as long as they continue to support it somewhat, I'll be happy.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
I just don't see the point of focusing on used games when they could help themselves in other areas. I mean, seriously...they REALLY need to get a better marketing team. How many commercials have you seen for Halo 4? Black Ops 2? A TON. How about the new God of War game? How about older big titles like Killzone and Uncharted? Virtually nothing. I've seen very little about the Vita, either, so it kind of makes me wonder what they're thinking.
But, I stand by my original statement. If they actually go ahead and do this for the PS4, I firmly believe it'll bomb and it will be their last console they make. With as large as the used game market is, I just don't believe people are going to be willing to go out and buy a console that doesn't support used games.
Are you kidding?Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk 2
Nintendo has done some asinine DRM for their downloadable games, so I could see them going in this direction at some point, if the other two led the way.Quote:
Originally Posted by souljahbill
I wouldn't. They were the first ones to be rumored to be doing something. I think there's more pressure on them to stop used game sales because of all the pressure from US developers wanting their bottom line to increase. Lot easier for a US developer to put pressure on a US company.Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
People who buy used will just wait til they're $20. Most games are cut half in price from release 3-6 months after release as it is now.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelerfan
Lots of factors to consider and you are only considering "as it is now".Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using Tapatalk 2
And, FWIW, sports games don't have that appreciable drop. At least not at brick & mortar stores. Online they'll drop some, but Target still has Madden for almost full price, NCAA for 75%, and I swear I saw NCAA at full price just a couple weeks ago.
Yeah, I've noticed that. My friend wants me to get Madden 13 (he got it for Christmas) so we can have a sports game to play online against each other (only other games we both have are Halo: Reach, COD games, and one or two other random games), but upon glancing at prices for Madden online, yeah, no way in hell am I buying it right now for $50+. I hate that connected careers shit, so pretty much the only reason I'd be getting it is to play some online games against my friend.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
MS's deal of the week is the EA games direct, for $50 :DQuote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
Yeah. If we go to a digital-only system, and M$ and $ony get to set the prices? We'll NEVER see sales.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
Yes, but even then, Sony would be making more off those people than if they bought used. When someone buys a used game, it all goes to that specific retailer. Publishers don't see a cent. I don't think Sony or Microsoft really care about the used game market, because they literally get nothing from it. However, one part of the equation I believe they're not really taking into account with these anti-used games ideas is "how many people will actually buy a console that eliminates used games?"Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
For the record, I would. I don't buy used games enough to care, but I know a lot of people who buy mostly used.
I also remember Gamestop saying that if this happens, they would not carry specific consoles that eliminated the possibility of playing used games. Not like it would matter anyway, I'd imagine they would go out of business pretty quick without the ability to accept trade ins and then turn around and sell them for double and triple profits.
If both MS and Sony eliminated the used market, Gamestop would be gone within a year.
If MS and Sony eliminate used games, someone will figure out an easy mod within 30 days.
User outcry and lack of sales would push them to have to put things on sale. Steam is a perfect example of something going on sale and immediately being bought in the tens of thousands or more. Every time a fairly big game goes on sale, it jumps up to the #1 sold spot on Steam within a few minutes as people flock to purchase it. Any digital distribution setup that doesn't include sales like Steam pulls off is just shooting themselves in the foot and costing themselves millions of dollars in revenue.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
Steam is perfect example of something that has competition, thanks to Amazon, other digital services and boxed sales. Currently, PSN and XBL are the only options. They could theoretically own the entire market, much like e-book prices were being set by the publisher and there were no appreciable sale prices.
I just don't think the old marketing idea of supply and demand applies as much anymore when it comes to digital distribution. Give someone the option between buying something for less than the normal retail price and it, invariably, causes the overall sell numbers of that item to be MUCH higher than it otherwise would have been if it stayed at the normal retail price.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
Hell, ask any Steam user how many games they have and then how many of those games they have played and almost every single one of them will tell you how they have games that they bought and haven't even installed yet, or have installed and haven't even touched since. Now, yes, most of those games they probably got for $5-15 a piece, but when you have 100,000 of users doing that, you have a marketing plan that makes producers of games perk up and pay attention to what you're doing.
I know I've never seen a game developer get pissed at Steam (besides EA, of course or this new shit with Steam Greenlight producing the bullshit that was WarZ and a few games that got rejected because of their content).
I'm not sure where our disconnect is, mors, but I wasn't saying that Steam isn't a good model. My point was that Steam's sales are as much (though probably more) about getting market share and sales as it is about being nice to their customers. Because, at the end of the day, they have to compete. I agree that it is advantageous for content providers like Steam and Amazon to offer sales. But we also have current examples (e-book prices) where digital providers are not offering sales, where there is no competition between providers (because the prices are set by the publishers), and where there's really no incentive for providers to offer lower prices.
Does a $60 game sell 3X at $20? Maybe. Maybe not. When you look at it from a business standpoint, it has to sell better than 3X to make up for the lost revenue.
Right now, because the PSN is the only way to get a digital title on the PS3, they have no incentive to lower their price. The PSN digital price doesn't even keep pace with the retail price at brick & mortar stores like Wal-Mart and Target, let alone keep up with the price on Amazon, or in used game shops. If that didn't change, and we went to all digital consoles, the consumers would be screwed. You may think that would cause Sony or M$ to lose sales of both games and consoles in the long-run ... you might be right. But we'd still be screwed in the meantime.
You missed my point man. I'm saying that Micro$oft and $ony would be stupid to not have competitive pricing for their items if they went all digital. They could easily work out a deal with a place like Amazon to have "XBL keys" and "PSN keys" for games purchased through Amazon to be downloaded on the console. Hell, the direction that $ony and Micro$oft both are going with their app setups, they could just have a built in Amazon app that took you to an easy to navigate Amazon webpage that was built like Steam's sale pages to easily convey on sale items and soon to be on sale items.
While, yes, that's part of the market share going to Amazon and such, but, again, Micro$oft and $ony would be insane to stick with their antiquated market ideals when switching over to all digital distribution.
As for the flat out lie that our current internet infrastructure wouldn't be able to handle a setup like that, well, that's just silly. I have one of the worst internet connections you can get (6mbit/s down and .7mbit/s up) and it doesn't stop me from playing games online and downloading all my PC games through Steam. It might take 4-5 hours to get a big game (12-16 gigs) but that's what sleep is for. Just like the FBS Playoff argument about school work, it's just a silly lie to prevent these companies from having to figure out their own infrastructure issues. They say they're worried about the people with consoles that aren't hooked up to the internet; well, clearly, those people aren't your customers are they? It's time to kick them to the curb and move on to the future of game distribution. If they want to play games too, they'll get with the damn program or do without. As long as Micro$oft and $ony don't get dumb and FORCE you to be connected at all times to play their games, customers will be happy to be able to buy their games without having to leave the house.
And my point is that they might BE stupid. Nothing to stop that from happening.
While the infrastructure discussion is overblown, you do not have one of the worst. Plenty of worse connections out there, some of which I've had the displeasure of using.
Won a gift card to Best Buy
Not anything else I want there and looked at a few of the cheaper games
Pretty sure which one I want but still undecided
Unchartered Dual Pack (1 and 2)
or
Resident Evil 6
I played the demo of RE5 but didn't care much for it. I've always been a fan of the RE games and movies for that matter. Played the demo of RE6 and actually enjoyed it.
Heard the Unchartered series was pretty good, and I played the demo for 3 and really enjoyed it.
Any of you played or have RE6?
Aside from it being a complete abomination to the series, it has DECENT game play. There's 4 or 5 different campaigns to play through with the characters, so it should keep you busy. Just don't go it expecting it to have the same haunting feeling of the older Resident Evil games. Much like 4 and 5, it's all action and no scare.
Uncharted 2 is probably one of the top 5 games of all time, but you would probably want to play through the first one to get the full back story. Uncharted 3 is good but doesn't quite live up to the quality of Uncharted 2.
Uncharted....definitely
Of course I've never played RE6 :D
:+1:Quote:
Originally Posted by I OU a Beatn
Yeah the deal is pretty good for Unchartered, plus it's 2 games.
Haha thanks OU, figured as many games as you've owned/played..your advice is sound.
I only considered RE6 because my friend recently bought it and wanted to do Co-op. I haven't really be into the RE games since they lost that haunting feeling. I remember playing on the PS1 and feeling honestly nervous while playing lol. Those damn ribbons for the typewriter haha
Thanks fellas
Am I the only 1 with a 3DS?
Sidenote: I haven't played a Pokemon game in forever but this one tempts me
Quote:
Originally Posted by souljahbill
Yes you are the only one lame enough to own one!!..lol......:D
I'm just messing with you, my wife owns one if it makes you feel any better.
Really? What does she play on it? The 3DS I "own" is really for my wife.Quote:
Originally Posted by oweb26