SenjutsuSage
Banned
I kinda expected this all along. No biggie, though. I honestly never thought that this was something only Microsoft were looking into.
The reason people buy used games is because new ones are expensive, often risky purchases. Gamestop, regardless of what one might think of them, is simply providing a service that fills a particular consumer demand.
You originally bolded four words spelling out "WTBT". I don't know what that acronym means please explain. I'm assuming it's something really mean because you removed it.
You havent been paying attention. Of course theyll be raked through the coals. Probably even more so after how they kept being propped up as salvation.Lol. This.
Twisted?
It wasn't that. You got the letters mixed up.
I wont tell you, but ill give you a hint. I'm British.
Have a nice day.
Do people on GAF not realise how big Sony is?
Here's the entire list of sony folks I know of that either are in on the decisions or have the ears of people who are in on the decisions that are on twitter.
My biggest piece of advice is be respectful. They aren't likely to finish a tweet in all caps threatening them.
Shuhei Yoshida (president of worldwide studios) @yosp (easily the highest level person on twitter and quite accessible)
John Koller (head of hardware marketing) @jpkoller (dude has like 150 followers - heh)
Guy Longworth (senior vice president PlayStation Brand Marketing) @luckylongworth
Scott Rohde (PlayStation Software Product Development Head for Sony Worldwide Studios America) @rohdescott
Also couldn't hurt to let the ex-journos that work there like @nsuttner and @shanewatch
If Microsoft barters down to this as well then I would at least buy Xbox One for exclusives. I'll just use PC for everything else.This is the correct compromise. This means I can avoid the anti-consumer publishers and purchase games that are not anti-consumer.
Wrong one. Hes a wrestling writer.
I'm not sure about that. I get the impression that it is the system itself that people are really against, it doesnt matter if Microsoft or Sony does it.They wouldn't complain as much as they would be disappointed. Sad threads would happen for sure. You almost expect this from Microsoft, but Sony?
Like I said from another thread here, it'll be financially suicide for them to ignore PS4.
Indeed, i think this is the case as well. It would be a big risk to ignore a whole platform.If Sony said "there will be no online passes or DRM of any kind" everyone would still put games on the platform.
The ONLY way it would happen would be if EA, Ubisoft, Activision, + others got together and said "no, fuck you, we are going with XYZ box". Otherwise they would stand to lose (as in, not make) far too much money.
I really hope Sony doesn't go through with this. famousmortimer's posts have gave me some hope, but things could still change. If they do in fact end up using some form of DRM I'll just stick with the Wii U and build a PC. It's going to be tough though, I don't see many fighters releasing for the Wii U and they pretty much never have PC ports. I don't want to have to abandon my favorite genre.
Or the fact that games are selling 10k units.
I believe it's been noted that trade-ins of older games go mainly into buying new games. If there's not a crash there WILL be a shift in what's being bought, I doubt it's going to be a simple linear growth. People would probably focus more and more on high value purchases and disregard anything that isn't.The reason they buy them cheaper is because they can. Not because they can't unless they buy second hand. If someone offers you two identical products for two prices you take the cheapest. The idea used games are required for a healthy market is unfounded until there's evidence. If the next gen collapses, maybe people will have that evidence, at the minute it's just an assumption.
Funnily enough he'll think you've missed a word because its twitter, and because of all the tweets he's getting, and will consider it in the same group as the people saying they don't want DRM.
So, thanks.
What system? What makes you think they have one? All they said so far implied they don't have it. 3rd parties works have to code their own block if they wanted.
It works by supplying a contactless RF tag with each copy of a game (NFC?), which can (independent of a network connection), remember if a game has been tied to a different machine or user account previously. The system checks with the tag before playing the game.
I suppose I should say that this doesn't mean PS4 will, for sure, restrict second hand games. This would not be the first time Sony registered patents in this area and then did nothing with the tech. In fact I remember a patent fueling rumours prior to PS3's launch. The decision would be a business one, not one based on technical feasibility. This system would be relatively expensive to implement vs network-DRM. Although it could have the double effect of limiting piracy - at least until pirates could hack or reproduce the 'rf tag' system.
The last official comment we had from someone at Sony was Jack Tretton's "'for the record, I'm totally opposed to blocking used games." - but maybe people would be better reassured by a comment from SCEJ...
So with those qualifications out of the way, have at it
edit - since it's causing some confusion, the application refers to a system that can tie a game to your user ID (i.e. your account), or a machine ID via the RF tag. For people wondering what would happen if your console died etc.
This is a very easy bet.
SONY will allow publishers to "lock" their games someway... BUT they won't use the system on their own games.
It won't be mandatory and publishers like CD Projekt Red won't use it.
I hope this is true and I hope we, as a gamers, support those publishers that doesn't block used games.
Personal preference, but I don't. I will always buy new, even if it means paying more. For one, GameStop sells their used games only slightly lower than newer one's. However, my main reason is I like good, clean unopened copies. I hate dusty, possibly slightly scratched discs and boxes that smell like cigarette smoke and cat pee.The reason they buy them cheaper is because they can. Not because they can't unless they buy second hand. If someone offers you two identical products for two prices you take the cheapest. The idea used games are required for a healthy market is unfounded until there's evidence. If the next gen collapses, maybe people will have that evidence, at the minute it's just an assumption.
Waste of time. Most of those people don't even respond to tweets about company business unless it's people fellating them. Suttner and Bettenhausen would have zero influence. For all the praise Yoshida gets here he has been cagey about stuff like DRM, paid online, region free gaming, when they should be being transparent. It all seems like a controlled PR exercise that is going to blow up in their faces after the hiding MS got.
Can someone summarise the OP? So many updates etc.
I'd love Sony and MS to change stance on this just to see EA desperately spin the PR with a return to online passes.
After all EA listened to the gamers and dropped it for us only 2 weeks ago.
I believe it's been noted that trade-ins of older games go mainly into buying new games. If there's not a crash there WILL be a shift in what's being bought, I doubt it's going to be a simple linear growth. People would probably focus more and more on high value purchases and disregard anything that isn't.
Doritopope says he's heard rumors of Sony implementing their own system to block gamesCan someone summarise the OP? So many updates etc.
This IS admittedly why just having the option CAN be best, if the likes of EA start to play hardball with GameStop instead. GameStop loves their used revenue, and I imagine having to sacrifice part of it is a better deal than having that system flipped on and lose a larger chunk or help ice the slope to being locked out entirely.Sony probably has a system in place to block used games for publishers who probably want to use it like EA and Ubisoft.
I love gaming but, the whole used game always online stuff could really sour a person on gaming. Rocking the boat too much could have really bad consequences for the entire industry. Also publishers should really direct their anger at their real target the retailers who sell used games not the people who actually buy games they make. I know they will not do that because they need retail partners to sell their hardware so the consumer is the target.
It's true some may well just keep getting as many games while shifting cost cuts elsewhere, but I think it's probably a safe bet quite a few WOULD buy fewer games and just focus on what they do want most.Just because people do something to get money off games doesn't mean that when they can't do it they're going to stop spending money. That's an assumption, but there's no evidence for it yet. We'll see how the systems they have are implemented and what the effect on the industry is before we can make grand statements like "if people can't trade in games they'll buy less games".
Personal preference, but I don't. I will always buy new, even if it means paying more. For one, GameStop sells their used games only slightly lower than newer one's. However, my main reason is I like good, clean unopened copies. I hate dusty, possibly slightly scratched discs and boxes that smell like cigarette smoke and cat pee.
Just because people do something to get money off games doesn't mean that when they can't do it they're going to stop spending money. That's an assumption, but there's no evidence for it yet. We'll see how the systems they have are implemented and what the effect on the industry is before we can make grand statements like "if people can't trade in games they'll buy less games".
He has posted here for ages, since I was lurking. Unless he has been impersonating the wrestling writer for all that time for no apparent reason its the writer of wrestling observer.And how do you know it's the wrong one? I find it highly coincidental that a user with the name of a former Microsoft product manager group is defending online DRM to such an extent that they'd send a troll tweet to @yosp in support of the practice.
Doritopope says he's heard rumors of Sony implementing their own system to block games
GAF-insider says the system existed until this week but Sony decided to scrap it after seeing Microsoft's rough week
GAF-insider urges to voice your opinion to key Sony execs
I'm not sure about that. I get the impression that it is the system itself that people are really against, it doesnt matter if Microsoft or Sony does it.
Indeed, i think this is the case as well. It would be a big risk to ignore a whole platform.
Can someone summarise the OP? So many updates etc.
I think many of us are fickle and will just go against whoever does it, Nintendo's probably the one I'd be most DISAPPOINTED in.They would hate the system itself, but be much more disappointed in Sony than MS. Sony is like the big brother who should know better.
It's true some may well just keep getting as many games while shifting cost cuts elsewhere, but I think it's probably a safe bet quite a few WOULD buy fewer games and just focus on what they do want most.
That its not what Geoff said btw.Nothing substantiated then?
He has posted here for ages, since I was lurking. Unless he has been impersonating the wrestling writer for all that time for no apparent reason its the writer of wrestling observer.
I think his opinion on this is terrible but he isn't a Sony mole.
They dropped Online Passes for a reason.
The reason they buy them cheaper is because they can. Not because they can't unless they buy second hand. If someone offers you two identical products for two prices you take the cheapest. The idea used games are required for a healthy market is unfounded until there's evidence. If the next gen collapses, maybe people will have that evidence, at the minute it's just an assumption.