GameStop Warns Against Anti-Used Game Technology

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

I want to believe that even if Microsoft or Sony were to block the used games, they'd be smart enough to see that there's good money to be made there and they could copy the Steam model for the PlayStation Store and XBox Live. That is, sales, discounts, promos, etc.

What I find hard to believe is an always online system for all their games. Once again, I don't think they're really that stupid. They saw what happened with Diablo 3 and I don't think they'd want to risk having the same backlash Blizzard had when their servers went down.

The most important thing to keep in mind is that companies like Microsoft and Sony aren't trying to screw their customers because, well, we're the ones paying for their products. But it wouldn't surprise if they're trying to kill GameStop and the like just so they can get the "extra" cash the retailers are making. Or maybe not even kill them, just get their piece of the cake... like 99.9% of the cake.

I do believe I only own a handful of preowned games. Call of Duty 2, Dead Space, Shadow of the Colossus...and I really think that's it. I prefer to buy my games new on release day. So this wouldn't affect me too much.

However, I do let my friends borrow my games (one is currently playing Halo 4), and there is the very rare occasion when I trade a game in. And I really can't see Microsoft pulling this. I just can't. The backlash would be something amazing to see, and I'm certain that even people inside the company would be warning against doing something like that. Still, I suppose it could happen, and it will be frightening to watch if it does.

As for the always online thing, I can't see that happening. Blizzard got a slap in the face from that, but there's a bigger issue. What if the servers go down, like they did for the PlayStation Network last year (or was it the year before)? What then? Will we not be able to play ANY of our games because their servers got hacked, therefore the game can't tell that we're connected and thus it won't run? If the crash around Diablo III's launch was bad, having gamers lose all there games for nearly a month would be...
I'm pretty sure the world would end.

It wont hurt them as much as people like to claim, if people cant buy a used game, they will save up for the game they want and people will buy the same or more amount of new games as before.

Still always online is a dick move, and I may have to move my business to Sony.

Fuck always online DRM.

Also, I am having to laugh how no one (Rightly so) considers Nintendo could pick up the customers.

Andy Shandy:
They're right, but the fact that this is coming for a company that is a big reason behind why Microsoft and Sony would be considering this leaves a bit of a bitter taste. Why not work something out with the publishers to do with the used sales, because at the moment (if the rumours would be true, that is) it would be a lose-lose situation, it would just be who loses more.

It's funny that gamers think publishers hate Gamestop when they continue to give Gamestop exclusive deals. Gamestop sells more shit for the publishers than any other retailer besides Wal Mart.

Also, what do you mean by "work something out"? Do you mean that Gamestop and other used sellers should pay the publishers a percentage? That would do everlasting harm to consumers and should never be considered.

Pyrian:
Uh, guys? I love Steam, too, but it's pretty much the poster child for buying games new and being unable to resell them. If MS/Xbox wants to chase Steam's coattails, no-used-sales no-game-stop all-digital-distribution consoles make good sense.

The remaining brick-and-mortar digital product stores are all staring into the abyss which Tower Records, etc., long since fell into. They're dinosaurs.

I'd be interested to see whether total demise of resale leads to better discounts, a la Steam, or leads to price gouging on a scale as yet unseen before.

Since this is Microsoft we're talking about, though, I know which one I'm betting on.

Sidney Buit:
Why does everyone latch onto the "Used Games" part of these stories while ignoring the absolutely atrocious part. You must always be online to use the console.

Maybe I'm the only one that lives in the dark ages, but the internet is a very expensive thing (especially at the speeds they'll require)and until recently I didn't even have access to high-speed at all. If any console requires that I be online to play my games - whether or not they allow used game sales - I simply won't be able to justify purchasing the console nor the games. I don't know when I'll be forced to cancel my internet subscription and I don't know when I'll have to move down the street where there isn't cable access...

By next gen almost every game will be multiplayer games with single player adventures tacked on (EA is already on board), so it makes sense for the system to require internet connection.

Yeah, add me to those LOLing at the notion of Gamestop telling Microsoft not to kill the used game market when said market provides the majority of Gamestop's business model. If you (and others, Game) didn't run this racket in the way you did then companies wouldn't have had to resort to these sorts of steps.

The ironing is delicious. [/Bart Simpson]

Newsflash: Microsoft - and most other console manufacturers - aren't that bothered about mates lending each other games or selling them on to each other. They're bothered about professional operations.

Pyrian:

Adam Jensen:
They are biased, but they are also correct. People will simply wait for price drops or switch to PC. Less hassle, and Steam deals are awesome.

SonOfVoorhees:
but as i say, i doubt MS will, maybe when consoles go digital only but then hopefully games will be cheaper and thus the used game market wont matter. Look at steam...at that price who cares about used.

KeyMaster45:
Ehh, all the games I want to play come out on steam nowadays anyway. ... If anything I think that's what Sony and Microsoft should be scared of happening, not used game sales.

Uh, guys? I love Steam, too, but it's pretty much the poster child for buying games new and being unable to resell them. If MS/Xbox wants to chase Steam's coattails, no-used-sales no-game-stop all-digital-distribution consoles make good sense.

The remaining brick-and-mortar digital product stores are all staring into the abyss which Tower Records, etc., long since fell into. They're dinosaurs.

But Steam sells for a hell of a lot cheaper than Microsofts digital copies or hard copies from, say, GameStop.

I've often thought about the fact that I can't sell my Steam games, but then I remember that most of them cost me less than 5. And the ones that cost more are ones I want to keep to maybe play again.

I'm not saying it's perfect, but it's definitely better than what Microsoft currently offer. We'll have to wait and see how this turns out. If they do this, but actually offer affordable prices for their digital games I wouldn't mind as much.

CardinalPiggles:

Pyrian:

Adam Jensen:
They are biased, but they are also correct. People will simply wait for price drops or switch to PC. Less hassle, and Steam deals are awesome.

SonOfVoorhees:
but as i say, i doubt MS will, maybe when consoles go digital only but then hopefully games will be cheaper and thus the used game market wont matter. Look at steam...at that price who cares about used.

KeyMaster45:
Ehh, all the games I want to play come out on steam nowadays anyway. ... If anything I think that's what Sony and Microsoft should be scared of happening, not used game sales.

Uh, guys? I love Steam, too, but it's pretty much the poster child for buying games new and being unable to resell them. If MS/Xbox wants to chase Steam's coattails, no-used-sales no-game-stop all-digital-distribution consoles make good sense.

The remaining brick-and-mortar digital product stores are all staring into the abyss which Tower Records, etc., long since fell into. They're dinosaurs.

But Steam sells for a hell of a lot cheaper than Microsofts digital copies or hard copies from, say, GameStop.

I've often thought about the fact that I can't sell my Steam games, but then I remember that most of them cost me less than 5. And the ones that cost more are ones I want to keep to maybe play again.

I'm not saying it's perfect, but it's definitely better than what Microsoft currently offer. We'll have to wait and see how this turns out. If they do this, but actually offer affordable prices for their digital games I wouldn't mind as much.

Normally, Steams prices are exactly the same. Sales are the exception, not the rule. For example: Skyrim is still $60.

Didn't we just go through a news story like this with the PS4?

I will believe it when I see it.

So lets hit all the reasons this is bad that GameStop didn't touch.
-Possible loss of game if xbox has a hardware failure (IE: RRoD) Depending on how the system is implemented, all games could be lost if the xbox breaks down.

-Stopping game history. (Want to know a bit about old games? Buy an SNES and Super Metroid. Want to do that if used games cannot be played? Too bad.)

-Loss of new game sales. (CoD goes on sale, not everyone wants to pay full price like they currently do. Online community shrinks due to this. Less player retention, harder to find a match, next CoD has fewer people buying it.)

-Loss of console sales. (SteamBox and OUYA coming out around that time, less restrictive than this, simpler for people than PC.)

Its a terrible idea that will hurt GameStop, Microsoft, and Consumers.

Winthrop:
(SteamBox and OUYA coming out around that time, less restrictive than this

This part confuses me, how would Steambox OUYA be less restrictive. Steambox would likely operate with the same DRM as Steam and OUYA would probably do the same.

Both are going to require an internet connection and neither are going to allow you to resell your games.

Crono1973:

CardinalPiggles:

Pyrian:
Uh, guys? I love Steam, too, but it's pretty much the poster child for buying games new and being unable to resell them. If MS/Xbox wants to chase Steam's coattails, no-used-sales no-game-stop all-digital-distribution consoles make good sense.

The remaining brick-and-mortar digital product stores are all staring into the abyss which Tower Records, etc., long since fell into. They're dinosaurs.

But Steam sells for a hell of a lot cheaper than Microsofts digital copies or hard copies from, say, GameStop.

I've often thought about the fact that I can't sell my Steam games, but then I remember that most of them cost me less than 5. And the ones that cost more are ones I want to keep to maybe play again.

I'm not saying it's perfect, but it's definitely better than what Microsoft currently offer. We'll have to wait and see how this turns out. If they do this, but actually offer affordable prices for their digital games I wouldn't mind as much.

Normally, Steams prices are exactly the same. Sales are the exception, not the rule. For example: Skyrim is still $60.

What I mean is, digital games on Xbox hardly ever go below 15. And the digital selection of games is pretty limited.

Whereas Steam's library is only limited by exclusivity (EA titles, console only titles (no big loss)). And Steam has more regular (and better) sales.

At the moment, digital sales through the Xbox dashboard are terrible in comparison. If they got on par with Steam with their digital marketplace I'd be less concerned about the no used games issue.

Every time I turn around, somebody somewhere is trying to take the fun out of gaming. It was recently rumored that Sony was going to do this with their next console, and 99% of comments I read from gamers were whole-heartedly running to Xbox at the mere idea that this could happen.

I have so many issues with these potential changes to Xbox, but the main two are that a) I don't want a console that makes me have an internet connection, let alone make it that I have to be online to use the console at all., and b) A large portion of the games I buy ARE used.

I read some comments above about people like me being in the "dark ages", and say what you will, but I really don't have use for an internet-connected console. I've had an Xbox since 2006, and only connected it via Xbox Live, a couple weeks ago. I don't like to play multiplayer games, and the only reason I hooked it up at all was because I used to play co-op games with my daughter before she moved across the country. I missed playing with her, so I bought a subscription for Xbox Live. I don't know if I'll renew the subscription in a year though, because although I enjoy playing with her, I don't do it often enough to warrant the subscription. So I'm not sure why that puts me in the dark ages...it's just a preference. I like to play single-player games, period. To have my console hooked up to the internet, puts another financial burden on my already financially-strapped family as well. I did it at the time, because we had the funds, but my husband's income fluctuates, and it's not something I'd even be ABLE to do if I wanted to subscribe right now. So Xbox would be cutting so many customers off, just by making the always on-line internet connectivity issue a reality, alone. Some people just can't afford it. These people will then go to Sony. Or, they'll just go to computer-gaming. I HAVE internet, and am on the internet most of the day (on my computer)...I just don't want to HAVE to pay for another device to be hooked to it, especially since I won't use it much.

Secondly, again, some people just cannot afford new games. I can OCCASIONALLY afford a new game, but that's not often. There are quite a lot of games that are still on my back-logged wishlist because I can't afford to even buy them used. The cost of gaming has gotten really expensive over the last couple of years. There are lots of games to be desired, and rarely have I met the person who can afford to buy all of them, let alone all new copies. Gaming companies would not be losing out on a sale because of used games, at least where I'm concerned, because if they stopped used games from being sold, I wouldn't own some of them. It's not a matter of saying "Oh, I have to buy BLANK new if I want it, so okay, sure, here's my $60 bucks." It's more like, "Oh, I have to buy BLANK new if I want it. Crap, I guess I'll have to do without it then." Xbox would be cutting another portion of people out of their possible customer base by making their consoles only play new games. I'm not even talking about all the people who sell or trade their games in order to buy a newer one on their WL. I don't sell or trade my games when I'm done with them, but I'm sure there are loads of people who do that because they also cannot afford to always buy new games.

We should all be on the same side on this issue, I think. We should not be okay with companies like Xbox telling us how we have to game. They WILL listen to us if we speak with our wallets. These possible changes to their consoles may be okay with YOU, but you HAVE to recognize that we all don't have the same financial capabilities, or want to play our games the same way you want to play. Why would you want to push other gamers out of our community, or be OKAY with the idea that they will be pushed out? The idea that a gaming company feels ripped-off because of the sale of used games is preposterous to me. If they're used, that means they were paid for once already. Why do they feel entitled to be paid for the same item over and over again? If they want, there's nothing to stop them from renting games. I want to reiterate here that they're NOT losing out on sales to people who just can't afford the price of a new game. If only new games are sold, some people will just have to do without gaming.

I don't even know how to sum up my opinion here....I just feel sad that gaming's come down to these issues at all. I'm passionate about gaming, and defensive about it I suppose, but it's what I like to do. Gaming is more to me than even for strictly entertainment purposes. I have medical issues that leave me sedentary most of the time. This is what I do with my mind, besides reading the news, interesting articles, and so forth. It is an excellent form of entertainment, expressionism, escapism, distraction, and just plain fun. I realize that gaming is also a business though too, and I know that gaming companies need to make money in order to survive. I WANT them to survive, to thrive, and to continue, of course....I just don't want to be left out of something I've been a part of since the 80's. Where there's one person who feels something, there's surely to be many more just like him or her....and so I'm quite sure I'm not the only one who feels this way.

CardinalPiggles:

Crono1973:

CardinalPiggles:

But Steam sells for a hell of a lot cheaper than Microsofts digital copies or hard copies from, say, GameStop.

I've often thought about the fact that I can't sell my Steam games, but then I remember that most of them cost me less than 5. And the ones that cost more are ones I want to keep to maybe play again.

I'm not saying it's perfect, but it's definitely better than what Microsoft currently offer. We'll have to wait and see how this turns out. If they do this, but actually offer affordable prices for their digital games I wouldn't mind as much.

Normally, Steams prices are exactly the same. Sales are the exception, not the rule. For example: Skyrim is still $60.

What I mean is, digital games on Xbox hardly ever go below 15. And the digital selection of games is pretty limited.

Whereas Steam's library is only limited by exclusivity (EA titles, console only titles (no big loss)). And Steam has more regular (and better) sales.

At the moment, digital sales through the Xbox dashboard are terrible in comparison. If they got on par with Steam with their digital marketplace I'd be less concerned about the no used games issue.

I think the selection issue will be solved next gen. As for the sales, hardly a reason to give up your consumer rights. There are quite a few Steam games I would resell if I could, Skyrim being one of them and if I had those games on console, they would be used to fund new game purchases.

While they naturally have a bit of a bias on the subject it doesn't diminish the fact it would be incredibly stupid. I doubt that something like that would be implemented, but if it does I can't wait to see the backlash.

Oh it ought to be great fun.

PsychoChick966:
Every time I turn around, somebody somewhere is trying to take the fun out of gaming. It was recently rumored that Sony was going to do this with their next console, and 99% of comments I read from gamers were whole-heartedly running to Xbox at the mere idea that this could happen.

I have so many issues with these potential changes to Xbox, but the main two are that a) I don't want a console that makes me have an internet connection, let alone make it that I have to be online to use the console at all., and b) A large portion of the games I buy ARE used.

I read some comments above about people like me being in the "dark ages", and say what you will, but I really don't have use for an internet-connected console. I've had an Xbox since 2006, and only connected it via Xbox Live, a couple weeks ago. I don't like to play multiplayer games, and the only reason I hooked it up at all was because I used to play co-op games with my daughter before she moved across the country. I missed playing with her, so I bought a subscription for Xbox Live. I don't know if I'll renew the subscription in a year though, because although I enjoy playing with her, I don't do it often enough to warrant the subscription. So I'm not sure why that puts me in the dark ages...it's just a preference. I like to play single-player games, period. To have my console hooked up to the internet, puts another financial burden on my already financially-strapped family as well. I did it at the time, because we had the funds, but my husband's income fluctuates, and it's not something I'd even be ABLE to do if I wanted to subscribe right now. So Xbox would be cutting so many customers off, just by making the always on-line internet connectivity issue a reality, alone. Some people just can't afford it. These people will then go to Sony. Or, they'll just go to computer-gaming. I HAVE internet, and am on the internet most of the day (on my computer)...I just don't want to HAVE to pay for another device to be hooked to it, especially since I won't use it much.

Secondly, again, some people just cannot afford new games. I can OCCASIONALLY afford a new game, but that's not often. There are quite a lot of games that are still on my back-logged wishlist because I can't afford to even buy them used. The cost of gaming has gotten really expensive over the last couple of years. There are lots of games to be desired, and rarely have I met the person who can afford to buy all of them, let alone all new copies. Gaming companies would not be losing out on a sale because of used games, at least where I'm concerned, because if they stopped used games from being sold, I wouldn't own some of them. It's not a matter of saying "Oh, I have to buy BLANK new if I want it, so okay, sure, here's my $60 bucks." It's more like, "Oh, I have to buy BLANK new if I want it. Crap, I guess I'll have to do without it then." Xbox would be cutting another portion of people out of their possible customer base by making their consoles only play new games. I'm not even talking about all the people who sell or trade their games in order to buy a newer one on their WL. I don't sell or trade my games when I'm done with them, but I'm sure there are loads of people who do that because they also cannot afford to always buy new games.

We should all be on the same side on this issue, I think. We should not be okay with companies like Xbox telling us how we have to game. They WILL listen to us if we speak with our wallets. These possible changes to their consoles may be okay with YOU, but you HAVE to recognize that we all don't have the same financial capabilities, or want to play our games the same way you want to play. Why would you want to push other gamers out of our community, or be OKAY with the idea that they will be pushed out? The idea that a gaming company feels ripped-off because of the sale of used games is preposterous to me. If they're used, that means they were paid for once already. Why do they feel entitled to be paid for the same item over and over again? If they want, there's nothing to stop them from renting games. I want to reiterate here that they're NOT losing out on sales to people who just can't afford the price of a new game. If only new games are sold, some people will just have to do without gaming.

I don't even know how to sum up my opinion here....I just feel sad that gaming's come down to these issues at all. I'm passionate about gaming, and defensive about it I suppose, but it's what I like to do. Gaming is more to me than even for strictly entertainment purposes. I have medical issues that leave me sedentary most of the time. This is what I do with my mind, besides reading the news, interesting articles, and so forth. It is an excellent form of entertainment, expressionism, escapism, distraction, and just plain fun. I realize that gaming is also a business though too, and I know that gaming companies need to make money in order to survive. I WANT them to survive, to thrive, and to continue, of course....I just don't want to be left out of something I've been a part of since the 80's. Where there's one person who feels something, there's surely to be many more just like him or her....and so I'm quite sure I'm not the only one who feels this way.

I feel where your coming from but I honestly doubt either company will go though integreating this tech into the next console. Even if both Microsoft and Sony were to do it at the same time, it would just make the Wii U into a massive success again by giving developers a reason to make more games for it (as it would be the only non-fail system left).

The only intelligent usage for this tech i can think of would be to allow beta-testers to test games on their own consoles without risking them giving the classified alpha or beta version of game X to all their buddies.

I don't know who to hate more

Gamestop and Microsoft legitimately seem like they're competing to see who can be the most scummy

Crono1973:

Winthrop:
(SteamBox and OUYA coming out around that time, less restrictive than this

This part confuses me, how would Steambox OUYA be less restrictive. Steambox would likely operate with the same DRM as Steam and OUYA would probably do the same.

Both are going to require an internet connection and neither are going to allow you to resell your games.

According to this article, the new xbox will be always online (Lose single player data if your internet goes down?). While the other consoles will require internet to download games, they will still allow you to play offline (OUYA source: http://ouyaforum.com/showthread.php?890-Ouya-offline-play no source for steam box, but given the way steam works I'm assuming) once the game has been downloaded.

On a related note, I believe both will allow hardware mods and OUYA will allow cracking and homebrew. Although this is a different form of restriction than the kind I was referring too in my previous post, the new xbox will presumably not allow for this.

Son of Songhai:

PsychoChick966:
Every time I turn around, somebody somewhere is trying to take the fun out of gaming. It was recently rumored that Sony was going to do this with their next console, and 99% of comments I read from gamers were whole-heartedly running to Xbox at the mere idea that this could happen.

I have so many issues with these potential changes to Xbox, but the main two are that a) I don't want a console that makes me have an internet connection, let alone make it that I have to be online to use the console at all., and b) A large portion of the games I buy ARE used.

I read some comments above about people like me being in the "dark ages", and say what you will, but I really don't have use for an internet-connected console. I've had an Xbox since 2006, and only connected it via Xbox Live, a couple weeks ago. I don't like to play multiplayer games, and the only reason I hooked it up at all was because I used to play co-op games with my daughter before she moved across the country. I missed playing with her, so I bought a subscription for Xbox Live. I don't know if I'll renew the subscription in a year though, because although I enjoy playing with her, I don't do it often enough to warrant the subscription. So I'm not sure why that puts me in the dark ages...it's just a preference. I like to play single-player games, period. To have my console hooked up to the internet, puts another financial burden on my already financially-strapped family as well. I did it at the time, because we had the funds, but my husband's income fluctuates, and it's not something I'd even be ABLE to do if I wanted to subscribe right now. So Xbox would be cutting so many customers off, just by making the always on-line internet connectivity issue a reality, alone. Some people just can't afford it. These people will then go to Sony. Or, they'll just go to computer-gaming. I HAVE internet, and am on the internet most of the day (on my computer)...I just don't want to HAVE to pay for another device to be hooked to it, especially since I won't use it much.

Secondly, again, some people just cannot afford new games. I can OCCASIONALLY afford a new game, but that's not often. There are quite a lot of games that are still on my back-logged wishlist because I can't afford to even buy them used. The cost of gaming has gotten really expensive over the last couple of years. There are lots of games to be desired, and rarely have I met the person who can afford to buy all of them, let alone all new copies. Gaming companies would not be losing out on a sale because of used games, at least where I'm concerned, because if they stopped used games from being sold, I wouldn't own some of them. It's not a matter of saying "Oh, I have to buy BLANK new if I want it, so okay, sure, here's my $60 bucks." It's more like, "Oh, I have to buy BLANK new if I want it. Crap, I guess I'll have to do without it then." Xbox would be cutting another portion of people out of their possible customer base by making their consoles only play new games. I'm not even talking about all the people who sell or trade their games in order to buy a newer one on their WL. I don't sell or trade my games when I'm done with them, but I'm sure there are loads of people who do that because they also cannot afford to always buy new games.

We should all be on the same side on this issue, I think. We should not be okay with companies like Xbox telling us how we have to game. They WILL listen to us if we speak with our wallets. These possible changes to their consoles may be okay with YOU, but you HAVE to recognize that we all don't have the same financial capabilities, or want to play our games the same way you want to play. Why would you want to push other gamers out of our community, or be OKAY with the idea that they will be pushed out? The idea that a gaming company feels ripped-off because of the sale of used games is preposterous to me. If they're used, that means they were paid for once already. Why do they feel entitled to be paid for the same item over and over again? If they want, there's nothing to stop them from renting games. I want to reiterate here that they're NOT losing out on sales to people who just can't afford the price of a new game. If only new games are sold, some people will just have to do without gaming.

I don't even know how to sum up my opinion here....I just feel sad that gaming's come down to these issues at all. I'm passionate about gaming, and defensive about it I suppose, but it's what I like to do. Gaming is more to me than even for strictly entertainment purposes. I have medical issues that leave me sedentary most of the time. This is what I do with my mind, besides reading the news, interesting articles, and so forth. It is an excellent form of entertainment, expressionism, escapism, distraction, and just plain fun. I realize that gaming is also a business though too, and I know that gaming companies need to make money in order to survive. I WANT them to survive, to thrive, and to continue, of course....I just don't want to be left out of something I've been a part of since the 80's. Where there's one person who feels something, there's surely to be many more just like him or her....and so I'm quite sure I'm not the only one who feels this way.

I feel where your coming from but I honestly doubt either company will go though integreating this tech into the next console. Even if both Microsoft and Sony were to do it at the same time, it would just make the Wii U into a massive success again by giving developers a reason to make more games for it (as it would be the only non-fail system left).

The only intelligent usage for this tech i can think of would be to allow beta-testers to test games on their own consoles without risking them giving the classified alpha or beta version of game X to all their buddies.

I really hope you're right. Somehow, I guess I like to think that all of the people who make gaming a part of their living, are good-natured, fun people at heart who want to share gaming with other people. Reading news stories like this make me feel disillusioned and make me think I'm just REALLY naive.

PsychoChick966:

Son of Songhai:

PsychoChick966:
Every time I turn around, somebody somewhere is trying to take the fun out of gaming. It was recently rumored that Sony was going to do this with their next console, and 99% of comments I read from gamers were whole-heartedly running to Xbox at the mere idea that this could happen.

I have so many issues with these potential changes to Xbox, but the main two are that a) I don't want a console that makes me have an internet connection, let alone make it that I have to be online to use the console at all., and b) A large portion of the games I buy ARE used.

I read some comments above about people like me being in the "dark ages", and say what you will, but I really don't have use for an internet-connected console. I've had an Xbox since 2006, and only connected it via Xbox Live, a couple weeks ago. I don't like to play multiplayer games, and the only reason I hooked it up at all was because I used to play co-op games with my daughter before she moved across the country. I missed playing with her, so I bought a subscription for Xbox Live. I don't know if I'll renew the subscription in a year though, because although I enjoy playing with her, I don't do it often enough to warrant the subscription. So I'm not sure why that puts me in the dark ages...it's just a preference. I like to play single-player games, period. To have my console hooked up to the internet, puts another financial burden on my already financially-strapped family as well. I did it at the time, because we had the funds, but my husband's income fluctuates, and it's not something I'd even be ABLE to do if I wanted to subscribe right now. So Xbox would be cutting so many customers off, just by making the always on-line internet connectivity issue a reality, alone. Some people just can't afford it. These people will then go to Sony. Or, they'll just go to computer-gaming. I HAVE internet, and am on the internet most of the day (on my computer)...I just don't want to HAVE to pay for another device to be hooked to it, especially since I won't use it much.

Secondly, again, some people just cannot afford new games. I can OCCASIONALLY afford a new game, but that's not often. There are quite a lot of games that are still on my back-logged wishlist because I can't afford to even buy them used. The cost of gaming has gotten really expensive over the last couple of years. There are lots of games to be desired, and rarely have I met the person who can afford to buy all of them, let alone all new copies. Gaming companies would not be losing out on a sale because of used games, at least where I'm concerned, because if they stopped used games from being sold, I wouldn't own some of them. It's not a matter of saying "Oh, I have to buy BLANK new if I want it, so okay, sure, here's my $60 bucks." It's more like, "Oh, I have to buy BLANK new if I want it. Crap, I guess I'll have to do without it then." Xbox would be cutting another portion of people out of their possible customer base by making their consoles only play new games. I'm not even talking about all the people who sell or trade their games in order to buy a newer one on their WL. I don't sell or trade my games when I'm done with them, but I'm sure there are loads of people who do that because they also cannot afford to always buy new games.

We should all be on the same side on this issue, I think. We should not be okay with companies like Xbox telling us how we have to game. They WILL listen to us if we speak with our wallets. These possible changes to their consoles may be okay with YOU, but you HAVE to recognize that we all don't have the same financial capabilities, or want to play our games the same way you want to play. Why would you want to push other gamers out of our community, or be OKAY with the idea that they will be pushed out? The idea that a gaming company feels ripped-off because of the sale of used games is preposterous to me. If they're used, that means they were paid for once already. Why do they feel entitled to be paid for the same item over and over again? If they want, there's nothing to stop them from renting games. I want to reiterate here that they're NOT losing out on sales to people who just can't afford the price of a new game. If only new games are sold, some people will just have to do without gaming.

I don't even know how to sum up my opinion here....I just feel sad that gaming's come down to these issues at all. I'm passionate about gaming, and defensive about it I suppose, but it's what I like to do. Gaming is more to me than even for strictly entertainment purposes. I have medical issues that leave me sedentary most of the time. This is what I do with my mind, besides reading the news, interesting articles, and so forth. It is an excellent form of entertainment, expressionism, escapism, distraction, and just plain fun. I realize that gaming is also a business though too, and I know that gaming companies need to make money in order to survive. I WANT them to survive, to thrive, and to continue, of course....I just don't want to be left out of something I've been a part of since the 80's. Where there's one person who feels something, there's surely to be many more just like him or her....and so I'm quite sure I'm not the only one who feels this way.

I feel where your coming from but I honestly doubt either company will go though integreating this tech into the next console. Even if both Microsoft and Sony were to do it at the same time, it would just make the Wii U into a massive success again by giving developers a reason to make more games for it (as it would be the only non-fail system left).

The only intelligent usage for this tech i can think of would be to allow beta-testers to test games on their own consoles without risking them giving the classified alpha or beta version of game X to all their buddies.

I really hope you're right. Somehow, I guess I like to think that all of the people who make gaming a part of their living, are good-natured, fun people at heart who want to share gaming with other people. Reading news stories like this make me feel disillusioned and make me think I'm just REALLY naive.

Truthfully, I think that most of the developers are. It's just the publishers who are complete dickwaffles.

Blindrooster:
Ive always been an avid xbox owner, and never owned a play station in my life. If this is what Microsoft does with the next xbox, sony, here I come......

Rumors of the " ps4 " are similar to the ones of the new " xbox ". Having said that I share your opinion on used games. I rarely play used game but I do want the FREEDOM to play a used game if I so choose.

Realistically, I think both consoles will ship with the capability, but it will be a mexican standoff with the first few games that test out the feature.

Which publisher will want their AAA title to be the first to ship with that feature on?

Wouldn't it be great if all next-gen consoles sucked?

so the only way to make somone interested into maknig actual research is tumbling share price? nice.

Blindrooster:
Ive always been an avid xbox owner, and never owned a play station in my life. If this is what Microsoft does with the next xbox, sony, here I come......

why not PC? i mean, PS3 has quite a few inherent problems that you may not like being xboxer. PC is much closer.

zehydra:
Wouldn't it be great if all next-gen consoles sucked?

I would love it. It would push a hell of a lot of gamers back to PC and we might get a nice boost to the PC games industry.

Pyrian:

Adam Jensen:
They are biased, but they are also correct. People will simply wait for price drops or switch to PC. Less hassle, and Steam deals are awesome.

SonOfVoorhees:
but as i say, i doubt MS will, maybe when consoles go digital only but then hopefully games will be cheaper and thus the used game market wont matter. Look at steam...at that price who cares about used.

KeyMaster45:
Ehh, all the games I want to play come out on steam nowadays anyway. ... If anything I think that's what Sony and Microsoft should be scared of happening, not used game sales.

Uh, guys? I love Steam, too, but it's pretty much the poster child for buying games new and being unable to resell them. If MS/Xbox wants to chase Steam's coattails, no-used-sales no-game-stop all-digital-distribution consoles make good sense.

The remaining brick-and-mortar digital product stores are all staring into the abyss which Tower Records, etc., long since fell into. They're dinosaurs.

Steam only works because it is cheap.

Console devs won't do that kind of price stripping to get sales. They look for scape goats, not sales.

Crono1973:
Normally, Steams prices are exactly the same. Sales are the exception, not the rule. For example: Skyrim is still $60.

It's been on sale for much less than that at least once a month since release >.>...sometimes multiple times.

Crono1973:
I think the selection issue will be solved next gen. As for the sales, hardly a reason to give up your consumer rights. There are quite a few Steam games I would resell if I could, Skyrim being one of them and if I had those games on console, they would be used to fund new game purchases.

I could have never resold games at the same price I save on steam sales. There is no market where people are willing to buy my game off me for 75%-85% the cost of new without dealing with ebay or local trades with people.

Its much more convenient to just get it 75% off already and not >need< to trade it in just to afford my next game.

theultimateend:
Steam only works because it is cheap.

That's pretty much the truth of it. Steam isn't competitive just because of all its bells and whistles. It's competitive because it COMPETES in the pricing market.

Sure Skyrim is still going for $60, but that behemoth has been perhaps the most successful single player game in... forever. It's STILL selling well. I am certain Steam would lower the price if people would just stop buying it for a moment.

I can tell you that if one console has something like DRM requirement or anti used game tech, that will tip it for me, and I'll buy what ever the competitor is.
And I don't even buy used games, and I have a stable internet connection, that's not the point.

Don't TELL them, let Microsoft make its own mistakes. They're big boys, and besides...might take a good example for publishers and manufacturers alike.

itchcrotch:
I can tell you that if one console has something like DRM requirement or anti used game tech, that will tip it for me, and I'll buy what ever the competitor is.
And I don't even buy used games, and I have a stable internet connection, that's not the point.

What is your point then? The console developer does something you don't like so you're going to throw a tantrum and go to their competitor who either has that same "feature" or is sure as hell going to include it in the next OS patch (which you will need to install before going online), leaving you stuck with your 2nd choice of console.

Always on DRM is a dick move, the world saw how well that worked with the Diablo 3 launch. No service provider and no online server ever has 100% uptime so we can predict that at some point gamers will be screwed either because their ISP is broken, their modem/router has crapped itself or MS/Sony's server aren't accepting connections. Thats a point.

Blocking used games... suck it up, save the extra $10 and buy the game new, you're not saving that much and if you have to buy an online pass then the $10 you "saved" buying pre-owned just got spent on the pass and you didn't even get to enjoy the new game smell. No-ones say you have to buy full price on launch day, but second hand games just aren't cheap enough to be worth it, personally I'd perfer the publisher/developeer got the money anyway... if its a good game maybe then they can make a decent sequal (it hasn't happened in recent memory but a guy can hope)

MagunBFP:
Snip

The point, which you missed, is that he knows how to shift the economy and make a statement. You lead by example so that others might learn to follow. You don't throw good money after bad. You influence the market towards good. What, do you think companies have really taken a loss because 'the market isn't strong'? Hah. Please, don't talk to us of tantrums. That was rude and the comment attached aggressively-stanced supposition. Please do not do that again.

FalloutJack:

The point, which you missed, is that he knows how to shift the economy and make a statement. You lead by example so that others might learn to follow. You don't throw good money after bad. You influence the market towards good. What, do you think companies have really taken a loss because 'the market isn't strong'? Hah. Please, don't talk to us of tantrums. That was rude and the comment attached aggressively-stanced supposition. Please do not do that again.

Indeed, the points you make are definitely valid, but you're inferring that they are the points he was making. Going with the competitor because of issues that are of no relevance to you, he said he doesn't buy used games and his internet connection is stable, doesn't actually fall under throwing good money after bad or influencing the market towards "good". If these new features don't impact you, then how exactly are they bad?

I can't comment as to profits/losses of companies because I don't know, I just like good games and it doesn't matter much to me who makes then. What I do know is that when I used to go into stores and buy a new game the sales person would, most of the time, try to sell me a second-hand version instead. Which is just about the retailer getting all the money for the used game instead of anyone else, so by logical extension of this if people are convinced to save $5-$10 dollars then the publisher has lost any profit from the sale.

As for my comment about tantrums, yes it was condescending but gettng worked up about something that, by his own admission, isn't going to affect him is pretty much a tantrum.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here