Slashdot Mirror
The Death of Used Game Sales?
xtracto writes "The Inquirer has an interesting piece about a new Sony Patent on a technology that may possible prevent DVD disc media users from using their purchased disks in other machines after they have used them on a specific reader. Commentary also available on Joystiq. From the Article: 'While many are aware of the double profit companies make on pre-owned games, this would ensure the death of trading games between friends and even going to a friend's house to play a little multiplayer.'"
And what if you upgrade your DVD drive? Are you screwed? I'll believe the tech when I see it. I'm not sure Sony has the guts to try something this restrictive.
Against stupidity the Gods themselves contend in vain.
I would never buy another Playstation game again.
Of course, with Sony's DRM kick and some other things, they're making it easier for me to decide to ban them outright. I can live without a lot of movies (I have 3 small children, so I hardly go these days anyway).
So if they want to break the existing system in the hopes of getting more money, then screw them. I have an entire back catalog of games I haven't gotten around to playing. I can wait a few years.
Can you, Sony? Yes, I know, you won't miss me. But I wonder how many other people you'd piss off along the way - and in a looming battle between Microsoft and Nintendo, can you *really* take that risk?
Well? Do you feel lucky, punk? (Apologies to Clint. I couldn't help myself.)
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
If you took your disk to a friends, presumably you'd take your pc too?
One obvious problem with their system is playing your disk on a replacement device, or are they going to replace your whole game library whenever you get a new unit because of shoddy workmanship on the previous one?
So what happens when the PS3 dies and you have to get a new one? Does that also mean it is time to get a new set of games? -Citoahc
No f'in way I'm buying a PS3 if this happens. Almost all my games are bought used - it makes it a lot easier on those who are gaming on a limited budget. If this happens, I'm going to end up the proud new owner of a Nintendo Revolution.
When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
Just because they have a patent doesn't mean they are going to use it. Nobody at Sony would be stupid enough to implement this on the PS3. If they did, gamers would view Sony on the same level at the Phantom Game Console.
-Dipster
... it just ensures that the first time I get a game like this and the system fails that I sue Sony. Alternately, it may ensure that *everyone* starts burning copies of their games.
Copy protection as it currently exists hurts no one but legitimate purchasers of the material. It costs the pirates maybe a few hours of time or in worst case a day.
So long as the hardware isn't secured, the data that is being read in it can't be secured.
Alot of this new BS with sony and drm/copy protection/etc is seriously making me consider NOT buying a PS3. I don't want to support this kind of stupidity.
Be the first significant console I didn't own since the Nintendo days.
Shadus
do something major to make the 360 seem like the better choice. Yeah Sony took a BFG to their foot.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
How Jaded Are You?
What if my player breaks and I have to get a new one? I don't think this is going to go through unnoticed by people.
The technology would allow an authentication code to be read and then rendered unreadable
Wait a sec. If it is rendered unreadable, then how can the same machine read it next time you put the disk in?
Infuriate left and right
Oh, Sony, you always have our best interests in mind.
Moo
While many are aware of the double profit companies make on pre-owned games, this would ensure the death of trading games between friends and even going to a friend's house to play a little multiplayer.
The death of trading games? Sure. Just like DRM has brought about the death of trading music. Yep! That's going to happen! When oh when will the "death of..." articles stop?!
Legit, bought and paid for, just don't wanna deal with the hassle copy protection puts on you, or your source for warez. Whatever the reason ... LONG LIVE USENET!
http://www.giganews.com/ combined with http://www.newzbin.com/
PS - Who the fuck needs TIVO -- alt.binaries.tv -- if it ain't in there it wasn't worth watching anyway...
-- http://anonet.org -- The internet the way it was meant to be. Check it out, you may be surprised.
While it is easy to jump to the conclusion that this would be used on their DVDs and games, I don't think this is the aim of this technology. Even Sony isn't that oblivious to the marketplace. This technology is probably intended for either high end software protection, i.e. $1k+ or disks ment for VERY limited distribution. I could see this as a product they would offer to companies that sell professional software for limited applications.
On alienating yet more customers. I haven't bought my own console since the n64 (i gennerally stick with hand helds). I was planning on buying either a revolution or a PS3 when they come out.
My friends and I are constantly playing games on eachothers systems. Not because we don't want to buy the games ourselves but more often because either their own system died or because they can't get to their system (one of my friends lives a 3hr drive away and when he comes up he brings his games but not is PS3). We also enjoy getting together and playing DDR at eachothers houses. Since each of us has different DDR games we are switching them around all the time. With this we wouldn't be able to do that. It wouldn't make us buy more games: at best (for them) we would buy the same amount we always do, more likely it would just make us not buy any games that have this protection on them.
I just hope they don't require this DRM on all games for their systems. If it is the case, no one I know will be buying a PS3 (my friends are all very anti-DRM)
Speaking is NOT communication
And if your own personal console/player/reader dies and you have to replace it, you now have to replace these "protected" discs? Bullshit.
Psst.. sony.. if you want to lock people in to certain hardware, the idea is generally to lock them in so they will /keep buying new versions of the hardware/. If "upgrading" requires all new software, the point is lost.
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
You want to stop piracy? Stop making it so profitable for pirates. Lower your prices to the point were piracy isn't profitable anymore. How you do that is something I really dont have a clue on, but hey thats not my problem.
M$ it's whats for diner!!!!!
Well... I guess when (if) this happens, I won't be getting as much games for a while, I'm not going to want to spend $50 on a game certain reviews and such say is good and turns out to be crap. I'd rather waste $5 and play it for a few days, (renting) and if I like it, then spend $50. Otherwise I'll just wait a year or so until the price gets down to $20. And about Sony and it's DRM, it's not going to affect my purchasing of the PS3. I don't see how DRM affects me playing a console game (excluding the statement above, and playing games at friends houses, plus most of my friends come to my hosue anyways...), diffrent that audio, I don't plan on ripping the game to my computer, and different than a DVD, I don't care much for backups. I buy the game, put it in the system, take it out, back in the case, and kept out of reach of children. (You know...they need that tag on certain games "Keep out of reach of children", not that I have kids or am too concerned about kids playing GTA, I could care less, but I don't want them stepping on my games and breaking them) Just my $0.02
This is NOT going to happen. Many major game retailers (e.g. GameStop) make a significant amount of money on pre-owned (used) game sales. You can bet that they'll fight Sony tooth-and-nail to keep them from implementing any system that permanently binds a game disc to a single console.
It's also a pretty ridiculous idea, as I know a lot of people who bring together their games and/or consoles to have parties and whatnot. This kind of (legal, by the way) game trading and loaning is a form of free word-of-mouth advertising for game companies.
Going back all the way to my Atari 2600 in the early 80s, I can remember buying way more console games after having borrowed a friend's copy or renting a copy from a store that I have from reading useless magazine ads and reviews.
Arguing about vi versus Emacs is like arguing whether it's better to make fire by rubbing sticks or banging rocks.
Sony - Playstation 3 (confirmed name)
... Halo.
+Blu-ray drive
+Lean Mean Sony Company Gaming Machine look
+Backwards compatible with PS2/PS1 games
+Games: Final Fantasy series, GTA series (first serve, anyway)
-Lock out technology to make sure that when a review says a game has no replay value, that means no one else can replay it, either
-Probably makes lousy burgers
-Expensive
-Same old controllers
Microsoft - XBox 360 (confirmed name)
+First to launch
+XBox Live features
+Games: Halo,
+It's white?
-Plain old DVD drive (no advanced drive- what is their's, HD-DVD?)
-Only partial backwards compatibility
-Same old controllers
Nintendo - Revolution (tentative name)
+Smallest of the three systems
+Innovative, new controller interface
+Backwards compatibility for the past 20 years
+Ability for controller attachments greatly increases game immersion and developer freedom
+Games: Zelda, Mario, Smash Brothers, Metroid
-Regular DVD drive
-Lack of HDTV support (IIRC, it has high resolution, but not HDTV)
-Arms or wrists could wear out faster than after a "session" with certain Pamela Anderson videos (this remains to be seen)
-Ability for controller attachments could overwhelm people who get 15 different types (there are already two "official" regular attachments- the Ninchuck and the shell)
Personally, I was leaning towards a Revolution when they first revealed the console, and I'm hard set on it now that I know about the controller. Sony's attempts at similar "prevention" in other technology realms ("P.C. phone home") helps make my mind up. Sony can keep their anti-customer DRM and Spider-man font. They won't get another cent from me.
This company is blowing up from the inside!
I can only hope this technology is only going to be used to stop disc copies to work. If they intend to lock a game disc to a console, they are going to be opening themselves to a class action. What happens when you accidentally break your PS3, and purchase a new one? I think most people will be very upset if they even just have to contact tech support. Can you take your game to a friends for a night of multiplayer mayhem? If Sony limits any of this (not even taking the used game market into account), they are setting themselves up for a fall. I truly hope they only implement this as an antipiracy protection.
Isn't this the point of CD keys? I mean, who in their right mind would buy a used copy of Half-Life, Starcraft, Guild Wars, Neverwinter Nights, etc.?
The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience
More people will download their games illegally to circumvent the DRM bullshit, and enjoy free games as a side benefit. "Hey, I'd love to support the industry by buying the game, but the game is more functional this way".
/. blew this whole thing out of proportion (not that Slashdot would ever blow something out of proportion).
For more on driving people to illegally copy games, see the mod detection Sony put in games that made them not work on a modded PS1... unless you burned the game onto another CD. That's right, only illegal games would run on modded PS1s. "Well, I was gonna actually buy this one, but oh wait, since I modded my PS1 (or bought a PS1 that happened to be modded), looks like I can't actually buy any games anymore".
Oh, and if you think for one millisecond that hackers aren't going to find a way to upload DRM'd games to a torrent site...
Fuckin' brilliant, Sony.
No, I didn't RTFA, and I take it
"When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
Approximately 2 years into owning it my PS2 broke and I got a new one. Or what if your drive breaks under warranty and Sony replaces it? How would this new system act under these likely and legal situations?
I had to return my PS2 4 times during the length of my extended warranty. No doubt the same crap will happen with the PS3. Also, way too many games come out each year for either myself or my friends to affordably own them all, so instead we split up the release list amongst ourselves. We each play our own games, then swap them out in a circle until all of us had played all the games. Its been a mutual arrangement since PSone. If this retarded stuff is applied to the next gen console, well then, I personally can name over a dozen people that won't be buying a PS3. Bye Sony!
If i wanted to hear bullshit, i'd go to church.
So does this mean everytime my Sony PlayStation system fails because it is made out of crap parts, I have to repurchase my entertainment library. F'em. This is insane.
The console noone buys. Lets see, I can't rent games, can't bring it to a friends to play, can't trade with my friends to try out a game. This would pretty much assure that I only by the Revolution next round. And it'll push a large, large chunk of their other customers into Xbox/Revolution as well.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
This is the future as the big companies see it. With bandwidth being so cheap, and so much of their product being little more than 0's and 1's, they feel they need to do something to continue making a buck.
I'm not happy with it, but I can also see why they are doing it.
Spell cheek you've failed me four the last thyme!
This is a stupid idea. They probably won't use this for the PS3, and if they do, then the PS3 will be a massive failure.
Regular Meta Moderators are not more likely to get mod points.
First off, I take it you've never been to a used book store? Never used eBay, an auction, or even Goodwill?
What's so special about game developers that they deserve protection from their products being resold used that the rest of the world doesn't have?
I don't see a problem with selling or purchasing used games at a small fraction of the cost of a new package as long as the games themselves are marked as used and aren't already 'tied' to an individual like most MMO's are.
Secondly, if a developer can't get the majority of people to purchase their games at the new game price point, that's a good sign their product deserves the bargin bin or that they need to lower their prices.
So when my PS3 breaks (and it will, all of Sony's consoles are made to break and be rebought), then I will be unable to play the games that I purchased and "own".
It is the next generation of Sony's (successful) plan to continue selling playstations to people who already own (a broken) one. Not only do the consoles break, but the games do too!
As much as I complain, I will still get one for MGS4 and a few other choice titles =[
Do I have to buy new games? Or what if I upgrade to a newer release of their console that claims backward compatibility, but most of my games won't work because they're locked into the older, obsolete console?
Yeah, how dare they, um... offer stuff for sale? If it was a bad deal, these stores wouldn't exist. And you can always get at least store credit if the game doesn't work (regardless of whatever their own policy says)
First off, I take it you've never been to a used book store? Never used eBay, an auction, or even Goodwill?
Think of Chapters (in Canada) or Barnes & Nobles promoting used books before new books, and you'd be closer. Used book stores don't push the kind of volume as megastores do in new products. Ebay/auctions also mainly involve people selling directly to other people.
What's so special about game developers that they deserve protection from their products being resold used that the rest of the world doesn't have?
Because with a book, once the publisher prints and sells it, that is the end of their involvement. Game developers are expected to provide warranties, support, and online resources (servers) for games after sale, and they often do even when the users don't have a right to it.
I don't see a problem with selling or purchasing used games at a small fraction of the cost of a new package as long as the games themselves are marked as used and aren't already 'tied' to an individual like most MMO's are.
A small cost, perhaps. But go to EB Games and they pay you something like $6 for a $60 game, and then sell the used copy for $50. I'd actually not be oppose to reselling MMOs, since they have a monthly fee attached in addition to the boxed cost. So companies are getting paid for the after-sale resources consumed by a used buyer.
Secondly, if a developer can't get the majority of people to purchase their games at the new game price point, that's a good sign their product deserves the bargin bin or that they need to lower their prices.
The most vocal opponent to megastores selling use games for slightly under retail price is Mark Rein, I believe, or one of the other guys from Epic. They also happen to make very popular games that ALSO happen to be some of the lowest priced big-budget games on the market. It's not about matching the used product's pricepoint; as soon as a game developer lowers prices, the megastores would lower THEIR used price to slightly under the new retail price. Developers can't win.
If this is implemented in the PS3 and elsewhere, it would completely kill the game rental business. Gamefly.com would go out of business and places like Blockbuster would stop carrying games.
Also I assume that once the PS4 game out there would be no backwards compatibility since none of the discs would work anyway.
I hate the arrogance from these guys. It looks like they are going to get their asses handed to them in the next gen of consoles and I really hope this is true. They definitely need to be taken down a notch.
My sony boycott started because I thought all their hardware was shit, but they keep giving me more reasons to continue it.
$_='while(read+STDIN,$_,2048){$a=29;$b=73;$c=142;
Don't buy it.
1: It does not screw the sellers. There are any number of other channels that people can use to sell their old games, such as the ones you mentioned - Ebay, direct sales to friends, local mom and pop stores, etc. If someone elects to sell a used game to Best Buy, they have done so of their own free choice.
2: It does not screw the buyers either. Again, if you want you can buy your games somewhere else. Best Buy is going to sell the games at a market price (you know, since we have free markets and all that good stuff) and if there are competitors selling games cheaper, they will have to drop their prices if they want to stay competitive.
3: Perhaps it is true that fewer new games will be sold when there are used game markets, but do you seriously think that it is a good idea to try and protect developers by doing away with the used game market? Should we also make sales of used cars illegal, since it is so unfair to the autoworkers? Why should I as a consumer be forced to keep or throw away an item that I am no longer using, but that may provide value to someone else?
\/\/oobie
If you remember the Divx DVD players at Circuit City, you will remember failure. A technology like that was precisely what Divx did. That leads me to the assumption that they would use the technology for something else. One use is region encoding (post-purchase). Another use may be full-version game demos that can be disabled after X hours unless you buy or rent the game license. And yet another use may be in lieu of a CD Product Key for MMORPG.
I also believe that some smart modder would discover how to bypass the system check altogether.
1) So, Microsoft never was and never will be a monopoly or anti-competitive, because there are always other operating systems?
2) As I said, if developers drop prices, so will the stores. The used price will always be a raw deal for everybody but the store.
3) I never said the entire use game market, only the megastores that are doing the damage. Used cars don't suddenly get a brand new extended warranty with the original manufacturer every time somebody buys it used. Game developers have to because of the bad press they'd get if they didn't. When you buy a game, there is a certain expectation by the manufacturer that you will probably use the game for a while before stopping. While you are using it you are costing them money. They need to provide you with support, provide server resources for you, etc. If you use the game more than they expect, oh well, it averages out. But if the megastores cause 50% of all game sales to be used, suddenly the average is way higher. So it's not ONLY about hurting existing sales.
I'd almost like a clause in the licence that states that if the game was resold through a large commercial store, the game comes with no support (no patches) and does not function in multiplayer mode other than LAN play. Of course that's getting a bit silly, but something needs to be done before the smaller developers get pushed out of the market. Nobody is weeping for EA, but people like Epic could run into trouble, especially since their prices are already so far below market average.
Don't forget that this is on their wish list.
o ry.php(que)id=125925%22
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/news/news_st
Mark Rein, Vice President of Epic Games
"If you walk into EB in the US, they try and sell you a second hand version of a game before a new one. I think that's bad. It would be fine if they share that revenue with us. They can also be marketing partners with us as well. We can have an official refurbished games policy. That's the problem. Those resold games use server resources, tech support. The majority of guys calling up saying "I don't have my serial number", I'm sure a lot of those are resold. It costs us money. Those customers think they paid for it, and they're entitled to support. The reality is, we didn't get paid. They didn't pay us."
Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
Instead of investing the hundreds of thousands (millions?) of dollars in researching and developing these anti-copying techniques (most of which get hacked anyway) how about they NOT spend that money, and cut the cost of the systems AND/OR the games by, oh lets say.. half?
.50? The bucket they put it in probably cost them more. I never buy it at a theater, but if it was $2.00, I'd probably have one (at least) every time I went to the movies, and so would probably most other people in the theater.
.50 and see how many more you sell. You don't have to have an MBA to see the problem here. Perhaps their target audience is the gaming community that has money to burn. I hate to say this, but the majority of the people in this country do not have disposable income for games and game systems.
In many cases, if price is the only issue, halving the price will more than double the sales. The latest game console system I have is a Nintendo 64. After EBGames said they've give me $7 trade-in value (not just cash, but trade-in value for store credit) for my system, two controllers, and 2 games, I decided I'd much rather hold onto it and let my children play Donkey Kong 64 and Super Mario 64 when they get a little older.
There's no way in hell I'm paying $400 for a game system, when I've got a perfectly good (and relatively modern) PC at home. In addition to these games, I have dual-booting Windoze/Linux (yes Linux is default!) my Gravis Gamepad Pro, a Logitech Wheel for my NFS games, and plenty of other stuff. Sure there are a few games out (Starcraft Ghost, Resident Evil 0, etc) that I can't play on a PC, but I'll get over it.
However if one of these companies announced that they were cutting the price of the system and the games (maybe the *little* older games, I would probably pick one up.
One thing that Sony, and more specifically the MPAA and RIAA doesn't seem to realize, is that 1) there will always be piracy, and there's nothing they can do to completely stop it. 2) there just might be less piracy if the products they released weren't so damn expensive. Sure, people will say that Sony has to be reimbursed for their time and effort of research and development, blah blah blah. If Sony was going to 'just barely break even' then they wouldn't even be in the business to begin with. These companies make insane profits, because the actual cost to manufacture a unit is a very small fraction of the price they charge the consumer.
Just like popcorn at a movie theater. $4.00 for a bucket of popcorn that probably cost less than
Of course I'm not a marketing genius, or a business executive, but the simple fact remains. Lower the price and you will sell more units. Sony and Microsoft will probably recoup a large portion (if not all) of their R&D costs just in the first day of their units being sold. After that, its just gravy in their wallets.
Try selling a cup of lemonade for $5.00. Your mom *might* buy one. Try selling them for
And they said zombies weren't real!
And don't forget that all those Trade-In programs make it super easy for folks to steal your stuff and trade it in for store credit, no questions asked. "And would you like a Disk Doctor with that, sir?"
Is Sony trying to make sure the PS3 is a total and absolute failure? Do they even have anything at all?
DxBlog - It's where you want to be
Bull Hockey! I have stacks binders full of game CD's in my computer room and I can move the complete list of ones which provided more than a cursory amount of effort into after-sales support into half a binder and still probably have room for the cd's containing the combinded patches provided by those companies.
There are a few, extremely few, companies that have supported their games offically past the six month sales mark. There are even fewer that rely on their own bandwidth these days for patches. Most rely on sites like FilePlanet or fan comminity mirrors to distribute everything.
I salute those companies, and every single game of theirs I own new. In fact, for most of them I would have to own new, because they tie access to things such as the game servers or even online access to accounts created off of CD Keys.
And I've YET to see a 'warranty' on a video game. In fact, the majority of games I purchase not only tell you specificly that they aren't warrantied, but they include even more restrictions on what you can expect in their EULA.
Nor have I seen any tech support provided (outside of a handful of patches) which wasn't in the form of static web pages which are updated off a knowledge base once a year or "please give us your CC# and we'll charge what we think the answer is worth before giving it to you".
This is called economics.
The game company shouldn't care what price the games are being resold at, but even if they did, if you don't like paying $50 for a used game, there is a quick, easy, and affordable way to win. Shell out the extra $10 and buy new.
But don't expect people to go your route simply because it sticks in your craw to spend $10 less on the latest "Tony Hawks Underground NFL 2006 NBA Tourny for Speed!" because it's used.
First off, this is speculation based on a patent from 2001 in Japan, and patented in the US in 2004. So it's not brand new.
Secondly, there's already a system in place to do this for Online games at least - the DNAS copy-protection system can enable this behavior (locking the disc to a specific console) but no publishers enable it, for the obvious reason that it would piss a lot of people off.
While console makers would no doubt like to stop second-hand sales, I think they realize that people would be less likely to buy the hardware if they're unable to play second-hand games, and that game retailers make most of their money on second-hand games - killing that market would kill the retailers.
Of course, I woudl have said the same things about rootkits on audio CDs. So we'll see.
I yearn for you tragically. A. T. Tappman, Chaplain, U.S. Army.
2) I was comparing mega-stores for other used game channels - not the original developers themselves. I've never bought a used game from Best Buy, because the prices are better at Ebay and at other stores. If people are buying at Best Buy they are not getting screwed - they have voted with their dollars that the convenience of buying the title at Best Buy outweighs the better price that they would get somewhere else.
3) So you want to have different rules for mega-stores vs. other outlets? I actually like the free market model myself. But, perhaps you have a point that game developers should build in protections so that they do not have to provide support or service to secondary buyers. So maybe we do agree on something after all.... :-)
\/\/oobie
Jesus fucking christ people, look at the filing date. The article is written for sensationalism alone.
(edited for brevity)
CALLY: Sooner or later, Blake is going to attack Federation Central Control on Earth itself. And for that attack we shall need all the weapons we can get.
BLAKE: And where better to get them than the Weapons Development Base?
AVON: It is a triple-A security installation.
VILA: We have got into those before.
AVON: Usually with your screams of protest ringing in our ears. Are you telling me that you're in favor of this idea?
VILA: No, not exactly, I just don't think it's stupid.
[But ORAC reports the base is currently on maximum security alert.]
GAN: Someone must have made an attack on the base.
VILA: Who'd be stupid enough to do that?
AVON: [Snaps his fingers] Justify "stupid."
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
I'm not against casual used sales (Selling to friends, ebay, lending), but I am against stores like BestBuy ripping off customers by paying out next to nothing and reselling for almost retail, while promoting these before new sales.
Just to et you know, because of fixed price console games, retailers make a bare minimum of margin on selling brand new games and consoles. A friend of mine who worked in a game store claimed the margin for the store on selling a new console was ~$2, whereas for a new console the margin must have been at least ~$50.
Retails push used game so much because nowadays, that is the only place they make money. If Sony pull this off, a lot of retailers will simply go out of business, and you can expect to see an increase in both console and game prices.
Be careful what you wish for. Enjoy your decreased market sales.
May the Maths Be with you!
If nobody buys the games new, there won't be any used games to sell again later.
The only way for ANY kind of "install once" mechanism is to save the state in such a way that the pre-install state cannot be cloned.
A game that is delivered ONLY on a read-only medium and which does not require any connection to the Internet or other outside "registration" cannot be "protected" from being installed on two different machines.
However, the game can be rigged in such a way that the first time it connects to a network it is "registered" and any subsequent attempt to register the same copy will be rejected. This assumes uniquely manufactured CDs. This is basically the same technique Microsoft XP takes, with the unique licence-key substituting for uniquely-manufactured CDs.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Where to start. Im guessing your pro sony eh? Why cant we all just get along. Now, let me correct your either fan-boyism or ignorance, not sure which it is...
:)
I am rolling on the floor here. Seriously. Big, shit-eating grin and everything.
I'm a full-blown Nintendo fanboy. While I don't really hate Sony or Microsoft, it would take a lot for me to get a system from either company. My initial post was trying to compare the three consoles with basic good/bad snippets, but with as little fanboyism as possible. I made sure to have some negative points for the Revolution (there are some, though most of the ones brought forth I don't care about, like HDTV compatibility), but I still listed it in a better light (at least, I thought) than the other two.
You apparently stopped reading after my Revolution listing, or you would have seen in the next paragraph that I plan to get a Revolution and to buy as little Sony merchandise as possible, if any.
Sony fanboy... Again, thanks for the great laugh (and longwidned reply).
Sorry about the Sony reference. Yet, what I saw from your post looked more like a veiled Xbox bash then pro Rev or PS3. I made the sony fanboy quip because frankly, its normally the sony camp the is guilty of such crimes.
I was leaning harder on Sony than the XBox. The "Lean Mean Sony..." comment was meant to be a sarcastic plus, in that it reminds me (and others) of the George Foreman grill, which is also where the burger comment came from.
I also forgot to mention the batarang controller.
So forgetful...
I happen to be one of the weird guys out there who collects video games as a hobby, primarily for classic game systems like the Atari 2600 and Colecovision, but also more recent systems like the Sega Dreamcast. If this move is successful and the second-hand market is eliminated, my hobby is pretty much screwed. 10 years from now if I decide I want to play a game that was only released on the PS3, what will my options be? Finding a sealed copy that hasn't been imprinted on a system yet will be exceptionally difficult and expensive.
-"One machine can do the work of fifty ordinary men. No machine can do the work of one extraordinary man." -EH
They're all sorts of crazy over at Sony, maybe even this crazy. All we know for sure is that they've patented the technology, which means less and less given the insanity of our patent system. Are they shooting themselves in the foot? Or just making sure that they can license FootBullet(TM) technology to their competitors?
As with most rumors like this, file it under "Unconscionable If True".
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
Actually, I saw the post as Revo biased myself. I'm the same way.
"When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
I'm not buying a PS3. The Revolution will be the only next-gen console I'll buy.
Good job shooting yourself in the foot, Sony. When I bought my last PS2 game, I bought it because I borrowed a friend's copy, and liked it so much I wanted a copy for myself. I doubt I'd have bought it if I hadn't tried it out first. This bullshit is going to cost Sony so much money...
I support the Center for Consumer Freedom
There are probably 15 games (or more) for current-generation consoles that I would like to play and haven't yet.
Problem with buying video games years after release is that you don't know whether they will be still available at reasonable price when you get around to buying them. For instance, a used copy of Rez for PS2 costs 100 USD for just the disc, without the box, manual, or rumble accessory.
The article describes Sony's new patent, and then speculates on one possible use for it. Everyone here seems to have their panties in a bunch based on that alone.
Therefore The PS3 will incorporate said technology.
QED
I think a few people here are overdue for a nap.
pornking
but can you take it to the extent of not buying anything with a S/PDIF port? The S stands for Sony
No, the "S" in AES/EBU stands for "Society". The protocol formally called IEC 958 type II and popularly known as S/PDIF is primarily a proper subset of AES/EBU except for one minor detail (the "channel status bit") that most implementations of AES/EBU can probably handle.
If you're serious about keeping money away from them, find alternatives to the PS3
If all three major consoles of the next generation (PS3, Xbox 360, and Revolution) have "features" that block my intended use of the console, then what is the alternative that doesn't break the bank?
[The Game Boy Player accessory] screws to the bottom of your gamecube and lets you play everything an gameboy advance will play (and a very large proportion of nintendos classics have had some form of gameboy port)
Not exactly:
But replace "everything" with "98 percent of games" and you're set to go.
Frankly, the rootkit stuff was enough. I'm going to see if I can go through the rest of my life without buying anything with the Sony name on it ever again. This sure makes my PSP v DS decision easy -- or at least it's now down to "Will I get a DS or not?".
Not Buying A Fucking Videogaming Console
In other words, not playing same-screen multiplayer games (such as Bomberman) at all?
is there any reason you can't link multiple gameboy players? do they give a reason for reccomending against doing it?
Probably some radio interference thing, as the manual for the Game Boy Player in Australia is said to show two units in a LAN. In fact, I've tried linking two North American Game Boy Player accessories with Mario Kart Super Circuit, and it has worked. But for the discussion, if we're allowed to break the console maker's rules (by linking two North American Game Boy Player accessories), then we're allowed to break the console maker's rules (by running homebrew programs from flash memory).
You made your point. Take 2:
but can you take it to the extent of not buying anything with a S/PDIF port? The S stands for Sony
Huh? I don't see any "S" in "IEC 958 type II".
How are they going to make this work for major rental outfits. Blockbuster would have a fit.
At the very least they'll need to create two formats of the game... one for fixed-machines and one for allowing rentals. All in all this makes the whole process more of a pain in the ass for everyone, Sony included.
Hell, add to that. I know people that have multiple units often families... one for kids and one for the parents, or people who are on the go lots and can toss one in the car at the hotel or whatnot.
Can anyone see a single reason for this other than greed or (moreso) stupidity?
Actually, I think it's *great* that Sony patented this. Think about it--anyone else who wants a similar scheme will have to license it--from Sony!
Even if it wasn't a horrible idea, I think we won't be seeing widespread adoption of this tech any time for that reason alone.
If a giant oil company wanted an abortion, would W's head explode?
I agree that upgrading your hardware could be a problem. However there are some reasonable ways to use this kind of technology. For instance, the MSDNAA, an agreement between Microsoft and some colleges allowing students to recieve software that would be needed in classes for low cost or free, would be an example. The students that have access to this are only supposed to use the software they have for one computer, so it would make sense to use this technology there. Since it is also controlled primarily by the campus, if the student got a new computer they'd be able to talk to the administration and get a new copy that could be used. As the agreement is now it's difficult to get a new copy without talking to administration anyway. I don't believe that Sony will use this on their products that they will sell to the general consumer, in fact I believe it violates the Fair Use rights that we are granted under current copyright laws. I'm not sure about the last statement, going off my memory, feel free to correct me on it.
I guess you're unaware of the fact that Sony ALREADY uses DRM in their music CDs.
Oh and its most recent attempt isn't their first either.
And then theres the whole backing of the RIAA and the MPAA in their 'anti-piracy' efforts.
And lets not forget their regional locking of PSP games.
I see a lot of posts talking about boycotting sony and other brilliant nonsense.
Walk the walk or just shut up, people.
Want to know my take on this?
One night, Ken Kutaragi and Bill Gates were busy drinking expensive liquor, and made a bet :
"I'm going to kick your ass with the 360, man.
-ROR! Ok, let me tell you something, four-eyes. I'm gonna do everything in my power to make the PS3 look like shit, play like shit, and sell like shit. But the sheeple will still buy it because it has SONY PLAYSTATION written on it! Think the layman hates SONY? Go to any hi-fi store and listen to the salesman bash iPods and praise ATRAC64-only players!
-Double Dare!"
Making the DVDs unreadable on a new system could be interpreted as "malicious injury of property". So unless Sony tells buyers of the PS3 upfront about the system (which might be bad for marketing), IMHO (IANAL) affected customers could sue with good chances of success.
The whole scheme looks like they want to shoot themselves in the other knee now, after the recent rootkit affair.
C - the footgun of programming languages
Because with a book, once the publisher prints and sells it, that is the end of their involvement. Game developers are expected to provide warranties, support, and online resources (servers) for games after sale, and they often do even when the users don't have a right to it.
Maybe for MMOs. On-line multiplayer? Well, if user is paying for an account, it matters not really whether the software is bought new or used, because the big $$$ are in the subscriptions, right? If not, and it's really a bitch about most console games, well, too bad.
A small cost, perhaps. But go to EB Games and they pay you something like $6 for a $60 game, and then sell the used copy for $50. I'd actually not be oppose to reselling MMOs, since they have a monthly fee attached in addition to the boxed cost. So companies are getting paid for the after-sale resources consumed by a used buyer.
See what your car is pulling in your area in the classifieds. Go to the dealer, and semi-seriously inquire about getting a new car, and see how much they offer you to trade in your car. It'll be about 1/2 what you could probably sell it for on your own. Trust me, it doesn't feel good. Go pawn your car stereo. You won't get more than 10% "street" value for it.
Buy low, sell high. Welcome to basic mercantilism.
This would be a consumer relations nightmare for Sony. Just look at the stink Sony has raised over it's recent DRM in music CDs. I, for one, haven't bought a Sony CD since they started that DRM crap. I can assure you that I won't buy a PS3 if they implement a DRM as described in the above article. Think about it, we wouldn't be able to try out a game by renting it first. If we go out and buy one and then don't like it, there's no secondary market for it. Get real Sony, if you do this, the market will respond and Sony will not prevail.
You must be new in the computer gaming world. There are tons of same screen games for the PC.
Titles please (other than "classics collections")?
Maybe not so many split-screen games, but who wants to play garbage like that when you can have a screen for each player?
People who can't afford to buy a computer for each family member perhaps? Do most games support four video cards and four monitors on a single computer? Do most computers support four video cards?
Game developers are expected to provide warranties, support, and online resources (servers) for games after sale, and they often do even when the users don't have a right to it.
Of course they have a right to it. If I sell 10 copies of a piece of software, it doesn't matter if they are all resold or all retained by the origional buyers: either way, it's 10 copies.
But go to EB Games and they pay you something like $6 for a $60 game, and then sell the used copy for $50.
Yup, that's pretty crappy. It makes me want to go ahead and pay the $60 to make sure I'm getting new materials, but I make sure to do it elsewhere.