Slashdot Mirror
PlayStation 4 'Orbis' Rumors: AMD Hardware, Hostile To Used Games
silentbrad writes "Kotaku reports some 'details' about Sony's next console given to them by a 'reliable source.' They say that the console's codename is Orbis, and it is planned for release by the 2013 holiday season. Developers are reportedly being told to plan for an AMD x64 CPU and AMD Southern Islands GPU. Further on, they mention that there will be no PS3 backwards compatibility and, like rumors about the next Xbox, will have anti-used game DRM. Specifically, 'new games for the system will be available one of two ways, either on a Blu-Ray disc or as a PSN download (yes, even full retail titles). If you buy the disc, it must be locked to a single PSN account. ... If you then decide to trade that disc in, the pre-owned customer picking it up will be limited in what they can do. ... it's believed used games will be limited to a trial mode or some other form of content restriction, with consumers having to pay a fee to unlock/register the full game.'"
If you buy the disc, it must be locked to a single PSN account. ... If you then decide to trade that disc in, the pre-owned customer picking it up will be limited in what they can do
You expect this kind of craven, heavy-handed behavior out of a Samsung or a Panasonic, sure. But Sony?!?!?
But seriously, it's been clear that developers have been asking for this for some time. They already killed the used market for PC's. Now it's console time. Sadly, I suspect MS and Nintendo will follow suit if Sony goes through with it.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
...Sony cooks up another draconian DRM scheme....
Another brilliant example of not understanding your audience. Used games are part of the lifeblood of the hobby. Make me pay full retail for every game and I will skip the platform.
Um... Yeah, and this far out in the PS3 dev cycle we thought we'd be stuck with those horrible boomerang controllers too. So I'll take it with a grain of anti-Sony-bias salt. Not that I'd put it past them, just that it's too early to start shitting myself with worry.
what exactly is going to be so cool about this console except better graphics?
$60 games with no resale means i buy one or two awesome games per year
i mostly game on my x-box and use the PS3 for movies and netflix. the xbox has enough $20 GOTY editions of good games that i have years left to play them and no need to buy any of the new systems for a long time.
my dream system for next gen is x-box with blu ray and backwards compatibility. i'll buy it even if the new next gen games are locked down since i'll play the old and use it as a blu ray player after dumping my current x-box and PS3
If they're planning on limiting the resale value of games, then they better plan on lowering the price. I know a lot of people who justified spending $40 or $50 on a game because they knew they could sell it for $20 or $30 in 6 months when they got tired of it, making the end cost a reasonable $20 or so. A move like this might end up hurting sales in spite of forcing more people to buy directly from Sony (or Sony's retailers) because a large segment of the market can no longer use the money from selling older games to buy newer ones.
Big companies seem to think that consumers have an endless supply of money to spend on anything and everything they want... no concept of a consumer has $100 to spend on games this year. If titles are $50 each, then only two get sold. If titles are $50, but they can resell each for $25 then three games get sold.
... until Sony gets hacked, PSN accounts are lost and everyone's games are rendered useless. That lawsuit should be epic.
If you buy the disc, it must be locked to a single PSN account
no PS3 backwards compatibility
Sony, I really want to enjoy the games you and your partners put out, but if you go through with this? I have two words for you.
Buh-Bye.
(Either that or Yo-Ho, if someone finds a reliable way to pirate games on to the console)
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
Not only will retailers revolt...but they're straight go out of business. Gamestop makes the vast majority of its money off of used game sales.
When a large percentage of their income evaporates...it won't bode well for them.
On the flip side, if MS doesn't put this limitation on the next XBOX, sony can probably kiss their console goodbye before it even launches...
Wow, this will cause an uproar with families I would think!
Example: Buy game for 2+ children, but each child has own account as they don't want to have their saves touched / overwritten. Find out that game can only be used on child(a) account. Child(b) cries foul, wants his own saves and doesn't want to share etc. Fight breaks out as parent can't game to work on child(b) account.
Now I don't think this will be extremely COMMON to be honest, but I could certainly see some backlash from it! I don't like having other people in the house using my account to play games, as I fear that someone would accidentally mess up my saves etc. I'm sure a self entitled child will throw complete fits over it.
Practice Static Safety - Hack Naked
If publishers can count on more direct sales
That $10 I don't get anymore for turning in the old games no longer goes towards buying new ones.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
If you do this, I won't buy it. Lots of people won't. Stop this stupid BS.
You really need to learn to think in the long term. People will pay a lot for a game when it first comes out, but if you do this DRM crap, you MUST follow through and offer older games at much lower prices, and continue to do so for YEARS if not DECADES. Used game stores do this for you, and allow people with less money to remain rabid fans, and buy your big games when they first come out. If you kill the used game market, you cut those players off. Once they are cut off, they will find other things to do. YOU DO NOT WANT THIS TO HAPPEN.
If you must have DRM, you need to offer games from old systems that run on emulation on your new systems for free or next to nothing, and you need to offer older games at prices that used games get now. You need to keep people playing. If you keep playing these stupid DRM games without offering a substitute, then people will stop playing, and you will go the way of the music industry. Maybe someone like Apple will come along and save your sorry ass, and drag you kicking and screaming into a new, profitable business model, but I wouldn't bet on it.
However, the more likely scenario is just a repeat of what happened with PC games.
You can't really buy PC Games used anymore, so a large portion of the pc game traffic moved on and got consoles instead. When consoles suffer from the same thing, people are going to move on to mobile games on platforms like the iPad, Android, and soon windows 8 tablets.
Sure, you can't resell mobile apps, but it's a rarity when a mobile game costs more than $10. At that price, you can afford to buy 6 games for the same price as 1 console game. Who cares if you can't sell them back. And, for that matter, most mobile games are less than $5, and the majority are stuck squarely at $0.99.
I am going to open up a sarcasm detector repair shop. I mean, the guy even followed up his sarcasm with "But seriously..."
Look at all this from Sony's perspective - what has been one of the wilder gaming successes in recent years?
The iOS platform.
There people cannot trade or otherwise share games. But it ends up not really mattering because in the iOS world there are so many developers vying for purchasers that the real world has actually had an impact on pricing - pricing is quite low per title.
Or you could even come at it from the PC side and note the only model that is really growing there very well is Steam - again no sharing of games, but lower prices.
So I would submit it's you who are out of touch with what modern gamers accept.
Of course it remains to be seen if Sony REALLY understands that for the no-sharing model to work, prices must also come down substantially for each title. They are adopting the DRM protected no-sharing model because it's innately what they desire anyway, but can they unclench the greed fist just a little? Hard to say. All I know is I have a PS3 but am pretty unlikely to get an Orbis, even if it supports Vorbis...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
A rented games is an used game right? What will happen with services like redbox,blockbuster or gamefly?
I worked at gamestop. It's not a matter of traffic or customer numbers, it's a matter of margins. On those midnight releases, a lot of money is flowing from the customer to gamestop. However, before that, a lot of money has flowed from Gamestop to whoever is publishing the game. Gamestop charges you $60 maybe for red dead redemption. They have though likely paid $55 for the disc to sell you, making $5.
Meanwhile, kids trickle in during the majority of the time gamestop is open. They might be selling back a game they bought two weeks before at $60. What gamestop gives them in return depends on supply and demand, but it's likely the kid will get $20 for it. Gamestop will then put the game on the shelf for $55. Someone else will come in for the new game, the cashier will point out that they can buy it gently used for 5 dollars less. Gamestop has therefore made $35. Moreover, that $20 is store credit. If the kid wants cash, then gamestop will give him $16, so the kid takes the store credit. Which, of course, means that gamestop keeps that too. Gamestop essentially made $55 on reselling a two week old game.
This is no secret. Bring any game into a gamestop, ask how much you will receive for it in cash, and compare that to how much they're selling it for used. It's less than half of what they'll get. They do not make that profit margin on new game sales. The cashier or manager can and will confirm that.
They make very little comparatively on new game sales. In fact, the only reason they sell new games at all is to get people going into the store so they can advertise to them and try to get them bringing in lightly used games. Gamestop is, essentially, a used game store, despite the fact that they occasionally sell a lot of new games at once.
Sony probably will not prevent used games from playing... AT LAUNCH (of PS4). They even did this before:
Their first PS3 allowed the user to play PS2 games. Subsequent PS3s dropped that feature.
The PS3 had an "other OS" option... Then they took it away.
It would be a PR nightmare to release the PS4 with a catchphrase like "now only new games can be played", so they will allow the used games to be played initially, then, once they have sold enough consoles to get some serious market share, they will make an update that screws us all.
Funny, I can buy a house "used" and not be obligated to pay the original builder a dime. A house can even appreciate in value beyond the original purchase price. The original developer still gets nothing from the profits of the sale. There is no grand conspiracy to deprive house builders of something they're owed, because they aren't owed squat.
This is just another example of software companies trying to cherry-pick the distinction between "owned" and "licensed." Your CD is scratched and won't read anymore? Sorry, you own the product and you'll need to buy another one as a replacement. Oh, you want to sell the product to someone else? Nope, you didn't really buy it, you purchased a license which isn't transferrable. Unadulterated cash-grab, it is.