My guess is Microsoft will have some fancy way to spin no used games as a good thing by pushing that the new box is all about YOU.
When YOU buy a game it's YOURS, AND it will always be yours!
Announcing all XBLA games carry over and stressing that from the new box onward they will always have backward compatability in some way would be the easiest way to bullshit an answer about "since we tie all your content to you forever you have to actually keep it and can't untie it."
That's just my PR speak guess.
PSN: mxmarks - WiiU: mxmarks - twitter: @ MikesPS4 - twitch.tv/mxmarks - "Yes, mxmarks is the King of Queens" - Unbreakable Vow
The no used games thing will end up as a footnote/fine line on the specs sheet of the system.
I'm not sure they'll want that announced on stage. :P
Exactly, and it'll be tempered with some sort of "value-added incentive" to XBox Live Gold now, I fully expect them to rip off the PS Plus idea going forward.
"Retail Game Purchases Are Tied to the New Xbox Console, but with an XBox Live Gold™ Membership, A New Selection of Free Games and Content Will Be Available Every Month!"
0
Vicious_GSRDudePrincipality of ZeonRegistered Userregular
If I still worked in marketing I would have suggested this...
So Sony is turning it around against all predictions, go figure. I feel like they're due for a big return to the top, with smart consumer friendly moves like PS Plus, a console priced fairly that's leagues ahead of the current gen and will likely actually play used games.
Meanwhile the current leader in the West is moving towards abolishing used games and making your console retain a constant connection to the Internet in order to operate. Oh, and now Siri, because we all demanded that.
Isn't that still just an unconfirmed rumour from anonymous sources? I havent seen it backed up anywhere else.
I've seen alot of people touting it as fact recently, so more of an honest question if its confirmed by Microsoft themselves.
Microsoft hasn't even acknowledged a new Xbox at ALL this year, but after the last 6 years of following this industry I subscribe firmly to the belief anymore that "where there's smoke there's fire". And there's a TON of smoke about the "no used games" rumor. I almost wonder if it was an intentional leak in order to get people's outrage out there and over with before MS announces it next month or something.
How will they phrase it, though? There is literally no way they will, in an announcement of a console, get on stage and say "and you won't be able to play used games on it!" So, how do you get something like that out? There's no way to talk that up as a positive to the consumer, so it's the kind of thing that would have to be announced through other channels.
Well I don't think it's going to be this "Aaand just one more thing, NO MORE USED GAMES!" announcement to thunderous applause after they've just done 45 minutes of introducing the New Xbox, but more like what you said, after the fact. But by leaking it now we have 15 threads on GAF on the front page and everyone is outraged for the 48 hour news cycle, and then when MS mentions it to a few outlets after their announcement the basic sentiment is just acceptance. People will say "welp, I guess that rumor was true, that sucks" and move on.
I'm sure there's some PR term for this shit, like "softening the blow" only way more douchey.
"As you can see, Halo 5 will feature an all new game engine that takes our hardware to the limit! Real time environment destruction, and beautifully detailed characters. Master Chief is back... again, folks! Halo 5 will ship holiday 2014!"
*cheers and thunderous applause*
"Oh, also, no more used games. We're destroying that market."
Everyone has a price. Throw enough gold around and someone will risk disintegration.
My guess is Microsoft will have some fancy way to spin no used games as a good thing by pushing that the new box is all about YOU.
When YOU buy a game it's YOURS, AND it will always be yours!
Announcing all XBLA games carry over and stressing that from the new box onward they will always have backward compatability in some way would be the easiest way to bullshit an answer about "since we tie all your content to you forever you have to actually keep it and can't untie it."
Re Rayman: I'm thinking that losing the exclusivity of a sequel to a mediocre selling title won't hurt Nintendo's bottom line any.
Oh and Ubisoft: It'll sell as ho-hum as the first game did....just so you know.
I really don't understand the delay of the Wii U version. Multiplatform I understand. But the thing was supposed to come out in a couple weeks. At a time where it would have had virtually no competition and people may have purchased it just because "hey, nothing else to buy." Instead they move the already done game to the busy holiday season to die. Seems like a dumb move.
Well, it *is* a game based around slapping things.
They just felt like slapping the people looking forward to it for once.
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
Guys, they don't need to announce that "feature".
If they actually have that on the nextbox, you can be sure MS won't mention this used game thing on E3 at all.
you know, the PC games market showed very effectively that there's no need of an used market to keep a gaming platform alive and well ...
Yeah but it's for other reasons than simply because content producers like to double dip and treat their content like property when it suits them and as a license/service when it doesn't. Them console overlords gonna learn this the hard way.
Donnicton on
+1
Vicious_GSRDudePrincipality of ZeonRegistered Userregular
you know, the PC games market showed very effectively that there's no need of an used market to keep a gaming platform alive and well ...
The PC market also had a vibrant internet community that continued to support older games well into modern operating systems and hardware. A used market for console games is essential for the value a consumer can find in titles they can sell in order to buy newer titles. It's almost like owning a console that can only play locked games diminishes the financial value simply by never being able to sell it.
+1
CuvisTheConquerorThey always say "yee haw" but they never ask "haw yee?" Registered Userregular
you know, the PC games market showed very effectively that there's no need of an used market to keep a gaming platform alive and well ...
I would counter that by saying (1) as I pointed out before, the PC games market has a vast number of other selling points, (2) there's a difference between a direct action to destroy a market and a market that never existed in the first place, and (3) PC games can be routinely had for 50-75% off MSRP, which tends to soften the blow of no resale.
Looks like the LittleBigPlanet baton has been passed.
LittleBigPlanet 3 is rumored to be in development at British studio and Sonic & All-Stars Racing Transformed dev Sumo Digital. VG247 is reporting that, according to sources, Sony and former series developer Media Molecule approached Sumo Digital to make LBP 3, and that the game, which has yet to be announced, has already been in development for "well over a year." Upon inquiry, a Sony representative told the site that it "doesn't comment on rumor or speculation."
When approached on the matter, a Sumo Digital representative told Joystiq, "No comment."
LittleBigPlanet 2's Cross-Controller Pack, released in December 2012, was outsourced to Sumo Digital, so the developer has hands-on experience with the property. Also, as spotted by superannuation last April, motion graphics artist Naomi Summerscales' LinkedIn profile noted the developer is working on a PS3 exclusive to be released this year.
Media Molecule is now working on Vita papercraft game Tearaway, having announced it was stepping away from LittleBigPlanet back in July 2011.
you know, the PC games market showed very effectively that there's no need of an used market to keep a gaming platform alive and well ...
I would counter that by saying (1) as I pointed out before, the PC games market has a vast number of other selling points, (2) there's a difference between a direct action to destroy a market and a market that never existed in the first place, and (3) PC games can be routinely had for 50-75% of MSRP, which tends to soften the blow of no resale.
Well I mean it's kind of silly to point out these differences as if they are innate to the platform itself.
At one point PC games were just physical media as well. If I wanted to, I could go buy used copies of PC games from the 90s without issue.
It could be argued that the existence of registration keys and DRM as a fact if life on PC has created those factors.
you know, the PC games market showed very effectively that there's no need of an used market to keep a gaming platform alive and well ...
This is true -- but the PC compensated for the market that drives the Used sales in another way:
With Used games sales, it's essentially a person going to buy a game for cheaper than buying it new*. With PC games, that option largely doesn't exist (with the exception of at-launch or pre-launch discounts that we often see); but there's still a market for people wanting to buy a new-ish game for a little bit cheaper. So what happens is new PC games get sales and discounts far quicker and often far steeper than new console games.
And you know what, it works out fine for PC gaming. Wouldn't a dev or publisher rather sell you its game for $40 a few months later rather than you going and buying someone else's used copy?
Of course, that's all fine and dandy for the PC market because it's sort of been this way for so long that it's kind of expected, I guess? But with console games, you really have to seriously consider what the market expects and wants out of a platform... and I think people tend to like the option of later selling a game, or buying a used one cheaply.
The other problem is that who is to say that these companies, if they went this route, would follow a similar "quicker, steeper discount" route that PC games tend to? Just look at the laughably high prices some full-download-retail games go for on XBLA or whatever. That's not going to fill the gap left by a lack of Used games sales.
This is all hypothetical anyway, since I seriously doubt MS is going to eliminate the Used game market from its next machine. But I could be wrong.
*The used market also encourages sales by providing the option to new buyers of reselling the game later; thus getting some money back to put towards other games. Of course.
you know, the PC games market showed very effectively that there's no need of an used market to keep a gaming platform alive and well ...
Removing used games was one of the things that practically killed PC gaming post-1999. It took digital distribution and mad crazy Steam sales to bring it back.
I may not like the way GameStop runs its used game business, but removing a customer's ability to resell games entirely isn't a prudent response to the problem.
Want to find me on a gaming service? I'm SwashbucklerXX everywhere.
+1
GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
My big question is this: If MS went the "Steam route", and offered a more vibrant selling environment, where game producers get to set the prices, and there is a vibrant sale culture, with deep discounts....would anyone care in the long run if used died?
I know that's a big if, but I wonder if the ablooabloo is really about used games, or just that as of yet we haven't heard any announcement of a better way to buy console games at possible discounts later in their life.
I already play on a platform that has a "no used games" policy: PC
But PC has Steam and other DD stores, where I can get games for $20, $10, $5 a few times a year, and I don't think too much about buying a game at that price versus $60. I've bought a LOT of cheap (and big name! Sleeping Dogs, Deus Ex HR, Saint's Row 3, The Walking Dead to name a few) games on Steam. I think the last full-priced PC game I bought was...The Witcher 2?
So some hypothetical console going "no used games" isn't an alien concept.
BUT
I cannot remember the last time I bought a NEW console game for $20. That does not happen often. I will, just like on PC, be very hesitant to buy a game for full-price if I know it completely loses its value as soon as I pop it in my system.
So I do not like the idea of a "no used games" console. It makes it less likely for me to buy games, less likely for me to play games, less likely for me to enjoy my hobby. And if I'm not alone in thinking that, and I don't think I am, that sort of attitude hurts EVERYONE involved in making and selling games.
If Microsoft or Sony want to remove used games, tie games to an account, and basically borrow the steam model with games, I welcome that change. If it ends up being as bad for them as everyone says, they have the steam model of steap sales and specials to move to.
If it can work for steam, I see no reason it won't work on consoles as well. There are ways to make this work offline and online, so that people can still have their retail games without ever taking their console online. Remember, this isn't about piracy, it's about used games.
My big question is this: If MS went the "Steam route", and offered a more vibrant selling environment, where game producers get to set the prices, and there is a vibrant sale culture, with deep discounts....would anyone care in the long run if used died?
I know that's a big if, but I wonder if the ablooabloo is really about used games, or just that as of yet we haven't heard any announcement of a better way to buy console games at possible discounts later in their life.
It bugs me a tiny bit that, having won a copy of Battlefield 3 in a LAN raffle and activated it on Origin back when I thought I'd actually play it sometime soon, I can't even give it away to someone else who'd enjoy it. But that's more a matter of me hating waste than wanting to recoup some of my original purchase price (which was, in this case, zero).
Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
0
MaddocI'm Bobbin Threadbare, are you my mother?Registered Userregular
I'm not even saying this is a good hypothetical move for them to make.
But the argument that "It can't work on consoles because consoles are consoles and PC is PC" doesn't hold any water whatsoever.
Pointing out the differences in the market between consoles and PC is literally only pointing out the differences in their environment pre and post transition to DRM and registration keys.
I already play on a platform that has a "no used games" policy: PC
But PC has Steam and other DD stores, where I can get games for $20, $10, $5 a few times a year, and I don't think too much about buying a game at that price versus $60. I've bought a LOT of cheap (and big name! Sleeping Dogs, Deus Ex HR, Saint's Row 3, The Walking Dead to name a few) games on Steam. I think the last full-priced PC game I bought was...The Witcher 2?
So some hypothetical console going "no used games" isn't an alien concept.
BUT
I cannot remember the last time I bought a NEW console game for $20. That does not happen often. I will, just like on PC, be very hesitant to buy a game for full-price if I know it completely loses its value as soon as I pop it in my system.
So I do not like the idea of a "no used games" console. It makes it less likely for me to buy games, less likely for me to play games, less likely for me to enjoy my hobby. And if I'm not alone in thinking that, and I don't think I am, that sort of attitude hurts EVERYONE involved in making and selling games.
I'll be honest - I buy most of my games at high prices. If it's used, it's probably an old, hard to find game. If it's new, it's probably bought at launch. Outside of PC gaming, I'd say the average cost of purchase form me is $60.
Where the no-used deal chaps me is that I'm the kind of gamer who will go back and continue to build up old collections. I have a ton of Xbox 360, PS3, and Wii games, but nowhere near every game from this generation I want. I'll continue to buy games for those systems for decades, until I have the collection I want. No used games kills this prospect. It's soul crushing to me. Price is never a problem for me, it's time.
There are also instances where licensing can kill a digital game, like Outrun Online Arcade. Not being able to go back and buy physical copies in the future sounds risky as a collector.
I'm not even saying this is a good hypothetical move for them to make.
But the argument that "It can't work on consoles because consoles are consoles and PC is PC" doesn't hold any water whatsoever.
Pointing out the differences in the market between consoles and PC is literally only pointing out the differences in their environment pre and post transition to DRM and registration keys.
Yes. We are indeed using the only information available to us to form conclusions and opinions.
I'd hate this system for the same reason I've always been wary of it:
I pretty much always bring my fighting games (and stuff like that, group games, party games, etc) to friends' houses to play together all the time.
If my fighting games / party games /etc are tied to an account, it becomes a pain in the ass. I can't just take the disc there and play it. What, do I have to log into my account on his system and redownload what we want to play? Pain in the ass.
But I guess every time I bring that up someone says, "Well everyone plays with friends over the internet now so your whole 'bringing things to friends' houses' is outdated and meaningless." So who knows.
I don't like it simply because of the fact that I won't be able to take advantage of commodity markets by way of games with extremely limited runs that appreciate in value geometrically as years pass.
It will slow down the advancement of my Atlus-backed retirement plan.
If it can work for steam, I see no reason it won't work on consoles as well. There are ways to make this work offline and online, so that people can still have their retail games without ever taking their console online. Remember, this isn't about piracy, it's about used games.
The inherent revenue model for PC and consoles is different enough to say, no, what works for steam will not necessarily work for Microsoft or Sony. MS and Sony make money from licensing and distributing their SDK. It keeps an overhead built into console development. To make an Xbox 360 game, you need to spend several million in SDK fees and licensing fees before you even write a single line of code. For that reason, it's not in a game maker's best interest to launch at, say, $10. Steam is divorced from this problem - steam makes money from the sales of games, not the development of them. The Steam API is free to use. Valve is more concerned about selling games, than taxing people for making them.
It's an enormous difference that drastically affects MSRP. It's precisely why Sony and Nintendo are having so much trouble countering the "app problem." They can't compete against app development using their conventional development licensing philosophies.
I'd hate this system for the same reason I've always been wary of it:
I pretty much always bring my fighting games (and stuff like that, group games, party games, etc) to friends' houses to play together all the time.
If my fighting games / party games /etc are tied to an account, it becomes a pain in the ass. I can't just take the disc there and play it. What, do I have to log into my account on his system and redownload what we want to play? Pain in the ass.
But I guess every time I bring that up someone says, "Well everyone plays with friends over the internet now so your whole 'bringing things to friends' houses' is outdated and meaningless." So who knows.
If you buy retail, you use the disc, but log into your account to be able to play. Or something like that.
I'd hate this system for the same reason I've always been wary of it:
I pretty much always bring my fighting games (and stuff like that, group games, party games, etc) to friends' houses to play together all the time.
If my fighting games / party games /etc are tied to an account, it becomes a pain in the ass. I can't just take the disc there and play it. What, do I have to log into my account on his system and redownload what we want to play? Pain in the ass.
But I guess every time I bring that up someone says, "Well everyone plays with friends over the internet now so your whole 'bringing things to friends' houses' is outdated and meaningless." So who knows.
If you buy retail, you use the disc, but log into your account to be able to play. Or something like that.
And what about save games?
The point is this sort of move only makes things more difficult for the consumer. It makes it harder (or impossible) for us to do what we're used to doing.
I'd hate this system for the same reason I've always been wary of it:
I pretty much always bring my fighting games (and stuff like that, group games, party games, etc) to friends' houses to play together all the time.
If my fighting games / party games /etc are tied to an account, it becomes a pain in the ass. I can't just take the disc there and play it. What, do I have to log into my account on his system and redownload what we want to play? Pain in the ass.
But I guess every time I bring that up someone says, "Well everyone plays with friends over the internet now so your whole 'bringing things to friends' houses' is outdated and meaningless." So who knows.
If you buy retail, you use the disc, but log into your account to be able to play. Or something like that.
I'd hate this system for the same reason I've always been wary of it:
I pretty much always bring my fighting games (and stuff like that, group games, party games, etc) to friends' houses to play together all the time.
If my fighting games / party games /etc are tied to an account, it becomes a pain in the ass. I can't just take the disc there and play it. What, do I have to log into my account on his system and redownload what we want to play? Pain in the ass.
But I guess every time I bring that up someone says, "Well everyone plays with friends over the internet now so your whole 'bringing things to friends' houses' is outdated and meaningless." So who knows.
If you buy retail, you use the disc, but log into your account to be able to play. Or something like that.
And what about save games?
The point is this sort of move only makes things more difficult for the consumer. It makes it harder (or impossible) for us to do what we're used to doing.
Cloud saves loading when logging into my account, presumably
I don't like it simply because of the fact that I won't be able to take advantage of commodity markets by way of games with extremely limited runs that appreciate in value geometrically as years pass.
It will slow down the advancement of my Atlus-backed retirement plan.
You should diversify your holdings.
I just want to say one word to you, just one word: Hats.
I'd hate this system for the same reason I've always been wary of it:
I pretty much always bring my fighting games (and stuff like that, group games, party games, etc) to friends' houses to play together all the time.
If my fighting games / party games /etc are tied to an account, it becomes a pain in the ass. I can't just take the disc there and play it. What, do I have to log into my account on his system and redownload what we want to play? Pain in the ass.
But I guess every time I bring that up someone says, "Well everyone plays with friends over the internet now so your whole 'bringing things to friends' houses' is outdated and meaningless." So who knows.
If you buy retail, you use the disc, but log into your account to be able to play. Or something like that.
My friends and I already have to lug around our consoles. I don't have a PS3, he does. He doesn't have a Wii, I do. We both have 360s, but will often lug it over anyway because he has the game we want to play patched and with the unlocks we want available on his console, or if it's multiplayer we'll play LAN and use his LCD monitor as a second screen rather than split screening the game (if it even supports that).
PITA? Yes. But considering the way saves and games are already this generation, a necessity. Otherwise it's "I forgot my memory card" or "the save is on my HDD not the thumb drive" or "I have to log in as primary while we play or else it will only give us the demo instead of the full game since my account purchased it" etc. It's not user friendly at all.
I've always stayed away from Sony products because they have very frequently used proprietary designs that do not interface well with accessories or other products. Memory cards, plugs, batteries, etc. I'd be okay with paying a price premium for top quality for the main device, but being locked into proprietary accessories that aren't any higher quality or better than the generics and also come with a huge markup has soured me on pretty much any of their electronics.
0
Warlock82Never pet a burning dogRegistered Userregular
I've always stayed away from Sony products because they have very frequently used proprietary designs that do not interface well with accessories or other products. Memory cards, plugs, batteries, etc. I'd be okay with paying a price premium for top quality for the main device, but being locked into proprietary accessories that aren't any higher quality or better than the generics and also come with a huge markup has soured me on pretty much any of their electronics.
You could say the same thing about Microsoft and their $200+ proprietary hard drives too :P
The no used games thing will end up as a footnote/fine line on the specs sheet of the system.
I'm not sure they'll want that announced on stage. :P
Exactly, and it'll be tempered with some sort of "value-added incentive" to XBox Live Gold now, I fully expect them to rip off the PS Plus idea going forward.
"Retail Game Purchases Are Tied to the New Xbox Console, but with an XBox Live Gold™ Membership, A New Selection of Free Games and Content Will Be Available Every Month!"
Well, it's Microsoft, so "value added" would end up meaning "only new games get achievements, and you need Gold to access them."
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
I can't begin to state how dickish it is to release a demo and after a montth, weeks before the game launches, you announce a fucking seven-month delay.
You can release the damn Wii U version now and still have your ports in September. There's no drawback to this unless you have some weird contract stipulations.
I've always stayed away from Sony products because they have very frequently used proprietary designs that do not interface well with accessories or other products. Memory cards, plugs, batteries, etc. I'd be okay with paying a price premium for top quality for the main device, but being locked into proprietary accessories that aren't any higher quality or better than the generics and also come with a huge markup has soured me on pretty much any of their electronics.
You could say the same thing about Microsoft and their $200+ proprietary hard drives too :P
Yeah, it's one of the things I've learned to stay away from when purchasing electronics. If I'm locked to proprietary accessories, and accessories will be something I'm expecting to purchase and possibly replace/add to later on, I'm going to stay away from that product.
Also, with regard to Steam and it's lack of ability to sell/buy second-hand, I have hopes that the recent European first sale court case involving an Oracle license will prompt Valve to allow used game sales via the Steam interface, since it appears many of the same principles apply. They can even charge a slight fee for providing a secure method of transferring the games. If they get forced into it, it's better to make some money from the transaction than be left out entirely.
I can't begin to state how dickish it is to release a demo and after a montth, weeks before the game launches, you announce a fucking seven-month delay.
You can release the damn Wii U version now and still have your ports in September. There's no drawback to this unless you have some weird contract stipulations.
I can guarantee you that this wouldn't happen if it were the other way around.
Edit: Meaning if it were originally a 360/PS3 release, they wouldn't delay for a Wii U release.
skeldare on
Nintendo Console Codes
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!
Posts
When YOU buy a game it's YOURS, AND it will always be yours!
Announcing all XBLA games carry over and stressing that from the new box onward they will always have backward compatability in some way would be the easiest way to bullshit an answer about "since we tie all your content to you forever you have to actually keep it and can't untie it."
That's just my PR speak guess.
Exactly, and it'll be tempered with some sort of "value-added incentive" to XBox Live Gold now, I fully expect them to rip off the PS Plus idea going forward.
"Retail Game Purchases Are Tied to the New Xbox Console, but with an XBox Live Gold™ Membership, A New Selection of Free Games and Content Will Be Available Every Month!"
"Xbox PWN: Buy a game once. It's your forever."
"And finally, here's something we're sure everyone's excited for... ladies and gentlemen: HALO 5!"
*Teaser trailer plays*
"As you can see, Halo 5 will feature an all new game engine that takes our hardware to the limit! Real time environment destruction, and beautifully detailed characters. Master Chief is back... again, folks! Halo 5 will ship holiday 2014!"
*cheers and thunderous applause*
"Oh, also, no more used games. We're destroying that market."
I buy a game once and it's mine forever right now. My EarthBound cart is mine as long as I can keep it working, which is effectively forever.
"Theft protection"
Well, it *is* a game based around slapping things.
They just felt like slapping the people looking forward to it for once.
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
If they actually have that on the nextbox, you can be sure MS won't mention this used game thing on E3 at all.
Yeah but it's for other reasons than simply because content producers like to double dip and treat their content like property when it suits them and as a license/service when it doesn't. Them console overlords gonna learn this the hard way.
The PC market also had a vibrant internet community that continued to support older games well into modern operating systems and hardware. A used market for console games is essential for the value a consumer can find in titles they can sell in order to buy newer titles. It's almost like owning a console that can only play locked games diminishes the financial value simply by never being able to sell it.
I would counter that by saying (1) as I pointed out before, the PC games market has a vast number of other selling points, (2) there's a difference between a direct action to destroy a market and a market that never existed in the first place, and (3) PC games can be routinely had for 50-75% off MSRP, which tends to soften the blow of no resale.
This is their first platformer since, what, Zool 2? Wow.
Well I mean it's kind of silly to point out these differences as if they are innate to the platform itself.
At one point PC games were just physical media as well. If I wanted to, I could go buy used copies of PC games from the 90s without issue.
It could be argued that the existence of registration keys and DRM as a fact if life on PC has created those factors.
This is true -- but the PC compensated for the market that drives the Used sales in another way:
With Used games sales, it's essentially a person going to buy a game for cheaper than buying it new*. With PC games, that option largely doesn't exist (with the exception of at-launch or pre-launch discounts that we often see); but there's still a market for people wanting to buy a new-ish game for a little bit cheaper. So what happens is new PC games get sales and discounts far quicker and often far steeper than new console games.
And you know what, it works out fine for PC gaming. Wouldn't a dev or publisher rather sell you its game for $40 a few months later rather than you going and buying someone else's used copy?
Of course, that's all fine and dandy for the PC market because it's sort of been this way for so long that it's kind of expected, I guess? But with console games, you really have to seriously consider what the market expects and wants out of a platform... and I think people tend to like the option of later selling a game, or buying a used one cheaply.
The other problem is that who is to say that these companies, if they went this route, would follow a similar "quicker, steeper discount" route that PC games tend to? Just look at the laughably high prices some full-download-retail games go for on XBLA or whatever. That's not going to fill the gap left by a lack of Used games sales.
This is all hypothetical anyway, since I seriously doubt MS is going to eliminate the Used game market from its next machine. But I could be wrong.
*The used market also encourages sales by providing the option to new buyers of reselling the game later; thus getting some money back to put towards other games. Of course.
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
Removing used games was one of the things that practically killed PC gaming post-1999. It took digital distribution and mad crazy Steam sales to bring it back.
I may not like the way GameStop runs its used game business, but removing a customer's ability to resell games entirely isn't a prudent response to the problem.
I know that's a big if, but I wonder if the ablooabloo is really about used games, or just that as of yet we haven't heard any announcement of a better way to buy console games at possible discounts later in their life.
But PC has Steam and other DD stores, where I can get games for $20, $10, $5 a few times a year, and I don't think too much about buying a game at that price versus $60. I've bought a LOT of cheap (and big name! Sleeping Dogs, Deus Ex HR, Saint's Row 3, The Walking Dead to name a few) games on Steam. I think the last full-priced PC game I bought was...The Witcher 2?
So some hypothetical console going "no used games" isn't an alien concept.
BUT
I cannot remember the last time I bought a NEW console game for $20. That does not happen often. I will, just like on PC, be very hesitant to buy a game for full-price if I know it completely loses its value as soon as I pop it in my system.
So I do not like the idea of a "no used games" console. It makes it less likely for me to buy games, less likely for me to play games, less likely for me to enjoy my hobby. And if I'm not alone in thinking that, and I don't think I am, that sort of attitude hurts EVERYONE involved in making and selling games.
If it can work for steam, I see no reason it won't work on consoles as well. There are ways to make this work offline and online, so that people can still have their retail games without ever taking their console online. Remember, this isn't about piracy, it's about used games.
It bugs me a tiny bit that, having won a copy of Battlefield 3 in a LAN raffle and activated it on Origin back when I thought I'd actually play it sometime soon, I can't even give it away to someone else who'd enjoy it. But that's more a matter of me hating waste than wanting to recoup some of my original purchase price (which was, in this case, zero).
Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
But the argument that "It can't work on consoles because consoles are consoles and PC is PC" doesn't hold any water whatsoever.
Pointing out the differences in the market between consoles and PC is literally only pointing out the differences in their environment pre and post transition to DRM and registration keys.
I'll be honest - I buy most of my games at high prices. If it's used, it's probably an old, hard to find game. If it's new, it's probably bought at launch. Outside of PC gaming, I'd say the average cost of purchase form me is $60.
Where the no-used deal chaps me is that I'm the kind of gamer who will go back and continue to build up old collections. I have a ton of Xbox 360, PS3, and Wii games, but nowhere near every game from this generation I want. I'll continue to buy games for those systems for decades, until I have the collection I want. No used games kills this prospect. It's soul crushing to me. Price is never a problem for me, it's time.
There are also instances where licensing can kill a digital game, like Outrun Online Arcade. Not being able to go back and buy physical copies in the future sounds risky as a collector.
Yes. We are indeed using the only information available to us to form conclusions and opinions.
I pretty much always bring my fighting games (and stuff like that, group games, party games, etc) to friends' houses to play together all the time.
If my fighting games / party games /etc are tied to an account, it becomes a pain in the ass. I can't just take the disc there and play it. What, do I have to log into my account on his system and redownload what we want to play? Pain in the ass.
But I guess every time I bring that up someone says, "Well everyone plays with friends over the internet now so your whole 'bringing things to friends' houses' is outdated and meaningless." So who knows.
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
It will slow down the advancement of my Atlus-backed retirement plan.
The inherent revenue model for PC and consoles is different enough to say, no, what works for steam will not necessarily work for Microsoft or Sony. MS and Sony make money from licensing and distributing their SDK. It keeps an overhead built into console development. To make an Xbox 360 game, you need to spend several million in SDK fees and licensing fees before you even write a single line of code. For that reason, it's not in a game maker's best interest to launch at, say, $10. Steam is divorced from this problem - steam makes money from the sales of games, not the development of them. The Steam API is free to use. Valve is more concerned about selling games, than taxing people for making them.
It's an enormous difference that drastically affects MSRP. It's precisely why Sony and Nintendo are having so much trouble countering the "app problem." They can't compete against app development using their conventional development licensing philosophies.
If you buy retail, you use the disc, but log into your account to be able to play. Or something like that.
And what about save games?
The point is this sort of move only makes things more difficult for the consumer. It makes it harder (or impossible) for us to do what we're used to doing.
That makes sense. Crisis avoided in that case.
Cloud saves loading when logging into my account, presumably
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
You should diversify your holdings.
I just want to say one word to you, just one word:
Hats.
Steam, Warframe: Megajoule
My friends and I already have to lug around our consoles. I don't have a PS3, he does. He doesn't have a Wii, I do. We both have 360s, but will often lug it over anyway because he has the game we want to play patched and with the unlocks we want available on his console, or if it's multiplayer we'll play LAN and use his LCD monitor as a second screen rather than split screening the game (if it even supports that).
PITA? Yes. But considering the way saves and games are already this generation, a necessity. Otherwise it's "I forgot my memory card" or "the save is on my HDD not the thumb drive" or "I have to log in as primary while we play or else it will only give us the demo instead of the full game since my account purchased it" etc. It's not user friendly at all.
You could say the same thing about Microsoft and their $200+ proprietary hard drives too :P
How many game consoles are online these days? If it's less than 95%, always-on online DRM could really hurt the market.
PSN ID: fearsomepirate
this mindset is straight out of 2005, man.
Low-budget, small-team games like Torchlight 2 hit 1 million sales*. 1 million isn't shit anymore.
Blockbuster PC games sell 10-20 million copies.
EDIT: *fixed for accuracy, 1 million, not 2 million
Well, it's Microsoft, so "value added" would end up meaning "only new games get achievements, and you need Gold to access them."
COME FORTH, AMATERASU! - Switch Friend Code SW-5465-2458-5696 - Twitch
You can release the damn Wii U version now and still have your ports in September. There's no drawback to this unless you have some weird contract stipulations.
Yeah, it's one of the things I've learned to stay away from when purchasing electronics. If I'm locked to proprietary accessories, and accessories will be something I'm expecting to purchase and possibly replace/add to later on, I'm going to stay away from that product.
Also, with regard to Steam and it's lack of ability to sell/buy second-hand, I have hopes that the recent European first sale court case involving an Oracle license will prompt Valve to allow used game sales via the Steam interface, since it appears many of the same principles apply. They can even charge a slight fee for providing a secure method of transferring the games. If they get forced into it, it's better to make some money from the transaction than be left out entirely.
I can guarantee you that this wouldn't happen if it were the other way around.
Edit: Meaning if it were originally a 360/PS3 release, they wouldn't delay for a Wii U release.
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!