I ran across a rather fucked up rumor today about what the new 720 will or won't do.

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Wii-U-Xbox-720-Oban-Radeon-Performance,news-13994.html

Quote :

"Kotaku has learned from an unnamed source that Microsoft's next console will feature a Blu-ray optical drive and some kind of anti-used game system. Details surrounding this little interesting nugget is virtually nonexistent -- even the source wasn't sure how Microsoft planned to implement such a system. One theory is that games will be initially tied and registered to one Xbox Live account. When sold off or passed to friends and siblings, these games would either be unplayable, or have a locked multiplayer component."

If the new 720 won't play used games unless I pay an additional fee, I will completely abandon the Xbox for the PS3. If they do this, this would be one of the dumbest fucking moves in video game history. Also, having a wiiU controller is a giant fucking negative in my book as well.

Thoughts?

[Edited on February 10, 2012 at 5:21 PM. Reason : .]

2/10/2012 5:19:49 PM

god forbid should someone who makes a product get paid for you using it

2/10/2012 5:22:40 PM

are you serious?

2/10/2012 5:24:33 PM

I could see some kind of anti-stolen game device, but only allowing all features to be useable by the initial purchaser would drive away sooooooo much business and garner the wrath of the gamin community.

2/10/2012 5:27:45 PM

-First you pay for multiplayer access via an xbox live subscription - $60 a year
-Second, you buy a game for $60.
-Third, some new games like Call of Duty have an Elite multiplayer structure that funnels people towards spending $20 to get better weapons, faster experience, etc. That, in itself is already one of the greediest fucking things in gaming and it is here to stay. Locking the multiplayer is just flatout lame if this is already in place.
-Trade it in when you are done for $30 or less depending on how long you wait. Now Microsoft wants a cut of this game being resold again so they lock the multiplayer and will let you enable it for $10.
-Game gets traded again and Microsoft, again, wants another cut and so on and so on.

It's like some kind of fucked up pyramid scheme.

Regardless of how they do it, it's a bad idea that would alienate gamers and cripple businesses like Gamefly, Gamestop, etc that help most people save money.


Making money is one thing but raping your customers hand over fist is another.



[Edited on February 10, 2012 at 5:38 PM. Reason : Corporate greed disgusts me]

2/10/2012 5:32:13 PM

asking your customer to buy the product from you in order to use it is not raping them

2/10/2012 5:39:44 PM

retailers give them a percentage of every sale so they get paid for every sale

they just want a larger percentage and this process would guarantee it

2/10/2012 5:44:11 PM

So, I'm supposed to buy new cars instead of used cars now?

2/10/2012 5:45:11 PM

gamestop does not give them a portion of used game sales

the car analogy does not work. multiplayer requires server infrastructure on their end, support through continued balancing and patching, etc. a car company does not keep your car running for free after you buy it. you pay them to fix it. you pay the state taxes on gas to keep the roads running.

2/10/2012 5:47:55 PM

Nor should they have to. The game has already been purchased from the manufacturer/retailer once. They've gotten their piece. Imagine if you had to pay GM for purchasing a used chevy pickup from some guy who had bought it new. Does that make any sense whatsoever?

I agree with you about the server upkeep, etc. but that should be done through a use fee on that service, not through preventing the current owner of a game from utilizing all its options. You pay for the server upkeep by paying for an XBox Live account. It should not be mandatory that you buy all games new to play them at their full capacity.

2/10/2012 5:55:20 PM

i don't understand how you can complain about a game developer wanting to do this while at the same time pay microsoft money to use the full capabilities of your console.

2/10/2012 6:07:10 PM

yall gettin trolled ITT

2/10/2012 6:08:44 PM

Quote :

"If the new 720 won't play used games unless I pay an additional fee, I will completely abandon the Xbox for the PS3. If they do this, this would be one of the dumbest fucking moves in video game history. Also, having a wiiU controller is a giant fucking negative in my book as well."

If Microsoft goes this route for their next gen then you can be pretty damned sure that Sony will follow suit.

2/10/2012 6:11:51 PM

I thought you had already explained that yourself with noting the expense of maintaining a platform for running multiplayer. I honestly wouldn't be terribly upset if you had to pay a nominal fee to use the multiplayer option on a game, say $1 per game in addition to your XBox live subscription regardless of whether the game was new or used, but punishing people for purchasing used is a horrible business idea.

Locking it seems extreme and will just encourage new and cleverer ways to get around it. Let's not cry for game developers here, you don't get to cry about the used game market any more than movie studios get to bitch about used DVDs. Imagine the uproar from Joe Public if Paramount made features of DVDs unusable by second hand purchasers. We aren't talking about piracy here, we are talking about used games. Big difference.

2/10/2012 6:13:12 PM

how is it horrible? they get ZERO dollars from you buying it used. the people who pay full price for new will continue to do so as this doesn't impact them. there is no negative result for the publisher. unless you're naive enough to think that someone who buys new games is going to find pity for those who never do and boycott the people they have happily paid for new product for years

[Edited on February 10, 2012 at 6:21 PM. Reason : if you think i'm trolling, you're sadly mistaken]

2/10/2012 6:17:30 PM

Sorry Volcom and all followers, but I disagree with you.




You either
A. Give the company money for their product and work
B. Give the company nothing for their product and work


If they want to implement this feature and you don't like it, then just don't buy it

2/10/2012 6:21:58 PM

does it do 1080p?

I'm Krallum and I approved this message.

2/10/2012 6:26:11 PM

Hell, a number of software companies, EA for one, already do that with their "online pass" bullshit. For those games, the original buyer has a code which they enter to "access" online play. Every subsequent user needs to buy another code for $5.

2/10/2012 6:29:40 PM

Quote :

"a car company does not keep your car running for free after you buy it. you pay them to fix it. you pay the state taxes on gas to keep the roads running."

Sure they do, its called a fucking warranty.

^I think it's $10. Or at least it is for Battlefield 3

[Edited on February 10, 2012 at 6:32 PM. Reason : .]

2/10/2012 6:30:46 PM

if you buy it new, yes. the point of used cars was brought up, which that was in reference to.

2/10/2012 6:32:14 PM

You don't think people consider the second hand market when they buy a game? For a lot of people the $60 cost of a game isn't that bad when you know you can recoup some portion of that buy trading it in or selling it. If you eliminate that market, and that's what this would do, you will see a decrease in your sales.

Look, I'm pretty much completely free market, they can do what they want, but there will be consequences to this kind of business model, mostly negative IMO. You don't shit all over secondary consumers if you ever want them to buy something new from you. A lot of people don't discover a franchise until they've played one of the older ones, and that usually happens when they buy it used.

Quote :

"Hell, a number of software companies, EA for one, already do that with their "online pass" bullshit. For those games, the original buyer has a code which they enter to "access" online play. Every subsequent user needs to buy another code for $5."

And I'm fine with that. If people don't want to buy it they won't. I just don't like the idea of console manufacturers and software developers colluding to destroy the used game market.

[Edited on February 10, 2012 at 6:37 PM. Reason : asdfs]

2/10/2012 6:33:24 PM

^^Tons and tons of used cars are sold with it still under warranty.


This fuckup would be a long the lines of the Netflix fiasco from this summer. Even if they were to do it, it more than likely wouldn't last for long.

[Edited on February 10, 2012 at 6:35 PM. Reason : .]

2/10/2012 6:34:27 PM

the major backlash will be against the used game market. EA, Sony, Microsoft, etc could give two shits about GameStop's business

[Edited on February 10, 2012 at 6:40 PM. Reason : .,]

2/10/2012 6:37:21 PM

Ruh roh, gamestop sells a shit ton of new games too. Think they'd continue to do that if their vendors shit all over them?

Unintended consequences man, if you shift your business model to a point where you are forced to sell exclusively through big box retailers or online there are potential downsides to that too, like walmart deciding what is and is not suitable content for gaming, etc.

2/10/2012 6:40:32 PM

It probably doesn't matter all that much in the long term, it's only a matter of time before all content is downloaded and you don't even buy a physical game from a store anyway. I personally think a video game store is a pretty unsustainable business model anyway.

2/10/2012 6:43:14 PM

again, pubs and devs don't give a shit if gamestop survives or not. games were bought long before that company existed and have seen the rise and fall of plenty of other game retailers. if gamestop is a non-sustainable business without their pure profit used game sales, that's their shitty business model's problem.

and amusing you would talk of consequences. what about the consequence of devs not getting paid for their product? they need cash flow to make games in the future. every used game sold with no money going to the creators of the product is less dollars that goes to paying for future game development

[Edited on February 10, 2012 at 6:50 PM. Reason : .]

2/10/2012 6:45:11 PM

Note: I only read the first post and none of the replies, so it's probably already been addressed, but I wanted to point out that when the PS3 was being developed, the exact same rumor kept popping up.

I'm not saying this means it will, or it won't happen to a future console, but just take everything you read with a grain of salt. A lot of times big companies will float things like this across rumor sites and see what the reaction is. I would be surprised (but not completely shocked) if this actually does end up happening.

2/10/2012 6:49:10 PM

I cant imagine any publisher giving two flying fucks about gamestop.

2/10/2012 6:51:53 PM

I couldn't really care less about this. I buy games so rarely that I usually just get them new anyways.

2/10/2012 7:01:42 PM

I haven't bought a game console since the original PS2, and I haven't bought a new video game since Madde 2005.

2/10/2012 7:06:54 PM

holy shit is there a guy here actually arguing that he wants to spend more money on things rather than less?

2/10/2012 7:09:00 PM

If they're basically banning you from selling the game, then it becomes a service rather than a good. You're buying the right to play the game as long as you like, an infinite rental. But a good, with notable exceptions like condoms and toilet paper, can be bought, used for a variable duration, and then sold to someone else. You don't own the game, because if you own something, you can sell it. Now, they're not technically banning you from selling the game, but since it becomes worthless to anyone else, they kinda are.

If this comes to pass (which I doubt), they're sabotaging their consumer base on two levels. One, they flush out all the poor kids who don't have sixty bucks in their pocket. They can't afford the new games and any used ones don't work. They're basically fucked. The kids with bigger wallets can still buy all their fresh brand spanking new games hot off the shelf. But when they inevitably tire of them, they stain your living room as neon green eyesores. So the thirty dollars Gamefly was going to give you (before, of course, they resold it for $55) for your week old copy of Arkham City goes away. Then someone else buys that used copy and subsequently beats it and sells it again. It was a perfectly functional food chain of incrementally disparaging income, where even the Kenny McCormicks of their world finally got their shots.

I actually almost want it to happen, just to see the ensuing trainwreck. People love secondhand shit. What the fuck are craigslist and eBay?

2/10/2012 7:09:35 PM

I think it's a really bad idea. I exclusively buy used games, I wait patiently for the reduced price and that was the penalty for not buying new. I cringe every time I have to buy an online pass, but I still do if the used price plus online pass is less than a new copy, it's my decision as a consumer.

What Xbox is doing (if this pans out to be true) is making people decide if they are going to eat the extra cost associated with a used game or if they are not going to pay more for used games and go elsewhere. The bad idea is you are creating a decision point for the consumer, and the consumers are deciding if they want to spend more money or not in a bad economy. It's the consumers decision, but why create another decision point with a negative outcome for yourself?

If I have to pay the ea online pass and a Xbox used game fee I am 100% out.

To sum it up, used game price + fees < new game then it's a deal. The only individual factor is the value of having it now vs later.

[Edited on February 10, 2012 at 7:59 PM. Reason : .]

2/10/2012 7:54:01 PM

2/10/2012 8:08:41 PM

consumers want to be able to have used games

publishers and developers want only new games

who do you think will win?

Everyone is going to bitch and moan about how horrible it is, and yet they will be there on day 1 lined up to buy a new console.

The consoles after next generation will be all digital download anyway, which means you won't even have an actual blu-ray in your hands. You definitely won't be able to "sell" a digital version of a game to someone used.

2/10/2012 8:32:39 PM

Maybe they could have a one-time fee for play a set number of games so the publishers can get a cut - make package deal something like you $40 to play up to 10 used game. This is not so bad but its not gonna set that well either.

2/10/2012 9:19:30 PM

I imagine this would be done through the use of a one-time use code that is inside the game case. Similar to how a brand new Mass Effect (2?) has that free addon for actually downloading content, whereas normally its 1200 MP. It would be very hard to trust any used game that you bought, since you don't know if that code was used, how many uses it has left...etc

2/10/2012 9:35:29 PM

If they did this, I'm done with console gaming.

2/10/2012 9:43:05 PM

2/10/2012 9:48:27 PM

^^^ I am saying you buy code from MS before hand (if you anticipate playing used games) and when you put in a game that you do not have any saved data for and they prompt for a code from the box of the game or use one of uses of code. I also think they should reduce the price of games to $50 (which will never happen), or sell a digital copies for $40 (which also never happen) - this is essentially what they do on Steam except you pay full price for the game and you OWN it for life.

[Edited on February 10, 2012 at 9:50 PM. Reason : /]

2/10/2012 9:50:29 PM

Isn't this kind of like what happens if you buy a computer game on steam? I haven't used it in a long time so correct me if I am wrong but you can't sell those games can you?

2/10/2012 10:55:42 PM

Sorta but you can't a buy to a code to play used games. Your game is tied to your Steam account permanently, no fee can make the game transferable - its just is not transferable under any circumstance.

2/10/2012 11:02:06 PM

Quote :

"It probably doesn't matter all that much in the long term, it's only a matter of time before all content is downloaded and you don't even buy a physical game from a store anyway. I personally think a video game store is a pretty unsustainable business model anyway."

I would honestly be surprised if the next gen consoles aren't the last ones to employ discs. I expect everything to go the way of DLC once the HD markets stabilize again.

[Edited on February 10, 2012 at 11:07 PM. Reason : ]

2/10/2012 11:06:08 PM

I think this is a terrible idea, but I can see why they're doing it. This generation of console games were incredibly expensive to make. They have 100s of people working on these big name games for years at a time. I can only imagine how big the teams for the next gen will be.

The workaround to this is to buy games new but only after the price has dropped. Not ideal, but it's an idea. Batman: AC was going for like $35 on Black Friday (a month after it came out) IIRC.

2/10/2012 11:06:51 PM

Quote :

"every used game sold with no money going to the creators of the product is less dollars that goes to paying for future game development"

no, because the developers got their money from the original buyer. this is just a way for them to be greedy and basically sell the same game twice.

2/10/2012 11:09:43 PM

Now now, the real issue is that they believe a used game sell SHOULD generate a brand new copy sell instead.

2/10/2012 11:23:01 PM

Quote :

"they believe a used game sell SHOULD generate a brand new copy sell instead."

SALE. The noun form of the word is sale. You generate a SALE.

Fuck.

2/10/2012 11:25:14 PM

There's nothing on a hardware scale that would enable this in a way that isn't already possible with games on the Xbox 360. You can bitch about it all you want, but AAA publisher feel they're entitled to the full price from everybody who plays their games, and they'll find a way to get it.

tl;dr deal with it dot gif

2/10/2012 11:59:33 PM

Quote :

"no, because the developers got their money from the original buyer. this is just a way for them to be greedy and basically sell the same game twice."

Or two people have got to play the game and theyve been paid once

2/11/2012 12:27:01 AM

I think Hasbro should confiscate every monopoly board game someone tries to give or sell to someone else.

2/11/2012 12:43:25 AM