Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: Sony files patent to prevent used game sales
  • Subject: Sony files patent to prevent used game sales
Subject: Sony files patent to prevent used game sales

Posted by: x Foman123 x
Posted by: CIint Beastwood
That's total bull-blam!- though. No other industry actively tries to prevent second-hand sales, since that's infringing on the consumer's rights.
Can you tell me where I can resell an e-book? Or a song I downloaded from iTunes? Or an app for my mobile phone? How about that movie or TV show I downloaded to my tablet? How about every single event ticket, club membership, loyalty program membership, and association membership I've ever had that said "non-transferable" as part of the terms when I bought it?

Don't be ridiculous. Resale is prevented all the time, and the vast majority of the time people understand why and don't care. Nobody said a word when ebooks and apps were made so that they could not be resold. It's only here in gaming that some people act like it's such a big fat deal.

Apart from the tickets all of those are digital. This game disc thing is about physical copies of games that can no longer be resold or even lent to anyone. That might not be unheard of, but it's an unsettling trend in an industry that was pretty much invented around sharing (arcades). Game rental services, like Gamefly, and second-hand retailers, like GameStop are also huge.

While games can be easily likened to digital downloads I think they're more akin to cars. It's as if Sony is trying to cut out used car dealerships from the equation. That would make many people angry and might even hurt business by preventing trade-ins at stores like GameStop.

  • 01.03.2013 12:25 PM PDT


Posted by: Android Spartan

Posted by: x Foman123 x
Posted by: CIint Beastwood
That's total bull-blam!- though. No other industry actively tries to prevent second-hand sales, since that's infringing on the consumer's rights.
Can you tell me where I can resell an e-book? Or a song I downloaded from iTunes? Or an app for my mobile phone? How about that movie or TV show I downloaded to my tablet? How about every single event ticket, club membership, loyalty program membership, and association membership I've ever had that said "non-transferable" as part of the terms when I bought it?

Don't be ridiculous. Resale is prevented all the time, and the vast majority of the time people understand why and don't care. Nobody said a word when ebooks and apps were made so that they could not be resold. It's only here in gaming that some people act like it's such a big fat deal.
Yea because you can't plug in different Ipods and Kindles to transfer over those e-books and songs that you or your mate bought and is now in the hands of many others for free.

That season ticket/membership can be passed onto others for use and potentially keep. You never got a ticket and found out you can't go somewhere so you give it to somebody for a similar or less price than what you got?

It's a common thing...Oh and how many times have I seen concert tickets on ebay.

People are always giving things to each other it's called reality.

For example my mum has given somebody her membership card for a warehouse so the guy can go and look around a buy something if he wanted. Afterwards if he liked it he can get his own.

So in your own words "Don't be ridiculous".

Memberships can be passed on, but they usually require your credit information. So people wouldn't usually sell a membership to someone.

  • 01.03.2013 12:26 PM PDT

Though the morrow may be barren of promises, nothing shall forstall my return.


Posted by: x Foman123 x
Posted by: CIint Beastwood
That's total bull-blam!- though. No other industry actively tries to prevent second-hand sales, since that's infringing on the consumer's rights.
Can you tell me where I can resell an e-book? Or a song I downloaded from iTunes? Or an app for my mobile phone? How about that movie or TV show I downloaded to my tablet? How about every single event ticket, club membership, loyalty program membership, and association membership I've ever had that said "non-transferable" as part of the terms when I bought it?

Don't be ridiculous. Resale is prevented all the time, and the vast majority of the time people understand why and don't care. Nobody said a word when ebooks and apps were made so that they could not be resold. It's only here in gaming that some people act like it's such a big fat deal.


While you do make a sensible point, don't forget there is normally quite a difference in price margin between a new video game and most of those things you listed (event tickets however are quite a bit more). In this economy (and yes I have to throw this out there) $60 is still quite a bit for a game. If you can only play it on one system, then I hope either the price drops, or the consoles get a bit easier to transport. If my system breaks, and we all know that can be a possibility, my whole library of games will need to be purchased again. Or at least the ones I enjoy.

  • 01.03.2013 12:27 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: johnny106

Posted by: Android Spartan

Posted by: johnny106
Than explain day one DLC and planned DLC packages that could be incorporated into the actual game. They deliberately milk every penny out of their customers and that behavior should not be rewarded. It's inexcusable and to try and give them a cop out like "It's because gamers are aggravated" is ridiculous. While I know some are over the top it doesn't mean their complaints are unfounded and are justification for more ways to restrict the use of something that was purchased.
Day one DLC has been explained already. A developer must get a "green" light for their game before it can be shipped and released. This takes some time and is not instant. So instead of waiting in their office, the developers create some new content that users can purchase if they want. DLC is never necessary. Also just a few bucks shouldn't be something to have a heart attack over.
From ashes DLC was left out intentionally, the character was an important one for ME3 and the story.

There is no excuse there but to get cash out of our pockets, also don't forget all ME3 DLC is free from multiplayer, we only pay for single player.

Can't be that difficult.

From Ashes didn't really impact the story. Imagine if it were never made story would've played the same way. Now if it made a giant change in story then that's different, but all it did was add a lore character to learn more about the protheans. Could say the same about omega or leviathan dlc.
The point is they knew people would want it and made him a very big part in the game and made him day 1 DLC.

The other DLC you mentioned was created many months after the game was released so that's no problem. Making an important story character Day 1 DLC is blatantly ripping off the loyal customers.

  • 01.03.2013 12:28 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: johnny106

Posted by: Android Spartan

Posted by: x Foman123 x
Posted by: CIint Beastwood
That's total bull-blam!- though. No other industry actively tries to prevent second-hand sales, since that's infringing on the consumer's rights.
Can you tell me where I can resell an e-book? Or a song I downloaded from iTunes? Or an app for my mobile phone? How about that movie or TV show I downloaded to my tablet? How about every single event ticket, club membership, loyalty program membership, and association membership I've ever had that said "non-transferable" as part of the terms when I bought it?

Don't be ridiculous. Resale is prevented all the time, and the vast majority of the time people understand why and don't care. Nobody said a word when ebooks and apps were made so that they could not be resold. It's only here in gaming that some people act like it's such a big fat deal.
Yea because you can't plug in different Ipods and Kindles to transfer over those e-books and songs that you or your mate bought and is now in the hands of many others for free.

That season ticket/membership can be passed onto others for use and potentially keep. You never got a ticket and found out you can't go somewhere so you give it to somebody for a similar or less price than what you got?

It's a common thing...Oh and how many times have I seen concert tickets on ebay.

People are always giving things to each other it's called reality.

For example my mum has given somebody her membership card for a warehouse so the guy can go and look around a buy something if he wanted. Afterwards if he liked it he can get his own.

So in your own words "Don't be ridiculous".

Memberships can be passed on, but they usually require your credit information. So people wouldn't usually sell a membership to someone.
Since when did they need credit information??

Then again it depends on where your a member I suppose but still I have had season tickets for a rugby game given to me or other people if somebody can't go the match.

I have given people games and had games given to me, me and my brother both have xbox's and according to this 2nd hand gaming block we need 2 copies of the same game in 1 house if we wanted to play the games.

That means spending £80 instead of £40.

It may not be a problem for single kids or 1 gamer in a house hold but when you have a few it gets bloody expensive.

  • 01.03.2013 12:31 PM PDT

Studies show that men think about sex every 7 seconds. I do my best to eat hotdogs in under 6, just so things don't get weird.

Please allow me to introduce Myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
I've been around for a long, long year
Stole many a man's soul and faith

This pretty much sums up how I see the pro-2nd hand game argument as presented in this thread

  • 01.03.2013 12:38 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

So do all who live to see such times, but that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us.

-Gandalf

Posted by: brandorobot
If this happens I might just have to go exclusively to PC.

  • 01.03.2013 12:39 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie
This pretty much sums up how I see the pro-2nd hand game argument as presented in this thread
No you just want as many kids offline as possible, which could happen if games are to expensive for the adults to buy.

I don't want to pay £80 just so me an my brother can play on the same game on different consoles at different times.

I take it your the only gamer in your house so quite frankly you don't give a dam about anybody but yourself when it comes to this.

Stop being selfish and think about how this would effect more than just yourself. Just think more expensive games means less people buying = less money overall.

Great idea considering the whole idea is to get money from consumers, hell it could kill off the console's if it went bad enough.

  • 01.03.2013 12:42 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: brandorobot
If this happens I might just have to go exclusively to PC.

  • 01.03.2013 12:43 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Oh Yes!

This probably means more business for the next-gen Xbox, and the WII U.

And the PC.

[Edited on 01.03.2013 12:47 PM PST]

  • 01.03.2013 12:46 PM PDT

Studies show that men think about sex every 7 seconds. I do my best to eat hotdogs in under 6, just so things don't get weird.

Please allow me to introduce Myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
I've been around for a long, long year
Stole many a man's soul and faith


Posted by: Android Spartan

Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie
This pretty much sums up how I see the pro-2nd hand game argument as presented in this thread
No you just want as many kids offline as possible, which could happen if games are to expensive for the adults to buy.

I don't want to pay £80 just so me an my brother can play on the same game on different consoles at different times.

I take it your the only gamer in your house so quite frankly you don't give a dam about anybody but yourself when it comes to this.

Stop being selfish and think about how this would effect more than just yourself. Just think more expensive games means less people buying = less money overall.

Great idea considering the whole idea is to get money from consumers, hell it could kill off the console's if it went bad enough.


I am thinking beyond myself.

I am one of the few who are considering the developers and publishers. Take a look at activision's or EA's books. They both are public, you should be able to find them in the Investor Relations page on their sites.

Both companies are barely profitable, and they lurch from one crisis to the next. There are several problems, one of which is the second hand game market. Game Stop and its ilk do not give any of the proceeds from the sale of 2nd hand games to the devs. They buy it from you at $10, and sell it at $45. And they reap all the reward for that.

It isn't right. Dev's would be able to make better games with a larger budget. They could afford to lower the initial price too.

This isn't rocket science.

  • 01.03.2013 12:47 PM PDT

Posted by: jjboy84

Posted by: ST0NE COLD
Posted by: What is thiss
why a murder train?Well, The Blues revolve around trains, and I'm trying to be Blues-y about it.
I think a t-rex sounds better, I mean Murder T-rex. just think about it.
This made my day.

I see nothing wrong with this.

It just means that the developers will get more money.

  • 01.03.2013 12:48 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie

Posted by: Android Spartan

Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie
This pretty much sums up how I see the pro-2nd hand game argument as presented in this thread
No you just want as many kids offline as possible, which could happen if games are to expensive for the adults to buy.

I don't want to pay £80 just so me an my brother can play on the same game on different consoles at different times.

I take it your the only gamer in your house so quite frankly you don't give a dam about anybody but yourself when it comes to this.

Stop being selfish and think about how this would effect more than just yourself. Just think more expensive games means less people buying = less money overall.

Great idea considering the whole idea is to get money from consumers, hell it could kill off the console's if it went bad enough.


I am thinking beyond myself.

I am one of the few who are considering the developers and publishers. Take a look at activision's or EA's books. They both are public, you should be able to find them in the Investor Relations page on their sites.

Both companies are barely profitable, and they lurch from one crisis to the next. There are several problems, one of which is the second hand game market. Game Stop and its ilk do not give any of the proceeds from the sale of 2nd hand games to the devs. They buy it from you at $10, and sell it at $45. And they reap all the reward for that.

It isn't right. Dev's would be able to make better games with a larger budget. They could afford to lower the initial price too.

This isn't rocket science.
Well don't hit the consumers get the profits off the shops instead of making us fill the hole.

Gaming is an expensive hobby already we don't need to pay more because of gamestop.

  • 01.03.2013 12:50 PM PDT

In memory of those fallen in the defense of Earth and her colonies.

March 3, 2553


Posted by: Not The Joker
So dumb if true.

  • 01.03.2013 12:52 PM PDT

Studies show that men think about sex every 7 seconds. I do my best to eat hotdogs in under 6, just so things don't get weird.

Please allow me to introduce Myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
I've been around for a long, long year
Stole many a man's soul and faith


Posted by: Android Spartan

Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie

Posted by: Android Spartan

Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie
This pretty much sums up how I see the pro-2nd hand game argument as presented in this thread
No you just want as many kids offline as possible, which could happen if games are to expensive for the adults to buy.

I don't want to pay £80 just so me an my brother can play on the same game on different consoles at different times.

I take it your the only gamer in your house so quite frankly you don't give a dam about anybody but yourself when it comes to this.

Stop being selfish and think about how this would effect more than just yourself. Just think more expensive games means less people buying = less money overall.

Great idea considering the whole idea is to get money from consumers, hell it could kill off the console's if it went bad enough.


I am thinking beyond myself.

I am one of the few who are considering the developers and publishers. Take a look at activision's or EA's books. They both are public, you should be able to find them in the Investor Relations page on their sites.

Both companies are barely profitable, and they lurch from one crisis to the next. There are several problems, one of which is the second hand game market. Game Stop and its ilk do not give any of the proceeds from the sale of 2nd hand games to the devs. They buy it from you at $10, and sell it at $45. And they reap all the reward for that.

It isn't right. Dev's would be able to make better games with a larger budget. They could afford to lower the initial price too.

This isn't rocket science.
Well don't hit the consumers get the profits off the shops instead of making us fill the hole.

Gaming is an expensive hobby already we don't need to pay more because of gamestop.
That's just it. You ARE paying more because of Game Stop.

Why do you think the price is $60 for a new game? Lost profits from resale are factored into the Cost of Goods Sold.

Furthermore, why is paying $30 for a game that Game Stop paid $5 acceptable? They mark their product up 600% and you don't complain. They are ripping you AND the developers off.

And you defend them?

  • 01.03.2013 12:55 PM PDT

Life?
I have the internet and Doctor Who; i don't need a life.

Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie
I am thinking beyond myself.

I am one of the few who are considering the developers and publishers. Take a look at activision's or EA's books. They both are public, you should be able to find them in the Investor Relations page on their sites.

Both companies are barely profitable, and they lurch from one crisis to the next. There are several problems, one of which is the second hand game market. Game Stop and its ilk do not give any of the proceeds from the sale of 2nd hand games to the devs. They buy it from you at $10, and sell it at $45. And they reap all the reward for that.

It isn't right. Dev's would be able to make better games with a larger budget. They could afford to lower the initial price too.

This isn't rocket science.
but that's implying that the people who buy at second-hand price would buy the same game at full price; i just don't see how you'd think that would happen.
if they were gonna buy the game at full-price then they would have done that; making them pay more will just stop them buying it altogether, then you haven't gained anything and only lost possible future sales.

  • 01.03.2013 12:56 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Should car companies also prevent people from buying used cars?

  • 01.03.2013 12:57 PM PDT

Studies show that men think about sex every 7 seconds. I do my best to eat hotdogs in under 6, just so things don't get weird.

Please allow me to introduce Myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
I've been around for a long, long year
Stole many a man's soul and faith


Posted by: CultMiester4000
Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie
I am thinking beyond myself.

I am one of the few who are considering the developers and publishers. Take a look at activision's or EA's books. They both are public, you should be able to find them in the Investor Relations page on their sites.

Both companies are barely profitable, and they lurch from one crisis to the next. There are several problems, one of which is the second hand game market. Game Stop and its ilk do not give any of the proceeds from the sale of 2nd hand games to the devs. They buy it from you at $10, and sell it at $45. And they reap all the reward for that.

It isn't right. Dev's would be able to make better games with a larger budget. They could afford to lower the initial price too.

This isn't rocket science.
but that's implying that the people who buy at second-hand price would buy the same game at full price; i just don't see how you'd think that would happen.
if they were gonna buy the game at full-price then they would have done that; making them pay more will just stop them buying it altogether, then you haven't gained anything and only lost possible future sales.


Dev's don't always charge full price... I thought you knew that when all of you were dancing on Halo 4's grave when they dropped the price to $40.

AT a normal retailer, say Target, Best Buy or Walmart, the dev see's something from each of those sales. Even when they are the $20 old games. When Game Stop sells a used game 2 weeks after launch for $50 instead of $60, the dev's see none of that sale. 100% of it goes to Game Stop.

  • 01.03.2013 1:01 PM PDT


Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie

Posted by: Android Spartan

Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie

Posted by: Android Spartan

Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie
This pretty much sums up how I see the pro-2nd hand game argument as presented in this thread
No you just want as many kids offline as possible, which could happen if games are to expensive for the adults to buy.

I don't want to pay £80 just so me an my brother can play on the same game on different consoles at different times.

I take it your the only gamer in your house so quite frankly you don't give a dam about anybody but yourself when it comes to this.

Stop being selfish and think about how this would effect more than just yourself. Just think more expensive games means less people buying = less money overall.

Great idea considering the whole idea is to get money from consumers, hell it could kill off the console's if it went bad enough.


I am thinking beyond myself.

I am one of the few who are considering the developers and publishers. Take a look at activision's or EA's books. They both are public, you should be able to find them in the Investor Relations page on their sites.

Both companies are barely profitable, and they lurch from one crisis to the next. There are several problems, one of which is the second hand game market. Game Stop and its ilk do not give any of the proceeds from the sale of 2nd hand games to the devs. They buy it from you at $10, and sell it at $45. And they reap all the reward for that.

It isn't right. Dev's would be able to make better games with a larger budget. They could afford to lower the initial price too.

This isn't rocket science.
Well don't hit the consumers get the profits off the shops instead of making us fill the hole.

Gaming is an expensive hobby already we don't need to pay more because of gamestop.
That's just it. You ARE paying more because of Game Stop.

Why do you think the price is $60 for a new game? Lost profits from resale are factored into the Cost of Goods Sold.

Furthermore, why is paying $30 for a game that Game Stop paid $5 acceptable? They mark their product up 600% and you don't complain. They are ripping you AND the developers off.

And you defend them?


Not gonna defend GameStop as I'm not a big fan of em, but I will defend my right to do whatever the hell I want(within reason) with something I payed for. Also, I don't know how accurate this is but I figured I'd leave it here for people to read.

  • 01.03.2013 1:03 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

I am an orange mist amongst a sea of blue, so my flames may stand out and represent all those who trully believe in this great sacriment of Bungie history, let my story be told as the only legendary still standing even after I fall Just as my comrades did so graciously to fight for the true loyal.
If you have legendary, would you stand by my side and go forth into a sea blue and demise as my brothers fighting for those who are trully loyal to Bungie?

Lol bye bye gamestop and every other gaming store that exists. If they do this then I guarantee sales will go down instead of up.

  • 01.03.2013 1:04 PM PDT

Life?
I have the internet and Doctor Who; i don't need a life.

Posted by: MyNameIsCharlie

Posted by: CultMiester4000
but that's implying that the people who buy at second-hand price would buy the same game at full price; i just don't see how you'd think that would happen.
if they were gonna buy the game at full-price then they would have done that; making them pay more will just stop them buying it altogether, then you haven't gained anything and only lost possible future sales.


Dev's don't always charge full price... I thought you knew that when all of you were dancing on Halo 4's grave when they dropped the price to $40.

AT a normal retailer, say Target, Best Buy or Walmart, the dev see's something from each of those sales. Even when they are the $20 old games. When Game Stop sells a used game 2 weeks after launch for $50 instead of $60, the dev's see none of that sale. 100% of it goes to Game Stop.
i have never been to a Gamestop in my life; i am not defending them or their practices.

and the only games you'd be able to buy at a rate that would be worth the risk of not liking it and not being able to do anything with it after not liking it, would be so old that you'd have to wait months after the game came out to even try it. probably longer since they won't have to lower the price since they aren't competing with the used-game market anymore.

  • 01.03.2013 1:16 PM PDT

Team Unicorns all the way!


Posted by: Thrasher Fan
Posted by: AK 47625714

Posted by: MadMax888
Digital downloads is the way to go for future generations.
I hope that day never comes.

This. I'll always prefer a physical copy.

  • 01.03.2013 4:01 PM PDT

Soul of the mind, key to life's ether
Soul of the lost, withdrawn from its vessel
May strength be granted so the world might be mended...
So the world might be mended...

They also have a patent to have ads play during loading screens, they apparently tried it with a Wipeout game for a week before they took it down via backlash.

Just because they have a patent doesn't really mean anything.

EDIT: If, for some reason, they do actually make it so used games won't be playable, then it's a very very stupid move.

[Edited on 01.03.2013 4:08 PM PST]

  • 01.03.2013 4:05 PM PDT

**Devil's advocate of the Flood. My posts may or may not represent my personal opinion, I just enjoy disagreeing with people. None of my posts are representative of the official view of the Navy or any government agency.

Non Sibi Sed Patriae
Homework questions? Forget the Flood, join The Academy.
I've got a fan!

First Sale Doctrine. Read it, Sony.

  • 01.03.2013 4:08 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Methew
  • user homepage:

Posted by: theHurtfulTurkey
First Sale Doctrine. Read it, Sony.

This.

Pretty sure it'll get knocked down by the courts.

Remember: It's a patent only, there's nothing say that it's going to come to fruition.

Still siding with the developers and publishers though on the concept of used game sales.

[Edited on 01.03.2013 4:11 PM PST]

  • 01.03.2013 4:10 PM PDT