Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th Mar 2012 22:29 UTC
Games The rumour mill for the next generation of video game consoles has been churning out some juicy stuff these past few months. While Nintendo has laid most of its cards out on the table, Microsoft and Sony have remained tight-lipped, probably because their consoles are still seeing increased sales. So, we have to rely on rumours, and those rumours have one thing in common: Microsoft and Sony want to eliminate the used games market.
Thread beginning with comment 512194
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
The year of Open Source? or just PC
by Darkmage on Wed 28th Mar 2012 22:35 UTC
Darkmage
Member since:
2006-10-20

Any attempts to kill second hand gaming are going to meet fierce resistance, and mass piracy. Most games don't justify the $99 price tag and most gamers are not willing to fork out the thousands of dollars needed to keep a brand new game habit going. Second hand gaming drives most of those platforms. Without it the next console generations are going to die.

I see a huge opportunity here for the indie/open source developers to step up.

Edited 2012-03-28 22:36 UTC

Reply Score: 6

Dr.Mabuse Member since:
2009-05-19

I see a huge opportunity here for the indie/open source developers to step up.


It certainly is, and there are already some great titles out there.

As people who know me will testify, I'm a huge fan of Urban Terror. IMHO, this game ticks ALL the right check boxes for a multi-player FPS... I've played it for YEARS, and it's completely free to download and play!

What commercial title can compare for that sort of long-term satisfaction? WoW perhaps? (Not my thing, but it seems popular.)

So as far as I'm concerned, if they kill the used game market they are only going to hurt themselves - it might just turn people off buying completely (as you say.)

I think a lot of people are struggling with the concept of paying top dollar for the same repackaged titles over and over again.

Reply Parent Score: 4

bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

Actually I'd say Urban terror is exactly what is WRONG with indie games and here is why: What is it? yet another Q3 Arena clone. Now compare it to MW3 or Call Of Duty or even Far Cry I from 2003...see the difference?

The problem with indie games in a nutshell is unless its a little popcap or humble bundle style game what you end up with is "itch scratching" and ripping off the same old tired ideas over and over and OVER because its easy. its simply easier to just make another Q3 Arena clone that it is to make a game with good story, excellent characters, decent acting, etc. the simple fact is there is a VERY small niche for the whole "chicken with its head cut off" throwing crap at each other MP only game and most of those players are in the latest Call of Dooky MP or playing TF2 for free.

So while I wish the indies nothing but luck ripping off Q3 Arena AGAIN simply isn't gonna set the world on fire, nobody is gonna go "Oh but YOUR ripoff of Q3 Arena is just so much more special than the 40 other Q3 Arena ripoffs" and suddenly make it take off. Do something different, something new, hell make it funny like No One Lives forever or crazy like Postal II, SOMETHING besides yet another MP only Q3 Arena clone.

Reply Parent Score: 3

sgtrock Member since:
2011-05-13

While I concede that most commercial games don't have legs, I can think of three answers to your question about commercial games with long term playability; Counter-Strike, Team Fortess, and Day of Defeat.

It's interesting, isn't it, that all three started as free, player developed mods? It's almost as if players actually design games that are, you know, fun to play! :-)

Edited 2012-03-29 14:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

It certainly is, and there are already some great titles out there.


As I wrote on my Google+ page a few days ago, all I'm seeing is very much simpified rehashes of some old game, completely relying on one or two silly gimmicks like e.g. "let's make it look like it's 8-bit, ZOMGSOCOOL!"

Or, they rely on it being multiplayer being enough of a reason for people to play it.

Sure, there is an audience for stuff like that, too, and I'm not saying there's anything wrong with aiming for such an audience. However, people like me want more, I want visually pleasing graphics, I want an interesting single-player story -- even better if the story can be completed in co-op! --, I want it to be involved enough so that you can't just pick it up for 5 minutes and go do something else after that.

I do not want or need yet-another-brainless-multiplayer and I do not want or need stupid, gimmicky tricks like pixelized graphics. As such there's EXTREMELY little of anything worth mentioning on either the F/OSS- or Indie-games scene.

Reply Parent Score: 2

deathshadow Member since:
2005-07-12

You said exactly what I was thinking - Much like crappy DRM that makes you HAVE to crack games you legitimately bought on PC -- the "penalize buying used" is more likely to cause piracy than prevent it.

Though at least on PC there's an outlet for the game makers to see a profit on their old properties; I don't go to the used bin anymore; I don't go to gamestop anymore...

Why? GoG! I mean, when Witcher 2 is up on GoG already -- how long before other titles follow suit? Rather than losing sales from the used bin, maybe they should sell them at *SHOCK* prices people are willing to pay after a year. Then they'll find people like me actually willing to pay money for their releases.

It really does come down to treating legitimate owners as if they are criminals... That's DRM in a nutshell particularly for games, given that how many games copy protection have gone unbroken? Oh wait, NONE. Penalizing the legitimate owners using something the majority of people running cracked copies will never have to deal with... Great plan guys!

Reply Parent Score: 4

_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

Why? GoG! I mean, when Witcher 2 is up on GoG already


The witcher has the same developer/publisher as GoG so there isn't any suprise that it is there...

Between GoG and Steam the PC is well covered. However...

I don't have a gaming pc and I can no longer justify the cost of one (I also like some of the console exclusive games), so I'm stuck with consoles

Reply Parent Score: 2

bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

Dude, tried Redneck Rampage or Blood on GOG yet? If not you SO have to get them, they are fricking great! RR has you attacking trailer parks with titty guns (Yes you read that right, they have a titty gun) and dynamite to Mojo Nixon while eating moon pies and drinking beer for health, while Blood shamelessly rips off every horror cliche there is and one of the first levels is the cemetery from Phantasm!

I agree though that between Steam and GOG we PC gamers never had it so good, tons of games, all cheap and easy as "push button to get game". I mean why would I care if I can't sell a game if it only cost me $3? I don't because at that price it wouldn't be worth selling anyway, doesn't make the games less fun though.

Reply Parent Score: 1

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Any attempts to kill second hand gaming are going to meet fierce resistance, and mass piracy.


LOL, you're kidding right? One thing about gamers is that they will scream, bitch, cry, and moan, but then they'll be there on launch day for the latest military shooter of the month, to take it up the ass, just like they always do. Why? Because gamers are lamers. You guys should carry a jar of Vaseline when you go to pick up your pre-ordered copy of Call of Duty 27. Then, maybe the pounding won't hurt so bad.

You mention $60 for new games, but more like $90 when you factor in all the DLC involved. Hell, some of these publishers aren't even hiding it anymore and just putting the DLC right on the disc (locked, of course). And why shouldn't they? I mean, if you're gonna f**k somebody, might as well be honest about it, right?

As for me, between Sony removing features of the PS3 and MS charging $60 to play online while showing ads on the dashboard, I sold all of my consoles, so I'm out. This generation was my last. The games are pretty horrible anyway now days.

Edited 2012-03-29 01:32 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

Darkmage Member since:
2006-10-20

Err.. wrong. I've bought over $1000+ of PS3 games from the UK, and Sony will not be receiving any more business if I can't keep getting cheap games. $99/title is not justified. Currently I have ~20TB of storage at home and 26 legitimate PS3 games. If they decide to screw me over I'll just have 20TB of storage full of pirate PS3 games. Considering that 20TB costs about the same as 26 ps3 games but it'll store more games and do other things. They might want to be careful with what they do to their customers. Assuming the console makers will build walled content gardens, ditch hardcore and make tons of cash is also assuming Apple don't launch a better product later this year with iTunes store integration completely smashing their plans to bits.

Edited 2012-03-29 04:05 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

morglum666 Member since:
2005-07-06

As a gamer I want to desperately disagree. I'd like to tell you that COD 124 will not sell $200 million on launch day. It will. People are sheep.

We will also probably be paying for games in installment plans as DLC has gone from every few games to every single games. I believe one of the dragon age games had content that you had to "unlock" with paid DLC. How crazy is that?

If they remove the used games market my strategy is two fold:

* Buy all the games I want to play on the console I own (xbox 360) from gamestop, etc
* Based on the user account model - Unless the games come heavily discounted (ala steam) I'm not going to be buying them. I'd rather not pirate but not every $60 game (to start) is worth $60.
* I might also just switch to PC where there is more freedom.



Morglum

Reply Parent Score: 3

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

LOL, you're kidding right? One thing about gamers is that they will scream, bitch, cry, and moan, but then they'll be there on launch day for the latest military shooter of the month


I guess I'm not a gamer then, even though I've always imagined myself as one o_O I've never enjoyed military shooters, and I almost never buy anything on launch day because I can just wait 2-3 months and get it 50-70 percent off on Steam sale.


to take it up the ass, just like they always do.


Yes, and I actually quite enjoy it.

Why? Because gamers are lamers.


Hey, you've got something in common, then! Congratulations, mate!! ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

modmans2ndcoming Member since:
2005-11-09

not really....Indie makers wants access to users... a, electronic game market gives much higher volume....Just look at Steam.

Reply Parent Score: 1

MollyC Member since:
2006-07-04

The Android version of iFishing has a piracy rate of 98%.
http://mobilitydigest.com/ifishing-for-android-has-a-staggering-98-...

So you'll have to spare me the "massive piracy" threats, since pirates have zero scruples anyway. Android is as open as you can get, and iFishing only costs $3, yet that doesn't soften the hearts of the pirates as they still pirate iFishing like there's no tomorrow. The notion that piracy will increase due to "bad" behavior of Sony or Microsoft higher than it would've been anyway is laughable.

Pirates pirate not out of any altruistic motive or idealism, they pirate because they have zero respect for the hard work that creators put into the creation of their products. It makes absolutely no difference whether the creators appease them or not, pirates don't give a damn.

Tell me, what "bad" behavior did Rocking Pocket (the developer of iFishing) due to deserve a 98% piracy rate? What, is 3 dollars so burdensome that people just couldn't afford it, so had to resort to piracy? What, does Android's ability to side load apps have too many barriers (it has none), that people decided to "stick it to the man" by resorting to piracy, in order to teach Rocking Pocket and/or Google a lesson? Please...

Note that the iPhone and Windows Phone versions of iFishing have a much lower piracy rate. Why? Because those phones have the "closed garden" model, which is an inherent barrier against piracy. Google exhibits "good" behavior by allowing free side loading of apps, and the pirates rewarded Google by pirating the Android version of iFishing at a 98% rate. So much for appeasing pirates.

"If they just make the price of the game/software low enough and make the system 'open' enough, then folks wouldn't pirate!" Yeah, right. lol

Note: The above takes no position regarding "used games". I think folks should be able to buy used games and rent games. But I don't think a massive increase in piracy would result if such were blocked. Even if it did, game developers wouldn't care, since the increase in piracy would've been rentals or used game purchases anyway, which game devs see zero money from. Game devs think they'd see more revenue from blocking "used games" and rentals than from not, even is there were an increase in piracy as a result.

Edited 2012-03-29 09:11 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

Darkmage Member since:
2006-10-20

The point is, I am a legitimate paying customer, who has not resorted to pirating any console games, but if the prices rise, I will consider pirating consoles much more seriously. What you want to argue about threats etc is irrelevant. I am sharing my personal experience with these consoles.

Currently I consider what I have with sony to be a good deal, and I am happy to pay for their products. However should that change then I would stop paying for their products. I am sure there are many others out there who will share that view with me. People pirate things for many reasons. Some do it to save money, some do it out of principle. It really varies. I stopped using Microsoft purely because they stopped supporting hardware products I bought within a year of my purchasing them. People will get mad about the lack of a second hand games market and increased prices WILL drive more people into piracy.

Edited 2012-03-29 09:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

bjb1959 Member since:
2012-03-29

you don't even know how misguided your comments are. The real question is do we continue to allow entertainment companies to "sell" us stuff that they think we don't actually own but are just paying a fee to use. Let me give you a simpler example. Imagine not being able to buy a used chevy from your neighbor or a local dealer because the manufacturer didn't make any money from that sale. or if you do buy a used one, you can't start it until you pay Chevy more money or, preferably, just buy a new one from them. Same for your house, can't buy a used one cause the home builder won't make more money from the sale etc.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

The Android version of iFishing has a piracy rate of 98%.
http://mobilitydigest.com/ifishing-for-android-has-a-staggering-98-...

That's extreme, however is there any information out there other than this tidbit with a miniscule chat screenshot, no links, no nothing? I checked on rocking pocketgames blog and there was no mention of this which I found weird, also I was very curious on how they came up with this piracy rate.

Reply Parent Score: 2