Sony files patent to stop second-hand game sales

[RaY_210]

You're describing your own experience and making it general while completely disregarding something factual. Word of mouth can work but experiencing it first hand draws a better picture. This is free marketing for game publishers and their future investments, not a way to stunt them. This move to further restrict gamers will put more video game studios out of business then this generation ever did.

Here is why: The common gamer will want to try a game that is hardly marketed so they don't want to risk heavy investment. What's the alternative?: Rental or purchase it used(You can get them from fifty percent off or more from online retailers). They try it out and depending on their experience, they might purchase the next game or heck, even become fans of the franchise. The same scenario works for lending your friends a game(s).

Now put restriction on your games and continue your Online Pass nonsense. The common consumer won't be able to lend their games to their buddies or family. They can't buy used either so what will they do?: Stick with what's well known for the sake of their wallets while the underdogs go out of business. Word of mouth doesn't always work and you can't seriously replicate that event you had with your friend with everyone.

The amount of apathy publishers and gamers alike are showing in this industry is concerning, like very. I'm quite surprised that they don't see how counter-productive this really is. Big publishers could come out okay but everyone else will just disintegrate.

This is the big problem/conundrum with the whole used game sales. You say people can buy used and get into the series in future games. That's great and all and could be true. But as you also say, big publishers should be fine regardless, because they have the big hits. The smaller publishers/developers also suffer now because a game may not sell well enough to warrant a sequel. As we go to the next generation, games are only going to get more expensive to develop, especially if Sony and MS make them as powerful as rumors are suggesting. So it's a sort of catch-22. Risk alienating consumers by trying to force them to buy new. Or allow used games sales to steal new sales. It'll be interesting to see if anything of this sort actually happens in the near future

[DeviousOne]

It will effect me I like to buy games used even tho I can financially afford to pay for new games I rather just save the 5 or 10 bucks and use it on more games or accessories. Also they offer better deals for used games like the buy 2 get one free at gamestop.

This is the second time this rumor is floating around I don't like what's going on around here lol

[Ixion]

If you read the link (although I'm one to talk, I just skimmed it ), it says you can share a password or something so that you can play it on other consoles. So you and your friend can still do this, its just a minor inconvenience for one of you.

Here's the paragraph that details the password:

As a technique to suppress the second-hand sales and purchase, a user may be first required to send a password or the like to a remote authentication server from a reproduction device (game player) via the Internet and the reproduction of content may be permitted only for the device that has succeeded in authentication. However, where the reproduction device is not connected to the Internet, use of the content cannot be controlled. Also, where the connection to the Internet is an absolute requirement, user's convenience may be significantly reduced. Besides, users may communicate to share the password between them and therefore the second-hand sales and purchase cannot be eliminated reliably.

It seems second-hand sales can still exist, but the need for a password just makes it less simple.

[Suzano-O]

And the award for being so fucking obvious goes to

*insert overreaction in the form of unfunny memepic*

When the hell did I say I or anyone else was untitled to try before they buy? I was listing it as an option that people have now.

I guess I wasn't being simple enough for you to understand...
I was only mentioning it to illustrate that not all game retailers even extend such a courtesy, and to no negative effect on gaming sales overall as far as I know...

Relax, child...

[D3seeker]

It's not enough to be implemented. They will want something that will totally be stop all, end all. It it however a shame to know it is something that's being worked on. The consoles may well com to an end if something like this ever gets implemented.

[mankind]

I guess I wasn't being simple enough for you to understand...
I was only mentioning it to illustrate that not all game retailers even extend such a courtesy, and to no negative effect on gaming sales overall as far as I know...

Relax, child...

LOL child?

[Fon]

im going to be blunt, and i don't mean any disrespect of course.

but what you've just said wasn't factual either...
you've just provided a theory.

the patent, i feel, is not being read properly by users who are using arguments clearly outlined in the patent.

I never denied your example and the example I gave is actual fact. It's just how it works and it's been working for generations(Console cycle wise).

long story short. every argument thus far for demo's and the like are unjustified. the disc will still work, the only thing you should worry about is to what capacity.

this isn't aimed at you (the consumer) this is aimed at the retailers somewhat bullish approach other peoples IP's.
why you would think otherwise is beyond me...

Care to clarify a little better?. The gist of what I got from the patent is that it will still affect consumers. They want to lock new games into your console so that no one else can second hand the game.

This is the big problem/conundrum with the whole used game sales. You say people can buy used and get into the series in future games. That's great and all and could be true. But as you also say, big publishers should be fine regardless, because they have the big hits. The smaller publishers/developers also suffer now because a game may not sell well enough to warrant a sequel. As we go to the next generation, games are only going to get more expensive to develop, especially if Sony and MS make them as powerful as rumors are suggesting. So it's a sort of catch-22. Risk alienating consumers by trying to force them to buy new. Or allow used games sales to steal new sales. It'll be interesting to see if anything of this sort actually happens in the near future

I said "Could". I can't fully predict what might happen but it is concerning. THQ was big last generation and now it has taken a tumble for the worse, what could happen with EA, Activision and Ubisoft next gen?.

Development shouldn't be that much costly compared to this generation, they have to be smarter in their development cost and engineering with video game engines, otherwise they'll just be shooting themselves in the foot. I still stand with what I said in my quote above so I won't reiterate.

[Kopkiwi]

I ONLY buy used games. Nothing is realesed under $100 here in NZ. They will guarantee that they see very little sales in NZ and Australia if this goes ahead for the next gen. I most definitely will not be buying a PS4 if it's the case.

[Fijiandoce]

I never denied your example and the example I gave is actual fact. It's just how it works and it's been working for generations(Console cycle wise).

i must have missed that in the text books then

what i did read from my text books would imply otherwise.
the average consumer will indeed purchase a good they are interested in, its the job of the marketers to achieve a sufficient level of interest.
the onus is then on the consumer, once purchased, whether or not they feel inclined to continue with successive purchases.
this argument enforces the notion of cash flow within an industry.

Care to clarify a little better?. The gist of what I got from the patent is that it will still affect consumers. They want to lock new games into your console so that no one else can second hand the game.

this is your quote fon,

"Here is why: The common gamer will want to try a game that is hardly marketed so they don't want to risk heavy investment. What's the alternative?: Rental or purchase it used(You can get them from fifty percent off or more from online retailers). They try it out and depending on their experience, they might purchase the next game or heck, even become fans of the franchise. The same scenario works for lending your friends a game(s)."

the disk is still capable of achieving what you've outlined here. the disc is not "locked away". the content will still be available to you in some form. probably a time limit. or locking you to the tutorial etc. you will still 'play' something...
ergo, your argument is in someways invalid. as the disc still provides what your argument is based on.

what this is targeted at is the retailer. would you buy a demo from them only to have to then pay a publisher for the right to open the disc fully? no, get the disc for free, from where ever you want. test it out. then give the money to the Publisher.

Publisher gets all the money, you get to try out the game. and the retailers get screwed for abusing their hubris.


win win for us right?

what is locked away (and i think this is what is causing confusion) is the ability to play online.

[Fon]

i must have missed that in the text books then

Indeed, especially when you said.

that is simply fallacy. i told a friend of mine about how much i was enjoying Mirrors Edge. how much i loved its art style. the constrained sense of freedom.
he lives in the US, there was no way for me to "lend" him my game. i got him hyped up, he went and bought it.
he is more pumped for Mirrors Edge 2 than i am, in fact, he is the one hyping me now. every piece of info released he reads and passes on to me.
people seem to forget that they have a mouth capable of forming words to convey a feeling or emotion for something. if you thought it was good and someone else might enjoy it; tell them. Simple as that.

You literally used this as a general scenario and how it should be when it's nothing more then idealism. While it does factually happen in real life(I never once denied this), so is the scenarios I described. What you're doing is misunderstanding my intent.

what i did read from my text books would imply otherwise.
the average consumer will indeed purchase a good they are interested in, its the job of the marketers to achieve a sufficient level of interest.
the onus is then on the consumer, once purchased, whether or not they feel inclined to continue with successive purchases.
this argument enforces the notion of cash flow within an industry.

This actually supports my argument. While different in minor areas, the same effect applies.

this is your quote fon,

"Here is why: The common gamer will want to try a game that is hardly marketed so they don't want to risk heavy investment. What's the alternative?: Rental or purchase it used(You can get them from fifty percent off or more from online retailers). They try it out and depending on their experience, they might purchase the next game or heck, even become fans of the franchise. The same scenario works for lending your friends a game(s)."

the disk is still capable of achieving what you've outlined here. the disc is not "locked away". the content will still be available to you in some form. probably a time limit. or locking you to the tutorial etc. you will still 'play' something...
ergo, your argument is in someways invalid. as the disc still provides what your argument is based on.

What?. What I was implying was the experience you have with the games. Being able to play or provide "Something" does not fall under my quote.

what this is targeted at is the retailer. would you buy a demo from them only to have to then pay a publisher for the right to open the disc fully? no, get the disc for free, from where ever you want. test it out. then give the money to the Publisher.

Publisher gets all the money, you get to try out the game. and the retailers get screwed for abusing their hubris.


win win for us right?

what is locked away (and i think this is what is causing confusion) is the ability to play online.

Wait, where did free game disk come from?.

This is what I meant about games being locked away(Hence why I needed clarification, the gist of what I got gives me that impression).

“By employing the game playing system 1000 according to the present embodiment, the use permission tag 220 together with the game disk 210 is supplied to the user, and the use permission tag 220 actively determines the use permit/rejection of electronic content. Thereby, the use of game AP stored in the game disk 210 can be restricted as appropriate according to the attribute of a reproduction device. Consider, for example, a case where used is a game package 200 distributed in the second-hand market. Then the ID of reproduction device for the game disk 210 differs from the legitimate use device ID stored in the use permission tag 220, so that the game disk can be reproduced in a mode which is predetermined for those bought and sold in the second-hand market. Also, for example, a content key may be supplied to the reproduction device 130 and the encrypted game AP may be decrypted using the content key only if the reproduction device ID matches a legitimate use device ID. Hence, use of game APs bought and sold in the second-hand market can be eliminated.”
In this section, Sony explains how it may work:
“As a technique to suppress the second-hand sales and purchase, a user may be first required to send a password or the like to a remote authentication server from a reproduction device (game player) via the Internet and the reproduction of content may be permitted only for the device that has succeeded in authentication.”
“However, where the reproduction device is not connected to the Internet, use of the content cannot be controlled. Also, where the connection to the Internet is an absolute requirement, user’s convenience may be significantly reduced. Besides, users may communicate to share the password between them and therefore the second-hand sales and purchase cannot be eliminated reliably.”

Edit
http://www.psu.com/a017923/Sony-pate...and-game-sales

[Fijiandoce]

wait, now im confused

what is the basis of your argument?

as i see it. this has no impact on us, the gamers. you can continue to do as you please. only thing different is that publishers want 100% of what you would normally give to the retailer.

why is this wrong? id assume this was a win for us, more money = better games

this is clearly outlined in the patent.

this should eliminate the second hand market. not second hand games. the patent continually refers to stubbing "sales"[bold in blue]. unless you are a second hand dealer yourself i don't see the problem?

“By employing the game playing system 1000 according to the present embodiment, the use permission tag 220 together with the game disk 210 is supplied to the user, and the use permission tag 220 actively determines the use permit/rejection of electronic content. Thereby, the use of game AP stored in the game disk 210 can be restricted as appropriate according to the attribute of a reproduction device. Consider, for example, a case where used is a game package 200 distributed in the second-hand market. Then the ID of reproduction device for the game disk 210 differs from the legitimate use device ID stored in the use permission tag 220, so that the game disk can be reproduced in a mode which is predetermined for those bought and sold in the second-hand market. Also, for example, a content key may be supplied to the reproduction device 130 and the encrypted game AP may be decrypted using the content key only if the reproduction device ID matches a legitimate use device ID. Hence, use of game APs bought and sold in the second-hand market can be eliminated.”

In this section, Sony explains how it may work:
“As a technique to suppress the second-hand sales and purchase, a user may be first required to send a password or the like to a remote authentication server from a reproduction device (game player) via the Internet and the reproduction of content may be permitted only for the device that has succeeded in authentication.”
“However, where the reproduction device is not connected to the Internet, use of the content cannot be controlled. Also, where the connection to the Internet is an absolute requirement, user’s convenience may be significantly reduced. Besides, users may communicate to share the password between them and therefore the second-hand sales and purchase cannot be eliminated reliably.”

how is the part in bold[not blue] different to this:

Here is why: The common gamer will want to try a game that is hardly marketed so they don't want to risk heavy investment. What's the alternative?: Rental or purchase it used(You can get them from fifty percent off or more from online retailers). They try it out and depending on their experience, they might purchase the next game or heck, even become fans of the franchise. The same scenario works for lending your friends a game(s).

i don't get where you're coming from man?
how is this bad for you? the game disc could in theory function as a demo disc for you until you get around to purchasing an authorised ID.

for the record. i still think word of mouth plays a bigger part than you imagine. but for arguments sake, i'll leave it at that

[Wrath]

I ONLY buy used games. Nothing is realesed under $100 here in NZ. They will guarantee that they see very little sales in NZ and Australia if this goes ahead for the next gen. I most definitely will not be buying a PS4 if it's the case.

Well that is your fault then.

I lived in Australia for 1.5 years and they seem to have very similar pricing. Consequently, I imported my games from Hong Kong (brand new and sealed) for about half as much since Asia is right around the corner.

Worked like a charm and is as easy as ordering from any online shop.

[DarkVincent07]

Well that is your fault then.

I lived in Australia for 1.5 years and they seem to have very similar pricing. Consequently, I imported my games from Hong Kong (brand new and sealed) for about half as much since Asia is right around the corner.

Worked like a charm and is as easy as ordering from any online shop.

That's all well and good (the your fault was uncalled for) but the mass market and regular people aren't going to know to buy games off play Asia.

This crap won't happen, too much backfire. Just watch all will be fine


Via Tapatalk

[claud3]

the effect this will have is insane, sony will never understand the outcome off this

They are so blind the this and believe you me, MS will be all over this

[eddified]

When will they figure out that secondhand game sales (or ultra-cheap game sales, such as can be found on Steam) help the bottom line? The easier it is to get games, the more people will have them. The more people have games, the more ubiquitous the platform, which strengthens the whole playstation experience.

[claud3]

but how do they know the game will be second hand and will be sold as such

Stupid move big time

[Typical guy]

I said "Could". I can't fully predict what might happen but it is concerning. THQ was big last generation and now it has taken a tumble for the worse, what could happen with EA, Activision and Ubisoft next gen?.

Don't worry about Activision or Ubisoft. If you have to worry about a company going bankrupt in the next few years, WORRY ABOUT SONY.

Sony has 7.54 billion cash on hand and 162,700 employees.
Nintendo has 14.13 billion cash on hand and 4,928 employees.
MS has 66.64 billion cash on hand and 94,420 employees.

Above you can see the problem. Sony has a LOT of employees and their cash on hand is dwindling. They have expensive manufacturing sectors with low profit margins (or no profit margins in recent years).

Nintendo has VERY FEW employees and when you compare their cash on hand to the number of employees, you can easily see that they're going to be fine for a long time into the future. IMO they should have subsidized the price of the Wii U more than they did. They can easily afford it.

MS has a lot of employees but they're extremely profitable and have a HUGE pile of cash.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/1...n_1071304.html
By Isabel Reynolds
TOKYO (Reuters) - Sony Corp surprised investors on Wednesday by warning it is heading for its fourth straight annual net loss and that its TV business alone would produce a loss of $2.2 billion due to tumbling demand and a surging yen. The maker of Bravia TVs, Vaio computers and PlayStation game consoles cut its sales forecast for TVs, cameras and DVD players on Wednesday and said it may report 90 billion yen ($1.1 billion) net loss in the current financial year, scrapping its earlier net profit estimate of 60 billion yen.
Investors had expected Sony to reduce its profit forecast, but not flag a swing to massive losses.
Sony vowed to bring an end to losses in its TV division, which it expects to report its eighth straight annual loss. But it gave scant details of a plan to halve losses next year and drag the unit into the black by March 2014.
"I am surprised at the extent of the losses and I was anticipating TV restructuring, so I feel let down on both counts," said Shigeo Sugawara, senior investment manager at Sompo Japan Nipponkoa Asset Management, which owns Sony shares.
"We were focused on what would happen to Sony's TV division, but I don't see any drastic restructuring steps, in fact I can't even see any signs they've begun to cut," he added.
Sony said it would revamp LCD panel procurement, but second-in-command Kazuo Hirai declined to comment on reports it would end a panel joint venture with Samsung Electronics.
The lack of firm details from Hirai, in a rare appearance at an earnings conference on Wednesday, dashed investor hopes that the once-stellar brand is at last getting to grips with its struggling TV business and can challenge smartphone rivals.
Sony said it expected TV losses to be 175 billion yen ($2.2 billion) this financial year, including a 50 billion yen impairment charge. It cut TV sales forecast by 9 percent to 20 million sets, its second reduction this year.
"The TV business is an essential part of Sony's growth strategy. We, as management, feel a great sense of crisis after seven straight years of losses," Hirai, executive deputy president, told a briefing. He described this year's losses as a necessary step toward recovery.
Hirai, appointed to the company's No. 2 position this year, must map out a plan for earnings growth if he is to take over the top job from Welsh-born Howard Stringer, analysts said.
Shares of Sony tumbled 3.6 percent to 1,520 yen on Wednesday, although the results were released after the close of Tokyo's market. It resumes trading on Friday after a public holiday on Thursday.
RESCUE PLAN 'NOT ENOUGH'
Sony, which also cut its full-year operating-profit outlook by 90 percent to its lowest level in three years, said earlier this week that it would split its television business into three divisions of outsourcing, LCD TVs and next-generation TVs from November 1 to turn around the operation.
Sony might also pull out of its flat-screen venture with Samsung Electronics Co, sources say, which will enable it to cut panel supply costs and improve its TV business earnings. The company revealed no details of such a plan on Wednesday.
"Sony has not done enough to rescue its TV business," said Jeff Yeh, chief investment officer of Taiwan-based Capital Investment Trust's overseas portfolios, which has $1 billion of client assets.
"It took them 15 years to become an electronics giant, but it only took them the last five years to plunge to where they are," he added, saying he would not buy Sony shares in the near future and did not own any currently.
Many global TV brands including Panasonic and Philips are losing money from TV sales, hit by faltering demand and growing competition from low-cost producers.
Dutch electronics firm Philips agreed on Tuesday to transfer its loss-making TV business into a joint venture with TPV Technology.
Once a symbol of Japan's high-tech might, Sony is struggling to come up with hit devices and finds itself outmaneuvered in TVs by Samsung Electronics and in the booming smartphone market by Apple.
Sony posted an operating loss of 1.6 billion yen for July-September, well below analysts' consensus forecast of 40 billion yen profit.
Sony shares have fallen 48 percent since the start of the year, compared with a 16 percent fall in the broader market, hit by the March earthquake and a massive security breach on its PlayStation and other networks, as well as yen strength and the Thai flooding disaster.
Sony blamed the deluge in Thailand for cutting 25 billion yen in expected earnings, but said it had not yet factored their impact into unit sales forecasts, which it trimmed for a range of major products.
It is the latest in a lengthening list of Japanese firms that have posted poor quarterly results due to the strong yen, flooding and weak demand in the United States and Europe.
The list includes Honda Motor Co, Panasonic, Nintendo Co Ltd and Nomura Holdings. ($1=78.28 yen)

[Kopkiwi]

Well that is your fault then.

I lived in Australia for 1.5 years and they seem to have very similar pricing. Consequently, I imported my games from Hong Kong (brand new and sealed) for about half as much since Asia is right around the corner.

Worked like a charm and is as easy as ordering from any online shop.

My fault? The price of games in NZ is my fault? Well done..

[Wrath]

My fault? The price of games in NZ is my fault? Well done..

Lol, seriously?

I was obviously referring to you paying for these prices (and thereby supporting them), not for creating the whole pricing infrastructure.

[sainraja]

There was a rumor/report like this regarding Xbox 360 as well. Here's a link: http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/01/...s-on-next-xbox

I don't see why people should be up in arms about this if this comes to pass since used games aren't that much cheaper than new games. If you wait around you can find new games at a pretty good price too.

Now, if the game does go out of production and you're looking for a copy, then I do see reason to complain but then so many games (specially on the Sony side) also have digital versions (which you can download whenever you want to) and who is to say that once a game you've bought retail is linked you can't download the digital version? I mean, Blizzard is already doing that. You buy a retail version of their game and once you link it to an account you can download it anywhere, anytime.

I don't see any reason to complain about this, just yet.....all this ensures is that the people who made the games are getting money. To keep the industry strong (which means more games, etc.)

[Typical guy]

There was a rumor/report like this regarding Xbox 360 as well. Here's a link: http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/01/...s-on-next-xbox

I don't see why people should be up in arms about this if this comes to pass since used games aren't that much cheaper than new games. If you wait around you can find new games at a pretty good price too.

Now, if the game does go out of production and you're looking for a copy, then I do see reason to complain but then so many games (specially on the Sony side) also have digital versions (which you can download whenever you want to) and who is to say that once a game you've bought retail is linked you can't download the digital version? I mean, Blizzard is already doing that. You buy a retail version of their game and once you link it to an account you can download it anywhere, anytime.

I don't see any reason to complain about this, just yet.....all this ensures is that the people who made the games are getting money. To keep the industry strong (which means more games, etc.)

You seem to be on the buy side only. I'm a core gamer but I'm not a collector. I have a couple games that I really like or that I think may become rare that I'll hold. 99.99% of my games I dump after I'm done with them. I either send them into Amazon trade in or I sell them on eBay.

If used games are no longer playable then I'll have to start boxing and storing the games I'm done with. I'll look like a hoarder in 10 years. So in reality I'd just end up throwing them away. Personally, I won't buy a console that doesn't allow used games. I'm not going to put myself into the situation where I've got boxes of games in my house that are only playable on my console (god forbid it breaks) and I have to decide if I want to hold onto them for the rest of time or just throw them into the garbage.

[Fon]

wait, now im confused

what is the basis of your argument?

as i see it. this has no impact on us, the gamers. you can continue to do as you please. only thing different is that publishers want 100% of what you would normally give to the retailer.

why is this wrong? id assume this was a win for us, more money = better games

this is clearly outlined in the patent.

this should eliminate the second hand market. not second hand games. the patent continually refers to stubbing "sales"[bold in blue]. unless you are a second hand dealer yourself i don't see the problem?

i don't get where you're coming from man?
how is this bad for you? the game disc could in theory function as a demo disc for you until you get around to purchasing an authorised ID.

“By employing the game playing system 1000 according to the present embodiment, the use permission tag 220 together with the game disk 210 is supplied to the user, and the use permission tag 220 actively determines the use permit/rejection of electronic content. Thereby, the use of game AP stored in the game disk 210 can be restricted as appropriate according to the attribute of a reproduction device. Consider, for example, a case where used is a game package 200 distributed in the second-hand market. Then the ID of reproduction device for the game disk 210 differs from the legitimate use device ID stored in the use permission tag 220, so that the game disk can be reproduced in a mode which is predetermined for those bought and sold in the second-hand market. Also, for example, a content key may be supplied to the reproduction device 130 and the encrypted game AP may be decrypted using the content key only if the reproduction device ID matches a legitimate use device ID. Hence, use of game APs bought and sold in the second-hand market can be eliminated.”

In this section, Sony explains how it may work:
“As a technique to suppress the second-hand sales and purchase, a user may be first required to send a password or the like to a remote authentication server from a reproduction device (game player) via the Internet and the reproduction of content may be permitted only for the device that has succeeded in authentication.”
“However, where the reproduction device is not connected to the Internet, use of the content cannot be controlled. Also, where the connection to the Internet is an absolute requirement, user’s convenience may be significantly reduced. Besides, users may communicate to share the password between them and therefore the second-hand sales and purchase cannot be eliminated reliably.”

Sounds like DRM to me which literally backfired on PC. My entire argument here is that Sony shouldn't attempt to put further restrictions on gamers. Online Passes is enough, more difficulty to accessibility is counter productive(Not only that but having access to a demo isn't equal to what I stated in my quote). This member explains it better.

When will they figure out that secondhand game sales (or ultra-cheap game sales, such as can be found on Steam) help the bottom line? The easier it is to get games, the more people will have them. The more people have games, the more ubiquitous the platform, which strengthens the whole playstation experience.

While the patent attempts to eliminate second game sales, the result will be DRM.

for the record. i still think word of mouth plays a bigger part than you imagine. but for arguments sake, i'll leave it at that

I never in this entire argument, discarded that. In fact my argument is strongly based around that. Easier for gamers to get a hold of games = stronger word of mouth.

Don't worry about Activision or Ubisoft. If you have to worry about a company going bankrupt in the next few years, WORRY ABOUT SONY.

Sony's case is kind of predictable. With the way things are going they'll need some miraculous changes to keep themselves floating. Their credit is practically junk now.

[upmagic]

I rarely ever buy used so I wouldn't mind Sony doing this, but I wonder if it would backfire somehow.

[sainraja]

You seem to be on the buy side only. I'm a core gamer but I'm not a collector. I have a couple games that I really like or that I think may become rare that I'll hold. 99.99% of my games I dump after I'm done with them. I either send them into Amazon trade in or I sell them on eBay.

If used games are no longer playable then I'll have to start boxing and storing the games I'm done with. I'll look like a hoarder in 10 years. So in reality I'd just end up throwing them away. Personally, I won't buy a console that doesn't allow used games. I'm not going to put myself into the situation where I've got boxes of games in my house that are only playable on my console (god forbid it breaks) and I have to decide if I want to hold onto them for the rest of time or just throw them into the garbage.

That's a fair point. I didn't really consider that aspect.....I do like to have a collection.

[Chickenooble]

I bought my GTX670 the first day it came out and it's capable of playing all modern games on Ultra settings with more than good frame rates. I could buy another in a year for less than the cost of a new console.

Again, I say, PC GAMING MASTER RACE.