PS3 Won't Play Used Games?

[bapenguin]

I read this over at Joystiq (http://www.joystiq.com/entry/1234000420067137/) and promptly heard Mark Rein scream in delight. Sony's DRM delights continue, this time it appears the PS3 (or some Sony device) may employ it to only allow a title to be registered with a specific machine.

”A device and method for protection of legitimate software against used software and counterfeit software in recording media… A specific title code is read, and if this title code has been registered, the main unit shifts to a normal operation. If the code has not been registered, verification software is initiated… If matching does not occur, the disk is processed as illegitimate software… Since only titles for which legitimate software has actually been purchased and which have been initially registered in the machine table can be used, resale (so-called used software purchase) after purchase by an end-user becomes practically impossible.”
I really don't see this happening as now it cuts out rental outlets as well...it'll piss off a lot of people. What is it lately with Sony and their crazy DRM type stuff?

[JediSanf]

Sigh, while I'm sure Sony would love to be able to do this (as part of their control the distro, control the world scheme) I don't see it being even remotely possible without an always connected unfied online service which they apparently have decided against.

You know what this reminds me of? The Win XP registration. Everyone wanted Sony to steal a page from Microsoft's playbook and they stole the wrong damn page.

[greensky]

If it stops used games wouldn't it also stop you from bringing the game over to a friends PS3? Good luck selling the PS3 if that happens Sony...

[if76]

I wish this were true as sales of used games severely cut into publisher's and developer's profits.

I'm sure it wont' apply to the PS3 since it would require every PS3 to have an internet connection.

As far as rental outlets go, Sony could always just sell special rental-only games to blockbuster and gamefly. It's not like the hardware manufacturers are that enamored by rentals anyway.

[Thenetcase]

The WinXP registration is NOTHING like this. You can put your copy of Windows XP on ANY number of computers as long as you don't put it on MORE than one AT THE SAME TIME. And in a way, that makes complete sense (to me, anyway).

This PS3 protection makes it impossible for me to take my copy of Gran Turismo: Crap Edition over to a friends house and play it on his PS3 so he can see how badass it is and buy his own copy.

This whole thing is complete bull. If they do something like this, I definitely will never buy a PS3. No way in hades.

-TNC-

[Citizen Philip]

Where do you get this retarded stuff?

I guess all the PS3 will be connected by WIFI to the Sony Hivemind and broadcast over the evil network, each time a key is used on a specific system?

SO GEE.. I guess that "PS3 or some other Sony Device" should be read as "Probably not the PS3, but you know, it probably is, because, they might do that and force you to hand over your first born too."

[Thenetcase]

I wish this were true as sales of used games severely cut into publisher's and developer's profits.

I'm sure it wont' apply to the PS3 since it would require every PS3 to have an internet connection.

As far as rental outlets go, Sony could always just sell special rental-only games to blockbuster and gamefly. It's not like the hardware manufacturers are that enamored by rentals anyway.

Wow, someone needs to beat you senseless with the "Fucked in the head" stick. Or maybe they already have.

Damn fools. This world is fully of raging, idiots. Get a clue.

Oh and it wouldn't hurt to do a little research into marketting. Rentals *help* Sony, not hurt them and used games likewise (most people sell old games so they can buy.. ahem.. NEW ONES.... Now how does that hurt Sony?)

-TNC-

[nonchalance]

Surely they wouldn't be that stupid.

I call shenanigans.

[Bushi]

This is just FUD

[Samurai Joe]

This would definitely be a bad move on Sony's part. But like many of you, I don't see this happening.

The first Sony gaming product I purchased was the PSP, could it be the last?

[Beelzebud]

So is lending a game to a friend now illegal?

WTF is Sony thinking?

[KNOTE]

What is Sony thinking? Videogames are becoming so risky to make that it's threatening growth. Their business model is based on the video game business growing to television-levels of acceptance. For every game rental, for every used game, for every pirated game, it sucks profits from the system and so you get every publisher following the EA model. It wouldn't be an issue if we had an audience the size of DVD or television.

[TalkingOctopus]

This is a really stupid idea. It would cripple the ps3. I can't imagine it will actually come to be.

[Serapth]

Get gun
Insert bullets
Point Gun to head
Pull trigger


Point blank, thats what Sony would be doing if they implemented a scheme like this. Not only would the BlockBusters of the world ( video rental chain to the non-north American audience) be driven out of the game business, but what happens when Joe consumer lends a game to a friend and blammo, it wont work. Or worse, when Joe consumers PS3 breaks ( like the ps2 never had any quality issues....... ;) ), and all of his games suddenly appear to be "used" to his new PS3.

It would be suicide to pull something this stupid. That said... your right, with there recent DRM shit, I wouldnt put it past them. From a business perspective Sony is doing alot of stupid stuff right now. Personally I wouldnt cry too many tears if their stupidity brings them down. Ironically, with Sonys current financial state, if the PS3 flops, it could do just that.

Two last things to think about... Do you think Sony ( or Nin or MS ) give a flying fuck about the rental market? You bet your ass no! It loses them sales, especially for bad games. None of them would mind cutting blockbuster out of the loop. Probrably the only reason VHS and DVD are provided for rental from these places is because video stores pay more for the versions they rent then the end consumer does. Its pretty scarey how much more sometime, I looked at the order form from a local mom and pop video rental place, and the DVD you could buy for 15$ cost him 60$. Given a model like that, no wonder they tolerate video rental. No such structure exists for games.

Secondly, game companies, all of them, had the secondary market. If they could get rid of used games, they would in a heart beat! In the age of "Greatest Hits" and "Platinum Collections" for discounted prices, its almost 100% lost money every time one of these games is resold as used.

Those two things lead me to believe that this might actually be a possibility for sony to do. That said, I still think it would be suicide unless they convinced MS and Nin to do the same thing.

Finally, at least the source is perhaps one of the least reliable sites on the internet. So most likely its bullshit!

[EvilBob46]

Where does it say the PS3 won't play used games?

[Citizen Philip]

Where does it say the PS3 won't play used games?

From quickdraw FUD shooters.

[The Great Gatsby]

I say go for it Sony. I only buy games I really want to buy and know will be pretty good. I don't do much in terms of renting or borrowing from friends. So if Sony can make themselves a few extra bucks, and put some extra money into the pubs/devs pockets, even better, yo.

[EvilBob46]

From quickdraw FUD shooters.

I thought so.

This thread is retarded (no offense to the mentally challenged intended).

[Mason]

Unless they're making you go online or on a phone to activate every game you buy, it is of course technically impossible. And if Sony's online service consists solely of activation, while the 360 consists solely of fun ways to play with your friends, we simply won't need to worry about PS3 games. Ever.

That said, if there was a "nice" way of doing this, I wouldn't mind it much on principle. Used games are a shithole. The developer gets no money, and the store makes many times what it makes on new sales, so of course stores always push the used games on customers. The minimal savings used games provide to customers is nothing compared to the income they steal from game developers.

I know a level designer who I have to keep from physically assaulting EBGames employees when they keep insisting she buy a used game. She could've taken him, I'd wager, but there were security cameras.

[Dabombpizza]

This information is completly inconclusive. The title of the thread is misleading. Nobody said anything about used games or rental sales and all the discussion forth with is meaningless and pointless. This should be told as it is, a rumor.

I'm going to go play video games.

[jeffool]

Where does it say the PS3 won't play used games?
If you're referring to the 'PS3' part of that, even the article says it's not likely to occur with the PS3, (and bapenguin said "some Sony device",) but this is easily possible with future generations. This place is begrudgingly getting like Fark when you have to tell people "Read the fucking article."

Of course if you're referring to the 'used games' part, well:resale (so-called used software purchase) after purchase by an end-user becomes practically impossible.And anyone who didn't see this coming is blind. Devs have long wanted a bigger chunk (or the curtailing) of the rental/second-market pie. Though Serapth is completely right in that if Microsoft and Nintendo don't follow along, Sony's insane.

[Serapth]

I thought so.

This thread is retarded (no offense to the mentally challenged intended).

Actually, no. If you take the thread at face value as being true ( which would be moronic, this is Joystiq after all ), technology wise, the only way a system like this could work ( without requiring an online auth method like XP ), would be if it locked to the first machine it installed to. Given BluRays dependence on Java, this would be quite possible. On first run, a hash between a unique ID on the disk, and a unique ID of the machine could be generated that requires it to run.

Again, without the use of an internet connection, this is about the only scheme they could use to implement what they are describing. If that is the case, they would essentially be locking the disk to the machine, which would infact prevent rentals or resale or even lending.

Basically put it this way... if they dont tie the disk to the first machine its run in, and dont have access to an internet connection.... how could they implement ANYTHING the article described? Either this is what they do, or they implement the worlds easiest to circumvent protection system ever.

[carneconcarne]

weird how all this anti sony news is popping up mere weeks before the 360 launch. weird...

btw if76, the used market actually helps profits for publishers and developers. Selling old games to purchase new ones. I believe someone else mentioned this right after calling you an idiot. I just wanted to reiterate and mention that several studies in the used book market have verified these claims: used sales spur market growth.

[Serapth]

Unless they're making you go online or on a phone to activate every game you buy, it is of course technically impossible. And if Sony's online service consists solely of activation, while the 360 consists solely of fun ways to play with your friends, we simply won't need to worry about PS3 games. Ever.

That said, if there was a "nice" way of doing this, I wouldn't mind it much on principle. Used games are a shithole. The developer gets no money, and the store makes many times what it makes on new sales, so of course stores always push the used games on customers. The minimal savings used games provide to customers is nothing compared to the income they steal from game developers.

I know a level designer who I have to keep from physically assaulting EBGames employees when they keep insisting she buy a used game. She could've taken him, I'd wager, but there were security cameras.

Its a little harsh to call it stealing income, as its completely legal. That said, if publishers were a bit fairer about their pricing I would agree with you. I would rather see the dev's get money for there product then a resell of the same title again and again, with all the money funnelling to the middle man and nothing trickling back. That said, publishers are a right bunch of bastards, so I dont feel too much pity.

That, and really... how is this any different then used book stores, that have been with us for ages. You dont see a huge backlash against them ( atleast not anymore ). People want to own what they buy, its hard to get away from that. And if part of owning means reselling, well... its something to consider.

As to going to a game store and having the used product pushed on them over the new one because the vendor makes higher profit margins off used.... who created this problem? The publishers, plain and simple. If the retailers got the same margin off used as they do new ( say 10% ), what would they try to push... the 20 used copy, or the 40$ new copy? Ill give you a hint... 10% of 40 is more then 10% of 20. If the retailers werent operating of shoestring margins, maybe they wouldnt be so happy to dwell in the used market so heavily. Its a beast the publishers created themselves.

[Dabombpizza]

btw if76, the used market actually helps profits for publishers and developers. Selling old games to purchase new ones. I believe someone else mentioned this right after calling you an idiot. I just wanted to reiterate and mention that several studies in the used book market have verified these claims: used sales spur market growth.

I don't remember which developer was talking about this, but it's the used games that really hit developers. It's the technical support, or so they claim, that owners of used games think they are entitled to, but according to the developer are not. It also pisses them off when they have to dish out new serial keys. Whether this is determental or not, I don't know.

[lpmiller]

not that I remotely think this relates at all to the ps3, but killing the used market would just make warez that much more viable.

[Thenetcase]

$59.99 x 150,000 (which is the number of first copies made of most games -- sometimes more)... Equals....

$8,998,500

So 9 Million Dollars off the first 150,000 sold? We could cut it down to $8 million just to be generous.
Now let's say that they are only making a 40% gross margin on this....
That means they made $5,399,100 (after expenses) to pay their employes.

Yeah, they are suffering... damn.

-TNC-

[KNOTE]

Average cost of a game to create, press, and market is over 10 million. The hope is the one "hit" game pays for all the rest, which flop.

[Schnoogs]

Wow, someone needs to beat you senseless with the "Fucked in the head" stick. Or maybe they already have.

Damn fools. This world is fully of raging, idiots. Get a clue.

Oh and it wouldn't hurt to do a little research into marketting. Rentals *help* Sony, not hurt them and used games likewise (most people sell old games so they can buy.. ahem.. NEW ONES.... Now how does that hurt Sony?)

-TNC-

How do you figure? Blockbuster buys a game and then rents it 1000 times which means Sony was denied selling 1000 games and seeing as they're losing money on the sale of the hardware they NEED the games to be sold to get their cut.

Plus the sale of used games further kills them. I could Sony being all for this.

Oh and spare me any smart ass comebacks Thenetcase

[Serapth]

weird how all this anti sony news is popping up mere weeks before the 360 launch. weird...

btw if76, the used market actually helps profits for publishers and developers. Selling old games to purchase new ones. I believe someone else mentioned this right after calling you an idiot. I just wanted to reiterate and mention that several studies in the used book market have verified these claims: used sales spur market growth.

No offence, but without linking to one of these studies I have to assume you ( or anyone else ) are talking out your ass. It makes no sense that the loss of a potential sale spurs more sales.

Second to that, these studies are a crock of shit anyways, as they fail to take in other market related issues. To use books as an example... They bascially come to these conclusions by comparing new book sales to old book sales, and plot a growth chart. Frankly that means absolutely jack shit. They completely ignore factors like.... hmmmm.... increasing literacy rates ( or declining ), current popular media ( harry potter, or years back, Steven King ), current levels of disposable income, etc... If you look purely at numbers, you can prove anything you want.

As an example, the MPAA is constantly bitching that piracy is hurting movie ticket sales. Then they show that ticket sales are down by X numbers. What they fail to show is what DVD sales are doing... or that revenue is actually going up because ticket costs increased so much. Without looking to see if DVD sales ( which go to the same person $ wise ) are canabalizing the market, or if price gouging for tickets is causing less to be sold, your really just proving fuckall.

Take all numbers and all studies with a grain of salt. Anyone who puts them out tends to have an agenda. You have to keep that in mind first.

Edit: I agree there has been a spurt in anti sony stories, but really... considering the last one was around DRM ( which sony legitamitly fucked up ), dont you think that the cause is just as likely the CD scandal then it is the Xbox 360? People are pissed off and for legit reasons.

[RMan]

Yea, this is just a technology patent, I'm sure Sony has tens of thousands of them. They have enough problems without implimenting another questionable bit of tech on the PS3, expecially since it would cause most consumers that heard about it to think twice about the system.

[jeffool]

To say that the used game market helps them sell new games is a bit odd.

Let's (falsely) assume that the money regained on all games sold to a store or traded in goes toward the purchase of a new game. And that many people bring new games back within the week that people seeking the new game decide to buy instead. How many games do you have to trade-in/sell to equal the value of a new game? Five? Probably twice as many. But let's say five. The store then sells the games for $20 each (rather than the $40/$50 they cost new.) I'm not going to say that developers miss out on five sales, but let's say one.

The five games are traded in and one is bought, or one is bought. So, the developers have made no money off of the second market. And c'mon. If there was no secondary market it's much more likely that more than one would-be-buyer would say 'oh it's just twenty more than the used one would have been' and pay the full price.

I'm not saying that we should get rid of the secondary market, I'm just saying I understand why.

[Kamalot]

If you read the article, it sounds like there is a code on each new, original disc. The code is read by the device (PS3), verified and then destroyed. This renders the disc unusable by anything other than the original machine.

The technology involves actually rendering a authentication code originally encrypted on the game disk unreadable to other machines once the disk it is used.

This would mean that Net-based and other such games will not be the only ones to be affected by the technology.

This isn't outside the realm of possibility at all. Looking at Sony's track record, we may even see this implemented.

[Serapth]

Yea, this is just a technology patent, I'm sure Sony has tens of thousands of them. They have enough problems without implimenting another questionable bit of tech on the PS3, expecially since it would cause most consumers that heard about it to think twice about the system.

Moreso, given recent sony interviews, it will cause people to think twice about BluRay and all things BluRay related. Which IMHO, isnt a bad thing.

Actually, atleast among the netsavvy, geek community, I think people are already afraid of what draconian DRM measures sony is putting into BluRay. And dont kid yourself, if interviews are to be believed, Sony is betting the farm on BluRay(one interview basically straight out said the PS3 was a vehicle for pushing BluRay adoption). They are lucky Toshiba is doing such a bad job selling HDDVD, or it would already be game over. Sony REALLY has to get over this kick of owning the rights to the media soon, or they are going to pay a harsh price.

[nonchalance]

How do you figure? Blockbuster buys a game and then rents it 1000 times which means Sony was denied selling 1000 games
It doesn't mean that at all.

I've rented dozens of games that I never had any intention of buying.
A couple of times, I've bought games based on enjoying renting them.
I've never rented a game that I would have bought if I had not rented it.
If the rental market didn't exist, I doubt I ever would have played those games at all.

Over here, a rental's about five bucks. A new game is a hundred.
That's a huge gap.

[rein]

Does Sony plan to employ this technology in the PlayStation 3? Not likely.


Bap

Come on, even the article states they don't think it would be used for the PS3. Are you going for the record for most miss-leading headlines in a row or something?

[Kamalot]

Unless they're making you go online or on a phone to activate every game you buy, it is of course technically impossible.

I don't know what's so difficult to understand about this.


There is a code on each new disc.
When the disc is read, the disc is validated by the system (PS3)
After the disc is validated, the code is physically destroyed; either with a laser, like a CD burner or with something that scratches the code from the disc.
The disc is now only able to be used on the machine with which it is validated.

This is a brilliant move for Sony. It effectively kills the market for used games. It ensures that if your PS3 breaks, you have to buy your favorite games all over again. It allows them to keep better control over prices. I bet the folks at Sony are estatic over this idea.

Having said that, it would suck balls for a consumer. I often take games over to my friend's to play. I have 2 consoles, one in the rec-room and one in the office, on which I play games. I have had consoles die. This is quite possibly one of the MOST unfriendly examples of digital rights management I have ever heard of.

Once again, this isn't a validation through some centralized database, it is a mechanical locking by physically destroying the code on the disc.

[Serapth]

It doesn't mean that at all.

I've rented dozens of games that I never had any intention of buying.
A couple of times, I've bought games based on enjoying renting them.
I've never rented a game that I would have bought if I had not rented it.
If the rental market didn't exist, I doubt I ever would have played those games at all.

Over here, a rental's about five bucks. A new game is a hundred.
That's a huge gap.

100$??? Where the hell do you live?!?! :D

That said, your system works on certain games, and works terribly against others.

For example, if you rent a roleplaying game that provides say, 50 hours or more entertainment, like it, you will probrably buy it, because cost wise, its cost effective to buy it ( unless you have 10 hours a day to dedicate to playing the rental ). Ditto, for a sports game. You rent it, find you like it, so you know you will get hours and hours of enjoyment out of it because the replayability is so high.

With highly replayable games or long games, rentals *may* actually drive sales.

On the flipside, play throw once and never touch again games get slaughtered by rental. For example, I rented a Silent Hill game ( not sure which ), and played through it in a weekend and returned it. No reason to ever play it again, so no reason to ever buy it. Ironically, I rented it, because I was sitting on the fence about buying it. After getting through it so quickly, I saw no reason to buy it. Rental didnt help the game, it lost a sale.

So yeah, certain games *can* benefit from rental, most however dont.

[bobbler]

The patent is in japanese, as often the case this has more to do with poor translation than anything else -- it is no worse than an automatic CDKEY that is entered every time the disc is put into a console. It doesn't lock the disc/software to a specific console, it just makes a quick check to see if the disc is actually a legit game and not some burned thing. Encoded into each legal disc (apparently burning a copy won't reproduce this) is a key that is read and the console/player verifies it (either through a database or an algorithm).

I had a feeling this would show up on this site -- friggin work has this site blocked so I don't get to see all the exciting new silliness as it unfolds here.

If someone already corrected this, then I apologize -- I don't really feel like reading through the entire thread of people freaking out and exploding.


Additionally: I question the sanity of Bap for posting something so clearly a horseshit translation of japenese patentnese and even trying to gather anything relavent. Surely you guys must be fucking insane to believe something so insane as destroying the rental and used game business? You guys are insane sometimes. I can't stress the insanity of a topic like this getting past the reality filter.

[nonchalance]

100$??? Where the hell do you live?!?! :D

Australia.

if you rent a roleplaying game that provides say, 50 hours or more entertainment, like it, you will probrably buy it, because cost wise, its cost effective to buy it ( unless you have 10 hours a day to dedicate to playing the rental ). Ditto, for a sports game. You rent it, find you like it, so you know you will get hours and hours of enjoyment out of it because the replayability is so high.

True enough, although with that sort of game, I don't bother renting them. Either I'm interested enough to buy, or I'm not.
Although I only like one sport, and it only gets one game a year, and it's always fairly average, so I guess I'm not really qualified to comment there.

With highly replayable games or long games, rentals *may* actually drive sales.

On the flipside, play throw once and never touch again games get slaughtered by rental. For example, I rented a Silent Hill game ( not sure which ), and played through it in a weekend and returned it. No reason to ever play it again, so no reason to ever buy it. Ironically, I rented it, because I was sitting on the fence about buying it. After getting through it so quickly, I saw no reason to buy it. Rental didnt help the game, it lost a sale.

Okay.
See, I'm either interested enough to buy a game, or I'm not. If I rent a game, it's because I'm not going to buy it, but I'm bored on a particular evening and want to try something new.
For me, rental is entirely disconnected with purchase. If the rental market for games didn't exist, I'd just rent movies instead, or play more freeware.

[Zanzibar]

$59.99 x 150,000 (which is the number of first copies made of most games -- sometimes more)... Equals....

$8,998,500

So 9 Million Dollars off the first 150,000 sold? We could cut it down to $8 million just to be generous.
Now let's say that they are only making a 40% gross margin on this....
That means they made $5,399,100 (after expenses) to pay their employes.

Yeah, they are suffering... damn.

-TNC-

You don't know jack. Are you a developer? No? STFU.

Gah. Too tired and grumpy to go into the detail I want, but here's a few buzzwords:

Licensed middleware and rendering engines. Dev kit investments and support costs. Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo license fees per unit. R&D costs. Add to that the standard office costs for teams of 40-120 people for 18+ months and you'll see we're not living high off the hog. It ain't the developers that see the profits - it's the publishers.

[agentgray]

I don't see why this is surprising. Blu-ray can make all this possible.

However. Not likely...at least not now.

[Mephistopheles]

Another case of a minimal amount of information being padded out with hefty doses of conjecture and anti-Sony sentiment into something that resembles a news story and then posted as such on the front page. It seems there is a requirement to post at least one anti-Sony news item a day. If there isn't a legitimate story then we get served something that is 1 part fact and 2 parts conjecture.

I will admit that I haven't been real happy with Sony in recent years what with their efforts in the fields of "piracy prevention" and now DRM, but this is just out of control. This site is rapidly losing any ability to function as a news site when the front page posts are so frequently based on insufficient information and skewed by poster bias. You might get the full story if you can be bothered to wade through the threads on the off chance that someone has posted something that might be closer to the true story. Just change the site motto from the current one to "Daily gaming news...fair and balanced" and get it over with.

[Dracula-X]

This is probably comparable to the earlier authentication methods employed on PS1/PS2 discs (wobble tracks, encoded SCEI/SCEE/SCEA strings or so), only updated for PS3/Bluray tech. It basically prevented burned copies from working. Until anyone has anything more concrete to add, that's all one can reasonably assume it is.

[Flarnet]

What is it lately with Sony and their crazy DRM type stuff?

Yes lately indeed *cough* Net MD download *cough*.

[Citizen Philip]

This site is rapidly losing any ability to function as a news site when the front page posts are so frequently based on insufficient information and skewed by poster bias. You might get the full story if you can be bothered to wade through the threads on the off chance that someone has posted something that might be closer to the true story. Just change the site motto from the current one to "Daily gaming news...fair and balanced" and get it over with.

:(

Remeber that time...

[51|RandoM]

Seems to me, it'd make more sense to just move to a digital distribution system, with game licensing tied to an account. Cache data and licensing locally---after a validated purchase---and never touch it again, unless that user logs into a different console without either the cached game, or the cached license.

Either way, Lik-Sang will have a 'mod' of some type available within a month of release to keep the thieving pirates happy.

[Karmakin]

Quoth the patent

"By means of the present invention as described above, the following effects are obtained. Since only titles for which legitimate software has actually been purchased and which have been initially registered in the machine table can be used, resale (so-called used software purchase) after purchase by an end-user becomes practically impossible. "

That's directly from the last paragraph of the patent application. Directly. It's a cut and paste. So yes, this is intended to prevenent UNAUTHORIZED (there's the keyword) rentals and practially ALL sales of used games.

You can make rentals with a certain code. The problem? Maybe that code is crackable, and boom. There's your pirate copy right there. Or just rent and copy the disk. I'm guessing until Blue-Ray DVD+Rs come out, piracy isn't exactly a huge problem anyway.

How it would work, is that the Blue Ray disc would have a special sector with a serial code in it. When you play the game, the access to the game is stored inside the PS3, and the serial code is blanked out. (Limited DVD-R ability I guess). Or the opposite, the serial code of the PS3 is burnt onto the Blue Ray disc. I'm not really sure which it is, but it's one of the two. Damn techno-speak.

And yes, Sony would do this. In fact, I'm shocked it's taken them this long to do it. It, meaning shooting themselves in the head with their ego and hubris.

[Last of the Red Hot Mamas]

A little surprised nobody has mentioned this patent was filed over five years ago.

[Serapth]

Seems to me, it'd make more sense to just move to a digital distribution system, with game licensing tied to an account. Cache data and licensing locally---after a validated purchase---and never touch it again, unless that user logs into a different console without either the cached game, or the cached license.


You mean like Xbox Live Arcade? :D


Beware the horse, for his name is trojan! This is exactly what MS intends, not that its necisarrily a bad thing, unless its like iTunes, in which case you have to pay for the same music twice if something bad happens ( aka, fuck you Apple!)

[Zeal]

They do this, and pirates will launch a war against Sony that'll make the demise of Dreamcast look like a joke.

This would also essentially make renting games worthless, so it is of course not allowed.

[Last of the Red Hot Mamas]

This would also essentially make renting games worthless, so it is of course not allowed.

I'm not sure what you mean by "not allowed." The first-sale doctrine allows you to resell or rent games you've already purchased but there's nothing prohibiting developers and publishers from implementing measures that would make such resales worthless. If that were the case then DIVX and EZ-D would be illegal.

[bobbler]

Was just going to mention that, LotRHM (damn you're long name). After reading it fully, it describes methods to erase a track from the disc, as Karmakin mentioned (I didn't have time to see more than a translation of the japanese patent, and assumed this patent was recent and had to be a mistranslation -- my bad). Then I looked near the top only to see a file date of April 17th 2000, and foreign patent date was April 21st 1999. its based on a dozen or so other patents from varying dates (all the way back to 1984) -- all of these patents are the same basic thing.

It seems like if this type of technology was going to be used it would have by now -- frivolous patenting is often the case in large companies. Check out the other patents they have (or any company really).

While my initial claim was wrong I have come to the conclusion that even if this is rather scary, it isn't going to get used, based on the date alone -- it was done early enough that it could have just as easily been used in PS2 era, or PS1 era for that matter (based on one of the dozen earlier patents). The requirement of an extra amount of technology with no real gain seems to make this absolutely stupid to assume will be used (not only would the BR drive require writing abilities of some sort, be it magnetic or laser, but this would fuck over quite a bit of the industry... rentals, which publishers get money from; and used market, which is quite large now, to the point that best buy is thinking about diving in). Basing reality based on patents is silly. If you are so inclined you can find all kinds of patents that'd scare you if they were actually used (DRM based or whatever).

Making games on BR alone is quite enough copyprotection at least for a few years alone, add in their normal amount of copy protection (requiring a mod chip to play burned games) and its quite sufficient.

I wish these old patents didn't get brought up every so often -- new patents are fine, and sometimes interesting, but something 5 years old (with sister patents upwards of 20 years old) it isn't much more than sensational "journalism".

[grammatoncleric]

Oh and it wouldn't hurt to do a little research into marketting. Rentals *help* Sony, not hurt them and used games likewise (most people sell old games so they can buy.. ahem.. NEW ONES.... Now how does that hurt Sony?)

Rentals do not help sony. They help blockbuster. Used games do not help sony. They help EB. Look at the profit margins that those companies have in those areas and you'll see that. Even if only 10% of the people that bought a used game or rented one would have purchased it new had that been the only option, that a HUGE increase in sales. The rental industry greatly hurts also because of the fact that games are released same day to rental companies as to retailers. If there was a 6 month grace period like in the movie industry (which there should be but unfortunately there was too much anti-Nintendo backlash at the time that the bill for renting software was passed in the early 90's) then it might be a different story. As stands Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, and pretty much all publishers would kill for a chance to cut out the competition of used shops and renters.

$59.99 x 150,000 (which is the number of first copies made of most games -- sometimes more)... Equals....

$8,998,500

zanzibar already touched on this, but really, do you think that's 100% profit? There are so many middle men besides the dev, publisher, manufactuer, reseller, shipping....that money gets spread out and while I don't know what the actual percentage is exactly, these guys aren't exactly wiping $100 bills on their asses. The majority of games don't even bring in a significant profit as publishers usually rely on AAA titles to bring in most their money. Releasing a video game doesn't make everyone involved in the process an instant millionaire, and the smaller studios especially really could use that extra money taken by the rental and used game markets.

[EternalGamer]

I agree that there is an awful lot of conjecture built into this forboding news, however what shocks me is that there are people here who would actually defend such a ludicrious practice. An action like this would be so incredibly uncalled for that pirating a game would become more moral than actually purchasing one and supporting such a ridiciulious raping of the consumer, in my opinion. When I buy a game, I own the goddamn game. Sony or any other company does not get to tell me how I am allowed to use it. No way in hell would I ever consider buying a PS3 no matter what came out for it if this became a reality.

Dan

[Murmillo]

I am begaining to think that Red Cloak has kidnapped bapenguin. What happened man, before you always double and triple checked your facts before posting, and now.. its like.. WTF - fanboi from hell.

if you read the rest of that page, it continues to read:
Does Sony plan to employ this technology in the PlayStation 3? Not likely. If so, PS3 owners would not be able to rent (used) games or borrow their friends’ games—or even purchase used games! Sure, the technology could be used for Blu-Ray movies, but for games? It just won’t go down like that… right?

[Karmakin]

bobbler:As we've seen in the Sony rootkit fiasco, Sony as a corporate entity really would do something of this nature. Why havn't they? I'm guessing technology. The Blu-Ray disks WOULD allow them to easy and relativly affordably insert this technology into the system. Would people bite? I doubt it. Sony THINKS they will.

So far, SCEA and SCEJ have kept quite a bit of distance from Sony corporate as a while. And that's why you havn't seen it yet.

Now of course, nobody knows if they'll actually use the technology. So it's best to take a wait and see. But I wouldn't rule it out completly.

[51|RandoM]

They do this, and pirates will launch a war against Sony that'll make the demise of Dreamcast look like a joke.

This would also essentially make renting games worthless, so it is of course not allowed.

*would* launch a war? Lol, the war has been going on for years already.

[Dracula-X]

Having read the patent, it is pretty much the existing authorization/security methods employed by the PS1/PS2 (specifically referenced) as I mentioned earlier with a 3rd layer of security (pulse data & erasure method). I'm also of the mind we'd have seen this employed already (it's from 99). But you never know... I'm still doubtful. And the timing of this bit of news is also... interesting. :)

[The Iron Weasel]

I am begaining to think that Red Cloak has kidnapped bapenguin. What happened man, before you always double and triple checked your facts before posting, and now.. its like.. WTF - fanboi from hell.

if you read the rest of that page, it continues to read:

Maybe Bap IS Red Cloak, but hes using Red Cloak, to vent the fanboy. :D

[Suicidal ShiZuru]

I would be totally for this if games cost half as much. It makes sense though but it would suck.

Rentals are a strange thing though. The stores buy the videos and games at low cost, then rent/resell them over and over and over and over and make an assload of money/profit. But no one complains. Then theres music, people bitch about wanting to copy a cd you own jsut for backup. Whats wrong there...

My album I made in my garage last weekend cant be copied/resold! but my game that took years and millions of dollars to develop sure can!

[Schnoogs]

It doesn't mean that at all.

I've rented dozens of games that I never had any intention of buying.
A couple of times, I've bought games based on enjoying renting them.
I've never rented a game that I would have bought if I had not rented it.
If the rental market didn't exist, I doubt I ever would have played those games at all.

Over here, a rental's about five bucks. A new game is a hundred.
That's a huge gap.

It actually does mean that...

Even if only 2 out of a 1000 renters would have bought it thats 1 more than the single copy sold to Blockbuster.

$100 > $50

Simple math...

[bean19]

I will completely not buy their system if I can't rent games on/for it.

Simply put, there are too many 5 to 6 hour games that I can't afford to pay $50 and as many games that I'm not sure about spending $50 on. That is simply too much money for me to throw at something that cannot be returned for it's full price if it is not satisfying.

I'm not difficult to sell games to either. I was looking at Gamespot's games sorted by their rankings, and found that I own at least 80% of titles that got a rating of 9 or above, and most of the ones that I don't own are sports titles for sports that I don't watch or play in real life.

The point being that rentals don't hurt the good games. They only hurt the bad games, and the bad games far outnumber the good. I don't want to play the $50 videogame lottery.

Also, I want to be able to play all of the games that come out for the PS3, not just the very best titles. If they did this, then I wouldn't be able to play more than one new title a month.

Another bad thing is that this would mean that the games I buy would be "locked" to my PS3. That means that I couldn't resell them to afford other titles. Additionally, this means that I could not buy used games from other players either.

Only getting to play 12 games or so on a system each year is not worth the initial investment in the system to me. Such a move would cause me to boycott the product, and I don't think I'm alone in this.

Sony can't be this stupid. This has to be bogus.

[Citizen Philip]

Maybe Bap IS Red Cloak, but hes using Red Cloak, to vent the fanboy. :D

The worms are the spice! The spice are the worms!

His name is a killing word?

[nonchalance]

It actually does mean that...

Even if only 2 out of a 1000 renters would have bought it thats 1 more than the single copy sold to Blockbuster.

$100 > $50

Simple math...

True enough.

But you said that 1000 rentals means 1000 lost sales, and that's just bullcrap.


Why don't publishers lobby for a system that gives them a percentage of rental income?

[jspeak32]

Also consider sony's track record with defective units! Remember how many bad ps2's came out of the initial bunch (and still a few bad ones thereafter)?
What if your console dies and you have to go out and buy a new one? Couldn't play anything from your existing library then! HA!
But I doubt sony will incorporate this into their ps3...it would prevent them from selling you a slimline ps3 years later!

If it stops used games wouldn't it also stop you from bringing the game over to a friends PS3? Good luck selling the PS3 if that happens Sony...

[bone_matrix]

I would be totally for this if games cost half as much. It makes sense though but it would suck.

Rentals are a strange thing though. The stores buy the videos and games at low cost, then rent/resell them over and over and over and over and make an assload of money/profit. But no one complains. Then theres music, people bitch about wanting to copy a cd you own jsut for backup. Whats wrong there...

My album I made in my garage last weekend cant be copied/resold! but my game that took years and millions of dollars to develop sure can!

I used to work at a video rental store. I've seen the bill for new movies we used to get to rent. Some of the movies we bought for OVER a hundred dollars a piece. Some less popular ones weren't nearly that expensive, but in the 60 dollar and a bit above range. I can't speak for games, as I was never around when (if) we received new ones.

So, if a new movie cost $100 to a video store, and they rented it out at $5 a rental, they would have to rent it 20 times before they would make any profit. Just something to think about. (And I'm pretty sure every rental store has to pay a premium for rental copies. But don't quote me on that.)

BAck on topic:

I realize that the article doesn't say Sony is going to do this with the PS3, but I'm just saying that if they did, I'd be pissed.

[Karmakin]

I used to work at a video rental store. I've seen the bill for new movies we used to get to rent. Some of the movies we bought for OVER a hundred dollars a piece. Some less popular ones weren't nearly that expensive, but in the 60 dollar and a bit above range. I can't speak for games, as I was never around when (if) we received new ones.

So, if a new movie cost $100 to a video store, and they rented it out at $5 a rental, they would have to rent it 20 times before they would make any profit. Just something to think about. (And I'm pretty sure every rental store has to pay a premium for rental copies. But don't quote me on that.)

BAck on topic:

I realize that the article doesn't say Sony is going to do this with the PS3, but I'm just saying that if they did, I'd be pissed.

Bone, that is what used to be the case, but that's changed recently. Generally speaking now a rental copy is the exact same as one you would buy at any department store.

[Last of the Red Hot Mamas]

Expanding on Karmakin's post: traditionally VHS tapes would be sold to rental stores at an inflated price (often $100 or more). These tapes were uanvailable through normal retail venues because the average consumer is not going to pay $100 for a movie. But if they waited 6-12 months, the tape would enter the "sell-through" market, at which point the price would drop to something more reasonable and the tapes would be sold through normal retail channels. This practice is usually not applied to DVDs (at least not in the U.S. -- it's done on occasion in the UK and Australia) and it's never been applied to video games. A video store pays the same price for a video game as the average consumer (indeed, it's not uncommon for video stores to send out employees to pick up new games at a local store, which is why many retailers have limits on how many copies one can purchase of a given game).

[Sl1pstream]

Isn't this like the system Valve uses for steam, but without manually entering your CD key?

[Kefkataran]

Sensationalism. No way this'll happen.

[Player 1]

If the suggested outcome of this newspiece is true then the pirates and cracking groups are going to savage the PS3 even more than they did PS1 and PS2. There's nothing they love more than taking this kind of attitude on.

This is one of the reasons why I never buy hardware until 6 months after release (apart from first generation games usually being tech demos with no game to play). Wait and see how things settle down.

.. that's IF all this stuff isn't baloney.

[if76]

It doesn't mean that at all.

I've rented dozens of games that I never had any intention of buying.
A couple of times, I've bought games based on enjoying renting them.
I've never rented a game that I would have bought if I had not rented it.
If the rental market didn't exist, I doubt I ever would have played those games at all.

Over here, a rental's about five bucks. A new game is a hundred.
That's a huge gap.

I've rented hundreds of games if not thousands over the course of my lifetime and I've saved thousands of dollars. Would I have bought all those games otherwise? Certainly not. But at least 10%. Over the course of my lifetime that could total to like $2600. That's about 60 games I would have purchased over the last ten years. Rentals are definitely hurting publishers and developers.

[mattpeckham]

All this activation - activate this, turn your personal credentials over for that. Individually it's not like there's some great cabal to "get you," but taken all together over time, it adds up.

"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both, and deserve neither."

- Thomas Jefferson

matt peckham (dot com) (http://mattpeckham.com)

[Revolutionary1]

Wow, someone needs to beat you senseless with the "Fucked in the head" stick. Or maybe they already have.

Damn fools. This world is fully of raging, idiots. Get a clue.

Oh and it wouldn't hurt to do a little research into marketting. Rentals *help* Sony, not hurt them and used games likewise (most people sell old games so they can buy.. ahem.. NEW ONES.... Now how does that hurt Sony?)

-TNC-

Besides, I'm pretty sure the game developers get a royalty off of used game sales as well. Not as large as that for a new game, but I can't imagine any publisher allowing their games to be sold as used without getting something from it.

I should ask the manager at the game store I work at. I'm sure he'd know. In fact I'll try to remember to do that next time I work there and then post it here for all to read and debunk.

[Revolutionary1]

I've rented hundreds of games if not thousands over the course of my lifetime and I've saved thousands of dollars. Would I have bought all those games otherwise? Certainly not. But at least 10%. Over the course of my lifetime that could total to like $2600. That's about 60 games I would have purchased over the last ten years. Rentals are definitely hurting publishers and developers.

Why would it hurt them? Would you rather get $15 profit from a game once, or $3 a couple dozen times? I think the rental and used game market benefits both sides. The user gets to test out a game and find out if it's worth buying, and the publisher gets royalties many times over, even if their game sucks.

[phantomhitman]

Besides, I'm pretty sure the game developers get a royalty off of used game sales as well. Not as large as that for a new game, but I can't imagine any publisher allowing their games to be sold as used without getting something from it.



(this is not directed at soley you)

According to an article posted on ea about a month or so ago you are wrong. The sell of used games does hurt game companies. A single game could be passed around a dozen times, but only the first purchase price goes back to the companies. After that the used dealers get the profit. Those same 12 people can play on the game servers and lobby areas which the game companies paid to develop and maintain. Even though most people hate it, mainly because it saves them money, it is wrong. Places that rent games and sell used games makes ton of money off of a little purchase price. I do buy used games occasionally, but I think this is a good idea. The developers get their money for every single game purchased, it will screw over the used dealers (which rip people off in the most inhuman way), and it will help support that company making the game. There is some kind of deal setup with rental chains, I THINK, that works with some game developers that way the developers do not lose a ton of money. People are bitching because now they have to buy a game at full price rather than wait and buy it used 2 months after it comes out. Guess what, the game companies want their fair share of the money just like the gamers want what they pay for. Stop being greedy and realize you are just trying to keep prices as low as possible for yourself. It will never go through, so do not worry about it.

[bapenguin]

It seems there is a requirement to post at least one anti-Sony news item a day.

The actual requirement is:

2 anti-sony stories
1 crazy Ken story
1 Nintendo is teh d0000med!!! stories
2 THIS GAME GOT X REVIEW, OMG TOO LOW Stories
3 360 related items, with one of them questioning supply

Rinse and repeat

You guys are hillarious....we post whatever news is out there. This story was on a couple of sites and in a few forums. People take things to literally, the strength of our site is our discussion boards. That's what sets us apart from the other blog style sites. The reason this was posted was to talk about the implications, and the fact that this COULD happen, not just to Sony, but to any manufacturer. I felt it had great relevance, especially considering all the Sony DRM chat around here lately. You'll also notice the ? mark in the title, that means not confirmed, up for discussion. Rumor.

As you read through the thread, you saw some of our more intelligent posters had some great discussions regarding it, how it could be done, why it would be done, etc.

[bean19]

I agree that there is an awful lot of conjecture built into this forboding news, however what shocks me is that there are people here who would actually defend such a ludicrious practice. An action like this would be so incredibly uncalled for that pirating a game would become more moral than actually purchasing one and supporting such a ridiciulious raping of the consumer, in my opinion. When I buy a game, I own the goddamn game. Sony or any other company does not get to tell me how I am allowed to use it. No way in hell would I ever consider buying a PS3 no matter what came out for it if this became a reality.

Dan

lol.

Pirating would not be MORAL. It would still be stealing.

Boycotting the system based on principles would be moral. However, most people would just be practical and boycott the system based on finances. . . not morals.

[bone_matrix]

Bone, that is what used to be the case, but that's changed recently. Generally speaking now a rental copy is the exact same as one you would buy at any department store.

Expanding on Karmakin's post: traditionally VHS tapes would be sold to rental stores at an inflated price (often $100 or more). These tapes were uanvailable through normal retail venues because the average consumer is not going to pay $100 for a movie. But if they waited 6-12 months, the tape would enter the "sell-through" market, at which point the price would drop to something more reasonable and the tapes would be sold through normal retail channels. This practice is usually not applied to DVDs (at least not in the U.S. -- it's done on occasion in the UK and Australia) and it's never been applied to video games. A video store pays the same price for a video game as the average consumer (indeed, it's not uncommon for video stores to send out employees to pick up new games at a local store, which is why many retailers have limits on how many copies one can purchase of a given game).

Granted, I haven't worked at the rental place in about 3 or 4 years, but we paid a buttload for DVDs as well as VHS tapes. We also got the rental copies the same time as we got copies to sell, and had to pay the very high price on our rental copies while the ones we sold were the normal DVD and VHS price. I'm just working with what I know and have seen.

And Karmakin, how recently did the practice change? I can't imagine that the companies that sell rental copies want the price to be the same as a real DVD.

[agentgray]

You guys are hillarious....we post whatever news is out there. This story was on a couple of sites and in a few forums. People take things to literally, the strength of our site is our discussion boards. That's what sets us apart from the other blog style sites. The reason this was posted was to talk about the implications, and the fact that this COULD happen, not just to Sony, but to any manufacturer. I felt it had great relevance, especially considering all the Sony DRM chat around here lately. You'll also notice the ? mark in the title, that means not confirmed, up for discussion. Rumor.

As you read through the thread, you saw some of our more intelligent posters had some great discussions regarding it, how it could be done, why it would be done, etc.
Exactly. At least in this thread, I don't think its anti-Sony sentiment we're seeing. However, in light of recent events this stuff will come up. Why? Because Sony has made it possible for people to look.

No one company can ever really be trusted. They want your money. Money. Money. Money. Not you. Money. Money. Sony has gone one step farther because they've blatently intruded (to also potentially get your info) to protect their interests, not ours. That, and they've damaged something I own that I bought with my money...without my permission. The execs have even defended it siting customer ignorance.

So, yeah, I think the Sony bashing is justified for now. It'll eventually be replaced with something else, but for now, Sony (thanks to themselves) is in the spotlight.

"There are four lights!"

[Citizen Philip]

The actual requirement is:

2 anti-sony stories
1 crazy Ken story
1 Nintendo is teh d0000med!!! stories
2 THIS GAME GOT X REVIEW, OMG TOO LOW Stories
3 360 related items, with one of them questioning supply

Rinse and repeat

You guys are hillarious....we post whatever news is out there. This story was on a couple of sites and in a few forums. People take things to literally, the strength of our site is our discussion boards. That's what sets us apart from the other blog style sites. The reason this was posted was to talk about the implications, and the fact that this COULD happen, not just to Sony, but to any manufacturer. I felt it had great relevance, especially considering all the Sony DRM chat around here lately. You'll also notice the ? mark in the title, that means not confirmed, up for discussion. Rumor.

As you read through the thread, you saw some of our more intelligent posters had some great discussions regarding it, how it could be done, why it would be done, etc.

Or people who couldn't careless about which side the console coin lands, see nothing but wave after wave of bad headlines, all attacks against Sony: mostly submitted by the few "offical site editors" and can't help but feel that, whatever balance in reporting that exsisted previously, is slipping away and post against the almost limitless slanderfests. Flamewars from fanbois are one thing, but when the accuracy of "offical editors" seems slanted: you get upset readers/viewers.

[shiznit]

i was gonna wait until the ps3 was out in usa to make a decision on which next-gen console to buy. either the ps3 was going to be better and i would get that, or the 360 would be cheaper by then. but if sony actually goes through with this code validation and deletion scheme, there's NO way i'm getting a ps3. part of me actually hopes they try this, so i can watch the company collapse and shareholders burn kutaragi at the stake.

[Knite]

But this IS a site where submissions are also accepted by people who are not the main news editors. If you feel that there needs to me more Anti 360 newsposts, and more positive Sony ones, then see if there's any NEW news with Negative Microsoft or Positive Sony spins.

As it stands right now, the only new console coming out this year is the 360, so a lot of news will be of the upcoming 360. One of the other hottest topics is Sony's invasion of privacy on home PCs with thier DRM. Is this the news editor's fault, or the nature of news currently? Add to that the title of the news article has to be a little controversial to properly stir up conversation and the negatives seem really negatvie, and the positives as fanboism. This IS an opinionated website ya know ;-)

[MasterKwan]

TheNet, explain how used and rental games help Sony? They get a cut of ever SOLD game and nothing from rentals or used. They subsidise the hardware and take a loss on every unit sold (at least in the first year or so) so, the money for them is in the games. Every rental or used games sold/rented is money that Sony and the publisher didn't make.

I'm not saying rental and used is bad or illegal, used in particular is totally legal. I am saying it's not good for anyone but the end user.

You guys know how DVD's work right? Data's encrypted, DVD player has the ability to decrypt the data? I read this comment as really just a method similiar to the DVD's where the content of the game disk can be allowed to run or not. I'm guess that Sony's going to keep a blacklist of games found in the wild and will update the blacklist either from newer game disks or over the net to prevent the leaked games from playing. So, they can lock out any particular game disk they want to.

[shiznit]

"There are four lights!"

nice st:tng quote, or was it orwell?

[bean19]

Or people who couldn't careless about which side the console coin lands, see nothing but wave after wave of bad headlines, all attacks against Sony: mostly submitted by the few "offical site editors" and can't help but feel that, whatever balance in reporting that exsisted previously, is slipping away and post against the almost limitless slanderfests. Flamewars from fanbois are one thing, but when the accuracy of "offical editors" seems slanted: you get upset readers/viewers.

Dude, do you ever read the links?

The news that is reported is the news that is going on. Do you get this bent out of shape when there is a negative story about the X360? Btw, I have one in submission right now. ;)

[Citizen Philip]

But this IS a site where submissions are also accepted by people who are not the main news editors. If you feel that there needs to me more Anti 360 newsposts, and more positive Sony ones, then see if there's any NEW news with Negative Microsoft or Positive Sony spins.

As it stands right now, the only new console coming out this year is the 360, so a lot of news will be of the upcoming 360. One of the other hottest topics is Sony's invasion of privacy on home PCs with thier DRM. Is this the news editor's fault, or the nature of news currently? Add to that the title of the news article has to be a little controversial to properly stir up conversation and the negatives seem really negatvie, and the positives as fanboism. This IS an opinionated website ya know ;-)

Stories can be submitted by anyone, but when official editors post about consoles and you get: slander against one and at worst neutral posts about another you are granted the seed of doubt. I certainly don't disagree that the company, Sony, is neck deep in mud, but including the phrase PS3 everytime Sony comes up is wrong. Of course Sony and Microsoft suck, mostly evenly for different things.

Except Sony monitors, they are really good.

[bapenguin]

Or people who couldn't careless about which side the console coin lands, see nothing but wave after wave of bad headlines, all attacks against Sony: mostly submitted by the few "offical site editors" and can't help but feel that, whatever balance in reporting that exsisted previously, is slipping away and post against the almost limitless slanderfests. Flamewars from fanbois are one thing, but when the accuracy of "offical editors" seems slanted: you get upset readers/viewers.

That's fine, it's all about perception.

[Kefkataran]

The actual requirement is:

2 anti-sony stories
1 crazy Ken story
1 Nintendo is teh d0000med!!! stories
2 THIS GAME GOT X REVIEW, OMG TOO LOW Stories
3 360 related items, with one of them questioning supply

I knew it!

[Citizen Philip]

Dude, do you ever read the links?

The news that is reported is the news that is going on. Do you get this bent out of shape when there is a negative story about the X360? Btw, I have one in submission right now. ;)

I believe Microsoft and Sony are always in season. The bone I am picking at is specifically the editors, sure Red Cloak is a hoot - but he isn't an editor, he's a submitter. When you wear the badge of editor for a website that does reporting, the content of your posts has a raised bar. The quality of reporting from the editors has a direct relation to the percieved reputation of the website.

[Bubby]

After the disc is validated, the code is physically destroyed; either with a laser, like a CD burner or with something that scratches the code from the disc.



That's the most ridiculous thing I've read in a few days.

[Zanzibar]

Besides, I'm pretty sure the game developers get a royalty off of used game sales as well. Not as large as that for a new game, but I can't imagine any publisher allowing their games to be sold as used without getting something from it.

I should ask the manager at the game store I work at. I'm sure he'd know. In fact I'll try to remember to do that next time I work there and then post it here for all to read and debunk.

Nope. Developers/publishers get nada after the first sale. EB gets X number of games from the publisher, they sell them, they return whatever's left. Virtually all publishers use the sell-through numbers when determining any kind of developer profit - like Game Y needs to sell Z units before the publisher has recouped their dev costs, after that, developer starts seeing profits. And yes, there is all kinds of cooking-the-books that goes on that basically screws developers out of profits from the publisher. Not always, mind you, but it does happen often.

Used games are not considered AT ALL. The only people that get anything out of selling used games are the retailers. You turn in 5 games and they give you a pittance (you're lucky if they give you half of what it costs new), they turn around and sell those 5 games at $5-$10 off the price of a new copy. They don't report that sale to the publisher at all, they've made a sizeable profit off the deal.

I urge you, support your local developers, just buy a new copy for the extra $5. Sure, if you're trying to find an old game that isn't sold anymore, knock yourself out in the bargain bin. But if a new copy is sitting next to a used copy, buy the new copy. (Hm. Unless it's EA, I suppose.)

[shiznit]

i completely agree that used games hurt developers, who are inherrently strapped for cash anyway, but if sony implements this in the ps3 then all hell will break loose and the ps3 will flop. i wont buy just out of spite, and will do my best to convince every one i know not to buy one. they are really starting to alienate the consumers lately. they can end this stupid blu-ray vs. hd-dvd war by implenting user managed copy (so legit users can back up their expensive movies) but they refuse, then the secret rootkit bullshit, and now this is just too much. sony can kiss my a$$.

[nonchalance]

I urge you, support your local developers, just buy a new copy for the extra $5. Sure, if you're trying to find an old game that isn't sold anymore, knock yourself out in the bargain bin. But if a new copy is sitting next to a used copy, buy the new copy. (Hm. Unless it's EA, I suppose.)

Except that it's not $5, at least not here.

I can spend $100 on a new game, or I can spend $50 on a used game - and if I sell my old one, that $50 goes down to $20 or $30.
My heart bleeds for game developers not getting my cash - but you know what? 99% of them get paid twice what I do anyway.

I'll buy free trade coffee, I'll not buy sweatshop clothes, but used games just don't really worry me.

[vherub]

This has been an epic read so far, my thoughts are:

DRM hurts the idea of backwards compatibility, just tears into it with rusty hooks.
I would be surprised if Sony, or any company, would be successful with a strategy of preventing both timeshifting and placeshifting. And in this regard I do not want to be surprised.
Given not only the havok played with rentals (perhaps drm-free games, inevitably increasing rental costs), but if your machine ever goes down, you are left with coasters. Sony may have an undeseved rep as making systems that break easily, but this is reckless arrogance towards the consumer.
I do not see this happening, MS/Nin would need to also support, if not gamers would not buy the mulitplatform game they are chained to, and developers would be less likely to develop once they saw the lower sales.

Plus, if this ever did happen, the internet as we know it might very well implode.

[Serapth]

So why is it you guys get so screwed over for pricing in Australia? Is that on all consumer products, or just games? Im assuming you are running normal power lines and either NTSC or PAL TV's so there shouldnt be any additional development costs, and granted you are in the middle of an ocean, but still... shipping aint that expensive.

Or is it taxes/tarrifs that kill you?

[reimomo]

I've rented hundreds of games if not thousands over the course of my lifetime and I've saved thousands of dollars. Would I have bought all those games otherwise? Certainly not. But at least 10%. Over the course of my lifetime that could total to like $2600. That's about 60 games I would have purchased over the last ten years. Rentals are definitely hurting publishers and developers.

Maybe devs shouldn't expect people to pay 50 bucks for 20 hours of crappy "entertainment". Used game sales is about the best way I can think of to enforce some "stop making shitty game" requirement on the industry. If the rental stores aren't paying more for a rentable version of a game (the way they do movies) thats something the publishers need to address with the stores, not the customers.

Oh, thats right... you do realize its the publishers boning devs in the ass all week long when it comes to margins, dont you? Your average gamer who, golly, wants to buy a piece of merchandise and then be able to treat it as their property, isn't your enemy.

[shiznit]

if it hurts EA, i'm all for it. they don't deserve any better after liquidating westwood and other quality studios. like the previous poster said, if the rentals hurt developers then the publisher needs to work out a better deal with the rental chain to better compensate the developer. as for used game sales, if i buy it, its mine and i wanna be able to do whatever i want with it, including selling it after im done with it. and the developers aren't saints either; how can they expect us to pay $60 for (and not rent) a game that takes 10-15hrs to finish and then not try to get some money back? are they f@#$%ing crazy? maybe if they made games that offered more than a rental period's worth of playing time or with some replay value we wouldn't be selling them back to EB or renting them. how many people honestly do you all think sold their copy of Tie Figher? i still have mine, along with many other quality games that took longer than a rental period to finish and made me want to play them again. if people did not want to get rid of their games, then EB wouldnt have any used copies to sell. like the previous poster said, used game sales is the best "stop making shit" mechanism in this industry.

[nonchalance]

So why is it you guys get so screwed over for pricing in Australia? Is that on all consumer products, or just games? Im assuming you are running normal power lines and either NTSC or PAL TV's so there shouldnt be any additional development costs, and granted you are in the middle of an ocean, but still... shipping aint that expensive.

Or is it taxes/tarrifs that kill you?

It's not taxes - we're running a flat 10% tax - the sort of thing that makes consumer goods cheap and essentials expensive.
We run normal power and PAL TV systems.
1 USD = around 1.2 AUD at the moment, but from what I know of American prices, you'll pay about what we do for coffee, bread and all that.
Importing most electronics is a bit cheaper before shipping, but not significantly so.

Because we can't import, thanks to the wonderful region-coding inherent in today's consoles, production companies jump on the additional profit available through this artificial price inflation.
Importing PC and handheld games is worthwhile, but shipping costs and the fact that most American online retailers are uninterested in anything outside their continent makes importing hardware impractical.

Even games created by Australian companies and produced in Australia come out at the same price point.

A number of Aussie online retailers have started importing US handheld and PC games en masse and selling them at import prices only a couple of weeks after the US gets them, as opposed to the standard 'wait four months'.

If Sony, Nintendo and MS give up their region-coding bullshit those importers will extend to console games, and then hopefully shopfront retailers will follow suit.

[Kamalot]

That's the most ridiculous thing I've read in a few days.
Well then, you should read the patent application. It specifically states the ability to remove the code from the disc. How would you go about removing a code from an optical disc?

If you think back to how some of the disc-based systems checked to ensure the discs were original, you can find examples of the Saturn and Dreamcast.

The Sega Saturn had a ring on the outer edge of the disc that contained the 'key' to prove the disc was original. You can fool the Saturn by booting a copied game and when the laser moves to the outer edge, quickly swap the copy with an original. The laser will verify the original disc and then return to the center of the disc to start loading. When it does, quickly swap back the copied disc.

The Dreamcast had a ring in the middle of the disc surface. The inside of the ring was regular CD-ROM data. Everything past the ring was GD-ROM data, data that is compressed more than a regular CD-ROM.

Sony could easily implement a portion of PS3 discs to contain the verification code. When the disc is inserted, the verification code is confirmed, the disc's unique ID written to the system's internal memory. The disc will now always be recognized by the PS3 due to the disc's unique ID number. The verification code is then destroyed, preventing the disc from being verified with another PS3. How one goes about destroying the code is open for speculation.

The verification code could be on a portion of the disc that is writeable, like a regular CD-R. The PS3 could then write over that verification code, eliminating it from the disc.

A more barbaric solution could involve a 'ring' within which the verification code resides. Upon successfully being verified with a PS3, the surface of the disc within that 'ring' could be scratched off via mechanical means. It would only have to be a tiny scratch mark around the disc, barely perceptible. Much like a needle on a record player, a needle could be used on the top of the disc (the side that contains the label and foil surface that actually holds data) scratching off the validation ring. Poof! Data gone in a single rotation of the disc.

Granted, it is mechanical and barbaric, but so is putting an optical disc in a portable player instead of using ROM chips. That didn't stop Sony.

Like I said, the actual system of removing the verification code isn't specified in the patent and is open for speculation. The patent does clearly say that the verification is done on a system level with no need to be online. It also clearly says that the verification code is REMOVED FROM THE DISC.

How would you remove the verification code from the disc?

[Zanzibar]

Except that it's not $5, at least not here.

I can spend $100 on a new game, or I can spend $50 on a used game - and if I sell my old one, that $50 goes down to $20 or $30.
My heart bleeds for game developers not getting my cash - but you know what? 99% of them get paid twice what I do anyway.

I'll buy free trade coffee, I'll not buy sweatshop clothes, but used games just don't really worry me.

Sorry for the ridiculous price markup, I really am. That's just not right.

However, your other point about the amount of money game developers make really shouldn't apply here. It's like saying that policemen make more money than you do, so you don't feel sorry if they lose their jobs. You enjoy the safety they provide, but hey, when it comes right down to it, you'd rather not pay the taxes for their salaries.

If you and lots of your friends buy used (or for some people, PIRATE THE GAME, you fucktards, you know who you are) , then the bottom line is that the sales of that title go down. Could be the best game ever, but damned if the publisher doesn't look at the sell-through and scratch their collective heads and notice that the developer's title has missed sales expectations, which means that the developer is less likely to get another good project. Which means that good developers get stuck doing bottom-line-friendly licensed games instead of being innovative and taking the occasional risk with game development.

You ever wonder why fewer and fewer risks get taken with games nowadays? You have no one to blame but those who enjoy the game in ways that can't be tracked by the publisher - used game sales and software piracy. Reviews be damned, if the game doesn't sell, there won't be a sequel.

Okay, okay, I'm presenting the worst-case scenarios here and probably taking more than a little hyperbole, but there's truth in what I'm saying, and you know it.

[nonchalance]

However, your other point about the amount of money game developers make really shouldn't apply here. It's like saying that policemen make more money than you do, so you don't feel sorry if they lose their jobs. You enjoy the safety they provide, but hey, when it comes right down to it, you'd rather not pay the taxes for their salaries.

True enough. Good metaphor, if a little overblown.

I guess a better point would be that I can very rarely afford new games, regardless of whether I want to or not.
I can justify breaking the budget for starving coffee farmers, and spending more for clothing labels that pay their workers reasonable wages.

I can't justify doing that for game developers, regardless of whether or not they deserve it. I can't afford to support everything I want to, and developers work in a field they love and earn a decent wage, so buying new games rather than used is a relatively low priority on my social justice schedule.

If that means risk-taking is reduced to a few companies that are prepared for it, and nothing is left but Madden clones and Sims expansions, that'll suck, but in the end, it's just games, and everyone involved will survive.

[Zanzibar]

Yeah, I'll say it again - paying twice as much for games just is gruesome. OK, I won't be mad at Aussies who buy used, but if it's a good game, tell your friends and maybe somebody will actually buy it new ;)