Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

The next generation of consoles will require Internet connections. No preowned sales allowed.


Video Games

1 to 50 of 390 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

Whilst hard info is still borderline non-existent on the PlayStation 4 (apparently code-named, and maybe finally-named, the PlayStation Orbis) and the X-Box 720 (code-named Durango), there seems to be a growing consensus that Sony and Microsoft want to shoot dead the pre-owned gaming market with their new systems, regardless of what impact that has on gaming retail.

According to Kotaku, the PlayStation Orbis will require Internet activation for all of its games. This will link your game to a unique serial code. The code may actually be transferrable, but only for a fee payable directly to Sony.

It is also strongly rumoured that at least the PS4 will require an always-on Internet connection in order to work.

In other words: for the next console generation there will be uniform, perpetual DRM for all titles. There will be no preowned games market to speak of. There will probably be no grey/import market for hardware. If you're living in the USA and want an early console, tough, you'll have to wait for the native release. If you haven't any Internet access for any reason, tough, you won't be able to play games.

I suspect many console gamers will not be happy with this.

Obviously we're still 2-3 years away from these consoles launching and complaints and market research may change the console companies' minds, but this is still a startling development. Sadly, it may have been triggered by the relative passivity that has greeted PC DRM schemes in the last few years. Whilst there's been complaints about it, PC game sales have still increased dramatically in the last two years, mostly through DRM services like Steam and Origin. This may have encouraged Sony and Microsoft to take this step.


Doesn't really bother me much. Half my Xbox 360 games require I be signed into Xbox Live Gold to use my DLC anyway if I play on my second Xbox. (DLC works on the first Xbox it was purchased on, or when logged into the Live account it was purchased on.)

I hope they'll keep that scheme, honestly, where the game or DLC works on the first Xbox it was registered on even when that Xbox isn't connected to the Internet, but requires a connection for any other Xbox it is played on. That works pretty well for me.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber

The new Diablo 3 is going to be Battlenet only. Which means the purchase of the game is linked directly to your battlenet account.

If the developement is startling you.... you haven't been paying attention. The whole model now is licensing.... not purchase. And generally licenses aren't transferable.

Osirion

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Unfortunate yes, but really, my PS3 is nearly exclusively used as a Blu-ray player, and all the games I want to get used are PS2 or earlier anyhow. My PC purchases (95% of my gaming) are roughly 75% from Steam, and the others are "register to the Publisher's service and you can download it forever and ever" like ME3 or the upcoming Diablo 3. Also, I've been used to the 'no used games' lifestyle on the PC for well over a decade (CD Keys: FTW? or is it FTL?), transitioning the same thing to my console won't affect my everyday gaming habits.

If Gamestop really really wanted to push the issue, they would just be brushed aside by the larger companies. Afterall, Walmart, Target and KMart don't have used game sales (or not widespread), and used sales are a drop in the hat of Best Buy's revenue. Those major retailers will just carry whatever their suppliers give them, no complaints. Gamestop sits alone as the other 20% of the market, and dissolves into a specialty store where antiques of yore line the shelves.

What the game companies need to do, if they're intent one hedging out first sale rights, is develop a way to sell your license of the game (afterall, all games are considered software, and their producer sees your purchase as a license). They'll probably want to collect a premium off the fee, probably somewhere in the 5-7.5% range, and would likely set a minimum transfer price based on the title. This price wouldn't scale down very fast, just like retail prices stay high for 3 years before dropping 25%. But at least you *could* sell your copy of that next crappy COD:MW45 game you bought for your Xbox-5280.


LazarX wrote:

The new Diablo 3 is going to be Battlenet only. Which means the purchase of the game is linked directly to your battlenet account.

If the developement is startling you.... you haven't been paying attention. The whole model now is licensing.... not purchase. And generally licenses aren't transferable.

I was actually more amused by it, as I'm a PC gamer exclusively. Many, many times over the last few years I've seen PC gamers complaining about DRM on multiple forums and sites like Kotaku, only to see (a very small number of, to be fair) console owners come in and laugh, "Well, that's what you get for gaming on PC, consoles FTW!" It's been pointed out many times that DRM of the exact same kind will probably come out for the next generation and it's always been shot down as a possibility. Yet here we are.

Of course, people who play online and people who buy lots of DLC and so on are going to be unaffected, since they need to be online anyway. But people who have unreliable connections because they are far from the exchange, or people who live in remote rural areas with limited or no connections (a major problem in the Republic of Ireland, where I was living a couple of years ago), or people who move around a lot because they are in the armed forces or whatever, will be justifiably outraged by this move.

As I said before though, it may not come to pass. Sony and Microsoft may have even floated the possibility to see how bad the reaction is and then decide what to do about it. I suspect that for them the DRM and internet activation is mostly about killing the second-hand market, and if they can find another way of doing that they'll do that by preference.


Guess I'll be sticking with PC gaming and waiting a few years to play the console games I'm interested in on the innevitible emulators.


I do not know about Sony, but Microsoft has denied or shot down the rumor that the next Xbox would not play used games.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Well then. Time to stop playing new games, then. Gods know I have enough old ones, and honestly, there are seriously few new ones that make me interested anymore.


LazarX wrote:

The new Diablo 3 is going to be Battlenet only. Which means the purchase of the game is linked directly to your battlenet account.

If the development is startling you.... you haven't been paying attention. The whole model now is licensing.... not purchase. And generally licenses aren't transferable.

I just saw today that the new SimCity will also require a constant online connection. I wonder how many more PC games will go this route.

I also just saw this evening the rumors about the next Playstation not being backwards compatible or being able to play used games. If any of these rumors turn out to be true, I guess the other companies should just give all their money to Nintendo now, as I doubt they will be doing anything like this at all with the Wii U.


One of the measures being strongly considered is "locking" games to an individual console.

This means no more rental games, no bringing games to your buddy's house, no letting people borrow games, and yeah, no one pre-owned games.

Honestly, I get it, the pre-owned market is shooting developers in the foot. I just wish there was a way to stop Gamespot's business strategy without screwing over the end users.


Quote:
I wonder how many more PC games will go this route.

Some, particularly the European studios, are making a big deal out of dropping or not having DRM, such as CD Projekt and Paradox. Others are only taking small steps towards having one-time activation (like Steam, though the offline mode can be sketchy) rather than anything too outrageous.

But the problem is that the very success of Steam and other forms of DRM has shown that people will put up with it. The numbers of people who cannot or will not get a permanant Internet hook-up has been shown to be small to negligible, and can be ignored. Certainly Microsoft and Sony will be aware of this, especially since Microsoft's PC games division has tried various forms of DRM before (on the original MASS EFFECT, most notably).

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

So what about us poor sods in the backcountry where everytime we get a good rain, our internet poops out for most of the day? Now I can't play a game that I paid for whenever I want because they assume that everyone has reliable access? Hope they realize that there are still large swaths of land in this country, mostly the midwest, deep south, and mountain regions, that still have crappy internet connections. I have friends in Mississippi where only DSL is offered. And yes, I have 'broadband' here in North Dakota. And about once a week, maybe only twice a month if i'm lucky, i'll lose internet for the majority of the day. And it seems like its always on a Saturday.

Osirion

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
sirmattdusty wrote:
So what about us poor sods in the backcountry where everytime we get a good rain, our internet poops out for most of the day? Now I can't play a game that I paid for whenever I want because they assume that everyone has reliable access? Hope they realize that there are still large swaths of land in this country, mostly the midwest, deep south, and mountain regions, that still have crappy internet connections. I have friends in Mississippi where only DSL is offered. And yes, I have 'broadband' here in North Dakota. And about once a week, maybe only twice a month if i'm lucky, i'll lose internet for the majority of the day. And it seems like its always on a Saturday.

Do the same thing I do when my internet goes out (Steam offline mode has to be set BEFORE the internet goes out)... spend time with your family, watch TV, read a book, go outside and do yard work, sleep, etc.

Most all of the South has cable television access, and all of those have cable internet (Cox and Comcast have eaten the South alive), and at least here in AR, if you don't have access to CATV, there is a real good chance your telephone provider offers DSL or your local telecom has a wide spectrum WIFI over the county. According to Broadband Map, the Great Plains and the Rockies are where the worst penetration of broadband internet exists. And that map doesn't even cover the 150/mo, 256kpbs down 56kbps up satellite internet.


Well. Looks like the Wii U is going to be my main console for the next generation.


I've read the rumors, and while concerned, I don't believe them at this time.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I honestly see strict DRM as the death of consoles.

Niche games survive and thrive because of Gamestop. They do not sell well enough to get stocked on shelves at most non-game stores. Gamestop requires secondary market sales to stay afloat. If the secondary market goes away, niche games will move away from consoles. This will significantly reduce the number of games for sale on the consoles, reducing console sales. Basicly, the only things available will the the top sellers, many of which are also available for PC now, so I see it as a very poor buisness decision.


I frankly don't understand the fuss. I own a 360, a Wii, and a gaming PC, and I don't think I've ever played a pre-owned game on any of them. If I want a game, I'll buy it from the people who actually made it, and make sure that my money supports the development of additional games along the same vein.

Why would anyone care about this? Other than the obvious, "I don't want to pay full price for the games I play," argument, which frankly doesn't have a whole lot of ethical weight behind it?


Hey Scott Betts there is people out there in the world not making much money and used games keeps their families happy with affordable prices. This is what keeps game stores in business to begin with... used titles and trade ins. It is getting ridiculous they are forcing people to go to the internet to do anything anymore. The internet is like a spreading disease being forced upon peoples everday lives to enjoy things they once grew up with.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SuperSlayer wrote:
Hey Scott Betts there is people out there in the world not making much money and used games keeps their families happy with affordable prices.

I'm sure it does. But that's a one-sided argument; it ignores the deserved gain that the games' creators stand to make from a new copy bought in lieu of a pre-owned copy.

Quote:
This is what keeps game stores in business to begin with... used titles and trade ins.

Game stores don't really have much reason to be in business. They are a dying breed struggling to find a reason for keeping physical stores open.

Quote:
It is getting ridiculous they are forcing people to go to the internet to do anything anymore. The internet is like a spreading disease being forced upon peoples everday lives to enjoy things they once grew up with.

The internet is making things incredibly convenient. I can purchase excellent, very affordable games from the comfort of my home, download them immediately, play them to my heart's content, uninstall them to make room for more games, and reinstall them whenever I feel like.

Again, is there an ethically-defensible argument for being upset with the demise of the pre-owned games market?


Caineach wrote:

I honestly see strict DRM as the death of consoles.

Niche games survive and thrive because of Gamestop. They do not sell well enough to get stocked on shelves at most non-game stores. Gamestop requires secondary market sales to stay afloat. If the secondary market goes away, niche games will move away from consoles. This will significantly reduce the number of games for sale on the consoles, reducing console sales. Basicly, the only things available will the the top sellers, many of which are also available for PC now, so I see it as a very poor buisness decision.

Niche games can easily find a home in digital distribution. For an example of how this works, look at the PC market. Consoles started moving in that direction this generation, and I expect the next generation of consoles will embrace it as much as they're able.

"Axing used games will kill consoles," strikes me as a pretty short-sighted argument, especially since console manufacturers are the ones considering restrictions on used games.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Unsurprising. Publishers do nothing but lose money from used sales (profits go straight to the distributor). It's why DRM hit PC gaming awhile ago... you used to be able to buy used PC games in stores too, remember? Various kinds of DRM and online activation caused that to go the way of the dodo. The argument for it was always that they were (and are) avoiding piracy, but it's as much if not moreso getting away from used game sales and game sharing.

Funny thing is, I remember a time when a big component in the PC gaming vs console gaming argument/comparison was that console gaming was attractive was because it was easy--put the game disc in, turn it on, go. No rigamarole. By comparison, PC game experiences tended typically to be more: do a lengthy install, download and install patches, troubleshoot incompatibilities with your particular system.... then eventually, go, but it took a long time to get there. (Note I am saying this all as primarily a PC gamer.)

When the current generation of consoles came out, I thought, oh, I better get one of those eventually. There seemed some cool games for them. But then... I realized while they did not require to be online all the time, there were huge online components. Console games were starting to have patches (sometimes to fix hugely game breaking bugs). One friend of mine had to replace his XBox 360 3 times in short succession before he finally got one that wouldn't brick. Etc. etc. etc. And I thought... "gee, this sounds just like PC gaming, except it's harder to troubleshoot it yourself." And I decided to stick with the devil I knew.

The one "console" I play (besides my old PS2) is my Nintendo DS -- precisely because I can plug in the cartridge and turn it on and go. I love the complexity of a well designed PC game but sometimes I like to play something simple on a machine with a very simple purpose. Even that will go away soon -- probably you will need WiFi and only be able to download games to the next gen of handhelds too. And nothing will be simple any more... (until someone figures out how to market offline plug and play as the next big user friendly thing, at least).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Scott Betts wrote:

I frankly don't understand the fuss. I own a 360, a Wii, and a gaming PC, and I don't think I've ever played a pre-owned game on any of them. If I want a game, I'll buy it from the people who actually made it, and make sure that my money supports the development of additional games along the same vein.

Why would anyone care about this? Other than the obvious, "I don't want to pay full price for the games I play," argument, which frankly doesn't have a whole lot of ethical weight behind it?

I'm less concerned about paying full price, and more concerned about the shortened shelf life of the games that are being made as a result of the loss of the used game market. Even if the used games weren't directly making the creators money, they spread the games beyond the initial buyers, creating an environment where the developers didn't have to rely solely on direct advertisements. It also meant that the games would be available long after the company went out of business, making it more likely that people looking for a longer term investment would be willing to buy them.

The loss of the used game market impacts the making of the new games in several ways. One, you lose the long term appeal, which means the games that are made are shorter and shallower. Two, because they have to spend more on direct advertising for each and every game instead of letting a few flagship titles carry the clout of the developer beyond the original buyer, they have less money to spend on the game itself. Lastly, as many have pointed out, the internet is not reliable everywhere in the country. I live in the midwest, and it's very hit and miss as to how good of quality you can get. Outside the cities, you may as well forget it as a reliable way to entertain yourself. That is going to mean that the developers lose a large market they currently can access at least indirectly if they go to internet only and all the time.

I can understand the desire, and even the need, for DRM, and similar measures, but making all console and computer games reliant on a reliable and consistent internet connection is a very bad idea.


Also, right now, they can generate a lot of sales from people who are willing to try a game they are on the fence about because the buyer knows they can sell the game back, and still get some value from it, even if they don't like it. Without that resale value, a lot more people are going to be very picky about what titles they are willing to spend money on.

Taldor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

What does "Strongly rumored" mean?


sunshadow21 wrote:
The loss of the used game market impacts the making of the new games in several ways. One, you lose the long term appeal, which means the games that are made are shorter and shallower.

I'm not seeing any evidence of this. If anything, it encourages publishers to produce higher quality, more substantial games, because the secondary market will not be in play. Consumers will purchase titles that they feel are worth the investment, and if the price of the investment goes up, consumers will expect a similarly increased level of quality.

Quote:
Two, because they have to spend more on direct advertising for each and every game instead of letting a few flagship titles carry the clout of the developer beyond the original buyer, they have less money to spend on the game itself.

I honestly don't think advertising is that big a deal. The gaming community does a tremendous job of spreading word-of-mouth on its own, irrespective of advertising dollars. Heck, the only titles that receive significant ad budgets are AAA titles anyway. The gaming community is also very receptive to non-traditional marketing.

Quote:
Lastly, as many have pointed out, the internet is not reliable everywhere in the country. I live in the midwest, and it's very hit and miss as to how good of quality you can get. Outside the cities, you may as well forget it as a reliable way to entertain yourself. That is going to mean that the developers lose a large market they currently can access at least indirectly if they go to internet only and all the time.

I don't mean to be harsh for its own sake, but it's time to accept that the internet is good enough. The infrastructure is there for most major population centers, and it's improving rapidly everywhere else. New technologies (like consoles) should be built to take advantage of this. Synergistic demand will drive development of network infrastructure and console technology.

Quote:
I can understand the desire, and even the need, for DRM, and similar measures, but making all console and computer games reliant on a reliable and consistent internet connection is a very bad idea.

It becomes a better idea with every passing day.


14 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm kind of old fashioned. I like to own my property, not merely rent it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scott Betts wrote:
sunshadow21 wrote:
The loss of the used game market impacts the making of the new games in several ways. One, you lose the long term appeal, which means the games that are made are shorter and shallower.
I'm not seeing any evidence of this. If anything, it encourages publishers to produce higher quality, more substantial games

I am so sorry, but I read this, thought about the rampant bugs being released with PC and Console games alike in even HUGE games (Skyrim, anyone) and laughed and laughed and laughed. Nothing could convince me game quality will improve from big publishers until I see it with my own eyes.

There may well be advantages to finding ways to eliminate second hand sales and sharing, but I am pretty certain that will not be one of them. If I turn out to be wrong, I will be delighted, however.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

All I can say is if the next-gen consoles are going to lock games to an online account I'm not going to buy either and use the money saved to upgrade my PC. Why buy a console when my PC can do every thing they can do but better. If they do game lock the consoles all they are effectively doing is selling a easy to set up gaming PC without the fine control of a real gaming PC. The only reason I play games on a console now is because I can re-sell my games.

Osirion

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Xabulba wrote:
All I can say is if the next-gen consoles are going to lock games to an online account I'm not going to buy either and use the money saved to upgrade my PC. Why buy a console when my PC can do every thing they can do but better. If they do game lock the consoles all they are effectively doing is selling a easy to set up gaming PC without the fine control of a real gaming PC. The only reason I play games on a console now is because I can re-sell my games.

+1

And its funny to me, how the prevailing opinion over the last five years or so (current gen consoles), that PC gaming was going to disappear. Here we are in 2012 looking at consoles having the same copy protection and activation methods that PC's have had for nearly 20 years (or a reasonable similarity). Now I just need to get a good wireless mouse and keyboard, hook up my PC to my living room TV, and play skyrim on UHQ on my huge screen.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Caedwyr wrote:
I'm kind of old fashioned. I like to own my property, not merely rent it.

Software has really never been your property. What you bought was a license to use it with EULA's that defined the mutually agreed terms of use (you agree to those terms by opening up the package and/or starting the game). That's true even in the console world.


DeathQuaker wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
sunshadow21 wrote:
The loss of the used game market impacts the making of the new games in several ways. One, you lose the long term appeal, which means the games that are made are shorter and shallower.
I'm not seeing any evidence of this. If anything, it encourages publishers to produce higher quality, more substantial games
I am so sorry, but I read this, thought about the rampant bugs being released with PC and Console games alike in even HUGE games (Skyrim, anyone) and laughed and laughed and laughed. Nothing could convince me game quality will improve from big publishers until I see it with my own eyes.

I experienced no significant bugs in my many, many hours of Skyrim play. A couple of glitches, but given the silly-huge scope of the game it's actually remarkable that there weren't more problems.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Caedwyr wrote:
I'm kind of old fashioned. I like to own my property, not merely rent it.
Software has really never been your property. What you bought was a license to use it with EULA's that defined the mutually agreed terms of use (you agree to those terms by opening up the package and/or starting the game). That's true even in the console world.

It also has depended somewhat on your jurisdiction as to what rights you have regarding a software purchase and how far the vendor can restrict what you are allowed to do with the software. Forcing everything to an always on internet connection allows for situations like what happened last year where Amazon deleted the E-book version of 1984 from people's Kindles remotely.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

What about when your console breaks do you have to purchase all of your games again that is bad. Or pay a transfer fee is still bad.

Silver Crusade

Scott Betts wrote:
DeathQuaker wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
sunshadow21 wrote:
The loss of the used game market impacts the making of the new games in several ways. One, you lose the long term appeal, which means the games that are made are shorter and shallower.
I'm not seeing any evidence of this. If anything, it encourages publishers to produce higher quality, more substantial games
I am so sorry, but I read this, thought about the rampant bugs being released with PC and Console games alike in even HUGE games (Skyrim, anyone) and laughed and laughed and laughed. Nothing could convince me game quality will improve from big publishers until I see it with my own eyes.
I experienced no significant bugs in my many, many hours of Skyrim play. A couple of glitches, but given the silly-huge scope of the game it's actually remarkable that there weren't more problems.

Same here. Owned Skyrim since it was released and only two issues have come up for me. One was where my xbox froze up while playing Skyrim. The other was where i couldn't complete one of the daedra quests because the elf disappeared when he went into the tower. Other than that not a single issue has popped up for me with Skyrim. But that's actually been my experience with several games. Mass Effect didn't have many bugs that I noticed either. I definetly can't recall one right now.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

"Yes, and because bad things never happen to me, they never can possibly happen to anyone else, ever (plus who cares if they do as long as I am having fun?)." I love video gamer logic.

Anyway, the point was that I do not think the business method change will result in higher quality games. I look forward, with time, to being proven wrong.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Scott Betts wrote:

I frankly don't understand the fuss. I own a 360, a Wii, and a gaming PC, and I don't think I've ever played a pre-owned game on any of them. If I want a game, I'll buy it from the people who actually made it, and make sure that my money supports the development of additional games along the same vein.

Why would anyone care about this? Other than the obvious, "I don't want to pay full price for the games I play," argument, which frankly doesn't have a whole lot of ethical weight behind it?

It's not really relevant whether you, personally, purchase or don't purchase used games. Enough people do - and have the right to do so - that your particular habits are meaningless. Keep that in mind.

Purchasing used products (of any sort) is certainly legitimate - and consumers do have the right to sell their property, and have the right of first sale. The above complaint is nothing more than a complaint against libraries and used car sales, as well. Pretty dumb.

If you "don't understand the fuss" and wonder "why anyone would care about this", then you simply aren't thinking hard enough. Whoops on your part.

(Generally, it is a wise idea to purchase a game in such a manner as to give the original creator as much money as possible in order for the creator to continue to make games that you are likely to enjoy, but that breaks down a bit if the creators are inconsistent, or only rarely come out with something enjoyable. At that point, consumers can/should exercise their rights and make whatever purchasing decision they see fit for themselves.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DeathQuaker wrote:
"Yes, and because bad things never happen to me, they never can possibly happen to anyone else, ever (plus who cares if they do as long as I am having fun?)." I love video gamer logic.

Actually, that's not necessarily "video gamer logic". It's just a@**!@@ logic.


doctor_wu wrote:
What about when your console breaks do you have to purchase all of your games again that is bad. Or pay a transfer fee is still bad.

If the games are tied to an account then you will still be able to play them on any x-box you log in on. That said, you wont however be able to share a game with another account even if they use the same x-box. Parents will now have to create a shared account for their kids if they only want to buy one copy of the game.

If the games are tied to an account people will still be able to sell their games. All they would have to do is create a new account for each game and then sell that account along with the game.

Cheliax Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

7 people marked this as a favorite.

All I know is that I'm going to be pissed when I survive the zombie apocalypse, fire up the generator in my old farm house, and can't play any new console games.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Sebastian wrote:
All I know is that I'm going to be pissed when I survive the zombie apocalypse, fire up the generator in my old farm house, and can't play any new console games.

You can still play zombie vs. shotgun.

Cheliax Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

8 people marked this as a favorite.
Xabulba wrote:
Sebastian wrote:
All I know is that I'm going to be pissed when I survive the zombie apocalypse, fire up the generator in my old farm house, and can't play any new console games.
You can still play zombie vs. shotgun.

Good point. Hmmm...I think my son is upstairs with the shotgun...

OMG! HE'S GONE, HAS ANYONE SEEN MY SON?!?

CARL? WHERE ARE YOU?


DeathQuaker wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:
sunshadow21 wrote:
The loss of the used game market impacts the making of the new games in several ways. One, you lose the long term appeal, which means the games that are made are shorter and shallower.
I'm not seeing any evidence of this. If anything, it encourages publishers to produce higher quality, more substantial games
I am so sorry, but I read this, thought about the rampant bugs being released with PC and Console games alike in even HUGE games (Skyrim, anyone) and laughed and laughed and laughed. Nothing could convince me game quality will improve from big publishers until I see it with my own eyes.

When game developers can put out day of release patches, they get lazy. Just compare the number of games that needed patches for major issues on the PS3 and 360 versus the number of games on the Wii with major bugs and glitches and you will see what I mean.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Arnwyn wrote:

It's not really relevant whether you, personally, purchase or don't purchase used games. Enough people do - and have the right to do so - that your particular habits are meaningless. Keep that in mind.

Purchasing used products (of any sort) is certainly legitimate - and consumers do have the right to sell their property, and have the right of first sale. The above complaint is nothing more than a complaint against libraries and used car sales, as well. Pretty dumb.

Yep, and you just have to look to the past where both the music and movie industries lost in court over the issue of trying to prevent the sale of used cd's and dvd's. If the gaming companies try this, then they too will eventually lose in court.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Enevhar Aldarion wrote:
Arnwyn wrote:

It's not really relevant whether you, personally, purchase or don't purchase used games. Enough people do - and have the right to do so - that your particular habits are meaningless. Keep that in mind.

Purchasing used products (of any sort) is certainly legitimate - and consumers do have the right to sell their property, and have the right of first sale. The above complaint is nothing more than a complaint against libraries and used car sales, as well. Pretty dumb.

Yep, and you just have to look to the past where both the music and movie industries lost in court over the issue of trying to prevent the sale of used cd's and dvd's. If the gaming companies try this, then they too will eventually lose in court.

Far more likely, it wouldn't make it to court in this case. They would simply lose a great deal of their current customer base, which would be even worse from their prospective.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Sebastian wrote:
Xabulba wrote:
Sebastian wrote:
All I know is that I'm going to be pissed when I survive the zombie apocalypse, fire up the generator in my old farm house, and can't play any new console games.
You can still play zombie vs. shotgun.

Good point. Hmmm...I think my son is upstairs with the shotgun...

OMG! HE'S GONE, HAS ANYONE SEEN MY SON?!?

CARL? WHERE ARE YOU?

You're horrible.


LazarX wrote:
Caedwyr wrote:
I'm kind of old fashioned. I like to own my property, not merely rent it.
Software has really never been your property. What you bought was a license to use it with EULA's that defined the mutually agreed terms of use (you agree to those terms by opening up the package and/or starting the game). That's true even in the console world.

Ummm...I just looked at the manuals for my Intellivision cartridges. There's a reference to a 90 day limited warranty for the original purchaser - but no EULA or reference to a license. Although, it and the Atari 2600 both make explicit references to it being software. (The NES/SNES/GameBoy manuals all refer to the product as GAME PAK)

The CD based consoles (up to PS2 and Wii) also admonish against illegal duplication - but again, just the 90 day warranty.

I guess that I may not advance my console collection any further if this holds up.


doctor_wu wrote:
What about when your console breaks do you have to purchase all of your games again that is bad. Or pay a transfer fee is still bad.

In fairness, this won't be the case (or it shouldn't be). You'll have an online account which will register what games are tied to that account. It may even have a cloud-save system which copies your save games to the account. If you console breaks then you should be able to register the replacement console with the account, re-download any games that were lost on the old system and still access your old saves.

Quote:
What you bought was a license to use it with EULA's that defined the mutually agreed terms of use (you agree to those terms by opening up the package and/or starting the game)

There seems to a reasonable level of agreement (here in the UK anyway) that EULAs are inherently legally worthless because they usually cannot be accessed until you've already bought the game, and returning the game to stores on the grounds that you disagree with the EULA won't get you very far once the shrink-wrap has been removed. The only reason they still exist is because no-one's ever bothered to challenge them in court.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

What happens if you get banned and lose access to all your games because you used your name "Richard Gaywood" as your account handle and somebody complained?

Taldor

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Caedwyr wrote:
What happens if you get banned and lose access to all your games because you used your name "Richard Gaywood" as your account handle and somebody complained?

I doubt they would ban you from using the system. Most likely force you to re-name to something they deem as appropriate. So if your name really is Richard Gaywood I guess thats too bad.


The example I gave was based on a real story involving a Mr. Richard Gaywood and Xbox Live. There's also a number of stories of people getting banned from their EA accounts and losing access to their games.

1 to 50 of 390 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Gamer Life / Video Games / The next generation of consoles will require Internet connections. No preowned sales allowed. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.