Sony Joins the Offensive Against Pre-Owned Games 461
BanjoTed writes "In a move to counter sales of pre-owned games, EA recently revealed DLC perks for those who buy new copies of Mass Effect 2 and Battlefield: Bad Company 2. Now, PlayStation platform holder Sony has jumped on the bandwagon with similar plans for the PSP's SOCOM: Fireteam Bravo 3. '[Players] will need to register their game online before they are able to access the multiplayer component of the title. UMD copies will use a redeemable code while the digital version will authenticate automatically in the background. Furthermore ... anyone buying a pre-owned copy of the game will be forced to cough up $20 to obtain a code to play online."
Weeeellllllllll. (Score:5, Insightful)
If memory serves, isn't the PSP one of those systems it's (relatively) easy to pirate for?
I have a feeling Sony has traded getting no money from resales to getting no money because everyone's downloading a cracked version.
Someone doesn't like second hand market? (Score:2, Insightful)
Doesn't look like a smart move to me after all the bad press with the sony DRM and rootkit.
It benefits the consumer, really. (Score:5, Insightful)
They really are completely delusional. What benefit does this provide to the consumers that they'll react positively to? Is there even any theoretical benefit to the consumer? Maybe the research was done entirely among Sony executives.
Re:Someone doesn't like second hand market? (Score:4, Insightful)
Digging their own grave (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Bypassing doctrine of first sale (Score:5, Insightful)
I know car analogies are old on slashdot but I seriously wonder how long before car manufacturers start building the electronic components of their cars such that they are needlessly dependent on some online system run by the manufacturer so that your fuel indicator only works correctly if your car has been able to update this month from the manufacurers online fuel level measuring methods database and your aircon shuts down unless authenticated with a secure server on a regular basis as a "car theft prevention measure".
Idiot lawmakers make bypassing or removing the "anti car theft" systems for any reason a crime.
Drivers pay through the nose to have an account with the manufacturer.
Manufacturers get more profit since now people have an incentive to not buy used cars.
Shills start trolling car enthusiast message boards talking about how it's a good thing because this way the car companies get more money to build better cars and everyone wins except those dirty car thieves.
I can honestly see it happening.
Re:Someone doesn't like second hand market? (Score:5, Insightful)
How long before there is a class action lawsuit against Sony for articifically reducing the value of assets that are purchased in good faith. What happens if you wish to sell your PS3 and all of the games? The package will be devalued by the amount of resubscriptions required for the online games.
And that's grounds for legal action because? Sony is not stopping you from reselling the games; just not letting you transfer the subscription; something you knew when you bought the game.
A flip side to this is it benefits someone who doesn't play online - used game prices will drop to accommodate the subscription fee; and if you don't plan to play online you now have a code that you can sell to someone who bought a used game. Either way your price for the game would drop if you don't play online.
Re:Someone doesn't like second hand market? (Score:5, Insightful)
If I don't want to play online, am I allowed to return the code to Sony for a $20 refund? I should be.
Smart move? (Score:2, Insightful)
Why on earth do they do everything in their might to discourage people from buying games and instead pirating them? Im starting to believe its intentional and that for some reason the media industry think they will make more money out of lawsuits than from selling games the normal way.
bleh (Score:3, Insightful)
Should we try the hollywood approach here instead?
You wouldn't sell a car..
EA/Bioware compared to Sony (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It benefits the consumer, really. (Score:1, Insightful)
I'm pretty sure their research has shown that the majority of gamers has no clue when it comes to these things and the few loudmouths that complain will fall in line because they are weak.
Saying "it will be received positively" means: "There won't be any negative consequences for us because our customers are chumps".
this really saddens me (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Someone doesn't like second hand market? (Score:5, Insightful)
> Sony is not stopping you from reselling the games; just not letting you transfer the subscription; something you knew when you bought the game.
Online play is a part of the game as advertised on the retail box. Therefore barring use from another machine is a crime on Sony's part. There is no "subscription' - I'm not paying Sony to play this game, I paid the store and online play was included.
What if my PS3 breaks down due to a technical failure and Sony's warranty replaces the unit. I would then have to pay $20 again for each game?
More than that. (Score:1, Insightful)
I don't buy a Sony TV because of my past experiences with Sony's car radios etc. The whole DRM thing is useful to tell the good ones from the bad ones.
Having such cool products.... I wonder if they fully appreciate what they're doing to their brand.
Re:Bypassing doctrine of first sale (Score:5, Insightful)
It doesnt bypass anything. The first sale doctrine still applies, and Sony has to allow the transfer of DLC to other accounts. Of course someone has to sue them first to force them to respect the law, until that happens they can flaunt the law all they want.
Re:Used games are not harming the New Game Market! (Score:5, Insightful)
By the reasoning that you've used, I think that one has to endorse what Sony's doing here. After reading through most of the comments, I think I do anyway. All Sony's doing, after all, is competing more effectively. Their competitor is a reseller. Therefore, is there really anything wrong with Sony creating a product that is more useful when purchased new than when purchased from their competitor? Let's try a different spin on this: Sony isn't selling crippled software. They're selling software bundled with a one-time use subscription code. $30 for the software, $20 for the code. Sorry, no refunds, though. If you're interested in just the single-player experience, you should buy the game used. It's fine if you choose to sell the software but the new user will also have to subscribe.
Re:Bypassing doctrine of first sale (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps it is a different market, but the concept here is basically the 'right of first sale', 2nd hand sales etc... not piracy. No, the car cannot be copied, but your right of reselling he car could very well be restricted.
Say a car manufacturer considered 2nd hand sales of it's cars to be theft, just as video game makers see 2nd hand sales of their games. So, you must register your vehicle with the manufacturer in order for it to continue to work beyond five minutes at a time with a ten minute 'cool down' period, the registration 'agreement' may or may not restrict you from reselling the car, and when it is registered the car is imprinted with some sort of bio signature that is unique to you... an imprint that cannot be changed without secret tools only the manufacturer has. So, after a few years you sell the car, and the new owner must pay the manufacturer MORE in order to drive it.
"recieved positively", not by consumers (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Someone doesn't like second hand market? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Bypassing doctrine of first sale (Score:4, Insightful)
They already tried something similar when cars first started having diagnostic ports - you had to use a special machine to read the diagnostic code which was only available from the manufacturer to franchised dealers. This is why OBD-II was developed and is now mandated in much of the world.
Re:Someone doesn't like second hand market? (Score:2, Insightful)
I think you've just described the MMORPG model popular in the west.
Re:Used games are not harming the New Game Market! (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course it harms new game sales. If someone can buy a new game for $60 vs a used game for $50 then obviously some people would choose the latter. The money from that sale goes to store, not the publisher.
How much they're losing is the big question. I wouldn't be surprised if it were 10-15% of sales, more on some titles. Publishers should thank their stars that the likes of Gamestop are so greedy. If second hand prices were more reasonable I expect the % loss would be even higher.
How do publishers combat the issue or clawback money?
The obvious way, the way that the likes of EA and others are following is to start bundling redemption codes in the box. But it only works games with a substantial multiplayer / online element. Doing so means second hand owners get a crippled game (e.g. because other people have the map pack that they don't) and must purchase the missing component on line. Also, since the second hand game is crippled its resale price is less and therefore people may be discouraged from selling the game since they get less for it.
A better way IMO is to produce decent games in the first place and to support them longer. People sell crap titles, those with no replay value and those where the servers are dead. Raise the quality bar and people will naturally be inclined to hang onto their titles longer. The less games in the second hand channel, the more people are likely to buy new.
Personally I buy most of my games brand new but I restrict myself to games which are highly rated. I don't see the point of rewarding bad games or bad publishers.
Just when i was almost ready to buy a PS3... (Score:4, Insightful)
This is a cycle, and I'm stuck in it. When the PS3 came out, first I waited simply because I wanted to be sure the platform took off. I eventually said to myself "It's going well, as soon as they drop the price I'll buy one." Well, they not only dropped the price, they dropped the emotion chip. ...so I didn't buy it. Later they were to drop the price, and they dropped the Emotion chip EMULATOR TOO, then Linux boot support, now they're dropping my ability to get good value on resale of games (since that $20 is getting passed to the consumer, my game is not $20 less valuable at resale, especially since most used games I BUY are only $20 or less, that's a huge hit). I was all set, finally just willing to admit there were few enough PS2 games I have that I'd actualyl play it was worth just keeping the PS2 slim i have around to play them, and I was going to buy a PS3 this summer when the price inevitably dropped again.
Sorry Sony, your screwed yourselves again. I'll just buy another PC based game or two, maybe a new Vid Card.
Re:Digging their own grave (Score:2, Insightful)
That's true - I used to be an avid collector of games and movies. I loved to have a "complete" version of things I loved.
But then they started putting out different versions of collector's edition DVDs in different regions (so I couldn't access all the bonus content that other country's consumers got), and games where DLC was included solely in the collector's editions (Assassin's Creed 2 was the most egregious - multiple collector's editions all with different bonuses. Almost impossible to have a complete version of the game unless you bought several copies!).
And... it really put me off buying the games and movies at all. Now, I'm content to wait and just rent, or buy used.
They actually lost me as a customer, because they tried so hard to rip everyone off, instead of providing value for money. (And I was a good customer - single guy with no debts, on a very high salary, and a geek's need to buy stuff ;)
Re:It's a company. Of course it's right. (Score:1, Insightful)
Woosh.
Re:It's a company. Of course it's right. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Used games are not harming the New Game Market! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:More than that. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't buy a Sony TV because of my past experiences with Sony's car radios etc. The whole DRM thing is useful to tell the good ones from the bad ones.
Having such cool products.... I wonder if they fully appreciate what they're doing to their brand.
I don't buy Sony products because:
I think any of those alone are enough reason to boycott any company. Put more than one into a single company and there's no excuse to buy anything from them.
Re:Bypassing doctrine of first sale (Score:3, Insightful)
Can I join the war against the term "pre owned" (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously, it is "used." I have no idea why used has become a dirty word. "Pre-owned" is a BS term, that is more complex than it needs to be. Used is fine.
Re:Bypassing doctrine of first sale (Score:2, Insightful)
Doctrine of first sale only prevents them from using legal means (i.e. suing you) to prevent you from reselling. It does not force them to enable you or help you or even make it possible to resell.
Re:It's a company. Of course it's right. (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree with you, and more. My comment was intended to be satire. (Check my comment history if you doubt me.)
That so many people took me seriously is really an indictment of how absurdly far right the discussion [wikipedia.org] has moved. If corporations were natural persons, they'd be seemed psychopaths, a danger to themselves and others, and locked up where they couldn't do any harm. It's absolutely preposterous that some people elevate them above a democratically-elected government.
The right to form a corporation is not a natural right. Let's not mistake it for one: freedom of expression, of assembly, and of religion: these are natural rights. Operating as a corporation is a privilege that we grant as a society because we expect to be made better-off overall through investment.
When that bargain ceases to be in society's interest, we must revise it. Corporations must be regulated to counteract their natural tendency to concentrate wealth and distort the political process for the benefit of a few. Arguing that the integrity of a contract or a charter is somehow more valuable than the happiness of real, breathing people is misanthropy.
cut the bullshit. this 'right to use' has to end (Score:3, Insightful)
do you think what will happen if this 'right to use' bullshit takes hold ? what if all service and goods providers take up on it and you end up buying your car as 'right to use' only ?
there is NOTHING preventing any business from selling their products and services with these type of contracts that will make you only 'own the right to use'. (whatever the fuck that is, since it can be so easily redefined by the provider)
you need to stop buying into this exploitative crap. if you buy a copy of a piece of software, you OWN THAT COPY and you can resell THAT COPY. thats why the term is 'copyright'. it means you can own a book, and give out or resell a book, but you can not COPY it and reproduce it. that was how the term copyright was created and used since last 300 or so years.
no half assed digital company has the right to 'redefine' terms to the detriment of people.
It's cool, this is a shining example of capitalism (Score:5, Insightful)
They feel the need to screw their customers, and I feel the need not to buy their products.
Shine on, Sony. Shine on.
Re:Someone doesn't like second hand market? (Score:1, Insightful)
I totally agree that Online play is a part of the game as advertised on the retail box and should be playable by anyone that purchased the game. It is complete bullsh!t that people with xbox 360s can't play the online component of games because they won't shell out $50 per year to Microsoft. Even more ridiculous is the fact that your $50 doesn't get you dedicated servers. If you consider EA games that host the servers all you are getting from microsoft for you $50 is match making and facebook.
Re:More than that. (Score:5, Insightful)
"They did underhanded deals to foist a sub-optimal solution (Blu-Ray) on everyone."
After putting out a superior product in the days of VCR's and getting owned, they learned their lesson. This is the way business is done. You make the deals that you need to make in order to turn a profit.
Yawn. Who cares. (Score:4, Insightful)
So long as Sony is upfront about its policy (which may be in question given it is Sony) who cares.
There is a very easy solution. Vote with your wallet. Don't buy the game. If you feeling really pissed, don't buy Sony products. They will get the message eventually, or if they don't they won't be around much longer.
It really is that simple.
However if they "trick" people into buying their products, and then once it is too late announce that "Oh BTW that thing you just bought is now crippled by this DRM, you must be online or register online, etc... to actually play our game". That would piss me off to the point where I would be demanding my money back.
Re:Someone doesn't like second hand market? (Score:4, Insightful)
Except it's not up to the company -- the fact that they're trying to invent that right by stripping away the property rights of the buyer is the ENTIRE FUCKING PROBLEM!!!!
Re:More than that. (Score:2, Insightful)
Not if all play is online via the new "disconnect your computer and your game freezes" features.
No way it'll work... (Score:1, Insightful)
Corporate Disappointment (Score:2, Insightful)
Wtf is wrong with the gaming industry? First Ubisoft closing down servers for relatively new games, then their crappy DRM. Now Sony and EA cracking down on things they haven't, and shouldn't mind. If they want to get rewards for their games, which are fantastic, don't you think that they should let people play them? It seems that the era of plug in and play games has ended.
</Rant>
Re:Someone doesn't like second hand market? (Score:3, Insightful)
Your one of those people who say X will always be enough activations/repairs/replacements.
I can assure you that X will NEVER be enough. I have had to purchase a new Xbox 360 because I've had 4 years of RROD's. I have had to call two software companies/hack 4 games to get around "too many activations" limitations due to product defects (all on a single box). I have had to do the same thing for work related commercial software. I have also been involved in activation issue from the software vendors side.
Things happen and no matter what limit you set, you will have legitimate cases where the customer is prevented from using there purchased product for no good reason.
Re:Someone doesn't like second hand market? (Score:3, Insightful)
People have a right to use their own personal property; Sony does not and should not have the authority to interfere!
The physical game disc that you bought is your property. The services that you access with it are not. Sony has the right to decide who can access external services for a game. They have a right to create ToSs for it and the right to enforce it.
If you are an abusive fuck, they have every right to prohibit you from using THEIR servers to play online. Furthermore, if you accept the premise that they have the right to charge a subscription fee to play online (whether or not it makes sense for them to do so from a market perspective), then I don't see really any problem in a legal sense for this new scheme they are using. It's not very much different than the MMO model, just a one-time charge rather you might have to pay if you got the game second hand, rather than a monthly fee.
Re:Someone doesn't like second hand market? (Score:1, Insightful)
Other industries don't have the right to set up usage rules. What makes the software companies so special? Car companies don't get to specify that you can't sell exterior surface space for product advertising. Gun companies don't charge you extra license fees if you are going to use a rifle for guiding hunts rather than just target practice. Tools manufacturers don't get to specify that you can not sell any products created by using the tools. Home builders don't get to demand extra fees and veto power over any renovations you want to do to your house. Toy manufacturers don't have the power to prohibit you from selling them in a garage sale. You might say that software companies have to provide patches and user support. But that just means the product was shipped defective. When other companies produce defective products they have to issue recalls and fix or replace the product. Why is software different?
I can only hope... (Score:1, Insightful)
I consider myself a pretty avid gamer. Games are my hobby, that's what I do when I'm not at school or work... I like to play games for their story, games like Modern Warfare 2, and other games with a high online population. I'm not much for player versus player, I don't like how people treat each other online, and to be perfectly honest, I'm terrible at facing other people in games.
But it makes me wonder... if Sony were to follow in the footsteps with what the other guys did with DRM (Making you pay ~$20-30 for a new code to play online), I wonder if this would drive down the cost of used games? I know for a fact, at least with GameStop, that fairly new games (ei: games that came out within the past 3 months or so), GameStop will buy these games off of you for like $30 store credit (No idea what they give you in cash, but its far less), and they will go and resell the game for about $5-10 off the New sticker price. (It's a pretty good business plan really: They get $60 off you, you finish the game, you sell it back to them at half of what you paid, $30, they make $30 still and they can go and resell it for another $50 or so! note: I'm not taking into consideration tax, or how much they actually buy each individual game for in mass)
I guess what I am hoping here is that games that require a "New Code" to play online will be cheaper in re-retail because no one is going to pay ~$45-55 for a used copy of a game if they can buy that same exact game for $60 and save a few bucks (At least that's how my mind works...).
Re:Used games are not harming the New Game Market! (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps the entire inference sailed past you - that game was sold once, the publisher has their money from the stores. The publishers want a SECOND DIP, and that's bullshit.