Sony looking into charging second-hand buyers for online play. Fair deal, or massive rip-off?

GamesRadar: The second-hand market is a tricky beast to tackle. On the one hand it's every gamer's desire - and right - to pick up a bargain-priced slice of digital delight. But at the same time second-hand game sales mean than an increasing amount of players' purchases are of no benefit whatsoever to game developers' livelihoods. With game budgets spiraling this generation and game studios dropping out of the industry like rot-riddled teeth collapsing out of a tramp's mouth, loss of revenue is obviously a big problem nowadays.

[2FootYard]

Looks like everyone here is going to think this is a good idea now.

[DasBunker]

interesting way to force people to buy new games... as a business point of view it could be a pretty good move, people on a budget will be the ones suffering..

[supremacy]

i mean i used to work for gamestop and lol i can say either way gamestop are the biggest rip offs of the industry and probably one of the biggest reasons why the gaming industry struggles the way it does.

You the consumer buys a new game for 60? we gamestop give you 6? 9? dollars for that same game?

Than sell that game you just sold us for 9 dollars to some other person for just 5 dollars less than what you originally bought it for(60?)

So..again whose ripping off who? and whose winning again? because Sony or any of these companies aren't making a cut for a every used game sold.

Again these companies spend millions of dollars making these games, for some random person to be burning their games and some retailer undercutting their investments by a two fold.

I don't want to sound like a rep here, but if you like the games you are playing now than all im saying is support whoever makes them.

I love new stuff because i don't feel ripped off, i feel confident and comfortable with my purchases.(i have never bought a used exclusive title for any platform whether that being ps3, 360 or whatever the platform is)

And another thing if i'm going to pay 55 or even 45 for some used game why not just pay the extra 15 or 20? for the new game, which is most likely to be in top condition and is likely to work when you put it in your console 99% of the time.

[zeeshan]

They should charge the sellers and not the buyers!

[longcat]

too bad for those thinking bout renting games and using the jailbreak to store them

[karl]

bubbles supremacy

very true.. its not always easy to get what u want..
but even if i have to wait i always buy new...

just cuz i like my game collection.. i dont trade games in...

[Spydiggity]

you don't HAVE to get used games at gamestop. ebay, gameswitch, etc, are much better choices.

to answer the article: It's a massive rip-off. unfortunately...it seems to be becoming the norm.

EDIT: The supreme court ruled on this. Once you purchase a movie, game, cd, etc... you are allowed to do what you want with it. you can rent it out, sell it, let people borrow it, whatever. The publishers are getting WAY too greedy and they are coming up with all sorts of ridiculous, consumer screwing plans to circumvent this ruling and this protection of the consumer. and there are apparently blind fanboys that will support it depending on what publisher is doing the screwing.

the problem with the industry is that you have developers that make great games that sell really well, and they see only a tiny percentage of the profit because the extremely greedy publishers wanna keep all that money for them selves. it should never have become a publisher vs consumer issue...it should be a developer vs publisher issue.

this is all about maximizing profits...that's it. there's no noble cause. this is why i refuse to buy nearly every activision title and EA is about to get added to that list. sony is welcome to play that game too, but i vote with my dollars and a boycott is alright with me.

[AC130-Gunship]

The issue of "Development Studios need to get paid" is freaking stupid. The Big Publishers need start paying these studios. Honestly, Studios should be publishing their own content on the internet and cut out these publishing companies. What the hell is Activision doing around anyway.

The Infinity Ward leads are no longer around because of issues with pay.

Alternative, the games should be cheaper. Then only charge for online play. That way you catch everyone who wants to play online.

[DasBunker]

im talking about people on a budget that cant buy new games every week.. so they look into used games.. everybody knows GS is a ripoff and you have to be a 11 y/o or mentally unaware to trade your games there..

[madpuppy]

because, For myself, I will just wait till there is a discount for the game I want or I will just wait till the game drops in price to get it new. the only way I would pay for an on-line play code for a used game is if I got the game for super cheap 20.00 or less. and if the code is more than 2 or 3 dollars, forget that, I will just get single player games used and multiplayer discounted new. no more day one purchases for me.

[ExplosionSauce]

It's a good idea from a business perspective. They don't make money from used games.

Although it's not a good deal if the price of the used game + online fee = more than a new game. In which case, might as well buy it new.

@Ghost-mutation
I can see your passive aggressiveness against Sony and PS3 owners in your comment, btw.

[RyuStrife]

Well think about it, you save 5 dollars. But get charged 10 for online pass. Big savings right? Of course not. If you can buy it other places for less, then save 10 bucks for the pass. You still get "x" amount of trial online to play anyway. Besides, you didn't buy "your" game, you bought someone elses. And on ebay(if you use it) you can get them new, used, usually with online pass still not activated. Just read the description. Only problem I see with this online pass is that if you have multiple psn account it probably won't work with the other accounts. I don't know that because I haven't tried it yet and I haven't bought any of these games with the thing online pass.

[Prototype]

The big problem with the system is people grow tired of games over time; there's some moments you want to jump on a once popular game only to find its a wasteland with maybe 3-4 people max online playing. The problem I see from a customer standpoint is lately I've bought games that were voted "good" however ended up being junk - so I traded with a friend for a better game. By their logic that means if we traded games we're gonna pay $ for a trade because it's considered second hand? F- that and f- them.

If this system does go through I will vote to either classic gaming only or digital download where it's cheaper to just download a demo then pay to unlock it. It's no longer based on what the fans want but how greedy the developers get because someone found a loop hole.

Yes I do buy a lot of games new and I do support a lot of companies, however as of late I have lost some confidence in a lot of studios because you can tell the ones that want $ rather than cater to their fans.

[vickers500]

"And another thing if i'm going to pay 55 or even 45 for some used game why not just pay the extra 15 or 20?"

Because you could spend that 15 or 20 bucks on a PSN game, or even a very good but kind of old used game. And you don't have to worry about games not working with the ps3, it's bluray ya know (pretty much indestructible to accidents).

[BulletToothtony]

this is gameradar we're talking about.. this is pure BS they do this crap every week!

Food for fanboys.. that's what they do

[Davoh]

If it's still going to be cheaper to buy a secondhand game and to play online then everybody wins =D

[bjornbear]

never complained about it when other devs do it...so not going to complain now.

but it does suck, i do buy used games sometimes and its a low blow, then again, I am against gamestops monopoly, and thus, i don't disapprove of this.

and yes ghost, everyone will think its a good idea because its sony, everyone loves sony, all hail sony, n4g is sony4gamers, poor little 360 owners, PS3 owners are so brainwashed and stupid /s

anything else?

sheesh

@davoh - exactly =P

[douchedebater]

GHOST is 100% correct, and you know damn well he is, when EA talked about doing something similar you guys were in an uproar EA this EA that, now it's rumored that sony is doing it and somehow your sorry butts can see ways to make it work. Even feeling bad for the guy on a budget.

I am so sick of you hypocritical bums slamming everyone else and praising sony for doing the same thing. How can you even look yourselves in the eye and still feel like a man with that dripping "SONY SLONG" hanging out of your mouths.

Yeah I said it, take a damn bubble, that's what you pucks do best.

Edit: OOps! Sorry guys I was thinking out loud, here is my real comment...

YEAH! GOOD IDEA SONY. SONY ROCKS! (MORE BUBBLES PLEASE!)

[madpuppy]

I personally think the idea sucks and I will not be preordering games at full price anymore if this happens, I will just wait for a discount or when the price starts to drop to get the games I want rather than the getting multiplayer games I want to play used from now on. unless the price is under 2.00 and I can get the games used for under 20.00 I won't be doing it myself.

and saying that people that own a PS3 will blindly follow what Sony does is stupid, just as stupid as a person who thinks Microsoft is great because they extended the warrantee of the poorly designed pre-jasper 360's.

[cliffbo]

its a ripoff devs get paid enough already its extortion.

what next? buy a second hand car then have to pay a fee for a key to drive it!.

[Lifendz]

Ya know, for a site allegedly run by PS3 fanboys it's kinda funny that the first post in PS3 articles is usually by someone that's not a PS3 fanboy.

[jack_burt0n]

BFBC2 already does it, didn't see you all crying about that, its inevitable its gonna come from all the major publishers it their way of staking a claim to a share in the second hand market which is understandable.

@godmars
How if its tied to ur account? u can take it with you they just cant use it without you.

[NYPunkster]

Exactlly. They just want to bitch at Sony, nothing more.

[Godmars290]

But still there's a point making and maintaining an online infrastructure and not seeing any income from the re-sale games with online components. And the true is the person who bought a title out of a discount bin does not have the same privileges as someone who stood in line for hours much less someone who paid full retail.

Its just that you can't take that same game over to a friends house, let them borrow it, without having to pony up more cash. Can be just as screwed if you have to buy a new console.

[thebudgetgamer]

:(

[Blaze929]

So what are they going to do about single player games which require no Internet connection to experience the game? Gonna rip parts out like Ubigreedy and Assassins Creed 2?

Or why not just give free DLC to new copied like Microsoft does with all their published titles now? And I don't mean stupid KB-30MB sized DLC. They give full on 300MB+ content free.

[HelghastKid]

You mean pull a bioware and release games with huge dlc? thats actually a good idea, it gives the consumer a good reason to purchase the game new. To this day i regret getting DA used :(

[Takoulya]

That's a great incentive for people to buy used. I think they should definitely implement this in all $60 games.

[The Maxx]

I think this will result in more pirating.

A) Buy a retail game at $60 with online code

B) Buy a used game at $50 and pay $10 for the code

C) Use mod (Jailbreak or whatever will come out) and pay $10 for online play...

Those that feel money is not an issue will continue to buy new games at retail cost, however those that are on a fixed budget, or just want to get something for their kids used and think they are saving a few bucks only to find out they have to pay extra may just think of easier ways to attain the game instead of allowing companies to charge them extra for used games.

[badz149]

WTF? all companies are on board with this now? what's the point of buying used if it's going to cost more?? it's not like new prices are going down anytime soon! Sony, please don't do this!!

[callahan09]

I thought it was a good idea when THQ mentioned it and I still think it's a good idea. I love this hobby and have MASSIVE respect for the talented people that bring me my favorite form of entertainment, so I never buy games used unless they are out of print and impossible to buy new. I like supporting developers and the people that actually take the risk to fund expensive development projects, by giving them my money for the product they deliver when they've done a good job. I think it's perfectly fair for developers and publishers to start doing SOMETHING to give incentive to buy their games new instead of used.

[BattleAxe]

Its a great idea. Why should some broke ass bumb get the same privileges as someone who has spent their hard earned money to buy a game on day one?

[hazelamy]

not me, i will never buy any game that includes some sort of online pass new, i may buy it second hand though.
if losing online play is the price for not supporting this then i'll gladly pay it.

[HeroXIV]

Pre-owned games can get to the sub £20 price point pretty quickly. A measily £10(?) on top of that is completely fair and a good way for the developers to get a steady stream of revenue instead of getting £0 when someone buys pre-owned.

[captain-obvious]

i think sony shouldn't even think about doing that

[madjedi]

Actually with sony first party game it's not as big deal as third party games are, the reason alot of sony's games will drop below the 59 dollar mark after a few months or sony turns it into a greatest hits.

I only see this being an issue with online based games, as for fighting used game sales, don't keep the damn price tag @59.99 for a 1yr old game.

Some people might snatch it up for 39.99 instead of refusing to pay $59, for it.

[Dance]

massive rip off

[NYC_Gamer]

can these codes be shared between two profiles?

[Canucks23]

Wouldn't that defeat the purpose? But i do think that they need to have some work around for families or something that have multiple accounts on a ps3.

Mabye have the online available for all profiles that the code was first activated on? then on other systems only for the account that entered it?

That's how xbl does some stuff and i think it works out alright... as long as it doesn't die on you.

[CombatEvolving]

This has always been a good idea. Buying used means you use their online without paying them, its their choice to make you pay. If you don't like it don't pay

[Jrome]

That makes no sense...it's not like there's an extra person playing online...it's the same copy that the ONE person bought...and now another ONE person will be using it. And who knows, maybe the money the seller gets from the sale would go towards buying a new game.

[theonlylolking]

As long as I can use the code on at least 3 different profiles I am fine but just one time use like EA is absolutely stupid.

[Reefskye]

Their better be more than one use out of code cos I ain't paying an extra £10 so 1 of my family can play it on their ps3 in same house as me.. I buy a game new and cos I own more than one PS3 I get shafted :S

[gamingisnotacrime]

this whole pay for a code ordeal is garbage

[jack_burt0n]

why take your account with you and then deactivate when you leave.

[Trroy]

I think it's a great idea to only support your actual customers, with regards to online play and features. Online used gamers are basically freeloaders -- increasing the price of the service for people who actually were willing to pay the provider for it.

If people want to buy used, either GameStop needs to run their own online service, or they should include vouchers for online play along with their used sale. And yes, they (GameStop) would probably have to buy the vouchers from Sony/MS/Nintendo/etc., before including them in their used sale. Fair business is fair business.

If you buy a used car, you can't expect it to be in as good of shape as a new one. That's kinda the point -- it sells for less because the value just isn't there. If you want it fixed up to be just like new... guess what... you have to pay extra for it. Any car dealership who would do all that work for free would be run by a fool, and would go out of business.

If the games industry doesn't go this way, eventually the only games that turn a profit will be utter crap that you pay $1.99 extra for with your kids meal at the local fast food joint, or $4.99 extra for on the way home from watching the movie that the game is made for -- because online play in serious games won't be profitable... thus it'll go away.

[rjgbyrne]

Unless you lend it to a mate, its prob not too bad they can't play online free as that would revoke your psn.

[rjgbyrne]

I reckon it is a good idea if they stick with it and not crap on buyers of new games. I am fed up buying new games that are later released as GOTY editions for the same price. I supported the initial sale yet get left out. This is something they need a proper policy on and also need to stick to their guns (Sony and 1st buyers) as the MS model just screws the customer over at the moment.

[DA_SHREDDER]

I buy most games new, looks like you guys will start doing that too. Hopefully Sony gets more money so they can keep making more of these sick ass games.

[UnwanteDreamz]

I agree I have only bought 1 used game since 09 so I don't care. Kids mad cause trade in values on the games they get as gifts will crash. jk

Not about caring though cause I don't

[spooky205]

however there are games i cannot justify paying 60 bucks for. Some games have a sweet spot around 40. So if sony does implement this then its no biggie for me. I just believe some games arent worth retail hence why i dont wanna pay retail.

[lucifon]

Massive Rip Off but it's what EA are trying to do too.... Pretty sure it wont be long til they realise it is most definitely not the way to go

[ChronoJoe]

They've already started to do this. Modnation Racers on PSP, features this.

It's not a massive ripoff, the used video game market really hurts developers and publishers. You give your money for the game to the second hand retailer, and they see none of it, yet you expect the publisher to facilitate your online needs with there servers. Why should they?

[jambabie69]

in order for me to buy a game used someone else had to buy it new before me, thus "they" got their cut then.
if i sell my truck, do i have to give some of that to the original dealer, and the motor manufacturing company that made it originally? NO. if i buy a used car lets say a ford, do i owe ford somewhat too, or does that "dealer" then pays that cut to them and then pass what they paid onto me as the buyer raising my price?

i buy something its mine. i can do what i want with it. also it really isn't that expensive to maintain servers anyways. what about those games that use psp severs?
to me this is a hot topic, because i can see the arguements on both sides, but some where you also have to consider us THE CONSUMERS.

at the end of last gen the industry said we are raising game prices to 60 dollars or by 10 dollars and they said it was to cover the rising cost of developement, what happend to that? that "extra" 10 bucks they get now for every copy sold new doesn't dissapear.

anyways have a good one, i just wanted to say what i think about it, but i do understand the opposite side on this from my opinion. ina sense to me this is a "hard" topic to me. also hell we are still ina rough ass economy, companies think they are the only ones feeling a "crunch" trust me they aren't feeling it as bad as individuals are.

i realize the gaming industry has taken a hit since the "recession" but over all it still is doing better than companies in other fields.

anyways peace.

[ChronoJoe]

That's fine man. But don't expect the manufacter to provide free servicing on that car you buy.

There not stopping you buying the game second hand, or playing it, they're just charging you if you want the service they provide.

Also in general it was a fairly poor analogy, with most games having less than a months worth of lifespan... one single game sold can satisfy the needs of 10 gamers who would have otherwise bought it new, by passing hands through consumers that resell.

[AnonUser5555]

Look, I've got a few different thoughts on this:

a) I'm sorry, but there's nothing illegal about what they're doing. To some extent, they have a right to ensure that they make money off of their product, and this is [unfortunately] a good way to do it. Put yourself in their shoes: You make a quality product that 1,000,000 want...yet you only sell 500,000 because people can share it and there's nothing you can do. Nothing wrong with trying to earn a little extra.

b) I find it odd that people are up in arms about these systems from game publishers, yet they are completely ok with the ridiculous profit that Gamestop makes on their used games.

For a recently released game, Gamestop will give $25 trade in-value and then sell that game for $50-55. That's a 25-30 profit. The publishers are "only" looking for $5. Why does Gamestop get a free pass but we're pissed at publishers?

____

And frankly, used game buyers shouldn't get all that much sympathy. Most of the time, you're paying a significantly reduced price for an equivalent product. It's not like other electronics where there's wear-and-tear and decreased battery lives and cosmetic issues. The game is exactly the same.

Buying games new = Support Publishers that produce great games. Buying used = Lining Gamestop's pockets so that they can continue to eff us all over.

[jambabie69]

and i can somewhat agree with you. like i said up there i can fully understand "both" sides on this issue. have an agree for the hell of it, because even though myself don't fully agree with all you typed, i do get what you are saying, and somewhat agree anyways.

lol we need a "somewhat agree" button

[ChronoJoe]

It's the retailers who will suffer here, not the gamers. In the long run they are going to NEED to drop the prices they sell used games for, so they remain viable purchases compared to new games.

So the used game market will still remain viable, but the retailers will be losing out, and the publishers and developers will benefit.

[dvtran93]

This is why I get all used games from Craigslist or Ebay.

[Seraphemz]

This would suck big time..

[v1c1ous]

wow...

some of these comments....wow. you know guys, you can love a company but still have the mental capacity to see when they can make a mistake.

i could see this as the beginning of paying $40 for 2 year old games. case in point:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/of...

[coolbeans]

This is N4G we're talking about here....

[big_silky]

The Guy Game is somewhat of a collectors item because it was taken off store shelves, that's why it's expensive.

[SilverSlug]

I rather them give out 'free DLC' for new buyers.

[BenCrazy424]

I doubt it will happen. As the article stated from scee president,"a blanket charge for all online play was something that Sony would "struggle with", due its pride in the PSN's free-to-use policy."

[telekineticmantis]

I don't wanna pay for Online.

[Trroy]

You should be telling your story to GameStop, and telling them to include online play codes with your used purchases.

If you buy used, you're 100% GameStop's customer, not Sony's.

[AnonUser5555]

Well either way, Gamestop will likely have to drop the cost of their used games to accomodate this. If the online pass is $10 and they're selling it for $50, there's no advantage to buying used anyways.

People will start understanding this very quickly and GS's used game sales will COLLAPSE if they don't drop the price to make up for it. So that's at least one positive.

Of course, since Gamestop is a douche corporation they'll probably decrease the amount they pay out too..which is already too low.

Maybe we'll all just become smart enough to use other methods to sell out games...

[fucadastates]

then dont buy second hand games :)

[palaeomerus]

More like don't buy new games at full price because you can't resell them for as much. Wait till the price drops.

[Supraman]

No. Fuck you, you greedy developers. $60 is already enough for video games and now your gonna be even more greedy by charging used game buyers to pay to play online. Fuck you. Id love to be extremely rich and start my own studio and say all these fucks are greedy to the media. They would be doing damage control like no other.

[AnonUser5555]

lol. "greedy"

You do realize that game developers make NO MONEY on used games, right? And game servers cost money to maintain...you understand that right?

As a general business practice, you are supposed to make money on your product.

If you've paid NO MONEY to the developer, you don't deserve to play the game online on servers they are paying to maintain (This is ESPECIALLY true on the PS3 where you don't even need to pay for online). If you buy a game used, you've only paid money to Gamestop. Nothing to Sony/MS. Nothing to the publisher. Why do you feel entitled to play the game online leeching off of others?

And you can still play the OFFLINE part of the game to your little heart's content...so you don't pay extra if you don't want to play online anyways.

[Mc Nasty]

So if 100 people bought a game and played on a server for 100 people, then they all decide to sell there game to someone else, what difference does it make? Isn't the server for 100 people already paid for to maintain? How is it costing the servers more? The server is for 100 people, how are they losing money towards the servers? Even if 1 out of the 100 sell there game to someone else to play, wouldn't it still be 100? Not 101 but 100, how is it costing more? I dont mind supporting developers but this generation of gaming is very sad because its all about fucking money, developers withhold shit on purpose, yes there are a few good developers out there, but me personally they dont give a fuck about you, they just care about money. I remember back in the days when i didn't have to worry about this shit, it was all fun. Greed and money is killing gaming.

* Lets get NASTY!!

[dvtran93]

Amen to Mc Nasty. If I sold the game to a friend, it's just my friend using the online service instead of me. There's no net gain in server load just b/c a different person is using it.

[Apotheosize]

Wou;d suck for the used market but hey, the devs arent being paid when you purchase and play that used game online. Is it greedy? Yeah. Just like pirating on the PC, you are not able to play with official servers. Now dont get me wrong piracy /=/ used game market. Morally they are completly different, but on the technical level developers dont get paid, and thats what this is about. If a single person bought a game, and sold it to the next guy and this happened a million times, yea thatd be agreat deal. But what about the people who supplied the game in the first place? What bout Gamestop? The store that buys your game for 20$ and sells it for 5$ cheaper than new copies. Comparing the used games market to used cars is different, companies have their own used car dealerships and still make money off their product, unlike Gamestop.

[palaeomerus]

It's NOTHING Like pirating. At all.

[dvtran93]

Devs don't make as much money as publishers who do 10% of the work for 60-70% of the pay. Blame them for being greedy, not the devs.

[PS3-247]

How about finding ways to cut cost on game development. Like do CEO's have to get millions a year in bonuses?

[Unicron]

You realize only a small, small percent of studios break even in this industry, don't you?

Kotick and his ilk are the exception, they are NOT the norm.

[dvtran93]

The last place to cut costs should be game development. If you want all future games to be slight graphical changes to frameworks we already have/own, then go ahead to think that way. If you want new innovative games, R&D costs will always be there.

[Motorola]

I doubt they will enforce this, doesnt seem like something Sony would do. Ive been with them from PS1 kinda and it doesnt seem like sony would do this

[Apotheosize]

edit double post

[Philaroni]

How is it a rip off? You buy the game second market and Sony gets 0$ the online pass gives them at least 10$ its still a rip off for Sony. They are just trying to cut there losses to an extent. Besides is this any different then playing $50 a year to get online on your Xbox? Its is much the same, I don't mean to bring XBL in to this but company's have been doing this in clever ways for a long time now and will keep doing so. If everyone just got the game new or waited for it to drop in price then we would not be seeing this. Only the consumer is to blame.

[AnonUser5555]

Agreed

[palaeomerus]

Sony gets $0 from used sales because they ALREADY made their money when it was sold the first time. They don't deserve more.

[Hudahudahuda]

Nobody "deserves" anything here. Sony doesn't deserve to make money on just any game new or used, they aren't forcing you to pay for any of their games but neither do you deserve to be able to play online on the servers the publishers have to maintain and update without putting in a cent. I mean Sony already does their part with me by not forcing me to pay to access PSN. In every single SCEA game it says on the back that the developer may cut the online portion of the game within 90 days notice. I guarantee if the majority of games were bought new publishers wouldn't have even begun to think about this method. Just like a consumer finds a way to cut his spending by buying a game with full value for half the price the developer can find a way to maximize his profits by giving consumers a reason to buy a game new over used. It's called capitalism.

As a 19 year old who pays to go to college and have a decent paying job I find it strange that I am able to buy most games new without much trouble and own all 3 consoles on top of that. My collection is freaking huge. How could you not afford to put in some money on a product that will give you tons of laughs, entertainment and fun for hours or in some cases days? Do you think you deserve to have the same product people like me pay full price for just because you exist? Gaming is not a need. It's an optional form of entertainment. And I find it comforting that true fans like myself who pay for a products servers and updates and funding for sequels like uncharted 2 since week one will get the better product compared to 12 year olds who can't afford crap and just leech of the lovingly crafted product someone else made only to get bored of it and trade it in to whatever else is new and shiny. You also don't seem to understand that this will drastically reduce the amount of crap games on the shelf.

Personally rather than cut the entire online portion I would reward new buyers the way Bad company 2 did. I find that a much better alternative.

[MGRogue2017]

... Why would they want to do that?

Kinda pointless.. & not to mention, Extremely unfair to innocent consumers.

[Kingdom Come]

Everyone thinks it's a good idea. Pathetic.

[AnonUser5555]

Not pathetic. We just understand supply/demand and that the purpose of business is to MAKE MONEY.

[Philaroni]

Yeppers, and used game sales are eating alot of that $$.

[palaeomerus]

And the purpose of consumption is to get a good deal.

[Aclay]

It wouldn't surprise me at all if nearly every major publisher eventually implements this because of publisher's/developers loosing out on $$ due to Used games sales, and I could completely understand why Sony (and EA) would do it.

For people who are against this and regularly buy used games with an Online component, I guess they'll have to just wait a little while for a price drop....compared to just a few years ago this gen., to me it doesn't really seem to take that long for most games to go on sale nowadays (especially on Amazon).

The only game I've ever bought used is ICO way back in 2002 and the only reason why I bought it used is because I went to multiple stores (this was before I started buying stuff Online) and couldn't find a new copy anywhere even though the game wasn't even that old...other than that, I've bought every game I own brand new, so if more and more publishers implement this, it wouldn't affect me.

[mightydog01]

my look on things yes game from uk and gamestop are greedy and rip gamers off so i dont go to them i goto shop2.net or play.com so gamers trade games to put towards new games and alot of gamers do this,That money is going back into the gaming publisher and developers.So its going back to them....If they start doing this then gamers will buy less games....less games mean poor sales for publisher and developers......I think the long term will be more damaging?......What they should do is start talking to use game retailers and come to some arangement...Or make a law so use game retailers pay 10% back to the publishers somthing like that make it standard

[Unicron]

Something needs to be done on all sides, as the current market setup just isn't working.

Dev budgets need to come down.
MSRP needs to come down as well.
A delay on when used games can be sold from release?
More incentive to buy new (like ME2 did with Cerberus)?

Things need to change on all fronts, and one specific fix isn't the answer. But as long as used titles cut into first month sales, and devs are being hurt by this, well... we can't blame studios for releasing a ton of FPS titles when we're the ones voting with our dollars people.

What I'd really love is for consumers to wise up and realize how much Gamestop rapes your wallet on used prices.

[Jrome]

Ripoff.

If we don't draw the line somewhere...these companies are going to start charging us for breathing.

And before people start talking about the servers...the companies are still getting the money for the servers, it's not like an extra person is playing on the server now.

[big_silky]

Agreed, 1 used game doesn't magically become 50 discs when somebody buys it. It's still 1 person playing it.

[koehler83]

My criticism of XBL has always been that online play is "Part of the $60 package". It works the other way around too.

[Gamer_Z]

This isn’t that bad a lot of the games I buy I don’t even play them online in fact the only games i do play online are Halo and call of duty (i know sad) so really this wouldn’t bother me nor deter me from buying used games but still it seems like a rip-off and the only reason i got a ps3 is so I wouldn’t need to pay to play online (xbox live).

[kagon01]

to my eyes.

This is proof games of this generation are losing their value for consumers that sell, exchange, trade, etc... their BELONGINGS.

It easy to attack the honest consumer than dealing with thieves/pirates...

I'm against this practice, if there is a game that has this rule I won't buy it plain and simple regardless if its new or used...

[sarshelyam]

...Sony knows GameStop is eating into their ROI, so why not? I support them, and I support new purchases over preowned on the same token.

[Kingdom Come]

Double Post.

[big_silky]

I'll keep buying used games, especially ones that skimp on sp to provide mp modes because I'm not paying full price for something I won't use 50% of anyway. I'll always buy good sp games new.

[Horny Melon]

it's the top heavy publishing conglomerates.

[HorriblePanda]

And all you fanatic fanboys are just find and dandy with sony doing this but If ea or activision do this then its a crime? I am sure if ms started doing it there fanboys would wet there pantys just like sony fanboys....this is sad sad sad time in gaming....maybe we will see a gaming crash just like the early days of atari... how about they QUIT making online the norm and make more single player games.....instead forcing games to have an online mode!how about they stop making the same god damn game over and over and calling it new! I buy new games when I wanna reach new vegas mafia 2 metroid other m are a few that are getting bought new...but I don't buy used games for more than $20.. and no way in hell am I paying 30 40 or 50 for a game that's 2 3 4 or more years old no way in hell so let them do this no skin off of my nose they can get along with out my money besides the screwed me over after my BD drive went out on my 14 old 60GB ps3 so here comes psjailbreak and used consoles

[artsaber]

I don't support this practice no matter whose idea it is. People reserve the right to buy used games if they like. Sony makes plenty of money, they just need to be glad that the person buying a 2nd hand game has bought their console. So what is next, people will be victims of additional charges when they buy 2nd hand consoles too?

This idea to ME is rubbish. Sony is not in the same boat as greedy companies like Activision and EA. Sony has other means of profit and sales, even from a PS3 owner. Owning a PS3 console brings in revenue from alternate sources like Bluray movies, PSN purchases, peripherals, etc. I say leave gamers alone, there are enough of us to buy new games to support 2nd hand user purchases. Don't be blinded by dollar $igns Sony (or anyone else). But I can't lie, I think I understand the strategy in depth more so than some might.

2nd hand purchases of games is a legal practice. But understand this business model's main idea and goal is to DEVALUE 2nd hand games. (For Instance) Gamestop would no longer be able to sell a used copy of a 2nd hand Killzone3 for $54.99, it would be much lower since an online activation code would be not be included. This is a brute force way of forcing Gamestop to lower that 2nd hand Killzone3 game to $44.99, and allowing themselves (Sony) a chance to recoup $10 on that 2nd hand sale for online access. This would be Sony's way of cashing in on 2nd hand game sale transactions. This would hurt business for Gamestop, etc., since most people would want to play 2nd hand games online, so they'd be forced to reduce the cost of 2nd hand games, while discouraging 2nd hand sales altogether, and/or let Sony recoup their profit from 2nd hand sales.

The SP campaign enthusiast is the only one who would come out great on this deal... but they are probably not the majority of gamers. Sony may find themselves with a few less online players of these games, but since there is no monthly fee to recoup, Sony may care less.

[NIRVANArazor]

im a huge SONY supporter but i think that this is a complete rip off. NO just NO!

[Gilliand]

More money that is flowing into them the more money that they will put into their games: except Activision of coarse. If they make enough money they might even lower the price sooner than they would have. People who buy used games are leaches on the game industry. All they do is give money to the retailers and nothing to the people who actually made the game. Most of the time when you buy used games you are only saving 10-15 dollars compared to a new copy, when the retailer bought the game for only $10.

Though I don't have a problem with trading or borrowing from friends or an eBay. Since the person who sold it got some more money which he can buy more games with.

[na2ru1]

Please don't do this. The only thing it will stop is publishers whining and nothing else. We already have to pay so much for DLC so stop the greed you corporate mongrols.

[sashimi]

If people would stop using GS this wouldn't be a problem...there has always been used game sales.But GS's abuse of the stupid has raked it tons of profit which would've gone to the developers/publishers of those games.

[ReBurn]

Not sure that I agree that Gamestop abuses the stupid. The stupid sign up for it. Gamestop makes an offer to buy games. Before the transaction occurs they clearly state the price they're willing to pay. The seller has the option to sell the games or to keep them. Take it or leave it. Nobody holds a gun to the seller's head.

There's also another way to look at it. Some people sell their games when they're finished with them to subsidize the price of new games. New games are expensive. In that scenario game developers do benefit from the trade because it makes it possible for someone to buy their new game where they might not have been able to afford it otherwise.

[supremacy]

And i know gamestop isn't the only retailer out there with so call deals, regardless the point is those retailers don't pay those people who originally pay full price for their games near what they originally pay for them.

Instead whether its 10, 20,30 just think of it like this, the person who sold that retailer that game or those games most likely got short handed even worse than the label price i just printed. And that's after the fact he or she or they payed 60 bucks for said game/s originally.

EDIT: The supreme court ruled on this. Once you purchase a movie, game, cd, etc... you are allowed to do what you want with it. you can rent it out, sell it, let people borrow it, whatever. The publishers are getting WAY too greedy and they are coming up with all sorts of ridiculous, consumer screwing plans to circumvent this ruling and this protection of the consumer. and there are apparently blind fanboys that will support it depending on what publisher is doing the screwing.

the problem with the industry is that you have developers that make great games that sell really well, and they see only a tiny percentage of the profit because the extremely greedy publishers wanna keep all that money for them selves. it should never have become a publisher vs consumer issue...it should be a developer vs publisher issue.

lol relax, seriously though if the consumer who bought their games can do whatever they want with it its fine, Sony isn't saying you cant sell your game.

Sony however is simply saying for "OUR" first party titles, which simply means property they rightfully own in every sense of the word off which most likely is content built by studios they've acquired.

"Support our studios and their work by simply buying new and not second hand".

This would also mean that whatever profits Sony makes than it simply trickles down to the owned developers under that publisher which in this case is Sony.

In simple terms Sony is like Nintendo whatever profits they make its developers will receive a healthy amount not to mention they depend and live of whatever Sony does.
Which is exactly why not too many companies are as big as say...EA, Activision, Nintendo and Sony in this regard, its not easy and its definitely not cheap maintaining all these in house studios/developers.

Its a big industry run by big business practices that bring in that much needed denominator call money, ill say something's got to give the day you own a company in the same breath and size than you would comprehend why they seem so greedy to you and many others.

And in sony's, nintendos and even ms case that simply means someone else is eating from their funded and backed first party owned studios/developers labor.

Now for a business practice like EA partners your argument can hold some water for the simple fact ea doesn't own those partners therefore the profits simple lie on the deal between said parties.

Now if you want to talk about greedy than lets talk politics, politicians are the greediest living organisms on this planet. And that's a known fact for sure, they are suppose to work for us(as their job is a civil duty, for the citizens) yet they try and screw us whichever way they can. check this out, something to wet your appetite while we dispute whose greedy and whats a rip off. http://www.boston.com/news/...

http://biggovernment.com/fg...

[Phil Mc Crackin]

.

[ReBurn]

I rarely play online any more. But I can see why Sony would want to charge use game buyers to get online access. They offer free online play, so the cost of maintaining the network has to come from the software revenues.

I have mixed feelings about used game sales. I'll always buy the games I really want brand new. But when I'm bored and just want something to hold me over I'll pick up a cheap used game to play. I don't want to pay full price for a mediocre game, and at least half of the stuff out there is pure cruft that isn't worth $30, much less $60.

Something's only worth what people are willing to pay for it.

[artsaber]

I co-sign 150%. I operate the exact same way. Some games aren't worth the admission in the first place, so used games definately have a place in gamer's lives. I believe your stance is fair and balanced.

[supremacy]

we have reviews and fiends, i don't have too many games because of this.
i was told wet was a bad game by a friend i did some research and what do you know i saved myself 60bucks.

But to me i only buy certain games, i just don't see the need to buy every game that comes out, let alone rent them if i know they are that bad, why waste your time?

And besides lots of these games are going down in price, and places like new egg and amazon have great deals on new games?

Bottom line is if the gaming industry which by today's standards is a risky business to invest in (referring to companies)than i believe the used game market has to die at some point in time.

Unless these retailers start giving these companies a percentage of whatever profit the garner from each title sold?lol somethings got to give my brother, somethings got to give..lol

[Montoya]

I hate the idea of this. But, XBL has been doing basically this for years and got away w/ it so.......be careful of the business modos you support. Corp suits w/ these companies study everything you do and support and will push you as far as you will go to get your money. Plus, the can be/are heartless and their NOT gamers they only see money, increases and decreases.

[HorriblePanda]

All you blind fanboy fantics need to wake the hell up and not blame this on pirates or used game sales....here a little bit of info dev already get paid for a game in advance from a publisher to make a game...all this is is pure greed! And they are gonna stick it to used gamers first to see if we are dumb enough to pay for some sub fee...and after everybody bends to there will they will hit up new game buyers and charge you a fee for services... mock my wards its gonna happen and then were will your blind worshiping get you? 80 or 90 dollars for a pos 5 hour long game with worthless mutiplayer tacked on

[unworthyBOZO]

This is all about used games I wonder if this takes off what will gamestop do.

[04soldier]

I buy a game at full price. its then my right to keep sell or lend to anyone I please.. If I was to lend a game to my brother he would then have a small fee before he plays said game..?? &%$#^@^! THATS RIDICULOUS!!

[ImmortalLegend]

If the game happens to be good I will gladly pay the full $60 for the game, but a lot of games aren't even worth it because of things like a short story, lack of updates, etc. If the game isn't worth $60 I'll be more than happy to buy it used. You don't want me to buy used games, then quit releasing short ass games with a lack of content and then shower us with a bunch of overpriced DLC.

[supremacy]

If the game you feel is bad or short and dont like that, than you dont buy it.

Thats what adults and smart buyers do they limit their purchases to a select few, instead of wanting to buy everything that comes their way.

And not defend sony, but every company I know makes one or two bad products and judging from recent releases I say sony is one of the few companies in this industry releasing and hosting studios that are crafting and releasing good products.

Which is why some of their products take look or even get delayed, in which then the argument becomes sony is always delaying their releases.

I notice people are never happy nor satisfied, too much expections too greater of a deman for a once in a lifetime 60dollar investment.

Sad thing is I see people waste their money on worse, and get nothing in return but a small time high.

Point is relax, do your research and become a smart buyer anc this might not come to affect you. Just saying.

[spektical]

I cannot imagine SONY charging for used games. They ahve many first party studios churning up AAA games thatpeople buy....

I dont think SONY has reason to charge for 2nd hand games. They should not feel threatened as well, they make quality first party games.

[Ludakriss]

So I take it that no one heard about UK raising taxes to 20% after January? How can they fucking think this is a good idea when it already cost almost 50 pounds a POP!

[Time_Is_On_My_Side]

..if Sony does this through the courts with their brands it wouldn't affect anyone. Trying to deal with it on their own can potentially harm the people who barrow games with an online portion.

In the end if nothing happens, the gaming industry will most likely fall due to the fact developers don't get paid for second had used games from retail stores.

[ian72]

I would rather have codes for new games and pay to get online with second hand games than pay to play.
I buy mostly new games anyhow, but if I did buy second hand, paying to get online isn't a big deal. The Activision Pay to Play idea is worse IMO.

[Tzuno]

Yay!!! doesn't mater there are enough PS3 addict's to accept this shit. Woooo Sony PS3 is the best.