Sony's latest business decision revolving around the PSN Pass has users and fanboys up in arms. But they shouldn't take it so personal. It's just business, and there's a reason Sony's doing it.
lol can't believe a site like this is defending such an action $ony fanboys much?
There are SONY fans angry with this idea, and of course we'll have hypocrites that bashed EA supporting PSN Pass. Fanboys are blind fools.
This is a fail all around. Even if i buy the game new, its my copy that i own. If i choose to sell it the person buying should also be able to play online. AND WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WHO LET FRIENDS BORROW GAMES. This is another fail. Fanboys need to stop defending whoever did this, either sony or insomniac cause its just plain ignorant and stupid. Get a life.
They could give 3-5 passes, similar to how you can put games on PSN on multiple consoles. At least its not capcom Resident evil bad. that shit is scary
hold on...what if i create an account and sell the game with the account access. Solution? No trophies, but i dont care bout that
the bright side is used games will be cheaper
So people always complain about Gamestop and how its used games hurt the business, but now Sony does something that other companies are doing to counter used games and everyone is bashing Sony for it??? I don't remember people flipping this much when all EA games, and even new games like Mortal Kombat have it.
...It's not a monthly fee. It's a one time activation. My guess is Sony is just trying to get a bit of their money back from used game sales. My question is, if you get this new(or used and get the pass) can you play the game online on another PS3 under the same account?
KillaManiac, the people complaining about GameStop are the ones supporting this pass, not bashing it. You have it backwards. NationExplosion, it's tied to whatever PS3 console(s) you activated under your account. Any gamer with those PS3 consoles can play online. This leaves used games, renting, lending and borrowing out of the equation unless someone is willing to purchase a pass. All in all I despise this idea in its entire. However I never planned on buying R3 regardless as I grew weary of FPS games. BF3 on PC will be an exception because I haven't played a BF game before so I am curious what the game is about.
to stop this nonsense, don't buy their product period, same with EA's. If you don't buy, they'll stop. You can't make money back from "used sales" if no ones buying your product in the first place. If you go out and buy Resistance 3, or any EA product, your supporting this stupid pass. I'm calling the next step, guess what its going to be, passes for the whole game, like on PC. Then were stuck indefinitely with a game we no longer play. Send a message.
I haven't read it yet, but I'm guessing they are saying its a good idea... Like, Buy the game new, Play online for free.... However, if you buy it second hand, we will make sure you pay an entry fee... But for that game only... After all... Online is actually FREE. MS Fanboy Much ? Let me reply. As for me, I have never sold .nor traded a game in.... And with that,Xbox Live aint worth my money. EDIT: Opps.. Much more fun like this M$ Fanboy Much ? (ooohh, the dollar sign.... MMmmm)
Are you having a conversation with yourself? You don't have to be a Microsoft fanatic to dislike this Sony Pass thing. A friend of mine has a PS3 as well. Sometimes he gets MP games before I do and I have the option of borrowing them from him to test them out, but now I don't think I can really borrow them for any extended period because I'd have to pay. It doesn't hurt me that much because I can just play the game at my friend's house for a cool minute to see how it is, but this new Pass is just another system of control. Sony and EA are not offering enough incentive for gamers to accept this DRM. Valve did a better job of appeasing its community with free games and highly discounted game packs. STEAM is so great it doesn't really feel like a DRM.
Yeh, sorry , i was blabbling on drunk early this morning...
@Kaveti6616 You are aware that you have a trial period of 4-7 days with EA's online games before you either enter voucher code or buy a pass right?
they're just trying to get money from used game sales...Why is that such a big deal. I think it's fair since used game sales prevent the developers and publishers from seeing a penny for their work...If you guys are so mad, go complain and boycott gamestop...They are the entire reason all these companies are doing this stuff. Gamestop makes 80 percent profit from a used game sale and nobody else sees the money from that sale.
I Agree.. Why is this actually a problem ? Surley, YOU, the software owner, knows the value of a traded game? Do you? For what its worth,the game store will rip you off on trade in, and rip you off at 2nd hand sales... Its up to YOU, yes you, to make sure if you trade or buy, its a fair price... Otherwise, use ebay, and if its an extra $10 to play online, But its still $20 cheaper than the next best buy... Everyone wins ! Its a scale of economics..
they're just trying to get money from used game sales...Why is that such a big deal. because games are 60$. Sony wants to control the market by eliminating the middle man as much as possible. They aim to have digital downloads at a set price, see the psp. They are now aiming at eliminating used games, a practice that has allowed people to buy games at a reasonable prices for a few decades. Now watch R3 stay at a high price (60 bucks to play) since it will have no trade in value / less competition in the free market
slayorofgods Bear with me.. I've never traded Nor sold any of my games... What is the value of trading in a game ? (Purchase price as to trade value) Can you swap it for a new release after 7 Days? BTW, So gamestop (& place other game outlets here) controlling Sony IP on the 2nd market is any different... Its really simple.... When you buy 2nd hand, Take into account the online pass price and make sure the retailer subsidises you for it... As for buying it new....It wont cost you $60... Great deals can be had on the Net.
$60 really isn't that much for a video game. I paid the exact same amount when I bought perfect dark for the N64 in 1998. 13 years later and the price hasn't gone anywhere. Considering the scale difference in the size of a dev team it takes to make a triple A game now, compared to 13 years ago Im inclined to say that Im not opposed to companies trying to make more money by limiting used sales. This is a much better idea then say, jacking up the cost of a new game to try and cover the money they lose from used sales.
@Lich120 yeah, i think i would much rather have this than have the price go up on all games but i have to say, i wonder what will happen when i get R3 on gamefly...there should really be some fix for when people rent games
Ahhh, I didn't take renting into account because I havent rented in a long long time. It would be tricky to make a system that supported renting as well as fighting piracy.
My only question is how much will the passes from Sony be. If they think they can charge $20 like they started doing with PSP games like Fire Team bravo 3 - then good luck to them.
But thats the question... Sony, MS, EA,ABC, XYZ... If you know how much the online will cost and take that into account, whether you trade or buy second hand, the precedence is SET. If your a gamer, and in the know, (and we we are here @ NG4), That gross profit is gone.. So, they make ?? % mark up on a traded game... Who cares... Prices will reflect this "online pass" introduction... As it should of already.... Lets not let the retailers hide the fact... If it needs an online pass, the price, cost ratio is taken into account... Its not that hard really...
Lol Dude of they could be fanboys of the games industry in general lol.. Pre owned market hurts the games industry not just Sony... They could be defending network passes in gerneral and not just Sony.. Jeez i hate people like you that just cause somebody supports an Idea that they are Automatically a fanboy of MS or Sony.. Not every1 is as childish as you so obv are
It's also a communistic system of controlling the market. If you buy property shouldn't it be your property? Shouldn't you be able to put it into the "free market" sell it, make a lot of money on rarities (sukodien 2), trade it in when you get tired of it for a different game. putting it out in the free market, gamestop can make money they still have to follow the law of supply and demand. This law ensures that I get a fair deal when I buy a game. If there is only one source of getting games that is communism, or at least a monopoly. Either way it ignores the free market.
@slayrofgods Your argument is a strawman fallacy. You can still sell your games in the "open market". Try presenting a real argument on the topic instead of twisting reality to support your ridiculous claims. BTW Sony owns PSN at no time in your games buying or selling have you purchased PSN. You therefore can not resell something you never owned. Face palm to your whole argument.
@UnwanteDreamz My agruement is more satirical then literal... "Sony owns PSN at no time in your games buying or selling have you purchased PSN. You therefore can not resell something you never owned." That is the point, Sony is going in a direction that all games are going to be through the psn or bypasses the middle man in some way. Just look at the psp, the sales are regulated by Sony via the psn, where are the actual copies of the games going? My point is from not being able to resell or trade R3 to Gamestop via GamePass. Imagine all games going in that direction. It takes away from our overall ownership and ability to trade..... To give a FU to your facepalm I will say it again. enter satire/ It's comunistic / end satire
"it does take away dollars from the game developers and publishers" NO, you were NEVER entitled to that money, EVER. There has always been a used market for video games, like most other consumer products. You lost nothing, get over it. It is on THEIR shoulders do make a product that people don't want to sell, not ours to buy only brand new. The only thing worst then these companies greed is the sheep "gamers" that allow them to do it. The consumer has always held the power.
No-Pantaloons is dead right. As a musician I dion't bleat,cry and moan like a bitch the way the games industry does over used sales of discs.Insomniac and Sony might think it clever and, somehow, right to align themselves with Ea over this but I expected better(esp of Insomniac) and expected a more honest and realistic approach to used sales-make a better game and fewer will WANT to trade and MORE will preorder or buy new. It'ssimple. also, not every used sale means a new sale is lost. I ALWAYS preferred new games and to show my support to developers of good games but when I was a stgudent or unemployed for spells I simply couldn't afford new games and those who rely on used games now simplyt won't magic up the cash for R3 or for a pass on top of the used fee. All that wiill happen is fewer people will be playing online after a month or two and a dead online is no advert for the next fdranchise installment or next IP from Insom. Also allowing us to buy used when we're too poor to buy new keeps us in touch with gaming and allows us to become hooked for life and students are the big buyers of tomorrow. In short, just as I became an Insomniac fan via a used copy of R&C back in the day, so woud peole with R3 now without this silly move which is both short sighted and a bit effin greedy. I think it will mean fewer fans in fujture and a weak, shorter lived online community for R3 than it would otherwise have had and as a result it's no incentive fior gamers to stick with them in the nrext generation/next IP etc. Used sales aren't this blanket bad thing for gaming and developers and publishers both short and long term used sales can benefit gaming as an industry and if they keep pricing folk out they will leave gaming for more accessible pass times. That's to say nothing of the fact this makes the industry look greedy and pirates use exactly that as a reason to justify what they do to gaming. If the industry was more inclusive and took some responsibility when we don;'t kee(or buy) a game because it's just not that great then we'd all be less inclined to turn blind eyes ti the pirates we al know imho. These greedy moves will do more harm than what they intend to stop. I doubt I can support games doing this any more just as games making us pay for true endings etc via DLC(C:LOS anyone!?)I find unbearably crass and greedy. This is part of a problem and not a cure for anything.
It isn't a matter of defense. It's just the go with the flow when it comes to business.
So IGN are fanboys too aren't they? http://uk.ps3.ign.com/artic...
Nope & with the PS4 people will be charged to play Online
yeah I think it's pretty much a guarantee that Sony will charge for online play in some sort of way for the PS4. But I guess we will find out with the Vita first.
HEY GUYS! you want to buy an USED game? PAY ME $10! IT'S ONLY FAIR SINCE US POOR DEVELOPERS ARE STRUGGLING :C oh and BTW, why don't you pay us $15 for day 1, on disc DLC? you guys love that right?
Why is PSN pass such shocking news? Sony was already testing the waters with Socom: FtB3 last year. Should've bitched about it then, rather than now.
Apparently select PSP games were doing the same too for some time.
Why do people think Sony fans are the ones that are ok with it? In the end the only people that have a problems with it is the ones that buy it used. I can buy it used and get a free pass if I want to, I just know my own way around it.
Exactly! The other part people seem to neglect is the fact that the Online Pass is tied to the hardware, not the PSN account. So if you have multiple accounts on one PS3, everyone benefits from the Pass...even those who didn't pay a dime for the game in the first place. Wow, that's so incredibly unfair of Sony...isn't it? Sarcasm aside, this only benefits Sony in making a bit more money in a market that thrives on preowned sales. The only folks who really should be that upset are those that don't support new product, or those that buy-sell-rebuy the same product over and over. That said, once you have the online pass it really isn't going to matter as you own that license regardless if you own the software any longer. So really then, the ONLY people who should be objecting this are those buying preowned...or those trying to beat a system they deem unfair. Look, I'll summarize by stating the following; If the end product in a system that offers an Online Pass to New Software purchases spells a more robust online experience and the insurance that developers, no matter their size, are stabilized and continue to deliver new product that is worth my money...then it's a "price" I'll pay. I left price in quotes considering I'm really not paying anything extra for this, nor am I losing anything from the move...it's just a simple step to activate the title and its online feature set. No skin off my back really.
I don't think Sony is getting any of the money out of this, in fact I thing it is all going to EA. To tell the truth EA never really had to good of online, games are awesome but most of the time their online couldn't even handle half the number of people in one game (At least for consoles).
You don't think the fact that I can't borrow games to play online isn't a problem? If my friend playing a game, and I'm like, hey.. Lemme borrow that to see if I like. So, I bring it home, put it in my PS3, go through the menus, find Online, click on it... Then I get a message telling me I cannot play online, I needa purchase the pass. You think that is just all find and dandy? There's other examples listed above, too. But, as far as what I said, I suppose it's alright if it goes the Homefront way.
If that is the case you should have brought it or check to see if a store that has it for rent has the pass in the case. Other then that, you can deal with it.
While I understand developers and publishers want to make there money, it appalling really that software is about the only thing where it is acceptable to do this kind of stuff. Would you expect a used car to come with half of its features missing or a used house to come with no windows or doors or for those companies selling those to things to impose those type of restrictions. I don't think so... and don't give me that BS about not really owning the game, that's pure BS that they want you to believe in. Can you hold it, can you keep it forever, did you spend money on... yes, then it's YOURS. The fact of the matter if you bought it, everything that is suppose to come with it should be there... no strings attached.
You make a good point about the used car scenario. Most people buying used at places like GameStop are not aware that if they buy a used game (that has this pass feature), once they get home little do they know that they may have to pay an additional $10 for a "pass" on the PSN and Xbox Live to play it online.
Actually it's completely different. A used car has mileage wear & tear, so yes...expecting the same "features" would be ignorant of a consumer considering you can't simply refresh a car back to its original state without...what's that? Investing a little money outside of the initial purchase?
You don't think games get wear & tear? Games get smudges, scratches, broken cases, and so forth. Everything gets some wear & tear over the years. But that has little to do with the initial point. NO other product is restricted like software from resale rather it be personal or a store. Any other thing you buy your free to re-sell or do anything else you want to do with it, and this should be the same with software (other than copying and modification for obvious reasons). It is a complete double standard... @sarshelyam: "Protecting the medium that is art, is far more vital than the rights of reselling a car, or a television, or whatever other example you want to throw at this discussion." That is pure BS, and you know it... your trying to rationalize something that can't be rationalized. Games are a product, like any other product... nothing more.
That doesn't make your used car sale analogy any less flawed. You realize you can be fined for showing a movie in your personal collection in a public setting, be it for profit or otherwise? It requires you purchase a Public Performance License to share that content. You should count yourself lucky games don't adhere to the same $100/day licensing for showing a film in any other location other than your house. Protecting the medium that is art, is far more vital than the rights of reselling a car, or a television, or whatever other example you want to throw at this discussion.
My exact feelings on DLC. there already nickeling and diming us there! now the actual game it self. how much money do these companies really need. they are still keeping fed!
You simply cannot compare buying a car or house to buying a video game. Cars and houses are necessities, video games are not. Developers have lost a lot of money to used sales, they are trying to recoup costs so that you the consumer will be able to enjoy better entertainment in the future bc they will have more money to develop with. Also, Games in general were going in a bad direction by having online. Video games used to be about awesome single player experiences. Now everyone is trying to make the next COD. Hopefully more companies move away from online and start focusing their attention on the very thing that started the whole game industry, an engrossing single player experience. I like some online in games, but for the most part it is stifling creativity in the industry. Most "children" now a days have no idea what gaming was like because they were not born yet. The industry used to have so much more variety and really well thought out games, now everything is dumbed down and has auto aim, what kind of crap is that, no skill involved at all cough COD cough. Gaming going main stream has done nothing but hurt the industry. Just look at people's comments to see how it has hurt it.
know you can't borrow games to play online anymore. When I first got my 360, I had NO GAMES. I had to borrow a bunch from my friends so I could actually use the damn thing. Thats when I first got to taste the awesomeness of Halo 3. The same thing with my PS3. If this nonsense was in place, I'd have to pay so I could try the first resistance online. I'm a student, contrary to some people here, I don't have some loyalty to some company or developer. I look out for myself first. I also don't buy used at gamestop, where MW2 used costs $45 still. I go around to smaller ones where you can barter and get fairly new used games for cheap. With this Pass for the exclusive games (exclusive games are usually top notch) now I have to dish out moore money for new games and I can't trade in those titles because of the pass. I can't tell how many trade ins I've done to get new games. I'm totally against this pass thing. If anything, it should give players that buy new more stuff. Like heavily discounted DLC, more starting maps/weapons. Rather than restricting online.
Do what a lot of poeple do...Wait till it hits the bargin bin...I doesn't take too long for that to happen. I know what you mean...It's hard since I lost my job (and yes I'm a college student too)...I deal with waiting 3-4 till it hits the $20-30 mark...If you look for the deal, you'll be surprised. It makes it harder now since I used to split the game 3 ways with friends so we buy the full retail game for $20 a piece >_<. They should the same thing that they did with BFBC 2's "VIP" pass...It gave me all the DLC free when I downloaded the Vietnam pack (which was also free).
@JEW Not being able to trade-in our games or lend them is the real problem here... I buy new, always, but I also trade in games I don't play anymore to buy more games, and with this "Pass", the game you just bought now has less value. What's in it for me, the consumer that buys new?
@Fox01 IDK...I buy used all the time on ebay...It sux, but we can't do anything about it, except boycotting those games (if it's PS3 exclusive, I doubt that would happen)...I usually play single player/local COOP exclusively (with friends)...Way too many kids on PSN and XBL for me to want to play MP (on any of those system), so I shouldn't be talking...I'm going from my experiences. That's why I'm not really complaining. I keep my online passes unused. I get more $$$ on ebay with that included. Again I wait for $20 because I play SP.
@jew What happens when those games go bargain bin? It probably wont be for months on top of months. Do you think the multiplayer for a mediocre title will still have the high number of players it did at launch? Probably not, go check out resistance 2 for proof of that.
@maniacmayhem You have to check out the deals yourself...I found Mortal Kombat (PS3 and X360) for $30 (I got it for $20 since I had a $10 coupon) a week after it came out and that required a "Kombat Pass" and I got a skin for the subzero skin that was included in the new game....Plus Portal 2 (for PS3, PC, and X360; which I didn't get) was around $30 (even though I foolishly didn't get/wanted then, but that's my loss). They came out the same week!! You find the deals. Usually great deals start after a month or two has past. That's the way it works this generation. I don't game online but I'm sure the community doesn't die out that early. If you want to wait and get a deal then do it if not pay $60 and be grateful...Anyway, I've been burned with too many GoTY editions to know to wait about a year (and it'll cost less and you get all the DLC). Usually the GoTY editions will most likely ignite the online community. That's my 2 cents...I'm a college student and just lost my job...I don't need to spend money on leisure things when I got bills I still have to pay for. I don't support DLC and the other bullsh*t schemes these companies pull (i.e. pulling content, which could of made the final version easily, just for DLC sake...Also, leaving the data on the disk and make you unlock it later for a hefty price...I'm referring to Capcom on that last part lol) and online passes...But you got to understand that companies need $$$ to survive in this tough economy too. If you want the DLC, get it. If not then done get it...Nobody is forcing you to buy DLC YOU WANT (key words)...If there is a demand for online, they will supply it. And it's not like their charging to go online every month like I they for the X360 (yes I'm a gold member and a PSN user). Plus your buying a used copy off ebay/craigslist for a whole lot cheaper than GS used and new copies of games. If your into online then I'm sure $10 more wont hurt since your getting what you want and it's still going to be way cheaper than GS used and new copies. As for Resistance 2...My brother's brother-in-law is addicted to R2 mulitplayer and he always finds game without waiting, so I really don't know what your referring too...I will say it again, I don't play online so I don't check every second of every day.
This goes for both 360 and PS3. This will really effect stores like GameStop. Stores like GameStop make most of their profits off of selling used games. These codes also makes a game less valuable once the pass is used (just look at GameStop trade values). Once you use your code you might as well knock about $10 off of your games trade-in value.
No it's not & ALL GameStop's should be put-out of business anyway. Tho it would freak out all you penny pinching mamas boys. I support the game makers not the used market hustlers.
Meanwhile, Sony wants everybody to pre-order Resistance at GameStop. http://www.gamestop.com/ps3...
@ glory Since you support the game makers dont you think those game makers should buy back the game if you feel the game sucked? How about when they shut down servers or no longer support with dlc, shouldnt the developer buy back your game? I wonder when you buy a car do you pay sticker price or do you try and get a good deal? Or when you go to an electronic store and compare prices or buy stuff on sale because its a good deal, noooo not you right? Just us penny pinchers.
I'm surprised it took this long. This is a great thing for gamers whether they want to believe it or not.
Explain how it benefits us? I'm really curious.
Isn't it obvious? It ensures that the Publishers and Developers see continued income post-market in a retail environment that elevates the pre-owned sale. Prior to this, devs/pubs had no recourse to continue support of a product, or income to support upcoming projects. It's been said before, but why should a consumer who doesn't support a product at launch benefit from all of the incentives those who purchase at a premium do? What a backwards society one must live in when you consider that mentality to be the just and fair stance. You benefit by buying a game new and getting a free online feature set, in turn giving the dev/pub more profit margin to continue making the games you enjoy to play. Really, buying new...this changes nothing, it's simply one more step you have to take to access your FREE online functionality.
So car manufacturers, PC companies, or any other company known to sell products in a retail environment should see income post market? No, I didn't think so...
Exactly as sarshelyam said. It helps devs make the money that they deserve so they can continue to make new, and better games. @Snake-Doctor-99 Cars and games have 2 entirely different economies. Gaming is a niche market that only a small portion of the world partakes in meaning far less games sold in the first place. Everyone needs a car meaning more cars sold. besides, cars only resell about once before theyre dead and done for. Games can be almost eternally resold to dozens of other players before going to the dump.
@ sarshelyam when in reality we are just gonna have to pay for more DLC and what nots. even tho we were dedicated fan and bought it day 1! i dont buy your statement for a minute. as years go by all i see these devs doing is whats best for their wallets. and who can blame them. but like we said with the whole cod elite we gotta vote with our wallets. that we like the used video game market. usually when i get a game used or for cheap. i spend the money on some DLC i want. so these devs are still getting their money. they just want to insure they are getting all of it! which isnt fair.
No it isn't. And people really need to stop moaning about it.
I'm sure we all agree if the psn pass is just a 1 time life-time fee of 9.99. And its on psn store.
what are you talking about? you dont have to pay 9.99... its just to ensure that people arent pirating. you pay 60 bucks on day 1, and buy the game, you wont have no probs, or have to pay anything else. ya it sucks cause we wont be able to play much of used games, but hopefully in a couple years this will put gamestop under, hahahaha... that would just be awesome and as much as we all hate em, we do shop there alot, but hey...
Bad for us, but good for the Industry (on a financial scale, of course)
No! I heard read they were looking into it from 2010, I informed a few PS3 owners and fanboys and they didnt believe me. But if it works it works, good luck to sony.