XMNR: According to a reveal on Sunday from Michael Pachter, Sony Computer Entertainment of America CEO Jack Tretton thinks it would be anti-consumer to block used games with the Playstation 4.
Jack is the man.
Wonder if this will atleast slow down the Orbis anti-used games rumors? Next gen consoles rumors in general (I think someone at MS said that they were against having that as well).
It should, the man is the ceo of the greatest gaming company in the world, im pretty sure he has some say so on how things will turn out regarding used games.
This doesn't necessarily mean that Orbis wont have anti used game tech. Tretton is the CEO of SCEA not sony in general and it is SCEJ that designs the playstation systems. Like he said in the article, Japan aka SCEJ may still decide to go anti used. @tentonsoftube: Unfortunately he has no say. Tretton is only in charge of north american distribution, not design. It will be up to SCEJ whether PS4/Orbis has anti used tech or not.
If he had no say , all the more reason they wouldnt let him do that kind of statement for the company
Whilst the second hand market DOES impact negatively on the current gen, it impacts positively on the last generation because it helps sell hardware that has lost developers support. it's a difficult balance to strike but Sony have proven they can do it with the PS1 and the PS2.
I'm still surprised this is even being discussed. Sony I know dismissed for the PS3 and i'm pretty sure Microsoft have looked into it as well and decided it was basically an insane idea. The devs however seem to love the idea and that's probably why it has lingered on.
Sony had patented a system to "sign" games onto a console so that only that console could play the games, thus eliminating used games sales. They patented this system before the PS3's release and I remember at that time everyone was screaming "OMG! They're going to put this in the PS3." They didn't, and they aren't going to now. It's just the same rumours we saw before.
They may make the tech available and just let it up to devs and publishers to decide game by game which cases to use it. It could be a point for getting extra support with some publishers (EA?) and devs, but I don't believe Sony will enforce it to every game. As Darkride66 said, we had seen this talk before.
JT definitely has a say, but it's the greaseballs in Japan that will make the decision. If it is done I think it will only be exclusives that practice it.
@darkride: Sometimes patents are taken to block the use of it, and in any case, the tech can be used to award the first user instead of blocking the second, which Sony was aiming to do (they had an award program in beta, dunno what happened to it, tho)
I still don't see what's different between used games and used books, movies and music. I think the video game industry is filled with spoiled brats. I think they'd be biting themselves in the foot once they see how many people don't buy their game when they know they won't be able to re-sell it later.
@inveni0, it is no different from used books, movies, or CD's. And they would change their tune when the see so many people not buying their system. I agree with Pachter (Oh, my God! Did I just say that? I must really be getting dumber with each day.) Banning used games is a dumb idea. I for one know that I am not going to buy any system that forces me to be on the internet in order to play it. If all the consoles do that next gen, the I will be forced to declare that gaming has passed my by. I guess then I will have to focus on having kids and other stuff.
@inveni0 and @ darrius Cole : it is different if the game has online; you log on and take up further server space etc and store data on there not very much at any one time but it's clearly enough however this costs money; money the original buyer paid a small part of his RRP he paid to cover this cost whereas the used byer has not :p
That is completely unrelated. They're already limiting multiplayer. But is THAT even okay? How many multiplayer games are P2P? If the company servers are only storing stats, the cost is so minimal that it costs them more to enact a fee on used games than they lose from used games. But that's if it's P2P. If the company runs servers for gameplay, then I totally agree that used game buyers should have to pay a fee. But I'm not at all interested in online, so I couldn't care less about that. Should I be punished? It's a double standard. Video game publishers feel like they're special for some reason. But they're not. They've done less for society than movies, books OR music, and those industries are doing just fine with the prospect of used media.
well, if i had any doubts of sony before, they're certainly gone now. I mainly game on my 360 right now, but I doubt I'll be picking up the new xbox due to the anti-used game rumors that I've been hearing.
You would think if he was going to show off a pair of cards they would be two Jack's Anyway I total agree with him, I think ti would be a bad move if this happens
How DIBBLE DARE YOU criticise the Tretton >:(
I think those are the two cards he held on his last poker hand in a tournament that he won......i think.
You missed the point, Tretton won that tournament and by the photo, most people think he won bluffing, so this photo is generally posted to mean he's bluffing or he wins. But what actually happened is that he indeed called all in with that hand, indeed I believe he was trying to bluff, but the other guy with one high card din't bited and called, lefting Tretton behind. When most would grant Tretton as dead meat, the flop paired Tretton and left the other guy on an open ended straight. It was decided on the river, which made Tretton a two pairs hand. It was the first Sillicon Valley Poker Challenge if I remember correctly.
i don't think any company has the balls to block used games sales because that console will be a huge failure
Just picture how much money that company will lose... I think by having online pass is good enough for greed. I just don't see how any company can consider that insane idea..
MS has the balls to do it. 360 still sells in droves with hardly any exclusives worth a damn.
Jack may not be the most charismatic CEO but he is a very okay guy. Used games are a lot of people entrance to gaming. Its stupid to shut it for them.
Tretton is the CEO of all of Sony or even the world-wide Playstation division. Still, he will have some say. He won't make the final decision, but as the CEO of the North American distribution, they will consider his input, especially if he says that he doesn't think it will sell in North America. They sell more units in North America than they do in Japan.
Then why do all Sony games have online passes now?
Because developers make absolutely no money from used games whatsoever. The online pass is just a fair method that if you buy a used game for cheap, the developers see a cut of it too. You can get the full game, developers get their due, it's a good system. Developers were losing lots of money from used game sales and game shops were making a mint.
I definitely wouldn't call it "fair".
Thank god. Seriously, online passes are enough.
I feel the same. I wanted to borrow my friend's Battlefield 3 to play the multi-player for a while and turned out I had to fish out 10 bucks even to just access the mp. :/ I doubt I'll purchase any future games with online passes associated with them.
Even though I always by my games new (not day 1 as I wait for it to be discounted), I think the online pass is a fair system for publishers.. What should really be happening is the trade in/re-sale prices should adjust accordingly.. In other words, margins made on used games need to change... Whether people agree or not with the above, Im sure we all agree, It should be advertised with a sticker, if its online component requires a online pass. It should be made law . How many times has a mom/dad bought a 2nd hand game for the kids, or themselves, not knowing? Cha Ching... Moneys in the till....... As for borrowing, Its definitely harsh... Maybe they should have a free 48hr pass system that counts down from first MP Play?
Well sorry but the game developer's worked there ass off and maybe you could acully spend 5 or 2 more dollars and not buy a used game so they would get the money not fuckin game stop (Gonna get a lot of dislikes for this but all of this is true)
That's true, but online passes have actually acted as a deterrent to buying second hand games for me, but like you said, I have the option. A author of a secondhand book or the crew of a secondhand DVD don't get back any money for secondhand sales. But now, because of the advent of the online pass, even with secondhand game, if I want to play it's full capabilities and contents, I have to get an online pass. It actually works out better waiting for the game to drop in price on online retail sites.
You know used games can actually be cheaper than just by $2 or $5 more dollars. Some people purchase through Amazon (great used prices).