PS4 Release Date Is Unlikely To Be A Joyous Day For Fans Of Used Games


We still don't know much about the PS4 release date, outside of the Holiday 2013 launch window revealed back in February. However, the future of the second-hand games market is looking increasingly grim as yet another notable game developer jumps on the anti-used game bandwagon following the console manufacturer's near-abandonment of the used game "cause".

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
NastyLeftHook03030d ago

because nobody would have traded them in yet.

3029d ago
fermcr3028d ago

The next gen console that doesn't allow used games, I'll not purchase. Simple as that.

... unless, the prices of new games go way way down, well below the 60-70€ price we have now.

HammadTheBeast3028d ago

The PS4 has already been confirmed by Sony to be able to run disc based games on any console, even after multiple uses.

CBaoth3028d ago

I never do. I always buy either through digital downloading or new (physical retail) so I ALWAYS support the people who make it. I'll never give a dime to scummy leeches who profit off of other's hard work!

I just don't see the need for "used" when a little patience usually gets me the price I like. Example, Target had Ni No Kuni on sale for $39.99 last week. I used a gift certificate leftover from Xmas and got it brand new for $12. Sony, Level 5, and Namco benefited from my purchase and I got a 120hr playthru; literally 10 cents an hour!

nukeitall3028d ago (Edited 3028d ago )


I don't see how reselling used games are "scummy leeches"?

They do an honest business just like used book and music sellers. The law even has a "first sale doctrine" to protect consumers and allow for used resale.

If anything, these developers are the slimy scumbags to that wants to repeatedly earn a profit for something they already got their share.

Imagine if other parts of the industry behaved the same way?

If you buy gold, diamond, car, house or anything secondhand, the manufacturer gets a cut for no work!

On the flip side, used game sellers take a risk on buying the game back, hiring employees, a place to do business and pay taxes.

So I ask again, who are the leeches?

Don't let these developers/publishers fool you into being their megaphone! :D

That said, I don't buy my games used. In fact, I don't buy any gaming stuff used, but do I want others to have the option. It's just *fair*!

lilbrat233028d ago

I for one don't own used games for PS3 as I always believed Gamestop was a ripoff. Now If they don't allow used games the price better drop to $40 or $50 for new games.

thechosenone3028d ago

(this site is intentionally reporting false information in order to get hits, please report this story as fake)

Inaccurate info, Sony has repeatedly and clearly stated that the PS4 will not blocked used games at all. It will leave that decision up to the devs/publishers but the PS4 hardware will not automatically block used games.

GameSpawn3028d ago


Honest business?! Seriously you realize used games retailers rip you the hell off right? Used games are a racket.

Gamestop is buying those games for $5-$20 and reselling them at $5 less than a new retail version. Gamestop stands to make $30-$40 PROFIT off used games versus $10-20 on new ones. All this so you can save $5-$10 from buying it new? For games with online passes you can kiss any of that savings goodbye.

I disowned Gamestop years ago and have been getting my games (all new) via Amazon; most after they've been out a while and seen massive price drops, even on new copies. There is the added bonus of no sales tax with Amazon over Gamestop as well (for those outside the US - online retailers with no physical retail presence, an actual physical store, are not required to charge sales tax).

On top of the highway robbery that used game retailers are getting away with, the developers don't see a red cent beyond online pass and DLC sales.

So, who do we have to thank for loads of on-disc day 1 downloadable content and online passes? Places like Gamestop and their ridiculous practices.

I hate being the devil's advocate, but I can understand developers' and publishers' frustrations with used game sales and how on a very grand scale (like Gamestop) it can undermine true game sales thus effecting future prospects in related game projects sometimes causing a future game to be cancelled altogether.

crazysammy3028d ago

@Game Spawn

Not all used stores are GameStop. I buy new releases for 25-30 dollars and sell them for 44.99 (or cheaper if online passes are required and used). How is that a racket? I run an honest business and do not scam my customers. I offer a service that many people appreciate.

Not everyone can buy every game for full price when it comes out. What developers/publishers don't understand is that you would rather have your game in the hands of a customer than not at all, even if they bought it used. It is a gateway to more purchases in the future. Its advertising.

This hatred of the used market isn't good, and I understand that GS has set a bad example for how the market can work. However please don't lump us all in together and treat us like we are criminals. It is NO DIFFERENT than used cars, books, music, dvds, houses, etc.

CBaoth3027d ago

consumers who sell their goods are scummy leeches? I called Gamestop and pawn shops who PROFIT off of other's work dirtbags. Learn to read! Devs and Pubs are closing down right and left while Gamestops are opening stores on every block in every city. And you call me a megaphone?

@ Crazy Sammy - good points my good sir. I'm glad you're not fleecing your consumers. But you know you are a beacon of honesty in a sea of corruption, right? So I apologize if I offended you by painting you with such a broad stroke.

GameSpawn3027d ago


I understand that not every used game retailer is ripping their customers off. Smaller "mom and pop" stores tend to be more honest and live with smaller margins. It's unfortunate that they get dragged down with corporate a-holes such as GameStop.

Sadly though, the honest only make up the few. The biggest players in the used game market and the ones who have the greatest stake in it are those like GameStop. Why? Because they rip their customers off and the high profit margins just make them more and more successful and controlling. It happened to Microsoft in the OS business. It's happening now to Apple in the computer market.

Eventually every company grows so big in its market that it can't grow anymore and it either branches out or collapses. The problem though is what does that do to everyone else involved, the customers, the competition?

In the case of the used game market...honest used game resellers (such as yourself) get a bad rap and gamers suffer the backlash from publishers trying to recoup their losses in new game sales. It sucks, but it's reality.

If you're a small operation and you and your customers have a great relationship, even personal relationship with each other, then keep doing what you're doing. Make sure your customers don't feed the bigger fish and educate them on your business and the not so honest competition's business. Help them spot signs of dishonest retailers vs the honest ones and make sure they support only the good ones. If not, those fish will only get bigger and bigger and their actions will only have a greater impact on the community...good or bad.

MYDEATH213027d ago

Don't pay any attention to this article. -_- Sony had already confirmed that the ps4 will play used games about a week after the 2/20 Sony event

Gaming1013027d ago

I know right, if you want to take away my right to sell my property, I won't buy it, simple as that. I'll become a PC gamer and torrent my games like every other PC gamer out there claiming to have a huge cost advantage to PC gaming lol

Boody-Bandit3027d ago (Edited 3027d ago )

I myself rent more than I purchase new. I don't see a need to purchase when certain genres I will blow through in a few days and move on to the next title.

I myself wont support any console that wont support used games. I want what I purchase to have resale value. Sooner or later most games lose their allure.

Sony wont go this route next generation. They are sticking with physical media.

rainslacker3027d ago


Blaming GameStop is just a red herring in all this debate. GameStop provides a service, and it's damn obvious that many people find that service useful...otherwise where would they get their used games from.

You don't like their practices, don't use them to trade your games. Tell others of better options. Simple as that. Don't give up your consumer rights so easily because you have a dislike for one aspect of the larger market, and don't presume to speak for the millions of people who don't want more restrictions put on games in the interest of taking down the evil GameStop.

I find it ironic that you lament how much they make off of used games, but then completely disregard how little they make off of new games compared to the regular retail mark ups. Who do we blame for that? What's even sadder is that you even point out how much they make off new games. Somewhere between 15-30% markup. In retail that is just a pathetic sum to recoup compared to the cost of a retail establishment.

I don't approve of GameStop's trade in practices any more than you do. But I also don't approve of retailers being shafted in the interest of publisher benefit. The retailer plays an important role in the grand scheme of things, and no matter how much you may dislike their practices, when we buy something it should be ours to own and do with as we please. If I choose to sell to GameStop(or anyone else for that matter), then I sure as hell don't want the original developer or publisher telling me that I can not, because as far as I'm concerned, they already received the money for that game from my original purchase.

ALLWRONG3027d ago

So you guys have a problem with these kinds of rumors now?

InTheZoneAC3027d ago (Edited 3027d ago )

@fermcr "... unless, the prices of new games go way way down, well below the 60-70€ price we have now."

who pays $91-$107 for a game?

0ut1awed3027d ago

You wanted the PS4 to be a sweet PC? Wish granted. No used game system.

Welcome to the club of us pc gamers... There are pros and cons to everything.

MoveTheGlow3027d ago

"I'll never give a dime to scummy leeches who profit off of other's hard work!"

@CBaoth, ask Richard Garriott what EA did to Ultima 9 to maximize profit elsewhere. Check out the fight between Activision and Zampella/Ward over Call of Duty. Experience the amount of marketing risk-aversion Ken Levine had to compromise with just to get his game out there. See what EA coerced Maxis into doing with the beloved SimCity franchise. Watch in astonishment as EA carries on the exploitation of non-paid student athletes by making money off of their images and names in college sports games. Weep for your beloved game creators.

Game developers, artists, designers, engineers, testers - the guys and girls behind the scenes, making the games - they deserve as much money as possible for their work. But just like the state of other entertainment industries at the moment, you're not paying much to those guys. You're paying for risk-aversion market research, pushy PR, often dreadful advertising which imagines consumers as mindless idiots, executive pay, etc. I get that new game sale metrics keep franchises running (granted, those metrics are screwed up on digital sales way beyond the point that they should be), but don't act like you're throwing sixty bucks at no one but the development studio when you buy a new game. The first-sale doctrine is all we've got on the consumer's end; don't demonize it while it's still here.

Fat Bastard3027d ago

You know what I hate? When people buy food at grocery stores! All those grocery stores do is buy food from wholesalers, who only buy that food from the farmers! Anyone who doesn't buy food directly from the farmer is an awful person, because the farmer isn't getting that money! The grocery store is, and they're just selling other people's goods! How detestable

insomnium23027d ago

I buy my games brand new for 20€ or so. Far cry 3 and Borderlands 2 have been approaching that pricepoint ever since launch. You could even buy them for 20€ each during a sale a few weeks ago. The only problem I have is with time management. I have a 7 months old baby (and 2 older kids) and I have 2 jobs (one for weekends every now and then and the other for mo-fri).

Atm the only time I can play videogames is during the drive to work (if I'm not doing the driving) or on weekends when I'm not working.

I took a few weekends off a while back and got some time in in BF3 and boy was it fun.

Wait how did I end up here? Oh yeah the games. I always buy new but not at full price unless it's a must have. Next day 1 will be TLOU for me. Ni No Kuni was the latest day 1 but still. Usually onlu 20-25€ so yeah not that bad.

+ Show (16) more repliesLast reply 3027d ago
avengers19783028d ago

Sony already squashed this rumor back in feb, the only console were not sure is the nextbox, but honestly we no nothing about nextbox... I can't see them blocking used games either.
I don't see used games hurting the industry at all... In fact if not for used games I never would have played games like boarderlands and that caused me to go wait in line a midnight for the release of boarderlands2 day one purchase

MikeMyers3028d ago

It would be silly for Microsoft to go solo in this area but then again they went solo in charging to play online. We also don't know all the details about the PS4. This is exactly what they said:

“When you purchase the disc based games on PS4, that should work on any hardware,” Yoshida confirmed.

A loophole could be a verification process that makes sure you are the rightful owner of that disc. It is unlikely but also a possibility. So until we get all the details I'm not too worried.

MultiConsoleGamer3028d ago (Edited 3028d ago )

>Sony squashed anti used game rumors

Actually they didn't. They later claimed that "It's a publisher decision. We are not talking about it. Sorry.” This comment was made after questions were raised about the ps4 containing technology that would lock a disc to a single console.

Publishers are the biggest supporters of blocking used games. And if the decision is being left up to the publishers, and Sony isn't talking, well... You figure it out.

extermin8or3027d ago

yeah but if the console itself isn't blocking it, then software based DRM/anti used games is nothing new... and in that situation it's not Sony that we need to have ago at but the publishers choosing to go down that route.Sony said there would be nothing stopping a disc physically being read by other consoles etc and they personally wouldn't be stopping people but as for if publishers might they didn't want to discuss it....

cyguration3027d ago


Please l2read:

Apparently MS shills are trying to keep misinformation spreading to damage Sony's brand. Multiple Sony reps have REPEATEDLY said that the PS4 will support used games, and they've been doing so since last year.


+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3027d ago
dcbronco3028d ago


Companies like Gamestop are leeches because they have no talent. They scavenge other peoples work for their gain. And they cheat the person that is selling them the game too. I can't understand how people see developer after developer go out of business and think that the developers are just trying to get more money. Going out of business doesn't make you more money. It all stops. Best Buy and Amazon are a little better on the customer side, but still don't help the developer at all.

If people think used games are so important, then why is it that they don't also believe that used games hurt the developer. If used games are selling to so many. That means they are selling games that people want. And if they want them and had no choice they would get them from the developer. And that developer would make more money.

This isn't about the developer getting paid more than once. This will help and hurt them. For developers that make games that people love, they will do even better. For those that make games that sell okay, they will remain about the same. For those that make poor games, they will disappear faster. Nothing will change that much. But for all developers, if you get a hit, you will benefit to the fullest.

I also don't understand the belief that there will be huge drops in prices. Digital will save a lot of money. But cost are also going up also. Selling more copies only keeps developers from going out of business. If you want variety, new IP, longer games cheaper cost on some games(less than AAA), you have to support blocking used games.

whoyouwit043028d ago

That's a bunch of bull shit. I don't see how anyone sits there and agree with developers on blocking used games. This is coming from someone who has (out of 20+ years of gaming) only bought one used game. so, obviously it's not a big deal for me one way or another, but it just boils down to greedy ass developers. Since you think it's OK go out and buy in old house or car. Fixed it up, and advertise it with your money, and see how you fill when the manufacture of the house/vehicle comes asking for there cut.

The only problem I have with used games is the way game stop gives you 5/20$, and then turn around and sell it for 45$. Well to be honest 20$ is fine for me regardless of what they resale it for, It's that 5$ thing that's a killer.

pabadamus13028d ago (Edited 3028d ago )


I agree with you in part but not in whole. I was never a proponent of Gamestop's practices to repurchase newly released games at a 12th or a 3rd of their full retail price to then resell at 90% of that full retail price. The margin was too great to me and it appeared to be absolutely anti-consumer. On the other hand if people are willing to do this in full knowledge then that is their choice. Even more important to the whole issue is the consumer's rights to sell their property they have purchased through lawful means. That choice should never be taken away. This can all change if the nature of the relationship changes between content creators and consumers next gen from product ownershp to that of licensed agreement/distribution model.

rainslacker3027d ago (Edited 3027d ago )

GameStop is a retail store. As such, there is no talent involved. They sell a product, nothing more, nothing less. It is not up to the retail environment to create the product in which they sell, only to sell the product they deem reasonable to sell. I do not require my CSR's at GameStop to have talent to take my money, and hand me a game. It's a pretty simple process.

Dev's aren't going out of business because of the used game market. I call BS on that bit of hyperbole. If this was in fact true, then the data should be readily available to back up that argument, but I challenge you to go out and find any such data. I mean hard evidence that a games 2nd hand sales is damaging to original sales numbers. Those numbers are surely available given the advent of online technologies and are likely readily available to all these companies who make games. So why aren't they backing up these claims with cold hard facts? I'll even give you the benefit of the doubt and assume every used sale equals one lost new sale.

BTW, this is the reason I don't believe that it hurts developers. There is just no data to back up this claim.

"And if they want them and had no choice they would get them from the developer. And that developer would make more money."

Ah choice.

It seems you believe that the consumer...which I assume you are...should have their choices taken away from them. Here's a thing for you. A game restricts my ability to resell it later, I choose not to buy it, no matter how much I want it. So, they lose one paying customer to try and hopefully get another? This is coming from someone who buys new unless no other option is available. This is from someone who NEVER sells their games to anyone.

Why is it if this debate came up in any other form of entertainment, people would completely ridicule the idea? Why should the game industry(or software in general) be immune from the first sale doctrine? Is it because of some perceived notion that companies are closing because of the 2nd hand market. Could it be that studios are making less and less of a game, disillusioning consumers to the point where they just don't feel it's worth it anymore?(BTW, historically this led to an industry wide crash). I find this much more likely considering that game sales in general are down.

Lets look at Square. They set extremely high targets for their games. Are you telling me that Tomb Raider, which has been out for a month has suffered drastically in sales(despite selling quite a lot), because of 2nd hand sales? Couldn't it just be bad business practices, or improper management that causes these devs to be shut down? Or will you continue to blindly ignore all the issues that get talked about every day to get on a soapbox for the dev in which our rights as consumers are just stripped away even further?

InTheZoneAC3027d ago

games have always been about the same price, going back to the 80's, when people were making 400%+ less than what they're making now

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3027d ago
DivineAssault 3028d ago

Ya, a good 6 months into the systems life, more things will be available for purchase at used game stores.. If devs decide to block used games on PS4 it would be very unfortunate & i would be VERY picky about what games i decide to buy.. Hard to take back or exchange new games once theyre opened

dcbronco3027d ago


So you think developers are just being greedy? So many of them are so greedy that they have gone out of business. You've been a gamer for 20+ years. How many companies have you watched go out of business. I've seen a lot in my 30+. Many never got beyond a hit or two. That's understandable. Gamers always talk about new IP, but if developers can't make enough profit they have to continue to use outside sources to fund games. Which means they can't take risk. To put it simply, if your on N4G and read all of the articles of developers going out of business(THQ being a current example), you just don't want to get it. You just want what you want and couldn't care less about what it takes to get it.


There is a huge problem in your argument. And this goes toward the house argument Whoyouwit made. Consumer rights only go so far in a situation where the thing being sold doesn't degrade. A house is not the main thing being sold in most home sales. It's the land that is important. Many houses sit on land that is worth 3 or 4 times what the house is worth. And more often than not, homes go up in value not down. Games are also different in that they don't degrade in quality over time. Most other things do. If you take basic care of the disc it is the same on day 1,000 as it is on day one.

A car that's three years old will have lost a ton of value. A game has really lost none of it's quality. Cars are sold at a much larger profit. Games are not. A dealer gets a car from the manufacturer for much less than the cost to you. In fact the dealer can often sell the car to you for well under invoice and still make a profit because of incentives he gets from the manufacturer. Games don't have that much profit built in.

I don't buy the Quantum Dreams statements about Sony's profits. If you put 40 million in and make 100 million(I know it was Euros) I believe the profit is very small if there is a profit. As publisher Sony can skip some of the cost to themselves like $10 in royalties and publisher fees. Most developers don't get to do that. Of $60, ten goes to Sony off the top. Let's go with 20% business tax so $12. That's twenty-two gone. Let's say all of the packaging and disc duplication and mastering are in the 40 million spent on making the game. But you still have to pay the retail. Transportation of the product. Administrative overhead. A lot of copies weren't sold at full price. Now subtract that 40 million initial investment. Not a lot left. Journey sold really well. They almost went out of business. It's not all greed or stupid management. It's expensive to run a business. Especially when you're dealing with some of the most fickle fans.

All about the exclusives and then they don't buy them. They should block used games and let the market decide. People either really want a game or they will wait til the price goes down. Games like CoD sell 2 or 3 million the first week. They'll be fine. People keep them more than a week and used copies are only $5 less. Sales are far better than used. I'm sure they want used games blocked. They will gain a bunch of sales. They have rights too.

Hububla3027d ago

Why the hell is everyone getting so worked up about this.. im primarily a PC gamer and pc has basically been digital only for YEARS now and i prefer it 10x more then discs.. you get games cheaper brand new.. they have sales that go as low as 90% off ALL THE TIME and i never have to worry about lost scratched or stolen disks.. i just log into my account and bam over 100 titles that i can reinstal on any PC in the world with just a password.. get with the times people

extermin8or3027d ago

we are assuming that this is how digital only will work on the psn etc in the future i mean atm there are a certain number of account activations etc (and although i understand why completely-2 is not very many.....) and the publishers put the prices at fucking ridiculously high prices even when digital...

rainslacker3027d ago

There's nothing wrong with DD. If someone chooses to buy their games that route, then they are willing to accept the terms of the sale.

DD is currently a supplement to the physical market, and likely will remain that way for a long time.

It's hard to say if games will continue to be cheaper this way though. Sales will always exists, but since the normal DD channels for releasing games(particularly on consoles) is a closed one, there is no real competition to force the prices to remain competitive. Steam sales go off the premise that some revenue is better than none, and it allows publishers/devs to get more people to try out their game if the initial entry point is desirable. It's a form of marketing...not unlike PS+.

Retail though is still a choice, and there are many of us who like that choice and what it has to offer. Things may change in the future, but to me, DD is really not that beneficial to the consumer in regards to choice. I will concede though, for the time being, it is beneficial often in the price(at least for releases that are past their launch games tend to be priced the same, or close, to retail).

We're getting worked up, because this change means that there is no real incentive to use retail, as all we're doing is buying a license which we could do just as readily as purchasing through DD.

It makes me sad that the joys of collecting, and being into the history of gaming, and being able to play games on their original consoles many generations in the future will simply vanish with the advent of 2nd hand DRM, and DD binding purchases to a person, instead of an actual product.

dcbronco3027d ago


What's up Rain. We've had this debate before and we know we disagree. That said you are misrepresenting me a little. I'm not saying used games are what's killing off developers. I'm saying blocking used games will be a help to quality developers. Bad developers will go out of business no matter what. Not having data is not an argument. If you need data for everything you believe in you're in for a rough life. I don't assume every used sale is a missed new sale. But some will buy new if they have to. I believe between 10-20% more. And ten to twenty percent is a big increase in most businesses.

Consumer choice? Really. Where exactly does that exist. If you're an American there is no consumer choice anywhere. Americans just have the illusion that they have choices. Most things are sectioned off to keep competition out. Cellphones, cable, internet,. Even the soda on your grocery store shelf. Everything is negotiated and paid for ahead of time. There hasn't been chose in decades. But that was funny.

I agree on choice though. I make choices, many don't. I will continue to buy what I want because I don't trade games in anyway. Many of my friends don't either. Most of them have collections that go back over a decade. I still have a Sega Genesis. Crazy Ivan, anyone? And a lot of other people will choose to not buy. But a lot will buy. Things will remain the same for the most part. With the exception that good game will sell a little more, bad games will sell a little(maybe lot) less and the big games will sell a lot more.

As for games getting shorter and shorter this is where I really don't understand the gamers. At what point are you willing to pay more for what you get. It is becoming impossible to satisfy gamers for what they are willing to pay. We know the cost are going up. Software developers are one of the few careers in demand so they have some strength to make demands. I'm sure other areas of the tech field is getting paid more. Game developers aren't getting the tax breaks that far lager companies get. In some countries they are. But not in most. But gamers want new IP, longer games, innovation, better graphics, better AI and more physics. But I won't pay more or promise to buy your game. So good luck with that. But get it done right now.

Square is doing something else with money. 3 million plus should be very profitable and if it isn't someone has a coke problem or really sucks at business. I would love to have a look at their books. But most games don't sell 3 million copies. Most are lucky to sell 1 million. So because of that, enjoy your copy of Halo 44 and Uncharted 44. Or you can support companies when they take a chance even if it wasn't great. You can wait til the price drops to $30. Just buy it new.

rainslacker3027d ago

I'm sorry, but if your entire argument is based on lack of data then it falls flat. Lack of evidence is not a good way to support a conclusion. You came to this conclusion based on your belief, and that belief is held up by assumptions that have no weight in reality due to lack of evidence. I can pull out a hypothetical number as well to support my argument based on belief or assumptions, but any company that does the same thing is bound to fail, which is why they rely on cold statistical facts.

Do publishers lose some sales due to 2nd hand? Of course. Otherwise they wouldn't be saying how 2nd hand sales are bad. Is this number large enough to truly effect the bottom line in such a way that it would cause a companies demise? We can't say. This is why I asked you, or more importantly these devs making these claims, to provide these facts. If they want me to support such measures, and rally behind them as you do, then I need to be convinced that I am doing it for the right reasons, and not because it's what they want.

Will the publishers see a substantial gain in new game sales by blocking used games? Hard to say. Many people may be put off by it, which could cause the inverse to happen. Again, I'd have to see some factual numbers to come to a conclusion. In the meantime we're both just speculating and assuming things which may or may not be true.

In order to address your point and not misrepresent you, I actually believe it will cause only the most hyped and publicized game to gain more sales. Smaller titles which rely on a modest amount of sales would suffer, because less people would be willing to try it. Many people become fans of a series or developers through the 2nd hand market, and that is terribly important for a companies long term viability. This is inverse to your reasoning that quality games will do better, because how many sub-par games sell huge numbers now, while amazing games sit on the store shelf? People are going to stick with what they know, and what they're comfortable with. This is even more true if they know there is no recourse for gaining anything back from their purchase.

Consumer choice does exist. At it's basest level, as a consumer we all have the right to simply choose not to purchase something, or purchase a competing product. It's sad your so cynical about how things are done, and while some of the things you mentioned do limit choice, they aren't cutting choice out. There's a huge difference. Blocking 2nd hand games cuts out a choice, using an online-pass limits choice, or makes the choice less desirable.

rainslacker3027d ago

As far as game budgets go...which is the jist of your closing comment...I feel it would be better if companies find better ways to streamline their development in order to produce their products cheaply. This is something the big guys are already doing by creating their own engines to work with. Just one small step, likely against many. The problem is, is that these types of savings aren't being passed on to the consumer, except maybe indirectly through game prices staying the same. The fact of the matter is though, is that if people don't see games worth $60 now, then they aren't going to see them worth $70 now either. It's called what the market can bear, and we are at a tipping point. Competition pushes games to excel above their competition, and that competition is what drives the consumer to decide on their purchase, not the other way around.

Do I believe that some games should be more expensive? Possibly, but only if it truly is worth the price of entry. We have to assume that worth isn't subjective here though. The problem is again, companies are taking a game that may be worth more, and then applying that model across the entire library in which they produce, regardless of quality. It's why almost every game is $60 on launch day.

Software development and sales is a demanding field. But these people choose to do it, and choose to do it in the hopes to make money. The best way to make money is to keep your consumer happy. Much of my argument is based around the fact that companies aren't seemingly trying to do this any more. I don't believe the tech field deserves an exception, I belive they have to follow the same rules as every other company, and produce their products towards consumer demands and desires. Successful companies have two routes to become successful. 1. Create a product that people desire and are willing to pay money for while maintaining costs in such a way to make it profitable. 2. Create a product that people feel they want or need but control the market in such a way that the consumer has no other recourse but to get that product through them. This gen, publishers seem to be moving towards this second option compared to prior gens where it was more about the craft, and providing a good product to the consumer.

My reason for bringing up square was not to point out their unrealistic expectations, it was more to show that companies that are struggling(not necessarily square) are the ones that set unrealistic expectations on themselves and their product. There are smaller devs/publishers out there that work hard to cater to their fan base in the interest of making a modest profit. Atlus, XSeed, Gust, Etc. Their games sell moderately well, and people are generally happy with them. In some cases they even provide things like DLC or MT and people are happy with it because it isn't meant as a way to gouge consumers.

I support many games and their developers. I buy almost all my games new. My arguments against blocking 2nd hand sales isn't because I want to be able to benefit myself in such a way and screw over the devs/pubs, it's because I am a consumer, and I am just tired of companies ignoring the gamers in the interest of maximizing profit. As a collector, I want my purchases to have value. If all I'm purchasing is a license to play a game, that holds no value to me. If one day I want to sell off my entire collection, I want to be able to do so. If I want to will it to my children, I want to be able to do so. The ability to own the product I spend money on is more important to me than the gaming industry, and as such I will vote with my wallet, and quit gaming should this come to pass across the board.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 3027d ago
zerocrossing3030d ago (Edited 3030d ago )

Is this true?

Ezz20133030d ago (Edited 3030d ago )

not true

this is what you get when the so called
'gaming media'
don't even bother with doing any research first before making articles

sony already confirm they are not blocking used games
"you just can't disagree with FACTS here"

fanboys just can't sleep the night well
with all the Awesome **NEWS** (not rumors) about ps4

BitbyDeath3028d ago


Wish the journalists would do a quick google search before posting what is on their mind.

morganfell3028d ago

Desperate much? Scared to the point that this is the result?

Completely misleading article. No, better still it is a lie and a disservice to gamers expecting news or at least a modicum of research from speculative articles. This is the sort of writing and submission that should lead to a ban.

IK IR Y IP T3028d ago

You fanboys need to shut ur mouth and not talk about what u don't know ! Like the article stated sonys first stance on used games was that the ps4 will support them, now it's in the air. My self and other publications have reached out to sony about used games and they quickly fired back we dont comment on speculation or rumors. So you tell me if the ps4 was a sure fire thing to play used games why wouldnt they just confirm it when we asked, Well i'll tell u why because they are waiting for microsoft and there stance on used games and u say fanboys can't sleep I think it's u who is losing the sleep because u obviously are the sheep following the one crowd....

AtomicGerbil3028d ago


You may want to calm down and think before ranting about Sony not commenting on one specific rumour.

If you want to be taken seriously then you need to take on board the fact that Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft have the same response when it comes to nearly all speculation and rumour......They do not comment.

So in response to your outburst, does that mean according to you every speculation or rumour is true?

Diver3028d ago (Edited 3028d ago )

The only person that doesn't know what they are talking about is the incompetent kid that wrote this article. He didn't research an he is dying to find something wrong with the ps4.

Then look at how he responded. IKripple blew a gasket. Yeah jus redouble your attacks, that works just grand.

How is it up in the air? Cause some lame site can't research facts? Sony made the statement 60 days ago. Where is their statement otherwise?

Lame article from some site that's been under a rock.

Then there's this:

This is a guy with inside info not some kid making up crap from his parents basement.

DragonKnight3028d ago

@IK IR Y IP T: Why would they respond to you when they've already quashed the rumour? Both Jack Tretton and Shuhei Yoshida spoke against used games and Yoshida specifically said that all disc based games are going to work on any PS4. That is confirmation right there. What more do you want?

dcbronco3028d ago (Edited 3028d ago )

Sony said that they wouldn't block used games. But they said they would leave it up to publishers. So Sony titles might not be blocked, but games from others might. There may be a situation where they are blocked for a certain period. Say for the first 3 months. But there was an interview where one of the Sony executives said that it would be left up to publishers. Maybe Sony has changed their stance because of blowback, but they did say it.

DragonKnight3028d ago

@dcbronco: Actually, what was asked was "will there be online registration of games" and Yoshida said "that's up to the publishers but we're not talking about that."

Ars Technica, the original source, believes that Yoshida was referencing the already existing online passes and that they will continue with the PS4. If Sony isn't blocking used games, third party publishers would look really stupid to block used games themselves. In all ways of thinking about it, blocking used games would be a bad business decision for everyone involved. It would earn the ire of not only gamers, but the big retail stores like Gamestop who make money off of used games. It wouldn't be long before pressure from the largest sellers of disc based games would force the issue and we're nowhere near a DD only solution.

dcbronco3028d ago (Edited 3028d ago )

People act like gaming is only important to the developers. Retailers need games and consoles too. There is a reason that games and movies line the shelve of the line ques. Games are probably the biggest item in most big box stores that drives traffic. They will not just dump games or consoles.

Also the retailers would be far more upset about Sony having digital games day and date with the physical releases. Something Sony hasn't hedged about. That goes a long way toward forcing retail out since the games drive the traffic. And gamers talking about boycotts are mostly just talking. Developers know this. Once GTA or GT6 or Halo comes to next generation people will swallow their pride and get in line.

People stopped complaining about getting forced out of their homes by a bunch of crooked bankers. Do you really believe they will last long on a gaming issue. If Activision and EA decide to block games it will be over in months. FIFA, Battlefield and CoD will smother the boycott in it's crib.

Why o why3028d ago

No clicks fro me ik+ or whatever your name is. So professional in your attack on people who posted facts. Where's your proof their stance has changed. ... OH the fact they didn't want to tell you anything ....gotcha and the up to the developer stance was in regards to online registrations just like Dragon stated... its all there people.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 3028d ago
Majin-vegeta3030d ago (Edited 3030d ago )

PS4 will support used games.Article is trash.



OlgerO3028d ago

Honestly I have been part of this site since the announcement of the PS4, and I loved it for getting me all the info on the PS4 from all over the web. But In the last week alone I have seen only articles and article titles that seem to have been written by 10 year olds and people with a mental handicap.

Tales RPG addict3028d ago

Exactly that's true PS4 & Wii U will support Used Games. All we have on Microsoft's side is Rumor and Speculation. Nothing set in stone yet.

I can't shake the feeling that Xbox 720 is going to be the Most expensive console of the 8th Generation.

GalacticEmpire3030d ago (Edited 3030d ago )

"Unfortunately, Sony's stance on the topic seems to have changed, with numerous reports suggesting the next PlayStation won't support used games."

Complete bull, there has been absolutely no indication PS4 will block used games. The entire article itself trys way too hard to paint Sony in a negative light, almost to the point of inferring bias.

Knight_Crawler3028d ago (Edited 3028d ago )

Actually at one point N4G went into overload when it was rumored that the PS4 will block used lazy to find the artcile on N4G but the rumor started when Sony was granted a patent for technology to block used games.

GribbleGrunger3030d ago

So where has this idea been dredged up from? Sony have said absolutely nothing about this and NONE of the rumours so far have said this either. These are the ramblings of someone with a sphincter shaped keyboard.