PlayStation 4 'Orbis' Source 'Is A Monkey' - Pachter

NowGamer: Reports of anti-pre-owned technology in the next PlayStation are wide of the mark says Michael Pachter.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
NewMonday3103d ago

"Anti-pre-owned consoles would lead to a 'consumer backlash' if a platform holder incorporated it alone. If they all do it, they are susceptible to a 'collusion charge', and if one does it and the others don’t, the one who does it will see a loss of market share," Pachter explained.

i think most gamers are agreeing with Pachter for a change.

Hellsvacancy3103d ago

Thanks for postin that, and yes, it think for once i agree with Patcher.........which means he'll end up bein wrong, again

decrypt3103d ago (Edited 3103d ago )

We have to remember N4G is a very small population of gamers.

Most console gamers are gluttons for punishment. Before MS introduced Pay to go online no one would have thought anyone would pay for such a thing(it seemed rediculous). Infact PC gamers out right rejected it. However console gamers on the other hand welcomed it with open arms.

Other examples can be drawn with the state of DLCs. DLCs for stuff like new Maps or skins used to be user made content. Console gamers knew this. It was proven to them with UT on PS3. Yet never did they ever demand moddability on other games, instead they are most willing to pay for petty stuff like maps lol.

Hence if this goes through. I fully see console gamers bending over. In fact if Sony or MS attached some exclusive DLC just to introduce this stuff, most console gamers will think its a bargain and will even go ahead to defend their platform of choice lol, later on it will become a trend and everyone will embrace it.

Ares84HU3103d ago (Edited 3103d ago )

I think that Pachter is a Monkey.

It is very likely that Sony will tie your games to your account because developers keep complaining about used games being sold. This would resolve the issue and I'm sure that Sony wants to appeal to as many developers as possible to get them on their side.

Which just means more games for us. Possibly more Playstation exclusives as well....
More developers will turn to a safe, secure and copy protected system where they know that after every game sold they will get their $.

I buy 95% of my games new anyways so I'm not worried at all.

SilentNegotiator3103d ago (Edited 3103d ago )


The problem is that this crap limits how us legitimate new buyers use them. As someone who buys new so often, you should be VERY worried. Publishers keep using more and more ways to limit our ownership and usage of games.

Used sales aren't destroying gaming. Big publishers still brandish multi-million dollar CEOs and sell millions of copies of games. Even many of the little guys are selling millions of copies of games with little advertisement.

T9003103d ago


You realise, indirectly most games already cost more than 60usd. This is because most games now a days already come with DLCs at launch. Hence most people already pay more than 60usd for games.

Having the option to sell the same games and buy new ones was what kept people buying new games. Games on consoles are simply to expensive to buy and not being able to sell the previous game will further limit budgets hence this may lead to a slow down in game sales rather than increase as publishers are hoping for.

The only other option i see people do having is buying stuff from online outlets like Steam. Where games are on discount within 2-3 months of launch. At those price points it is fine to not be able to sell the game again. Hell there are online shops which are selling CD keys for PC version of games. Mass effect 3 can currently be had for 36usd. I personally bought BF3 day one at 37usd.

If console makers are willing to go to those prices, then yea i would think it would be justified to not be able to sell the games. However at 60usd plus DLC costs i think its a bit too much. Console gaming is already too expensive imo.

JBaby3433103d ago (Edited 3103d ago )

I only see this as a problem for letting friends borrow games which would include taking it to a friend's house to play together. Otherwise I buy all my games new and never sell them (I frequently play my old games) and I don't agree with the used game industry. I think other people should do the same. I'm not made of money so I understand the expense can be an issue. If price is an issue then wait a little while and the price comes down. There are several games I'm waiting on before I buy them. Heaven forbid you don't have every single game day 1. If it is that good then pay full price otherwise wait until the price is more comfortable for you. Only buy DLC if the game is really worth it which for me is about 5% of games.

Gaming1013103d ago

Anti-used-gaming protection is something that will only make sense if both Microsoft and Sony do it. If just one company does it then the vast majority of gamers will opt to buy the other company's console instead and enjoy a life of buying used games, and selling used games. It's suicide for the one company that does it, but if both of them do it, they have something going for them, now it's a monopoly and gamers will be forced to buy in or just stick with their last gen consoles, which a huge ton of them will. Gamers must learn to speak with their wallets, and that means not buying something and caving in. Once you hand your money over you're sending the message that what they're doing is ok. If there's one thing a console maker can't afford its a non-starter to a new console, so they'll either have to conspire to make both consoles anti-used or stick with the current business model.

zeeshan3103d ago

I love SONY but God knows I won't even think for a second to drop my support if they do this. And if both SONY and MS do this, I'll simply jump to either Nintendo or PC platform. At least the games are cheap on PC.

This used game sale thing is becoming a monster. If they can lower the prices of games to say $30 or $40 then yeah mmaaayybbbeee we can deal such crap but at $60 price point, I think it will fair with gamers.

snipes1013103d ago

What these big publishers fail to realize is that many new games are purchased with credit obtained via trade ins. People dont usually pay for too many games right out of pocket. They need the ability to trade their used games so that they may buy new games.

This is an all around dumb idea and the only people that lose here are the consumers.

sikbeta3103d ago

Can't believe it, but Pachter is right this time lol

Ares84HU3103d ago


I don't really know how it limits you using your game. Do you mean that now you can't take your game over to your friends house?? Because you can do that too as long as you log in on their system to your account. Or what do you mean exactly??


You do know that first day DLC and add-on content and stuff like that is all the result of publishers trying to make more money do to second hand sales. Well that's not the only reason but that's a part of it. But a good example is Battlefield 3. We had to enter a stupid code the "online pass" just so we could play online. Now if you want to buy BF3 used and want to play online, you are forced to buy an online pass. They came up with this thing so they can get money from used sales somehow. But we have to put up with it.

I agree with you that publishers should lower games prices because if they tie games to your account than the direct result will be less games purchased because not everyone has $60 2x a month to buy a new game. I'd say if they want this thing to work they should drop the prices down to $40 and this wouldn't be an issue. Or reward people with discounts if they buy a lot of games since they will know how many games you purchased just by looking at your account.

SilentNegotiator3103d ago

"you can do that too as long as you log in on their system to your account"

1) Some online passes are being restricted to hardware.

2) Most CONTENT passes are only for one system at a time (even if you can delete and download elsewhere, it's very inconvenient to have to do that every time).

3) This argument is irrelevant if "orbis" and "Durango" have the sort of systems described in some of the rumors. Because it will be much worse.

tee_bag2423102d ago

This move has very little to do with helping developers as pitched. More so the plan is to transfer wealth from the second hand buyers/sellers industry to subsidise for online gaming.

MaxXAttaxX3102d ago

Can't rent or keep titles from them anymore for these new systems.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 3102d ago
Chitown712913103d ago

LOL yea I agree with Patcher for once. I personally think Sony know what they were doing this gen....everything was a prototype this gen.....The move, the online services, Home.....everything was a prototype for what the PS4 will be. I feel like the PSP was a prototype for the Vita, and PS3 is gonna be one for PS4. The PS4 will be a fully realized PS3.....and I can't wait.

Jobesy3103d ago

I wouldn't say "prototype". Every platform improves on it's previous model, the PS4 will be no different but that doesn't make the PS3 a prototype. The only issue the PS3 had was a lack of RAM which made it fall short of the Xbox360's social features (x-game chat, voice messaging, etc.) as well as having a slow xmb. Other than that, the PS3 is an amazing machine.

Chitown712913103d ago

Nah I was just saying that I felt like Sony took a lot of gambles this generation, and I think they were just testing the water, to see what could work, and would couldn't.... The only thing they really gambled with on the PS2 was the DVD drive, and the Eye Toy.....that had a lot more stuff to offer this gen.

kevnb3103d ago

ps3 and xbox 360 have the exact same amount of ram, only difference is that the 360 can share ram between gpu and cpu while the ps3s ram is split and dedicated. The ps3 also has a unique processor capable of handling many little tasks at once to make up for a shortage of ram. What microsoft was able to do better was the os itself, not a big surprise really lol.

Greyfoxdbz3103d ago

Wow, When did a Monkey learn how to type or speak.

Mr Patriot3103d ago

Looks like patcher got one such monkey

ziggurcat3103d ago

his name is luke plunkett, he works for kotaku, and he thinks pastebin is a legitimate source.

kevnb3103d ago (Edited 3103d ago )

pachter doesnt realize that the publishers and console makers agree on this. Gamestop selling their games for $5 cheaper over and over again and barely stocking any new games isnt helping them.
I think they will throw online pass in for even single player games, and even stricter drm than consoles already have.

cjflora3103d ago

The problem with Pachter though is that half of the crap he says is common sense. I think most people I've seen who've commented on this topic have stated that it's highly unlikely because it would really turn people off of the product.

morkendo233102d ago (Edited 3102d ago )

@ area84
that is the purpose buying used games
its cheaper!! dont think used games going anywhere anytime soon.
if developers pissed at used sale market not gamers fault we're trying to save and servive. not everyone can afford 60.00 a pop. example:180 for 3 games while used games: 3 games 19.99 = 64.98

metroid793102d ago

patcher is right 4 once if sony or microsoft go with this approach they will fail BIG.

salinidus3099d ago

come check out our show on youtube we present this weeks major gaming news and discuss it, this week we discussed orbis and the whole anti-used games countermeasures rumor

so come check us out we are 2andahalfgamerz1

link down below

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 3099d ago
tehpees33103d ago (Edited 3103d ago )

I never thought I'd see the day where I say this but I agree with him. I buy my games new as much as I can but there are cases where games go out of print or some just don't sell and are very hard to find.

cjflora3103d ago

This is about the equivelent of him claiming the sky is blue. It's not hard to agree with a statement that is pretty obvious. I mean, they could decide to go down this road, but I don't think anyone can argue that anyone will be pleased with the results and they'll lose console sales over it.

Hicken3103d ago

And yet look at how many of the fools in here think it's a good idea. They're all brainwashed into thinking used game sales hurt developers... as if new game prices don't hurt consumers.

Hell, I love gaming. If I've got four hours to sleep, I'll spend three of em gaming. And there's nothing I like more than supporting my favorite developers. But if it weren't for used games, I never would have become a gamer. Of the 60+ PS2 games I have, 3/4 of them were picked up used. And I never would have found amazing games like The World Ends With You, Lost Odyssey, or Valkyria Chronicles if used copies hadn't existed. My PS3 library, though, consists of almost all new games, now.

People who think this is a good idea probably don't understand that this is how most people become gamers. If you're not certain, you don't wantonly go spending 60 bucks a pop. That would be the same as someone who's just getting into painting going out and grabbing the most expensive materials possible, without knowing if it's something they're good at or want to keep doing.

And then there's the whole ownership rights issue. General Motors cannot tell me where I can drive my car. They cannot stop me from selling my car. They have no right to tell me I can't loan my car to my sister. They own the "intellectual property" that is my car's design, but the ownership of my particular vehicle is mine and mine alone, and I decide what I do with it. The same is true for my house, my bed, my shoes, my clothes, my movies, my music, my alcohol. I can do what I want with my stuff(within reason and legal bounds), including build a Gundam if I damn well please.

And I can sell my games, and just like my clothes, car, or house, the next person should have every reason to believe that the games will work just as they did when they were originally sold.

What's next? DVD/Blu Ray players won't play used movies? Are you people REALLY okay with this?

cjflora3102d ago

Not sure why you only have 1 bubble, but well said and + bubbles from me.

Used games have been around for ever and it's never killed the gaming industry up to this point.

Also, I've heard people use game rentals as a reason for developers losing money on new game sales. Last I knew rental companies have to pay a pretty high royalty fee for each copy they purchase. They aren't going out and buying $60 copies and renting them out.

I'm curious if this will be something similar to the Vita games. I remember an article recently about the Vita locking trophies on a game so that the next person can't earn trophies. However you can "reformat" the game cartridge to reset it and allow trophy collection again. I recently rented Ninja Gaiden from Gamefly and while I did have an option to format the game, I didn't have to in order to get trophies. Maybe I was the first one to use it...

LX-General-Kaos3103d ago (Edited 3103d ago )

I hope that no console goes down that path. Things will just continue to get worse as time goes along if any of this is true. Gaming seems to slowly be shifting into some type of policed lockdown. Its getting more difficult every generation to simply get a game up an running on our consoles. These rules will eventually ruin gaming.

No used games, online passes, the rumored need for a consistent internet connection just to game. Even word of digital distribution only for retail games. Sony and Microsoft are rumored to be heading down this path of videogame lockdown which I pray is false. Let's hope Nintendo does not follow. As of now I have not heard of any such thing from them.

For the 1st time ever I hope that Pachter is right, and that we won't see such madness on our consoles. And like he said, if anyone pulls a stunt like that alone they will likely fall. I believe that completely.

Rated E For Everyone

NateCole3103d ago

Dam it. Patcher is always wrong. Now i am worried.

dale_denton3103d ago


_Aarix_3103d ago (Edited 3103d ago )

^ This guy again?

Wintersun6163103d ago

These guys again?

Wow, I just found myself agreeing with Pachter for once and now I'm confused.