Playstation 4

[villa4europe]

[Ingram85]

That dual shock looks like a happy alien with big ears.

Edited May 27, 2013 by Ingram85

[Stevo985]

Microsoft do seem to be doing most of Sony's marketing for them at this stage.

[hogso]

Wellllllllll...kinda. As the above shows, as well as previous statements about not being always online has shown, they will put something out when they feel the need to. What is telling, and I believe Chindie alluded to this in the XONE thread, is that they have said zero about what their own system will have in place for the sale of second hand games. They haven't attempted to remove themselves from it at all, which seems a little odd, don't you think? It could well mean Sony will have a similar model, or maybe even exactly the same, as the XONE will have.

 

From a publishers point of view (and there is some surmising that, because the big publishers love the idea of getting money from second hand sales so much, it was they who convinced Microsoft to go through with it), who are going to make some significant $$$ where they didn't before from second hand sales, would they want to even release games on the PS4 if they weren't going to get a cut from second hand sales? Why bother, when they could make more cash via the XONE? Maybe that's a bit of an extreme example, but the point remains.

 

Could we be entering a gen where consoles are for casual gamers, and the rest of us shun both (uh oh sorry, WIIU, all three) consoles and retreat to PC gaming?

[Daniel]

Also seen this today.

 

PS4 'to regulate used games like Xbox One'
 

I'm thinking the person they're quoting(Geoff Keighley) might be talking bollocks, but who knows. I think both Sony and MS need to come out and tell us how it is.

[Kwan]

I thought I read somewhere earlier during the PS4 reveal that they themselves weren't going to have a fee, but they would leave it up to the publishers if they wanted a fee similair to what they do for online passes right now.

[Stevo985]

Wellllllllll...kinda. As the above shows, as well as previous statements about not being always online has shown, they will put something out when they feel the need to. What is telling, and I believe Chindie alluded to this in the XONE thread, is that they have said zero about what their own system will have in place for the sale of second hand games. They haven't attempted to remove themselves from it at all, which seems a little odd, don't you think? It could well mean Sony will have a similar model, or maybe even exactly the same, as the XONE will have.

 

From a publishers point of view (and there is some surmising that, because the big publishers love the idea of getting money from second hand sales so much, it was they who convinced Microsoft to go through with it), who are going to make some significant $$$ where they didn't before from second hand sales, would they want to even release games on the PS4 if they weren't going to get a cut from second hand sales? Why bother, when they could make more cash via the XONE? Maybe that's a bit of an extreme example, but the point remains.

 

Could we be entering a gen where consoles are for casual gamers, and the rest of us shun both (uh oh sorry, WIIU, all three) consoles and retreat to PC gaming?

I don't think that's it.

 

I'm a casual gamer. I don't want all this shit that comes with an XBox. I'd happily pay £100 less and get a box that JUST plays games.

In fact I'd say it's the casual gamer who's less likely to use all the bells and whistles on the consoles.

 

Maybe that's just me.

[lapal_fan]

Why is it that computer game developers are so needy about 2nd hand sales anyway? 

 

When DFS sell you a chair, you can sell it 2nd hand.

 

Same goes with almost everything, because it's yours.

 

Even though the person who buys it 2nd hand will play it online or offline, the guy buying the chairs going to **** sit on it.. where does it end? 

 

AND WHY DID I USE A **** CHAIR AS AN ANALOGY?! 

[hogso]

 

Wellllllllll...kinda. As the above shows, as well as previous statements about not being always online has shown, they will put something out when they feel the need to. What is telling, and I believe Chindie alluded to this in the XONE thread, is that they have said zero about what their own system will have in place for the sale of second hand games. They haven't attempted to remove themselves from it at all, which seems a little odd, don't you think? It could well mean Sony will have a similar model, or maybe even exactly the same, as the XONE will have.

 

From a publishers point of view (and there is some surmising that, because the big publishers love the idea of getting money from second hand sales so much, it was they who convinced Microsoft to go through with it), who are going to make some significant $$$ where they didn't before from second hand sales, would they want to even release games on the PS4 if they weren't going to get a cut from second hand sales? Why bother, when they could make more cash via the XONE? Maybe that's a bit of an extreme example, but the point remains.

 

Could we be entering a gen where consoles are for casual gamers, and the rest of us shun both (uh oh sorry, WIIU, all three) consoles and retreat to PC gaming?

I don't think that's it.

 

I'm a casual gamer. I don't want all this shit that comes with an XBox. I'd happily pay £100 less and get a box that JUST plays games.

In fact I'd say it's the casual gamer who's less likely to use all the bells and whistles on the consoles.

 

Maybe that's just me.

 

 

Thing is, there isn't going to be a new console on the market that 'just' plays games, is there?

 

Well...no. There's Ouya, and other android based stuff, like Steams thing, but I don't think they'll appeal as much to the casual gamer. Then again, the impact of gaming on mobiles has probabaly changed how we define a 'casual gamer' to how we did when the Wii was released, for example.

Edited May 28, 2013 by hogso

[flamingsombrero]

[Davkaus]

Why is it that computer game developers are so needy about 2nd hand sales anyway? 

 

When DFS sell you a chair, you can sell it 2nd hand.

 

Same goes with almost everything, because it's yours.

 

Even though the person who buys it 2nd hand will play it online or offline, the guy buying the chairs going to **** sit on it.. where does it end? 

 

AND WHY DID I USE A **** CHAIR AS AN ANALOGY?! 

 

 

It's a tough one. Whilst you're right about being able to resell your other items, software is just different. If I buy a used chair, it's probably got a few bumps and scrapes, and years' worth of someone else's farts. There's also just the feeling that it's not new. Someone else has been using it and it's just not quite the same as having a brand new one just for yourself. This doesn't matter with software. Okay, you can say that the CD could get scratched and so on, but the disk really isn't important at all anymore. The software doesn't deteriorate. Okay it loses value over time, as newer games come out, but that's also the case for first-hand sales. Take the disk out of the equation, which is clearly the way things are going anyway. Should you be able to sell the games you buy on Steam, or games you download from the Xbox/PS store? Songs on iTunes?

 

On the other hand, there's strong arguments to support the idea that a strong second-hand market strengthens the primary market, but I'm not sure how much that applies to software. I'm sure I'm not the only person who's bought a few games I was unsure about, because after all, even if it sucks, I can sell them back and get something else. Not necessarily a new copy though...

 

It's not something with an easy answer, IMO.

Edited May 28, 2013 by Davkaus

[lapal_fan]

Fair enough and I can see what you're saying, but it still doesn't really add up.  As you've said, if you buy a 2nd hand copy of a game with the intention of playing online, say, 12 months AFTER the game already come out, you'll be behind other peoples levels, the community will have thinned out as the other gamers have bought the newer games and you're buying something that's not new, in any way shape or form, Plus the company will probably have bought out or will be bringing out an updated title anyway!

 

Fair enough with sofas etc, but you could say something about cars, furniture, collectables, electricals, other games which are not video games.  

 

Developers saying 'no, you can't have a 2nd hand market' is something I'm totally against, and I very rarely buy 2nd hand games!

 

You can buy and sell consoles 2nd hand.  What's to stop Sony saying, "once your I.P has been used with this PS3/4/5/6, it won't work in other peoples homes, because we don't want you to take your PS4/5/6 around your mates house to play games and we don't want you to sell the actual console".

 

To make it worse IMO is that the games have already been sold once... The developers have already received their cut.

 

Imagine if you couldn't buy a 2nd hand car because the manufacturers didn't like it?

 

It's setting a very uneasy precedence, and not one I agree with.

 

There's always been a 2nd hand market, devs should **** get used to it, or advertise their games to make them an absolute must buy, day one purchasefor gamers (I.e. make the games better)

[The_Rev]

The theory that people trade in their old games in order to buy new ones will be tested on the next gen, that is for sure.   Part of me thinks it will be incredibly funny if Call of Duty 48 tanks because Activision wouldn't let people trade Call of Duty 47 in. 

[P3te]

 

I'm thinking the person they're quoting(Geoff Keighley) might be talking bollocks, but who knows. 

Doritos probably paid him to say that

[P3te]

Why is it that computer game developers are so needy about 2nd hand sales anyway? 

 

When DFS sell you a chair, you can sell it 2nd hand.

 

Same goes with almost everything, because it's yours.

 

Even though the person who buys it 2nd hand will play it online or offline, the guy buying the chairs going to **** sit on it.. where does it end? 

 

AND WHY DID I USE A **** CHAIR AS AN ANALOGY?! 

 

If it was all private second hand sales there'd be no issue. The problem is the fact that there are companies like GameStop making BILLIONS per year for buying second hand games for buttons, then selling them back for a fiver under the RRP

[Chindie]

 

Why is it that computer game developers are so needy about 2nd hand sales anyway? 

 

When DFS sell you a chair, you can sell it 2nd hand.

 

Same goes with almost everything, because it's yours.

 

Even though the person who buys it 2nd hand will play it online or offline, the guy buying the chairs going to **** sit on it.. where does it end? 

 

AND WHY DID I USE A **** CHAIR AS AN ANALOGY?! 

 

If it was all private second hand sales there'd be no issue. The problem is the fact that there are companies like GameStop making BILLIONS per year for buying second hand games for buttons, then selling them back for a fiver under the RRP

 

There would be an issue if it was private second hand sales only. The fact of the matter is that the industry sees (in a pathetically simplistic manner) every second hand sale as a lost sale for them, which is nonsense. It doesn't matter if it's you flogging something on eBay or you walking into your local games retailer and trading in a recent release to knock the price of the latest new release to a more palatable level, they see that as a loss when it's resold. They would combat it, as far as the industry is concerned a person buying a second hand copy of a title is little better than a pirate.

 

Gamestop isn't making billions - it's profit was $50m odd in Q1 this year. They would need to have a stonking next 3 to see BILLIONS in their coffers. And they're not buying for buttons and selling for a fiver under RRP. Only newer releases and popular titles sell at that level, and those titles aren't bought for 'buttons'. They get bought in for a reasonable price - never as much as the customer might like and not as much as they could get for a private sale, but I won't bemoan a business looking to make a reasonable profit. The emotive nature of your argument doesn't help your argument, it weakens it.

 

I used to work at Gamestation, as most of you would know. The second hand market is good for the industry and good for the consumer, and frankly I can't look at any attempt to combat that as anything other than holding the consumer in contempt, coupled to greed.

[lapal_fan]

If they had such a problem with Gamestop, Game, Gamestation (same company obviously), then the publishers (i.e. Rockstar, Valve, Gear Box, EA etc etc) should club together and make their own stores!

[Davkaus]

2 of them already have. One of them is the biggest PC game distribution platform, you might have heard of it.

 

Game et al had better hope ISPs never get their act sufficiently together for console game downloads to be as ubiquitous as it is for PC, as soon as it does, they're finished. As soon as the infrastructure is there for enough customers to download all of their games, there's no reason for the middle man to be there.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Davkaus

[Kwan]

The most optimal solution to the used games problem would be for the retailers to gradually lower their price over time like Steam does. Games depreciate over time (well some games, you can argue SP-only games don't). People don't want to pay $60 for a game that was released a year ago, but the lowest they'll do it is $40 or $30 if it's a greatest hits games and that's only 2 or 3 years after the fact.

[hogso]

 

Here it is! It's big, it's black, it's slanted, and it'll cost £350.

 

Does that indent light up? Red? And it swishes from side to side? Like KIT? It looks like the front of KIT.