US Publishers Trying to Prevent the Reselling of Used Games

[Ed Oscuro]

retro, i thought i was reading a thread from 2007...

konami did this 12 months ago with pes

It happened in like 2005 with Battlefield 2 and the expansions (2006 and up).

That was the bad old EA. Supposedly things are a bit better.

Meanwhile, Sega forced me to get two copies of The Club, and the one-month Gold Live trial is probably expired by now (didn't do me a bit of good either).

There was also a news item back in 2005 or so about the Japanese vidyagaem companies wanting to do the same thing, but nothing came of it.

I think I will be happy enough with freewares and uh maybe I'll get a PeEssPee and stay away from the MMOs and whatever other garbage they put on it.

Seriously though, fuck paying full price for anything, unless you know it's holding value that is...

[RackGaki]

Good thing you're a shoot 'em up fan, Ed, or you wouldn't buy any game brand new.

[Ed Oscuro]

The only game I bought brand new in recent memory is Contra 4 (Orange Box doesn't count because, well, nevermind). I"ve been lucky in that other people have bought some of these games I've enjoyed - despite my bitching, for a while I was thinking that I needed to buy a second copy of CoD4 for myself to support the dev. Then I realized I was only getting about a couple weeks of fun out of it. Oh well...

I think I'm going to look on eBay for a cheap copy of Quake II for N64 next, I'm sure there's some new copies floating around like there were of Perfect Dark

edit: Also, I totally wish I had a time machine. Importing shmups in 1998 > impoting shmups in 2002 (as I'm told, anyway).

[Blade]

I buy used games regularly but nothing so advanced that it needs a code for such things as online features, I'm still not done getting PS2 games yet...

Being poor sucks but at least I don't have to deal with the current trend of gaming woes yet...

[Ganelon]

I've never bought a used game for my PS2 and newer systems and intend to keep that mentality for any future game systems. Oddly enough though, every other person I've seen in a game store has always opted to buy pre-owned.

The only good part I can see in this is that GameStop would get stabbed in the jugular and that's something that'll actually make me pretty happy (unless you rely on wages from GameStop, in which case I offer my sympathies). Current GameStop store have nowhere near the class that its swallowed-up companies Babbage's, Electronics Boutique, and Software Etc. had with their rich and colorful displays of new games.

[Octopod]

And Funcoland. That was an awsome store.

[FatCobra]

Seen EA's DRM policy for their PC games?

This is exactly what they are trying to prevent, it doesn't fight piracy like they claim it is. They figure that since they think they are loosing so much imaginary money on pirates that they will charge paying customers more and force them to keep paying for the same game (isn't there already a scheme like that, it's called an MMORPG), by limiting the number of times you can install it. Run out and you have call their awful tech support line and beg them to give you permission to reinstall the game YOU PAID FOR! Oh, did I mention the DRM also installs A ROOTKIT THAT COULD DESTROY YOUR DVD-BURNER IF IT FEELS LIKE IT. A ROOTKIT YOU CAN'T REMOVE EASILY!

THAT'S PRETTY MUCH MALWARE! OR A VIRUS!

Meanwhile the pirates get a better, DRM and malware free product, and it's free! Customers are getting fucked in the ass, and eventually they are not going to take it anymore. If a game is good, you wouldn't need DRM because people are willing to pay for it. Throw in a good multi player and it's a definite buy.

Also, require internet access to play a single player game = WRONG! When Half-Life 2 first came and I discovered that you needed to log on to Steam, it drove me crazy and I didn't buy the game as a result. Fast-forward to now, and I LOVE STEAM. Sure, requiring an net connection to play a single player game is annoying, but it's a fair tradeoff because it auto-updates. Plus, I have the option of playing offline, it's not bad. I'm just worried what will happen if Valve ever goes out of business and shuts down the servers.

Now I said needing to be online to play a single-player game is wrong, yet I love steam? Well that's because Steam is tolerable and has benefits. Requiring to be online just to check that I didn't suddenly become a pirate = BAD.

DRM has gotten so bad that I think the disc check is a luxury now!

If Fallout 3, GTA4, or Diablo III has draconian DRM, I'm buying a sledgehammer and gonna crack some corporate shithead skulls!

[Lordstar]

I just wont buy them if they have malware on I will wait for someone to make some sort of crack for it and download it for free.

just so you know. I have not pirated a PC game since the early nighties. Everything I own i have bought new from a retail sotre.

Its fucking dire this. Not everyone has internet access for there computer they play games on. I know my friend has one for the familly and the internet and a much higher spec games playing machine. So now he has to go out and buy a wireless router and a wireless card for his pc.

Is it me or are they trying to distroy the PC gaming scene and make everyone convert to consoles?

[jpj]

nah mate. pc gamers are fucking it up for themselves

If a game is good, you wouldn't need DRM because people are willing to pay for it.

i'm not so sure

[neorichieb1971]

I think its a great idea. At least its stopping piracy. If it goes ahead you can make 2000 copies of a game and everyone who puts the blank in their drive will have to pay regardless.

The way things stand now, people are just pirating, and moaning about codes and what not is senseless if you don't moan at the millions of people worldwide pirating.

Sorry.

[RackGaki]

Fatcobra, Steam seems to be the best compromise between keeping a game unlocked and full-blown malware DRM. Glad you like it, too. Steam has a nice Xbox-Live-style community that can at least serve as justification for everything. I honestly wish I could buy more through them, since it's such an admirable service. I'm appalled that I bought Crysis Wars at all... I sold that shit as soon as I found out. Doubt I got rid of everything, even with my third party registry cleaner.

And by the off chance Valve closes their doors and the developers don't release something to let us play all our games, we know where to go.

[ED-057]

I think Steam is a good deal as it is, but what worries me more than Valve closing up shop is the eventuality that they simply drop support for the OS I'm running. When I signed up for Steam it worked on win98 but now it doesn't. I recently found this out when my brother was over and tried to run Steam on one of my old PCs so we could play a LAN game of half-life. That's only a minor annoyance as I have a triple-boot (98/2000/ubuntu) on my main PC anyway and I could setup 2K on the other one. But the number of win2k users on Steam is very small by now so it's probably just a matter of time before I get cut off. The game Audiosurf was selling for only $5 on Steam a while back and I bought it. The system requirements had said only that it needed Windows and 512MB of RAM. But it turned out that it didn't run on win2k at all without a hacked .DLL file. This problem had been noted at least five months earlier and yet it hadn't been corrected despite the simplicity of the issue.

[bVork]

There is going to be an interesting economic effect of bundling one-time free use codes with new games and then charging people if they want the same content if they bought the game used. The average price of that used game will drop by however much it costs the secondhand user to get that DLC.

...limiting the number of times you can install it. Run out and you have call their awful tech support line and beg them to give you permission to reinstall the game YOU PAID FOR!

This is true. And it's bullshit.

Oh, did I mention the DRM also installs A ROOTKIT THAT COULD DESTROY YOUR DVD-BURNER IF IT FEELS LIKE IT. A ROOTKIT YOU CAN'T REMOVE EASILY!

This is false. You're mixing up SecuROM and StarForce. Almost nobody apart from a few Eastern European publishers use StarForce anymore.

[Ed Oscuro]

PIRACY IS BAD

THIS IS A POST AGAINST PIRATING GOOD SOFTWARES

IT WAS PUT HERE AT THE INSISTENCE OF PEOPLE LIKE jpj and neobichierich WHO DON'T PLAY PC GAMES ANYWAY

THANK YOU FOR TELLING ME THAT THE GAMES I BUY LEGITIMATELY, TWO OR THREE TIMES, IS NOT HELPING THE SOFTWARE COMPANIES

BOY ALL THOSE PEOPLE WHO DON'T PAY MONEY FOR GAMES, THEY SHOULD PAY FOR GAMES MORE EVEN THOUGH THEY WON'T. WHAT WILL THEY DO WITH THEIR LIFES NOW THAT I DON'T GIVE THEM FREE SOFTWARES

oh lol screw it[/size]

There is going to be an interesting economic effect of bundling one-time free use codes with new games and then charging people if they want the same content if they bought the game used. The average price of that used game will drop by however much it costs the secondhand user to get that DLC.

Nah. eBay list "BRAND NEW NIB NEVER PLAYED APLUS+ MINT!" + "my copy was stolen here's another from the local gamestopper"

(funny that they call it gamestop, you know, game...stop, as in hey look at me i stopped playing games because gamestop is charging $40 for a game I can get off eBay for $12 shipped anyway)

[jpj]

you got me wrong dude, i would *love* pc gaming's decline to carry on downards for another ten years

[gameoverDude]

The NBA Live $20 update thing isn't as bad as the one with Gears of War, where you have to be the first buyer of that copy of the game to get the maps. Epic should make that DLC for GoW2 available by purchase for those who buy used. $10 to get the extra maps wouldn't be unfair.

I don't think Epic would care if you sold your Ninja Gaiden 2, Call of Duty 4, etc. for store credit toward a new mint GoW2.

Anyway, I think GS charges too much for used games. $60 for the new copy or $55 for the same game used? I can't decide! Having the game new should account for more than a five dollar differential. I think their profit margin on used stuff should be a bit lower. I'd be more apt to consider buying the game used for $40 instead of $55.

If they're trying to get people to convert to consoles by slapping DRM malware on PC games, they've succeeded in my case. That's why I chose 360 ports of BioShock, F.E.A.R., etc over their PC counterparts. Screw SecuROM, but OTOH I'm not as concerned about SafeDisc. If not for Digital Restriction Malware, I'd be buying more PC games.

[Ed Oscuro]

you got me wrong dude, i would *love* pc gaming's decline to carry on downards for another ten years

I believe that's how I characterized you. Hopefully you'll get tired of carrying on the "worthless shitposter" act before those ten years are up.

[jpj]

[wasting my time]

[Twiddle]

I post more (shitty) threads and like more (shitty) games therefore I am better than you

[Ed Oscuro]

jpj wanted the glory. jpj wanted the fame. jpj wanted the pretty girls to come up and say 'Hi... I see that you're good at shitposting'

I'm not clear why jpj would think leaving would be a 'victory' for me. If you think that torturing yourself is fun, by all means do go ahead.

[brokenhalo]

bumping this thread for great jus... er....rantings.

so mortal kombat 9 is just around the corner and i was thinking about buying it. but there's rumors that it will have a one-time use activation code for online multiplayer. if so, i'm not buying it. this is getting out of hand. my brother and i share my 360. he buys some games, i buy some games. only one of us can use that activation code, the other has to fork out $10 so that they can play the game online. that's just rediculous. we both pay $50 a year for xbl accounts, now we're expected to pay an extra $10 per game for a license? on top of that, the game isn't even out yet and they are already announcing dlc characters.

at the moment, i'd love to play homefront but i'll be damned if i shell out an extra $10 on a game that we already paid $60 for. i think if they are going to pull this crap, the activation codes should at minimum be per console, not per gamertag.

[TransatlanticFoe]

Certainly in the UK, I question why anyone would buy a pre-owned game from a store. HMV and Game sell used titles which are still more expensive than new ones listed on Amazon.

Maybe the companies moaning about lost sales ought to think about making their games better, so they're not traded in immediately after completion or when the player realises it's shit.

Activation codes and DRM are out of control anyway in the PC market which I'm fairly sure contributes to piracy rather than fights it. UbiSoft recently make you have a constant internet connection to play the game because half of it's downloaded as you go. Sorry, I paid for my game and not for the privilege of connecting to your servers.

[neon guide]

Sorry, I paid for my game and not for the privilege of connecting to your servers.

Nope you paid for whatever they said you were paying for, not for what you wish you were paying for. Also if the game is shitty, it is definitely your fault for buying it.

Isnt all this making people pay separately to get multiplayer on used games basically the same as what has been happening with PC games for years with steam and cd-keys etc.?

[louisg]

Yeah, I'd suggest voting with your wallet. In the end, it'll probably be futile, but at least you won't be taken for a ride. Maybe making the opinions known could help though, if it's an organized movement (writing to the company and explaining why you're not buying their game).

[TrevHead (TVR)]

Publishers would love to see console games go the same way as PC games which cant be sold on as 2nd hand. I suppose it does suck for gamers, especially retro game collectors. However the cost of making AAA games is forever rising and the industry needs to find a way to make more money to fund these games.

So devs and publishers making AAA games have only 3 choices: 1) Lower production (and marketing) costs, 2) Raise price to buy the game, 3) Make a game that appeals to a wider audience.

Genrally most devs go for option 3 as the number of gamers has grown in numbers over the years and the games are made to appeal to a much more casual gaming audience (ie "dumbing down"). Unfortunatly the costs of AAA games has risen to such a degree that the millions of mainstream gamers on one console arnt enough making multi platform titles more nessercary to turn a decent profit.

ATM I think were are at a crossroads if the core gamers arnt prepared to pay more for their games (and lets face it compared to the 8 / 16Bit days games are much cheaper especially in the USA and with the low shelf life / bargin bins) Then the quality of our games are going to suffer even more as devs have no choice to make their games to appeal to the ultra casual gamer crowd. Ild much rather pay more cash for my games then see AAA games that have kenect gimmics or farmville / angry birds mechanics, its already bad enough that every classic IP or genre now is a FPS hybrid, less then 10 hrs single player campagn and an tacked online mode even though it doesnt need it.

Most gamers nowadays are totally spoiled by the fact that they can buy so many games quickly finishing one game off before moving onto another, I suppose the 2nd hand market gives gamers the funds to do this. But I would rather pay an extra £10n or £20 and have a game that has better content and spend longer playing it. If more mainstream gamers bought less titles were forced to spend more time with their games just like the old 16bit years, then they would delve into the more deeper gameplay and devs would make their games with even more deep gameplay. (I would guess that this would be a good thing for all us on this forum).

However im not totally sure that the industry using the $10 for online content is a great way to claw back money from the 2nd hand market as this industry usually goes too far and abuses any system to make extra money. So that every damn game will have online content, which takes funds away from making other parts of the game good. For someone who isnt really into co-op gaming this would suck. Personally I think its time the RRP of all games be increased by £10 just like PC games have risen £10 to match the price of console games, (Ill be suprised if any dev / publisher will put the extra cash into providing PC gamers with the same level of service as console ports, rather then taking the money and running like they do atm)

[Ruldra]

I'm kinda bummed about this online pass thing. I don't want to support it, but two games I'm really looking forward to (MK and Shift 2) have it.

I buy my games new but I sell/trade them after I'm done. This will make it harder to get rid of them.

[TransatlanticFoe]

Sorry, I paid for my game and not for the privilege of connecting to your servers.

Nope you paid for whatever they said you were paying for, not for what you wish you were paying for. Also if the game is shitty, it is definitely your fault for buying it.

Isnt all this making people pay separately to get multiplayer on used games basically the same as what has been happening with PC games for years with steam and cd-keys etc.?

Yes, I can read. Which is why I don't buy UbiSoft games with their fat "this game requires a constant internet connection in order to play" notice on the back.

My point being a game is a game. If it's not worth replaying in 5, 10 or more years then it's not worth anything. No matter how good a game is, something with this sort of system has a limited lifespan - it's only there as long as the servers are up.

Games are designed to have a high turnover and low replay factor these days, because that's how gamers are going. They're consumers now - consuming the content quickly then moving on to the next thing.