Sony adopts online pass system of their own, Resistence 3 confirmed to use it

Link.

Additionally, the bundle's box art shows off something called PSN Pass. Last summer, Sony's Andrew House said the company was "broadly supportive" of making online portions of a game available or unlocked for a fee, further noting that Sony was exploring an Online Pass equivalent.

Now, it appears that initiative may begin with Resistance 3, which is due out exclusively for the PS3 on September 6. Unfortunately, specifics concerning the PSN Pass cannot be determined by the logo alone, as all that can be read is, "network features only available in countries that have the PlayStation Store."

The online passes bundled with new copies of EA Sports titles, as well as Homefront, Mortal Kombat, and others are seen as an effort to make buying games new more attractive than buying them used (a sale that puts no money in the publisher's pocket). Typically, secondhand users must pay a nominal fee ($10) to access all the features new purchasers receive with Online Pass-enabled games.

Additionally, it is uncertain whether the PSN Pass--if real--will be punitive or appreciative. It is not known if the PSN Pass will bar secondhand gamers from some or all of a game's online component, or if it will grant new purchasers bonus material, like Mass Effect 2's Cerberus Network.

GameSpot

So... now console makers are going to adopt online passes, maybe? Can't say I would be surprised. Just about everyone on the development side of the industry hates used games with a passion. It was only a matter of time before console makers adopted the online pass system, assuming that's what this PSN Pass is to be used for.

Thoughts?

EDIT: Meant to add this when it happened, but Sony has confirmed their online pass system. As of now, Resistence 3 is the only title confirmed to use it.

I read that Sony is redesigning the PSN store for sometime later this year so maybe that has something to do with the online pass. Personally I'm not a fan of it.

Store and customers are within their rights to buy and sell used games, but I can see why the game industry is unhappy about such sales and is taking steps.

Its ridiculous how hard Gamestop pushes used games. I've bought many, many products in many, many places and nowhere else have I had the bizarre experience of store clerks try to talk me out of buying a product new.

Its ridiculous how hard Gamestop pushes used games. I've bought many, many products in many, many places and nowhere else have I had the bizarre experience of store clerks try to talk me out of buying a product new.CarnageHeart

If this continues, I will definitely be looking at my purchases for games in a more scrutinizing manner. Reason being? If the used/re-sale market floor falls out - you are not going to be able to fetch the same going rates on these games. Therefore, I would only purchase games I know are worth the full purchase. I can honestly say in the past 3 years there are only about 5-10 games that I have held onto... so, in my mind this initiative (while making business sense) is going to hurt the gaming industry from the perspective of my cash flow to them.

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]Its ridiculous how hard Gamestop pushes used games. I've bought many, many products in many, many places and nowhere else have I had the bizarre experience of store clerks try to talk me out of buying a product new.jekyll

Ok if they do that they no longer have any excuse: they have to give us cross game chat

A few dollars less for disks which at best, have faint scatches. I'd rather pay a few bucks more for disks in perfect condition.CarnageHeart

What about many dollars less for a disc in perfect condition? Shop at Game instead of gamestop.

Bought Far Cry 2 used last night for $14.

It's $30 new on Amazon.

So it's more than a few bucks, and I would have had to wait for shipping (my main reason.)

My problem is that if people are not going to pay full price for the game new, then how would changing it so games are worthless in reselling increase profit?

how about devs make their games better? STOP giving me a 8 hour game that has no replay value and expect me to pay 60 bucks for it. a game like yakuza 4 i will glady pay 60 bucks for because so much content is packed into that game that even after i beat it i only completed 7% of the game.

Bought Far Cry 2 used last night for $14.

It's $30 new on Amazon.

So it's more than a few bucks, and I would have had to wait for shipping (my main reason.)

ZombieKiller7

If the used games market bottoms out because of industry wide implementation of stupid things like this then I just won't be buying 70% of the games I normally would anymore. Hell I won't buy your game new on principle or out of spite. Its just amazing to me, like literally mind boggling how much better PC gamers have it compared to console gamers. The games are so much cheaper and no company is trying to tell you how to obtain, use, enjoy your product. With Steam being so great and cheap why pay $60 for the mass of garbage games they release that are not worth the cost? I don't see anyone excited for ****ing Resistance multiplayer anyways :roll:GodModeEnabled

There's a market for used PC games? I was under the impress that activation codes precluded such a market.

I disagree with online passes. When I buy a product I buy it. You can't just disallow me from selling something I bought myself. I will not buy a single game using such a system.Overlord93

[QUOTE="Overlord93"]I disagree with online passes. When I buy a product I buy it. You can't just disallow me from selling something I bought myself. I will not buy a single game using such a system.starwarsjunky

[QUOTE="jekyll"]

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]Its ridiculous how hard Gamestop pushes used games. I've bought many, many products in many, many places and nowhere else have I had the bizarre experience of store clerks try to talk me out of buying a product new.CarnageHeart

I don't know about you guys but I wait a week or two after a new release and find great deals on Amazon, Best Buy or some big-box retailer. I rarely buy at Gamestop because most often than not the games I can find at other places new on sale are cheaper than they are being sold used at Gamestop. I don't see this as a problem at all.

One logical progression for the "Used Games War" is this:

1. More and more gaming companies adopt a partial unlock system. Some gamers protest, but the prevelence of the system railroads them into either accepting it or choosing from a dwindling selection of games that have no restrictions.

2. Used game sales and game rentals decline drastically over time as more companies restrict features in used games. Companies like Gamestop encounter sales losses to the point where less profitable locations are forced to close. Rental stores downsize their game selection or even remove their game sections entirely due to reduced revenue. Some game publishers adopt a special system that allows rentals to bypass the used game restrictions, but this only slows the game rental industry's slow death (especially since big name companies will use this system to gouge the rental industry, since they now have the power to kill revenue from any given game).

3. Without competition from used and rental copies of their own games, game publishers realize they can increase game prices with less backlash than before. The days of affordable, big budget games comes to a quick end.

4. In a final attempt to end used game sales and trading, game publishers restrict the entire game instead of just multiplayer and further increase the cost of unlocking it. The used game market moves to the internet and is relegated to old games and to releases from companies that actually care about their fanbase (ie. they did not adopt the used game restrictions). The game rental industry finally dies, and companies that rely heavily on used game sales experience massive revenue losses and eventually bankruptcy.

And the end result of this? Without access to used and rental games, your options are "new", "pirated", "old games" (essentially games made around now and in the past), and used games made by companies that actually care about their fanbase (which I'm curious as to just how large a percentage that will be...). Stores that specialize in video games largely die out or diversify as retailers like Best Buy, Wal-Mart, Sears, etc. take over the lion's share of game sales.

I'm sure people will pick this "timeline" apart, but I'd like to see what people's opinions are of the future of used games.

One logical progression for the "Used Games War" is this:

1. More and more gaming companies adopt a partial unlock system. Some gamers protest, but the prevelence of the system railroads them into either accepting it or choosing from a dwindling selection of games that have no restrictions.

2. Used game sales and game rentals decline drastically over time as more companies restrict features in used games. Companies like Gamestop encounter sales losses to the point where less profitable locations are forced to close. Rental stores downsize their game selection or even remove their game sections entirely due to reduced revenue. Some game publishers adopt a special system that allows rentals to bypass the used game restrictions, but this only slows the game rental industry's slow death (especially since big name companies will use this system to gouge the rental industry, since they now have the power to kill revenue from any given game).

3. Without competition from used and rental copies of their own games, game publishers realize they can increase game prices with less backlash than before. The days of affordable, big budget games comes to a quick end.

4. In a final attempt to end used game sales and trading, game publishers restrict the entire game instead of just multiplayer and further increase the cost of unlocking it. The used game market moves to the internet and is relegated to old games and to releases from companies that actually care about their fanbase (ie. they did not adopt the used game restrictions). The game rental industry finally dies, and companies that rely heavily on used game sales experience massive revenue losses and eventually bankruptcy.

And the end result of this? Without access to used and rental games, your options are "new", "pirated", "old games" (essentially games made around now and in the past), and used games made by companies that actually care about their fanbase (which I'm curious as to just how large a percentage that will be...). Stores that specialize in video games largely die out or diversify as retailers like Best Buy, Wal-Mart, Sears, etc. take over the lion's share of game sales.

I'm sure people will pick this "timeline" apart, but I'd like to see what people's opinions are of the future of used games.

jadaski1

There's no correlation between rentals and game pricing. Game pricing is driven by game budgets (and in the medium and long terms, demand) more than anything (Black Ops still sells for full price because lots of people still buy it, Child of Eden's price has fallen 40% because no one is buying it). Also, there's more price flexibility online (Steam and even PSN) than at retail, and given your thesis that used game prices drag down retail game prices, the opposite should be true.

Also, the notion that companies are inclined to drive up prices (which has a negative effect on sales)ignores the entirety of videogame history. I've been gaming for 34 years and most of that time $50 was the price one paid for games (N64 carts were $65 and in the 16 bit era bigger games cost from 70-90 dollars). 2600 games tended to be developed by one guy and over the course of several months (vs development by teams of up to 200 over the couple of a couple years and sometimes several years) but we pay only 10 bucks more now than we did then. I remember the price of candy bars and books (two other things I was into back then) and they are over 50% more expensive in terms of non-inflation adjusted pricing.

*Shrugs* But if you labour under the delusion an industry that has done a good job of not passing on increasing costs to consumers will choose to push prices through the stratosphere just because game rentals are no longer a factor, I don't know how I can make you see sense.

If a store's business model doesn't allow it to survive by selling games new (each of which costs retailers $48 dollars, translating into a 12 dollar profit per new game sold) then they are doing something very, very, very wrong.

http://www.forbes.com/2006/12/19/ps3-xbox360-costs-tech-cx_rr_game06_1219expensivegames.html?partner=rss

What if like several years later, you want to buy that game but you can only find it used because it has been discontinued? Imagine buying the discontinued game used but has that online pass system. Of course, it only pertains to online mode amd maybe around that time, the servers for that multiplayer part of the game might be taken down. But then imagine if that online pass system pertained to Single Player as well. I see how this could be a problem in the future.

There's no correlation between rentals and game pricing. Game pricing is driven by game budgets (and in the medium and long terms, demand) more than anything (Black Ops still sells for full price because lots of people still buy it, Child of Eden's price has fallen 40% because no one is buying it). Also, there's more price flexibility online (Steam and even PSN) than at retail, and given your thesis that used game prices drag down retail game prices, the opposite should be true.

CarnageHeart

This is actually one of the reasons why I suspect that prices will increase in the future. For a decade now, the price of video games hasn't even kept pace with inflation, yet development budgets have increased dramatically. Coupled with recent economic problems, the gaming industry has been hit hard, especially over the past three years. I just don't see this being sustainable in the long run.

*Shrugs* But if you labour under the delusion an industry that has done a good job of not passing on increasing costs to consumers will choose to push prices through the stratosphere just because game rentals are no longer a factor, I don't know how I can make you see sense.

CarnageHeart

The elimination of rentals and used games would only be one factor, but a sizable one. If companies were to substantially increase game prices now, people could protest the increase by simply renting, buying used, or trading with friends. Take away those options and all you're left with is piracy, waiting a significant length of time for prices to decrease (which could possibly take longer than what we're used to now), and simply not buying the games at all. If the price increase becomes an industry standard, then even the more vocal customers will eventually accept it and move on. I very much doubt that prices will increase astronomically, but I'd be surprised if we don't see a much more sizable upward trend over the next decade than we've seen in the last decade.

If a store's business model doesn't allow it to survive by selling games new (each of which costs retailers $48 dollars, translating into a 12 dollar profit per new game sold) then they are doing something very, very, very wrong.

CarnageHeart

Companies that don't rely on used game sales will be fine. Gamestop will probably be the hardest hit; between 42 and 48% of Gamestop's gross profits in 2009 and 2010 came from used game sales.

http://www.forbes.com/2006/12/19/ps3-xbox360-costs-tech-cx_rr_game06_1219expensivegames.html?partner=rss

CarnageHeart

That was a good article, thank you. Also, I'm not saying that I am definitely right in my opinions. I'm just posing what I consider to be a very real possibility for the future of the gaming industry.

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

Bought Far Cry 2 used last night for $14.

It's $30 new on Amazon.

So it's more than a few bucks, and I would have had to wait for shipping (my main reason.)

CarnageHeart

They didn't have any in stock.

It was the only copy and it was used.

I suppose Sony is forgetting that when a game is sold used, that somebody has already previously bought it new, and thus they already have had their money?DevilBorg

That's Sony's right to do this, just as it's my right to wait until this game hits the bargin bin before I make a purchase. No sense in rewarding those who feel entitled to double-dip with a $60 purchase.

If this becomes common practice It will do one thing and only one thing. It will make people wait until the price of the game drops and buy it new. At worst this will only force gamers to be more critical of what games they buy right at launch.

I don't buy used games all THAT often, but often enough to where this would affect my buying habits. Instead of buying "random game" used, I would buy it 6 months down the line for 20 or 30 dollars. Or I just wouldn't bother buying it, because if I'm not willing to drop $60 on it then odds are I'm not losing any sleep over not playing it.

Perfect example: Portal 2 came out April 19th. Just a few days ago I downloaded it off Steam for $33. Less than 3 months after It's release I got it for almost half of what it would cost me if I bought it new today on a console. It's this "save it for later" mentality that I would hope gamers would adopt. It would make a statement to the industry that even if you crush the used game market. We're still not buying a game for full price if we don't think It's worth the money.

P.S. Not that I wouldn't of paid full price for Portal 2. I was just broke when it came out so decided to wait for a good deal. :lol:

[QUOTE="starwarsjunky"][QUOTE="Overlord93"]I disagree with online passes. When I buy a product I buy it. You can't just disallow me from selling something I bought myself. I will not buy a single game using such a system.Overlord93

That's silly because you're missing out on some very very good games, a lot actually.

So what if you waste $ 15 on a DL title and dislike it? There are demo's and reviews online. More than enough info for you to make a good decision off. Besides titles priced for $10-$15 on downloads wouldn't be worth much reselling anyway

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"][QUOTE="jekyll"]It really is win-win; they get more profit and you getthe same game for less money.

Archangel3371

Yeah that may be true in some cases but in most it's not. I went to Wal-Mart the other day. I was planning on buying Final Fantasy XIII because I love RPG's and the price I saw there was ridiculous. It was 50 bucks for a brand new copy of Final Fantasy 13. I decided to see if any other stores had it cheaper and low and behold I saw a Gamestop. I walked in, found a copy of Final Fantasy XIII used and the price was alot cheaper than Wal-Mart's price. 16 dollars for the game, while at Wal-Mart it's still 50. Not all used games have 5 dollars taken off, Gamestop is a good place to go for cheap Gamers. They have a bunch of games that are still pricey in retail stores like Wal-Mart or Best Buy and resonably cheap at Gamestop.

[QUOTE="jekyll"]

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]Its ridiculous how hard Gamestop pushes used games. I've bought many, many products in many, many places and nowhere else have I had the bizarre experience of store clerks try to talk me out of buying a product new.CarnageHeart

Except that by the time you pick the game box off the shelf, the developers and publishers have already been paid. You are giving the retailer your money whether you buy it new or used.

"3. Without competition from used and rental copies of their own games, game publishers realize they can increase game prices with less backlash than before. The days of affordable, big budget games comes to a quick end."

Prepare to spend $80s on Super Man Vita 3 years after its initial release.

[QUOTE="Archangel3371"][QUOTE="CarnageHeart"] A few dollars less for disks which at best, have faint scatches. I'd rather pay a few bucks more for disks in perfect condition. Also, as a gamer I'd rather see money go to people that make games rather than people that sell them. Gamestop making money results in them building more Gamestops, game companies making money results in them making more games.Ikouze

Yeah that may be true in some cases but in most it's not. I went to Wal-Mart the other day. I was planning on buying Final Fantasy XIII because I love RPG's and the price I saw there was ridiculous. It was 50 bucks for a brand new copy of Final Fantasy 13. I decided to see if any other stores had it cheaper and low and behold I saw a Gamestop. I walked in, found a copy of Final Fantasy XIII used and the price was alot cheaper than Wal-Mart's price. 16 dollars for the game, while at Wal-Mart it's still 50. Not all used games have 5 dollars taken off, Gamestop is a good place to go for cheap Gamers. They have a bunch of games that are still pricey in retail stores like Wal-Mart or Best Buy and resonably cheap at Gamestop.

Don't like it but in truth it doesn't effect me. I usually get new games for less then used and if I really want a game I buy it day one so I'm paying full price anyway...

[QUOTE="Overlord93"][QUOTE="starwarsjunky"] i hope you don't buy anything off of PSN/XBL/WiiWare/Steam then...darth-pyschosis

That's silly because you're missing out on some very very good games, a lot actually.

So what if you waste $ 15 on a DL title and dislike it? There are demo's and reviews online. More than enough info for you to make a good decision off. Besides titles priced for $10-$15 on downloads wouldn't be worth much reselling anyway

I dislike it.

THe gaming industry takes advantage of its supporters more than any other because they can. No other industry is so driven to stop used sales. Used CD's and DVD's are taking money from the companies that put them out, but no one seems to care about that.

If they was sales of used games to stop, make better damn games. If a games genuinely good, I wont trade it in, even if I dont plan on playing it again.