http://www.gamespot.com/news/next-xbox-to-play-blu-rays-block-used-games-report-6349165 XBOX http://www.gamespot.com/news/next-playstation-to-lock-out-used-games-report-6368582 PLAYSTATION http://www.gamespot.com/news/next-playstation-to-lock-out-used-games-report-6368582 Both will require user to be always online to play games as well. Link above for next Sony product already states this.
that is so annoying. I really hope this isn't true- I don't want to be constantly connected to the internet just play single player games.
Just doesn't sound like move at all for either system. No more 10-15 dollar used games, now everyone will have to pay the full 60 bucks or whatever they decide to charge. Ill just stick with the current versions as long as they last. I cant imagine what this going to do to places like gamestop?
that will be the death of gaming too....who is going to want to pay full price for every game all the time?? Seriously think if that were true for the PS3, so you couldnt play the first Black Ops until you paid 59.99 for it?!?!?! Thats insane!!!! They would have to lower the price of games then...
I remember reading this rumor was shot down by someone working for Sony. He said something like he doesn't want to move on from games on CDs just yet.
I'd worry if it were closer to release and if announcements came from Sony or MS themselves (which neither will block used game sales entirely). Neither of the 1st two links are recent rumors, the one is 3 months old, and the other almost 5.
It really isn't a big deal IMO. I had an original PS3, and partially got it because my PS2 had just died. You know how many PS2 games I played over the next year though? About 2. And both of them were actually collections of games from previous systems (Mega Man and Mega Man X collections).
I had an original as well and spent a pretty significant amount of time playing the old games. It was especially important early on when the PS3 game library was really crappy. I played the entire God of War 2 game on my original PS3. After three or four years it won't make any difference but early on it's a pretty nice touch. I wonder how difficult it is to include that in the system.
I should have phrased my 1st sentence a little better. Where I said "IMO," I should have said "to me."
No, you had it right the first time, IMO. BC isn't that big of a deal, which is one reason Sony dropped it later. MS never really gave a ****. It can be nice for some classic games, but it makes little sense for Sony or MS to go out of their way to include it. The solution is to bring out a good library of games from the jump, IMO.
One rule of thumb about the gaming industry is that no one seems to arrive at the same idea at the same time, especially the hardware developers. I don't believe that used games will be somehow barred, but I do believe that there will be extra incentive to buy retail.
maybe if they made it so you could only get access to DLC if you buy an original or something? That'd be an understandable middle ground I guess, if they really wanted to do that. Then again, people would just assume that they'd make the 'base' game much weaker and add all the cool stuff as "DLC"- thereby essentially forcing your hand anyway. The internet thing seems crazy though. I understand most people who can afford a PS3 or 360 canprobably also afford basic internet, but not necessarily. It would seem completely unfair to force someone to be 'online' to play a game. I'm not as concerned about the whole big brother thing and forcing us to be connected to "the machine" to play games. Whatever. If FROM Software really wants to know how much I play Dark Souls, so be it, but the bigger concern for me is the money issue for those who can't afford it. It's essentially like what they already do for 360 to force you to pay a monthly fee if you want to play online against or with others, though just not as bad.
The incentive would most likely come in the form of additional DLC and stuff that comes when you purchase a retail copy. Like a key that can only be used once to access it. EA could also get rid of the online keys for purchase and make it so you have to buy retail to get the key to play online. If they do make everything digital, which I doubt, we wouldn't hear about it this soon. What happens if Sony goes digital and Microsoft doesn't? Sony gets absolutely obliterated in sales. And the online requirement just seems absolutely ridiculous to me.
Always being connected thing is bad news. I usually bring one of my consoles on long trips home. My parents don't even know what a router is.
What I really meant by how difficult I guess was how much does it cost them? Maybe they could offer some of the better selling PS3 titles digitally on PSN.
This is possible. Though there are some experiments in place where, if you buy a used game, you have to pay a charge in order to, say, play online. Whatever they do, if restrictions are enacted against used games, then I think it's a bad response to an actual problem, which is companies who invest millions of dollars into games and miss out on potential sales because of used game sales. I think companies are trying to make more per sale, meaning they want to push prices upward, but the predominant trend—through used game sales and iOS' popularity—is a downward pressure on prices. I want to see companies make less games for lower prices and deemphasize the AAA blockbuster game. Not every game needs to be a gigantic smash hit delivered by a hype train to be good. I've had more fun with games like Radiant Historia and Phoenix Wright than games like Killzone or Gears of War. Ubisoft has already tried the always-online DRM idea in the PC versions of Assassin's Creed, and it's been loathed. They've had to backtrack on the concept. An always online console seems like something the hardware guys would like to do, but there are better uses for it than DRM.
Blizzard also did it with Diablo 3. People are up in arms about it as well. Seems like software is evolving in that direction.
EA with Origins and BF3.....which is loathed as well. Can't even access single player campaign without connecting to Origin. Consider the fact that many people are having a tough time even connecting to Origin and you have a $60 purchase that you can't even play.
Pretty much the reason I've pirated the last few AC games, Max Payne 3, and some others. No way I'm giving my money to a company that has such ridiculous DRM that hassles legit users more than the pirates. I sure won't be be buying a next gen console if they decide to do it either. PC will be superior still regardless.
I am about to build one, thanks for helping me wait for Ivy Des. This is what I'm going with; I7-3770k ASUS Sabertooth Z77 mobo (PCI-E 3.0) Corsair Gold AX850 power supply Corsair H100 hydro cooling Coolermaster case - HAF something or another EVGA GTX 560Ti - already have this one, can upgrade later if need be RAM: undecided SSD: undecided HD: 2TB Western Dig Audio: Have a card already, but it is the larger PCI port, not the smaller one, so we will see Just have to pull the trigger. Having a local company build it for me.
Not bad. And yes, waiting for Ivy was the right move. Just for e-peen comparisons, here's what I built for myself last week: CPU: Ivy Bridge Core i5-3570k HSF: Coolermaster Hyper 212 Plus MOBO: Asus P8Z77-V LK RAM: G.SKILL DDR3-1333 8GB GPU: Gigabyte GTX 670 Windforce OC SSD: Crucial M4 128GB HDD: Samsung F3 1TB PSU: Antec Neo 520W Case: Silverstone Raven RV02B-EW Audio: Asus Xonar DG w/Sennheiser HD598 headphones I'm not only set for ArmA III, I'm set for ArmA IV.
You guys will be pulling at your wangs next Anyway... another point about this anti used rumor is what happens with the monthly rental businesses? I think Gamefly, Redbox etc. might have something to say about this
CPU: Core I7-2600k HSF: Coolermaster Hyper 212 Plus MOBO: ASUS Sabretooth Z77 RAM: G.Skill DDR3-1333 8GB Ripjaws GPU: Two XFX Radeon 5850's SSD: Crucial M4 128 GB HDD: Western Digital Elements 1TB. PSU: Corsair Enthusiast 750W Case: Antec 900 Audio: Stock onboard sound card. Should probably upgrade that but not really using any speakers/headset worth doing so. Turtle Beach X12 headset/mic. Cyber Acoustic 2.1 Subwoofer Satellite System. Monitor: ViewSonic VX2450wm-LED 24" Planning to replace my two 5850s with a GTX 680 closer to the time ArmA 3 gets here to save me some bucks. Don't plan on upgrading anything else at this time.
I'm not sure the 680 will be such a large improvement over the paired 5850s. Then again, you'll win in power efficiency and noise levels.
But two 680s... Not now, but eventually when the prices drop substantially. Plus 1GB VRAM is becoming more and more of a bottleneck with newer games. I may just shell out the extra $100 for the 4GB 680, or maybe even go with the 3GB 7970 since it's equal to a 680 in performance when both are overclocked and it's cheaper.
I don't think you need that kind of GPU performance, at least not right now. Given how almost every game is now made with consoles in mind, you simply don't need to go to the very top end of the PC market to match and improve on the performance of 7 year old technology. Now, if the next generation of consoles really is around the corner, then we'll all be buying new GPUs anyway. So don't sweat it.
Yea, my PC's a year old and at 1920x1080 I've had little to no issue running every game I've tried at (near) max settings.
Easy fix. Dont buy the new console If they make 2 million consoles and people only buy 50,000.....well there is your answer
True, hence why I'll be waiting for substantial price drops. For a second 680 anyways. I imagine the 680 will be a respectable price come time for ArmA 3 when I plan to purchase the first one. I don't imagine ArmA 3 will be very happy with 1GB of VRAM. It's already a bottleneck on intensive games. I play a lot of RTS games, which are especially intensive.