Bad feelings about online for Dark Souls 2

Sloth9230 wrote:If I sell a car, I still need to buy another car. Unless I no longer need a car; in which case, I no longer need any car companies service anyway. Once I play a game, I don't need to play it ever a again. Unless the game is really good; in which case, I probably wouldn't sell it.

The owner of the disc is irrelevant. Fact of the matter is, you still got to experience the contents of the disc. Thats what you're paying for, an experience. The disc itself is just a licence. Got to a theater and watch twilight. Once it's over, ask for your money back. That's what your doing when a you sell a game.

This is a real bad excuse for an argument, Sloth. If you own a Ford but sell it and buy a Merceds it will be like second/hand games. Your car metaphor is not valid, even if you need to buy a new car you can chose another manufacturer. Also, companies do profit from their products even if you buy it used since they already sold one. You cant compare that with piracy, because the problem with piracy is that the companies lose profit due to the fact that no one buys their product.

Also, you shouldn't be forced to pay full retail price for something that ain't "mint-condition". The game companies count how many ex they sell of a game, not how many time it changes owner. I really dont get your obsession in this matter.



The original car metaphor made all your argumets invalid due to true facts btw. And online passes are typical greedy EA kinda thing.

A car if used enough, will not run the same as a new one. Unless I go out of my way to scratch the disc, a used game will play exactly like a new one.

And cars and games are different types of commodities. If you buy a car, it's because you need a method of transportation. If you buy a game it's because you want to play that game.

Again they're not my rules, they're the publishers/developers. So long as you buy their games, they can set any conditions they want. if you don't wish to follow them, then don't play their games. I buy used games, I do it all the time. But if they wish to charge me so I can play online, then that's fine. Because I recognize that I'm using their services without actually having paid them for it. They wouldn't of had to charge for online passes if people had actually played by their rules. They should not be seen as greedy, when all they did was protect their interests.

I ask a friend for the favor, and he says that he'll only help me out in exchange for something. My choices are: give him what he wants or I don't get his help.

That's what terms of service are. Conditions that you have to agree to, before you have the right to play the game.

Sloth.. you're gonna just have to admit you're wrong on this one. Any kind of used commodity can be resold by the owner without giving money to the original maker. Everything is like this and the fact is games, despite them being file based should be no different. In this way, selling my disc to someone is identical to selling a car.. or a sofa.. or a pack of cigarettes.

The fact is, they sell a game, they make the money of that game and that's it. You can't make money of selling a product twice, it would be the same as charging someone double for a product. They sell the disc, then it's not theirs anymore, they don't own it and have no legal right to expect another payment for it.

Btw, the point of a commodity is simply 'use', other sub-verbs of usage like 'drive' or 'play' are just different kinds of it, all you're doing is using the product, but there's a different name for it. In this way, they're no different.

There's no point in my opinion talking about the terms and service. It's a well known fact that the two biggest lies told in the world are "I'm fine" and "I agree to the terms and conditions". The whole thing is a load of BS that would never hold up in courts of law as they contradict the law of every country i know. We lie about keeping to the conditions, they lie that we have to agree to them to play their game, nice two way system.

I'm over this. People will do whatever it is they want. But if Sony actually goes ahead with their anti-used game patent for the pS4, or if everyone starts charging for online, then nobody will have any right to complain. They'd merely be enforcing rules that were already there.

If people don't like it, then they won't buy PS4/online passes.

Serious: I'm aware that they aren't enforceable by law. But if the industry itself starts doing things to enforce them, then nobody can really cry foul. The rules were always there, that nobody followed them is another thing.

Serious, +1 for the two biggest lies in the world statement. I lmoad irl

hageshisa wrote:Serious, +1 for the two biggest lies in the world statement. I lmoad irl

Thank you It's a quote and i would credit where i got the line from if only i could remember

Still legit : )

That or "nothings wrong/everythings fine" when girls say it, something about the phrase just fills me with fear. I start going though everything I did that week, just so I can prepare for what's about to come.

Sadly thats just part of a generic female tendency to say the oppposite or something completely other than what they really want you to do. Fun times when you're the kind of person who doesn't like dealing with ******** like that

Sloth9230 wrote:I'm over this. People will do whatever it is they want. But if Sony actually goes ahead with their anti-used game patent for the pS4, or if everyone starts charging for online, then nobody will have any right to complain. They'd merely be enforcing rules that were already there.

If people don't like it, then they won't buy PS4/online passes.

Serious: I'm aware that they aren't enforceable by law. But if the industry itself starts doing things to enforce them, then nobody can really cry foul. The rules were always there, that nobody followed them is another thing.

That wont happen.

If PS4 does it then the new XBox wont do it and no one will buy a PS4. Also if the XBox does it then the PS4 wont. Then no one will buy an XBox.

I don't care how much I like either system. Just the hundreds upon hundreds of dollars I would save by buying used games would make me pick the system that doesn't have it.

Since the Wii U already doesn't then I would suspect that the PS4 and new XBox wont either. It would take a conspiracy between the three companies, which is very illegal mind you, for it to work.

Doesn't WiiU support used discs? =OO

defacto wrote:

Sloth9230 wrote:I'm over this. People will do whatever it is they want. But if Sony actually goes ahead with their anti-used game patent for the pS4, or if everyone starts charging for online, then nobody will have any right to complain. They'd merely be enforcing rules that were already there.

If people don't like it, then they won't buy PS4/online passes.

Serious: I'm aware that they aren't enforceable by law. But if the industry itself starts doing things to enforce them, then nobody can really cry foul. The rules were always there, that nobody followed them is another thing.

That wont happen.

If PS4 does it then the new XBox wont do it and no one will buy a PS4. Also if the XBox does it then the PS4 wont. Then no one will buy an XBox.

I don't care how much I like either system. Just the hundreds upon hundreds of dollars I would save by buying used games would make me pick the system that doesn't have it.

Since the Wii U already doesn't then I would suspect that the PS4 and new XBox wont either. It would take a conspiracy between the three companies, which is very illegal mind you, for it to work.

Your statement is flawed. There will be people who buy the console, even if they do stop used games. For instance, I don't care too much about saving a whole $10 or so by buying a new game, and my left hand is deformed to the point that trying to use the L1/L2 buttons on a Playstation controller is physically uncomfortable. Even if the next Xbox blocks used games, I will get one of those rather than a PS4.

Just like how people still get Xboxs even though PSN is free.

I, for one, am looking forward to DS2 team death match, capture the flag, and king of the hill.

Bro, you forgot free-for-all.

Serious_Much wrote:Sadly thats just part of a generic female tendency to say the oppposite or something completely other than what they really want you to do. Fun times when you're the kind of person who doesn't like dealing with ******** like that

Yeah, It leaves me like this >>>

They have raised prices before, the jump from PS2 to PS3 added 15-20 dollars to the games. It's also not a monopoly, you could still buy from Microsoft, Nintendo, or any new competitors. They would not have complete control of the market. At best for them/worst for us, they would only have complete control over certain franchises. Something they already do, i.e. exclusive titles.

If region locking fixes the rubbish PVP lag then I'm all for it. Given that I don't remember having a fight were I was not killed by a totally wide attack that some how hit from twice the distance in the wrong way... I want good PVP thanks.

Why is everyone talking about the used games sales on next gen?

Christ it's like I'm on youtube in 2005 again.

Onion Knight wrote:Why is everyone talking about the used games sales on next gen?

Christ it's like I'm on youtube in 2005 again.

Sony filed the patent to block used games that are even offline, game companies have been using online pass to profit off used games, locked on disc content, game companies moan about losing money to used game sales. All this paints a picture that this is a very likely outcome with effective results.

steveswede wrote:

Onion Knight wrote:Why is everyone talking about the used games sales on next gen?

Christ it's like I'm on youtube in 2005 again.

Sony filed the patent to block used games that are even offline, game companies have been using online pass to profit off used games, locked on disc content, game companies moan about losing money to used game sales. All this paints a picture that this is a very likely outcome with effective results.

I know that, there's a whole thread on it in off-topic, but this is a thread about Dark Souls II online.

Sure... sure guys I see the relevance...

Yeah, everyone give it a rest. This thread is about how Dedicated Servers will ruin PvP

Region Locking = Stupid

I'm only worried about they multiplayer aspect if DS2 comes out for the ps4, and DS2 is one of the first releases. Most games, not all, but most immediate console releases are garbage. I don't want to wait for 6-7 patches before DS2 is playable on the ps4. Heck they are just now using the ps3 correctly.

And ya, dedicated servers doesn't equal "auto-nolagmode". The only thing that I like about servers is being able to summon consistently. I dont find it to be a HUUUUGE problem now. But it is kinda frustrating to wait 15-20 minutes to summon a friend you've summoned a hundred times in the past because of xyz lobby issues.

However, I dont think p2p should be ruled out completely. If lagstabs were reduced somehow and summons had less problems EVERYONE would want the p2p system. I wuv pwaying with my eastern friends, and my friends "across tha pond" lol.

Actually I'm not really worried about anything....Dark Souls 2 is gonna effin rock man!

I am happy the maker of Demon Souls wants back the servers of demon souls. He hated the crappy p2p system of dark souls. With good maintained servers it will be a blast again to play dark souls! Also the message system will be far better.

Thanks for that.

TheBigLebowski wrote:I am happy the maker of Demon Souls wants back the servers of demon souls. He hated the crappy p2p system of dark souls. With good maintained servers it will be a blast again to play dark souls! Also the message system will be far better.

Thanks for that.

Good but quiet. Region locking online for the privilege of dedicated servers is what makes the EU servers of Demon's Souls a ghost town.