Money-grubbing Sony

It's also an agreement that I never signed/agreed to which renders it worthless.

WhatDoesThePendantDo? wrote:It's also an agreement that I never signed/agreed to which renders it worthless.

"BY PLAYING THE VIDEO GAME (EITHER ON YOUR HOME CONSOLE OR IF APPLICABLE ONLINE), AND/OR INSTALLING OR OTHERWISE USING THE GAME PROGRAM, YOU AGREE TO BE LEGALLY BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITH NAMCO BANDAI."

These things, they baffle me. This really should be in the manual or something.

EDIT: And I found a way to make this all relevant to the thread. Maybe this patent is being created specifically so that Sony can enforce EULAs? That and the $$$

They actually can change them without telling you, but you have to have aggreed to it in the first place.

When playing online, most often you have to agree to tos before you're allowed, but the don't do so with offline play because its not possible to enforce atm and its impossible for them to present them and actually determine wether or not you agree.

By your logic sloth (or maybe rancor, not sure anymore,) its wrong for me to let someone have some of my funions.

I don't know how they could expect that hold up in a court of law. It's not my responsibility as a consumer to go out of my way and seek out the TOS online. It's not even on the manual/gamebox.

Pirate(I plan on calling you Pirate now, Forum feels weird since we're on a forum and all):That would be wrong because it deprives you of more funions yes. Pretty sure I've read similar things on some food products(beef jerky I think). I guess it's all kind of meaningless though.

*resists urge to link lol limewire*
Pfft, personally I would not stand for that BS from any company on principle (cue someone asking dont I have an xbox). I'm sorry but I dont have so much spare money that I couldn't find plenty of other enjoyable ways to spend it.
I love how microsoft are considered the bad guys, they are certainly greedy as hell but sony have always been the paranoid ones about piracy and secondhand.

Because they're less greedy (in this area) so piracy hits them harder.

While not video game related meet sony on piracy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal

Yeah, but again, sony isn't evil. The piracy hurts sony more, so they're more paranoid.

MS essentialy has a monopoly on PC OS's and makes insane amounts of money with advertisements on xbl, which they upkeep with the consumers $50 a year.

MS practically oozes money, so they can afford to care less.

Sony has been in a steady decline for a long while now, so any lost money is a much bigger deal.

Forum Pirate wrote: sony isn't evil.

I'm sorry. they installed rootkits on peoples computers and monitored them without permission? Considering how much the word has been devalued I think that qualifies as "evil"

Microsoft does ooze money and I find the new screen with the massive advertisement incredibly obtrusive. Can I just say I dont like either company much?

Oh yeah and sony is in a decline because they act like assholes in an effort to arrest their decline.(no flaw with this plan right) anyone remember what they did to people running linux on their ps3? Police breaking into your house in germany anyone?

People doing things such as piracy would rarely allow someone to check their things, so their "permission" is sort of irrelevant.

The problem with the rootkits was that it made them vulnerable to bigger problems.

They are stupid, but thats not the same thing.

Forum Pirate wrote:They are stupid, but thats not the same thing.

Don't know why that made me laugh, but because of you I now have a piece of Flamin Hot Cheeto up my nose :evil:

Digital gaming is the future, and because Steam is the most successful digital store right now, Steam is the future.

If Sony and Microshit (yeah, I hate them) don't get this soon enough, they are going to be held down as years come to pass.

Digital distribution is more cheap, and "most of the time" (not always) buying games digitally is cheaper too, the only thing preventing the digital market to succeed as it should right now is the fact not everyone has lot of space in their console/PC and ultra fast internet is not a standard. When that time comes (which is not far btw), digital market will be the standard. That's when used games will cease to exist. But at the same time, costs will go down.

Anyway with Digital distribution, then we will finally have Cloud gaming as a standard making hardware limitations almost non-existent.


And my opinion: both companies care for money a lot, but if we are going to point someone, Microsoft is the worst. I think that neither company will be foolish enough to include this feature in their next consoles, unless they come to an agreement in which both do it, but that would give advantage to the other companies considering making their own console, and the already independent projects of innovative consoles.

ChizFreak wrote:And my opinion: both companies care for money a lot, but if we are going to point someone, Microsoft is the worst.

Microsoft has nothing to do with any patent that Sony may or may not implement.

Considering that Sony nor the game companies gain anything from second hand sales, they're only doing this to protect their interests and those of their partners(gamestop not included).

Otherwise, game companies have to make DLC's and charge for Online Passes in order to make up for the loss.

^ I would rather they do that. Things seem fine the way they are to me.

I'm referring to day 1 DLCs, most of which suck anyway. And the 10$ from a online pass hardly compares to the 60$ from a new game(not sure how much they actually get, I'd say a little over 40 and the rest is for the retailer).

You and I prefer it because it's convenient for us, it's definitely not convenient for Game Developrs or Sony though.

To be honest if developers made their games more worth buying and value for money (i.e more content or price based on hours worth of content, obviously with a cap), i'd be more obliged to buy new games. As it stands though unless it's a game like dark souls or fifa where i know i'm gonna get my money's worth, i'm gonna go and get the preowned alternative.

Developers should focus on making their games release day must haves rather than whining that people don't wanna buy their games new because people don't think it's worth it. It's their fault the games aren't worth buying new, and i don't think the consumers should suffer because of it.

Problem with that, how do you know if a game is worth buying before you buy it? Demo's help but they don't show you the whole game.

By establishing a precedent. Make sure by being consistent that fans KNOW that the game will always be a winner and worth new purchase.

It's up to them to prove to us that they're worthy of our money, we shouldn't have to throw around money to know whether something is good or not and that's done by establishing a brand that people will wanna buy.

If its a one off though its more difficult, but again reputation of developers and publishers should influence.

However like I said, it shouldn't be up to us to think of ways to prove a games worth or to find how good a game is. Unfortunately game reviewing is so political the numbers can be completely meaningless.

If you don't think the game is going to be any good, then don't buy/play it. New or Used. Believing that a game is going to suck is no reason to not pay the Game Developers for their work(however piss-*** it may be). If you want to pay less because you think the game might suck, then wait for it's price to drop.

I hate fish, you wont see me buying sushi just because it's price changed.

The only thing I hate about all this is that all new games cost the same amount. Whoever decided on generalized prices is an idiot. The Uncharted series had way more work put into it than any of the WWE games and many others.

Well I can argue both sides to this.

As brick and mortar stores are starting to die out, this patent will only accelerate their death. This is both good and bad as it reduces pre owned games and will lose hundreds of thousands of jobs worldwide. Yet increases digital sales and would increase variety in the stores online, hopefully driving down prices.

However I don't think it is good for pre owned games to be bought with nothing going to the devs.

Really the only solution I can see that would work for us as consumers and them as devs is DLC and Passes. Don't close off the whole of the online play, but maybe block access to some of it. Example in DkS (hypothetically) if you bought the game pre owned you could only access the sunbro covenant, or to PvP you would have to buy cracked red eye orbs. To access any PvP covenants you pay say £5 (or your regional equivalent). Probably not the best example but I hope you get the concept. Also make DLC, no need for day 1 DLC which is a tonne of BS, and make the DLC worth it.

To think I would see the day when gamers saw DLC as a good thing...

It can be good when done well, Dark Souls says high. But day-one DLC that's already on the disc and only needs an unlock key is just BS.

I wouldn't mind if they added back all the content that they originally cut as DLC. So long as it's done well.