Sony Threatens Game Collectors?

[bombatomba]

Normally I don't go for this sort of thing, but I really wanted to learn the perspective of the peanut gallery on this hot button topic.

Ahem.

As some of you no doubt know, recently Sony has filed a patent that, paired with the miracle of an online console with attached profile, would restrict games to the console that they were first played on.  Didn't enjoy Metal Gear Skylanders 9?  So sorry, Charlie, you are out $59.99 Sony space-bucks, because no one will ever be capable of playing that disc but you on your Sony Playstatia 9000.  Suck, huh?

I would now like to quote the abstract of the patent itself.  Ahem.  "A game playing system includes a use permission tag provided for use in a game disk for a user of a game, a disk drive, and a reproduction device for reproducing the game. The disk drive reads out a disk ID from the game disk. When the game is to be played, the reproduction device conveys the disk ID and a player ID to the use permission tag. The use permission tag stores the terms of use of the game and determines whether a combination of the disk ID and the player ID conveyed from the reproduction device fulfills the terms of use or not."

Seems pretty clear to me (though the person doesn't know the difference between "disc" and "disk", which makes e twitch a little).  While this is merely a patent, and does not actually represent technology that will ever be used is a system, we all know the gaming industry has been gunning for the second-hand gaming market for a while now.  Utilizing the technology described in the patent one could then draw a line on the sand where there would be no future second hand games available for that system.

Sure, given the massive backlash over this story it may come to nothing, but the threat lingers.  It could literally be several console generations away before anything like this is implemented (remember Sony's grand plan for an all digital PS3?).  But something to remember is that unlike before, there is now a delivery system that does not threaten retailers (which the console manufacturers still need) while still protecting their first and second party software sales.

That is all, I think.  Likely some of you will rejoice that the value of your collections will skyrocket as later generations, deprived of the secondhand goodness of their childhoods, are forced to deal in $60 copies of Total Recall for NES (I'm looking at you, Crab).  Me, I feel sorry for the Future Collector.

[Shadow Kisuragi]

Wait...what you're talking about basically already exists on the PlayStation 3. There's already an ownership tag for digital content, and the IDs are already existing (BLUS-##### and your profile ID). How does this change things?

[bombatomba]

Wait...what you're talking about basically already exists on the PlayStation 3. There's already an ownership tag for digital content, and the IDs are already existing (BLUS-##### and your profile ID). How does this change things?

The patent in question was filed on 9/12/12, a few months short of six years prior to the release of the Playstation 3, ergo it is different.  The difference is in the media itself.  As you clearly stated, it is for digital content, while the patent covers content with a tag placed on a disc.

[SirPsycho]

Wait...what you're talking about basically already exists on the PlayStation 3. There's already an ownership tag for digital content, and the IDs are already existing (BLUS-##### and your profile ID). How does this change things?

Yeah, this time they've patented a way for the disc to basically marry itself to the first system it is put inside, not with digital content. Its been all over the news outlets.

Here's a link to it: http://www.freepatentsonl...ne.com/y2013/0007892.html

[Izret101]

Sony said they were going to do this with the PS3 anyways.
They also said game prices were going to be 79.99 or something and the consumer would have to deal with it.

Maybe Sony is just filing a patent to prevent someone else from doing so?
It has happened before. Maybe not in the gaming world (or at least no instances i can think of) but it has certainly happened.

I of course could be wrong but i don't think Sony is looking to further limit themselves in the market by doing something like that.

Because this certainly has not come to fruition:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog...e-with-playstation-3/8313

Instead the market has more or less stayed a 3 way tie for system sales:
    Wii – 97.18 million as of 30 September 2012[8]
    PlayStation 3 – 70.2 million as of 30 September 2012[53][54]
    Xbox 360 – 70.0 million as of 30 September 2012[55]

[Shadow Kisuragi]

Okay, just read it a bit more closely this time with physical in mind. It's essentially a patent to turn your disc into a key disc, much like PC gaming enjoyed during the late 90s and early 2000s before going mostly digital.

I'm honestly not that surprised - it's the next logical step for Sony. Also, the ownership tag wasn't implemented until Sony patched it in with an SDK update some time last year. I'm not talking about the DRM licensing - it's something entirely different.

[Izret101]

Ubis DRM? That worked wonderfully.
http://www.rockpapershotg...oft-drm-piracy-interview/

[Fleach]

This doesn't really come as a surprise to me considering that the used game market has been taken shots from developers. Sony is basically saying, "We don't want the consumer to go buy the used game and let the store get 100% profit, that money should be coming to us."

By linking a game to a player ID and console ID they're trying to put an end to the sale of previously played games. Although, I bet a scenario like this will happen: a person buys a used game, puts the disc in their system and gets a message saying, "You are playing a used game. To access the complete game $5 will be charged to your account."

I don't know if this will hurt the retro collecting scene, but it definitely targets the current generation used game market. This will certainly make collecting for current games expensive.

[Duke.Togo]

I personally think it would be a foolish move unless their competitors follow suit. If Sony was the only one to do this I would think used game resellers like Game Stop would respond by relegating their games to the back of the store and having their sales associates push the system and games from their competitors that they could profit from. Sony is already in poor financial shape and this wouldn't help them in the next gen race.

As a collector, I fully understand that there will be a point when something like this happens, or we have all digital consoles. I've already decided that that will probably be the exit point for me. Far too many older games out there to still play and collect. I'm certainly the minority here.

[Fleach]

As a collector, I fully understand that there will be a point when something like this happens, or we have all digital consoles. I've already decided that that will probably be the exit point for me. Far too many older games out there to still play and collect. I'm certainly the minority here.

You're saying that, should something like this happen, you'll start playing and collecting only "retro" games? As I read the original post I figured I'd do the same.

[Duke.Togo]

You're saying that, should something like this happen, you'll start playing and collecting only "retro" games? As I read the original post I figured I'd do the same.

Yes sir.

[bombatomba]

As a collector, I fully understand that there will be a point when something like this happens, or we have all digital consoles. I've already decided that that will probably be the exit point for me. Far too many older games out there to still play and collect.

Me too, brother!  I would still play all the indie, demake, and "new retro" style games, but since most of those games are free, I would end up turning my resources towards digging through the massive amount of computer games from the past.  Imagine the finances that could be diverted to pure retro gaming and collecting...

[Sauza12]

Frankly if this ever did go into effect, I think it would be disatrous for the company implementing it.  The way they see it is "Hey, we only sold 1 million copies of our game, but there are 1.5 million people playing it online.  We missed out on 500,000 sales!  We have to stop used game sales".  The thing they aren't taking into account is how many of the initial 1 million units sold were due to people trading in old games to Gamestop and using the trade in money to buy their game.  That's not even taking into account the number of people that would just not buy the game if they couldn't get it used.  I know my cheap ass wouldn't just say "Aw shucks, guess I better buy a new copy then".

A final thing is if the used game market would suddenly disappear, I'm pretty confident that the total number of units sold would decrease rather than increase.  Granted, with the extra money they would be making they might be able to offset the reduction in total sales, but they would essentially be in the same spot monetarily as they are in now, best case scenario.

This just seems like a completely terrible idea.  I really would be shocked if it was ever implemented.

[Izret101]

It could work if a new AAA game at retail was 30$s tops.
And budget releases were moved from the 30$ range to the 10$ range.

As it is many people will buy a used copy of a still brand new game and save 5-10$s and think it is a steal.

[Leynos]

This kinda talk went  around before PS3 was launched as was 100$ PS3 games and GT5 coting 900$ to get every car in DLC. Pre launch hype and worries. Listen most patents never come to be real things