I'm sure they'll miss you...

I don't buy used games, but this seems like a stupid idea. I doubt too many people only buy used games. Most who buy used will also buy new, and this restriction could keep them from getting a system at all. I doubt they have a reasonable way to predict how much this will hurt/help their company.

I wouldn't dish out $300-$500 for a system if I couldn't borrow and loan games to friends. Half the games I play are borrowed and a more then half the games I buy are used and loaned to friends when I'm done.

People would also only buy the best games on the market that would also kill the sale of games as soon as a few bad reviews come out.

Think of all the ****ty (not too well known/good) games that come out and you only buy out of curiosity when it's $20< used.

Games still go on sale. Look at Steam.

Outside of sales, Steam prices are generally higher than console game prices

yeah but the developers dont see a penny when you buy that used game so they dont care.

A million more people had trophies on Heavy Rain than had actually bought the game. Developers need to find a way to monetize that, and they obviously think this is the way.

I would guess the used game market is bad for the consumer in the long run because developers are less willing to take risks on games where they think they wont recoup. I mean you'll still get games for $20 on the nextbox and PS4, but at least that $20 will go to the people that made the game and not gamestop.

not like it would take hackers long to figure out how to bypass it anyways..

But that would probably involve some kind of modifying your console, and I think the amount of people who want to risk that is small. Pirating on the PC is a much much bigger problem than on the xbox, even though with the xbox you only need some modified software installed if I'm not mistaken.

My copy of Dark Souls was recently rendered useless because of a tiny crack I discovered starting from the inner part of the disc. It would be awesome if when you buy a physical copy of a game, you also have access to a digital copy of it in case something happens to the physical copy.

The only used game I've ever bought was MW2. I've traded in four or five games over the years. A used game ban wouldn't really bother me that much.

In honor of this thread, I bought some games 4 cheap last night

while I still can.

Pretty much. Those 1-2 year old games will still stay at the $40+ price range.

They are probably best off doing something lame like this:

Have the game usable on unlimited systems for the first 6 months. After it's used once on that system, it can be used forever on that system (so it's "registered" on that system). After 6 months you need to buy something from the playstation store or some kind of registration "card" to play it on a new system. Maybe 5 bucks, or work out some optimal price.

This all can probably create a lot of annoying variables, but it seems like a decent solution. Like someone said, a lot of games with mediocre reviews get played because people can get them cheap used, so if they do end up liking the game it can entice them to play more games from the same dev. Creates some "buzz" around the game I guess, kinda like what internet streams do.

http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1302046...y_pachter.html

Both the PlayStation 4 - rumoured to be codenamed 'Orbis' at Sony - and the next Xbox are highly unlikely to feature anti-pre-owned technology according to Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter.

"The anti-piracy rumors started in 2005, when Ken Kutaragi patented a technology for it prior to the PS3 launch," Pachter told NowGamer, adding that the 'Orbis' rumour's "reliable source is a monkey".

Sony considered, but ultimately decided against including such technology in PS3 he explained. "Today’s rumor is just a re-hash of that old rumor and the recent one about the Xbox 720," he said in a statement sent to NowGamer and gi.

Anti-pre-owned consoles would lead to a "consumer backlash" if a platform holder incorporated it alone. "If they all do it, they are susceptible to a collusion charge, and if one does it and the others don’t, the one who does it will see a loss of market share," Pachter explained.

But how important is it to Microsoft and Sony to lock out pre-ownd software? Not very, added the analyst, with Sony and Microsoft software sales amounting to "less than 10 per cent of sales on their respective consoles."

"It isn’t really in Sony’s or Microsoft’s best interests to block used games," Pachter added, reasoning that traded games also fund new game purchases.

While publishers would benefit, retailers would suffer and could refuse to stock any new hardware with the feature.

"If Sony unilaterally did this, I could see GameStop refusing to carry their console, and sales of the PS4 would thereby suffer," concluded Pachter. "On balance, it’s a dumb idea, making it a dumb rumor. Of course, you never know."

I highly doubt this is correct, or maybe I'm interpreting it wrong.

Either way, at least they understand that it's a bad idea.

Just fyi that crack on the disc could be due to taking the disc in and out of the case too much or improperly. A friend of mine who works at gamestop told me this was one of the reasons they use cd sleeves to store discs.

I think he means 10 percent based on software published directly by Microsoft and Sony.

Sure they do. Used game sales are often used to fund the purchase of a new game. People would not be able to buy as many new games if they could not also sell their old games.

Should car manufacturers try to prevent people from selling used cars?

I used to work at a used cd/game store. There are definitely an amount of people who buy only used because of financial constraints. This will affect them the most.

Should car manufacturers try to put their dealers out of business for daring to resell their old merchandise?

No, I think we are in agreement.

It's just useless gimmick information as it won't have enough power to run anything at that resolution save maybe videos.

"Yay, our console can output xxx-resolution since it has STANDARD HDMI x.x in its ass!"

60 FPS at 1080p is probably something to look for though.

I don't think the used car analogy is relevant. Cars depreciate and need repairs. Games only depreciate monetarily because of a decrease in popularity and demand.

I can't imagine a system capable of gaming at that resolution retailing around $300-$500 next year already. It takes a monster of a PC these days to do that (range $2000-$3000?), so i have to call BS on this....me think

According to the rumors it would be late next year, and one version of the PS3 launched at $600. While obv its still just a rumor I think it's somewhat possible.

I'm certain the 4k will be upscaled (from 1080p perhaps).
A desktop PC capable giving a decent framerate at 4k doesn't have to be that expensive. I think somewhere between 1200-1500 is sufficient for almost any game, just don't expect to run everything on ultra. But yeah that's still way to expensive for a console.

im still cool with my ps3 dont really want a ps4 to come out right now

mostly use my ps3 for netflix anyways