Sony has confirmed what we were all assuming – they’re bringing out a network pass program called PSN Pass. You’ll remember we brought you news about this brand new service yesterday evening – although at that stage it was mostly guess work on our half.
We were half right.
[drop2]It looks like PSN Pass is per game, and thus works like similar services from EA and other publishers – games will come with a code you enter to unlock multiplayer modes, meaning second hand copies will require a seperate purchase to activate such features.“We are always evaluating new programs for our online offering, and starting with Resistance 3 this September, we will be instituting a network pass program for PS3 games with online capabilities,” say Sony.
“This program will be game-specific. Games that are a part of this program will include a single-use registration code that grants the account holder redeeming the code full online access for that title. This is an important initiative as it allows us to accelerate our commitment to enhancing premium online services across our first party game portfolio.”
Resistance 3 is the first game to official go under the PSN Pass moniker, although obviously it’s hardly the first game from the publisher that needs a code to use certain features of a game – some PSP games like ModNation Racers had this last year.
So, go on – what do you think? Is this a serious knock to the second hand market?
cam the man
At last! I got a prediction right saying ‘it could just be for the game on the box’.
BrendanCalls
Shame. Was bound to happen.
BAGPUS
I don’t get it, why do developers get miffed about someone buying my game second hand once I’m done with it?
If I buy a game and play multiplayer for six months then trade it in and someone else plays it for six months have they really lost anything? I could have kept the game and played for a year. Both scenarios the dev gets the same server costs and the same profit on the initial sale.
BIGAL-1992
The argument about second hand games, is that all the profits of second hand games goes to the retailers, it never goes back to the devs or publishers.
cc_star
The counter argument is that by someone trading-in a game it has enabled them to purchase a new game, reduced trade-ins will equal reduced ‘new’ sales further down the line.
BIGAL-1992
I’m just the messenger mate.
xdarkmagician
This is how I see it too.
Say R3 sells 5 million copies, that means their servers should be bought and paid for 5 million accounts. If 2.5 million copies get traded, and 2 million of those copies get bought back, they servers are only working for 4.5 million copies. They’re saving money IMO. Now if pirate copies were being added that’d be different but the servers are paid for by the initial purchase. But Devs and Pubs would have us believe that a used game cost them money because they add server support for an additional copy, when all they’re adding is an account and a new position on the leader board, to which they’ll then brag we now have 5,000,001 players playing our game. I say that they just match the disc to an account and when you sell your disc you also sell your account to that game (which can then be reset in the option menu).
CrawFail
DO NOT WANT.
CrawFail
I buy many of my games used, not because i’m sticking it to the man or whatever.. but because I’m genuinely bloody poor. Sod paying an extra fee on top just to play online,
Introducing such a game changing thing this far into a generation is B.S in my opinion. I hope next gen they just charge for PSN and maintain their servers that way and do away with this crap.
I also can help but think that this decision is going to piss MANY people off.. a bad idea when Sony aren’t exactly best friends with their consumers at the moment.
aerobes
This has pros for no gamer and cons for the majority.
esir
Online passes are shite. If the people who are praising this trully tihnk the developers are suffering and need the money than go and buy 3 copies at launch of every single game ;). Now that’s support!
To be frank I don’t like to be screwed over, and I don’t care about the developer. Why should I? Do you care about the Chinese guy that makes your phone? I don’t and I’m sure none here does. Morally speaking the low wage worker who has a shit job would be more entitled to compensation than the developer who I’m sure has a pretty good wage.
What I’m saying is, that developers don’t deserve shit from 2nd hand sales. As for online multiplayer. If you buy new, and then sell the game you forfeit your position to the other person. What this means that the cost to maintain the servers does not change, and I’m pretty sure they are not stupid enough to not include server costs in the pricing.
esir
Oh yeah, and if people are angry with retailers screwing both them and the developers just sell them on ebay, or in real life to someone directly. Problem solved. We don’t have Gamestop or its ilk in my country see if we sell second hand, it’s on an auction site or a specific forum. And I’m pretty sure that the price Gamestop is willing to give for a used copy can be easily obtained from selling it on ebay…except you either get a buyer or not, whereas Gamestop will buy it back in probably 10 minutes.
CrawFail
Also, I don’t know if this has been mentioned yet. I dont fancy going through 5 pages of comments…
But I find it hugely rude they didn’t utter a word of this at E3. They were obviously too busy trying to make everyone forget about the hack that lost them millions. It OBVIOUS this is to pay for the financial damage the PSN outage causes..glaringly obvious… but I guess they thought a few games would sort all of that out before they pull out the dick moves again.
Put it this way:
Scenario 1) I buy game brand new.. I play game online using the pass thingy.. Game is bob… I take game back under 10 day return policy… Retailer then has to resell the game at a massive loss.
Scenario 2) I but game brand new.. I play game online using the pass thing… Game is bob.. I take game back under 10 day return policy.. Customer 2 walks in and buys game for 37.99 instead of 39.99.. Has to pay for online pass..
Who wins there? Sony. The other two in the equation get royally ripped off one way or another.
So to top it all off.. It seems to me that Sony get hacked, lose lots of money and now we pay for it. Awesome.
And the fact it’s PER GAME is even worse! That could add up to hundreds!
F’ You, Sony.
BIGAL-1992
No worries mate, your point hasn’t been already spoken yet, so it’s new. By the way, what does ‘bob’ mean?
CrawFail
Haha, ‘bob’ was what me and my friends called (and still call) a poo.
“Just off for a bob.”
“Ahh, that smells like bob.”
“I think I’ve just stepped in dog bob.”
etc..
xdarkmagician
Good points, but to be fair I’m sure this is to help pay for all of Sony’s mistakes. :)
heedbaw
awesome greed I’d say if I’m reading this chart right, using EA as an example as they like their Online Pass. Damn thing has lots of money sprayed all over it and I’m no accountant.
Income of $3.6 billion, and the cost of goods sold is $1.5billion.
That’s from their 2011 filling, admittedly they did make a loss but that was through investments/mergers/restructuring etc.
hate_smith
I never buy used games or sell my games, when I get rid of games I just trade them between friends, so this doesnt bother me but it may anger some of my friends when they find out they have to still buy something after trading me a game.
xdarkmagician
In the end, people that buy their games used are just going to stop playing MP. All this is going to do is diminish the amount of people playing MP, which is bad for everybody who wants to play the MP. Servers will get turned off sooner, and less DLC and updates/patches will be available.