When I was younger, maybe back in college or so, video games
were sometimes a little cost prohibitive to buy. $50-$60 bucks a pop for
games for our favorite consoles was a little steep for us that had an income of
roughly nil accompanied with tens of thousands of dollars in debt to repay when
we were done our fancy book learnin'. Doubly so for a house of nerds that
decided that they could run a game review site without time and without
money. So sometimes we would rent, sometimes we would borrow, and
sometimes we would buy used to save money whenever stuff went on sale.
Granted for PC games we couldn't really do that (those had, well, different
methods of acquisition) but for consoles it was no issue - we grabbed the disc,
popped it in our Xbox or PS2 and when we turned it on it worked.
Scratched media excluded, there were never really any issues.
But selling those copies back for store credit and having
someone else pick it up used doesn't make publishers happy. It's money
they could have had with a new sale that they've lost, and at the same time it
creates a big market that they can't get their hands in at all. So now it
was time for them to get creative. These days in our digital age,
with the popularity of DLC for content delivery and online play,
publishers are more than ready and able to do a lot of things digitally to pick
up additional revenue streams. Let me give you an example - I own a copy
of Dead Or Alive 5. If I get bored of it and sell it to a
shop or to a friend of mine (let's call him Sven), that money goes to me, and
not Tecmo. So they added a little hook in the pricing model. My new
copy came with a key that allows me to play online. But that code links
itself to my Xbox Live ID. So having bought my copy, Sven now has to pay
for an online pass to play DOA5 to link to his Xbox
Live ID. See what Tecmo did there? They put a method in place so
that someone buying the game used still had to pay for certain elements of the
game. And in this case it's the online pass. And Sven might even go
on to buy some of the DLC character costumes, so look at that! Money
Tecmo made on a used game where they would have made none before.
![]() |
original comic here from Penny Arcade |
So what's the next step in how publishers can monetize used
games? There could be other methods like the one above that could help
publishers extract money from the used games market. But then there are
also more extreme options... like trying to kill used games outright.
Recently on the NeoGAF forums,
we found that the legal eagles at Sony filed a very interesting patent (which
you can see here)
regarding console games and rights. When it broke, the news of this
patent application was received so poorly that GameStop's stock price actually
dropped on the day, with GameStop shareholders selling like mad out of fear of
losing one of their core businesses. Funny thing, the internet.
Don't worry kids, you don't have to read through that
ridiculous amount of text. I'm here to do that for you - and strangely
actually kind of like reading patents.
The patent more or less states that this technology would
lock a disc to a specific player ID, the same way my DOA5 online
pass has a lock to my Xbox Live ID. If this goes through and is
implemented in the PlayStation 4, then a disc, once authorized to a single
player, wouldn't be able to be played by another player, nullifying any value
it potentially had in a used games market or sale. How would they do
it? The console would write info to a designated blank part of the game
disc, putting that link on there. It may sound pretty Spartan in its
method, but it's not really a stretch, seeing as that's
how most digitally delivered games work these days. Just take a look at
Steam's model.
But does this mean that they're actually going to use
it? It's true, applying this technology to the PS4 would indeed lock out
a used games market, but there were also rumors that Microsoft was talking
about doing something similar a while ago with Project Durango (or Infinity, or
720, or whatever). A lot of companies file for patents that they don't
actually implement. And I have to believe that they know implementing
this would shoot themselves in the foot, and they would be giving up more benefits
than they would be getting gains, including but not limited to a ridiculous fan
backlash.
The whole thing adds a bit more murk to the waters of DRM
and used games, especially when an increasing percentage of software doesn't
actually exist on physical media. But one thing I will admit, Sony's come
a long way on their protection technology from being able to be beaten by
scotch tape and Sharpie markers.
No comments:
Post a Comment