Sony executive hints the PlayStation 4 may surface before E3

[cliffordcooley]

Once a material object is sold a company's interests in what happens to that object become irrelevant -- that is the law. I can sell it, rent it, give it someone as a gift, or even throw it on the fire, as long as I'm not making copies of it and selling those. I refuse to be labelled as a threat to gaming simply because I'm willing to pay less for a copy that isn't brand spanking new.

I do like the way you think about this topic.

I would also like to mention the possibility that people may not be willing to pay the same prices, if they are not allowed to resell. If they usually purchase a game for $60 and then resell for $40, they would probably only be willing to spend $20 on an item they couldn't resell. I honestly don't see any financial gains in preventing resell. Personally, if I'm not willing to spend $60 on a game, I still wouldn't be willing to spend $60 if I couldn't find a cheaper second hand copy.

You see, I look at movies and games this way. There are literally thousands of movies and games. I would like to see and play them all. But yet at the prices being asked, I must choose. Its this choice to choose one over the other that keeps people from purchasing certain games. Its not that they don't want the game, it the fact that they can't pay for the game (that is when they choose to spend on another). If the movie/gaming industry want people to purchase their products they can lower their prices, so that people will not be forced into making choices that would exclude them as a possible prospect.

 

[TorturedChaos]

I have been a large console (and Playstation) fan since the first PS came out. But as time goes on I find my self playing more and more games on my PC then on my PS3. My poor PS3 sits on it self and occasionally plays a game I borrow from a friend or a Blu-Ray I rented. (I mostly bought it to play new Final Fantasy style JRPG's that seem to be mostly PS3 exclusive, but there seems to be a large lacking of them lately).
If all backwards compatibility is removed and games get locked to the PS4 I really don't have much of a reason to buy one. Most of the games I want to play eventually come out on the PC and I can play them there. They small portion of games that will be PS4 exclusive or don't play well on the computer (like Street Fight - IMO) wont be worth it to buy a $400-$500 console, especially if I can't swap games with my friends.

 

[Guest]

Im probably oing to be the one here tha agrees to kill the resell of games , but its just because it gets me so pissed off when I just bought a game and maybe I go to game stop and try to sell it they give you $10 for it and put on their shelfs for $54.99. and its suck a lucrative business that they sometimes make more money than the developers that worked one year or two on the game, that does not seem fair

 

[cliffordcooley]

its such a lucrative business that they sometimes make more money than the developers that worked one year or two on the game, that does not seem fair

And who was it that decided to let a product go back to a shelf with the potential for such great markup? When you answer that question you will know who's fault it was in giving them more money than the developers. You can't blame a business, if people are willing to give them products to sell.

Perhaps the producers should setup a return policy for those who grow tired of the game, to protect their investment for future sells. This policy could prevent businesses from purchasing second hand merchandise for less than a specific price that developers have set. But in the end who would this disappoint? Resell allows consumers to move on and try something new (notice the word new as in a new game).

 

[St1ckM4n]

Another thing I don't understand is why there is no second hand market for DVD's and other consumable media. I know there is renting, but these places rent out games too.

A movie or a CD doesn't change, it is constant. Yet people purchase these to watch over and over again. A game usually has a constant storyline or a linear gameplay, but it sure as hell plays different every time you pop it in.

 

[GuyDalziel]

Perhaps the producers should setup a return policy for those who grow tired of the game, to protect their investment for future sells. This policy could prevent businesses from purchasing second hand merchandise for less than a specific price that developers have set.

They tried that before in 1908 with the book 'The Castaway' by Hallie Erminie Rives in which the book stated, "The price of this book at retail is $1 net. No dealer is licensed to sell it at a lower price, and a sale at a lower price will be treated as an infringement of the copyright". However, R. H. Macy & Co purchased a whole load of them in bulk and sold them for 89c each.

The court decided in favour of R. H. Macy & Co as the publisher did not have a right to limit resale since purchasing of the object does not constitute a contract. They can "recommend" a retail price, but people are not obliged to stick with that.

Frankly if one is selling games for $10 which then go on to be sold for $50, then perhaps one should take a lesson from that and sell them elsewhere? This sort of thing happens everywhere, from antique dealers to market sellers; I fail to see why games should be specifically targeted.

 

[cliffordcooley]

The court decided in favour of R. H. Macy & Co as the publisher did not have a right to limit resale since purchasing of the object does not constitute a contract. They can "recommend" a retail price, but people are not obliged to stick with that.

Interesting!!!

Makes me wonder how we can be forced to use our products in specific ways, if we are not purchasing contracts.