Sony reminds players they don't actually own the PlayStation games they purchased

[mbrowne5061]

Secondly, Steam have identical agreement, calling all games service:
"
2. LICENSES ⏶

A. General Content and Services License

Steam and your Subscription(s) require the download and installation of Content and Services onto your computer. Valve hereby grants, and you accept, a non-exclusive license and right, to use the Content and Services for your personal, non-commercial use (except where commercial use is expressly allowed herein or in the applicable Subscription Terms). This license ends upon termination of (a) this Agreement or (b) a Subscription that includes the license. The Content and Services are licensed, not sold. Your license confers no title or ownership in the Content and Services. To make use of the Content and Services, you must have a Steam Account and you may be required to be running the Steam client and maintaining a connection to the Internet."

...ok, and? I never claimed otherwise. Literally no one here has claimed otherwise. I only said Steam had software that could do it, then pointed out all the questions they would need to answer before they ever legally could.

And if all I bought were the "rights" to access content and services, then I should be able to sell those "same" rights, too, on a secondary market. Let the game companies keep their IP, fine, let me sell my rights to access it.

First of all, family sharing does not allow playing same game. In this area already primary and secondary ps5 account seems at least compareable for 2 people, and now add kids account. Here is your family sharing. Not to mention gog, where you just share it however you wish.

Steam family sharing was pictured to be use the same way: people you either live together with, sharing the same hardware, or friends who live nearby

Secondly, family sharing is geofenced, so you cant share your library with your family if they are in another country, which is common case in EU.

Yeah, and the example setup you mentioned with PS5 - a single console with multiple accounts - is even more "geofenced". That takes it down from a single country to a single living room.

First of all, family sharing does not allow playing same game.

first of all, you can not play the same game at the same time in your steam family library. Unless you have multiple copies, which kinda breaks the purpose. Just google it.

The same is true with your PS5 example, unless there is couch co-op/competitive, which is a very rare feature these days. But 'couch' modes also still exist in Steam games, and accounts you've shared games with can join in with you as long as you're the one "running" the game. So, again, feature parity.

Except Steam will let you lend digital licenses in some cases, and consoles won't let you in any case.

 

[dangh]

Except Steam will let you lend digital licenses in some cases, and consoles won't let you in any case.

Consoles has kids mode, where you lend it as well to their console, so that's factually incorrect.

I'm not saying sony is better than valve, or valve is better than sony. Both are equally shitty, and is stupid to blame sony for something valve is doing for years.

Only good option for PC players is gog as they give you full control on a game you bought.

 

[fadingfool]

Fourthly, Steam hasnt done anything that is anti-consumer? In which alternate reality? Price fixing, blackmailing publisher to stop them from listing games for less on other store fronts effectively destroying competition and enforcing monopoly, price matching agreement with Microsoft (even less competition), same issue with ownership as with Sony (you licensing a right to play a game, not buying anything), geo-blocking, no account inheritance, vendor locking (I cant buy a DLC from other vendor to a game I 'bought' on Steam and vice versa), pushing loot boxes to kids... but that is nothing you would consider anti-consumer. Sure you're fine with Sony then, as they just follow the Valve so all is good...

You do not need two copies - certain games you can share - look up "Steam Remote Play". There is no price fixing - you can sell you game where ever you like at whatever price you want you just are not allowed to sell it cheaper than you price it on Steam (seems fair to me). This is not price fixing. This is not monopolistic. Where is the agreement with microsoft? If anything I have seen cheaper prices on steam than via microsoft store so again where is this agreement? As to account inheritance -which store allows for this and whilst I would love to bequeath my collection to my next of kin - instead I will make sure they have my account details. Geo-blocking - FFS my DVDs are region locked, netflix, amazon prime - all geoblocked - even BBC iplayer where is this a Steam thing? Playstation store is the only store available on the Playstation - Steam is not the only store on PC - big difference. Yes digital rights needs re-focusing on the consumer but aside from GoG (which I have around 300 games on) Steam is the best of the rest.

 

[dangh]

You do not need two copies - certain games you can share - look up "Steam Remote Play". There is no price fixing - you can sell you game where ever you like at whatever price you want you just are not allowed to sell it cheaper than you price it on Steam (seems fair to me). This is not price fixing. This is not monopolistic. Where is the agreement with microsoft? If anything I have seen cheaper prices on steam than via microsoft store so again where is this agreement? As to account inheritance -which store allows for this and whilst I would love to bequeath my collection to my next of kin - instead I will make sure they have my account details. Geo-blocking - FFS my DVDs are region locked, netflix, amazon prime - all geoblocked - even BBC iplayer where is this a Steam thing? Playstation store is the only store available on the Playstation - Steam is not the only store on PC - big difference. Yes digital rights needs re-focusing on the consumer but aside from GoG (which I have around 300 games on) Steam is the best of the rest.

you cant play the same game at the same time in valve family sharing. No matter the type.

Can Same Game Be Played At The Same Time In Steam Family Share

For those who think it's easier to annoy you than to Google 'Can same game be played at the same time in steam family share' themselves.

letmegooglethat.com

"There is no price fixing - you can sell you game where ever you like at whatever price you want you just are not allowed to sell it cheaper than you price it on Steam (seems fair to me)."
ahhhh. So, if a company sells petrol at their gas station, and uses their position to make other gas stations from other companies to sell petrol at the same price, it is not price fixing. Great logic. This case is currently in court, so apparently other people dont think it is fair. How could that be? ;'S

"Where is the agreement with microsoft?"

Valve And Microsoft Price Fixing Agreement

For those who think it's easier to annoy you than to Google 'Valve and microsoft price fixing agreement' themselves.

letmegooglethat.com

"If anything I have seen cheaper prices on steam than via microsoft store so again where is this agreement?"
... yes, that is the point? valve requested that? Meaning, valve can offer better prices to gain more trade, whie microsoft can not? are you even trying?

"As to account inheritance -which store allows for this"
GoG allows that.

"Geo-blocking - FFS my DVDs are region locked, netflix, amazon prime - all geoblocked"
Ah, so if someone did that then it is alright? that's a slippery slope. You wouldn't mind game available in California but blocked in Texas because Netflix has region lock?

"Steam is the best of the rest."
hahaha, sure, lets wait for the results of ongoing lawsuits. It already shows how crazy monopolistic practices Valve is using. Steam itself is a drm client you're happily put on your pc while complaining about denuovo. Steam deleted physical copies of games, but it is Sony issue when they planning to do the same That is a very tool like thinking, really.

 

[fadingfool]

Hence I asked you to look up "steam remote play together". GoG only allows for inheritance if you provide a legal court order explicitly entitling the transfer - in general:
Key Details on GOG Inheritance

• • Non-Transferable by Default: By default, GOG accounts and game licenses are personal, limited, and non-transferable. The whole WWW is fecking Geoblocked these days from the UK - hence VPNs are required for a lot of interactions I used to take for granted. I don't even notice Steam doing it. So Steam negotiated with microsoft and is allowed to sell me games at a cheaper price and that somehow is "anti-consumer" - that is a pro-consumer move.

 

[dangh]

Hence I asked you to look up "steam remote play together". GoG only allows for inheritance if you provide a legal court order explicitly entitling the transfer - in general:
Key Details on GOG Inheritance

• • Non-Transferable by Default: By default, GOG accounts and game licenses are personal, limited, and non-transferable. The whole WWW is fecking Geoblocked these days from the UK - hence VPNs are required for a lot of interactions I used to take for granted. I don't even notice Steam doing it. So Steam negotiated with microsoft and is allowed to sell me games at a cheaper price and that somehow is "anti-consumer" - that is a pro-consumer move.

"steam remote play together"
We are talking about 2 people in your family wanting to play e.g. skyrim at the same time, from your family sharing. Streaming a hot seated (a local coop) game is totally different story, and has nothing to do with family sharing.

I said inheritance, not sending a gift. Inheritance is a mechanics where someone inherits your stuff of value after you die. Gog is allowing that without much of an issue.

"The whole WWW is fecking Geoblocked"
does not matter. Steam geoblocking is now as well in court in EU as it breaks open market practices. Again, the fact geoblocking exists is not 'get out of jail' card.

Steam fixing prices and ensuring no other companies can sell games for less than Steam does IS anti consumer, and anti competition. If no other store front can offer a cheaper game or facing Steam backlash, how in your world it is pro consumer? It is pro valve, only valve can sell cheaper titles, so no other store can have better agreement with publishers, no publisher can have an agreement without asking valve if they can do that. In which dimensions a company which sets price for whole pc gaming market destroying competitiveness is a ''pro-consumer" move? ;D
Steam agreement with microsoft is not about steam selling you games cheaper. It is about steam selling you games in the normal price, but ensuring MS wont be able to sell it to you cheaper than Steam EVER. Same blackmailing they did to Ubisoft, threatening delisting their games from steam if they would sell THEIR games on THEIR website cheaper. pro consumer move, ensuring you cant pay less in other places;D

 

[gamerk2]

Not really. AFAIK, Steam lets you lend digital games to people in your "family" (which don't necessarily have to be your actual family). Sony does not let you do this.

Which is permitted under the license agreement you agreed to when you installed Steam, so "not owning the game" still applies.

 

[fadingfool]

"steam remote play together"
We are talking about 2 people in your family wanting to play e.g. skyrim at the same time, from your family sharing. Streaming a hot seated (a local coop) game is totally different story, and has nothing to do with family sharing.

I said inheritance, not sending a gift. Inheritance is a mechanics where someone inherits your stuff of value after you die. Gog is allowing that without much of an issue.

"The whole WWW is fecking Geoblocked"
does not matter. Steam geoblocking is now as well in court in EU as it breaks open market practices. Again, the fact geoblocking exists is not 'get out of jail' card.

Steam fixing prices and ensuring no other companies can sell games for less than Steam does IS anti consumer, and anti competition. If no other store front can offer a cheaper game or facing Steam backlash, how in your world it is pro consumer? It is pro valve, only valve can sell cheaper titles, so no other store can have better agreement with publishers, no publisher can have an agreement without asking valve if they can do that. In which dimensions a company which sets price for whole pc gaming market destroying competitiveness is a ''pro-consumer" move? ;D
Steam agreement with microsoft is not about steam selling you games cheaper. It is about steam selling you games in the normal price, but ensuring MS wont be able to sell it to you cheaper than Steam EVER. Same blackmailing they did to Ubisoft, threatening delisting their games from steam if they would sell THEIR games on THEIR website cheaper. pro consumer move, ensuring you cant pay less in other places;D

Do you know how many games I have paid for at full price on Steam (out of the 1,446 I have access to)? 3, 3 out of 1,446 (L4D, L4D2 and Portal 2 - £19.99 (on disc), £19.99 (on disc) and £24.99 when purchased new at Valve's full price). I can't say the same from any other online store where discounts for first party games are rockin' horse **** levels of rarity in comparison. I'm from the era of big box games where £50 got you manuals, maps and other memorabilia - over the years this turned into a DVD case with a cardboard insert - yet the price was still £50 or upwards. Re-sell values for old games (before the retro wave) were pennies. When Steam came along you could get relatively new games for a few quid. This was not anti-consumer even if reselling was no longer an option (price differential more than made up for this). So what if MS can't sell cheaper than steam - they can reduce the price on both outlets - so no one gets ripped off for buying from the wrong store - again this is a good thing as Steam are not keeping the prices high. No, Steam is not perfect but is a lot better than we had before steam existed and is a lot better than what Sony has planned (digital only, PSN only, PS exclusives with subscriptions just to play online with friends), a lot better than Epic (timed exclusives at high prices, poor shop front with no real review system and a link to opencritic.com doesn't count), uplay? battlenet? amazon games? Nothing comes close to the ecosystem Steam has. Yes would be nice if Steam adopted some of GoG's features - and market forces may make them in the future - I can't see Epic, PSN or uplay/ubisoft connect ever considering changing their behaviour.

 

[onebignerd]

No wait, for MSFT I meant how they are destroying Windows as a brand. I wasn't talking about CDs for them, sorry I should have clarified that, but you do have a point on CDs about Sony.

Understand, but I disagree that this media format change is harming or going to destroy the PlayStation brand. As I pointed out in my original comment, the format change has already happened by the consumers choice of moving to digital voluntarily. Where Microsoft has spent years and years turning their Windows platform against their user base.

Apologies, no intention of upsetting you if I still miss your point.

 

[Robert Priest]

Phones never had disc’s…

PC’s haven’t had discs in years…

How many of the discs now actually have a game on them? The downloads can be bigger than what can fit on the disc anyways, not to mention internal storage is significantly faster anyways not to mention there always a day 1 patch that huge…

 

[dangh]

Do you know how many games I have paid for at full price on Steam (out of the 1,446 I have access to)? 3, 3 out of 1,446 (L4D, L4D2 and Portal 2 - £19.99 (on disc), £19.99 (on disc) and £24.99 when purchased new at Valve's full price). I can't say the same from any other online store where discounts for first party games are rockin' horse **** levels of rarity in comparison. I'm from the era of big box games where £50 got you manuals, maps and other memorabilia - over the years this turned into a DVD case with a cardboard insert - yet the price was still £50 or upwards. Re-sell values for old games (before the retro wave) were pennies. When Steam came along you could get relatively new games for a few quid. This was not anti-consumer even if reselling was no longer an option (price differential more than made up for this). So what if MS can't sell cheaper than steam - they can reduce the price on both outlets - so no one gets ripped off for buying from the wrong store - again this is a good thing as Steam are not keeping the prices high. No, Steam is not perfect but is a lot better than we had before steam existed and is a lot better than what Sony has planned (digital only, PSN only, PS exclusives with subscriptions just to play online with friends), a lot better than Epic (timed exclusives at high prices, poor shop front with no real review system and a link to opencritic.com doesn't count), uplay? battlenet? amazon games? Nothing comes close to the ecosystem Steam has. Yes would be nice if Steam adopted some of GoG's features - and market forces may make them in the future - I can't see Epic, PSN or uplay/ubisoft connect ever considering changing their behaviour.

"Do you know how many games I have paid for at full price"
doesnt matter. What matter is Steam preventing other publishers from giving you a better deal. Most probably, if not for steam, you would be paying even less.

" I can't say the same from any other online store"
Obviously you cant say the same, because STEAM PREVENTS IT ffs. for this whole discussion, can you just try to understand that Steam made impossible for other stores to give you a better deal?

"Re-sell values for old games (before the retro wave) were pennies."
But I could give it to any number of friends. now I can't resell it and I cant give it. Great deal.

"So what if MS can't sell cheaper than steam - they can reduce the price on both outlets"
... I mean, im not here to teach you economy basics, but thankfully the court found this important enough to pick the case.

"Nothing comes close to the ecosystem Steam has"
because Steam ensuring via his monopolistic position no other store can give a better offer. And I know that is not an issue for you, you are happy to be a shill of a huge company without bating your eye. There are many people happily allowing big companies to just use them as much as possible not realizing at all a larger picture. Complaining about Epic or Sony exclusivity? So you telling me Steam does not have exclusive games? I would love buy any game on GoG but sorry, steam exclusive on most of them! but again, not a problem for you. Problem is only when you want to play game on steam, but somehow it is not there, how dare a small publishers not accommodate to your likes, while other way around it is great...

 

[ActualViking]

Cry me a river.

Sony is just saying out loud what has been true for a long time. It is a good thing they are making people aware.

It is true for everything you own that needs a data connection to run, like try digging out an old phone from the box you keep them - not much use I bet since chances are the type of network it needs isn't around anymore. And then there is the music, the movies and shows... maybe even the books you "have". Everything you have through a subscription is not yours.

For sure some here may have a physical collections of music on vinyl, CD's or maybe even tape. Only I bet the most here has Spotify, Apple Music or one of the others - if so then why the outcry about Sony, when you've clearly chosen the path already.

Want games you own. You can collect the classics from like 20 years ago, it will btw. also save you loads in hardware and electricity, since the old gear needed can be found for cheap and it hardly needs electricity to run. And there is lots of great games from back then, just don't expect ray tracing and 4K resolution.

 

[mbrowne5061]

Which is permitted under the license agreement you agreed to when you installed Steam, so "not owning the game" still applies.

Literally never said you owned the game. Once again: I said Steam simply already has the software to trade digital assets on an open market. That's it.

 

[mbrowne5061]

Consoles has kids mode, where you lend it as well to their console, so that's factually incorrect.

I'm not saying sony is better than valve, or valve is better than sony. Both are equally shitty, and is stupid to blame sony for something valve is doing for years.

Only good option for PC players is gog as they give you full control on a game you bought.

I was not aware of that mode; it wasn't clear in any of your replies

But yes, I would agree that GOG is king in terms of control and ownership. They are weak in terms of what is offered in their catalog and whether their versions of the game are the most up-to-date (publishers and studios sometimes update their games on other stores, then neglect to push those same updates to GOG)

 

[Thom Vee]

That's okay, I don't own a PlayStation.

I don't play their game, I don't lose.

 

[fadingfool]

"Do you know how many games I have paid for at full price"
doesnt matter. What matter is Steam preventing other publishers from giving you a better deal. Most probably, if not for steam, you would be paying even less.

" I can't say the same from any other online store"
Obviously you cant say the same, because STEAM PREVENTS IT ffs. for this whole discussion, can you just try to understand that Steam made impossible for other stores to give you a better deal?

"Re-sell values for old games (before the retro wave) were pennies."
But I could give it to any number of friends. now I can't resell it and I cant give it. Great deal.

"So what if MS can't sell cheaper than steam - they can reduce the price on both outlets"
... I mean, im not here to teach you economy basics, but thankfully the court found this important enough to pick the case.

"Nothing comes close to the ecosystem Steam has"
because Steam ensuring via his monopolistic position no other store can give a better offer. And I know that is not an issue for you, you are happy to be a shill of a huge company without bating your eye. There are many people happily allowing big companies to just use them as much as possible not realizing at all a larger picture. Complaining about Epic or Sony exclusivity? So you telling me Steam does not have exclusive games? I would love buy any game on GoG but sorry, steam exclusive on most of them! but again, not a problem for you. Problem is only when you want to play game on steam, but somehow it is not there, how dare a small publishers not accommodate to your likes, while other way around it is great...

Steam has not always existed. Unless you remember the times before Steam you really are not in a good position to judge. Remind me how much Nintendo games cost again? And Playstation exclusives, and Exclusives on Epic. Steam is cheap - dead cheap during sales time. They are not the ones stopping "better offers" - they generally offer the best offers (again a company can reduce the price of their game as long as they also reduce the price on steam - Steam is not fixing the price). If a game isn't on steam and I want it I go to another store and buy it - according to GOG galaxy I have 1492 games on steam, 469 on GOG, 698 on Epic, 19 on Xbox, 34 on Ubisoft connect, 390 on playstation and 70 on EA. With a couple on battle.net, 320 on Amazon games and one on Rockstar launcher - where is the monopoly?

 

[Aolish]

Understand, but I disagree that this media format change is harming or going to destroy the PlayStation brand. As I pointed out in my original comment, the format change has already happened by the consumers choice of moving to digital voluntarily. Where Microsoft has spent years and years turning their Windows platform against their user base.

Apologies, no intention of upsetting you if I still miss your point.

No prob. Appreciate your comment. Perhaps it really is a small amount of people that are complaining compared to the larger scope. Its just that when you read all these articles on the internet about how everyone feels like I get the "imaginary" its the entire world when it's not. Any change whether positive or negative will always receive a backlash. Can't make everyone happy. lol

 

[NewSparrow]

Sony isn’t backing down. It believes most customers will keep spending money without actually owning the games, and that only a small minority will complain enough to matter. In practice, it expects people to keep buying digital titles and keep playing on its console anyway, that is the sad truth. Hope they are proven wrong.

 

[OortCloud]

Another company absolutely destroying their brand name and reputation all in a headlong rush for enshitification.

 

[ni6hant]

My friend bought a PS5 and sold it a few months later stating the games are too expensive if you want to play online. It was fun to have a couch gaming but it's not worth paying for.

 

[Y2JB47]

I firmly believe that Sony are headed for a 50% crash in sales next gen. People have had enough of being gouged and most people are not going to pay £70+ for all their games.

SteamOS is primed to take a chunk of the market, they just need people to realize it exists. I think a lot of gamers will just leave the market when the ps6 is £1k+ with £70 games, no sales and no physical games.

 

[Y2JB47]

It’s amazing that both Sony and Microsoft are incapable of realizing that people love Steam because Valve treats their customers with a small amount of respect and doesn’t always leave you feeling like they would sell your children’s souls for 50p if only they could.

 

[techstrike]

You'll always own the physical hardware, they can't take that away. However, as with games, you are only licensing the software (OS) that runs on that hardware and they can legally stop it working at any time. They may make it difficult to run alternative software but they can't legally stop you (I think this has been proven in court but I can't find a reference now).

If I own my physical hardware (PS5) why can't I install another Operating System that I know that the HW technically supports it?