Sony Doing 'An EA?' - PSN Pass

[DustDriver]

do not represent any revenue to the publisher,and it does represent and expense(production and shipping)

Those expenses have been paid by the first buyer.

by using an online platform in which players can buy the game cheaper without carrying them the costs of physical copy production.

The idea is good, but most of the time it really doesn't make so much difference. And after a couple of months the physical copy will be cheaper because prices in an online platform mostly don't go down as quickly.

 

[Akira AC]

Those expenses have been paid by the first buyer.

While this is logically correct,the problem is,to a certain time progression(1 to 3 months)the supposed copy sales will be reduced to less copies for more users(take for example 6 users using 3-4 copies instead of the target 6 copies sales,that the whole whining from the publishers,and one of the reasons of why Gamestop should be regulated).

The idea is good, but most of the time it really doesn't make so much difference. And after a couple of months the physical copy will be cheaper because prices in an online platform mostly don't go down as quickly.

Agreed,hence one my plans for game distribution,however it will only work on the next gen of consoles,allow me to elaborate:

During the last 10-15 years videogame formats have used(and still uses) generic data storage spaces(like CD,DVD,however few exceptions like Nintendo's formats and UMD format),but PC distribution have been linked to the online distribution since about 20 years ago(think about times of the original Doom),one of the reasons why PC online distribution works its because the flexibility of data storage,hence one of the basis for my idea(and probable massive failure).

If the user is allowed to storage the data in any way he/she wants,then the usage of a physical copy can be eliminated,and,if the user do not feel right without having physical copy then he/she should be allowed to storage the data(burn a disk for example)in any format she/her wants.

This will mean that future generation consoles should be provided not only by an acceptable HD space,but they should be also equipped with a disk burner(hence the first problem of the idea,this will increase production costs for the console and potential piracy,copies burned by the user should be tagged to be burned once,and it gets massively complicated from there).

For the publisher this will represent less production costs,because the physical copy costs have to be managed by the user,meaning that the only costs handed to the publisher will be development costs and network distribution maintenance(more costs are obviously overlook here),this will also mean that the shipping and distribution cots will no longer be handed by the user(shipping costs will be taken out all together)and games can see a drastic pricing reduction(this is just surface mathematics)from 30 to 40 percent of the costs of a physical copy.

I'm completely sure that there is a ton of flaws with this method of distribution,but seeing brand new games at 35 USD(probably) its not that unreachable either,I know that this might not be the ultimate solution but I'm pretty sure that the solution for the issue relays on online distribution.

 

[plate88]

Mmmm, glad this won't affect me. I don't buy used and am very selective on the games I do buy.

Good thread though. Interesting reads.

 

[marchi]

Why are people complaining. If anything this should reduce the price of 2nd hand games. It will also raise the selling price of second hand games that don't have the online registered for users.


Absolutely no issue with this. Why should game stores get to double dip in sales?

 

[Tornado]

Absolutely no issue with this. Why should game stores get to double dip in sales?

Why should Sony charge a sin tax for buying used?

 

[Spagetti69]

It will also raise the selling price of second hand games that don't have the online registered for users.

How does the store know the code is active or not?

 

[Villain]

Why are people complaining. If anything this should reduce the price of 2nd hand games. It will also raise the selling price of second hand games that don't have the online registered for users.


Absolutely no issue with this. Why should game stores get to double dip in sales?

Imagine if you had to pay Toyota for the priviledge of driving the used car you just bought off of craigslist.



That's why people don't like it.

 

[CaptainHarlock]

I'm probably late for this one,but it seems that Sony(as game publisher) also wants to stop the whole used game business,its no surprise that several publishers will start with this practice and in fact(for the publishers)its an effective method to rank up revenue numbers a bit.

Part of the problem is the "used game" consumer,this practice has increased since a couple of years back (hence the fame of gamestop) and has become a real problem for publishers,the reason for this is not the actual purchase of the used game,its the manufacturing costs behind the copy,unlike a pirated game,the used game do not represent any revenue to the publisher,and it does represent and expense(production and shipping),and as it turns out,gamestop and used game sellers do not give a revenue for the used game(obviously).

Then there is the problem of piracy,online passes have been proven as an effective method of stopping unauthorized copies to be play online(similar to CD key on online PC games),and if it becomes more effective,then the "online pass" will be more frequent.

For me,this is no surprise(in fact I fell like that that last segment was unnecessary),however I feel a bit biased by this,because it shows the incompetence of game publishers at the time of facing these issues,the consumer shouldn't have to go through this,the games(physical copy)should be able to be identified as piracy copies by a system,and publishers should also negotiate with used-game game sellers to stop shovelling this to the used game market.

With that said,I think that they should rather follow the Steam model,by using an online platform(In fact EA is starting to do this with Origin,but not quite) in which players can buy the game cheaper without carrying them the costs of physical copy production.

See here's the thing; the "online platform" hasn't done anything to reduce the price of games. It's been the hope of gamers that when online platforms took off then prices would be driven down, reason being is that all the expenses with a physical product will have been eliminated. That is simply not the case. If you take a look at some of the full games on the Playstation Store, they are EXACTLY THE SAME PRICE as the retail copies. inFAMOUS 2 is $59.99 any way you slice it. Same for Mass Effect 2. If you look on Steam (shudder!) you'll see that Need for Speed Shift 2 Unleashed is $49.99. Over at Amazon.com you have your choice of the PS3 version for $39.99, the XBox 360 version for $39.75, the PC retail version for $37.07, or the download from Amazon.com for $29.99. So how exactly do you "buy the game cheaper" from Steam? If anything there's LESS incentive to lower prices using that model. There's no threat from used sales, all sales are final, and there's little or no competition, since Steam has 70% of the download market.

A lot of gamers are enamored with digital distribution because it's considered "the future", but there's much more downside than there is upside.

 

[Akira AC]

See here's the thing; the "online platform" hasn't done anything to reduce the price of games. It's been the hope of gamers that when online platforms took off then prices would be driven down, reason being is that all the expenses with a physical product will have been eliminated. That is simply not the case. If you take a look at some of the full games on the Playstation Store, they are EXACTLY THE SAME PRICE as the retail copies. inFAMOUS 2 is $59.99 any way you slice it. Same for Mass Effect 2. If you look on Steam (shudder!) you'll see that Need for Speed Shift 2 Unleashed is $49.99. Over at Amazon.com you have your choice of the PS3 version for $39.99, the XBox 360 version for $39.75, the PC retail version for $37.07, or the download from Amazon.com for $29.99. So how exactly do you "buy the game cheaper" from Steam? If anything there's LESS incentive to lower prices using that model. There's no threat from used sales, all sales are final, and there's little or no competition, since Steam has 70% of the download market.

A lot of gamers are enamored with digital distribution because it's considered "the future", but there's much more downside than there is upside.

The issue there is the negotiations between the publishers and the distributors,networking and digital distribution hasn't reach the point of competing with physical distribution,hence the reason of the high prices on the digital versions of the games,if the publishers only resort themselves to digital distribution then they will loose a lot of money by loosing that sector of the market,however online distribution already covers all the DLC market.

Apart from that,there is an existing threat by the used games market,the problem with used game market is that(well this all from the publisher point of view)they cover several users with one single copy,this is translated into sales reduction,this incline them to use online passes and the sort of thing that piss off a lot of people(specially me),just to recover from the losses produced by the used games market,one of the reasons why I'm really against Gamestop market model,it doesn't offer quality on its products and do not provide any revenue to the publisher,and makes the whole "EA pass" thing exist.

I'm aware that some people cant afford full new copy for $60 and the used market works for them,but at the end,they are the most affected people by this,lets say that you buy BF3 after 1-2 months of launch at $40-$35, and then paying for the online pass($10),makes the whole thing a complete waste of money for the publisher and user,while Gamestop and used game distributors win all the money.

 

[CaptainHarlock]

The issue there is the negotiations between the publishers and the distributors,networking and digital distribution hasn't reach the point of competing with physical distribution,hence the reason of the high prices on the digital versions of the games,if the publishers only resort themselves to digital distribution then they will loose a lot of money by loosing that sector of the market,however online distribution already covers all the DLC market.

Apart from that,there is an existing threat by the used games market,the problem with used game market is that(well this all from the publisher point of view)they cover several users with one single copy,this is translated into sales reduction,this incline them to use online passes and the sort of thing that piss off a lot of people(specially me),just to recover from the losses produced by the used games market,one of the reasons why I'm really against Gamestop market model,it doesn't offer quality on its products and do not provide any revenue to the publisher,and makes the whole "EA pass" thing exist.

I'm aware that some people cant afford full new copy for $60 and the used market works for them,but at the end,they are the most affected people by this,lets say that you buy BF3 after 1-2 months of launch at $40-$35, and then paying for the online pass($10),makes the whole thing a complete waste of money for the publisher and user,while Gamestop and used game distributors win all the money.

Like I said before, that's where being an educated consumer comes into to play. You won't be affected if you take the time to find the best deal available. Case in point; I was able to buy Tiger Woods The Masters 12 about two weeks ago from Best Buy for $39.99 BRAND NEW. The "pre-owned" price from GameStop is $47.99. Amazon.com has the same game NEW from the Market Place for $34.99, that even with shipping for $8 you STILL aren't at the price of a "pre-owned" copy at GameStop.

I always find it strange that with all this information out there, that gamers are willing to line up to be fleeced so readily by GameStop. What this really comes down to is EFFORT. Are you going to be complacent and just sit back and throw money down the drain? Or are you going to find the best deal out there, and negate that "extra ten dollars" that the online pass is going to cost you? Knowing "gamers", they'll choose the former and then complain about how "We're being ripped off!" and how the industry are supposed to be "swell guys". All I know is I work hard for my money, and if getting the best deal means waiting a couple of days for a sale, I'm willing to do it.

 

[posimosh]

Bottom line: consumers lose
Cause: many, lack of competition, anti-competitive practices (illegal), reluctance to stop mergers and conglomeration of power by the govt. Coupled with the breakdown of the court system especially pertaining to class action law suits, and the elevation of companies' rights and privileges.
Conclusion: UNRestrained capitalism has failed. It only serves to further the inequality in society. When companies can take away features that they once offered and advertised as a feature again and again without a lawsuit or state agency even investigating, or advocating for the people they purport to represent, the people, especially the least among us have lost. Sony (and M$ for that matter) and their interactions with customers is a perfect microcosm for this. Sure, it's a luxury item, but wait until it's not. Shares of commodities are being sold on the open market and have trade lobbies and interest groups who speculate on them. So... Just like Sony they have very powerful people who want their shares of commodities to rise in price (or fall as the case may be). Again I ask what happens when it's not the cost of an online service but a loaf of bread, or bag of rice? (saying that others do it doesn't make it right, in fact, in this world, it's probably wrong)

 

[posimosh]

Imagine if you had to pay Toyota for the priviledge of driving the used car you just bought off of craigslist.

That's why people don't like it.

This is shockingly not far off bro, don't want to hijack the thread but especially if you have one of those "certified" cars, a dealership of the same variety will both buy your car back from you for more (and turn and sell it for more) effectively taxing you for selling yourself or to another dealer.

 

[Robin]

Backlash by fans at Insomiac because of PSN Pass... and dev's respond.

http://buypoe.com/playstation-3/139...y-fans-regarding-psn-pass-resistance-3-a.html

The way I see it is if the original owner plays it for 3 months then sells it to a second person who plays it for 6 months.... how is that any more taxing on Sony and its servers than if the original person didn't sell and plays for 9 months? It isn't!

i.e. Its a stealth tax to stop second hand games. Good developing will ensure good first time sales, more often than not games which are sold on again and again are poorly developed, short or buggy games which unfortunately these days is becoming the norm. Release now... fix, patch and charge for DLC later!

 

[Akira AC]

Like I said before, that's where being an educated consumer comes into to play. You won't be affected if you take the time to find the best deal available. Case in point; I was able to buy Tiger Woods The Masters 12 about two weeks ago from Best Buy for $39.99 BRAND NEW. The "pre-owned" price from GameStop is $47.99. Amazon.com has the same game NEW from the Market Place for $34.99, that even with shipping for $8 you STILL aren't at the price of a "pre-owned" copy at GameStop.

I always find it strange that with all this information out there, that gamers are willing to line up to be fleeced so readily by GameStop. What this really comes down to is EFFORT. Are you going to be complacent and just sit back and throw money down the drain? Or are you going to find the best deal out there, and negate that "extra ten dollars" that the online pass is going to cost you? Knowing "gamers", they'll choose the former and then complain about how "We're being ripped off!" and how the industry are supposed to be "swell guys". All I know is I work hard for my money, and if getting the best deal means waiting a couple of days for a sale, I'm willing to do it.

Which has nothing to do with the online pass,regardless of the price for which you buy the game,the game still has the online pass,and that's pretty much the whole issue here,besides,Gamestop normally goes for the casual "inexperienced" market which is composed by people who don't purchase objects online.

^Good point, however the online pass costs is far away from the actual maintenance of the servers,to put it in other words,the price tag of the online pass has nothing to do with the actual maintenance of the servers,with that said,I think that this is more of a "damage control" method use by Sony to stop revenues loss from used games(I think I'm posting the same over and over again,I will stop that from now).

 

[marchi]

Imagine if you had to pay Toyota for the priviledge of driving the used car you just bought off of craigslist.



That's why people don't like it.

Quite often, you do if you want an extended warranty. There is also a massive difference between a car and a video game......... Namely thousands of dollars.

In the end though, I don't buy used games so it really doesn't affect me. If people look around they'll find cheap games without the need to buy second hand. Hell, I'm about to buy Modnation brand new for $26. Same price as a second hand copy from the game stores in my city.

 

[CaptainHarlock]

Which has nothing to do with the online pass,regardless of the price for which you buy the game,the game still has the online pass,and that's pretty much the whole issue here,besides,Gamestop normally goes for the casual "inexperienced" market which is composed by people who don't purchase objects online.

^Good point, however the online pass costs is far away from the actual maintenance of the servers,to put it in other words,the price tag of the online pass has nothing to do with the actual maintenance of the servers,with that said,I think that this is more of a "damage control" method use by Sony to stop revenues loss from used games(I think I'm posting the same over and over again,I will stop that from now).

Actually it has EVERYTHING to do with the online pass. Here's why; what's the complaint about the online pass? That anyone who buys the game used will have to pay for it. You can find the game NEW with the pass code intact for a better price than you can a used game. But gamers would much rather be outraged than take the time to find the best deal, and save even more money than they would if they bought a used game.

 

[CaptainHarlock]

Backlash by fans at Insomiac because of PSN Pass... and dev's respond.

http://buypoe.com/playstation-3/139...y-fans-regarding-psn-pass-resistance-3-a.html

The way I see it is if the original owner plays it for 3 months then sells it to a second person who plays it for 6 months.... how is that any more taxing on Sony and its servers than if the original person didn't sell and plays for 9 months? It isn't!

i.e. Its a stealth tax to stop second hand games. Good developing will ensure good first time sales, more often than not games which are sold on again and again are poorly developed, short or buggy games which unfortunately these days is becoming the norm. Release now... fix, patch and charge for DLC later!

You have to ask yourself though how many are "gamers", and how many are those who don't frequent game forums, and are just your average "consumer"? Notice I said "consumer", not "casual gamer"? Once we start seeing Resistance 3 commercials on the NFL on CBS and Sunday Night Football, I doubt any of the 18-39 year old sports watching, beer drinking males are going to even care.

I wonder how many of those complaining buy games with a Steam code enclosed with the disc? And how is that any different?

 

[Tornado]

I wonder how many of those complaining buy games with a Steam code enclosed with the disc? And how is that any different?

Its different because PC titles have never been comparable to console games in regards to used game sales.

 

[CaptainHarlock]

Its different because PC titles have never been comparable to console games in regards to used game sales.

Yet it's perfectly acceptable to have a code with Steam that prevents you from reselling the game COMPLETELY? That to me seems a bit strange that with PC games it's perfectly acceptable. If anything it's even more unacceptable. With the Steam code you can't even GIVE the game away. If anything that's worse.

 

[Robin]

You have to ask yourself though how many are "gamers", and how many are those who don't frequent game forums, and are just your average "consumer"? Notice I said "consumer", not "casual gamer"? Once we start seeing Resistance 3 commercials on the NFL on CBS and Sunday Night Football, I doubt any of the 18-39 year old sports watching, beer drinking males are going to even care.

If they have gone to the trouble to find Insomniac's Forum (even find out who the developer is!) register and post I'm sure they have some sort of interest in gaming to a level slightly higher than the casual crowd. If you frequent a gaming forum your pretty much a gamer.

Besides why should it matter who is complaining, everyone gets the raw deal anyway whether they are big gamers or not and even whether they buy the game or not because its about consumer rights and owning what you buy. It's yet another setback for a DRM free world.

 

[Lion-Face]

The way I see it is you walk into Gamestop or who ever, who sell both brand new games and used games on the same shelf, side by side, and actively encourage you to trade in your games and purchase 2nd hand games.
A customer who picks up a new game off the shelf is encouraged to purchase the 2nd hand copy because it's the same thing but cheaper.
It is Gamestop and those stores which are doing the damage, taking customers who were willing to purchase a new game, taking that sale away from the publisher/developer and re-selling an already sold title. They are biting the hand that feeds, yet are so big and 'casual consumer' naturally will go there because they are the game store, the place you go for games, that the hand has to keep feeding.

I'm sure Sony, EA, Activision, who ever, wouldn't be bothered if it was a 2nd hand market, garage sales, only auction sites etc. But when a huge company makes a business out of it, that's where it has come from, I believe anyway.

Personally for the topic at hand, I couldn't care less. The few games I purchase I buy brand new. The 2nd hand games I do occasionally buy, I would factor in the online pass price to the total price to justify if it's worth my money.

 

[Piotrov]

For me its not so much of buying used games... I sell my old games in order to be able to afford my new games.
Thats the big kick in the balls for me.

So now because a company like Gamestop has taken advantage and is losing sony and EA and many other companies like that revenue we are the ones who are paying the price.
Just pass the tab to the costumer...
That I dont agree with.. Im sure there are better ways of doing this but this seems to be the fastest and least cost effective for sony and EA.

With all this stuff going on with the Online Passes and with games coming out rushed and unfinnished then selling DLC's which were already done before games release just to make extra money is really turning me off the gaming market.
I may be the only one who feels this way but in time I think more people will get fedup of this king of costumer abuse.

 

[Tornado]

Yet it's perfectly acceptable to have a code with Steam that prevents you from reselling the game COMPLETELY? That to me seems a bit strange that with PC games it's perfectly acceptable. If anything it's even more unacceptable. With the Steam code you can't even GIVE the game away. If anything that's worse.

The time to complain about unfair practices in the secondhand PC game market passed 25 years ago (it has never actually been legal to sell PC software used, and if a publisher wanted to sue you over it you probably wouldn't win), and digital distribution comes with evils that you knowingly agreed to when you purchased the games in the first place (basically, its your own fault for thinking you have the same rights as a consumer with DD titles, because there shouldn't have been any doubt that you didn't).

The situations aren't comparable.

 

[icelt]

Have we all considered the question that if used game sales are truly so damaging to Sony, MS and Ninty then why do they continue to enter into distribution contracts with companies like GameStop?

Also if the profits in used game sales are SO outrageous then why is the most recent profit margin for GS a pretty reasonable 4.27%?
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=GME

For comparison Ninty's is 7.65%, Sony (the whole Corp) is (-3.62%) and MS's (as a whole Corp) is 31.76%.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=NTDOY.PK+Key+Statistics
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=SNE+Key+Statistics
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=MSFT+Key+Statistics

This whole worrying for the game publishers over the issue of used game sales is really confusing. I mean for once there is a market dynamic that for the most part actually works out to the customers advantage and then many of these same customers complain about it. Very odd.

Edit...
More interesting insights, here are the total cash reserves for each company (understandably Sony & MS numbers aren't exactly similar as they are not solely game publishers):
GameStop - $0.36B
Nintendo - $14.53B
Sony - $10.56B
Microsoft - $48.72B

And some select others:
Activision Blizzard - $3.36B
Electronic Arts - $2.24B
Sega Sammy Holdings Inc - $2.37B
Namco Bandai Holdings Inc - $1.09B

 

[LaBounti]

More interesting insights, here are the total cash reserves for each company (understandably Sony & MS numbers aren't exactly similar as they are not solely game publishers):
GameStop - $0.36B
Nintendo - $14.53B
Sony - $10.56B
Microsoft - $48.72B

And some select others:
Activision Blizzard - $3.36B
Electronic Arts - $2.24B
Sega Sammy Holdings Inc - $2.37B
Namco Bandai Holdings Inc - $1.09B

It was never a battle vs Gamestop. They may make up maybe 5% or less of secondhand game sales. 1 Amazon or Ebay account gets you access to 1000's of used game sellers to buy from with a single click that aren't Gamestop. Gamestop could fold and it won't kill used game sales. This included pass covers the usage of the specific game online, not the sale of the game.

Besides why should it matter who is complaining, everyone gets the raw deal anyway whether they are big gamers or not and even whether they buy the game or not because its about consumer rights and owning what you buy. It's yet another setback for a DRM free world.

What does a game to (specific)game issued pass have anything to do with ownership. It was never about ownership or selling. Its about consumer acquisition of specific games to be played Online. You can do whatever you want with a game you bought that's not illegal. No one gets a raw deal except maybe low budget online gamers who absolutely must play a specific game online. No one is challenging consumer rights here.

 

[Robin]

What does a game to (specific)game issued pass have anything to do with ownership. It was never about ownership or selling. Its about consumer acquisition of specific games to be played Online. You can do whatever you want with a game you bought that's not illegal. No one gets a raw deal except maybe low budget online gamers who absolutely must play a specific game online.

Well when you buy the game you buy the online component which is advertised as a feature of purchase provided you only agree to the PSN TOS. You own that online portion of the game disk but you don't obviously own the servers, however.....

Everyone who purchased a PS3 is now being cheated because they are entitled to free online gaming whether a title is new or not because Sony said all you have to do is agree to the PSN TOS and that was a pledge of the system. Now that's all changed because its no longer free online for everyone, its free online for first time early buyers. You could look at it as you have been cheated out of your PS3 purchase rather than the game purchases.

Some are being cheated financially and others (who never buy second hand games) are being cheated out of consumer rights even if they never exercise them. You should be able to play any PS3 games online for free, period.

No one is challenging consumer rights here.

Most consumers want to have a DRM free world and there are plenty that campaign for it every day.

Robin.

 

[icelt]

It was never a battle vs Gamestop. They may make up maybe 5% or less of secondhand game sales. 1 Amazon or Ebay account gets you access to 1000's of used game sellers to buy from with a single click that aren't Gamestop. Gamestop could fold and it won't kill used game sales.

Understood and I was just focusing on GS to help underscore the point because they actually have publicly released numbers we can point to. Furthermore if 2nd sales are really that profitable they should show up in the financials of a company like GS right? I mean walk into any GS and compare the self space dedicated to Used games versus New. If not 60%/40% in favor of Used than it's gotta be at least 50/50.

Anyway stating GS only accounts for 5% or less of used game sales probably deserves a source.

One thing I'm struggling with regarding the concept of "used game sales severely hurt publishers" is cold hard financial facts demonstrating this. If it is true, then there are facts out there to support the conclusion. Personally I think it is a load of hogwash, but I leave the door open for acceptance if someone can prove it. "It" meaning significant detrimental impact.

 

[LaBounti]

Well when you buy the game you buy the online component which is advertised as a feature of purchase provided you only agree to the PSN TOS. You own that online portion of the game disk but you don't obviously own the servers, however.....

Every game I own that has some kind of pass has it labeled on the box. But if you are buying used in the first place what ever you don't get that comes with the "new" game is no longer the manufactures responsibility. I screwed myself by buying Boarderlands GOTY used but the code was used for the additional content that was "advertised" as included. I can't blame anyone but myself. Now they come with it on the disc.

Everyone who purchased a PS3 is now being cheated because they are entitled to free online gaming whether a title is new or not because Sony said all you have to do is agree to the PSN TOS and that was a pledge of the system. Now that's all changed because its no longer free online for everyone, its free online for first time early buyers. You could look at it as you have been cheated out of your PS3 purchase rather than the game purchases.

It's the simplistic perception approach that causes people to see this as "charging for online" or "killing used game sales" which neither is true. These gamers will just have to play something else on PSN. Not even a full XBox live like paid PSN would change this. SOCOM4's pro mode is good example why. Most of these passes come with bonuses.

Some are being cheated financially and others (who never buy second hand games) are being cheated out of consumer rights even if they never exercise them. You should be able to play any PS3 games online for free, period.

No one is being cheated, games have been $60 since Xbox 360 introduced the new standard. Also they have a choice to just play something else... or they can buy new. No rights are being violated.

icelt I think I should have said probably instead of "may" I haven't bought used from them in at least a year. I'm just implying that used game sales can also come from Joe Everyman and his best friend Craig Slists. I really don't know. Just that Gamestop isn't the only source to acquire a game that wasn't directly sold for Sony Profit.

 

[marchi]

If people are so concerned about the added cost, go down to your local gamestop and request they take the cost of the online pass off the game value. In the end, these shops are making as much out of second hand games as they are brand new ones if not more and this is why Sony and Co are getting involved.

 

[CMvan46]

If people are so concerned about the added cost, go down to your local gamestop and request they take the cost of the online pass off the game value. In the end, these shops are making as much out of second hand games as they are brand new ones if not more and this is why Sony and Co are getting involved.

GS doesn't set a lot of the prices. Especially brand new titles. That's how businesses get licenses to sell their products, there are pricing structures set with certain games.