Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Xbox One Used Game Policy Leaks: Publishers Get a Cut of Sale

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the times-are-a-changin' dept.

XBox (Games) 379

Chewbacon writes "Details about the used-game policy on Microsoft's newly-announced Xbox One console have been leaked. The policy explains how used-game retailers can survive Xbox One destroying the used-game market as we know it: they have to agree to Microsoft's terms and conditions to do so. In summary, the used game retailer can still buy the game from the consumer, but they must report the consumer relinquishing their license to play the game to a Microsoft database. They must also sell it at a market price (35£ in the UK), but the publisher will get a cut of the price. The article goes on to explain how Xbox One will phone home periodically to verify a player hasn't sold the game according to the aforementioned database." A big downside is that we're likely going to see the end of cheap, used games. A potential upside pointed out by Ben Kuchera at the Penny Arcade Report is that this would unquestionably boost revenue for game publishers, giving the smart ones an opportunity to step away from the $60 business model and adopt pricing practices seen on Steam and iTunes (neither of which allow the purchase of "used" games/media). Also, it's worth noting that even if the policy leak is 100% correct, it could change before the console actually launches.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Where's the profit (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812131)

If game stores have to sell used games back at market price, why wouldn't they just sell the new game? Why would they buy back the old game at any price?

Re:Where's the profit (2)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812185)

If game stores have to sell used games back at market price, why wouldn't they just sell the new game? Why would they buy back the old game at any price?

..and uh, if they have to sell the used game at £35, why would the games companies sell them at that..

what it does is makes buying physical copies fucking useless. plenty of companies going to sell games at live for ten bucks though.

Re:Where's the profit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812193)

If game stores have to sell used games back at market price, why wouldn't they just sell the new game? Why would they buy back the old game at any price?

Brings customers into the store. They also have the option of not giving the customer cash but higher value in store credit which helps with additional sales of new titles and store loyalty.

market research? (5, Interesting)

Zimluura (2543412) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812215)

some anon yesterday(i think) suggested that all the info info we're getting about the drm sheme is just ms doing clandestine market research.

they leak news that makes it sound bearable - people respond positively.
then they leak news that gives them more control - people respond negatively.
through enough iterations they may find out the approach that will be most accepted.

who knows if that's what's really going on; but it sounds plausible.

Re:market research? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812579)

Not at all. MS have already said games are going to be locked to a single account and using a disc elsewhere will require paying an installation fee. Resellers are going to have to pay to have access to MS's disc/key system to be able to reset the disc within the system. We know all the details and how it will work, what we don't know is the price for each part.

Re:Where's the profit (1, Interesting)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812287)

in the USA the $60 game costs them somewhere around $50 to buy from the publisher. with store expenses its a loss leader.
in reality almost every retail store makes their profits on a small part of their inventory. almost everything else is a loss leader meant to get people into the store.

there is no way gamestop or anyone else can survive on new game sales. especially in the age of the internet and the ability to buy accessories cheaper online and get your game guide from youtube

the $50 used games at gamestop were bought for less than half that price which is why gamestop pushes used game sales

Re:Where's the profit (4, Informative)

Holi (250190) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812501)

Except Gamestop has admitted that their main profit driver is New Games, not used games. Kinda blows a hole in your theory.

Re:Where's the profit (3, Interesting)

Dunbal (464142) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812459)

The whole thing reeks of anti-trust.

Re:Where's the profit (1)

al3 (1285708) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812509)

And if the floor price for a used game is 35£ that creates a much narrower window for Steam-style sales. You wouldn't price a new copy below a used one.

Re:Where's the profit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812513)

And why would I, a consumer, buy a used game when it's the same price as a new game? Game stores aren't idiots. They won't buy used goods they can't then sell for a decent markup.

This sounds like MS promising they'll play nice with the used games market while still trying hard to kill it.

Re:Where's the profit (1)

Mitreya (579078) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812627)

If game stores have to sell used games back at market price, why wouldn't they just sell the new game?

Hahahah, probably because 35£ is the used game market price, not the new game market price.
Things have gotten so crazy, that 35£ is now the "reasonably low/used game" price?

Used Games? (5, Insightful)

Vanderhoth (1582661) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812145)

Can't sell used games for a console, if no one buys the console. Anyone foolish enough to fall into this trap and buy one deserves what they get.

Re:Used Games? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812539)

Can't sell used games for a console, if no one buys the console. Anyone foolish enough to fall into this trap and buy one deserves what they get.

As opposed to buying games on Steam? I must've missed it -- where's a link to the "transfer this" page?

Re:Used Games? (4, Insightful)

Sockatume (732728) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812559)

The funny thing is that it could turn out to be a thousand times less bad than it sounds, but by being cowards and refusing to lay out the system at the event itself, leaving the explanation of the service to a confused mass of PR statements, Phil Harrison interviews, and FAQ entries, they've made sure it looks absolutely as bad as possible.

Perfect.

Fuck you, MS (5, Insightful)

realmolo (574068) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812153)

Seriously.

I won't be buying ANY console that doesn't allow me to sell/trade/lend my games to WHOMEVER I want, for WHATEVER PRICE I want.

And frankly, I fully expect MS to get sued by various states, and possibly the feds. This is exactly the kind of "screw you" that consumers HATE. Maybe, possibly, this whole mess could finally get the Supreme Court to clarify what "first sale" rights are, and to do away with this whole bullshit of "we didn't sell you software, we just sold you a LICENSE TO USE our software".

Re:Fuck you, MS (4, Insightful)

Scutter (18425) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812237)

You're not buying anything. You're temporarily renting a license. The whole idea of "buying" any form of media has been bullshit for at least the last 15 years.

Re:Fuck you, MS (5, Insightful)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812289)

This is what they WANT you to think

Re:Fuck you, MS (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812593)

This is what they WANT you to think

Yeah. Because that's what it is, and that's how it works, and that's been proven for the past decade or so. So, yes, they want you to think that because that's correct. Idiot.

Re:Fuck you, MS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812365)

Downloading isn't stealing. It's temporarily making a replica. There was no intention to make a sale, so no sale is lost.

Don't download or buy kids! Punish by obscurity.

Re:Fuck you, MS (1)

mark-t (151149) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812421)

Downloading isn't stealing.

Did you reply to the wrong post or something? Who was saying that it is?

Re:Fuck you, MS (2)

Endo13 (1000782) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812523)

Don't download or buy kids!

I agree completely. I think your idea for punishment is a bit off though.

Re:Fuck you, MS (5, Insightful)

tankbob (633230) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812527)

Actually you are buying it in Europe... The European Court of Justice ruled on July 3, 2012, that it is indeed permissible to resell software licenses even if the digital good has been downloaded directly from the Internet, and that the first-sale doctrine applied whenever software was originally sold to a customer for an unlimited amount of time, as such sale involves a transfer of ownership, thus prohibiting any software maker from preventing the resale of their software by any of their legitimate owners.

Re:Fuck you, MS (3, Insightful)

Artraze (600366) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812549)

That is entirely untrue: you are buying a copy. What you can do with that copy is limited by copyright law (including the concepts of fair use) and every other applicable law (e.g. DMCA). A copy may come with an explicit license altering what you may do with it. For example, software EULAs will usually allow you to install a copy and create a backup. Without the ELUA you still have a copy; whether it has any value is another argument. Could there be exceptional cases where a copy might come with a shrink wrap license that says you must return the copy (without refund) if you violate it or don't agree? Possible, but it would quite likely unenforceable.

Even in this case, you are totally welcome to sell your game without going through MS's hoops; just don't expect it to work on MS's console. Why? Because that's what the copy does. If you modify it to work, you've broken copyright law by creating a derivative work. A license doesn't even come into play.

The only way your 'temporary/rental' bit makes any sense is if you meant it in the same way that one is only renting a car before it's eventual return to it's proper form of stardust. Just like a book from 100 years ago or a CD right now. A copy is a copy and the thing you bought. Just as owning a car doesn't entitle you to gas to make it go, owning a game copy doesn't entitle you to a console and authorization to make it play.

Re:Fuck you, MS (4, Interesting)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812269)

Especially since Sony announced the PS4 will play used games. If I were Sony, I would blast the airwaves with ads on how their competitor will not allow you to play used games without a feee. Sony has burned a lot of bridges in the past; they could use some good PR.

Re:Fuck you, MS (5, Insightful)

redemtionboy (890616) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812353)

I don't know if I'm convinced Sony isn't doing this either. Sony said they won't "block" used games. Technically Microsoft isn't either. Both companies were holding secret meetings about a year ago. I doubt both companies having similar architecture and other features is a coincidence. Sony has also said that you would install games to the drive like Microsoft claims. I'm betting they're just playing quiet.

Re:Fuck you, MS (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812443)

I don't know if I'm convinced Sony isn't doing this either. Sony said they won't "block" used games. Technically Microsoft isn't either. Both companies were holding secret meetings about a year ago. I doubt both companies having similar architecture and other features is a coincidence. Sony has also said that you would install games to the drive like Microsoft claims. I'm betting they're just playing quiet.

what sony is smartly doing is that sony is pushing it to be a problem of the publisher - if they want to limit it to one player per physical copy, then be it.

what publishers(EA) did with MS was that they made MS hold the shit stick.

Re:Fuck you, MS (5, Insightful)

stewsters (1406737) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812605)

Playing used games probably will be a nice feature that they decide will remove in 2014.

Sent from YellowDog on PS3... Oh wait, no it wasn't.

Re:Fuck you, MS (5, Funny)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812397)

Absolutely, because if there's one company you can trust, it's Sony.

Re:Fuck you, MS (1)

multimediavt (965608) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812301)

Maybe, possibly, this whole mess could finally get the Supreme Court to clarify what "first sale" rights are, and to do away with this whole bullshit of "we didn't sell you software, we just sold you a LICENSE TO USE our software".

Yes, but they may have patented said software that they just declared nothing but a license in their terms of use. How does that work? I don't mean specifically in this case per se, but I would imagine there are patented software components in the Xbox console's software. How do they declare the software not a thing but a license in the terms of use but have a software patent for code used in the software? Doesn't this circular logic invalidate software patents by terms of use?

Re:Fuck you, MS (2)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812337)

Patents don't preclude anyone from using/reusing/selling software. Copyright only prevents resales when there has been modification. The only thing that MS can do is specify that all games are leases (which require) you to agree to a EULA.

Re:Fuck you, MS (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812529)

> This is exactly the kind of "screw you" that consumers HATE.

LOL. Don't be so fucking naive. Apple's astonishing success with the "app store" proves that consumers will buy anything that is well marketed.

EU law? (5, Interesting)

Viewsonic (584922) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812167)

This sounds like it might run counter to the new EU law that mandates all software can be resold, regardless of licensing, agreements, and dongles. Didn't they make it specifically clear that when you buy software, it is yours, and yours alone, and you are free to resell it, and it then becomes theirs, and theirs alone. The actual publishers have no say in what you want to do with it.

Re:EU law? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812231)

Corporations only care about the law when somebody drags them into a courtroom, the existance of the law itself is often hardly a deterrent.

Re:EU law? (4, Interesting)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812265)

This sounds like it might run counter to the new EU law that mandates all software can be resold, regardless of licensing, agreements, and dongles. Didn't they make it specifically clear that when you buy software, it is yours, and yours alone, and you are free to resell it, and it then becomes theirs, and theirs alone. The actual publishers have no say in what you want to do with it.

ms didn't think of eu one bit with xbox one.
if ms wanted to turn their new console into a steam box, they have succeeded.

I suspect there was one big company, namely EA, who lobbied for MS to do this so it wouldn't be their fault. they knew what was coming when they made an empty announcement about dropping the online pass.. which was fucking stupid shit pr - ONLY people who care about it are the people who are now angry at both EA and MS. just shit poor PR.

"hey let's make a reveal about the new console.. what shall we tell about it? I KNOW, let's tell only the crap they'll be getting! and let's not show them one bit of cool gameplay or tell about the hw! ". it really seems they were fucked by the PS4 release and someone just decided that they had to announce something.. but what do they announce? that you can watch TV! live TV! and that you might just as well buy all your games from steam, you're not going to be reselling or loaning them anyways.

Re:EU law? (4, Interesting)

Xest (935314) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812417)

One of the guys at the top of EA, Peter Moore, was at the top of Microsoft's XBox program for years too, so it's no surprise really to see the level of collaboration.

I don't think there would've had to have been much lobbying in all honesty, I think the MS-EA relationship is extremely cosy.

Re:EU law? (1)

Kartu (1490911) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812325)

I wonder how that applies to Starcraft II that I bought (I do live in EU)... =/

Legal? (5, Insightful)

fermion (181285) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812175)

I don't normally assume that major companies do not have competent lawyers, but as far as I know price fixing is illegal in the US. There are ways to keep prices set for new products, but for the most part we have "suggested retail price". This also would seem to violate the first sale doctrine, which has been upheld in many court cases.

Re:Legal? (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812281)

You're buying a license. You also are not allowed to re-sell licenses to Blizzard games, or MS Office, or a lot of software, and I dont believe that has ever been successfully fought.

Price-fixing (1)

phorm (591458) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812345)

Well, they're allowing sales, but they're still fixing the price. I think the issue at hand is this:

They must also sell it at a market price (35£ in the UK)

It looks like pretty much straight-up price-fixing to me. By similar logic, ebooks are also "licenses" rather than physical copies, but Apple and various publishers are still in trouble for price-fixing in that market.

Re:Price-fixing (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812589)

Good thing you're not a lawyer, then.

This is about as much "price fixing" as Wal-Mart saying, "You can buy this item at any of our stores for $8.88," or Amazon saying "We sell all e-books at $9.99."

Don't like MSFT's policies? Don't buy into their ecosystem. Plenty of other game systems and games exist.

Re:Legal? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812467)

It should have been fought a long time ago. The concept of "licensing" is horrible and the reason its horrible will become evident as soon as 3D printing goes mainstream.

Humans copy behavior just like their ape cousins. Licensing says "You can't do something you were genetically predisposed to do because money."

It's such a stupid, foolish thing and the longer people buy into it the more evident the stupidity will become.

Re:Legal? (2)

Krojack (575051) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812367)

I kinda figured this goes against First-sale. How can the publisher demand that the used product be sold for a set amount then try to take a cut? They already got their cut from the first sale. What's next? Auto manufactures going after used car dealers?

Re:Legal? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812517)

I kinda figured this goes against First-sale. How can the publisher demand that the used product be sold for a set amount then try to take a cut? They already got their cut from the first sale. What's next? Auto manufactures going after used car dealers?

yeah, the only way this would be ok if gamestop etc would have to start labeling their xbox bin as "rentals".

Re:Legal? (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812543)

It's funny that maybe a dozen years back, my older brother started getting into country music, particularly Garth Brooks. Garth Brooks has this crusade where he wanted used music stores to pay royalties on used music they sold. My brother thought this was a great idea until I told him that meant that book publishers could demand a cut of every book sold on the used market which meant his college books would be even higher in price. The only thing that the publisher has is that since this is software it has a license whereas other goods like cars, books, etc do not. The Kindle books are in a gray area here.

Re:Legal? (1)

SirAstral (1349985) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812381)

Yep, paid much attention to the market lately?

You will not be hard pressed to find things that are effectively price fixed, but you are essential correct, this should technically be illegal as it circumvents first-sale, and anti-monopoly law.

They removed a statement from my submission (5, Insightful)

Chewbacon (797801) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812191)

Anyway, I wanted to spell it out for you all, but it was removed. This proves to us that this plan for used games has nothing to do with countering piracy, but only feeding greed.

Re:They removed a statement from my submission (1)

Zeromous (668365) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812217)

Slashdot editors, shame on you. There is nothing hyperbolic about this statement.

Man why is every site I like just a corporate shovel fest these days?

Re:They removed a statement from my submission (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812261)

Anyway, I wanted to spell it out for you all, but it was removed. This proves to us that this plan for used games has nothing to do with countering piracy, but only feeding greed.

We prefer to make our own conclusions and we don't need it spelled out for us. Thanks!

Re:They removed a statement from my submission (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812515)

Greed, aka paying development costs. Now, I believe that people should be able to sell their games (even though I never do). The big issue, as I see it, is that there are stores that make a great deal of profit off of buying back games and slightly undercutting the cost of the new copies. To me, this is a bit different than an individual selling to another individual since the store itself is controlling prices of both the new and used markets. Not all titles are hurt by this practice, but those with no online component and average game length (~10 hours) definitely are.

Re:They removed a statement from my submission (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812525)

Glad they removed that statement from your submission.

People don't complain at Steam (5, Informative)

earlzdotnet (2788729) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812201)

I already see the trolls coming to say "So what if Microsoft does it, Steam's been doing it for years". Well, look at Steam's prices and sales. I saw a game that came out a few months ago for $20 on Steam in a sale. The best "sale" of new-ish games on the Xbox (online) market is a $60 game being sold at $50. Steam's prices are competitive, Microsoft's isn't.

In fact, if they are making used game activations fixed at ~$35, this is basically price fixing. Here's to hope that some publishers will see that they can offer new copies for $35 or $40, instead of the typical $60. If they allowed distribution across the internet, this would *completely* destroy the used games market, which I wouldn't say is a super terrible thing if the pricing will be fixed. This would lead to a chain reaction of the used game market fighting to have non-fixed prices.

Re:People don't complain at Steam (2, Informative)

porges (58715) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812329)

35 pounds, not dollars, aka (right now) $53.

Re:People don't complain at Steam (1)

Luthair (847766) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812349)

You're making excuses for Steam, many stores sell off slightly older titles at a steep discount. If Microsoft goes this route I won't buy their system any more than I will buy a game on Steam.

Re:People don't complain at Steam (2)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812379)

In the case of Steam, if you want to buy the original game, you can (if you can find it) and install it on your PC. Steam offers you convenience as you can get the game easily and not have to worry about compatibility. For some of the really old games, there are some work to go through to make them work on Win 7 for example.

Re:People don't complain at Steam (4, Interesting)

bickerdyke (670000) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812389)

And at least with Steam, you get back a few of the advantages of media-less game distribution. Like immedeate delivery (download), free replacement delivery (try that with a broken physically DVD) and no need to jam the DVD in just for the useless copyprotection check.

Re:People don't complain at Steam (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812465)

uh xbox live already exists.

what this is, is pushing people towards more to it.

which makes xbox not have any advantages over steam box/pc. hell, you can even watch the fucking halo tv series on pc so no need for that even!

Steam looks better by comparison (1)

SirGarlon (845873) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812577)

Well, I'm one of the trolls -- I've complained about Steam more than once. Let's just say I prefer the model where I have a physical medium I can lend to my friend or resell. If Microsoft is abandoning that model, then my reason to prefer Xbox over Steam goes away.

PC Gaming (5, Insightful)

puddingebola (2036796) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812203)

If you find this onerous, being tied to a console and the policies of the manufacturer, why not vote with your dollars and return to PC gaming? Crazy first person shooting, online RPG playing, live-action strategy obsessing gamers have never had more options to choose from in terms of platforms and services to supplement their addiction.

Re:PC Gaming (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812453)

You didn't list anything that would indicate the "PC gaming" situation is any different than that of console gaming. Given your lead-in, you should've pointed out how PC game prices are better, capricious manufacturers aren't a problem, resale works flawlessly, etc. - but since you didn't say any of that, I'm left to conclude PC gaming has the exact same issues as console gaming.

If you don't like the policies Microsoft (or anyone, really) puts in place for their products... don't buy the product. Don't pirate it either, since that just a) shows them there's demand for it and b) reinforces their self-justification for the onerous practices. Buy something else, or nothing at all - but don't buy into their system.

YRO (4, Insightful)

multimediavt (965608) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812207)

A big downside is that we're likely going to see the end of cheap, used games.

Ummm, no. The big downside here is the death of the First Sale Doctrine [wikipedia.org] in the United States and the ridiculous court proceedings that will ensue to try to defend it and revise copyright law that has gone completely off the rails from its original intent.

HaHaHa (1)

SirAstral (1349985) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812211)

I am glad this will not be affecting me as I will not be buying any more consoles for the remainder of my life. It is time for them to die and just use the PC or a smartphone in my opinion.

I wonder how people would react to Ford, Chevy, or GM not only requesting to be compensated when that vehicle is resold, but also controlling its price? It is time to stop selling vehicles and licensing their use!
It takes a publisher nearly nothing to copy/create/spawn a new disk where the auto maker still requires the expertise of staff and systems capable of building the same machine repeatedly with quality.
We must all look forward to the future where we do not own any of our technology.

Unbelievable (1)

furbyhater (969847) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812219)

Muahahaha!!!

I used to be an avid gamer during the first 3-4 console generations, but when I see what they're trying to push nowadays (less freedom/revenue for consumerls and SMBs, more control and profits for the most useless parts of the chain (distributors), I can't believe that people continue buying this stuff. Get yourself a few good emulators for SNES/GBA/PS1/PS2/N64/GCN and you've enough old-school gems to stay entertained for the rest of your life. If you want new games, buy PC games and join kickstarters.

I hope the younger generations still hasn't and won' get used to such a blatant rip-off.

Re:Unbelievable (1)

SirAstral (1349985) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812303)

Yep, this is pretty much the model I have adopted! If I had the financial muster I would start a gaming company just to keep things the way they should be!

No always on DRM, no stupid snoopity systems and quality diverse selection of games not where titles are just FPS based with an endless sequence of ever changing numbers.

This almost feels more evil (1)

duckgod (2664193) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812225)

Am I the only one that feels worse about this plan then if they had banned used games alltogether. So I won't be able to sell my games first hand anymore. I am at the mercy of GameStop(which is at the mercy of Microsoft).

So if GameStop receives a million requests to sell back Madden whatever because of poor quality. Supply and demand would normally mean used prices would go down both for the seller of the game and the resseller. But in this scenario Gamestop can't give much money for game because they are going to have to sell it for X amount of $ according to Microsoft.

Meh I aint no economist but the feeling I get is consumer will get screwed worse then if they were just 1 use license like PC games have adopted.

Re:This almost feels more evil (1)

bickerdyke (670000) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812409)

For me, Gamestop dies at the moment when I discovered that used games cost more there than new games at Amazon.

Consumer policy leaks: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812245)

We're not going to buy it.

Windows 8: The Console

LOL Publishers Backing Away from the $60 Mark? (2)

Apharmd (2640859) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812247)

They are more likely to RAISE prices if anything. Whatever game journalist actually believes that DRM makes prices lower is extremely naive.

Re:LOL Publishers Backing Away from the $60 Mark? (1)

Luthair (847766) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812375)

Exactly, new expensive games compete with older games that you can buy at a discount. Artificially inflate the price of older games and that will decrease the need to be price competitive on new games.

Re:LOL Publishers Backing Away from the $60 Mark? (1)

jellomizer (103300) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812387)

Not if people will not buy the games at that price.
Games are controlled by market forces. And unlike say Windows of Office where you are more or less need the product, or suffer the pain of using 3rd party alternatives (Please no LibreOffice works for me and my business examples, I get it!, I am talking broadly here). Games people can get by without it if they are too expensive.
You do not need to play video games.
Not playing a video game will not negatively affect your life, in any grand scheme of things.

So if you don't like the price don't buy it. So if makers start raising the prices in dollars, while also raising the price in loss of freedom. You can choose not to buy it.
Chances are if you lose your freedom, you can buy the product for a cheaper price, because you are choosing to give up say reselling your game for the ability to get it for a lower price.

Collusion? (5, Interesting)

mrjatsun (543322) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812275)

Excuse my ignorance of the law, wouldn't this be considered collusion between Microsoft and the game companies to fix game prices?

Re:Collusion? (1)

KillaGouge (973562) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812493)

I believe it would only be collusion if they said that all new games must cost $80 and cannot cost less. Also if they said you must only pay $x for games traded in, and I don't believe that is the case. Microsoft and publishers are just saying that if you want to accept games you need be attached to Microsoft's database and agree that Microsoft and publishers will take a percentage of whatever price you set. They are not setting prices for used games, just asking for a slice of the pie. Immoral maybe, but not illegal.

Re:Collusion? (1)

KillaGouge (973562) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812601)

I know TFS says market price, but the article states "The retailer can then sell the pre-owned game at whatever price they like, although as part of the system the publisher of the title in question will automatically receive a percentage cut of the sale. As will Microsoft. The retailer will pocket the rest." https://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/publishers-to-receive-cut-of-xbox-one-pre-owned-sales-at-retail/0116137 [mcvuk.com]

Corporate greed (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812295)

Why do I foresee Xbox 1's license server being dos'd into the ground day 1

Craiglists and friends ? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812297)

This means we can't sell the game thru any other channel than a certified used game store ?

Yeah... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812309)

Lets show ourselves a little respect and not give Microsoft our money anymore...

time to short game stop stock? (2)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812313)

time to short game stop stock?

Re:time to short game stop stock? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812613)

Too late, you already missed the big drop.

The question is (1)

Kartu (1490911) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812315)

Whether Sony will follow them, or try "we are better, we don't!" route.

I don't see how Microsoft's scheme could work without forcing you to activate your game online.
Bought a disk, don't have even a dial up internet connection, can't play, wonderful...

And regarding "boosting revenues" argument, Activision Blizzard has been grabbing money for quite some time, remind me, how that had changed the quality of their games. Or how their games have become cheaper.

Re:The question is (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812607)

Well, the new Xbox One will require an internet connection. MS has not disclosed many details other than it will be required to play games. They have said different answers to questions but the most common message is that the Xbox One will contact MS at least once a day. So if your internet goes down, you have one day of playing time.

Longevity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812319)

One of the biggest issues I have with this console is the uncertainty of how long it will be supported. I'm not a fan of people selling used games next to new ones, but I often buy used games that are no longer in production. I like buying old ds games that didn't sell well or N64 games I lost many years back, but if they did this, why would anyone resell their games? Would used games be stil sold and then get the fee added on? What happens when MS discontinues support of the Xbox 3: Xbox One? Too much uncertainty.

So much for right of first sale ... (4, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812333)

This largely wipes out your right of first sale, and it props up the business model for the buggy whip makers.

Why should a video game company get a cut of used sales? Oh, right, because it's software, you licensed it, and have no rights.

This pretty much cements the fact that XBox One is something I will definitely not be interested in.

Right now I can buy used games, take a game over to a friends place, and sell my games -- and it's none of Microsoft or the game publisher's business. This basically says we will need their permission to do anything, and entrenches their own revenue stream.

There's no way in hell this leads to companies charging less for games, they'll just take their cut on both ends and expand their profits.

Sorry Microsoft, but I'll pass thanks. There's nothing about this that's good for consumers.

Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812341)

Why would I pay market price for a used game instead of buying it new? This will absolutely not make used game sellers any money, they will lose a lot of money, which in turn will screw consumers selling their games.

M$ has failed as usual...

Re:Why? (1)

TheSpoom (715771) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812591)

I'm not sure I would consider forcing the used game buyers to buy new instead a "failure" from Microsoft's perspective.

Double payment (2)

intermodal (534361) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812343)

What I want to know is why in the world the publisher deserves a cent for a game already paid for. Not why they legally can put it into their license, but why they deserve it.

Re:Double payment (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812531)

What I want to know is why in the world the publisher deserves a cent for a game already paid for.

Because America has staked her entire future on the needs of the copyright/IP lobby, and is entirely dependent on these companies being able to grow their profits indefinitely, to the point that business models are now entrenched in law.

Without corporate profits and executive bonuses, the entire economy would grind to a halt.

Who cares if they cut out jobs and outsource everything and actually gut the economy they're supposed to be driving? Capitalism demands that you work for the same wages as someone in Mumbai, or are just an impediment to profits.

Why do you hate America? You must be some sort of commie if you don't recognize the primacy of corporate profits.

Re:Double payment (2)

intermodal (534361) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812615)

AC doesn't bother to comprehend a post before responding. Go figure.

Trinity: Dodge this! (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812363)

Seems like they could be heading for legal problems, where sales are, and simultaneously are not, actual sales, depending on which laws they are trying to dodge.

It's not sales to they can dodge warranty and liability laws, but it is sales so they can get money, but it's not so people can't resell discs, but they do anyway, so it is so we will do it, but it's not because we will force you to give us a cut of something you already bought from us, but didn't.

"Own" is dead? Time to rent. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812395)

I dropped $60 for a product, not a rental. This means I own it, it's my property.

If you're not gonna sell me a product, I'm not buying. If you're gonna "license" it out to me, I'll rent properly and not pay you shit. I'll gamefly, I'll netflix, I'll blockbuster. Okay, that last one might be tricky.

Only stores can sell 3rd party games (4, Insightful)

CimmerianX (2478270) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812403)

So, this effectively kills my ability to ebay off an old game I don't play anymore. Only 'big' stores will be able to sell used games after they remove the original buyer from the database? I can easily forsee many many people unable to play games because some minumum wage gamestop employee typoed a game's serial number or something. Plus, you might as well paint a big bullseye on that database for hackers. Can you imagine all of xbox losing all it's user/game data at once.... lol

Amusing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812411)

It's amusing to me that anyone thinks that the game publishers will voluntarily reduce their prices. Will. Not. Happen.

This kills the rental market (1)

Nyder (754090) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812423)

Guess no one will be renting Xbox One games either. I know back in the day I'd rent games I'd be thinking about buying.

But then, maybe no one rents games anymore. Well, we know they won't be renting Xbox One games.

they can offer online renting / free weekends (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812561)

they can offer online renting / free weekends

What I want to see is (2)

medv4380 (1604309) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812431)

Nintendo and Sony having commercials at launch highlighting the problem of friends sharing games under the model. I will not give Microsoft One Dime of my gaming budget. I will not allow my children to on a console they can't lend games to their friends. I will not eat Green Eggs and SPAM.

I wonder if they've fully considered.. (1)

Troggie87 (1579051) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812447)

I really have to wonder if they even consider gaming the primary market for this next Xbox, or if they are thinking that the Xbox will find its way into homes primarily as a unified entertainment system. If the latter is their goal, they must believe that most families aren't going to own multiple expensive gaming devices, so once established they have a captive market on the gaming front.

Of course if they are wrong, they might literally cause the decline of gaming in society. If we operate on the premise that modern young people are "addicted" to media in general, and gaming in particular, Microsoft is assuming that they can spike the price in their drug and extract more from the junkies. In the real world when this happens, the junkies typically turn to crime (I suppose piracy in this case, though I'm not a big advocate of copyright), stop using, or move on to another drug (sometimes a homemade variant of the original).

What we might very well see in the future is a shift in media consumption habits away from the big publishers to smaller studios making games for pc and mobile devices, underscored by a drop-off in "traditional" gaming in general (as people start to see more value in a movie and a meal for $20 instead of paying $60 for a 10 hour long game). If the big publishers actually implemented a steam-style pricing model that could change, but I seriously doubt any will try. Companies very rarely evolve into an entirely different animal, and a Steam-esque change would be one hell of an evolution for the likes of EA and Activision.

Game price reduction? Don`t make me laugh! (5, Insightful)

CmdrEdem (2229572) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812449)

Here in Brazil we saw comparable situation. Our import taxes pretty much doubled the price of the games. So a few business started to print discs here while the game industry lobby worked on a tax reduction. They got the reduction and guess what? Most games are still the same price as before, with exceptions like Ubisoft that at first reduced the price by 25% (From 200R$ to 150R$), but since then already increased the prices again from 150R$ to 180R$ at launch. They will just increase profit margin per unit and hope people are dumb enough to buy a console that takes away your right as owner of the product.

I don`t but used games, but I respect the right of a user to do to his game as he pleases. Games should not be different from any other physical property. If I pay for someone to build a house, I don`t have to pay the contractor a part of the rent or part of my money if I sell the house. That`s absurd! The difference is that since games still have market value when the original owner is done with them they are trying to milk us once again for our money.

Best line (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43812457)

"as profit margins rise it's possible we'll see prices drop"

Yeah, and if my grandma had wheels she'd be a WAGON. Good fucking luck with THAT pipe dream, PA Report guys.

The article also fails to mention a key component of AAA game purchasing nowadays: the de-facto acknowledgement that you're paying WAY TOO MUCH for 10-15 hours of shiny, badly-plotted shit but that it's OK because you can sell it after you're done and only end up $20 in the hole. Take that away, and now you're paying $60+ for that 10 hours with no recourse: publishers had better *hope* that their profit margins increase, because their sales are almost certainly going to drop.

Yeah, such a credible source too.. (1)

adycarter (261257) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812481)

The source of all this is an email, from a guy, who spoke to someone who does something at a game store.

Totally legit man, lets just take everything from here http://thexboxreveal.com/ [thexboxreveal.com] as gospel too!

Android Gaming Wins Again (1, Insightful)

tuppe666 (904118) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812487)

I started writing a post about who the hell could afford this new gaming environment...how bland and safe games in that market will become(have already become), and about Microsoft squandering another opportunity at this crossroads(the smart TV while we have dumb TV's)...where they could have dominated the living room(Bill is going to be squirming in interviews again)...the whole point of the Xbox anyway.

The fun is going to be in $1-to-$4 android (and platform independent indie) games I've been there for a while...I'm adding OUYA to the mix, but there is already a cheat choice of consoles.

This is exactly what consumers want! (3, Funny)

Alejux (2800513) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812623)

To boost revenues of game publishers! Microsoft is really in touch with their consumers, it's like magic. First the Windows 8, now this.

Get a clue (1)

SINternet (1194899) | about a year and a half ago | (#43812629)

MS and others have been wanting to get Consumers away from Physical Media anyway. This "leak" is on par with that. Everything is intended to be downloadable. What that does for Gaemstop and the like who knows.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?