Sony exploring EA's Online Pass equivalent

[rounds1]

Originally Posted by PirateThom

Sony, as a major publisher, have a lot to lose from used game sales.

I have said this a few times, if you buy used you're not the customer of the company, they don't care what you think and don't have to give you anything.

If this was about online play, they'd do what they're doing with MAG, charging 99 cents a month for a new character slot, but apply it to EVERY game, but they're not... this is entirely about making people give Sony a cut, rather than Gamestop everything.

If they really weren't considering it, why would they mention it in the article that they were going to have discussions, which means they're considering it? They've mentioned it MANY times in the past, too. But if they meant to keep their word, would the topic have even come up, and wouldn't the guy giving the interview have squashed it right then? Like, "THAT'LL NEVER HAPPEN BECAUSE WE'RE SONY AND WE'VE NEVER SAID ONE THING AND DONE ANOTHER!" It's the same as BioWare saying "no comment" whenever they were asked if Mass Effect were going to be on the PS3 one day.

Don't you see the signs? Home, PSN+, now this? It all points to one thing... all of this buildup isn't so they can eventually stop charging for things... it'll only get worse until the inevitable happens, which is just to charge for online play rather than nickel and diming everyone to death with a bunch of nonsense. I know you want to believe when Sony said they'd never do it, but companies backtrack on a lot of things, and Sony is certainly no stranger to backtracking.

Now, I understand what the online pass is supposed to be for - but I doubt they're going to make much off of it, due to the reasons I listed above. If anything, this will just prevent people from buying used, but I doubt that'll even really happen. There are plenty of people who could care less about online play.

[rounds1]

Originally Posted by PirateThom

How many copies of Modern Warfare 2 did you see in stores, $5 cheaper a week after release?

Cause, I saw a hell of a lot.

The online pass is SPECIFICALLY trying to prevent the scenario you're describing, people buying used because it's cheaper. If the difference is $5 and an online pass is $10-15, then they'll likely opt for a new copy. Publisher gets a cut and retailer gets a cut rather than buying used where retailer gets all.

I get that, but I don't know many people who are going to buy a used copy a week after release that's only a few bucks cheaper. There is more of a risk for very little gain with buying used under that scenario.

I would think that most people buy used a long while after the game was released - and for those people, an online pass probably wouldn't be worth it anyhow.

But I'm not even denying that's what Sony's intentions are CURRENTLY. I'm saying that this is just one more clue towards what they really want to do, imo.

I'm very much understanding you guys - it seems the opposite when it comes to what I'm saying, though!

[rounds1]

Maybe if I copy the quote, you'll see that I'm not just reading between the lines. In fact, I had thought what I'm thinking immediately, before even reading the quote:

"In terms of just a charge for basic online play, that's something that we have to talk about a lot more and we struggle with a little bit because we feel very vindicated and base a lot of the success of PSN today--a 70 percent connection rate across consoles--on the fact that we've removed that major initial barrier to entry."

So what's there to talk about if they vowed to never do it? But what do I know?!?!? I've only always been right about everything I've ever said!

Maybe if you bury your head in the sand further and shove your thumb up your own arse, you won't see it happening before your eyes - and you can continue denying what is the inevitable! The problem with you guys, is that you always vowed to never pay for XBL and that because of your "principals" you'd never pay to play online. If Sony were to begin charging, we all know you'd all be first in line to start paying because it's Sony and suddenly it would be ok for one dumb reason or another.

It's just like with PSN+. All of these dopes who would NE-VER pay for XBL would pay for some idiotic service where you pay the same amount but get a bunch of discounts and freebies (which aren't really free... because you pay a subscription fee, you see) to games you may not want or already have. Does Burger King charge a monthly subscription fee for their coupons? No - because it's the dumbest thing anyone's ever heard of.

[boffo]

Obviously there will never be a cost for basic online play with the PS3. They've boasted that as a key selling point over the 360 for years now so there really isn't any way they could start doing it this gen. I think currently they are just experimenting with a bunch of different ways to generate revenue from the PSN to see what works and what doesn't with the hopes they won't have to lose the free online play trump card in the next gen.

And even if the PS4 charges for the PSN I think this online pass concept is here to stay. They really aren't related charges in any way as each one serves an entirely different purpose.

[rounds1]

So you think even if people are paying to play online that they'll charge you more for buying used? I would think just paying the monthly fee to Sony (or whomever) would be your "online pass"?

But I agree that you're safe as long as the PS3 is around. If anything, you'll be charged to play online with the PS4. And then MS will stop charging (yeah, right).

[dz06lt]

You can't seem to get it through your head that's has nothing to with online play other than a means to make $s off used games. Not how to charge for online play

[rounds1]

Ugh.

That is all.

[boffo]

Originally Posted by rounds1

So you think even if people are paying to play online that they'll charge you more for buying used? I would think just paying the monthly fee to Sony (or whomever) would be your "online pass"?

Yes they would. One charge would be to cover the costs associated with running the online infrastructure and the other is for the developer of the game to at least gain some revenue from used sales of the game they worked for months/years on.

Do you honestly think Sony would take the time to divide up the cost of an annual subscription, keep a certain percentage for their online division to cover network costs and then split the rest amongst the various 1st and 3rd party studios that lost revenue due to used game sales?

An "online pass" has nothing whatsoever to do with the costs associated with running the network. It's just the newest attempt at including something free with a new copy to encourage someone to spend the extra $5 over a used copy.

[rounds1]

No, no - I'm not saying Sony would divy up the profits from charging for online. I'm saying that if Sony were charging for online then they'd have no need to make an online pass for their own exclusives.

As for other publishers charging an online fee when buying a used game - I can still see that happening, just as EA is doing so on XBL.

I'm only talking about Sony exclusives, which from what I gather this article is referring to as well.

[boffo]

And it's still two totally unrelated charges that you're trying to pass off as being the same thing. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if within 6-12 months every single game that ships with an online mode will come with some sort of one-time use code to access the online play. Maybe not Wii games but definately everything on the other 2 consoles.