E3 2013

  • (4 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4

45 Replies - 1927 Views - Last Post: 12 June 2013 - 10:23 AM

#16 Curtis Rutland  Icon User is online

  • (╯□)╯︵ (~ .o.)~
  • member icon


Reputation: 4498
  • View blog
  • Posts: 7,850
  • Joined: 08-June 10

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 05:57 AM

Sony absolutely won E3. I was hoping they'd go for the throat, and they did. Better price point, better hardware (minus the Kinect, of course), better policies...Sony hit it out of the ballpark. I was already planning on getting a PS4 first. I'm more excited now than I was.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#17 rgfirefly24  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Lover
  • member icon


Reputation: 267
  • View blog
  • Posts: 1,477
  • Joined: 07-April 08

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 06:21 AM

I was going to get an XBox just because of the kinect, but after the E3 reveals I would have to say that Microsoft really fell flat. The only game that I really am looking forward to at this point isn't exclusive so why should I pay for the XBox version only to be stuck with it when I get get it on PS4 and not have to worry about the DRM crap.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#18 creativecoding  Icon User is offline

  • Hash != Encryption
  • member icon


Reputation: 926
  • View blog
  • Posts: 3,205
  • Joined: 19-January 10

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 07:28 AM

Not to mention the whole kinect being required to be connected. Should have called it the Xbox One Nine Eight Four.

Flukeshot: the argument of potential sales only really applies to piracy. That argument could be applied to anything, really (ex hammers at Walmart to ensure only one person uses it - otherwise it "hurts" the manufacturer). If you buy the product, it's 100 percent yours and while things like making copies aren't acceptable, sharing your own property damn well should be.

This post has been edited by creativecoding: 11 June 2013 - 07:29 AM

Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#19 Bort  Icon User is offline

  • Ill-informed Mongoloid
  • member icon

Reputation: 409
  • View blog
  • Posts: 3,001
  • Joined: 18-September 06

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 07:29 AM

One reveal that looked good, but I am dubious about is Elder Scrolls Online. I would assume they are trying to move everyone onto using voice comms asopposed to chat boxes ont he screen, since it is being launched for the PC, Mac, PS4, and xBoxOne. That in itself makes me think it won't go anywhere, having played both PC and console RPGs. The PC versions are far more in depth than the console versions due to superior processing power and memory, so my fear is that ESO will be too simplistic for people who preferred PC games, and not action-y enough for console gamers who play the likes of CoD.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#20 modi123_1  Icon User is offline

  • Suitor #2
  • member icon



Reputation: 9287
  • View blog
  • Posts: 34,811
  • Joined: 12-June 08

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:24 AM

Nifty news nuggets..

Quote

Apparently, online multiplayer gaming on the PS4 will require a $50 per year subscription to PlayStation Plus, matching a similar requirement for Xbox Live Gold to get online multiplayer on Microsoft's systems.
...
Elsewhere on Twitter, Sony provided some good news to potential PlayStation 4 owners who might want to buy games from across the ocean. In response to a direct question, Sony third-party relations manager Brad Douglas tweeted that "SCEI PR tells me 'no region locking' [for the PS4]."

cite
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#21 creativecoding  Icon User is offline

  • Hash != Encryption
  • member icon


Reputation: 926
  • View blog
  • Posts: 3,205
  • Joined: 19-January 10

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:34 AM

Didn't Playstation Plus give the subscriber a ton of cheap/free games though? I wonder how this will impact that.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#22 Curtis Rutland  Icon User is online

  • (╯□)╯︵ (~ .o.)~
  • member icon


Reputation: 4498
  • View blog
  • Posts: 7,850
  • Joined: 08-June 10

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:40 AM

Yes it does. They have a pool of free games, and every month one gets added and one removed, is how I'm pretty sure it works. You can download any of the ones that are free, and you can keep it as long as you are a PS+ subscriber.

I'm actually OK with them adding the requirement to pay for multiplayer, assuming they reinvest that profit in a more robust online experience. What I'm not OK with is if they decide to make non-game stuff require PS+, like Netflix. Which from everything I've read, they're not doing.

I really think PS+ is like a better, slightly cheaper version of XBL.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#23 adolf625  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Head
  • member icon

Reputation: 21
  • View blog
  • Posts: 161
  • Joined: 22-November 08

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:45 AM

Playstation plus is the better service, this month alone they added 7 free games. some are indie games but they have even given free copies of Deus Ex and Sleeping Dogs. It definitely has more bang for the buck.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#24 depricated  Icon User is offline

  • Derpicorn

Reputation: 752
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,501
  • Joined: 13-September 08

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 09:14 AM

View PostFlukeshot, on 11 June 2013 - 02:38 AM, said:

It hurts the developers to allow it - for every resale of a used game is potential sales that the developer has lost.

I disagree with the idea that game trading hurts developers - I think it assumes a false sense of entitlement. Every game I've ever received as a trade was one I would not have been willing to buy to try. For example, I traded Street Fighter 2 for Ys 3: Wanderers from Ys. Just seeing the game lying there I never would have tried it, but I was unimpressed with Street Fighter (still am, have never bought another SF game) and my friend was unimpressed with Ys.

So I loved Ys as a kid. A few months ago I stumbled onto the franchise again. Had I not known the game, I would have skipped past Ys: Origin. Instead, I bought it. And then I bought Ys Chronicles. Then I bought Ys: the Oath in Felghana. Now, Ys 4 and 5 are not remade or available, so I'm still trying to dig up copies of those. But I picked up Ys 6: the Ark of Napishtim, and plan to buy Ys 7 when it's released. But that's just over $100 I spent buying Ys games and plan to spend on more. And that's just Ys.

But, that's not why game trading is the 'right' of the customer. That's why it's good for business.

Why it's the right of the customer is simple: once I have purchased a copy of the game, that copy is my property, to do with as I wish. I can play it, I can destroy it, I can do anything in between - including giving it away to someone else who wants it when I don't. Imagine if the same logic applied by big-name game studios and their apologists to the 'right' of game developers to not have their product traded were applied to other materials vendors. I'll even stick with another game in this example.

Want to play Baseball? Awesome, lets get you a baseball starter package for the low low price of $150! That's a glove, a ball, and a bat. Low quality ones, because you're only buying the starter kit - the standard gear is going to cost you. $800 isn't unreasonable for your own licensed copy of our famous Louisville Slugger. Trust us, we say it's not, so it's not! Part of the reason we had to make that Slugger so expensive is the DRM protection - if the sensor detects an impact without having received a scan of your fingerprint within 3 minutes before, it sends an alert to our HQ with your registration information and device key to let us know about unlicensed use of our gaming equipment.

Now, our gear is only licensed for play with our equipment. The Smallpark Scanner Pack is only a mere $9000 and includes everything you need to register your three bases, up to 50 balls, and two full dugouts worth of bats and mitts! It also comes with a license allowing up to 200 spectators! Now you can host your own Amatuer League Game!

Transfer of goods is strictly prohibited. Equipment sold separately. See store for details.

How many people would have played baseball as a kid, if baseball manufacturers marketed the way EA Games does?
Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

#25 Curtis Rutland  Icon User is online

  • (╯□)╯︵ (~ .o.)~
  • member icon


Reputation: 4498
  • View blog
  • Posts: 7,850
  • Joined: 08-June 10

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 09:22 AM

Quote

once I have purchased a copy of the game, that copy is my property, to do with as I wish. I can play it, I can destroy it, I can do anything in between - including giving it away to someone else who wants it when I don't


That's a fundamental misunderstanding of licensing and ownership. Games are software. For example, if you buy a copy of Office from Microsoft's online store, you don't expect to be able to trade or resell it. You've licensed the usage of that software for yourself. The same is true with PC games. You don't expect to be able to resell or trade your Steam games. On top of that, even if we accept that you physically own that copy and can resell or trade it, you still don't have carte blanche; you're not allowed to copy the game, or reprint it for sale. So even if your premise were correct, you still can't "do as you wish with it".

The difference is that we've had over 20 years of treating console games as physical property rather than software licenses. Microsoft is trying to shift the model. Consumers don't like that, since it gives us nothing, and takes away something we consider to be critical.

To be clear, I'm against what Microsoft has done. But I'm also for clarity and understanding, and what you've posted is just not true.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#26 depricated  Icon User is offline

  • Derpicorn

Reputation: 752
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,501
  • Joined: 13-September 08

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 09:36 AM

View PostCurtis Rutland, on 11 June 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

Quote

once I have purchased a copy of the game, that copy is my property, to do with as I wish. I can play it, I can destroy it, I can do anything in between - including giving it away to someone else who wants it when I don't


That's a fundamental misunderstanding of licensing and ownership. Games are software. For example, if you buy a copy of Office from Microsoft's online store, you don't expect to be able to trade or resell it. You've licensed the usage of that software for yourself. The same is true with PC games. You don't expect to be able to resell or trade your Steam games. On top of that, even if we accept that you physically own that copy and can resell or trade it, you still don't have carte blanche; you're not allowed to copy the game, or reprint it for sale. So even if your premise were correct, you still can't "do as you wish with it".

The difference is that we've had over 20 years of treating console games as physical property rather than software licenses. Microsoft is trying to shift the model. Consumers don't like that, since it gives us nothing, and takes away something we consider to be critical.

To be clear, I'm against what Microsoft has done. But I'm also for clarity and understanding, and what you've posted is just not true.
Well, I was trying to avoid outright getting into the evils of Intellectual Property Rights.

The PHYSICAL object is mine to do with as I wish. No I don't expect to be able to trade a game on Steam or a digital download, however I absolutely expect to be able to trade a disc or cartridge. I frequently (well, as frequently as is likely anyway - every couple months or so it comes up) share my Windows 7 disc, my Office discs, my Metroid 3 cartridge, my car, my baseball bat, and any other number of entertainment devices. In the case of Windows 7 and Office, this does not give them a LICENSE KEY, but it does allow them to use their license key to install the software without having to rebuy it. Any game either purchased as a digital download or purchased with a soft-key I would expect not to be able to trade. However, if I can physically transfer the license then I absolutely expect to be able to transfer it. I hand my brother my copy of Fallout 3, because hey I think it's an atrocious game and find it patently offensive to any fan of the original franchise, I expect him to be able to use it. If I give him the physical key, it's his. If I give him the physical discs with the physical key, he can use that key to activate the software on the discs, on his system. Why should this be a problem?

edit: incidentally, even though most don't expect it, you ARE able to trade games over steam, it's just a convoluted process for a game you didn't buy into your 'gifts' bin

This post has been edited by depricated: 11 June 2013 - 09:38 AM

Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#27 supersloth  Icon User is offline

  • serial frotteur - RUDEST MEMBER ON D.I.C.
  • member icon


Reputation: 4503
  • View blog
  • Posts: 28,411
  • Joined: 21-March 01

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 10:00 AM

so by that logic if they started requiring license keys to the use the discs then your expectations of video game software would change accordingly?
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#28 supersloth  Icon User is offline

  • serial frotteur - RUDEST MEMBER ON D.I.C.
  • member icon


Reputation: 4503
  • View blog
  • Posts: 28,411
  • Joined: 21-March 01

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 10:11 AM

View Postadolf625, on 11 June 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

Playstation plus is the better service, this month alone they added 7 free games. some are indie games but they have even given free copies of Deus Ex and Sleeping Dogs. It definitely has more bang for the buck.

well, it was at least. now that it's required for multiplayer and xbox live is giving away free games as well, it's basically the same thing.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#29 Curtis Rutland  Icon User is online

  • (╯□)╯︵ (~ .o.)~
  • member icon


Reputation: 4498
  • View blog
  • Posts: 7,850
  • Joined: 08-June 10

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 10:14 AM

Except it's slightly cheaper, and you don't have to pay to use Netflix. So, sight unseen, PS+ is the superior product. We'll have to wait until they're out to determine which offers the better online experience.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#30 BenignDesign  Icon User is offline

  • holy shitin shishkebobs
  • member icon




Reputation: 6132
  • View blog
  • Posts: 10,592
  • Joined: 28-September 07

Re: E3 2013

Posted 11 June 2013 - 10:36 AM

View PostFlukeshot, on 11 June 2013 - 04:38 AM, said:

Game trading is a good topic for a philosophical debate.

It hurts the gamer to disallow it - you buy a game, play it to death, you should be able to sell something at a reduced price if you aren't going to use it anymore.
It hurts the developers to allow it - for every resale of a used game is potential sales that the developer has lost.

They're both hurting someone in a stupid popularity contest. (And I get that this is business).

I think that games should be traded in to the company that made them for a reduced amount. Sort of like a "Sorry our game was not good enough" gesture.
What about developers offering the used versions of their game at a reduced price? Works for both the developer and the gamer.

Only problem there is how to you keep the retailers alive?

So I can't really tell who's the bad guy and who's the good guy. I can only tell who's hurting me - and that means what I think is just a biased opinion.


By this logic, reselling ANYTHING is bad.

That yard sale you've been planning? Nope. Sell all that shit back to the original manufacturers so they can resell it at a discounted rate and make more bank on an item from which they've already made an initial profit.

Recycling? Fuck that. Sell those empty cans back to PepsiCo so they can be reused and turn more profits. Ship that scrap paper back to Mead-Westvaco to be added back to the pulp and resold.

Are you crafty? Do you make junk to sell at craft fairs? Fear not! Every time someone is faced with buyer's remorse over that $150 hand woven artisan basket, you can buy it back from them for $25, tag it as "gently used" and resell that bitch for $100. That's $225 profit for you, and $125 loss for the consumer.

Fuck the consumer.
Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

  • (4 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4