http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_2
You just had it. Sony continued to support the PS2 well into the next Gen.

Given Sony's track record and its world wide install base they will continue to support the PS3. It ain't dead yet.

They made the Atari 2600 until 1992?! I can't imagine many people continued to buy it after 1985.

Take this FWIW.....

Article dated Jan 9, 2013


Sony files patent to block used games

Controversy has surrounded the rumors that the PlayStation 4 (and possibly the Xbox 720) could block used games completely. Now a recently filed patent shows Sony might seriously take action against used games with the yet to be announced PS4.

.....Rumor awhile back was that developers and console developers wanted and were looking to take used games to the grave by blocking used games completely with the next generation of consoles. That rumor seems to be coming true from the new patient that Sony just filed, with Sony themselves saying that it’s vital used games are blocked.


Full article here showing the way and how this would work....

http://wololo.net/2013/01/09/sony-fi...ck-used-games/

If Sony and Microsoft blocked used games on their new systems, then they just ceded this generation to Nintendo, which is why I think that will never happen. They'll continue to push downloads and give incentives for purchasing new games, but they won't outright block used games. It's just bad business.

That's exactly what I think a well. But all these stories are coming from somewhere.

If they do block used games, then my choices are easy. Upgrade my old school 360 to a slim, hold onto my PS3, and buy next gen games for the Wii U.

Would be hilarious if the source was really an elaborate internet trolling job. Like we've been te'od

Yeah all these reports are disheartening. I rarely buy used (once every couple of years?) but I certainly sell shit I'm tired of or games that suck.

This won't affect games like Halo or CoD but it will fucking kill any experimental titles, which leads me to believe that Jay G is onto something in his post in the 360 thread. MS & Sony put the tools in but it's up to developers to implement it on a possible per title basis.

I buy most of my games used. I'm no longer at the point where I feel like I need to own games on the first day, or even in the first six months. A few select favorite titles are the exceptions, but I'd say 90% of all the games I buy are used.

I buy most of my games new, so I'm not completely against what they're trying to do... but this is what will cause a legitimate problem with banning used games.

After a game has been out for an extended period of time, it becomes more and more difficult to find even a used copy. If you decide you'd like to play a game that has been out for, say 2 or 3 years, that you missed out on it for whatever reason, good luck finding a brand new copy of it.

Well I posted over in the 360 Forum on something I found after seeing the Sony article. I saw some articles about some well known names in the gaming industry actually for blocking used games. Here are some articles from last year from Dice, Crytek and Activision. Just do a search for Publishers Developers for used game ban/block.


Yet Another Game Developer Claims Used Games Kill Innovation
May, 2012

This week it's Patrick Bach, who is the interim CEO of DICE, the developer behind the Battlefield games. In an interview with CVG, he makes perhaps the most strained argument yet, explaining that the existence of used games on the market actively prevents the development of new and interesting IP:

So if you think that there are too few new IPs on the market, no one can take that risk if their game is at risk of being resold too many times. ... So on the positive side you could see more games being created because of this, and also more new IPs, because there'd be a bigger market for games that don't have for instance multiplayer. There could be awesome single player-only games, which you can't really do these days because people just pirate them, which is sad


http://kotaku.com/5907173/yet-anothe...ill-innovation



"Crytek Calls Used Games Block ''Absolutely Awesome''
April, 2012

So what does Crytek want to see in the next generation of consoles? A way to block used games, of course. Who cares what you the consumer wants, right? "From a business perspective that would be absolutely awesome," said Rasmus Hojengaard, Crytek's director of creative development, while talking about reports of anti-used games tech. "It's weird that [second-hand] is still allowed because it doesn't work like that in any other software industries, so it would be great if they could somehow fix that issue as well."

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Crytek-C...ews-14972.html


How much do industry CEOs hate used games? A whole, whole lot..

Silicon Knights chief Denis Dyack says that if used games continue to wreak havoc on the gaming business, "there's not going to be an industry."

March, 2012

Developers can't stand used video game sales. Just ask Silicon Knights chief Denis Dyack.

"I would argue, and I've said this before, that used games are cannibalizing the industry," Dyack told GamesIndustry International in an interview published yesterday. "If developers and publishers don't see revenue from that, it's not a matter of hey 'we're trying to increase the price of games to consumers, and we want more,' we're just trying to survive as an industry. If used games continue the way that they are, it's going to cannibalize, there's not going to be an industry."


http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-57...ole-whole-lot/

You guys keep talking about physical media. Don't forget that most games will be available digitally. Think about Bully Scholarship edition. It's difficult to find it used for cheap, but you can readily download it.

What Microsoft and Sony should do, but they won't, is they need to start making their way towards a digital distribution model a la Steam.

For those people who purchase a physical copy of the game, viola. Your copy has now been verified with the serial number (or whatever technology Microsoft and Sony choose to go with) and you're free to play it whenever you like. There's no need for the console to have an always online connection, but you can't sell that game because that serial number is a one-and-done time thing. This same concept has existed on PC for decades and nobody has complained and screamed outrage.

For those who purchase the game digitally, it's yours instantly. How Microsoft and Sony will get gamers buy-in is if they offer discounts to those who purchase titles digitally. I'm not talking about Nintendo's eShop promotion when you buy a Wii U Deluxe Set. I'm talking about that $59 AAA title is available on-demand at launch at $49 when purchased digitally. If they can't offer discounts (which they should as it kills the need for distribution and packaging), offer promotions for those who pre-order the titles digitally like free DLC when it becomes available, exclusive in-game items, or whatever have you. If they really want buy-in from consumers, have sales a few times a year where the everything in the store becomes dirt cheap a la Steam's summer and winter sales. I've purchased more games during Steam's sales than at any other time in the year. I've spent hundreds of dollars purchasing games I will probably never play because of how cheap they were. I know Microsoft and Sony do this, but it's never for premiere titles and they don't make it something consumers look forward to. Steam's sales are the equivalent to a PC gamer's wet dream. Microsoft and Sony need to steal from the best and run with it.

If Microsoft and Sony decide to block used games sales, I don't think it'll influence my decision on what my next console purchase will be. Let's be honest, I'll buy both anyway. However, it'll make me a lot more cautious buyer on what games I purchase if I can't sell it at a later date because I don't like it. That's where promotions and sales really come into play. If I spend $60 on a game, it sucks, and I can't re-sell it; I'm going to hate myself. If I spend $30 on a game, it sucks, and I can't re-sell it; at least I don't hate myself as much.

http://www.onlysp.com/2013/02/10/mot...al-in-10-days/

Cool. I liked the first Motorstorm. Never got around to #2.

2 (Pacific Rift) was great. 3 (Apocalypse) was awful except for the 3D effects.

What's appealing about Steam for me are the sales -- I mean flat out amazing sales, not this shit like on consoles where Max Payne 3 is the big sale at $39.99 where a new physical copy is $19 down the street.

Since you mentioned "Steam"...this very well could be the start of future Steam Gaming....and console makers should take notice.


Why Valve's Steam Box is a console killer

Opinion Forget Xbox vs PlayStation: Valve's new hardware will change everything

http://www.techradar.com/us/news/gam...killer-1124160

But what exactly do we mean by "support?" Sure, the PS2 was still available in stores, but let's face it: the vast majority of development resources got shifted to the PS3 in short order. Unless you like movie licensed games, sports roster updates, and music games missing the ability to play online and download songs. God of War 2 is the only significant post-2006 PS2 game that comes to mind, and it was released only a few months after the PS3's launch.

Every major sports title and licensed game along with some JRPG's Motorstorm, Silent Hill, a jak and Daxter game, a Ratchet abd Clank game
and these are all in 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...tation_2_games

I would be completely okay if Gaben can take out Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony all out in a single blow. In fact, I hope he does so.

I just don't see it happening. I believe the Steam box will be more of an extension of PC gaming, existing alongside the other consoles. The console makers have exclusives that they are not giving up, and they could get more aggressive with acquiring them if they are threatened. It seems like any time something is touted as a "______ killer," it is anything but that. We heard this sort of thing about OnLive.

For Steam to take out one of the others, there would probably have to be an exodus of third-party developers from MS and Sony. (I'll leave Nintendo out of it because they don't really need third parties to support their consoles.) Would EA, which has always supported multiple platforms, move exclusively to the Steam box? They have Origin, and they haven't released a new game on Steam in nearly a year. On top of that, they'd have to develop the games for Linux.

As for those PS2 games, I admit I wasn't aware there were so many. Still, I'd call a lot of those "A" and "AA" titles; it's not like the system was getting big franchises like Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, Borderlands, Elder Scrolls, etc. I see there was a COD in 2008, but it was handed off to another developer - that's exactly the kind of thing that happens when a console is past its prime.

A rare exception to the general rule that used games can be had for cheaper than digital releases.

You realize sales would disappear overnight without competition right? That is probably the worst possible future possible for gamers.

People in the industry who think that eliminating used game sales will help the industry are short sited at best. The proliferation of used games is one of the main reasons that the industry has grown to be as large as it is. The reason we don't see tons of new (retail) IPs is because the cost of development has gotten out of hand.