Sony announces UMD to Digital License Transfer for PS Vita

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

http://kotaku.com/5858586/here-is-sonys-umd-solution-for-ps-vita-owners

UMD PASSPORT

While this is not likely to please all of the people all of the time, it is ultimately more than they did for PSP Go owners and shows some amount of effort on their part to make good on a process that was previously discussed (in a conceptual way) and ultimately not followed-through in any fashion.

So, via this service, PSP owners with UMD discs can download software that allows them to register their PSP and register physical UMDs which will permit them to purchase digital versions via the PSN store at rates that are set by game publishers participating in the program.

The current rates appear to be between $1.29 and $31.

Since a large portion of PSP UMD games are available digital on the PSN, I can only assume that these license transfer rates are lower than the existing PSN pricing, and since the price/value of PSP games are in a continual decline, these rates will probably slope downward in the future.

Nothing formally announced for regions outside of Japan.

So, yeah. Not ideal, but at least it's something!

I've personally double-dipped on a few digital versions of UMDs, it'll be nice to get discounts on future instances of that.

[Bojay1997]

This is really shocking and disappointing. I have no problem paying a one time fee for a transfer cable or some other means of attributing ownership to one person and preventing people from just sharing all their UMDs, but charging me a significant fee for each UMD to play games I already own is really pretty ridiculous. What could possibly be the justification for this other than sheer greed?

[Collector_Gaming]

This is really shocking and disappointing. I have no problem paying a one time fee for a transfer cable or some other means of attributing ownership to one person and preventing people from just sharing all their UMDs, but charging me a significant fee for each UMD to play games I already own is really pretty ridiculous. What could possibly be the justification for this other than sheer greed?

oh you mean like how some companies ( i think capcom is on this) hate the purchase of used games through stores like game stop or through yard sales/thrift stores/goodwills/classified ads/ebay ect ect ect.
Because they aren't making any money off them. So they wish they could create a game thats a one time ownership game. Meaning once you feel your done with that game. its done might as well throw it in the garbage.
which is why i am surprised everything hasn't gone to just plain digital downloads by now.

Frigging greedy corporations.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

This is really shocking and disappointing. I have no problem paying a one time fee for a transfer cable or some other means of attributing ownership to one person and preventing people from just sharing all their UMDs, but charging me a significant fee for each UMD to play games I already own is really pretty ridiculous. What could possibly be the justification for this other than sheer greed?

Well,

No pricing has been announced for the US (if they even bring the service here), but if the initial reports are between $1-$30, I'd hardly call anything less than $5 "significant".

$30 seems excessive and I'm sure that that's nowhere near the standard. I can't imagine what games if any would hover around the high end of the existing reported pricing, but I can't imagine that many people will be paying to transfer those anyway.

My outlook is that it's an option that didn't (legally anyway) previously exist in any form prior to this, so, personally speaking - I'll take it if they give it to us.

And let's be honest, no software publishers were ever going to agree to allow us to buy a cable or dongle that would allow for hard copies of their games to be copied all willy-nilly. Games aren't encoded with anything that makes one copy unique to any other, so rampant abuse of the system would take place through sharing and borrowing.

A "toll" charge in the process should have been expected. That or some means/manner to "surrender" the physical copy of the UMD to an official source, which should be a wholly unappealing concept to collectors.

Again, there's no way that they're going to make everybody happy with this, but - if it means I can transfer my favorites from UMD for less than what I would have to pay for just buying the digital versions outright, I'll take it.

[G-Boobie]

This sucks, but its the only way for Sony to do it without damaging developer and publisher relations. I'd bet that the fee is 25% less than the cost of a digital copy on PSN or something similar.

Whatevs. Welcome to capitalism.

[Amon_Re]

You know, for me this is excellent news because this means there'll be heaps of UMD's on the second hand market soon

[portnoyd]

Again, there's no way that they're going to make everybody happy with this, but - if it means I can transfer my favorites from UMD for less than what I would have to pay for just buying the digital versions outright, I'll take it.

Are you on drugs?

[BlastProcessing402]

Charging you money to play something you already own? :roll: Total dick move.

Can't wait until someone figures out a way to hack it and let people do this exact same thing for free. And I don't even plan on getting a Vita at this point.

[Dangerboy]

There is a difference between paying a toll and being ridiculous. If it's say, a $1.29 to transfer each game, hell so be it. You just sell off your real copy and get the money back after the transfer. 20 or so PSP games at $1 (or so) each would be the same as having had to buy the Transfer cable for the 360. Make it a bandwidth fee, whatever.

Can you imagine the future this is opening up? I can just see the Xbox Next being backwards compatible with all 360 games, you just have to pay 400 MS Points to download the 'digital version' (i.e. patch) to make it work.

Granted, this is all nonsense, add you can just play them on the PSP still, but geez.

This is only going to open up the hackers world even more.

[Richter Belmount]

I woudnt mind if it was something like a dollar charge , sure its a dick move to charge but i think if it were free people would totally abuse the hell out of it. Its one thing to own something but digital , it would be like renting pc games that didnt require cd and never paying full retail ever.

[Nebagram]

Or, I could just keep my PSP and play the UMDs on that instead.

[Kitsune Sniper]

The current rates appear to be between $1.29 and $31.

Whoever charges $31 is a fucking douche.

[Amon_Re]

Or, I could just keep my PSP and play the UMDs on that instead.

And have all the other kids laugh at you because you're using a PSP and not the Vita?! @_@

[Leo_A]

Too bad it probably only applies to UMD releases already digitally available via PSN. I'd love to transfer something like Outrun Coast 2 Coast to put on the Vita (Never could properly enjoy that one with the PSP's nub).

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Are you on drugs?

I'll ignore your unwarranted personal insult this one time and pose the question:

How is a discounted price for a digital version of owned, registered software a bad thing?

We were NEVER promised any legal means by which we could transfer PSP UMDs from physical to digital at the time that we purchased them.

Without this program people would otherwise pay full price if they want to buy the game again on their Vita.

I can't think of a single other company that has ever offered anything of the sort.

And I damn well know that a vast majority of people in this community have double, triple and quadruple-dipped on digital releases in the past.

I own physical copies of practically all of the software that I've downloaded on Wii Virtual Console, yet I didn't have any option to register them on my computer and get them for less than what their retail price was.

I expect people to generally be myopic about this, but throwing your hands up and calling this "lame, etc." is completely ignoring the financial/legal labyrinthine complexities involved in making something like this happen.

It could never be as simple as "I own this game, give me a digital version for free!".

I'm not saying that it's the greatest thing ever or the most ideal scenario, but it's an option plain and simple. I'll take an option where I can make a choice over no option whatsoever any day.

But, that's just me.

[skaar]

Like coffee creamer and orange juice.

[T2KFreeker]

Here's the skinny on this from my perspective, with no insults thrown in free of charge. LOL "IF" they were going to charge $1.00 fee per game that you own, that might work and it wouldn't be a huge deal. The problem is that we all know that this isn't going to happen. The problem is that game companies are trying to wring every cent they can out of consumers for everything they can get. I can see most games being at least $5.00 for them and "Special Editions" or the like going much higher, especially if it's an RPG. This is all speculation at this point anyway. Who knows if this will even happen here in the US anyway?

[Bojay1997]

How is a discounted price for a digital version of owned, registered software a bad thing?

I expect people to generally be myopic about this, but throwing your hands up and calling this "lame, etc." is completely ignoring the financial/legal labyrinthine complexities involved in making something like this happen.

It could never be as simple as "I own this game, give me a digital version for free!".


Well, it's certainly nothing to celebrate. It's not like consumers demanded that the Vita not come with a UMD drive. They are already charging $250 or more for the thing and requiring that you buy a proprietary and expensive memory card and this is just another means of gouging us.

There are not massive legal or financial complexities standing in the way of making this happen. If Sony was serious about doing something for their loyal customers, they could simply have established a registration program before the PSP Go was released where you registered your games on-line or via postcard and then you are entitled to download the digital version either free or for a very nominal amount (a buck or two to cover bandwidth/server space to get you the digital version). Many other media companies bundle digital and physical media all the time including vinyl albums that come with a free digital download of the full album, DVD/Blu Ray/Digital bundles, etc...It's simply a matter of getting those rights from the developer and publisher which is done every single day.

Instead, they are viewing this as another opportunity to charge almost full price for the same thing we already paid full price to purchase once before. The point is, this is of zero benefit to consumers and it really is just another example of an old line company holding on to outdated ways of doing business just like they did as the music industry collapsed. It's sad, but as much as I hate to admit it, we may actually be nearing the end of the console and dedicated handheld business if Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft keep focusing on the same outdated gimmicks to squeeze every penny from consumers. Apple, Google and other more nimble competitors will continue swooping in and literally drive them from the market.

[portnoyd]

How is a discounted price for a digital version of owned, registered software a bad thing

Can I have some of your money? You apparently have too much of it to be ok with this.

Why yes, I would love to rebuy something to use it on your new system. What a brilliant idea that no one has ever done before. Man, why didn't Nintendo think of that. Oh, that's right. They didn't need to. We didn't need an option. The GBC/GBA/DS/3DS already had me covered.

The VC is different and not part of this discussion. We're talking old system/new system, not much older system/new system where games are scarce on a mainstream level. As the Wii, for most of its lifecycle, could play Cube games out of the box.

Sony wants to offer me downloads of my UMDs at the cost of bandwidth/site maintenance, fine. Anything more, eat my shit.

[substantial_snake]

At the very least its a method, probably one I won't use for every game I own but I like having the option at least. I just hope this somehow comes to the states.

siliconera says hi:

Here’s a list of prices for various titles announced by SCE. Please note this is not the complete list of games that will be available for the UMD Passport program.

Guilty Gear Judgment – 500 yen
Carnage Heart EXA – 400 yen
Pachipara Slot – Pachislot Sea Story in Okinawa - 1,000 yen
Akiba’s Trip – 1,000 yen
Tale of the Lost Promise – 1,000 yen
Shin Megami Tensei: Persona 3 Portable – 1,500 yen
Metal Slug Complete – 500 yen
Higurashi Daybreak – 500 yen
Atelier Viola – 1,000 yen
Street Supremacy (Tokyo Xtreme Racer) – 1,000 yen
Dynasty Warriors Portable – 500 yen
Dead or Alive Paradise – 1,000 yen
Colin McRae: Dirt 2 – 1,000 yen
Ever 17 ~ the out of infinity ~ 1,000 yen
Nanatama: Chronicle of Dungeon Maker – 500 yen
Silver Star Shogi Portable – 1,000 yen
Chameleon – 500 yen
Hot Shots Golf: Open Tee 2 – 500 yen
Patapon 3 – 1,000 yen
Gran Turismo – 1,000 yen
Nano Diver – 1,000 yen
Himehibi Princess Days Portable – 740 yen
Sacrifice of the Inescapable Room – 1,000 yen
The Promise I Made Over this Blue Sky: Paradise in the Palm of Your Hand – 100 yen
Everyone’s Reading: Masterpieces & Detective Stories & Ghost Stories – 500 yen
Disgaea 2: Dark Hero Days – 500 yen
Makai Kingdom Portable – 1,000 yen
The Convini Portable – 1,000 yen
Evangelion: Battle Orchestra Portable – 1,000 yen
Kanon – 1,000 yen
Harvest Moon: Boy & Girl – 500 yen
Memories Off – 500 yen
Prince of Persia: The Forgotten Sands – 1,000 yen
Onore no Shizuru Michi wo Yuke – Free
Prince of Persia: Sands of Oblivion – 1,000 yen

The vast majority of these titles fall within the 500yen (6.50) and 1000yet(13.00) which depending on the title for me is completely worth it. I was aftaid that it was going to be some trad in deal with gamestop but if I can keep the physical copy of my games and a significant discount on the PSN costs that I am pretty ok with this system and I don't know why anyone would be butt hurt over it, after Sony's talks over a previous UMD voucher system fell through. Oh and hate the publishers for the pricing not Sony. This is dictated by the individual publishers and not Sony Corporate on what games are what price so take that for what you will.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Well, it's certainly nothing to celebrate. It's not like consumers demanded that the Vita not come with a UMD drive. They are already charging $250 or more for the thing and requiring that you buy a proprietary and expensive memory card and this is just another means of gouging us.

There are not massive legal or financial complexities standing in the way of making this happen. If Sony was serious about doing something for their loyal customers, they could simply have established a registration program before the PSP Go was released where you registered your games on-line or via postcard and then you are entitled to download the digital version either free or for a very nominal amount (a buck or two to cover bandwidth/server space to get you the digital version). Many other media companies bundle digital and physical media all the time including vinyl albums that come with a free digital download of the full album, DVD/Blu Ray/Digital bundles, etc...It's simply a matter of getting those rights from the developer and publisher which is done every single day.

Instead, they are viewing this as another opportunity to charge almost full price for the same thing we already paid full price to purchase once before. The point is, this is of zero benefit to consumers and it really is just another example of an old line company holding on to outdated ways of doing business just like they did as the music industry collapsed. It's sad, but as much as I hate to admit it, we may actually be nearing the end of the console and dedicated handheld business if Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft keep focusing on the same outdated gimmicks to squeeze every penny from consumers. Apple, Google and other more nimble competitors will continue swooping in and literally drive them from the market.

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

This was simply not ever going to happen free-of-charge through some kind of "honor system". Sony can't tell all of the developers and publishers that made games for PSP that they're going to be giving away free digital copies of their games to anybody who claims to be an owner because there's simply no way for anybody to "prove" ownership of anything. Even if it required plugging your PSP into the computer and going through the same steps involved with this - the software has no unique encoded properties. We could all pass around the same copy of Lumines and nobody would be the wiser.

Devs and Publishers are most likely the ones getting paid out in this program.

And as far as being something to celebrate, being a PSP Go owner that has faced several years of no legal option to transfer games, I DO celebrate the opportunity to now make a personal choice about using the transfer program to selectively choose games to transfer that fit what I believe to be an acceptable price.

And for the record, I'm not going to pay more than $10 on the high end to transfer anything that I already have in my collection. So everybody scoffing at/insulting my open-mindedness to this concept should know that I have plenty of personal lines drawn on the subject.

And, to that point, prices haven't even been formally announced for the US, so who knows, we may see nothing even remotely close to $30, that may just be for some specific unique or brand new Japanese game release.

If the prices are nominal, I'm fine with it where my own personal usage of the program is concerned. That's all I have to say on the subject.

[Leo_A]

How is a discounted price for a digital version of owned, registered software a bad thing?

Ignore them, you're talking to a bunch of people that seem to think taking a picture of Super Mario Brothers for the NES should entitle them to being able to have free access to that game on any other platform it's ever made available for.

So I'm glad it's available, although I doubt there will be more than a few games that I'll take advantage of this with since I've already been heavily buying PSP downloads (Gran Turismo and Gradius Collection are two likely candidates for this program that I have on UMD that I don't already have in download form but would like to be able to play on a Vita).

[Mianrtcv]

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
If the prices are nominal, I'm fine with it where my own personal usage of the program is concerned. That's all I have to say on the subject.

Ditto. In a perfect world things could be different. It's not perfect so we have what we have.

[Bojay1997]

Can I have some of your money? You apparently have too much of it to be ok with this.

Why yes, I would love to rebuy something to use it on your new system. What a brilliant idea that no one has ever done before. Man, why didn't Nintendo think of that. Oh, that's right. They didn't need to. We didn't need an option. The GBC/GBA/DS/3DS already had me covered.

The VC is different and not part of this discussion. We're talking old system/new system, not much older system/new system where games are scarce on a mainstream level. As the Wii, for most of its lifecycle, could play Cube games out of the box.

Sony wants to offer me downloads of my UMDs at the cost of bandwidth/site maintenance, fine. Anything more, eat my shit.

Agree fully. What's really shocking to me is that Nintendo and Microsoft have both offered almost total backward compatibility with their previous systems this generation and Sony was the first to abandon it on the PS3 and now is looking to screw us over again and expects that we are all gonna be ok with it. If this was a truly different piece of hardware that required some work on Sony's part to make the older stuff work, I might be more swayed, but the hardware is completely backwards compatible so they are punishing me for being stupid enough to buy a bunch of games at MSRP over the past six years and on top of it, they want to charge me $10 or more to buy what I already own. Totally ridiculous.

[RP2A03]

Or, I could just keep my PSP and play the UMDs on that instead.

This. Seriously. I fail to see what everyone is so upset about. It's not like Sony is going to repossess your UMDs or nuke them.

[swlovinist]

Will just play on my UMD games on the PSP instead. Like others have said I will just wait for the UMDs to be traded into stores, and then buy them used. For the past couple of months, I have totally scored on used UMD PSP games. I dont have a problem with the Vita offering this service, I just prefer to not have to pay twice to play my videogames.

[Bojay1997]

This. Seriously. I fail to see what everyone is so upset about. It's not like Sony is going to repossess your UMDs or nuke them.

I think it's the fact that Sony has implied on numerous occasions including leading up to the release of the PSPGo that it would offer a solution to allow UMD owners to play games on the PSPGo and Vita digitally at no additional charge. I believe there was also talk of an external UMD drive at one point. In any event, those things never happened and rather than planning for this in an organized way (like handing out unique codes for digital registration with each UMD purchased for example), Sony just took the opportunity to announce a new scheme to charge people for the same stuff. I'm just tired of it and disappointed in Sony as it seems like all they know how to do recently is charge for the same content we already own with their various HD collections, dumping PS3 backward compatibility, etc.... I will be keeping my PSP, but it just makes the Vita less valuable to me because it means I will have to have two systems in active use when I should only need one.

[Leo_A]

Agree fully. What's really shocking to me is that Nintendo and Microsoft have both offered almost total backward compatibility with their previous systems this generation and Sony was the first to abandon it on the PS3 and now is looking to screw us over again and expects that we are all gonna be ok with it.

I wouldn't call 50% or so of the Xbox library being backwards compatible, with only 10% of that 50% actually running close to 100%, as almost total backwards compatibility.

I'm glad it's there and I've enjoyed playing several Xbox games on it that run well and benefit from upscaling, but lets not exagerrate here.

And Sony isn't hurting us in the slightest. They're providing a way to turn UMD's into downloads at a small fee to play them on a successor. They could've easily had done nothing and we still wouldn't of had any legitimate room to complain.


I think it's the fact that Sony has implied on numerous occasions including leading up to the release of the PSPGo that it would offer a solution to allow UMD owners to play games on the PSPGo and Vita digitally at no additional charge.

We didn't even know about the Vita at that point. So how could they of implied that? All I've seen since we started getting details was a mention from Sony that they were investigating allowing people to transfer at least some of their UMD's to the Vita.

And they've done just that.


I believe there was also talk of an external UMD drive at one point. In any event, those things never happened and rather than planning for this in an organized way (like handing out unique codes for digital registration with each UMD purchased for example),

Then you'd be complaining that 90% of the UMD's out there were sold before things like the PSP Go and Vita appeared and lacked this transfer code.


Sony just took the opportunity to announce a new scheme to charge people for the same stuff. I'm just tired of it and disappointed in Sony as it seems like all they know how to do recently is charge for the same content we already own with their various HD collections, dumping PS3 backward compatibility, etc.... I will be keeping my PSP, but it just makes the Vita less valuable to me because it means I will have to have two systems in active use when I should only need one.

You're really reaching here.

[Bojay1997]

I wouldn't call 50% or so of the Xbox library being backwards compatible, with only 10% of that 50% actually running close to 100%, as almost total backwards compatibility.

I'm glad it's there and I've enjoyed playing several Xbox games on it that run well and benefit from upscaling, but lets not exagerrate here.

And Sony isn't hurting us in the slightest. They're providing a way to turn UMD's into downloads at a small fee to play them on a successor. They could've easily had done nothing and we still wouldn't of had any legitimate room to complain.



We didn't even know about the Vita at that point. So how could they of implied that? All I've seen since we started getting details was a mention from Sony that they were investigating allowing people to transfer at least some of their UMD's to the Vita.

And they've done just that.



Then you'd be complaining that 90% of the UMD's out there were sold before things like the PSP Go and Vita appeared and lacked this transfer code.



You're really reaching here.

Are you serious? I have a launch 360 and I have played a pretty decent chunk of my Xbox library on it and the vast majority of the games play as well as they did on my Xbox. Sure, there are some games that aren't supported and some that have significant glitches, but it's certainly most of the major releases that are supported and they didn't charge me for the backwards compatibility. In fact, on several occasions they added more games to the library which required some time and expense on their part as the hardware is not 100% compatible and yet charged nothing for the added titles.

The Wii is 100% backwards compatible with Gamecube also at zero additional cost to consumers. Now admittedly, the new version of the Wii just arriving in stores is not backwards compatible, but it's also years after launch and Gamecube games aren't even still sold at mainstream retail anymore.

I've actually been at various press events for Sony including all but one of the last 10 E3 shows. Both at the PSPGo unveiling and the Vita unveiling, there were press materials and representatives that indicated owners of UMDs would be provided with a solution to using their games on the new platforms. Now, admittedly, they never said it would be totally free, but for the PSPGo, they never even bothered to provide anything and for Vita, it appears it will cost in some cases almost as much as just buying the game digitally to begin with.

I'm sorry, but the world has moved on from people willingly paying for the same thing multiple times on new formats. That's why DVD and Blu Ray sales are tanking and why the music industry has collapsed. People expect to be able to use their media purchases across multiple devices and not for a significant fee each time technology changes slightly. The reality is that people aren't going to pay for this service and once the A games dry up like they did on the PSP, people will move on to Apple or Google or whatever the smart and sleek new non-game specific platform happens to be in a few years. It's unfortunate, but Sony is trying to play by old rules in a game that is rapidly outrunning their ability to control it.

[kupomogli]

All I see is most people bitching about having to purchase PSP games that they have UMD format because the Vita doesn't support the format. Sony's already seen what a mistake it was to include a disc drive on a portable console so the Vita is a fix to that.

Other than a few, the people against Sony are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites(unless they bitched about Nintendo as well.) Everyone didn't bitch when Nintendo started to release NES games for $5, SNES games for $8, and N64 games for $12 on the Wii. The 3DS has Gameboy games but also NES games that you will have to purchase again, despite the fact that you already have them(the NES games) on your Wii. The ambassador program also shows that there will be GBA games, so first you could play GBA games on the DS, removed from later revisions, and later you're going to have to purchase them to play on the 3DS.

It doesn't matter if the Nintendo is almost 30 years old. It's a different console. Just like the Vita is a different console. Atleast Sony is giving users the ability to reduce costs of UMDs that already own.

I'm not really a fan of digital downloads regardless, so only a few of my absolute favorites are going to be repurchased, more if most of them are closer to $1.29.

The only thing that I thinks sucks is the games not availalbe on UMD and imports. I own eight or more imports between PAL and Japanese games. I probably won't be able to get them on the Vita without having three seperate accounts.

*edit*

Also. About the devices being a different console. It's that it uses a completely different format. The Wii having NES, SNES, and N64 slots just like the Vita having PSP and PSX slots is just unrealistic. With the 360 and PS2, backwards compatibility was software based, mainly emulated. With the PS3 to PS2 and Wii to GC it's mostly hardware based, so the backwards compatibility was removed to cut costs. So up top is only about completely different formats.

[portnoyd]

Kupo, you do know your entire argument was invalidated on page 1, right?

[Icarus Moonsight]

Whoever charges over the minimum is a fucking douche.

Fixed


Whatevs. Welcome to capitalism.

I'll reserve saying that until the Vita is hacked open. LOL

[kupomogli]

Kupo, you do know your entire argument was invalidated on page 1, right?

Doesn't matter the age of the product, it's a different format. So the Vita and Wii are doing the same. They're both releasing digital content of games from older devices.

I'm sure Sony has realized that the UMD format was a poor choice. The UMD drive is probably the major reason for PSP failure. I've had two PSPs where the UMD drive just stopped reading discs, but everything else worked fine.

Maybe they're release a Vita with a UMD drive also on the device for people who want to complain.

[Ryudo]

Don't do Digital Downoads anyway. I will get a vita for Vita games and keep my PSP for PSP games. So no loss for me

[Amon_Re]

I'll reserve saying that until the Vita is hacked open. LOL

That could take anything between one week and one decade. I'm assuming they'll use different keys then those of the PSP & PS3.

[Gameguy]

Doesn't matter the age of the product, it's a different format.
If it's a different format they really shouldn't offer any sort of discount or ability to transfer a license between the two products. You couldn't transfer a license between buying a cassette tape and upgrading to a CD, nobody really minded being expected to buy it again for a different format if you wanted it. The way Sony did this just doesn't come across so well, it's very poorly marketed.

Nobody felt bad having to pay for the various Genesis collections when those came out because they were for a different format, same with buying the Intellivision Lives compilation or those new Virtual Console games. Even with having to buy Tetris for both the NES and Gameboy nobody minded since they were for different systems, though those actually were different versions of the game.

The problem with this is that it really comes across that you're paying to use the same game meant for the same hardware but just with a different method of storage. With PC games think of Telltale games, you can buy a physical copy of the game but you'll also have access to digital copies so you won't have to wait for the games to arrive with shipping. That's what people are expecting now. It comes across badly with the PSP because the games and systems come across the same way like the Nintendo DS and 3DS, they come across as a slight upgrade to what you already have(like buying a newer Ipod with more storage space). Yet the newest 3DS can still play the original DS games just fine, you don't have to pay anything extra to do it either.

A company doesn't have to offer backwards compatibility at all, but if it's done it shouldn't be the way that Sony has with charging for each game to be transfered. It just comes across badly. Having a device to transfer the games yourself would be better, to play SMS games on the Genesis you needed to buy a piece of hardware to do it. It was a one time purchase and that was it, that's what should be done for this new PSP.

If Sony offered to send you a download code if you mailed in a receipt for each game to be transfered it would have come across better, even if it would have cost more in postage and having to buy envelopes it would be more friendly from a consumer's perspective. People would think that Sony is still letting them play the games for free, even if it cost more in postage and envelopes to do it. Plus with insisting on requiring a receipt, it would exclude used games from being allowable without really coming across as being against used sales. That would be better marketing.

[Bojay1997]

Doesn't matter the age of the product, it's a different format. So the Vita and Wii are doing the same. They're both releasing digital content of games from older devices.

I'm sure Sony has realized that the UMD format was a poor choice. The UMD drive is probably the major reason for PSP failure. I've had two PSPs where the UMD drive just stopped reading discs, but everything else worked fine.

Maybe they're release a Vita with a UMD drive also on the device for people who want to complain.

Of course the age of the content is relevant. The Vita is 100% backwards compatible. The only thing preventing anyone from playing PSP games on the Vita is a lack of a means of loading from UMD to the Vita. If Nintendo decides tomorrow to start selling Gamecube games on the newly non-backwards compatible Wii, you can bet there will be outrage, just like there is here. It's simple, if you want to maintain your loyal customers, you reward that loyalty by providing a low or no cost alternative to rebuying the entire catalog of games you already own. Anything else is just plain greed and completely out of touch with the economic realities of today and the way people consume media.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

...Anything else is just plain greed and completely out of touch with the economic realities of today and the way people consume media.

Video games ain't charity.

It's a capitalist, materialist, consumerist industry and the "economic reality" is that even if it's not the way that it's always been/that we're used to we've moved into an era where publishers expect continued compensation for the continued distribution of their product via digital channels.

Now, once this transfer project goes live, I think that there should be a healthy expectation that new UMD games should come with a one-time single use transfer code in-box at no extra cost, but the expectation that Sony and developers should be able to come to some kind of terms that mulit-year-old existing UMD product that was never intended to be legally transferred from one media format to another (on a next-gen system no less) is unrealistic.

I acknowledge your position and it's your right to have that position.

I simply disagree with the notion that we should expect Sony and devs to just give us a pass on everything for free (though I do note that one or two of the list of japanese transfer pricing do say "free"), because as much as it sucks for the frugal/miserly consumer to pay for a transfer, free-to-play backwards compatibility as an industry standard has always relied on the means to play the existing physical media. Any downloadable past previous gen software available on any console/portable system (Wii, XBOX360, PS3, PSP, DSi, 3DS, etc.) has been a pay-to-play option. If we need to cite existing last-gen games - XBOX games of the last generation have been available on 360 for quite some time and PS2 Classics are recently available on the PSN both for cash monies with no massive public outrage to be heard.

If they're not giving us a snap-on UMD drive, then I never expected this to be a charitable venture.

[Icarus Moonsight]

Too bad Sony can't invent a patent-able proprietary digital data format... Who owns the copyrights to zero and one again? Someone is owed a shitload from everyone.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Too bad Sony can't invent a patent-able proprietary digital data format... Who owns the copyrights to zero and one again? Someone is owed a shitload from everyone.

I'll just leave this here.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/microsoft-patents-ones-zeroes,599/

[kupomogli]

Of course the age of the content is relevant.

With that you're only partially correct. Age of content is relevant, but not what I was on about. While most PSX digital copies are $5.99, NES digital copies are $5 and N64 titles are twice as much. So if you want to bring being greedy into it, that's a topic that I could talk about Nintendo as a company all day long. I could easily point out multiple things that Sony and Microsoft do as well, but Nintendo is king in this category.


The Vita is 100% backwards compatible.

Actually it's not. There are quite a few games missing as digital downloads.


It's simple, if you want to maintain your loyal customers, you reward that loyalty by providing a low or no cost alternative to rebuying the entire catalog of games you already own. Anything else is just plain greed and completely out of touch with the economic realities of today and the way people consume media.

I'm not even going to point out the irony.

[portnoyd]

Dude. Seriously. Everything you are saying, Frankie did and what Frankie didn't, was already invalidated many posts ago. Give it up.

[goatdan]

The *entire* reason that people are pissed about this is exactly because of what someone said before -- when Sony announced the PSPGo, they said that they would come up with this device. It was supposedly part of the reason that the PSPGo was so god-awful expensive, it was an upgrade, and you would get this ability to do this!

Now, Sony is launching a product which is essentially compatible for free with the PSPGo, but is again telling the people who bought stuff for the PSP to shove it. That is where the problem comes in. You *promised* that you would do this, never did, and now want to charge people for the ability to do it.

Yeah, the original idea had a million and seven issues with it, and yeah game companies weren't going to want to do it, and yeah, this somewhat solves that so I get why Sony is doing it, and it honestly isn't a horrible solution *if they didn't already tell us we would have this ability for free before*. But they did. So it seems really stupid.

[Leo_A]

Are you serious? I have a launch 360 and I have played a pretty decent chunk of my Xbox library on it and the vast majority of the games play as well as they did on my Xbox. Sure, there are some games that aren't supported and some that have significant glitches, but it's certainly most of the major releases that are supported and they didn't charge me for the backwards compatibility. In fact, on several occasions they added more games to the library which required some time and expense on their part as the hardware is not 100% compatible and yet charged nothing for the added titles.

It still doesn't change the fact that only half of the library was compatible and that the majority of compatible titles ran with significant issues. Take PGR2, for instance. While there are some minor issues that don't affect gameplay with such things as the car selection screens, pay close attention to the frame rate when you're in the car. It's all over the place and slows down a good bit on many corners. It's so bad that it even seems to get the AI cars out of wack and they make mistakes they never did on the original hardware. And there's no shortage of popular games and classics that aren't on the list and don't run at all.

I can't believe you were actually serious when you said it had "almost total backwards compatibility".


I've actually been at various press events for Sony including all but one of the last 10 E3 shows. Both at the PSPGo unveiling and the Vita unveiling, there were press materials and representatives that indicated owners of UMDs would be provided with a solution to using their games on the new platforms. Now, admittedly, they never said it would be totally free, but for the PSPGo, they never even bothered to provide anything and for Vita, it appears it will cost in some cases almost as much as just buying the game digitally to begin with..

It's odd that they never used such wording on anything I've read online.

[Icarus Moonsight]

I had a run in with the Post-Eating-Tree, 500 of them. O_O
Anyway...

Sony had to work very fucking hard to do something worse than the 3DS before their system even launches. Be impressed and show some appreciation for the effort they put into it to earn your patronage. Or don't. *shrugs*

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

The *entire* reason that people are pissed about this is exactly because of what someone said before -- when Sony announced the PSPGo, they said that they would come up with this device. It was supposedly part of the reason that the PSPGo was so god-awful expensive, it was an upgrade, and you would get this ability to do this!

Now, Sony is launching a product which is essentially compatible for free with the PSPGo, but is again telling the people who bought stuff for the PSP to shove it. That is where the problem comes in. You *promised* that you would do this, never did, and now want to charge people for the ability to do it.

Yeah, the original idea had a million and seven issues with it, and yeah game companies weren't going to want to do it, and yeah, this somewhat solves that so I get why Sony is doing it, and it honestly isn't a horrible solution *if they didn't already tell us we would have this ability for free before*. But they did. So it seems really stupid.

Sony promising any such thing for *free* is largely the product of created/implanted false memory.

They stated that they were looking into solutions for UMD transfer, they never officially in any public press release used the words "free" much less "we promise". Stating that they did is only adding hay to the strawman position in this argument.

They did initially state that they were "evaluating solutions" for UMD transfer, and eventually they went on record stating that they could not come to terms with publishers on an acceptable method. That's as far as it went. Anybody claiming that they "promised" anything is mis-remembering/mis-stating the facts.


Dude. Seriously. Everything you are saying, Frankie did and what Frankie didn't, was already invalidated many posts ago. Give it up.

And, Dave, as far as what has and hasn't been "invalidated" - everybody here (myself included) merely has an opinion on the subject. No matter how loud you shout your opinion, it's still doesn't make yours more (or less) "valid" than anybody else's.

Last time I checked opinions such as "this is a good idea/this is a bad idea" aren't a measurable thing in terms of correctness and they can't be invalidated. So go ahead and keep thinking that your position is more correct than anybody else's if it helps you sleep better but that doesn't make it so.

[G-Boobie]

We should probably remember a few things before tossing out wild rhetoric on the subject of the UMD Passport thing.

1) If you have any UMDs to transfer, chances are you still have a PSP, which plays UMD games.

2) When the PS3 backwards compatibility was pulled, everyone (including myself) screamed bloody murder. Four years later, I received my limited edition of the MGS HD collection in the mail. I bought and loved the Ico/Shadow of the Colossus collection last month, too. These are HD ports of games I already own. These are selling pretty well: some of you out there are buying them despite your earlier reservations. We are hypocrites. Also, the release of the "PS2 Classics" on PSN is being treated pretty positively. So much for consumer rage. Assuming you buy a Vita, and assuming that you're going to want to play Patapon or Gradius Collection at some point and you own the UMD, you're going to pay the fee and forget about it.

3) Sony does not have the legal right to offer licenses for games that it does not own. It could certainly offer up a free transfer for God of War, Twisted Metal, SOCOM, etc(which of course they most certainly won't), but in the cases of games by third party publishers, not so much. They have the legal right to demand recompense to transfer their games: especially since Sony charges them bandwidth every time someone downloads one of their products. In fact, I'd bet that third party publishers are the ones who choose which price point their license fee takes. We'll know for sure when Square-Enix charges thirty bucks for a license to download Dissidia or Crisis Core.


What I don't get is that no one freaked out when Nintendo started charging five to fifteen bucks to play ROMS of games that we've been running in Nesticle for ten years, on a system with a shit controller and NO OPTION AT ALL to transfer your games in the event of a system failure. In fact, mostly we hear bitching about how there aren't enough ROM dumps available to lose completely when the Wii U comes out and there's no server side account to transfer over and you have to buy them all AGAIN, because Nintendo knows Fuck All about the internet and how it actually works. So figure that one out.

I am not a fan of Sony, or Nintendo, or Microsoft, or any entity that exists purely to suck the money out of my wallet as quickly as they can. I pay for what I want to play and leave it at that. If I buy a Vita, and if I want to play Street Fighter Alpha 3 MAX on it, AND if the license fee is less than the cost of the game as a new download: great. If not? Fuck it. It's not like someone is holding a gun to my head, and anyway, I have a PSP somewhere, I'm pretty sure, assuming it still works. I think. I might have sold it.

[portnoyd]

And, Dave, as far as what has and hasn't been "invalidated" - everybody here (myself included) merely has an opinion on the subject. No matter how loud you shout your opinion, it's still doesn't make yours more (or less) "valid" than anybody else's.

Last time I checked opinions such as "this is a good idea/this is a bad idea" aren't a measurable thing in terms of correctness and they can't be invalidated. So go ahead and keep thinking that your position is more correct than anybody else's if it helps you sleep better but that doesn't make it so.

Invalidated, already said, redundant, what the fuck ever. Kupo is bringing nothing new to the table which doesn't help the Defend Sony No Matter What Crowd (which is just you and him) at all.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Invalidated, already said, redundant, what the fuck ever. Kupo is bringing nothing new to the table which doesn't help the Defend Sony No Matter What Crowd (which is just you and him) at all.

I'm a card carrying member of the defend anything game-related that's being railed on by hypocritical, closed-minded over-reactors club.

I'm constantly voicing support for all manner of companies, developers and publishers when I feel that an "unpopular" concept has some manner of redeeming quality or simply isn't as big a deal as the community/gaming media is making it out to be.

Just because I don't have some kind of misplaced and unnatural "hatred" for Sony based on who-knows-what doesn't mean that I'm defending them with no logical position.

You and others butt-hurt individuals are WILDLY over-reacting, and as much as you're entitled to feel whatever the fuck you want to feel I don't see anything you or anybody else has said that that strictly invalidates anything about the normalcy of what Sony is offering here.

If we're supposed to be OUTRAGED over the logic that Sony is asking us to pay for license transfer, answer me this:

If I purchased a vinyl LP of Iron Maiden Killers in 1985, why did not not retain the right to obtain it for free when it was released on CD? And if I spent $20 on the CD when it was released, why was I not entitled to download those tracks for free when they were relased on iTunes?

If I purchased Tim Burton's Batman on VHS in 1990, why was I not entitled to a free copy on DVD when it was released? And if I purchased that film on DVD why was I not entitled to a free digital version of it when it was released on iTunes or other digital movie services?

If I purchased the audio book version of Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy why am I not entitled to a free version of that on iTunes?

If I purchased Monkey Island for PC in 1989 on floppy, why was I not entitled to a free version when Lucasarts released it on CD rom? And if I purchased the CD rom version, why was I not entitled to a free copy of the version on the iOS app store?

If I own all of the Genesis Games on Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection for XBOX/PS3, why am I not entitled to a free copy of that game or all of the un-altered versions of those games available on the Wii virtual console?

If I purchased all three of the games in the XBOX/PS2 Splinter Cell Trilogy, why am I not entitled to a free copy of that game on PS3?

I could go on. I won't, but I could.

We ALL pay for the same things again and again. And for every moment of "outrage" like this another new Star Wars Box Set tops the global sales charts.

And as much as you may love wagging a self righteous finger at me (mainly just because it's me) over shit like this it doesn't change the fact that this is how the entertainment industry works. It's not by my design, I just try to look at it from a logical perspective and not act like a myopic cry-baby every time a company asks for my money.

As far as this being some kind of new/outrageous precedent, I directly addressed your specific position about last-gen games being a free to play industry standard.

If your claim is that all last-gen software should be free-to-play via backwards compatibility standards offered by Nintendo in recent generations - Microsoft and Sony say otherwise in this current generation.

They both currently want cash for immediate last-gen XBOX and PS2 games offered via download on their respective systems and I'm pretty sure that if you check the sales records Halo Combat Evolved is a pretty big seller via digital download on XBL - so we as consumers are supporting and reinforcing that game companies should continue down that road.

[Icarus Moonsight]

That's pretty much it. You can rip a vinyl source to MP3 and then burn a CD and record it onto tape reel or cassette if you want. My dad has been recording his VHS collection onto DVD for years now... They're charging for a shortcut no-fuss service, which is fine. Granted, most heavy player/collectors are invested enough to opt out and just do it themselves... From our perspective, it's stupid and a waste. For Jane Doe Aerostar Drivin' Soccer Mom, not so much. She'll gladly spend $20 to get Ben 10 and DBZ on their kids Vita just so they STFU.

[Bojay1997]

I'm a card carrying member of the defend anything game-related that's being railed on by hypocritical, closed-minded over-reactors club.

I'm constantly voicing support for all manner of companies, developers and publishers when I feel that an "unpopular" concept has some manner of redeeming quality or simply isn't as big a deal as the community/gaming media is making it out to be.

Just because I don't have some kind of misplaced and unnatural "hatred" for Sony based on who-knows-what doesn't mean that I'm defending them with no logical position.


I have no problem with you or anyone else expressing an opinion. Having said that, based on your previous posts, you are what any neutral observer would describe as an unabashed Sony fan-boy. You seem unable to recognize their numerous flaws. I own all three consoles this generation and I am glad I own them and use them all, but each one has amazing games but very real flaws. You seem to have no problem recognizing Microsoft or Nintendo's flaws, but the second someone points out Sony's flaws, it's like you are being personally attacked. Just a couple of weeks ago you were arguing that we should all accept Sony's low failure rate self-reported number and disregard a more unbiased report by a warranty company that actually deals with the failures on a daily basis.

This week, you took a story which many people found to be negative about Sony's "solution" to the UMD backwards compatibility issue and tried to spin it like it was some wonderful program. You're right, Sony never said it would be free, they always just claimed they were hard at work on a solution, a solution which never materialized despite the fact that Sony develops and publishes many of the top games for the PSP, so there should be no licensing issues. I guess I just assumed that they would go the Nintendo or Microsoft route and make the backward compatibility free. Now, obviously they ran into some issues, the biggest of which is that they are loosing massive amounts of money every quarter. The fact is, you seem unable to see both sides of an issue when it comes to Sony, so, you'll forgive me if I disregard and devalue your opinions on Sony related topics.

[kupomogli]

Sony never said it would be free, they always just claimed they were hard at work on a solution, a solution which never materialized despite the fact that Sony develops and publishes many of the top games for the PSP, so there should be no licensing issues.

If you lived in Europe they did. 10 games for free with the purchase of a PSP Go.

http://blog.eu.playstation.com/2010/06/01/buy-a-new-pspgo-and-get-10-free-games/

Why are you bitching about the PSP Go anyways. Did you even purchase a PSP Go to feel robbed out of the games they didn't allow you to transfer into digital copies for free? Most people didn't purchase a Go, and those that did were well aware that Sony wasn't offering any sort of discount other than what I just mentioned. If you're fully aware that Sony wasn't doing anything for the PSP games you already owned and you still bought a PSP Go then that was your choice. You were well aware of what you getting into.

The Vita is a different system. A new system is for new games. Those that purchase their games digitally would have no problem playing older PSP games, but those that want to play their UMD copies would be required to repurchase them.

Like others have already mentioned, you can play the UMD copies on your PSP which you should still have. Or, someone mentioned that you can use the transfer system to purchase the digital copy for a lower price and then sell your physical copy on Ebay. With this way, you'll probably make more money off selling the game on Ebay than you lost by purchasing the digital copy. This way you're not spending anything and still keeping all your games, atleast all of them that have a digital copy on the PSN.

So you guys just expect Sony to allow you to have all the games free and still keep the UMDs? What's to stop you from getting the games free and then selling the UMDs? What's to stop you from going to the nearest video store using a one time out at a time video game rental service and transfering all games into free digital copies? I'm pretty sure people will do this for discounted rates.

The only other way would be Sony could have all their consumers send in the UMDs for a one time free digital copy of that game. There's really no other way to prove that the user actually owns the copy of the game. That would cost you more than it would just purchasing the game digitally through discount more than likely.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

I have no problem with you or anyone else expressing an opinion. Having said that, based on your previous posts, you are what any neutral observer would describe as an unabashed Sony fan-boy. You seem unable to recognize their numerous flaws. I own all three consoles this generation and I am glad I own them and use them all, but each one has amazing games but very real flaws. You seem to have no problem recognizing Microsoft or Nintendo's flaws, but the second someone points out Sony's flaws, it's like you are being personally attacked. Just a couple of weeks ago you were arguing that we should all accept Sony's low failure rate self-reported number and disregard a more unbiased report by a warranty company that actually deals with the failures on a daily basis.

This week, you took a story which many people found to be negative about Sony's "solution" to the UMD backwards compatibility issue and tried to spin it like it was some wonderful program. You're right, Sony never said it would be free, they always just claimed they were hard at work on a solution, a solution which never materialized despite the fact that Sony develops and publishes many of the top games for the PSP, so there should be no licensing issues. I guess I just assumed that they would go the Nintendo or Microsoft route and make the backward compatibility free. Now, obviously they ran into some issues, the biggest of which is that they are loosing massive amounts of money every quarter. The fact is, you seem unable to see both sides of an issue when it comes to Sony, so, you'll forgive me if I disregard and devalue your opinions on Sony related topics.

If you or any other quote-unquote "neutral observers" think that I'm a "fanboy" based on any discussions I have on these forums, plainly stated, you simply don't know me.

I don't get off on being negative about shit like this, be the discussion about Nintendo, Sega, Microsoft, Google, Apple, Sony, etc.

It's obvious that a lot of you get your jollies by cleverly condemning every move that every company in this industry makes.

That's just not me. Jabbering on about how company X wants to strangle every last dollar out of us because they're greedy and evil isn't how I want to spend my days.

If that makes me come off like a fanboy to you, so be it.

There are plenty of people on these forums and elsewhere that really know me and know that my passion for every crevice of this industry goes way way beyond being tolerant in the face of programs like this.

As far as this thread is concerned, I've stated multiple times that I realize that this is not an ideal situation and not one that not all users will be satisfied with.

However, even if I acknowledge that it's not an ideal thing, I'm still allowed to have a fucking opinion of my own.

There's a HUGE difference between being of the position that a choice is better than no choice at all and spinning something as a "wonderful program".

You're just reading everything that I say and taking any proclivity that I have for positivity or optimism and applying some assumption that it's because I'm not lock-step in line with your rage-filled perspective that I'm incapable of viewing flaws in a business model.

This one isn't ideal for those who don't like re-buying the same games, but it hardly seems flawed to me. Somebody is going to stand to make money, and those who own UMDs and a PSP are going to have an option to spend less than those who don't.

You know what a FLAWED business model is?

One that doesn't make any money.

Because it gives everything away for free.

[portnoyd]

Since we're all in agreement Frankie is a monstrous Sony fanboy...

http://game-rave.com/psn.jpg

[GarrettCRW]

This thread needs a Picard/Riker/Worf facepalm pic. Seriously.

[RP2A03]

This thread needs a Picard/Riker/Worf facepalm pic. Seriously.

Will these do?

http://i926.photobucket.com/albums/ad101/RP2A03/picard_palm.jpg

http://i926.photobucket.com/albums/ad101/RP2A03/riker.jpg

http://i926.photobucket.com/albums/ad101/RP2A03/worffacepalm.png



Bonus facepalms!



http://i926.photobucket.com/albums/ad101/RP2A03/1313178415025.jpg

http://i926.photobucket.com/albums/ad101/RP2A03/Janeway_facepalm.jpg

http://i926.photobucket.com/albums/ad101/RP2A03/Kirk_Facepalm.png

[Gameguy]

If I purchased Monkey Island for PC in 1989 on floppy, why was I not entitled to a free version when Lucasarts released it on CD rom? And if I purchased the CD rom version, why was I not entitled to a free copy of the version on the iOS app store?
It's a bit different than what you're getting at, it's more like if you played your copy of Monkey Island on your 1989 PC you won't be allowed to play it on your recent 2010 PC unless you pay more money to transfer the license. You wouldn't be allowed to backup the floppies using your old PC with a floppy drive and send the files to your new PC to play them, or have any access to a USB floppy drive to transfer it yourself.

If you bought the PC version you never had the Mac version included, why would you expect to have access to the iOS version years later? With PSP games they're the same games in the same format, if anything it's more like having the PC floppy version of Monkey Island and not being allowed to have a USB floppy drive to use them on your current PC.

[kupomogli]

With PSP games they're the same games in the same format

But again. It's not the same format. That's what we're getting at. Playing PSP on the Vita is no different than playing a PS2 game on a non bc PS3, NES game on the Wii, or even a PSX game on the PSP. The consoles can't support the previous format.

I'd see the point in complaining if the Vita had a higher capacity UMD drive and then it didn't play PSP games, but it's a totally different disc drive. That's where the complaining should end.

It doesn't matter. People are going to bitch regardless. Remember when PSOne Classics were announced and people were bitching about having to repurchase their PSX titles to play on the PSP. Praise Nintendo for overpricing their virtual console games and then bash Sony for doing the same thing except with some reasonable prices. That's Nintendo fanboy logic for you.

[Leo_A]

It's a bit different than what you're getting at, it's more like if you played your copy of Monkey Island on your 1989 PC you won't be allowed to play it on your recent 2010 PC unless you pay more money to transfer the license..

No, you've failed to form a correct analogy.

It's far closer to someone being upset that they'd have to pay $2.99 to download a 20 year old game off Steam that they own on a floppy disk but can't play since their new computer lacks a disk drive.

The Playstation Vita lacks a UMD drive. If it had a UMD drive and you still had to pay to be able to play your UMD's, I'd be all behind you.

[Gameguy]

But again. It's not the same format.
The games sold as digital downloads are not the same format as what's on the UMDs? I'm thinking of Papaton 2, this game was sold at retail as both a UMD and as a download code. If I'm understanding this new system correctly, if you purchased the game as a download code you can still use it on your new system but if you bought the UMD instead you have to pay more money to download it. Is that basically how this system is working?

I don't like Nintendo's download service either, but it's mostly for people who don't already have the game. And these are made available on another system years after they came out and long after they went out of print on their original format, I do agree that most games are overpriced though. For old games I'd rather just play them on original hardware anyway, I won't buy any type of ROM when it's also available in a physical format.


No, you've failed to form a correct analogy.

It's far closer to someone being upset that they'd have to pay $2.99 to download a 20 year old game off Steam that they own on a floppy disk but can't play since their new computer lacks a disk drive.
That's basically what I said in my second paragraph.


The Playstation Vita lacks a UMD drive. If it had a UMD drive and you still had to pay to be able to play your UMD's, I'd be all behind you.
People just want Sony to offer a device equivalent to a USB floppy drive so they don't have to pay for another version of the game when they already own one.

I don't have a problem with them offering the games for sale so people who never had a copy can buy them, but charging people for what they call a license transfer is what's bad. It's not paying for a new version of the game, it's to transfer a license. You don't have to pay a fee to transfer a license when selling a used game to someone else or selling used computer software to someone else, even if you just gave them to someone else as a gift the license is transfered to them automatically. You're not even transfering the license to someone else, the license still belongs to you just as it already did.

If these games were made for truly different formats there shouldn't be a license transfer available, you would be buying a new license for a new version. As for transfering your old games to your new system, all I can think about is how their current competitor in the handheld market lets you play old DS games on their new 3DS system as a standard feature(I don't even like the 3DS that much). This just looks bad for Sony, it's poorly marketed and comes across as bad public relations. That's how it's coming across to most people.

[Icarus Moonsight]

The transfer fee above 1-2 monetary units... No thanks.
The transfer free... There it's obvious why that won't happen.
"Hey dude, can I borrow your PSP stuff for the weekend?"
Wash... Repeat...

Charging $5+ to transfer isn't ethically "bad" either, it's just insulting, bad.

Nintendo is a different case. Gamecube works on Wii (up to recently - MiniWii: Successor to NES-Topper and SNES2). DS works on 3DS. That's full BC. VC is a cherry and optional. Going back 2 steps (or more), even though that's all Sony has at this time... Meh. It adds little value to a PS3 over a PS2. The PS2 is arguably still a better platform because you have the entire PS1/2 library at your disposal for $30-$80 entry fee. Vita can't go BC back one, let alone two. UMD was error, and not forward thinking. Sony will still take the UMD hit through the Vita cycle. Just this time, a glancing blow.

Also remember, Sony was responsible for consumer expectation of BC... They're getting better, but they're still rather schizo and narcissistic.

[G-Boobie]

No, you've failed to form a correct analogy.

It's far closer to someone being upset that they'd have to pay $2.99 to download a 20 year old game off Steam that they own on a floppy disk but can't play since their new computer lacks a disk drive.

The Playstation Vita lacks a UMD drive. If it had a UMD drive and you still had to pay to be able to play your UMD's, I'd be all behind you.

Exactly.

Again, this comes down to the "license" concept. I'd like to reiterate that Sony cannot legally offer a license to play previously purchased games published by a third party on a new device. That's up to the publishers. Remember that Sony charges publishers for bandwidth on PSN, and that third parties felt burned in regards to PSP software sales.

And again, you already own a PSP if you're that worried about playing UMD games on the vita.

[kupomogli]

The games sold as digital downloads are not the same format as what's on the UMDs? I'm thinking of Papaton 2, this game was sold at retail as both a UMD and as a download code. If I'm understanding this new system correctly, if you purchased the game as a download code you can still use it on your new system but if you bought the UMD instead you have to pay more money to download it. Is that basically how this system is working?

Sony had to pay licensing fees to sell the physical copy. They have to pay licensing fees to sell the digital copy. Technically, they're two entirely different forms of media. The PSP can play both UMD PSP games and digital PSP games while the Vita can only play digital PSP games. All previous purchased digital PSP games can be played on the Vita. This is exactly the same as the Wii, as all games on the Virtual Console also have to be relicensed before they can be sold.

But like someone else and I said previously. If you want to digital copies for "free," in a sense. Use the license transfer, purchase the games on the PSN. Put your PSP games on Ebay, come out richer than you were and still obtain the rights to all games except in digital form. What's the problem there?

Either keep the games in UMD form or swap them out for digital form. Don't expect both unless you want to pay money. Legally, the only way you'll get both a physical format and digital format with anything else in this world is to, usually, pay more than once.

[Icarus Moonsight]

That UMD drive was our last hope.
No, there is another.

[Emuaust]

There is a lack of Derp and Cool Story Bro images in this thread, maybe the smell of massive nerd ass crack scared everyone away...

And I think Gameguy's summing up of the "monkey island" thing is pretty much perfect.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

So, yeah, I'm still trying to follow the logic of ownership/entitlement going on in here ...

... forget about all my LP records, books on cassette and NES Cartridges, what about all the PC CD ROM games that I own?

Why do I have to pay to buy those again on Good Old Games and/or Steam?
Why????

Why can't I have those for free???

Same format game, same software code, same operating system ... why are GOG and Steam such beloved, popular and successful software delivery platforms if they're charging users for software that they already own with NO option to download what you already own for free?

There's no reason why they can't make some kind of program that allows you to pop your physical media in your computer's disc drive and verify that you're an honest-to-goodness owner.

Shouldn't there be some type of similar outrage over publishers not giving consumers any option to prove that they own the PC games that they're selling on GOG/Steam?

I have the discs, hell, I even still have the mail-in warranty cards! (Can I send those in somewhere as proof of purchase?)

[Kitsune Sniper]

*deleted*

You people keep squabbling amongst yourselves. Eff this thread.

[Icarus Moonsight]

They used a standard media [5.25/3.5 floppy, CD/DVD etc.], not a proprietary one. Big difference. Pull vs push.

It's their fault it's a mess.

[dgdgagdae]

As someone who has no sense of entitlement for free games on a new system, the option to repurchase games I've already purchased on different media for a previous system doesn't bother me. I probably won't use the option, but it's fine that it's there. My PSP will continue to play UMDs. I'm not sure when we started expecting that companies had to provide backwards compatibility, or when it became evil if they don't.

[portnoyd]

What Icarus said.


It's their fault it's a mess.

Thread over.

[GrandAmChandler]

What the hell has this forum turned into?

[98PaceCar]

What the hell has this forum turned into?

Daycare for people too young to be allowed on the internet by themselves, apparently.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

They used a standard media [5.25/3.5 floppy, CD/DVD etc.], not a proprietary one. Big difference. Pull vs push.

It's their fault it's a mess.

Well,

I'm honestly at the point now where I'm JUST trying to distill the core of the logic being batted around by detractors.

If I'm somehow wrong in being okay with this program because software owners are entitled to the right to free data transfer, we've all either accepted, participated in or have been tolerant of the practice of buying the same thing more than once in the past and present on other platforms, and if there has been any outrage it has been silent and private.

If we're going to call out this program as an affront to our consumer rights, I'm lacking in my understanding of at what point we as software owners accept that our "right/entitlement" has somehow passed or expired and when it is okay to pay for the same thing that we've already paid for.

Is this only related to consoles/portables?

Is it dependent on the format of the original media (media that would otherwise have a finite lifespan)?

Do these standards not apply to PCs/Macs because their "generational" standards/compatibility are more liquid than consoles?

For the sake of those of us who are struggling to understand the positions of outrage, somebody from that camp needs to come up with a set of rules as to:

When it is acceptable for a company to ask that we buy largely unaltered software code again in a digital format if we already own that software on physical media?

When is it not acceptable?

When it is acceptable, what price is acceptable?

because all I see currently is what G-Boobie hammered home a few pages back, hypocrisy

... ie it's not okay for Sony to do this, but ... it was okay with the myriad of media formats of the past, or it is okay on console/portable x,y,z, or based on this amount of software scarcity, or on this,that or the other "industry standard"., etc. etc.

I'm pretty much lost at this point as to why it's a terrible thing that Sony and 3rd party developers are doing with this.

I'm well aware that at this point there won't be anybody swayed from their deeply entrenched positions, some of us are okay with this and some of us are outraged - BUT, in the interest of salvaging some manner of non-contentious debate in this thread, maybe we can all come to some middle-ground consensus on when this kind of practice is acceptable from a business standpoint.


What the hell has this forum turned into?

A place where bullying, dog-piling and the public shaming of those who have an opinion that isn't in-line with all the cool kids doesn't work quite as well as it used to.

[portnoyd]

A place where bullying, dog-piling and the public shaming of those who have an opinion that isn't in-line with all the cool kids doesn't work quite as well as it used to.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_s36XsIujFj8/S9x8u2U761I/AAAAAAAAAOo/HHLJ_PT9XGM/s1600/simpsons_nelson_haha2.png

[GrandAmChandler]

A place where bullying, dog-piling and the public shaming of those who have an opinion that isn't in-line with all the cool kids doesn't work quite as well as it used to.

Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, I totally agree here, but this board has turned into GameFaqs caliber quite quickly. This thread is a prime example.