Google+

Sony confirms that all future online games will utilize PSN passes

Earlier this week, Sony revealed that Uncharted 3: Drake’s Deception would utilize an Online Pass for multiplayer play, just as Resistance 3 did last month. Curious to see if this was a trend that would be continuing for future releases, Destructoid reached out to Sony and was told, fairly bluntly, that the "Online Pass will be incorporated into Uncharted 3 and future Sony Computer Entertainment Worldwide Studios (SCE WWS) games with online functionality." This confirms that Sony would, from here on out, require gamers to type in a password before they jump into online games. Because there's nothing more fun than typing in a 12-digit long code before starting a new game, right?

There are a number of PS3 games that might be influenced by this decision coming out in the near future. This year there’s Ratchet & Clank: All 4 One, which is due out this month and puts an emphasis on cooperative play. Going into next year, two of Sony’s biggest releases, Starhawk and Twisted Metal, are both due out within the first few months, and both focus completely on online multiplayer over the PlayStation Network. In other words, they're totally going to require a PSN Pass.

Like it or not, the trend of including Online Passes seems to be growing. EA has been pushing them in just about every multiplayer game it published for the past two years, and THQ has started to do the same since UFC Undisputed 2011 was released. Sony is the first console maker to actually jump on the bandwagon, though, if it’s successful, we’d be shocked if Microsoft didn’t do something similar with copies of Halo or Gears of War in the future. It might be an inconvenience that hurts customers who purchase games used, but it certainly does its job of pushing gamers towards picking up new releases, instead of waiting for someone to trade it in. So... success?

Oct 3, 2011

Topics

online pass PSN

We Recommend By ZergNet

19 comments

  • SolarPoweredShitMachine - October 4, 2011 7:22 a.m.

    "Because there's nothing more fun than typing in a 12-digit long code before starting a new game, right?" A bit like trying to leave a comment on this site amirite? But yeah, this sucks for people who buy 2nd hand games...
  • SolidBaker - October 3, 2011 8:42 p.m.

    this is the old CD Key idea if I'm understanding it right. Something which has been cracked and dropped already by PC Gaming companies almost universally (there are still some hold-outs) due to it's prevalence to be brought down when someone figures out the key to generate them. I personally have no problem with it, it's just a little extra, and if you only have to enter it the one time, it's ok, as that's just another way to tie the game to your account, and say Sony adds in the option that if you own it, lose the disc and it is available on the PSN you can re-download it(doubtful, but hopeful).
  • ryoishibashi - October 3, 2011 7:32 p.m.

    If games were cheaper, people would buy them new.
  • SparkleDevon - October 3, 2011 6:27 p.m.

    so... basically the equivalent of friend codes for secondhand PS3 games? Isn't that why the Wii has such a bad rep? >.>
  • gopikmin - October 3, 2011 7:06 p.m.

    No, this only needs to be entered once for firsthand gsmes. The secondhand have to pay a couple dollars. Wii friend codes have to be entered for every friend for each game by both sides.
  • ParanoidAndroid - October 3, 2011 7:12 p.m.

    No, usually friend codes required you to type them in every time you went online. This is a one-time thing.
  • Moondoggie1157 - October 3, 2011 6:12 p.m.

    Cooper, you make it sound so dire... "...there's nothing more fun than typing in a 12-digit long code before starting a new game, right?" I could see this being relevant if we had to type that every time we went online, but unless that's the case, well, so what? We already have to wait up to (sometimes) 30 minutes to play a game before we install it, so why does typing in a 12 digit code matter? This will prompt people to buy new games, and I can't say that's bad... I buy both used and new. If those who buy a used game want the passcode, they will likely pay $10 (Canadian, to those who care). Think about it, who waits to buy a used game they've wanted because it is $5 or $10 less? I know very few, they wait longer. The difference between $25.99 + $9.99 used, and $59.99 to $69.99 new, is still a big gap, I doubt it will change much really. And as long as the developers make good use of the cash, I don't care. W.W. for Prez, PEACE! P.s. what's up with the Capctha? : thryft 1051-8037/91? I mean, really? haha :P
  • jmcgrotty - October 4, 2011 1:56 a.m.

    "so why does typing in a 12 digit code matter?" Because it's annoying that honest (that might not be the best word for it) people have to jump through hoops just because of the actions of a small to medium group of consumers.
  • rabidpotatochip - October 3, 2011 5:32 p.m.

    I can't wait to see this implemented with used cars.
  • D0CCON - October 3, 2011 6:13 p.m.

    It already is, it's called that the car already has a lot of miles on it and will need to be brought in for repairs. There is no tarnish at all for buying a game used (maybe, at worst, there isn't an instruction manual). These codes are the equivalent of the extra miles and wear and tear.
  • rabidpotatochip - October 4, 2011 6:40 a.m.

    I take it you've never bought a used car. When you buy a car it loses thousands of dollars value the moment you drive it off the lot because it's no longer new, it's now "pre-owned" (used). That's the gaming equivalent of removing the wrapper. Calling these codes the equivalent of extra miles of wear and tear is ridiculous, you said it yourself in the previous sentence: "there is no tarnish at all for buying a game used". A large segment of the gaming market is driven by gamers who buy used and those who buy new with the intention of recovering some of their investment; this move won't make either of those segments put more money into the market and that's a bad thing. I'm not saying we'll all be living in caves with no electricity because of this but it will hurt the industry as a whole. Look for the NY Times article titled "Reading Between the Lines of Used Book Sales". The tl;dr version is that a healthy resale market (used products) increases sales in the primary market (new products). I think forcing the used market to pay extra is a bad idea but it's not out of some misplaced sense of entitlement, it's because there are very real consequences that will eventually bite us (consumers) in the ass. I'm all for paying people for their work and believe that there needs to be some kind of compromise but this isn't it. I'm not just trolling, I'm using actual logic based on economic principles. Anyway, serious Chip's going back in the box now.
  • chrisat928 - October 3, 2011 6:15 p.m.

    Flawless logic, especially seeing as how several car manufacturers sell their own used cars...
  • gumbyx84 - October 4, 2011 4:10 a.m.

    Its highly flawed. First off, just because you buy a used car from the original manufacturer doesn't mean you have to let them service your car, which means they don't see the extra money. Secondly, you don't pay extra for the extra miles and "wear and tear" on the vehicle. That is the reason you pay less.
  • Taboo5289 - October 3, 2011 5:24 p.m.

    I don't see this as sucking for consumers except for not being able to buy a game for cheap and watching none of the spent money making its way to the creators of the game. Putting in a code to access stuff in games isn't that big of a deal and nowadays is usual business for any new game. It takes what 3 minutes tops? Not a biggie and a fair way to see revenues make it to the people who deserve it.
  • jmcgrotty - October 4, 2011 1:51 a.m.

    (I say this mostly as a "devils advocate" look at the topic) "I don't see this as sucking for consumers except for not being able to buy a game for cheap and watching none of the spent money making its way to the creators of the game." You mean like when you buy a used car, where they force you to send a check to the automaker who made it, as well as the engineers that designed it to begin with? Like when you buy a "used" house, where you have to send money to the contractor and/or the property developer before you can move in? Like when you go to use a hooker and not only have to pay her, but pay her parents for creating her?
  • Sjoeki - October 3, 2011 5:23 p.m.

    This kinda sucks if you ask me, and I dont even buy second hand games. Specially now that they let you play the online mode of Uncharted 3 a month early if you buy a drink at Subway (America) or if you have playstation plus (Europe), how is that fare? If you ask me, if somebody goes to buy a second hand game and really likes it, he or she is more likely to buy the next game in the series directly when it comes out. You just have to make good games, and people will buy it. What are they gonna do next, cut singleplayer only games in half, and make you fill out codes half way through?
  • gopikmin - October 3, 2011 7:23 p.m.

    You know some people are just cheap bastards who cannot pay for things at full price. Other times, it is the last game in the series since the developer cannot afford to make another game. This is still cheaper than buying at full price ($30+$10 vs. $60) The developer still loses on a lot of money from secondhand($10 vs $60 though developers get only a portion of that). That subway thing is also a contest.
  • cloudbus - October 3, 2011 5:08 p.m.

    As much as this sucks for consumers, I still think its a good idea. It allows the creators to earn the full profit for their games instead of a shop that sells pre-owned copies.
  • gumbyx84 - October 4, 2011 4:06 a.m.

    You make it sound as if the developers and publishers will never see that money, which is complete bull. Its not like companies that sell used games hide their profits in a money bin and take regular swims in it. Said money goes back into the company towards purchasing new games, systems, and accessories. They might not get as much as they would from new games, but its not like they don't get anything. I wouldn't mind these online passes if they didn't cost $20+. They should cost $5, no more than $10. Basically, this is all driven by greed. And, sadly, greed makes the commercial world go round. This sucks as I wanted to rent One 4 All from Gamefly to see if it was worth picking up, but seeing as I'm locked out of one of the main selling points (online co-op) why should I bother. And because I can't try it, I'm not getting it. I have blindly purchases a number of games due to hype and "great" reviews only to have regretted the purchase (looking at you White Knight Chronicles). Unless I'm 100% sure I want the game (Arkham City and Super Mario Land 3DS to name a few), I refuse to buy it unless I can try it out first. So in turn, they now lose a customer.

Showing 1-19 of 19 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.