Ben-DutkaThe game itself isn't necessarily big news; the fact that it's only available on the PlayStation Network with a lofty price tag…well, that could be an interesting little test.
Okay, first- the Xbox 360 version of Record of Agarest War , the very revealing and awfully titillating RPG, has already shipped to retailers. It's a regular physical disc, obviously. However, PS3 owners will only have the option of downloading the game on the PSN; there will be no Blu-Ray disc available at the stores. But because it's a full-production game, the price will be $44.99, which is actually $15 less than the $60 360 version, so that's a bonus. But we've noticed that people tend to set their own limits on PSN spending and it may not matter that Record of Agarest War is a full game. Thing is, we're not yet to the point where all games have to be purchased digitally; when gamers have a choice in the matter, and they have to pay out a significant chunk of change, are they more likely to simply get the physical media? And if there is no option for a disc and box, will they simply shrug their shoulders and go, "eh, it's the same thing"? There's very little on the PSN that even comes close to this price tag so, full game or not, it's going to appear a little out of place and some are gonna be confused.
So is the lack of an actual disc enough to make you download the game? It may appear high for the PSN but clearly, it's actually cheaper than the competition. The question is whether people would rather have something physical and tangible when it comes to higher prices.
Related Game(s): Record of Agarest War
It is on disc I'm sure of it.
Seen it at the used shelf of Game, unlikely you mean just the US?
I will support the move to all digital media full on. Even though it's success means I'll end up unemployed! (GameStop)
It's so nice and convenient having EVERYTHING right there ready to go!
I love my PsPGO, and am getting ready to upgrade my 60 gig launch system to a TeraByte. Then I won't have much to worry about.
If only Sony would add support for stackable external HDD's…..
What Sony needs to do is have an official Sony external SATA port to allow external drives.
Not one of the people here who are so against protecting the rights of the copyright holder would be so against DRM if it was their copyright being infringed.
So tell me how locking a game to a specific PS3 is a good idea. Like I said earlier, if a game is locked to a specific PS3 and that PS3 craps out, you are then going to have to jump through hoops just to be able to get that game back on a new PS3.
I will be awaiting your comment when that happens to you.
Like I've said in several replies above, Capcoms idea of locking a game to a specific PS3 and specific user is un-workably annoying. It's simply too restrictive. If I buy a game on a disc, then any user on my PS3 can use it. That is the minimum functionality required. But I can take that disc to other PS3s as well. Downloadable games have to mimic the same rights/utility of a game on a disc, so you have to be able to take it to another PS3 and it has to be usable by other users of that PS3. Sony's original PSN terms set 5 activations of a game, and the activations cover all users on a given PS3, so you effectively can put the game on up to 5 systems. That works OK, but if they want to cut the number of possible activations say to 2 or 3 then they need to do something about the way we can manage activations. For example. If I buy a downloadable game on my PS3 phat, and put it on my wife's system too. The my system dies and I get a new one and re-install my game, that's 3 activations right there. How easy is it to manage the system activations of my content to remove the dead system? Not very.
If managing the activations were made easier and more dynamic, then having a limited number of activations wouldn't be an issue, as long as the user can easily manage them.
Now that we can agree on. I have already been through this. My original 60 died, I sent it in for repair and they sent me another 60. That 60 crashed as well so I ended up buying another one. That is 3 activations right there. My friend had my account activated on his 60 and it crapped on him so he bought his stepdaughters 80 but by that time all my activations were used up.
I had to contact Sony and give them the whole layout of what happened and explain that I needed those systems deactivated. I asked them why they didn't put something in your account management that shows all systems that are activated for your account and let you manage it. They said that would never happen and they unlocked all my activations but told me they wouldn't do it again.
As for the rights being reduced from 5 to 3. Most games on the PSN have already done this. Maybe they will give us control someday but I doubt it.
BTW, it is not just Capcom that is using this idea. Singstar already locks their songs to the PS3 that it was dl'ed on and UNO on the PSN only works if you are logged in as the person who dl'ed it in the first place. I don't like that. Not at all.
Last edited by rogers71 on 4/29/2010 3:04:28 PM
I actually don't think this game being PSN only reduces the price all that much or at all.I checked amazon and they only offer the limited edition which is $60..so if we take away the limited edition items it would effectively cut $10-$15(just a guess) making the price of the game about the same as the PSN version.The fact that the xbox version actually has a limited edition and the ps3 doesn't bugs me since now i am not sure if i still want the game.
Last edited by huh1678 on 4/28/2010 11:14:08 PM
I would have much preferred the have the option for the disc. If I pick this one up it will have to be for 360.
thats what she said!
Seeing as how I've been downloading more games rather than buying physical copies the past 2 years or so, I welcome this. If PSN starts doing this more then I might actually hook my PS3 up to the net.
15 bucks is kinda a rip off if you ask me.
i mean the distribution costs, manufacturing costs, disk costs, cost of manual, case, printing and such surly would b3 saving them much more than that!
downloadable games should be minimum 30 bucks less than their disk based counterpart.
plus not to mention its a full based game, its on 360, all 360 games use dual layer disks, all dual layer disk 360 games are up in the region of 8GBs.
now who has 8 GBs to waste on one freaking game?
again, when are developers going to wake up and smell the beans?
not everyone lives in Japan with unlimited download usages!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I do, it's called a 320GB HDD, and it has the room for more than 30 such games. How is this much worse than games with 4-5GB HDD installs?
ahhhhhh bandwidth?
its going to be hard for me to download a 8GB+ game when i have a download limit of 10 no?
1 game and ive barley got anything left to use for the month!
curse Australia and its ridiculously overpriced cable internet!!!
one thing i will never understand.
cable @ 1.4Mbps with cap of 10GBs = 120 bucks.
ADSL2+ @ 1.8MBps with cap of 500GBs = 80.
i thought you were suppose to pay less for less, not more for less!