Maybe if you could use PayPal would add another level of security. I am very reticent to give m$ my card details. Have heard too many horror stories from friends.

A for the used game restriction idea it would be a huge blow to physical retailers the would all but disappear. Also imagine a world where all you had was something like steam across all platforms and no physical media it could make gaming once again the preserve of the geek as it takes it out of the mainstream. Zumba fitness and modern warfare displays in you local supermarket etc have gone a long way to normalizing gaming for the masses ( which is a double edged sword at the best of times)

Also I simply would not by nearly as many games. I am of the played it trade camp. I rarely keep games once I have finished them. Last year I got deus ex played it sold it put the money towards gears of war 3 finished that then onto rage then onto batman arkham city. I would never buy all of. Those games outright the trade helped soften the financial blow. If that option was taken away I would have to be a lot more selective.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out and if there will be anny announcement at this years e3.

Post edited 23:49 – Feb 6th 2012 by darthsteve333

Not much I can add on the whole MS points / real money issue, but reading this thread, I felt I had to comment on the whole pre-owned thing that Baron mentioned.  Apologies in advance if my thoughts are rambling and incoherent!

I've never been able to understand why the big three console manufacturers have never made it a contractual requirement for game re-sellers to provide them with a cut of pre-owned game sale profits (i.e. in order to re-sell the game, the retailer (GAME for example) has to agree to provide Microsoft / Sony / Nintendo a certain percentage of that sale).  The console manufacturer then redistributes half of that to the publisher and everyone gains something from the re-sale of a game, (albeit by a smaller amount than if the game had been purchased brand new – which in all likelihood, it would not have been anyway)… 

That would seem fairer than the previously mentioned hare-brained idea (which must surely have been concocted by a faceless suit with no experience of gaming) and would seem to my layman's eye, to be a better way than simply preventing all pre-owned sales.  I know for a fact that a good 75% or more of my game collection would not exist if it were not for the ability to trade games.  Not only for the ability to buy traded games themselves, but also as a form of currency (i.e. the trading of games accrues instore credit that I can use to 'buy' the games I really, really want brand new).

If all pre-owned game sales were to suddenly stop, I'm confident in stating that a fair number of games shops would go straight out of business, thus making it harder for the public to buy games and consoles.  It would also limit gaming to those families & individuals with higher levels of disposable income, forcing gaming firmly back into the realms of niche product, (or alternatively opening the door to OnLive & cloud gaming competitors to really clean up).  In short, I think that idea would kill home gaming as we know it stone dead, (deader than Atari managed even with the mess that was ET the Videogame!).

So it would seem that the idea of preventing all pre-owned gaming would be a guaranteed non-starter…or would it?I'd love to hear what others think…