xbox 7201 -
xbox 7201 -

The next generation Xbox console will require an always on internet connection and won't support second hand games, sources with first-hand experience of the console have told Edge.

Next-gen Xbox games will continue to ship to retail – now on 50GB Blu-ray discs – but will include a one-time use activation code, essentially wiping out the second hand games market for the platform.

Regarding the system's specifications, Edge's source goes along with information already reported: an AMD eight-core x64 1.6GHz CPU, a D3D11.x 800MHz graphics solution and 8GB of DDR3 RAM. In addition, Microsoft is expected to ship the console with the largest storage hard drive capacity featured in an Xbox to date.

The source also indicates that Sony's PlayStation 4 will be the most powerful of the next generation platforms, not only in raw terms, but also because Xbox developers are required to utilise approved development libraries and must contend with greater OS overheads.

Kinect will also feature, with a new version of the motion-control hardware said to ship alongside the new Xbox. Sony too will update its PlayStation camera tech to offer similar features, says Edge.

Sony is expected to announce the next generation PlayStation at an event on February 20, whilst an analyst has pointed to an April reveal for the next Xbox. Analysis

The growth of Steam indicates irradiating the second-hand market may not be such a bad move for Microsoft, although gamers will want to see game prices fall in-line with what publisher's charge on Steam's digital store.

Source: Edge

New stuff to check out

To add your comment, please login or register

User Comments

rbevanx's Avatar


Now I know why at least Sony are announcing their new console so early even though they have God of War, Beyond and The Last of us coming out soon.

Their game department’s profits were down 84% from what they have announced!

Konami were down quite a lot as well.

I really hope they don't go through with, always on or killing off the 2nd hand market.

I honestly think it would be such a huge own goal, no one will like it and more jobs will be hurt if anything.
Posted 11:46 on 07 February 2013
Batmamerc's Avatar


I don't agree with it I buy games new but only ones I really want most I still buy new but months after release when price has dropped but will most of the time buy pre owned as its always cheaper. I agree it doesn't help developers buying pre owned but I can't afford to pay £35-£45 for games any more the price needs to be a lot lower or they should let you sell pre owned but only be able to use them after 6 months of release or something, I thought DLC was there answer to pre owned they don't make on the game but do on there DLC as its downloadable only.
Posted 11:05 on 07 February 2013
Woffls's Avatar


Later this year: "So, we're gonna' sell games at the same price as this gen. Isn't that great! It costs A LOT more money* to create next gen games, so we're really pleased we're able to bring consumers these experiences at a price they're already happy with"

*It doesn't
Posted 21:35 on 06 February 2013
DancingRhino's Avatar

DancingRhino@ rbevanx

Yes I'd do that and seriously consider just sticking to it and hand helds as well.
Posted 19:28 on 06 February 2013
rbevanx's Avatar

rbevanx@ pblive

If both Sony and MS do it, I'm getting a Wii-U for sure!

But I will be amazed if they both decide to go that route.
Posted 19:26 on 06 February 2013


If it turns out to be true, expect a lot of hacked consoles to start appearing in the next generation.
Posted 18:45 on 06 February 2013
CheekyLee's Avatar


You have never bought an online pass. You will never buy one, either. Don't feel bad, you're not alone. None of us have ever bought one, and none of us ever will. Any console manufacturer that pins their hopes on them will find a lot of money not going their way.
Posted 18:21 on 06 February 2013
munkee's Avatar

munkee@ dav2612

I did consider that myself. But, also took into account that the entire topic is based on rumour anyway.
Posted 17:40 on 06 February 2013
MJTH's Avatar

MJTH@ EverTheOptimist

I think the difference is between buying a bike/ t-shirt second hand from ebay and a game from a second hand retailer, is that a situation where someone has the need to buy a shirt a shirt or a bike, then use it for as little as a month and then selling said shirt or bike back to the retailer they bought it from is not common practice. And because it's not common practice with most other products, there isn't an entire sub system of retailers buying back shirts and bikes from customers to sell them in competition with the original companies that made the shirt.

A better comparison is the used car market, which has a similar system to games. However the reason why car manufacturers don't complain about this market is that the majority of consumers use their car for 3-6 years (in a lot of cases even longer) before selling it. At which point the car manufacturer has either already started selling a newer model, or has a newer model on the way. With games, after a single month a developer is nowhere near finished with it's next product. Depreciation on the cost of new games is already at an astronomical level, and part of the reason that is used game market drives down prices quickly as retailers undercut new copy prices with used copy prices.

I understand the idea of trying to work and understand the used game market instead of forcefully exterminating it. However I think a better idea is to try to just decrease the price of a new game in general from the off. Say if new games were £25 from now. More people would buy more games because they're cheaper and people would be more willing to take chances with games. More copies sold of any game means more profit for retailers, console manufacturers and developers. And the second hand market becomes pointless as games are now cheap to buy from the off anyway. Three birds, one stone, everyone wins and everybody is happy.
Posted 17:34 on 06 February 2013
dav2612's Avatar

dav2612@ munkee

Whilst that makes logical sense, "won't support second hand games" doesn't suggest buying an activation code is an option.
Posted 16:39 on 06 February 2013
EverTheOptimist's Avatar

EverTheOptimist@ munkee

Yeah good call mate, you've actually sat back and thought about this rather than jumping in like me :)

If this was the case though, a pass that works in the same way multiplayer passes work now, it'd be interesting to see how it might be priced if it was true.
Posted 16:32 on 06 February 2013
rbevanx's Avatar

rbevanx@ munkee

Well if that's the case then Xbox Live had better be free then which I doubt.

I just think the story along with all the other rumours are just BS right now, I will comment on something when I hear something offical.
Posted 16:28 on 06 February 2013
munkee's Avatar


Everybody is jumping to the conclusion that you can't resell titles. But, surely an activation code just means that you'll simply have to buy an activation code to play second hand games. Online passes, yo! They reap minor benefits from pre-owned sales.
Posted 16:20 on 06 February 2013
EverTheOptimist's Avatar


This is rubbish (as in untrue) for the same reasons others mention. If high street retailers and online businesses weren't able to sell second hand titles their profits would crumble. Not only that, but gamers would only buy a game if they were really sure they'd get the most out of it and it was right for them. After all, if they couldn't trade it in what would be the point?

I know what you're saying about only buying new games MJTH, but not everyone can drop £40 on a game or wait a couple of years until it's dirt cheap. I'd like to think I'm as ethical and as supportive as the next man, but I think, as dav says, companies need to work with the second hand market and not against it. Imagine if you couldn't buy a bike or a t-shirt on eBay because the original creator wouldn't profit, it's daft. As important as it is to try to pay full price where you can afford to, many people don't think about struggling devs - they look at the money a lot of companies rake in and find it difficult to justify that full price purchase.

I can't see it happening though, it'd be a really dumb move and if Sony went the other way MS would surely lose a ton of potential customers.
Posted 15:42 on 06 February 2013
Endless's Avatar


Steam games are cheaper because they are on a universal platform. However in my experience you can, in most cases, get a non-steam PC game for cheaper than steam at launch. it's only when there's a sale or the game has been out a week or two that Steam becomes cheaper.

Always on internet connection i'm fine with. But then WE would be. What I'm not ok with is single use activation keys and online authentication. What that means is that if I buy a game, my wife can't play it on our console without having her own key.

Had this exact scenario recently: Wife bought Viva Pinata to entertain our son, I installed it and was forced to enter the software key to play it and authenticate with GFWL. She has her own user on our home PC, but cant play it because the game is authenticated to my GFWL account.

It's bull*****.

Restrict to user and hardware the same as it is now. But dont force me to buy multiple keys to play a game on the same console.

They should be embracing and controlling second hand sales, not removing them. if the service allows trading licence keys at a fixed lower prize where the platform takes a cut of the sale. Then I dont see the problem.
Posted 14:29 on 06 February 2013
View Full Site