Sorry, but i just read this yes i Gameshare. Me, and a friend swap games, also went half, and half on the Walking dead season pass. Also sorry , but everyone dosen't live with their parents, or have a that awesome job to throw money down on a new game every week. Just as long as you share with a friend you can REALLY TRUST you should be good.
This can also be said with physical copies. I could suck up all the fun out of a game and trade it with my friend so he can enjoy it until he pukes. He skipped the step of paying 60+ dollars for playing that game and so did I. If you think about it, if Sony thought that was bad, then why are we allowed to have 2 PS3's activated? Why not let it be one? If you want to play it on another PS3, well deactivate that PS3 and activate the other. My friends and I usually give each other games (physical) so we can try them out. The same thing could be said with game sharing. I guess you could do it, but "at your own risk".
Plus, you can easily protect yourself if you share your account by immidietly changing your password after allowing someone to download something. Considering that someone is someone you really know in real life. If you're doing it with someone you don't even know then you're just asking for trouble.
I dont take it to heart if someone asks..Usually its just a kid that just wants what he cant have...I am nice about it and move on..I was once a kid myself and know the feeling about wanting stuff you cant afford...You have to realize this gets them worked up and they get mad that they dont have the money to get things that adults can afford on here ..Home is an expensive habbit between gameing and home I blow alot of cash...So be kind homies...if someone asks to apt share be nice and just say no...Who knows it might be your kid in the other room asking cause you said no to him or her...lol
I was almost about to gameshare before I read this. I agree it does put people at a very high risk for fraud, but poor Activision? Black Ops mad 1 billion world wide in the first two months of it's release, so I don't think 60 bucks would cripple the franchise. Although, they DO put a lot of work in their games unlike some *cough* (Treyarch).
Second, game sharing is not the same as letting a friend borrow a game disc. Game sharing is done digitally, and since you're allowing another person obtain content on a permenant basis, it is theft. It's no different than using bit torrents or peer-to-peer file sharing programs to download programs, music, games, movies, tv shows, or any other type of content that should be paid for. This is also called pirating, and even goes to the extent of copyright infringement since you're illegally distributing copyrighted content. In the case of game sharing, both the person that is allowing the content to be downloaded and the person/people that are doing the downloading are equally guilty. This has gotten to be a very large problem, and because of this, I'm surprised that Sony isn't making the PS4 lock games to the console. If this trend continues, we will see it if not within the ps4/Xbox 720 generation it will most likely be implemented in the following generation.
If others are like me and enjoy classic games (pre-ps1 generations), you will know that the easiest way to enjoy these titles now is to download an emulator and the ROM files. This is the exact same as game sharing, and cheats the people that work hard on these games from getting paid for their years of hard work.
For those that say the developers get paid on a bi-weekly or monthly basis, and the only people that make any money off of the games are the CEOs, you're wrong. The game designer comes up with the idea and sells their idea to a production company. The production company hires the team of programmers, musicians, graphic designers, voice actors, etc. and pays the designer who usually doubles as a programmer a royalty which is usually only $1 - $3 per copy sold. The rest of the money made from the game is used to pay all of the other members of the team that made the game. There is some profit for the production company since they do the legal work of the copyright, marketing, finding the talent for the production team, and a lot more. Then your retailer puts some inflation on the game, but that is usually only about $3 per new title since the industry itself sets the price point for the games, and the retailers have to keep the games around the same price or they'll lose their customers. As you can see, the cost of a game is very justified, and I'm surprised that the price isn't higher.
Where the money is really made (for retailers) is in the accessories. The controllers will sometimes cost the retailers as little as $8.50 (afterglow at Walmart) and the store will sell the controller for $25 - $40. As for the official ps3 controllers, I forgot how much they cost the Walmart that I work at, but the inflation is over double the cost.
Another example would be a set of headphones, when you pay $10 - $20 for a set of earbuds, the store you buy them from only pays about $1.50 per set. Games on the other hand cost the stores about $56 and they sell it for $59.99 and then you have tax on top of it.
It's not just once or twice here and there. Game sharing is a major problem for PSN and that 60 dollar loss can occurs hundreds to thousands of times in a single month. Besides, regardless of how much money they made it still does not make stealing from the company right. By that logic, stealing from Walmart is okay because it does sales in the hundreds of billions every month.
Then get off your rear end and go earn the money yourself. I don't know what is wrong with your generation but when my generation was kids we could be seen doing things to earn money from others whether it was from walking dogs, to selling lemonade, to mowing lawns or pulling weeds, etc etc. Stop being such a spoiled brat and expecting to be handed everything without any effort. You are going to get a cruel slap in the face when you finally have to get a job of your own and actually earn your own money to survive on your own.