Forum

For the inaugural post in this shiny new forum Tempest made us, I figured should do something more than gushing over how much I'm looking forward to Bravely Default, by putting something that's can be a debate topic.

So, thus, since it's been coming up a lot lately, I bring you a debate on Region-Locking. Please, however, do not make this into a "region-locking is always bad" thing. I want to discuss ways that would make it acceptable.

To start out, let's set some clear definitions.

Region-Locking: The practice of making a video game system so that it will only play games from a certain region, and not from any other regions. In general, among the most common/largest regions are North America, Japan, Europe, and Australia. Region-locking can be done on a hardware or a software basis.

Region-Free: Game Systems that aren't region-locked.
Examples of Region-Free systems are the Game Boy family, and the DS family (with the exception of DSi eShop games).

Hardware Lock: A hardware lock is where the hardware itself is made to disallow games from other regions. Sometimes this is done by subtly (or not-so-subtly) changing the shape of the games, so they physically can't fit (also how backwards-compatible systems avoid letting newer games fit in older systems). For the purposes of this thread, if the system's on-board software is programmed to lock the region, this will be considered a Hardware Lock.
Examples of systems with hardware locks are older consoles, the PS1/PS2, the Xbox and Xbox 360, all Nintendo consoles, and the 3DS.

Software Lock: A software lock is where the system itself is created/coded to play games from any region, but if a game publisher wishes, they can include software that the system will recognize and lock the region.
Examples of systems with software locks are the PS3.

With the recent cancellation of Rune Factory IV in EU, as well as the numerous delays and non-releases of Japanese games in NA and other regions, the debate on region locking has come to the fore again.

With the PS3's software-level lock, it seemed to prove that most publishers didn't have much interest in region-locking their games, with the only major exception being Persona 4 Arena, which was more due to the language options in the game, and the closeness as to when the JP, NA, and EU games were being released, rather than not wanting the games to be playable in other regions.

I know, from having read articles on the subject, that Australian laws regarding content are harsher than those of NA, and that one concern with Nintendo consoles and handhelds (namely, the 3DS) being region-free would be AU importing games that violate their laws. However, that wouldn't make sense with the earlier handhelds being region-free.

IMO, I think the PS3's method, leaving the system open, and leaving the decision up to the game publishers, is the best style, and would have been much better for the 3DS.

One thing to note about the DS to 3DS argument is the following: Even when the written law stays static, the level of enforcement behind those laws can change, depending on the people in charge of the regulatory agencies. This is true even when the agencies have published guidelines on how they operate. This level of flexibility is an intended feature of regulatory agencies, so the law writers (who act much more slowly than agencies) do not need to act every time something changes.

The argument that "Nintendo handhelds were not region locked before, so there's no need to region lock them now" is superficially appealing, but it does not necessarily work for the reason I described in the preceding paragraph.

With that out of the way, the answer to the topic question seems obvious, and it is already implemented: Leave the option in the system firmware to allow region-locking and allow the publishers to choose. This is already how the PS3 implements region locking. It seems obvious that most publishers do not so choose, if for no reason other than most gamers are not interested in importing.

But it is not enough to simply allow region locking and leaving the choice to the publishers. We can see at least one additional criterion by comparing the Vita to the PS3. The PS3 allows more than 1 PSN account per console, so a user can maintain a Japanese account and a EU or NA account simultaneously by simply switching logins. The Vita allows more than 1 PSN account per device as well, but it is limited to 1 PSN account per memory card. This is annoying, because the user has to keep track of more than one extremely expensive (relative to other flash storage) and tiny card to switch accounts, an exercise that may very well prove worse than maintaining multiple 3DSes.

I understand why it exists, it's for making they make maximum profits on games, by making sure that people in wealthy countries don't "cheat", so to speak, and pay the prices that people in poor countries pay for games.

However, as region locks are arbitrary, they often simply punish wealthier people and disallow them to play games from other cultures, even if they pay more. Unless of course, they buy a different region system.

For instance, the fact that America 3DS and Wii U systems are unable to play Japanese games is nonsensical. Japanese video games cost more than American video games. So the region locking in this instance isn't allowing them to pay less for video games at all. It's completely arbitrary, and serves no purpose but to separate cultures and markets.

It could be argued, that, in this instance, that it serves a purpose of discouraging importing, so that localized versions are more likely to be bought. And that not doing so would hurt the localization industry. However, the people who would buy an imported Japanese version and not a localized copy would be minimal. And far too many video games will never have any plans of localization. So the only thing this is helping to do is stop, for instance, Americans for paying a premium for games that will never be localized.

And that doesn't make business sense. Since no profit is made from this specific region lock.

Until contracts stop being written specifying that things can only be released in certain markets, it's going to be hard to make this acceptable. I'm not just talking about games themselves. Many Japanese musicians sign contracts with their record label that their music is for release in Japan only. Since some Japanese games have said music in them, then it suddenly makes the game *itself* for Japan only just because of that music. The only way to get past that is to pay for it the rights to use it outside of Japan. That typically happens during the localization process... or another song will be put in instead.

I don't know. I've totally given up on the idea of region locking working for me. I pay the premium for import consoles to play import games. It really sucks and I don't feel like I should have to do it, but I don't know if things will really change.