surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
@comradetrotskii: If you check out my initial post on the EA Sports Online Pass, you'll see that I noted that I have no problem with this -- I buy all my games new. But a lot of folks don't, and this hurts their wallets.
Except you can play games that don't use persistent world servers for free on PC. And the games cost 10$ less.
Honestly, this is kind of lame. Providing additional new features to people who buy new is okay; DLC isn't a core portion of the experience. Playing online is, and always will be, the core experience people expect from a game like this.
Honestly, this is kind of lame. Providing additional new features to people who buy new is okay; DLC isn't a core portion of the experience. Playing online is, and always will be, the core experience people expect from a game like this.
I find this a totally acceptable alternative to draconian DRM bullshit at least. I don't buy used games anyways, I don't want someone elses' scratched crap...potentially scratched, rather. :)
If I were ya'll, I wouldn't bitch too hard about this. It's either this, or something invasive and fucked up.
If I were ya'll, I wouldn't bitch too hard about this. It's either this, or something invasive and fucked up.
i bought a used copy of wii fit and it didnt come with the balance board. lets start a riot over that too.
@Samit
I have zero problems with the EA Pass.
It's the forced fee we're going to have to pay that I'm going to have problems with: new copy or not. You know it's the next logical step.
I have zero problems with the EA Pass.
It's the forced fee we're going to have to pay that I'm going to have problems with: new copy or not. You know it's the next logical step.
I don't understand this crap. You pay for Xbox Live and now a game? What does it matter if someone buys a game used?
so either pirate the game and put up with zero bullshit, or legally purchase the game and then you get to pay more to play online. Since the days of Atari people have let friends borrow their games and buy used copies but somehow this industry continues to grow every year.
I'm guessing those $55 dollar used games at gamestop wont be selling anymore.
I'm guessing those $55 dollar used games at gamestop wont be selling anymore.
And everyone's still going to go out and buy it: Essentially bending over and taking THQ's gigantic, throbbing dong as you plead for triple penetration from EA and Ubisoft. I hope this isn't the future of consoles. If it is, I think I'll just stick to getting fondled by Steam.
@kingsigy
It matters to publishers who want as many New games sales as possible because used game sales provide them no money.
Either way I don't buy games with dates in them, so this is just another reason to wait for either a really good deal, or next years iteration.
Although this is bullshit that a game is restricting access to standard XBL features.
It matters to publishers who want as many New games sales as possible because used game sales provide them no money.
Either way I don't buy games with dates in them, so this is just another reason to wait for either a really good deal, or next years iteration.
Although this is bullshit that a game is restricting access to standard XBL features.
@KingSigy
If you buy a game new, for $60/£40 or whatever, the developer and publisher are making money from that. If you buy a game used, the only people making money are the store to which you sold the game.
Anyway, what's the difference between buying a second hand video game and software/music/film piracy via file sharing? When you consider that the only non-aesthetic difference is that when you torrent something the guy who uploaded the torrent doesn't get paid, the correct answer to my question would be nothing apart from the legitimisation of the act.
If you buy a game new, for $60/£40 or whatever, the developer and publisher are making money from that. If you buy a game used, the only people making money are the store to which you sold the game.
Anyway, what's the difference between buying a second hand video game and software/music/film piracy via file sharing? When you consider that the only non-aesthetic difference is that when you torrent something the guy who uploaded the torrent doesn't get paid, the correct answer to my question would be nothing apart from the legitimisation of the act.
nowherekid03 said:
"so either pirate the game and put up with zero bullshit, or legally purchase the game and then you get to pay more to play online"
I don't understand. If you pirate the game you will not have a code and cannot play online. If you legally purchase the game (new) you do not have to pay anything extra as the code is supplied with the game.
"so either pirate the game and put up with zero bullshit, or legally purchase the game and then you get to pay more to play online"
I don't understand. If you pirate the game you will not have a code and cannot play online. If you legally purchase the game (new) you do not have to pay anything extra as the code is supplied with the game.
@Robotic-
Unless you're like me and always buy your games new anyway, and as such, this kind of thing doesn't affect you at all.
As someone who actually supports developers and publishers who make the games we play, I love that they are either adding incentives to buy games new or taking away privileges from those who don't.
Someone else pointed out loaning out games- it's true that that aspect sucks, but how many times do you loan out a game for someone to play online? 9/10 times I loan a game out, it's because it's single-player and one of my friends wants to play it.
Unless you're like me and always buy your games new anyway, and as such, this kind of thing doesn't affect you at all.
As someone who actually supports developers and publishers who make the games we play, I love that they are either adding incentives to buy games new or taking away privileges from those who don't.
Someone else pointed out loaning out games- it's true that that aspect sucks, but how many times do you loan out a game for someone to play online? 9/10 times I loan a game out, it's because it's single-player and one of my friends wants to play it.
So it's tied to what? An EA account or a Ubisoft account?? Great, I think PSN or XBOX will have to release a password manager soon enough to accommodate all the shit companies that will require this.
So when does the first game come out that if you don't have the code you have to just shell out the whole price of the game even if you have the disc?
Just think of it like a very large expensive DLC game that isn't downloadable.
Just think of it like a very large expensive DLC game that isn't downloadable.
This is just straight up greed. Nothing more.
The fact that consumers are actually going out of their way to justify it makes it even worse, albeit funny in a sort of hopeless kind of way.
The fact that consumers are actually going out of their way to justify it makes it even worse, albeit funny in a sort of hopeless kind of way.
I would have to think that this would have to piss off places like Gamestop since they generally sell used games for $5 less than new games. Now there is no real incentive to buy it used since that $5 you save is just going to go to EA or THQ or wherever.
I do generally buy all my games new, but sometimes I'll buy an older game used and it's not something I'd likely play online, so this won't really affect me. I don't really agree with it from the standpoint that I pay for Xbox Live already and shouldn't have to pay another fee to play something online regardless of whether or not it's secondhand.
I do generally buy all my games new, but sometimes I'll buy an older game used and it's not something I'd likely play online, so this won't really affect me. I don't really agree with it from the standpoint that I pay for Xbox Live already and shouldn't have to pay another fee to play something online regardless of whether or not it's secondhand.
@robotic: I'm gonna buy it new...and why shouldn't I? I'm not opposed to the idea. If you want a game bad enough to play online, you will buy it new, or five bucks, which is peanuts.
I buy all my games new also (except for games I wouldn't normally purchase), however I will not buy games with this feature in them, because I will not support this implementation of Corporate ownership over part of the game. Especially when they use OUR connection to host THEIR games. They should PAY US to host their games online. I also don't support Gamestops BS prices of 54.99 for a used game either though, now $20 I'm on it.
@Schmo0zle No offense but you might be retarded, just thought you should check into that.
@Schmo0zle No offense but you might be retarded, just thought you should check into that.
Meh, I buy new anyways. I've always felt the assholes at GameStop were ripping consumers off by paying them $20 for a game then turning around and selling it for $55.
@StingingVelvet:
Yes, it is "DRM" in it's own way, but at least it targets someone. Other forms of DRM are indescriminate, they target everyone and anyone. Even if you buy Spore legally, you still have to put up with BS to stop pirates. But if I buy this retail and not used, I only have to enter a code and then game over, no more bullshit to deal with.
I see this as fine. Game companies have a right to do something like this...They lose a lot of cash to leeches like Gamestop who make a fortune off reselling their IP's.
I'm against the fascist copyright-state as much as the next guy, but I find this totally reasonable, especially when you consider the alternatives they've been using...Or would you really rather buy a used game that requires 24/7 internet connection or your game dies and you lose all your progress? ;)
Unfortunately we still might see this AND that, because they target different issues. Which sucks, but whatev'.
Yes, it is "DRM" in it's own way, but at least it targets someone. Other forms of DRM are indescriminate, they target everyone and anyone. Even if you buy Spore legally, you still have to put up with BS to stop pirates. But if I buy this retail and not used, I only have to enter a code and then game over, no more bullshit to deal with.
I see this as fine. Game companies have a right to do something like this...They lose a lot of cash to leeches like Gamestop who make a fortune off reselling their IP's.
I'm against the fascist copyright-state as much as the next guy, but I find this totally reasonable, especially when you consider the alternatives they've been using...Or would you really rather buy a used game that requires 24/7 internet connection or your game dies and you lose all your progress? ;)
Unfortunately we still might see this AND that, because they target different issues. Which sucks, but whatev'.
I buy most if not all of my games new, but why the fuck do I pay $50/yr for XBL if I just have to pay each developer again for a service I'm already paying for.
You people always bring up gamestop, but what about places like goozex or even here on our forums where we trade games amongst each other? You know, places where profit is little to none? I will not support this, at all.
Retarded.
This is going to a major extreme but lets just say that every game from here on out game with some sort of code or gift for buying new rather than used. GameStop, Play N Trade, and other video game retails make their money off of people buying used games. There is little to no profit in anything else that is sold. If everyone jumped on the bandwagon to strictly buy new only for their codes that would cause a loss of money on the retailers end and could cause stores to close. With stores closing where would people buy their games from? I prefer buying my games from specialty shops. I'll skip the trip to Target, Best Buy, and Walmart. Kthnx.
Also, I don't know about other people but I buy games such as Alan Wake and Red Dead close to, if not, the day they come out. If I happen to find a used one within those first few days then sweet deal for me. If not, oh well. Chances are people aren't waiting around for a used one to come around and want to get their game the day it comes out. Working in a GameStop I can say we hardly get newer games the day or even week of. Publishers may lose a small portion of money to used game sales but I doubt it's big enough to cause such a fuss over it. Gtfo. >:c
This is going to a major extreme but lets just say that every game from here on out game with some sort of code or gift for buying new rather than used. GameStop, Play N Trade, and other video game retails make their money off of people buying used games. There is little to no profit in anything else that is sold. If everyone jumped on the bandwagon to strictly buy new only for their codes that would cause a loss of money on the retailers end and could cause stores to close. With stores closing where would people buy their games from? I prefer buying my games from specialty shops. I'll skip the trip to Target, Best Buy, and Walmart. Kthnx.
Also, I don't know about other people but I buy games such as Alan Wake and Red Dead close to, if not, the day they come out. If I happen to find a used one within those first few days then sweet deal for me. If not, oh well. Chances are people aren't waiting around for a used one to come around and want to get their game the day it comes out. Working in a GameStop I can say we hardly get newer games the day or even week of. Publishers may lose a small portion of money to used game sales but I doubt it's big enough to cause such a fuss over it. Gtfo. >:c
I buy my games when it's cost effective, by any means necessary. Cry me a river about who gets paid. it's the game companies that allowed their costs to inflate so high for game production. If they would invest their time and efforts into IP's that innovated and challenged people, there would be more interest for people buying these games. Instead the game industry falls into the same patterns as the film industry. Remakes, rehashes, endless sequels. I have zero sympathy that this method isn't making them as much money as they want it to.
By witnessing the deep discounting that hits games at retail so quickly, it's obvious that the $60 premium price was an arbitrary profit grab, and this is even further padding their bottom line as quickly as they can.
Giant titles like Mass Effect 2, Final Fantasy XIII, Assassin's Creed II, and even our debut "buy it new" title The Saboteur are already available NEW at a steep discount from their not-too-long ago debut. I bought DJ Hero for more than half price AND got the bonus content. Yay!
Now how does this benefit me to buy it now-now-now for new to get a download code? I can wait an extra month, buy it at a discount when it goes on sale on Amazon for $40 and fuck the publisher out of that extra $20?
We can play that game, you know... I fully grant Michael Pachter the ability to rub his balls all over your big huge title not selling well in it's first 30 days because YOU PUBLISHERS do this shit.
It's no incentive for me to run out and buy Mass Effect 2 new at retail when I can get it 2 months later for half the price. I do not care how it affects your bottom line. I know you're either going to commit to sequeling the shit out of any new game, or it'll fade away and something else new and shiny comes along.
Either way... The only person truly HURT in this process is the publisher. I could give a crap if Bobby Kotick can't afford to buy Top Shelf Ramen this month. Let him eat the expired Shrimp Chips (on sale for $.50!) and imitation Top Shelf Ramen.
A game developer, those grunts making textures, rigging, mo-cap, those people? They get laid off, but they find another gig someplace else. And so it goes.
You want the used game market to dry up? Punish Gamestop, not the consumer. Also get over it. As long as physical media exists, then we as consumers have a right to treat our media however we see fit. If you don't like it, we won't buy your game.
DRM'ing a physical disc with bonus codes that unlock prominent features on a game is just fucking dumb.
By witnessing the deep discounting that hits games at retail so quickly, it's obvious that the $60 premium price was an arbitrary profit grab, and this is even further padding their bottom line as quickly as they can.
Giant titles like Mass Effect 2, Final Fantasy XIII, Assassin's Creed II, and even our debut "buy it new" title The Saboteur are already available NEW at a steep discount from their not-too-long ago debut. I bought DJ Hero for more than half price AND got the bonus content. Yay!
Now how does this benefit me to buy it now-now-now for new to get a download code? I can wait an extra month, buy it at a discount when it goes on sale on Amazon for $40 and fuck the publisher out of that extra $20?
We can play that game, you know... I fully grant Michael Pachter the ability to rub his balls all over your big huge title not selling well in it's first 30 days because YOU PUBLISHERS do this shit.
It's no incentive for me to run out and buy Mass Effect 2 new at retail when I can get it 2 months later for half the price. I do not care how it affects your bottom line. I know you're either going to commit to sequeling the shit out of any new game, or it'll fade away and something else new and shiny comes along.
Either way... The only person truly HURT in this process is the publisher. I could give a crap if Bobby Kotick can't afford to buy Top Shelf Ramen this month. Let him eat the expired Shrimp Chips (on sale for $.50!) and imitation Top Shelf Ramen.
A game developer, those grunts making textures, rigging, mo-cap, those people? They get laid off, but they find another gig someplace else. And so it goes.
You want the used game market to dry up? Punish Gamestop, not the consumer. Also get over it. As long as physical media exists, then we as consumers have a right to treat our media however we see fit. If you don't like it, we won't buy your game.
DRM'ing a physical disc with bonus codes that unlock prominent features on a game is just fucking dumb.
"I want games to be awesome, but I don't want developers and publishers to get the money it takes to make those games awesome!"
Some of you people astound me. For fuck's sake, if you love and support the hobby of gaming, then you should love and support the people responsible for making the games you play. EA, Ubisoft and THQ are not the bad guys here, GameStop is.
Whether you like it or not, used game sales hurts the industry. Don't be surprised when a console developer creates a game that requires a code to access ALL of the content. PC Gamers have been fine with CD keys for decades, and this would be no different.
Some of you people astound me. For fuck's sake, if you love and support the hobby of gaming, then you should love and support the people responsible for making the games you play. EA, Ubisoft and THQ are not the bad guys here, GameStop is.
Whether you like it or not, used game sales hurts the industry. Don't be surprised when a console developer creates a game that requires a code to access ALL of the content. PC Gamers have been fine with CD keys for decades, and this would be no different.
@ Schmoozie
I agree it is not bad for DRM, compared to what I sometimes put up with on the PC, I was just saying it is DRM.
PC gamers have been using codes like this to access multiplayer for years and years and years, and if you needed a second one you needed to buy the game, not some $5 thing, so in a sense this is not that bad.
I just dislike publishers' endless wars on consumers in general. No other industry, even modern music companies, attack their customers like this.
I agree it is not bad for DRM, compared to what I sometimes put up with on the PC, I was just saying it is DRM.
PC gamers have been using codes like this to access multiplayer for years and years and years, and if you needed a second one you needed to buy the game, not some $5 thing, so in a sense this is not that bad.
I just dislike publishers' endless wars on consumers in general. No other industry, even modern music companies, attack their customers like this.
Why all the support for what is essentially a money-grab? Developers want money. This I understand. All companies want any profits they can muster. But I disagree with the whole IP rights in a very fundamental way. Just because you create something doesn't mean that you now have a right to a profit every time this creation is sold. A game is sold new, developer makes profit. Player sells game, player recoups some of his loss, or hell, even profits. Why should the developer get more money from this transaction? There are no new costs to absorb. I understand that there is hatred for the used game market. The companies see someone else profiting from their hard work and they feel as if they are entitled to some of that dough. IMHO they are not. They received their money when they sold the physical DVD, or the license to Steam, etc. CtMythic even went so far as to equate used game sales with legitimized piracy. His eloquent use of english notwithstanding, i can't get behind this view. Why must all profits reside at the top of the food chain? Isn't there room for others to profit after the initial sale?
....PROFIT
....PROFIT
Im sorry, I dont have the funds to buy every game I want, so I trade them to Gamestop. It's easier and their recent promos have been kick ass. I see alot of people here blaming Gamestop for all this. All they do is sell games. No TVs or Movies..just games. With the high production costs they make very little on new games. In fact, if it were just new games, they wouldnt make enough to keep open as many stores. Also, if Gamestop closed down tommorow, it would very nearly CRIPPLE the game market. So thats why they need to profit as much as they can off of trades and used. And it works for them, so deal with it.
Why must game budgets be so high? When the economy is in the shitter, banking that random game #5 is going to sell millions just to break even is luck of the draw. I think games need to be worth owning before game companies work on Splinter Cell for like 5 years to make a 10 hour game (just an example).
Why must game budgets be so high? When the economy is in the shitter, banking that random game #5 is going to sell millions just to break even is luck of the draw. I think games need to be worth owning before game companies work on Splinter Cell for like 5 years to make a 10 hour game (just an example).
...And they even bite harder the hand that feeds them...
This is just killing the online lifetime of any game. Wait and see...
This is just killing the online lifetime of any game. Wait and see...
What's hurting the industry isn't used games sales. What's hurting the industry is the HD model of 5-hour long games with content cut from it to be sold ala carte as DLC that try to pose as "artful movies" and fall right on their face.
If devs actually made epics that were worth a shit, they wouldn't have to worry as much about people saying "fuck it" and waiting or selling it off immediately. Stop focusing on goddamned HD graphics and focus on the fucking gameplay.
And as said, shit is just too expensive now with video games. I'm a poor college student--I can't afford to pay $64 a pop on a video game. Fuck the "discipline yourself to save money!" tools, video games aren't a lifestyle, they're a goddamned hobby. I shouldn't have to go hungry or not be able to buy gas just to afford a piece of shit game that's under eight hours long and tries to microtransaction me to death. (Or, in FF XIII's case, a piece of shit game period.)
If devs actually made epics that were worth a shit, they wouldn't have to worry as much about people saying "fuck it" and waiting or selling it off immediately. Stop focusing on goddamned HD graphics and focus on the fucking gameplay.
And as said, shit is just too expensive now with video games. I'm a poor college student--I can't afford to pay $64 a pop on a video game. Fuck the "discipline yourself to save money!" tools, video games aren't a lifestyle, they're a goddamned hobby. I shouldn't have to go hungry or not be able to buy gas just to afford a piece of shit game that's under eight hours long and tries to microtransaction me to death. (Or, in FF XIII's case, a piece of shit game period.)
I don't like this since it takes away choice from the consumer. That's always a bad thing. The online matchmaking in last year's UFC game sucked, so I don't see the need to purchase this code. And that's if I buy the game at all. I probably won't.
Also, you would think the publishers would come up with better ideas to counteract the declining sales of their sports titles other than nickel and diming the consumer. They release the same game every year with a few extra tacked on features and they think that used games are the reason they're losing money. Give me a break!
Also, you would think the publishers would come up with better ideas to counteract the declining sales of their sports titles other than nickel and diming the consumer. They release the same game every year with a few extra tacked on features and they think that used games are the reason they're losing money. Give me a break!
Should've made it $15. Anyone who disagrees with this is basically saying that Gamestop deserves our money more than the game developers do.
Shut up about gamestop. In how many countries there are Gamestop stores? This will affect everyone, everywhere, whether you rent, trade or buy used.
Well... this does suck for those who have multiple users in the house, I can guess that these codes are tied per gamertag/PSN ID. Which really sucks.
how come nobody has even said anything about the fact that are games are worthless after we buy them and use the code means that when we sell it or try to get credit or sell the game we get even less because we payed full price for the game i think something has to give a over all MSRB price drop for all games then if they want to use this method because most people want to play online anyways
follow
