EA's Online Pass

[Hum4n After All]

L1 Games: EA Sucks! online pass? No thank you!!!

More on EA's Virtual Extortion

EA's Official Site

http://www.easports.com/onlinepass

"EA is implementing the Online Pass system with all their new sports titles. This is a one time registration code that locks the online content availability to your console. if you buy a used EA sports title (starting with the 2011 titles) you will be forced to buy a new online pass for an additional $10!!! for the same service that already exists and is offered for free right now."

Gaming Media Should Stand Up to EA's Online Pass for Consumers

http://www.gofanboy.com/go-fanboy-news/2804-gaming-media-should-stand-up-to-eas-online-pass-for-consumers/

THQ Joins The Used Game Fight

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/100797-THQ-Joins-the-Used-Game-Fight

[EdgeCrusher]

That's what people get for buying sports games every year.

[SoulinEther]

Great way to make money off of people who buy used titles... titles that they already made money off of the first time they were sold. I have to hand it to them for having the balls to do it. Who'll challenge them?

[Coyote-Trickster]

heh, I heard about this last week.

Companies are having fun with us. first was that ubisoft online thing and now this.

We're coming to a point with technology that online console gaming should have free online as standard.

...especialy with games that would be multiplayer heavy. paying 10$ for each game I'd buy used to get online would make me Rage, would add up if your a sport game person.

it's all about what companies can get away with I guess they aren't forcing you to play their games online, or to play them at all. So I guess they can do what they want.

...even if it sucks lol

Oh btw, about the gamestop thing in the video, I wonder if they will be so excited and supportive when companies start all doing direct Downloads of their games via networks such as xbox live and playstation network.

[Broadcast Bowsette]

F those bamas. Thank goodness I don't play sports games, but that'd do me in if I did. Also great touhou sig Curly digs.

[Coyote-Trickster]

Thanky Curly ^-^

Though one day this type of charge could apply to any type of game thats used, who knows.

[Toadofsky]

I'm sorry, but I don't support this, at all.

What I find astounding is all the industry "apologists" of this. Look, there may be a number of people that have a large disposable income, but the truth is, games are too expensive, and there are financially stripped gamers. And when you release major titles within 3 weeks time frame, how do you expect to make a profit off your game?

The uninformed consumer is going to see a copy of a game 15 dollars less than the retail disc, what do you think they're going to do? They're going to get the cheaper deal!

All of this is anti-consumer. You see this all you self professed hardcore gamers? That's those companies that "care" about you soooo much. They care sooo much, they're eventually going to make you pay more and more, and sucker you in by calling it a work of "art". And the game journalists will be suckered into it, and make sure they spin all this into something good.

I refuse to embrace this practice that EA and now Ubisoft is implementing, even if it means no longer buying their games (yeah, I'll skip Beyond Good and Evil 2 if it ever comes out, I already lost interest over playing Mass Effect 3). Day one DLC is bad enough when many already believe that it should be on the disc from the start (me being one of them). What do you think they'll start trying to do next? They'll start trying to restrict how far you get in the SINGLE player games, just you wait and see, maybe not in the next year, but in the next set of consoles I wouldn't be surprised.

Do companies honestly believe they'll boost sales up higher? What if this plan backfires in the long run? It'll run the cost of games higher or sink companies. I've always questioned why I should pay $60 for a 5-10 hour game. It's not worth it, that so called "experience" will be forgotten after you play the next game, because far too many games today are not worth playing a second, third, or fourth time. That's not what I call a good purchase.

I will stand by my statement that companies should revolve around the consumer, not the other way around. Game companies are no different to me. By trying to turn used games, and used game buyers into some sort of evil person, you'll lose customers, possibly for good. This "Oh woe is me! I don't get a dime from used game sales!" is getting old.

What astounds me is that journalists nor game companies want to bother finding out why people are buying games used MORE. It's obvious, we're in a time when we have to tighten our belts, and look for deals, again, not everyone has a large disposable income. Heck, if they were to cut the price down on games, including the content, and offer it at a later point as DLC, at a REASONABLE price, I'd be fine with it. But greed is a powerful thing, and I don't expect any companies to do that.

Keep hiking the price of games and screwing customers over, and we'll see how much "growth" results from it. Pachter and all the other game "analysts" won't be able to spin that.

I'm officially fed up with the gaming industry, and that's pathetic when I have little to no involvement other than being the customer.

Sorry for this basically being a rant.

[zircon]

[qipte]What I find astounding is all the industry "apologists" of this. Look, there may be a number of people that have a large disposable income, but the truth is, games are too expensive, and there are financially stripped gamers. And when you release major titles within 3 weeks time frame, how do you expect to make a profit off your game?

[The Coop]

Awwww. The multi-billion dollar company feels butthurt in the wallet over used games. Poor widdle baby. I'd play a sympathy violin for them, but a small enough one doesn't exist yet.

So what are people supposed to with games when a new yearly update comes out, throw them away? God forbid someone without $69.99 to blow on a roster update goes after a previous NFL or NBA game because it's $7.99 used a year later.

EA and others have gotten so tweaked over their games getting resold, and all they've told you is basically, "By a new game from us because we'll cry if you don't!" Guess that didn't work, so now they're punishing the people who buy it used with a $10 fee to activate it for online use. Yeah, that's a good plan. It'll work well.

The problem is, despite my sarcasm, it probably will work well. People will buy a used game at $39.99, pay the fee, and think "WOOHOO! I saved me some money!" It'll give EA and anyone else who tries this dollar signs in their eyes, and we'll be off to the races as they try and figure out new ways to carry out similar fees.

Now, I don't play games online. I'm not paying for Live, or the upcoming Premium PSN package, or some monthly fee on top of the $50 I forked out to buy the game just so I can play on their dedicated servers. Not interested. So this fee-to-play-a-used-game-online thing doesn't affect me. But if this gets even remotely close to profitable, it'll spread into other areas like offline play, single player play and so forth... and that's bad. Really bad. Why?

Let's say you don't have Live. You buy a game used, have no interest in the online aspect of it, and just want a fun time waster to play. You get home, pop the game in, and the game starts trying to check on Live to see if its code has been used by someone. Guess what? It can't check, tells you to log into Live to verify the game, and you can go no further. And even if you had Live, it would see its code in the database and you'd have to pay a fee to play it in single player offline mode.

Don't tell me it couldn't happen.

...

I wonder how long it'll be before we're charged for the patch fixes.

[Gollgagh]

or the upcoming Premium PSN package

what ಠ_ಠ

[The Coop]

what ಠ_ಠ

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6262879.html?tag=result%3Btitle%3B2

[Jam Stunna]

You would think that after almost 20 years of internet, companies wouldn't still be banging their heads against walls to try and monetize it.

The sad thing is, I actually bought Madden 10 and enjoyed it. It was my first Madden title in years, and if EA chooses to go this route, it will definitely be my last.

[Coyote-Trickster]

on that note we can't forget micro transactions, the real hidden cash cow of the internet.

1.45 can go a long way >>;

say.. X50 times.

[Gollgagh]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6262879.html?tag=result%3Btitle%3B2

ohok

that sounds spectacularly unimpressive

[Thalzon]

This type of thing is ridiculously short-term in terms of profit. Games are far from an essential service, and so if the price gets too high, then people will simply do without. Companies like EA and Ubisoft would like to think they are the be-all, end-all of entertainment. But even if it takes 10 years, their nickel-and-diming will eventually get the better of them.

But for now, this is likely a sound business strategy. It probably will be for a few years to come.

[Coyote-Trickster]

ohok

that sounds spectacularly unimpressive

unimpressive would also be a good description of their last updates of Home...

[Toadofsky]

Let's say you don't have Live. You buy a game used, have no interest in the online aspect of it, and just want a fun time waster to play. You get home, pop the game in, and the game starts trying to check on Live to see if its code has been used by someone. Guess what? It can't check, tells you to log into Live to verify the game, and you can go no further. And even if you had Live, it would see its code in the database and you'd have to pay a fee to play it in single player offline mode.

Don't tell me it couldn't happen.

I wonder how long it'll be before we're charged for the patch fixes.

I already called it. And I have no doubts it'll spread into the Single Player gameplay.

And Zircon, I do consistently forget that games were expensive back in the day ($70 dollar Yoshi's Story in Babbages! Ugh! ).

Don't take this personally, but the fact that games are sooo expensive to make, is not my problem. It's the game companies fault for not trying to find better ways to make a game without it being such a financial risk, if companies can't figure that out, or find a way to compete with the used game market, that's their own fault.

[Moseph]

I'll never buy another EA title. I'll stick with Steam, which doesn't allow me to buy or sell used games at all.

o wait

[Hyperion5182]

Steam is the wave of the future and this may well signify a shift from Console to PC gaming. This really dissapoints me. EA was finally beginning to pick up traction as a gaming company after the huge Bad PR it had this past decade. Now they go and do this...

[DarkeSword]

I don't see the big deal. The used game market kills developers and is the lifeblood of shitty retailers like Gamestop. Anything that puts a dent in their business is fine by me.

It's not like you save that much buying recently released used games anyway. You could buy a new game on Amazon for just as much, or even less.

[Hyperion5182]

I don't see the big deal. The used game market kills developers and is the lifeblood of shitty retailers like Gamestop. Anything that puts a dent in their business is fine by me.

It's not like you save that much buying recently released used games anyway. You could buy a new game on Amazon for just as much, or even less.

The problem is sport game values drop drastically once a new year hits. And no one here think's EA will keep this to sports games only. What if they do this with ME3? Or they mess with ME2? WCS what if they pull something with TOR?

The used game market is the only way for people who have limited incomes to be able to play some of the better games out there. I'm sorry if that pisses you off but thats the way it is. Most of us dont feel like spending 60 dollars for a game to begin with.

Now it'll be 70 for an EA sports title. I wasnt willing to pay 50 before what makes you think i'd pay 70? I was seriously thinking of getting a Madden this fall. Not going to happen. Not now probably not ever at this point.

This is another trend in general gaming that i'm really afraid of. Activision with SC2's paid maps and its now legendary chaos concerning the latest call of duty are another warning light.

If this kind of fee had been on FF13. I wouldnt have bought. Had it been on Forza 3 i would have kept my money and gone elsewhere. If it spread to every game on consoles i'd pawn my xbox and upgrade my computer and renounce console gaming all together. This aint good for anyone. And the long term implications of something like this should scare people.

[The Coop]

I don't see the big deal. The used game market kills developers and is the lifeblood of shitty retailers like Gamestop. Anything that puts a dent in their business is fine by me.

It's not like you save that much buying recently released used games anyway. You could buy a new game on Amazon for just as much, or even less.

It's so much what it does to Gamestop, but rather the good smaller, more local stores, and the good sellers on ebay, Amazon and half.com. It's going to affect everyone trying to sell a used game with this fee thing attached to it; from store chains to flea market booths. I'm not fond of Gamestop either, but I don't want to see the second hand market get crippled if this thing takes off. I don't like the idea of walking into a fee minefield two or three years from now because I didn't own system X when it was in its heyday.

[The Vagrance]

I don't like the idea of walking into a fee minefield two or three years from now because I didn't own system X when it was in its heyday.

This is the only downside I see to this plan, otherwise I'm in full support of what Darkesword said. Is it a relentlessly corporate thing to do? Sure, but I'd much rather see some amount of the used game market get thrown back to developers when, as zircon said, the price of making games has hit an all-time high.

[Vivi22]

Now it'll be 70 for an EA sports title. I wasnt willing to pay 50 before what makes you think i'd pay 70? I was seriously thinking of getting a Madden this fall. Not going to happen. Not now probably not ever at this point.

Where did you get $70 from (unless this is some crack about Gamestop selling used new releases for about $5 less than a new copy)? The online pass is included when you buy the games new.

Personally I hate this on the one hand, but agree with supporting developers on the other (anytime the used copy is only $5-10 cheaper than a new copy I'll spend the extra money).

[Jam Stunna]

I make extensive use of the used game market. I've only paid full price for three games in two years. The end of the used market is pretty much the end of gaming for me, as I can't fathom paying $50 or $60 for 3/4 of the games I own.

I understand the argument of supporting the developer, but what about sharing games among friends? That does still happen.