[Yahoo! Games] How playing Madden online could cost you $10

Instead of combating the used game market, they should focus on piracy.

 

If you played Madden10 online last year it is not that much of a difference. When you bought your copy there was an activation code in order to play Online Leagues, without the code w/ your NEW copy of madden you had to pay 10 dollars for it.

Now they are just changing it to the entire Online Game Play activation code, not a big deal.

 

Can anybody give me a realistic explanation on how this is anything but a used-game tax imposed by the developer?

 

It is a big deal if you look at Madden 09 having no codes. Give an inch, they take a yard.

 

This alone won't kill the used game market, no, but everyone recognizes this is what some are trying to lead to.

While misguided, I can understand why the devs think this is what they want to happen. When gamers try and justify it (because they don't like Gamestop, for example) it is mindblowing.

On something like Madden it isn't as big a deal; I figure most of the sports game market is front loaded by default.

But there is no logical explanation for this other than 'we want to make the money of used sales' - something that very few other markets bother with.

The growth of the industry up to this point is thanks in part to used sales.

Of course, the growth of DD could circumvent all of that - but widespread adoption of that model is going to take some time.

Pandemic was already shut down by the time Saboteur released.

So...what difference would used games have made? Also, out of curiosity, what numbers are you using to pull the 'very little front end purchases lots of used purchases' statement from?

 

Downloaded games are the future, so this won't be much of an issue with the next gen of consoles.

 

sad thing, if downloading is the future, they still will not drive the price down.

 

Shelf space.........length of time in front of consumers.....

We are losing millions of dollars in sales due to the used market, and honestly, we should do everything we can to capture that revenue.

DD

 

Why in the world would they do this? What would be their motivation? Who in their right mind would share their revenues out of the goodness of their heart??

I know if I was in their shoes, I would tell you guys to shove it.......

 

So, like someone else mentioned, I guess you'd be OK with car manufacturers charging a fee to drive their used cars? So they can "capture some of that revenue"?

 

again, pandemic was already shut down by the time of saboteur's release....so used games didn't impact your example. And you said Saboteur specifically was one that had high used sales numbers; so what kind of comparison are we dealing with? I'm curious about that.

 

That was basically my point, PC gaming had to deal with not having online content when buying used games. There are still a lot of used pc games where offline content are available without having to go through Steam or Battlenet. Just saying that console gamers are experiencing what PC gamers had for the longest time so it's not something new to complain too much about.

I've always buy used for single player (probably because most of my online gaming is done through the PC) For all those complaining about the cost on top of XBL, with XBL you're paying for a slick interface with a ton of people. I chose PS3 because I didn't find that too important but in some of the PS3 vs. XBox360 debates, it seems most users find that a good service and worth the money.

 

The Video Game market is just looking for more ways to nickel and dime us. It sucks.

 

It's BS, pure and simple...To charge an additional $10 for a code to play online, which was already paid for by the original owner is stupid...what if your the original owner and lost the code...you'd end up paying twice because of this stupidity...

I still disagree...Unless your in the used market, there is no way to capture any revenue from that...GameStop isn't going to share...they're an independent marketer, in the business to buy and sell new and used games and to make the end user (us gamers) pay again is greedy, and wrong...

Think of it this way, you buy something new, play with it, enjoy it but you get bored with it, so you sell it for a price you think is reasonable...the buyer, by purchasing the item, wants to enjoy the same benefits the seller enjoyed, and should...by selling the item, the original owner has transferred his rights...if this is the case, why would the seller pay again to enjoy the same benefits...

 

Really? Thats stupid.

Look, if ownership is transfered from person to person, the servers are not taxed by any extra workload. One person leaves the online community and one joins, thats a zero net.This is bull****. EA is just looking for extra cash where they can get it. I'm honestly near the point of never buying a game from them ever again, modding my xbox and stealing their games just to prove a point. I stayed legit for a long time because I felt they were not asking to much, but this crosses the line.

Video game makers have forgotten why they make games. It was never about the money, they are just getting greedy.

 

How is blockbuster doing these days......

Because that is the direction they are headed.

Nope that means they have to maintain the servers and bandwidth longer because of all the used players, if they stopped that practice, the games would die out more quickly and they could stop supporting them earlier as well.

Why should any company support a group of people that are playing their stuff, and not paying the company that made it?

I am sorry, I know you guys feel that it is some sort of injustice, but we feel just as strongly about the used market that we are losing MILLIONS in revenue every single year because of it.....

That work is ours, we took the risk, we made it, we should benefit from it....

More and more things will require you to have the disk, or at least keep it to get the new stuff etc.....trust me, this is just the beginning....

Eventually it won't matter anyway because it will all be digital.....and only usable by one person.....

Now that is truly stupid....lol.....in order to stay in business you have to make money, to compete with the ever demanding public the games have to be bigger, and better, and that costs money....

What is wrong with making money anyway?

But those rights do not include the company giving them the right to access their servers and utilize their bandwidth.....if they want that privelidge they have to pay for it.

Look, I know the gaming public is not going to be keen on this, I buy used games sometimes too....but I completly understand and support it...

And, you know what? So will ALL OF YOU !

:grin:

DD

 

Im in the mood to play some Duck Hunt

 

Basically the argument you're making is a similar argument I would imagine the music industry makes...when I buy a used CD, non of the second hand sales revenue goes to the artist...but why should it? They were perfectly happy with earning their pre-dermined profit the first time. cars are the same thing, new car sales = profit A and used car sales = profit B...that's why dealerships have both...to profit on both sides...if EA and others want the same, open up second hand stores...

 

There is a difference between interactive entertainment and passive entertainment like the movies, or music.

No one is stopping anyone from reselling their disks, and the new users can play at home, for free.....they can have friends over, they can play by themselves...

But, if they want to utilize the servers and downloadable content, or online multiplayer, they need to pay for it.

DD

 

I agree with all that ^