And from an industry standard, child labour is a good idea. Doesn't mean it works out for us. Unless you're actually part of the industry, maybe you shouldn't be looking at how awesome it is for the people cracking down on the right of the used market to exist.Delusibeta said:To be honest, from the publishers perspective it's a bloody good idea, and it's already pretty much industry standard a mere two years or so after Mass Effect 2 pioneered the technique.
Bull.Had retailers not been forcing used games down customer's throats, the games industry wouldn't have reacted in this way.
In order for a game to be used it must first be bought when it is new and then sold again. every single used game has been paid for and that money has already gone to the publisher. they're work is done and they are paid for it. the money from used games goes to gameshop for their service of giving people the chance to get rid of old games they don't want. the publisher is trying to get more money without doing extra work.Delusibeta said:The problem is that before Online Passes, used games and new games were identical (assuming the previous owners didn't carve their name on the disc), except that one type meant that all the profits were going to the retailer, and with major retailers (GAME, GameStop et al.) pushing used games hard and new retailers (Argos, Tesco) joining the used game bandwagon, something had to give. To be honest, from the publishers perspective it's a bloody good idea, and it's already pretty much industry standard a mere two years or so after Mass Effect 2 pioneered the technique. Had retailers not been forcing used games down customer's throats, the games industry wouldn't have reacted in this way.darthotaku said:the thing thats wrong with online passes is that somebody has already paid the devs. somebody did pay $60, and the correct percentage of that money has gone to the developers. you have simply paid that person a smaller amount for their right to ownership. it's like saying that I should send a cheque to mazda for my old car, the money has been paid to them, I didn't steal the car from them by buying it from somebody else. same thing with games. it's all been paid for already, I'm just giving money to somebody else to use it.Joccaren said:I never had a problem with online Passes. There was nothing wrong with them. They were good for the industry. Buy the game from the Dev, get all content. Buy it from a store and give $0 to the Dev who made the game, get cut out of content that the Dev put hard work into making.
This is bullshit, and I noted that the second I saw it on T.V. I can't imagine this will do very well...
And yeah, another seconding to the 'What the hell is that thing its not Spiro' comment(s).
So the real question is "How bad will the majority of gamers allow it to get?"Zachary Amaranth said:PRECISELY.GonzoGamer said:That's pants on head retarded but it doesn't make me feel any better about online passes.
In fact, it only makes me think that because gamers were so accepting of online passes, we're sure to see more obscenely stupid schemes like this... and they're going to get even worse than that.
Companies are profit driven. when they maximised their sales, they needed something else. Online passes, in this case. And they will want more, once Online Passes look to have reached their capacity. Which means they'll need some other way to expand profit. In probability this will be either locking content for new buyers as well, or them trying wilder stunts.
Or, in thie case, it seems a little of both.
This is what you get for saying "I don't mind online passes."
Now, I know a lot of corporate apologists will say "How dare you expect companies not to make a profit," because I get that almost every time I mention this, that's not what I'm saying. There is a point beyond which they no longer need to make more profit, and this trend of attacking the consumer WILL BE progressive as long as we allow it to.
Do tell? First I hear about it :sQitz said:So we've all heard of the whole debacle with Online Passes, Cerberus Network for example, where game developers would lock you out of content if you bought a game new.
Chased said:Is anyone actually buying this stuff? I can't imagine any sensible adult buying this for their kid.
Son: DAD! I gotta get this new Spyro video game!
Dad: Alrighty there champ, how much is it?
Son: $70 plus $8 for the characters.
Dad: Get out of my house.
Dont you mean used?Qitz said:So we've all heard of the whole debacle with Online Passes, Cerberus Network for example, where game developers would lock you out of content if you bought a game new.
Ah. Yup, flubbed that, good catch.WanderingFool said:Dont you mean used?Qitz said:So we've all heard of the whole debacle with Online Passes, Cerberus Network for example, where game developers would lock you out of content if you bought a game new.
And my dear GOD! Who the fuck thinks of something like this!?
The Cerberus Network was a DLC network that would be given to you for free if you bought the game new from stores but had to be purchased for $10 if you got the game used.kebab4you said:Do tell? First I hear about it :sQitz said:So we've all heard of the whole debacle with Online Passes, Cerberus Network for example, where game developers would lock you out of content if you bought a game new.
Out over that I find it funny activision is trying to get you to pay 100$ for a franchise which have been dead for ages...
Well that I figured , but your post said it would lock out ppl of continent IF they did buy it new...Qitz said:Ah. Yup, flubbed that, good catch.WanderingFool said:Dont you mean used?Qitz said:So we've all heard of the whole debacle with Online Passes, Cerberus Network for example, where game developers would lock you out of content if you bought a game new.
And my dear GOD! Who the fuck thinks of something like this!?
The Cerberus Network was a DLC network that would be given to you for free if you bought the game new from stores but had to be purchased for $10 if you got the game used.kebab4you said:Do tell? First I hear about it :sQitz said:So we've all heard of the whole debacle with Online Passes, Cerberus Network for example, where game developers would lock you out of content if you bought a game new.
Out over that I find it funny activision is trying to get you to pay 100$ for a franchise which have been dead for ages...
So if you wanted Zaeed, The Price of Revenge and didn't buy the game new, you'd have to fork out an extra $10 to get onto the network.