EA Does it Again

[Quid Plura]

Here's a thought.

Person A buyes game X and plays it for 3 years online. He pays a one time 60 dollar price.

Person B buyes a game, preowned by C, D, E and F. Game exists for about 3 years too. F bought the game at 60 dollars, brought it to a gamesstore, which sold it on, etc. From persons E to B, the developer gets money for each online activation.

Given that all the people will play the game online, persons B,C,D and E have to pay for person A's gaming.

Hard to explain myself, but what I'm getting at is, that in some situations, this is a very unfair principle.

Other than that, I think that putting a leash on used games sales, is a smart move by a company that gets less money for the development of new games. Stores like Gamestop only make money for themselves and contribute absolutely nothing to development of games and the games industry.

And one more thing: Do not compare used games to used cars, houses, electronics. It has no use whatsoever.

 

[gl1koz3]

Wan't an easy solution to your 'wealth' problems? Buy less games. Seriously. If 10-15$ makes such a big issue for you in terms of game cost, just buy 1 game less, you will have for 2-3 at full price. Or buy older games that went on discount.

I don't know how this civilized American market works apparently, but in my crappy Poland we have something like classics collections, 1.5-2 year old games for 50% or less of their original price. Older ones for as little as 5-6$, sometimes promotion packs where you an get a second game for about half a dollar. And everyone's happy. You get a fresh, new copy, retailer is happy cause they earn money, publisher's get their share and customer gets a cheaper product.

Buying used you just say that you are willing to spend money but not willing to support the company behind it and as it was said, pirates at least don't pretend to be anything else than pirates.

I won't ever understand the infinite thankfulness some people who play games have. It's absurd. Why should one care about all that hassle? Just go and get the fish where it's closest to surface.

 

[the_pleasure_is_mine]

I think Shale in Dragon Age was intended to be on-disc but was cut and added later as new-game bonus.

No they planned for it to be on disc but they couldn't finish it before the cut-off point.

Like with Zaeed on Mass Effect 2, they had no choice and if they wanted Shale in the game it had to be DLC.

 

[Legend of J]

Ah so there going to charge thanks for the warning. But yeah EA is always the first to try and make extra money...then microsoft.

 

[Jaded Scribe]

I've talked about this topic many times. This is absolutely ridiculous (and I hated last week's Critical Miss. I felt it was a cheap and unreasonable shot and said as much in the comments there).

Many warranties are non-transferable, or you have to pay to transfer it (most used cars).

If you buy a used car, do you expect it to be in mint condition? Or do you expect there to be a little wear on the upholstery, and in need of more maintenance?

Why do you think that you should get the exact same experience for a lower price? The developers (more-so than the publishers who while they get a cut of the profits, also get a big payday from the developer before the game even hits the shelves) are the ones that are hurt when you buy used games. These people bust their asses to make you a game. They deserve the benefits (pay raises, good benefits, bonuses, etc etc etc) as well as the ability to better upgrade their equipment.

Times are tough. Even I buy used games (I would prefer not to). But I'm not so arrogant, so self-entitled, to think that these companies owe me something, or that I deserve the same benefits as those who buy new.

EA does a lot with DLC. But sports games are, in my view, harder to do that with.

You can play just fine without multiplayer. Here's the question you have to ask yourself: Is it worth the extra $5-$10 to get the multiplayer. If that increase is too much for you, then just don't buy the game.

These companies don't owe you anything. Yes, good customer service and all that jazz. But when you get down to it, they are a business, and they are out to *gasp* make a profit. That's how businesses work.

In many ways, getting more people to buy new can actually help push companies to make a better product. Right now, if you get self-righteous and decide to boycott their product, they don't care. They weren't getting your money anyways.

The more people that buy new, the more encouragement they have to provide improved customer service because losing you as a customer of their games actually makes a difference.

You should not get the exact same benefits, bonuses, etc as someone who buys new. Plain and simple. They paid for it.


Look at it this way. Say your game was good enough to sell 1 million copies, but 40% of those were Used. Say that of that 400,000 a whopping 3/4 of them would not have bought the game if there wasn't a used option (I think there would be more people willing to buy it new than that, but just for argument's sake).

That's 100,000 copies of the game that they didn't sell (i.e actually make money off of). Multiply that by an average of $65/game: $6,500,000 in lost money. That's a big chunk of change that isn't getting put back into the company to support the development of their games.

You all act like all the money from game sales goes into a Scrooge McDuck-type money bin where the executives go swimming in it. No. Most of it goes into the investment and improvement of their game development.

Grow up. If you buy Used, you do so knowing full well what you're missing out on (unless of course you don't do any research on the games you buy used, in which case that's your own damn fault). You don't pay full price (or even the company that made the game), so you don't get full functionality. It's as simple as that.

 

[Irridium]

Bullshit is what it is.

They failed to fill in a particular gap they left, so Gamestop did. And now they're bitching and punishing people who spend their money wisely in a tough economy.

If they just lowered prices at a normal rate more people would buy new, and they would put the squeeze on Gamestop and the used games market.

Honestly, the fact that they're bitching about a "problem" caused by their own incompetence and trying to make it look like the consumer's fault is just sickening.

 

[squid5580]

Could you just imagine if other used markets started doing this? Used cars? used furniture? It's crazy. I understand that Gamestop and EB Games with their $5 less than new used game racket are the real problem here, but you know what? There are other better ways to deal with this. Digital Distribution, mail orders, big retailers like Future Shop and Best Buy who aren't really out to fuck the distributor, etc. Just stop shipping your games to EB and see what happens. Or ship less copies. No, instead they take it out on the consumer.

They do. Some cars require specific parts made by the manufacturer. ANd EB/GS is only one place. There is tons of places to trade in games.

 

[Yagharek]

It's funny how everyone is crying "Think of the developer". What about the game shop? There are definetely two sides to that coin. If I buy used, I am supporting my game shop. They have to pay to employ people, and they have to pay to supply me with games. They are providing a service. At the end of the day, you're choosing between supporting the games shop more, by buying used, or the developer(and publisher) by buying new.


Now, the argument can be made "But the shop makes money by selling new games too". This is true. However, if their was no advantage for them to selling used games, they wouldn't.

It also amuses me that, considering how publishers and the shops rely on each other to survive, they seem to be pretty happy to try and hurt each others business.

 

[Seydaman]

SNIPASNIPASNIPA

Yup that
I can see why people don't like it
But calling EA a bunch of fucks isn't really warranted

 

[Seydaman]

It's funny how everyone is crying "Think of the developer". What about the game shop? There are definetely two sides to that coin. If I buy used, I am supporting my game shop. They have to pay to employ people, and they have to pay to supply me with games. They are providing a service. At the end of the day, you're choosing between supporting the games shop more, by buying used, or the developer(and publisher) by buying new.


Now, the argument can be made "But the shop makes money by selling new games too". This is true. However, if their was no advantage for them to selling used games, they wouldn't.

It also amuses me that, considering how publishers and the shops rely on each other to survive, they seem to be pretty happy to try and hurt each others business.

Durp steam
And Gamestop already makes a bajillion gazillion dollars off idiots.

 

[Yagharek]

And one more thing: Do not compare used games to used cars, houses, electronics. It has no use whatsoever.

How so?

If I buy a house used, I am not supporting its builder. If I buy it new, I am. If no one bought new houses, there would be no money for builders.

It is exactly the same situation.

 

[Yagharek]

It's funny how everyone is crying "Think of the developer". What about the game shop? There are definetely two sides to that coin. If I buy used, I am supporting my game shop. They have to pay to employ people, and they have to pay to supply me with games. They are providing a service. At the end of the day, you're choosing between supporting the games shop more, by buying used, or the developer(and publisher) by buying new.


Now, the argument can be made "But the shop makes money by selling new games too". This is true. However, if their was no advantage for them to selling used games, they wouldn't.

It also amuses me that, considering how publishers and the shops rely on each other to survive, they seem to be pretty happy to try and hurt each others business.

Durp steam
And Gamestop already makes a bajillion gazillion dollars off idiots.

Yeah, I considered adding the word "traditionally" and changing it to "relied". On the other hand, not everyone would be happy to switch to digital distribution.

 

[Yagharek]

I've talked about this topic many times. This is absolutely ridiculous (and I hated last week's Critical Miss. I felt it was a cheap and unreasonable shot and said as much in the comments there).

Many warranties are non-transferable, or you have to pay to transfer it (most used cars).

If you buy a used car, do you expect it to be in mint condition? Or do you expect there to be a little wear on the upholstery, and in need of more maintenance?

Why do you think that you should get the exact same experience for a lower price? The developers (more-so than the publishers who while they get a cut of the profits, also get a big payday from the developer before the game even hits the shelves) are the ones that are hurt when you buy used games. These people bust their asses to make you a game. They deserve the benefits (pay raises, good benefits, bonuses, etc etc etc) as well as the ability to better upgrade their equipment.

Times are tough. Even I buy used games (I would prefer not to). But I'm not so arrogant, so self-entitled, to think that these companies owe me something, or that I deserve the same benefits as those who buy new.

EA does a lot with DLC. But sports games are, in my view, harder to do that with.

You can play just fine without multiplayer. Here's the question you have to ask yourself: Is it worth the extra $5-$10 to get the multiplayer. If that increase is too much for you, then just don't buy the game.

These companies don't owe you anything. Yes, good customer service and all that jazz. But when you get down to it, they are a business, and they are out to *gasp* make a profit. That's how businesses work.

In many ways, getting more people to buy new can actually help push companies to make a better product. Right now, if you get self-righteous and decide to boycott their product, they don't care. They weren't getting your money anyways.

The more people that buy new, the more encouragement they have to provide improved customer service because losing you as a customer of their games actually makes a difference.

You should not get the exact same benefits, bonuses, etc as someone who buys new. Plain and simple. They paid for it.


Look at it this way. Say your game was good enough to sell 1 million copies, but 40% of those were Used. Say that of that 400,000 a whopping 3/4 of them would not have bought the game if there wasn't a used option (I think there would be more people willing to buy it new than that, but just for argument's sake).

That's 100,000 copies of the game that they didn't sell (i.e actually make money off of). Multiply that by an average of $65/game: $6,500,000 in lost money. That's a big chunk of change that isn't getting put back into the company to support the development of their games.

You all act like all the money from game sales goes into a Scrooge McDuck-type money bin where the executives go swimming in it. No. Most of it goes into the investment and improvement of their game development.

Grow up. If you buy Used, you do so knowing full well what you're missing out on (unless of course you don't do any research on the games you buy used, in which case that's your own damn fault). You don't pay full price (or even the company that made the game), so you don't get full functionality. It's as simple as that.

I disagree, and think your argument is flawed. As you say, if I buy a used car, I don't expect it to be in mint condition. However, I don't expect my game to be either. What I do expect from my used car, is for it to function. Likewise with my game.

There is a difference between something not fully functioning, and something deliberately sabotaged.

You see, if I buy a used car, I might expect it to be a bit slow, a bit scratched. What I don't expect, is for someone to rip a chunk out deliberately.

There is a difference between knowing that what you are getting is secondhand, and so might not work perfectly, and having a company ensuring that what you are buying is not the full thing.

I don't buy used games expecting them to be in mint condition. I don't buy used cars expecting the creator of it to have ripped out the dashboard so as to encourage me to buy new.

Edit: Just realised that was a triple-post. Sorry.

 

[pretentiousname01]

You could always just search your local gamestops. hope one is an idiot and swipe the book from their wall copy. That will go over well.

 

[tredecim]

I really hope this ends up bringing down the price of second-hand games as a result, as I don't play online anyway (can't be bothered beating someone who's not in the same room for mocking!) - the pricing of 2nd-hand games at the likes of Game and Gamestation is nothing short of ridiculous. They're still selling COD:MW2 in my local Game for £35 new and £32 second-hand. Makes you wonder what the point is?

 

[Makon]

Because they can. It's their right, and frankly i support it. Ignoring everything else, why do people that buy used games feel like they deserve to be treated like any other customer when they don't want to give their money to the publisher/developer? Go complain to those you buy used games from.

I agree, word for word.

 

[Wicky_42]

...
Look at it this way. Say your game was good enough to sell 1 million copies, but 40% of those were Used. Say that of that 400,000 a whopping 3/4 of them would not have bought the game if there wasn't a used option (I think there would be more people willing to buy it new than that, but just for argument's sake).

That's 100,000 copies of the game that they didn't sell (i.e actually make money off of). Multiply that by an average of $65/game: $6,500,000 in lost money. That's a big chunk of change that isn't getting put back into the company to support the development of their games.

You all act like all the money from game sales goes into a Scrooge McDuck-type money bin where the executives go swimming in it. No. Most of it goes into the investment and improvement of their game development.

Grow up. If you buy Used, you do so knowing full well what you're missing out on (unless of course you don't do any research on the games you buy used, in which case that's your own damn fault). You don't pay full price (or even the company that made the game), so you don't get full functionality. It's as simple as that.

Look at it this way. Say your car was good enough to sell 1,000,000 units, but 40% of those were used re-sales. Of those, 3/4 may not have bought the car at full price anyway, so don't really count as lost sales.

That 100,000 cars that you didn't get to sell, and at, say, £15,000 a car that's £1,500,000,000 you didn't make - a theoretical loss of 10% expected returns. That's £1.5 billion that's not going into reinvestment and development!

You all act like it's perfectly normal to buy used cars, that you have some right to avoid paying full price and to sell your car on if you want!

Grow up. If you buy a used car, the makers should be allowed to make you pay additional fees in order to make the engine start, unlock the gear stick and turn the lights on (all in addition to the risk of wear-and-tear from the previous owner - after all, they went through all the hassle of making it in the first place, and that makes it theirs for ever. You should know full well what you're getting yourself into before hand, you dirty cheap-skate.

 

[Lyri]

Could you just imagine if other used markets started doing this? Used cars? used furniture?

Do explain that, other than sticking it into your rant for the sake of a point it's ridiculous.
How would they restrict a used piece of furniture or car?

How is that different? Bioware doesn't do multiplayer (not including that mmo thing) so they don't have multiplayer to use as incentive to buy new. You say Bioware is doing the right thing when its almost identical to EAs plan, I really don't see the harm in this. Buying second hand the developers don't see the money,some of that money is used to maintain servers etc, if you buy used really you aren't helping maintain the servers you will be using when you think about it its really not that big a deal, want the feature buy new, if you don't care, don't.

This man is the winner.

 

[Keava]

Comparing piracy to purchasing used games is absolutely stupid. If you buy a used car you aren't pirating it. If you buy a used television it isn't piracy. Why do games have some special rules when it comes to buying them used. If there is a new game coming out that I must play then I buy it the day it comes out. I am a gamer. If I'm bored and want to spend a little bit of my hard earned cash on a 2 year old game who are you or anyone else to tell me that it's wrong to buy it used? Hell I went to buy a new copy of Lego Star Wars for my son only to find out they don't produce them anymore. I had to buy a used copy. Shame on me! Get real man.

First of all, there is no such thing as -must play a game-. It's like me saying i -must- have a mint condition Bentley in my garage while i can't even afford a 4 year old VW. If you think the game is worth a day-0 purchase then save for it, just like you do with every other luxury product because games, like it or not, are luxury products.

Second thing games do have special rules, because your game doesn't get less of a game as it ages. The data stays the same no matter how many times you play through it. Cars, TVs or any other physical object you may buy used has it's life-span as well as life-span of parts. When you buy used car you will have to, sooner or later, fix something in it.

You buy used, you should acknowledge that you are not eligible for a full service from the publisher/developer. It's after all your choice. You didn't give them your money, they don't have to give anything in return, you are not their customer so you don't have customers rights. Of course they may let you use their services anyway, but it's their good will, not because they have to.

And, get real, we're not talking about single incidents where a game is no longer on sale and not available at any retailer. The issue is mostly with new games, weeks to 4-5 months old that could still sell at full price but instead are being pushed out by reselling practice. Those situations can actually be calculated as money and customer loss. I dare you find me a car or TV dealer that sells 1 month old models for 80% of price in mint condition.