EA online pass. Will the extortion end with EA sports?

[Obsidian Rocker]

Very true, delusibeta. It just irks be that this is going to screw over people who have to work on a budget.

I hate to sound like a prick, but this thread is making me think this site should be renamed "The Elitist"

 

[Obsidian Rocker]

Just buy new you cheapskate

Yes I think this is apart of project 10 dollar to insure that they make some money off the sale of used games potentially.

So it isnt extortion though i would consider it an incentive to buy new.

It's not an incentive. An incentive would be giving those that have said code something shiney for free, for their effort. Use carrot, not stick. The way they're doing it is an infringement on consumer rights. I don't even ever resell my games, but I sure as hell won't accept the companies taking that option away from me. If I own the product, I have finally say about what I'll do with it.

I understand that the used games market is a problem for the big companies; lost revenues and all that. What they seem to be ignoring, though, is that it's ultimately also an opportunity to reach more people with their products, increasing their costumer base. Besides, attacking consumer rights like this serves to alienate parts of their base. Carrot, not stick. EA could learn something from Bioware in this regard.

This is the point I'm trying to get accross. They're limiting the game. If they did what bioware did with ME2 that would be fine. If EA said "Here's the game but, for buying new, you can get this stuff extra" and then give people the option to pay for it if they bought used.

 

[TheSupremeForce]

Everyone's on a budget. Stop tossing the word around like it's some magical justification.

Since used games screw over publishers, it makes sense for the companies to do something to fight back. I'm surprised it took them this long to come up with something so simple.

In regard to budgets:
Buy one less game. Problem solved.
Don't buy any games that use this policy. Problem solved.
Wait for the price to go down naturally. Problem solved.
Buy used and go without multiplayer. Problem solved.

 

[P.Tsunami]

This is the point I'm trying to get accross. They're limiting the game. If they did what bioware did with ME2 that would be fine. If EA said "Here's the game but, for buying new, you can get this stuff extra" and then give people the option to pay for it if they bought used.

Exactly. Going about it the way Bioware does, you make sure not to punish or harm any of the people playing games gotten legitimately (i.e., used), while rewarding those buying your games new. This incentive will make sure that more people buy your titles - which is where your most important source of income is - while no one gets disenfranchised with your products at the same time. Going about it the other way, sure, it might make some people buy your games new. And you'll get a bit of extra income from those buying it used and later pay the $10 to access online services. However, in the same stroke, you're creating antipathy towards your company and products, antipathy that may cause consumers to buy Pro Evolution Soccer instead of FIFA the next time around.

 

[shadow skill]

Perhaps you're forgetting who it screws over. The kid who wants to trade in his old games so he can buy a game with his pocket money. The college student strapped for cash. The married couple on a budget.

Like I said, I buy used almost all the time, but it's the principle. I'm sick of these rich, selfish, greedy pigs, taking money they don't need. When he lives on welfare, THEN he he can tell people it's justified

Yeah right, EA doesn't need money. Because they totally haven't been taking a fiscal beating for several years running. They're just greedy, that's why they had to fire so many people! Shame on them. Also shame on them for trying to make money with a product they made, and a service they provide! Curse these capitalist pigs! Communism and free games for everyone!

On the other hand, the average gamer needs to buy a new game every month! It's his constitutional right never to be bored! Shame on EA for exploiting people's physical need for games to make money!

You don't need to buy the newest Madden whenever it comes out, nor are you entitled to. You're taking this sick sense of entitlement way too far. Besides, they're not stopping second-hand trade. You want to buy a game for far less than it's market price? Go right ahead. Just don't be surprised if it contains a few less features than if you'd bought the full-price version. And, as I said before, a used game + $10 is still significantly less than a full-priced new game, so I don't see what you're whining about here.

I love how people whine about customers feeling entitled when the corporations' entire argument stems from a sense of entitlement. No one is able to explain why EA needs any money from the used game transaction since they have already been paid. No one can explain why simply giving away a game needs to be negatively impacted in any way. Yet people such as yourself have the nerve to talk about entitlement issues...

 

[rated pg]

They had better have a system in place to remove it once the game becomes older...if I go to buy, say, Tiger Woods 11 after 12 is out, I'd certainly feel cheated paying an extra 10 bucks (probably a good third of the cost of the game) simply because finding a new copy at that time would be highly unlikely.

Furthering that problem is that video games have a magical exchange rate when it comes to CAN dollars vs. USD...if it was real money, it'd be almost equal. Since it's video games, $10 USD is apparently $15 CAN.

Really, it's a shortsighted solution since Gamestop/EB will just lower the price and trade in values of the pre-owned versions of Tiger Woods 11/UFC 2010/etc. to the point where it's worth it to not buy new (maybe even advantageous) and life will continue on as it always does.

 

[joshuaayt]

Boy, am I glad the only online I use is for Mount&Blade.
I've always found it interesting that anti-used games posts are so much more vehement than anti-piracy ones. Where'd the ol' "Every X does not equal a lost sale" rebuttal go?
Anyway, I'd prefer this sort of thing to shitloads of hardworking game developers losing their jobs to the turbulent economical system so go EA, I suppose.

 

[P.Tsunami]

Really, it's a shortsighted solution since Gamestop/EB will just lower the price and trade in values of the pre-owned versions of Tiger Woods 11/UFC 2010/etc. to the point where it's worth it to not buy new (maybe even advantageous) and life will continue on as it always does.

This is also a very good point. If Gamestop, EB Games or any other large retail outlet relying partly on used games trade want to, they can undermine their efforts entirely. And, considering the used games trade amounts to a considerable part of their income, it's not unreasonable to expect that they just might do that. It's an ineffectual, combative way of going around it, and it certainly isn't winning EA any friends. There are better ways to do this that doesn't harm anyone; it's simply not a zero sum game we're talking about.

 

[shadow skill]

Really, it's a shortsighted solution since Gamestop/EB will just lower the price and trade in values of the pre-owned versions of Tiger Woods 11/UFC 2010/etc. to the point where it's worth it to not buy new (maybe even advantageous) and life will continue on as it always does.

This is also a very good point. If Gamestop, EB Games or any other large retail outlet relying partly on used games trade want to, they can undermine their efforts entirely. And, considering the used games trade amounts to a considerable part of their income, it's not unreasonable to expect that they just might do that. It's an ineffectual, combative way of going around it, and it certainly isn't winning EA any friends. There are better ways to do this that doesn't harm anyone; it's simply not a zero sum game we're talking about.

EA will just raise the online price when Gamestop drops theirs. Their corporate shills will continue to tell us that our hearts should bleed for them.

 

[Penguinness]

I'm still confused, I mean like most items in life, they are bought and the company gets money, they get sold on and the company gets nothing.. they've still gotten money from that product.

Does this basically mean when you want to trade-in some games, they'll now be worth $10 less than the low-low price you trade them in for anyway? When money was tight the only thing we could do was to trade in some N64 games to get a new one. Seems now you probably won't be able to do that.

 

[P.Tsunami]

EA will just raise the online price when Gamestop drops theirs. Their corporate shills will continue to tell us that our hearts should bleed for them.

Maybe. But it's not a sustainable theory. Sooner or later, EA will demand a price that will simply be so high, absolutely no one will be willing to pay it, and simply stay with the single player aspect of their used game. At this point, there will be no advantage or income from EA from this, only the antagonizing. The same goes for the game stores; at some point, they'll have to charge nothing for their used games, and their profit will obviously disappear entirely. The question is, who are willing to go farthest, the stores in their deflation, or EA in their inflation of the price?

 

[shadow skill]

EA will just raise the online price when Gamestop drops theirs. Their corporate shills will continue to tell us that our hearts should bleed for them.

Maybe. But it's not a sustainable theory. Sooner or later, EA will demand a price that will simply be so high, absolutely no one will be willing to pay it, and simply stay with the single player aspect of their used game. At this point, there will be no advantage or income from EA from this, only the antagonizing. The same goes for the game stores; at some point, they'll have to charge nothing for their used games, and their profit will obviously disappear entirely. The question is, who are willing to go farthest, the stores in their deflation, or EA in their inflation of the price?

Oh I know. Good. Hopefully they will annihilate each other so I can see how the shills try to spin the whole thing to blame the consumer for the failure of large corporations.

 

[Hurr Durr Derp]

Wow. Sarcasm. You're really getting desperate, aren't you? (please don't reply to this, I just realize don't have a solid argument so I'll just accuse you of being desperate) Yes, this means pre-owned games will cost less. But it also means that a trade in will GET less. Or did you not think about that? Like I said, it will screw over people who have to live on a budget. Not all of us rely on mummy and daddy to buy us games. Think about the long term. A game like MW2 which, let's face it have a pathetic excuse for a single player campaign. It was just thrown together and, if I might take a quote from Yahtzee, more money was given to the knobbing around (Multiplayer) side of things.

And wether or not EA have taken a fiscal beating several years running, they're now on the up. 4.212 BILLION dollars profit, a 15% increase from 2008 is plenty and doesn't warrent this blatent rip-off of the consumer

Sure, it might have the indirect effect that you'll get less for your trade-ins. But if you can't afford a one-time payment of ten bucks you've got bigger things to worry about than videogames. Videogames are not a right. Also, please stop pretending that you're only paying for half a game. Yes, some features will be locked, but you still end up with a fully playable game. If you want to pay the full thing, pay the full price. I don't see how that's anything less but fair.

Accusing a commercial business of making money is just silly. They're not ripping off the consumers, they just try to get paid for a luxury service they provide. That's capitalism, not criminality. Noone's stealing your money, you're just demanding that you get something for nothing.

I love how people whine about customers feeling entitled when the corporations' entire argument stems from a sense of entitlement. No one is able to explain why EA needs any money from the used game transaction since they have already been paid. No one can explain why simply giving away a game needs to be negatively impacted in any way. Yet people such as yourself have the nerve to talk about entitlement issues...

A commercial business feels entitled to getting paid for their services. A spoiled kid feels entitled to making use of a company's servers without paying them one penny. If you don't see the difference here, I can't help you.

And yes, I can explain why they ask money for something they already sold. They're not. Simple as that. You buy the game second-hand, you own it. That's it. You want to make use of the online service, that costs money. They're giving away that service to loyal customers who buy the game new, because at least a part of that money goes to the publisher and the developer. If you play a used game, noone involved with the actual creation and maintenance of the game ever gets paid. If you'd play that game online, you'd be using resources you've never paid for. Some publishers might be okay with that, but that doesn't mean that you're entitled to get that service for free in every situation.

 

[sosolidshoe]

Just buy new you cheapskate

If I'm strapped for cash and want a fairly priced game, used is the way to go. I shouldn't have to have a company, which makes billion of dollars I usually buy new so perhaps you should think before you type.

Now, last year EA made, for the 2009 fiscal yeah, was 4.212 BILLION dollars, not million, BILLION. Thats up 15% from the 2008 fiscal year. Can you honestly tell me that EA can justify this blatent "Fuck you" to the consumer? I didn't think so

yes because the consumer isnt paying them the money they're paying some used game shop the cash.So they can say fuck you for not paying them money for wanting to play there game.

Consider that they make absolutely nothing from the sale of the game itself. And how much less are used games anyways? I know the more recents ones are about five dollars less. So don't cry to me when you so effectively screw yourself over. Why shouldn't they make money from their product? If anything I say screw Gamestop and their laughable markdowns.

They make nothing from used games? TOUGH SHIT. No other form of product producer makes money from the secondhand market; if I buy an Ikea desk from the classified ads, are Ikea allowed to confiscate some of the drawers until I fork over an extra tenner?

And before anyone starts with any crap about it being online stuff only, that doesn't wash either, because you pay for that when you pay for LIVE, and also because it evidently wasn't a problem for them to provide such services in the past.

The gaming industry are trying to claim a right for themselves that no other producer in the damn world has, and it's not on.

EDIT: As for your argument about server usage Hurr Hurr Derp, that's a pile of horseshite as well. The cost of each user draining their server bandwidth is factored into the retail cost of the game. When the game changes hands, THE COMPANY EXPERIENCES NO ADDITIONAL COSTS. The situation is no different than if the original purchaser had been using the online facilities which they payed for when they bought the game at retail.

 

[Mr. Grey]

I see what you're getting at... but I disagree.

Do I think it's right? I don't think DRM is right since it doesn't work and is rather indiscriminate in who it punishes. That's wrong, that takes away your ownership rights. But here's the thing with Project Ten Dollar: you don't own the servers EA provides for you... so it's not unreasonable to ask for some money in order to access them. They're letting you keep the game, they just want money for you to access the servers they own. And considering how popular EA Sports is... that's a lot of people accessing the servers, a lot of money to be paid to keep it running. I don't see a problem with wanting people who haven't paid them yet to access said servers.

In fact... don't the people that don't pay to see a sports game get kicked out when they attempt to? Why aren't you up in arms about that? I mean they can watch the game on TV without paying the Stadium a cent, but they can't use the Stadium's chairs and facilities without paying to use them... that seems awfully similar to this.

I've always found it interesting that anti-used games posts are so much more vehement than anti-piracy ones. Where'd the ol' "Every X does not equal a lost sale" rebuttal go?

I think it's because they're actually buying the game. Whereas the pirates that illegally download may never actually go out and buy the game.

 

[FinalDream]

I've said this before, but I'll repeat it here.

First of all, if you buy a game new, you won't miss anything. If you buy a game used, you're already paying a lot less than the average person, so the extra $10 is a small price to pay.

Second, remember that EA doesn't get a cent from used games sales, but you're still expecting them to provide you with all the services they provide the paying customer. Server bandwidth, regular updates, use of community portals, help desks, etc. These things all cost money. Money they're not getting from you. In stead, they ask a small amount of money ($10 for a code, in stead of $60 for a new game) to help support them, giving you access to all these things.

Finally, no one's forcing you to do anything. You'll still be able to play the games perfectly with an unregistered game, you just won't get the shiny extra online functions. If those functions are really necessary for your enjoyment, it would be a small sacrifice to pay $10 for them, wouldn't it?

I almost never buy used games so I don't care, but even if I did I don't see the problem. In the end, you still up paying less.

Here in the UK, pre-owned prices are the real extortion. Usually for newer used games they are a couple of quid less than a new title! I hope EA destroys GAME's (the shop) profits. I hope they make them go bust (unlikely) because they are absolute robbers and con merchants.