Et tu EA?

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Fuck, this is simply amazing. I can't believe there isn't more support for used games.

Oh I fully support used games and our ability to sell the ones we buy when we're done. I just don't support us complaining about a company trying ti work it's way out of debt with optional material. And even more ridiculous is you're like TIME ARE TOUGH I NEED THIS 10 DOLLARS, but I pre-ordered Dragon Age 2! I'm getting SUCH a sweet deal! Hoo yeah!

It's silly, you don't need what you get for the 10 bucks. EA isn't holding the disk hostage until you pay, you can still play the game.

Let's use Battlefield 3. Is the focus of that game single-player or multiplayer?

It's focused on both actually. It's going to have a campaign and they're putting a lot of work into it. Didn't you know that?

But which will you play more?
Also, Call of Duty has a campaign, but it's lasting quality is clearly multiplayer.

The point is the Singly player doesn't cost the publisher/developer money the muliplayer component does. If you are not going to compensate the publisher for the resources their offering you have no right to be on their servers, period.

Let's put it this way. The original buyer paid his dues, and you're taking his spot. He no longer has multiplayer access, you do. If there were 100 people playing multiplayer, and he sold it to gamestop, there would be 99 people playing multiplayer with enough money in the system for 100. If you then buy that game, it's back up to 100. Unless by buying the game, you somehow shifted that number up to 101, you aren't giving the company any additional server costs. Also, this is ignoring the fact that Xbox 360 and PC games are hosted by the players; the only time you're actually paying for server upkeep is on the PS3 or on an MMO.

 

[oplinger]

But they're still fucking a legitimate consumer out of extra money. He didn't steal the game, he bought it a few months after it came out after someone else played it.
Also, DLC may be made between when the game is finished and shipped. You're getting extra stuff, not being denied a complete product.

You're not being denied a complete product, you're getting extra optional material that you do not need to play the functioning game. You're simply being charged for buying used, a measely 10 dollars, the person who bought new probably ended up giving them more than 10 dollars in the long run, and they got all the optional features as a bonus.

But which will you play more?
Also, Call of Duty has a campaign, but it's lasting quality is clearly multiplayer.

Doesn't matter which I play more, the game is still functional even if they gave me multiplayer over single player. But it's be silly for them to charge me for single player I don't want, they have to make it interesting for me. So they do it to multiplayer, as it costs upkeep. Also if I bought it for the multiplayer, then I'd give them the 10 bucks, as I'm still getting it cheaper than buying it new if I played my cards right.

 

[Blindswordmaster]

Fuck, this is simply amazing. I can't believe there isn't more support for used games.

Oh I fully support used games and our ability to sell the ones we buy when we're done. I just don't support us complaining about a company trying ti work it's way out of debt with optional material. And even more ridiculous is you're like TIME ARE TOUGH I NEED THIS 10 DOLLARS, but I pre-ordered Dragon Age 2! I'm getting SUCH a sweet deal! Hoo yeah!

It's silly, you don't need what you get for the 10 bucks. EA isn't holding the disk hostage until you pay, you can still play the game.

Let's use Battlefield 3. Is the focus of that game single-player or multiplayer?

It's focused on both actually. It's going to have a campaign and they're putting a lot of work into it. Didn't you know that?

But which will you play more?
Also, Call of Duty has a campaign, but it's lasting quality is clearly multiplayer.

The point is the Singly player doesn't cost the publisher/developer money the muliplayer component does. If you are not going to compensate the publisher for the resources their offering you have no right to be on their servers, period.

But what's the point of having multiplayer if I can't play it?
P.S. Singly player? I like that.

 

[nub the samurai]

Fuck, this is simply amazing. I can't believe there isn't more support for used games.

Oh I fully support used games and our ability to sell the ones we buy when we're done. I just don't support us complaining about a company trying ti work it's way out of debt with optional material. And even more ridiculous is you're like TIME ARE TOUGH I NEED THIS 10 DOLLARS, but I pre-ordered Dragon Age 2! I'm getting SUCH a sweet deal! Hoo yeah!

It's silly, you don't need what you get for the 10 bucks. EA isn't holding the disk hostage until you pay, you can still play the game.

Let's use Battlefield 3. Is the focus of that game single-player or multiplayer?

Well in Battlefield Bad Company 2 they didn't block you out of the multiplayer completely if you didn't have an online pass, they just didn't let you have the maps they "released" in the map packs (I put released in quotation marks because most of the maps they released were already on the disc). They didn't want to completely screw over ppl who bought used I guess. They'll prolly do the same for Battlefield 3.

 

[Blindswordmaster]

I'm pretty sure that if you buy the game new you get the online for free.
At least, that's how it was with my last EA multiplayer game.

It is a tactic to get money from people who buy used games.

thank you for summarizing the points I made in original post

So why are you complaining? You don't have to pay anything.

Yes, but I like to buy used games and I like EA games and I don't want to pay for content that's already on the disc. I'm rallying for my gamer brothers.

EA has every right to charge you. If you want access to the full content, buy the game from the publisher, not a third party. The used game market takes away multiple sales from the publisher/developers, so it makes perfect sense for them to charge you to use extra content.

It's not extra content, it's on the fucking disc. Have you never bought a used game?

I should have worded that better. But my point stands. If you want full access to a game, pay the company. Your getting a game they made at a lower price, without paying them anything, and you expect to take up their multiplayer servers for free? Bandwidth costs money, so it is only fair that they get compensated for bills that you rack up.

Then put out DLC. New maps, I'll gladly pay for new maps!

I wouldn't unless there were enough maps to call it an expansion pack. This generation has been heavy on the customer gouging, to the point that it's pretty much driven me away from buying the mainstream titles. To all the people that quoted me: thank you for proving my point. Yes, the companies deserve to get paid. But they don't deserve to nickel and dime me for all I'm worth, nor do they deserve to charge whatever the heck they want, and expect me to pay it. I haven't paid full price for a game since Mazes of Fate on the GBA, and then it was because it was made by a small developer and I needed to grab a copy before it pretty much permanently disappeared into the hands of collectors.

Developers can cry all they want about how they're losing money, but a AAA game costs significantly less to make than a blockbuster movie, yet they charge us much more than Hollywood could ever dream of charging. PR agents are not the consumer's friend -- and neither is any company who wants their money.

Are...are you actually arguing my point?

 

[oplinger]

I'm pretty sure that if you buy the game new you get the online for free.
At least, that's how it was with my last EA multiplayer game.

It is a tactic to get money from people who buy used games.

thank you for summarizing the points I made in original post

So why are you complaining? You don't have to pay anything.

Yes, but I like to buy used games and I like EA games and I don't want to pay for content that's already on the disc. I'm rallying for my gamer brothers.

EA has every right to charge you. If you want access to the full content, buy the game from the publisher, not a third party. The used game market takes away multiple sales from the publisher/developers, so it makes perfect sense for them to charge you to use extra content.

It's not extra content, it's on the fucking disc. Have you never bought a used game?

I should have worded that better. But my point stands. If you want full access to a game, pay the company. Your getting a game they made at a lower price, without paying them anything, and you expect to take up their multiplayer servers for free? Bandwidth costs money, so it is only fair that they get compensated for bills that you rack up.

Then put out DLC. New maps, I'll gladly pay for new maps!

I wouldn't unless there were enough maps to call it an expansion pack. This generation has been heavy on the customer gouging, to the point that it's pretty much driven me away from buying the mainstream titles. To all the people that quoted me: thank you for proving my point. Yes, the companies deserve to get paid. But they don't deserve to nickel and dime me for all I'm worth, nor do they deserve to charge whatever the heck they want, and expect me to pay it. I haven't paid full price for a game since Mazes of Fate on the GBA, and then it was because it was made by a small developer and I needed to grab a copy before it pretty much permanently disappeared into the hands of collectors.

Developers can cry all they want about how they're losing money, but a AAA game costs significantly less to make than a blockbuster movie, yet they charge us much more than Hollywood could ever dream of charging. PR agents are not the consumer's friend -- and neither is any company who wants their money.

AAA devs don't have movie theaters, WHABLAM argument killed.

Fuck, this is simply amazing. I can't believe there isn't more support for used games.

Oh I fully support used games and our ability to sell the ones we buy when we're done. I just don't support us complaining about a company trying ti work it's way out of debt with optional material. And even more ridiculous is you're like TIME ARE TOUGH I NEED THIS 10 DOLLARS, but I pre-ordered Dragon Age 2! I'm getting SUCH a sweet deal! Hoo yeah!

It's silly, you don't need what you get for the 10 bucks. EA isn't holding the disk hostage until you pay, you can still play the game.

Let's use Battlefield 3. Is the focus of that game single-player or multiplayer?

It's focused on both actually. It's going to have a campaign and they're putting a lot of work into it. Didn't you know that?

But which will you play more?
Also, Call of Duty has a campaign, but it's lasting quality is clearly multiplayer.

The point is the Singly player doesn't cost the publisher/developer money the muliplayer component does. If you are not going to compensate the publisher for the resources their offering you have no right to be on their servers, period.

Let's put it this way. The original buyer paid his dues, and you're taking his spot. He no longer has multiplayer access, you do. If there were 100 people playing multiplayer, and he sold it to gamestop, there would be 99 people playing multiplayer with enough money in the system for 100. If you then buy that game, it's back up to 100. Unless by buying the game, you somehow shifted that number up to 101, you aren't giving the company any additional server costs. Also, this is ignoring the fact that Xbox 360 and PC games are hosted by the players; the only time you're actually paying for server upkeep is on the PS3 or on an MMO.

Self hosted through a service (XBL) and sometimes the matchmaking service is needed in games that also needs upkeep. ALso they need to store your profile on their servers or locally, so statistically yes the playerbase went up to 101.

 

[Zhukov]

It's not extra content, it's on the fucking disc. Have you never bought a used game?

So if the $10 online content had to be downloaded you wouldn't mind?

 

[Normandyfoxtrot]

Fuck, this is simply amazing. I can't believe there isn't more support for used games.

Oh I fully support used games and our ability to sell the ones we buy when we're done. I just don't support us complaining about a company trying ti work it's way out of debt with optional material. And even more ridiculous is you're like TIME ARE TOUGH I NEED THIS 10 DOLLARS, but I pre-ordered Dragon Age 2! I'm getting SUCH a sweet deal! Hoo yeah!

It's silly, you don't need what you get for the 10 bucks. EA isn't holding the disk hostage until you pay, you can still play the game.

Let's use Battlefield 3. Is the focus of that game single-player or multiplayer?

It's focused on both actually. It's going to have a campaign and they're putting a lot of work into it. Didn't you know that?

But which will you play more?
Also, Call of Duty has a campaign, but it's lasting quality is clearly multiplayer.

The point is the Singly player doesn't cost the publisher/developer money the muliplayer component does. If you are not going to compensate the publisher for the resources their offering you have no right to be on their servers, period.

Let's put it this way. The original buyer paid his dues, and you're taking his spot. He no longer has multiplayer access, you do. If there were 100 people playing multiplayer, and he sold it to gamestop, there would be 99 people playing multiplayer with enough money in the system for 100. If you then buy that game, it's back up to 100. Unless by buying the game, you somehow shifted that number up to 101, you aren't giving the company any additional server costs. Also, this is ignoring the fact that Xbox 360 and PC games are hosted by the players; the only time you're actually paying for server upkeep is on the PS3 or on an MMO.

Original players have a expected average game play life span that is factored into the costs of video games prior to the original sale of of a product when you start bringing in used sales into the equation you knock out the balance those positions are no longer emptying as was originally expected or budgeted for because the only information they have to go on namely sales and account play periods simply isn't adding up.

 

[Blindswordmaster]

I'm pretty sure that if you buy the game new you get the online for free.
At least, that's how it was with my last EA multiplayer game.

It is a tactic to get money from people who buy used games.

thank you for summarizing the points I made in original post

So why are you complaining? You don't have to pay anything.

Yes, but I like to buy used games and I like EA games and I don't want to pay for content that's already on the disc. I'm rallying for my gamer brothers.

Why should they? A used sale gives them the same amount of money that a pirated copy does. They have every right to withhold content in used copies to encourage people to buy it new so they can make a profit.

No, they should encourage people to buy new, not punish the impoverished for buying used. Like Dragon Age 2: I pre-ordered so I'm getting a fuck ton of extra goodies and exclusive weapons. That's the right way to do it.

Day 1 DLC needs to die. In a fire. Slowly. Withholding content from used copies is one thing, fucking a paying consumer out of content is another.

What's the difference?

My money is going to the publishers and developers. I'm paying a hefty sum because I thought enough of their product to risk dropping 64$ on it. Day 1 DLC is basically saying: glad you like it, now give us more money to get the full game.

But they're still fucking a legitimate consumer out of extra money. He didn't steal the game, he bought it a few months after it came out after someone else played it.
Also, DLC may be made between when the game is finished and shipped. You're getting extra stuff, not being denied a complete product.

I was thinking of things like Fable 3. Black Dye DLC and things like it. Unrelated, I can't access characters like Shale in DA or Zaeed in ME2 because I don't have LIVE. I really hate not being able to access things I pay for.

THAT IS MY FUCKING POINT!!!

 

[IronicBeet]

You get the code with the game if you buy it new. You only have to buy the online pass if you buy it used.

 

[Blindswordmaster]

But they're still fucking a legitimate consumer out of extra money. He didn't steal the game, he bought it a few months after it came out after someone else played it.
Also, DLC may be made between when the game is finished and shipped. You're getting extra stuff, not being denied a complete product.

You're not being denied a complete product, you're getting extra optional material that you do not need to play the functioning game. You're simply being charged for buying used, a measely 10 dollars, the person who bought new probably ended up giving them more than 10 dollars in the long run, and they got all the optional features as a bonus.

But which will you play more?
Also, Call of Duty has a campaign, but it's lasting quality is clearly multiplayer.

Doesn't matter which I play more, the game is still functional even if they gave me multiplayer over single player. But it's be silly for them to charge me for single player I don't want, they have to make it interesting for me. So they do it to multiplayer, as it costs upkeep. Also if I bought it for the multiplayer, then I'd give them the 10 bucks, as I'm still getting it cheaper than buying it new if I played my cards right.

But isn't multiplayer part of a functioning game? And am I not being denied part of a functioning part of a game?

 

[Vault101]

Bought Bulletstorm and Dead Space 2 recently and I noticed the online pass-code. I didn't really think about it, why should I when I bought both games new? Then I noticed that the Bulletstorm online pass is 10 dollars. 10 dollars?! On top of whatever anyone else paid for it? Bullshit! I know this is to combat used game sales, but what the fuck? Now you may argue that you could easily enjoy both those games on single-player alone, but what about Battlefield 3? Will you be willing to pay an additional 10 dollars to play the majority of the game's content? No, this is horse shit.

I bought dead space 2 new and it didnt charge me for online...whats going on here?

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

I'm pretty sure that if you buy the game new you get the online for free.
At least, that's how it was with my last EA multiplayer game.

It is a tactic to get money from people who buy used games.

thank you for summarizing the points I made in original post

So why are you complaining? You don't have to pay anything.

Yes, but I like to buy used games and I like EA games and I don't want to pay for content that's already on the disc. I'm rallying for my gamer brothers.

Why should they? A used sale gives them the same amount of money that a pirated copy does. They have every right to withhold content in used copies to encourage people to buy it new so they can make a profit.

No, they should encourage people to buy new, not punish the impoverished for buying used. Like Dragon Age 2: I pre-ordered so I'm getting a fuck ton of extra goodies and exclusive weapons. That's the right way to do it.

Day 1 DLC needs to die. In a fire. Slowly. Withholding content from used copies is one thing, fucking a paying consumer out of content is another.

What's the difference?

My money is going to the publishers and developers. I'm paying a hefty sum because I thought enough of their product to risk dropping 64$ on it. Day 1 DLC is basically saying: glad you like it, now give us more money to get the full game.

But they're still fucking a legitimate consumer out of extra money. He didn't steal the game, he bought it a few months after it came out after someone else played it.
Also, DLC may be made between when the game is finished and shipped. You're getting extra stuff, not being denied a complete product.

I was thinking of things like Fable 3. Black Dye DLC and things like it. Unrelated, I can't access characters like Shale in DA or Zaeed in ME2 because I don't have LIVE. I really hate not being able to access things I pay for.

THAT IS MY FUCKING POINT!!!

You didn't pay money to the people that made the game. I did.

 

[Normandyfoxtrot]

But they're still fucking a legitimate consumer out of extra money. He didn't steal the game, he bought it a few months after it came out after someone else played it.
Also, DLC may be made between when the game is finished and shipped. You're getting extra stuff, not being denied a complete product.

You're not being denied a complete product, you're getting extra optional material that you do not need to play the functioning game. You're simply being charged for buying used, a measely 10 dollars, the person who bought new probably ended up giving them more than 10 dollars in the long run, and they got all the optional features as a bonus.

But which will you play more?
Also, Call of Duty has a campaign, but it's lasting quality is clearly multiplayer.

Doesn't matter which I play more, the game is still functional even if they gave me multiplayer over single player. But it's be silly for them to charge me for single player I don't want, they have to make it interesting for me. So they do it to multiplayer, as it costs upkeep. Also if I bought it for the multiplayer, then I'd give them the 10 bucks, as I'm still getting it cheaper than buying it new if I played my cards right.

But isn't multiplayer part of a functioning game? And am I not being denied part of a functioning part of a game?

No your not you can get your enjoyment and the experience from the single player.

 

[Blindswordmaster]

It's not extra content, it's on the fucking disc. Have you never bought a used game?

So if the $10 online content had to be downloaded you wouldn't mind?

Yes. If I bought a game and there was no multiplayer button and then I put in this code, downloaded the thing, and multiplayer was available, then that would be fine.

 

[oplinger]

But they're still fucking a legitimate consumer out of extra money. He didn't steal the game, he bought it a few months after it came out after someone else played it.
Also, DLC may be made between when the game is finished and shipped. You're getting extra stuff, not being denied a complete product.

You're not being denied a complete product, you're getting extra optional material that you do not need to play the functioning game. You're simply being charged for buying used, a measely 10 dollars, the person who bought new probably ended up giving them more than 10 dollars in the long run, and they got all the optional features as a bonus.

But which will you play more?
Also, Call of Duty has a campaign, but it's lasting quality is clearly multiplayer.

Doesn't matter which I play more, the game is still functional even if they gave me multiplayer over single player. But it's be silly for them to charge me for single player I don't want, they have to make it interesting for me. So they do it to multiplayer, as it costs upkeep. Also if I bought it for the multiplayer, then I'd give them the 10 bucks, as I'm still getting it cheaper than buying it new if I played my cards right.

But isn't multiplayer part of a functioning game? And am I not being denied part of a functioning part of a game?

Does the game cease to function when you don't have multiplayer?

...No usually not. Sorry, no dice. You're being denied an optional part of an optional thing. You don't need the game either. But the game functions without multiplayer.

 

[Normandyfoxtrot]

It's not extra content, it's on the fucking disc. Have you never bought a used game?

So if the $10 online content had to be downloaded you wouldn't mind?

Yes. If I bought a game and there was no multiplayer button and then I put in this code, downloaded the thing, and multiplayer was available, then that would be fine.

I really, really doubt that.

 

[Blindswordmaster]

Bought Bulletstorm and Dead Space 2 recently and I noticed the online pass-code. I didn't really think about it, why should I when I bought both games new? Then I noticed that the Bulletstorm online pass is 10 dollars. 10 dollars?! On top of whatever anyone else paid for it? Bullshit! I know this is to combat used game sales, but what the fuck? Now you may argue that you could easily enjoy both those games on single-player alone, but what about Battlefield 3? Will you be willing to pay an additional 10 dollars to play the majority of the game's content? No, this is horse shit.

I bought dead space 2 new and it didnt charge me for online...whats going on here?

That's because you bought new and got the code to play online. If you had bought used, you would have to pay extra to unlock multiplayer.

 

[Blindswordmaster]

I'm pretty sure that if you buy the game new you get the online for free.
At least, that's how it was with my last EA multiplayer game.

It is a tactic to get money from people who buy used games.

thank you for summarizing the points I made in original post

So why are you complaining? You don't have to pay anything.

Yes, but I like to buy used games and I like EA games and I don't want to pay for content that's already on the disc. I'm rallying for my gamer brothers.

Why should they? A used sale gives them the same amount of money that a pirated copy does. They have every right to withhold content in used copies to encourage people to buy it new so they can make a profit.

No, they should encourage people to buy new, not punish the impoverished for buying used. Like Dragon Age 2: I pre-ordered so I'm getting a fuck ton of extra goodies and exclusive weapons. That's the right way to do it.

Day 1 DLC needs to die. In a fire. Slowly. Withholding content from used copies is one thing, fucking a paying consumer out of content is another.

What's the difference?

My money is going to the publishers and developers. I'm paying a hefty sum because I thought enough of their product to risk dropping 64$ on it. Day 1 DLC is basically saying: glad you like it, now give us more money to get the full game.

But they're still fucking a legitimate consumer out of extra money. He didn't steal the game, he bought it a few months after it came out after someone else played it.
Also, DLC may be made between when the game is finished and shipped. You're getting extra stuff, not being denied a complete product.

I was thinking of things like Fable 3. Black Dye DLC and things like it. Unrelated, I can't access characters like Shale in DA or Zaeed in ME2 because I don't have LIVE. I really hate not being able to access things I pay for.

THAT IS MY FUCKING POINT!!!

You didn't pay money to the people that made the game. I did.

I did too, but I may eventually sell this game and I'm looking out for the guy next on my copy.