Kingdoms of Amular locks content for second hand users.

[Tanakh]

Curt Shilling, head of 38 Studios, recently announced that the upcoming Kingdoms of Amular will feature day 1 DLC. This content will be free for new users and any second hand user will be able to buy and download it. He said:

DAY 1 DLC, to be extremely and VIVIDLY clear, is FREE, 100% totally FREE, to anyone that buys a new copy of Reckoning, ANYONE. If you don't buy new games you buy them used, and in that case you will have to pay for the Day 1 free DLC content the new copy buyers got for free.

It's clear the intent right? To promote early adopters and MUCH MORE IMPORTANT TO ME, REWARD fans and gamers who commit to us with their time and money when it benefits the company... This is not 38 trying to take more of your money, or EA in this case, this is us REWARDING people for HELPING US! If you disagree due to methodology, ok, but that is our intent... companies are still trying to figure out how to receive dollars spent on games they make, when they are bought. Is that wrong? if so please tell me how.

Now, being a PC only gamer I really don't care, and seeing how from a game studio PoV a second hand copy and a pirate copy are the same I see where this is coming from, but it's sure to generate some user hate.

Links to the ./ article and the original article:

Spoiler

http://games.slashdot.org/story/12/01/30/0216258/anger-with-game-content-lock-spurs-reaction-from-studio-head-curt-shilling
http://hothardware.com/News/Outrage-Over-Kingdoms-of-Amalur-Content-Lock-Brings-Studio-Head-Out-To-Debate/

 

[Xeorm]

No complaints here, I've never seen the reason for hating on this sort of idea

 

[Tanakh]

Hehe, never expected to see this posts as the first response on the Escapist. And well, AFAIK the content is not on the disk, though there hasn't been a clear answer about this.

About this game, I'll buy it when it goes on sale on a digital distribution store, so it get's added to the pile of games i have the right to play but never manage to find the time to... damn you DotA2!

 

[AppleShrapnel]

I support it fully.

Devs (and by some extension, the publishers) put millions of dollars and thousands of man-hours into making a single game. Is it wrong for them to sneer at second-hand sales and straight-up pirates? Not in the slightest.

Now don't get me wrong, I also understand the need of some people, whether they're in school or out of a job, to buy games second-hand... but no, there's no legitimate excuse for pirating. It's wrong- end of story.

To help put things into perspective; if you write a really good, neigh, exceptional report for class, you'd want credit where it's due, right? To you.

Continuing the metaphor, a pirate would be some a**-clown that snaps a pic of it with his phone while you're away, none the wiser. This is bad... this is cheating. This is not a good thing to do, regardless of circumstances.

And second-handers... hmm... you let a friend take it home, because you wanna show it off- because after all, you won't be seeing and/or revising your handiwork again. Some of his friends, whom you don't really see eye-to-eye with, look at it and end up with more or less the same paper, with only a few minor differences. Not as bad, per se, but they just kinda mooched your work, and the teacher/professor is highly unlikely to give you any credit for their reports.

I hope that made sense... if it doesn't, disregard. :S

 

[Soviet Heavy]

It's a game published by EA. Are we honestly still surprised by this?

 

[Tanakh]

-snip-

The way i see it the games that are sold via a disc involve tree entities:

- The publisher
- The shop
- The consumer

Now, if this article of forbes is right when you buy a new game out of a retail store 70% of that goes to the shop and 30% to the publisher, if the game is used 100% goes to the retail store.

Seeing how GameStop is already doing more money out of games that any publisher except Activision/Blizz; i can't but understand devs trying their hardest to stop the used game market, because for them, not for the shop nor the consumer, but for the publisher a pirated game and a second hand sale are exactly the same.

Quite a messy subject, because I can't but support the right of the consumers to resell or burn or do whatever they want with their copy. But when reselling only feeds a company like GameStop where love for game has no place and who's buisness is to give the developers as little money as they can for the products they sell... sigh.

Glad I am a PC gamer and can just go to GoG or Steam and be done with it.

Edit: Damn href, any idea what's the sintaxis for it here?
Edit2: That works, ty.

 

[Mekado]

-snip-

The way i see it the games that are sold via a disc involve tree entities:

- The publisher
- The shop
- The consumer

Now, if [href="http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/0228/technology-gabe-newell-videogames-valve-online-mayhem_2.html"]this[/href] article of forbes is right when you buy a new game out of a retail store 70% of that goes to the shop and 30% to the publisher, if the game is used 100% goes to the retail store.

Seeing how GameStop is [href="http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.338863-Jim-Sterling-Why-I-Cant-Defend-the-Games-Industry-Anymore?page=4#13737674"]already doing more money [/href] out of games that any publisher except Activision/Blizz; i can't but understand devs trying their hardest to stop the used game market, because for them, not for the shop nor the consumer, but for the publisher a pirated game and a second hand sale are exactly the same.

Quite a messy subject, because I can't but support the right of the consumers to resell or burn or do whatever they want with their copy. But when reselling only feeds a company like GameStop where love for game has no place and who's buisness is to give the developers as little money as they can for the products they sell... sigh.

Glad I am a PC gamer and can just go to GoG or Steam and be done with it.

Edit: Damn href, any idea what's the sintaxis for it here?

Use link instead of href, also no "", see;

Seeing how GameStop is already doing more money

Quote my post if you wanna see the line

 

[Fishyash]

Free day 1 DLC. Interesting.

I don't really want to form an opinion until I know what the DLC is, but if it's inconsequential, I think it's pretty fine.

...what is project 10 dollar? Am I supposed to compare it to that?

 

[StriderShinryu]

I've got no issues with this at all and fully support this system of making new copies of games more appealing than used copies.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

I've always backed free DLC for new buyers, always. I mean honestly, what's the problem? I wish more developers and publishers would do it (Note: As long as it's genuinely DLC and not disc based content that needs a small data key to unlock), in the case of larger DLCs it'd be nice to see publishers rewarding new buyers with discount codes for upcoming DLC too.

 

[ramboondiea]

so so long as the copy is new then the customer gets free DLC, so basically how EA handle alot of the games?
yeah i am okay with this, not like they are flat out denying people the content, still unsure if i will buy the game tho haha

 

[burningdragoon]

The difference between "getting free content" for buying new and "getting locked out of content" for buying used mostly has to do with context and presentation sadly. I do not think the developers releasing extra content for free to customers who buy new is in anyway bad, be that additional questlines (as long as it's not integral to the story) or cosmetic in-game goodies. Multiplayer or other game modes are another story, but that is clearly not the case here. We really have no way of knowing if during the development someone said "hey let's also do and release it for free with new copies" or someone said "hey, this questline we're doing? Let's release it as DLC instead."

I do not mean to call bullshit on Mr. Shilling, because I don't really know what the intent is, but just saying something doesn't make it true.

My feelings on this specific case requires a couple facts:
1: Is the content already on the disc? If so, I say this move is bullshit. If not, cool beans.
2: Is there any indication at all within the game that this questline exists? If so, signs leaning closer to bullshit depending on some more specific details.

 

[RagTagBand]

The Content is not on the disk so to say that the content is "Locked" for second hand users is misleading. It would be entirely more accurate to say that people who buy the game new get bonus content for free.

 

[Palademon]

Rewarding fans, eh?

Well I must've missed the last installment of Kingdoms of Amalur.

 

[Kapol]

I honestly don't see any problem with this idea. The main problem I have is with day-one DLC in general. The main reason is because it's normally already on the disk, just locked out from users. Dead Space 2 was a good example. Like how they were able to find all of those DLC items they charged for right in the PC files.

 

[kasperbbs]

It's a game published by EA. Are we honestly still surprised by this?

You beat me to it. Day 1 DLC has been around for a while now.

 

[Braedan]

The only thing I care about is whether I have to enter a 296 character code. If so, keep your fucking DLC.

 

[viranimus]

Well ive slogged through the quagmires of "locking away content for used players" enough times that im not going to regurgitate my position on it.


However, I am puzzled by the notion of Day 1 DLC that Used players have to pay for . I mean who buys a game, and sells it the same day, so as someone can rebuy it used on the first day (yes I get it, Im not ignoring a system set up for days after release date, Im concerned by a wording that makes it sound as such, though Shilling was never really the most eloquent guy to begin with.)

 

[Thyunda]

Well ive slogged through the quagmires of "locking away content for used players" enough times that im not going to regurgitate my position on it.


However, I am puzzled by the notion of Day 1 DLC that Used players have to pay for . I mean who buys a game, and sells it the same day, so as someone can rebuy it used on the first day (yes I get it, Im not ignoring a system set up for days after release date, Im concerned by a wording that makes it sound as such, though Shilling was never really the most eloquent guy to begin with.)

Day 1 DLC merely means it's released on day 1...I don't see how this is confusing.