Kingdoms of Amular locks content for second hand users.

[Cowabungaa]

They're trying to use the carrot instead of the stick, I can approve of that intent. Yeah, Day-1-DLC is still kind of weird, but whatever.

 

[Irridium]

Rewarding fans, eh?

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

It appears EA has so little faith that people will keep this game that they HAVE to put a pass on it.

Not exactly encouraging.

 

[Something Amyss]

Of course it will generate user hate, gamers want everything for free. I'm totally for it though, so long as that DLC isn't less than 50MB. Anything less and you know for a fact it's on the disc, and that's not incentive, that's dickish.

I for one love DLC incentive when it truly is DLC, they just need to not pull a Dragon Age and have it on the disc, and trying to sell it to me in game.

Err...It's on-disc. It's actually locked content. Even if the article at the beginning of the thread didn't say it (though it uses correct terminology at least), it's been covered elsewhere.

So basically: People will whine because gamers want everything for free, but this case bugs me, so it's okay.

Kinda silly, but alright.

 

[newdarkcloud]

As long as it's just side-stuff like an optional mission or some cool weapon(s) and not something that is required for the story, then I'm all for it. That's doing it in the best possible way.

 

[GeorgW]

Everything about this game, I love. I love that 38 studios were one of the first ESA members to speak out about SOPA, I love that one of the side quest devs jokingly said that if you're actually doing the main quest, he's failed at his job (meaning that he wants everything to be interesting, not just the main story). I love that the lead dev was the lead dev of morrowind and oblivion. I was very worried about the demo, but once I heard it's based on 3 month old code and done by another studio, my worries were gone.

Given that, unfortunately, like many other of my favourite devs, they're in the soul sucking monster that is EA partners, I saw this coming. It won't affect since I'll be buying it day one, but if I weren't I'd be really pissed about what they're closing off. It will remain to be seen once I play the game, but it seems like a pretty big side quest storyline. I'll still be buying the game, and for what it's worth he argues it well, but I still don't like it.

 

[Smeggs]

That's fine. Chances are if I didn't buy a game on release It's just one of those games that I'm interested in playing but not super invested in. So the likliehood that I'd even pay for the DLC in the first place is slim and none. And if I do? Yippee, unless the DLC costs 1600 points each it'll still be cheaper to just wait until the game falls to like $20-$30 and just buy the DLC's which usually only run about $10 each.

With the average BIG DLC releases being about three to five.

 

[Naeras]

I'm still wondering why car companies aren't doing the same thing to people who buy cars used. They'd get a lot more money if people had to activate their steering wheel with a one-time use code.
Oh wait, it's because they don't need to. The second hand market isn't what makes or breaks them.

Games industry... /facepalm

edit: like I said in my next post: change out "car companies" with "film- and music industry" here. Stupid analogy was stupid indeed :V

 

[Deathmageddon]

Better than online passes... Reward vs Punishment- huge difference

 

[Hal10k]

I'm still wondering why car companies aren't doing the same thing to people who buy cars used. They'd get a lot more money if people had to activate their steering wheel with a one-time use code.
Oh wait, it's because they don't need to. The second hand market isn't what makes or breaks them.

Games industry... /facepalm

Used cars undergo significantly more economic degradation due to normal wear and tear. You pay less for a used car, but you get an inferior product. But since used game stores are generally happy to replace their used games if they have any significant damage to the product itself, and used games are generally available within days of the original product being launched, they are much more comparable to the original product. The consumer is left with the option of buying one of two products, one of which is cheaper, but has little loss in utility to compensate for this. Used cars don't have this issue, since a used car will inevitably undergo significant utility loss. The two markets aren't analogous.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Well since they are reward first time buyers and not punishing second hand buyers and it can actually be bought online that is fine. The only reason I raged(I didn't but I didn't like it) at the Rage one was because it seemed like something that should have been in the game. Actually giving people something for buying the game new/collector's edition or whatever is always good and it is better if you can make it available for everyone as well.

Online passes for online play is another thing.

 

[T'Generalissimo]

It appears EA has so little faith that people will keep this game that they HAVE to put a pass on it.

Not exactly encouraging.

My thoughts exactly. The games industry seems to be incredibly concerned about the people who buy a game used only a few days after release, but they don't seem to care at all that there are so many people who want to sell their game after only a few days of ownership.

 

[Naeras]

Used cars undergo significantly more economic degradation due to normal wear and tear. You pay less for a used car, but you get an inferior product. But since used game stores are generally happy to replace their used games if they have any significant damage to the product itself, and used games are generally available within days of the original product being launched, they are much more comparable to the original product. The consumer is left with the option of buying one of two products, one of which is cheaper, but has little loss in utility to compensate for this. Used cars don't have this issue, since a used car will inevitably undergo significant utility loss. The two markets aren't analogous.

Fair enough. Replace "car industry" with "music and film industry", that should make a bit more sense. =p

The problem here is that the biggest(?) games retailer in the world got to where it was by trading in used games and thus providing a better customer service than other retailers. Not just because they could sell the used games a bit cheaper, but also because I can trade in any game I bought that turned out to be rubbish, and get a discount on my next purchase because of it. The efforts to work around this problem should be aimed at GameStop, not their customers. That, or they could change up their distribution method or business model a bit, but apparently it's easier to antagonize people who are legitimately interested in your game. Hence the facepalm.

 

[Inkidu]

Look, you can do whatever you damned well pleased with your game, EA. Just don't expect me to like it. I don't care that you're trying to give incentive to the people who buy new. That's cool. What I take issue with is the poor people who buy new without internet connections (or at least a stable enough one for the service). They did everything right and still don't get rewarded... doesn't that make it a punishment?

 

[burningdragoon]

I'm still wondering why car companies aren't doing the same thing to people who buy cars used. They'd get a lot more money if people had to activate their steering wheel with a one-time use code.
Oh wait, it's because they don't need to. The second hand market isn't what makes or breaks them.

Games industry... /facepalm

Shaky analogy is shaky. Pretty sure you need the steering wheel on a car. If anything it would be something like heated seats or a radio or something. Sure it might be real nice to have them, and you kinda (understandably) expect them, but it's still a functional product without them. (Less shaky analogy is still shaky)

I'm still wondering why car companies aren't doing the same thing to people who buy cars used. They'd get a lot more money if people had to activate their steering wheel with a one-time use code.
Oh wait, it's because they don't need to. The second hand market isn't what makes or breaks them.

Games industry... /facepalm

Used cars undergo significantly more economic degradation due to normal wear and tear. You pay less for a used car, but you get an inferior product. But since used game stores are generally happy to replace their used games if they have any significant damage to the product itself, and used games are generally available within days of the original product being launched, they are much more comparable to the original product. The consumer is left with the option of buying one of two products, one of which is cheaper, but has little loss in utility to compensate for this. Used cars don't have this issue, since a used car will inevitably undergo significant utility loss. The two markets aren't analogous.

Oh joy, someone else who understands why the used game market is a different beast. I think it should still exist and there are far better ways to fight it than locked content, but that doesn't change the fact that it's different.

 

[The Pinray]

I am abundantly okay with this. It's probably just useless articles like pretty armor or a sexy sword.

Reward new buyers, that's fine with me. It's more of a pat on the head. A "thank you."

 

[viranimus]

(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.

Because it is worded as if to imply if you buy it used on day 1, which I was pointing out is an unlikelihood. I guess it is my own special brand of grammar nazism. I can tolerate typos, or using their instead of there and such, but it grates on a nerve when you get phrasings that make the sentence muddled. So note...the confusion has nothing at all to do with day one DLC.. it has to do with the implication of customers buying a used copy on release date.

 

[Wolfram23]

I feel like I should dislike this, but honestly, I don't really care because I pretty much never buy used games.

The interesting part about this is that normally used games are only maybe $5 cheaper than new, but of course that's essentially 10% off so a lot of people still go for it, netting Game Stop/EB Games/Futureshop/etc a nice big profit. Well if the DLC is $10, then suddenly it's more cost effective to just buy it new. This might force used games prices down, and therefore help alleviate the price gouging (considering you sell it back for maybe $25-35).

 

[Twilight_guy]

I've seen this before, I've heard people complain before. I honestly think its fine but lots of people will see it as "omg, they're chopping up the game" or "omg they're trying to milk us." I honestly am looking forward to the day that this ceases to the thing and people move on to something else.