Poll: EA Sports locks out online play in used games(Differentiating offline & online content)

[capacollo]

Based on the article :
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/personal-tech/controller-freak/ea-sports-locks-out-online-play-in-used-games/article1565033

I myself am not an avid online play user so not sure if I care about what they're doing. More of a question of do you like this idea of a pricing model for separate online and offline content (i.e. let the consumer decide what features they want to buy). In my case I like this idea so long as the price reflects it. My only beef in EA's case would be to do it for new games as well and not try to milk it which it seems EA and used game suppliers are trying to do.

 

[PDizzle418]

to me that's extremely rediculous, while ten dollars isn't that much, the only way you'd save money on that is if you bought the game heavily discounted used, which at game stop doesn't happen so in the end your likely paying more for online play than if you just bought it new, which in turn defeats the purpose of buying it used in the first place.

plus if your buying a game used chances are the multiplayer has a seriously reduced amount of players, meaning that it's not worth 10 dollars, but you won't know that until you pay. Taht and there will likely be a new iteration of the same game out already, further reducing teh vaule of the online component of the game.

money gouging is all this is turn into, forget that. So glad I just don't play consoles anymore it's the nickel and dime crap taht microsoft and all the other major Dev's are pulling that bug me, and now their trying to move it to the PC, which people just don't stand for.

 

[Marowit]

If I deem the game worth the money I have no problem picking it up new to not have to pay to get the online feature.

I guess the only real statement that players can make about this, other than not buying the game, is to not play it online. A good game should be able to stand alone as a single-player game.

 

[squid5580]

Seems fair to me. Just like it was fair with DA:O and ME2. Don't want to pay the extra 10 bucks, don't rent it or buy it used. If places like GS or EB weren't sellling used games for 5 bucks less then I could understand the frustration. At least this way the ones who deserve to get paid are getting paid.

Why is it only EA is being targeted? Alan Wake has free DLC with a new game. No one cares. Any Nintendo game has the coins voucher to get free swag. No one whines. We made this bed so we have to sleep in it as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Uber Waddles]

If I deem the game worth the money I have no problem picking it up new to not have to pay to get the online feature.

I guess the only real statement that players can make about this, other than not buying the game, is to not play it online. A good game should be able to stand alone as a single-player game.

I do not agree with your opinion, in the least bit. Some very old games are extremely fun to play online; in some cases, these games aren't readily available new. Games like Shadow Run, Vegas 1, and the original Modern Warfare are complete gems (atleast, in my opinion), that are extremely hard to find new.

The fact that you would have to pay for online accessability, even if the game is used, is ridiculous. Its just industries, such as EA, trying to nickle and dime us for their far-from-decent quality games. The danger in this is the idea could spread to companies that arent filled to the brim with fucktards for staff, just to try and squeeze more money out of consumers.

Also, your second point is a very narrow and Yahtzee-esque one. Some games aren't developed to be played single player. Lots of games have their focus towards making the game multiplayer oriented. So, while you can play games like Boderlands and Left 4 Dead by yourself, the developers intentions were not meant for it to be played that way, and your experience will suffer for it. Its not 1997 anymore, people have the internet and it doesnt take 5 minutes to log onto it. Most games will either have an emphasis on story or multiplayer, but will contain both to appease the horde of people who support either side.

 

[Tim Hann]

I think that this is a big issue. How dare people sell stuff they own. I mean EA have cottoned on to something very big here. I mean think about builders. They build a house and sell it. And then those people years later sell it on. Do the builders see a penny of that sell on? NO! Its a travesty. Maybe when a house is sold on you need to get a new code from the original builders so you can get running water.

Doesn't stop there either. I just looked and it turns out... My car is also second hand. And shit on me I looked and I paid no money to Citroen... AT ALL. I was shocked. But then I realised, as I often do, that I do pay money to Citroen. Every time I want to have it fixed up and it needs parts.

Come to think of it when I want a game to gain new life I normally buy NEW content online, that the developers see plenty of money from.

Possibly a better way of making sports games, given the current console generation, would be for them to become more MMO-esque. A paid subscription where the stats are updated in real time. Where your made up club could be in a league (see server) and you are playing for cups and trophy's for money and prestige. New title updates. Wonder if EA are developing this in coordination with the FA or just pouring their MOUNTAINS of money into restricting content to the people who buy their games.

God I hate these companies some times. All their whining about not making money. How the fuck did the game become second hand? And when I look through the second hand piles of games I rarely see any good games being traded in, and even then they're old. Curiouser and Curiouser.

 

[Marowit]

If I deem the game worth the money I have no problem picking it up new to not have to pay to get the online feature.

I guess the only real statement that players can make about this, other than not buying the game, is to not play it online. A good game should be able to stand alone as a single-player game.

I do not agree with your opinion, in the least bit. Some very old games are extremely fun to play online; in some cases, these games aren't readily available new. Games like Shadow Run, Vegas 1, and the original Modern Warfare are complete gems (atleast, in my opinion), that are extremely hard to find new.

The fact that you would have to pay for online accessability, even if the game is used, is ridiculous. Its just industries, such as EA, trying to nickle and dime us for their far-from-decent quality games. The danger in this is the idea could spread to companies that arent filled to the brim with fucktards for staff, just to try and squeeze more money out of consumers.

Also, your second point is a very narrow and Yahtzee-esque one. Some games aren't developed to be played single player. Lots of games have their focus towards making the game multiplayer oriented. So, while you can play games like Boderlands and Left 4 Dead by yourself, the developers intentions were not meant for it to be played that way, and your experience will suffer for it. Its not 1997 anymore, people have the internet and it doesnt take 5 minutes to log onto it. Most games will either have an emphasis on story or multiplayer, but will contain both to appease the horde of people who support either side.

The main problem I have with your argument is it completely debases gamers ability to choose what they spend their money on. It basically assumes that if a game is released that gamers will buy it, and will have no choice but to spend money on it. If the game is worth (the key word in this sentence) it, you, me, and others, will spend the cash. If it's not, the game will fall by the wayside and the publisher will take notice (Games are no small investment these days, it's not 1997 anymore).

I know that's probably not what you're trying to say, but seriously the world isn't going to end. Games like Boarderlands and L4D are great multiplayer games, but if they charge $15/month I'll stop playing it. They simply are not worth it, to me. However, If the cost of an unlimited online game play is to buy the game new, and I think the game is worth it then I'll pick it up new. It's pretty simple. Plus I like to support publishers/developers that release games I enjoy - they don't see a dime of profit on used purchases.

Also, my point about games being able to stand on their own in single-player is personal preference - I rarely buy multi-player only games (like L4D) at full price. I generally wait for steam to put them up for sale (since I don't believe they're worth retail). As a consumer where you put your almighty dollar is the loudest statement you can make. If you don't like EAs policy, don't buy their games.

 

[Altorin]

to me that's extremely rediculous, while ten dollars isn't that much, the only way you'd save money on that is if you bought the game heavily discounted used, which at game stop doesn't happen so in the end your likely paying more for online play than if you just bought it new, which in turn defeats the purpose of buying it used in the first place.

In one fell swoop you described exactly why they're doing this.

In my opinion, it's win win for EA Sports. Used games sales must really suck for EA sports. "Oh, you released madden 2k10? Oh, what's this? Madden 2k9 for 7 bucks at gamestop? And if I wait a couple more months Madden 2k10 will be there too? Lol, pwnt."

This way, they increase new game sales, and if people do decide to use the bargain bin, for a decent price (considering the game will probably be dirt cheap anyway, as most sports games are when used), the player gets online capability, and EA sports gets a little extra cash to make more Madden games.

They just better put it on big writing on the box, because those EA sports gamers are typically the ones that don't read gaming forums (I'm sure there are a couple of you out there, but not many), they won't be happy that their 7 dollar purchase is actually a 17 dollar purchase if they want to play online. Big letters on the box EA Sports.

 

[gibboss28]

How are they going to block it out? because the article doesn't really explain. I'm assuming that they're going have a serial key on the back of the case like with PC games.

Which if so, means that they're starting to rub out the lines between PC and Console gaming in regards to protecting their product, which means that one day in the (maybe) not to distant future, consoles will have to constantly be online, just like certain single player games on the PC

Note: I am going to put this bit in bold. The 2nd paragraph I just wrote is a what if based on an assumption, i'm no doubt wrong but as i said, its a what if and ya never know what could happen. I also want to know how they're going to block the used copies so lemme know, K? K.

 

[Altorin]

How are they going to block it out? because the article doesn't really explain. I'm assuming that they're going have a serial key on the back of the case like with PC games.

Which if so, means that they're starting to rub out the lines between PC and Console gaming in regards to protecting their product, which means that one day in the (maybe) not to distant future, consoles will have to constantly be online, just like certain single player games on the PC

Note: I am going to put this bit in bold. The 2nd paragraph I just wrote is a what if based on an assumption, i'm no doubt wrong but as i said, its a what if and ya never know what could happen. I also want to know how they're going to block the used copies so lemme know, K? K.

the online multiplayer will basically be a DLC package that you can get for free by inputting a code (like the Cerberus Network in ME2), or pay 10 dollars to buy without the code.

 

[Cabisco]

I think I prefer the Carrot method rather than the stick. I like being told I'm going to get cool stuff later for buying it new, rather than forced as otherwise i'd have half a game.

 

[Altorin]

I think I prefer the Carrot method rather than the stick. I like being told I'm going to get cool stuff later for buying it new, rather than forced as otherwise i'd have half a game.

EA sports games don't have too much to Carrot though.