EA Blocks Multiplayer Mode on Used Games XBOX360/PS3/PC

thecremeegg said:
A disgrace imo, why do games publishers feel they are so different from every other manufacturer? Dont find companies like Panasonic charging you to use your second hand telly, its disgusting!
Click to expand...

Couldnt agree more, nothing to do with piracy. The big publishers have never been happy about the used game market and I cant work out why they think they deserve a cut of resales.

As cremeegg says it just doesnt happen in others industries because consumers wouldnt stand for it. EA et al however are used to bending gamers over and giving us what for.
 
If everyone follows suit with this so that you have to register your copy then the second hand market will die and new games will just rise in price because people will have no other option.

In a worst case scenario people will buy less games. Also it may turn out that people shy away from buying inventive and unique games because they dont want to buy a turkey that they cant sell on... or can only sell for a fraction of what they paid. That will hardly persuade developers to try making games that break away from the norm.

Not to mention piracy usually gets around activations and cd keys so it could actually boost that activity...
 
Last edited:
dont see the issue here tbh, if a game is going to have a decent multiplayer that will last you hours and hours then whats the problem with paying for a new copy? the developer/publisher gets paid for the work they put in not some highstreet store that does nothing to help the evolution of the format..
 
Dyson said:
EA, and all the other publishers who you can be sure are waiting in the wings with similar ideas, are a business out to make money, and why shouldn't they take some of the second hand market?
Click to expand...

They already got their cash at the first sale.

Alternatively, tell me why car manufacturers should or shouldn't do the same by getting some income from second hand car sales.
 
Love the selfish repsonses of doesn't affect me since I don't buy 2nd hand games.

Trust me you DO NOT WANT the console market to equal the pc market. Prices are only going UP, this won't solve piracy, and this won't improve the 2nd hand sales market.

Why?

Point 1: Reselling a Console game at 80% of new is fine currently because you get EVERYTHING (talking about older games, as I am aware of the DLC codes for BC2/Dragon Age/Mass Effect 2) that the first buyer got and can even ask to inspect the disc+manual (plus the money obviously helps going to running costs of the store).

Point 2: Game/blockbuster etc loosing profits/revenue would make even harder for them to compete with online prices, therefore online prices don't need to be so competitive (see Steam for an example, not the cheapest but more convenient and less staff to pay).

Not asking anyone to change their view, just try to understand my reasoning.

I don't even have a xbox360/ps3/wii. Just a failure of a console called the GC (although I still love Rogue Squadron + Zelda lol).
 
Don't ever buy their games if you are against it, problem solved.
It's not like EA made ''must play'' games anyhow recently.


PS, I find this ridiculous, would anyone buy a car if they can't sell it on after a couple of years? No. They will simply never buy the car in the first place. I hope people against this practice stop buying EA games.



Everyone against it: Stop buying EA games.
Anyone else: move along, nothing to see here.
 
Last edited:
Gzero said:
Love the selfish repsonses of doesn't affect me since I don't buy 2nd hand games.

Trust me you DO NOT WANT the console market to equal the pc market. Prices are only going UP, this won't solve piracy, and this won't improve the 2nd hand sales market.

Why?

Point 1: Reselling a Console game at 80% of new is fine currently because you get EVERYTHING (talking about older games, as I am aware of the DLC codes for BC2/Dragon Age/Mass Effect 2) that the first buyer got and can even ask to inspect the disc+manual (plus the money obviously helps going to running costs of the store).

Point 2: Game/blockbuster etc loosing profits/revenue would make even harder for them to compete with online prices, therefore online prices don't need to be so competitive (see Steam for an example, not the cheapest but more convenient and less staff to pay).

Not asking anyone to change their view, just try to understand my reasoning.

I don't even have a xbox360/ps3/wii. Just a failure of a console called the GC (although I still love Rogue Squadron + Zelda lol).
Click to expand...
all your points completely miss the point! the publishers do not want the 2nd hand market and have been unhappy with it for years now. none and yes that means ZERO money goes back to them through 2nd hand goods.

it has nothing to do with piracy..

point 1) you get everything ,the devs/publishers who made the game get nothing.
point 2) your argument here is completely counter productive you say online prices will rise then quote steam - a system that has above retails prices for years now regardless of prices elsewhere mainly down to their server overheads which are massive.
online prices will not rise, its basic economics and lost retailing. you also missing the point as to why online prices are cheaper full stop - its because they cut out the middle man, import cheaply and dont hold assets in the forms of shops. Thats why its cheaper not because of bloody game or gamestation lol.

i would understand your reasoning if it wasnt so poorly thought through.

oh and for the record blockbuster are losing profits becuase they failed to keep up with online rental schemes and still offer ridiculous day rentals.
and game are losing profits bc of they have also failed to be competitive and generally hold far to many assets for the minimal demand of a company like Game.
 
Last edited:
iamtheoneneo said:
all your points completely miss the point! the publishers do not want the 2nd hand market and have been unhappy with it for years now. none and yes that means ZERO money goes back to them through 2nd hand goods.

it has nothing to do with piracy..

point 1) you get everything ,the devs/publishers who made the game get nothing.
point 2) your argument here is completely counter productive you say online prices will rise then quote steam - a system that has above retails prices for years now regardless of prices elsewhere mainly down to their server overheads which are massive.
online prices will not rise, its basic economics and lost retailing. you also missing the point as to why online prices are cheaper full stop - its because they cut out the middle man, import cheaply and dont hold assets in the forms of shops. Thats why its cheaper not because of bloody game or gamestation lol.

i would understand your reasoning if it wasnt so poorly thought through.

oh and for the record blockbuster are losing profits becuase they failed to keep up with online rental schemes and still offer ridiculous day rentals.
and game are losing profits bc of they have also failed to be competitive and generally hold far to many assets for the minimal demand of a company like Game.
Click to expand...

They got their money when they sold the first guy the product. The first guy gets money when he sells the product on AND NO LONGER HAS ACCESS TO IT.
 
iamtheoneneo said:
all your points completely miss the point! the publishers do not want the 2nd hand market and have been unhappy with it for years now. none and yes that means ZERO money goes back to them through 2nd hand goods.

it has nothing to do with piracy..

point 1) you get everything ,the devs/publishers who made the game get nothing.
point 2) your argument here is completely counter productive you say online prices will rise then quote steam - a system that has above retails prices for years now regardless of prices elsewhere mainly down to their server overheads which are massive.
online prices will not rise, its basic economics and lost retailing. you also missing the point as to why online prices are cheaper full stop - its because they cut out the middle man, import cheaply and dont hold assets in the forms of shops. Thats why its cheaper not because of bloody game or gamestation lol.

i would understand your reasoning if it wasnt so poorly thought through.

oh and for the record blockbuster are losing profits becuase they failed to keep up with online rental schemes and still offer ridiculous day rentals.
and game are losing profits bc of they have also failed to be competitive and generally hold far to many assets for the minimal demand of a company like Game.
Click to expand...

You mean like every other industry? I dont see why you dont get it :confused: Would you be happy if intel decided that if you bought a second hand cpu then you had to pay them an activation fee to use it? No, of course you wouldnt, yet you seem to be ok with EA doing it? :rolleyes:
 
You don't get it though.

Intel/BMW/AMD etc. get top whack first time round, the person then selling as second hand gets a fraction of this cost when they sell it. If you could sell Intell CPU's close to RRP cost when you came to sell it I'm sure Intel would have other ideas about the second hand market the same with BMW etc.

But with games, the retailer then sells these second hand games at near on RRP price, making themselves more money and less for the dev/publisher.
 
Last edited:
anticonscience said:
But with games, the retailer then sells these second hand games at near on RRP price, making themselves more money and less for the dev/publisher.
Click to expand...

Why is the dev/publisher making less? they have already made their money on the sale of game when it was new. Plus i would rather pay £3 or so more for new over preowned in game/gamestation etc
 
vonhelmet said:
They got their money when they sold the first guy the product. The first guy gets money when he sells the product on AND NO LONGER HAS ACCESS TO IT.
Click to expand...

It's nothing to do with who has 'access' to it though, you seem to have missed the point. It's the fact that the 2nd hand user was going to buy the game, thus the profit would have been divided by the shop/Dev/Publisher; instead though, they've bought the game they were going to buy and the profit all goes to the shop.


On a second note, claiming that it's going to destroy the market is nonsense. Online retailers aren't going to suddenly change their prices. If anything, if the high street game stores are struggling, they may have to start offering better deals and lower prices.

Personally, I see that as a good thing as I could buy games from a shop straight away.... but you also have the fact that the online retailers might further drop their prices against them.
 
You dont appear to get it you have no idea the person who bought the second hand game had any intention of buying it retail so why on earth should the dev/publisher and so on expect money from them anyway.

What the second hand market has to do with them is nothing ! They got there money initially from the sale they have nothing to moan about. What the customer does with there game is upto them.
 
topshot said:
Why is the dev/publisher making less? they have already made their money on the sale of game when it was new. Plus i would rather pay £3 or so more for new over preowned in game/gamestation etc
Click to expand...

Nexus said:
It's nothing to do with who has 'access' to it though, you seem to have missed the point. It's the fact that the 2nd hand user was going to buy the game, thus the profit would have been divided by the shop/Dev/Publisher; instead though, they've bought the game they were going to buy and the profit all goes to the shop.
Click to expand...

See this post explains that. You wouldn't but Joe Public will see the same game cheaper second hand and buy that, then trade it in later, further perpetuating the cycle of lost revenue for the company in the first place.
 
anticonscience said:
But with games, the retailer then sells these second hand games at near on RRP price, making themselves more money and less for the dev/publisher.
Click to expand...

Well surely we could assume that a number of people would opt for the new, sealed copy if it were a fraction more than the pre-owned one? Don't get me wrong, I dislike GAME/Gamestation's business model, while I'll always appreciate a gaming presence on the high street I think they need to adapt their business model if they are to survive in the forseeable future, I just don't think this is the main issue with this.

I guess what the key issue, and how the situation is different to a second-hand car for example is, is once you buy a game, the game itself still belongs to EA essentially, so if you want to sell it on I imagine they feel it should be on their terms rather than your own or the buyers's. I really don't think this will solve any kind of piracy issues however I can understand EAs position with regards to second hand sales, it will be just be shame that people won't be able to use the game on another console for an extended period of time, it almost kills off an element of social gaming in that respect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom