EA Sports Fucks Over People Who Buy Used Games

[oldskool]

how's it not justified to want to be paid for all the internet features you provide by every person that uses them instead of just the first one to use them out of however many people end up using that particular disc?

hell, this forum has an example of it with the ban on re-selling Ryland game codes but nobody's beating down Marsh's door wailing about stolen rights to property transferral.

[Gene Kiniski]

Companies such as Sony and Microsoft provide a console to play video games on.

These consoles come with an optional feature that allows a connection to the internet.

Companies such a EA choose to develop games for these consoles. In doing so they decide whether or not they are going to use the optional features such as internet connection that these consoles provide.

By providing online content and game play they are choosing to take advantage of the ability to do so.

EA isn't being forced to provide online content - they have the option not to include the multiplayer features so there is no reason for them to force gamers to to pay for the usage.

It breaks down that simple.

Edited May 11, 2010 by Gene Kiniski

[ChrisSteeleAteMyHamster]

Stores like Gamestation won't be happy. The largest chunk of their income is from the preowned section (they make tiny amounts on brand new titles but huge profit on trade-in games). Not being able to play online means they'll have to slash the preowned sale price too....Having said that... a) They probably won't and b) even if they do they'll just slash the trade-in value.

[RoyWill Rumble]

Companies such as Sony and Microsoft provide a console to play video games on.

These consoles come with an optional feature that allows a connection to the internet.

Companies such a EA choose to develop games for these consoles. In doing so they decide whether or not they are going to use the optional features such as internet connection that these consoles provide.

By providing online content and game play they are choosing to take advantage of the ability to do so.

EA isn't being forced to provide online content - they have the option not to include the multiplayer features so there is no reason for them to force gamers to to pay for the usage.

It breaks down that simple.

Right, and consumers are being gouged out their fucking asses for consoles, video games, controllers, LIMITED EDITION COLLECTOR'S BULLSHIT, possible subscription fees, etc. It is optional, but essentially it is generally accepted that most major game releases will include some form of online multiplayer, ESPECIALLY SPORTS GAMES, for Christ's sake. It is essentially forced by the will of the people to include such major features when, again, people are paying their hard-earned money and being gouged out the ass for video games. Video game companies owe their consumers quite a bit, not the other way around. Hell, Online Team Play has been the NHL's selling point for the past two years, essentially, and it was a huge feature of FIFA. And it was INCLUDED WITH THE GAME, USED OR NEW. So, even if game companies can do what they want, they're essentially removing half the damned game and charging the same price to those who buy the game used. Yeah, it's still a giant dick move.

[zero]

And Gamestop are pussies for buckling and fucking over their customers in the process. Probably wouldn't have been the best business move, but how nice would it have been for Gamestop to come out and say "oh you want to screw up our main source of income? Well, no more midnight releases for Madden, no posters in the windows, no 'thank you for calling Gamestop where you can pre-order Madden,' and no huge in store displays for EA Sports titles."

how's it not justified to want to be paid for all the internet features you provide by every person that uses them instead of just the first one to use them out of however many people end up using that particular disc?

When you buy a used car, Honda doesn't lock you out of the air conditioning until you buy a special code. This move is strictly anti-consumer, it not only kills used games, you also won't be able to play a rented game online, you can't lend your game to a friend, and it's all part of companies trying to kill the second-hand game market. Forget Gamestop, what about smaller shops that specialize in nostalgia gaming? This is just the first blow, but once consumers are used to this, and they will get used to it, gamers have to have Madden, they'll start extending it to other EA games, other game features, etc. It's pure greed, it punishes consumers, and will do nothing except encourage piracy. Give people bonus levels for buying new, free DLC, special weapons, whatever, but to remove a core element of the game like online play for people that buy used, especially in this economy, EA's taken the shit crown back from Activision.

[RoyWill Rumble]

And Gamestop are pussies for buckling and fucking over their customers in the process. Probably wouldn't have been the best business move, but how nice would it have been for Gamestop to come out and say "oh you want to screw up our main source of income? Well, no more midnight releases for Madden, no posters in the windows, no 'thank you for calling Gamestop where you can pre-order Madden,' and no huge in store displays for EA Sports titles."

how's it not justified to want to be paid for all the internet features you provide by every person that uses them instead of just the first one to use them out of however many people end up using that particular disc?

When you buy a used car, Honda doesn't lock you out of the air conditioning until you buy a special code. This move is strictly anti-consumer, it not only kills used games, you also won't be able to play a rented game online, you can't lend your game to a friend, and it's all part of companies trying to kill the second-hand game market. Forget Gamestop, what about smaller shops that specialize in nostalgia gaming? This is just the first blow, but once consumers are used to this, and they will get used to it, gamers have to have Madden, they'll start extending it to other EA games, other game features, etc. It's pure greed, it punishes consumers, and will do nothing except encourage piracy.

I totally forgot about this whole point, too. Fucking laaaaaame.

Seriously, this reeks of dick move. Anyone defending this, whether EA Sports is justified or not, I question whether you also enjoy feasting on aborted fetuses and kicking puppies.

[Gene Kiniski]

Just for the record, I was not defending EA in my post. I could see how reading everything besides the final line could seem that way, but in no form do I condone this.

[SeanDMan]

EA isn't being forced to provide online content - they have the option not to include the multiplayer features so there is no reason for them to force gamers to to pay for the usage.

It breaks down that simple.

You aren't being forced to pay for the usage. It's optional. If you don't pay, you don't use it.

[DMN in the House]

Wah, wah, wah.

Don't like it? Don't fucking pay for it.

Yeah, I'd love for it to remain free as well. So guess what? I won't pay for it. Fucking simple.

If the market will allow it, then the companies are COMPLETELY justified, and in the right, to get whatever money they can get for it. Games are a luxury item, and online play is a luxury on top of a luxury. Its not like they're gouging homeless people for food and water, so stop acting so fucking entitled.

[oldskool]

how's it not justified to want to be paid for all the internet features you provide by every person that uses them instead of just the first one to use them out of however many people end up using that particular disc?

When you buy a used car, Honda doesn't lock you out of the air conditioning until you buy a special code.

Hondas break down and have hundreds of parts that Honda manufactures & sells (among others, I'm sure) as replacements.

Game discs, by and large, do not break down.

Game discs can theoretically be sold hundreds of times, and with the install feature of the 360 it's possible that the disc could see extremely minimal wear despite that extensive transaction & usage period.

Cars are only sold a few times, and their usage piles up exponentially until there's a point where they're worth more as scrap than they are as a potentially working vehicle.

How does it encourage piracy? If you want to play without internet access you can buy the used copy and at least you'll have the option of adding online play in the future if you so choose to. If you want it for $0, well, piracy's piracy.

Hell, I'm not thrilled with it either as it means I have to either buy the game new & hope for the best (which is usually 3 months later after a couple patches come out) or wait until the used price drops $20+ to justify the purchase, but if a $0 new/$10 used passcode gets me collective DLC that would've sold for $20+ on the 2009/2010 model....

It's a wait-and-see approach. Which is bad, I know, the whole "grawr, establish precedent once and then everybody sticks it in your butt and makes you humble" thing. But at the end of the day they're taking something that should've been free...and keeping it free for their most valued supporters, and adding a price tag to the people that aren't supporting them at all.

I'm just familiar enough with this forum and another one that will start up their Madden leagues as soon as the game drops, requiring me to either buy it new or miss out entirely because the league will be long over before the price drops enough.

I'll either buy it new and not have to pay the DLC fee or I'll get it late enough to not warrant buying the DLC fee. Either way I'm not paying that fee, so it's not a big deal to me that they're charging it.

[EddieRuckus]

Eh, the league here will still be going. Our league from...September/Octoberish is still going.

As for this, I'm a little irked by it, but nothing too major. If it's a good enough game to buy new, I'll buy it. If it's a shitty game or a good game that isn't worth 60, I'll wait for it to come down in price or trade in games towards it.

[The Mask of Norro]

I'd argue that the companies doing this are in no way justified, actually, considering the fact that at GameStop our base fee for a new title released on the XB360 or PS3 is $59.99 before taxes new, and $54.99 before taxes used.

Say a person purchases a used copy of a title that's just launched for roughly $5 cheaper than the cost of the new title. Now, assuming they don't have our Edge Card, they won't be getting any discounts barring their trades and/or any sales promotions going on at the time. Should they need to purchase a $10 card to play the content of the game they've purchased used, they would then be paying more for the used version of the game than they would have been for the new version.

"Then just buy the new" might be a viable answer, too, but GameStop is woefully notorious for getting short-stocked on supplies of high-demand games and so a vast majority of the time I actually find myself with more copies in-store of a game preowned than I do it new. Customers shop for preowned because they want a game at a lower price, and there is a legal work-around to it that doesn't make them nor subjugate them to feeling like criminals for doing something that allows them to.

And I'm almost positive that GameStop will regret the move, too, because it essentially cuts off a mass number of our customers who buy preowned games for money saving reasons to begin with. The instant a customer realizes that they'd be paying more for a used copy of a game to unlock all the benefits of the new copy, they'll just buy the new copy. The company will sustain itself off a mass backstock of games not requiring codes to play online, but if the gaming industry is to move in this new direction, then the commercial second-hand gaming market is basically meant for self-destruction.

[Herr Matzat]

As long as their games end up being soled for 30GBP on day one of the release i don´t care that much. Actualy they kinda already did this with the silly Rock Band SOng Export Key... thats 10€ and only works once.

[Ruckus]

Do companies actually make any money on 2nd hand sales though? When buying a game for $5 cheaper or so used, none of that actually goes to the publisher. While I still don't agree with the move, I think it;s understandable that game publishers would want to curb used games sales from a business standpoint.

[The Mask of Norro]

GameStop makes pure profit off of all of their used sales, none of the money made there goes to anyone else. However, the publishers of these games entered into contracts and agreements with GameStop and other companies like GameStop to allow the redistribution of preowned games, so in many ways this sort-of action is a direct hit on the people that help fuel the moneytank of a major company which supports them.

That being said, I can't somuch question the original companies themselves doing it somuch as I question GameStop supporting it. Again, they're shooting themselves in the foot-- we only price newly released preowned titles roughly five dollars less than the new cost, and so with an additional $10 fee tacked on they're essentially telling customers to buy new, reducing the profits made by GameStop quite a bit over time.

[RoyWill Rumble]

Eh, the league here will still be going. Our league from...September/Octoberish is still going.

As for this, I'm a little irked by it, but nothing too major. If it's a good enough game to buy new, I'll buy it. If it's a shitty game or a good game that isn't worth 60, I'll wait for it to come down in price or trade in games towards it.

You don't exactly get the point, do you?

[Liam]

My problem is that I think they had the right kinda idea with the Online Franchise last year. Online play as a whole being restricted to the one copy is stupid, as Zero pointed out, just for rentals or borrowing off mates for a start. However, if you offer DLC that is worth picking up, like the Online Franchise, you'd make back some money off of second hand purchases.

It's a crass solution to a situation that could be resolved by better potential DLC.

[RoyWill Rumble]

The online DLC, even the Cerberus Network, the stuff in Battlefield, whatever... to a degree. It's a dick move, but seriously, online fucking play, in a again, MAJOR TITLE when OTHER MAJOR TITLES HAVE ONLINE PLAY INCLUDED IN THEIR GAMES, USED OR NEW, is absolutely ridiculous. Not to mention, is this just limited to DLC? What, would you have to pay the ten bucks for stuff like patches, roster updates, etc.? With people jaded by the fact that the economy is in the shits and jaded by EA in general, this really isn't going to help things. Not to mention, they're essentially alienating themselves to customers who have any kind of second choice in sports games like FIFA and PES and Live and NBA 2K10.

[SeanDMan]

Blah blah blah blah blah so don't buy it. The real reason you should be mad is because millions of people who still buy the game, play it for four days, and trade it back to the stores because they're bored. The people who keep their mouths firmly encircled around EA's bellend will ensure they can pull shit like this and no amount of you whining will change a goddamn thing.

[Liam]

Blah blah blah blah blah so don't buy it. The real reason you should be mad is because millions of people who still buy the game, play it for four days, and trade it back to the stores because they're bored. The people who keep their mouths firmly encircled around EA's bellend will ensure they can pull shit like this and no amount of you whining will change a goddamn thing.

I bolded the most pertinent part of this comment, but fuck it, it is all right.