EA Sports Fucks Over People Who Buy Used Games

[Sousa]

"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.

Okay, this one's obvious: GameStop and stores like that make a pretty penny selling pre-orders for games. I don't know what role if any the developer plays in this, but GameStop and stores like that cultivate an environment that allows for and benefits from shortages. They want you to pre-order the new games for various reasons, and I'm certain one of them is that they benefit if you drop your deposit down on a game and then either forget to pick it up or aren't able to pay the rest of the cost off in time. This has been GameStop's business model for a while. I can walk into a GameStop and find zero copies of a brand new title, and I'll catch shit from the clerk for not doing "the smart thing" and pre-ordering. Then I will drive two blocks to Best Buy and buy one of the dozens of new copies of the game that are sitting right there on their shelves.

Again, I'm not sure what role the developers play in all this, but if GameStop is having problems because GameStop's business model isn't working, maybe they should start stocking the damned game instead of insisting that I buy something six months before I own it.

[Trey]

I think a better solution would've been for EA to force those who buy used to view a 30 second ad between online games, a lot like how websites show ads before you view a video. If you wanted, you could spend the 10 bucks after you get it used and get the ads removed. With the second hand market being as big as it is I would think there would be sponsors that would be willing to pay out some cash and it would keep the poor people like myself happy.

Oh, and as I don't play online games this doesn't effect me, but it just seemed like a much more consumer-friendly way of milking a little cash out of the pre-owned market.

[Guest Mr. Potato Head]

I think a better solution would've been for EA to force those who buy used to view a 30 second ad between online games, a lot like how websites show ads before you view a video. If you wanted, you could spend the 10 bucks after you get it used and get the ads removed. With the second hand market being as big as it is I would think there would be sponsors that would be willing to pay out some cash and it would keep the poor people like myself happy.

Oh, and as I don't play online games this doesn't effect me, but it just seemed like a much more consumer-friendly way of milking a little cash out of the pre-owned market.

How could that be implemented? I'm a bit ignorant on how online gaming works, but how could the game differentiate between the original owner and a roommate playing the same copy?

[Blue Rosler]

Who the hell buys pre-owned or used DVD's?

*hi*

You can actually find a lot of cool shit used at, say, SunCoast. Picked up some interesting wrestling DVDs that way.

Yeah, there's nothing wrong with pre-owned DVDs. I found Kung Fu Hustle in a charity shop today for 99p.

[apsham]

These days, consoles require you to log into an account on their menu screen before you go into the game - it saves everything to that single profile.

[Trey]

What they are doing is giving you one code for online play to put on a system. So while if the roommate was playing on the same system they wouldn't see the ads, if the roommate borrowed it to take to another system or the owner himself took it somewhere else he would have to see the ads. They did something similar with the code for the online franchise thing last year and while it was just a quick idea of mine I'm sure if they can do all that they do with online gaming, making things exclusive to certain consoles, etc they can find a way to put ads on the games.

[apsham]

It's doable for sure - I mean, without system/game updates the UFC game constantly updates itself with the most recent ads/banners for upcoming fights.

[TKz]

Who the hell buys pre-owned or used DVD's?

What the hell SRN? Pre-Owned DVD's are like something I buy every week. Hell, of play.com they have a whole service dedicated to people selling their DVD's. I'm pretty sure 7/10 of my current DVD collection are Pre-Owned, all in near perfect condition.

I think you're the first person I've ever known that doesn't buy Pre-Owned DVD's.

EDIT: I think I'm safe from this cursed EA bullshit because I have 0 interest in sports games and I can't really think of many other games EA have done that interest me. Apart from Dragon Age, but games like that I tend to buy on release anyway.

[zero]

I enjoy the input from our Mini Ron Pauls, but "the free market will solve it!" is kinda bullshit. There are a handful of game companies out there, the vast majority of games are developed under one of their umbrellas and most people don't understand or care to understand. Just like the rest of the entertainment industry, there isn't a whole lot of competition since the major companies are too damn big. EA is taking the bold move of stripping out long-standing features in a game for anyone who buys used, rents, borrows from a friend, etc, and if you think that's okay or if you buy exclusively new, then that's fine, but don't be surprised when they take it a step further.

Remember last gen when "Special Editions" came around and publishers figured out that if people were willing to pay $10 for useless shit to go along with their game, then they're willing to pay $10 more for a game period? Well, if people are willing to pay an extra $10 for online when they buy used, maybe people who buy new are willing to do so as well. I'm waiting for the "EA ULTRA ONLINE PASS - $50 a year to play all EA Sports titles online!" A slippery slope argument, sure, but when you allow companies to take advantage of their customers, they will. When you allow EA to charge people for part of the game that's been free since the goddamn Dreamcast, don't come crying if they start charging everyone.

[TKz]

I don't see how it's that big a deal. Chances are if I'm buying a used game it's because it's been out a while and I'm only recently giving it a chance, and if I really like it that much I'm not to bothered about paying an extra £5. (or 10. however it works out for GBP)

Maybe I just don't buy enough used games for this to really seem like a big deal to me.

[Blue Rosler]

I don't see how it's that big a deal. Chances are if I'm buying a used game it's because it's been out a while and I'm only recently giving it a chance, and if I really like it that much I'm not to bothered about paying an extra £5. (or 10. however it works out for GBP)

Maybe I just don't buy enough used games for this to really seem like a big deal to me.

Yeah, same. Especially as most games I do play, the online function would be used for about... an hour a month? So effectively it's saving me money and time. That said, my friend spends a large portion of his waking life playing his games online, so I think he'd definately be shelling out quite a bit.

But yeah, used DVDs rule. I just wish there were more high street outlets that stocked, and I mean properly stocked, second hand stuff.

[zero]

I buy a lot of games used, games I never would've bought in the first place, but if I see it for under $20, sure. I rarely play online and I almost never play EA Sports titles, so this won't affect me in the slightest right now, but it's still a really shitty thing to do. I totally understand offering incentives to people who buy new or people who pre-order, like I said last night, if you want to give them classic jerseys, an ultra powerful weapon, or bonus levels, that's fine and I totally support that, but online play? The big focus of this generation? The thing that Xbox 360 owners are already paying $50 a year for? Something that EA has never charged for, but is now supposedly "premium content?" Yeah, shitty.

I will say this though, since Gamestop is on board with this, they're going to have to lower their absurd prices for used games.

[Sousa]

To be fair, I don't play anything online because I've seen the kind of douchenozzles who hang out there, so I'm probably a bit far removed from this argument.

[Guest Mr. Potato Head]

I enjoy the input from our Mini Ron Pauls, but "the free market will solve it!" is kinda bullshit. There are a handful of game companies out there, the vast majority of games are developed under one of their umbrellas and most people don't understand or care to understand. Just like the rest of the entertainment industry, there isn't a whole lot of competition since the major companies are too damn big. EA is taking the bold move of stripping out long-standing features in a game for anyone who buys used, rents, borrows from a friend, etc, and if you think that's okay or if you buy exclusively new, then that's fine, but don't be surprised when they take it a step further.

Remember last gen when "Special Editions" came around and publishers figured out that if people were willing to pay $10 for useless shit to go along with their game, then they're willing to pay $10 more for a game period? Well, if people are willing to pay an extra $10 for online when they buy used, maybe people who buy new are willing to do so as well. I'm waiting for the "EA ULTRA ONLINE PASS - $50 a year to play all EA Sports titles online!" A slippery slope argument, sure, but when you allow companies to take advantage of their customers, they will. When you allow EA to charge people for part of the game that's been free since the goddamn Dreamcast, don't come crying if they start charging everyone.

So you're saying that if developers wanted to charge for online play, they should have done so from the beginning. They didn't, but I don't think that means they can't try to charge now anyhow.

[Lint]

Yea..this really doesn't affect me in the slightest. Easily 95% of the people who play sports games online have no idea how the game sohuld actually be played..and up that to 99% for Madden.

[zero]

So you're saying that if developers wanted to charge for online play, they should have done so from the beginning. They didn't, but I don't think that means they can't try to charge now anyhow.

I suspect that's what's going to happen next. There have been rumors that the next Call of Duty will have a monthly subscription fee to pay online, which I assume will go on top of the $50 a year people pay for Xbox Live. It's not that I'm saying they can't, I'm just saying it's really shitty. If this does become the trend with new games, then they want people to pay $60, then an additional fee to access content they were getting for "free" (minus the initial purchase) in the previous year. I can't imagine many other businesses getting away with something like that. Between this, on-disc DLC, non-online games that require you to have a constant internet connection to play, and all the other bullshit involved in today's consoles, it just alienates consumers. I don't get why entertainment companies, whether it's music, movies or games, insist on punishing their audience.

[Guest Mr. Potato Head]

Because the audience seems to show a willingness to accept it.

[zero]

Because they don't have any choice but to do so. If you want to play Madden (which a good portion of gamers do), you have to put up with it. If you want to watch Avatar on Blu-ray (which many people want to do), you have to deal with absurd copy protection. It doesn't make it right, and customers are left with no other choice. There is no other NFL game on the market, so if you want to play football, you're stuck with EA.

[TCO]

They did this last year with Madden's Online Franchise and charged 0.99 for a host of other features that coul've been included in the game. I said it then that it was just the start and here it is, and don't doubt for a second that it won't continue in this fashion, it's bullshit. I usually buy FIFA and Madden new on release day, but it still annoys me.

[Cactus Drags]

I can see both sides to the argument here, it's a dick move, but if they can do it, tehy will. No one should be surprised by this, it's EA we're talking about. I call bullshit on them charging 360 owners though, when they pay for live subscriptions already.And I definitely call bullshit on Gamestop setting a retarded precedent by following along with it. Perfect opportunity to show EA that they can't throw their weight around and mnakle money than they deserve, but no, they cave. And I imagine the same will happen over here. To be fair though, it's consumers' own fault, if they'd show a bit of backbone for once, these kind of antics would easily be put to rest.