EA Sports Locks Out Multiplayer Modes On Used Sales

Strid said:
Problem is what dictates worth playing?
Click to expand...

I think not making a lazy port from Console to PC, full of glitches and crashes is a good first step. Yes developers, you can patch later, but that isn't a valid excuse for releasing a broken product.
 
Raesvelg said:
It's like I'm talking to a wall, or something. A wall that only says "we're not saying piracy is ok".
Click to expand...

I know the feeling. I keep talking to this wall that keeps insisting that DRM is perfectly acceptable in any capacity.

Seriously though, there has to be a happy medium because realistically they can't stop pirating 100% of the time. There's a point after which their efforts yield diminishing returns. Anyone who is determined to pirate the game will be able to find a way.

So what's your happy medium?

*twitch*
*twitch*

I think I've painted myself into a corner here because I realize that Diablo2 style CD-keys are probably my happy medium which is extremely similar to what EA is doing, although there are some subtle differences. D2 keys are easy enough to generate if you know where to look online, so the game itself can be pirated but the online section gets locked out of the official servers unless you have a legit key. This means folks who are determined to pirate it will still do so and play privately but they're locked out from the legitimate online community. It's the best of all worlds. The implementation costs are relatively cheap compared to some of the other crazy shit developers have been attempting(like demanding a constant internet connection for an offline game), but they are enough to discourage the casual pirate. For the casual pirate it's far easier to just drop the $30 and avoid the hassle. Also yay for low price point seducing potential pirates. Sure you could go pirate it and spend the next 8 hours trying to find the right configuration and find the right cracks to download that aren't full of pron and spyware, but it's a hell of a lot easier to just go down to the store and pick it up on a whim. Determined people are still going to pirate the hell out of your product, but people will do that no matter how much you try to stop them. The trick is to find a solution that's cost effective and inoffensive enough to your customers that they don't even think twice about the fact that they're even putting up with DRM.

I think I'm going to go sit in a corner and try to figure out what just happened now.
 
CidBahamut said:
I know the feeling. I keep talking to this wall that keeps insisting that DRM is perfectly acceptable in any capacity.
Click to expand...

That's because it is.

It's their product; they can attach whatever conditions they like to its sale.

It is your right, as the consumer, to not buy their product.

And that's the aforementioned calculation that the corporations are making. They're judging that the loss of sales due to "excessive" DRM is exceeded by the number of people who will be unable to pirate the game and will subsequently buy it.

Personally, I (as mentioned) applaud EA's approach to the problem. But they have the right to protect their product with whatever means are necessary, so long as those means do not infringe upon the rights of the consumer.

Where this gets fuzzy, however, is in certain DRM schemes, mostly in the form of mandatory software, where said software (Tag's example of StarForce) can have detrimental affects on the consumer. Ubisoft's "always online" scheme, however, that's fine. Sure, it sucks if you have a particularly unstable internet connection. But again, you have the right to not buy the product.
 
I was havin' this discussion with someone else last night and he reminded me of two things; the First-sale doctrine and the simple reminder that sometimes you have to stick up for the even the guys you hate. With that in mind I'm gonna have to withdraw my previous stance in place for a I dunno wtf they should do other than to make games "worth playing." Though I think the First-sale doctrine needs a damn upgrade by now.
 
1. like used sports games/last years model sold well anyway
2. this sets a rather dangerous president...what if they did this with call of duty?
 
Shadowneko said:
2. this sets a rather dangerous president...what if they did this with call of duty?
Click to expand...

I believe if they do (and if I were you, I'd be assuming that they will) that you'll be forced to shell out the extra cash to play online if you want to buy the game used.
 
Shadowneko said:
2. this sets a rather dangerous president...what if they did this with call of duty?
Click to expand...

This would be the least of worries for a CoD fan. I mean, with Activision still breathing about monthly fees and all.
 
THQ is now on board with this as well, starting with UFC 2010.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/109/1091294p1.html

UFC Undisputed 2010 Requires Code To Play Online
THQ fights back against pre-owned videogame sales.
May 19, 2010
by Jim Reilly

THQ is the latest publisher to join the fight against the sale of used games. The company confirmed PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 versions UFC Undisputed 2010 will require players to entire a one-time use code to access the game's multiplayer modes and features. The code is available with all new copies of the game. If the game is bought used and the code has already been redeemed, then a $5 access fee is required.

"THQ is delivering a truly unmatched online gaming experience for fans of UFC and across all fighting games in general," the company said in a statement issued to IGN. "The main enhancement of UFC Undisputed 2010's premium online content is the new "Fight Camp Mode" in which players can assemble ranks of up to 40 people and train together.

"This is a significant value-add to the game as players can continually improve their skills by training with their friends and bringing teams of MMA specialists together."

UFC Undisputed 2010 is set for release next week. THQ said it will have additional details at a later date. One-time use access codes continue to be a growing trend in the industry. Electronic Arts plans to soon implement the "Online Pass," a code that must be entered before players are granted access to multiplayer modes in most of the publisher's upcoming sports titles.

Ubisoft has also stated it plans to combat used sales with a similar method.
 
Jinx posting ftl.
 
Last edited:
If I sell my couch because I'm moving, Raymour and Flannigan doesn't come to my house and take out the cotton. Fuck EA, I was considering buying NHL 10, but screw it. Looks like the Show is the only sports game I'm getting this year, AGAIN. Perhaps forever.
 
Firestreak said:
If I sell my couch because I'm moving, Raymour and Flannigan doesn't come to my house and take out the cotton. Fuck EA, I was considering buying NHL 10, but screw it. Looks like the Show is the only sports game I'm getting this year, AGAIN. Perhaps forever.
Click to expand...

I take it you were going to buy a USED copy of the game? If you were going to buy it new then you don't have anything to worry about.

EA can dictate whatever policies they wish. Don't like the policies they set? Don't buy their products.

That simple.
 
Of course, and I barely have any EA games. Doesn't look like I'll be buying many more. To me it's principle, I doesn't even play sports games online. Their entire purpose is for local multiplayer. I'm sure it'll actually make their resale value drop and them cheaper to buy used. At the same time... fuck em. They just keep taking things an inch at a time.
 
So, you are showing solidarity with your EA brethren over something that doesn't affect you in any way? Nice.
 
Firestreak said:
I'm sure it'll actually make their resale value drop and them cheaper to buy used.
Click to expand...

You'd think so, wouldn't you? I took this from something I said earlier in the discussion and it still holds true:

Strid said:
Gamestop sells BFBC:2, used, for $49.99+shipping so in store it's probably around $54. Tac on the $10 for the VIP code and you're lookin' at the price of the game as if it were new PLUS some. This is not only scandalous on the part of Gamestop but also stupid. They are preying on the customers who are not in the know and for the ones in the know they are placing a price on the game that will not make them the profit they fiend off of because they wont buy it used, but new.
Click to expand...
 
All they want is more money, I was going to buy NHL 11, screw that.
 
Libara said:
All they want is more money, I was going to buy NHL 11, screw that.
Click to expand...

All they want is money off of their product being sold in a market where they see no sales. Don't really see the problem with that.
 
Libara said:
All they want is more money, I was going to buy NHL 11, screw that.
Click to expand...

And what exactly is wrong with a corporation wanting more money? I mean, it's their job. It's actually punishable by legal action, brought upon by shareholders, for them to NOT "want more money".
 
Hey, I love capitalism, I'm not arguing against that at all. They can slap whatever price they want on any product they want to sell. However, I believe the second-hand market is part of capitalism as well. In fact, the ability to resell a product gives it some extra value in the first place. If a game is great, I'll keep it, otherwise, I'll resell it and try and make some money back. It's capitalism. It's something books and movies have had to deal and there's no reason video games should be any different. Not to mention, these EA sport games flood the used market for a reason... you don't need NHL 10 and NHL 09 at the same time. They offer 60 an upgraded version of their previous game, with the year's roster, for $60 on an annual basis, and are pissy people are unloading their previous year's copy instead of owning both at once...

Their model is designed to have us cycle through their games as quick as possible, which only serves to pump up the second hard market, as a result of THEIR business strategy. Movies and books have sequels with unique plot lines that make more sense for the buyer to own both simultaneously. You probably don't sell off the previous Harry Potter book when the new one comes out. They're part of a series. The sports games on the other hand are an upgraded version of the previous years.

They could sell a sports game and then sell a $10 upgrade every year to put on the new roster and add some tweaks - maybe a new mode every couple of years even. Of course that defeats the purpose of us buying again what we essentially already own. To say we should then hold onto the game, and if I choose to use the secondary market, calling me essentially a fucking thief, rubs me the wrong way. So as I said, fuck EA.

And no, it's not a legal mandate for a company to gouge the customers as much as possible. It's a decent short term strategy, but it's a great way to go out of business long term. I'm not saying EA is anywhere near on its way out, I'm just saying that they have a choice. You lose customers and drain more money from the ones you keep. It's far from certain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top