New approach to online play by EA Sports

Damien360

Not sure if this is going on the last FIFA world cup game but I am betting it will be in the new FIFA 11.

I bought Madden 11 and you require a single use code from the back of the manual to allow online play. The implication of this will be, when you buy my game secondhand in a few months you will not be able to go online without extra payment.

Once the code is entered it sends a 100Kb sile to my PS3 which allows the purchaser of the game free online gaming for Madden 11

When did EA start this and how long before all the other developers copy this approach putting a sting in the secondhand games market.

Professey Chin

They started it with Tiger Woods and looks like it will continue without a doubt.
THQ also did it with their UFC game this year.
Id say its here to stay tbh

Mister men

Pure greed.

dreamers75

The code for Bad Company gets you the free maps (which are already in the game just new modes for them) but the other guy has to fork out a tenner to get them.

Ubisoft will be doing it next.

Varik

EA sports

destructoid.com

only 60% of player used code

dreamers75

Mister men wrote: »

Pure greed.

How so?


Its perfectly fair for them to do that, it rewards the buyer of the game.

F1ngers

<Moved, not just a PS3 issue>

Stercus Accidit

I can't wait to start PC gaming, f*ck consoles.

Monotype

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

I can't wait to start PC gaming, f*ck consoles.

PC games worse on this aspect, with games bound to steam accounts, meaning you can't sell them at all. But at least they're cheaper.

I think it is greed by the publishers though. People selling second hand games are probably going to spend their money on more games, so they're not going to get any richer out of that. They're just eyeing the money that the game shops are making with trade ins. The shops that distributed the games over the years just aren't needed any more so just back-stab them and cut them out.

Overheal

Well aside from flea markets and craigslist the 2nd hand PC market was dead anyway. Gamestop etc. havent dont 2nd hand PC games since the turn of the century. Nothing new.

Steam still does good sales and I prefer the digital locker option.

I don't know how big a problem it was for the Games Industry (not gamestop!) but how many people where buying launch titles, burning through them in 2 days and then trading them back in for 1/2 - 2/3rds of what they bought them for? Then Gamestop sells them back to other people for pure, pure profit. Without a dime to the publisher.

Fnz

I don't see anything wrong with this approach. I believe it will end up being that each account will get 10 days of online play before the code is required - to facilitate the rental market.

Gunmonkey

Overheal wrote: »

Well aside from flea markets and craigslist the 2nd hand PC market was dead anyway. Gamestop etc. havent dont 2nd hand PC games since the turn of the century. Nothing new.

Steam still does good sales and I prefer the digital locker option.

I don't know how big a problem it was for the Games Industry (not gamestop!) but how many people where buying launch titles, burning through them in 2 days and then trading them back in for 1/2 - 2/3rds of what they bought them for? Then Gamestop sells them back to other people for pure, pure profit. Without a dime to the publisher.

Had a friend once who was bragging about how he bought PC games, ripped em and brought em back after an hour or two for the ful refund/store credit. Tool.

The blame of greed cant be levelled solely at the publishers, gamestores have been screwing the Publis/Devs with the second hand market, they bit the hand that fed them.

jock101

This is pure greed! It will make me only buy games with 9/10, 4star, 90% scores. Basically games I will want to keep! Since the price of console games has dropped to 45quid on avg. The games industry is screwing us with DLC, paying to unlock content already on the disc. Now this crap, having to pay to play MP modes on secondhand games.

K.O.Kiki

Meh.

Give me cheap games and I'll pay your little fee.

Sucks for everyone without access to a CC/voucher card though.

cherryghost

Monotype wrote: »

PC games worse on this aspect, with games bound to steam accounts, meaning you can't sell them at all. But at least they're cheaper.

I think it is greed by the publishers though. People selling second hand games are probably going to spend their money on more games, so they're not going to get any richer out of that. They're just eyeing the money that the game shops are making with trade ins. The shops that distributed the games over the years just aren't needed any more so just back-stab them and cut them out.

Let's analyse EA's latest PC strategy, shall we.

So far this year they've released THREE free PC games: Need for Speed World, Tiger Woods online and FIFA Online, and last year they released Battlefield Heroes. EA has had a long hard look at the PC market and they know well that the PC gamers will not accept the extra charges etc as it is.

What they've done instead, is almost completely ruin BF Heroes by allowing people who make purchases absolutely thrash someone who hasnt paid for anything. And they're not going to stop doing it either, since BF Heroes nearly has 2 million registered souls, half of which are active, and nearly half of them are paying something in some form (IIRC). Now that adds up to a hell of a lot of money to something that's essentially a BF2 mod in disguise. Amazing really.

The newly released games arent saturated as much as it stands, but no doubt they'll get their finger wet and exploit as many people as they can for their money.

To conclude: EA will try to stinge you out of every cent you have, even if they insist a game is 'free', whether it be PC, console or anything they decide to release something on, and whether it's 2nd hand or not.

Overheal

Hadnt even heard of those 3 offerings... but I think I know why that is.

cherryghost

Need for Speed World is pretty fun... for now. They start by releasing some car packs, and the last few weeks some faster ones etc etc it's just basically going to implode on them

BrianSlipknot

New Smackdown vs RAW game will use this too. 800msp or 9.99 to play online 2nd hand. Lame!

thenightrider

Its only right how can the makers of the games make any money from second hand games and the likes of gamestop make all the money there is more profit in second hand games then new games for these type of shops

Helix

no beef with this at all

might stop the likes of gamestop printing free money by ripping punters off with second hand sales

Stercus Accidit

Monotype wrote: »

PC games worse on this aspect, with games bound to steam accounts, meaning you can't sell them at all. But at least they're cheaper.

PC gamers have a little bit more recourse than a consoler, if a title has ridiculous drm or terms, its may just end up pirated more than payed for.

I'd sooner pay for a game, but I would absolutely crack any restrictions that were over the top. There is a social responce in pc games, and the community may or may not lash out at a dev who steps over the line, where that line is drawn is still being prodded at.

Sticky_Fingers

I previously got burnt by this, was in GAME buying ME2, saw it secondhand for £5 cheaper and thought happy days, wasn't till later that I realized about the Cerberus Network thing. Was raging at myself though not enough to cough up the extra amount to get the code. F@ck that, I am not going to support this gaming by installment model that this leads to, the content was finished (I think) when the game was published, it should have been on the disc in the first place.


While some of you will say "well it makes sure that people buy the game from the publisher rather than secondhand where they don't see a penny" my reply would be that many people can't afford new games unless they trade in older ones and if trade-ins were stopped or hobbled in this way you would probably see a reduction in total new game sales as people would be more cautious with their cash. (note: no sources to back this up just my gut feeling)

Overheal

"well it makes sure that people buy the game from the publisher rather than secondhand where they don't see a penny"

my reply being OK you might get 1 buyer in 5 that has the Money on the Table to pony up €60 for a new game, but 4 in 5 might have €35 (€140) that you're going to lose to piracy.

Helix

Overheal wrote: »

my reply being OK you might get 1 buyer in 5 that has the Money on the Table to pony up €60 for a new game, but 4 in 5 might have €35 (€140) that you're going to lose to piracy.

the publishers arent losing a penny of that tho, coz they never got it in the first place

gizmo

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

I previously got burnt by this, was in GAME buying ME2, saw it secondhand for £5 cheaper and thought happy days, wasn't till later that I realized about the Cerberus Network thing. Was raging at myself though not enough to cough up the extra amount to get the code. F@ck that, I am not going to support this gaming by installment model that this leads to, the content was finished (I think) when the game was published, it should have been on the disc in the first place.

This isn't gaming by installment, this is publishers trying to protect themselves from second hand sales. In terms of the content itself, there is more than enough of it in Mass Effect 2 to warrant the purchase. You can't say "oh this was completed so I want it on the disc", as you have no idea when it was completed and for what reason. For instance, the decision may have been taken to add an extra week onto development in order to finish it off so that it would be ready for DLC. In cases like this, it wouldn't have been on the disc otherwise so the argument is invalid.

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

While some of you will say "well it makes sure that people buy the game from the publisher rather than secondhand where they don't see a penny" my reply would be that many people can't afford new games unless they trade in older ones and if trade-ins were stopped or hobbled in this way you would probably see a reduction in total new game sales as people would be more cautious with their cash. (note: no sources to back this up just my gut feeling)

In the short term I think people would perhaps buy one or two less games over a period of time however in the long run I think it'd return to normal.

As for losing potential sales due to piracy, that's the beauty of it I guess. There is no way of playing these games on line even if you have a pirated copy, you have to pay for the code so at least they're getting some revenue from that side of things.

Exclamation Marc

I don't really mind it to be honest.

Rewards the buyers around the time of release which I don't think is a bad thing. Plus considering gameshops make an absolute mint on trade ins (ie buy it back off you for 25, sell for 50) its really just the developers wanting a piece of the pie that trade in stores have been making for a long time now, which I don't actually see anything wrong with.

Although I do feel bad for buyers like Sticky Fingers. Pre-owned games should have stickers stating that online features need to be paid for.

BlitzKrieg

Although I do feel bad for buyers like Sticky Fingers. Pre-owned games should have stickers stating that online features need to be paid for.

I'm not 100% sure but doesnt ME2 have it written on the back about the cerberus network.

Its not the same but I was faced with the same dileama a while back and I chose the new copy over the second hand because I saw it written on the back.

My 2 cents on the issue games publishers are still very much finding their feet on issues like this

In comparison to some other decisions this is a half step in the right direction in some points.

For those complaining about stuff already on the disc being unlocked, consider that only last year that content on the disc wasnt unlocked for those who bought the game new but was required to be paid for (Bioshock 2 *DLC*).

In EA's favour they have also tried to sweeten the offer each time beyond purely being multiplayer.

And to be honest, the 2nd hand trade in industry is somewhat out of control for the games industry. I mean dvds dont get the same treatment in high street stores. Is there a 2nd hand dvd section of HMV? There's a 2nd hand game section though... There's going to be 2nd hand business for everything. But its not normally done by the same person who is selling brand new copies right beside each other.

It also relates to an issue I was thinking about earlier today.

A film makes money in waves. You get the cinema release +money then the dvd release +money and then the satelite tv release +money and the terestial tv +money then rereleases of the dvd +money anniversary edition +money, box sets +money blu ray edition +money

you got to also divde that up for regions +money

thats alot of resale for a single film shockingly waterworld has actually started making a profit now for universal, only took 10 years of vhs/laserdisc/dvd/hd dvd/blu ray sales coupled with tv rights across the world. But films have a resale value that ensures that money is always being made (and why a single flop isnt a problem, its when you get a series of them that drys up all immediate funds that kills studios)

With a budget of $175 million, the film grossed a mere $88 million at the U.S. box office, which seemed to make it the all time box office bomb.[9] Adjusted for inflation and expressed in 2006 dollars (USD), the budget for the movie was $231.6 million, and grossed $116.8 million at the U.S. box office.

The film, however, did much better overseas, with $176 million at the foreign box office (for a total of $264 million),[10] and good VHS and later DVD sales, giving the movie over $100 million dollars in profit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterworld#Box_office_and_reception


Can the same be said for videogames though? The resale for a single videogame is much lower then that of a film. Its no surprise that they cost six times more then a dvd. Once the current generation is finished almost 80% of the current market will become dead weight. While waterworld will simply get recycled onto a new format and continue making money. Backward compatability helps, but that doesnt lead to resale. The re release of psone games on the ps3 market and the wii virtual consoles are the first strong signs of games being recycled for the publishers.

gizmo

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

For those complaining about stuff already on the disc being unlocked, consider that only last year that content on the disc wasnt unlocked for those who bought the game new but was required to be paid for (Bioshock 2 *DLC*).

I still don't see an issue with that. Time was taken to produce the content and they decided to hold off unlocking it for PDLC. If people didn't know it was on the disc would they have felt more or less "ripped off" instance?

Overheal

gizmo wrote: »

I still don't see an issue with that. Time was taken to produce the content and they decided to hold off unlocking it for PDLC. If people didn't know it was on the disc would they have felt more or less "ripped off" instance?

It was absolutely tactless though. Theres a difference between hanging on to content in-studio, and what they did.

gizmo

There was no hiding from it though, when people initiated the download they saw it was only a tiny file. Given the assets in question it was therefore obvious they had just downloaded an unlock for said content. As for why it wasn't just held off the disc and released later, well given the nature of XBL and PSN it would have worked out cheaper for them doing it this way as they would have been able to avoid another cert pass for the update.

BlitzKrieg

well given the nature of XBL and PSN it would have worked out cheaper for them doing it this way as they would have been able to avoid another cert pass for the update.

isnt there a cost for them from microsoft/sony to upload the service?