Online Passes Are Absurd

I’ve encountered the strangest phenomenon in recent years that I find difficult to explain. Gamers around the world have been suckered into either awkwardly plugging in codes or paying additional fees for each game. A publisher’s decision has cost them both time and money while offering nothing in return, and oddly enough the consumers defend and even encourage the practice. Second hand buyers deserve what they get! That’ll show them for having the nerve to show interest in your project over someone else’s!

[zeal0us]

"it’s the quality of the game that will combat used game sales."

So more people will buy the Syndicate brand new instead of used because of its quality? That don't make any sense.

Do KoA really need an online pass?

[Reibooi]

I understand the whole online pass thing and to be honest it doesn't bother me(mainly because I don't play many games online but the few I have still didn't bother me)

To me I don't understand why people really go the whole used game route all the time. I mean at places like Game stop you are only getting 5 bucks off in most cases(for recent games older games are of course gonna be a better deal used but for the sake of this comment i'm talking about new games) If I'm buying a game from a studio I like I would rather pay the extra 5 bucks to see that they see a sale instead of Game Stop taking all the profit)

The argument of better quality in a game will combat the used sales as Zeal0us said flat out makes no sense. The quality can be the greatest of all time but the buyer is still getting that quality if they buy it used or not so I don't understand those who use that statement.

The bottom line like it or not is Online Passes are a good move as far as Business goes. Yeah it's made alot of people mad but Business often does that and when it comes to making games it's not a charity they need to make a profit and if Online Passes help them do that then that is what they are gonna do.

[Rearden]

No they're not absurd. Online passes are there to combat used game sales, which are very hurtful to the industry. The developers don't get a penny from used game sales, but still have to support it through patches and online servers.

Also, the article reads like it's written by a 10 year old.

[Naklsonofnakkl]

Can you provide to me some financial charts showing how used games are hurting the industry. And not just specific companies, I want to see the whole industry on a big Excel spreadsheet where I can see each companies loss due to used sales games.

Also, developers don't see a penny of the Online Passes that people have to buy when they get a used game either, so how does that work? Does EA really need that Online Pass sale that badly that they can't release another Madden game every year?

In all lack of respect, you seem like a 10 year old who can't comprehend what is going on in the 'industry' you seem to want to defend that well.

[Lex_Dangerously]

Be cool man.

Lol Geez.

Ot: The reason I believe that the online passes are so common is that gamestop really got out of hand. If you disagree power to you. But be cool about it.

[christheredhead]

-Online passes do not combat used sales under any circumstance. Its mainly a profitable option similar to that of DLC. If you buy new with a faulty code, your code expired (happened to me for dragon age) or you need to activate it on another account you will be out of luck. Well, for the most part. Will the developer or publisher give you a free pass because you bought new? No, of course not. Online passes make money, so regardless they are here to stay. People are still buying used and renting in mass amounts.

-Secondly, developers actually make every penny from every used sale. Truthfully, they make 100% of the profit for every used disc sitting on a shelf. Someone, at some point, bought the game new. I dont think people need to feel guilty when they buy used, play a game at a friends house, rent or borrow. I just dont think double profit should apply for developers as it doesn't apply to any other second hand market. Why should gaming be an exception? I dont just mean the "used car argument" either. You have thrift stores, second hand clothes stores, used houses, used cars, used furniture warehouses, used movies, pawn shops...I mean the list goes on and on. People don't seem to care about buying second hand items at all, so why change that for game developers?

[rdgneoz3]

"If you buy new with a faulty code, your code expired (happened to me for dragon age) or you need to activate it on another account you will be out of luck."

I've had that happen before with passes / DLC, and a few emails/calls and it was fixed. Annoying, but it was fixed.

"I just dont think double profit should apply for developers as it doesn't apply to any other second hand market. Why should gaming be an exception?"

Movies, clothing, cars, etc, the makers of those things don't give out free maintenance after its sold (except stuff with warranties). They sell a movie or an article of clothing and that's that. Games have patches, updates, some have free DLC, and the devs have to keep the online functions of the game going. Sure its dumb as hell for a single player game to have a pass, but online games I can see why its there.
Also, look at some PC games, especially MMOs (most MMOs). You spend the money on the game and then more money each month to play online with others, and you can never sell that copy of the game since you already used up the activation code for the account.

I buy both used and new games. It just depends on how much value I see a game as having, or if too many great games come out at once, I'll get some down the road for cheaper. Hell, wait a few months and Amazon tends to have sales on the new copies of the games with all the passes and such, for less than the price of a used copy a few weeks after a game comes out.

[christheredhead]

@rdgneoz3

I agree, but if publishers wanted to combat used sales they would have already implemented a 1 time code similar to that of PC. Sure, online passes slightly curb used sales, but its not a deterrent at all. Online passes make money under the guise of "combating used sales." The used industry has always been around and the video game industry as a whole has been expanding exponentially. If there is a way for a publisher to make extra money, they will. They will use whatever excuse to justify extra compensastion.

The only reason I say that is because the trade off is a 1 to 1 ratio. So yes servers have to be up and running, but what truly makes the difference if one person stops play and another takes their place? There is only one person online at one time per copy. Is there that much of an upkeep change if that copy changed hands?

[hiredhelp]

Also, the article reads like it's written by a 10 year old
So it was you that wanted to stop this post cos of a mistake ,
Typo in description "phenominon"
as for your reasons of thinking online passes are good thing you got issues.
If a game sales as well as bf3 did and ea makes statment saying one there best years do you still think they looseing money put it another way hmmm what is it for some of you guys here for a game $60 or more lets times that by say 4million retail take less than quater of that, tax takes another quater publishers take just overva quater and rest goes to the company not the DEVELOPERS. They get paid there useral sallery contracted each year.. Oh btw i made shit loads spelling mistakes cos im crap at spelling so go ahead fail me.

[Relientk77]

Maybe I don't have $60 to buy EVERY game I want, ever think of that. Yes I buy used games, and I buy new games too, but online passes are just stupid.

[JellyJelly]

I say drop the online passes and give the devs a percentage of the used game sales instead.

[Sharingan_no_Kakashi]

I personally think online passes are a good idea. EA will definitely find a way to exploit them for malicious reasons though. But they help the developers, which helps the industry.

[SebastianSB]

What makes you think that any of the revenue from an online pass goes to the developer when it's a standard practice of the publisher? It's not something that DICE and Bioware came up with on their own, it's a thing that's crammed in by EA.

[thedude44]

in this economy its absurd.

[MysticStrummer]

Unfortunately, a large segment of the gaming population has shown that it's ok to charge for online play. Online passes are just an extension of that idea. Call of Duty Elite is another. If you don't like Online Passes, but pay for XBL or Elite, you need to look in the mirror for who's to blame.

[Fairchild Channel F]

This ^

[Kaos_Vll]

I couldn't agree more with the article. Only thing that was left out was those who buy new and don't have access to the internet and are short changed of a full product.

I really can't believe that ANYONE would support such a practice let alone defend it. The even sadder part is that it's YOU the consumer that is being hurt by it, yet you still defend?

I could go on and on about the number of games that I've bought used because I was unsure of it, liked it so much I bought every piece of dlc it had AND bought the next one in the series day one.

They made more than $200 off of a lost used sale that would most certainly NOT happened had I not bought the used game first, and they complain about used sales? Not to mention most games at launch are NOT ready for release, yet they demand you spend top dollar?

What's wrong with you people? How can you kick and scream to defend these companies who constantly and repeatedly short change you? We all enjoy our favorite pasttime, but to remain blinded and dumbfounded to the reality of it all is absurd.

If you won't protect and look out for yourselves how can you expect to be treated as you should be, as a valued customer.