Stefanie Fogel writes an editorial on why Online Passes are a bad idea in light of server shutdowns.
Very good article, but I'm wondering who's upset about these game servers shutting down?
online passes are inside a BRAND NEW copy. without any price. it's a problem only if you buy a used copy, and for gaming industries, used copy = bad thing.
you'd say that but a lot of people wouldn't even buy the game if it wasn't for used games, the devs still get some money by dlc. there are a bunch of decent games out there i would like to play, but not even half of those games is worth the full price imo
A lot of people also share their legally bought brand new copy with other family members. They aren't able to do that with Online Passes.
Well if they share the game what's the problem with sharing the online account? You people act as if one copy means endless licenses. It costs money to run servers. If anyone has an issue with this then set up your own online services. See how much time and effort it takes on your part to make the game sync. to each account. See how easy it is to manage your own leader-boards and trophies/achievements for each account.
@LevelHead ***Well if they share the game what's the problem with sharing the online account? *** Because prior to Online Passes, I didn't have to share any accounts. ***See how much time and effort it takes on your part to make the game sync.*** My job is to deal with that sort of thing all the time, so I have pretty good knowledge on how much it cost and how much time. Far less than you think! The online access used to follow the game, not the person/account. This is less freedom and smaller online community for no advantages to the customers.
We will continue to get less freedom as we shift to online supported gaming. It only makes sense from a business point of view. We now live in a world of easy access. Borders have become virtually non-existent and now every Tom, Dick and Harry sells used games. The used gaming market is a lot different now than it used to be. It's very easy to find used games now thanks largely to the internet. The other issue is online games takes online support. So why would publishers want free-loaders on their system as they invest in servers that track your profile and stats? I too like freedom but I'm not naive to think why they are going this route. Consumers continue to want more. They want more content, unrestrictive freedom and pay as little as possible for it. This isn't like the old days of 6 people in a garage making a game. Gran Turismo is one example. It now has online support meaning Polyphony has to invest more into the franchise. GT5 also took more investment to make. So why would they support a used market that basically sees no net return on their investment from certain gamers? Steam, IOS devices, OnLive and so on are restricted to their services. We are slowly shifting to that format with console services like PSN and XBL and the online passes are just an introductory way of them going about it and getting the gamer comfortable of having to put codes in to access the content. The consoles will be the slowest to adapt because their infrastructure and history has previously supported physical media. We can all see this is shifting to online supported gaming. Those that whine about not being able to connect or have poor online service with download caps will just be left on the sidelines. The gaming world will move forward without them and there are enough out there who do have access now to make it sustainable but they will do it slowly.
except they usually could . most cases you "just" lose dlcs , bonus and the mp , not the ability to play the game . Not saying it doesnt hurt , but how many games actually are unplayable ?
EA is always shutting down servers early , regardless of passes , so i'm not sure it's that relevant and such a big point against passes
What do you expect from yearly sports games? I also notice that EA always closes their servers more on consoles then PC.
There should be a law that protects gamers so these can always enjoy a game, even in 10 years. Today, if you want to play some genesis games,like thunder force 4, you can. For example, imagine you want to play uncharted 3, with a friend, and do some co op missions, in 10 years.maybe your first ps3, where you used the online pass, is dead, and you could buy another ps3, for 50$, so you can enjoy some great games, like god of war 3,4, on your 8k tv, that will upscale god of war 4, add 3d,etc. You decide you want to play with your friend, but the game asks you an online pass, in order to activate the multiplayer portion of the game, that included the co op missions. Since you don't own a good online pass, you want to get one. But you can't buy them , the psn isn't running anymore, therefore you can't purchase it. And EVEN if you still have a good online pass, since you have to introduce the code using the psn, and since the psn no longer exists, there you have: you can't play AT HOME , the co op levels on uncharted 3. This is an example, but I'm sure once the psn goes down, it won't be possible to play many games we have.and its a crying shame. A crime, I would say. There should be a law, that forces editors to make games, where, AT LEAST, the single player missions of the game will always be playable, with all the content on the disc, in 5,10,15 years. I think we, gamers, don't realize what's going on, and we just let these studios act the way they want, which means the way they make the most cash. Online passes and dlcs are just some open doors, that will make possible many worse ideas and ways that will block our paid games, in the future. I really hope, one day, soon, some people will react and act. Any lawyers here?
I doubt the psn structure is going down anytime in the next decade . But yeah , publishers should at least figure a way to give the sp and dlc portions access back to the offline copies at some point
If there are extra hoops to jump through, I expect a better service.
The end result for this industry is to make video games digital. They package it up like video games are ownership so that they can make you buy the hardware. Once people catch on that video games they own are really controlled by someone else they will refuse to buy anything as they will realize that there is little to no difference between what they own and what they rent (The real sense of ownership is sole control and possesion). That is when the industry will shift to a cloud based service where they supply the hardware. Until then, the industry will mask reality with the illusion... that you are buying their "cable box".
Yeah, and once everuthing is digital, it will ne really easy for them to apply any kind of restrictions or rules. You download a game, they can control how you play it, how many times, one or more players,erase the game remotely,make you pay every time you play,etc etc. Imagination and greed are the limits. That's why I buy full games from psn IF I know I won't be playing them later. But all the other games that I know one day, in 5 years, I may want to play them again, I buy exclusively the boxed version. No way I would buy a digital version of uncharted or god of war. I want to be able to play these games whenever I want, with 0 restrictions. I don't know if we'll go 100% digital, with the next consoles.unless you have a 1 tb disc, we'll need a lot of space to download all those games. Dead space 2, with extra content, was +15gb, modnation racers, full, 23gb, battlefield 3, 13 gb. A 320gb disc would be full in a couple of months. I bet one day, game reviews and scores will also depend on the support , a boxed game will score better that a 100% digital one.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.