@plm3d_basic LOL, what are we arguing about again? Dirt 3 is awesome btw (although I've only played like 45 min).
Codemasters confirms multiplayer-enabling onetime-use VIP Pass comes with new copies of off-road racer, used games require $10 code.
The Online Pass initiative spearheaded by Electronic Arts has gained a new follower. It was first reported by Eurogamer, and now Codemasters has confirmed for GameSpot that it will be including a onetime-use download code with new copies of its upcoming off-road rally racer Dirt 3 that activates the game's online modes.
In addition to unlocking Dirt 3's multiplayer offerings, the code--known as a VIP Pass--delivers access to five bonus vehicles. These extra rides include the McRae M4, the Ford Sierra Cosworth RS500, and the Hummer H3.
Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 gamers who pick up a secondhand version of Dirt 3 can purchase a VIP Pass for 800 Microsoft points, or $10 in the US, £6.29 in the UK, and €7.99 in Europe. The pay wall is similar to that erected by a number of publishers beyond EA, including THQ and Sony. Ubisoft has expressed interest in the scheme.
For more on Dirt 3 in advance of its launch on the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and PC this week, check out GameSpot's previous coverage.
@DilPower Congratulations on getting the game for $40. So you paid $20 less and for the same amount you would have paid used. Also, since you're not using XBL then why are you complaining about lack of multiplayer for used games? Video games have always been $50-60, just like movies have been $9-12, just like CDs are $10-15, just like DVD are $10-20, etc. Your argument makes it like if they reduce prices for everything then more people will buy it. There's no guarantee that lowering prices will have more people buying the game. The fact is that people who like the game will find some way to buy it or they will steal it through pirating. My original argument is still true no matter how many zit faced entitled teenagers thumbs it down. You rent games to play it or share games among friend then when you want to buy it you pay for it new or buy it used or wait until prices drop. Or if you get luck buy it when there's a discount. Yes people, it's that easy.
@plm3d_basic Didn't actually have to wait. I got it brand new for 40 $. Hmmm... and I could probably sell the online pass given I can't justify paying for XBL with the little time I invest in this. All in all, I just wish they would try to make it more accessible rather than the other way around. I can't imagine all those people waiting to buy the new titles when prices drop would actually wait if they could afford the brand new game day one! If the developpers want to make more money they shouldn't try to sell for more but rather sell more!
At least gamestop is selling this game used 4 days after release for only $47.99 instead of the usual $54.99. You can pay the $10 for online and it'll still cost less than $60
This should also drop the ridiculously high prices of second hand games to compensate. And to my mind, about bloody time. You never know, you might get a 2nd hand that has never been used online too, happened to me with dragon age origins and saboteur.
I'm quite surprised that companies haven't done this earlier. More money for them, no effort needed and even more pissed off customers who will still buy the next game in the series.
If I buy this and later on give it away to a charity, the end recipients will still incur a charge should they wish to play online. It is this reason why I disagree with this practice. The world is too greedy and this just gives me an added reason not to buy the game.
@DilPower I buy games that I like and which will give me entertainment for months to years. You rent games to play and get hooked. When/if you're hooked you buy it. It's that simple. If you want to buy used games then go for it, but don't blame developers for wanting to get money from used games by including dlc or online support. I give away games that are years old which I don't play anymore. They aren't worth selling by the time I don't want them anymore. I also don't buy every game so I have plenty of money to spend on games that deserve $60. You can also easily buy new games and sell them for $20 less so you wind up paying only $20 for a new game. Also, you can wait several months to buy a new game when the price drops if you don't want to spend $60.
@RadView Games are a necessity? Are you also entitled to games as well? You sound like a really sad person. Also, nobody says you need to play every game exactly when they come out. Renting games provides a good idea whether you like a game or not. If you think it's worth $60 then buy it. Nobody is forcing you to fork over $60. Also the online version of a racer is usually the exact same thing as the single player except with human players. You can also read forums and reviews from dozens of sources about multiplayer.
@frankblack789 Ooh, what a comeback. Yeah, you're the adult. Right. Sounds like you don't have any common sense and are probably living in your parent's basement. You ever heard of renting games? Go back to kindergarten.
I guess I can't really boycott this game since I wasn't gonna buy it anyway. But to those of you who do want this game but don't like this practice, don't buy the game or you'll only encourage them. Yes, your one, single vote does count. Vote against the anti-ownership movement by denying yourself this one game.
This just rubs me the wrong way. I don't buy used games and I don't trade in my old ones. So I don't really have a direct bias. It just doesn't feel right.
@Chimpdaddy You lost most of your credibility when you tried to classify the game industry's concern with pirating as "pathetic" and "greedy." You completely lost all credibility when you said that if the games industry isn't comparable to other industries, it isnt an industry. That's a set-up for a broken analogy, and sure enough you followed up with a barely coherent rant against the housing and banking industries, which, regardless of your ridiculous attempt to imply that they resemble the games industry, have absolutely nothing to do with what we're talking about. Also, here's a helpful hint for future arguments: your opinion does not automatically equal common sense. Common sense in this case says businesses try to make money. To expect anythig else is stupidity no matter what you wish would happen. I can now see that I'm having a discussion with someone who thinks the world should revolve around what he thinks is right regardless of the realities or necessities of business, so I'm going to cut this off. I know from experience that you can't win an argument against someone whose logic is severely broken in the first place. Can't wait to see you back here ranting when pay to play subscriptions start hitting.
Just thought of something. This feature is very stupid. Regardless of all points stated. The developers/publishers are killing their own game community. The game population will dwindle and anyone who buys it second hand will probably not shell out for online if the game is old and they will know no one is playing the game. Its a useless feature and it helps kill the game's online community. So it is a quick buck for loss of the developer and gamer.
I agree these guys have to earn on their product, but this'll just make me wait till it hits the bargain bin.... not moaning, just feedback
in order for us to buy new the whole point of my threads are hey need to make quality games again and the run of the mill hum drum games. this type of action will also kill rental. but its funny as... shall i buy a game brand new £40 quid or wait for 2nd hand £10 and pay £6.24 to activate it, they have lost £33 off me, this is short sightness "lets jump on the band wagon of ohh look at 2nd hand games" this in the long run will be abanoned as its a fruiltess money grabbing venture that will cost them more in the long run
and before you go "well you cant compare one industry to another" then you cant really call the game industry a "industry" if its not comparable in terms of growth/regulations and measurable contexts. you see these greedy shareholders all they have done is seen the this "game" money bubble and tried to grab it and squeeze every last penny. only it will burst which it is slowly leaking now due to their meddling. look at banks and the house markets. look how greed has messed that up, there is no common sense. just greed
one game can set a precedent, why has everyone tried to copy cod in the fps genre if one game or making a game cant change the industry. also the witcher sold 1.5m due to it was something new. if it did flop just like hydrophobia did on 360 then whos knows, just like that indie developer who listened to the consumers rather then ignore and listen to greedy sharehlders they made a revamped version, they could still of made the witcher 2. I only tout cd projekt due to they have shown a precedent in this stale time of the game industry on how to make a AAA title game without the high production costs, sure theres coders/engine designers/enviroment artists/ level designers and so forth yet if you look at it indie low cost games are starting to rise up to the challenge against these hum drum EA/Activision run of the mill games then they should in business terms analysis that and step back and ask why. its not about "free love maaaan". lets put it in business terms as you only look at it like that. why should i as a consumer expact to pay for goods that are rushed/shorter game length/ bug filled product when in every other industry there are rules and regulations against this for customer satisfaction. continued....
@Chimpdaddy I get it, you really like The Witcher 2. You can't generalize facts about games in general from one title. That is especially true when the game is not even a new IP. It's a sequel to a game that sold well. If the first The Witcher had flopped entirely, do you honestly think they would have made a sequel just out of love for the game? You're kidding yourself if you do. Also, I think you need to do some research on what goes into game development. It sounds like you really have no idea what you're talking about. Games are horrificly expensive projects, and there's a lot more going on there than texture or graphical coding. You really think that a developer or publisher--someone who you yourself admitted is outto make money--is going to hire, pay for, and take care of people they don't need? That would just cut into their profit and would make little sense given what we know about them as companies. Finally, if you honestly think that a major AAA title could be developed, published, and distributed for the same cost as an indie game, you're delusional. You need to step back into reality; your idealistic "all you need is love" argument has more holes in it than The Witcher's plot.
Oh and what part of the development actually costs a lot, due to ps3 and 360 is damn old technology so surely making games should be efficient, if its not then that shows bad business since the whole point about businesses is streamlining if you think its all about profit, surely with the "streamlining" in games for mainstream players shouldn't the games be cheaper to make. Since the games are actually getting shorter shouldn't it be cheaper to make. Since its the same old rehashed story and gameplay, ie cod just with did textures. How is it more expensive. The only way to make a profit like the days of ps2 and before is to make decent games. Look at hawkin. A indie game that rivals crysis 2 in looks. It's indie so less production monies but due to indie where love is put in not just money it will be good and people will buy brand new. I'm gonna keep mentioning them but cd projekt red Are really classed as a big indie team still made a game of a much higher calibre the EA/Activision games which try to justify high costs when there's no need for them
@sixgears2, I haven't contradicted at all, the point I was getting across is if they made a game for the love not just to justify the expense it wouldn't cost much to make, the non essential staff aren't necessary, once again look at the credits for crysis 2 and the witcher 2, less essential staff for Atari/cd projekt red. Yet the game is far better production then crysis 2 or da2, The whole short sightedness of this money grabbing corporations is that people will stop buying the same old rubbish and will wait for 2nd hand or until it becomes cheap, they need to stop spending money on these silly little schemes with no pay off in the end and just face facts they need to put quality back into games First it was there pathetic "oh piracy is hurting the industry" to "oh no 2nd hand games are hurting the industry" its pathetic, all they are doing is squeezing the cash cow for money for the shareholder/CEO and none into actual decent game development.
@Chimpdaddy Games cost much more to make now than they used to, and that is especially true of console games. The argument that companies are hiring people simply to justify a cost increase is preposterous. They are hiring more people because they need them for jobs outside of development--marketing, distribution, and accounting to name a few. As you stated, games are made for money first and love second. That's always been true, it's just more apparent today than 10 years ago. Your example of the Witcher 2 doesn't work either; I can nearly guarantee you that its development cost more than even the most expensive game from last generation, and even if that's not true there's no arguing that development costs have risen on average. Also, in terms of the new IPs instead of yearly installments argument, you're contradicting yourself. If game companies are only looking at games as money makers, what incentive is there for them to move away from things that have been proven to be big bits with consumers and risk capital on untested ideas? Beyond that, a bunch of new, risky IPs would encourage game companies to squeeze every possible penny out of them to ensure that they at least break even, so it would actually accomplish the opposite of what you're arguing for. Risks = possible losses, and since people like you clearly aren't even interested in spending full price on established titles, why should they assume that you would behave differently and support new IPs? And once again, the Witcher 2 is a poor example, this time because of the "2" in it's title. It's a sequel to an established game that sold reasonably well, not a new IP.
Well considering for some games like Mass Effect 2 it costs £12, it isn't that bad, although I wish it was still free.
@sixgears2, games don't need to be expensive, look at the witcher 2, prob one of the cheapest AAA to make this year and also the best game this year, production, story and everything else. Games are only expensive to make due to stupid decisions that the stakeholders are gettin involved with. Take crysis 2 for instance. Looks at the end credits, you'll find that a higher percentage of staff are actually non devs, mainly pr and hr staff, because gaming has gone from about making a game for the love of it to making a game for profit they have stupid job titles created to make an excuse to raise price, games are stale now, look at la noir, to me it hasn't really made any advancements, sure faces are pretty but due really bad body animations it looks like a head stuck on a doll, wrecks the enjoyment. It's just like the car industry, as soon they to to monopolise it, it goes stale, its the same old same old. Here's a new idea that might work, hows about stop making a year game which is the same boring thing and make a brand new IP, la noir to me is just gta and heavy rain mashed together. If they make good games again like the witcher 2 where hard work and love is put into it then people will buy new, I haven't brought a cod game since mw, once you've played that, you've played them all since then
Game companies are businesses, and just like any business they want to ensure that they maximize their revenue. They have stockholders to answer to and benchmarks to hit, and games have become fantastically expensive to develop. When a game sells one copy but then gets passed around among 10 different users, it takes a big chunk out of the dev/pub's revenue. Multiply that by a couple hundred thousand and you begin to see why they are so serious about trying to recoup those losses. For-profit companies aren't out to help your wallet, they're out to make money. Expecting them not to pursue an additional revenue stream just because you don't want to spend money is silly. Gaming is an expensive hobby, and if you can't afford $10 to try all the aspects of a game from GameFly or that you got used, it may be time to reevaluate your choice of activities. If you can afford it, get off the soap box because neither the company nor most other gamers care about your financial principles or what you think you should or should not have to pay for. The days of $20 games and always free MP are dead, so stop with all the "it used to be true" junk already. Support the industry and stop being cheapskates or find a new hobby.
I would normally pay the extra $10 or so for the new version of a game. Mainly to support the developer. But these new shenanigans have got me thinking.
@siarhei exactly. And which makes them more money, a sale at $20 or a sale at $60? It doesn't have to turn off too many people work against them.
I wish you lot would stop using developers as a excuse for this, developers are given a set amount of money as stated by their contract For a particular project, usually all first day purchases cover this and the rest is huge profit for the parasites known as shareholders/CEO's of the publishers, all this will do is line theft pockets of the shareholders and NOT the devs, if any of you actually do your research you will find that due to the way the industry is going, its a production line factory and workers get screwed. I have been gaming since the 80's and there has always been 2nd hand markets and yet its growing and growing and with profits rising 20% year on year, all this is simply pure nasty greed where the rich shareholders are trying to fleece the common folk, that's all. Also with how stupid the bugs and laziness of game development lately who would want to buy a bug ridden game on day of release. It's best to wait til it actually works and then price drops
So let's all thank Codemasters for killing the resale value of Dirt 3. May it find a quick and painful journey to the bargain bin. It seems to me that Codemasters is cutting off its nose to spite its face.
So when a gamer buys a game he/she doesn't really own it. You pay for the privilege to play it when you sell it, the next owner get half a game. Developers are getting lazier by the minute. Why don't you make good games then people might consider buying it at full retail price. This locking of game content is ridiculous. Some games go out of print and can only be bought second hand. They think they can make more money by extorting the community. If a massive boycott of all games with this feature is enacted, those greedy developers will think twice before biting the hand that feeds them.
@JohnF111 Don't take this offensive, imobi systems in cars are a advanced security measure...if you lose your key and have to pay 150.00 to replace it because it needs to be programed as well...that is responsibility on your behalf. Kinda a weak argument as I don't really see how your are referring to pirates in this and car theft. Wheel locks again, if you lose that, its not anyone else fault but yours for not putting it in one spot on the vehicle so you know where it will be at all times. Dealers have there own keys for your vehicles..and if you go to 3rd party hacks for work on your vehicle well that is just a risk you take. Pirates take those same risk when they pirate games....RIAA is it? I don't know anyways this is all way off the point I was making..It wasnt about the money aspect for the gamers here, it about how they are controlling the phasing out those who purchase used games. Soon enough, used games will need a activation code to play the game...then what next...used gaming consoles....you have to pay to play the console after purchasing it used. Sounds just as ridiculous as this article and how they want "you" the gamers to pay just a little bit more...and I use that term lightly...they will nickle and dime you to death...this is another dark area of console gaming.
@plm3d_basic umm, since you're just a child, i don't think you're really qualified to lecture us adults about the 'necessities of life' or what we should do with our hard-earned money. go spend more of your parents' money & stop bothering us.
@plm3d_basic Video games is a necessity in 'my' life.... Talk about blabling... spoiled, cheap and poor...lol Selling your games sounds like some cheap or poor person trying to get ther money back from an over priced game they paid for thats been sitting collectiing dust for the past 11 1/2 months. Stand up against developers nickel and diming everyone and stop pretending to support them. If you did you would not give away a game, you would burn and destroy it, so your friends can purchase ther own copy to support the devs. If I rent a game with the online feature locked, how the hell am I supposed to know whether the online mode, which i look forward to in replay value, is supposed to be worth it too ???
@plm3d_basic Oh, because you're helping the developers by giving your games away to friends instead of selling them used? It's not complicated you've finished playing games, you sell them, take the money to buy the newest ones and encourage the studios... or you can just keep your old games and not afford the new ones (because by the way money doesn't grow out of trees). Open up your eyes seriously! 60 $ a game IS expensive. Studios should probably do more research. The people that can't usually afford new games are often students... they start off with used games, get totally hooked, and by the time they are out of school and have a stable job they buy all the latest games brand new because they've learned to love them AND can now afford them! This is probably how each new Call of Duty titles sells more than the previous ones. People get hooked along the way with a "used" copy that does not appear in the quantity of official sales and when the next game in the series comes out they want to play it day one and thus more people know about the game... and more people will buy the next one in the series, brand new! (it doesn't matter how much you hate Activision... I could have cited Rockstar... same principle, every single new game sells more than the last)
Gosh one more reason to buy used games! I should save AT LEAST 10 $!!! Seriously??? Where is this going to end? If they want to make more money can't they just make affordable games so more people can afford them? I wouldn't have to wait 6 months to buy new releases if they sold at decent prices in the first place. I NEVER play online, does that mean I can buy the game for 50 $???
@HT89488 What about pirates? I can say the same about my car, all the thefts have made my car almost unusable, i need an immobiliser, an alarm, locks and even my wheels have a locking nut.. You think it's ok for games to be completely unprotected and pirated games just be allowed to played online and hacked and exploited for easy wins? I can't leave my car windows down on a hot day as the sensors get affected and the alarm goes off, if i lose my keys i can't just get a new one, i gotta order it from Citreon to be matching my immobiliser code. If i get a flat tyre i need that locking wheelnut remover, it all affects how easily i can go about my daily life and of course i'd prefer not to have it all but it's not my call just as the same measures are present in the gaming world, this VIP pass isn't just to steal your money it serves a purpose of keeping your online experience safer and better. Ofcourse it's flawed but unless you have the solution then just buy the game new or pay the measly $10 if you want to go online with it. If you're truely strapped for cash and grudge $10 then a new game is the least of your worries.
@HaloPimp978 For people who just want to rent a game to try it I usually see trial passes, so you can rent games and play online for a while without buying the online pass.
So less people will play online. BTW It won't stop me from buying used games bc I don't care about caotic online gaming. Nice try!
@RadView What are you babbling about? Gas, food are all necessities of life and taxes are a necessary evil. Since when is a game a necessity? Are you that delusional and spoiled? I like people like you, who are too cheap, poor, and spoiled to buy a game new and feels entitled to play games at half the cost and obviously doesn't care about the developers. By the way, I rarely sell games and usually when I do it's years later. Most of the time I'll just give it away to friends. By the way you can still try a game out by renting it. You just won't get to play online. Oh, whoa is me. Boo hoo hoo.
Here we go again with this online pass thing. I really think its unfair to people who just want to rent to game to try it out. It just shows how greedy the industry is getting.
@plm3d_basic Get a job! lol So when taxes, gases prices, food goes up we should just tell everyone to "get a job!" right ?? I like people like you, who buy new games so when your done them less than 10-20hrs later I can pick it up used from your ebay listing or which ever retailer you traded it in, for half the price you paid.
Incredibly naive to believe this goes to the developers. This goes directly into executive bonuses for the publishing company. Children have no idea how the corporate world works.
How is this punishing your customers when the people who buy used games aren't your customers? The developers make nothing from used game sales. The only people profiting from used games are Gamestop and similar outlets. If you buy the game new then everything is included and no toll. Apparently, some people on here can't comprehend that idea. Here's another idea. Get a job!
So while Gamestop and other companies alike.."Used game dealers", rack in those Billions dollar profits...they still some how manage to go after the gamers wallet. There has to be a better way, is this truly is becoming a issue, why not all publishers and developers, music artist focus on the legalities of this and in a further means of taking some of this profit. This is obviously a flawed system that has been greatly overlook for several years in media.
Whats the point of buying recent releases second hand anyway. Amazon.com new price is cheaper than Gamestop used prices 90% of the time.
Avalanche Studios co-founder says developer's ambition is for action, not moments that make players cry; steampunk-style game on hold. Full Story
- Posted May 15, 2013 6:33 am PT
4A Games creative director Andrew Prokhorov thanks Jason Rubin for telling the studio's story, but says, "We deserve the ratings we get." Full Story
- Posted May 16, 2013 12:44 pm PT