EA has a new system. Thoughts and opinion?

[QUOTE="rp108"]

You know they aren't working for free.

Jaysonguy

They most certainly are

Any sale not new does not show up to the devs or publishers at all

To further make matters worse someone buying a used game and then playing it online actually makes the dev and publisher go in the red

So you quote one thing I said and ignore the rest? Why? I am guessing you know I am right. These companies are making money off each these investments. Sure, there are some games they don't break even but it's actually rare. Companies are losing money on used game sales but that is not the reason they are posting losses. They are posting loses because of poor management. It is THE only logical explantation when they are earning money on these investments regardless of how bad the used game industry is.

For a game to be used it had to be new at one point so the company did earn money from the initial sale. They may not get money directly from a used game sale after that but they sure as hell are getting it indirectly. Anybody in marketing will tell you that word of mouth advertising is the best form of advertising. It's cheap and spreads like wildfire.

So even though johnny junior may have bought the game used because they are outragelousy priced to begin with. Johnny telling his friends about the game and getting them to play and then they tell their friends, etc. They go out and buy games and have a 50/50 shot of being used or new. If it's new, then great, you got your cake and eat it to. But if it's used you are still gaining brand recoginiton and I guarantee you they make the differnce up in overpriced download content.

So basically what I am saying used game sales they make up by download content and these used sales can be seen really as a marketing tool. But again, if games weren't overpriced to begin with the used game industry would not be as large as it is.

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

[QUOTE="rp108"]

You know they aren't working for free.

rp108

They most certainly are

Any sale not new does not show up to the devs or publishers at all

To further make matters worse someone buying a used game and then playing it online actually makes the dev and publisher go in the red

So you quote one thing I said and ignore the rest? Why? I am guessing you know I am right. These companies are making money off each these investments. Sure, there are some games they don't break even but it's actually rare. Companies are losing money on used game sales but that is not the reason they are posting losses. They are posting loses because of poor management. It is THE only logical explantation when they are earning money on these investments regardless of how bad the used game industry is.

For a game to be used it had to be new at one point so the company did earn money from the initial sale. They may not get money directly from a used game sale after that but they sure as hell are getting it indirectly. Anybody in marketing will tell you that word of mouth advertising is the best form of advertising. It's cheap and spreads like wildfire.

So even though johnny junior may have bought the game used because they are outragelousy priced to begin with. Johnny telling his friends about the game and getting them to play and then they tell their friends, etc. They go out and buy games and have a 50/50 shot of being used or new. If it's new, then great, you got your cake and eat it to. But if it's used you are still gaining brand recoginiton and I guarantee you they make the differnce up in overpriced download content.

So basically what I am saying used game sales they make up by download content and these sales are really a marketing tool. But again, if games weren't overpriced to begin with the used game industry would not be as large as it is.

No I quoted that part because the rest is too off base

You say it's greedy to want to sell something for more then what it cost to make? Really?

So you hate everything that's sold then?

[QUOTE="rp108"]

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

They most certainly are

Any sale not new does not show up to the devs or publishers at all

To further make matters worse someone buying a used game and then playing it online actually makes the dev and publisher go in the red

Jaysonguy

So you quote one thing I said and ignore the rest? Why? I am guessing you know I am right. These companies are making money off each these investments. Sure, there are some games they don't break even but it's actually rare. Companies are losing money on used game sales but that is not the reason they are posting losses. They are posting loses because of poor management. It is THE only logical explantation when they are earning money on these investments regardless of how bad the used game industry is.

For a game to be used it had to be new at one point so the company did earn money from the initial sale. They may not get money directly from a used game sale after that but they sure as hell are getting it indirectly. Anybody in marketing will tell you that word of mouth advertising is the best form of advertising. It's cheap and spreads like wildfire.

So even though johnny junior may have bought the game used because they are outragelousy priced to begin with. Johnny telling his friends about the game and getting them to play and then they tell their friends, etc. They go out and buy games and have a 50/50 shot of being used or new. If it's new, then great, you got your cake and eat it to. But if it's used you are still gaining brand recoginiton and I guarantee you they make the differnce up in overpriced download content.

So basically what I am saying used game sales they make up by download content and these sales are really a marketing tool. But again, if games weren't overpriced to begin with the used game industry would not be as large as it is.

No I quoted that part because the rest is too off base

You say it's greedy to want to sell something for more then what it cost to make? Really?

So you hate everything that's sold then?

Off base? LOL! Did you read it? They are MAKING MONEY ON THESE INVESTEMENTS WITH USED GAME INDUSTRY AS IT STANDS TODAY. If they weren't earning money on these investments you can very well bet they would stop. So what this implies is that the used game industry only affects their bottom line by a small percentage. Then that means, it's greed.

I never said to not sell something for more than it cost, never. I said was if you cost you 2 million to make a game, you get 20 million. You realize that you could have gotten 30 million if used games weren't a problem. So you punish the people willing to give you 20 million dollars to combat the 10 million that don't. That is greed.

They make their money up in used game sales both directly from download content and indirectly from marketing. These companies are poorly managed but let's close our eyes just like in every other industry.

All of you that thinks this is great......... when you grow up one day, you will realize that you have to buy used. If/when you go to college, you will more than likely buy used textbooks. Also, almost every one of you, unless absolutely filthy rich, will have to buy a used car someday. Now, I know you guys will come up with some excuse as to why buying used textbooks and cars is different, but it's not. The main complaint that I see is that Gamestop rips off the consumer by buying back games at a low cost and selling them for a considerably higher cost. This makes it so both the customer and the developer are getting ripped off. Anyone who goes/has gone to college knows that this is the exact scenario with college bookstores. They buy back books at a ridiculously low rate and sell them for insanely high amounts. This screws both the consumers and the publishers of the books. Meanwhile, a used car dealership is the exact same thing. They buy cars for well under blue book value and turn around and overprice them when selling them, screwing both the buyer and the car manufacturers.

To all those who think that EA is right, please be sure to remember that when you go off to college or the next time you need a new car. Be sure to get it new to make sure that the makers get their "fair" share.

This policy is ludicrous. EA doesn't have any claim to anything sold on the used market, just like every other corporation in existence.

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

[QUOTE="rp108"]

So you quote one thing I said and ignore the rest? Why? I am guessing you know I am right. These companies are making money off each these investments. Sure, there are some games they don't break even but it's actually rare. Companies are losing money on used game sales but that is not the reason they are posting losses. They are posting loses because of poor management. It is THE only logical explantation when they are earning money on these investments regardless of how bad the used game industry is.

For a game to be used it had to be new at one point so the company did earn money from the initial sale. They may not get money directly from a used game sale after that but they sure as hell are getting it indirectly. Anybody in marketing will tell you that word of mouth advertising is the best form of advertising. It's cheap and spreads like wildfire.

So even though johnny junior may have bought the game used because they are outragelousy priced to begin with. Johnny telling his friends about the game and getting them to play and then they tell their friends, etc. They go out and buy games and have a 50/50 shot of being used or new. If it's new, then great, you got your cake and eat it to. But if it's used you are still gaining brand recoginiton and I guarantee you they make the differnce up in overpriced download content.

So basically what I am saying used game sales they make up by download content and these sales are really a marketing tool. But again, if games weren't overpriced to begin with the used game industry would not be as large as it is.

rp108

No I quoted that part because the rest is too off base

You say it's greedy to want to sell something for more then what it cost to make? Really?

So you hate everything that's sold then?

Off base? LOL! Did you read it? They are MAKING MONEY ON THESE INVESTEMENTS WITH USED GAME INDUSTRY AS IT STANDS TODAY. If they weren't earning money on these investments you can very well bet they would stop. So what this implies is that the used game industry only affects their bottom line by a small percentage. Then that means, it's greed.

I never said to not sell something for more than it cost, never. I said was if you cost you 2 million to make a game, you get 20 million. You realize that you could have gotten 30 million if used games weren't a problem. So you punish the people willing to give you 20 million dollars to combat the 10 million that don't. That is greed.

They make their money up in used game sales both directly from download content and indirectly from marketing. These companies are poorly managed but let's close our eyes just like in every other industry.

OK, now you've perfectly cemented yourself in being off base

You're dictating to a company how much they're allowed to make

"Well 20 million is ok but 30 million isn't ok"

How about this? I think that you don't need anything but the very basic things in life to get by. That means no TV no internet and no games, anything else is greedy. According to your rules for other companies I'm right to think that and you're being greedy.

Now, I know you guys will come up with some excuse as to why buying used textbooks and cars is different, but it's not.

psyko0815

If you buy a used book and the binding starts to go can you have it replaced at no cost? No

If you buy a used car and something starts to break in it can you have it repaired at no charge from the dealer? No

So if people are buying used games why should they be allowed to use EA's online services for free?

[QUOTE="billyd5301"]

The difference is that video games companies can take advantage of this because your console is hooked to the internet while Samsung can't do this with a television, Ford can't do it with a car, or Topps can't do it with baseball cards. It is VERY unfair and only someone working in the industry for a big name company could possibly think this was a "good" thing.

Jaysonguy

Completely wrong

Ford DOES do it with their cars and Samsung DOES do it with their TV's

EA isn't stopping anyone from buying games used and ripping off devs and publishers. They're stopping anyone who rips them off from using their services for free.

If you buy a car from a Ford dealer and you need it repaired it'll be covered by the Ford dealership. If you buy a Ford from a third party and want something fixed you'll be paying out of pocket. Same with Samsung and every single manufacturer on the planet.

And to go further, I play a lot of video games, but I also work for a living. I am not and was never big on the preorder exclusive stuff anyways because I don't like having to shop around to buy a freaking VIDEO GAME. If you want to give me money off fine, but shopping around 10 stores to see who is giving away an extra map or golden gun is well beneath me at this point. And I am sure the other 99.9% of video game consumers that I already mentioned do not give two cents about it ether. But yeah, really EA, why jump in bed with Gamestop and used game dealers to make life harder on consumers so you can shove a knife in their backs two years later???

billyd5301

If you're not willing to put in any effort then there's no reason to complain about the shopping practices.

As far as Gamestop they do sell new games and the incentives are only for the new games.

??? How is a warranty vs. missing content compatable? If I go buy a Ford car from a used dealership it doesn't have half the horsepower. It doesn't shut off at 65mph unless I send Ford a check for $6000. If I buy a Samsung tv of my friend it doesn't have half of the channels unless I pay Samsung.

And to further show how wrong you are if I buy a 2009 or even a 2005 used Ford, it IS still covered under factory warranty no matter how many owners have hadit. I can go to a used lot right now and ask them which cars they have that are still under warranty. Heck just go over to an auto trading website and search for USED CARS STILL UNDER WARRANTY. That means I could be the third owner of a car... yet the manufacturer still will fix it for FREE. Why? BECAUSE THEY SOLD IT ONCE!!! They take into account that this car has ALREADY BEEN SOLD! So not only are you wrong, but you refuse to see the fact that used games have already been profited on by the manufacturer. After that so long as you live in a free country it is your right to buy and sell how you see fit. Only in one of the greediest business in the world, video games, would a company somehow see it as correct to profit more than once off of something. If they REALLY want to make profit off of their games multiple times how about they open the EA Store on every block and do it the right way?

And if I buy a used Samsung tv I do have the warranty as long as when I buy it I get the original receipt and warranty info. You really aren't even making sense at this point.

??? How is a warranty vs. missing content compatable? If I go buy a Ford car from a used dealership it doesn't have half the horsepower. It doesn't shut off at 65mph unless I send Ford a check for $6000. If I buy a Samsung tv of my friend it doesn't have half of the channels unless I pay Samsung. And to further show how wrong you are if I buy a 2009 used Ford, it IS still covered under factory warranty no matter how many owners have it. I can go to a used lot right now and ask them which cars they have that are still under warranty. And if I buy a used Samsung tv I do have the warranty as long as when I buy it I get the original receipt and warranty info. You really aren't even making sense at this point.billyd5301

Not at all

1. The EA games wont be missing content, all of the content on the disc is available for everyone. ADDITIONAL ONLINE CONTENT wont be available for used buyers unless they have a new copy with that pass code. You do not get the extra service for free unless it's new.

2. The same applies to cars and TV's

The warranty is a service and the reason you get that service is because you've directly supported the TV or car maker, if you buy it used you don't get that service.

No one is talking about lack of content or as one member thinks an additional price to all games, EA is simply saying if you do not buy in a way that supports them they will not offer their services free of charge

Just like every other comapny on the planet

When I saw this from EA I shook my head just like I shook my head when DLC was first introduced. The consumer will begin to get nickle and dimed and this is only the start of it. I remember when DLC was first introduced I actually created a thread on here saying it will get abused and developers will take advantage down the line by leaving things out of games but calling it DLC a few months later so they can make their release dates. A lot of people shot me down and supported DLC but as I read this thread I see people are starting to realize what DLC is becoming. Like most of you I see this type of thing growing and this is only the start of it.

What annoys me about EA inparticular is that 80% of their games can use the same basic code from the previous year. There is no way you can convince me that EA starts from scratch everytime they make a Madden game. Espically when the main diff from 09-10 is gang tackling and better crowd graphics. So how is EA not ripping us off by charging full price for games released yearly that cost them half the production costs of an original game. Other developers can not put out a game every year, its more like every 3 years.

Then there is the subject of fanboys/ignorant parentsthat go into GS and buy a used game for 54 beans. If you know gaming then you know this is absurd but it happens constantly. After all the complainingabout MW2, I think over 17 million bought the DLC which was 3 new dinky maps and 2 recycled maps for 15 bucks. That number amazed me and made me realize that eventhough some complain, a lot of people will still buy it. (correct me if my numbers are off)

The Jay poster from above did have a good point about why EA shouldn't get paid for a used game if the person is using their online service. I do get that but the 2 things I ask in return is: 1. does it really cost EA 10 bucks for a new person to use their server? (i highly doubt it) 2. Does EA complain when a person buys a used game and then buys DLC for it? (nope)

And for people that only buy new games, I applaud you. Let me know when you grow up and have to pay a mortgage and support a child and then let me know how you feel about being charged more money for something that is already an expensive hobby.

[QUOTE="psyko0815"]

Now, I know you guys will come up with some excuse as to why buying used textbooks and cars is different, but it's not.

Jaysonguy

If you buy a used book and the binding starts to go can you have it replaced at no cost? No

If you buy a used car and something starts to break in it can you have it repaired at no charge from the dealer? No

So if people are buying used games why should they be allowed to use EA's online services for free?

If you buy a book, does the publisher take out the index? No.

So if people are buying used games, why should EA be able to take out something that was included with the initial product?

Your argument is totally flawed. You are talking about books and cars being repaired from the manufacturer. Of course they wouldn't do that... just like I wouldn't expect EA to replace a disc that no longer plays if I bought it used. Online, however, is something that comes in the package when you buy the product.

all you people saying that the developer deserves to get money from the used game sales thats ridiculous, what happens in the used market is nothing to do with the developer

if i went out and bought a second hand car tomorrow then the manufacturer of that car doesnt get any money, only the garage you are buying it from does, but you dont think there is anything wrong with that, u just think its a good deal on a car

if car manufacturers started making cars that say the brakes only worked if you bought the car new, and if you bought it second hand you would have to take it to a dealer and pay a fee to re-activate the brakes, then you would all go mental, but i dont see how this situatuion is any different to something like that happening?

i think it's BS, i rent 90% of my games before buying and the online and multiplayer parts of the game are the deciding factor if i buy a game or not. i WILL NOT purchase a game if it does not have good multiplayer because i can always just rent a game to beat the single player, multiplayer is what gives the game re-play value, if i can't test the online before i buy then i simply wont buy.

Super, you work for free

I don't know why you'd expect everyone else to

Is there a particular reason you want everyone to work for free like you are currently doing?

Jaysonguy

Please that lame excuse holds no water, because guess what, in order for me to buy Mass Effect 2 used someone had to already buy it. The only way GS can live on used games, is if people are buying a ton of new games. so its not like publishers haven't sold a copy in years. Second like others have said, the used market benefits the new game market. I bought a used copy of ME1 in January obviously because there is nowhere to get a new copy. Then I went on to buy ME2 a few weeks later brand new. If I hadn't bought ME1, I wouldn't have bought ME2. So EA gained a sale from the used market and I highly doubt I'm the first person in history to do that.

Secondly Funcoland has been around for a long time and the game industry somehow has seemed to survive, hell there were more places in the used game market back in the cartridge days then there are now, since GS has all but taken it over. Yet here we are with motion controls and Xbox Live all these years later, because the used game market is clearly not the death sentence you make it out to be. Simply put EA makes their money and plenty of it, they just want more. There is nothing wrong with that, its how a free market works. But they need to actually compete, to give people a reason to not trade in a game two weeks after buying it. Instead of trying to strong arm a one sided relationship with consumers.

Here is a list of ways not to compete, tell me to pay 60 bucks for a game and then an extra 20 for content that was in the game to begin with, but just held back to sell as micro transactions. To build on that, stop making games so transient. I buy Madden this year and less than a year later its useless a paperweight. Why would I keep that and why not trade it in for the next Madden? Call me crazy, but how about NOT sending people to the place your competing against. That's like me owning a laundry next door to a competitor and I tell people to go to the other place to get change for my machines. Does that make any sense? They make every move to promote this market and when they see all the money it makes because of them, they want that money. Well welcome to the world of business EA, you want consumers, your going to have to sweeten the pot, not wave around threats. I'm not going to go into McDonald's over Burger King because there is a worker in front of McDonald's with a shotgun. In fact. I'm probably going to avoid that whole scene completely.

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

[QUOTE="psyko0815"]

Now, I know you guys will come up with some excuse as to why buying used textbooks and cars is different, but it's not.

psyko0815

If you buy a used book and the binding starts to go can you have it replaced at no cost? No

If you buy a used car and something starts to break in it can you have it repaired at no charge from the dealer? No

So if people are buying used games why should they be allowed to use EA's online services for free?

If you buy a book, does the publisher take out the index? No.

So if people are buying used games, why should EA be able to take out something that was included with the initial product?

Your argument is totally flawed. You are talking about books and cars being repaired from the manufacturer. Of course they wouldn't do that... just like I wouldn't expect EA to replace a disc that no longer plays if I bought it used. Online, however, is something that comes in the package when you buy the product.

For like the third or fourth time, they're not removing anything from the game

Every single game new or used is exactly the same. They'll have all the same content and they'll have all the same features

They'll both be able to go online except that only people with the online pass will be able to use EA's online service. Everyone else will be held up at the log in screen and get 7 days for free and then have to pony up the dough to keep going

There is nothng being removed from the game

[QUOTE="psyko0815"]

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

If you buy a used book and the binding starts to go can you have it replaced at no cost? No

If you buy a used car and something starts to break in it can you have it repaired at no charge from the dealer? No

So if people are buying used games why should they be allowed to use EA's online services for free?

Jaysonguy

If you buy a book, does the publisher take out the index? No.

So if people are buying used games, why should EA be able to take out something that was included with the initial product?

Your argument is totally flawed. You are talking about books and cars being repaired from the manufacturer. Of course they wouldn't do that... just like I wouldn't expect EA to replace a disc that no longer plays if I bought it used. Online, however, is something that comes in the package when you buy the product.

For like the third or fourth time, they're not removing anything from the game

Every single game new or used is exactly the same. They'll have all the same content and they'll have all the same features

They'll both be able to go online except that only people with the online pass will be able to use EA's online service. Everyone else will be held up at the log in screen and get 7 days for free and then have to pony up the dough to keep going

There is nothng being removed from the game

yeah well to use the book argument as an example, if i bought a used book but for the last chapter the pages were glued together and i couldnt read them to find out the end unless i paid the original publisher some money

in this situation nothing has been removed from the book, you would just have to pay more to access it, but you would find this unacceptable, so why is it acceptable for a game to do the same thing?

[QUOTE="psyko0815"]

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

If you buy a used book and the binding starts to go can you have it replaced at no cost? No

If you buy a used car and something starts to break in it can you have it repaired at no charge from the dealer? No

So if people are buying used games why should they be allowed to use EA's online services for free?

If you buy a book, does the publisher take out the index? No.

So if people are buying used games, why should EA be able to take out something that was included with the initial product?

Your argument is totally flawed. You are talking about books and cars being repaired from the manufacturer. Of course they wouldn't do that... just like I wouldn't expect EA to replace a disc that no longer plays if I bought it used. Online, however, is something that comes in the package when you buy the product.

For like the third or fourth time, they're not removing anything from the game

Every single game new or used is exactly the same. They'll have all the same content and they'll have all the same features

They'll both be able to go online except that only people with the online pass will be able to use EA's online service. Everyone else will be held up at the log in screen and get 7 days for free and then have to pony up the dough to keep going

There is nothng being removed from the game

It's funny to me how people insinuate that all people who buy games new are rich, spoiled brats with money to burn when I bet most of these posters own HD TV's and surround sound systems. Wait, if money is so tight, why do you even own a console? And a PS3 and a Wii?DJ_Magneto

This doesn't change the price of games at all for people, they will still be the normal price and will go down over time and as long as you have a new copy you get everything without having to pay another dime

What gets me is that the difference between new games and used games isn't even that much anymore. I mean Tiger Woods 2011 now on Amazon is 56 plus 20 bucks back, what's it going to sell for at a used place next month? 54 with no money back?

It's about time a company took a stand and did something to stop these used sales from continuing to destroy the industry

Jaysonguy

you know whats ironic.

EA,makes the Bad Company games.

^ Not to mention games like Mass Effect with the Cerebrus network. I rented Mass Effect 2 from Gamefly and was unable to access content because I didn't have a code to access Cererbrus. Same as if you sold this to your friend, he would then be unable to access that content. I was even unable to access the Dr. Pepper promotional items because I didn't have it. Jasonguy is trying to dodge anything that makes common sense in defense of this for his own gain, but keeps coming up with the same statement that is nowhere near true time after time. billyd5301

This idea of theirs just doesnt sit right with me. As I said thats stops people from borrowing games from each other. We all know once Madden drops and it close to the next season, it becomes worthless, now it will really have a low trade in value. I use my games as trade to pick up new titles, but now if this was to effect more games then that would make my trade-ins worth jack or at least worth $10 less.

For people to buy the games used someone had to buy it new at one point, so EA got their money. Now as far as using their servers, if I sell my copy of Madden to my friend I am nolonger on their server and he is taking my place, so it remains the same.

if car manufacturers started making cars that say the brakes only worked if you bought the car new, and if you bought it second hand you would have to take it to a dealer and pay a fee to re-activate the brakes, then you would all go mental, but i dont see how this situatuion is any different to something like that happening?

NoDzombie

Exactly.

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

Super, you work for free

I don't know why you'd expect everyone else to

Is there a particular reason you want everyone to work for free like you are currently doing?

Sepewrath

Please that lame excuse holds no water, because guess what, in order for me to buy Mass Effect 2 used someone had to already buy it. The only way GS can live on used games, is if people are buying a ton of new games. so its not like publishers haven't sold a copy in years. Second like others have said, the used market benefits the new game market. I bought a used copy of ME1 in January obviously because there is nowhere to get a new copy. Then I went on to buy ME2 a few weeks later brand new. If I hadn't bought ME1, I wouldn't have bought ME2. So EA gained a sale from the used market and I highly doubt I'm the first person in history to do that.

Precisely. My fiancee bought Bioshock pre-owned, for example, on my recommendation, and then went on to buy Bioshock 2 brand new at release. Same with Mass Effect, like you. The used game market helps fuel the game market whether EA like it or not. I think it's a disgrace to charge users like this, as if they aren't getting ripped off enough with cheap re-hashed sports games or overpriced DLC (not all DLC and not necessarily from EA but you get the picture.)

Like others have said, if other markets and manufactuers started doing this with their products there would be uproar. What makes it okay for EA to do it? Microsoft don't go nuts over you buying pre-owned consoles for God's sake so what makes EA think they're important enough to get away with it? It's not like they're broke or on the brink of bankruptcy. It's greed pure and simple and to try and make it out to be a valid business measure is preposterous.

What other company makes more money off used goods after the initial sell? You know, EA is actually hoping that people get rid of their games they bought for 60 bucks, so they can be bought used by gamers to activate their online passes and make another 10 on top of that. Hold on... think about this... yes, it makes sense now! EA IS FOR THE USED GAMEs MARKET! :o *facepalm*

You know, I didn't think paying for online could get anyworse. First Xbox Live for 50 bucks, feel shafted but I like online but I pay for it. Not only that, but now it's moving to individual games. And for what? To combat glorified pawn shops & pirates who werent gonna buy your crap in the first place either. dj_pulserfan

So many complaining. If you dont like it, dont buy it, simple. If EA sees a big loss i bet they will revert the change.

I'm so happy, I just wish they were charging more

I don't know who thinks they have the right to get games and not have the money go to the developer and the publisher. That's what happens when you deal with stores that sell used games, the people who made the game see none of it.

So now we have EA who finally say enough is enough with their "fine you want to screw us out of the money then we're not going to let you use our online services unless you pay" policy and for that they're only charging 10 bucks

This doesn't change the price of games at all for people, they will still be the normal price and will go down over time and as long as you have a new copy you get everything without having to pay another dime

What gets me is that the difference between new games and used games isn't even that much anymore. I mean Tiger Woods 2011 now on Amazon is 56 plus 20 bucks back, what's it going to sell for at a used place next month? 54 with no money back?

It's about time a company took a stand and did something to stop these used sales from continuing to destroy the industry

Jaysonguy

Thats just stupid. For one when you buy a new game, that suks, your stuck with it, used most places offer a trail period. This is just EA realizing people hate them for their PISS poor customer service and VERY glitchy often never patched games.Namely Madden, I dont know how many times new maddens have major bugs and they say "oh well better luck next year."

So then one might say rent it or buy used first then buy new and play online... Well many of said glitches are in online only modes. So how ru supposed to know if EA tarded up another game without giving them ur hard earned money to keep????? EA sucks, they became big from making decent products and taking care of consumers, now the do very little of either, while they line thier pockets with ur money.

So many complaining. If you dont like it, dont buy it, simple. If EA sees a big loss i bet they will revert the change.

IxX3xil3d0n3XxI

Yet another guy happy to be milked. Do you work for ea?

okay...call me cheap or selfish but second hand games cost like $35 used anda new game costs $60...which means that for $10 more, you could have 2 games old (which is just as good quality!) :P Iam a high school student and Idon't have that amount of money to spend for one game when i could add a little and get two. Sorry EA, bad move for me :P

lol, I thought from the thread title that they released a new GAME syestem. I was like WTF!

XboximusPrime

Same here, so I came in and saw this stupid new movement from EA. Stupid EA.

[QUOTE="billyd5301"]^ Not to mention games like Mass Effect with the Cerebrus network. I rented Mass Effect 2 from Gamefly and was unable to access content because I didn't have a code to access Cererbrus. Same as if you sold this to your friend, he would then be unable to access that content. I was even unable to access the Dr. Pepper promotional items because I didn't have it. Jasonguy is trying to dodge anything that makes common sense in defense of this for his own gain, but keeps coming up with the same statement that is nowhere near true time after time. franky_babylon

This idea of theirs just doesnt sit right with me. As I said thats stops people from borrowing games from each other. We all know once Madden drops and it close to the next season, it becomes worthless, now it will really have a low trade in value. I use my games as trade to pick up new titles, but now if this was to effect more games then that would make my trade-ins worth jack or at least worth $10 less.

For people to buy the games used someone had to buy it new at one point, so EA got their money. Now as far as using their servers, if I sell my copy of Madden to my friend I am nolonger on their server and he is taking my place, so it remains the same.

^ That's what Jasonguy does. He has no answer to the fact that for a game to be used it had to be sold new at one time. Plus there is no good support for this arguement unless you stand to gain something by an insulting policy like this....

I haven't recieved anything from EA in the last 10 years that even resembled an instruction manual but throwing in VIP passes doesn't seem to be a problem with them. Just like "Hey guys let's divert our resources away from making great games that people want to buy new and make a division to stop used game sales!"

lol The only thing this does is encourage more illegal downloading, and I wouldn't be surprised if there was some workaround hack for jtagged 360s.

I feel like if they reduced the cost of a new game from $60 to say $30-$40 I would have no problem buying it new the first week

I hate them now almost as much as activision.

[QUOTE="raylewisnfl52"]Thats stupid why should I have to to pay for something I already bout. So what if I buy it used I still payed for it I should be able to play online. Its stupid to pay $60 for a recycled game.Jaysonguy

Why do you think the people who make the game should get no money from it at all?

He's not saying that.

No product or industry is immune to used sales. Video Games are no different.

Theres no reason EA can't let used buyers pay $10 for those features too, at the least then it requires some money to come to them.

Infact, some might say EA should just figure the overall cost into the single MSRP of the title.

If they wanna charge $60 plus $10 for online, why not charge $70 for the game and be done with it?

And the fact is, with sports titles, a lot of ppl play sports titles for offline purposes. this will most likely do nothing to alter used sales of Madden, NBA Live, etc.

Infact, if this extends to Skate then i'm done with Skate.

If you're gonna make me pay $10 worth extra you better give me $10 extra in features, at this time i don't know if they're planning on giving us extra features since they're charging us extra for something that then entire industry doesn't charge extra for, excluding MMOs.

I can already see how 2K is gonna have a field day with this. I bet there will be lots of ads saying "you don't have to pay to play our online NBA games"

Plus a lot of people like to buy a cheap $5-$15 used sports game and then pick up a copy for a buddy too and hop online for only those two people, while no one else plays online. Are you telling me i should pay $10 to play NBA 2008 online with a friend across the country a few times, even though no one else is playing it?

I understand the used market hurts developers but i just don't see how this will ever solve the issue. No one will stop buying used games. Infact, i expect to see a drop in EA sports online gaming population due to this.

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

I'm so happy, I just wish they were charging more

I don't know who thinks they have the right to get games and not have the money go to the developer and the publisher. That's what happens when you deal with stores that sell used games, the people who made the game see none of it.

So now we have EA who finally say enough is enough with their "fine you want to screw us out of the money then we're not going to let you use our online services unless you pay" policy and for that they're only charging 10 bucks

This doesn't change the price of games at all for people, they will still be the normal price and will go down over time and as long as you have a new copy you get everything without having to pay another dime

What gets me is that the difference between new games and used games isn't even that much anymore. I mean Tiger Woods 2011 now on Amazon is 56 plus 20 bucks back, what's it going to sell for at a used place next month? 54 with no money back?

It's about time a company took a stand and did something to stop these used sales from continuing to destroy the industry

VikingNate44

EA thinks their video games can be immune from the problems that CDs, DVDs have.

They're missing one thing. Music was saved my DD in form of iTunes and other things, while it still took a hit money wise it didn't hit rock bottom.

How about EA sells Mass Effect 2 on the marketplace for $29.99 or $39.99 and $50-$60 at retail?

Works for Music. sell a download of the album for $6-$12, stores sell the physical CD for $15-$20.

But no EA wants to add costs, not subtract them even though we all know cutting out shipping and packaging gives them extra money to work with

Thats just stupid. For one when you buy a new game, that suks, your stuck with it, used most places offer a trail period. This is just EA realizing people hate them for their PISS poor customer service and VERY glitchy often never patched games.Namely Madden, I dont know how many times new maddens have major bugs and they say "oh well better luck next year."

So then one might say rent it or buy used first then buy new and play online... Well many of said glitches are in online only modes. So how ru supposed to know if EA tarded up another game without giving them ur hard earned money to keep????? EA sucks, they became big from making decent products and taking care of consumers, now the do very little of either, while they line thier pockets with ur money.

[QUOTE="Doomtime"][QUOTE="gamer082009"]lol..what makes you guys think that this isn't gonna become the norm for all major titles and not just sports games? And what makes you think if this is a success that it wont be implemented with other developers/publishers and NON-sports games?

I definitely would not support this, especially if you rent your games from Gamefly, Blockbuster or where ever. It's not just people who buy them used that get screwed, it's people that rent as well (and low income people). And what's up with all the hate against people who buy games used? lol, it's getting a little ridiculous now.

These developers are not hurting for cash..I mean look at Activision and how they made 1 Billion dollars with MW2. You make a good game, people will buy it period. And I can't believe that gamers are actually supporting a major company (EA) to screw over the low income/little guy. I tell you, ignorance is at an all time high in our country today. LOL. These developers ARE making unbelievable amounts of money (especially off of DLC content as well) (Hollywood looks at the gaming industry in aw at how much money they make).

I wont be supporting this, it's just not right and it opens the door for even more "IDEAS" that will eventually screw over the people that buy new..lol wait and see. And YOU supporters will be the ones that opened the can of worms. (but that's just my opinion of course) :)

gamer082009