Battlefield 3 Will "Probably" Use Online Pass

[Grey_Focks]

Then have a monthly fee, if I buy a game that's a slot on a server. If I give that game to a friend that slot is still there, nothing has changed. If it's to support server costs they should do what MMO's do and have monthly fees.

You'd really prefer monthly fees to a single $10 one? I guess I see where you're coming from, but good god, I think your the only one. In the current system, they would need to buy their own pay. That's putting you out $10 (20 if you bought used)....as opposed to monthly fees, and god knows what those would be.

 

[Vicarious Vangaurd]

So creating new accounts is that straining to them?

Did I read that right, or am I going crazy, because I think he said that creating accounts puts a strain on them.

Here's an idea, DON'T MAKE US CREATE NEW ACCOUNTS FOR THE GAME!

I believe by accounts he means they have to make a spot on their servers for you to be able to play which in turn means they have to give you some of their bandwidth and all the other things associated with such a thing.

OT: I'm buying it day one, it might even be my first midnight release pick up, so I am not really affected by this.

 

[Arehexes]

If you're a gamer and a fan chances are you'll read about Online Pass. If you're a gamer and a fan chances are you will get most of your games new anyways since fans don't tend to wait for purchasing. Therefor if you're a gamer and a fan knowing in advance about Online Pass is knowing about something that won't affect you in the slightest (generally).

A lot of fan's aren't stupid enough to run out and buy something the moment it hits (at least I hope not). A lot of my friends who are fans like to wait to see what game breaking bugs are on a game. But by your logic I guess fans of capcom games shouldn't complain when instead of making DLC they just release a whole new game to add more characters. Because hell they are fans so they should know, expect, and except that's what Capcom will do and take it smiling.

 

[laggyteabag]

im fine with it, i buy games like this new anyway but i think its a good way of lowering
pre-owned sales

 

[Arehexes]

Then have a monthly fee, if I buy a game that's a slot on a server. If I give that game to a friend that slot is still there, nothing has changed. If it's to support server costs they should do what MMO's do and have monthly fees.

You'd really prefer monthly fees to a single $10 one? I guess I see where you're coming from, but good god, I think your the only one. In the current system, they would need to buy their own pay. That's putting you out $10 (20 if you bought used)....as opposed to monthly fees, and god knows what those would be.

Well you said it yourself, they do it for server costs. I'm just saying if they want to really justify it as a server maintenance cost they can charge a monthly fee for it. Because as I see it right now this is just a way to make it so you can't sell your copy of the game you bought. Making so we can't own it, like I said if I buy a copy of battlefield that is my slot on the servers. And if I sell it to a friend my slot should transfer over to him no questions asked, it's not like we would both have a slot. Nope effectively we both have to buy for a slot, only I won't have the game to play with he would. So you have two slots and only one person can use that copy of the game (providing I don't buy a used copy to play again).

 

[laggyteabag]

Then have a monthly fee, if I buy a game that's a slot on a server. If I give that game to a friend that slot is still there, nothing has changed. If it's to support server costs they should do what MMO's do and have monthly fees.

Good god! Shut up! EA might be listening, and dont give them any new (and terrible) ideas!

 

[Irridium]

So creating new accounts is that straining to them?

Did I read that right, or am I going crazy, because I think he said that creating accounts puts a strain on them.

Here's an idea, DON'T MAKE US CREATE NEW ACCOUNTS FOR THE GAME!

I believe by accounts he means they have to make a spot on their servers for you to be able to play which in turn means they have to give you some of their bandwidth and all the other things associated with such a thing.

That'd make sense. But...

"The whole idea is that we're paying for servers, and if you create a new account there is a big process on how that is being handled in the backend," he explained. "We would rather have you buy a new game than a used game because buying a used game is only a cost to us; we don't get a single dime from a used game, but we still need to create server space and everything for you."

He's saying making a new account. By that I'm guessing he means EA account, since on the consoles people already have accounts, and the majority would have made that with another game, so the amount making new accounts won't be that much. Making people create accounts should not be an issue. And if it is, they should stop making people create accounts.

If he's wants to justify the online pass thing, fine. But can't he come up with a better excuse than "it's too straining to have people make new accounts"? It just makes him, and EA, look like morons.

 

[Arehexes]

Then have a monthly fee, if I buy a game that's a slot on a server. If I give that game to a friend that slot is still there, nothing has changed. If it's to support server costs they should do what MMO's do and have monthly fees.

Good god! Shut up! EA might be listening, and dont give them any new (and terrible) ideas!

No I refuse to, you guys are ok with project 10 dollar and one of the reasons is for "server costs" as you guys like to put it. So EA should do it, I mean if the used buyers 10 bucks to get access to online helps with servers. Just think what service you would get with monthly fees? I mean when Battlefield Bad Company 2 came out their were server problems because it seemed they didn't have the servers ready so yeah go for it EA do monthly fees. Your fans won't care, because they will pay for it anyway.

 

[DaHero]

A lot of fan's aren't stupid enough to run out and buy something the moment it hits

I dunno in what world you live in, but on Earth, it's a multiplayer FPS specialty to fanboy and buy everything day one. Because whoever gets their ego builder first wins...

 

[MortisLegio]

I see where EA is coming from and that makes sense to have a $10 start code for online (of used games) its when a game is Single player only and you have to pay then $10 that pisses me off

 

[ImprovizoR]

They won't make money this way. If BF3 is good, there is no reason to sell the game. And if someone wants to sell it will probably be after a couple of years. Prices will drop by then anyway. This isn't the kind of game that people will buy second-hand often.

 

[esplode]

"The whole idea is that we're paying for servers, and if you create a new account there is a big process on how that is being handled in the backend," he explained.

Not that I've had a lot of experience with development, but is the creation of an individual account really that huge of a hit after you've got the basic system down?

 

[Kopikatsu]

I hadn't thought of that before. If you buy the game used and play the multiplayer, they still have to pay for the server upkeep...so buying the game used actually COSTS them money.

 

[Black Watch]

I buy new, just for this reason. I feel that what DICE does is worth it.

 

[Arehexes]

A lot of fan's aren't stupid enough to run out and buy something the moment it hits

I dunno in what world you live in, but on Earth, it's a multiplayer FPS specialty to fanboy and buy everything day one. Because whoever gets their ego builder first wins...

Yeah..after reading that I realized the sales of CoD games and how high they are on release. I live with my head in the clouds hoping gamers won't buy the first shiny piece of eye candy that is the same thing year after sequel and then complain saying nothing changes when games they try new things (even if they may rip off other ideas) aren't looked at. Gaming is at a slump when it comes to original ideas (like resident evil 6 T_T) but right now my sights are on project 10 dollar.

I hadn't thought of that before. If you buy the game used and play the multiplayer, they still have to pay for the server upkeep...so buying the game used actually COSTS them money.

So why not charge monthly fees? That way no used sales problems AND they will have enough month for server upkeep.

 

[Ne1butme]

Let's see. No Steam purchase, Online pass... The only thing EA needs now is to require a constant online connection and they hit the trifecta of shitty game decisions.

 

[Wicky_42]

Welp, doesn't affect PC games, what with there not actually being a second hand market here.

But still, project $10 always struck me as fairly reasonable for games with large online components. Annoying, perhaps, to not have access to all the features of a game, but then again you did go looking for the cut-price copy being re-sold by a store at a ridiculous profit to them - just get a new copy from Amazon or something, or wait for a sale, save yourself some hassle and support the dev. with sales numbers.

 

[ReaperzXIII]

Ok but if I paid for a new game with my own money why should I have to pay you extra money if I feel like going to a friend's house and playing it? Or if I make a new profile? Or one of my siblings wants to play that game? They have to pay extra for online too? Unless they can address blatant holes where it limits the freedoms of even the people that paid for the game new then I think it is a terrible idea.e

Project $10 is retarded, punish the people cheating you out of your money (retailers) and not the people that may not have the money to pick up a game they want (customers). I mean its the retailers that are selling your intellectual property without giving a slice of the cash.

 

[Marudas]

Horseshit. If a game gets sold preowned, that means that someone gained a license at the same time that someone lost a license. There is still a net number of people on the server. I dont know what possible "Big backend processes" that he's spouting, but i'm getting sick of it.

Yes, you are entitled to money for people being on your server. No, you are not entitled to secondary market money when you were not at all involved in the exchange of the copy, and no, you do not get some magical extra server load from this game trading hands.