Looks like Jim has been shopping at "Spirit Of Halloween", though I didn't see those cups this year, they seemed to be availible in great quantities last year.
That said, I have to say I disagree with Jim this time around, largely because I don't like the idea of "rewarding" people who buy a game new. Cutting people out from content because they bought a game used is wrong, whether it's online or offline. Among other things it reduces the trade in value which is part of what justifies the price.
See, my basic attitude is that if a game company releases a game it's promising to support that content. Supporting a game for several years is the same, whether that game has gone through one owner, or several.
This is to say nothing of the collector's market, coming from a guy who had recently been considering trying to replace his Dreamcast and some of his favorite games, I will say that decent games that are self contained increase in value. If a game is released but requires special codes or additional purchuses for anyone other than the initial owner to access the product that reduces the overall value. Like it or not games, or at least decent ones, are becoming similar to other media like comic books and the like. What I find paticularly ironic is that the games industry seems to understand this with their various "Collector's Editions" while at the same time castrating the very market they are trying to appeal to. 10, 20, 30 years down the road some of these elaborate game sets might be worth big bucks if it wasn't for the game industry acting like a bunch of money hungry 5 year olds.
Truthfully I've wondered at the legality of selling someone as a "Collector's Edition" when the nature of the product prevents it from being a collectible. With some of these products even if the box was never opened, if you tried to sell it 50 years down the road when it requires online connection or the redemption of paticular codes... well that's an issue for a mint copy, for someone trying to sell a collectible like that in used condition it's even worse.
In the end my basic attitude is that this is about pure greed, there is no reason for the game industry... which is worth billions, to be concerned about the used game market and the trade of games in general, when that has been part of the business for a very long time. In the end it comes down to bean counters looking at the used game sales and thinking about how great it would be to be getting money there too... basically wanting to find a way to profit on the same product multiple times. As far as I'm concerned online and offline passes are both equally bad, because in the end the game companies aren't entitled to any more money, they go their money when the game was initially sold.