Jimquisition: Online Passes Are Bad For Everybody

[Azuaron]

I buy used games because I have no choice. I can't afford to buy them new.

I buy used games because I have no choice.

I have no choice.

no choice.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Don't buy the game/s?

Buy 1/3 the games you normally would?

Wait until the game's older and cheaper, but still buy it new?

Make more money?

Start a pool with your friends/family and buy games together, then share them.

Spend less money in other aspects of your life (for instance, my mom's recently gotten into extreme couponing, and she now pays $50/month on groceries for two people. I spent more than that on groceries when I was in college and "groceries" meant "ramen".)

Now, right at this moment, I am not saying that used games shouldn't exist. I'm saying that you saying you buy used games because you have "no choice" is:

1. A lie.

2. Disingenuous.

3. A lie.

You have many, many choices, you are simply choosing the easiest one for you at this moment. Don't pretend otherwise.

 

[dystopiaINC]

The problem with believing that used games are a good way for gamers to test new IPs is that publishers require the sales of the new IP to judge if a sequel is worth it. If everyone buys a new IP used, then it simply isn't going to get a sequel because the publisher doesn't consider it worthwhile since the first game just didn't sell. If someone made a great new IP, but most people bought it used because they are afraid of that fact, then there wouldn't be a chance to BUY a sequel because a sequel wouldn't happen.

EDIT: Also, why do people expect companies to trust them? Do you know the first rule of fucking business? It's that you NEVER trust your customer. When you give a customer trust, even just a little bit, then they will find ways to exploit that trust and fuck you over because of it. Not trusting your customer is good business. It isn't being a dick or being rude. Stop being entitled and expect publishers to trust you, because it isn't going to happen.

I hate the entitlement of so many gamers nowadays.

never trust your customers, i work in fast food and we require people who walk in with a problem to show is their receipt and we'll help them, yet almost half the people i give the recites to don't take them.

also we once had a coupon special and we had to start making sure we rips the coupon as soon as they gave it to us because we had instances of people taking their coupons back when he turned our back to make their order, and reusing them the next day. before we wold have a stack of five or six coupons since everybody and his bother was coming in with them, and they even took the stack a few times and came back with tree of four of them. never trust the consumer.

 

[Epona]

As a PC gamer I know where it leads when the publishers treat you like shit. Oh, it starts out harmless enough but before you know it you're trying to play your game, only you cannot because Steam fucked up a CD key with TAGES or the secuROM client can't connect or StarForce forgot to make a 64bit version of their DRM or printed the wrong key in the cover or Steams offline function craps out again. That all started with a simple cd check. That hurt nobody, right? So don't just accept this crap like it's a fair deal.

Yes, it's funny how people seem to ignore the example that is right in front of them. Somehow they believe that what publishers did to the PC via DRM can't possibly happen to consoles even though it's happening right under their noses. Online passes are really just activation keys that will lead to the end of the used market when they take the next logical step and completely lock down games until you input an activation key.

 

[Redd the Sock]

Point 1: Valid, but not really what is concerning companies. I guess I speak for myself when I say that the $5 difference in price is never the selling point for used games for me. I'd rather pay the extra $5 and be sure I got an unabused copy. The same applies to trying new titles. $5 off isn't going to get me to try the new risky game. I wait at least a year for 20 - 30 off. Yeah, it's true that the used market has got me waiting with baited breath for the new releases later, but they're after the quick turnarounds, not the more general used market. Besides, if $5 is really going to break your budget, perhaps you should be in the gaming world in the first place.

Point 2: only recently valid. Those of us resistant to the whole digital thing have pointed out the possiblity off massive server outages to general dismissal. We only recently have a real life example of it being a real issue.

Point 3: not related as it's a technical issue. They could easially embed the code in the game and link the code to your account the way it does now without the manual entering. That is more a courtasy to show that yes, this code has yet to be redeemed.

Additional point: the type of gamer inclined to trade in the game in two weeks may not even redeem the pass. I've received day one DLC in used games that could still be claimed, so I imagine there's going to be a few unclaimed online passes in the used section, game depending.


I've always said the best thing for publishers to do is to try and make a deal with gamestop for used games, controling when games may be offered used and a cut of the price. It could be tiered by age, as in, 50% percent of the profit for a game less than 6 months ond, yet only 5% of the profit on soething more than 3 years old. Sadly, Gamestop has no reason to bargin. These things have yet to sut into their sales, and probably even help the more profitable used sales as we wait unti the savings catch up to the extra costs. With games going the digital route, their days as a software seller are numbered anyway, with the used market being their only use, and even that's limited.

 

[leviadragon99]

Well then what's the alternative, let Gamestop pocket 100% of used game sales and make the gaming industry that much less lucrative, in turn cutting down on the number of companies with the cash and will to actually release tangible game copies?

Yeah, flow-on effects can be used to prove anything, and the argument is not one-sided, hell my take on it here is dramatically abridged and misses several of the relevant points I've forgotten.

 

[Epona]

The problem with believing that used games are a good way for gamers to test new IPs is that publishers require the sales of the new IP to judge if a sequel is worth it. If everyone buys a new IP used, then it simply isn't going to get a sequel because the publisher doesn't consider it worthwhile since the first game just didn't sell. If someone made a great new IP, but most people bought it used because they are afraid of that fact, then there wouldn't be a chance to BUY a sequel because a sequel wouldn't happen.

EDIT: Also, why do people expect companies to trust them? Do you know the first rule of fucking business? It's that you NEVER trust your customer. When you give a customer trust, even just a little bit, then they will find ways to exploit that trust and fuck you over because of it. Not trusting your customer is good business. It isn't being a dick or being rude. Stop being entitled and expect publishers to trust you, because it isn't going to happen.

I hate the entitlement of so many gamers nowadays.

never trust your customers

Never trust the people giving you money? It's a shame your customers trust you enough to pay you.

This is why customer service is non existent these days, the old slogan "the customer is always right" has been changed to "the customer is a thief and a liar".

 

[bombadilillo]

Well in the grand scheme, day1dlc is a secondary problem to DRM. DRM literally only affects paying customers, you can pirate copies with drm taken out as easy as you used to before it, so it is 0 percent effective and only hurts legitiment customers.

 

[CannibalCorpses]

It's funny really. I buy used games and i never buy online passes because they aren't value for money. I play on my 360 every day but i don't have gold which isn't value for money. I finish most games in a day so i don't buy them new...because they aren't value for money. I don't buy DLC because it isn't value for money.

I'm spotting a trend here...

 

[Brandon237]

You know what hurts the game industry even more than online passes? Cheap people who wait a month after a game comes out just to get a used copy of a game, thus giving all their money to Gamestop, and not the creators or publishers of the game.

"Oh no, I can't play this shitty multiplayer without putting in a code. Oh woe is me."

Yes, because everyone can easily afford to pay for every game they want new before the price drop or before used ones start appearing.

Whoops, sorry, I didn't mean yes. I meant no, no way, and if you can then you are very much in the minority and you shouldn't be blaming others for having less money than you.

Thanks for that, If I had retaliated without taking a breather and reading a reasoned response, I would likely have gone from "clean record" to "red" on my health meter in thirty seconds flat.

You know what hurts the game industry even more than online passes? Cheap people who wait a month after a game comes out just to get a used copy of a game, thus giving all their money to Gamestop, and not the creators or publishers of the game.

"Oh no, I can't play this shitty multiplayer without putting in a code. Oh woe is me."

Not everyone has money coming out of their asses, I live in a third world country. With current exchange rates (which are very good for my country at the moment), a game like Dead space 2 can cost $80... and some special edition crap things around $90-100... and this is a country where the GDP per Capita per year is under $15 000... way under that actually.
And often your online pass will be rendered useless after a while as the servers empty out anyway!

And it is capitalism... if the publishers can't compete in it, they should change their idiocy and learn to make do the way normal companies do, the games industry is the only one with this shit, they can't change the rules of the capitalistic market to suit themselves...

 

[jacobythehedgehog]

Just stop with on line passes, before you know it, you will need them to play the single player modes too

 

[SenseOfTumour]

I think one of the biggest problems is, to the customer, they seem to be saying used sales, rentals and the like are as bad as piracy. We can see straight thru that shit and it lessens the value of any genuine complaints the industry may have.

They may as well tell us DRM is for our own good.

Steam has the idea, gets the majority of sales at full price, then for those who aren't crazy about the title, knocks it out 50% off 3-6 months later. Then a year later it's 75% off for those curious about and willing to throw $5-10 bucks at it to try it. With each step down in cost, there's an exponential boost in sales numbers too.

I also still maintain that they need to stop feeling like every game needs to cost $60 to but, and $20 million and 3 years to make. Many of us would be happier buying $30 games with lesser graphics, and unknown but quality voice actors, and the like.

 

[Epona]

to me a single player game is a product and the multiplayer access to a server is an aditional service

One copy of the game per online player. There is no need to charge for multiplayer more than once (when the game is bought new) because there will never be more than one player per disc and in fact many people who buy new and pay for multiplayer will never go online with their copy.

 

[bombadilillo]

There are many solutions from a publishers side.
Teired pricing.
Digital distribution.
Gamers that people dont trade in after the first day.
Free dlc after launch. (See Valve)
Best solution: STFU and stop looking at used sales with stars in your eyes. No this is not a "unique industry" Used record and CD stores have existed popularly for 50+ years.

 

[GonzoGamer]

I hate the entitlement of so many gamers nowadays.

I hate the way gamers over/mis-use the word "entitlement" now-a-days.
I think Jim's right, if you just bought a new game for $60 you are "entitled" to a finished product that you shouldn't have to download extra crap for: provided you're not modding.

Besides. I?d rather be entitled than be a sucker.

Jim Sterling is the greatest man who ever lived, and an inspiration to us all. I kind of want him to impregnate me.


In all seriousness, Jim voices his opinions very well, and I agree with him wholeheartedly. I've declined to purchase games in the past or even rent them due to this "online pass" system to which I strongly object, and I'd like to point out to the "Call of Duty is ruining gaming" hordes that nobody is making you buy their DLC. I know that kind of came out of nowhere, but it's something to think about. People love to ***** about Activision, but they aren't doing this shit.

I've done the same.
I'm also liking this guy. I don't know if I want to bare his children but his perspective is a refreshing contrast to the usual game journalism hype machine.

But I think he touched on a very important point here that relates not just to Online Pass, but also the over-infusion/pricing of dlc, the values gamestop offers, monthly fees, releasing broken beta copies & patching them later, and every other nickel & dime money making scheme that's been thrown at us this generation:
Gamers (on the whole)need to grow a spine and start standing up to these practices that only serve to make gaming more complicated and expensive for all of us. If they remain complacent and accepting of all this bullshit, we're going to see a future of $60 demos with $120 of dlc for the complete game. Maybe the stereotype is true: gamers are mostly nerds who are used to being bullied & intimidated out of their money and are incapable of standing up for themselves.
I don't really want to believe it because I always thought I was a bit of a nerd but shit, I'm not a pushover.

It's too bad because at this point in my life I can actually afford to buy new games but I never buy a new game with one of these schemes. Then again, if used games were valued like this when I was making minimum wage, I probably wouldn't be buying any games now except for maybe the occasional PC release: it's not like I have no other interests.

 

[Aprilgold]

Once again, this shows us the need to vote with our wallets. If a game with a new pass was released that was annoying and intrusive, and no one bought it because of that, don't you think they'd rethink what they'd just done? Same for intrusive DRM. Yeah, I may not get to play the game I want to for a while, but I try to send a message.

YAAY, I DON'T HAVE TO SAY SHIT ABOUT THE SUBJECT!

See, for some reason, when I asked to have a better definition of a video, HE SLAPS HIS WHOLE ARGUMENT ON THE TITLE.... Maybe hes listening to me, eat pizza, Jim, enjoy that pizza.

 

[Genixma]

Track 09 - Court Jesters off of FFIX for anyone who is looking.

OT: I remember when you could buy a game and the game was bought good times.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

I don't get up in arms over used games. I buy both, depending on my financial situation. I do believe though that used games have an impact both ways on the publisher. One way is that a customer who is unfamiliar with said publisher may not be 100% on their products and most likely will not want to pay $60 for a new product. Therefore they buy the used game and test it out. Now yes I understand some people are either cheap or just can't afford the game new and really really really want to play that game anyway.
The other way is a customer who never played the game at its inception and maybe a year or two down the road picks said game up at a pawn shop for $5. At that point the game isn't really the focus of the publisher anymore and thus isn't subject to financial loss on said publisher as the market has moved on in scope to the newer products being produced. Or that publisher no longer exists due to cutbacks, financial mismanagement or other factors.
But I still think that there should be some kickbacks from used game peddlers (i.e. Gamestop) to the publishers directly or indirectly to help offset the huge financial gains they make off the used copies they have sold. Or not. Economics and capitalism is morally gray anyway and everyone makes money off of someone else's hard work at some point without that person seeing a dime...
What a world we live in!
But then, we could all be like the russian dude who made no money off of the NES hit Tetris and who wasn't even able to own his kickback NES and copy of his game because of the socialist country he lived in reaping the benefits.