Kingdoms of Amular locks content for second hand users.

[Hal10k]

Rewarding fans, eh?

Well I must've missed the last installment of Kingdoms of Amalur.

It appears EA has so little faith that people will keep this game that they HAVE to put a pass on it.

Not exactly encouraging.

That's kinda what I think to.. it shows a huge lack of confidence. We made this new IP, it sucks, and we NEED new sales cause no one is gonna buy this stinker once the word hits the street. People are gonna dump it, it wont sell new, so if we do get some dupes who buy it used for $20 in 3 months, we need to make something back.

Your argument would have a lot more weight if virtually every new game made these days didn't do the exact same thing. By your sort of logic, Batman: Arkham City was expected to be a commercial flop.

 

[Naeras]

Film and Music are also not comparable markets.

Films sink or swim based on their theater performance, long before they get close to hitting the personal use market. Theaters themselves are the best DRM in the world; for the primary run the only way to see a film is to physically go to a special location and rent an individual seat to watch it. By the time it gets to the secondary home market it's already been declared a success or flop and made it's money. Any additional profit is icing on the cake or off-setting the loss.

Most of the Music industry is by no means a benign industry group. That aside, the majority of musicians make their money from performances, which again are a primary experience that requires special venues and conditions. The dynamic for music is also different as consumers don't buy music to experience it once, they buy it so they can experience it whenever they want because they already have some attachment to the music. I don't recall any businesses making money hand over fist reselling week old CDs.

That brings us a back to the Game industry. The only of the three discussed that sells you the best and primary experience that can then be infinitely resold. The problem is the lack of separated primary and secondary distribution markets for games. They just don't exist right now.

Even books have an enforced primary/secondary with hard/soft cover releases.

Movies and books are still comparable markets, it's just that their distribution- and business model doesn't get affected that much by second-hand sales. Which was pretty much my point.

I'm also a bit on the fence about your point when it comes to music, but I'll concede that as I'm tired and can't manage to formulate a decent answer to that :V

 

[Sylveria]

Rewarding fans, eh?

Well I must've missed the last installment of Kingdoms of Amalur.

It appears EA has so little faith that people will keep this game that they HAVE to put a pass on it.

Not exactly encouraging.

That's kinda what I think to.. it shows a huge lack of confidence. We made this new IP, it sucks, and we NEED new sales cause no one is gonna buy this stinker once the word hits the street. People are gonna dump it, it wont sell new, so if we do get some dupes who buy it used for $20 in 3 months, we need to make something back.

Your argument would have a lot more weight if virtually every new game made these days didn't do the exact same thing. By your sort of logic, Batman: Arkham City was expected to be a commercial flop.

Arkham City? You mean the sequel to that block busting, critically acclaimed Arkham Asylum. That wasn't a new IP. It was a new game, sure, but it was already an established franchise with Batman behind it.

Perhaps my language is incorrect, but by "new IP" I mean a completely new brand/series/franchise/etc. Something that has no ground to stand on, yet. Not one that is already established as a successful series and has a character who is more well known that wheat bread.

With that said, Arkham Asylum could have been shit. It wasn't, thank Xenu, but it could have been. But Batman has a lot more pushing power than Kingdoms of Whoziwhats.

 

[Valdus]

I would much rather they just made a game that was good enough for me to not want to sell once I was done with it. That would put 2nd hand sales down a notch. If they have to rely on gimmicks like these to discourage people buying second hand it makes me think they have little faith in their game's replay value.

 

[Hal10k]

Rewarding fans, eh?

Well I must've missed the last installment of Kingdoms of Amalur.

It appears EA has so little faith that people will keep this game that they HAVE to put a pass on it.

Not exactly encouraging.

That's kinda what I think to.. it shows a huge lack of confidence. We made this new IP, it sucks, and we NEED new sales cause no one is gonna buy this stinker once the word hits the street. People are gonna dump it, it wont sell new, so if we do get some dupes who buy it used for $20 in 3 months, we need to make something back.

Your argument would have a lot more weight if virtually every new game made these days didn't do the exact same thing. By your sort of logic, Batman: Arkham City was expected to be a commercial flop.

Arkham City? You mean the sequel to that block busting, critically acclaimed Arkham Asylum. That wasn't a new IP. It was a new game, sure, but it was already an established franchise with Batman behind it.

Perhaps my language is incorrect, but by "new IP" I mean a completely new brand/series/franchise/etc. Something that has no ground to stand on, yet. Not one that is already established as a successful series and has a character who is more well known that wheat bread.

Exactly. My point is that this sort of thing has become common practice in the industry, whether it's involving an entirely new IP or a character who dates back to the 30s. You implied that the presence of day one DLC implied that the developers expected it wouldn't make any money otherwise, and I provided Batman as a counterexample to prove that this sales practice is utilized no matter what the expected sales figures are.

 

[T'Generalissimo]

I'm sick of this. I've already asserted my position on DRM for long enough to say that I hate it all, but I can't help but feel that pretty much everyone else on this thread who is against it is a MASSIVE hypocrite.

At least EA, that horrible soul-sucking company that they are, are actually allowing their customers to buy used.

You want to know another even more horrible soul-sucking company, by your standards?

The Valve comparison. The guys who don't let you buy used full-stop.

If this doesn't match your opinion on the matter, then it isn't directed at you, obviously. But if it does... /facepalm.

True, but Steam also has regular sales that are upwards of 90% off and are often in the 50 - 75% off range, which is more savings than you're likely to get from a used game.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Don't care, day one DLC has always been fine with me, doesn't matter what kind of content it is. If they want to reward fans(yes there can still be fans of such a new game because there might actually be people that have been following the development and played the demo) and day one purchasers.

More people buy new, the more money they get for their work. If people think that is wrong, then they don't know how companies work.

The only thing I care about is whether I have to enter a 296 character code. If so, keep your fucking DLC.

Really?! At most it will be a 25 character code(considering all Xbox Live DLC codes are that long). It takes all of 1 minute, 2 if you are slow, to enter the code.

Seriously, have people become that impatient and/or lazy, that they can't take 2 measly minutes to do something to get something that they can use and experience.

(Hypothetical:

Company: "This code will guarantee that you win some money, anywhere from 10, 20, 50, 100, to 1 million dollars. You just have to enter this 25 character code. We guarantee that there will be 15 people that win the million dollars.

Customers these days: Oh man, I would love some free money, but I just can't be bothered taking the time to enter that easily entered code, my two minutes of life that would be used for it is sooooo precious.)

 

[JohnDoey]

Ehhhh. Unsure how I feel about this. Any word on how big this DLC will be? My purchase could depend on it.

Its not like im going to start cussing out the game and what not. Just... Unsure.

Apparently it's a short non-essential questline.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Fair enough, you win,

What? Just like that?

No rebuttal? No arguments?

I just...

Win?

No, this never happens...

Spoiler: Image spoil.

That made me chuckle going through this thread's comments. I agree; I was surprised no argument arose.

I've used your same reasoning about day 1 DLC, and I usually get a response like, "If they still had bugs they shouldn't have gone gold, same goes for if they still had content ideas."

I just can't stand the way things are these days. It seems like most gamers(usually newer ones), if they can't get something close to free 100% of the time, no matter when they buy it, it is obvious that the company is evil, because....they are trying to make money. OH NO!

 

[Tony2077]

people these days are so lazy and full of hate

 

[TK421]

As long as this 'day one dlc' is actually extra content, i'm fine with that. If it's something that should already be part of the game, I have no kind words for them or their kin.

 

[Something Amyss]

That's kinda what I think to.. it shows a huge lack of confidence. We made this new IP, it sucks, and we NEED new sales cause no one is gonna buy this stinker once the word hits the street. People are gonna dump it, it wont sell new, so if we do get some dupes who buy it used for $20 in 3 months, we need to make something back.

I disagree (No offense, mind, just offering a contrary point of view).

It sounds more like a bad business decision. "We're doing this for every single game now, even if we should be incentivising people to play our new franchise so as to help get support for future titles."

Not so much a lack of confidence. If they had no confidence, they probably wouldn't already be talking about the future Muhmorepuhguh.

 

[Zelcor]

Buying for PC...doesn't bother me none.

While I do not like this method of game control it's EA it's practically expected from them.

 

[omicron1]

Here's where I stand on this:
Either the publisher is selling me a physical copy of the game, or he is selling me a license to use the game.

If I buy the physical copy, I can resell it however I want, at any point in the future.

If I buy the license, I can download it whenever I want, and play it as often as I want, forever.

Either way, the bonus content better stay part and parcel with the original purchase. Twenty years down the road, it had better still be there. 'Cause like it or not, you put it in the box and you're selling it to me. I own that content, and I will have it out of you, one way or the other.

So, EA, listen closely: If this thing breaks, doesn't work, or gets deactivated by you in the future (and do note that I have had paid-for products backfire on me TWICE so far), I am going to download it via other methods. And if some freeloaders hitch a ride, tough luck. That's your individual idiot tax. Wear it proudly.

 

[jklinders]

Makes perfect sense to me. No one is outlawing second hand games here and new copy buyers are getting a little something extra for actually giving the developer a slice.

A second hand game buyer is getting it cheaper not not getting all of it. I think that is fair since the developer is getting nothing for a second hand copy. Maybe if retailers were kind enough to share a bit more in the second hand market these type of things would not happen.

 

[boag]

If this indeed is DLC and not locked content on the disc, im all for it, if its not, then EA can go suck it.

Im still not convinced on this game, so i will be waiting for more info before I consider purchasing.

 

[AppleShrapnel]

I don't understand the mentality of some of you...

If the day-1 dlc content is non-essential quests or something, that's cool, right?

But if it's already on the disc, just locked, somehow it's instantly the bane of all existence? I don't follow. :S

 

[TheRookie8]

I don't see how this statement by itself should create "user hate". What they ask is reasonable, and true based upon what I've learned of the industry.

The only people who might get rubbed the wrong way about this statement are people who misunderstand its intent. I get this funny picture of people surrounding Shilling with pitchforks and torches while he hands out free stuff, ready to hang him for treason. Doesn't make much sense, but very funny.

As for the game, very excited about it. Reminds me of Dragon Age, but with a fresh setting and glorious combat. Will be getting it new, for sure.

 

[Stormz]

Well at least they aren't pulling a Bioware and announcing 20 DLC packs before the game has been released. I can at least deal with this.

 

[Innocent Bystander]

What? How do I imply that every retail copy is a used copy? If my statement doesn't make sense to you, maybe you're to blame. I didn't exactly use any big words, did I?

And no, day 1 DLC gets unlocked on every copy they approve of.

"They're punishing people who buy used. Day 1 DLC should ALWAYS be unlocked and free on every copy of the game, digital or retail."

Since there is no used market on the digital scene this two sentences imply that retail consists of used only. Because otherwise it makes no sense to bring this up...

I'm not seeing what you're getting at here either man, I don't see how he's implying that all retail sales are used.