Online Pass Required to Play as Arkham City's Catwoman

[rje5]

I'm about to stop playing games. There is a huge difference between letting someone who buys new download a free DLC, and withholding content that ships with the fucking disc to people who didn't buy new. It's not rewarding people who buy new, they're getting exactly what the developer planned on being released. They're punishing everyone else.

Maybe a kid doesn't get his allowance until later and can't afford it when it comes out. Maybe two people in the same house want to play it, one can and one can't? Especially when they hyped it up that 10% of the game is with Catwoman. You're cutting out 10% of the game?! People who enforce online passes are evil and I won't buy any of their games or their content.

What happened? When did developers and publishers stop caring about releasing a game that's fun and instead focus on how they can make as much money as possible? At least DLC is added content, although I still feel day 1 DLC is the devil because it shows premeditated money scamming. This is content that ships ON THE DISC and won't be unlocked. FUCK THAT. FUCK YOU ROCKSTEADY. I bought Arkham Asylum day 1. I will not buy Arkham City at all. I will not support developers who don't support they're fans.

Developers keep doing this because people keep buying their stuff. People need to learn to take a stand for a purpose. No other industry does this shit. Developers need to realize it's not just about what you're selling today. Maybe I pick up Arkham City down the road when it's cheap because I never heard of it. Maybe I fall in love with it and the company and say "Wow that was awesome I'll definitely get their next game new." If I see you're withholding content because I didn't know about your game, do you really think I'll have that thought?

I say this time and again, if you make your game good enough, and I do believe Arkham City will be good enough, you won't need this shit to sell your games. People won't return it that quickly, if at all. If people are playing your game and enjoying it, the market won't be flooded with used copies, and then you'll sell more new copies. Make a game worth holding onto and you won't need these shenanigans.

 

[Something Amyss]

Oh no! They're locking out people that they would gain absolutely no revenue off otherwise! Shit, it must suck to have to deal with whingers who aren't currently their customers anyway, because this is the only person that it's going to effect. Morons.

Also, everyone needs to shut the fuck up about the used cars example. You don't buy a car, use it for a week then sell it off. You keep it for YEARS before you decide to sell it, and by that time new iterations have come out if consumers to buy new. It's a stupid example people need to stop using to justify their stingyness.

Fine. Name another industry that does this. Go on, I'll wait.

It actually is a right to resell your purchases in the states, and is not a right for the pubs to make money off a used sale. While most industries don't cry about this, the gaming industry not only does, but has convinced fanboys that actual defined rights are evil.

That they make no money off used sales is silly and pointless. You are defending an industried that feels it is entitled where no other does, that they are a speshul snofwake who somehow deserve more than anyone else. Yet somehow, you feel the need to attack the people who are being infringed upon.

Classy.

 

[agent_orange420]

so what happens if the game then has a price drop? are the developers going to have a hissy fit as they are getting 100 million rather than 175 million due to a new game being sold for 19.99 rather than 39.99? is there going to be time activated DLC where you can only access certain levels/extra pish for a certain time, and if you don't queue up to get it at 12 in the morning then you dont get it?

seems they are being extra special kinds of greedy

 

[rje5]

Oh no! They're locking out people that they would gain absolutely no revenue off otherwise! Shit, it must suck to have to deal with whingers who aren't currently their customers anyway, because this is the only person that it's going to effect. Morons.

Also, everyone needs to shut the fuck up about the used cars example. You don't buy a car, use it for a week then sell it off. You keep it for YEARS before you decide to use it, and by that time new iterations have come out if consumers to buy new. It's a stupid example people need to stop using to justify their stingyness.

The used car example is perfect. Don't get caught up on "a week and sell it". How long someone owned it before hand is pointless. The car does the same thing from production line to scrap yard. Whoever owns it second doesn't get less of the product. It gets a product that has some wear on it. That's it. Games are actually worse. I already pay an online fee in Xbox Live. I already pay to play my game online, I shouldn't have to pay the publisher to play my games online too. Especially if they can't make a game that people don't want to sell right away.

 

[Something Amyss]

well to go further than that the car company makes money aslong as some1 owns it as repairs/new parts will be need on mot's or when you crash regardless. So who owns it is less of an issue. (not to mention the large difference in income per unit sold)

Unless you buy parts second hand, or buy parts through third party dealers (especially since the most common parts to be replaced probably WON'T come from the manufacturer). Yup. I've had like 16 years of car ownership experience, and almost none of my repairs benefited the dealer....And I'm probably being generous with the "almost" there.

And by that logic, it doesn't much matter whether the core game is bought used because of the present DLC model. Despite the risk you might not buy "DLC" from the automotive manufactuer, they do not resort to "online passes" and "DRM."

Hmmm....I guess the "car" example bears more parallels than I gave it credit.

 

[kenu12345]

Fun Fact for you kiddies out there
There will never be as many used sales as new sales why you ask because you have to buy new to make it used
That being said the money being lost used minimal if the game is good then it will sell good no need to fucking take used sales.
There trying to make a living and just being greedy.
But it dont matter i already know half of you are going to ignore this because you have your mind set that developers desperatly need this money.




On other news you hear about that movie pass to see non-important parts of that one movie?

 

[Ross Fixxed]

This is getting a bit tedious. I don't want to harp on but having to enter a pile of codes (50 digits worth for Rage) is not really rewarding or encouraging me.

Even a tweak like a QR code and an app that does it for you would ease the pain of the process... though not having to pay 800 points for content you often would not have paid 5 points for. I get a lot of new games but I'm not made of money.

 

[DaMullet]

Ahahahaha!

This is exactly the kind of things that will get people to buy new copies of games.

Buy new, or no boobies for you!

LOL

 

[Titan Buttons]

That is rediculous it is part of the game that people will be paying for even if they buy it second hand, content that is already on the disc shouldn't be blocked it is just daylight robbery.

Why call it an online pass? why not just call it day one DLC and get it over with.

But nothing is being downloaded, the content is on the disc you just need a pass to active it.

 

[AmrasCalmacil]

Thank goodness that if I don't buy new, I don't buy a game.

I'll be getting Arkham City the second I can, and I'll be getting it new.
I like boobies.

 

[pyrotechraider]

i don't get it, is it like DLC?

 

[Zach of Fables]

What bullshit. What fucking bullshit.
Stop screwing those of us too poor to afford sixty bucks for your shit, god dammit!

Look, you can disagree with this decision if you like, but don't tell us that you're "too poor." If you can't afford $60 for a game, then sell your $150+ Xbox or $300+ PS3 or computer. Gaming is an expensive hobby, period. If you really can't afford new games, then you shouldn't be gaming in the first place.

 

[Cormyre]

...and this is just getting out now? just in time for people who would not buy the game because of this who already had it pre-ordered to not be able to cancel out of it. Wasn't the timing about the same for Mortal Kombat as well? Last time I pre-order a WB game. I'll wait until after launch and then if it doesn't have this stupid online pass BS, then I'll buy it -_-
Yes, hi? I just paid you $60 for a new game? oh I have to put in a code to access part of it? what my girlfriend has to pay $12 to play through that part on her system? yeah, shove it up your *** publishers.

 

[rje5]

What bullshit. What fucking bullshit.
Stop screwing those of us too poor to afford sixty bucks for your shit, god dammit!

Look, you can disagree with this decision if you like, but don't tell us that you're "too poor." If you can't afford $60 for a game, then sell your $150+ Xbox or $300+ PS3 or computer. Gaming is an expensive hobby, period. If you really can't afford new games, then you shouldn't be gaming in the first place.

You sound like an elitist douchebag. Not everyone can afford every game brand new. Especially now when there are multiple huge releases coming out. A lot of gamers are young and don't have tons of money. Others actually have other bills to pay, like mortgage, electric, gas, heat, car payment, college, pets, kids, and other hobbies. If I can't afford a brand new car I buy a used one. It still comes with everything it came with new. People who think gaming HAS to be an expensive hobby are just sheep doing what they're told.

 

[EmzOLV]

Oh dear...this will NOT go over well with some people...

Nope... I can hear them now... I think they've got fire and pitchforks... *cringes in corner*

It is a bit of a bummer, but then I guess as a business they are trying to get the majority of customers to buy new copies and where they may not be receiving income from second hand sales they've provided an incentive to get some money from it somehow.

A business trying to make a profit? no way!

[sub]Jokes of course... [/sub]

Reality is I wanna play as catwoman and because I am a slave to my wants and desires I will probably pay for it somehow.

 

[Zach of Fables]

You sound like an elitist douchebag. Not everyone can afford every game brand new. Especially now when there are multiple huge releases coming out. A lot of gamers are young and don't have tons of money. Others actually have other bills to pay, like mortgage, electric, gas, heat, car payment, college, pets, kids, and other hobbies. If I can't afford a brand new car I buy a used one. It still comes with everything it came with new. People who think gaming HAS to be an expensive hobby are just sheep doing what they're told.

And that is exactly the situation I am in. I am working at a relatively low paying job, take the bus instead of having a car, and have to keep track of my spending. So you know what I do? Not buy every single new game that comes out. I prioritize. I would certainly like to buy Gears of War 3, MW3 and Arkham City, but I'm only going to buy Arkham City because that's the one I value the most. And if I end up getting it used instead, I'm not going to complain that I can't play as Catwoman because I will be spending less anyway.

Fine, if you can't afford to buy new games all the time I get it. But then don't expect the developers to accommodate you. A car is a necessity, as are gas and heating. Video games are not. That's all I am saying.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

In order of the points
1) Nothing is preventing publishers from opening up their own second hand stores. I can find no law or regulation to prevent it. They could also buy back games themselves, and give you credit towards their own titles. But they won't, because that would require thinking.

2) I meant in terms of Publisher/Developer. They get more money, so the whole "Help the starving devs" argument doesn't really stand up

3) I don't doubt it's legal. It's stupid. I was saying you shouldn't feel sorry for the publishers

Allow me to quote a man over at Destructoid

Onered said
It comes down to one thing, regardless of argument: publishers have zero proof that used games cost them any money. None. Nada. It is all conjecture, and a fair amount of hubris. Again, publishers have zero proof used games cost them money, they are not even actively trying to prove it.

I can, however, prove that Gamestop alone buys $1 billion worth of murchandise from gamers a year, and according the their president, more than 75% of that is used on new product in the same visit, and more than 95% is used in the same visit on everything in general. In simple terms, Gamestop, the evil empire of games retail, adds $1billion to gamer's pockets anually, the vast majority of which is spent on new product before walking out of the store. Numbers.

Publishers cannot prove that used games cost the industry money, they don't want to try. I've said it before, when your weapon of choice is conjecture, you have to keep your image squeaky clean. If big publishers could prove anything, they would have. They know that the second they put the effort into doing just that, they lay waste to the image they've been perpetuating, as the actual numbers would be incapable of perpetuating it for them.

1: People really needs to understand that second hand purchase has an effect on the gaming industry. It makes them compete with themselves. They cannot setup a used games market because they will be fighting themselves for customers. Just stupid. If anything they would sell new stock as used taking huge losses because they are fighting the real used market where profit margins are a lot higher.

Now that Destro comment is really mind boggling.

They prove right there that used games sales hurts the value of a game by pumping in about a billions worth (using his word) dollars back into the system. The game itself gets devalued because a 3rd of the stock gets resold.

How the hell can you can you undermine your own argument and not see it a paragraph later?

2: Well true the Devs make money the second game launches. However they do lose their jobs if the game doesn't turn a profit for the publisher. Its a co dependant relationship. You cant say that you want to help the dev, but not the publisher the 2 need each other.

3: I dont feel sorry for publishers. I understand basic business. I understand that they dont ow me anything and they only like me because I pay them. I also understand they will do whatever it takes to ensure that they get as much money as possible for their investments, in the same way I want to get as much entertainment as possible for my money. No feeling involved.

1. I don't mean to sound rude, but did you even read my post? Gamestop buys all those used games, and the credit is spent on NEW items with 75% of the money. That's $750 MILLION dollars being pumped back towards NEW sales. NEW!

2. Devs STILL get shut down by publishers sometimes, even if their game sells. So this whole "Pwese help the paww devs" argument doesn't really stand.

3. Again, no other industry on earth needs to fund itself every time an item changes hands. No other industry.

 

[rje5]

You sound like an elitist douchebag. Not everyone can afford every game brand new. Especially now when there are multiple huge releases coming out. A lot of gamers are young and don't have tons of money. Others actually have other bills to pay, like mortgage, electric, gas, heat, car payment, college, pets, kids, and other hobbies. If I can't afford a brand new car I buy a used one. It still comes with everything it came with new. People who think gaming HAS to be an expensive hobby are just sheep doing what they're told.

And that is exactly the situation I am in. I am working at a relatively low paying job, take the bus instead of having a car, and have to keep track of my spending. So you know what I do? Not buy every single new game that comes out. I prioritize. I would certainly like to buy Gears of War 3, MW3 and Arkham City, but I'm only going to buy Arkham City because that's the one I value the most. And if I end up getting it used instead, I'm not going to complain that I can't play as Catwoman because I will be spending less anyway.

Fine, if you can't afford to buy new games all the time I get it. But then don't expect the developers to accommodate you. A car is a necessity, as are gas and heating. Video games are not. That's all I am saying.

My point is, and I've said this on many forums, is that there is a difference between rewarding people who buy new, and punishing people who buy used. Give people who buy new DLC for free or reduced price. Giving people who buy new the content the developers planned to release is not a reward. It's spiteful and ridiculous to cut content for used copies. You find me one other industry that does that. Especially to cut content that they've marketed like crazy is just juvenile. People have been buying and selling used games forever, and the games industry and stronger than ever. It hasn't destroyed the industry and to act like it will is asinine. Punishing people who want to play your game just doesn't make sense. It won't make them want to buy your products new in the future.