Rage Cuts Single-Player When You Buy It Used

[GonzoGamer]

If you buy it used, you ain't supporting the developers, just like the pirates do. Don't see anything wrong with it, as long as this new little feature doesn't affect the legit buyers.

Except it does effect legitimate buyers. What this does not effect in any way at all is people who pirate games.

That?s what bothers me about schemes like this. All they do is affect the people who don?t have as much money but still try to be legitimate consumers anyway. It?s not going to affect the pirates or the retail chains that take advantage of their monopoly on used game values. All things like this will do is encourage people with less money to start pirating.
If they really want to combat used game sales and pirating, then they have to figure out a way to make new games cheaper. It could?ve been done by making games shorter and shallower but they?ve already done that without altering the prices at all.
It?s too bad, this game looked very purchasable but something like that is usually a sign of desperation which for me is a sign to rent.

 

[fundayz]

This is exactly the same as project $10, but in reverse. There should be no fuss over it.

This. People frothing at the mouth over this just diminishes whatever credibility gamers' as a community have.

Hell, this is even LESS of a deal because it is only cutting a PART of the single player game, instead of the WHOLE multiplayer. ID is "locking out" a much less significant part of the game than Project $10 ever has.

Except it does effect legitimate buyers. What this does not effect in any way at all is people who pirate games.

First of all, legitimate customers are affected by this EXACTLY as much as by one-time validation(because that is essentially what it is).

Secondly, you realize this has nothing to do with pirates right? It's about the buying of used game disks, not illegal downloading of the game.

 

[Epona]

This is exactly the same as project $10, but in reverse. There should be no fuss over it.

This. People frothing at the mouth over this just diminishes whatever credibility gamers' as a community have.

Hell, this is even LESS of a deal because it is only cutting a PART of the single player game, instead of the WHOLE multiplayer. ID is "locking out" a much less significant part of the game than Project $10 ever has.

Has it now become the norm that Project $10 is ok? I don't think so. What you fail to understand is that this "less significant part of the game" is merely a foot in the door. Next time there will be crucial single player parts removed and eventually the entire single player game will be locked out. It will be just like PC games where the used market no longer exists.

It's not a slippery slope since these same publishers have already done it for PC games and they ARE trying to do it with console games. So yeah, people should object before it's too late.

 

[cjbos81]

Well, I guess I won't be buying this game.

To be honest, I probably wasn't going to buy it anyway.

I'm one of those "criminal degenerate scum" who occasionally purchases a game used. "Rage" might've been one of those games. Then if I really like the game, I'm all the more likely to buy the next one new.

I bought the following games used:

Gran tourismo 4
Assassins creed
Grand theft auto: San Andreas
Tom Clancy's Splinter cell.
Tomb raider.
Max payne.

I have either purchased or plan to purchase a sequel to all of these games NEW!

Well I guess id or whoever the hell can forget about that.

 

[Char-Nobyl]

Meh. I've seen stuff sorta like this before. I think this is just a failure of wording on id's part. When you buy the new game, you get a card with a code on it, and you get some sort of bonus doohicky.

The right way to pitch that is as a bonus: if you buy the game new, you'll get access to this special extra stuff. The wrong way to do it (what he's doing here) is to pitch it as an anti-piracy and anti-used game measure: unless you buy the game new, we're cutting down the single player content.

 

[blaze96]

This is a rather pointless attempt at a solution to this "problem," as I doubt this will stop many people from buying it used. This won't stop me from buying it, though.

I don't think they are trying to stop people from buying it used. I think the approach is more based around an idea that if one likes the game (singleplayer story mode and multiplayer) that they can then maybe kick some cash to the developer.

From reading the article it seems more like the free DLC that sometimes comes included with a pre-order. It isn't banned forever or even necessary, but it is just a reward for people who follow a certain path. A kind of reward for brand loyalty or supporting the game. I'm honestly okay with this idea, rather than the more strong armed tactic of literally locking an entire mode that is a major part of the experience behind a closed door.

Basically I see it as the difference between a cover charge to be a sort of VIP member of a club. Rather than having to pay a cover charge once to gain access to half the building then yet another charge to be a VIP member. So, if I have a choice between the two options, I would personally take the first.

 

[Suicidejim]

I'm obviously some kind of Neanderthal, but I don't have my 360 connected to any kind of internet connection. So even if I buy a lot of these games brand-new, I still lose out on stuff whenever they try the "use this code online to unlock your content" technique. I mean, i know connecting to the net will solve that issue, but I don't feel like I should be punished for not wanting to spend money on a function I have little interest or time for. Perhaps I'm just some Luddite who needs to be drop-kicked into the modern gaming era.

 

[Mister Linton]

Great, now you have to use PSN/LIVE to access single player content? Smart one guys.

 

[Caine Master]

This doesn't bother me to much, I usually buy my games new anyways.

 

[kael013]

Or you could, you know, buy the game new and actually support the developer? Rather than the, "Fuck you, I want to buy your game at a cheaper price, and not let any of the money go back to you, and you're a piece of shit for wanting to make a profit off of the sale of one of your games." attitude you've got going now.

You really want to blame somebody: Blame GameStop for not giving a portion of their 100% gain on a used game being sold back to the developers.

Your definition of "used game" is a little off. It doesn't mean just the second-hand games sold at GameStop, it means ALL second-hand games. I bought a new copy of Dragon Age: Origins for the 360 and after a year of playing it I sold it to a friend of mine for $40. You see where I'm going with this? HE now owns a USED COPY of DA:O; all because he wanted something I didn't want anymore. Now thankfully, DA:O doesn't have this DRM crap on it, but what if it did? My friend would have been locked out of a part of the game just because of a mutually beneficial arrangement among friends.

 

[GonzoGamer]

Next time I want to buy a used Mercedes, I'll call official Mercedes dealership to ask them if they're gonna cut my brakes if I don't give them a piece of that action.

This is fuckin' stupid. Stop punishing gamers already. This kind of behavior can only increase piracy.

Or you could, you know, buy the game new and actually support the developer? Rather than the, "Fuck you, I want to buy your game at a cheaper price, and not let any of the money go back to you, and you're a piece of shit for wanting to make a profit off of the sale of one of your games." attitude you've got going now.

I don't get why people are all up in arms about this. RAGE is going to be a massive game by the way all of the news stories seem to say about it, if it's a good game it'll be worth the money to buy it new. If you really want to save money and buy it used, then you're paying for a lesser experience. I see no issue in this.

You really want to blame somebody: Blame GameStop for not giving a portion of their 100% gain on a used game being sold back to the developers.

Then they should fucking punish GameStop, yeah? And the attitude is "I can't afford 60 dollars, but 40 or 20 won't break my bank." Selfish? Consumer rights. We don't have to buy the game, they're lucky we're buying them at all.

I actually place the blame squarely back on the Publisher for being idiotic. Has anyone actually looked at the prices for used games there or the trade in values?
Why don't the publishers just beat those prices themselves? It wouldn't be too hard.
If the consumer wants to trade in Oblivion, Bethesda could offer a better trade in value; especially if the consumer wants to put said trade in towards their Skyrim preorder. Then they could sell those used copies of Oblivion (again, cheaper than gamestop) and make the profit off of it.
Either way this practice of punishing the legitimate consumers who (probably have to for financial reasons; that's why I used to) buy used has to stop. It's just going to end up hurting the industry overall when those gamers find something more cost effective (and less insulting) to take part in.

 

[marioandsonic]

How will this affect people who rent the game?

 

[Alkore]

I would like to point out that the Publisher/developer of any game doesn't actually have any say in what Gamestop or other retailers charge the consumer for the game so if the publisher was to charge less to Gamestop for the game Gamestop could just continue to charge $60 and pocket the extra profit.

 

[serata]

Well everyone hates the sewer level anyway (though the one in Silent Hill Homecoming was pretty neat)

 

[orangeapples]

just wait until developers have you wait for an e-mail to get access to your just purchased DLC. It seems crazy, but we are headed in that direction.

 

[superline51]

Guess I will be taking this off of my Gamefly queue then.

 

[StriderShinryu]

Next time I want to buy a used Mercedes, I'll call official Mercedes dealership to ask them if they're gonna cut my brakes if I don't give them a piece of that action.

This is fuckin' stupid. Stop punishing gamers already. This kind of behavior can only increase piracy.

Or you could, you know, buy the game new and actually support the developer? Rather than the, "Fuck you, I want to buy your game at a cheaper price, and not let any of the money go back to you, and you're a piece of shit for wanting to make a profit off of the sale of one of your games." attitude you've got going now.

I don't get why people are all up in arms about this. RAGE is going to be a massive game by the way all of the news stories seem to say about it, if it's a good game it'll be worth the money to buy it new. If you really want to save money and buy it used, then you're paying for a lesser experience. I see no issue in this.

You really want to blame somebody: Blame GameStop for not giving a portion of their 100% gain on a used game being sold back to the developers.

Then they should fucking punish GameStop, yeah? And the attitude is "I can't afford 60 dollars, but 40 or 20 won't break my bank." Selfish? Consumer rights. We don't have to buy the game, they're lucky we're buying them at all.

I actually place the blame squarely back on the Publisher for being idiotic. Has anyone actually looked at the prices for used games there or the trade in values?
Why don't the publishers just beat those prices themselves? It wouldn't be too hard.
If the consumer wants to trade in Oblivion, Bethesda could offer a better trade in value; especially if the consumer wants to put said trade in towards their Skyrim preorder. Then they could sell those used copies of Oblivion (again, cheaper than gamestop) and make the profit off of it.
Either way this practice of punishing the legitimate consumers who (probably have to for financial reasons; that's why I used to) buy used has to stop. It's just going to end up hurting the industry overall when those gamers find something more cost effective (and less insulting) to take part in.

Actually, he may have been locked out of part of the content. Assuming you purchased it before they stopped giving them out, DA:O launched with a code to download the Shale character as well as it's associated storyline quests and the areas those quests took part in. When your friend bought the game used from you, they didn't get that code. The only difference here is that Shale was marketed as a bonus set of content instead of already in the game content that was locked.

 

[pixelcat]

All you people who think the devs deserve a cut of used game sales need to look at how the entire rest of the world works. Or do you also get upset that Ford doesn't get a cut of used Focus sales?

 

[Lunar Templar]

I'm only 17, and even I recall fondly the times that when you buy a game, you get that game, unimportant parts and all.

What is this?

i'm 29 and i remember those days to, good times back then, *sighs* now this crap, :/ kinda glad i only buy like 2 games a year anymore now