Rumor: Mortal Kombat Reboot Locking Multiplayer Behind Online Pass

[rwege]

I feel this is just another cash-grab that will soon become the norm if this takes hold. Keep in mind the trend in gaming used to be that you would purchase a game for its full retail price and get THE FULL GAME.

Now you get whatever the developers managed to finish and test before the company big-wigs said "enough, ship it out" regardless of the stage it was at. You can release the biggest crapfest imaginable, as long as you made a trailer for the game showing an awesome cutscene without any actual gameplay.

 

[katsabas]

I bought Mass Effect 2 second hand at about 35 euros. Would I pay 10 more? Yeah, for ME2. Depends wholly on the game. MK and Batman are also 2 games I wouldn't mind paying an extra 10. Besides, it would still be a minus 15 to 20 euros from every game, so...

 

[GonzoGamer]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Online Pass systems are a good thing. They mean that developers effectively make money from second hand sales, rather than everything going to the retailer. They deserve something for their hard work.

I just think it's too bad that they always do this by ripping off the consumer rather than the establishment that's causing their loss of revenue. Do you really think this is going to stop gamestop from selling the used copy for $57.99? Of course not. This will just lead to the consumers getting ripped off.

It's too bad because this looked like a game I would've bought new but this news inspires me to buy it used purely to make a statement. I wouldn't be playing this online anyway. Games like MK are meant to be played on the couch with friends. I'm not going to get so good at this game that I can go up against some 12 year old Korean kid who's been playing it 8 hrs a day since launch.

They can take their online and shove it.

 

[DTWolfwood]

You know what would be a hoot? the publishers charging retailers $10 for every used copy of their intellectual property and give the consumers everything inside the box. :O

must be a really silly concept to make royalties off someone else who is selling your IP for profit.

 

[Trogdor1138]

Great, the publishers want to be greedy so the consumer is the one to get shat on... AGAIN.

Why can't this "pre-owned is destroying games" bullshit just go away? Where do you think we'd be without pre-owned game sales? Fucking nowhere because I wouldn't be able to find 80% of the games I want. What happens when they stop producing copies of the game or you want to find something from a previous gen? Exactly.

Maybe you should start looking at why so many pre-owned copies are on the shelf within days after launch, instead of screwing everybody even more.

 

[spartan773]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Online Pass systems are a good thing. They mean that developers effectively make money from second hand sales, rather than everything going to the retailer. They deserve something for their hard work.

it's also, as i've said in a previous post, a way to recoup losses.

Are you sure? You sure it even goes to the developers? Or does it just go to the greedy publishers.

Think about it. These fuckers charge for content already on a disc through DLC, and now if you buy it pre-owned you have to buy more content on a disc.

You're owning less and less of the software you bought, even if you bought it new. How long does it take before a new game seriously becomes used? 6 months?

Gamestop, Best Buy sell used games.

Walmart/Online retailers (such as Xbox Live/PSN) do not.

Greedy fucks. They expect when some one buys a game a year or two later that their "online activation" bullshit is still going to be around? That crap costs money to maintain.

Now you tell me how much of that 10 dollars went towards the developers and not maintaining a shitty DRM system.**

** Note very rhetorical request that kind of data is hard to prove either way. I just don't believe that stuff is really out to "protect the developers".

listen, why else would there NOW be development of these paid online passes, DLC and the like?
This didn't exist during the ps2-xbox reign.
It's all because of the massive budget and shorter deadlines of today's games. They need a way to recoup losses based on the game. sure those prices are split umong sony/microsoft and their respective studios, but the fact still stands...
DLC and paid online passes are here to thrive. and, they said PRE-OWNED games, these passes are more than likely to be included in new copies. Example of this is Dead Space 2 Collector's Edition or new copies... it came with an online pass code... most likely this implementation will exist in 2 ways, a limited-time, one-use code included in new games and paid passes for pre-owned games...

They're finally realizing that pre-owned games exist and that they see it as a loss since none of the money goes to them,
may sound greedy but that's a bare necessity. that money's crucial... without money, coders, modelers, actors, studios would be out of jobs. no money = no more future games.

 

[spartan773]

shit, double post.

 

[jackanderson]

I've talked about this in the past with people, but I'll put it this way: If you agree with this, you and I are on opposite sides of the fence.

Do an online pass, or do paid DLC. Don't do both. No one can tell me that the company is losing money after they release 10+ characters as DLC and the grand total of the game ends up being £90.

I completely agree with that statement. It's just greedy otherwise.

 

[Shy_Guy]

This is so much crap. I rented Homefront only to find out I was locked at Level 5 online unless I paid up for a code. This idiotic plan absolutely kills rentals for everyone.

And $10 to rank past Level 5 Homefront with it's horrendous party system and constant disconnections? No thanks. Fix your fucking game before you even think about charging extra for online play.

Now Mortal Kombat will have no online at all unless you buy new? Bullshit.

 

[ryo02]

well I wasnt going to buy this game anyway so meh (or pirate it I just dont want it)

Mod Edit: Piracy is illegal

AHH bad wording on my part I meant I wasnt going to buy it or pirate it SORRY thats why I said "I just dont want it" (I dont pirate ever)

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

This is so much crap. I rented Homefront only to find out I was locked at Level 5 online unless I paid up for a code. This idiotic plan absolutely kills rentals for everyone.

And $10 to rank past Level 5 Homefront with it's horrendous party system and constant disconnections? No thanks. Fix your fucking game before you even think about charging extra for online play.

Now Mortal Kombat will have no online at all unless you buy new? Bullshit.

But you didn't buy the game, and even though rental copies cost much more than retail copies, neither you nor anyone else who rented the game have the right to enjoy the online features. I mean that makes sense, right? T_T

 

[BabySinclair]

I can understand shipping the game with a DLC code, bonus content not needed for the game. These day online multiplayer is expected, so I'm calling BS on this. It's like MW or CoD not coming with it, it's why people buy the game in the first place. 1st day DLC is fine, reduced functionality is not.

 

[Mettking]

I have no problem throwing a little extra money the developers way; HOWEVER, I do have a problem with the way they're doing it. I feel like I'm having a finger pointed a me saying I'm the problem. I do buy games used, but the 2 biggest reasons I do that is 1: I wasn't interested in the game at launch and now have to buy used if at all or 2: I didn't feel like paying the $60 at launch and decided to wait for a price drop. Again, no problem with the idea of DLC or the like, just a problem with the fact I'm being pointed at as though I was a pirate.

 

[RAWKSTAR]

Massive amounts of shit this is.
Fuck playing online though, seriously.

 

[ace_of_something]

I see nothing wrong with these Online Pass schemes for playing online or whatever from buying a pre-owned game.

It's good that the developer gets some money out of it.

Let's say you want to buy a car from a used cars dealership, Mercedes for example. Do you have to give money to Mercedes in order to use the car or are you just gonna pay the dealership?

No, but the dealership has to pay Mercedes if they want to keep their dealer license and continue to sell said vehicles.

 

[Shy_Guy]

But you didn't buy the game, and even though rental copies cost much more than retail copies, neither you nor anyone else who rented the game have the right to enjoy the online features. I mean that makes sense, right? T_T

No, and since I rent games to try them and decide if I want to buy, this kills my incentive to buy the games even more. No Trying = No Buying. Not to mention just the whole idea of paying extra for used games alone making me not want to buy it. I assure you I'm not the only one with this sentiment.

You talk about people who rent not having the "right" to enjoy the online features. Are you kidding me? Next, when publishers decide to charge $10 extra for everyone including people who buy new are you going to argue that we have no right to that content still? Don't kid yourself. You give money-greedy publishers a thumbs up on this and they'll try and shove their collective fist up our asses even deeper next time.

We're already paying $10 a month in the case of Xbox 360 owners to play online, paying $15 for a map-pack in CoD, and now $10 if you buy a game used... On top of the price of games rising $10 from the last generation of consoles. Enough already.

I'd be perfectly fine with getting something extra for buying new, such as what Epic did with GoW2; that was a great extra for people and still available for $10 for those who did buy used. Extras are the only reasonable way to go, not to lock out content.

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

But you didn't buy the game, and even though rental copies cost much more than retail copies, neither you nor anyone else who rented the game have the right to enjoy the online features. I mean that makes sense, right? T_T

No, and since I rent games to try them and decide if I want to buy, this kills my incentive to buy the games even more. No Trying = No Buying. Not to mention just the whole idea of paying extra for used games alone making me not want to buy it. I assure you I'm not the only one with this sentiment.

You talk about people who rent not having the "right" to enjoy the online features. Are you kidding me? Next, when publishers decide to charge $10 extra for everyone including people who buy new are you going to argue that we have no right to that content still? Don't kid yourself. You give money-greedy publishers a thumbs up on this and they'll try and shove their collective fist up our asses even deeper next time.

We're already paying $10 a month in the case of Xbox 360 owners to play online, paying $15 for a map-pack in CoD, and now $10 if you buy a game used... On top of the price of games rising $10 from the last generation of consoles. Enough already.

I'd be perfectly fine with getting something extra for buying new, such as what Epic did with GoW2; that was a great extra for people and still available for $10 for those who did buy used. Extras are the only reasonable way to go, not to lock out content.

I completely agree. Just so you know, the last post was sarcasm (ish, I was pointing out how silly it is for them to be punishing you as a renter) but yes, I'm on your side here.

 

[Treeinthewoods]

Actually, this means retailer's will probably start cutting used games to $45 instead of $55 in the states so they can still end up five dollars under the price of new (the retailer will still make more profit doing that instead of selling new).

This tactic allows developers to take money from the retailers pocket through the gamer who will still pay the same price for the used game as before. If the retailer cuts a game to $55 buying it is pointless since new will cost less, if they cut it to $50 people will still prefer new since the price is identical. In every scenario it is the retailer who takes the hit and the developer who comes out ahead.

Silly gamers, whining over nothing. If you can still get a game for the used price but now a portion of the money goes to the creator isn't that a good thing?

 

[Shy_Guy]

I completely agree. Just so you know, the last post was sarcasm (ish, I was pointing out how silly it is for them to be punishing you as a renter) but yes, I'm on your side here.

Well, now I feel like a dummy! :l

Actually, this means retailer's will probably start cutting used games to $45 instead of $55 in the states so they can still end up five dollars under the price of new (the retailer will still make more profit doing that instead of selling new).

This tactic allows developers to take money from the retailers pocket through the gamer who will still pay the same price for the used game as before. If the retailer cuts a game to $55 buying it is pointless since new will cost less, if they cut it to $50 people will still prefer new since the price is identical. In every scenario it is the retailer who takes the hit and the developer who comes out ahead.

Silly gamers, whining over nothing. If you can still get a game for the used price but now a portion of the money goes to the creator isn't that a good thing?

Did you not read my post? This kills rentals. And I've actually yet to see used games go down in price anywhere at all.

I like to rent games I'm not sure about + I like to play online = This Plan Sucks.

 

[Fawcks]

'Entitlement much?' are you serious? Good god, since when did people bend over like this and take all this gratefully! If you buy the damn game then it should include access to ALL content on that disc. This is just ridiculous!

Look.

The developer is the one providing the Online service.

If you buy the game used, you're not buying from the developer. They get NO MONEY from that.

Why should they provide you with a service you did not pay for?