Ubisoft Prepares "Uplay Passport" - UPDATED

[UnravThreads]

Note to Ubisoft: EA is a company of money grubbers. If you learn money-earning tactics from them, you sink parts of your user base in response.

I think you need to look at Ubisoft's catalogue. They're worse than EA for "money grubbing", as you'd call it.

Anyway, why is this garbage? Buy the game new, you get everything. Buy it used, you don't. In other words, support the dev/publisher and get 'rewarded'. Be a cheapskate, and miss out. The idea games are 'expensive' for most people is complete BS, because games drop in price ridiculously quickly. I recently picked up new PC versions of Hunted: The Demon's Forge - Special Edition and Fable 3 for £14 and £16 respectively from a major retailer in the UK, despite them only releasing about two months ago. A little patience just saved me £30. I got stung earlier in the year because I stupidly bought Bulletstorm: Limited Edition for £35 the day of release, but weeks later I saw it for £20.

Games drop price quicker than a working woman drops her unmentionables.

Is this supposed to be a new feature? Cause afaik it's already implemented in Might and Magic: Heroes 6 beta... (the uplay login etc)

This is different. UPlay has been around since last year, at the very least, but this is something else. Basically, if you don't register a code you get with the game, you don't get access to certain features. You can still play the game, but the 'UPlay Passport' features will not be accessible to you until you redeem the code you get or you buy one (Which is only supposed to be done if you've bought the game used).

The only market it truly has any effect on is the console one, as the used PC market doesn't exist too much due to the prevalence of account-tied games (Such as Steamworks releases) and the relative low price of PC games. Plus stores don't stock many PC games these days, let alone used ones.

 

[Richardplex]

I think it's fair. It's the only way companies can make money off pre-owned games, and it's unfair that only retailers make money off them. The effect on the people who buy the game new is limited. It's for the greater good, in my opinion.

So it's ok if Toyota disables your onboard nav and stereo when you sell it to someone?

I don't drive, nor pretend I know anything relating to cars or their technologies, so I have no opinion.

Ok so if you sell your house should they be able to lock a room until the new owner pays up?

I feel the difference is that there is not your expected, nor wished to, go to a brand new house if another old house is available, because there are natural limits on housing and what not, but I see your point. The reason I support this is because I've seen the Extra Credits episode on this, and feel sympathetic towards the game developers for the same reasons.

 

[Richard Allen]

I think it's fair. It's the only way companies can make money off pre-owned games, and it's unfair that only retailers make money off them. The effect on the people who buy the game new is limited. It's for the greater good, in my opinion.

So it's ok if Toyota disables your onboard nav and stereo when you sell it to someone?

I don't drive, nor pretend I know anything relating to cars or their technologies, so I have no opinion.

Ok so if you sell your house should they be able to lock a room until the new owner pays up?

I feel the difference is that there is not your expected, nor wished to, go to a brand new house if another old house is available, because there are natural limits on housing and what not, but I see your point. The reason I support this is because I've seen the Extra Credits episode on this, and feel sympathetic towards the game developers for the same reasons.

Well there are scratched discs, less players to play with, and games get boring so they deal with the same things as physical products. We'll have to agree to disagree, but I'm curious what the extra credits post said that make you feel sorry for an industry that is growing at a huge rate, with more and more developers every day, and companies making billions of dollars makes you feel sorry for them. Do you feel sorry when buying a used dvd or movie? Cause the gaming industry is making more then them and isn't slowing down.

Like I said I'm a coder for 10 years, trust me, it's not a bad business to be in.

 

[Cenequus]

Don't understand the anger over this. Atleast if you buy it new some money goes to he developer,if you buy it used nothing goes to the developer. Sure a AAA title can afford it but new IPs usually die because people rather buy the game used.

A long as the overall price isn't higher than a new game I really see no problem.

I think people's anger over this is for 2 reasons

1) It punishes people who play second-hand rather than rewarding those who got it new

2) This money goes to the publishers, not the developers.

Oh, and ah, used sales exist for everything. And yet we still have new books, movies, TV shows, ect every year.

And how they punish them?They pay less they should get less.There is no problem having used sales thing is there is no difference btwn a new game and a used copy,they both have the same content,while a used car for example is not the same as a new car(even in perfect conditions her life span is lower than a new car for example).

Sure a big chunk goes to the publisher but don't write lies like developes get nothing since that would be te same like sayng a writter gets no money from selling a book and his publisher gets all.

 

[UberNoodle]

Game publishers are doing all that can to:

1) make game collecting past the Playstation 2/Xbox/Gamecube generation very hard to do.
2) ensure that game collecting past THAT generation virtually impossible.
3) foster an industry environment in which gamers can be resold 'classic games' again and again.

For all the debate I have seen about these passes, I have not seen the ones above. Honestly, are gamers today so prepared for all their games to become tea coasters in a generation from now? That's what going to happen.

The idea that second-hand sales are only things that occur near launch is logically flawed. I have a vast collection of 8, 16 and 32 bit games and most of them were bought second hand. They are all out of print (of course) but entirely playable, just as they were when they were first released. Say farewell to that from now.

Besides, why is it that consumers are being punished for exploitation by retailers? CD rentals and second-hand sales are regulated in many countries at no negative affect to consumers in terms of availability and useability.

Consumers should be allowed to sell, trade and lend games they buy, just as they can with pretty much every other thing they own. These actions by consumers are NOT the problem and never have been. Retailers are the ones exploiting the situation, thus THEY should be the ones bearing the brunt of the publisher's attack.

In the end, what sales are truly lost by a second-hand sale. The publisher has been paid for what they produced, and essentially, all that is happening is a transfer of ownership or possession. The money or goods, or just good-will that funds the transfer is no business of the publisher, just as Toyota has no say in used car sales.

If 1,000,000 games are sold at full price, it results in 1,000,000 owners. When those games are sold again, there are still the same number of owners and the same amount of product. The publisher has lost nothing, but they seem to want something for free.

 

[NLS]

Sheesh. Again with this pass thing? Good thing I could care less about online play, but to those folks who do play online and have to put up with this garbage, I feel for you. I really do.

Somebody needs to slap these companies in the face and in the coinpurse by not buying products that have this coding. It's starting to get a bit out of hand.

Note to Ubisoft: EA is a company of money grubbers. If you learn money-earning tactics from them, you sink parts of your user base in response.

But, wasn't this implemented because they don't gain enough already from pre-used and non-sales. So if you don't buy into it, won't they just push it even more?

 

[MajorDolphin]

Watching the big fish of the gaming industry slowly dig their own grave with the greed shovel makes me giggle.

 

[vivster]

"buy it used and you'll have to fork over another ten bucks to the publisher for missing content, or do without. The most common component held back in new releases is online play"

are there other components that have been held back by that online pass system?
i don't know of any so i won't describe it as "missing content" but "entry fee to the servers"
which already sounds a lot less evil

 

[Richardplex]

I think it's fair. It's the only way companies can make money off pre-owned games, and it's unfair that only retailers make money off them. The effect on the people who buy the game new is limited. It's for the greater good, in my opinion.

So it's ok if Toyota disables your onboard nav and stereo when you sell it to someone?

I don't drive, nor pretend I know anything relating to cars or their technologies, so I have no opinion.

Ok so if you sell your house should they be able to lock a room until the new owner pays up?

I feel the difference is that there is not your expected, nor wished to, go to a brand new house if another old house is available, because there are natural limits on housing and what not, but I see your point. The reason I support this is because I've seen the Extra Credits episode on this, and feel sympathetic towards the game developers for the same reasons.

Well there are scratched discs, less players to play with, and games get boring so they deal with the same things as physical products. We'll have to agree to disagree, but I'm curious what the extra credits post said that make you feel sorry for an industry that is growing at a huge rate, with more and more developers every day, and companies making billions of dollars makes you feel sorry for them. Do you feel sorry when buying a used dvd or movie? Cause the gaming industry is making more then them and isn't slowing down.

Like I said I'm a coder for 10 years, trust me, it's not a bad business to be in.

AYe, we will, I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, I'm pretty on-the-fence on this really, but you'd get less players and the games get boring whether you buy new or old. If the game costs £10 or more less than the game new, the players are still getting a better deal, and the companies are still paid for their work. I don't buy used dvds or movies, I buy them new... well, I ask my parents to, being a NEET and all, to support the official release etc like the paragon of justice that I am. Like I said though, I don't think your opinion is wrong, just not the same as mine. and the extra credits episode is http://bit.ly/pO6DxG, and yes I know it's pretty biased forming my opinion because of this, but it's logical (I think) so I don't mind so much.

 

[rembrandtqeinstein]

Locking away single player content that is already on the disk or finished at launch behind a code is slimy.

 

[The Lost Big Boss]

But the real question is. Will it have coma mode?!

 

[Kuroji]

Oddly enough, all this thing does is make me not buy a game at all. At least if I buy the game used I may still want to buy DLC, or future/past games in the series.

I'm just wondering when they'll start charging for split-screen co-op, because that second player is getting the game free, right?

 

[Adzma]

Anyone else surprised that Activision hasn't jumped on the bandwagon yet? They're the only one's who could get away with it in the eyes of the mass market since they publish COD which is the greatest game evarrrrr.

Anywho, I always buy new so this does not effect me in the slightest. Go about your business Ubisoft.

 

[BENZOOKA]

I only buy games as new, so these online-registration-demanding features are nothing but an (major, if there's no Internet available at the moment) annoyance. Especially when the registration & log-in systems are usually clunky, somewhat unreliable and usually add time in between launching the game and playing the game.

 

[Epona]

I can't see why anyone has any problem with this. As long as the used game is at least $10 less, you are literally losing nothing. Hell, you could even argue that it's still a better deal getting it used because you get a chance to try the game for a cheaper price before deciding if you want the online portion.

I understand that some people are on a tight gaming budget, but if $10 is going to make or break a purchase then you could simply wait a few months for the price to drop. Sometimes it doesn't even take that long; I bought Portal 2 at Best Buy for $40 new just three weeks after it came out.

There are 2 problems with this:

1) They already made their money when the used copy was sold new. There will still only be one person per copy on their severs.

2) It won't stop with online multiplayer. Once this effectively kills online multiplayer (which is the only bright side) they will start tagging single player games with activation keys.

 

[Zyst]

I think it's fair. I mean, not really complaining..

And I agree that things like Project $10 can do a very good job at this in a way that is a fair compromise. What I don't like is gamers lining up to say how much they hate used sales and want to see them done away with, and publishers wanting all sales to be new.

Imagine this: You buy a DVD of a movie that runs 120 minutes. However, if you buy a used copy of the DVD, or rent it, you miss 10 minutes of character development/plot information unless you put down some extra money. That would be nuts.

When. The. Fuck. Are. They. Going. To. STOP!? Treating. Customers. Like. CRIMINALS!?

No kidding. Really, they just need to wise up about this issue. Not all sales are going to be new. I also don't like entering the code everytime I pick up a new game.

The thing is, a lot of Movies get their development costs and such back merely with the Cinema, the DVD sales are just a plus. On the other hand game developers live off the money you buy of their games, with you buying used games they get nothing. I'm not saying I endorse this, I just think it's fair enough, and I'm not complaining.

Does Toyota get a cut of used cars sales? Then why should developers. Coming from a 10 year veteran coder.

*Shrug* it's their game, and if they wanna grab their ball and play home they have every right to in my opinion. If you are Really so against this "movement" don't buy their games and voila!

 

[Richard Allen]

I think it's fair. I mean, not really complaining..

And I agree that things like Project $10 can do a very good job at this in a way that is a fair compromise. What I don't like is gamers lining up to say how much they hate used sales and want to see them done away with, and publishers wanting all sales to be new.

Imagine this: You buy a DVD of a movie that runs 120 minutes. However, if you buy a used copy of the DVD, or rent it, you miss 10 minutes of character development/plot information unless you put down some extra money. That would be nuts.

When. The. Fuck. Are. They. Going. To. STOP!? Treating. Customers. Like. CRIMINALS!?

No kidding. Really, they just need to wise up about this issue. Not all sales are going to be new. I also don't like entering the code everytime I pick up a new game.

The thing is, a lot of Movies get their development costs and such back merely with the Cinema, the DVD sales are just a plus. On the other hand game developers live off the money you buy of their games, with you buying used games they get nothing. I'm not saying I endorse this, I just think it's fair enough, and I'm not complaining.

Does Toyota get a cut of used cars sales? Then why should developers. Coming from a 10 year veteran coder.

*Shrug* it's their game, and if they wanna grab their ball and play home they have every right to in my opinion. If you are Really so against this "movement" don't buy their games and voila!

I don't and that is the issue. No one can see this for what it is and everyone supports it. So I can try to educate and ***** so at least people know they are being ripped off. I've been gaming for over 20 years now, and I love the new games I'm not one ot ***** at devs cause they make to many sequels, or there is not innovation. It's simply not true, but I will ***** about how gaming was a much better value where developers had to fight for your money instead of removing features, charging more, and saying take it or leave it. It sucks, so yea I'll be vocal about it

I do wish more people would vote with there wallets and consider if they want to buy a product from a company blatantly making cash grabs at them. That being said I gave up in my heart a long time ago, too many gamers who can't skip cod:x or w/e so they will continue pusing this as far as they can. Can't wait til games are 80$ a pop plus 20 for online play.

 

[Zyst]

I think it's fair. I mean, not really complaining..

And I agree that things like Project $10 can do a very good job at this in a way that is a fair compromise. What I don't like is gamers lining up to say how much they hate used sales and want to see them done away with, and publishers wanting all sales to be new.

Imagine this: You buy a DVD of a movie that runs 120 minutes. However, if you buy a used copy of the DVD, or rent it, you miss 10 minutes of character development/plot information unless you put down some extra money. That would be nuts.

When. The. Fuck. Are. They. Going. To. STOP!? Treating. Customers. Like. CRIMINALS!?

No kidding. Really, they just need to wise up about this issue. Not all sales are going to be new. I also don't like entering the code everytime I pick up a new game.

The thing is, a lot of Movies get their development costs and such back merely with the Cinema, the DVD sales are just a plus. On the other hand game developers live off the money you buy of their games, with you buying used games they get nothing. I'm not saying I endorse this, I just think it's fair enough, and I'm not complaining.

Does Toyota get a cut of used cars sales? Then why should developers. Coming from a 10 year veteran coder.

*Shrug* it's their game, and if they wanna grab their ball and play home they have every right to in my opinion. If you are Really so against this "movement" don't buy their games and voila!

I don't and that is the issue. No one can see this for what it is and everyone supports it. So I can try to educate and ***** so at least people know they are being ripped off. I've been gaming for over 20 years now, and I love the new games I'm not one ot ***** at devs cause they make to many sequels, or there is not innovation. It's simply not true, but I will ***** about how gaming was a much better value where developers had to fight for your money instead of removing features, charging more, and saying take it or leave it. It sucks, so yea I'll be vocal about it

I do wish more people would vote with there wallets and consider if they want to buy a product from a company blatantly making cash grabs at them. That being said I gave up in my heart a long time ago, too many gamers who can't skip cod:x or w/e so they will continue pusing this as far as they can. Can't wait til games are 80$ a pop plus 20 for online play.

I s'pose that makes some sense. But really, can you blame them? This doesn't hurt AAA Franchises so much, they make their budget back in the release day, but what about new IPs venturing into the wild who end up dying simply because there were not enough sales, and after the guy finishes it and sells it you will find it on a Bargain bin for 10$, at that point you really don't buy the game new at all.

Although I digress, since it WILL be AAA games using this, but I would buy the game new to support a new IP, or buy a "pass".

 

[Richard Allen]

I think it's fair. I mean, not really complaining..

And I agree that things like Project $10 can do a very good job at this in a way that is a fair compromise. What I don't like is gamers lining up to say how much they hate used sales and want to see them done away with, and publishers wanting all sales to be new.

Imagine this: You buy a DVD of a movie that runs 120 minutes. However, if you buy a used copy of the DVD, or rent it, you miss 10 minutes of character development/plot information unless you put down some extra money. That would be nuts.

When. The. Fuck. Are. They. Going. To. STOP!? Treating. Customers. Like. CRIMINALS!?

No kidding. Really, they just need to wise up about this issue. Not all sales are going to be new. I also don't like entering the code everytime I pick up a new game.

The thing is, a lot of Movies get their development costs and such back merely with the Cinema, the DVD sales are just a plus. On the other hand game developers live off the money you buy of their games, with you buying used games they get nothing. I'm not saying I endorse this, I just think it's fair enough, and I'm not complaining.

Does Toyota get a cut of used cars sales? Then why should developers. Coming from a 10 year veteran coder.

*Shrug* it's their game, and if they wanna grab their ball and play home they have every right to in my opinion. If you are Really so against this "movement" don't buy their games and voila!

I don't and that is the issue. No one can see this for what it is and everyone supports it. So I can try to educate and ***** so at least people know they are being ripped off. I've been gaming for over 20 years now, and I love the new games I'm not one ot ***** at devs cause they make to many sequels, or there is not innovation. It's simply not true, but I will ***** about how gaming was a much better value where developers had to fight for your money instead of removing features, charging more, and saying take it or leave it. It sucks, so yea I'll be vocal about it

I do wish more people would vote with there wallets and consider if they want to buy a product from a company blatantly making cash grabs at them. That being said I gave up in my heart a long time ago, too many gamers who can't skip cod:x or w/e so they will continue pusing this as far as they can. Can't wait til games are 80$ a pop plus 20 for online play.

I s'pose that makes some sense. But really, can you blame them? This doesn't hurt AAA Franchises so much, they make their budget back in the release day, but what about new IPs venturing into the wild who end up dying simply because there were not enough sales, and after the guy finishes it and sells it you will find it on a Bargain bin for 10$, at that point you really don't buy the game new at all.

Although I digress, since it WILL be AAA games using this, but I would buy the game new to support a new IP, or buy a "pass".

I can get behind that, even though blizzard is not a small company anymore I'd always support their games (even the horrific diablo exp pacs), and I'm sure I'd feel ok with it on a great indie game. Even still it would be better if they just sold mp and sp separately and priced accordingly.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Why is thismultiplayer pass thing so "news worthy" now, why not we just assume this. Head Lines:All game companies now own your game you just buy a pass to use the software, if you trade it the disc will melt."

Were that true, that would be a sad day.

Anyways, things like this are reasonable if they are only $10 or so. Still, it does get annoying to put in a code with every new game.

Completely and totally unreasonable. If they are worried about the costs of online play sell it as two separate games. One single player and the multiplayer only version for some split of the 60. Or let people run their own servers again.

It's not about that however it's about publishers who now have stock holders to answer screwing people over for a few more bucks. Every single industry has a used market and they are killing it and skirting around laws that have prevented this for years.

I don't mean this to be a personal attack, we're all entitled to our opinions and to spend money where we think it's worth it, but people sitting there defending a practice that has no benefit to them whatsoever is crazy. How anyone can defend this is beyond my reasoning skills.

Don't get me wrong: I don't like it. But I understand this is an issue people are devided on. So I am willing to compromise and say that disabling online play is iffy, but I won't damn them for it. Locking out SINGLE PLAYER things, however, has no excuse.

I sympathize with devs. But make your game worth $60 or deal with it.