Why are people acting like the online pass is a bad thing?

its probably worth it in the long run. This should cause a price drop in online games as you'll need to purchase the passes later. Will boost new game sales. Also if a games old and has a dead online i don't even need to have paid for the online.

Seeing as used prices are close to new games now I really see almost no point in buying games used at all.

Because people hate DRM in general and consoles have always been free from it until now.

I don't really see how this is DRM seeing as to use online features you need to be online

You need a code to activate online portions of the game. People take that for the horrible sign of things to come that it is.

I'm actually surprised neither of you think that this is bad. You disappoint me.

What gave you the impression that I approved of it?

Because you didn't yell at Buu and let him know he was wrong.

Moose doesn't need to do that, he speaks in such a way that just about anything he says and can be taken as a symbolic insult.

I understand it from a business point of view...


every used game sold is 1 less new game they can sell. there's a big difference in 2 people buying new and 1 buying new and selling it used to someone else..

and with the increasing costs of making games these days, it kinda makes sense they want to compensate for all the losses they have from used sales.. (of course, if you have a non-online game, you're pretty much still screwed)


at least that's how I see it... as far as good or bad goes, can't say I'm leaning towards any of the sides..

Of course I get it from a business standpoint but the line needs to be drawn somewhere.

Might as well shut down thrift stores and second hand shops every where. Fuck poor people anyway right? They don't deserve to have a chance to enjoy the hobbies of us members of the aristocracy.

Well it's their fault for being poor, why should I not pay for an online pass because the poor decide they wanted to be poor?

Ellis wrote:

Of course I get it from a business standpoint but the line needs to be drawn somewhere.

Might as well shut down thrift stores and second hand shops every where. Fuck poor people anyway right? They don't deserve to have a chance to enjoy the hobbies of us members of the aristocracy.

buy used game for 30$ , online pass of 10$... still cheaper


of course it'll take a while before it drops down to that price, but obviously, if you wanna buy used, you're not gonna buy used when the game is still relatively new cause then it would be more expensive and indeed a bad idea..

It would be humo(u)rous if this back fired on them and very few people bought new and everyone waited for price drop.

Eevil-Psycho wrote:

Ellis wrote:

Of course I get it from a business standpoint but the line needs to be drawn somewhere.

Might as well shut down thrift stores and second hand shops every where. Fuck poor people anyway right? They don't deserve to have a chance to enjoy the hobbies of us members of the aristocracy.

buy used game for 30$ , online pass of 10$... still cheaper

You know what's even cheaper than that? NO PASS.

Baal wrote:

Eevil-Psycho wrote:

Ellis wrote:

Of course I get it from a business standpoint but the line needs to be drawn somewhere.

Might as well shut down thrift stores and second hand shops every where. Fuck poor people anyway right? They don't deserve to have a chance to enjoy the hobbies of us members of the aristocracy.

buy used game for 30$ , online pass of 10$... still cheaper

You know what's even cheaper than that? NO PASS.

no shit Sherlock

Bloody hell, nobody gives a fuck about the pass. It's the precedent it sets and the potential for other 'extra fees' that people are worried about.

Out of interest Psycho do you think piracy equals lost game sales and revenue for publishers too? It is, after all, exactly the same as buying a used game as far as the publisher in concerned.
If somebody buys a game used or pirates it they obviously don't want to pay the full price so they wouldn't be giving Sony, for example, any money anyway.

I don't think it is, piracy just is lost game sales and revenue for developers/publishers...


and maybe they're buying used or pirate it because they can't afford new at the moment, it's not because someone buys used or pirates the game, it automatically means they were never intending to buy it new..

"I wouldn't have bought it anyway" is such a bullshit excuse. Not wanting something enough to pay for it doesn't mean your entitled to get it for free. It does not work that way.

A_Nonny_Moose wrote:

"I wouldn't have bought it anyway" is such a bullshit excuse. Not wanting something enough to pay for it doesn't mean your entitled to get it for free. It does not work that way.

I'm not saying it's ethical or right, it's just the way things work.

If piracy and used game sales makes the publisher lose money I'd better go pirate Black Ops a bunch of times and put Activision out of business.
See how stupid that sounds? You can't treat people who buy used games or pirate like the people who would buy your games on day 1, they think and behave completely differently. What you should be trying to do as a developer/publisher is convert these people to paying customers, screwing them over isn't going to do that.

People shouldn't lump in piracy with used game sales.

but Neo still has a good point.

but not all people that buy used are in the category you're describing.... many people buy used just cause they can't afford new. many of those are the same people that would've bought it on day 1, but couldn't cause it was too expensive..

and a small percentage of people pirates because they can't even afford used...




and then there's the people that just don't wanna pay full price or no price at all.


there's a difference between not wanting to pay full price or not being able to

Ellis wrote:

People shouldn't lump in piracy with used game sales.

While it's different from a consumer standpoint it really is the exact same thing though for the publishers. They get no money but the person gets to play the game, usually without multiplayer.

Psycho wrote:

there's a difference between not wanting to pay full price or not being able to

And so you'd attempt to gain their custom by making them pay extra?

Neo wrote:

A_Nonny_Moose wrote:

"I wouldn't have bought it anyway" is such a bullshit excuse. Not wanting something enough to pay for it doesn't mean your entitled to get it for free. It does not work that way.

I'm not saying it's ethical or right, it's just the way things work.

If piracy and used game sales makes the publisher lose money I'd better go pirate Black Ops a bunch of times and put Activision out of business.
See how stupid that sounds? You can't treat people who buy used games or pirate like the people who would buy your games on day 1, they think and behave completely differently. What you should be trying to do as a developer/publisher is convert these people to paying customers, screwing them over isn't going to do that.

Yeah, piracy doesn't literally take money away from a publisher any more than used games do. But you can't deny that a lot of people will have pirated Black Ops on day one just because it's relatively easy and they couldn't be bothered to pay for it. Plenty of pirates could easily pay for the games they play but don't just because they can get away with it.

I didn't say that, my only point is that even with a pass, it's still cheaper than a new game, and that not everyone who buys used belongs in the category that you described, so yes, part of them are the ones that would've bought it on day 1, and yes those are losses in revenue..


I have no real opinion on whether or not it's a good idea or that this is a direction they should take and if they're taking it in a good way, I'm just saying it how it is, or at least how I see it is.

A_Nonny_Moose wrote:

Yeah, piracy doesn't literally take money away from a publisher any more than used games do. But you can't deny that a lot of people will have pirated Black Ops on day one just because it's relatively easy and they couldn't be bothered to pay for it. Plenty of pirates could easily pay for the games they play but don't just because they can get away with it.

Yeah, probably, but that doesn't change the fact that the game companies are handling almost everything the wrong way. You don't want to screw over potential customers, you want to entice them and draw them in.

If people were "ones who would've bought it on day 1", they'd have bought it on day 1. You need to look at why people didn't so you can offer a better service and possibly change their future decisions, not focus on fucking up their day because of it.