Game Retailers Not Liking EA's Project $10 Tactics

[tpi2007]

[citation][nom]Lavacon[/nom]Did I miss ignorance 101 in college? It makes perfect sense. EA does provide content and connectivity on THEIR network using THEIR resources. Why shouldn't they be compensated? They are providing service above and beyond "just the disc" and when you buy a used game, you are buying "just the disc".[/citation]

Look, I don't know what you missed, let's not go that way; what I'm saying is, if I buy a new game I can use it for as long as I want (or at least should), so if I want to, I can use EA'se servers playing the game for as long as they provide the service, right ?

If I sell the game to someone else, I can no longer use it right ?

So, the person using it in my place should have the same rights as me, would you care to explain to me why not ? I'm no longer occupying EA's servers with the game becasue I sold it, so they are not being overloaded, it's the same situation as before, just a different person using the game.

What will come next ? EA is going to charge more money it it sees on the webcam tham a friend of mine/my girlfriend/my wife is playing it and that is not the name on the receipt ?

Look, they are actually trying to bring the used market out of business, or the very least, trying to profit from it, but while they do it, effectively also selling the used game to us at 10$, they are admitting that the games are overpriced in the first place!

 

[mohjong]

Thanks for the Indulgences, St. EA and Holy Sony.
$10 for each sin committed thus allowing me enter heaven without paying $50.

 

[Lavacon]

The long and the short of it is this:

EA wants to get paid for the EXTRA services it provides to the buyers of new games from the people who buy the game used. When that game is bought used, the ONLY one making any money is Gamestop(easy used game shop example). Why should Gamestop or anyone else for that matter be allowed to profit on EA's services at EA's expense?

Where is the incentive to buy a new game if someone buying it used gets all the same extras and perks that were included for the purchase of the new game? There needs to be an incentive to buy a new game. Yeah, a disc may get a few scratches, but, other then that, there is NO downside to buying a used game. Most things you buy used have a downside whether it be wear and tear or lack of warranty.

 

[dreamphantom_1977]

Then maybe they should charge for there online content. Why should I loose value on my discs to pay for there servers? Last time I checked they make money through advertising and the games. Am I missing something? I remember when you could download a mod, install it on your game for free, then run your own dedicated server to run the game. Now they are trying to change all that. Anyone notice call of duty modern warfare 2? Dedicated servers anyone? Probably why so many people are hacking that game. I didn't by it cuz of that. If they want us to pay for there servers they should charge a monthly fee. I'd gladly pay for it if I liked the game. Anyone remember battlefield heroes? You buy something with real money, then it expires. This makes the game unbalanced, unfair, and it's a ripoff. I would much rather just buy the game, and run it on our own servers, with mods, just like bf2, or hl2. If you want us to play the game on their servers, no problem, If I like the game I'll gladly pay. If you want downloadable content, sell it to us permanently, but don't let it affect gameplay, or expire, and if you want more money, raise the price for the servers or sell an expansion pack.

This isn't just about them getting money for downloadable content, the content was already paid for, this is hurting the resale market, which hurts honest consumers. If they are having trouble running the downloadable content on there servers because of cost to run the server, then start charging to use the server, or let us run our own servers, or start an mmo, but don't come up with some scheme to hurt the used market. It's like a scam to make free money. They are charging twice for the "thing" they sold. It's not being copied, it's being resold, and they are trying to get more profit from that, A single original copy that was already sold. If they want money for running there servers, then they should just ask, if they want to sell downloadable content, then instead of asking for money from the resale market, maybe they should ask for money from the person who originally buys the content. Raise the price of the online content. Asses a value that it is going to cost to run that particular piece of online content for the estimated lifetime of the game, and assign a value to it, then charge more for the content, so that it will offset the price of running the content on that server for that estimated time. For ex. lets say the content is good for 10 years, (probably more like 5 years at best) but lets just say 10 for fun, how much is it going to cost that server to run your downloadable content for 10 years? lets say you got a new sword for your guy, how much extra is it to run that xtra code for 10 years? Now charge the person who wants it that bad to pay that amount. SIMPLE I KNOW. Or another solution would be just charge a monthly fee to play that particular game with downloadable content (like an MMO), or you could assign the content to a person's account rather then tie it to a disc and allow the person to sell the downloadable content back to the EA. What if the content that I bought only costed $2.00 originally? Are you saying my game automatically loses $10 because it has online content? You might say no, but this isn't just going to hurt a single game, I work in the used market, and Know that this is going to effect the resale value of all the games, not just the ones that have the online content. Besides, what if it's free content that came with the game? Then it's not really downloadable content, it's free content that originally came with the game.

P.S. I'm not ignorant, I have plenty of time to read and try to grasp the concept before I open my mouth, or say what I say, I'm just looking at it from all angles and it just doesn't seem fear the way it is being handled. I think there are better alternatives out there than going this route, because I think this is going to hurt people, even if they aren't the ones buying the downloadable content originally. This should only affect those people who originally bought the downloadable content. This is going to drive the used game market down. Also, the new games market, because the people who are reselling the game, instead of using that $10 towards a new game, EA is gonna have it. Even if the original owner only spent $2 on the original downloadable content. Where did that missing $8.00 go?

This is the end of my rant. If anyone thinks I'm wrong, then pm me. I don't think I am, but maybe I am. If you prove me wrong, I'll admit i'm wrong. But I don't think I am this time.

 

[Hunter_Killers]

The original owner didn't spend anything on that DLC, it came with the game for buying it new and is now locked to his online account.

Used game sales aren't effected in the slightest unless those people want that DLC that was included with the new game which you wouldn't have otherwise.

Used game retailers are making a fuss over it because its probobly going to either drive them to pricing EA used games lower or lose sales because used+DLC(IF YOU WANT IT)=same price as new in which case you might as well buy new

 

[kittle]

yet one more reason i'll never get a console -- say nothing about EA games for it

 

[tate_chad]

This tactic would be analogous to General Motors requiring someone who bought a used Chevrolet out of the classified ads to send them a check for 20% of the original MSRP to get a new key that would enable the new owner to start the car.

A consumer as an individual has very little influence over a large corporation because the amount of money a single individual spends is very small compared to the net income of a large corporation. Consumers taken as a whole though have a lot of influence.

If you believe that this tactic is underhanded then the best thing you can do is take your business elsewhere and encourage friends and family to do the same.

Don't let EA get away with this!

 

[tate_chad]

This tactic would be analogous to General Motors requiring someone who bought a used Chevrolet out of the classified ads to send them a check for 20% of the original MSRP to get a new key that would enable the new owner to start the car.

A consumer as an individual has very little influence over a large corporation because the amount of money a single individual spends is very small compared to the net income of a large corporation. Consumers taken as a whole though have a lot of influence.

If you believe that this tactic is underhanded then the best thing you can do is take your business elsewhere and encourage friends and family to do the same.
Don't let EA get away with this!

 

[Lavacon]

[citation][nom]tate_chad[/nom]This tactic would be analogous to General Motors requiring someone who bought a used Chevrolet out of the classified ads to send them a check for 20% of the original MSRP to get a new key that would enable the new owner to start the car.[/citation]

No... no it's not. Not even close. They are asking you to pay for the extras that were included with the purchase of a new game. What you are suggesting is more like buying a used game and EA making you pay $10 to get the disc. That is not the case.

Stop with the auto analogies, they are way off base. If anything an Auto comparison to this is more like.... Buying a new car that comes with free onstar for a year... trading in the car in a few months... someone else buying it and wondering why they are not getting free onstar...

EA is not preventing you from playing the game used.

 

[fracture]

It's also funny when Steam still sells Left 4 Dead 2 for 49 bucks while you can just go to Fry's and buy it for 29 bucks.

 

[tpi2007]

[citation][nom]Lavacon[/nom]No... no it's not. Not even close. They are asking you to pay for the extras that were included with the purchase of a new game. What you are suggesting is more like buying a used game and EA making you pay $10 to get the disc. That is not the case. Stop with the auto analogies, they are way off base. If anything an Auto comparison to this is more like.... Buying a new car that comes with free onstar for a year... trading in the car in a few months... someone else buying it and wondering why they are not getting free onstar...EA is not preventing you from playing the game used.[/citation]


Not it's not extras EA is talking about, you misread it:

the last paragraph in here: http/www.tomsguide.com/us/ea-project-ten-dollars-dlc,news-5797.html?xtmc=project_ten_dollar&xtcr=1

says the following:

"EA's "Project Ten Dollar" first appeared in last year's Dragon Age and, more recently, in Mass Effect 2. While gamers buying those games used will still have a good experience, they'll have to fork over ten dollars to get access to all the same things that the original owners had."

But even if it were extras, you would have to specify what you understand as extras. For example, in a car, a GPS system is an extra, and so is a high end sound system with top notch speakers and whatever. Would you accept the auto manufacturer disabling those extras just because the car is second hand ?

But you could also specify that free vouchers to get cheap petrol at specific stations for the first three months after purchase is an extra... and you're not expecting to get those in the sixth month, are you, even if you didn't sell the car, right ?

You quote the car example and then prove yourself wrong, if you say "Buying a new car that comes with free onstar for a year... trading in the car in a few months... someone else buying it and wondering why they are not getting free onstar...",

of course, if it's for a year... if the second hand buyer still gets it in that year, he might still enjoy some months left for free, if not, well, then, bad luck, but that does not REMOVE functionality from the car itself!

What we are talking about here is not allowing access to functionalities, which is the same are removing them from the game you purchased, just because you didn't purchase it from EA, instead second hand.

 

[Lavacon]

EA is not removing the functionality of their games.... They are making people pay for the "Exclusive DLC" that comes with the game... It's usually a single use key and once said DLC is used, it can not be used again without registering for it at a $10 fee.

They are NOT REMOVING ANYTHING from the game, they are preventing you from adding to it for free. The DLC has been used up. Why should they hand it out to everyone who happens to pass around that copy of their game via Gamestop again?

Buying a used game at Gamestop does nothing to support anyone but Gamestop. EA does not see a cent from that used game purchase and you expect them to give away the bonus DLC that was given for purchasing the game twice? three times?

Some of you saying that you are a loyal customer blah blah blah.... but you buy games used? You are Gamestops loyal customer, not EA's.

You quote the car example and then prove yourself wrong, if you say "Buying a new car that comes with free onstar for a year... trading in the car in a few months... someone else buying it and wondering why they are not getting free onstar...",

How is this wrong again? The used car buyer here should not expect to get the same freebie the person buying it new got and may have used. That's what we call an incentive.

 

[Lavacon]

The only reason anyone is upset is because the extra content(free bonus with purchase of game) is download content. If Dragon Age came with a collectible figurine in the box and you were buying this game used at Gamestop would you really expect a new figurine in the mail because the freebie that came with the new game wasn't included when you purchased it used????? I would say.. Probably not....

What is happening here is that; just because the content is a download, people expect it.. and for free ... and at EA's cost when you haven't even bought it from them. File distribution and R&D is not free. Not even for EA.

A file, just because you can't touch it, isn't worthless.

 

[dreamphantom_1977]

I buy "all" my games new.

One thumbs down for you buddy. LOL

 

[Lavacon]

Alright, so if you buy your games new..... this affects you how again? Are you afraid Gamestop is going to give you less cash for your game because you used up the freebie that came with it and the guy wanting to buy it used is mad because they have to pay the company that made it a small fee because you used up the freebie?

Why should they hand out two freebies off one purchase from them again??

 

[dreamphantom_1977]

Why not just sell the content separate from the game then? Just put it on a separate cd in a separate box? Why hit the "used" game market? Why not just create another expansion and sell it? Why not let us run our own servers? Why even have payed downloadable content when there are such a big community for free modders out there and so many people willing to run there own dedicated servers?

Cuz the economy is bad, people are pirating, and they have no way of recovering lost money except to take it from the used market, cuz they know that noone will pay a premium for crappy downloadable content in the first place, so they make content just to give it away and then charge us later for it hoping we don't notice and won't complain. Keep your xtra content, i'd rather have my $10 and use it the way I want. It's my money.

 

[dreamphantom_1977]

[citation][nom]Lavacon[/nom]Alright, so if you buy your games new..... this affects you how again? Are you afraid Gamestop is going to give you less cash for your game because you used up the freebie that came with it and the guy wanting to buy it used is mad because they have to pay the company that made it a small fee because you used up the freebie? Why should they hand out two freebies off one purchase from them again??[/citation]

Dude, seriously, I haven't sold a game in years, I keep my games because I am an avid gamer and I keep them for nostalgic purposes. I love popping in old games just to see what kind of frames I get. Besides, I don't even buy the games for the consoles, I get to play them for free up at work. The reason I am ranting is because I am a salesman, and I see whats happening cuz I work in a pawnshop and I just know when people are scamming, and I think it's wrong, not the fact they are doing it, just the way they are going about it. If they want extra money, charge for the content, don't take it from the used market. It's just not right, because it effects more then just the game wether you used the content or not.

OK, think about this, person "A" go's and buy's a used game, and u get home, and they thought they were getting the game with the extra content, and then they get home, and find out they have to pay $10 to get the extra content that they thought they would get with the game (cuz it says so on the outside of the box), then they are gonna be pissed. They might not even want the content, but on the box it says comes with free Content. So that pisses them off, and they avoid buying used games all together. Ok, that doesn't effect that person (person A) really that much, but overall when a lot of people do that, then the person who sells there games are hurt cuz they can't get much for there games anymore, they loose there resale value. Even if they didn't use there downloadable content. Because it effects the used games value as a whole in the used market. Who gets that money? EA. Even if the person who bought the game didn't use the content, because on the used market that particular game is worth less overall. THATS NOT FAIR.

Thats not fair because if you don't use the extra content, in the end you still have to pay. Why should you have to pay? It's like getting something for free, and having to pay for it later even if you didn't want it.

Who ever wants the content should have to pay for it. If they want to make money, then charge charge for the content through a download on an account, or in a standalone disc.

 

[dreamphantom_1977]

What if robin hood stole from the poor and gave to the rich? Thats whats happening.

 

[Lavacon]

No one is STEALING anything from anyone. The content we are all arguing about is "bonus" "free with purchase" content that comes with the game when you buy it new. It does not effect the functionality of the game.

Why does EA owe somebody who bought the game used bonus DLC that the original owner used up? That used game purchase from Gamestop circumvented EA; EA doesn't see a dime, and the second or third owner of that game comes knocking at their door saying "you owe me!" EA doesn't owe you what someone else used.

If you sell a game and used up the bonus content, whether it be item,cloths or maps you should get less money for it then the copy that has all of that untouched.

 

[Lavacon]

How about I go buy a used Wii and when I notice Wii sports isn't included call Nintendo and demand my copy of Wii sports because it came with the console when it was bought new and that means it's owed to me.

Why yes, my console works fine, but you owe me wii sports... The guy who bought it brand new from the store that bought it off you got it..so should I....CLICK...**dial tone**.....**muttering**

oy....