Warner Bros. Issues Statement on Catwoman DLC Issues

@TurboMan: If the movie Clue had been released in 2010, the multiple endings would ABSOLUTELY have been DLC. >_<

@sofacitysweetheart said:

@TurboMan said:

here's another reason why locking away part of your main single player via a code and DLC is a fucking stupid idea.

Over-dramatic Internet Squad! GO!

How is calling something a stupid idea "overly-dramatic"?

@kcp12 said:

This is just purrfect.

You broke it! YOU BROKE EVERYTHING!!!

@Meowshi said:

@sofacitysweetheart said:

@TurboMan said:

here's another reason why locking away part of your main single player via a code and DLC is a fucking stupid idea.

Over-dramatic Internet Squad! GO!

How is calling something a stupid idea "overly-dramatic"?

I have to agree with the OP: making it DLC multiplies the points of failure with NO benefit to consumers.

@kcp12 said:

This is just purrfect.

Well played sir.

That´´s pretty shitty what WB is doing here. I have absolutely nothing against copy protection and even the online pass is ok to by for pre owned copies. but a DLC code to enjoy the full single player campaign? What if someone (for whatever reason) has no or can´t have a internet connection? When I buy a single player game I expect to have all content on disc and nothing else. shame on you WB.

@Vortextk said:

@ch13696: Gamestop is a very very large reason these codes are in existence, and yet the publisher decides to do a backdoor deal with them(exclusively?) anyway. It's fucking stupid. It's like a mob shakedown with dirty cops getting a cut and we're stuck as the laundromat owner getting beaten out back until we pay. If only batman could save us but he's too busy wondering where the hell catwoman is at and calling WB on the batphone.

WTF? This if far from a scenario like that. No one is getting hurt. No one is getting swindled. It's basically a win win for everyone. People get their used games and the publisher gets a cut of the cash. Geez, people need to stop being so delusional, thinking Gamestop and WB is doing some shady business deal.

I am sorry but if the Catwoman part is as important to the game as it seems to be then it should not be a code to get it. If it is a small quest like Bioware does or an online pass like most shooters and sports games do then that is fine but to take such a large part of the game away that way sucks especially when some don't have online ability and therefore no way to get it even if they paid for it. Codes should reward or punish in a small way.

Catwoman is the opening of the game. How do you make the opening of the game only accessible through an online pass? What kind of thinking is that? What they should have done is just make Robin the online pass character for the challenges.

Perhaps taking catwoman of the disc was the only way they could fit the rest of the game on a DVD

This whole "code for content" thing needed to work flawlessly for people to accept it and take it seriously. WB has fucked up big time here.

Welcome to PC gaming circa 1998, console gamers!

I hate when companies try to justify this shit by saying "HEY ALMOST NO ONE HAS THIS PROBLEM SO DON'T COMPLAIN TOO MUCH RIGHT GUYS?"

I think my favorite part of this whole thing is that its not on the disc, that fucking sucks. It sounds like all the bitchy internet kids who cry every-time there is an unlock code for disc content finally got to a company, and look what happened! Good Job, Internet!

@Vortextk said:

@ch13696: No, it's not that simple. The $10 online pass from every single company for every single game is to stop you from trading games in(lower money back) and buying games used(less value). Gamestop is the biggest retailer of used games in the united states. The online pass was developed to hurt gamestop's business, probably not maliciously, but in reality that's what they wanted to happen. Now they go back to gamestop and only gamestop to give them passes for some used copies, I can only imagine not all of them, thus enabling them to continue in the business. I'm not saying it's shady, I'm saying it's fucking stupid. As some of the GB guys put it, this may lead down to a path of gamestop just offering continued kickbacks to game companies without something like the online pass leaving us out of the middle, but until that happens, this is a shit solution good for no one but the companies and actively hurting, AS WE SEE HERE, the consumer.

Yeah, at this point why doesn't gamestop just give in and start profit sharing with pubs and devs on used copies. I mean, its practically what they are doing anyway and lord knows gamestop makes more than enough money from used games.

@ch13696 said:

@Vortextk said:

@ch13696: Gamestop is a very very large reason these codes are in existence, and yet the publisher decides to do a backdoor deal with them(exclusively?) anyway. It's fucking stupid. It's like a mob shakedown with dirty cops getting a cut and we're stuck as the laundromat owner getting beaten out back until we pay. If only batman could save us but he's too busy wondering where the hell catwoman is at and calling WB on the batphone.

WTF? This if far from a scenario like that. No one is getting hurt. No one is getting swindled. It's basically a win win for everyone. People get their used games and the publisher gets a cut of the cash. Geez, people need to stop being so delusional, thinking Gamestop and WB is doing some shady business deal.

That all being said, I do appreciate the batphone reference.

I don't own the game yet, but if I did and put in one of those really long codes and found it not working, I would be really pissed too!! At this point why don't they just make it a free download and quit while there ahead. No instead there going to make people call, be put on hold and then finally deal with some smuck that probably doesn't care if you get to play as Catwoman. This is yet another big corporation making a mistake and finding an ass backwards solution.

I know when I got my copy of Arkham City on PS3 2 days earlier from EB Games my code for Catwoman wouldn't work. Thankfully come the official release date the code worked and an option in the AC main menu allowed me to play the Catwoman levels I missed. I'm hoping this is the last we see of this type of anti pre-own strategy.

Meanwhile, pirates have been enjoying all the exclusive DLC paying customers were unable to get

Just bought this game and it seems like my retailer was giving out notices to prevent any backlash. It's likely they were just covering their own backs but it also shows a level of responsibility I didn't expect from a store.

Before online Passes I bought two WB games NEW

After online passes? Not getting a damn cent out of me ever again.

@Cold_Wolven: Game DLC is set on timers. It's a policy that's been in place since like forever. Nobody is supposed to have early copies of any game therefore the policy shouldn't have a negative impact on anyone because as far as the publisher and first parties are concerned you're not supposed to have the game early.

It's not something you'll see change on current gen systems. It probably won't change on next-gen systems either.

Note I understand your frustration and I'd be bummed too, I'm just explaining how it works.

You know we need day one digital distribution. If you going to make people jump over hoops when u obviously fu, then is time to change the way you sell games. They handling this poorly. I feel sorry for the so called .5% and all the people with no internet connection that pay full price for a single player game that comes incomplete.

@Vortextk said:

@ch13696: No, it's not that simple. The $10 online pass from every single company for every single game is to stop you from trading games in(lower money back) and buying games used(less value). Gamestop is the biggest retailer of used games in the united states. The online pass was developed to hurt gamestop's business, probably not maliciously, but in reality that's what they wanted to happen. Now they go back to gamestop and only gamestop to give them passes for some used copies, I can only imagine not all of them, thus enabling them to continue in the business. I'm not saying it's shady, I'm saying it's fucking stupid. As some of the GB guys put it, this may lead down to a path of gamestop just offering continued kickbacks to game companies without something like the online pass leaving us out of the middle, but until that happens, this is a shit solution good for no one but the companies and actively hurting, AS WE SEE HERE, the consumer.

I'm going to assume you're troll because I can't see how Gamestop is hurting the consumer. The only thing I see that is hurting the consumer is the publishers putting in online codes.

I typed in the code and my cat got aids and my cat died of aids and now I can't get dead aids cat to flush down my toilet and I really need poopy.

@dael said:

You know we need day one digital distribution. If you going to make people jump over hoops when u obviously fu, then is time to change the way you sell games. They handling this poorly. I feel sorry for the so called .5% and all the people with no internet connection that pay full price for a single player game that comes incomplete.

Unfortunately, all it means is they hire better PR reps.

@clank543 said:

Catwoman is the opening of the game. How do you make the opening of the game only accessible through an online pass? What kind of thinking is that? What they should have done is just make Robin the online pass character for the challenges.

What they should have done is not make an online pass at all. If they're really in it to 'battle' used game sales, then find a better means to battle it. Make your games cheaper (of course that will never happen because the real reason it exists is to squeeze as much money as they can out of the consumer), have better content with the game new when it comes out, etc, etc. Make buying a game new more worthwhile.

Instead we get released games with glaring bugs that interfere with game play or just straight up game breaking bugs, online passes making it's way to single player games and having codes that don't work, and DRM bullshit. I'm sure there are other issues I'm missing.

But none of this stuff above is any convenience to the person who bought the game, it's quite the opposite. And most of it is a means just to get more money out of your pocket.

@WickedFather said:

I typed in the code and my cat got aids and my cat died of aids and now I can't get dead aids cat to flush down my toilet and I really need poopy.

This was one of the most useless posts on a topic I have ever read.

Good job, Day one..... convoluted once again.

just release the content. i agree with Vinny's sentiments on the last bombcast. this stuff is getting crazy convoluted.

@ch13696: Gamestop started this whole mess by making most of their money by screwing over the people that make the video games.

so glad my code works if this is happening.  Really reallly sucks for people that have bought the game with faulty codes but at least warner bros are doing something about it rather than trying to brush this under the carpet

@MordeaniisChaos said:

@ch13696: Gamestop started this whole mess by making most of their money by screwing over the people that make the video games.

Why was it not a problem 10 years ago, when game publishers could have easily just squeezed Gamestop right out of the picture by simply not shipping product to them and making it impossible to buy the game of the moment there? Why is it only a problem now, despite the fact that new games are clearly selling absolutely fantastically? This is about games costing too much money and the returns on investment getting smaller and smaller. That the gaming industry dares to demand privileged treatment compared to other entertainment industries shows just how broken the business model is, and that's the only reason we're seeing this nonsense.

Man, when did our forums start filling up with a bunch of self serious, whiny, pussies?

Here's a simple solution... Don't support crappy companies like this. Just rent it, beat it, and the hype is over. Or wait and get the GOTY Edition which will include all dlc on disc.

@YukoAsho said:

@MordeaniisChaos said:

@ch13696: Gamestop started this whole mess by making most of their money by screwing over the people that make the video games.

Why was it not a problem 10 years ago, when game publishers could have easily just squeezed Gamestop right out of the picture by simply not shipping product to them and making it impossible to buy the game of the moment there? Why is it only a problem now, despite the fact that new games are clearly selling absolutely fantastically? This is about games costing too much money and the returns on investment getting smaller and smaller. That the gaming industry dares to demand privileged treatment compared to other entertainment industries shows just how broken the business model is, and that's the only reason we're seeing this nonsense.

Remind me again of the large retail power that makes all of it's money by selling used music or movies? Maybe you should know what the fuck you are talking about before you spout out total shit. And 10 years ago, perhaps they didn't expect gamestop to be a complete monopoly and that used game sales would end up being half of Gamestop's fucking revenue. I don't give a fuck if it's because the industry didn't have 10 year foresight, it doesn't matter, because that doesn't make it ok. It effects the lives of developers that had no ability to get such a thing to happen, new kids starting careers, etc. If they sold those games at low margins like they ought to, MAYBE it wouldn't be such a big deal, but if a video game retailer is making half of it's profits from used games that do not give a single penny to the people that work hard to make them, then I am pretty comfortable saying that it's fucking wrong. Think of all the awesome games that didn't sell super well that should have probably received sequels, that deserved it, that just didn't because of things like piracy and used sales. The money should go to the developers, so that they can make more games and not just have to focus on the cash cows. Games are expensive, and to start a project, you need to start with a lot of capital, and the less evidence you can give of it selling like hotcakes, the harder that capital is to come by. But if there is more money in the industry, more of those smaller projects like Enslaved and Shadows of the Damned could maybe make enough money to get another game out there and potentially do much better now that there is a little more awareness of the brand. Or at the very least, publishers like EA wouldn't just say "fuck you" to their smaller projects and let them fend for themselves, they could actually give a few bucks towards marketing.

Remember, games aren't made by large corporations, they are made by teams of human beings who have a passion for making shit for you to bitch about being terrible, who often have families to support and work harder than a lot of the idiots in the gaming "community" do.

@MordeaniisChaos: Calm down man you should know that you cant appeal to people by talking down to them. Your obviously very passionate about the subject, but i doubt many people are going to read your entire 300+ word essay on the bullshit of coporations. Even less in the comment section of a website.

Online passes = dumb idea. Just as dumb as day one DLC. 

@MordeaniisChaos said:

@YukoAsho said:

@MordeaniisChaos said:

@ch13696: Gamestop started this whole mess by making most of their money by screwing over the people that make the video games.

Why was it not a problem 10 years ago, when game publishers could have easily just squeezed Gamestop right out of the picture by simply not shipping product to them and making it impossible to buy the game of the moment there? Why is it only a problem now, despite the fact that new games are clearly selling absolutely fantastically? This is about games costing too much money and the returns on investment getting smaller and smaller. That the gaming industry dares to demand privileged treatment compared to other entertainment industries shows just how broken the business model is, and that's the only reason we're seeing this nonsense.

Remind me again of the large retail power that makes all of it's money by selling used music or movies? Maybe you should know what the fuck you are talking about before you spout out total shit. And 10 years ago, perhaps they didn't expect gamestop to be a complete monopoly and that used game sales would end up being half of Gamestop's fucking revenue. I don't give a fuck if it's because the industry didn't have 10 year foresight, it doesn't matter, because that doesn't make it ok. It effects the lives of developers that had no ability to get such a thing to happen, new kids starting careers, etc. If they sold those games at low margins like they ought to, MAYBE it wouldn't be such a big deal, but if a video game retailer is making half of it's profits from used games that do not give a single penny to the people that work hard to make them, then I am pretty comfortable saying that it's fucking wrong. Think of all the awesome games that didn't sell super well that should have probably received sequels, that deserved it, that just didn't because of things like piracy and used sales. The money should go to the developers, so that they can make more games and not just have to focus on the cash cows. Games are expensive, and to start a project, you need to start with a lot of capital, and the less evidence you can give of it selling like hotcakes, the harder that capital is to come by. But if there is more money in the industry, more of those smaller projects like Enslaved and Shadows of the Damned could maybe make enough money to get another game out there and potentially do much better now that there is a little more awareness of the brand. Or at the very least, publishers like EA wouldn't just say "fuck you" to their smaller projects and let them fend for themselves, they could actually give a few bucks towards marketing.

Remember, games aren't made by large corporations, they are made by teams of human beings who have a passion for making shit for you to bitch about being terrible, who often have families to support and work harder than a lot of the idiots in the gaming "community" do.

All I read was "fuck one large corporation and praise the others". Anyways, who cares if Gamestop is giving only $10-20 for a game and selling it for $50. People apparently don't mind that and just sell the games anyways. Once Gamestop buys it, it's their property. They can sell the game for however much they want. And it's not a monopoly because there's other retailers that do the same thing. I can easily take my game to Best Buy and they would give me the same amount for the game. I can also sell the game directly to Amazon and they would give me less than what Gamestop would give me also. So I fail to see the monopoly in Gamestops business. If you want to punish Gamestop then you will have to punish every used game seller. Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Amazon, Craigslist, e-Bay, etc.

Rabble Rabble Rabble, games are shit, now excuse me, I have video games to play

@ch13696 said:

@MordeaniisChaos said:

@YukoAsho said:

@MordeaniisChaos said:

@ch13696: Gamestop started this whole mess by making most of their money by screwing over the people that make the video games.

Why was it not a problem 10 years ago, when game publishers could have easily just squeezed Gamestop right out of the picture by simply not shipping product to them and making it impossible to buy the game of the moment there? Why is it only a problem now, despite the fact that new games are clearly selling absolutely fantastically? This is about games costing too much money and the returns on investment getting smaller and smaller. That the gaming industry dares to demand privileged treatment compared to other entertainment industries shows just how broken the business model is, and that's the only reason we're seeing this nonsense.

Remind me again of the large retail power that makes all of it's money by selling used music or movies? Maybe you should know what the fuck you are talking about before you spout out total shit. And 10 years ago, perhaps they didn't expect gamestop to be a complete monopoly and that used game sales would end up being half of Gamestop's fucking revenue. I don't give a fuck if it's because the industry didn't have 10 year foresight, it doesn't matter, because that doesn't make it ok. It effects the lives of developers that had no ability to get such a thing to happen, new kids starting careers, etc. If they sold those games at low margins like they ought to, MAYBE it wouldn't be such a big deal, but if a video game retailer is making half of it's profits from used games that do not give a single penny to the people that work hard to make them, then I am pretty comfortable saying that it's fucking wrong. Think of all the awesome games that didn't sell super well that should have probably received sequels, that deserved it, that just didn't because of things like piracy and used sales. The money should go to the developers, so that they can make more games and not just have to focus on the cash cows. Games are expensive, and to start a project, you need to start with a lot of capital, and the less evidence you can give of it selling like hotcakes, the harder that capital is to come by. But if there is more money in the industry, more of those smaller projects like Enslaved and Shadows of the Damned could maybe make enough money to get another game out there and potentially do much better now that there is a little more awareness of the brand. Or at the very least, publishers like EA wouldn't just say "fuck you" to their smaller projects and let them fend for themselves, they could actually give a few bucks towards marketing.

Remember, games aren't made by large corporations, they are made by teams of human beings who have a passion for making shit for you to bitch about being terrible, who often have families to support and work harder than a lot of the idiots in the gaming "community" do.

All I read was "fuck one large corporation and praise the others". Anyways, who cares if Gamestop is giving only $10-20 for a game and selling it for $50. People apparently don't mind that and just sell the games anyways. Once Gamestop buys it, it's their property. They can sell the game for however much they want. And it's not a monopoly because there's other retailers that do the same thing. I can easily take my game to Best Buy and they would give me the same amount for the game. I can also sell the game directly to Amazon and they would give me less than what Gamestop would give me also. So I fail to see the monopoly in Gamestops business. If you want to punish Gamestop then you will have to punish every used game seller. Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Amazon, Craigslist, e-Bay, etc.

ch13696 is so god damned right. There are so, SO many avenues for used games it's not even funny. GameStop was pretty gigantic even 10 years ago, and even before the internet we'd all go to the various sundry pawn shops of the era and get ol' Nintendo games there. Used games have been everywhere for as long as I can remember, right up there with used movies and music (BTW, your average video rental place loves to sell used stock, at least of movies that aren't renting).

The problem here is that @MordeaniisChaos and the others don't get that the reason used games make up so much of Gamestop's business isn't because they sell more than new - obviously that's not the case - but because the margins on new games are fucking pathetic. Game companies wanna stop that shit? Up the margins for specialty retailers, which are BTW the only way we're ever going to see smaller games stocked with any real regularity.

Oh, and Mordeaniis: Catherine, Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, the Persona series, and a whole lot of other games seem to be doing AOK in the current system, likely because they weren't breaking the bank on their graphics budget. Maybe if EA and NBGI spend more than $0.15 marketing Shadows of the Damned and Enslaved, they wouldn't have languished as badly at retail. Hell, even Bayonetta and Vanquish did pretty well for games no one fucking knew existed.

No, the problem here is that the biggest publishers have no idea how to market a game other than SUPER HI DEF SEQUEL N+1. The middle and smaller tiers seem to be doing just fine.

@PerfidiousSinn said:

All this malarkey with the DLC makes me just want to wait a year and buy the GOTY Edition.

Agree 100%, patched, all extras and good price.

http://thehalfgame.blogspot.com/

@miguelkosta76 said:

@PerfidiousSinn said:

All this malarkey with the DLC makes me just want to wait a year and buy the GOTY Edition.

Agree 100%, patched, all extras and good price.

http://thehalfgame.blogspot.com/

Here's hoping the GOTY edition actually keeps Catwoman and has something that's actually Peripheral for the online pass nonsense. Hell, maybe make an Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood style multiplayer? That seems to have worked for Ubi.

@McShank said:

@WickedFather said:

I typed in the code and my cat got aids and my cat died of aids and now I can't get dead aids cat to flush down my toilet and I really need poopy.

This was one of the most useless posts on a topic I have ever read.

How insightful.

Awesome. Happens to me all the time at work, I'll be all trying to piss in my customers faces and the wind will catch it and just splash it everywhere! I never plan on getting any on me, but you know, when you let flow into the wide-open who knows where it will go?!

I don't understand...are Catwoman's episodes completely cut out if you don't have the DLC? So, at the very beginning we'd start at the political rally cutscene rather than Catwoman breaking into Two-Face's hideout?

I don't blame them for trying to give people an incentive to buy the game brand new. I really don't. Yes, there's gotta be a better way. But who has figured out what the better way is, yet?

I do, absolutely, fault WBIE with the massive clusterfuck that this is. Even if it's less than 1% that's affected...that's still too many people. They need to make it up to those affected.

Yet another reason I've been boycotting launch DLC. DLC should be something added at a later date extend mileage out of a game you've had for a while or even extend the story which seems to not happen very much and DLC continues to be mostly a cash grab. Not to mention what launch DLC or even worse on disc DLC does to a game's longevity.

For example for all of you whom bought Batman AC perhaps a few years down the road you want to pull out the old PS3 or 360 or reinstall your hardcopy on your PC but now the Catwoman content is no longer available as the company who made the game stopped supporting it. Now you have a game you paid full price for but only have part of the main story's content.

I will continue to ignore launch DLC(which rarely is hard for most of it is garbage) and play the game that I was bought and not the game I'm being bribed in someway to play.

Is... is the thumbnail picture Halle Berry Catwoman?

Oh Patrick. :(

@YukoAsho: The number of fucking sales only matters because of the MONEY. The amount of money is INFINITELY more important and is what i was TALKING ABOUT. HALF OF GAMESTOP'S MONEY comes from used games. GAMESTOP MAKES A SHIT TON OF MONEY. HALF OF IT DOESN"T GO ANYWHERE NEAR THE BASTARDS MAKING THE GAME. The number of fucking discs is hugely irrellevent, because the number of discs isn't something you can buy anything with. It's not rocket science. I'm being obonoxious because if you're so goddamn simple as to think the number of copies sold matters worth a SHIT compared to the capital generated, then frankly you shouldn't be bothering to chime in. Money=money, sales=sales, and sales, while leading to money, do not EQUAL money. If the margins are so huge, if anything, devs should be able to be given MORE money for used sames (to be clear, no idea what margins on new copies are like for the dev and gamestop and all that, it could be huge, it could be tin). And no, there are not a lot of places to go for games. Maybe to trade them in, but if you want a game and you go to anywhere but Amazon, a VERY RECENT up and comer, or gamestop, you'll be sadly disappointed. Seriously, GO to all of these big retail stores like Best buy. FRED MEYERS has a better game section than most Best Buys. I'm serious! It's generally better cared for, better stocked, and sometimes even bigger, despite Best Buy tending to spread 40 copies of games over about as many square feet.

If I steal a painting from the artist, and then sell it for 10 billion dollars, does it mean a flying fuck that it was only one painting? NO. If a sale leads to money, then the money is what's important and fuck the rest, the rest is for investor meetings, and EVEN THEN it's just used as a metric to measure how much money is coming in and going out to figure out if more money could be made.

Most of the examples you gave of "success stories" either A) had large publishers (Atlus puts out enough games to have some goddamn capital friend, trust me) backing them, or were cult successes, lots of popularity but often limited sales. Catherine impressed us all with 500,000 copies. That's not a huge number. I mean it was good, but it was far from being a huge success story. It did well, made some money. And like I said, the reason the smaller titles usually flounder is because they don't get any attention from their pubs who only want to sell massive selling 5 billion copies AAA titles like CoD. I never said "Small games can't work" what I am saying is that a LOT of the time, they never get sequels, or they get held back by their budget, or aren't able to be marketed whch results in them failing hugely. It's a little different these days with the PC, where there is a large enough of a central community for word of mouth to be the saving grace of a lot of small projects. Ask people in the industry. They will tell you that a lot of the big publishers only give a damn about huge numbers. And yet a lot of people don't get to make the game they want to make without eventually ending up as an EA partner or some shit, but then they end up fucked over because their game ended up basically being invisible up until release.

Yeah, it's possible for the middle man to get their game out and do fine. And it's possible for a lot of tiny indy devs to get their awesome little games out like Bastion and stuff and kick ass with em. But it's just as common that small teams are eaten up by big publishers because they need capital to fund their project, and then it ends up underperforming. And rarely do those games ever get a sequel, even when they do alright. Persona was an exception because it was part of an ooooooooooooold as franchise. Dark/Demon Souls were cult hits, sorta like DP, so coming in with the sequel, brand familiarity was pretty high. Catherine was marketed a HELL of a lot, because again, Atlus is actually pretty capable of putting some dough behind their games.

I just woke up after about the 6th night of getting 3 hours of fuckin sleep, so I'm probably being a bit of a dick, but at the same time, come on, use your gorramn brain.

So if a game is out of print or sold out, and the only copy available is a used copy... one that was ALREADY BOUGHT ONCE... I shouldn't even consider it?

How about all those retro PS2/PS1/XBox/Gamecube/etc games that you can only buy used now, because they don't even bother making them anymore? Do GBA games go on that do not buy list? So now I can't jump on eBay to snag my SNES carts anymore?

Damn near all my PS3 games are BRAND NEW COPIES, but do any of you who are jumping on the boycotting used games bandwagon see the outright F******* STUPID part of your argument yet?!?!? And if the publishers really cared that much about the developer's profits from the game, they'd stop making them work for low salaries and massive work hrs and, oh, I don't know... PAY THEM MORE. This isn't about being fair to game devs... this is f******* GREED. The only difference is now they're making this blatantly obvious. They're not satisfied with the extra scratch they DO make from DLC... and don't get me started on how they're nickle and diming you there...

MordeaniisChaos... I'm especially talking to YOU.