EA New used games policy

Why is everybody making such a big deal on this new policy i mean what exactly is the whole point of the whole point of your arguements? that EA is being greedy? hell nah you know what you bought when you buy a used game? you bought everything inside that one disk but think about this did you buy the servers did you pay for the online expenses of ea did you pay for the free dlc they sometimes offer HELL NO! and people are taking this way out of context when it comes to renting the actual games since ea can simply give 20 days free online on the game or sell a version of the game that is meant to be rented at a higher price.  
 
Now instead of blaming EA and all these gaming companies who only wants to have more profit to be able to make their games and their online servers better why don't we blame the route of all this places like Gamestop or eBAY who doesn't give EA (or any other developer) any money to the sales of used games 

25 Comments
25 Comments
Posted by pishbollz

Why is everybody making such a big deal on this new policy i mean what exactly is the whole point of the whole point of your arguements? that EA is being greedy? hell nah you know what you bought when you buy a used game? you bought everything inside that one disk but think about this did you buy the servers did you pay for the online expenses of ea did you pay for the free dlc they sometimes offer HELL NO! and people are taking this way out of context when it comes to renting the actual games since ea can simply give 20 days free online on the game or sell a version of the game that is meant to be rented at a higher price.  
 
Now instead of blaming EA and all these gaming companies who only wants to have more profit to be able to make their games and their online servers better why don't we blame the route of all this places like Gamestop or eBAY who doesn't give EA (or any other developer) any money to the sales of used games 

Posted by GmanHull

Because they have already been paid for the item... maybe?

Posted by sixghost

People on the 360 already pay a fee to play online. If EA is so concerned about the cost of maintaining online servers, let microsoft fucking do it like everyone else. 

Posted by pishbollz
@sixghost: see Ms doesn't make servers for the games so unless they actually make dedicated servers like the servers on Battlefield Badcompany 2 then i can agree with 
Posted by pishbollz
@GmanHull: No as i said when you buy a used game you pay for the contents on the disk plus the used store's expenses while if you pay for it Bnew then you pay for the contents and the developers expenses
Posted by Jadeskye

OP is right, it's not a big deal.

Posted by Jimbo

Uh, hasn't the first person that bought the game already paid for all of that?  One person can access the servers before the trade and one person can access the servers after the trade - it's just a different person.

Posted by Tennmuerti

This has already been talked to death, do we really need a new separate topic? 
Just use the previous ones if you want to post your opinion imho, as they already contain a wealth of arguments and counter arguments.

Posted by Meteora

People like to nitpick, like to buy games for a cheaper price and make sure their wallet isn't too light after spending money. Quite frankly, I can sort of see where they're coming from. The cost of buying a average game has upped since last generation. 
 
But then when we get on the issue of us gamers and entitlement and piracy... yeah. Let's not go there.

Posted by Binman88

I think I'd rather see EA just ban companies from selling used copies of their games, but continue allowing individuals trade games with their friends and on ebay. That way people will still be able to get lower priced second hand games, without giving any money to the game stores.

Online
Posted by pishbollz
@Jimbo: no as i said he doesn't own the online part of the game EA does he only contributed to making the servers 
 
@Meteora:  What the hell do you mean man Gaming has always been this expensive  
 
@Binman88: eBay is also a company dude and EA can't ban companies since they lose more money using that technique instead of simply losing a few customers
Posted by Binman88
@pishbollz said:
"@Binman88: eBay is also a company dude and EA can't ban companies since they lose more money using that technique instead of simply losing a few customers "
Ban companies from selling used games. I was led to understand that EA would receive no money from the sale of used games, so how would they lose more money by banning this practice if they make no money from it in the first place? 
 
Of course eBay is a company, but the cut they take from sales and listings is no where near as egregious as the profit that companies like GameStop make from trading used games.
Online
Posted by GmanHull
@pishbollz:  But the person who bought it new has already paid for the developers expenses. You buy a product and everything that comes with that. If you sell it you are transfering that product not just the physical contents. If you buy a used car should you have to pay the manufacturer to fully use it?
 
A better solution would be to sell games $10 or a couple of quid (if your from the UK) cheaper and then make the online and optional extra for everyone even those who buy it new.
 
I know people who buy games 1st day then trade them within a few weeks to buy the next new game. If they get less trade in value because of this then thats less money to put towards new games. That said I guess we just have to wait and see what happens but I see this as a step forward towards of people simply paying to license a game as opposed to actualy owning what they have bought. Sort of in the same way DRM with limited installs has made it feel on the PC.
Posted by pishbollz
@Binman88: Simply put it like this when EA bans the companies from selling their product they might get to legal trouble although i am not sure since im not familiar with selling and reselling laws but if it does come to that then EA would lose money in going to court they'll win yes but still lose a tad bit of money 
 
@GmanHull: It is comparable to a car cuz imo the online is like a car's warranty you want it you gotta pay for it when its used if you bought the car new then you get free warranty simple right 
That solution may work cause i wouldn't mind doing something like that for games that absolutely suck at multi-player or for any game in that matter.  
Your second point only leads me to say this if places like gamespot who officially support trading in of used games only pays the developers a tad bit of the profit then we wouldn't have this problem in the first place
Posted by kariyanine
@GmanHull: I think the best example I heard about this was on the recent Weekend Confirmed.  Basically when you buy a car it should drive but if you buy a  car that has satellite radio in it, you still need to pay for it.  So basically imagine the game disc as the car, can you still play it?  Yes but you can't access the online features because that is like the satallite radio.
Posted by Jimbo
@pishbollz said:
" @Jimbo: no as i said he doesn't own the online part of the game EA does he only contributed to making the servers"
I don't even understand what that's supposed to mean, but whatevs.  
 
Traditionally, access to the multiplayer servers is advertised as being a part of that product - it isn't a seperate service that EA has you sign up to.  That access is a feature of that copy of the game.  When the copy is sold, that access is sold with it.  No more than one person has access to those servers via that copy at any one time, so it shouldn't make a difference on their end.
 
They can of course change this dynamic, by making it clear at the point of first sale that online access is a non-transferable service and not an inherent part of the product .  But if anybody ever called them on it, I don't know if having it on the back of the box in tiny letters would be considered good enough, or whether they should be having players read and accept a EULA, as has happened with PC software for years.  I think there have been examples before where EULAs have been shown not to be worth shit if the person hasn't actually had to accept them at any point.
Posted by Bones8677
@Jimbo said:
" Uh, hasn't the first person that bought the game already paid for all of that?  One person can access the servers before the trade and one person can access the servers after the trade - it's just a different person. "


Posted by GmanHull
@pishbollz:  I guess this can be argued either way. In the UK car warranties are attached to the item car the original purchaser it comes as part of the package but thats enough about cars! hehe.
 
I think at the end of the day as a consumer you should always try to get the best deal. This new policy bascially means certain consumers dont get as good a deal as they used to, which is why they complain. Its just human nature.
Edited by Arkasai

This cripples games that are more and more often very online centric, ie Skate 3.  I hardly ever pay full price for games (last one was FF13) simply because I don't have a lot of disposable income.  Stores that buy and sell used games will probably adjust their pricing to include or dampen the $10 charge.  The used game industry will exist as long as physical media is used to store game data, which I would assume to be two to four more generations of consoles before everything is distributed online.  Hopefully getting rid of physical media will help increase game sales, and lower costs enough for the price of a game to level out.  I cant really wrap my head around games for $69.99 or more next gen...at what point will people stop buying? 
 
I understand where EA is coming from here, but really, if there are a lot of people online seeing their real world ads in-game and buying their DLC, isn't that more than enough to maintain their servers?  If not they can probably do something with non-registered copies of the game where the game world/menus/loading screens are populated with ads, this is lame and would probably ruin a lot of games though.  I'm sure used game sales extend the life of a game in unpredictable ways, and this is especially hard for EA with their yearly franchise release schedules.  They've just got shit loads of games out there in the field they cant serve all at once.

Posted by KaosAngel

PC games have been doing it for years, it's all good.  Down with GameStop!  Those fuckers told me they couldn't give me RDR due to "short supply", I walked next door to Walmart and picked up a copy from the frickin' cabnit filled with them.
 
Once I get SC2 CE from GameStop, I am done with that shit hole...and just sticking with Amazon and Walmart.

Posted by Tireyo

 

  It's really no big deal. People are letting their shit hit the fan. Just flush it down the toilet and move on!!!
Posted by Meteora
@pishbollz: Last gen from what I remember, games were $10 less expensive. A $10 hike is expensive if you count in all of the games you will buy.
Posted by iam3green
@KaosAngel said:
" PC games have been doing it for years, it's all good.  Down with GameStop!  Those fuckers told me they couldn't give me RDR due to "short supply", I walked next door to Walmart and picked up a copy from the frickin' cabnit filled with them.  Once I get SC2 CE from GameStop, I am done with that shit hole...and just sticking with Amazon and Walmart. "
lol's same thing happened to a friend. he went there asked they didn't have it so he went to another gamestop that had it. the two are in the city. he asked if she could call them to see. she said no and said they probably won't have a copy. we went there anyway and bought a copy and left.  
 
EA just wants money. they are just mad that people buy games used for cheaper price.
Posted by KaosAngel
@iam3green said:
" @they are just mad that people buy games used for cheaper price. "
Yeah, that they don't make money from used.  They should do it the PC way and have a CD key to play online, if not you buy the key as a standalone for a fee, or you buy the full thing at retail.
Posted by xXNurbsXx

I just bought Medal of Honor last week at $20 at my local GameStop. why? because I couldn't afford it when it first came out. I'm not cheap, nor do I have the luxury to buy a new game every time it comes out. If I had $60 to spend on games, I'd rather get 3 pre-owned games at $20 each. I always find a better deal when it comes to my money.

Some of us are just barely making it by with today's economy, If these companies cared so much about profit, reduce the price to a reasonable one.

Now let's say that GameStop is no more (god forbid) If my neighbor were to buy the new game at $60 and then were to sell it to me for cheap, then he is the acting "gamestop". Because he just sold me a pre-owned game, What will the industry do then? charge him a percentage for selling the game to me?

Companies that sell pre-owned games are like the used car lots that sell pre-owned vehicles. If car manufactures are making it by, Then why can't the video game industry? It's all greed ...