Are developers in the right for charging for online play on used copies of games?
- Thread starter Tarvis
- Start date
- Nov 10, 2003
- 5,129
- Moderator
- #2
I don't see why not. They don't get any money from used sales, and if this is the only way then can get some, then so be it. I liked the argument I read on PA. Someone compared buying used games to buying any other goods used. When you buy used, you know you are risking buying an inferior, degraded, or otherwise sub par product when compared to new.
- Nov 10, 2003
- 13,192
- Admin
- #3
I have no problem with this. However, what's looming on the horizon is subscription based multiplayer. I can understand it for MMO's where there are constant updates and server costs, but the day you have to pay 100 dollars per year to play Call of Duty is where I draw the line.
- Nov 10, 2003
- 8,871
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #4
The only problem I can't wrap my mind around is that the fact that with used games, the developer has already been paid once when someone bought that copy new.
So why should a developer get paid again for the same copy? Because of online server costs? Well, that might be justified except the fact that if the guy who bought it new and never traded it in, how is it more expensive for the developers if he does trade it in and that same copy goes back online? When it comes down to numbers, its the same amount of copies going online, where is the increased cost?
So why should a developer get paid again for the same copy? Because of online server costs? Well, that might be justified except the fact that if the guy who bought it new and never traded it in, how is it more expensive for the developers if he does trade it in and that same copy goes back online? When it comes down to numbers, its the same amount of copies going online, where is the increased cost?
- Nov 10, 2003
- 5,129
- Moderator
- #5
I doubt it really has much to do with the online costs, and more to do with "hey, you're playing our game but you didn't pay us!".
TD
The Chairman
- Sep 28, 2010
- 139
Paying for Online is not that bad, as we still have the choice if we want to or not. Chances are if your not buying the game brand new then by the time you do get it the servers will be empty (unless its a top notch FPS).
What I do have a problem with is DLC, especially Day one DLC.
What I do have a problem with is DLC, especially Day one DLC.
Last edited:
marveldarkreign
Deku Sprout
- Dec 15, 2010
- 1
I don't have a problem paying for an access pass that gives me access to exclusive content. If buy new it is included, if you buy used you have to buy it online I get that and I understand to an extent. But the access pass should include day one DLC, not a discounted price on the DLC. But when some developers like EA do the Season pass for Madden, which does not give you anything special from what I have seen, why would I pay for it. On the subscription side of things, causing gamers to pay a monthly or yearly fee to play multiplayer games is insane..if developers go to this model in order for me to want to pay 60.00 for the game plus 60.00 a year to be allowed to play online, then here are my expectations, all developers use dedicated servers and mod players extensively to remove cheaters, hackers and modders from ruining the gaming experience. Also all DLC should then be free and I should have access to premier content such as Beta versions of games, dlc should be accessible earlier to those that pay for the service. Just to name a few things.
TalesOfPants
Project DIVA
- Mar 23, 2011
- 275
I don't have a problem with it, since I don't buy games used.
If I were to buy games used, I probably wouldn't mind, since used games are usually about 5 bucks cheaper than the brand new game, so it'd just get me to buy a new game instead.
If I were to buy games used, I probably wouldn't mind, since used games are usually about 5 bucks cheaper than the brand new game, so it'd just get me to buy a new game instead.
rman
The Grapist!!
- Mar 8, 2011
- 290
I don't have a problem with it. Used sales contribute nothing to the developer in terms of revenue. If the game sold 100K copies, but used sales of the game were at another 50K, then that publisher has missed out on an additional 50% of their revenue.
Personally, I hate stores like GS that sell used games at a "discount." $5 off the new price for used is NOT a deal. I really don't care, I am willing to pay the extra $5 for mint condition. Its especially annoying considering the horrendous mark up that goes into the buy back vs sale price for used games.
Personally, I hate stores like GS that sell used games at a "discount." $5 off the new price for used is NOT a deal. I really don't care, I am willing to pay the extra $5 for mint condition. Its especially annoying considering the horrendous mark up that goes into the buy back vs sale price for used games.
redxdeath
That Ninja Guy
- May 18, 2011
- 10
Are you talking about online pass from EA?
I guess it's right because that will stop people (not completely) buying pirated games. Most people play multiplayer head on without trying out campaign first, I think they are only limiting what pirated games can do.
I guess it's right because that will stop people (not completely) buying pirated games. Most people play multiplayer head on without trying out campaign first, I think they are only limiting what pirated games can do.
cameroncrogers
Cameroncrogers
- Sep 2, 2011
- 29
yes. Because its there game, they can charge. If someone was connecting to my server to play online, i would expect payment so i can pay the bills of the bandwidth and hardware replacements.
- Nov 10, 2003
- 5,129
- Moderator
- #13
Hey, welcome to the forum buddy.
- Nov 10, 2003
- 5,129
- Moderator
- #17
They include a one time use code for free online access with new copies of the game.