Battlefield 3, Mass Effect 3 MP Will Require Online Pass

Status
Not open for further replies.

ben850

Distinguished
Apr 19, 2009
325
0
18,780
0
What's the difference between someone buying the game and playing it for the next 10 years, or someone playing it for 5, selling it, and the 2nd person playing it for 5? There's still only one person on per disk. Not like it's putting any extra strain on the servers..
 
"because, after all, they get absolutely nothing from second-hand sales"

Oh, come on! It's not like the online servers are going to get an additional person per used/resold game! Besides, they already got 100% value from the first buyer (and overpriced, that is).

This thing is a totally stupid money milking strategy of people by the publishers.

Now, if they let the online part of the game with the old online pass code active and independent from the "offline"/SP still playable, I'm all in for that. So, you just sell the "offline" part of it and continue to rock online. I really doubt it's that way though.

Cheers!
 
G

Guest

Guest
"because, after all, they get absolutely nothing from second-hand sales"

So what! They are not entitled to revenue from second hand sales! Games are still goods and not services.
 
G

Guest

Guest
This just in:

Businesses and companies exist to make the most money they can
 

dane332

Distinguished
Sep 9, 2011
247
0
18,710
8



The difference is that the second person's money did not go to EA , Bioware, and anyone else related to production and distribution of the game.

The only person who benefits would be the guy who sold the game used, or gamestop.
 

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator
[citation][nom]ben850[/nom]What's the difference between someone buying the game and playing it for the next 10 years, or someone playing it for 5, selling it, and the 2nd person playing it for 5? There's still only one person on per disk. Not like it's putting any extra strain on the servers..[/citation]

Its about money. Mainly because that person buying used does not give them any money, only the store thats reselling it gets money. If that same customer who was buying it used bought it new, this wouldn't be needed.

So instead they tack on another fee that really makes used pointless. If its a popular game, it will be $40ish used. Then they add this which is normally $20ish so its $60 and you could have just gotten it new.
 

Scoregie

Distinguished
Nov 27, 2010
86
0
18,640
4
You no what piss's me off the fact that on xbox you pay for gold membership to play "online" so in other words we have to pay 2 membership... shouldn't EA/Bioware get royalties from Microsoft since people are buying there game to play online which then makes people buy gold so on so forth?
 

Benihana

Distinguished
Nov 21, 2009
330
0
18,780
0
Meh, new ways to milk money is all. In the future, they'll have the same for single player as well. And then you'll pay only for what you use in-game. i.e, "I never use rocket launchers, so why should I have to pay for that portion of the game?" So basically the few old farts that will exist then that can still remember the "good old days" will be the ones complaining. Meanwhile all the young whippersnappers will gladly fork out $100+ per game per month using teenager logic "well, I spend $15 everytime I go to the movies, and golly I watched 12 movies this month. So according to the math my iPad 8 crunched, if I watch only 8 movies this month then I'll break even. Wait, who cares, it's daddy's money anyways."
 

airborne11b

Distinguished
Jul 6, 2008
466
0
18,790
4
Honestly, with how game development is today, the really ground breaking, graphically intense, complex gameplay mechanic, AAA games require huge amounts of money to fund. On average games are in full swing development for at least 2 years with a team of over 100 employees. Each need to make a salary.

Lets just say they made bottom barrel pay of 50k - 60k, that's over 2 million dollars in wages alone for the staff for a 2 year development of a game.

Then you got to calculate in work space, hardware to work on, advertising costs, costs to manufacture - label - package - ship the product, liscencing fees, and all the other business expensenses for a large scale operation.

You consider all of that and complain about paying $50 or $60 for a AAA title?

Come on.
 

airborne11b

Distinguished
Jul 6, 2008
466
0
18,790
4
[citation][nom]jryan388[/nom]Good thing I'm not planning on buying either of those games ^.^ I don't buy EA anymore.[/citation]

Would be easier to not buy EA games if there were other titles coming out worth playing. :p
 

rohitbaran

Distinguished
Mar 21, 2010
1,938
0
20,160
116
[citation][nom]jryan388[/nom]Good thing I'm not planning on buying either of those games ^.^ I don't buy EA anymore.[/citation]
Craptivision is worse my friend, with $15 for atomic map packs and don't forget Ubisoft, who are adamant on putting 'always connected to internet' DRM in their games. Many big developers are doing things that upset the gamers.
 
While most of us already know that it's a way for publishers and developers to generate revenue from the used games sector (because, after all, they get absolutely nothing from second-hand sales), Kertz said the Online Pass revenue also helps pay for the cost of keeping multiplayer servers up and running.
with all the power efficiency and speed improvements from the newer technology the server maintenance costs must be going through the roof!!
they should totally use bulldozer platform if they want to make profit!!
 

Kurz

Distinguished
Jun 9, 2006
748
0
19,160
84
sigh you people are pathetic, it makes perfect sense, why should that person be able to play online without having to contribute to the running and maintenance of the game? Data space doesnt come cheap, i for one dont see anything wrong with this, the amount of data being pushed abck and fourth from the servers per player alone over the life of the game would be a lot more for such a bif title, live with it or fuck off and get a job.
You have no idea about the current costs of running a server. Every year the cost of running a server goes down. Cheaper Hardware, Faster, Cheaper internet connections. It doesn't cost that much money to run a server.

Past a certain point people will stop playing the game and the old servers will be reallocated to the newer games. This is just another way to garner revenue.
 

DarkBlue21

Distinguished
Mar 10, 2010
31
0
18,530
0
Wow, canceling my pre order now. First it had to run on crapper Origin, and a lame browser that adds nothing, but actually makes it harder for you to switch servers, and now there is going to be online pass. That is the last straw, I mean I don't even plan on selling the game nor buying it used, but just the fact that I'm buying a game, I want to know that I own it and that I can use it however I like. Screw this, I'll just wait till it hits bargain bin prices...
 

airborne11b

Distinguished
Jul 6, 2008
466
0
18,790
4
[citation][nom]DarkBlue21[/nom]Wow, canceling my pre order now. First it had to run on crapper Origin, and a lame browser that adds nothing, but actually makes it harder for you to switch servers, and now there is going to be online pass. That is the last straw, I mean I don't even plan on selling the game nor buying it used, but just the fact that I'm buying a game, I want to know that I own it and that I can use it however I like. Screw this, I'll just wait till it hits bargain bin prices...[/citation]

Battlelog was a little buggy in the beta, but I liked it's functionality. Best thing about it is going to be setting up squads in battlelog that carry over into the game itself, so you can group up with your friends on the browser, pick a server that will fit you all, and when you get into the game, it's going to put you all on the same team and in the same squad. That's awesome imo.

Then it's got stats, server list, everything rolled into one thing seperate from the game (So no need to patch the game to do updates on the browser. It's a great thing.

Origin, though I like steam better for their deals and selection, works damn the same way, so don't see how it's crappy.

If you'd cancel a game over this news, you must be a no-body anyway lol. Probably just some guy that got rolled over 100x per game in the beta and started raging.
 

zeromikey

Distinguished
Oct 10, 2011
46
0
18,530
0
still getting em great games that haven't disappointed in the past. lol if you "dont buy EA anymore" good luck with 1/3 of the market.
 

DarkBlue21

Distinguished
Mar 10, 2010
31
0
18,530
0



The Battlelog wasn't that bad and like what you said, all those perks is kind of cool, but I'd much rather have a traditional game screen that can do almost all of that, or at the very least make it optional to use Battlelog on the browser.

Origin on the other hand is like steam, the reason I don't like it is because it is just like steam, I already have steam, and don't want to add anymore crap onto my computer. Plus having the ToS state that EA may gather personal and/or computer information or game/app usages for marketing purposes is like having a spyware.

And to your third statement, I loled when I read it, it doesn't really matter to EA cause to them I am a nobody, sure me and my friends are no longer getting the game, but either way that's like a few customers down the drain. I'm not getting the game because I want to know that I actually fully own the game and can pass it down to a family member without having them to shell out whatever it costs for the online pass. And fyi I actually did okay on the beta (it was a lot fun, no doubt about that), and I was always a fan of Battlefield, I've owned Battlefield 1942, 2, and 2142, but never touched the bad company series.
 

ben850

Distinguished
Apr 19, 2009
325
0
18,780
0
[citation][nom]Kurz[/nom]You have no idea about the current costs of running a server. Every year the cost of running a server goes down. Cheaper Hardware, Faster, Cheaper internet connections. It doesn't cost that much money to run a server.Past a certain point people will stop playing the game and the old servers will be reallocated to the newer games. This is just another way to garner revenue.[/citation]

On top of this, the game is originally being sold as having a "free" online mode. If they required additional profits beyond game sales then they would incorporate a month-to-month fee.

They cannot possibly rely on any certain number of people to buy their game used. The only thing left is to snatch up the little amount of profit available from the used market, which they are not entitled to IMO.
 

airborne11b

Distinguished
Jul 6, 2008
466
0
18,790
4
[citation][nom]DarkBlue21[/nom]The Battlelog wasn't that bad and like what you said, all those perks is kind of cool, but I'd much rather have a traditional game screen that can do almost all of that, or at the very least make it optional to use Battlelog on the browser.Origin on the other hand is like steam, the reason I don't like it is because it is just like steam, I already have steam, and don't want to add anymore crap onto my computer. Plus having the ToS state that EA may gather personal and/or computer information or game/app usages for marketing purposes is like having a spyware.And to your third statement, I loled when I read it, it doesn't really matter to EA cause to them I am a nobody, sure me and my friends are no longer getting the game, but either way that's like a few customers down the drain. I'm not getting the game because I want to know that I actually fully own the game and can pass it down to a family member without having them to shell out whatever it costs for the online pass. And fyi I actually did okay on the beta (it was a lot fun, no doubt about that), and I was always a fan of Battlefield, I've owned Battlefield 1942, 2, and 2142, but never touched the bad company series.[/citation]

You called Battlelog Lame. First of all, they went with browser based battle log because it's the better choice. It's a fully functional, great working service provided for free. As I already explained, it also allows it to be updated and maintained without having to mess with the game itself. It's by far the best server browser/match making set up I've ever had the pleasure of playing (and I've pretty much played everything worth playing on the PC for past 15+ years.)

2nd, you're advocating for a monopoly. I have steam, we all like steam, but competition is one of the most nessesary parts of an economy. And you act as if origin is a ton of milicious files. It's a couple hundred MB and you can set it to not start up at launch from the get-go. It has no adverse effects on a system.

Also, if you hate their requirement to buy an online key unique to the user, you should hate PC gaming in general. If I buy Left4Dead on steam brand new for 49.99 but my wife and kid want to play with me, I have to buy TWO more copies of the same exact game(That's over $150 for one household to play 1 game). Where if I bought it on a console like Xbox, I could do 4 players on 1 game disk. So your hatred for EA's new online key requirements is both unwarranted and over exaggerated.

3rd, "Did *okay* in the beta" sounds like a synonym for "I'm a baddy" :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS