Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

they probally wont take the game in as USED

WOW ea is really trying hard to get money.. don't they make enough already

Originally Posted by kill3r7 First sale doctrine [17 USC §109(a)]→ the copyright owner only has the rights with respect to the first sale; he may not limit the sale by purchasers ( the exception being licensed products ie itunes). In other words if you buy a new book the author/publishing house cannot prevent you as the purchaser from reselling that book. EA is attempting to control the used game market which is bullshit and violates all sort of legal rights. Furthermore, think about how this will adversely affect game rentals from Netflix or BB. EA has no en clue what they're doing.

Can you be more wrong? You act like this is the first time some company has done something like this. You really have no clue what "first sale" means or entails.

EA is not attempting to control the used game market here. They are simply putting a limitation on a ADDITIONAL NON-REQUIRED feature of the game. If you buy the game used and want the feature, pay for it. This isn't a hard concept to understand.

How is this ANY different than what Activision did with the Call of Duty 4 game of the year edition? You buy the game, it had a code. You use the code, it's tied to your live account. You trade the game in. Someone else buys the game and cannot use the code (or the code isn't in the box). The new owner has to pay $9.99 for the 4 maps. Please explain how that is any different than what EA is doing here.

Originally Posted by mtxbass1 Can you be more wrong? You act like this is the first time some company has done something like this. You really have no clue what "first sale" means or entails. EA is not attempting to control the used game market here. They are simply putting a limitation on a ADDITIONAL NON-REQUIRED feature of the game. If you buy the game used and want the feature, pay for it. This isn't a hard concept to understand. How is this ANY different than what Activision did with the Call of Duty 4 game of the year edition? You buy the game, it had a code. You use the code, it's tied to your live account. You trade the game in. Someone else buys the game and cannot use the code (or the code isn't in the box). The new owner has to pay $9.99 for the 4 maps. Please explain how that is any different than what EA is doing here.

Please explain to me how this is not a first sale issue...if this isn't a first sale issue then why are they limiting the content.

The stats update feature is touted as being the "DNA" of the game. This is not simply just some tack on feature such as maps/additional content, this is the en game.

I made the flip to NBA Live last year in terms of basketball games. I do a lot of renting from GameFly, so I'm basically getting the idea that if I get one of the first rental copies that the code will be on my console. If anyone else who rents the game from GameFly gets an previously rented copy, that feature is going to get locked out for every single person who gets that copy. Unless the first renter buys it out of the gate, of course. This is hurting more than just GameStop. This also hurts rental services and chains a little, too. People who want to rent the game will have this highly-touted feature blocked out.

I just don't see how a policy like this will end up helping anyone. 2K9 will probably get put into the GameFly queue now, but I may purchase Live at a later point (aka when I have the extra cash flow). But I do think EA made a poor mistake here.

Originally Posted by kill3r7 Please explain to me how this is not a first sale issue...if this isn't a first sale issue then why are they limiting the content. The stats update feature is touted as being the "DNA" of the game. This is not simply just some tack on feature such as maps/additional content, this is the en game.

The feature is completely OPTIONAL. It is not required for play. It has absolutely nothing to do with first sale. PERIOD. EA is not limiting you from reselling the game. You can resell it to your hearts content. If the new purchaser wants this OPTIONAL feature, then they can pay for it.

The feature itself produces live stats on players throughout the season. It is in no way vital to gameplay, or required to make the game work.

Originally Posted by mtxbass1 The feature itself produces live stats on players throughout the season. It is in no way vital to gameplay, or required to make the game work.

What is vital to gameplay or required to make the game work?

I can think of plenty of demos that are perfectly contained -- they function fully, but end after a period of time or contain only one level.

They have everything vital to gameplay and required to make the game work. They just have a lot less of it.

How do we know what is included in a game? Publicity? Previews? The box art? Reviews? Word of mouth?

It's an inexact thing now. What's it going to be like when consumers have no idea what they're purchasing?

Maybe that's the point. To scare consumers into always buying new, since they have no idea what kind of gimped piece of shit they'll end up with.

To hell with GS -- what's going to happen if you want to sell or give the game directly to someone? Or take it to your friend's house, or to school, or to your relatives for a few weeks? If you don't care, I guess you don't care. But why should EA decide how you should use the product you paid for? "Because they can" seems like a really lame answer.

I also really don't see how making consumers jump through hoops with codes, DLC, or other annoyances is going to make things better. For them, certainly. For everyone else? Not so much.

I knew this would happen once they started making consoles with hard drives. I'm not surprised EA is the first to do this either. This is why I have no interest at all in the next gen of video games.

Originally Posted by Regian I made the flip to NBA Live last year in terms of basketball games. I do a lot of renting from GameFly, so I'm basically getting the idea that if I get one of the first rental copies that the code will be on my console. If anyone else who rents the game from GameFly gets an previously rented copy, that feature is going to get locked out for every single person who gets that copy. Unless the first renter buys it out of the gate, of course. This is hurting more than just GameStop. This also hurts rental services and chains a little, too. People who want to rent the game will have this highly-touted feature blocked out. I just don't see how a policy like this will end up helping anyone. 2K9 will probably get put into the GameFly queue now, but I may purchase Live at a later point (aka when I have the extra cash flow). But I do think EA made a poor mistake here.

So, you're now considering purchasing their game instead of just renting it? Actually I think you just proved EA's point.

Originally Posted by Professor Oreo So, you're now considering purchasing their game instead of just renting it? Actually I think you just proved EA's point.

Yeah. I may just rent it out and hold out until it goes on the cheap. I'm not gonna someone else over on the deal.

Win some, lose some.

Originally Posted by VipFREAK They are still around for a reason people. Don't buy their ing shit and they won't be able to do this kind of crap or won't be around at all. Simple as that.

No. That's the problem. You kids HAVEN'T been buying their shit.

Originally Posted by blandstalker What is vital to gameplay or required to make the game work? I can think of plenty of demos that are perfectly contained -- they function fully, but end after a period of time or contain only one level. They have everything vital to gameplay and required to make the game work. They just have a lot less of it. How do we know what is included in a game? Publicity? Previews? The box art? Reviews? Word of mouth? It's an inexact thing now. What's it going to be like when consumers have no idea what they're purchasing? Maybe that's the point. To scare consumers into always buying new, since they have no idea what kind of gimped piece of shit they'll end up with. To hell with GS -- what's going to happen if you want to sell or give the game directly to someone? Or take it to your friend's house, or to school, or to your relatives for a few weeks? If you don't care, I guess you don't care. But why should EA decide how you should use the product you paid for? "Because they can" seems like a really lame answer. I also really don't see how making consumers jump through hoops with codes, DLC, or other annoyances is going to make things better. For them, certainly. For everyone else? Not so much.

You don't pay for demos. What difference does it make how much of a game is in a demo if it doesn't cost you anything? You want the full game you pay for it.

Also, it's ALWAYS been the consumers job to do their own research and make an educated purchase. You should never trust ANY company to always be upfront and gift you every piece of info about their products in big bold letters. The fine print is fine for a reason. Some shit they really don't want you to know and hope you dont see. Is EA being secretive about what they're doing? I have no idea, but I know the game's not even out yet and we all know about this issue. So will they spell it out on the box, I'm guessing that they will but probably in fine print. Nobody knows for sure until the game comes out.

You want to take your game to a friends house or to school to play it? Log into your account at any of those other locations and play as yourself. End of story. Here's a question? What if the friend you want to loan your game to doesn't have access to broadband and can't get his system on the internet. Is EA somehow handicapping his game and ruining his experience because he won't have access to the online stat updates? Oh Noes! They are teh evils!

Lastly since when is inputting a code/password making consumers jump thru hoops? Didn't you have to input a password into CAG to register your user account to post your comment? OMG! Cheapy D and EA must be conspiring together to ruin your life!

I guess I've got no problem with companies giving me a bonus when my money for the game purchase went into the pockets of the people who made and published the game. EA or otherwise.

Originally Posted by daroga I guess I've got no problem with companies giving me a bonus when my money for the game purchase went into the pockets of the people who made and published the game. EA or otherwise.

Exactly, that's how I feel.

Anyway, when playing both 2k9 and Live 09 demos, I feel the Live 09 demo is better in almost every way, more enjoyable, and so on. I'm just getting sick of the same old gameplay in 2k9 and Live 09 felt more refreshing. I don't see this as a problem and I'd gladly buy my copy new to get this feature. I personally feel most 2k sports are overrated these days (they were great during the Dreamcast era, but have started to falter this gen, including their basketball games, although they are their best one).

I also felt 2k9 was terribly handled on PS3 (although I have yet to play the 360 demo, last year I know the PS3 version had more jaggies), while NBA Live 09 is identical on both platforms this year.

So stupid. It's sad that if I were to play a copy on someone else's 360 we cannot update the roster.

Originally Posted by 62t Another thing people failed to mention is that this is an effective move against piracy. EA will get money from people who pirated the game if they want updates.

I not familiar with how piracy on the consoles work, can people only pirate games but not downloadable content?

Originally Posted by daroga I guess I've got no problem with companies giving me a bonus when my money for the game purchase went into the pockets of the people who made and published the game. EA or otherwise.

I'm pretty much there. As I said, I don't' care much as it's just bonuses. If they start taking out major featues--i.e. lock out online play or something huge like that I'd have issues since I use Goozex so much. I just worry about the slipper slope factor.

But I can live with bonus. Will just buy new if it's something I want and the bonus is worth paying $60 to buy new, and just do without the bonus if it's not.

Originally Posted by itachiitachi I not familiar with how piracy on the consoles work, can people only pirate games but not downloadable content?

well in this case EA would get $20 from the pirates versus nothing from previous years.

At least the service is free if you buy the game new.

They could sell it as a separate service or DLC or not provide this feature at all. I doubt it costs EA nothing to produce these updates. There are developers/programmers, servers, bandwidth, maintenance, administration.

The game should be just as enjoyable without an updated roster.

I still play and enjoy Tecmo Super Bowl.

I fail to see how EA is controlling the used game market by doing this.

Originally Posted by b3b0p At least the service is free if you buy the game new. They could sell it as a separate service or DLC or not provide this feature at all. I doubt it costs EA nothing to produce these updates. There are developers/programmers, servers, bandwidth, maintenance, administration. The game should be just as enjoyable without an updated roster. I still play and enjoy Tecmo Super Bowl. I fail to see how EA is controlling the used game market by doing this.

God damn. Do I have to spell it out for you? It is because EA is doing it. If they are doing it, it must be bad.