EA Sucks!! If you buy a used EA game you can not play multiplayer unless...........

I saw that it just said EA Sports, but I wonder if it will extend to all EA published titles eventually. As it stands, it doesn't really bother me as I don't play many sports games, but I do love me some Skate, SSX, and Burnout.

I buy and trade a lot of used games and if it comes down to it, I will just not play online anymore.
 
Denting gamestop's used sales should mean little to any true CAG. Whoever "trades" their games to Gamestop and whoever buys used from Gamestop are virtually always getting ripped off anyway.

Instead, this action will hurt Gamefly subscribers the most unless Gamefly works out some special deal with EA, which I highly doubt. It will also hurt craigslist and ebay sellers whose would-be customers will be turned off by the prospect of paying extra.
 
[quote name='Thekrakrabbit']Absolutely terrible, but not unbelieveable. First EA shuts down the online for MADDEN NFL 09 (!!), but now they are going to be taking their most popular sports franchises and locking out online for used gamers? I mean come on, this is getting to the point where it feels like EA is becoming a Communist company, forcing me to do things I shouldn't be forced to do (such as having to buy Madden 10 to play online, or buy new to get/pay for a "Pass").

Its getting insane, and people had better not be paying for these passes. It doesn't matter if EA MMA is the greatest game that has ever been and will have ever been made, if I have to buy a "Pass" to play online I would rather just play the single player or never play online. I refuse to submit to EA's money hungry will that will continue to grow more and more threatening to gamers (especially cheap ones) unless we nip this now![/QUOTE]

Sure am glad nobody is forcing me to buy Madden 10 or any game for that matter. Far from being a communist company, this is pure capitalism. Those who don't like this should simply show their dislike by not buying the games new or used. If people don't vote with their wallets then this will spread. Personally, I rarely buy or trade used games so this really won't affect me.
 
[quote name='Scorch']With all of the giftcard deals going around lately, buying it new shouldn't be a problem.[/QUOTE]
That's the spirit!
 
Wait 4 months after launch and buy used copy for $17.99. Pay $10 for Online Activation code. Save $30 over new price with 'free' code.
 
Everybody keeps bringing up Gamestop, but this will also negatively impact Gamefly and Goozex. Sports games may not be a big market for either of these companies, but if this idea spreads to other genres it could have a very big impact.
 
[quote name='GaveUpTomorrow']I have absolutely no problem with this...

...I really like this way of business, and I hope they continue it.[/QUOTE]
Ok, at first I thought you were just a dick, but...

With the extra money coming in from people purchasing multiplayer codes with used sales, we may see online servers living for longer than they used to.
Click to expand...
...now I see you're ignorant.

I say continue on EA.
Click to expand...
You are a terrible person and should reconsider your gaming hobby.
 
[quote name='Bluth Superfan']Edit: Also this screws over multiple users in the same household. So far on PS3 all of these codes have only been good for one EA account. What about families that share a console? Sorry but your little brother/dad/sister has to buy a code. SMH at people who are ok with that.[/QUOTE]

A great point that I did not even consider.
 
The last EA Sports game I bought was Madden 2005 for the Gamecube. So This doesn't affect me, yet. I do have some EA games for the Xbox 360, but the only multiplayer one is Battlefield BC2. I never registered with the Cerebus Network in ME2 after hearing about the problems people were having with registered copies of Dragon Age.

But the part that really sucks for sport game fans is the fact that EA takes down servers for those games as soon as they can. EA did this back in the PS2 days with all of their PS2 online games. But PS2 online was free, so I could see their point. So really, buying it used for cheap and then paying the extra $10 will only get you a few months of online service. I thought the money we pay for XBL Gold was used to cover server costs?
 
I don't blame them really.
If you put in the work you want to be paid no matter what.

Even in the case of piracy, you are making them pay for something, rather than get nothing.
 
[quote name='mogamer']I thought the money we pay for XBL Gold was used to cover server costs?[/QUOTE]

The money you pay Microsoft would pay for EA servers how? Think that one through.



Anyway, honestly, this doesn't bug me too much. This is a step to fight the used market that, frankly, no other medium has been able to do. Music, books, movies... there are very few incentives for buying new. For games, I see no problem with the publisher of the game offering an incentive for purchasing the game directly from them. I also have to point out that this has already had it's testing phase... I guarantee you that the 'new' sales numbers for games like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Madden, etc from the past year will indicate that, yes, given the choice, consumers will buy a copy directly from EA (technically) if there's incentive. What's the downside for them? That's the most basic point... they make ZERO DOLLARS from a used game sale, so why not attempt to stem the flow of that market?

The sports games also, as has already been pointed out, also have dedicated servers that EA maintains. That's money. You buy the game used, you use their servers, they still get none of your money. It's not a good business plan because if you buy it used one year, chances are good that you'll keep buying used, meaning that they'll never make any money off of you.

Plus, the sports game are a yearly thing... I view them as the same outlook as movies: the bulk of the sales are within the first few weeks of release. What percentage of Madden players are buying the game within the first week of release? I can only guess, but I imagine it's a hefty percentage. It's a yearly release, so here's the rub... EA doesn't care about you if you're someone who goes "oh, I'll wait 5 months and get it used". At that point, they're already on to how to get that first group of consumers back to buy Madden 2012 on the first day. You feel like you're getting screwed, but they make NO MONEY OFF OF YOU, so why *should* they care?

I get that this is CheapAssGamer, so this isn't going to be popular, but... get ready, this is where the industry is headed. If this works for EA (and it will), you don't think Activision isn't salivating over pay-for-play Call of Duty? They already brought it up a while ago, and once EA's model works, it's only a matter of time.
 
[quote name='bryenfury']I don't blame them really.
If you put in the work you want to be paid no matter what.

Even in the case of piracy, you are making them pay for something, rather than get nothing.[/QUOTE]

You do get paid though. Someone purchased that copy before you did, and EA got the money for it. Sure, they didn't get it off your sale, but who is to say you won't buy the sequel brand new on day one because you liked the first game in the series for the bargain bin used price? Used books, music, and movies are huge markets too and have been for many, many years. Gaming should be no different. The developers nickel and dime enough with crappy downloadable content on day one and the extra $10 they charged for most games this generation.
 
I'm not surprised about this at all, won't bother me as I don't buy used anymore and I don't buy EA sports games with minor upgrades each year.

This seems like a very good way of fighting the used game market, can't blame EA for being aggressive when its money out of their pockets.
 
If there's no used game market for EA titles, then I would think that would have some effect on the price of the 'new' game. I would hope for quicker price drops at least.
 
[quote name='007']The money you pay Microsoft would pay for EA servers how? Think that one through.
[/QUOTE]

Er, why does EA seem to have this problem with servers but several hundred other Xbox 360 games can still be played online for years? If EA is doing something different, then maybe MS should have them do the same as most others are doing. XBL is MS's service and not EA's.
 
[quote name='mogamer']Er, why does EA seem to have this problem with servers but several hundred other Xbox 360 games can still be played online for years? If EA is doing something different, then maybe MS should have them do the same as most others are doing. XBL is MS's service and not EA's.[/QUOTE]

Because EA sets up and uses actual dedicated servers. For lack of a true technical explanation, Live uses a P2P system, where the online play is run through the 360s as servers... Microsoft isn't running dedicated servers for all 360 these games. If a company (EA, Sega, Valve) wants to run dedicated servers for their own, the online for those games is depedant on those servers. If it runs on Microsoft's systems, they'll effectively be playable online until Live shuts down or changes dramatically (like the OG Xbox games).
 
You not paying MS for servers, you're just paying them for the extra features.. basically its a gate fee to get to the developer's servers. The same servers that PS3 and Wii are getting for free. EA can't have their old games be available online for years... their model is the the update game replaces the old game.
 
I can see how this stinks for people who like to buy used games, but at the same time I can't exactly fault EA for trying to make as money as possible on new game sales. That's their job after all. Maybe if enough people 'vote with their wallets' and don't buy EA games, they will be forced to consider a different path.
 
I've stopped buying used games for a while now if they're still in print.

Good for publishers/devs. Though EA didn't need the help that much.
 
[quote name='007']Because EA sets up and uses actual dedicated servers. For lack of a true technical explanation, Live uses a P2P system, where the online play is run through the 360s as servers... Microsoft isn't running dedicated servers for all 360 these games. If a company (EA, Sega, Valve) wants to run dedicated servers for their own, the online for those games is depedant on those servers. If it runs on Microsoft's systems, they'll effectively be playable online until Live shuts down or changes dramatically (like the OG Xbox games).[/QUOTE]

Well then if EA used the P2P method, then they wouldn't have the expense of running dedicated servers. Then EA wouldn't have a reason to charge used games a $10 fee to play online. And their games could be played online for an extended period of time.

But then:

[quote name='Thomas96'] EA can't have their old games be available online for years... their model is the the update game replaces the old game.[/QUOTE]


They couldn't do this to force people to re-buy basically the same game every year.

So once again we see gamers who would rather support a company that treats it's customers like crap instead of supporting what's right for consumers.

So in conclusion fuck EA and the people who think this is a good idea!
 
[quote name='dwhelan']Is it really that big a deal? There are a number of sales on these games, the price for sports games drops pretty quickly and it does not impact local multiplayer, which the more casual audience is looking for. If you are going to be a diehard sports game fan, then you are probably lining up at Midnight.

P.S. Pirating on the PS3 is not impossible, and that is all I will say.[/QUOTE]

you're kidding right? you fail to realize that they are stripping out portions of a game that have been included in the past to now make it seem like a 'vip' type of reward for purchasing the game. with bad company 2, you got the 'vip' and regular editions in which with the code you could download free content that they gave away. with fifa 10 and other games, all of that was included via updates and what not. doesn't mean that after they implement this new idea that dlc won't be charged. If they stick to this, then I won't be buying an ea game again and they can stick this up their nose.
 
[quote name='mogamer']

So once again we see gamers who would rather support a company that treats it's customers like crap instead of supporting what's right for consumers.

So in conclusion fuck EA and the people who think this is a good idea![/QUOTE]

How is this treating customers like crap? Let me reiterate: you can pretty it up all you want, but if you buy a used EA Sports game EA GETS NO MONEY FROM YOU. Bottom line is, they don't care about you because you are NOT an EA customer. Multi-billion dollar company or not, you don't put out a product unless you are expecting to get paid for it. The used game market, which has grown exponentially in the past decade, cuts them out of the loop completely. GameStop is making money hand over fist for essentially being a glorified pawn shop, and the people that make these games want to stop that bleeding.

So, your view of 'good for the consumer' is a cheap game that the maker and publisher get NO MONEY for. You understand how, in the long run, that's BAD for the consumer, right?

If you really want to be a customer advocate, rally for CHEAPER MSRP for games in general. Ubisoft may have some dickhole practices, but I like the fact that their games drop to about $40 after a month like clockwork. They still get the money, and the customer wins. You're always going to pay an early adopter fee, and I'm okay with that... but to the people saying they're 'stripping out part of the game'? The game is still there. You can play it by yourself. You can have friends come over and play with you. The game is still functional. The ability to play online IS a feature, but don't act like it's game-breaking. If, TO YOU, it's gamebreaking, pony up the money for a new copy. Simple.

Alas, I know there's no convincing some people. It came up all the time with Sega and EA shutting down servers... certain people are convinced that, somehow, if the back of a box says 'online play' that it's their god-given right to ALWAYS have access to said online play. Look, if you've had that unopened copy of NBA Live 06 for 4 years and then complain that the servers are shut down and you 'might have wanted to play that online next week', that doesn't make you a consumer advocate, it makes you an unrealistic asshole. Online games have a finite shelf life, some of which are shorter than others. That's the reality of online gaming, one that people need to begin accepting. Online gaming is the 'it' thing of this generation, and EA sees it as a way of making money that, really, should be theirs in the first place. You either get it, or you don't.
 
[quote name='007']
Great Rant
.[/QUOTE]

But but but but I bought the game from someone that I know who bought the game off of Amazon who bought the game off of Ebay who bought the game from Gamestop new. Ea already got the money from "my game" for the server.
 
I don't buy a lot of EA games. I've picked up Mass Effect 2 and BFBC 2 in the last year. I'd either buy their games brand new if they were AAA titles or I'd probably pass up completely on them now.
 
[quote name='evanft']It's moves like this that justify piracy, IMO.[/QUOTE]

Yeah because stealing, robbing and cheating someone out of 1000's of hours of work is justifiable. Buying and playing a video game is a luxury and not a right. When you buy a video game you are playing by the rules that the Developer/Publisher enforce.


The entitlement issues that some have on here is just sickening.
 
This makes complete sense to me, and if I was in the business of making games, I would do the same thing. Screw Gamestop and their "used is $5 cheaper, just buy that" MO. Just wait until Halo Reach or COD 6 does the same thing.
 
I can't say that this is some big surprise but yes it does suck bottom line for used buyers and traders. I can't agree that this is all piracy's fault considering the fact that this in no way will effect pirates as ponying up $10 to play EA titles over XBL or even Wii will still be cheaper then $50 at time of release.

If anything it's about time .... GS buys Madden 10 for $10 a week before the new Madden comes out and slaps a $15 - $25 price tag on it and EA sees nothing for it but GS will make there money on it 10x over and over and over again when traded in for store credit.
 
[quote name='007']How is this treating customers like crap?
[/QUOTE]

EA treats their customers like crap by not using the P2P model of online playing. Thus giving some justification to closing servers, forcing people to buy newer versions of games they already have.

I can still play COD2 and Perfect Dark Zero online if I so choose. But I can't play online more recent EA games like Maddon 09, Mercs 2 and LOTRC. That isn't treating their customers like crap? And now their dedicated server model will be charging people money to play a used game online. Adding somemore crap to the pile.
 
Am I the " ONLY " one who doesnt care about the actions EA is taking ? I honestly could care less, I understand that Game$top wont have a chance in the market ( that kinda sucks for them ) but atleast "EA" can have more money that they deserve. As long as " Activi$ion " doesnt start this I am completely fine with it. " EA " has helped many developers out in the past that have made great games such as : ( dead space, mirror's edge, etc. ) that probably wouldnt have sold as well if they werent together. lately EA has been my Go-To company for games, they used to have shitty servers but now they are VERY reliable company that doesnt need to lose any money because of used game sale and piracy.

Now I am just cant stop typing so the last few sentences were complete bullshit :p
 
[quote name='Professor Oreo']Ummm... What? You're not serious are you?

A game is the code playing on a machine. Now whether I got that code on my machine by downloading it from the interwebs or by streaming it off the disc is irrelevant. What makes up the game I'm playing is the code. What's the difference between a Gears of War disc or a Forza disc? The discs themselves are both the same shitty piece of 10 cent plastic. It's the code on the disc that makes the difference. Blank dvd discs are cheap as hell. Discs that have the codes for new games on them cost $60. You aren't paying for the disc, you're paying for the information on the disc.

Please tell me how what you described in any way similar to buying and owning cars? Ford doesn't license you the experience of being transported by one of their cars - they sell you a machine that you operate. You can't extract the experience of being transported by the car, throw the car away and yet still get from point a to point b using that car. And there's a difference between a ford and a honda and a subaru. It's not all the exact same machine with a different logo slapped on the top.[/QUOTE]

I was attempting to match the absurdity of your post.

By law, we are purchasing a license to use the code. In reality, maybe 2% of the population actually understands this fact. The other 98% believe they are buying a copy of the code on a disc. And why shouldn't they? What would make them think media should get special treatment from any other product at a local Wal-Mart?

[quote name='iKilledChewbacca']Am I the " ONLY " one who doesnt care about the actions EA is taking ? I honestly could care less, I understand that Game$top wont have a chance in the market ( that kinda sucks for them ) but atleast "EA" can have more money that they deserve. As long as " Activi$ion " doesnt start this I am completely fine with it. " EA " has helped many developers out in the past that have made great games such as : ( dead space, mirror's edge, etc. ) that probably wouldnt have sold as well if they werent together. lately EA has been my Go-To company for games, they used to have shitty servers but now they are VERY reliable company that doesnt need to lose any money because of used game sale and piracy.

Now I am just cant stop typing so the last few sentences were complete bullshit :p[/QUOTE]

If EA is successful with this model, Activision, UbiSoft, THQ, and everyone else will follow.

It would be nice if EA offered some kind of trade-in program
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='mogamer']Well then if EA used the P2P method, then they wouldn't have the expense of running dedicated servers. Then EA wouldn't have a reason to charge used games a $10 fee to play online. And their games could be played online for an extended period of time.

But then:




They couldn't do this to force people to re-buy basically the same game every year.

So once again we see gamers who would rather support a company that treats it's customers like crap instead of supporting what's right for consumers.

So in conclusion fuck EA and the people who think this is a good idea![/QUOTE]


What's a shame is that EA with all their resources and this is the best idea that they could come up with for people to buy the game new. They could have a rewards program... rebates, extra online incentives. They could just make a better product (Madden specifically) but no.. instead they do things like this. damn shame
 
[quote name='mogamer']EA treats their customers like crap by not using the P2P model of online playing. Thus giving some justification to closing servers, forcing people to buy newer versions of games they already have.

I can still play COD2 and Perfect Dark Zero online if I so choose. But I can't play online more recent EA games like Maddon 09, Mercs 2 and LOTRC. That isn't treating their customers like crap? And now their dedicated server model will be charging people money to play a used game online. Adding somemore crap to the pile. [/QUOTE]

It's a strange day when a gamer asks for P2P instead of dedicated servers. Microsoft should be providing these as a part of the Live subscription so EA doesn't have to pay the bill IMO.
 
[quote name='msdmoney']It's a strange day when a gamer asks for P2P instead of dedicated servers. Microsoft should be providing these as a part of the Live subscription so EA doesn't have to pay the bill IMO.[/QUOTE]

Well the only reason why I feel that way is because the publishers with dedicated servers (Sega, EA), are the publishers who have games that are no longer playable online.
 
[quote name='msdmoney']It's a strange day when a gamer asks for P2P instead of dedicated servers. Microsoft should be providing these as a part of the Live subscription so EA doesn't have to pay the bill IMO.[/QUOTE]

qft
 
you know now that i think about it gamestop could easily just give you a bonus or something that covers that code. so lets say it costs 10 bucks to get an ea reactivation code so with the purchase of a used ea game valued 39.99 and up you get a $10 ea store card that way they still sell used ea games or something in that vein that covers the price of the code while allowing gamers to continue to buy used games. or they could just stop allowing people to trade in ea sports games ( especially since their value drops so drastically). besides how much longer will ea have the nfl rights? if it ends soon whose to say someone wont come out with a new nfl game?
 
[quote name='lokizz']you know now that i think about it gamestop could easily just give you a bonus or something that covers that code. so lets say it costs 10 bucks to get an ea reactivation code so with the purchase of a used ea game valued 39.99 and up you get a $10 ea store card that way they still sell used ea games or something in that vein that covers the price of the code while allowing gamers to continue to buy used games. or they could just stop allowing people to trade in ea sports games ( especially since their value drops so drastically). besides how much longer will ea have the nfl rights? if it ends soon whose to say someone wont come out with a new nfl game?[/QUOTE]


Nice idea but GS would never be humane or considerate in that aspect , only thing they'd give you is another year of Game Informer
 
This is a huge bummer, since i only buy EA sports games used. I know why they do it, but a lot of consumers are getting screwed here.
 
[quote name='bigdaddybruce44']Can you show me in what document or what court interpretation we were given the right to free online game play?[/QUOTE]

Can you show me where playing games on a P2P network costs EA more money than they received from the initial sixty dollar transaction?
 
I have no problem with this. Really its Gamestop that gets hurt the most. All other retailers will proper because of this.
 
[quote name='SOLUSDEATH']This is a huge bummer, since i only buy EA sports games used. I know why they do it, but a lot of consumers are getting screwed here.[/QUOTE]

Agreed.

Because I love Madden, I will always but it new every year. Actually, I think I already bought next year's version, can't remember... :rofl:

However, I always go one or two years back with NBA or NCAA games, because they are way cheaper and I can't remember half of the damn players in NCAA anyway, so the roster updates mean zilch to me.

This blows. fuck EA. First they lose out on making MLB games, when theirs was by far the best, and then they lock up NFL rights so they can make Madden shittier every year instead of better without fear of competition. Now this? Fantastic...
 
[quote name='Sparta Omni']I'm sure it's not 100% due to piracy, but it seems they are encouraging you to buy the game new, versus pirate it and miss out on DLC and Multi and other features. I guess it's just an incentive more than anything, but this is getting ridiculous. Are they going to let you only play half the game soon and you'll need a one time code to unlock the other half? I think the used game market is just getting affected by this more than them going after it, I figured it was mainly from piracy issues. I don't think they'd give PS3 a free pass, because most people would buy it over the 360 versions and not sure if MS would allow that.
Regardless the reason, this isn't a good sign for gamers.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, gamers are the ones that could get the shaft after it is all said and done. Without a strong used market out there, retailers will stop lowering prices on new games so soon and manufacturer's won't be offering rebate deals on new releases. You won't have any option either you buy it new or wait a couple months and ..............buy it new and probably $10 cheaper. What a deal!!:cry:
 
I'm guessing they looked at how many people activated VIP, Cerberus Network codes, etc compared to those who purchased them from XBL and determined if this initiative was a success. Well, I'm sure more went into it than that, but who knows.

So do we only have ourselves to blame? Maybe. Are other companies watching the strategy like a hawk? I'm sure.

If this works for them, this may become the norm down the line.
 
[quote name='lobito72'] Without a strong used market out there, retailers will stop lowering prices on new games so soon and manufacturer's won't be offering rebate deals on new releases. You won't have any option either you buy it new or wait a couple months and ..............buy it new and probably $10 cheaper. What a deal!!:cry:[/QUOTE]

Yeah, no. Not sure why everyone keeps pulling this argument out.
 
[quote name='Bluth Superfan']Can you show me where playing games on a P2P network costs EA more money than they received from the initial sixty dollar transaction?[/QUOTE]

Way to answer a question with a question. Bucket full of fail, coming right up!
 
another reason to not buy ea sports games. besides sports games depreciate in value so quickly, used game spots can't get rid of them. look at the pile of 1990's sports games that sit there even at $2 and less they won't be bought.
 
i like how driven by money the world is, "oh hey, you just bought our game, well pay to play it, by the way buy our other addons that should have been included in the game" is what i feel like the video game market is like now @.@. not only that but games got a lot shorter too, or at least it feels like that to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top