EA Sports boss sticks up for the publisher’s Online Pass, says gamers understand the implications of second hand
“One thing I have to do, and it's my job, and my development team's job, and my marketing team's job, is make you not want to trade the game in.”
Those are the words of EA Sports boss Peter Moore. The publisher has been one of the leading lights in the DLC code movement that sees those who buy pre-owned games locked out of certain in-game content.
In EA’s case, this will soon include online multiplayer. Those who buy a used game will have to fork out for a new code directly from the publisher to access the blocked content.
Full story can be found on MCV
Advertisement
Here are some tips for you Peter.
1. Make games people will want to keep, perhaps even cherish. Not just the same game with this years date tacked on it.
2. Sell them at a price that makes sense. This way people wont use trade ins to finance their next purchase. If people are buying second hand its probably because they don't have the cash for a £50 game. The PC market doesn't suffer from sales lost to preowned games because the games are closer to sensibly priced.
3. Consider the fact that maybe some of your games are bought by people who traded in other disks.
4. Talk to the retailers about your "problem" and stop abusing your customers over it.
EA needs to burn. They've been long overdue for a boycott, and if gamers don't do it, developers need to, and stop going with them.
-
The ethics of this are infernal, and it's impossible to justify to gamers. It's like telling someone that if they buy a new car, they can't drive on freeways until they pay Ford some SENSELESS fee.
EA is signing itself up for a never-ending PR flogging, and making itself ever more "The Bad Guys", both to gamers and developers.
I'm convinced that the more uncomfortable gaming as a whole is allowed to become, the less people you'll have around to sell to... because the population will start drifting back to forms of entertainment, spending more and more time with things that are less frustrating, and more likely to allow them to enjoy. (TV, real-life, movies, social networking, books, etc)
If you're a developer, and you're reading this, start sending emails. EA's lifeblood is your consent to allow it to continue selling your games.
Every time I see a picture of him, he looks more like an alien...
Although the ethics of this is really screwed, the one thing that I find most interesting is that the people so far are willing to keep paying. Have we seen any "market backlash" after all these moves? EA and the rest are trying to maximize their profits in any way possible. The thing is though that the people so far are happilly going with them. Why?
point of interest:In the mid 90s especially in greece, a snes game went for 48 pounds (converter from drachmas without inflation adjustment!!) and players still would pay for them.All in all the price of games has fallen, although console players still get the short end of the stick.
I think this is a great idea, and stand by it.
PC gamers have put up with the same situation for years. Its time the console players got a go.
I expect the major negative comments on this initiative to come from UK retailers. Of course they will whine, it directly eats their profits since GAME and the US's Gamestop have trained everyone to think 'pre-owned'.
The industry has to get smarter about treating games like an ongoing service. The amount of hours and value that one game gives, versus a movie or a book, is simply out of this world. Yet publishers are still giving away the farm!
It's about time publishers evolved and started cutting out the temporary middle-man, ie physical stores and discs. Personally I can't wait for this stuff to ALL go digital. No more being at the mercy of a GAME or GAMESTOP head buyer, who then mercilessly screws the publisher / developer on day 2 with heavy promotion of the Used copy.
Go EA go!
@6: "The amount of hours and value that one game gives, versus a movie or a book, is simply out of this world"
So how long does it take you to read a 300 page book? Let's say a page a minute for arguments sake (which I don't think is unreasonable unless you pointlessly speed read)... so that's 5 hours. How long is the average single player campaign in a Call of Duty game? So there's your first similarity.
Second time you read the book, how long does it take you... and the same with the game? 99.9% of the time, second play-throughs are substantially quicker than first time, which means you are getting less value per minute. The same isn't true of a book, reading speed is reading speed, it's a fact of human limitations.
Now given that the book cost you about a quarter of the price of that game, just how exactly does your argument hold up?
I have CD's at home that I have listened to hundreds of times, and they cost me anywhere from £5 to £10. I can buy full box sets of DVD's for the price of a game, in fact, I bought the full set of Friends DVD's for the same price as a Call of Duty game... that's 236 episodes, or 118 hours of entertainment. So you have a failed comparisons again. In fact, your argument pretty much fails all round.
As EA's motivation is a greed fuelled, yearly sequel release, why should I pay new price for something with an enforced 12 month lifespan? You keep on handing over your cash, I'll make my choice based on quality of product. EA deserve used games, I'll save the new purchases for those devs who deserve it.
