EA to Lock Out Multiplayer on Used Discs

[SopRage]

Following the thread here, it seemed timely:

EA Sports Locks Out Multiplayer Modes on Used Sales (Courtesy IGN)

 

[j_garcia]

If they think that is going to somehow generate more revenue, I highly doubt it will.

 

[Ares]

Every time that I thought I have seen it all in gaming, EA comes along with something that exceeds their previous levels of stupidity.

 

[GlocksRock]

What a horrible idea

 

[lsiberian]

This isn't a new idea. Blizzard has done this for years. Problem is Starcraft was a game I liked playing online. Madden is a game to play with friends that come over not some dude in California who only knows how to pass.

 

[Whitey80]

EA is, unfortunately, opening Pandora's box here. This will now never go away, and you will see others follow suit. No, it doesn't really hurt us with their sports titles, but FPS's are up next, and online multi is their biggest draw.

After all of the massive DRM nightmares that have been coming up lately with companies wanting more control and protection of the end-user's property, this is not the least bit surprising.

 

[darien87]

I love how Game Stop says, “We’re excited to partner with a forward-thinking company like EA.” Gimme a break. If anything, this will hurt used game sales for Game Stop. How can they possibly be excited about this?

 

[j_garcia]

Their thinking is that it will translate into more new sales than used, and they are right, but like you said, the flip side of that is their used sales will drop through the floor as a result. I have never bought one sports title ever.

 

[Thunder18]

Maybe EA Sports titles sales will tank making it easier for another publisher to get some of those sports licenses...or perhaps the various sporting commissions will stop giving exclusive licenses to a single publisher.

 

[yepimonfire]

i know what company i wont be buying games from, new or used. the only way to stop people from doing idiotic things like this is to boycott them.

 

[SopRage]

i know what company i wont be buying games from, new or used. the only way to stop people from doing idiotic things like this is to boycott them.

That's going to be quite the boycott; EA is a, if not the, major producer in the industry right now. You'll be missing out on some good stuff.

While none of us are big fans of this, it's hard not to see where EA's coming from. When people buy their used copies of Madden etc and play online, EA doesn't see a cent from their purchase or their active participation in a game they have to host servers for.

While I'm not wild about the idea, I can't say that it's unfair. You can still buy a used copy on the cheap, just don't expect to play online unless you pony up the $10. If you got your game for $20-$30, you're still saving quite a bit off the full purchase price of a new game.

Again, I'm not wild about it, but it does make business and logical sense. Gamestop's comment, and EA's about "serving the consumer," on the other hand, are complete and utter B.S..

::cue flaming::

 

[j_garcia]

IMO, I won't likely boycott EA as a whole, but on the flip side of that, none of the sports games they offer appeal to me with the exception of Skate. (so I take that back, technically I guess I have bought sports games from them via BlackBox) Skate features an excellent online community and I bought the previous two games new, so it isn't a big issue.

I agree, it is fair for them to do this to some extent, but I think they are still shooting themselves in the foot. They see it as a way to recoup some of that secondary revenue that they feel they are missing because of the fact that there is a used market. If they want to put that to rest, they should sell their games cheaper. There are very few games that have the kind of replay value that the majority of people will keep them and play them for years, so it is simply a given that there will be a used market.

 

[Nugu]

I'd be less bothered by this if they didn't cut online servers for their games only ~1 1/2 year after they release to force people to move on to the next yearly title. I don't play sports titles but if they want people to pay a extra 10$ for online on a used copy... well I don't see the point.

 

[j_garcia]

I'd be less bothered by this if they didn't cut online servers for their games only ~1 1/2 year after they release to force people to move on to the next yearly title. I don't play sports titles but if they want people to pay a extra 10$ for online on a used copy... well I don't see the point.

Since they don't make any money off dedicated servers, it costs them money to keep those servers up and running for the 20 people who are still playing a game a year later. It isn't cost justified unless they start charging and that will go over even worse...

 

[Ares]

Since they don't make any money off dedicated servers, it costs them money to keep those servers up and running for the 20 people who are still playing a game a year later. It isn't cost justified unless they start charging and that will go over even worse...

J. I won't put it passed EA to try and do something like that.JMO

 

[j_garcia]

Given the up and down year they've had this year, I wouldn't be surprised either.

 

[Nugu]

Since they don't make any money off dedicated servers, it costs them money to keep those servers up and running for the 20 people who are still playing a game a year later. It isn't cost justified unless they start charging and that will go over even worse...

That's the thing though, people DO play them. Only the die hard fans upgrade their Madden every year. They aren't closing them from lack of players but to push the 'new' games. Forcing a 'upgrade' (new roster/players) for 60$ every year. If it were a case of players/server ratio then they could easily run a virtual server to let the small # of players play, ideally subsidized by advertising in-game to turn a profit.

I realize they don't make bank on the old titles, and I see this as a good mid-ground IF they kept support on older titles. This way I could go out and buy Madden 2009 for 10$ and pay 10$ to play it online. But we all know that isn't how this will work.

 

[Nemo128]

This isn't a new idea. Blizzard has done this for years. Problem is Starcraft was a game I liked playing online.

Uh, wut? I have more used copies of Starcraft and Diablo 2 than I know what to do with, and they all work on Battle.Net

 

[ratso]

so if this kills the used market for a game and people get basically stuck with it after playing it, who's going to rush out and buy the latest version?

 

[SopRage]

so if this kills the used market for a game and people get basically stuck with it after playing it, who's going to rush out and buy the latest version?

I don't think this particular strategy is designed to kill the used game market - you can still play your used copy online, after all - but it's certainly designed to act as an incentive to purchase the game new.

After all, most of the time at Gamestop (or whereever), the used copy is around $5-$10 cheaper than the new (for recent releases). This $10 online fee seems squarely aimed to kill that pricepoint for Gamestop, to be honest.

Despite the happy face Gamestop puts on about this, it will be interesting to see how they play this out. I'm sure they'll simply prey on consumer ignorance until that's no longer a viable strategy, but sooner or later they're either going to have to offer their used copies for significantly less or find some other new incentive.