Beware buying used games from EA

[YewNork]

"BioWare announced the "Cerberus Network" for Mass Effect 2 (http://www.1up.com/do/gameOverview?cId=3170362) today, and in doing so made a not-so-subtle shot across the bow of retailers like GameStop. The name isn't actually new; for quite a while listings for the game have mentioned a "Cerberus Network card granting access to bonus content." But it's only today that EA and BioWare took the wraps off of what exactly the Cerberus Network is, and why it's so valuable to their strategy to combat the used game market.

The Cerberus Network, named after an organization in the game, is an online portal for downloadable content. New purchasers get the unlock code for the portal for free, which will give players access to the game's DLC. Those who buy the game used will have to pay for the Cerberus Network separately, meaning EA will still get a small bump in profits from those who save some money at the check-out. We don't know how much the Cerberus Network will cost yet, of course. But even at a hypothetical $5, it seems like players will essentially be paying for the ability to buy more content. GameStop, the most famous (or infamous) retailer in the used game business, tends to mark down popular games by $5-8. By roping off used copies from that amount (or more) worth of DLC, EA is essentially stripping any savings from buying used -- and that may be exactly the point. "read the rest here Source: 1up (http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3177659)

Looks like you wont be saving money on games if you buy them used anymore. That is, assuming, that you were going to get the DLC packs. I can't really understand why EA would do this OTHER than greed. It is like buying a used car and then given a fee for the ability to change your tires.

I like this quote "But even at a hypothetical $5, it seems like players will essentially be paying for the ability to buy more content."

[Wolverine]

This is becoming quite the trend lately, where publishers are focusing on how to squeeze more profits from a title by controlling the content rather than making a title that will stand on it's own merit. :confused:

[romeozor]

right. like it's a nice thing from GameStop and the likes to leech on the property of others. get real.

[triphammer]

I'll be honest... I saw this coming. Expect other devs to follow. It's all part of the "Pay to Play" scenario. Multi-player mode provides them ongoing constant "potential" customers who up til now having been getting a "free ride" in their eyes. I went shopping for games about a week ago.. and came across Star Trek Online. Release is 2/2/10 (I think). $60 for a game that is only multi-player... and expect a pricing plan to play online as well because they're also hocking yearly and lifetime memberships for STO access. Prices only valid til Feb 1st. Feb 2nd, the game is released. Guess what's happening to that price. For the curious:

http://www.startrekonline.com/

My point is every avenue they can make money they'll try. No matter what game. I'd suspect this move from Bioware might bring down the cost of used games anyway. Who'd buy knowing they'd have to also pay again? I don't but used anyway.. but this is an insentive just to get the game new.

IMO, this kinda greed would work with a flawless product. PPL will pay for no hackers or for a network devoid of the fools using hacks that ruin gameplay. They won't continue to pay if the software dev can't provide a secure environment to play in.

[Wolverine]

right. like it's a nice thing from GameStop and the likes to leech on the property of others. get real.

Yeah you are right. Publishers should be far more worried about their titles being re-sold than publishing quality games. What the heck was I thinking? :rolleyes:

[Misnomer]

'bout time them console punks were treated like us PC players. Why should they be allowed to resell their games when ours have been reduced to rentals?

Orrrrr:

PC gamers have been complaining about not getting to resell their games for a while. Plus, the whole "license" argument has been considered a grey area legally for a while and we were hoping some day our "purchases" would be considered to be more than a fee for temporay use of an IP.

Somehow this is how it goes. The good things about consoles are taken away from consoles and the good things about PCs are taken away from PCs. All so that some day they can monetize every part of our hobby.

I am getting the overwhelming urge to go play a completely free mod on the UDK that surpasses AAA titles.........

[Wolverine]

I guess I see it as bad because if you give them an inch they tend to take a mile.

We have already recently seen our pc games infected with consolitus. Any system that effects console users now, will one day effect pc games.

Before MW2 you could probably call that idea paranoia, but not anymore.

[romeozor]

Yeah you are right. Publishers should be far more worried about their titles being re-sold than publishing quality games. What the heck was I thinking? :rolleyes:

what the hell does adding extra incentive to buy the game first hand rather than buying it used have to do with the quality of games?

[Wolverine]

what the hell does adding extra incentive to buy the game first hand rather than buying it used have to do with the quality of games?

I did not think my response, or others in this thread, were at all cryptic. Sorry you don't see any connection.

You obviously have a strong negative opinion of the second hand game market, and that is dictating your view on this. That's your right, guess we will leave it at that.

[Misnomer]

what the hell does adding extra incentive to buy the game first hand rather than buying it used have to do with the quality of games?

Okay. Well let's put it this way. Almost anything that you buy can be re-sold to a limited extent (at least in the U.S.). This is in the sense that once you purchase something it becomes your property and you have the right to sell your property. I am not a lawyer and I don't know all the legal ins and outs of this system, but basically media companies have decided that this is not true because of how copiable their product is at the moment.

Think of it this way. If you bought a book, read it, and decided to sell it to your neighbor or a second hand book store.......you could. Same goes for music. You don't like the CD you take your property (the recording on the physical disk) back. While it is perfectly possible that you could have just scanned in the book or ripped the cd, publishers of books and cds have not focused on killing the resale businesses. There have been a few attempts to add online features that can only be accessed with a code that would likely make it to just the first purchaser, but this is just extra crap like music videos or author's notes.

Imagine if your cds started coming with 7 tracks stardard and you could only get to the 3 other the band meant to be on the cd if you had an original purchase code to log in and download them. Or if a chapter from your book was missing until you put in your original purchaser code that could only be used once. This is what they are trying to do.

The idea is that your are actually getting a license to temporarily experience an intellectual property when you are using software. While you may physically own a book, the idea here is that you have no physical hold on the code that makes up a game and it is more like going to a concert than owning a cd. You can't resell your concert experience....you can't resell your game experience. Not all courts accept this definition so rather than taking Gamestop to court, publishers want to drive them out of business.

The connection to quality: Once players lose all ability to return/tradein/resell then the quality of product has very few customer checks that could hurt the game creator financially other than reviews and word of mouth. Basically, if you hate a game right now, you can find some schmuck out there who may like it and resell it. But, under this system, if you buy a game and it absolutely blows, you are stuck with it. While that is a risk you take with many things (like seeing a movie in theaters, going to a concert), it has never been the case with retail purchased entertainment until software. Yet, if they can manage to kill the secondary sales off, you can bet that they will go after game rentals next (though this system will do that better than traditional DLC already did).

TL;DR If you are just "renting a game license" you have no protection against horrible quality. There will be EVEN MORE milked franchises and over hyped games since reviews can be bought and all they need to make money is a bunch of suckers (e.g. MW2).

[bacon]

This is just the step they are taking until all content goes digital. I see it waaaay down the road.