Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Op Ed

GameFront - Why Every Defense of Online Passes Has Been Bullsh**.
I am not going to go into the many better ways that publishers could be coping with used sales, nor am I going to reiterate exactly how bad the online pass scam truly is. Iíve done that many times, all over the Internet. However, I want to make it clear that the situation affects many, many more people than have been represented lately. Itís not just about people getting mad that they canít buy games used anymore. As a reviewer, I get most games free, so this affects me less than most, and IíM still pissed off by online passes. I am pissed off because theyíre a bad idea, with many negative implications, and it sickens me how gleefully the white knights have glossed over those implications to focus on the ONE issue that theyíre vaguely correct about.

Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at the bottom of the form.

61. Re: There is no longevity with unlock codes. Feb 5, 2012, 05:35 Razumen
[VG]Reagle wrote on Feb 4, 2012, 14:35:
Publishers are just making a stink about it now because they think, erroneously, that it cuts into their bottom line. Except it doesn't, AT ALL. (Much like piracy to an extent)

So you don't think piracy cuts into the bottom line. I agree lets not worry about things like facts when we can just say whatever garbaage spouts out of our asses.

I said to AN EXTANT. Of course piracy affects overall sales, but I'm also sure there's some out there that pirate that would buy the game if such avenues were closed to them, but for most of them that are used to getting their games for free, they wouldn't buy the game, they'd just look somewhere else. I've also known people using pirated copies essentially as demos and have bought the game because of doing so, in that sense it can even help their sales.

Jerykk wrote on Feb 4, 2012, 23:42:
People who are going to buy used games will always buy used games and those who prefer to buy new will continue to buy new. It's as simple as that.

Except I don't think it actually is that simple. The people who buy used games from GameStop typically only save $5-10 on average. If used copies were not available, would they be just as likely to pay an extra $5-10 for a new copy? I'd say yes. This isn't like piracy, where pirated copies cost nothing and there's no risk or investment required. If someone is willing to pay $55 for a used game, chances are pretty good that they'd pay $60 for a new copy of that same game.

Personally, I don't support used sales because I want to give my money to the developers, not the seller of the used copy. I think it's safe to assume that someone who buys used games is far more likely to buy new games than someone who pirates games, so the potential impact of used sales is far greater than the potential impact of piracy.

So if there's only a $5-10 and your assumption that people will normally pop the difference for the new one, why are online passes even necessary then? Doesn't it sound just a little bit illogical?

I am however specifically talking about when the price difference of used games are greater. Gamers who are used to waiting a while to buy games at a substantial discount are not likely willing to shell out the full price. I think this is a pretty fair bet. Publishers may have the right to sell their product at what ever price they want, but they certainly don't have the right to regulate the market once their product has left their hands.

I like giving my money to developers as well, but it's not my goal in life, and I have bills to pay. If I can buy a game for less with no substantial difference than all the better. That used game now has a home and someone with more money can buy the shiny new version. This is not some shady, back alley deals we're talking about here people, and there's no sense in demonizing the used market. Used games are bought just like regular ones-they don't appear out of no where and I doubt they travel back and forth enough from owner to reseller and back to cause as much loss as publishers claim. If anything, publishers adding in a almost hidden fee into used games that gamers must pay to fully use their purchase seems much shadier to me.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
      ;)   ;)   :(   :(   :o   :o   %)   %)   :)   :)   :|   :|   ;P   ;P   X|   X|   :D   :D   More
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you have a signature set up, it will be automatically appended to your comment.
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.
          Email me when this topic is updated.

Special Codes

  • b[bold text]b
  • i[italic text]i
  • u[underline text]u
  • -[strikethrough text]-
  • c[code text]c
  • +[bullet point]+
  • q[quote text (indented)]q
  • [quote="Author"]quote text (indented)[/quote]
  • [url=Link]text[/url]
  • r{red text}r
  • g{green text}g
  • b{blue text}b
  • m{maroon text}m
  • s{secret text (shows in the background colour)}s

Forum Rules

  1. Disagree all you want but attacks of a personal nature will not be tolerated.
  2. Ethnic slurs and homophobic language will not be tolerated.
  3. Do not post spam, links to warez sites, or instructions on how to obtain pirated software.
  4. Abusing the forums in any manner that could be construed as 'griefing' will not be tolerated.


Blue's News logo