I AM DISGUSTED - WHY WOULD EA DO THIS???

Forums › Gaming › I AM DISGUSTED - WHY WOULD EA DO THIS???

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

61 posts

Master Geek

#613960 23-Apr-2012 21:30

eXDee: Comparing a car to a software licence makes no sense, they are simply not the same thing. If you can't follow this its not worth arguing.
The last time I bought a physical game would be.... 2007? Maybe 2008 at best?

First, car and game are different things, that's right. But we are not arguing that here, I think so far the discussion has evolved to: what is ownership, and what the owner can do with the product.

Think about iPhone's jailbreak case. Now it is totally lawful to jailbreak your iPhone as your iPhone is your property and as the owner you can do whatever. However, if the game product key only gives you the right to play it instead of ownership, that's another story. Like someone said above, it does feel like players are like renting games nowadays.

Your last point: has anyone here noticed that with electronic purchasing, 2nd hand market is essentially diminishing? I mean, you can't sell the stuff you bought electronically, can you? Kindle books, Steam games etc, maybe that's why they are cheap? Sellers/merchants/publishers are going to earn more in the long run, as people who would have bought 2nd hand product now would have to buy brand new as there's no 2nd hand to be bought.
I like the idea of e-purchase, app store, kindle and all that. But I also don't like the disappearing of 2nd hand market. 2nd hand market, to me, is a very efficient way of using resources. Why do you have buy everything brand new while a 2nd hand product is total fit for use? To games, if one wants to jump on a new release, full price is expected to be paid. Later when the game's finished, the gamer is supposed to be able to sell the game for some money so he/she can but next new release.

Any thoughts/comments on that?

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#613965 23-Apr-2012 21:38

reekydesert:

Think about iPhone's jailbreak case. Now it is totally lawful to jailbreak your iPhone as your iPhone is your property and as the owner you can do whatever.

Can't say I agree with this statement. jail breaking an iphone means using a hacked version of iOS (which has been copied/modified/shared between people), and that already is against apples T&C. But with the hardware, yea you can do what you like.

reekydesert

61 posts

Master Geek

#613974 23-Apr-2012 21:45

jeffnz: eXDee I think they can't see the difference or don't want to, for it its perfectly simple and have understood it for years.

What would be the point of having a company develop software that can be pirated by others by simply having the key, in this case its being justified as a"friend "gave it too him, much the same as passing it around the game forums.

I suppose their logic would also apply to downloading music they haven't paid for or one pays and all thier mates entitled to it as they are only giving it not selling it.

I don't think it's "they" or "we" can't see the point.
See my 1st post, I am NOT passing the keys around forum. I am AGAINST concurrent use of one legal copy of software/game. I am all FOR IP protection. I am talking about this transfer of ownership, and game companies want to get a cut from this transfer.
In my story the game is a PC game. And I think that's the problem. Go to trademe or JB or EB, you see all those PS3 or 360 versions of ME3 for sale as a 2nd hand copy. Next owner is not going to pay a fee to the game company to be able to play it, is he/she? Why PC gamers get this discrimination?

I couldn't find EULA in the game package. Maybe there was not hardcopy and I'll have to find it on the game disc. Haven't read it, basically. Someone has posted something above - is that the EULA of ME3? So one product key per Original account? I'd rather buy a PS3 version then. Don't think the PS3 version has this in the EULA: one game per PSN account...
However, very sadly, I heard that some companies are starting to implement something similar for console games. Where is this world going to?

Also someone said above: if there are enough gamers are against this practice, game companies will have to re-consider. Think about Ubi-soft's requirement of always on-line to be able to play single player local game, and some DRM some label companies used in music CD many years ago. Not sure about the fate of Ubi's desperate measure, music CD's DRM are pretty much failed. Oh, here's a good one, iTunes music's DRM. Now all iTunes music is DRM free. Has anyone here remember the frustration of early iTunes usage? That's pretty much what stopped me using iTunes service till last year... And again, I'm not talking about IP piracy is the way to go, please do not mis-read me...

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#613979 23-Apr-2012 21:47

EA Modern Warfare 3 for the PS3 is exactly the same..

reekydesert

61 posts

Master Geek

#614021 23-Apr-2012 22:27

BraaiGuy: EA Modern Warfare 3 for the PS3 is exactly the same..

That's the game!!

With not enough data, I can't say how much a game retail chain's revenue is from second hand games sales, but Gamestop and EB and alike are not going to be happy about this type of practice which jeopardize second hand game sales. Will be interesting to see what's next.
Again, things are happening right now in this doesn't mean it is right, IMO.

reekydesert

61 posts

Master Geek

#614029 23-Apr-2012 22:39

BraaiGuy:
reekydesert:

Think about iPhone's jailbreak case. Now it is totally lawful to jailbreak your iPhone as your iPhone is your property and as the owner you can do whatever.

Can't say I agree with this statement. jail breaking an iphone means using a hacked version of iOS (which has been copied/modified/shared between people), and that already is against apples T&C. But with the hardware, yea you can do what you like.

Sory to go all technical here, jailbreak your iPhone does not mean using a "hacked version of iOS which has been copied ...", it means ta make iPhone run un-authorized apps. If you have done a jailbreak (I have), you wouldknow that you only tinker with the OS, not installed a "copied..." version it, let alone sharing etc. but if you choose to install pirated apps, that's totally another story.

Pleaseresearch below link for reference:

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/feds-ok-iphone-jailbreaking/

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#614035 23-Apr-2012 22:43

Interesting Stuff ...

http://www.complex.com/video-games/2012/04/gamestops-used-games-will-now-come-with-online-pass-and-dlc-warnings-in-california

Gamestop has reached a settlement with law firm Baron & Budd over used game sales in California that will require the retailer to warn customers online and in stores when the used game they purchase feature paid DLC or online passes that would have been free had the game been purchased new.

reekydesert: Sory to go all technical here, jailbreak your iPhone does not mean using a "hacked version of iOS which has been copied ...", it means ta make iPhone run un-authorized apps. If you have done a jailbreak (I have), you wouldknow that you only tinker with the OS, not installed a "copied..." version it, let alone sharing etc. but if you choose to install pirated apps, that's totally another story.

Pleaseresearch below link for reference:

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/feds-ok-iphone-jailbreaking/

Thanks for pointing that out. I always though it was about installing a hacked version.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

Ragnor

8223 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#614071 24-Apr-2012 02:05

The reason EA and other game companies use online for activation with one serial key being only usable once on one account are obvious: Anti piracy and money making.

The 2nd hand market does nothing for the developers and publishers, EA and their development houses are under no obligation to make a software product that is transferable in a 2nd hand manner.

Basically if you don't like EA's online account based system because you can't resell or pass on a game to someone else then don't buy their games, buy something else there are many of other options.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#614090 24-Apr-2012 07:18

Ragnor: The reason EA and other game companies use online for activation with one serial key being only usable once on one account are obvious: Anti piracy and money making.

The 2nd hand market does nothing for the developers and publishers, EA and their development houses are under no obligation to make a software product that is transferable in a 2nd hand manner.

Basically if you don't like EA's online account based system because you can't resell or pass on a game to someone else then don't buy their games, buy something else there are many of other options.

I'd dispute that this is anti piracy.

I'm certain that narrow license terms would increase piracy. eg, look at what happened to music when they introduced all the silly drm stuff.

Anyway, from what I can tell, you buy a physical box off the shelf. There is nothing to obvious to say you are only buying a license.

And, this is nothing like a drivers license, not sure how that got raised.

Behodar

10513 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#614245 24-Apr-2012 11:33

surfisup1000: Anyway, from what I can tell, you buy a physical box off the shelf. There is nothing to obvious to say you are only buying a license.

I don't believe that it's legal to add terms (in this case the EULA) after the sale has already been completed (see the hotel wardrobe example above, although that's for England). For services such as Steam, I need to agree to the EULA before I'm given the opportunity to pay for the software (if I recall correctly), but that's not the case for boxed games at retail.

Celticknife

8 posts

Wannabe Geek

#614336 24-Apr-2012 14:26

Behodar:
surfisup1000: Anyway, from what I can tell, you buy a physical box off the shelf. There is nothing to obvious to say you are only buying a license.

I don't believe that it's legal to add terms (in this case the EULA) after the sale has already been completed (see the hotel wardrobe example above, although that's for England). For services such as Steam, I need to agree to the EULA before I'm given the opportunity to pay for the software (if I recall correctly), but that's not the case for boxed games at retail.

EULAs post-sale have been upheld in courts of law. It depends on the individual wording of the EULA and the country the courts are located in (if any part of the EULA contravenes contract law in that country, the entire thing is invalid) but on the whole precedent states they are enforceable.

Ragnor

8223 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#614433 24-Apr-2012 16:47

Behodar:
surfisup1000: Anyway, from what I can tell, you buy a physical box off the shelf. There is nothing to obvious to say you are only buying a license.

I don't believe that it's legal to add terms (in this case the EULA) after the sale has already been completed (see the hotel wardrobe example above, although that's for England). For services such as Steam, I need to agree to the EULA before I'm given the opportunity to pay for the software (if I recall correctly), but that's not the case for boxed games at retail.

It was widely publicised that Mass Effect 3 would require Origin.

The buyer needs to take some personal responsibility for knowing what they are buying, it's called "caveat emptor" they teach you about it in school "let the buyer beware".

Consider this:

Dude buys game new
Dude beats game and sells or gives it to friend
Friend beats game and sells or gives it to stranger
Stranger beats game and sells or gives it too someone else
etc etc

The developer/publisher only gets money from the first sale, it's very obvious why publishers are using an online platform model for new games now, where a game key is tied to an online account.

It's their game, don't buy it if you don't like their distribution model.

sen8or

1789 posts

Uber Geek

#614471 24-Apr-2012 17:28

I can understand the thinking behind the "only new games benefit the publisher" bit, to a point, but used sales are an essential part of many products life cycle -

Where would car manufacturers be without used car sales?
Where would electronics companies be without sales of 2nd hand appliances / electronics on trademe etc?

Some / many of these "used sales" proceeds are indeed put straight back into new product (by the original owner), with the purchaser or the 2nd hand items "most likely" never to have been a new product buyer to begin with (whether or not that is for economic or other reasons).

EB games in NZ would struggle to be in business if it weren't for 2nd hand sales, in some / many cases, their margins on used games are higher than they are on new games. When you consider that many EB games are in major malls (westfields), the rent alone would be pretty crippling, and I would hazard a guess, unsustainable without the ability to deal in used games.

Is it shortsighted of the game company's to ignore the product life cycle, perhaps, but are they annoying "their customers" or the ones who don't want to pay "full price" for the game?

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#614478 24-Apr-2012 17:52

sen8or: I can understand the thinking behind the "only new games benefit the publisher" bit, to a point, but used sales are an essential part of many products life cycle -

Where would car manufacturers be without used car sales?
Where would electronics companies be without sales of 2nd hand appliances / electronics on trademe etc?

Some / many of these "used sales" proceeds are indeed put straight back into new product (by the original owner), with the purchaser or the 2nd hand items "most likely" never to have been a new product buyer to begin with (whether or not that is for economic or other reasons).

EB games in NZ would struggle to be in business if it weren't for 2nd hand sales, in some / many cases, their margins on used games are higher than they are on new games. When you consider that many EB games are in major malls (westfields), the rent alone would be pretty crippling, and I would hazard a guess, unsustainable without the ability to deal in used games.

Is it shortsighted of the game company's to ignore the product life cycle, perhaps, but are they annoying "their customers" or the ones who don't want to pay "full price" for the game?

But the only thing thats used is the physical CD Disk. The software on it is not really "used" as it belongs to EA, and is probably out of date by the time you get it due to it requiring updates etc..

If the game had no online features, required no updates every few months like the games of yesteryear then its a bit different I suppose.

But point is, you still able to use the game without the online pass. You just unable to access the more advanced features like the online features.

mattwnz

20169 posts

Uber Geek

#614484 24-Apr-2012 18:02

BraaiGuy:
sen8or: I can understand the thinking behind the "only new games benefit the publisher" bit, to a point, but used sales are an essential part of many products life cycle -

Where would car manufacturers be without used car sales?
Where would electronics companies be without sales of 2nd hand appliances / electronics on trademe etc?

Some / many of these "used sales" proceeds are indeed put straight back into new product (by the original owner), with the purchaser or the 2nd hand items "most likely" never to have been a new product buyer to begin with (whether or not that is for economic or other reasons).

EB games in NZ would struggle to be in business if it weren't for 2nd hand sales, in some / many cases, their margins on used games are higher than they are on new games. When you consider that many EB games are in major malls (westfields), the rent alone would be pretty crippling, and I would hazard a guess, unsustainable without the ability to deal in used games.

Is it shortsighted of the game company's to ignore the product life cycle, perhaps, but are they annoying "their customers" or the ones who don't want to pay "full price" for the game?

But the only thing thats used is the physical CD Disk. The software on it is not really "used" as it belongs to EA, and is probably out of date by the time you get it due to it requiring updates etc..?

If the game had no online features, required no updates every few months like the games of yesteryear then its a bit different I suppose.?

But point is, you still able to use the game without the online pass. You just unable to access the more advanced features like the online features.?

+1 . I wouldn't have any problem if I could access the game and it was fully usable in offline mode, as you do pay a big upfront fee for that. But for additional up to date online features, you have to expect to pay extra for that.
But if you buy the game and it wasn't operational at all, then I would have a problem with that.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6