online pass is required for uncharted 3

[hbkprm]

Uncharted 3's multiplayer is a well-designed part of the package, and Sony knows it. As if to reinforce the point, players won't be able to check out that online component unless they first redeem a code for a PSN Pass. As with other games that have online passes of one form or another, that code is bundled in new copies of the game.

If you don't buy the game new, and your copy of the game either doesn't include the code or it's already been redeemed, all is not lost. You'll just have to pay $10 to play online.

Are you used to this concept by now, or does it still bug you?

[exit]

I'm buying the game new regardless, so this doesn't bother me one bit, but I could have sworn I read that Sony was only going to charge $5 for their online passes. On the topic of online passes tho, a few years ago this would have bugged me, but now that retailers seems to have sales on most games a few weeks after they are released, it really isn't that big of a deal.

Only people I can understand being annoyed are Live users, since they already to pay to be able to play online, having to pay another $10 for an online pass is like a slap in the face. Then again the only people this really affects are the those who buy used, so unless the developers start forcing people to pay the $10 to play their multiplayer mode, I stand by my original statement.

[heybtbm]

Love it. Anything that puts more money in the pockets of developers/publishers and less money in the pockets of Gamestop is a truly wonderful thing.

Edit: Also love the default GS hyperlink. Classy.

[kupomogli]

As long as it's not a part of the single player experience then the online pass is fine with me. Helps out the developers and 15 years later when we can't get on PSN or XBL and happened to have a corrupted hard drive we can still play all the single player content.

Alice and Rage. What the fuck for locking out single player content just to sell more.

The early multiplayer for Uncharted 3 is up right now. Your levels and everything carries over to the full game once released. This early multiplayer lasts from October 1st to the 31st.

http://www.gamingunion.net/newsimg/watch-nathan-drake-run-with-a-30-oz-subway-drink.jpg

[Leo_A]

It bugs me because I know it isn't going to remain limited to online multiplayer modes.

They're out to create new revenue streams from secondary game sales and encourage people to buy new. And they've found one way that they've been successfully testing the waters with (Which I doubt has anything to do with subsidizing server cost or it would be applied to all users before opening online access or they'd be implimenting a subscription program).

I just can't see them stopping here. Someday sometime soon, one of these publishers is going to release a major single player focused game and are going to want to impliment a single use unlock code that blocks a significant portion of the content to discourage used game sales or at least earn some money off them.

And that's going to be a real pain for the classic gamer in the years to come with things like console failures, the cessation of online support, or just buying a used copy of the game years later and being prevented from playing a significant portion of the single player content.

[Clownzilla]

I have nothing wrong with online passes as long as the money is used to run and maintain the servers. Honestly, they should be allowed to charge whatever they want for whatever they want. Sony can come out and say that they want to charge $100 a year for an online pass because they want to give out CEO bonuses. I simply will stop buying the games and using the services if that were to happen. Practices like this get dicey when dealing with food, energy, housing, etc. but when dealing with video games then it's the company shooting themselves in the foot and nothing more.

[Dobie]

It bugs me because I know it isn't going to remain limited to online multiplayer modes.

They're out to create new revenue streams from secondary game sales and encourage people to buy new. And they've found one way that they've been successfully testing the waters with.

I just can't see them stopping here. Someday sometime soon, one of these publishers is going to release a major single player focused game and are going to want to impliment a single use unlock code that blocks a significant portion of the content to discourage used game sales or at least earn some money off them.

And that's going to be a real pain for the classic gamer in the years to come with things like console failures, the cessation of online support, or just buying a used copy of the game years later and being prevented from playing a significant portion of the single player content.

This. 100x this. Online passes have shown to be problematic if you buy the game digitally as well, as in the Games on Demand for Xbox, or the PSN store. BFBC2 is an example... though you pay full retail price when you buy it through their digital store, you still have to buy the online pass for the multiplayer to work.

[The 1 2 P]

Going forward Sony is going to be doing this with all their first party games that have online multiplayer components. I can understand why and it actually doesn't affect me much since I buy 95% of my games new but it sucks for those that buy their games used several months to a year later from somewhere like Gamestop or craigslist(where I've gotten alot of cheap games lately). And it's something that everyone is going to have to get use to because not only is it not going away but it's going to continue to spread to even more publishers.