EA to start charging for Online play with used games

[jcalder8]

IGN Source

May 10, 2010 - EA Sports is going after the used game market.

Starting with the release of Tiger Woods PGA Tour 11 on Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, the publisher will introduce a new Online Pass, a one-time registration code included with each brand new copy of the game. The code allows players to access "online services, features and bonus content."

Those who purchase the game used can buy an Online Pass for $10 or sign up for a free 7-day trial. The pass will be implemented for NCAA Football 11, NHL 11, Madden NFL 11, NBA 11, FIFA 11, and EA Sports MMA as well. The pass offers different features for each title, however, players will not have access to basic multiplayer features if purchased used.

"You will be unable to play multiplayer online game modes or use your downloaded content in online game modes," EA says. Online leagues, dynasty and franchise modes are also only available with the Online Pass. The break down for each title can be seen on the publisher's official website.

"This is an important inflection point in our business because it allows us to accelerate our commitment to enhance premium online services to the entire robust EA SPORTS online community," said Peter Moore, President of EA SPORTS.

Despite being the leader in used game sales, retailer GameStop, which acknowledged it plans to focus on digital content in the future, supports Electronic Arts' new direction.

"GameStop is excited to partner with such a forward-thinking publisher as Electronic Arts," said Dan DeMatteo, Chief Executive Officer of GameStop Corp. "This relationship allows us to capitalize on our investments to market and sell downloadable content online, as well as through our network of stores worldwide."

I've defended EA in the past but to me this is just inexcusable. I almost always buy used because I don't have the money to buy every game that I want brand new but now there is no incentive to buy the game at all. For me it'll make just as much sense to wait until the game is no longer on their servers since I'll never pay the extra $10 just to play online.

[Nirvana]

My god, I can't stand EA. This is just so damn lame. I mean, it's not too big of a deal, but why do this in the first place...

EA needs to end their NFL contract. I miss the 2k series.

[chrisbid]

im under the impression that only a percentage of gamers play games online. some diligent searching in the used bins may find more than one copy of an ea sports game with an intact online code still in the box.

itll be interesting to see how this develops


and while in general i am not cool with publishers double charging for a game (the practice should be called reverse piracy), charging for a service outside of the contents of the disk isnt that big of a deal to me. in fact, im surprised ea hasnt started charging for online across the board.

[g00ber]

I guess I wont be buying any more EA games..

That is so rediculous on so many levels.

And of course Gamestop is going to back them - they get all the 'exclusive' content that makes them the big $$$$. No big surprise there.

[Clownzilla]

If EA can deliver a top-notch, sports-centric online service that blankets ALL of their franchise sports games then I would have nothing wrong with even a yearly fee. If they offered weekly tournaments for prizes, constant roster updates, user made content trading abilities (for golf courses, skate parks, etc.), fantasy football access, etc. that brought together a community of sports gamers then they would have a winner on their hands. Unfortunately, this will be the same standard service with an extra fee attached FOR EACH GAME!

[XYXZYZ]

I guess I wont be buying any more EA games..

That is so rediculous on so many levels.

And of course Gamestop is going to back them - they get all the 'exclusive' content that makes them the big $$$$. No big surprise there.

I figure they'd need some kind of deal or they'd be against it; the way I understand it game shops make far more money on used games than on new ones, and I don't imagine they'd be too friendly to EA interfering with their moneymaker.

[pepharytheworm]

I guess I wont be buying any more EA games..

That is so rediculous on so many levels.

And of course Gamestop is going to back them - they get all the 'exclusive' content that makes them the big $$$$. No big surprise there.

I don't know about that. Used games are Gamestop's bread and butter, every associate is told to always offer the used copy instead if available. They only carry the extra content so you pre-order the game which is a guaranteed sale. They always hope you forget to cancel you reservation so they can keep the money same with gift cards.

I understand EA doing this but I still don't like it. Good thing I don't play sports games or online.

[Red Warrior]

I just recently purchased a complete copy of Tiger Woods 07 for $5 and a complete copy of Tiger 08 for $8 on ebay. I'm a late adopter when it comes to EA games cuz you can get them so cheap after the "sequels" are released each year.

Now, every used EA game from here on out will never be cheaper than $10 if you wanna play it online. Oh well, it's not like I play online that often anyway. Now I definitely won't with that $10 price tag hanging off of it. I already pay for Xbox Live Gold. I'm not paying yet another fee for a feature that I barely use.

With every passing year, the video game industry alienates me more and more.

[chrisbid]

but how well does gamestop do with used sports games? they breed like roaches in used game bins, and i cant see GS making much profit with them unless they grossly underpay for them.

[Oobgarm]

They do well with them over the course of the first couple months of availability, then not so well afterward, especially after season's over. The buyback price drops significantly after those first couple months in preparation for the flood that comes in later.

I personally could care less, online gaming does nothing for me anymore. If it means I can pick up a cheaper copy of a sports title since it lacks online connectivity, that's fine by me.

Most of the people who are gonna play online are new buyers, particularly day one adopters. Besides, I'd be willing to wager that over 50% of those who buy the game don't even touch the online portion.

*shrug*

[kupomogli]

I don't play online for any of EA's games. Dante's Inferno is a good game and I wasn't interested at all in playing Trials of St. Lucia because it's just going through the wave after wave of enemies with a friend. Once it was released and EA was charging 9.99 for it, I definitely wasn't interested.

Mirror's Edge has the highest time trial scores posted online, but there's no actual online play. Mirror's Edge is an awesome game, but even if the online portion was taken away, I could still do the time trials myself. The ridiculously hard time trials.

I've actually never played a sports game online. Ever. I also own no sports games for this gen. I don't see anything wrong with making people pay for an online code if they purchase the game used however. Whenever playing a game online you're using a portion of the companies server. If in a couple months 50% of the people occupying the server are people who purchased the game used, then EA is catering to them while not making anything themselves. Not that having an online server even costs much anyways, but they still do provide it.

[Clownzilla]

With every passing year, the video game industry alienates me more and more.

The gaming industry started alienated me when they had the ability to keep their hands in my pocket after the sale. Constant charges for everything from DLC to online connectivity charges ON TOP of the basic online connection charges (ie. EA online on top of Xbox Live Gold) is going to become the norm. It's not like the content is getting any better than it was either........just more expensive. It's going to get to a point when we don't own our games but just "lease" our games just like people lease vehicles. You want to play game "X" past next year? Too bad, our severs won't let you play game "X" anymore so you will just have to buy game "Y" (aka. game "X" with a new name). The sad part of this is that there are an increasing number of people that never knew a world where you can buy a game and have the COMPLETE GAME on day one and own the fully functioning game FOREVER!

[Clownzilla]

I don't play online for any of EA's games. Dante's Inferno is a good game and I wasn't interested at all in playing Trials of St. Lucia because it's just going through the wave after wave of enemies with a friend. Once it was released and EA was charging 9.99 for it, I definitely wasn't interested.

Mirror's Edge has the highest time trial scores posted online, but there's no actual online play. Mirror's Edge is an awesome game, but even if the online portion was taken away, I could still do the time trials myself. The ridiculously hard time trials.

I've actually never played a sports game online. Ever. I also own no sports games for this gen. I don't see anything wrong with making people pay for an online code if they purchase the game used however. Whenever playing a game online you're using a portion of the companies server. If in a couple months 50% of the people occupying the server are people who purchased the game used, then EA is catering to them while not making anything themselves. Not that having an online server even costs much anyways, but they still do provide it.

I think many of these complainers understand the costs associated with running servers (although there are quite a few people that think online gaming should be a free social service provided by the corporation). What is ticking many people off (including myself) is the fact that gaming companies keep increasing the price of these games through these extra charges while the quality hasn't increased to justify the price increases. EA has every right to do what they are doing but moves like are slowly killing the reputation of a once loved industry and creating new enemies out of old fans.

[unwinddesign]

This actually sucks even if you buy the game brand new. My friends bought NHL 10, Madden 10, NBA Live 10 and FIFA 10. I played an ass ton of NBA Live on my XBL account.

Now, if I want to do that next year, I'll have to pay $10. Really, really lame that you can't share a game with your friends and everything is tied to one tag. A lot of times my friends will make XBL accounts for one month or something like that. If you register the game to one of those, and then it expires and you make a new account later on, you can't play.

Or if you want to bring it over to a friend's place who doesn't own the game? Nope, can't play online... unless you bring your account too.

In trying to combat used game sales, EA has essentially dropped the value for those who actually buy the game new to begin with. I think a lot of their market (16 - 24 males) share games with either a roommate, brother or friend fairly often. This is going to be annoying as hell.

Then again, the Stimulus package on COD sold 2.5 million copies in its first week, so I don't think consumers mind getting fucked over that much. I just won't want to hear the bitching in seven, eight years when all the DRM/online play/activiation codes are so ridiculously draconian that it makes it a pain in the ass to actually play the game (hello, PC games!)

[duffmanth]

I'm glad I stopped buying EA games a long time ago. FUCK YOU EA!!!!!

[TonyTheTiger]

And of course Gamestop is going to back them - they get all the 'exclusive' content that makes them the big $$$$. No big surprise there.

As people have said above, considering that GameStop's primary source of income is used games and since this is a measure to make used game sales less attractive when compared to new copies, I think the GameStop statement is PR nonsense. Rarely will a company come out and say "X is being a douchebag." But I'd bet money that GameStop is fuming at EA right now ever since Mass Effect 2 undercut their typical $5 discount for used copies of brand new titles.

Without saying whether EA is in the right or not, I will say that this is a clever way to encourage people to buy new $60 copies instead of used $55 copies from GameStop. The best case scenario is it pushes down used game prices so everything balances out. So now that used copy costs $45 instead of $55, effectively bringing everything back to the status quo.

[kupomogli]

Nevermind with what I last said. I didn't even think of people living in the same home who may happen to use the same console but different accounts or friends bringing the game over to someone elses house, etc.

Yeah. This is actually a stupid idea. With PS3 users it's not really so difficult. My bestfriend has my PSN account added, I have his PSN account added so whatever I play over there if I really care about it being tied to my account I'll just play on that. I know XBL accounts can transfer over to someone elses 360 to play using the name but there is supposed limitations to this.

[phreakindee]

As much "good" has come from the internet, I think online is going to kill gaming. At least for old-school losers like me.

Eventually, it's going to be completely online. Seriously, every last bit of it. If there's even a local storage of the game at all it will be very, very minimal, with microtransactions and fees out the arse. That's pretty much unavoidable and this goes to show that.

Well, at least from the big publishers. Things like the Humble Indie Bundle give me hope!

[le geek]

I am okay with this.

[Shadow Kisuragi]

I'm glad I stopped buying EA games a long time ago. FUCK YOU EA!!!!!

Ignorant much?

There are a lot of things to be said to clarify the issue, but I'm going to keep quiet on the matter. Suffice to say, the deal only affects the user if the person buys the game second-hand and wants to utilize the online features. Publishers/developers don't get any money off second-hand sales, so they'd essentially be PAYING people to utilize the online features if they purchased the game used. If you were in charge of the company, would you want to be PAYING people to use your features, or would you like to at least break even?