Arkham City: So It Has Come To This...
Just read that the new game, Arkham City (the sequel to the wicked awesome Arkham Asylum game) has this online pass thing (like a lot of multiplayer games have of late) that restricts SINGLEPLAYER content if the game is purchased used. A one-time use content voucher is included in new copies. Cold.
It bothers me greatly that this is done with multiplayer, but is forgivable, as I shall explain: Eventually, servers will be shut down and the multiplayer will be phased out anyway. But after they've been marketing the CRAP out of 'playable Catwoman' (seriously? That's your hook? 'playable Catwoman?' Lego Batman had 'playable Catwoman', I just want the story to be shiny!) then, 'bout a week before launch they say, "Oh, hey, if you want those Catwoman missions, then you better buy it new. Yeah, the ones we've been running our yaps about? Yeah, not for you used-buying chumps unless you cough up 10 bucks for a code."
I'm still upset with Sony for getting into the whole 'online pass' thing and putting it in the next Uncharted game. News flash: We got our copy of Drake's Fortune, the first uncharted game, used and it got us hooked. We pre-ordered the second and third (with the third being the big collector's edition) so, attacking used sales is probably going to ultimately hurt you in sales, you morons.
Is this Catwoman thing REALLY that big a deal for this game? Not so much...games have been doing pre-order goodies like extra characters/missions for years. What is insidious about this is the fact they're doing stuff in offline singleplayer to penalize people for buying used.
Will this make a difference in the used games market? No. Duh! Gamestop will just lower their selling price/amount of trade credit for the games in question by 10 bucks. Won't make a dent in the used industry, other than hurting folk who bought new who are trying to get decent trade credit on their games. All it does is pass along extra cash to the publisher.
A scary trend, reallly, the direction 'product ownership' has taken into the realm of 'intellectual property licensure.' As the world gets more and more connected...with things like remote starting of cars and such via paid services...I wonder if car manufacturers will get in on the act and start selling 'online passes' in order to drive used cars? I mean, buying used cars hurts manufacturers...so a pass that you have to buy would make sense. If you don't pay the manufacturer, say $1,000, they lock out your car remotely.
Yard sales in the future are going to be interesting/hilarious.
"How much for this Myrtle Beach ashtray that says, "Happy New Year 1997?"
"Well, it's $5...but you'll have to read the EULA, register it online, and pay an additional $10"
"So, 15 bucks for an old ashtray?"
"Nope. $15 for the license to USE the ashtray...you never actually OWN the ashtray."
It bothers me greatly that this is done with multiplayer, but is forgivable, as I shall explain: Eventually, servers will be shut down and the multiplayer will be phased out anyway. But after they've been marketing the CRAP out of 'playable Catwoman' (seriously? That's your hook? 'playable Catwoman?' Lego Batman had 'playable Catwoman', I just want the story to be shiny!) then, 'bout a week before launch they say, "Oh, hey, if you want those Catwoman missions, then you better buy it new. Yeah, the ones we've been running our yaps about? Yeah, not for you used-buying chumps unless you cough up 10 bucks for a code."
I'm still upset with Sony for getting into the whole 'online pass' thing and putting it in the next Uncharted game. News flash: We got our copy of Drake's Fortune, the first uncharted game, used and it got us hooked. We pre-ordered the second and third (with the third being the big collector's edition) so, attacking used sales is probably going to ultimately hurt you in sales, you morons.
Is this Catwoman thing REALLY that big a deal for this game? Not so much...games have been doing pre-order goodies like extra characters/missions for years. What is insidious about this is the fact they're doing stuff in offline singleplayer to penalize people for buying used.
Will this make a difference in the used games market? No. Duh! Gamestop will just lower their selling price/amount of trade credit for the games in question by 10 bucks. Won't make a dent in the used industry, other than hurting folk who bought new who are trying to get decent trade credit on their games. All it does is pass along extra cash to the publisher.
A scary trend, reallly, the direction 'product ownership' has taken into the realm of 'intellectual property licensure.' As the world gets more and more connected...with things like remote starting of cars and such via paid services...I wonder if car manufacturers will get in on the act and start selling 'online passes' in order to drive used cars? I mean, buying used cars hurts manufacturers...so a pass that you have to buy would make sense. If you don't pay the manufacturer, say $1,000, they lock out your car remotely.
Yard sales in the future are going to be interesting/hilarious.
"How much for this Myrtle Beach ashtray that says, "Happy New Year 1997?"
"Well, it's $5...but you'll have to read the EULA, register it online, and pay an additional $10"
"So, 15 bucks for an old ashtray?"
"Nope. $15 for the license to USE the ashtray...you never actually OWN the ashtray."