lets talk about something physical.

[Yentis]

by which of course I mean physical media.

Ok guys I don't know what you guys think about this but I agree strongly with what this guy has to say.


I would like to here EVERYONE who has an opinion on this say something.

http://www.youtube.com/user/l1games?blend=1&ob=4

I personally do not support online pass or anything of this nature. I also do not like the onlive service of streaming games, but if that is what the gaming public wants then more power to you.

Just an example; I buy a used game from the store and pay 40 bucks then I have to buy the online pass to play online thats 10 bucks. I am up to 50 for a used game. Now I go and buy the dlc maps for let's say 30 bucks. I am up to 80 bucks for a used game. Now they come out with a elite service for the game now that is 50 bucks for a year of that service. now I am up to $130.00. Hmm; but wait I also have to get xbox live to play online anyway for all my games that is $60. Oh wait, next year I still wanna be playing this game. so let's say 50 more all that adds up to around 130 to ???? depending on how many years you play the game.

Now as far as digital streaming I can see how it could be usefull for someone who does not care about having a physical copy of the game.

As a collector of video games though I like physical media. I Love going home from a game store and having a Physical copy of the game that I can call mine. where I can say I own this this is MINE.

Now I know some of you might not agreee with me on this but; I would like to hear what you have to say and have an adult conversation about this as a gaming communitiy.

[BOSS]

As much as I don't like the concept of online passes, you have to look at the other side of the coin too. Companies don't want to lose profit by having the majority of consumers buy used products instead of new. The online pass is more of an incentive to sell their new products. It makes sense from a business perspective.

Personally, I find DLC for games are getting ridiculous. Especially since MOST of it is what's already on the disc (as of late anyway). Now they have DLC packs on DAY ONE or a week after release. Rather than patch in the features (like Warhawk did with new modes), developers want to make every cent they can once their product hits the shelves. Plus there's taking advantage of brand names (every COD DLC pack is $15...just because it's labeled COD, yet other game DLC is much cheaper). Most of the online features should also be available for free or patched in (that's why I liked the online support for the KZ games) and not have to pay for something that should already be in the game.

I also prefer hard copy games. I stand by that when Broc wasn't able to play the digital version of Warhawk because of PSN maintenance lol.

[nd32479]

Yentis,

I agree with Boss. I tend to be a capitalist. While I may personal think fees can be excessive I don't fault a company for finding more revenue streams. If it gets too out of line, then compition will step up and take a larger share of the market for less margin.

I totally get how you enjoy collecting games and gaming systems. While I do not collect games, I do collect other things. If it all just become streamed that takes that away! But at least it will make your existing hard media collection worth more!

[Yentis]

Ok do not take this as a rant or anything in the negative. I personally will not support these things but anyone who does I will not think any less of them. More power to you infact. Just not for someone like me.

Also I dont blame companies for trying to make more money. Hell I think we all try and do that!

Just think of it this way though there are some of us out there ( ME as one of them) who cannot afford to dump money into New games, every month or so. I get a used copy. There are some exceptions ( example i will be paying full price for skyward sword and elder scrolls 5 skyrim. ) but there are ALLOT of other games that I have bought. To me are not worth full retail price so I go to the used games store and get a copy for around 40. now lets say I wanna get online with this game. Oh wait I need an online pass for this game. so now I spend rough estement 15 bucks, to get this pass now for a game I could have got for 40 I am now spending 55 at that price. I might as well go ahead and spend the other 5 bucks and get a new copy. If I buy the game at gamestop who charges 55 for a used game. I am getting skrewed even more. Personally I think it is just a way to kill the used game market but once again all speculation.

NOW befor I get flamed allow me to explain. I DONT THINK IT IS A BAD BUISNESS MOVE. Still a bit of a dick move ,from a costomer stand point, but from a money hungry american standpoint not bad buisness move.

I just dont wanna see my used and retro game stores go out of buisness cuase of stuff like this. Hell I will be honest I pesonally want to be able to run a small used and retro game store one day. ( as soon as I get some stuff worked out) I will not personally shop at game stop anymore seeing as they are setting up a system like this onlive service. once again just me I will give my money to hellmart (WALMART) first, and I hate giving money to that place.

Also for those who support this might I get a little more into why you think this way is a move as a customer in the gaming community?

I also know things change with the time and we as consumers have to adapt or be left behind. I have this to say as well "climbs on soap box" I WANNA HAVE MY SAY IN WHAT HAPPENS IN GAMING. what happens in the section of media I spend the most of my hard earned money on. If this means I get left in the past. So be it I will be more than glad to take my stand and Not digitaly download games that have physical formats, or pay excess fees.

If it ment my games where worthless and not worth a commercial dime. I dont wanna ever see physical media die in any form wheather it be games, CDs, movies, or even books go away. I like holding something in my hand when I get something and be like I OWN THIS I can do whatever I want with this. Dont like it I can give it away, trade it, or even throw it away if I wish that is why I dont wanna see physical media die. once again no offence taken or ment to be gave by that statement just me saying what I think needs to be said for the sake of conversation.

ONCE again just me saying what I think no offence to anyone.

[BOSS]

I understant your points Yentis and don't think you're getting flamed. We're here to share our thoughts and discuss what's on our mind as mature adults. No reason to get flamed for that lol.

I don't support the added costs for games today, but I think that is also building competition (as ND pointed out). Recently a store opened up in a mall close by where I live that sells older games/recent games at lower prices (can't remember the name) and it's actually really close to the Gamestop store in there...I was thinking "these guys need to have some serious advantage to stay in business." Before long they are having more customers than GS right now. The used market/lower price market is still there, and will be as long as there are people who want used games.

The only thing to really do right now to lower costs for consumers that want new games (as opposed to used games + additional costs you mentioned) is look for good deals. Amazon and Newegg have advantages that can save you money on new/used games and offer free shipping (depending on the deal) so you minimize spending. I bring this up because I don't see DLC, online passes, or anything of the sort going away.

You're one of the many that oppose spending additional $$$ to get what you want. Don't feel alone in this.

[Yentis]

Thank you Boss I was not so worried about getting flamed it is just i have seen some of the post on the site go bad over a simple phase. lol...

I am just tring too see what ppl rly think. I know me being a collector am going to be a bit more caring of something like this. also I am not exactly against spending more for something I want. Just Like to get a bit more quanity for what I spend my 40 hour a week bust my ass every day paycheck on. Now when it comes to quality items like the mk acade stick or ya know some extra content that you can only get my handing over a little more money for the game. I FIND FAIR. what i dont find fair are things that give gamers a unearnd advantage ONLINE. Like some of the game + subsriptions. I am also going to say this I am not against paying a extra fee if it means my online experiance WILL BE BETTER. If it means I will have a smooth unlaggy online experiance where the gamers WANTS AND NEEDS are at least taken into accout when it comes to DLC and such. That I would have no problem paying a small extra fee lets face it if you get xbox live for 50 and a subsription for just one game for 50 that is 100 a year which is like roughly 10 hours of work for me. Knowing most companies though i would say they would just put the money tward the next game and give the nice one finger solute to the old game.

once again just an opinion.

[APAT]

All the DLC has encouraged me to buy less games actually. COD has cost me like $100. That's ridiculous. $60 plus $15 for DLC is fair. If they want to make money off online content why don't they release free or cheap DLC and sell advertising to display during the lobby and loading screens. These guys need to think outside of the box instead of raping their customers. The first company that does will reap the benefits.

[Brocman]

I don't think that the gaming market is going to ever go completely digital. If they would did that, it would only prevent people from buying a game (if their HD is full). As for the DLCs that have come out recently a lot are a waste of time. Most of the time it's a single new map and thats it. I don't have a problem when they release small DLCs but don't charge me 5 to 10 bucks for one new map. 5 to 10 bucks should get you like 3 or 4 new maps.

I don't think the used game market is going away either. There are plenty of games that come out that people play all the way through and then don't want to play them anymore or not as much as a new game that is coming out so they trade it in. The used game market, I think will end up giving less for trade ins and ask for less when selling them. Thats just my opinion I could be wrong about that last part. Not sure what else they would do to make money really.

@apat

I like the idea of selling ad time in games but not too much. Companies can go overboard with that stuff at times. I don't think they will ever do that though. I think from their perspective they are looking at the used game trade as lost revenue and they want to re coup it. Which is lame because it isn't lost revenue they are just being greedy.

[Deslock]

It seems Yentis, that Mr. Sterling agrees with you. :

[ame]http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/4568-Online-Passes-Are-Bad-For-Everybody[/ame]

(Just click there on top where it's says "Escapist")

And I also agree with the guy you have linked in your first point, but my own personal outlook is different than most people, as I'm an avid, almost rabid, consumer rights advocate.

Now mind you, I'm not against DLC. The only thing I say for myself and customers is make it damn good DLC, and make it worth my money.
I purchased the DLC for Warhawk, COD-MW, and DA:Origins. Why..? Because they were worth it to me. They were cheap add-ons, and enhanced my gaming experience with those products. I've also bought DLC for Hotshots golf and Tiger Woods. For a few bucks, being able to play Hot Shots Golf as Kratos was certainly worth $2.00.

I am in favor of worthwhile DLC, but certainly not in favor of "online passes", because of just the overall greed factor involved by the producer.
But I also know that I'm mostly in the gaming minority, since I've been electronically gaming since most of you here were even born.

I played the "King's Quest" games on a computer that didn't even have a "hard drive" yet, because they'd hadn't been invented yet. I remember when EA was called "Electronic Arts", and made damn good games, and you could tell that the guys and girls that made these wonderful games truly cared about their "Electronic Arts".

For myself, and what I've seen myself over the years, especially in the gaming world, as in the retail world, companies run just fine. :D That is until they become a "Corporation".

When they become "Incorporated", then their overall concern shifts from making a great product and pleasing their customers and employees, then they shift to focusing on the "bottom line"; that is focusing on squeezing out any possible dollar that they could make to please shareholders, to earn corporate "perks" only for themselves, and don't mind a bit from that point on to totally screw their own employees and customers. The focus from that time on simply becomes marketing, and focus groups, to literally squeeze every f'n dime out of everything, for themselves, their shareholders, and to protect their "golden parachutes" that even if they epically fail in their jobs, they will still earn more than what most of us will see in an entire damn lifetime.

Now mind you, I am American, and certainly believe in capitalism without a doubt. But as a mature involved American, I also see the hateful aspect of "Corporatism". Capitalism believes in working hard to make money. The other one literally worships the love of money at all costs.

I guess as a gamer the point I'm trying to make is that I remember a time when game companies made games that they loved to play themselves. Yes, they did it to make money, that's why we all work. But at that time they also had a true love of their craft, and wanted to share it with those that could recognize their work and craft. Those old Sierra games may have come with 10 3 1/2 disks, but you could feel the love.

I rarely buy full priced new games at all. I just can't afford it. I bought Transformers-War for Cybertron for $10.00. The last Final Fantasy for $14.00, as well as Fallout-New Vegas for $14.00 also. My wife recently re-bought Pirates-Legend of Black Cat on Amazon for $5.00 that we both love.

So no, I don't want to see the used games market die out due to overwhelming corporate greed.

[Yentis]

I think he brings up some good points about the used market. I also had not metioned the loss of value in used games. (kindof forgot about it in my ranting lol)

on the part of DLC. I might have been a Little unclear on my view of DLC.

When it comes to DLC on the first week or so of release = BULLSHIT.

DLC that is Released to bring a longer life to a game, AND MAKE THE EXPERIANCE BETTER = VERY GOOD [(Diserves A COOKIE) lol]

Also being a retro gamer I can see where Deslock is coming form. I play games Like Earthbound, Final Fantasy 3 (aka 6), CONTRA, Super Mario 3. I can see alot more Depth and general care given to these titles. Not to say there are not games today. Elder scrolls 4 oblivion, Drangon Age Origins, Mortal Kombat, hell even Socom 4. (SINGEL PLAYER online still needs allot of work). Have good stories and are solid gameplay and REPLAY VALUE. dont know about you guys but Replay is something I think about when I decide how much I am willing to pay for a certain title. (Online replayablity as well as Singel player.) Example the new Zelda and Elder Scrolls games I will Play over and over untill I have turned every rock looked inside every bush and been in ever place there is to explore. compleatly worth 60 bucks.

Although there are games that are just put out to get a QUICK DOLLAR. Examples COD series, Madden, or any other series that comes out one year after another. With little change to anything except maps and setting. If it can be DLC or and ADD ON just do it that way. I would rather spend 30 for Updated player stats or New Maps and modes of gameplay.

Also saying there is not compleat garbage in the PAST, or rushed out to make a quick dollar. E.T. on the 2600 was a compleat and utter disaster. As was Silver Surfer on my beloved N.E.S. Shaqfu anyone on the super nintendo or genesis. Yes i know there always was and will always be bad games, and hurried games.

Once again all opinion and I appologize to anyone who may get offeneded.

I am also not tring to say that oh the gaming world is going to hell over a stupid issue like this.

I just wanna ask form supporters, or non HEY THIS IS WRONG SAYERS.

What would you expect to gain from the Money GAINED form Online Passes?

Do you think 10 Bucks is a reasonable price for an online pass if you buy a used game?

last but not least

How would you feel if a game you bought for 60 bucks. You dont like it turn around to trade it in. Guy behind the counter asks you if it has the onine pass. You say no and instead of 35 dollars trade on the game. (you just spent 60 bucks on.) Instead you get 25, Because it is devalued 10 dollars buy this Online pass system?

[APAT]

I recommend selling your used games on Ebay. Usually get good money for them. For a relatively new game $35 w/o online pass. $40-45 with online pass. Unless the game is a P.O.S. and no one wants it

[keyser28146]

I want a disc. Or a severe price break, because simply put, it's NOT the same product.

When I traded in my Wii, I got $.00 for each of the 27 games I had on the Wii's internal memory.

I did, however, get $4 bucks on even the crappiest disc game for the system, and most were well over $15 each.

A major irritation with games like Shatter, PixelJunk Shooter, Plants Vs Zombies, PacMan DX, etc is that I can't bring them over to sell other friends on them, unless I drag my PS3 over. That blows.

However, I do support it and love DLC and PSN only games, primarily because a lot of them bridge the gap between huge chunks of commitment and simple addictive and fun games that smaller studios can afford to take risks on. I love the model and love the pricing. DLC at $60 doesn't work, and shouldn't.