If EA is locking out Players of PC titles from playing used copied that is fine. The PC does not have a platform based one time paid game system like live or psnetwork. Each game is open to it own online servers and such wich carries a per game cost to EA. I can understand this move on the part of EA for PC titles. AGAIN I can understand it but still I don;t think it is right.
If they are locking out Xbox live players with gold subscriptions that is a violation of contract. A gold membership gives me the right to play ANY GAME on xbox live. I don't think there is a SINGLE GAME ON 360 that has an additional fee like the original xbox did with Fantasy star online. Microsoft moved away from EXTRA subscriptions for online game play and while certain games such as World of War-craft, City of XXXXX, D&D online, Ultima, did ever come to the 360 - chances of customers accepting a small monthly fee on top of their gold membership might be acceptable. But to charge a Fee to play online for games like the ones mentioned - that just defeats the whole purpose of the gold membership. Microsoft knows that Xbox live has players on it's service playing games that they bought at $60 per title and at $20 a title used. They know that people share games, trade games and they don't care - as long as people are buying the gold memberships and the marketplace points for DLC - Microsoft is happy. If it is a orignal Disc (not pirated) it plays on Xbox live if you have a Gold membership - plain and simple.
If EA is allowed to set this precedent for any new game - this can be the downfall of xbox live. Players buying any EA game will be plagued with having to enter a code to even get online (a step that most players hate) the Idea behind xbox live is simple. Buy the game - Pop it into your 360, Log into live and play. IF every player has to VALIDATE their game first - this becomes another messy step that Microsoft wanted to avoid with Xbox live and idea behind how the gold membership worked. As for the precedent I was talking about, if EA is allowed to make their games so they have to be verified on Xbox live so "that they are FIRST PURCHASED TITLE" and not second hand used title then every other game company is going to follow. This is going to OBLITERATE Xbox live - Forget about game-stop. What about trading with your friend? Selling on Craigslist? eBay? All American Ideas that will be forget crushed.
IN essence Xbox live's gold membership is going to mean nothing. You can still buy and use second hand titles by shelling out an extra membership fee to get onto a service you already paid for - for a single title. I don't know about you guys but I personally buy and play about 12 USED GAMES a year (about one a month - sometimes more - some months none at all) Still I pay $50 a year to use Xbox live. Now to play those 12 games I buy - is going to cost me $120 Dollars? I also purchase new games - I buy maybe 4 or 5 of them per year. That is another $240-$300 I am spending on Games. Those I can play with no issue. They are hurting Xbox live ideology and they are going to decimate the USED market. Also that $120 in extra fees is going to cut into my NEW GAME purchases not my used game purchases. SO that's another 2 games a year less I am buying.
Lets touch on PlayStation network for a second. How is this not going to hurt them as well? They offer FREE ONLINE for every game. Now EA is going to ask that they validate their game with them before PS network allows it to play? If it is second hand - EA get the entire $10 fee and then the game is allowed on the PlayStation Network, a free netowrk and SOny gets nothing from that $10 fee? This is not right. Both Xbox live and PS network are run by Sony and Microsoft, that mens their rules not EA's. EA licenses the ability to be able to use those networks for their games. Microsoft has REQUIREMENTS about Xbox live before a game can even come out for 360 that it must fit - certain live features and such. One of those features is the game plays on all gold memberships online for FREE. Now EA thinks it is going to change the licensing terms? This could get messy.
If I were Microsoft and or Sony. I would not allow for a UNIQUE code validation system of a new game in order for it to access it's online features and online play. We already pay for those features and if I buy the game from someone else I am entitled to those features. The person who originally bought the game is entitled to every feature including the online feature when it paid for the game. IF he sells it to me for $1 or $60 it was his/her choice to part with it and I paid for entire CONTENT of the game. I should not be limited to what he got when he bought it just because I bought it from him. It is just a transfer from him to me with monitory reimbursement for doing so. If I buy a movie and sell it to a friend - how would that person feel if they had to re-validate just to watch the movie and by doing so they lost the special features, or the behind the scenes reels or the game demo that might be on there. What If I sold a CD to a friend and they lost 1/2 the tracks for buying it second hand? What If GM took away use of the Radio and air-conditioning when i bought a used car? What if I lost the ability of my DVD drive if I bought a used Laptop? This is the same thing - EA is taking away something it was already paid for.
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE PC, I understand EA's idea here when it comes to PC games. EA runs it own server PER GAME for PC titles. IF their games includes a License for the original purchaser to get on the EA servers for free - that is fine. If that game is sold to someone else I can understand them wanting a small fee for the new owner to get on. There are fees involved with the people who have to set up the new account (account server costs) and such for the PC so those additional cost's to EA does warrant them charging people with second hand games to have them pay a small fee. You don't have that kind of overhead with Xbox or PS3 - accounts are already established, there is no cost in a title changing hands. If I have an Xbox live account - I can play any game - no need for extra cost's for each new / used game I add to my collection that I am to use on Xbox live. The $50 a year covers all the cost's to Microsoft no matter how many games I buy and play on live. My system is already registered to me as well as my gold account. I am good to go. SO this makes no sense. Also Microsoft Knows that when a 3rd Party releases a new game how many of them are going to be out there. When COD came out Microsoft knew to expect over 1 million games sold in one day. It adjusted it's servers to handle the load. If there are only 3 million copies of call of duty or any game for that matter, Microsoft know how many games from that 3rd parts are pressed and sold and every single one of them is allowed on live with a gold membership. Changing hands from one gold member to another does not increase any cost to Microsoft - or to EA for that matter, they knew that many titles are out these and that is how many can be on Xbox live with a gold membership. Get my point here? My gold and your gold membership sharing the same title is no big deal as only one membership can play it at a time with one $60 copy of the game. Even if we are sharking a $10 used copy - only one of us can play it and that disc's license to play on live is already paid for anyways.
Microsoft and Sony need to make sure this EA validation thing for second hand games does not invade their online services. I honestly feel, with Xbox live, this scheme is a violation of my contract with Microsoft and my gold subscription. For 5 years any game I ever bought I could play on live - now all of a sudden I have to buy it new or pay more to play my used title? I don't see that in my LIVE terms of service. Microsoft and Sony need to make sure that any game bought stays free to play online (with proper membership levels). This is a recipe for the downfall of online gaming and for the explosive growth that both companies have achieved when it comes to their online services. This also opens up a can of worms on how licensing agreements work with putting 3rd party games on the first party game systems.
Xbox and Sony do need EA - but they don't EA - EA would be VERY VERY hurt if the big 2 would just tell them - your games (first, second, third hand) remain free to play on our online services or you cannot release any more titles for out system. If both Sony and M$ do this together - EA will have but no choice to squash this crazy idea at least on the game console services.
Is this fair? Nope (but life isn't fair)
Is it legal? Perhaps - on the PC side I can see more reasons for why EA might get away with this - But I wouldn't be surprised if EA, SONY, Microsoft and more were hit with classactions over this on the paid for services.
Is it going to hurt the Console online gaming? Absolutely (and I didn't forget about wii - I am sure nintendo will follow Sony and Microsoft's lead)
EA - Resist the urge to be evil and greedy.
Besides EA don;t make games worthy of extra fees - it the same rehashed stuff over and over. I give you $60 for a new title and that is enough.
Author
Topic: EA Locks Used Sports Games Out of Online Multiplayer (Read 1177 times)