The Death of Gaming - Page 7

**Mareeps** · 08-12-2011, 05:12 PM

That sounds extremely ridiculous, but how does the disc know its a new PS3 even if both of them have never been online? Does it get saved into the disc?

Also, I don't see what the big deal is with selling and buying used games. I'm allowed to buy and sell stuff like books and game systems, so what makes the games so much different? And what happens if you rent the game? Mostly if I rent a game it's to see if it's worth buying. A game like this, which would lock me out of most of the game, would be a game I return to the video store, and never even think of buying it.

**Dudebro** · 08-12-2011, 05:18 PM

All versions of the game will require a code to unlock the content. It comes packaged with a new game.

They're greedy. If they made consistently better games then people wouldn't mind paying full price. But instead of worrying about that they'll just make used sales not worth it, limit demos and just force people to buy full price and become jaded.

**Kugyince** · 08-12-2011, 05:25 PM

Every day piracy looks better and better.

**Dudebro** · 08-12-2011, 05:27 PM

I know right? It's like the game industry is taking a firm stance and daring people to resort to piracy.

In the meantime I'll just stick to Steam. If one of these online passcode games goes on sale like 80% off I'll get it. Otherwise I'm not giving them any money.

**Slime Slayer** · 08-12-2011, 05:44 PM

The amount of greed in this industry is abysmal. Could you imagine the uproar if other industries tried this stuff?

Why can't they learn from others mistakes? The music industry tried this kinda thing before and look where it got them.

**Dudebro** · 08-12-2011, 06:13 PM

Sadly I think the entire industry is due for a crash and this kind of thing is just more fuel for the fire. Also sadly I've seen plenty of people defending this practice because they always buy games new. So basically they're saying "it doesn't effect me so I don't care".

**RU Joe** · 08-13-2011, 09:41 PM

So they're still trying to get a piece of the pie after it's already been sold, on the resale?
There is no end to Corporate GR$$D.

Did I ever tell you that the character Dracula was actually the personification of a Corporation?

* Lives forever
* Has super powers
* Transforms others to think and act as it does
* Slowly drains the lives of its victims

Think about it.

**Demon-Mask** · 08-13-2011, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tenser

Every day piracy looks better and better.

It's generally worth it.
Think about it, if a game is never released in the U.S., why should I buy it.
I'd gladly have paid for a good portion of the PSP games I've pirated, had they been given a release in the U.S., not just Japan and Europe.
Furthermore, DRM only effects people with legitimate copies of the game, pirates find ways around it. I'll admit it isn't nice to pirate games but, the games I've pirated have all been either PSP games {generally ones without U.S. releases} or PC games that were never released in western markets and have been English patched. If I walked into a store and saw Embodiment of the Scarlet Devil, of course I'd buy it.

Quote:

Also, I don't see what the big deal is with selling and buying used games

The company only makes money off of the original sale. Any time it is resold, there is no money for the company but, someone else is making money off of it.

Basically, Gamestop is getting money that game developers/publishers feel entitled to, even though it isn't fair to make money off of the same copy multiple times.

---------- Post added at 08:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:10 PM ----------

@JG, awesome Dracula analogy.

**Slime Slayer** · 08-23-2011, 09:09 PM

Copy/paste from Reddit:

As many of you already know, EA's Origin digital distribution system will be doing such nasty invasion-of-privacy things as snooping around your hard drive and observing what you do on your computer all day. EA Origin is required in all copies (even hard copies) of games such as Battlefield 3.
From those of you who are aware of this and don't like it, I've seen mentions of "voting with your wallet" or "boycotting".
Even if our numbers are in the thousands, or even tens of thousands, a boycott will most likely be all but unnoticeable to EA (and DICE in the case of BF3). I've committed in boycotts of highly anticipated games before, and to this day, years after, I still have not bought these games. Did it work? Not even slightly. The games sold better than ever.
If you really want to make a difference and protest EA Origin's blatant invasion of privacy, voting with your wallet will only prove to EA that they can still take advantage of the remaining 90% of uninformed consumers who don't know the first thing of Origin's privacy issues.
So what's the solution, then?
Raise awareness of Origin's privacy violation. I cannot emphasize enough how important this is. Raising awareness of this issue would be 1000x more effective than a silent 10% "voting with their wallets".
Contact EA. Send them an email. Contact gaming sites, tell them about your concerns and that you extremely disapprove of this privacy violation. With enough flow of such emails, we might be able to make a change.
P.S. Let's try not to use cookie-cutter copy'n'paste emails. Even a one-liner email would be great, certainly better than spamming them with the same thing over and over. It's the thought that counts anyway

This is not a link post, because I don't want karma. I want people to understand how important it is to communicate your dissatisfaction of EA's Origin privacy violation to people who matter (Gaming sites, etc.) Also, if I left out any important credit or links on this issue, let me know and I will add them.
Edit: Here are some EA public relations email addresses, courtesy of an anonymous redditor:

UK:
General enquires Chloe Lara PR Co-Ordinator contactUKPR@ea.com 01483 463352
EA SPORTS Keith Hennessey Publicist khennessey@ea.com 01483 463783
The Sims Gem Woolnough Publicist gwoolnough@ea.com 01483 463925
Games Tom Goldberger Publicist tgoldberger@ea.com 01483 463485
Bryony Benoy Publicist bbenoy@ea.com 014834 63271
Sophie Orlando PR Manager sorlando@ea.com 01483 463342
Shaun White Head of PR swhite@europe.ea.com
US:
Lauren Svensson PR Coordinator, EA Play lsvensson@ea.com
Melissa Ojeda Coordinator, EA Games mojeda@ea.com
Honey Hamilton Publicist, Pogo.com hhamilton@ea.com
Angie Newman Manager, The Sims anewman@ea.com
Jen Riley PR Manager, EA SPORTS: Fight Night, NHL, NBA LIVE, FIFA Soccer, Tennis, EA SPORTS Active, NCAA Basketball jriley@ea.com
Rob Semsey Sr. PR Manager, EA SPORTS: Madden, Tiger Woods PGA Tour, NCAA Football, Nascar rsemsey@ea.com
Wendy Spander Sr. PR Manager, Events and Media, Corporate Communications wspander@ea.com
Greg Gervin PR Coordinator, Corporate Communications ggervin@ea.com
Cyndi Lum Senior Publicist clum@ea.com
Audra McIver Publicist w/ Bender / Helper Impact, MySims audra_mciver@bhimpact.com
Nicole Morrison PR Coordinator nmorrison@ea.com

**Dudebro** · 08-23-2011, 10:37 PM

Pointless. The issue is very well known amongst gamers who keep up with current events and still people buy their games. Hell I'm playing Fight Night right now.

**Slime Slayer** · 08-23-2011, 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dudebro

Pointless. The issue is very well known amongst gamers who keep up with current events and still people buy their games. Hell I'm playing Fight Night right now.

If this becomes standard in gaming, I will hang up my crontroller permanently.

**Demon-Mask** · 08-23-2011, 11:04 PM

That sure as hell constitutes an invasion of privacy in my eyes.

**Dudebro** · 08-23-2011, 11:04 PM

It might become the mainstream way of doing things but that just means the good developers will know to avoid it. These kind of things always seem to backlash so it'd be smart to not get involved with it.

**Demon-Mask** · 08-23-2011, 11:16 PM

Yes, good developers will ikely avoid it. So long as they have the common sense to realize that it isn't okay.
Just because something is the most common practice doesn't mean it's the right practice. Intrusive DRM and on-disk DLC are common but, aren't generally viewed as right.

**Slime Slayer** · 09-16-2011, 07:09 PM

Sony's next system update takes away your rights:

"Sony has been hit with a number of class-action lawsuits since the launch of the PlayStation 3, mostly due to the decision to retroactively remove Linux support from the console and losing the data of users due to questionable security practices. Sony has another solution to this problem beyond beefing up security (and it's not retaining the features you paid for): if you accept the next mandatory system update, you sign away your ability to take part in a class-action lawsuit. The only option left for consumers if they agree is binding individual arbitration."

Mandatory PS3 update removes right to join in a class-action lawsuit

**Tails** · 09-16-2011, 07:19 PM

How awesome. -.-

**Dudebro** · 09-16-2011, 07:23 PM

Not surprised at all. Sony has always acted shady and had their own corporate interests in mind.

**Slime Slayer** · 09-16-2011, 07:46 PM

Lol watch this turn into a class action lawsuit, seriously is this even legal for them to do?

**Dudebro** · 09-16-2011, 08:22 PM

I bet it's technically legal or else their lawyers would've told them to drop it. But they probably just figured this would slip under the radar and keep them from getting sued for their own screw ups yet again. Maybe now people will realize how shady and selfish this company is.

**Slime Slayer** · 09-16-2011, 08:40 PM

My issue is that you can't just sell someone a product, and then 6 months later tell them they can't use it anymore unless they agree to a new stipulation. That can't be legal.

**Dudebro** · 09-16-2011, 08:51 PM

It's legal if people agree to the terms. They have the option to not update. I agree it's wrong and messed up but legally I think they can do it.

**Mareeps** · 09-16-2011, 09:12 PM

Well I guess its a good thing I didn't buy my ps3. I'm pretty sure license agreements are null and void if you have to buy the item and then they tell you about the agreement.

**Slime Slayer** · 09-16-2011, 09:37 PM

The problem is that a lot of gamers bought the product to play online, if they don't agree to the terms then they can no longer use the product. I can't see how consumer protection laws wouldn't cover this.

---------- Post added at 02:37 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:24 AM ----------

I don't really get it but I'm sure some of you do:

**Dudebro** · 09-17-2011, 05:24 PM

That's the problem SC, when you connect to their online service it's like private property. You don't own anything besides your console. It's like how MS can ban your system for life if you alter it, but only from their online service. They can't just brick the system since you own it.

I know it's devious and shady business tactics but like I said before this is not a surprise from Sony, they are like the poster child for soulless corporations. But if there's a backlash from customers they'll cave and spin some apology and most of their fans will eat it up and forget about it. Kinda like how most did after that giant case of compromised personal info. I know some crappy free games and a insulting free month of their premium service wouldn't make me forget.

**Demon-Mask** · 09-17-2011, 05:27 PM

Corporations are corporations, what do you expect. Nintendo is no better, Microsoft is no better. People just need to accept that corporations tend to not care about their consumers in the least bit.