KoA: Reckoning - House of Valor Free DLC and More

[Couchpotato]

Sure…and used buyers don't deserve the freebies or perks that come with a new sale.

To say otherwise seems more like self entitlement.

I could care less about that and you know it. I was referring to used sales and company's bitching they deserve a slice of it. The title should be 38 Studios has attempted to justify the content being gated behind an online pass in Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning.

That content was cut out of the original anyway. Just like the new Batman game. A nice shining online pass with withhold content. Some of you on this site just accept everything the way it is. Just because the developer and publisher says so.

And if anyone thinks otherwise Im talking about the console versions we don't have used sales on the pc since most use steam are another form of drm nowadays. They killed it.

Its thinking like this that will allow Microsoft to block used games on there next console if the rumors are true. I'll stop there since obviously I'm in the minority on this site.

 

[turian]

i wait for the goty edition all dlc including

 

[Ball_Breaker]

What? You do realize that buying the game day 1 means you get this, right? Or are you planning on finding this game used somewhere on the day of release?

No, I'm planning to wait after six months or a year, and look for the "complete edition" or something like that, hoping that all DLCs are included (e.g. Fallout 3 GOTY edition).
And why on earth couldn't they add this House of Valor right from the start in the game, instead of releasing it as a free DLC?

 

[SpoonFULL]

And why on earth couldn't they add this House of Valor right from the start in the game, instead of releasing it as a free DLC?

To try and prevent/stop re-sale for consoles (but not for PC ofcourse).

 

[guenthar]

I won't be buying this day one either because of this. I wouldn't mind if they are doing that with new content but when they do that with content already in the game just to hurt the used market that is BS. Like Dhruin said above the people buying used are not entitled to the freebies and perks you get from buying new but you are entitled to having the full game. The person who originally bought the game paid full price and either didn't like it or played it until they didn't want it anymore (which usually by that time the game has come down in price and the company has made much of what they will) and traded it in or sold it.

 

[rune_74]

I don't think you understood what drhuin said at all. If you buy the game new, you get some perks. If you don't, you don't. It isn't some way to get you with dl content....

 

[Ithilien]

I firmly believe the developer or publishers don't deserve anything on a used product. It was bought and sold at full price already. Both already got a share. They don't deserve more on a resale.

To say otherwise seems more like self entitlement.

When you reduce the value of a used product you also reduce the value of a new one (as it will not have the same resale value).

 

[you]

EA's implementation of this crap is particularly poor; i.e, when they take their servers down or their servers crash your 'free' missing piece of the game no longer loads.
-
This is one of the reason I *HATE* EA's DLC. I remember numerous times playing dragon age; where their crappy service failed.
-

 

[darkling]

Online passes are bullshit, but PC users have had online registration and unique non-transferable CD keys for years and I guess I've gotten used to it. This kind of thing is only new in the world of consoles. Any time you've entered a CD key in a game, you've done this. Since the 90's. There hasn't been a viable used PC games market for over a decade because of this.

 

[TheMadGamer]

When you reduce the value of a used product you also reduce the value of a new one (as it will not have the same resale value).

That's a reality publishers have to live with - just like I have to live with the fact that the instant I drive a brand new car off the dealer's lot it dramatically depreciates. Publishers have no actual entitlement to a second bite at the apple for a product that was sold as new to a customer and is subsequently resold by that customer.

This was a non-issue when resales were mostly the purview of garage sales and E-bay. But now that some retailers have built a successful business model for used game sales, it seems to have caught the attention of EA and probably many other publishers who are working furiously to find ways to undermine this effort in favor of themselves - which I guess is to be expected but ends up trampling on everyone else.

It's stuff like this that bothers me so much about EA that keeps me from purchasing more of their products.

 

[Ithilien]

This was a non-issue when resales were mostly the purview of garage sales and E-bay. But now that some retailers have built a successful business model for used game sales, it seems to have caught the attention of EA and probably many other publishers who are working furiously to find ways to undermine this effort in favor of themselves - which I guess is to be expected but ends up trampling on everyone else.

To be expected, perhaps, but it shouldn't be accepted.

When I buy myself a new phone, as I do once or twice every year, I give my previous one to my girlfiend, dad, mum, kid etc. This way I don't feel like I'm throwing away money. It's a bit similar with games (I've bought a couple of consoles that I've put in my parents house, and they are used whenever myself or my brother are on holiday there).

There are a few games that I refuse to play because of schemes like this, though most often it's because of DLC-schemes that make you feel like you'll never get the whole product. If I haven't pre-ordered, I'll always know I will get an inferior product, so why should I buy it?

This is why I like Bethesda, whilst I hate Bioware; Bethesda never lock away content, and if you disagree with their initial pricing point it will always be possible to get it at a later date.

I wouldn't be so annoyed with Bioware if it wasn't for the fact that I love most of their games, but they've gone too far with everything they've done after DA:O.

 

[Couchpotato]

I don't think you understood what drhuin said at all. If you buy the game new, you get some perks. If you don't, you don't. It isn't some way to get you with dl content….

I do. I was talking about used games and developers. He twisted my comment.

That's a reality publishers have to live with - just like I have to live with the fact that the instant I drive a brand new car off the dealer's lot it dramatically depreciates. Publishers have no actual entitlement to a second bite at the apple for a product that was sold as new to a customer and is subsequently resold by that customer.

This was a non-issue when resales were mostly the purview of garage sales and E-bay. But now that some retailers have built a successful business model for used game sales, it seems to have caught the attention of EA and probably many other publishers who are working furiously to find ways to undermine this effort in favor of themselves - which I guess is to be expected but ends up trampling on everyone else.

It's stuff like this that bothers me so much about EA that keeps me from purchasing more of their products.

Thank you someone who also see's what I'm trying to say. All I want is the full game without used sale restrictions with an online pass that keeps original game content hostage.

I mean gasp how dare someone buy a game used for $30 instead of paying $60 for the overpriced console title. Its a shock people will buy something when its cheaper isn't?

I never buy a new used game at gamestop I rather buy off amazon or another online seller. There usually alot cheaper than gamestop.

 

[Dhruin]

I could care less about that and you know it. I was referring to used sales and company's bitching they deserve a slice of it. The title should be 38 Studios has attempted to justify the content being gated behind an online pass in Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning.

No, I don't know it. In fact, I often have no idea what you are saying and our positions are so far apart, there's no way I could guess what the hell you mean.

Since 38 Studios has barely commented on this and certainly haven't "bitched" about it (that I am aware of), I'm still not sure. You mean you hate this type of DLC and you assume 38 Studios were bitching about their share? It's your call on the first and you're completely wrong on the second.

That content was cut out of the original anyway. Just like the new Batman game. A nice shining online pass with withhold content. Some of you on this site just accept everything the way it is. Just because the developer and publisher says so.

If I buy it new, what do I care? I get the content. If I buy it used, factor the DLC into the price you are willing to pay then go buy the DLC pack or bask in the glory of saving a couple of bucks.

I do. I was talking about used games and developers. He twisted my comment.

I didn't even quote you originally, so it's a bit hard to twist your words.

 

[Fantasm]

Arguments in favor of the current used game market, where Gamestop currently banks 100% of the profits from used games, usually falls into an idelogical battle about ownership, free markets, etc. I prefer to use common sense, and common sense tells me that there is no other market like AAA video games, where all of the following is true:

* Product development requires millions of dollars up-front, with dozens or hundreds of talented, highly-trained people working over the course of several years.
* The end result is a product where 100% of the enjoyment can be achieved in 50-100 hours (if we're lucky), usually over the course of a month or two, after which the product's value to that person has decreased exponentially.
* The difference to the end-user between the new and used versions of a product is negligable.

Name one other product that deals with these realities of a massive development effort and cost, coupled with a rapid depreciation in value to the end-user, and negligable difference between new and used versions. The car analogy falls apart, because the user will continue to derive value from that car for as long as he owns it, and there is a tangible difference between a new car and one that has been driven 50,000 miles. Not so with games. This is precisely why the used game market is the only one to grow so large that entire national franchises are built around the buying and selling of used video games.

Creating quality games today is already a financial struggle, and I see no harm in developers/publishers trying to get a piece of the cut from everybody that plays their game by adding incentives to buy the games new, and requiring used buyers to pay a little extra to get the exact same enjoyment as somebody who bought new (and btw, the total cost of the used game plus the day 1 DLC will still be less than the new cost, so everybody still wins).

Again, it just seems like common sense to me...

 

[Couchpotato]

Fine whatever you all win. I learn something everyday on the internet and its always not good. Lesson of the day people are sheep and always support the dev or publisher. Good Day I'm taking a break from this site.

The sheeple clause:

Anyone who see's, or is shown the obvious, and still denies the facts or realities when they are clearly standing before their eyes results in falling under said sheeple clause in article 1.

 

[rune_74]

Actually if you look at it from a publisher viewpoint it is a pretty good idea, and for the consumer it is a better then locking the software to one device and n ot allowing resales. This way, you still can sell it, but it also allows the Publisher to get back some money from that deal(although, you don't have to have it). As a new game purchaser it has zero effect on you, if your buying used just have to pay for it if you want it.

 

[SpoonFULL]

EA and any organisation in the world will always work and find ways to maximise their profits, so I don't think that it is an issue of us following what these organisations decitate. This has been since the beginning of time, and we have the choice of paying more for the additional content when webuy used games or not (or not buy the game at all in the first place).

I think that the real issue will be with re-sellers and their pricing policy (I am happy for them to fight amongst each other and with EA - he said!)

 

[DeepO]

It lowers the value of the product.

 

[sakichop]

I don't always side with dev's . I do on this one though. They are a company and their #1 goal is profit. If they see second hand sales as a threat to their profits then they are 100% entitled to combat it any way they know how.

Just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong.

If understanding basic business economics makes someone a sheep then so be it.

 

[bjon045]

Pretty lame and greedy if you ask me. If you buy something you should be able to sell it with everything intact. That is a basic fundamental of how trade works and how the second hand market enables less wealthy buyers to partake. So now the poor sods who can't afford a new copy also don't get the full game...

Just because it makes a business more money doesn't make it right.