Games We Love but Wish We Could Love Playing
9 hours 9 mins ago
EA is not the first company to cut something from used game buyers, but they are the first to cut out all of the online content. EA has cut the online access from used game buyers forcing them to pay 10 bucks for online content.
Video game producers have long been trying to find a way to cut out the pre-owned game buying that has hurt their total profits, and it seems that EA may have found a way to get at gamers wallets.
Comments
Really?
Wow
Just another reason why EA can go *bleep* themselves.
Or car manufacturers? Is it ok for them to charge a fee for a used car when the original transaction was completed, on a independent sale to a new party?
Its the same crap with the exact same faulty logic. If you purchase something, you should be allowed to dispose of it how you see fit. Any other cavaets they put onto it shows how money-hungry they really are. It is Greed, plain and simple. And no, its not piracy or even close to it. The person selling a used game usually doesn't make copies and sell it to a whole bunch of places. They sell their license to use it to another, which is completely and utterly legal. Its getting to the point where common people don't have any rights and its only the corporations that do. When did a fictious entity (because corporations have TIN's) become more important than man?
Are you high? Books don't take millions of dollars to make, other than the actual production costs, which are easily made up at retail.
I would also like to point out your faulty logic about how artists are paid... Any artist is paid by a publisher, who often has their product (in the case of video games) licensed as property of the corporation. This is how it works: when you work for a company, anything you produce belongs to them. While this is not true for books as much, the result is the same. A publisher then sells the product to retail outlets, which inflate the price to make their MARGIN (i.e. what consumers pay). So, when you say I have a $20 book, you need to remove the markup from the retail store to find out what the PUBLISHER takes. And then, factor in that the artist gets so much of a PERCENTAGE of what the publisher takes.
So, in actuality, the artist should really be pissed at the PUBLISHER for taking such a large cut of the artists work.
Besides, the point is I bought a copy of the game that was licensed. Copyright law states that consumers are free to transfer licenses for consideration to other parties. This is basically saying that I only rent the license and its only by the good graces of the company that I get the privilege to play their game while I utilize the disk. But, it really is me renting it and not having a full copy.
However, the main point is that corporations are more important than man in this scenario. This is the antithesis of freedom and law. It is rule by unimpeachable sources; that is a very dangerous thing to a free and independent society.
If someone came along and killed six babies, that wouldn't change the fact I'm a baby killing ass hole.
Nice to see how suckered some people are though :\
I for one don't really care if you kill a baby or not as long as its not mine *sticking with the metaphor, of course*
They should've done the same here. Thankfully though I don't play EA Sports games....if it stops there anyways.
Good point. Those jokers need to get a life or start making their own damn games.
This news story is archived and is closed to comments now.