Kingdoms of Amalur's "Online Pass" continues a slippery slope f

[shakey]

New games are $59.99, and now they don't come with everything, and require paying for additional DLC to have "the full package". I'd say inflation is taken care of, and if anything, we are easily paying a little more now for games than we did ever before.....

[mattmatik]

New games are $59.99, and now they don't come with everything, and require paying for additional DLC to have "the full package". I'd say inflation is taken care of, and if anything, we are easily paying a little more now for games than we did ever before.....

How do you define what "everything" is, though? You don't have to buy anything beyond the game purchase to complete a game - personally, I can't think of any game where you had to pay to see the ending (excluding MMOs).

[shakey]

How do you define what "everything" is, though? You don't have to buy anything beyond the game purchase to complete a game - personally, I can't think of any game where you had to pay to see the ending (excluding MMOs).

Batman Ark City... If you didn't preorder, you don't get the catwoman playthrough which they made with the game.

A lot of games come out with day 1 DLC or items that if you didn't "preorder" the game , you have to then pay for. Those are made during the production, and used as leverage to get more money out of the initial sale.

Capcom seems to literally hold characters and small things hostage for time, only to release them for DLC, and then to just release a whole new but same game. They did it with characters, skin colors, and other small changes in fighting games.

Many companies do this. They have already the items, maps, or whatever before the game is released, but then they say you must either preorder or pay extra later to get the items, which really should just come with the game. That is what a "full package" is.

If you think just getting to see an ending to a game is a compelte experience, you are missing out on other elements.

[spaceelf]

Batman Ark City... If you didn't preorder, you don't get the catwoman playthrough which they made with the game.

A lot of games come out with day 1 DLC or items that if you didn't "preorder" the game , you have to then pay for. Those are made during the production, and used as leverage to get more money out of the initial sale.

Capcom seems to literally hold characters and small things hostage for time, only to release them for DLC, and then to just release a whole new but same game. They did it with characters, skin colors, and other small changes in fighting games.

Many companies do this. They have already the items, maps, or whatever before the game is released, but then they say you must either preorder or pay extra later to get the items, which really should just come with the game. That is what a "full package" is.

If you think just getting to see an ending to a game is a compelte experience, you are missing out on other elements.

Some do, most don't. Preorder bonuses usually aren't that big a deal to miss out on. As for DLC, I'd far rather have new characters in DLC than have to buy an entirely new version of a game every six months to get (yay fighting games! sigh.)

Also, Catwoman comes with all new copies, not preorder only. They did have a problem with missing codes in some boxes though.

[HawkMan]

New games are $59.99, and now they don't come with everything, and require paying for additional DLC to have "the full package". I'd say inflation is taken care of, and if anything, we are easily paying a little more now for games than we did ever before.....

Bah, a mere $60. And you never pay that, buy at a big chain around release and most games have a launch sale of 40.

And games used to be 70 and 80. And those 70 was worth relatively more than 70 today

[Emn1ty]

That IS inflation. And $50 today is a far smaller part of anyones paycheck than it was in 2000, much less 1990. Recession or not.

No, $50 today is equivalent because even if the monetary value is less, people have less money overall. I'm sure that people are far more stingy with their gaming purchases these days (most if not all waiting for sales on Steam or at Gamestop).

[shakey]

Bah, a mere $60. And you never pay that, buy at a big chain around release and most games have a launch sale of 40.

And games used to be 70 and 80. And those 70 was worth relatively more than 70 today

Dude, you got it backwards. Games used to be 49.99. Now they are 59.99. I just got back from buying xiii2... 59.99 at target and gamestop. No game has a launch of 40 unless its a utter trash game.

There were a few, maybe like 2 games I can remember that were 59.99 for snes and such, which were street fighter and strider. The rest were always 39.99 to 49.99. Games now don't cost too much more, if at all, but they do get more when DLC is added to it.

[trag3dy]

Dude, you got it backwards. Games used to be 49.99. Now they are 59.99. I just got back from buying xiii2... 59.99 at target and gamestop. No game has a launch of 40 unless its a utter trash game.

There were a few, maybe like 2 games I can remember that were 59.99 for snes and such, which were street fighter and strider. The rest were always 39.99 to 49.99. Games now don't cost too much more, if at all, but they do get more when DLC is added to it.

He's talking about about games for systems like nes and such. Those games used to be really expensive back in the day. And not all games that launch at $40 are trash, I can think of two... Dawn of War II: Retribution was $30, and Darksiders for the pc was $40. Granted the pc version of Darksiders came out like a year after the console version, but it's still a really good game.

[HawkMan]

No, $50 today is equivalent because even if the monetary value is less, people have less money overall. I'm sure that people are far more stingy with their gaming purchases these days (most if not all waiting for sales on Steam or at Gamestop).

No, it's not. Look up something called the consumer price index. Then national Norwegian statistical beaurau has a calculator for it online, letting you check how much a price of 60 bucks back in any other time would be today. That's what's used for the price examples earlier in this thread.

People's paychecks used to be nearly half of what they are today. In fact if ou go back to the 80 they pretty much were. There's a lot more only out there today than it was. This whole recession is made up anyway. It's scaremongering, it's not alf as bad as the government wants you to believe it is.

Dude, you got it backwards. Games used to be 49.99. Now they are 59.99. I just got back from buying xiii2... 59.99 at target and gamestop. No game has a launch of 40 unless its a utter trash game.

There were a few, maybe like 2 games I can remember that were 59.99 for snes and such, which were street fighter and strider. The rest were always 39.99 to 49.99. Games now don't cost too much more, if at all, but they do get more when DLC is added to it.

Several of the big retailers over here all tend to release games at 399 and 499 as get people in the door prices, prices they lose money on. These generally only last for at most a week after launch, and only for the big triple A games. I believe you'll fine that 399NOK is below 40 as well.

Case in point

http://www.elkjop.no/product/spill-og-konsoll/spill-xbox-360/X360ME3/mass-effect-3-x360

Btw, this chain is owned by dixons.

[S00N3R FR3AK]

Batman Ark City... If you didn't preorder, you don't get the catwoman playthrough which they made with the game.

A lot of games come out with day 1 DLC or items that if you didn't "preorder" the game , you have to then pay for. Those are made during the production, and used as leverage to get more money out of the initial sale.

Capcom seems to literally hold characters and small things hostage for time, only to release them for DLC, and then to just release a whole new but same game. They did it with characters, skin colors, and other small changes in fighting games.

Many companies do this. They have already the items, maps, or whatever before the game is released, but then they say you must either preorder or pay extra later to get the items, which really should just come with the game. That is what a "full package" is.

If you think just getting to see an ending to a game is a compelte experience, you are missing out on other elements.

Catwomen was just meh and not needed for the core game, Gamestop also have the code with every used game sold as well.

[mattmatik]

Batman Ark City... If you didn't preorder, you don't get the catwoman playthrough which they made with the game.

A lot of games come out with day 1 DLC or items that if you didn't "preorder" the game , you have to then pay for. Those are made during the production, and used as leverage to get more money out of the initial sale.

Capcom seems to literally hold characters and small things hostage for time, only to release them for DLC, and then to just release a whole new but same game. They did it with characters, skin colors, and other small changes in fighting games.

Many companies do this. They have already the items, maps, or whatever before the game is released, but then they say you must either preorder or pay extra later to get the items, which really should just come with the game. That is what a "full package" is.

If you think just getting to see an ending to a game is a compelte experience, you are missing out on other elements.

Bah, that Catwoman stuff is way overrated and is the whipping boy for way too many people. Her "storyline" was hardly influential on the main game itself, it was just a fun breather from Batman.

Now, I do agree, when it comes to the stuff Capcom does, that is when it gets ridiculous. And for sure we have had instances where DLC has been abused (Horse Armor always being the prime culprit). But yes, if I can play from beginning to end without gimmicky DLC, then I am fine with it. Until developers/publishers require us to buy the ending to games...

[Emn1ty]

No, it's not. Look up something called the consumer price index. Then national Norwegian statistical beaurau has a calculator for it online, letting you check how much a price of 60 bucks back in any other time would be today. That's what's used for the price examples earlier in this thread.

People's paychecks used to be nearly half of what they are today. In fact if ou go back to the 80 they pretty much were. There's a lot more only out there today than it was. This whole recession is made up anyway. It's scaremongering, it's not alf as bad as the government wants you to believe it is.

Again, not my point. I'm not trying to compare paychecks then to now. I'm comparing the relative difference between how much people are making now compared to then. There was no recession in past 30 years. There are less people in the market as well as less willing to spend money on games. The market now isn't the hardcore enthusiast who will drop a large percentage of their income on gaming, hence why gamers are less likely to spend $60 of their $600 check (if you work a part-time 30h week which I doubt most people are doing, then you factor in rent/taxes and bills, etc.). That's 10% of their income for those two weeks. Getting a game every month would be almost $800. Thats a lot. Especially when most people in the country aren't making more than $20-$30k a year.

[HawkMan]

Again, not my point. I'm not trying to compare paychecks then to now. I'm comparing the relative difference between how much people are making now compared to then. There was no recession in past 30 years. There are less people in the market as well as less willing to spend money on games. The market now isn't the hardcore enthusiast who will drop a large percentage of their income on gaming, hence why gamers are less likely to spend $60 of their $600 check (if you work a part-time 30h week which I doubt most people are doing, then you factor in rent/taxes and bills, etc.). That's 10% of their income for those two weeks. Getting a game every month would be almost $800. Thats a lot. Especially when most people in the country aren't making more than $20-$30k a year.

So you're arguing something and you have no clue what you're arguing about.

what you're talking about IS inflation and paycheck size is at the very core of it. People have a lot more money today than they did 10 years ago, 10 years ago they had a lot more money than 20 years ago. paychecks go up. and prizes go up to follow. except prizes don't allways go up as much, in fact electronics have gone down. and games have gone down in prize. even so, 10 dollars was worth more 10 years ago than they are today.

[playXray]

So you're arguing something and you have no clue what you're arguing about.

what you're talking about IS inflation and paycheck size is at the very core of it. People have a lot more money today than they did 10 years ago, 10 years ago they had a lot more money than 20 years ago. paychecks go up. and prizes go up to follow. except prizes don't allways go up as much, in fact electronics have gone down. and games have gone down in prize. even so, 10 dollars was worth more 10 years ago than they are today.

*Prices*, not *prizes* lol. :) Anyway, I agree with you, games are much cheaper these days than they were 10-15 years ago - I know someone who paid ?70 for Turok on the N64, which required you to buy some "save pak" or something. I paid ?50 for Resident Evil 2 myself!!! But on top of that, what you say is totally right - even if games were ?50 today, they'd still be cheaper in real terms than they were 10 years ago because of inflation.

[aguyuno]

The main argument FOR this (bull****) move on EA's part (and really, since when are we in the habit of defending EA?) seems to be that "Oh, it's a consumable, so that's why they need to get a return". Let me ask you this.

Say my friend has a copy of Monopoly (the board game) I really want. It has all the pieces still and he doesn't use it. I pay him, what, let's say 10 bucks for it. I'm sorry, should I now have to call up Parker Brothers or Hasbro just to get the online pass needed so that I can play as the Shoe, or use chance cards? Because we have a word for that - retarded.

The second argument I keep reading is that they need to do it to avoid bankruptcy (also nonsense) - that 10,000 copies might be bought but 100,000 people might play it. It's EA games, people. Bankruptcy isn't in their future - they're huge, and will remain huge just as long as they continue to regurgitate sequel after sequel to games NO ONE ever wanted to see sequels to. If the people using this online pass tactic were an indie company, like Twisted Pixel or something, I'd be ALL for it. Why? Because I can understand that worry of theirs, with them constantly probably fearing being victims of a hostile take over by EgAy or Hacktivision. But there's a big difference. Two, actually.

1) Twisted Pixel is a small company, and so bankruptcy IS a fear of theirs.

2) Twisted Pixel only sells games in the form of downloaded directly onto your xbox, because they're not idiots and know how to handle this industry.

[spaceelf]

The main argument FOR this (bull****) move on EA's part (and really, since when are we in the habit of defending EA?) seems to be that "Oh, it's a consumable, so that's why they need to get a return". Let me ask you this.

Say my friend has a copy of Monopoly (the board game) I really want. It has all the pieces still and he doesn't use it. I pay him, what, let's say 10 bucks for it. I'm sorry, should I now have to call up Parker Brothers or Hasbro just to get the online pass needed so that I can play as the Shoe, or use chance cards? Because we have a word for that - retarded.

The second argument I keep reading is that they need to do it to avoid bankruptcy (also nonsense) - that 10,000 copies might be bought but 100,000 people might play it. It's EA games, people. Bankruptcy isn't in their future - they're huge, and will remain huge just as long as they continue to regurgitate sequel after sequel to games NO ONE ever wanted to see sequels to. If the people using this online pass tactic were an indie company, like Twisted Pixel or something, I'd be ALL for it. Why? Because I can understand that worry of theirs, with them constantly probably fearing being victims of a hostile take over by EgAy or Hacktivision. But there's a big difference. Two, actually1) Twisted Pixel is a small company, and so bankruptcy IS a fear of theirs.

2) Twisted Pixel only sells games in the form of downloaded directly onto your xbox, because they're not idiots and know how to handle this industry.

EA is only serving Amalur through its EA Partners program, meaning they did not fund the game. Big Huge funded it along with 38 Studios or whatever.

Monopoly didn't take tens of millions to create.

Also, Twisted Pixel created The Gunstringer, their first retail title, and was recently acquired by Microsoft Studios.

[shakey]

No, it's not. Look up something called the consumer price index. Then national Norwegian statistical beaurau has a calculator for it online, letting you check how much a price of 60 bucks back in any other time would be today. That's what's used for the price examples earlier in this thread.

People's paychecks used to be nearly half of what they are today. In fact if ou go back to the 80 they pretty much were. There's a lot more only out there today than it was. This whole recession is made up anyway. It's scaremongering, it's not alf as bad as the government wants you to believe it is.

Several of the big retailers over here all tend to release games at 399 and 499 as get people in the door prices, prices they lose money on. These generally only last for at most a week after launch, and only for the big triple A games. I believe you'll fine that 399NOK is below 40 as well.

Case in point

http://www.elkjop.no...s-effect-3-x360

Btw, this chain is owned by dixons.

Norway is hardly a justification and a way to use as world wide prices dude. If you are going to be "quoting" prices, it would probably be better to use a place with a much bigger market. In America, games are released at $59.99. If we are going to base all statistics on Norway, then everything is going to be off.... That would be like me living in Zimbabwe and saying that all prices for games are in the trillions.... open your views and see outside of your country for such debates and discussions. It will help a lot more instead of trying to force your little nations ways as what the rest of the world follows, as Norway is hardly to be held as a representation of statistics for this discussion.

[HawkMan]

Norway is hardly a justification and a way to use as world wide prices dude. If you are going to be "quoting" prices, it would probably be better to use a place with a much bigger market. In America, games are released at $59.99. If we are going to base all statistics on Norway, then everything is going to be off.... That would be like me living in Zimbabwe and saying that all prices for games are in the trillions.... open your views and see outside of your country for such debates and discussions. It will help a lot more instead of trying to force your little nations ways as what the rest of the world follows, as Norway is hardly to be held as a representation of statistics for this discussion.

And the big chains do intro prices on big time products like this everywhere, not just Norway. As I said, this chain is a dixons chain. They and another chain tend to swap what games they do losses on, not all games will launch at loss prices but most will for a week.

Of course since most of you pre order these big games for a much smaller rebate and consider it beneath yourself to visit the big chains, it wouldn't matter anyway. I figure this chain would be more or less our wallmart.

[shakey]

And the big chains do intro prices on big time products like this everywhere, not just Norway. As I said, this chain is a dixons chain. They and another chain tend to swap what games they do losses on, not all games will launch at loss prices but most will for a week.

Of course since most of you pre order these big games for a much smaller rebate and consider it beneath yourself to visit the big chains, it wouldn't matter anyway. I figure this chain would be more or less our wallmart.

Not at all. Look up stores in America. Their prices all start at 59.99 for all new games. Even if you pre-order, you still pay that amount. The only time a game is released under that price, is if it is a small game, one that had horride reviews and won't sell well by reception, or if it is just a type of expansion.

Now, that's not to say some stores will throw deals out, with $10 dollar gift cards or something to get it to sell, but most stores still start new releases at the 59.99 mark in the states.

I can't talk for Europe. But in America, games have become a little more expensive.

http://www.walmart.com/browse/Games/_/N-91cgZ1yzttzlZaqur?_refineresult=true&ic=32_0&path=0%3A2636&pref_store=100&ref=421648+4292810769+501363&tab_value=All&povid=cat413799-env201251-moduleA070711-lLinkLHNShopWhatsNew1NewReleases

[Emn1ty]

So you're arguing something and you have no clue what you're arguing about.

what you're talking about IS inflation and paycheck size is at the very core of it. People have a lot more money today than they did 10 years ago, 10 years ago they had a lot more money than 20 years ago. paychecks go up. and prizes go up to follow. except prizes don't allways go up as much, in fact electronics have gone down. and games have gone down in prize. even so, 10 dollars was worth more 10 years ago than they are today.

There are more taxes and expenditures today than there were 10 years ago. It isn't as simple as comparing Check A to Check B. And most people today would be lucky to have a 30h part time job anywhere. I'm sure most people get around 15-20hours a week.

[spaceelf]

Not at all. Look up stores in America. Their prices all start at 59.99 for all new games. Even if you pre-order, you still pay that amount. The only time a game is released under that price, is if it is a small game, one that had horride reviews and won't sell well by reception, or if it is just a type of expansion.

Now, that's not to say some stores will throw deals out, with $10 dollar gift cards or something to get it to sell, but most stores still start new releases at the 59.99 mark in the states.

I can't talk for Europe. But in America, games have become a little more expensive.

http://www.walmart.c...New1NewReleases

Worst Buy used to have $10 off release week. I can't say if they still do that.

IMO, gaming is only more expensive if you NEED it on release day. Between digital sales and Amazon prices have been awesome lately.

[shakey]

Worst Buy used to have $10 off release week. I can't say if they still do that.

IMO, gaming is only more expensive if you NEED it on release day. Between digital sales and Amazon prices have been awesome lately.

http://www.amazon.co...&pf_rd_i=468642

http://www.amazon.co...VXQJ2ZM6ESBH4T8

http://www.amazon.co...VXQJ2ZM6ESBH4T8

New releases on Amazon are still 59.99.... The "deals" are few and far inbetween. Most games are at the regular price they have been for quite some time with this generation of consoles... with some now starting to hit the $65 mark.

And avid gamers don't want to have to wait 3 to 4 weeks just for a game to drop maybe 10 bucks. If it continues to sell well, it wont drop for longer than that. Only the low rated games drop quickly. But if it is a good game, it will stay at that price for some time.

[HawkMan]

There are more taxes and expenditures today than there were 10 years ago. It isn't as simple as comparing Check A to Check B. And most people today would be lucky to have a 30h part time job anywhere. I'm sure most people get around 15-20hours a week.

I see you still don't understand inflation and consumer price indexes.

Let's just put it this way. People a lot smarter than you or me, have calculated this and found that 10 dollars today is worth less than it was 10 years ago. Whatever you say can't change that, your faulty arguments that don't hold any real water can't fight facts.

http://www.amazon.co...&pf_rd_i=468642

http://www.amazon.co...VXQJ2ZM6ESBH4T8

http://www.amazon.co...VXQJ2ZM6ESBH4T8

New releases on Amazon are still 59.99.... The "deals" are few and far inbetween. Most games are at the regular price they have been for quite some time with this generation of consoles... with some now starting to hit the $65 mark.

And avid gamers don't want to have to wait 3 to 4 weeks just for a game to drop maybe 10 bucks. If it continues to sell well, it wont drop for longer than that. Only the low rated games drop quickly. But if it is a good game, it will stay at that price for some time.

Amazon doesn't matter, ony brick and mortar stores hold loss sales to lure people into the store to buy other things. Amazon and online retailers don't do that.

[shakey]

I see you still don't understand inflation and consumer price indexes.

Let's just put it this way. People a lot smarter than you or me, have calculated this and found that 10 dollars today is worth less than it was 10 years ago. Whatever you say can't change that, your faulty arguments that don't hold any real water can't fight facts.

Amazon doesn't matter, ony brick and mortar stores hold loss sales to lure people into the store to buy other things. Amazon and online retailers don't do that.

Well, then don't bring online prices into this.

You guys keep saying it is not 59.99. I am only proving that they are. People can make up whatever they want to try and pass it off as fact when they provide no proof and only their hearsay. I am brining actual proof to these discussions. And my proof is for a much larger audience than just the region of Norway; since our discussion involve people from more areas than just that. But all prices hold relevance really, especially when they are all showing the exact thing I have been stating.

[HawkMan]

I didn't bring online prices into it. I talked about regular prices. Elkj?p/Dixons however happen to have unified online and store prices so when their stores have launch day sales, they do as well.

Oh and unlike you, I DID provide proof.