I don't buy games used because I would rather have my $60 reward the developer for a great game than reward the retailer with $55 for just putting used goods on a shelf, but anti-consumer practices need to be punished. Here's my way of financially punishing companies that use anti-consumer practices such as this:
Take the cost of what they are charging for the online pass, double it, and subtract that amount from the highest price you are willing to pay for the game.
So if EA charges $10 for the online pass for KoA, then my highest price to buy Reckoning is now $40 instead of $60.
This kind of news really sours me on buying a game at launch, because if a company is willing to gut part of their game to make money, then what would stop the same company from filling the rest of the game with DLC hooks, offering gear that gives preorderers or DLC purchasers an edge, or skimping on a proper ending to be fleshed out as DLC? Even though I don't buy used games, doing something like this shows that the company is willing to put profit before player experience, which makes spending a full $60 on day one for their game a much dicier proposition for me.
I was amped for Arkham City, but their online pass soured me on buying it at the time, which led to me paying $60 for other games at the time and I ended up paying $25 for Arkham City as a result.
If enough of the people who normally purchase early and at full price did this for games with unnecessary online passes, publishers would get the message before too long.
