• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Dark Souls 3 (PC) £19.80 @cdkeys.com

How to easily spot most 'grey' resellers:
Do they sell Battle.net keys? If yes they are unauthorised.
Amazon grey market seller confirmed

CpcZD8i.png


:p
 

Mutagenic

Permanent Junior Member
Johnny Come Latelys complaining about the deal being dead. Tough. If you wanted the deal so bad, you could have gotten it for the several days it was up :)

BernardoOne: Where do you get the cheap keys you sell?
You shouldn't have bumped this thread. It's easy to understand that, surely.
 

Nev

Banned
I wouldn't say the amount of owners equals the amount of people who are doing co-op or PvP. When I tried getting into the multiplayer components of DS1 last year, it was a godforsaken graveyard on PC. Anor Londo was the only place where I'd get invaded once or twice or find some summon signs, whereas on PS3 (and I imagine X360 as well) the online player base seems to be a lot more active and more importantly, spread out throughout the game.

I find it hard to believe that there are more people doing co-op/PvP on PS3/360 than on PC tbh. Communities tend to last longer on PC whereas online console games tend to fade out because players go for the next thing in a few months, not to mention the game is not on current gen systems. If anything, the community is probably going to last for longer on PC like it usually is in every online game that isn't CoD or Battlefield. Dedicated players are on PC, and those are the ones who keep a community alive.
 
They aren't authorised by the publishers. This is literally what the term means.
CDKeys are not authorised by the publishers.


Geeze man, that was hard!
Okay. So using your logic, should the resell of 2nd hand/preowned games be categorised the same way?

Is the only legitimate sale one that is made directly to the publisher?
 

Bboy AJ

My dog was murdered by a 3.5mm audio port and I will not rest until the standard is dead
You shouldn't have bumped this thread. It's easy to understand that, surely.
Not really, no. Lots of us who were here bought the key. Here I am, in that big group, wondering if anyone in our big group got their key or when to expect it.

It's easier to not understand the complainers.
 

MUnited83

For you.
Okay. So using your logic, should the resell of 2nd hand/preowned games be categorised the same way?

Is the only legitimate sale one that is made directly to the publisher?

It's not about "my logic". The words grey/unauthorised have a very well defined meaning, a meaning that fits cdkeys business. There's nothing to discuss here.
 
Amazon grey market seller confirmed

CpcZD8i.png


:p

Time card != game key. The poster that you quoted meant a retailer that just sells the serial key of games. and probably even time cards. Ultimately, the tell-tale sign is that a key will be sent to you via email instead of you receiving a tangible object with the key and possible other things.
 

Bboy AJ

My dog was murdered by a 3.5mm audio port and I will not rest until the standard is dead
It's not about "my logic". The words grey/unauthorised have a very well defined meaning, a meaning that fits cdkeys business. There's nothing to discuss here.
Where do you get the keys you resell for less than retail?
 
It's not about "my logic". The words grey/unauthorised have a very well defined meaning, a meaning that fits cdkeys business. There's nothing to discuss here.
"Well defined meaning". You keep saying that.

You said:
CDKeys are not authorised by the publishers.
And I pre-emptively requested evidence of any reasoning you gave.

Please, if you are able to, back up this quote with evidence.
 

MUnited83

For you.
"Well defined meaning". You keep saying that.

You said:

And I pre-emptively requested evidence of any reasoning you gave.

Please, if you are able to, back up this quote with evidence.

They are not authorised by the publishers. Here you go. Feel free to comb through the list of authorised resellers that several publishers have posted in the past. Not about to link you since everything you want to do in this thread is arguing dumb semantics ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

Red Hood

Banned
I find it hard to believe that there are more people doing co-op/PvP on PS3/360 than on PC tbh. Communities tend to last longer on PC whereas online console games tend to fade out because players go for the next thing in a few months, not to mention the game is not on current gen systems. If anything, the community is probably going to last for longer on PC like it usually is in every online game that isn't CoD or Battlefield. Dedicated players are on PC, and those are the ones who keep a community alive.

With all due respect, but "finding it hard to believe" gives me the impression you haven't played Dark Souls on both (or all three) platforms to compare them, so why should I be discussing this with you?

Regardless, yes, we can see from Battlefront, for example, how communities last longer on PC. But even then it's apples and oranges, so I won't hold that against you. And "dedicated" players? (Dark) Souls is traditionally a console game series. Not only are the games practically unplayable with keyboard and mouse - which in a way should say enough - but the whole fan base began on consoles. So what does a shallow and meaningless word like "dedicated" even mean in your context? Did console players die out or did they migrate to PC? Also, ironically, I think your argument with "next thing in few months" applies more to PC than it does to consoles. There are mindbogglingly more games on PCs which means chances are higher people will play other games sooner.

But I digress. Unfortunately there's no hard data on the online player base either way, maybe I decided to get into multiplayer in a crap period, maybe the PC online base was, in fact, crap. I don't know, but Steam owners =/= active online players.
 
The thing is Bernardo, it's okay if you have a personal view that certain business practices are not to your liking. I'm okay with that. Genuinely (although CDKeys are not anywhere near in the same category as G2A).

What I do have a problem with is presenting personal opinion as fact. Statements such as:
CDkeys and G2A, for example, are definitely, objectively, 100% grey resellers.
and
This is not debatable.
and
Whether you are fine with that is subjective and up to you, but they are still grey/unauthorised resellers.
and
They aren't authorised by the publishers.
and
This is literally what the term means.
The words grey/unauthorised have a very well defined meaning, a meaning that fits cdkeys business. There's nothing to discuss here.
...do not become fact just because you present them as fact without supporting evidence.

(The bit in red by the way, is especially sneaky as you are the one who has arbitrarily decided that CDKeys business fits this mysterious 'well defined meaning')

Slapping a 'there's nothing to discuss' at the end is another especially telling offering that suggests that you aren't interested in supporting what you say with evidence.
 

MUnited83

For you.
With all due respect, but "finding it hard to believe" gives me the impression you haven't played Dark Souls on both (or all three) platforms to compare them, so why should I be discussing this with you?

Regardless, yes, we can see from Battlefront, for example, how communities last longer on PC. But even then it's apples and oranges, so I won't hold that against you. And "dedicated" players? (Dark) Souls is traditionally a console game series. Not only are the games practically unplayable with keyboard and mouse - which in a way should say enough - but the whole fan base began on consoles. So what does a shallow and meaningless word like "dedicated" even mean in your context? Did console players die out or did they migrate to PC? Also, ironically, I think your argument with "next thing in few months" applies more to PC than it does to consoles. There are mindbogglingly more games on PCs which means chances are higher people will play other games sooner.

But I digress. Unfortunately there's no hard data on the online player base either way, maybe I decided to get into multiplayer in a crap period, maybe the PC online base was, in fact, crap. I don't know, but Steam owners =/= active online players.

The only reason why DS1 online is crap on PC right now is because they fucked it majorly with the steamworks patch. Used to be just as active as consoles before (I would now, I played both PS3 and DS1 versions back to back).
Check DS2 to see how the online userbase without a bad patch murdering it. It's more active than both PS3 and PS4's versions.

The thing is Bernardo, it's okay if you have a personal view that certain business practices are not to your liking. I'm okay with that. Genuinely (although CDKeys are not anywhere near in the same category as G2A).

What I do have a problem with is presenting personal opinion as fact. Statements such as:
and

and

and

and


...do not become fact just because you present them as fact without supporting evidence.

(The bit in red by the way, is especially sneaky as you are the one who has arbitrarily decided that CDKeys business fits this mysterious 'well defined meaning')

Slapping a 'there's nothing to discuss' at the end is another especially telling offering that suggests that you aren't interested in supporting what you say with evidence.
There's quite a bit of evidence out there, feel free to search for it. Try to find them in literally any list that publishers have listed their authorised resellers in. Try to find them on Rebellion's list, the publisher that revoked keys sold from cdkeys that were quite literally sold out of the back of a truck. Feel free to search about all the stolen keys they sold from Elder Scrolls online that got revoked.
You got Google; use it. Not doing the legwork for someone that will only end up making circular discussions about semantics like it happens every time in these threads.
 

Red Hood

Banned
The only reason why DS1 online is crap on PC right now is because they fucked it majorly with the steamworks patch. Used to be just as active as consoles before (I would now, I played both PS3 and DS1 versions back to back).
Check DS2 to see how the online userbase without a bad patch murdering it. It's more active than both PS3 and PS4's versions.

Could be, I played it several months after it went to Steamworks and the co-op/PvP was far less active (bar some in Anor Londo and relatively high in the DLC areas) than on PS3.

However I can't speak for DS2, I've only played the PC version so I wouldn't have any other version to compare it with.
 
They are not authorised by the publishers. Here you go. Feel free to comb through the list of authorised resellers that several publishers have posted in the past. Not about to link you since everything you want to do in this thread is arguing dumb semantics ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Is my local independent shop, G Force, on Union Street in Glasgow (which has been in business for 25 years) on this list?

If they aren't, does that make them an unauthorised reseller?

(I think you forgot to hyperlink a list, but the general point I'm making is that such a list will inevitably miss a plethora of legal resellers and thus, not constitute a definitive list of illegal sources).

Publishers don't control the market. They receive a wholesale cost for the product that they release unto the market and after that...the normal laws and customs of trade apply.

Nintendo got slapped with a big fine a decade back for trying to constrain the market to 'authorised retailers. Ironically enough, unless a publisher decides that it only needs one storefront to sell its product (and the big name publishers know they stillrekay on the free market for most of its commerce, otherwise EA would ONLY allow its games on Origin; Sony would ONLY allow its games on PSN; Nintendo would ONLY allow its games on eShop etc)

...reselling is legal, whether publishers like it or not.
 

AHA-Lambda

Member
Jesus Christ, these threads are always a mess >_<

Buy from grey market seller at your own risk, there have been documented accounts, even here on gaf, of keys getting revoked. You run into no risk of this from the "authorised" sellers.

This isn't complicated.
 
There's quite a bit of evidence out there, feel free to search for it.
No, no, friend. You responded to me with certain claims. I asked nicely for evidence. I genuinely cannot find anything that supports your claims. If you believe strongly in the validity if what you are saying, you'll easily draw upon this 'quite a bit of evidence out there'. Otherwise...well, other readers of our exchange will be able to judge the robustness of our respective arguments.


Try to find them in literally any list that publishers have listed their authorised resellers in. Try to find them on Rebellion's list, the publisher that revoked keys sold from cdkeys that were quite literally sold out of the back of a truck.
'Quite literally sold out of the back of a truck'. Well that sounds like an exciting caper! I await your substantiation of this with great interest.

Feel free to search about all the stolen keys they sold from Elder Scrolls online that got revoked.
You got Google; use it. Not doing the legwork for someone that will only end up making circular discussions about semantics like it happens every time in these threads.[/QUOTE]
There's nothing circular or semantic about any of my posts in my thread. They have been direct, to the point, and too often I'm not getting a straight response.

The brief Google searching that I've done done indeed show revocation of license of some purchasers of Elder Scrolls Online...but not evidence that it was an illegitimate purchase. Further, the users I found seemed to have received refunds from their purchase point of origin.

A lot of the above seems to be people buying directly on Steam...but using a region changer or DNS. So ultimately, in this case, Bethesda seem to be taking advantage of the license nature of video game sales and enforcing an EULA in order to try and maximise revenue...
 

MUnited83

For you.
Could be, I played it several months after it went to Steamworks and the co-op/PvP was far less active (bar some in Anor Londo and relatively high in the DLC areas) than on PS3.

However I can't speak for DS2, I've only played the PC version so I wouldn't have any other version to compare it with.
Yeah, they absolutely killed the online with a bunch of weird decisions.
Is my local independent shop, G Force, on Union Street in Glasgow (which has been in business for 25 years) on this list?

If they aren't, does that make them an unauthorised reseller?

(I think you forgot to hyperlink a list, but the general point I'm making is that such a list will inevitably miss a plethora of legal resellers and thus, not constitute a definitive list of illegal sources).

Publishers don't control the market. They receive a wholesale cost for the product that they release unto the market and after that...the normal laws and customs of trade apply.

Nintendo got slapped with a big fine a decade back for trying to constrain the market to 'authorised retailers. Ironically enough, unless a publisher decides that it only needs one storefront to sell its product (and the big name publishers know they stillrekay on the free market for most of its commerce, otherwise EA would ONLY allow its games on Origin; Sony would ONLY allow its games on PSN; Nintendo would ONLY allow its games on eShop etc)

...reselling is legal, whether publishers like it or not.

Which is irrelevant because i never argued about the legality of them or said they are illegal? Doesn't stop them from being unauthorised still.

No, no, friend. You responded to me with certain claims. I asked nicely for evidence. I genuinely cannot find anything that supports your claims. If you believe strongly in the validity if what you are saying, you'll easily draw upon this 'quite a bit of evidence out there'. Otherwise...well, other readers of our exchange will be able to judge the robustness of our respective arguments.


'Quite literally sold out of the back of a truck'. Well that sounds like an exciting caper! I await your substantiation of this with great interest.

Feel free to search about all the stolen keys they sold from Elder Scrolls online that got revoked.
You got Google; use it. Not doing the legwork for someone that will only end up making circular discussions about semantics like it happens every time in these threads.
There's nothing circular or semantic about any of my posts in my thread. They have been direct, to the point, and too often I'm not getting a straight response.

The brief Google searching that I've done done indeed show revocation of license of some purchasers of Elder Scrolls Online...but not evidence that it was an illegitimate purchase. Further, the users I found seemed to have received refunds from their purchase point of origin.

A lot of the above seems to be people buying directly on Steam...but using a region changer or DNS. So ultimately, in this case, Bethesda seem to be taking advantage of the license nature of video game sales and enforcing an EULA in order to try and maximise revenue...[/QUOTE]

Lol, yeah, keys bought with stolen credit cards now aren't "illegitimate purchases".
See, this is the kind of crap I know you will try to come up with again and again, and why discussion with you is futile. I already knew you would come with "Oh they are deactivating legitimate purchases just because they can LEL". That's all ever your arguments are going to go.
 
Which is irrelevant because i never argued about the legality of them or said they are illegal? Doesn't stop them from being unauthorised still.
So you agree they're legal then. Cool! ;) :p

* * *

But hey. Genuine attempt at a mea culpa here. Exchanging walls of texts are fun to to a point, (well actually, I cam and have gone all night, but that's because I'm a total nerd).

We should be on the same general side here. I hope we are! I strive to support the creators that make so many of the games and experiences that we love.

But...big businesses and publishers are not on our side. They will do whatever they can to extract maximum profit from us.

That doesn't mean I condone piracy. In fact, I get all antsy whenever there are emu threads and such. But with a lot of publishers investing so much in maximising profit for minimal product, we as games/consumers should be looking for the best deal.

Clearly we have different views as to how to achieve that. For full disclosure, the only two games I have bought from a key reseller in that past year has been XCOM 2 and Street Fighter V...both from CDKeys (I don't and will never use G2A...who were a previous advertiser on GAF, by the way).

I have more than given my fair share of inflated EU prices of games to the two respective publishers of those games. I don't feel in any way that I short changed anyone other than perhaps the majority shareholders of those companies.

Anyway, it's been fun :}
 

CHC

Member
Johnny Come Latelys complaining about the deal being dead. Tough. If you wanted the deal so bad, you could have gotten it for the several days it was up :)

Yeah ok bump a thread about a 5 month old deal and then be smug when people are misled by it. C'mon dude.

You'll get the key from them - just hang in there. The game's still got 5 days before release!
 

MUnited83

For you.
I never once said that.

Those keys weren't deactivated just because, it's my point. Bethesda can't track which keys they are selling. They can, however, keep track of purchases elsewhere where the initial payment method was chargebacked. Implying they have willingly gone out of their way to disable actual legitimate purchases is borderline conspiracy.

Now to be perfectly clear:

I have no issues with how cdkeys is ran, and yes, they are a legal business. As far as I know, they also have great customer support that will generally work with you with to solve any issues. I also agree that for the most part they sell legitimate keys.
All I argue is that they shouldn't be painted as a "authorised", and that people should be aware of the risks involved and inform themselves before buying from them. As you can see, their supply chains have been rotten more than once. And that if it goes wrong, don't put the blame on the publisher. 99.9999% chances there was a actual issue with the method that your game as aqcuired with.
 
I'm happy enough with that response :)

I would certainly agree that purchasing a game, either from another person as a second hand sale or on eBay or through a discounted retailer, is certainly 'at your own risk'.

But if publishers want absolute control over sales, then they have to be entirely direct and provide the support that that entails (and risk the lack of sales as well - most games will not be rated above M in the US because Wal*Mart just won't carry it otherwise. A hard and fast retailing dictate that is becoming less and less relevant).

I mean, I bought (to bring this back somewhat on topic) Bloodborne day one for £44, so I must be a monster, right?! :p
 

Alo81

Low Poly Gynecologist
Okay. So using your logic, should the resell of 2nd hand/preowned games be categorised the same way?

Is the only legitimate sale one that is made directly to the publisher?

Publishers can't revoke your hardware for buying second hand. They can revoke your keys. The risk is different, so the assessment of the risk should be different.

The thing is Bernardo, it's okay if you have a personal view that certain business practices are not to your liking. I'm okay with that. Genuinely (although CDKeys are not anywhere near in the same category as G2A).

What I do have a problem with is presenting personal opinion as fact. Statements such as:
and

and

and

and


...do not become fact just because you present them as fact without supporting evidence.

(The bit in red by the way, is especially sneaky as you are the one who has arbitrarily decided that CDKeys business fits this mysterious 'well defined meaning')

Slapping a 'there's nothing to discuss' at the end is another especially telling offering that suggests that you aren't interested in supporting what you say with evidence.

oh my god dude he's not lying.

Someone not presenting evidence doesn't mean it doesn't exist or that they're wrong. It often means that the subject is straight forward enough that hand delivering sources isn't required. This is one of those cases.
 
Top Bottom