Support NeoGAF

[Dartastic]

Update the OP and title please. This isn't an "online pass." This is 38 giving out their first piece of DLC for free to those who buy the game new.

http://forums.reckoning.amalur.com/...-by-online-pass.&p=52249&viewfull=1#post52249

 

[inky]

Skyrim is gorgeous, but it is totally dominated by a very small number of colors. How is that not obvious? The vast majority of the game's landscapes are built from a very similar palette. Of course it is a preference thing as to whether you appreciate it, but that doesn't change the nature of how it exists.

Yeah sure, but it's not boring "browns and grays" only either, there's also blues and greens and yellows, they are just much more toned down And I do feel there is a distinctive feel to each sub-area, sure not theme park-like as is in Amalur, but not "it feels procedurally generated" either at least from what I've seen. My comment wasn't about the number of colors, but about how he said it feels boring after a while, I didn't find it like that.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Update the OP and title please. This isn't an "online pass." This is 38 giving out their first piece of DLC for free to those who buy the game new.

http://forums.reckoning.amalur.com/...-by-online-pass.&p=52249&viewfull=1#post52249

By this logic, Dragon Age: Origins wasn't an online pass, and neither was Mass Effect 2. How does this differ from those? I mean, good to hear that the game feels intact and that people who buy used won't be Catwoman'd out of their full game, but have day 0 content that costs money for everyone that doesn't buy new is having an online pass.

 

[scy]

By this logic, Dragon Age: Origins wasn't an online pass, and neither was Mass Effect 2. How does this differ from those? I mean, good to hear that the game feels intact and that people who buy used won't be Catwoman'd out of their full game, but have day 0 content that costs money for everyone that doesn't buy new is having an online pass.

By that logic, any sort of "buying new" or "buying at launch" incentive is an online pass. Where do we draw the line on this? Is it now a terrible practice for developers to give things to early adopters?

 

[Wolfe]

I haven't seen a single post in this thread that tells us why online passes are a bad thing. I like online passes! They make me feel like I'm getting a great experience for jumping on the bandwagon early. It honestly feels like a bonus to me. I loved the pass stuff from Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age 2 (though DA2's stuff was basically cheats).

What I do not like are "season passes" that sell you all the DLC for the game for one lump sum, before they're all out. Mortal Kombat had this, and its DLC turned out to be a touch on the lame side.

You really don't see any issues with a single player game having content locked out of it unless you go online and activate it with a one time code?

What if I don't have internet?
More likely what if I don't have Xbox live?
I buy the game used, and don't get to play all of it?

Etc etc.

But hey, I'm glad online passes with content locks make you feel better than if they just let everyone have the content from the get-go without any complications.

Update the OP and title please. This isn't an "online pass." This is 38 giving out their first piece of DLC for free to those who buy the game new.

http://forums.reckoning.amalur.com/...-by-online-pass.&p=52249&viewfull=1#post52249

While I'm not saying he isn't telling the truth I also am not eager to sit down and lap up everything he says, it's no huge secret that the publishers push this kinda shit on their studios hardcore.

 

[Gunsmithx]

By this logic, Dragon Age: Origins wasn't an online pass, and neither was Mass Effect 2. How does this differ from those? I mean, good to hear that the game feels intact and that people who buy used won't be Catwoman'd out of their full game, but have day 0 content that costs money for everyone that doesn't buy new is having an online pass.

question, assuming this isn't just spin about it being DLC, would you prefer that they held it a month and charged everyone for it? Would you feel differently if they announced it this way before everyone found out about it?

Assuming this isn't spin because it does sound a bit like it, but they've been pretty upfront so far.

 

[Dartastic]

By this logic, Dragon Age: Origins wasn't an online pass, and neither was Mass Effect 2. How does this differ from those? I mean, good to hear that the game feels intact and that people who buy used won't be Catwoman'd out of their full game, but have day 0 content that costs money for everyone that doesn't buy new is having an online pass.

By that logic, any sort of "buying new" or "buying at launch" incentive is an online pass. Where do we draw the line on this? Is it now a terrible practice for developers to give things to early adopters?

Basically, this. If people buy games used, the developers don't get squat. Incentives for buying the game new (like free DLC) are not the same thing as locking out entire modes when you buy used, such as when online multiplayer is locked out.

Their interaction and level of transparency with the community has been amazing, and to be honest, this game already has so much content already that it's not going to be a gigantic loss.

 

[Orca]

Update the OP and title please. This isn't an "online pass." This is 38 giving out their first piece of DLC for free to those who buy the game new.

http://forums.reckoning.amalur.com/...-by-online-pass.&p=52249&viewfull=1#post52249

If it's actually something we'll have to download, I'd be okay with saying it's free DLC for new buyers. If it's on the disc and locked away though...

 

[Dartastic]

If it's actually something we'll have to download, I'd be okay with saying it's free DLC for new buyers. If it's on the disc and locked away though...

I'm pretty sure it is, as EA said that their first DLC was "too big" which implies it's something that needs to be downloaded.

 

[Kintaro]

You really don't see any issues with a single player game having content locked out of it unless you go online and activate it with a one time code?

What if I don't have internet?
More likely what if I don't have Xbox live?
I buy the game used, and don't get to play all of it?

Etc etc.

But hey, I'm glad online passes with content locks make you feel better than if they just let everyone have the content from the get-go without any complications.

1) If you don't have the internet, you don't care about any of this anyway. You actively chose that.
2) I don't think having Xbox Live is required for this code.
3) If you buy the game used, tough shit. You're not entitled to get everything extra. Just what is on the disc unlocked. Do you expect every piece of DLC to come included when you buy the game used too? You can always choose to pick up the extra content online as well. Or, if you bought the game used and you have no internet, you can be happy that you got what you got for cheaper.

The House of Valor content is, for all intents and purposes, our first DLC content. Instead of holding onto it for a month or more and charging everyone for it later, we opted to give it to those who purchase the game new for free.

Believe what he says or not, would you rather pay for it?

 

[Akia]

By that logic, any sort of "buying new" or "buying at launch" incentive is an online pass. Where do we draw the line on this? Is it now a terrible practice for developers to give things to early adopters?

Yup, by Stump's logic TF2 pre-order hats are an online pass. Most of the time if you don't pre-order a game for the bonus hats, you could buy them in the TF2 store for real money after launch. My example is a little flawed because you can't buy a used Steam game.

 

[Stumpokapow]

question, assuming this isn't just spin about it being DLC, would you prefer that they held it a month and charged everyone for it? Would you feel differently if they announced it this way before everyone found out about it?

If wishes were fishes I'd have sushi for dinner, but as of right now, what's happening is day 0 DLC that's free for new purchasers and not for used purchasers, which is an online pass. I didn't agree with online passes on The Saboteur, Dragon Age Origins, or Mass Effect 2 (which I bought new, all from EA).

I don't agree with them on other publishers games either. I think the only online pass game I've ever purchased used was the newest Ratchet and Clank (actually, it was a birthday gift, but the gifter purchased it used). But I still don't like the idea of it.

Incentives for buying the game new (like free DLC) are not the same thing as locking out entire modes when you buy used, such as when online multiplayer is locked out.

Okay, well, by that logic Dragon Age: Origins did not have an online pass, and neither did Mass Effect 2, and neither did The Saboteur. Despite all openly being part of EA's "Project Ten Dollar".

I mean, like I said, it's good that used buyers will get a full (and probably pretty great!) game. It'd be better if they also got this "bonus content", which will be available day one for free for new buyers. I'm significantly less troubled by dumb cosmetic stuff like TF2 hats or pre-order exclusive +1% daggers of badass that many games have.

I also don't think TF2 hats are a great comparison since you can then resell those hats, often for more than the price of the game, and used copies don't exist on PC.

 

[Baconsammy]

By that logic, any sort of "buying new" or "buying at launch" incentive is an online pass. Where do we draw the line on this? Is it now a terrible practice for developers to give things to early adopters?

It's not early adopters though. I bought ME2 (new) a year after release and I got all the goodies. Quite frankly I love this.

 

[scy]

Basically, this. If people buy games used, the developers don't get squat. Incentives for buying the game new (like free DLC) are not the same thing as locking out entire modes when you buy used, such as when online multiplayer is locked out.

Their interaction and level of transparency with the community has been amazing, and to be honest, this game already has so much content already that it's not going to be a gigantic loss.

Basically. When I think of the terrible practices the stem from online passes, I think of on-the-disc locks or parts of the game (not extra content that is downloaded) that require online activation, constant online for offline content, and so-on. Not free DLC. Free DLC is on the winning side of the column I thought.

It's not early adopters though. I bought ME2 (new) a year after release and I got all the goodies. Quite frankly I love this.

Right, it's just new here but I was extending it to launch-window incentives, pre-order bonuses, etc. as well. It falls under that logic umbrella, so to speak.

 

[Wolfe]

I'm pretty sure it is, as EA said that their first DLC was "too big" which implies it's something that needs to be downloaded.

I could also see EA saying something like "oh hey your game is almost done? ok cool we're gonna need you to find something we can use for online pass/early DLC, get on it".

I can't judge it until I see it obviously but from what I've read it makes it sound like a short quest line.

 

[test_account]

Yep. The industry adapted in this way. Will it work? Well, so far it has. Gamers have too. Went from playing games online for free on Dreamcast/PS2 to paying for online games with Xbox Live. Just continues from there.

That is true.

Just a small comment regarding online play, most of it is still free though It is free on PS3 and PC, and also on newer systems like 3DS and Vita. But who knows how it will be with the next generation consoles.

 

[SafeinSound]

Hope it bombs.

This kind of mentality is dumb than the online pass.

 

[Wolfe]

If you buy the game used, tough shit. You're not entitled to get everything extra. Just what is on the disc unlocked. Do you expect every piece of DLC to come included when you buy the game used too?

You really don't see an issue with the bolded part? That would be like buying a used car with the A/C system locked and you needing to pay a fee to the dealer to unlock it. "What it's hot in your car and you want A/C? Should have bought it new! Now give us more money."

And no, of course I don't expect all DLC to be on the disc when I buy it new, are you serious?

Basically, this. If people buy games used, the developers don't get squat.

Yeah that's always been a part of the industry, it's a part of every industry, used markets exist EVERYWHERE FOR EVERYTHING. I love how people want to hold the gaming industries hand and treat them as if they're special. You must have forgotten when a few years back devs didn't give a shit about the used market because it was normal, it's the publishers that have been pushing this "used is worse than piracy!" BS and since the studios work for/are owned by the publishers, well they have to go along with it.

 

[Dartastic]

Okay, well, by that logic Dragon Age: Origins did not have an online pass, and neither did Mass Effect 2, and neither did The Saboteur. Despite all openly being part of EA's "Project Ten Dollar".

That's not quite true. I don't remember what DA:O did, but The Saboteur deliberately locked out content (boobies) as an incentive to buy the game new. Reckoning does not seem to be locking out content. Reckoning seems to be giving free DLC to early adopters.

Either way, please update the title so it's a bit clearer.

 

[Wallach]

I mean, like I said, it's good that used buyers will get a full (and probably pretty great!) game. It'd be better if they also got this "bonus content", which will be available day one for free for new buyers. I'm significantly less troubled by dumb cosmetic stuff like TF2 hats or pre-order exclusive +1% daggers of badass that many games have.

I can't really decide which bothers me more; these kinds of things are generally more significant content being withheld, but everyone has equal opportunity. Pre-order bonuses are often retailer specific and you're asked to make an exclusive decision amongst smaller bits of content, which somehow seems more offensive.

TF2 hats are kind of a whole different thing, because you can build or trade anything in that game. TF2 hats are a harder incentive to gauge because it's almost like getting an abstract form of currency as a bonus. It weirds me out but it is much easier to appreciate as a consumer.

 

[scy]

If wishes were fishes I'd have sushi for dinner, but as of right now, what's happening is day 0 DLC that's free for new purchasers and not for used purchasers, which is an online pass. I didn't agree with online passes on The Saboteur, Dragon Age Origins, or Mass Effect 2 (which I bought new, all from EA).

I guess it just comes down to the fact that I have no qualms, and readily support, incentives for new purchases. Free DLC (and actual DLC, not removed to sell as DLC / locked on disc) is a great incentive that I can get behind. Re-skins and fluff mean nothing to me and your average person; free, and potentially earlier-than-expected, DLC is a nice bonus.

But it has to be DLC and not removed content or core parts of the game. The goal is incentives/extras for new purchases (i.e., they get free stuff) rather than removing things for used purchases. If you buy it used, you don't get the off-the-disc freebies. That's perfectly fine by me.

 

[Baconsammy]

You really don't see an issue with the bolded part? That would be like buying a used car with the A/C system locked and you needing to pay a fee to the dealer to unlock it. "What it's hot in your car and you want A/C? Should have bought it new! Now give us more money."

And no, of course I don't expect all DLC to be on the disc when I buy it new, are you serious?

My car came with Sirius radio (on the disc/in the car). I have to pay to access it. This business practice isn't new or insulting to me.

 

[ultron87]

Update the OP and title please. This isn't an "online pass." This is 38 giving out their first piece of DLC for free to those who buy the game new.

http://forums.reckoning.amalur.com/...-by-online-pass.&p=52249&viewfull=1#post52249

I really don't understand why they don't always market these kind of things like this instead of as an "Online Pass".

It sounds so much better than "YOU CAN'T HAVE THIS BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T BUY NEW! *evil publisher laugh*" even though it is effectively the same thing.

 

[Wolfe]

I just have a hard time believing any day 1 DLC as being actual planned DLC, especially when it comes to stuff like quests as opposed to a few random items.

 

[Forsaken82]

The real answer is EA is afraid of the second hand market and want to make more money off used buyers.

No... they want to simply MAKE money off of used buyers.

 

[Wolfe]

My car came with Sirius radio (on the disc/in the car). I have to pay to access it. This business practice isn't new or insulting to me.

That's quite different than the A/C or heater unit... but point taken either way, was prolly a shitty analogy.

 

[Wallach]

No... they want to simply MAKE money off of used buyers.

No, more money is accurate. Paid DLC is already a revenue stream from used buyers.

 

[scy]

I just have a hard time believing any day 1 DLC as being actual planned DLC, especially when it comes to stuff like quests as opposed to a few random items.

Before this was announced, they were already mentioning that their first DLC (planned for March release) was on the way to completion.

 

[Baconsammy]

That's quite different than the A/C or heater unit... but point taken either way, was prolly a shitty analogy.

My analogy sucked too. What I meant to say is that I bought my car new and it came with a free year of Sirius. If I sell it does the guy buying it have the right to demand I include a free year of service from Sirius? I'm just less offended by this business practice than most I guess.

Does this "free" DLC sound like 10 hours of content that BHG and 38 was touting in their first DLC release? Maybe I'm wrong, but it doesn't sound that big to me.

 

[IcyRhythms]

In this economy, saying things like "hope it bombs" just shows how idiotic some people are.

At the core, gaming is still a business and money HAS to be made. You really want a developer's hard work to flop in sales and risk losing their jobs?

I'm sure some of them have a family to take care of.

 

[thechristoph]

You work for EA don't you? What's your next stop? Off to Metacritic to rave about a game that's not good?

I buy games new, I don't see how getting a free bonus in my game is a bad thing, and I liked Dragon Age 2. I must work for EA!

It's primarily a resale/used thing, the always-online | online requirement for single-player, or that they're tacked on without much thought. I always buy new and I keep everything I buy so it isn't really a problem for me but I understand that it's a big issue for some people.

ME2, DA:O DA2 didn't have always-online requirements, did they? I remember seeing messages that the game would fail to connect to EA's servers pretty frequently, and I don't recall content being missing because of it.

So it's a problem for folks who like to wait a few months and buy their games used. These folks must be the ones saying "fuck EA" in this thread. But they're already saying "fuck EA" for buying the games used. Seems like there are a lot of people who feel entitled to discounts.

 

[Wolfe]

Before this was announced, they were already mentioning that their first DLC (planned for March release) was on the way to completion.

That doesn't really change my point though, my hypothetical evil publisher scenario could still be true. Just sayin!

It's my own fault for doing a few testing gigs I guess

 

[scy]

Does this "free" DLC sound like 10 hours of content that BHG and 38 was touting in their first DLC release? Maybe I'm wrong, but it doesn't sound that big to me.

It's an entire faction so I assume it's got it's own quest chain on par with the others (however long they are). So, yeah, it actually does sound like it could have some meat on the bones, so to speak.

 

[Forsaken82]

No, more money is accurate. Paid DLC is already a revenue stream from used buyers.

DLC is an established revenue stream yes. Used game sales are not. If I buy a used game, the developer isn't seeing money from that unless I happen to buy DLC from them. Developers should not have to take a leap of faith on whether a used game buyer will buy DLC or not.

 

[Baconsammy]

It's an entire faction so I assume it's got it's own quest chain on par with the others (however long they are). So, yeah, it actually does sound like it could have some meat on the bones, so to speak.

Oh it's a 6th faction? Yeah, that could be big. My bad.

 

[daedalius]

I see nothing wrong with people that buy the game new getting the 1st round of DLC for free.

If you buy it used, you have to pay for said DLC. Its not like this is locking something out on the actual disc.

 

[scy]

ME2, DA:O DA2 didn't have always-online requirements, did they? I remember seeing messages that the game would fail to connect to EA's servers pretty frequently, and I don't recall content being missing because of it.

So it's a problem for folks who like to wait a few months and buy their games used. These folks must be the ones saying "fuck EA" in this thread. But they're already saying "fuck EA" for buying the games used. Seems like there are a lot of people who feel entitled to discounts.

The thing is, EA worded it that way as not an incentive for new purchases but, rather, as a reason to not buy used. They're essentially the same thing but the wording is enough to skew opinion. I imagine there'd be a little less backlash if it was always billed as a new incentive rather than a reason to not buy used. Just that little presentation difference could mean everything, really.

That doesn't really change my point though, my hypothetical evil publisher scenario could still be true. Just sayin!

It's my own fault for doing a few testing gigs I guess

Was just saying that, even without this announcement, the DLC was already planned for early release (and already done for Day 0 if they wanted, by the sound of it anyway). Whether or not that DLC started early due to this or not depends on how evil you want to think of them I guess :x

 

[Wolfe]

Seems like there are a lot of people who feel entitled to discounts.

Or some of us don't feel 60 dollars is justifiable for every retail console game anymore (granted there are titles that release for less but it's fairly uncommon). I do agree that some people get a little too overboard though when you see shit like "hope it bombs".

It's an entire faction so I assume it's got it's own quest chain on par with the others (however long they are). So, yeah, it actually does sound like it could have some meat on the bones, so to speak.

If that is the case then it's not so bad, still hate DLC that's "ready" so soon after the games release, and with this game it's ready before the games release which helps even less. Disc space should not be an issue anymore but obviously the xbox is still using dvds, why microsoft didn't just make HD DVD a proprietary disc format for the thing is beyond me but maybe there's issues that would have caused that I don't know about.

 

[Wallach]

DLC is an established revenue stream yes. Used game sales are not. If I buy a used game, the developer isn't seeing money from that unless I happen to buy DLC from them. Developers should not have to take a leap of faith on whether a used game buyer will buy DLC or not.

What's the difference between "taking a leap of faith" in these used consumers buying paid DLC versus this cut content DLC? If anything it's probably worse content-wise, much like how used buyers of ME2 were more likely to pass over the Cerberus content compared to the post-release DLC.

 

[CouchMaster]

Dammit wrong thread

 

[freddy]

If it's not an unbalanced addition to the main game then its almost certainly something that's been ripped from the original not an afterthought.

 

[scy]

Or some of us don't feel 60 dollars is justifiable for every retail console game anymore (granted there are titles that release for less but it's fairly uncommon). I do agree that some people get a little too overboard though when you see shit like "hope it bombs".

You can still buy it new but discounted down the road. Or used at a price "low enough" to compensate for the DLC missing, I guess?

If that is the case then it's not so bad, still hate DLC that's "ready" so soon after the games release, and with this game it's ready before the games release which helps even less. Disc space should not be an issue anymore but obviously the xbox is still using dvds, why microsoft didn't just make HD DVD a proprietary disc format for the thing is beyond me but maybe there's issues that would have caused that I don't know about.

It's kind of funny, really. When the DLC announcement plans came out, there were a lot of people happy at the sound of it being rather robust and fairly large and worth the price of admission; it was good that they were already thinking big for expanding the game via DLC so early. Now that we're getting it for free, apparently it's a problem.

Just funny how it works out.

 

[Forsaken82]

What's the difference between "taking a leap of faith" in these used consumers buying paid DLC versus this cut content DLC? If anything it's probably worse content-wise, much like how used buyers of ME2 were more likely to pass over the Cerberus content compared to the post-release DLC.

You are assuming every used game buyer is buying DLC and in essence handing money to the developer, despite being a used game player, but this is not the case. DLC is an optional purchase. The online pass merely guarantees that the dev sees SOME revenue from the used sale, beyond that it is up to the used game player to decide if he wants to BUY dlc or not.

 

[Wallach]

You are assuming every used game buyer is buying DLC and in essence handing money to the developer, despite being a used game player, but this is not the case. DLC is an optional purchase. The online pass merely guarantees that the dev sees SOME revenue from the used sale, beyond that it is up to the used game player to decide if he wants to BUY dlc or not.

The "online pass" - especially in the case we're talking about in this thread - guarantees no money at all. You can buy post-release DLC without buying this content as a used owner, just like you could skip the "online pass" of ME2 and still buy Lair of the Shadow Broker or any other paid DLC. Moreover, the actual content included with this is not even that compelling; it's an optional quest line for a particular side faction. It's just as much of a gamble as any piece of paid DLC is, except pretty much every example of these games where they don't actually have an online multiplayer mode to gate with the $10 fee offers single player content with a pretty bad value that almost never stands up to the value of the post-release paid DLC.

 

[Baconsammy]

Apparently the game was ready to be released last September, but being the new kid on the block they wanted to get out of the way of Skyrim, Zelda etc etc. So having DLC ready to go now isn't all that surprising to me.

 

[Vilam]

A stance all of us should take for console games. =D Rent first, buy cheap later. If more people on the board rented first, we would probably be a lot more peaceful in our discussion of games. =)

You'd probably have a lot less games to play as well... but hey, why support an industry that brings you so much enjoyment?

 

[Rad Agast]

As others have said: to curb used game sales. Games like Reckoning are perfect candidates for trade-ins and rentals because they have no multi-player. People will just beat it in 15-20 hours and then sell it somewhere or trade it in. These publishers are just getting your minds prepped for the start of the console CD-key era for next-gen. Welcome to our world; bring some lube.

I don't think that I agree with this. Reckoning will have DLC content in the future and from the sound of it, that stuff will be meaty. As long as people who buy the game enjoy it, they will hold on to it so they can get the DLC some time later. Even if they sell it after finishing, if the DLC is good enough/marketed well then you'll have sales on that end.

The only thing EA is doing with every game release is tell me that they're not confident in their product to stand on its own.

 

[Dogfacedgod]

I view this like any DLC. If you enjoy the game purchasing the DLC is worth the price. If that DLC is free for a new copy, that just a bonus.

Calling this an "Online Pass" might be a poor choice of words but I won't lose any sleep over it.

Remember you vote with your dollar. If you don't like what they're doing, don't get the game. Or you can buy it used and don't buy the DLC/Online Pass afterwards.

 

[Vamphuntr]

Well it's not any different from DA. Both aren't online game and you get bonus content by registering your promo code. I don't see why it's worse for this game. I guess many are attracted by the thrill to post some EA hate again.

 

[Sothpaw]

You'd probably have a lot less games to play as well... but hey, why support an industry that brings you so much enjoyment?

But I thought developing games didn't cost anything and highly skilled professionals like programmers work for peanuts. Are you suggesting that publishers should add incentives for new game purchases? How could you?