EA Sports: Online Pay Wall - Cash Cow or Fair Play?
$10 'Pass' comes in for EA Sports
Electronic Arts is calling it an 'Online Pass', everybody else is calling it a '$10 Pay Wall'. Either way, a $10 fee is being introduced for all future EA Sports games beginning in June 2010.
First - here's what Electronic Arts says:
"EA SPORTS expands your quest for glory by fully immersing you in the entire sports experience. Activating your Online Pass gives you full access to online features and bonus content.
"Online Pass launches in all future EA SPORTS simulation games on the PS3 and Xbox 360 beginning in June with Tiger Woods PGA TOUR 11."
Lots of good, hot sales words in there: "expands", "glory", "immersing", "experience", "Activating", "Full access", "bonus content". It's like a text book entry for selling up.
So, what lies in the detail? According to the FAQ:
"Your Online Pass code comes with the original retail purchase of the game. If the original consumer of the game did not use the Online Pass code, the second-hand consumer may use that code."
What if the original consumer did use the code?
"If you have purchased a used game and the code originally included has already been activated, you will need to purchase EA SPORTS Online Pass access from within your game by choosing PURCHASE ONLINE ACCESS from the Code Redemption screen."
Sounds okay. So, this thing is free then? Nope, if you do buy the game secondhand, you will pay $10 for your Online Pass.
This has lead to much uproar on the Internet. Much as we like to lay into the unfairness of publishers expecting to extract more cash from the consumers for the same game, this time, well, it does seem fair to fund further game development by requesting users who have contributed nothing to the publisher/development process to contribute.
Develop has talked to EA Sports SVP of worldwide development Andrew Wilson who told the magazine, "In order to continue to enhance the online experiences that are attracting nearly five million connected game sessions a day, we think it’s fair to get paid for the services we provide and to reserve these online services for people who pay EA to access them.
"With Online Pass everyone has access to the same premium online services and content regardless of how and where you buy the game. I've been here now for more than a decade, and the investments we're making in developing for digital are profound.
"When we see how many people are playing all of our games online, consumers are telling us that competition is endemic to sports in a way that most people don't get just by playing alone. We want to reserve EA Sports online services for people who pay EA to access them."
So, what do you think about purchasers of secondhand games having to pay $10 to use online services? Tell us in the Forum.
First - here's what Electronic Arts says:
"EA SPORTS expands your quest for glory by fully immersing you in the entire sports experience. Activating your Online Pass gives you full access to online features and bonus content.
"Online Pass launches in all future EA SPORTS simulation games on the PS3 and Xbox 360 beginning in June with Tiger Woods PGA TOUR 11."
Lots of good, hot sales words in there: "expands", "glory", "immersing", "experience", "Activating", "Full access", "bonus content". It's like a text book entry for selling up.
So, what lies in the detail? According to the FAQ:
"Your Online Pass code comes with the original retail purchase of the game. If the original consumer of the game did not use the Online Pass code, the second-hand consumer may use that code."
What if the original consumer did use the code?
"If you have purchased a used game and the code originally included has already been activated, you will need to purchase EA SPORTS Online Pass access from within your game by choosing PURCHASE ONLINE ACCESS from the Code Redemption screen."
Sounds okay. So, this thing is free then? Nope, if you do buy the game secondhand, you will pay $10 for your Online Pass.
This has lead to much uproar on the Internet. Much as we like to lay into the unfairness of publishers expecting to extract more cash from the consumers for the same game, this time, well, it does seem fair to fund further game development by requesting users who have contributed nothing to the publisher/development process to contribute.
Develop has talked to EA Sports SVP of worldwide development Andrew Wilson who told the magazine, "In order to continue to enhance the online experiences that are attracting nearly five million connected game sessions a day, we think it’s fair to get paid for the services we provide and to reserve these online services for people who pay EA to access them.
"With Online Pass everyone has access to the same premium online services and content regardless of how and where you buy the game. I've been here now for more than a decade, and the investments we're making in developing for digital are profound.
"When we see how many people are playing all of our games online, consumers are telling us that competition is endemic to sports in a way that most people don't get just by playing alone. We want to reserve EA Sports online services for people who pay EA to access them."
So, what do you think about purchasers of secondhand games having to pay $10 to use online services? Tell us in the Forum.
Companies:
Electronic Arts
Read More Like This
Comments
Daz 11 May 2010 13:41
1/4
I assume you meant June 2010 or 2011 other wise nobody would care right now.
I guess it makes sense from a business stand point as they get naff all from people buying second hand games and there's no guarantee that said owner of pre-owned game would buy DLC.
I guess it makes sense from a business stand point as they get naff all from people buying second hand games and there's no guarantee that said owner of pre-owned game would buy DLC.
DoctorDee 11 May 2010 19:02
2/4
Seems entirely fair to me. And I'd expect this to become a standard business model pretty quickly. Let's face it, the publishers get reamed by second hand sales... this lets them get a slice of that action, and makes sure that they keep the on-line aspects compelling.
more comments below our sponsor's message
AaronEis 11 May 2010 23:14
3/4
@DoctorDee Game publishers wouldn't get reamed by second hand sales if they didn't insist on maintaining the full $60 price tag months after the game has been released. They need to adopt a structure similar to books and movies where they incrementally lower the price after a certain time period.
DoctorDee 12 May 2010 05:09
4/4
AaronEis wrote:
@DoctorDee Game publishers wouldn't get reamed by second hand sales if they didn't insist on maintaining the full $60 price tag months after the game has been released. They need to adopt a structure similar to books and movies where they incrementally lower the price after a certain time period.
Publishers (and retail) DO incrementally reduce prices as a title ages. And then they re-release them on budget. But when a bestseller is bought on day of release, and traded three days later (and it happens with every major title) how can price decay protect them from second hand sales?
There are many people who will do anything to get a little back on a used game, and save a little on another game. This means that the people who take all the risks are getting a cut of only a proportion of the games sales. I think the EA model of charging for on-line access for second and subsequent owners is fair. Players do not HAVE to pay it, and EA has to make the on-line component compelling and good value.