Firstly, I’d like to thank a follower of mine by the name of
@Crayzeebiker636 for suggesting I discuss this topic.
With the gaming industry constantly developing, many would
argue it’s becoming increasingly expensive to partake in gaming related
activities. The frequent releases of DLC and expansions only add to the
ever-growing financial strain placed upon gamers. That being said, additional
content is something the individual is not required to purchase to utilise
their title. So that’s fair game, right? So how do we as gamers feel about the
introduction of online passes? The inclusion of online passes has caused
intense controversy amongst the gaming community. I’ll be analysing the topic
of online passes and the issues they produce for gamers!
Online passes are required to access the online content and
capabilities a game possesses. If a game requires an online pass, when
purchased new, a single-use code will be included in the game case. When
purchasing a used game, individuals are required to purchase an online pass
through their console to access the online capabilities.
The online passes were primarily introduced to combat the
sales of used games. Although the companies responsible for the production of
these games receive a substantial profit through merely releasing these titles,
like any other business they wish to accelerate this profit further. The
popularity of used games hinders the opportunity to push these profits further.
The inclusion of the online passes is growing daily.
Companies such as Electronic Arts and THQ utilise the passes fluently
throughout their products. Other companies are beginning to follow suit with
these passes, much to the disapproval of gamers worldwide. So are the online
passes actually benefiting the industry or are they merely limiting the choices
of gamers?
I must admit that personally, I have always been hesitant with
online passes. My console of preference is the Xbox 360, which means I am
already required to pay a fee to play online. I do not purchase pre-owned games
frequently at present, but the inclusion of the online pass increases my
reluctance to do so. Technically, I would have to pay two separate fees to play
online which is unnecessary in my opinion.
Despite my opinion, I am able to recognise the reasoning
behind the inclusion of these passes. They enforce additional funds into an
industry that we all adore. Do I agree that this method is the correct one to
generate healthier revenue for the gaming industry? Not particularly. One thing
that’s certain is people have an undying passion for this industry, so much so
that they will continue to invest in the products it generates, regardless of
price.
I’m certain that most are opposed to the idea of online
passes, but try and embrace the idea in terms of what it provides for an
industry that you adore. Thank you for taking the time to read this piece. I
hope you have enjoyed the topic discussed. I’d love to hear your opinion regarding
online passes.
Once again, thanks for reading!
Hannah
I think people like NetherRealm and Epic Games have the right idea in giving you an incentive to 'subscribe' to their online content. Not only do you get all the DLC as it's released, but you get you get the last one for free as a thank you for signing up and playing the game.
ReplyDeleteAlso, it discourages people from trading in becuase if they do they'll be ripping themselves off since theyve already paid for all the content they can't play anymore.
I think Publishers and Developers need to focus less on introducing charges, and more on encouraging gamers to keep hold of their games. Support your games consistently for up to a year after release with high DLC, and Average Joe Schmoe will support you right back.
(Also, as a side point, I also think playing online should ALWAYS be free. You've bought the console, the broadband and the game already, why do we have to pay more to unlock the games full potential? It's not the consumers fault that stores take make money from trade-ins.)
The fact that you are more hesitant to purchase a used game means the online pass is doing its job. That said, buying a game at $30 used, while it is still $60, paying an additional $10 gives both you and the publisher something. You get a game cheaper, they get $10 off of a used sale; something they usually wouldn't see money for.
ReplyDeleteNormally, this applies to online content, such as an online pass to play Battlefield 3 online. The problem with this is companies are no longer allowing you a "trial period" (Homefront, for example, let you play online, but you could only access so many playlists and only level up to level 5) so you can't try the game out to see if you like it online or not.
In the case of single player content (read: Kingdoms of Amalur) being locked out, the issue isn't so much the content, but people who buy the game new and have no internet connection are screwed.
That said, great article, thoroughly enjoyed reading it. Keep them coming. =)
Pretty interesting view. Two things bother me in Online Pass.
ReplyDelete1st - The Industry Punish Gamer that buy used Games, and can't seem to give a product exempt of fault or glitches. After that they have the Immoral way to ask more cash for playing online, and now even for some Offline content.
2nd - Like many thing in the world, It's always easier to take some more cash in Gamers pocket than to address a real problem where game industry lose money. Named the Piracy. In fact I think that the more the industry will try to get from our pocket, the more peoples will switch side to embrace piracy. Even more so if Microsoft push forward with locking used games from playing.
Hope it all make sense :-) Thank you for writing