Scottopia's forum posts

Avatar image for Scottopia
Scottopia

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#1 Scottopia
Member since 2008 • 55 Posts

After playing BC2 and MW2, I have a lot of faith in what EA and DICE can do together. Treyarch really has to nail this game, not because sales will drop, but becauseexpectations are running high. Think it's still too early to tell, though.

Avatar image for Scottopia
Scottopia

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#2 Scottopia
Member since 2008 • 55 Posts

Wait, you say the need to charge for online is understandable and then say it's not?

Online is online, it doesn't matter what mode you're in

Very true. I'm just trying to say that if these companies are going to start doing this, I wish they would find a way to implement it better. I'm not happy about this at all, especially already having to pay for online play monthly. I'm not sure if there is a solution that will find that happy medium.

Avatar image for Scottopia
Scottopia

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#3 Scottopia
Member since 2008 • 55 Posts

[QUOTE="Scottopia"]

IWhy do these companies feel the need to charge for something that is a BASIC component in most modern games?

Punch_Sideiron

Because you're using their servers, which cost money to maintain. If you bought it new, the price was factored in to the game price.

Which is understandable, but don't you think they can find a better way to implement something like this? Taking UFC as an example, I could understand it if you could go online and fight someone else, not in a ranked match or anything, and then charging extra for the online fight camp features and things like that. But, according to the news article, you would need the code to even play in an online exhibition match. To me, that's just insane. I can understand that the companies need to regain some of the money lost, but this just feels... wrong.

Avatar image for Scottopia
Scottopia

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#4 Scottopia
Member since 2008 • 55 Posts

EA is doing 7 day trials, I think, for pepole that rent or buy used. But, still, I think this is going to do a lot more damage than good in the long run.

Avatar image for Scottopia
Scottopia

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#5 Scottopia
Member since 2008 • 55 Posts

I posted about this over in the news section, and it still aggravates me the more I think about it. A game can have the greatest reviews in the world, but it still may not be a game that the consumer likes. So after $60+ for a game they don't like, they turn around and trade it in or exchange it. And someone else who likes that particular style of game or whatnot, is able to purchase it at a lower price. What's so wrong with that? Why do these companies feel the need to charge for something that is a BASIC component in most modern games? I got my copy of Bad Company 2 from a friend who preferred Modern Warfare. I was a little aggravated that I had to pay for a V.I.P pass, until I saw what it gave me access to. I think that a lot of companies can follow that kind of example, get increased revenue from used games, and still keep the consumer happy. Did I have to buy the VIP pass to play online? No, but it was an optional thing that gave me access to a lot of additional content.