Live 365 Subscription Sign of Industry Wide Trend

by pastapadre
Posted November 10th, 2008 at 4:46 pm

While NBA Live 09′s 365 feature is free to those who purchase the game new with the code that is included in the packaging, much discussion has taken place regarding how those who pick up the game used need to purchase the code separately ($10) in order to access the feature. Over the past couple years the industry has been looking at ways to reduce the negative effect that the used game market is having on them.

The structure of how EA is offering 365 is one way to accomplish that and we are seeing it with other games as well. Even more recently Gears of War 2 launched with a pack-in code to download five exclusive maps. Earlier today the head of Epic (Mike Capps) commented on the situation.

“The secondary market is a huge issue in the United States. Our primary retailer makes the majority of its money off of secondary sales, and so you’re starting to see games taking proactive steps toward that by… if you buy the retail version you get the unlock code,” he said.

I’ve talked to some developers who are saying ‘If you want to fight the final boss you go online and pay USD 20, but if you bought the retail version you got it for free’. We don’t make any money when someone rents it, and we don’t make any money when someone buys it used – way more than twice as many people played Gears than bought it.”

While that is an extreme example it does make a lot of sense for the companies to offer incentive to purchase the game. Used sales eat away at their revenues as those are (in many cases) lost sales of new copies. It seems most people are accepting of the way Live 365 was offered given the circumstances of the industry today. What is interesting about Live 365 is that it provides something new throughout the year not only giving reason to buy it new but could very well lead to gamers remaining interested in it longer meaning less used copies in circulation. This is a topic that gaming companies will continue to explore going forward and it appears we’re just seeing the beginning of how they plan to address the issue.

Tags:

Paul

The bad thing is, I really love this years Tiger Woods Golf. I also heard NHL 09 was awesome. But golf and hockey aren’t the mainstream sports in this country. We have been getting sub-par, uninspired football and basketball games for years from EA. Next year will be the first Madden that I won’t buy new ever. They haven’t earned my dollar.

[quote comment="44780"]Many dissappointed sport gamers hate EA, they sport frenchises are losing sales (especially NBA Live), I can not understand, why the hell they irritating the gamers.[/quote]
Paul

The bad thing is, I really love this years Tiger Woods Golf. I also heard NHL 09 was awesome. But golf and hockey aren’t the mainstream sports in this country. We have been getting sub-par, uninspired football and basketball games for years from EA. Next year will be the first Madden that I won’t buy new ever. They haven’t earned my dollar.

[quote comment="44780"]Many dissappointed sport gamers hate EA, they sport frenchises are losing sales (especially NBA Live), I can not understand, why the hell they irritating the gamers.[/quote]
ReignMan

Exactly, Pasta is suggesting is that EA is a pioneer solving this second hand issue. It is a lie. Just make quality games, and none shall sell their copies, thats how EA could decrease the second hand issue.

Second hand issue is a problem for EA, my problems are the issues of Nba Live 09.
ReignMan

Exactly, Pasta is suggesting is that EA is a pioneer solving this second hand issue. It is a lie. Just make quality games, and none shall sell their copies, thats how EA could decrease the second hand issue.

Second hand issue is a problem for EA, my problems are the issues of Nba Live 09.
rondoman

Wow!!!

EA, a company worth millions, wants even more money now for there subpar, glitch and bug filled games.

I agree that if games came out of the box working and not needing endless patches then maybe I could agree slightly.

But who in there right mind wants to pay 60 bucks for subpar games?

Used video games seems to be a huge industry. As is used DVD’s. Like someone said earlier, what if I went to Blockbuster, wanted to buy a used movie for 8 bucks, but found out I needed to pay an additional 5 bucks to see the last 20 minutes?

Completely absurd.

The “used” market affects lots of industries. Movies, books, cars, etc. How come video games are where we seem to see the greediest people at though? If people can’t buy used games like they do now, they just will end up not console gaming IMO.
rondoman

Wow!!!

EA, a company worth millions, wants even more money now for there subpar, glitch and bug filled games.

I agree that if games came out of the box working and not needing endless patches then maybe I could agree slightly.

But who in there right mind wants to pay 60 bucks for subpar games?

Used video games seems to be a huge industry. As is used DVD’s. Like someone said earlier, what if I went to Blockbuster, wanted to buy a used movie for 8 bucks, but found out I needed to pay an additional 5 bucks to see the last 20 minutes?

Completely absurd.

The “used” market affects lots of industries. Movies, books, cars, etc. How come video games are where we seem to see the greediest people at though? If people can’t buy used games like they do now, they just will end up not console gaming IMO.
Paul

Exactly, and where do you turn next for gaming need? Certainly not outside, but to the PC. The good thing about the PC is even if games are buggy or unfinished, there are talented modders out there who have a passion for making games good.

rondoman wrote:

The “used” market affects lots of industries. Movies, books, cars, etc. How come video games are where we seem to see the greediest people at though? If people can’t buy used games like they do now, they just will end up not console gaming IMO.
Paul

Exactly, and where do you turn next for gaming need? Certainly not outside, but to the PC. The good thing about the PC is even if games are buggy or unfinished, there are talented modders out there who have a passion for making games good.

rondoman wrote:

The “used” market affects lots of industries. Movies, books, cars, etc. How come video games are where we seem to see the greediest people at though? If people can’t buy used games like they do now, they just will end up not console gaming IMO.
Josh

Just a question, would anyone here be mad if EA announced that they were not releasing Madden 2010 because they were taking an extra year to develop & perfect the game? I for one wouldn’t but I would like to know how other people felt about that. I would rather them do that than release a game full of bugs & glitches & string us along about releasing a patch. Just using Madden as an example since it’s the most popular game.
Josh

Just a question, would anyone here be mad if EA announced that they were not releasing Madden 2010 because they were taking an extra year to develop & perfect the game? I for one wouldn’t but I would like to know how other people felt about that. I would rather them do that than release a game full of bugs & glitches & string us along about releasing a patch. Just using Madden as an example since it’s the most popular game.
Josh

Just a question, would anyone here be mad if EA announced that they were not releasing Madden 2010 because they were taking an extra year to develop & perfect the game? I for one wouldn’t but I would like to know how other people felt about that. I would rather them do that than release a game full of bugs & glitches & string us along about releasing a patch. Just using Madden as an example since it’s the most popular game.

I know this would never happen because God forbid EA lose out on sales but just a thought.
Josh

Just a question, would anyone here be mad if EA announced that they were not releasing Madden 2010 because they were taking an extra year to develop & perfect the game? I for one wouldn’t but I would like to know how other people felt about that. I would rather them do that than release a game full of bugs & glitches & string us along about releasing a patch. Just using Madden as an example since it’s the most popular game.

I know this would never happen because God forbid EA lose out on sales but just a thought.
rondoman

I wouldn’t be mad if EA took 2 years to release Madden, but they cannot do that.

They have a deal with the NFL and must release it yearly. . .

Plus, even if they could, they still would not. Too much money lost.

I can see it now: you buy Madden used, but have to pay 10 bucks for every round of the playoffs or you cannot advance!!!!
rondoman

I wouldn’t be mad if EA took 2 years to release Madden, but they cannot do that.

They have a deal with the NFL and must release it yearly. . .

Plus, even if they could, they still would not. Too much money lost.

I can see it now: you buy Madden used, but have to pay 10 bucks for every round of the playoffs or you cannot advance!!!!
pastapadre

Josh wrote:

Just a question, would anyone here be mad if EA announced that they were not releasing Madden 2010 because they were taking an extra year to develop & perfect the game? I for one wouldn’t but I would like to know how other people felt about that. I would rather them do that than release a game full of bugs & glitches & string us along about releasing a patch. Just using Madden as an example since it’s the most popular game.
I know this would never happen because God forbid EA lose out on sales but just a thought.

I don’t know if anyone would be mad per say, but disappointed I’m sure. Even though we all have problems with Madden it is well liked by the masses who line up on release night and make it the best selling game in the world for the last quarter. Its become kind of a tradition now. I get what you’re saying though, we all want quality and the yearly timeline can squeeze that. People would probably be upset if they did take a year off when they would realize the game still wasn’t going to be perfect

I can tell you who would be mad though…the NFL. The license requires a yearly game.
pastapadre

Josh wrote:

Just a question, would anyone here be mad if EA announced that they were not releasing Madden 2010 because they were taking an extra year to develop & perfect the game? I for one wouldn’t but I would like to know how other people felt about that. I would rather them do that than release a game full of bugs & glitches & string us along about releasing a patch. Just using Madden as an example since it’s the most popular game.
I know this would never happen because God forbid EA lose out on sales but just a thought.

I don’t know if anyone would be mad per say, but disappointed I’m sure. Even though we all have problems with Madden it is well liked by the masses who line up on release night and make it the best selling game in the world for the last quarter. Its become kind of a tradition now. I get what you’re saying though, we all want quality and the yearly timeline can squeeze that. People would probably be upset if they did take a year off when they would realize the game still wasn’t going to be perfect

I can tell you who would be mad though…the NFL. The license requires a yearly game.
Josh

pastapadre wrote:

Josh wrote:
Just a question, would anyone here be mad if EA announced that they were not releasing Madden 2010 because they were taking an extra year to develop & perfect the game? I for one wouldn’t but I would like to know how other people felt about that. I would rather them do that than release a game full of bugs & glitches & string us along about releasing a patch. Just using Madden as an example since it’s the most popular game.
I know this would never happen because God forbid EA lose out on sales but just a thought.
I don’t know if anyone would be mad per say, but disappointed I’m sure. Even though we all have problems with Madden it is well liked by the masses who line up on release night and make it the best selling game in the world for the last quarter. Its become kind of a tradition now. I get what you’re saying though, we all want quality and the yearly timeline can squeeze that. People would probably be upset if they did take a year off when they would realize the game still wasn’t going to be perfect
I can tell you who would be mad though…the NFL. The license requires a yearly game.

Yea you’re right about that. I don’t know but it just seems like it’s becoming the norm now for games to be released half done knowing that they can always string us along with a possible patch. I just seems like 1 year is not enough time, especially with sports games, to get everything right in a game. The standard for sports games is just getting higher & higher. People are spoiled when it comes to technology, myself included. I agree that we should push technology to the limit but maybe 1 year isn’t enough time for sports games. Look at games like Gears & Call of Duty for example, those games are great but it took at least a couple years to develop.
Josh

pastapadre wrote:

Josh wrote:
Just a question, would anyone here be mad if EA announced that they were not releasing Madden 2010 because they were taking an extra year to develop & perfect the game? I for one wouldn’t but I would like to know how other people felt about that. I would rather them do that than release a game full of bugs & glitches & string us along about releasing a patch. Just using Madden as an example since it’s the most popular game.
I know this would never happen because God forbid EA lose out on sales but just a thought.
I don’t know if anyone would be mad per say, but disappointed I’m sure. Even though we all have problems with Madden it is well liked by the masses who line up on release night and make it the best selling game in the world for the last quarter. Its become kind of a tradition now. I get what you’re saying though, we all want quality and the yearly timeline can squeeze that. People would probably be upset if they did take a year off when they would realize the game still wasn’t going to be perfect
I can tell you who would be mad though…the NFL. The license requires a yearly game.

Yea you’re right about that. I don’t know but it just seems like it’s becoming the norm now for games to be released half done knowing that they can always string us along with a possible patch. I just seems like 1 year is not enough time, especially with sports games, to get everything right in a game. The standard for sports games is just getting higher & higher. People are spoiled when it comes to technology, myself included. I agree that we should push technology to the limit but maybe 1 year isn’t enough time for sports games. Look at games like Gears & Call of Duty for example, those games are great but it took at least a couple years to develop.
http://www.pastapadre.com/ pastapadre

Well as great as a game like Gears 2 is, and I’m really enjoying it, it isn’t without its own issues.

http://gearsforums.epicgames.com/showthread.php?p=25673771

With extra time you’d probably get extra in the game but that just leaves more opportunity for problems. Its a tough balance, having just a year squeezes them in a way but I’m not convinced it would lead to much more impressive releases. FIFA and NHL are proof that once you get to where you need to be, a year between them can be enough.
http://www.pastapadre.com pastapadre

Well as great as a game like Gears 2 is, and I’m really enjoying it, it isn’t without its own issues.

http://gearsforums.epicgames.com/showthread.php?p=25673771

With extra time you’d probably get extra in the game but that just leaves more opportunity for problems. Its a tough balance, having just a year squeezes them in a way but I’m not convinced it would lead to much more impressive releases. FIFA and NHL are proof that once you get to where you need to be, a year between them can be enough.
Paul

They should be building on the foundation they have year after year. It is not like they are creating a new game from scratch every year, they modify and add.
Paul

They should be building on the foundation they have year after year. It is not like they are creating a new game from scratch every year, they modify and add.
tim daley

From a business standpoint i totally agree. Secondary sales, and rentals, especially Gamefly are the new “Napster”. It is way to easy to just pick up a game at Gamefly or blockbuster, pay substantially less for the game, and then hold on to it for as long as you like til you finish it.

The secondary market has made “NOT OWNING A GAME”, very easy and in most cases preferable.

Take a game like facebreaker. Why would you want to own a game like that when you can rent it, knock it out in a weekend, give it back, and move on.
tim daley

From a business standpoint i totally agree. Secondary sales, and rentals, especially Gamefly are the new “Napster”. It is way to easy to just pick up a game at Gamefly or blockbuster, pay substantially less for the game, and then hold on to it for as long as you like til you finish it.

The secondary market has made “NOT OWNING A GAME”, very easy and in most cases preferable.

Take a game like facebreaker. Why would you want to own a game like that when you can rent it, knock it out in a weekend, give it back, and move on.
Paul

I wouldn’t want to own Facebreaker. Why should someone spend $60 on a game that provides just a weekend of entertainment when other games give you hundreds of hours? If companies had such a big problem with rentals they wouldn’t SELL games to places like Blockbuster, Hollywood Video, and GameFly. The truth is, they make money off of it. The solution? Make game buyers pay more money to increase the profits that come in.

tim daley wrote:

From a business standpoint i totally agree. Secondary sales, and rentals, especially Gamefly are the new “Napster”. It is way to easy to just pick up a game at Gamefly or blockbuster, pay substantially less for the game, and then hold on to it for as long as you like til you finish it.
The secondary market has made “NOT OWNING A GAME”, very easy and in most cases preferable.
Take a game like facebreaker. Why would you want to own a game like that when you can rent it, knock it out in a weekend, give it back, and move on.
Paul

I wouldn’t want to own Facebreaker. Why should someone spend $60 on a game that provides just a weekend of entertainment when other games give you hundreds of hours? If companies had such a big problem with rentals they wouldn’t SELL games to places like Blockbuster, Hollywood Video, and GameFly. The truth is, they make money off of it. The solution? Make game buyers pay more money to increase the profits that come in.

tim daley wrote:

From a business standpoint i totally agree. Secondary sales, and rentals, especially Gamefly are the new “Napster”. It is way to easy to just pick up a game at Gamefly or blockbuster, pay substantially less for the game, and then hold on to it for as long as you like til you finish it.
The secondary market has made “NOT OWNING A GAME”, very easy and in most cases preferable.
Take a game like facebreaker. Why would you want to own a game like that when you can rent it, knock it out in a weekend, give it back, and move on.
http://pastapadre.com/ sdot

paul ur solution sux if dey charged more 2 own da gms more people just would rent / pirate dem
http://pastapadre.com sdot

paul ur solution sux if dey charged more 2 own da gms more people just would rent / pirate dem
http://nba.com/ bruno

whats he code?
http://nba.com bruno

whats he code?
mjlover23

I use to just go and by the EA game for each season (fifa, madden, live, triple play, etc). In the last few years, i've found myself wanting to rent them because of the gradual disappointment with the new versions. I actually switched to different brands of various sports because of that. So they can't fault us (the consumer) for being weary of just plunging in to buy a potentially below average product. With the expectations of release dates, I think that some of the products pushed out are released earlier than they should be. Which is effecting the quality of gaming, which also leads to more "glitch patches" and other things. With that said, I don't disagree with the philosophy of the game code for new games. The company just can't expect everybody to jump in feet first anymore till it can be proven that the consumer isn't getting shorted on game quality (i.e. the auto industry)
mjlover23

I use to just go and by the EA game for each season (fifa, madden, live, triple play, etc). In the last few years, i've found myself wanting to rent them because of the gradual disappointment with the new versions. I actually switched to different brands of various sports because of that. So they can't fault us (the consumer) for being weary of just plunging in to buy a potentially below average product. With the expectations of release dates, I think that some of the products pushed out are released earlier than they should be. Which is effecting the quality of gaming, which also leads to more "glitch patches" and other things. With that said, I don't disagree with the philosophy of the game code for new games. The company just can't expect everybody to jump in feet first anymore till it can be proven that the consumer isn't getting shorted on game quality (i.e. the auto industry)
jtl_nb1

yooo my man you have other nba live 365 x360
jtl_nb1

yooo my man you have other nba live 365 x360