Batman online pass unlocks Catwoman

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 13 October, 2011

UPDATE: Warner confirms, reveals cost.

UPDATE: Warner Bros. has confirmed to Eurogamer that the Batman: Arkham City VIP pass unlocks playable Catwoman content.

On Xbox 360 the Batman VIP pass costs 800 Microsoft Points. On PlayStation 3 it costs £7.99.

Warner issued Eurogamer the following statement: "Further to your story, players who purchase previously owned copies of Batman: Arkham City can access the playable Catwoman content for £7.99/ 800 Microsoft Points.

"Playing as Catwoman is not required to complete the game."

ORIGINAL STORY: The Batman: Arkham City online pass unlocks Catwoman as a playable character, it has been revealed.

Streams of the game being played reveal that Catwoman is only playable for those who have bought a new copy of the game or buy a code.

"Catwoman is a unique character with her own story, moves, and weapons. Unlock Catwoman by redeeming the 1st purchaser included in the game case or by visiting Xbox Live Marketplace," says the game's title screen.

Eurogamer has had this verified by a source.

Batman: Arkham City's VIP pass unlocks four story scenes that feature Catwoman as a playable character.

It also unlocks Catwoman as a playable character in challenge mode (called Riddler's Revenge).

Without the VIP pass code, Catwoman still appears in the game as part of the story, but her playable missions remain locked.

Meanwhile, reports indicate the Xbox 360 version has been leaked online and is available to download from torrent sites.

Those who wish to avoid story spoilers are advised to watch new gameplay videos with caution.

Eurogamer has contacted publisher Warner Bros. for comment.

Picture of Wesley.

About Wesley Yin-Poole

Wesley is Eurogamer's news editor. He likes news, interviews, and more news. He also likes Street Fighter more than anyone can get him to shut up about it.

Read more articles from Wesley by visiting the Wesley Yin-Poole archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (124) Latest comment 6 months ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Vlad27145 #1 7 months ago

    Ooooh, let's see how long it will take for people to start yelling: "See, another leak! As usual! Devs are right, piracy is killing PC gameing and all those elitists deserve it!"

    o_0

    Oh, wait! This is X360! Leaks for that are ignored and they don't risk killing the platform, right?

  • the_dudefather #2 7 months ago

    'Those who wish to avoid story spoilers are advised to watch new gameplay videos with caution. '

    Or the front pages of gaming websites

  • andytheadequate #3 7 months ago

    Leaks are bad for the industry regardless of platform, but do you really think that piracy is as big of an issue on consoles as it is the PC?


    And it's not really news is it? Wasn't it already known that she was a DLC unlock (or was that just Robin)? If it wasn't known then this is shocking journalism to put it in the title..
    Edited by andytheadequate at 13/10/11 @ 15:49

  • bad09 #4 7 months ago

    Wait....so online passes are already no longer about "server costs" of multiplayer?

    Now I would not have guessed that devaluing your goods is where this crap was headed all along.........

  • GamesProgrammer Verified Games Team Programmer, Eutechnyx Ltd. #5 7 months ago

    Surely it should be called Single Player Pass or Access the content on the disk pass, but online pass suggests your contributing to online running costs which just isnt true.

  • Desheep #6 7 months ago

    I really dont care what they offer. If im not getting something with the original purchase, i dont want it.

  • des #7 7 months ago

    online pass garbage strikes again

  • bad09 #8 7 months ago

    @andytheadequate

    Console piracy has always been king, PC has taken that crown in the age of internet with it's ease and the difficulty in hacking this gens machines (well except for the Wii) but it's actually increasing on the consoles while over on PC it's decreasing.

  • Frybird #9 7 months ago

    Well, that does indeed kind of suck.

    Not "IM GONNA BOYCOTT GRRR" suck, since i preordered the game anyways and i'm not going to cancel it for something like that, but yeah, sucks.

    I'd be okay with locking up Catwoman as Challenge Mode Character, but locking the story missions strikes me as punishing second hand buyers rather then rewarding first-hand ones.

  • Cylinder #10 7 months ago

    @Vlad
    You're forgetting that it's much harder to play a leaked game on 360 as you need a modded console.

  • HL706 #11 7 months ago

    I thought you needed Catwoman to do some of the Riddler challenges? If so then that means those not buying new can't complete the game 100%

    I know this is Batman and it'll be awesome, but restricting aspects required to complete the game 'poperly' is piss poor!

    Oh and;

    "Meanwhile, reports indicate the Xbox 360 version has been leaked online and is available to download from torrent sites."

    Irresponsible reporting? How many people have EG directed to torrent sites that wouldn't have bothered looking?

  • Darren #12 7 months ago

    "Meanwhile, reports indicate the Xbox 360 version has been leaked online and is available to download from torrent sites."

    I'm sure no-one is surprised by that as it happens with EVERY Xbox 360 game. I knew of someone on the Official Xbox 360 Magazine forum, who claimed he always downloaded Xbox 360 games and never bought a single one! The only reason publishers seem to gang up on the PC is because it is so much easier to pirate games on that platform than the consoles. I've no doubt that the PC version will be up on the torrent sites too ahead of its 11th November release.

  • Vlad27145 #13 7 months ago

    @andytheadequate

    Well, yes. My answer to your question would definitely be "yes". As I previously candidly admitted, on occasions I do download torrented games for my PC, because demos have gone the way of the dodo. This is ok-ish for proven franchises or proven devs, but with the amount of terrible ports the PC is getting, sometimes it's quite necessary to try before I buy. Now, try to do a search yourself, and you'll see that for a great deal of games you will find quite a lot more torrents for the X360 version than for the PC.

  • jablonski #14 7 months ago

    "Meanwhile, reports indicate the Xbox 360 version has been leaked online and is available to download from torrent sites."
    The way this was written, I half expected it to be at the bottom of the article.

    Batman: Arkham City is released on Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, PC and your favourite Torrent site

  • LR100 #15 7 months ago

    Weird, I thought the Catwoman parts in the campaign were an integral part of the story, or at least that's the impression I got.

  • 16bitworld #16 7 months ago

    Had a quick look at the go to website for 360 releases looks like it is indeed leaked, region free also bad news for the devs.

  • Vlad27145 #17 7 months ago

    @Cylinder

    As it was for the PS1 and PS2, unless I've gone completely senile. As it (kind of) is for the PSP. I didn't see that fact stopping piracy from being massive on those platforms...

  • geeza2020 #18 7 months ago

    Companies are not even trying to say its to do with server costs anymore, they just flat out say its so people buying it second hand dont get the product in full working order. Which is really cuntish.

  • Darren #19 7 months ago

    @LR100 - Apparently there are four Catwoman missions which make up 10% of the campaign.

  • Cjail #20 7 months ago

    On the official forums we have been asking for info about this for some days now; I even stated a thread to clarify if the pass is region/user locked or not, so I hope that Eurogamer will get more answers then me.
    Edited by Cjail at 13/10/11 @ 16:12

  • HyperTails #21 7 months ago

    How the hell has this become a sodding discussion about PC vs console piracy? Why did that insecure PC elitist Vlad have to throw a bloody boulder?

    ANYWAY... I always said that I would never accept SP passes, and look what game is getting boycotted now. That's right Bats, yours is! Not like i'm missing much by the sounds of things anyway, the way this game is going i'll have to spend more on DLC than the actual game if I want the complete experience.

  • arcam #22 7 months ago

    Companies are not even trying to say its to do with server costs anymore

    But last time I looked apologists in EG comments threads were...

  • darc #23 7 months ago

    Looking forward to Arkham City, but... is it just me or is all of this a bit more confusing than a video game release ought to be?

  • Vlad27145 #24 7 months ago

    @HyperTails

    Good evening Mr Troll :D Al least I'll choose to consider you such, while trying to respond in a civil manner, without throwing names about ;)
    We have come to discuss the topic, because it's a current one, on which there have been many opinions heard, often not quite accurate. Secondly, I believe it is of interest to gamers in general. All platforms are equally deserving of respect and consideration, as they suit different tastes, provide different options, and are cause of competition, which is necessary to keep any sector healthy.
    I personally own a PSP, PS2, PS3 and PC, so I'm not exactly a PC elitist. I just HATE spinning the truth to best serve one's interest. PC gaming of the "hardcore" variety is not in great health at the moment, due to the fact that consoles provide similar experiences with less hassle, so many have shifted to that option. All the talk about piracy is (mostly) bull. But many don't have the time or interest to check these facts and keep spreading disinformation. The ones of us that aren't ok with it choose to share our opinions, and if they are uninteresting to you, you can easily just skip them.

  • ubergine #25 7 months ago

    wow, I can't believe they went to all that trouble spoiling that Catwoman is a playable part of the story and it turns out she isn't.

    so this is essentially pay-extra-to-unlock-Operation-Ada.

    given how nuts people went when Capcon had people pay extra to play content already on the RE5 disc (to stick with RE analogies) I'm surprised people aren't going more apeshit about this. it's kind of reprehensible, this isn't content being made after the game's release, its not DLC, it's on the disc!

    or... is it...

  • homerramone #26 7 months ago

    Far as I can see online passes (and the things that are really that with another name) were never ever ever about s/h sales or anything other than a means by which for pubs. to get more money.
    This is proof (in case anyone needed it)

    Anyway - they can stick catwoman up their arse...

  • Der_tolle_Emil #27 7 months ago

    I never buy used games so this doesn't affect me but I still find it utterly ridiculous to withhold content from gamers just because they are not willing (or unable to) pay the full price at launch. I hope this whole concept goes down the drain, personally I think this is one of the biggest incentives in recent years to pirate a game - indirectly damaging the entire industry by hurting retail shops. We all know publishers don't get anything for a second hand sale so why not pirate it anyway? At least when you pirate and hack the game you get all the content. This does not change a thing for the publisher, they don't get any money anyway. However, this time retailers get hurt. Less money for retailers (or even worse, less retailers) = even less publicity for games. Publishers should not underestimate the value of window shopping, not everyone gets their information from the internet.

    And that is completely disregarding the fact that a full game (even second hand) might affect future purchases of people a lot more than demos - without costing the publisher a thing!

    Really, I don't see where this is going. I'm not liking it, as I said earlier, this is the worst money grabbing scheme the industry has come up with in recent years and I really, really hope it goes away.

  • Negotiator1 #28 7 months ago

    This has GOTY written all over it, I don't care what's coming out. Also don't pre-order this game form Zavvi if you want it on day of release, very slow delivery from those guys.

  • MrJihad316 #29 7 months ago

    I'm buying this game new anyway, as I do with 90% of my games. As a comic book nerd I have to support the few good comic book games out there. Regardless, I think the "online" pass in general is not a bad idea, but it definitely seems that it's a touchy subject for many gamers. If implemented correctly it could be a highly effective means of curbing secondhand sales by giving additional content to those who buy new. If the developers begin cutting out parts of the game and having consumers pay even more to get the full game, there is a problem. Rocksteady is dancing on that line (surprisingly ahead of Activision.)

  • -cerberus- #30 7 months ago

    No problem, let me just add this game to my 'Not to Buy'-list. Looks like I'll be saving up enough money to buy the Bioshock: Infinite Super Ultra Limited Steelcase Edition Deluxe to the Max. Twice!

  • HyperTails #31 7 months ago

    @Vlad

    You're seriously calling me a troll, when the article was about Catwoman being accessable via a SP pass, with a mention of the 360 version leaked online (not even a mention of the PC). Yet you're the first to comment, with a comment about PC gaming which has nothing to do with the article? And you call me a troll?

    PC piracy is a massive problem. A problem so large, it forces devs to actually not bother to release games on the system at all. And when they do, they DRM it up to the eyeballs, like what Ubisoft has done with its 'always on' DRM. Flip that onto the consoles, and you have to mod the things to be able to play pirated games. Capcom has also said that on PS3, piracy is considerably smaller than 360, which in turn is considerably smaller than PC piracy. The money is on the consoles. That's something that some people here don't like to admit is true, but it is, which is why games are geared towards consoles and not PC's. Even the great PC gaming God John Carmack has just said that his focus will be on consoles from now on.

  • vyseofhr #32 7 months ago

    I've cancelled now. Day one DLC and Pass-coded single player content is taking the michael.
    Glad this has given me one less thing to play, I'll wait for the GOTY edition next March/April now that's actually the complete game.

    Way to go Rocksteady, day one sale lost (not that you'll care).

  • Hindle #33 7 months ago

    Post deleted at 23:04:43 04-04-2012

  • metalangel #34 7 months ago

    First of all, what's on the actual fucking disc? Will you load it up and be presented with a prompt for a dozen 20-character codes so it can determine which parts of the game you're entitled to?

    Second, a singleplayer console game needs an online connection, even for the much coveted original purchaser.

  • coomber #35 7 months ago

    Eurogamer has had this verified by a source.

    What do you normally use to verify stories? Tea leaves?

  • arcam #36 7 months ago

    @HyperTails

    I think he was talking about leaks, rather than piracy. And leaks are fast becoming a console problem - more often than not it's the 360 version that is leaked before any other. Dismiss it now if you like, but it would serve you well to look to the PC industry's response to leaks, because that's what they're going to be doing to console games in a few years time.

  • HyperTails #37 7 months ago

    @arcam

    Piracy is wrong on all levels. If someone pirates games then they are nothing more than a common thief. Yes, when publishers get the chance i'm sure they'll spring DRM on consoles (i've been saying it for a while now), however, with regards to leaks, maybe devs should be looking a little closer to home on this case. I mean, when games get leaked a few weeks before release, who has leaked it?

  • wizlon #38 7 months ago

    800 points, that has to be criminal. They'll be selling used cars without the clutch soon.

  • Redeye #39 7 months ago

    I'll buy the game, but shelling out an extra 800 moon sponds to play as Catwoman? I don't think so.

  • homerramone #40 7 months ago

    Arent they forgetting about the people that dont have online access ? They paid for a full game too !

    I suspect that not everyone is as connected as is believed.

  • Toothball #41 7 months ago

    Well, I was probably going to buy this on Steam in a while so I probably won't notice. I've yet to finish Arkham Asylum after the last sale.

  • telboy007 #42 7 months ago

    So something optional which is there to entice people to buy the game new is causing outrage and fist shaking???

    I don't get it.

    Oh and.... BOOBIES!

  • arcam #43 7 months ago

    Yes, when publishers get the chance i'm sure they'll spring DRM on consoles (i've been saying it for a while now)

    You're commenting in an article about an online pass and a cracked version of Batman doing the rounds - DRM has been on consoles since the beginning. If you mean publishers will spring even stricter DRM on consoles, then I think you're right about that one.

  • StooMonster #44 7 months ago

    So how do I get the Catwoman DLC on my PC version?

    @ bad09 @ andytheadequate

    Years ago I worked in the middle east and was amazed by the level of SNES cartridge piracy, in Arabia it was far easier and significantly cheaper to buy pirate carts and that's from shiny 'game' shops in malls not just market-stalls.

    The pirate versions were even hacked with cheats, so some people would consider "better" than the official ones. They even had modified box art to reflect and promote the cheats, I had a Super Street Fighter II Turbo that was modified.

    Console piracy goes way back.

  • kinky_mong #45 7 months ago

    Vile, cuntish behaviour from Warner Bros*. As has been said, this isn't about covering server costs, it's purely about trying to wring extra money from second hand buyers.

    This, all the pre-order bonuses spread across multiple retailers and the day one DLC have really taken the shine off what was once my most anticipated game of the year.

    *Let's not point the finger at Rocksteady as I doubt this was their decision.

  • TheEarlOfZinger #46 7 months ago

    "it's purely about trying to wring extra money from second hand buyers. "

    Business, how does it work?

  • StooMonster #47 7 months ago

    HyperTails: I mean, when games get leaked a few weeks before release, who has leaked it?

    The disc duplicator? Some one in warehousing? A reviewer? There are plenty of people with access to games before they are released other than the developers.

  • MisterM #48 7 months ago

    Right, fuck this game. I wanted this, as I thought the first one was great, but the more I found out is locked, the more I don't want it. Fuck you, Rocksteady, you money grubbing arseholes.

  • Bluetooth #49 7 months ago

    This is understandable when you see retailers constantly buying a game for a few £s less than the purchase price, then selling it for 100% profit... so that's two people who have played the game, but only 1 sale has gone to the publisher/developer.

    There should be a way for offline players to register/unlock their content without net access though

    to the neggers: well how would YOU combat second hand sales killing off revenue for publishers and developers then? Selling online via Steam etc. is the only good solution I have seen, but it would be terrible if physical media just disappeared so I hope there are other solutions.
    Edited by Bluetooth at 13/10/11 @ 17:41

  • Cjail #50 7 months ago

    After the Update Comment.

    Nice to finally see how it will work...I just hope my UK copy/code will be compatible with other EU stores!

    P.S.
    7.99£ is more or less 1/5 of the game's price so I suppose this will be a problem for some people but I would like to say that for awesome games such as Arkham City it might still be worth!
    Edited by Cjail at 13/10/11 @ 17:18

  • Hunam #51 7 months ago

    Wow, Warner are trying to do a proper number on this game.

  • beastmaster #52 7 months ago

    So, hang on. I'm getting super-duper collectors edition and still have to pay for this? Meh!

  • Cjail #53 7 months ago

    @beastmaster
    If you buy it new the code is included: you don't have to pay for it unless you are buying it used!

  • Paulie_P #54 7 months ago

    Jesus Christ, I just want to buy the game, full experience instead of going to buy extra dlc or having to input codes for downloads. All this shit really is making me reconsider buying this and I loved the first one.

  • cynical #55 7 months ago

    "wring extra money from second hand buyers"

    The second hand buyers are essentially saying "fuck you WB and Rocksteady, I don't care that you worked hard and spent millions making this game, you're not getting my money. I'd rather get it for £5 less and give all the money to someone other than you".

    Is it any wonder than WB/Rocksteady are trying to get SOMETHING back for their efforts?

  • kinky_mong #56 7 months ago

    @TheEarlofZinger: Business, how does it work?

    Part of it is surely installing confidence in your customers so they will continue to buy future products? Buying a game only to find out you have to pay extra to access all the stuff on the disc won't do that.

  • metalangel #57 7 months ago

    @Bluetooth: I'd make a game people wouldn't want to trade in, at a price to make a new copy an impulse purchase. I'd also not be a big enough asshole to think I was somehow entitled to more money if a copy of the game gets resold.

  • metalangel #58 7 months ago

    @cynical: how do you think firsthand buyers feel about not having all the stuff unless they preorder the game from like three different stores?

  • arcam #59 7 months ago

    @metalangel

    People who don't preorder are essentially saying: "Fuck you WB and Rocksteady" so they deserve everything they get. /s

  • bad09 #60 7 months ago

    "well how would YOU combat second hand sales killing off revenue for publishers and developers then?"

    Nothing to combat in the first place. What people do with their goods is up to them, the industry can fuck off it's none of their business.

  • cynical #61 7 months ago

    @metalangel: I hate that shit. But that is not what this article is about. This article simply states that if you give WB/Rocksteady some money you'll get Catwoman, if you don't, then you don't get Catwoman.

  • cynical #62 7 months ago

    @arcam If you don't preorder, you're not actually losing anything. If you do preorder, then you are getting extra stuff for your trouble.

  • metalangel #63 7 months ago

    @cynical: fair enough, I am on about just how much of this game seems to be hidden behind DLC unlocking codes, that there's even stuff on the disc you need a code for is the icing on the cake.

  • danger.to.others #64 7 months ago

    Come on, Eurogamer! Was it needed for you to announce torrent sites have a leaked version, rumor or not?
    And don't use the cop out that all the other sites announce it too, because they're wrong, too. I'm suprised you don't just throw up a link.
    The thieves (you're not pirates, you're thieves) will know it already, since stealing is what they do. All saying it's out there in this article is telling somebody (usually a kid) too apathetic or stupid to see it as stealing to consider searching it out.
    Hey, you're kind of like Satan, Eurogamer! The snake tempting Eve.

    Let's all remember to place anger where it belongs, if you hate having to enter codes to get the rest of your stuff when you purchased a new copy. I hate it too. But it's not the publishers fault, it's the inbred waste of life's who are "pirates." They created this nusiance, but I support anything that gets more money in the developer's pocket instead of the stores.

    Support art, kill a pirate.

  • Cjail #65 7 months ago

    cynical is right about everything!
    Also the code is included in every NEW copy of the game not in every PRE-ORDER copy!
    If you buy Arkham City NEW in 2012 you are still going to get the code!
    RAGE just did something like this and nobody panicked: why?
    Edited by Cjail at 13/10/11 @ 18:14

  • RevanNL #66 7 months ago

    FUCK YOU WB! Thinking about either cancelling my pre-order or handing a second hand buyer my code. Did the same thing with Dead Space 2 (although it did help that the MP was crap anyway).

  • metalangel #67 7 months ago

    @danger.to.others: so you're saying that all these online passes are actually to stop piracy, not second hand buyers? Or are you saying that second hand buyers are all "thieves" too?

  • Death-Jester #68 7 months ago

    Wow, just look at all the cool things pirates get without any of the hassles we have to endure! Online Pass is the best*!


    *way of pushing more people into piracy

  • VibratingDonkey #69 7 months ago

    Why must everything surrounding this game be terrible?

  • DisneyJon #70 7 months ago

    Another case of greedy developers locking off part of the content of the disc behind a money making scheme. Accessing this single player content has no additional cost to the developer or publisher. Greedy and scheming IMO.

    And in true PC fashing.....those who have pirated the game get the Cat Woman content having paid nothing for the entire game at all. Still, it's easier for developers to target paying customers isnt it?

  • AVisualEpiphany #71 7 months ago

    Yet again, only affects those who wish to save FIVE POUNDS to buy used, giving all their money to the retailers rather than the people that have spent years MAKING THE GAME...
    Neg away, I shall continue to post the exact same thing any time one of these stories shows up as I honestly do not understand why people see the need to buy pre-owned in the first place when all you save is a few pounds (Or pay even more than a NEW copy)

  • mr_bez #72 7 months ago

    Online pass is one thing, as anyone who's buying a game for the online content obviously has an online connection. This is much worse. Plenty of people who don't have an online connection and buy games solely for single player are gonna miss out.
    It's also the start of a very slippery slope. How long before all boxed games need online validation with a single use code before you can play at all?

  • Der_tolle_Emil #73 7 months ago

    @Bluetooth: Why combat second hand sales at all? This is nothing special - music, videos, cars, electronics, clothes, newspapers, god knows what. Second hand sales are NOT a problem. Publishers are not trying to solve a serious problem here, they are trying to get ways to get more money - which is fine, they are a business - however, they are screwing customers and retailers with this.

  • gandhimaster #74 7 months ago

    kinky_mong - to be fair, WB aren't trying to get extra money from 2nd hand buyers.

    They are trying to get some financial compensation for their 2 year efforts to make a game, that people want to play but end up giving 100% of their money to a retailer rather than the people who actually made the game.

  • stryker1121 #75 7 months ago

    So those of us who are buying first day but are not online get screwed out of the CW content? That's some bullshit right there.

  • hazelam #76 7 months ago

    fucking disgusting, they can shove this game up their fucking arses.
    they've got more chance of fitting that batman statue up there than they have of me ever giving them a fucking penny for this game now.

    and i would have bought it new.
    but these greedy cunts have to learn they're not in fucking control here.

  • gandhimaster #77 7 months ago

    the second hand car sales are back again!

    seriously, ALL producers of content/products/services in every section of business etc deserve to be compensated for their efforts.

    luckily (or not depending on your viewpoint) video game developers/publishers have the means to try to reduce second hand sales whereby they receive no payment. if car sales etc could introduce a similar system i bet they would.

    people need to stop complaining like children and think how they would feel if they spent 2 years + of their lives working their arses off creating something that people ended up giving all the money to a retailer so they could save a fiver.

    seriously. why do you guys not want to see people rewarded for their work?
    Edited by gandhimaster at 13/10/11 @ 19:47

  • gandhimaster #78 7 months ago

    oh, and whilst I'm on my high horse, if the complaint of "i can't afford brand new" comes up.....

    not everybody can afford things, new or otherwise. but you just have to get on with it. save up, work harder, be more careful with your spending.

    you can't have everything you want. /end rant. ;-P

  • metalangel #79 7 months ago

    @gandhi: if my business plan doesn't account for the fact my product can be sold secondhand, I need a new business plan. Period.

  • bad09 #80 7 months ago

    "ALL producers of content/products/services in every section of business etc deserve to be compensated for their efforts."

    They DO get compensated!!!!! All those 2nd hand copies are bought from somewhere. What you are trying to say there without sounding like a loon is consumers should not have the right to sell on goods in a complete form so the games industry can earn a percentage from your sale of your goods.

    If they do it or not it's down to them but FFS let's stop defending this crap as something needed or deserved. It's a crappy sales tactic to get some extra dough they could never dream of getting before while at the same time devaluing the goods YOU bought. Nothing more.
    Edited by bad09 at 13/10/11 @ 19:53

  • gandhimaster #81 7 months ago

    The problem is not people selling their copy after they have decided they don't want it anymore tho, is it?

    It's retailers having one shelf of band new and pushing pre owned down our throats and making it almost impossible to buy a new copy of anything.

    If I sell my old game on eBay that is one thing (selling my car or something too for example) but the game retailers are actually trying to kill brand new sales by the way they are operating their businesses.

    That's a fair complaint I feel.

  • tiny_Pepper #82 7 months ago

    Gah, so many issues, where do I start

    1) Jeez, how many of you cant even read! It clearly says its only for preowned copies. So if you buy it new you get CW!

    2) Also, pirates clearly dont get more/the same as a true purchaser as they obviously cant redeem a code they dont have!

    3)Why does everyone also assume that if you're getting it secondhand you're having content taken away? Hardly anyone argues that they're actually giving you something free to say thanks for buying.
    Also, if people know that content is missing then wont they just pay less for second hand to compensate. Then they can buy the DLC and they've got the same game as everyone else, they've paid the same as they would for a normal second hand game and they've also helped out the developer. Win win! (except that the store makes less but they're the ones that makes the whole preowned issue so much worse)

    4) Those people saying they're cancelling their orders. Are you insane? Reviews so far (and we'll see for real tomorrow when the online embargo ends) seem to think that this is not only one of the games of the year but also this generation. You honestly telling me you'd pass on that because the person you might sell your copy to might want (no garentee) to pay for the dlc you got for free? (although you're probably ranting and still planning to get it. Remember all those MW2 people who said they'd boycott and then were found playing the game day1 :))

  • AVisualEpiphany #83 7 months ago

    @hazelam
    ...Going by your post, I assume you had been planning to buy a used copy
    Care to explain why?

    I honestly would like an explanation as to why you people have to save that WHOLE FIVE POUNDS
    (...Is it the 1 extra McDonald's you're gonna miss?)
    Not buying new does hurt the devs/pubs. It also screws with sales figures therefore affecting the future of a product or brand. You're giving away your money to the retailers who are constantly ripping you off with THEIR shit prices.
    They also get anywhere from 25-50% on each sale of a NEW copy...so, why?

  • bad09 #84 7 months ago

    @gandhimaster

    We've had stores selling 2nd hand for decades and the chains have been doing it since we got high street gaming chains, it only became a "problem" when we were well established in a console generation easily tied to the internet and the high sales of a few years ago started falling.

    Like I said if they are gonna do it fine but certain groups of gaming "consumers" need to stop the bleeding hearts routine and stop pretending this industry is a "friend" who needs support. They are doing it to screw every single person they can out of a little extra dough, no other reason.
    Edited by bad09 at 13/10/11 @ 20:04

  • jonc24 #85 7 months ago

    Why are there always apologists defending this kind of stuff? It's YOUR game you just paid full price for. WB games have artificially devalued YOUR property so they can make a few extra quid off the next mug who buys it( if you decide to trade). Why are we treating these developers and publishers like they're are friends? We don't owe them anything. If I pay 80 euro for the collectors edition I've preordered then they've got what they want. It's absolutely none of their business if I choose to trade it in to offset the purchase of my next game. What they never realise is, how many people will be trading another game in to subsidise their Arkham City preorder? How many simply wouldn't/couldn't buy it without that option? Wait till you have kids who want to play your games but cant play them properly as some knob in a publishers decided so. For anyone on here that defends this crap, please know that it won't stop here. Don't go saying that we have to support the developers when this online pass money only goes straight to the publishers. Plus, if it's such a threat to the industry then why is it only the bigger AAA games that use this tactic? You don't see smaller devs pulling this and they can do with the extra revenue.
    Apologies for the length but my blood boils when I see people bending over for these companies then saying please!

  • gandhimaster #86 7 months ago

    I feel gamers are being rewarded for supporting developers, not punished for buying second hand.

    I believe that we have the right to sell on a product, no question. And yes, stores have been selling pre owned stuff but not to the current level of saturation.

    I've had situation where game station actually sold me a pre owned copy of a game when I took the new version up to the counter. I bought 3 games (1 pre owned lol) so didn't notice the price difference.

    As I say, I'm not against pre owned, but it has got out of hand and that's only hurting everybody really isn't it?

  • tiny_Pepper #87 7 months ago

    @bad09 This very site ran an article not that long ago about greatly rising development costs coupled with a stable price point (actually lower than it used to be, £70 for Sf2T on the snes anyone). How anyone can argue that £35-45 for (reportedly in this case) 40h of content is too much is crazy (compare it to film £10 for 2h or live premier football at £45 for 2h). If sales are falling as you suggest (I honestly dont know) then is it any wonder that they have to find other ways of funding the great games we all love?
    What would you rather have (dont say it all, thats just childish and also unrealistic for reasons I've just explained) a game at its true cost (lets say £60-80) or the same game with some of the fringe/smaller elements that you might not even care about offered as extras on an initial £40 outlay. More choice! Sounds rather sweet for the buyer put that way.

  • gandhimaster #88 7 months ago

    Jonc24 - little publishers etc can't afford to use an online pass as they can't risk losing any potential band new buyers.

    The online pass system puts alot of people off, as is evident here, but the bigger games can get away with it.

    Also, by saying publishers get the money not developers, publishers are the ones financing the developers so it does still ensure new games get made.

    I'll repeat again, I don't want people to be forced to stop selling their used games etc. but I do think retailers need to be reigned in a bit as they really are the cause of alot of these problems.

    When even supermarkets are getting involved in trade ins, that should tell us how profitable it is to sell second hand instead of new.

  • jonc24 #89 7 months ago

    @aVisualEpiphany
    Your retail figures simply aren't true I'm afraid. The cost price of Arkham City (in Ireland) is 37 Euro, it'll be sold for 49.99 or even 44.99 in some places. That's a maximum of 13 Euro "profit" ( as you call it). But you're forgetting VAT (21% in Ireland), a percentage to pay for rent, staff, bills, delivery, and admin costs. It's not the free for all that it seems

  • tiny_Pepper #90 7 months ago

    @jonc24

    Yes its your game and yes you're free to sell it on. They're not stopping you. They're just saying that you cant sell the free dlc they gave you as a thank you for buying it new.
    Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Is it really that hard to see?

  • bad09 #91 7 months ago

    @gandhimaster

    See now I don't understand that. You support this stuff and say it's got out of hand but admit you shop at gamestation. Instead of cheering the death of a consumers right to sell a complete product on that they no longer want maybe some of you supporters of this nonsense should stop shopping at Gamestation or Game?

  • gandhimaster #92 7 months ago

    Asi said mate, I don't disagree with the ability to sell or trade in.

    What I don't agree with is how the shops present and market pre owned.

    I bought a new copy of FIFA, attempted a new copy of halo reach, but bought a pre owned copy of final fantasy 13 for my wife, as she had already completed the PS3 version and wanted to achievement hunt the 360 version.

    As I say, I buy pre owned. I trade in. It's not something I feel we shouldn't do.

    But i am arguing that the gamers who complain that a publisher is trying to encourage new sales, in order to actually make money, are not being fair.

    ps @bad I didn't neg you, by the way, you have a good point regards me buying pre owned. I support the added content for new buyers, and the gamers who buy pre owned. My beef is with the people who seem to hate a company for trying to ensure they get paid for their work. There needs to be more of a middle ground I feel.
    Edited by gandhimaster at 13/10/11 @ 20:31

  • Stomp224 #93 7 months ago

    Is there anything in this game available to access without a sodding code?

  • jonc24 #94 7 months ago

    @tinypepper
    But it's not free DLC, it's something they've simply blocked access to. I always buy my games new and day one as I'm impatient as hell butnmy 13 year old son should be able to access thecsame content on the copy ill be paying 80 quid for.

  • bad09 #95 7 months ago

    @gandhimaster

    Yeah but the point is you shop in a store that sells 2nd hand the way you dislike (not every shop sells like that). Why on earth would a consumer shop with someone when they do not like their business practices????

    I would say devaluing a product by cutting it up for DLC to charge for and turning console gaming into PC with all these crappy codes to input is not they way to encourage new sales, given how Ubisoft has already sent out invalid codes with one game I'd say they may well actually dent confidence in their products.

  • metalangel #96 7 months ago

    Attention corporate apologists: these companies are not your friends, no matter how much pleasure their products might give you and the affection you feel as a result. They don't give a fuck about anything except the cash in your wallet, defending them is not going to get you anything.

    If you were struggling to pay your bills, would you expect Warner to send you some money? Why should their mismanaging of their finances therefore become our problem?
    Edited by metalangel at 13/10/11 @ 20:35

  • kceenav #97 7 months ago

    @AVisualEpiphany: Your point of view falls short of reality in a similar way as when people insinuate the number of lost sales due to piracy were nearly as high as the number of pirated copies.

    Someone 'must' buy a used copy for another being able to sell one. What is the seller doing with his sales revenue? Buying something different altogether? Or buying (an) other game(s)?
    I presume people participating in trade of used games typically do it to (legally) get access to several game-titles on a limited budget. Not everyone of them could afford to increase their gaming-budget. And those who could wouldn't necessarily do it -- or not as much as to purchase every game new they are interested in.

    So it's debatable how much of a "loss" for developers/publishers results from those who tend to buy a used copy "just to save 5 bucks". (See, same as with piracy.)

    Anyhow -- I think in this case the amount of content being reserved for "online-pass" owners is too high. One "chapter" might have been okay to reduce the value of a used copy a tiny bit (just like a book is not exactly "good as new" once it has been read). But 4 chapters, and ones featuring the alluring Cat Woman, equal much more than a tiny (unessential) bit...

  • tiny_Pepper #98 7 months ago

    @jonc24
    That's a matter of opinion and one you can't back with data or facts. How do you know if they'd have even written the catwoman stuff if they hadn't decided to do an online pass? Only thing I can see in you favour is timing of release.
    Would you still be complaining if they'd released catwoman in a months time and had given new purchasers a code for "one free dlc". Id expect youd be less likely and yet financially it's exactly the same scenario.

  • gandhimaster #99 7 months ago

    @bad09 I don't shop exclusively at game or game station, but I agree the only way to show my displeasure at them would be to not shop there. Very good point.

    But I go back to my (hopefully not too hypocritical) reasoning. That even tho I am pro brand new, I am not anti-pre owned.
    I buy brand new when possible (availability/bank balance etc) and that ranges from shops in town to amazon/play/shopto etc.

    Just happened that day was in game station.

    The industry will either die (too extreme obviously) or they will come up with ways of protecting themselves. We have the choice to buy/sell pre owned if we wish, we are lucky to have the choices and whatnot. But if we must accept that if a company can try and make more money it will. I really get annoyed by those who actually won't buy brand new purely out of some ridiculous hatred for a publisher who wants to receive money for their efforts. Gamers who buy some new, some pre owned, mixture of both etc are all good by me,

    Even somebody saying "I really have to trade two games so I can get a new one" is fine by me. But there are people on here who are so against publishers' attempts to make any money that they are the reasons these comments threads always kick off.

    If a pre owned sale even gave publishers a small "royalty" payment from retailers that'd be a start, I think it will only get worse if retailers don't start to scale back a bit. Sorry for the rants but so many people want something for nothing in this world. Not you, you seem to have a balanced view mate....

  • mattigan #100 7 months ago

    I don't have a problem with it at all, I will buy the game new, it will come with the code which I will enter in about 30 seconds and enjoy the full game. Once I've had my fill, it will go on ebay, I don't give a shit if whoever buys it has to pay an extra £7 to get the full experience.

  • tiny_Pepper #101 7 months ago

    @jonc24
    Oops realised an error in my timing case. If you don't use the free dlc you could sell that too but I think my point is still valid

    Also, 13 year old son? The games a 15! Shame on you ;)

  • arcam #102 7 months ago

    According to wiki, EA made half a billion pounds profit last year, GAME made 15 million. GAME is EA's customer. Which is the company with the real power here? Surely there's some room for negotiation and/or compromise?

    If EA have a problem with the the retailer, sort it out with the retailer. Instead, they directly target the gamer while they both continue to do millions of pounds worth of business with each other and bug probably the poorest section of the gaming community for their measly £7 to play a shitty tacked-on multiplayer that that they only built so they could charge that £7 in the first place. It's just greed, but that's business for you. Unless one of these companies is paying his wages, the consumer should look out for himself.

  • bad09 #103 7 months ago

    @gandhimaster

    Yeah don't shop at game or gamestation,rip off scum and we are better off without them (and HMV).

    I think you raise a point there that may bite them on the arse actually the "I'm buying 2nd hand" protest buys. As this thing gets worse (and it will get worse now pandoras box is open, trust me PC style DRM WILL come to consoles now) how many of them will turn to piracy for their boycott? Personally I fully support someones right to legally play a game and not fund the actions of a publisher or developer they disagree with, limiting that legal protest will only serve to increase piracy. Honestly as a consumer I couldn't care less if someone played their precious game without handing over a liver, they bought the game from someone else big deal doesn't mean you are entitled to anything justr because you made the product orginally.

    The royalty idea is actually one that crossed my mind to, but how do you enforce that if someone says no and do you do it to everyone or just the big chains? Lets be honest small shops make practically nothing on new and need 2nd hand just to keep their stores open so asking them for money would hurt them a great deal. Maybe the publishers should look at investing in these big stores as shareholders or something, might be more ideal get involved with their business directly and earn from it.

    But then if why would you want to invest in something you are trying to destroy anyway? Remember big retail chains have only got more aggressive with 2nd hand now the industry wants to go digital, the ramp up in 2nd hand promotions and advertising from big chains has only really come about in the last couple of years as digital on consoles got more popular and publishers are pushing it more.
    Edited by bad09 at 13/10/11 @ 21:05

  • gandhimaster #104 7 months ago

    i agree bad, for sure.

    they should get their heads together and compromise.

    i think the industry will push for a system such as onlive for consoles. or steam style at least at the start.

    if they can't reduce second hand sales via fair means, then foul, they'll just go download/streaming only and that is a potential minefield.

    i love streaming music from spotify, and films from love film etc, and when virgin isn't throttling my internet onlive works pretty well and id be happy with that kind of system.

    but it IS coming, sadly for people without decent internet. its the only solution for publishers, i fear.

  • bobdebob #105 7 months ago

    Every time these sort of articles pop up, the comments make it seem like everybody goes out their way to save £5 on recently released game. You people never bought games from market stalls or ebay where you can save £5-£20 on a game new or used?
    Or have friends/relatives that give you unwanted games?

  • bad09 #106 7 months ago

    @gandhimaster


    I do think you are right sadly I to don't mind streaming or downloading stuff but I also like to own something physical a lot more as do the majority I reckon. It certainly isn't the only solution but it's the one they clearly want now (well maybe not all but certainly some like Ubi and THQ). Not a solution I'd want mind you, download only on closed console hardware is not something I'd ever consider personally (did not even consider the PSPgo as a purchase despite liking the redesign), hell even on PC I won't go fully into digital until they go DRM free (never gonna happen I know) and can you imagine sorry mess gaming would get into with publishers having the ability to turn off your games if they were streaming everything, gives chills given how bad the industry has already got with our "ownership" of our games.

  • mossmanfly #107 7 months ago

    What I think alot of people are missing is the fact that game companies need to make money. They release a game in the hope that people will buy it and it makes money so they can actually make another one. If they dont make money then a game will either not get a sequel or that game studio could be shut down.

    The problem is that 2nd hand sales have got to the point where stores such as GAME highlight the pre owned section so much that new sales are being affected. Pre owned prices arent that much cheaper, maybe £2-5. The thing is GAME or whoever get all the profit from that sale, they might of given you £25 for that game and sell it for £30 and that £5 is all profit for GAME.

    We know that really a game needs to probably sell 1 million new units to probably break even or make a profit. Now what if only 100,000 copies were bought new but another 900,000 bought 2nd hand so actually 1 million units were sold but only 1 in 10 were new. The games developer would get the money for 100,000 units and the stores selling pre owned would benefit from the other 900,000. So basically the game developer/publisher would loose money and shut down or the sequel wouldnt get made etc. Dont forget GAME etc get money from new games I think somewhere between 15-20%.

    Now im not against people buying 2nd hand, sometimes a game a few years old probably can only be found 2nd hand. But people must understand that buying 2nd hand the developer gets NO MONEY. So these online passes are a way for that developer to gain some of that lost revenue and actually hope to make a profit from their game.

    In the case of Batman maybe it shouldnt be called an "online" pass but the principle is the same. How many people will go in a week later and buy a used copy £2 cheaper than a new version, just to save a few pounds? And Rocksteady would get £0 for there effort and maybe even make zero profit on the game and maybe loose money, and that sequel that people will want wont get made.

    Alot of the comments are from people buying new versions, and saying they will cancel pre orders etc why? You get the code supplied. You wont miss out on any content apart from any future DLC, and if you want that wait for the GOTY. If you always buy new games then why would it matter it only matters to people that buy pre owned.

    I think people will start to reconsider 2nd hand especially as it really means that you will ultimately spend more than buying a new version, unless you are lucky enough to find a used version with an unused code.

    I buy all my games new never ever bought 2nd hand with any console I have owned, mostly I get the bargins when they are £20 or less or wait till the GOTY as alot of the bigger games seem to release one, so I may not give the full amount to the developers but at least I do support them. But I believe that GAME should at least warn people over online passes if they dont already, and maybe even think about dropping prices or not try and push pre owned onto people, as otherwise game companies will continue to find ways of making money out of lost 2nd hand sales. Maybe in the future games will be download only completely getting rid of GAME and all the other places that sell 2nd hand, the term "dont bite the hand that feeds you" comes to mind.

    Just a quick note about the DLC especially launch DLC, that I have more of an issue with than anything. Especially if its content that no copy of the game has and if you want it you have to buy whether its a new or used copy. Same with all the different retail only DLC bonuses, Batman must have about 10 different versions for different stores/websites to sell.
    Edited by mossmanfly at 13/10/11 @ 22:55

  • FuzzyDuck #108 7 months ago

    I'm getting it day1 still,l but i'm at the point where i'm not sure what content i can/can't access, particularly with my flakey new net connection
    Edited by FuzzyDuck at 14/10/11 @ 00:34

  • svenjl #109 7 months ago

    And a big FUCK YOU to Warner Bros again for screwing us with pre-release DLC announcements and now this shit. I feel sorry for Rocksteady. I was going to get this game until I read this article. All this time selling a game with Catwoman at E3 and other events, showing off her character in demos etc. And now I have to be online or pay for the privilege?!!! Instead of spouting crap about 2nd hand game sales, how about treating full price paying customers with respect instead your fucking lap dogs, as a matter of principle. I am apeshit angry about this. I was REALLY looking forward to this. I am not connected online, and don't play multiplayer as a result - my choice - and I don't honestly have time in my life to play multiplayer modes as well as single-player. So I would be screwed every which way by buying this game. What's that WB? I can still complete the game without 10% of the game that Catwoman would otherwise be part of...oh, cool...no, wait...FUCK YOU again. I will not put up with being roasted by publishers who plainly put profits before gamers. My heart has sunk to my fucking left foot, you pricks. Never buying a Warner Bros game again. Really sorry, Rocksteady.

    BTW - I don't see CD Project and THQ fleecing gamers with The Witcher 2. They have provided FREE updates and additional features for PC gamers and are including ALL of those in the 360 disc release next year. This is a visually gorgeous, huge RPG of a length and creative scope easily equal to that of Batman. It will sell fewer copies than Batman, and yet nobody is missing out on parts of their game in the name of a few extra quid. The Witcher 2 = day one, full price purchase + much love to CDP.
    Edited by svenjl at 14/10/11 @ 00:10

  • Batmanfan #110 7 months ago

    Chill The Fuck Out Your'll Be Play As Her If YOU Per Order The Game

  • mossmanfly #111 7 months ago

    @svenjl

    Theres a big difference between PC market and Console market. For 1, digital downloads are alot bigger in numbers so you cant trade in games that you download, and 2nd you cant trade in PC games in shops anyway. So every copy of a PC game sold the developer gets money unless your pirate it of course but thats a different issue.

    Im not saying Witcher 2 on Xbox 360 will have some sort of online pass but you never know, depends if they feel the 2nd hand market will take away valuable sales and profit away from them and cause them to actually loose money on the port of the 360 version.

  • bad09 #112 7 months ago

    @mossmanfly

    No way, CD projekt are a beacon of light and hope on how things should be done on PC they won't suddenly change into arseholes just because they are releasing on 360. You'll see none of this crap on a game from them, trust me.
    Edited by bad09 at 14/10/11 @ 00:39

  • superdmonkey #113 7 months ago

    @bad09

    I love the second witcher game, and I hope CD projekt continue down the same path. But didn't the first batman have no "online" pass, come out in canada at a reduced price, and feature free DLC after it was released? And now this on their second batman game as a thanks to those who supported the first one? What happened rocksteady? What you have planned next to surprise us with right before launch. "Forgetting" to put the codes in 1/2 the games you ship, then have a lengthy process you make people go through if you didn't get a code, in hopes people will just give up and buy an additional code to replace the missing one?

    As many others have said, the amount of content locked behind preorders was enough. This is too much. Much as I loved the first game, I'll be passing on this one. Stand for something or you'll fall for anything. Besides uncharted 3 is just around the corner.
    Edited by superdmonkey at 14/10/11 @ 01:37

  • stryker1121 #114 7 months ago

    I too find it aggravating that this news comes less than a week before the game's release, after months of hyping up the playable CW character. Guess they didn't want people cancelling their pre-orders.

  • Loghorn #115 7 months ago

    I hate to say this, but the practices of what publishers/developers keep on doing such as Online passes/Season passes, DLC, DRM, Day One/pre-order/On disc DLC, single player content passes locking side quests (such as on RAGE), just makes me want to hope for another video game crash to happen so it'll make the publishers/developers wake the **** up.

    I miss the old days when all this crap didn't happen on gaming consoles or handhelds before this gen. Ugh.

  • Nephirion #116 7 months ago

    fucking xbots

  • tancredo #117 7 months ago

    So players with no internet connection are basically purchasing 90% of the game because they cannot get access to the Catwoman content
    ...
    ...

    Just perfect

  • Uncompetative #118 7 months ago

    Just make the whole thing a digital download.

    Xbox LIVE Marketplace Games on Demand:

    Batman: Arkham City (including Catwoman)

    on the day of release - full price in MS points

  • Sonic_D #119 7 months ago

    I would get worked up, but since I am gonna buy a new copy I can't be bothered.

  • Darth_Flibble #120 7 months ago

    Soon it will be you can't sell your games due to the fact there is one use unlock code for the entire game. If the industry thinks they can do it, they will. The unlock pass actually DE-VALUES your game as you have to sell it for less to eg the pass is 7.99 and I have to sell it for less than £30 as you can buy it new for £37.99. The online pass has actually made more trade ins at Game or HMV as they do deals as it better to trade then sell it on ebay. Developers have a problem with ALL second hand sales not just Game etc as in their view any 2nd hand sale is a "lost" sale. Sorry does not work that way

  • TudeScud #121 7 months ago

    I would agree with the publishers selling content in a more piecemeal method, IF you could pass on the content if you so choose.

    @svenji While THQ may be handling the console version of TW2, they're hardly the good guys on this front. They were among the first to adopt the online pass, not to mention the insanity of their charging methods for MX vs ATV Alive and they're not handling all of the free content on the PC. Namco Bandai actually handled the PC retail version, and now they're using litigation against CDP for removing the DRM from the retail release.

    Really puts things in perspective when a publisher is willing to go to those lengths.

    @superdmonkey Of course Uncharted 3 has Sony's online pass.

    /headache

  • andrewrainnie #122 7 months ago

    My email to Rocksteady:

    Dear Rocksteady,

    Today I read an article (http://mediakick.org/2011/10/14/online-p... and could not agree more with it, especially this excerpt. "Whilst we’re well into a phase where online passes and activation codes for online portions of the game are becoming commonplace, the notion of having to unlock a section of your single-player campaign is outright disgraceful. "

    I have written to you before about the DLC content for Batman: AC and how I felt cheated for paying for a code that would unlock something on the disc I had already purchased, but that was a challenge map outwith the main game, but it did not affect the main game; it was an added bonus I since decided I could live without.

    As the article states though, the Catwoman content is part of the single-player game. I don't care much for multiplayer, I love games with great single player modes and even better, compelling plot. Batman: Arkham Asylum had both, it was one of my favourite games from the last few years, and I have been actively looking forward to the sequel.

    But now I definitely won't be buying Batman: AC. My PS3 is not connected to the internet, so I don't understand why I should be cheated out of the full game experience because of my lack of an internet connection. It is crossing a line that infringes upon what I feel is my rights as a consumer and video game player. I have no doubt your lawyers would disagree, but I also doubt they play your games.

    It has been pointed out that this online pass is an attempt to combat piracy or, more likely, 2nd hand games, but surely your company can see it from the consumer point of view - if we don't have internet access, why should we pay full price and miss one tenth of the game? Can you not see that this will drive more people to buy the game 2nd hand, because they will see it as a 2nd rate experience?

    From the reviews I've read online, you have crafted a beautiful and visceral game that surpasses the original, so congratulations, and I wish you every success with it. But, after the celebration when the sales numbers come in, I would just ask that you spare a thought for myself and some of the other gamers who do not have access to the internet, and how we are playing your game but not all of it. The work you put in, not everyone will get to enjoy, all because of a silly online first purchase pass.

    I hope the introduction of this pass was worth the loss of mine and, given the comments on N4G and other sites, many other purchases.

    Yours Sincerely

  • TudeScud #123 7 months ago

    I'm getting a dead link there, Andrew.

    Edit: The end parenthesis must have slipped into your hyperlink. Online passes you have gone too far
    Edited by TudeScud at 16/10/11 @ 14:32

  • Mr.Gordons #124 6 months ago

    I hope no one actually pays for something like this... feels like a kick in the nuts.