Kingdoms of Amalur online pass hides 7 single player quests

By Fred Dutton Published 27 January, 2012

And Mass Effect 3-themed extras.

Forthcoming EA action RPG Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning sees the next evolutionary step of the online pass, with second hand purchasers locked out of single player content until they cough up for the required passcode.

As reported by Destructoid, an online pass included with new copies of the game in the US offers access to the House of Valor faction quest, which includes seven individual single player missions.

In addition, it'll also unlock a Mass Effect 3-themed in-game item - the N7-inspired Shepard's Battle Armour.

EA declined to comment when asked if the same system will be in place in the European release, currently scheduled for 10th February.

Picture of Fred.

About Fred Dutton

Fred Dutton is Eurogamer's US news editor, based in Washington DC.

Read more articles from Fred by visiting the Fred Dutton archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (118) Latest comment 3 weeks ago

  • VicViper #1 4 weeks ago

    Well that's a bit fucked, I thought the online pass was just that for the online stuff, not that I planning to get it anyway the demo was a bit meh.

    You can't call it an online pass then block of the off line bits that called lying.

    Just call it the anti-pre-owned-we-want-full-price-off-you-so-buy-it-new pass and be done with it.

  • Adda #2 4 weeks ago

    Next evolutionary step as already seen in Batman last year. Still bullshit though.

  • byakuya83 #3 4 weeks ago

    I liked the demo but I can't be arsed with this bollocks. I rarely sign into PSN and certainly don't expect to do so to play a new single-player game.

  • Shikasama #4 4 weeks ago

    This should shut the 'server costs' idiots up.

  • Lexx87 #5 4 weeks ago

    What a load of bollocks.

    They don't get this makes people less inclined to buy the game new not more.

  • CORIANA_SIX #6 4 weeks ago

    So it begins...

  • FatalHybrid #7 4 weeks ago

    Really EA? You add this kind of pass to a new IP? They need all the sales they can get right now. The first title is usually always a test of how many units can they get into peoples homes. Once you have some form of brand awareness then start taking risks and rocking the boat slightly, don't do it for a new IP where sales directly influence whether a sequel happens..

  • ZuluHero #8 4 weeks ago

    "Project $10" srikes again!

  • Cjail #9 4 weeks ago

    @byakuya83
    If you usually don't sign in while playing then you lost the extra bonus item from Amalur's demo, ME3 items included.

  • asphaltcowboy #10 4 weeks ago

    Forthcoming EA action RPG Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning sees the next evolutionary step of the online pass, with second hand purchasers locked out of single player content until they cough up for the required passcode.
    Have you heard of Batman: Arkham City?

    Also: More money for the devs rather than the retailers? Good thing.

  • uknortherner2000 #11 4 weeks ago

    "In addition, it'll also unlock a Mass Effect 3-themed in-game item - the N7-inspired Shepard's Battle Armour."

    An excellent way to break immersion right there. Along with this online pass bollocks.

  • diver_gr #12 4 weeks ago

    i liked the demo but i am furious about what they are doing .Like Batman i won;t buy Amalur untils it goes down to 15-20$ new .

  • Letsalljusthavefun #13 4 weeks ago

    Second-hand purchasers *and* offline players.

    I know it's a small distinction, since most people do have an online connection these days, but there will be a few people who are not connected for various reasons who are now punished as well.

    And instead of locking off content, howsabout addressing the issue that causes such a large second-hand market: games are just too damn expensive for the everyman. If the rrp for a new release was £30 instead of £50 I'm sure a lot of people would buy new instead of second-hand.

    Make the customer want a new game, they will buy it.

  • FatalHybrid #14 4 weeks ago

    @asphaltcowboy I'd normally agree with the more money for devs than retailers angle. Though this is a new IP if only 400,000 buy this new and then no one buys it used because of this then the game doesn't get a sequel. Games with a legacy like Mass Effect can get away with crap like this because people know they want it no matter what, Amalur on the hand can't it's brand new.

  • Baleoce #15 4 weeks ago

    In the last article about this game I was really enthusiastic. But I refuse to be part of the movement that slowly pulls us into acceptance of these passes, to the point where it's just considered the norm, and second hand users will be considered the new pirates. I'm out.

  • Boku #16 4 weeks ago

    @asphaltcowboy
    Publisher, you mean. Don't fool yourself into thinking the devs will get a penny out of that.

  • HandleMaverick #17 4 weeks ago

    This is so lame. Fine, I'll just wait for it to drop to £10 before I even consider buying it. @asphaltcowboy You're kinda right about Arkham City, but remember the Catwoman stuff was sorta 'separate but parallel' to the game. A more apt comparison would be if part of the city or some sidequests were locked off while playing as Batman.

  • SteveHolt #18 4 weeks ago

    Online pass means I now have my own "project $10" going on - I buy EA games as soon as the price drops to 10$.

  • FatalHybrid #19 4 weeks ago

    @Letsalljusthavefun I agree with the price point issue. The average PC game is £28 with the odd exceptions and PC games sell in abundance for the most part. Yet we see time and time again Console games priced at £40-£50 which is enough to make people reconsider a purchase.

  • Gavilan #20 4 weeks ago

    I just continue to vote with my wallet and refuse to buy any of these games with so called online passes. Gamers are being bled dry from every angle these days. It's sad to see my hobby degenerating like this. :(

  • ZuluHero #21 4 weeks ago

    @FatalHybrid Erm.. When you see X game sells Y thousand copies, that doesn't include second hand sales.

    And publishers/ game devs use 'real' firsthand sales when deciding on making sequels.

    I mean how on earth would a publisher or game dev track it? It just goes straight into the retailer's big money pool. All 100% of it.

  • darkmorgado #22 4 weeks ago

    Good.

    If you're buying secondhand, you're not contributing anything to the developer. Why should you expect to get all the content when the people who made it aren't seeing a penny from you? Be thankful for what you do get.

  • ZuluHero #23 4 weeks ago

    @Boku They might. You don't know what royalties are set up. Sometimes Devs will get a percentage of the sale after a game reaches a target sale mark.

    But that's besides the point, if a game doesn't sell, and a publisher doesn't get that money, there is less chance that they will ask that dev to make a sequel or, in extreme cases, another game.

    So more money for the publisher, actually a good thing, as it indirectly helps keep devs in business so they can make us cool new games to play :)
    Edited by 1 at 27/01/12 @ 18:04

  • darkmorgado #24 4 weeks ago

    @Baleoce

    From the POV of the developer, secondhand users ARE the same as pirates. They're playing the game, taking up online bandwidth, but the developers aren't seeing a penny in revenue from them.

  • asphaltcowboy #25 4 weeks ago

    @gotyourmoney How is it the same money for the retailers? Do you somehow imagine that the retailers make the same margins on new games that they do on second hand?

    Also, all that stuff about devs/pubs getting the money - publishers do actually give money to devs sometimes you know? Inf act, I've heard that they actually finance projects! Also, the more money it makes, the more likely the chance of a sequel, the more likely chance of continued employment.

    Edit: darkmorgado and ZuluHero get +1s!
    Edited by 1 at 27/01/12 @ 18:07

  • homerramone #26 4 weeks ago

    At this rate 5 years from now we will be buying 1 level demos with the rest of the game locked out unless you buy a pa$$.

    Still i shall also vote with my wallet. i thought the demo seemed ok.. but this saves me worrying about it. (Or maybe ill rent it )

  • Gavilan #27 4 weeks ago

    Post deleted at 18:13:00 27-01-2012

  • FatalHybrid #28 4 weeks ago

    @ZuluHero That's typically why the online pass is there. If those used players have to buy a pass off Xbox Live then EA knows that's another purchase. The online pass is one a way for the publisher to make more money but also to calculate just how many people have played the title.

    Those without a pass can't do that but they can project based on how many copies were bought new, how many could be bought used. The publisher just needs to know enough people have played it to green light a sequel, the online pass just makes their jobs a bit easier provided they buy the pass.

  • ZuluHero #29 4 weeks ago

    @FatalHybrid That's a fair point. I didn't get that from your first post though :)

    I'd be interested to see how many people actually buy the DLC, after buying a game 2nd hand.

  • Baleoce #30 4 weeks ago

    @darkmorgado I think you're having a laugh. In what other industry are second hand purchasers considered pirates? For online bandwidth, that original spot has already been payed for by the original owner. There is only ever going to be one person occupying that online slot regardless. And how on earth does that justify the online pass seeping into single player content? If you think this is about ongoing server costs you are sorely mistaken. What "ongoing" costs are there for an offline game? Ridiculous.

  • FatalHybrid #31 4 weeks ago

    @homerramone That already happens. Pretty much every Xbox Live Arcade Game has a "demo" which gives you the first level free and then says "to advance further buy now". We are getting there..

  • silversun #32 4 weeks ago

    ok wont be supporting this pass anytime soon.
    Im sure game will be good and i dont mind online multiplayer pass but this is not a postive step forward.
    Was intresting to see on youtube David Jaffe talk about twisted metal pass and his view i kinda agree with him , it ok to have the pass that fine but i agree a game like that might gain something from not having it.
    locked off single player is a different thing and really not a good thing , if they spun it as we give you this free dlc for buying the game new that would be alot better rather than we will lock you out of this for not buying our game new.
    Edited by 1 at 27/01/12 @ 18:26

  • deded #33 4 weeks ago

    @darkmorgado I'm tempted to agree with you here. I don't like passes/codes, whatever, they're clumsy at best and I wonder how effective they are even at what they're designed to do, never mind in the long run.

    On the other hand, what are you losing? IF you buy second-hand then you don't get access to 7 missions out of what? 150? Big deal. I could lose more 'content' than that through buying from one retailer over another with all the stupid pre-order bull going around right now.

    Again, passes are stupid, but nobody buying this game first-hand loses a thing and second-hand buyers don't lose much either.

  • FatalHybrid #34 4 weeks ago

    @ZuluHero Yeah sorry about that. I know what I mean to say but it never actually hits the screen in the form it's meant to be in lol.

  • Sodding_Gamer #35 4 weeks ago

    They say the only thing they are scared of is people still playing skyrim, then they add this?! This makes people just carry on with their RPG fix (Skyrim) and decide to buy this 8 months down the line when it is a tenner brand new on amazon. Silly move, especially for a brand new IP

  • darkmorgado #36 4 weeks ago

    @spacedelete

    Developers really aren't all rich and riding around in ferraris you know. Publishing execs maybe, but not the devs, who often don't earn much more than you or me.

  • JorgeLuisBorges #37 4 weeks ago

    How much money do game devs get from (for example) microsoft for people playing the game online?

  • Trafford #38 4 weeks ago

    Good. I hate pubes with my games anyway.

  • FatalHybrid #39 4 weeks ago

    @Sodding_Gamer The developer was scared of Skyrim and chances are they had little to no say in this pass.

  • deded #40 4 weeks ago

    @silversun
    if they spun it as we give you this free dlc for buying the game new that would be alot better rather than we will lock you out of this for not buying our game new.
    So now it's alright if they spin it a different way? How's this for spin: we will lock you out of a small part of the game if we - as creators of the game - get no money from you whatsoever. Sound reasonable put that way?

  • Seafort #41 4 weeks ago

    Im guessing this is just for console gamers as kingdoms is locked into either origin or steam so u cant resell it on PC.

  • Lunatic4ever #42 4 weeks ago

    Did not intend to buy it because of the really mediocre demo, so I'm glad I don't have to be upset now.

  • silversun #43 4 weeks ago

    @deded- it shows they care about the people that buy the games new.
    Its there choice to do this but it would be nice see them say let build great support for this new game.

    maybe the stuff they locked out not that important to the game but an extreme example- i would not like to find in 5 years we buying a game with game chapters (built into one game, not being sold like say telltale does with its games) that you pay to unlock , that would be me stop gaming full stop.

    Its all to do with way it is perceived even if some people think what i just said here is ridiculous, i think there is maybe some truth in it.

  • Arsecake_Baker #44 4 weeks ago

    @uknortherner2000

    You beat me to it, why on earth would i want a scifi related armour kit (no matter what it looks like) in my sword n sorcery fantasy title...your losing the plot EA!

    PS Dark Souls! As i don't see it mentioned here :p

  • asphaltcowboy #45 4 weeks ago

    @gotyourmoney Erm... plenty of devs get shuttered after not meeting sales targets. Sure, it might not happen immediately but depending on the size/wealth of your studio, a single game can easily make or break you. If a publisher doesn't have confidence in your new project, who is going to finance it?

    You don't need publishers to release a big budget game? I'd disagree, unless your company has already had a massive success that you can use to finance the next game <- this is the exception rather than the rule.

    I understand the difference between a publisher and a developer and I also understand that most contracts will have royalty considerations such that if it generates enough money, the devs WILL get more money, so no I don't agree that the pubs will see it all and the devs will get nothing. And I also don't agree that all or even most devs will have moved on to a different company after a game is complete (unless it got shuttered).

    @spacedelete All game devs get Ferraris?! Damn, if only I'd known! 8)
    Edited by 1 at 27/01/12 @ 18:50

  • philreeduk #46 4 weeks ago

    Oh well wasn't planning on buying this on launch day anyway, whoever idea it was to sandwich this game in between skyrim and mass effect 3 must be a clever bugger.....

  • Peter_LIAR_Molyneux #47 4 weeks ago

    It all comes down to what you fundamentally believe. If you think that ownership of the physical game belongs to the consumer (which is true by law) then that consumer should be able to do whatever they want with that physical copy, be it selling it to someone else or having it collect dust on a shelf.

    If you believe that publishers have sole ownership of all physical copies even after selling them then you believe that having anything to do with the used market is "stealing" money from them and you will welcome these measures with open arms. In fact you probably are hoping for the destruction of the entire thriving used game market.

    This issue has nothing to do with GAME or Gamestop and how much or how little they charge or pay for used games. It all comes down to whether or not you believe the physical copy is owned by yourself or the publisher that was already paid in full for that specific copy. Any conjecture of what another gamer might or might not have done if not buying your used game doesn't enter into the equation.

  • Bigmac1910 #48 4 weeks ago

    I'll pass then, just cannot support this bullshit. I buy 99% of my games new, just an inconvenience I don't want to deal with.

  • asphaltcowboy #49 4 weeks ago

    @Bigmac1910 What?! If you buy it new, where is the inconvenience?

  • Baleoce #50 4 weeks ago

    @asphaltcowboy did you forget what happened on Arkham City's release? Code's not working etc.

  • FatalHybrid #51 4 weeks ago

    @asphaltcowboy I'm wondering that too.. If it's that much of inconvenience then gaming for @Bigmac1910 is going to end in a year or two when this unfortunately becomes standard practice.

  • silversun #52 4 weeks ago

    @asphaltcowboy- might be a small thing but i know alot people are put off by entering codes and passwords all the time , i dont mind it but other just think what is the point of this.

    I support buying games new but i also support being able to pick up a game years later.

  • deded #53 4 weeks ago

    @silversun It might be the case that buying in small chunks would be good - as long as you don't have to pay a lot for each part. And as you said yourself, if they went that way then you are well able to just not buy it. Not a future that appeals to me, but you never know.

    I pity the developer who busts their ass to make a game, sees lots of sales 'lost' (more on that in a minute) to the second-hand market and then sees numbers of gamers swearing never to buy their game because of actions the publisher takes to limit said 'lost' sales. Buggers must be banging their heads against a wall.

    And yes, I get and agree with the argument that a second-hand purchase might not have been bought at a higher price, but seriously, if people gave a crap about the developer then they could easily wait a few months and buy the game new at much the same price as they could get it second hand. It just takes a quick internet search most of the time.

    Sure, some people can't buy online, in which case you don't have that option, but in that case you'll surely be more upset about missing out on masses of free and paid DLC (and patches) than the DLC-like online pass chunks we're talking about here.

  • deded #54 4 weeks ago

    All the real gamers will buy it on PC anyway. :p /ducks and runs

  • Gavilan #55 4 weeks ago

    @deded Imagine how authors feel when they go into libraries and see their books available for free... My god what is the world coming to!!!
    Games dev's/publishers are not hard done by they just have the ability to lock down their content whereas for other media like books, DVD's & Movies that's not easily possible. Basically we legally own the games we buy therefore we should be able to sell them if we so choose. Imagine buying a second hand book only to find out you have to buy the last 50 pages from the author? Dev's/publishers are not downtrodden they are just greedy imo.
    Edited by 3 at 27/01/12 @ 19:18

  • silversun #56 4 weeks ago

    @deded "It might be the case that buying in small chunks would be good - as long as you don't have to pay a lot for each part. And as you said yourself, if they went that way then you are well able to just not buy it. Not a future that appeals to me, but you never know."

    I think game prices are a big issue for people.
    Lots intresting games but they all sell for £39-£49
    Not everyone is going do well when games sell at that price new, but smaller games could be made and sold at cheaper prices maybe.
    GTA 4 had 2 great smaller games.

  • asphaltcowboy #57 4 weeks ago

    @Gavilan You are very foolish if you think the movie industry would allow so-called specialist retailers to stock used movies alongside brand new ones - or in the case of most GAMEs and Gamestations, in a MORE PROMINENT position, for cheaper and not get a cut.

    Not to mention, how much profit can you get on a used book? Is it anything even approaching that of second-hand games? No.

  • deded #58 4 weeks ago

    @Gavilan Your comparison to books (or any other medium for that matter) is fairly pointless in my opinion; they aren't the same industry and there are huge differences, even between the other industries, (GL selling your Kindle purchases BTW).

    Regardless, if you buy games new the only moan you can have is that you need to spend 1 minute entering a one-time code to play. It's a far cry from studying minute colour charts and looking up the third word in sentence twelve, page 16 of the manual each time you loaded a game up. Those were the days.

  • Torkin #59 4 weeks ago

    I will pass, either online or offline.

  • silversun #60 4 weeks ago

    Going wrap up my posts on this topic but will keep reading what other saying.
    I dont support the pass in that form, but i hope the game does well because people been very positive about it.
    At least this topic gave a chance say why we dislike , of feel the need for the online passes.

  • Gavilan #61 4 weeks ago

    @asphaltcowboy Umm blockbuster (biggest DVD rental/seller in the UK) sell ex-rental DVD's as I'm sure does a number of DVD/Blu-ray outlets. Even Gamestation stock used DVD/Blu-Ray so I don't think I am foolish at all. I think you just have your head in the sand.
    As for profit on a used books the authors come out with new books which earn them money... gosh, fancy that!
    They don't re-write the old book and just add a few changes to some of the words and charge you for the privilidge of reading it again. I don't understand how you can't see how your rights are being taken away from you. Even worse you are agreeing that this is a good thing. I dread to think what the future holds if people like you give up your rights so easily.

  • asphaltcowboy #62 4 weeks ago

    @Torkin YOU... SHALL NOT... PASS!

  • Eraysor #63 4 weeks ago

    So essentially they want me to take a £40 punt on an unproven franchise, and then shaft me when I might trade it in because it's not my cup of tea? No dice. I've got plenty of other games to play.

    EDIT: Incidentally the Cerberus Pass for ME2 was basically the same thing.
    Edited by 1 at 27/01/12 @ 19:48

  • Gavilan #64 4 weeks ago

    @deded books are media, so why is the comparison pointless? Anyway it doesn't matter we shall have to agree to disagree.

  • Flipper79 #65 4 weeks ago

    I get it when it comes to online games. Obviously with the costs of servers and second hand sales extending the effective life of the game and extent of support needed. But for single player? Nah.

    Was gonna get this if it reviewed reasonably well, but now even if it does I'll wait until I can get it for as cheap as the 'online pass.'

    The games/software industry is starting to get away with far too much in the way they treat consumers. I'm fed up of everything I buy being rendered completely worthless once I've handed over my cash. I wouldn't be half so annoyed, but EA in particular have a very bad habit of releasing bugged games and doing next to nothing to sort the problems out after release.

  • asphaltcowboy #66 4 weeks ago

    @Gavilan First, rental copies that Blockbuster et all buy from the distributors are purchased at a far higher price than the cost of buying one from a shop. The distributors have already made their money back on those copies. That's a tiny side business.

    Gamestation - do game stock brand new DVDs and BRs? And does it make up the majority of their business? No. Does HMV stock barely any new DVDs/CDs and instead focus on trying to shift loads of second hand stuff that the film and music industry don't see a penny of? No.

    Are you seriously comparing the production of a book (maybe some tens of thousands of pounds up front for the author, plus publication and marketing) against the tens to hundreds of millions of dollars that go into AAA game production involving hundreds if not thousands of people? Well done. They're exactly the same!

    Also, tell me... If a book publisher didn't front the author some money (to live on), how are they going to write their book? All on the profits of their previous release?
    Edited by 1 at 27/01/12 @ 19:53

  • Gavilan #67 4 weeks ago

    @Eraysor make the most of the fact we have plenty of other games to play... it may not last much longer according to the views expressed above. :(

  • darkmorgado #68 4 weeks ago

    @silversun

    "might be a small thing but i know alot people are put off by entering codes and passwords all the time"

    PC Gamers have been doing it for several decades now. A few seconds entering a code isn't really any inconvenience at all.

  • Gavilan #69 4 weeks ago

    @asphaltcowboy Hmm depends on the book I guess... Harry Potter anyone?

  • darkmorgado #70 4 weeks ago

    @asphaltcowboy

    Not to mention that film studios have multiple revenue streams.

    You don't go to a multiplex to play a game, then wait a few months for it to come out in the shop do you? And you don't turn on your telly and switch to Sky Games + to play the latest titles.

    Comparisons between games and films are retarded. As is the stupid comparison of "If I sell my escort, Ford don't get any money, so why is it bad?" to cars.

  • darkmorgado #71 4 weeks ago

    @Gavilan

    She wrote the first book, penniless, as a single mother in a coffee shop while living on benefits.

    Try employing several hundred people and making a computer game and not being able to pay any of them for the 2+ years it takes from concept to final product.

  • Gavilan #72 4 weeks ago

    @darkmorgado Right I'm outta here this is gonna resort to name calling and I ain't into that. Enjoy the future you created... goodnight.

  • jimisere #73 4 weeks ago

    I'm amazed at some of the comments on here. When you go into game, gamestation, hmv, etc. It's all about the second hand games, there is very little new games on the shelves these days. games developers are going bust on a monthly basis, very few will probably driving ferraris, porches, etc.

    There has to be more people buying new copies of games, other than COD, to keep the variety of games coming.

    Sure, it's not the best scenario, but for people to miss out on the possibly of a very good game because of the stance EA is taking is beyond my comprehension.

    I think that in the future games will be downloadable only, which on reflection maybe the only way to keep a lot of game designers in the business, providing us all with quality games and making a profit. This is the only way forward unfortunately!!!

    Cheers

    Jim

  • byakuya83 #74 4 weeks ago

    EA, much like Ubisoft, will no longer be getting any further custom from me. I've been enjoying Driver recently and only when I started whilst signed into PSN (rare for me) I was greeted with a message about Uplay...so they want my name and email address so I can sign up to another pointless and irritating service, great...that really adds value.

    These passes also affect the re-sale value of your game - I always buy my games new and then trade them in toward new purchases. From now on I will have to be far more careful about what I buy, to avoid these ridiculous passes.

  • silversun #75 4 weeks ago

    Know i said was not going to post again but i very suprised just now to find out the game will be sold on steam as well, i think i am going to support this game by buying it on steam.
    Hopefully will have some fun with it , also fear 3 on sale atm : )

  • Inmediasress #76 4 weeks ago

    Well considering the demo I don't think the game has a bright future anyway so I guess its their way of trying to max out their profits. (if there is profit that is)
    Lets face it the game is worth to pick up only second hand or after significant price cut.
    I wouldn't even be surprised considering the recent article if they were also lying about the rather irksome bugs being fixed in the final product.
    I was willing to give them the benefit of doubt, but after these I'm not so its definitely a bargain bin purchase.
    You don't do this kind of stuff if your confident in your own game.

  • Nanakai #77 4 weeks ago

    Time to hold EA accountable for this BS, all we have to do is decide with our wallets! As much as I really enjoyed the demo and wanted to support this new IP, EA can suck a nut with it now.

    I've never bought a single pre-owned game in my life, and never will (I'm a huge collector). But it doesn't just effect pre-owned buyers, it effects me and everyone else in a different way too. In fact it would hurt us more, seems as we'd be the ones who would have spent more money buying it new.

    Somewhere along the line this will fark us over. Like when we move to a new generation of consoles, and they switch off this generation of online service (like LIVE on original Xbox), or the code 'expires' after 10 years or so. That's fine for a multiplayer experience, which by then will be dead. But NOT for part of the single player game, which should be yours to own and play forever.

    So for that, I think I'll wait until this game is about £9.99 on Play.com. Probably the price for the online pass. Nice way to introduce a new IP EA. FU and all who do this

  • darkmorgado #78 4 weeks ago

    @jimisere

    Very true.

    If everyone bought their games second hand, as GAME are pushing towards (my local GAME only has one shelf of new games, and only chart titles - the rest of the store is entirely secondhand) then the games industry will go broke within a year.

    GAME are utter parasites and the sooner they go bankrupt the better.

  • ShiroBen #79 4 weeks ago

    aaaaaaaaargh

  • Lord_Gremlin #80 4 weeks ago

    In other words - don't buy this game yet. Wait until you can get a full edition, without stuff being cut out. Price will drop too.
    Looks like EA just don't want this game to sell at full price or at the time of release.

  • Flipper79 #81 4 weeks ago

    @darkmorgado

    It's that business plan along with buying up all the competition that's killing them off. Used to be when they bought new games in reasonable bulk they were quite competitive in price. I'd go in buy a game new and have a quick browse for a cheap secondhand game if I had some cash spare. Everyone was a winner. Now I never bother. They have no choice, terrible prices and even secondhand games can usually be bought cheaper new online.

    It's worth saying there's a fair few series of games I'd never have started buying as day 1 purchases if used games weren't available. There's room for the market, but there needs to be real change in attitude from shops that over-push used games and fail to appreciate, as you say, that if everyone bought used (which is of course an impossibility past a certain point) the developers, publishers AND the stores will have a completely unsustainable business.

    However, I still think the publishers need to look at ways to promote buying new rather than punishing the consumer and devaluing the product.

  • joelstinton #82 4 weeks ago

    Gamers are being undermined left right and centre. Firstly its an offline game. Secondly not everyone is connected to the internet so won't have access to theses missions, despite paying same price. Thirdly the fact that games announce DLC before they are released. Is it stuff thats been cut? or new material? It just looks bad on publishers part, despite having valid concerns.

    I understand that piracy and second hand sales are a massive problem- as it should be, but there as to be a better way than this pass bollocks which puts honest gamers looking like fools. This type of story is going too show its head every month, there has to be some sort of dialouge between gamers, publishers and retail sectors into how to go about solving this issue. But it feels on our end that we are kind of left out of the loop.

    A easy starting point is bringing in small independent stores where they were able to buy there stock at a cheaper price so it can compete on the market and sell at more reasonable prices than the massive bulk buying warehouses. Secondly adressing Game etc severe profiteering issues.

    I can see why the big three are pushing for digital distribution. It cuts out the second hand market. However, they would have to allow steam etc on there services to make this work as a competetive and free market place.

    To be fair to darkmogdo his making some valid points.
    Edited by 3 at 27/01/12 @ 22:29

  • Machetazo #83 4 weeks ago

    I agree with others. To saddle this game with this approach is foolish.

    Mass Effect costumes in my fantasy action combat game - why, thank you EA, for your unwanted paid-for product placement!

    @homerramone: A situation akin to paid shareware. I hope it doesn't reach such a stage, but the more consumers give, pubs are proving really happy to go and take.

  • mkreku #84 4 weeks ago

    Shit, I enjoyed the demo and was planning on picking this up.. but this is beyond acceptable to me.

    In fact, it annoys me so much I want to pirate the game to punish someone. Unfortunately, I know the world doesn't work that way so I won't :(

  • Bigmac1910 #85 4 weeks ago

    @asphaltcowboy and @FatalHybrid

    The inconvenience is that one has to log into PSN network, redeem the code, wait for some download, sometimes 100KB other time more than a 100MB, plus day one patches, it takes around 20 - 30 min just to get started. I have very little time now days so it matters greatly to me.

    And actually, I started to play my 3DS more and more cause it doesn't have those issues. What publishers must realize, is that there are so many games out there on so many platforms, that there are always alternatives to how to consume entertainment.

    I think they will have to rethink their strategy in the future or they will start to loose costumers.

  • Rajin #86 4 weeks ago

    @darkmorgado

    I think some of you need to stop being UK centric.

    Sorry but people fail to see that there're more countries in europe suffering from these measures where not EVERY shop is filled with second-hand games(accidentally my homeland The Netherlands included)

    The argument about only second-hand in gameshops is false, most games in The Netherlands are bought in toystores+multimedia shops who never ever sell second-handed. We don't have supermarkets selling games, and gameshops do sell 2nd-handed but most of the time they're 1/6th of the shelve for the console.
    Edited by 3 at 27/01/12 @ 23:36

  • stryker1121 #87 4 weeks ago

    This shit annoys me to no end, as I'm not online but would have considered buying this first day. Rocksteady pulled the same bullshit w/ Batman..i hate being punished for something I didn't do.
    Edited by 1 at 28/01/12 @ 00:29

  • FuzzyDuck #88 4 weeks ago

    This shite. Again.

    I bought Arkham City, full price day one, with a bitter taste in my mouth over the Catwoman stuff. I generally collect games but decided to blitz it and traded it in for a 2 quid loss. I made a point of not redeeming the Catwoman stuff, left it in the box for the next buyer.

    Point is, despite what the publishers say, it's my property and i can do with it as i please. If they don't see it that way then they can stop asking for my money for it.

  • jogyourmind #89 4 weeks ago

    It's EA, what do you expect? It's your own faults for buying their games.

  • Xboxfanuk #90 4 weeks ago

    "Hey folks,

    We wanted to post a quick clarification for something we've seen a few comments about. For what it's worth, the House of Valor content was not in the finished game/disc at one point, then removed. It isn't there and we're locking you out of it. The House of Valor was created as stand-alone content, and was always intended to be the first DLC. Instead of holding onto it and charging for it later, we opted to give it to everyone who purchases the game new, for free, on launch day.

    We hope that helps clarify that point, at least. " - MUSE (Community Manager)

    If you want to hurt 38 studios please buy the game used where no one but GAME and CEX get paid.

    What pisses me off truely about the online pass is they DONT inlcude it with the Games on Demand SKU. That means EA is charging the top rate for games typically a year old and not even including all the content available to new purchasers of the retail copy.
    Edited by 1 at 28/01/12 @ 08:29

  • Breadbitten #91 4 weeks ago

    It takes a special kind of dumb to try out shit like this on an untested, unproven and NEW IP! Which is rather fitting since the publisher is EA...
    Edited by 2 at 28/01/12 @ 08:28

  • wobbly_Bob #92 4 weeks ago

    I was so looking forward to this and was going to buy it day one, but now i will never buy it because of this.

    The console games market is in bad trouble and probably dying. What other media or product is so fragile that it cant deal with a second hand market?

    Ah yes sir the first 5 minuets of this film are locked out unless you pay for a new copy.

    Why yes madam, if you buy this book second had you dont have chapter 5 or the special ending you get by buying the new book version.

    No the new music cd only has 6 tracks instead of 10 unless you buy a new one you filthy second hand music buying scum!

    Well sir with this second hand car you can only drive on standard roads but not moterways. Whats that? You already pay for moterways already via taxes? Ah well you see the second hand car dealing business is killing us so we are forced to do this. But if you buy new you get a fluffy dice and bike helmet for free! What? You dont want or need those and just want to be respected? Fuck you, sir!

    an industy that needs to resort to this kind of thing is dying. Devs going out of business left right and centre. Game development so expensive that its make or break for many devs with each game and with every leap to the next.generation ( costs of making a games rocket ) and a whole raft of devs go bust. Encrochment from mobile plaforms with serious power to run games, smart tvs, streamed games, and the masses becoming aware and acustomed to video games.AND a low 50p to 1.99  price point is the final death bell tolling. Video games need to change, become cheap and mass market or die.

    This generation coming is the last generation of consoles as we know it and maybe the last period. And EA you killed it, and Activison, and Ubisoft, and Microsof and Sony too, and all you other greedy bastards you killed it.
    Edited by 1 at 28/01/12 @ 09:04

  • deded #93 4 weeks ago

    Some of the arguments here are altering my opinion I'll admit. However, some of the arguments don't hold water either.

    @wobbly_Bob Music artists (or rather their record companies) release SE albums with extra tracks - are't you 'screwed' out of them if you don't get the SE? Same goes for Directors Cuts, etc, on film, which is a far closer equivalent if we insist on comparing unlike media - a side mission in a game is about the rough equivalent of a deleted scene in a film and who cares about that very much?

    Your book and car comparisons just don't work - a car isn't even media and books as serial media just wouldn't work, while games with missions removed (if you buy 2nd hand) work just as well, they just don't last quite as long. Thats why comparisons between serial and interactive media are flawed intrinsically.

    The other point I'd like to make is that although 2nd hand markets exist in other media, I believe the 2nd hand market in games is far larger and more firmly entrenched than other media - does anyone seriously buy new DVDs, watch them once and then sell them to buy more? Books? CDs? I doubt it because the market isn't there and people consume different media differently.

    Look at games though - how many people buy a new game, play it and then immediately sell it? A large number I'd guess. This gives a huge incentive to people not to buy new and to buy 2nd hand. The markets are different and games as a media are produced, marketed, sold and consumed in entirely different ways than any other media. They are also the most expensive to buy, which is much of the problem and arguably the weakest in terms of market fragility, which is why I still contend that the 2nd hand market is capable of doing more damage to the industry than in any other market. Of course if prices were broadly lower then it wouldn't be as big an issue.

    I don't see how punishing individual games is going to make the point to publishers that online passes are unacceptable though - low sales will just lead them to cancel any possible sequels and move onto to new franchises and add online passes to that. Do they know why you are'nt buying? No, they just see a game that didn't sell very well and probably close the developer. That doesn't really happen in music, films, books or most other media. Another difference.

  • Gastrian #94 4 weeks ago

    @Gavilan

    The authors feel quite happy because they get royalty payments for books loaned.

    http: //www.plr.uk.com/allAboutPlr/whatIsPlr.htm

    Also rental companies have to buy rental copies of movies that come at a much higher cost than retaail discs so they've already paid the publisher for selling it second hand when they want to clear stock.
    Edited by 1 at 28/01/12 @ 09:51

  • jimisere #95 4 weeks ago

    @wobbly_Bob this attitude I just don't understand. You are actually get more for you money if you buy it day 1, not less....

    Each to there own I guess, but I can't understand why you would pass on the game because of this.

    People who buy new, should have no issues surely?
    Edited by 1 at 28/01/12 @ 10:34

  • jimisere #96 4 weeks ago

    @gotyourmoney It won't destroy it, that the thing. But it may bring the overinflated used prices down and give you the option to buy the extra content as DLC.

  • uknortherner2000 #97 4 weeks ago

    @deded "Do they know why you are'nt buying? No, they just see a game that didn't sell very well and probably close the developer."

    They would know if they bothered to actually read their own official forums instead of either sticking their heads in the sand and locking threads that even dare to make light criticism of these practices (or moving them to "technical support";), or worse still, locking threads, banning users and locking gamers out of their own games - something EA and their subservient developers (like BioWare) are well-known for.

    I've been warning about these kinds of practices since 2009, but what do I know? I was merely a PC gamer back then and automatically a pirate in the eyes of you console gamers. Now that the same kind of crap has hit the consoles, are people finally starting to wake up?

    I would certainly hope so, because otherwise people can simply start forgetting about ever having consumer rights and access to complete games for full price. Pretty soon, you will be paying full price just for a level or two and then twice that for the rest of the game. The sad thing is, people will continue to defend these publishers and their underhanded practices even when they must surely know they are being royally screwed. They will continue to express some misguided loyalty to developers who are fully aware of how much they would be screwing over their customers once they got into bed with EA, and they will continue to shout down at anyone who has the mistaken belief they have consumer rights. The gaming industry is a law unto itself and will continue to be so as long as there are people to defend them.

    As for me, I see no reason to abandon my boycott of EA and Ubisoft for the foreseeable future.

  • deded #98 4 weeks ago

    @gotyourmoney
    @deded books as serial media just wouldn't work
    I agree, Dickens is shit.
    :) Books as serial media wouldn't work with chapters removed. Capisce?

    @uknortherner2000

    Ok, I accept that you think your approach will work, but I don't believe it will; you've been boycotting for two years you say - I don't see anything but an increase in online passes, do you?

    It might actually take the changes you fear to happen before the consumer en masse starts to protest and these companies listen. More likely it will take further internal changes in the industry before they are forced to change but I just don't see a boycott in any form being large enough for publishers to give a shit. GL, I hope it does.

  • DrMGinius #99 4 weeks ago

    Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, Warhammer Online: Reckoning. And I still don't know what a bleedin' reckoning is.

  • Syrette #100 4 weeks ago

    @darkmorgado

    They're a business that need all the money they can get. If that money is easier found in second hand then so be it. Hardly makes them parasites.

  • PenguinJim #101 4 weeks ago

    "Forthcoming EA action RPG Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning sees the next evolutionary step of the online pass, with second hand purchasers locked out of single player content until they cough up for the required passcode."

    Didn't Rage do this already by only including the sewers for first-hand purchases?

  • puzzledmonkey #102 4 weeks ago

    I feel sorry for the devs on this game. Locking out single player content is just disgraceful. I'll buying this day 1 so I'll be fine but I still disagree with this nonsense. This on top of the next Xbox blocking 2nd hand games. Please. Fuck right off.

  • puzzledmonkey #103 4 weeks ago

    Also, if it weren't for the 2nd hand games market there are a lot of games I would never have played and subsequently would never have enjoyed them and then paid full price for their sequel. I'm just not willing to take a 'chance' on a game for the asking price of 40 notes sometimes.
    Edited by 1 at 28/01/12 @ 13:51

  • Puzza #104 4 weeks ago

    How is it still an online pass then? They shouldn't be allowed to block single player content

  • jimisere #105 4 weeks ago

    @Puzza as mentioned in an earlier post, they aren't locking you out of any of the single player quest It's extra single player content that was going to be DLC, that they are giving free to people that buy on day 1.

    I can't see why everyone is getting so wound up about it!
    Edited by 1 at 28/01/12 @ 14:53

  • jimisere #106 4 weeks ago

    @gotyourmoney I said it may.....ridiculous is a bit harsh!!!!

  • abzddon #107 4 weeks ago

    Soooo..... I guess i'll end up renting this. Don't care that I'll miss out on 1 area which holds 7 quests. Lets face it; this was one of the many quests that was originally in the game, which got taken out to be sold separetly as dlc. But now became an incentive to stop second hand sales.

  • Abdu@EG #108 4 weeks ago

    I fuc*kn love internet rage.

    Bleh.

  • Wedge1985 #109 4 weeks ago

    I don't really have a problem with these passes. The way I look at it is that this is dlc that's been gifted to first hand buyers as a bonus. The name is misleading though. It should be referred to as a bonus code or something rather than an online pass. Also I wish publishers would stop trying to justify it as server costs etc and just say its a way of getting a better return on game sales.

    The publishers may get more money but that does then mean that there is more money available to future projects.

    Plus if it means that game etc have to start stocking more new games because people aren't buying so many second hand ones then all the better.

  • varkdm #110 4 weeks ago

    I dont have a problem with it. I occasionally buy 2nd hand games and i expect bits and pieces of non essential content to be missing as a result. You make that judgement when you decide to buy new or used.

    Ultiamtely used benefits your pocket and the retailer. New benefits your pocket, the retailer, the publisher and the developer and gives you a slightly better game experience.

    This stuff about PC price point... PC games are cheaper, but not as cheap as people keep quoting, I cant remember the last time I saw a new hotly anticipated PC gaming release for under £30, most of them seem to be trying to price at 35-50 these days. Open up Steam and look at the top sellers or coming soon list...
    Skyrim : £35
    king Arthur 2 : £35
    Call of Duty MW3 : £40
    Fear3 : £15
    Kingdoms of Amalur : £30
    Anno 2070 : £35
    Saints Row 3 : £30
    Football Manager 2012 : £20


    The additional cost on console games doesnt go to the developer either, it goes to Microsoft or Sony, its how they make profits on the consoles, without which neither the xbox 360, PS3 and probably the Wii would exist.

  • asho #111 4 weeks ago

    Well I tried the demo again and Nope just cant get into it, no excitement for me so its a pass.

  • craziii #112 4 weeks ago

    quick question, will this affect the pc version?

  • deded #113 4 weeks ago

    I don't think it affects the PC version no, since they have to go through either Steam or Origin.

    Curt Schilling (38 Studios) has commented directly on this issue, should anyone like to read their explanation in this particular case:

    bit.ly/Ak1Ggz

    or alt.

    www.reckoning.a malur.com/showthread.php?3063-Did-you-push-back-at-EA-at-all -over-this-Quest-content-gated-by-online-pass.&p=52812&viewf ull=1#post52812

  • Biker_Bob_1971 #114 4 weeks ago

    Post deleted at 16:59:10 06-02-2012

  • michaelius #115 4 weeks ago

    Best solution for such cases - wait till it hits bargain bin andd buy new copy for slightly more than EA wants for their online pass :)

  • TheDarkFurie #116 4 weeks ago

    So the pass will be free in the box of the first-hand copy I'm buying? Seems fair enough to me.

    Considering each film I watch threatens me with thousands of pounds worth of fine if I even have mates over to watch, leaving any functionality in games that aren't bought from the publisher is pretty generous I'd say.

  • newf #117 3 weeks ago

    I was planning on getting this game on release day but I'm not supporting a developer who does this shit.I'll just stick with Skyrim for now. These developers are starting to piss me off. If this shit keeps getting worse my days as a gamer will be coming to an end. I'll just get a new hobby, I've always wanted to buy some RC cars. Greed will end the gaming era.

  • jogyourmind #118 3 weeks ago

    @newf

    You are a stupid moron as are most of the people who posted above. You have no idea what this article is about do you? You just want to rant about something dont you? IDIOT!

    Explain to me how this affects you when you buy the game on release date, or you are a total moron.