Where exactly does your money go when you buy a game? Publishers make money when you purchase a game new, which in turn supports the game developer, but the used-game dollars goes to the site or retail store you purchased it from. It’s a system that has been in place for years and it has worked just fine. However, Electronic Arts, Sony Computer Entertainment and THQ have implemented codes that, if not inputted via some in-game menu, lock the player out of the online multiplayer. Worse, some codes can even lock the player out of singleplayer content such as Batman: Arkham City’s Catwoman character and the Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning side-quests. You can buy these passes for $10, which goes to the publisher and ergo the developer if you purchase a game used or rent it, which brings me to my point: I feel as if these online codes are having a more negative effect on the rental market than the used market, especially with regards to locking the player out of any multiplayer mode.
I am currently renting Mass Effect 3 from Gamefly and it has an online pass that locks me out of the multiplayer mode. Not only is the online code locking me out of 30 percent of the game, but due to Mass Effect’s heavy emphasis on story, it directly affects the game’s singleplayer mode. There are six regions in the galaxy for you to fight in, with three other people, and with each success your galactic readiness for fighting the game’s antagonists increases. From what I have heard around the Internet and gaming discussion boards, it doesn’t really matter if you play it or not but having the multiplayer affect the singleplayer and then locking me out of the multiplayer irritates me.
This leads me into another game that has an online pass: Ninja Gaiden III. Past Ninja Gaiden games have all been singleplayer only but the third iteration has multiplayer. Again, 30 percent of the game is being locked. I plan on renting the game to see how the developers handle the series without Tomonobu Itagaki, the designer for Ninja Gaiden and Ninja Gaiden II. When developers and publishers lock players out of content, it really makes it difficult for the player to judge the full product and whether or not the game is worth the $60 asking price. I believe this is detrimental to the rental market because the online codes prevent the player from making a full assessment on said game. Not that rental services like Gamefly are in danger of going under but I think these online codes do more harm than good for their suited purposes, which is to eliminate the used-games market.
I do appreciate some game developers implementing ways for players to try out all the modes included in the game while still having an online pass. Homefront, developed by Kaos Studios, lets you play the multiplayer until you reached level five out of the 75 levels, which is just enough time to evaluate the game and see if it’s worth a purchase. SSX has a system that lets you play the multiplayer mode in full but you don’t gain any credits. However, when you purchase an online pass, it remembers how many credits you would have earned, which I think is the best way to go about giving the player a test run of a game’s entire feature set.
It seems that online passes are here to stay and their effects vary from game to game. Sound off in the comments below or email me at shfawcet@asu.edu with your opinions of online passes.
