The Hazards of Buying SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy Seals Used

April 19, 2011 -

Last year, a few video game publishers (Notably EA and THQ) started charging a fee for online multiplayer from used video game buyers for $10. Sony Computer Entertainment America goes beyond the pale this week by charging gamers who dare buy SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy Seals used extra. Those who buy SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy Seals used will miss out on special guns, game types, and other perks that will be added to the game at a later date. To get these features as a used game buyer, you'll have to pay a $15 fee.

Sony is marketing all this as "SOCOM Pro," an suite of enhancement for new game buyers. While some might argue that these extra enhancements are rewards for buying new, it is also hard to deny that they feel like punishment to anyone who can't afford to buy the full game. Basically if you are a used game buyer, you start out at a disadvantage online. Further, that $15 activation fee nullifies the savings of buying used.

Is this the future of how publishers deal with used games? Sadly, I think this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Source: Technologizer


Comments

Re: The Hazards of Buying SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy Seals Used

I generally don't play on-line so these types of things are actually a benefit to me. The used game retailers will have to start lowering prices of used games even further to offset the extra fees, which means I get my single-player experience even cheaper! Yay!

Re: The Hazards of Buying SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy Seals Used

The problem with this is that it effectively kills any chance of longevity for these games' online community. After the initial wave of first-day purchasers is done with the game, it loses its appeal because you can't find anyone online to play with. It essentially becomes a game that there is little or no reason to buy. And you certainly can't hinge your online community on the assumption that people are willing to pay an extra $15 to get into a game a year or two after its release.

Re: The Hazards of Buying SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy Seals Used

Let's call this what it is: game companies not selling people a new game as a complete product.

Re: The Hazards of Buying SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy Seals Used

Lets call it what it really is. Game companies putting perks into the game for people who buy it brand new rather than used and at the same time letting players that bought it used get the same perks for a fee. It sounds fair to me. New copies come with it and used copies aren't left out.

Re: The Hazards of Buying SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy Seals Used

How so?  If I buy the game new, I don't lose out on anything, and I don't have to pay extra.  If I buy the game used, I'm not a customer of the game company, so that game company isn't selling me anything.

Until now, that is.

---

With the first link, the chain is forged.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: The Hazards of Buying SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy Seals Used

I'm wondering how many used gamers actually pay these sorts of fees? I've made it a habit to never use activation codes on new games, just to make sure Publishers are not encouraged by it.

On the other hand, I bought the PS3 version of Portal 2, BECAUSE of all the features it offers for buying new. You get cross-platform licenses and cross-platform play and achievements. That sort of thing is something I want to support, and so I bought new.

Re: The Hazards of Buying SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy Seals Used

not really new, they did the same thing for Socom Fire Team Bravo 3 actually.

Re: The Hazards of Buying SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy Seals Used

"Further, that $15 activation fee nullifies the savings of buying used."

I take it used game retailers are not marking down their used games to counter these types of deals?

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: The Hazards of Buying SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy Seals Used

They are. Gamestop has already been charging $45-48 for used games that use the online pass, instead of the usual $5 markdown. On the other hand, they're also giving less for trade-ins of said games. Haven't seen a SOCOM 4 traded in yet, since it came out yesterday, so I don't know what they charge for it use.... errr... "Pre-Owned". It should also be mentioned that you save another $4.50 or so if you have their Pro rewards card.

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Goth_SkunkI just had a thought: Fans of the original Ghostbusters film should recall a short scene in the film where it is heavily implied that Ray Stantz has sexual intercourse with a female ghost during a montage. In fact, it's technically rape.06/30/2015 - 3:18pm
Andrew EisenYou're assumption would be correct. The costumes are indeed for the film in production and not the one that the Sony emails showed was being considered and we have since heard nothing about.06/30/2015 - 3:16pm
Goth_SkunkOn the basis on chronology, I assume the aforementioned costumes and prop designs are for the female-led team.06/30/2015 - 3:14pm
Goth_SkunkJust asking out of curiosity, because while the all-female ghostbusters film will be out within a year, there is actually a male one being considered, too: http://ow.ly/P0AR706/30/2015 - 3:13pm
Andrew Eisen(There's only one Ghostbusters movie in production right now.)06/30/2015 - 3:07pm
Andrew EisenI'd say the fact that you can't tell is a positive sign!06/30/2015 - 3:06pm
Andrew EisenDoes it matter?06/30/2015 - 3:04pm
Goth_SkunkAnd now, to get back on target, these uniform and proton pack designs, are they for the female ghostbusters? Or the male ones?06/30/2015 - 3:02pm
Goth_Skunkabout GG is to be either shouted down, mischaracterized, or mocked. But, as James so eloquently put it, I am a GP member first, and a GG supporter second.06/30/2015 - 2:59pm
Goth_Skunkan anti-GG echo chamber with the majority of its users firmly entrenched in their belief that GG has no place in the culture, period. With that firm a mindset, there's little point to registering on the site when the likely response to speaking positively06/30/2015 - 2:59pm
Goth_Skunk@Manta: No, Gamergate is not rife with bigots and misogynists. Additionally, nothing excuses the behaviour by members of games press towards people they don't like, either. There is a lack of GG presence here because this site is still considered to be06/30/2015 - 2:57pm
Goth_SkunkWell I din't really have anywhere else to post it! Lord knows GP would not have posted a story about the Breitbart article. I'm genuinely sorry that I filled up so much space in the shoutbox, but I honestly had no other relevant place to put it.06/30/2015 - 2:53pm
ZippyDSMleeBOth sides make the asumpsoin that anyone is listening to what they have to say. I tend to ignore GG as mindless spewing of discomntent with everything and the other side is about the same whine whine we do not like whine whine. Can we move on yet?06/30/2015 - 2:52pm
Andrew EisenI made this video about two years ago but it's topical again. "The Effects of Gay Marriage" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcFyxiYu9I406/30/2015 - 12:12pm
black mantaA little more compact, but still not a radical re-design.06/30/2015 - 12:00pm
SuperKeegYeah, the proton pack is different in design, but similar in spirit. Its a little dirty, not pretty, but functional.06/30/2015 - 11:08am
IvresseI'm guessing it's specifically designed to be smaller. The original packs were pretty bulky looking...06/30/2015 - 11:07am
E. Zachary KnightThe proton pack is a very different design. Here is the original: http://www.gbfans.com/wiki/Proton_Pack_Part_Names06/30/2015 - 10:50am
black mantaProton pack looks essentially the same to me. Have no problem with either, BTW. :)06/30/2015 - 10:32am
Andrew EisenNot much change to the uniforms so I was surprised to see such a redesign for the proton pack. I like it though!06/30/2015 - 10:22am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician