PDA

View Full Version : Ubi Pass / Upaly Passport



BioPulse.ps3
07-15-2011, 12:29 AM
http://goo.gl/n60tF

what do you guys think about all these passes? ea has it, now sony has it, and ubi will have it soon.

MCRMJ
07-15-2011, 03:19 AM
I'm not over the moon about these passes. Not for games series that I'm passionate about (MGS, AC etc), but for the odd games that you can pick up pre-owned that you otherwise wouldn't normally try at full price.

Adding a 6-10 fee for playing the online sections (or in the case of games like Dragon Age/Mass Effect, locking in-game content out to people without the code) just negates any incentive to pick these games up.

I can never see how used games affect sales. People who are going to buy the game will anyway. Adding a surcharge to those that do buy used will only put those people off, so you're left with the original sales figures. If the excuse of online server strain is used, then why? The original owner isn't using the game online anymore.

If anything, this may just put people off picking the game up altogether, which will affect sales (look at the outrage at Capcoms attempts on the Resident Evil 3DS game).

We already have micro/macro transactions for things that are already contained on the disc (day one dlc, costumes, character packs) so where will it end? Next we'll have to enter a code to play the offline sections of the games as soon as you enter the disc. Not to mention the already implemented scams where you can't play online games with friends who haven't purchased DLC packs that you have.

Sad times ahead methinks.

Edit:

I also forgot about things like the PSN being down. Unforeseen situations where you can't redeem these codes. Portal, MK9 and Dirt were all affected by this recently. MK9 waived the code for the period the store was down, but apparently Dirt couldn't due to the way the game was made.

All these things really put you off.

kriegerdesgottes
07-15-2011, 09:40 PM
It really doesn't effect me being that I can't stand to play any online MP and I only buy games for the SP anyway but I can understand how some people might be upset. On the other hand I can also see how the developers are trying what they can to get something out of used games sales so I am a bit torn.

Calvarok
07-15-2011, 10:31 PM
YOU ONLY HAVE TO BUY A PASS IF YOU BOUGHT THE GAME USED.

ALL THIS MEANS IS THAT THERE IS MORE INCENTIVE TO BUY UBISOFT GAMES NEW NOW.

PAY ATTENTION.

MCRMJ
07-16-2011, 06:02 AM
I fully understand/stood that.

My point is what about people who don't want to buy Assassin's Creed new? The type of people who wouldn't pick it up at launch and only see it while browsing the game store, see it at 10-15 used and think 'oh I'll give that a go'.

Ubisoft/EA etc have already had the cash once, they aren't losing out on those buyers, yet by charging just to get online they MAY lose out on DLC sales (from the person buying the used copy) and more important word of mouth advertising.

With the likes of Playfire/Raptr/Facebook, people are likely to give games a try and if they're amazing (as AC is) spread the word to friends.

What they're also likely to do is to get the game home, find out they have to pay another tenner to get online, curse and bad mouth the game/Ubisost, EA etc.

Yes I know they get the money from the online code, but that's a big assumption they will buy it and not think 'I'm not paying that to get online stuff it'.

It will kill off some smaller independents who rely on trade-ins and it will also kill off game rental services (something I personally have never used but many do).

Calvarok
07-16-2011, 06:10 AM
You know what Ubisoft loses MORE money from? Retailers selling used games. They see none of that money. To them, that's 60 dollars, gone. So that more than covers people not bothering to get the pass or DLC.

Ubisoft discounts new AC games heavily within a few months of release. Anyone who wants full multiplayer stuff can get it pretty cheaply just by waiting.

It's smart buisness practice, and smart consumers are not affected.

It's really not a big deal. It's just like authentication codes for some PC games.

"smaller independents who rely on trade-ins" take something that is ubiofts, and sell it to someone else without ubisoft seeing any of the money. Most game companies hate this, and try to stop it as much as possible.

swiftkinfe
07-16-2011, 08:22 AM
Why should I have to pay another 10 dollars to simply get online? You do know that a new game ranges from 30 to 60 dollars? Assassins creed is generally found at 17 to 30 dollars used! Imagine finding the 30 dollar version and having to pay the extra 10.It's almost like there was no point to buy used in fact most stores carry used games . Gamestop for example is known for this for cheap prices for an incredible wide selection of games used.Hardly a new copy in sight and people are fine with that as it's affordable.

But not everyone can shell out 40 to 60 dollars on the spot.And thats why gamestop does so well.

Calvarok
07-16-2011, 08:40 AM
Originally posted by V-rex1986:
Why should I have to pay another 10 dollars to simply get online? You do know that a new game ranges from 30 to 60 dollars? Assassins creed is generally found at 17 to 30 dollars used! Imagine finding the 30 dollar version and having to pay the extra 10.It's almost like there was no point to buy used in fact most stores carry used games . Gamestop for example is known for this for cheap prices for an incredible wide selection of games used.Hardly a new copy in sight and people are fine with that as it's affordable.

But not everyone can shell out 40 to 60 dollars on the spot.And thats why gamestop does so well.
Yes, and that's great for you, but from ubisoft's point of view, it means that in effect, they don't make money off of the game you buy. So that means that the ubi-pass is all they get. And if you decide not to get the game because of it, then they're not actually losing any money, since you were buying it used and not giving them any.

The key part of your post is "That's why gamespot does so well". Gamespot makes money off underpaying people for used games and then selling it back at a higher price. That's actually not good.

Ubisoft has hundreds of people working on each game they put out, and thousands and thousands of hours go into creating them. The reason they can't sell their games even lower is because it's legal to sell it used, and they have to keep the prices high if they still want to make a legitemate profit off of the game, since all these people just buy it from stores.

It actually sucks for this to happen to game publishers. You mark my words, if it was illegal for game stores to sell used games, games would cost about 45$ NEW. That's how much buissness they take away.

If you really can't afford to pay 50 bucks after waiting a bit for the price to drop, then you should probably be concentrating on paying your bills, or getting your first job.

Assassin's Creed isn't going to get better if you buy it and all the funds don't go to the people who made it.

But seriously, if you get a 10$ game, and buy the ubi pass, you payed 20 bucks to get the same effect as 60$. Not a bad deal.

MORE TO THE POINT.

THIS IS PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE IN REVELATIONS. ALEXANDRE SAID HE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT, AND THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED BEFOREHAND TO MAKE THE MULTIPLAYER STAY LOCKED ON THE DISK WITHOUT A CODE.

albertwesker22
07-16-2011, 09:05 AM
Yes, and that's great for you, but from ubisoft's point of view, it means that in effect, they don't make money off of the game you buy. So that means that the ubi-pass is all they get. And if you decide not to get the game because of it, then they're not actually losing any money, since you were buying it used and not giving them any

Terrible I know. I mean Ubisoft only sells like 6 million Assassin's Creed games on average whenever one comes out http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif

Calvarok
07-16-2011, 09:28 AM
Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yes, and that's great for you, but from ubisoft's point of view, it means that in effect, they don't make money off of the game you buy. So that means that the ubi-pass is all they get. And if you decide not to get the game because of it, then they're not actually losing any money, since you were buying it used and not giving them any

Terrible I know. I mean Ubisoft only sells like 6 million Assassin's Creed games on average whenever one comes out http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A company does not stay afloat by letting themselves get ripped off, no matter how many copies they actually get paid for.

Anyways, it's not gonna be in Revelations. It's starting off in their least popular series, and there is a legitemate reason for that. (they sell less, it matters more that they get paid)

Investors will LET you drop the prices if you can tell them that you've fixed the problem of people buying used. The thing with used games are that it's not like borrowing a hammer. A hammer is not an experience. Once you finish a game, you've experienced what took thousands of hours to make. And if you lend it to someone else, they experience it too. Barely half an hour of work goes into a hammer. I doubt it takes very long to even make an xbox. it's fine to trade those in.

So the part of the game that's infinitely repeatable (Multiplayer) costs extra, unless you decide to pay a few bucks. Why should they give you infinite replayability free?

albertwesker22
07-16-2011, 11:15 AM
Originally posted by Calvarok:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yes, and that's great for you, but from ubisoft's point of view, it means that in effect, they don't make money off of the game you buy. So that means that the ubi-pass is all they get. And if you decide not to get the game because of it, then they're not actually losing any money, since you were buying it used and not giving them any

Terrible I know. I mean Ubisoft only sells like 6 million Assassin's Creed games on average whenever one comes out http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A company does not stay afloat by letting themselves get ripped off, no matter how many copies they actually get paid for.

Anyways, it's not gonna be in Revelations. It's starting off in their least popular series, and there is a legitemate reason for that. (they sell less, it matters more that they get paid)

Investors will LET you drop the prices if you can tell them that you've fixed the problem of people buying used. The thing with used games are that it's not like borrowing a hammer. A hammer is not an experience. Once you finish a game, you've experienced what took thousands of hours to make. And if you lend it to someone else, they experience it too. Barely half an hour of work goes into a hammer. I doubt it takes very long to even make an xbox. it's fine to trade those in.

So the part of the game that's infinitely repeatable (Multiplayer) costs extra, unless you decide to pay a few bucks. Why should they give you infinite replayability free? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are a clearly a fan boy.

Most people who buy the game used are new comers to franchise. If you buy a game used straight away, its probably only going to be 2 pounds cheaper(Don't know about that in USA dollars) Most long time fans are going to get the game brand new(You don't sell 6 million copies if you have a huge problem with used sales)

The people who buy the game used(One again, boo hoo, Ubi can't sell an additional 3 million games) they will become fans of the series too and are more likely to buy the next game brand new, they may not see extra profit(not really that big a thing, the way the AC series is going, it could end up being the biggest selling gaming franchise of all time someday) But it spreads word of the game tremendously and they will end up selling more games the next time around.

The multiplayer in ACB, I wouldn't pay a penny for that mess. Your statement about why they should give us free MP, made you sound like such a stooge. Multiplayer should not be something you pay for in any circumstance, its just a social form of playing that is just a second option to the single player. 8 plus for a multiplayer mode is way to much. You can get some brand new games for that price on Amazon.

Like what was said before, when does it end? More and more disk content will be locked out.

<span class="ev_code_RED">Please do not bypass the Language Filter.</span>

Black_Widow9
07-16-2011, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by albertwesker22:
The people who buy the game used(One again, boo hoo, Ubi can't sell an additional 3 million games) they will become fans of the series too and are more likely to buy the next game brand new, they may not see extra profit(not really that big a thing, the way the AC series is going, it could end up being the biggest selling gaming franchise of all time someday) But it spreads word of the game tremendously and they will end up selling more games the next time around.

You are still able to purchase the game used if you want to try it out. The Uplay Passport grants you access to online multiplayer play, bonus content, and more. It's close to the same price as most DLC. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

JeremyJOwens
07-16-2011, 02:13 PM
Used games hurt the business regardless of whether your buying a game made by an indie developer or a major company like Ubisoft. This is just a way to get some of the money back to the people who deserve it. Its an inconvenience, but at least it has a reason.

MCRMJ
07-17-2011, 08:18 AM
Originally posted by Black_Widow9:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
The people who buy the game used(One again, boo hoo, Ubi can't sell an additional 3 million games) they will become fans of the series too and are more likely to buy the next game brand new, they may not see extra profit(not really that big a thing, the way the AC series is going, it could end up being the biggest selling gaming franchise of all time someday) But it spreads word of the game tremendously and they will end up selling more games the next time around.

You are still able to purchase the game used if you want to try it out. The Uplay Passport grants you access to online multiplayer play, bonus content, and more. It's close to the same price as most DLC. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's the thing, it's in addition to DLC. Using purely Assassin's Creed for the examples, everyone (regardless of new or used) are already locked out of playing with friends if they have the DLC, meaning they have to buy the Da Vinci pack.

Add in the Uplay pass, then that's a further 15 or so.

I'm adverse to DLC on a disc or that is an essential part of the game exclusive to such codes (ala EA), but why not make something more compelling than locking out features?

Exclusive DLC to new buyers, that isn't essential to the game or on the disc, but is compelling enough to warrant a purchase. The Copernicus dlc for example, or a missing sequence?

As I said previously, it doesn't affect me much but it's the constant chipping away at the games that's the worry.

If the next game follows ACB, we'll have bits of the game scattered all over the place. Pre-order bonuses, DLC, uPlay points, enter codes for a uPlay Passport, Project Legacy (which means playing on a PC for hours on end). All to play a console game.

Next we'll have all of the above, plus DRM where we must be connected to the internet to play, have the disc locked to a specific system and have to enter a code to play the single player portion of the game.

zeejay21
07-18-2011, 04:42 AM
*sigh*

I only see people who ALWAYS buy used games considers this a problem. That, and people who are retailers who 'creatively' earn money without paying their suppliers & 'suppliers' much - this seems like a threat to their ecosystem.

To me, it's the retailers that ripped people off - for an average of $20-$35 of used games, retailers could triple or quadruple their profits with each used game sold. Unless used games are either at $10, $5 or less, this wouldn't be a problem, wouldn't it? Customers only need to pay 3/10 of the price of a new game but retailers wouldn't make much. Isn't that what customers want? To buy at cheap prices? To save money?

Like I have been telling people at Twitter, online passes serves more as a safety device than anything. You guys ever wondered why Xbox LIVE is safe and people like it? Because it's a paid service - in other words, an ONLINE PASS. Doesn't matter if you buy new or used, you still need to pay for Xbox LIVE for their online service. Yet people didn't complained, people still pay for continuous months use.

It's kinda ironic that people are complaining about online passes. What's $10 or $15 if you buy used to get online features? If you buy new, no matter at regular or discounted prices, online features are free. It's not mandatory, it's optional - you don't have to pay for online features unless you're really desperate to pwn noobz online.

Besides, there's always digital shops like Steam, EA's Origin, Ubi Store, GOG.com etc. that sells games at cheap prices during sales and you don't have to pay for any online passes since you actually buy them new. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

There are many options and workarounds - so I asked:

What IS really the problem?



Originally posted by MCRMJ:

That's the thing, it's in addition to DLC. Using purely Assassin's Creed for the examples, everyone (regardless of new or used) are already locked out of playing with friends if they have the DLC, meaning they have to buy the Da Vinci pack.

You don't make sense whatsoever. Have anything like this ever happened with online passes?

Don't worry too much & don't think negatively, it's not healthy.

CRUDFACE
07-18-2011, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by Black_Widow9:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
The people who buy the game used(One again, boo hoo, Ubi can't sell an additional 3 million games) they will become fans of the series too and are more likely to buy the next game brand new, they may not see extra profit(not really that big a thing, the way the AC series is going, it could end up being the biggest selling gaming franchise of all time someday) But it spreads word of the game tremendously and they will end up selling more games the next time around.

You are still able to purchase the game used if you want to try it out. The Uplay Passport grants you access to online multiplayer play, bonus content, and more. It's close to the same price as most DLC. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I can understand it if the pass takes away things that are considered extra such as bonus content and more, but isn't the multi-player a standard part of a game that offers it.

coupled with how the multiplayer unlocks things in the singleplayer. It's basically taking something out that was part of the original package then saying you have to pay to get that is harsh.

Now, will this pass come with free dlc from the start like ME and Dragon Age did? This better not be the signature edition stuff either.

Just making sure, but used game go right to the store's wallets, not the developers, right?

breedlove94
07-18-2011, 05:47 PM
Just making sure, but used game go right to the store's wallets, not the developers, right? Yup. Publishers and developers have been losing a lot of money to used game sales. Why buy new when you can get the exact same game for $5-$10 cheaper? "Special" passes like Uplay Passport and the VIP pass for Battlefield BC2, provide incentive for consumers to buy new and in turn allow the publisher and the developer to profit, instead of just the store.


I can understand it if the pass takes away things that are considered extra such as bonus content and more, but isn't the multi-player a standard part of a game that offers it.

coupled with how the multiplayer unlocks things in the singleplayer. It's basically taking something out that was part of the original package then saying you have to pay to get that is harsh. I kinda agree. While withholding such a unique MP from those who buy it used seems unfair, keep in mind AC is already a pretty complete game with the singleplayer alone. I still consider MP an unneeded add-on, though I still occasionally hop on to play online. If someone really wants to experience multiplayer, they would either buy it new, or pay $10-$15 for the the passport.

CRUDFACE
07-18-2011, 06:16 PM
If someone really wants to experience multiplayer, they would either buy it new, or pay $10-$15 for the the passport.

That's the thing, why would they want to experience something they can't even get a taste of? Maybe a level/skills cap is better in my opinion. Like what World of Warcraft is doing right now by stopping once a person reaches level 20. Other games didn't take out a core function of the game. In a way, that was brotherhood's selling point, and because the narrative and such is getting so much I hype, I assume Ubisoft would want only the die hard first day fans and people who only buy the new versions to experience.

lmao, it's like making somebody a sandwich (or sammich for the awesome versions) then they take off all the good parts until all you have left is the core of that sandwich. just a slice of turkey with a piece of bread on top. And that sucks. All for it, would just like to see it reworked maybe? and I mean, come on, Ubisoft gives away free dlc all the time for the multiplayer, is that really going to make me feel different when i have the pas? or will they start smacking prices on updates which I hope mold together this time around instead of only picking which update to use.

Wonder if they'll throw in "exclusive" missions into the single player that were supposed to be there.

LightRey
07-18-2011, 06:40 PM
Originally posted by t260z:
coupled with how the multiplayer unlocks things in the singleplayer. It's basically taking something out that was part of the original package then saying you have to pay to get that is harsh.
What are you talking about? What SP unlocks? I'm pretty sure there isn't anything in MP that unlocks things in SP (not that I have much personal experience to go on though).

CRUDFACE
07-19-2011, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by t260z:
coupled with how the multiplayer unlocks things in the singleplayer. It's basically taking something out that was part of the original package then saying you have to pay to get that is harsh.
What are you talking about? What SP unlocks? I'm pretty sure there isn't anything in MP that unlocks things in SP (not that I have much personal experience to go on though). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dude, Ubisofts been saying that for a while now. they haven't said what will be unlocked, but they have mentioned that through the multiplayer, you can unlock stuff over on the sp side of things.