Like us:
THQ To Reduce Impact Of Used Games
30
Plans to deliver "premium online play."
Published: 13:30, 10/08/2010 by Dan Lee.
5THQ plans to deliver “robust downloadable content and premium online play” in all of its major releases in a bid to get people away from buying their games used. According to THQ CEO Brian Farrell, this online strategy will;
“Increase our digital revenue, engage players with our games for a longer period of time and reduce the impact of used games.”
THQ has already trialled one form of this when it released UFC 2010 earlier this year. Part of the game’s online multiplayer content is only accessible using a one-time-use code packaged with the game. Second hand users will have to buy another code if they want access to the Fight Camp Mode.
We wonder what else they have in store.
Source: CVG
Most Comments This Week
- Gaikai’s Streaming – Does This Mean No PS4? [65]
- PSN Store Update: 23/05/12 [55]
- First Party Vita Games Drop To £12 On PSN [52]
- PSN Store Hit With 80023163 Errors [51]
- Is Something Big Coming To PlayStation Plus Soon? [50]
- “Leap” Motion Controller Could Revolutionise Gaming [43]
- Ghost Recon: Future Soldier PS3 Install Is Huge [42]
- Australian & New Zealand D3 Players Suffer High Ping Rates [41]
- Sony Files Patent For Game-Interrupting Soda Adverts [40]
- Ghost Recon Future Soldier Review (PS3, Xbox 360) [39]
Latest Reader Comments
-
New Hardware, New Plus: All Eyes On Sony This E3
- 04:24 Shaggy2Dope: I know this is a European site, but is anybody from the site or sraff going to the event?
- 01:37 Awayze: I really hope at this E3, Sony bring a major update to the PS3 such as instant trophy syncing as soon as...
- 01:36 samiro05: This is definitely a must for the PSV
- 01:30 stueeeee: Lol imagine, on the cusp of possible new hardware, their big announcement turns out to be…..a new...
- 00:47 JBoo: I would buy another PS3 if there is a slimmer version coming out :P But i am not going to think about it(i.e I...
- TSA Speculates: Why You Might Not Need To Buy A PS4
- Microsoft Job Offer Mentions “Next Generation” Of Xbox
- Doctor Who: The Eternity Clock Review (PS3)
- Community Round-Up: 26/05/12
- Gaikai’s E3 Invite All But Confirms PS3 Streaming Partnership
- Sony Files Patent For Game-Interrupting Soda Adverts
TSAtv: Original Video Content
Batman book review
Kris Dancing, again
Joe Danger interview
Sonic Generations
10/08/2010 at 13:40
Member since: Jun 2009
No, no no!! Bad game companies!!
10/08/2010 at 13:45
Member since: Jun 2009
It’s just logic the companies want to profit from the used games. I know for one that the gamestore where I usually get my goods, pays lets say 25 euros for a new game, and then sell it for 45 to 55 euros. And that is all going in their pockets.
If that were me, I’d wanna chip in too.
10/08/2010 at 13:47
Member since: Oct 2009
The funny thing is, announcements of “robust downloadable content” make me not buy games until the GOTY/Complete edition is released, and more often than not, until it hits the bargain bin. But then, that’s only me…
10/08/2010 at 13:49
Member since: Jun 2009
bahhhh ! arse clangers
10/08/2010 at 13:51
Member since: Oct 2008
Why does the games industry think it has the right to special protection from the 2nd hand market? No other industry in the world demands money from the 2nd hand marketplace – it’s just a fact of doing business.
The games industry need to grow up and concentrate on making quality products that entice gamers to buy them 1st hand because they’re great, not because they’ll lose out if they buy it 2nd hand.
10/08/2010 at 14:49
Member since: May 2009
I’m sorry but I’m fed up of hearing people say this. Companies in all industries are just as hostile about their products being sold second hand as the games industry.
A prime example is the car industry. They went as far as lobbying the last government to introduce the car scrappage scheme – now the government pays you to scrap a car (under the guise of a green policy) and buy a shiny new one. This not only gives you an incentive to buy brand new car but it also starves the second hand dealerships of stock.
Every industry hates it’s second hand market as the original manufacturer gets no income from sales. I for one am pleased that we are in a situation where gamers are incentivised to buy new and not forced to do so – given todays technology a company could easily tie your game to your account and stop anyone else playing it.
10/08/2010 at 15:45
Member since: Jul 2009
“forced to do so”? Wow. I’m all for creating incentives to buy new but forcing me to. No chance. I want choice. Make the choice that benefits them the most as attractive as hell, but don’t squeeze the used market as some of us simply cannot afford to buy new titles most of the time.
10/08/2010 at 16:03
Member since: Jun 2009
Completely agree mike – preowned has been a godsend this year with the glut of games that surfaced in the first 2 quarters of the year!
10/08/2010 at 18:32
Member since: Nov 2009
The car scrappage wasn’t anything to do with 2nd hand markets. Companies were in the shit and needed to shift unsold stock, that was just a way to get people to buy from them cheap. And manufacturers, like hardware producers with software, rely on parts to make money. Good example seen recently was a comparison using a Yamaha R1 – new £11,000ish, built from spares £62,000!
11/08/2010 at 12:03
Member since: Sep 2009
Online is slightly different though isn’t it? That is an ongoing service cost to the company, that is why these 2nd hand initiatives are focused on the online elements. Games are no longer just a boxed product they are also a service platform – and why should that service be offered for free to people who haven’t purchased the game from them?
10/08/2010 at 13:56
Member since: Jan 2010
I just don’t get it! They’re making you pay for online, right?
well if I sold my copy to someone else, i’m no longer taking up server space anymore, i’ve given it to a friend.
The Bobby Kotick disease is spreading….
10/08/2010 at 17:12
Member since: Forever
I don’t think Kotick’s Activision have a similar scheme yet.
I know EA do, and THQ & Ubisoft have said they want to expand what they’ve already done, hell even everyone’s beloved, do no evil – Sony do.
I can’t stand this blinkered Activision hatred, in articles & comments around the internet.
Sure the guy at the top makes a few statements that make him sound a bit arrogant to us mere mortals who earn less in a year than he picks up in a couple of days, but I can’t think of one thing that Activsion have implemented that deserves the bad rep they get.
Most of the negative publicity comes from someone who doesn’t even work for Activision; Michael Pachter, an analyst who works for Wedbush Morgan Securities.
I know your comment is meant light-heartedly, so I apologise but Teh Internetz really needs to look at what Activision have actually done, or have confirmed they are doing, and not listening to the blinkered hoards (some of whom are doing writing all the articles)
10/08/2010 at 14:33
Member since: May 2009
If this is the way things are going I’d prefer this over an 8 or 9 quid a month subscription to play online
10/08/2010 at 14:51
Member since: Jul 2010
THQ can go suck lollypops, same with EA and the other greedy companys. PREOWNED ROCKS!!!
10/08/2010 at 14:53
Member since: Nov 2008
“Increase our digital revenue, engage players with our games for a longer period of time and reduce the impact of used games.”
Yes, doing this will be the magic bullet and won’t put people off buying your games at all – dumbass. Why not try retailing your games for £99.99 while you’re at it? Figures show you will get over double the profits!
10/08/2010 at 15:21
Member since: Feb 2009
and another one for the list.