Comment by matwood | Hacker News Reader

Comment by matwood | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

The GPP sets up a strawman argument by saying that people are expecting EA to give their product away for free. No one is expecting that at all.

To address your point, they are getting paid when someone buys and uses their product. Currently the $60 price tag includes usage of the game servers for a single person. If that person sells the game why should the new owner have to pay an additional cost? The old user is no longer using the servers and as far as EA is concerned their cost didn't change.

In other industries it's theft? I've never bought a new car so all the used cars I've bought have been theft? What about used cars that still had original warranties intact? Should I be forced to buy a new warranty since I wasn't the original person who purchased it, even though it's tied to the car?

I don't think it's theft at all. It's perfectly rational for a gamer to buy and sell used games. But it's also perfectly rational for EA to try to make as much money as possible from the used game market which completely undermines its business.

I suspect the used car market is also a thorn in the side of auto manufactures. They probably carry higher prices at retail to compensate for the used market as much as possible (assumption). That works for them.

EA could do the same thing and raise the prices of its games to $80-$100. However, they have options. EA would rather shift the cost from 'good' gamers buying new games and go after 'bad' gamers buying from the used market who are only indirectly customers.

Why is this wrong? In the end, somebody has to pay for what EA produces.

In the end, somebody has to pay for what EA produces.

What? Absolutely not! EA are free to offer their products at whatever price point they see fit in an attempt to recover their costs for producing their product, as long as they do so within the applicable consumer protection laws. And people are free to accept their offer and purchase their product. Sometimes they succeed. Sometimes they don't.

Ha, we're on the same page. I meant the line in a 'if EA wishes to stay in business, they will have to recoup their costs from their customers' way.

EA is selling one ticket for a ride in a car, not the car itself.

Just because courts have ruled that the ticket coming on a disk means you can resell the disk, doesn't mean EA has no right to find a way to tear the ticket.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com