I'm just pointing out that it's a bit silly to call people dumb or stupid just because you disagree with how they spend their money.

It's not based on your ability to purchase, as I'm sure most people here could easily afford buying this. It's relative to how much you make as well as what it's worth to you is what actually matters. Your personal perception of this is as irrelevant to the people who care about it as the achievement is to you.

But, as he said, it's all relative. Many people think spending $30-50 on video games alone is stupid, but I'm sure you don't. That doesn't make you stupid or them stupid, it's all relative to how much money you make and what you spend it on for entertainment.

It was much more than over an emoticon. There have been numerous issues between the admin Horror and members of the twitch community. You shouldn't read this as just being over an emoticon. Even this article says there was more to it than that.

It may not be necessary, but it's also beneficial and not impeding on the original purpose of the system (gaming) so what's the harm in it? I get what you're trying to say, that development time on the system could have been spent more focused on gaming, but if that development isn't effected by the additional…

It's not about whether you want it or not, or even need it, but the fact that they offer it in the same device that you were already planning to get (generalizing for gamers). As I said, in 3-5 years everyone will have some form of PC in their living room if they don't have one already, and Microsoft wants the Xbox…

That, sir, is the entire point of this system. To be the PC in your living room that you don't have to buy because you already have it. MS took a riskier route than Sony by incorporating features that gamers all shunned because MS didn't devote their machine to gaming advances only, but in 3-5 years when everyone…

Using a term in quotes, as I did, implies that it doesn't necessarily mean what it's definition is. I'm well aware that most of the "extra features" companies try to leave out to get people to buy new are mostly non-DLC content and something that the game actually ships out with at launch.

You're right that the term entitled is probably not the best word to use to describe this, but honestly it's not far off from that.

Yet we don't know the actually reasons why they're phasing them out. I highly doubt they're phasing them out because people complain, because they would have done that years ago when it first started and not now. It's more likely that the phase out is due to the new consoles coming out more than anything, where new…

That's actually a somewhat valid argument, but unfortunately I couldn't find any information as to how much of the market is in used cars compared to new ones. But it is slightly different, as a car isn't something someone buys for a week or two and is done with for the rest of their life in the way 99% of video games…

I'm not making up excuses for the companies, I'm giving you the reasoning why they're doing this as it's fairly obvious. Sure you can try and throw conspiracy theories around and act like they're just out to get you, but the bottom line is they're out to try to make a dent into the used market because it does effect…

Exactly. The used gaming market hurts the overall video game market so much that people don't even realize and is why these companies are pushing so hard to go to digital only media.

Microsoft back tracked purely for PR reasons and nothing more. Their initial design intent is the way of the future whether we want to admit it or not. It was much more about the online DRM requirements than anything else, and that was purely due to the design of their overall marketing system on the device requiring…

Gaming obviously works differently than music or movies do because of the used gaming market being such a huge portion of the industry. Your argument that people buying something used deserve a cheaper price because the product is used is moot, since we're talking about software that never degrades.

They're not punishing the masses, they're punishing people who don't want to pay full price for a game, as they should really. Because in the end there's no real argument by saying you're entitled to something that you didn't pay for.

You're not paying more for it though, you're paying full price for a new game instead of $10 off for a used game. You haven't paid for it regardless of whatever feature that may be, and you aren't entitled to it if you didn't pay full price.

"An online pass is punishing people who buy the games used because it is denying them features simply because of the type of product they bought."

It's not about either piracy or shop lifters though. It's about used games and them getting absolutely zero for their product. I mean heaven forbid they give people incentives for paying full price for a new game rather than buying it new right?

You're making it sound like they're selling the online codes separately though. It's not like you go through any sort of method to obtaining them. And you can't blame them considering how the used game market works and effects their profits. They get absolutely zero from someone buying a used game, and adding…