You do realize that all of the information sourced in that link you just gave comes from Exxon's own blog right?

Source?

Games aren't always updated. In fact, most games don't get updated at all or if they do...it's once or twice a year. The ones that do are usually games with a huge online population that buys up their DLC. Very few games maintain dedicated servers...VERY FEW. Who moderates games? No one.

So...you've gone from claiming that this is perfectly reasonable as a way to recover costs from the used game market to...

Why are you using one poorly implemented attempt at DRM to an issue that doesn't apply to DRM?

I buy my games new as well. I don't ONLY play my games on my console. I play them with friends at other physical locations. I also sell my games when I'm done with them. This is my right as a consumer. I paid $60 for a product that then became my property.

You're assuming that because someone bought a game used that they would have bought a game new. This is a false assumption.

Except that less than two years ago they were the same product...

They lose zero money from a used game sale. Because a used game sale does not equal a lost new game sale.

Man, you're making my point for me. This was supposed to be a measure to prevent profit loss. Not garner profit gain. If it's to prevent profit loss and this was a success then either; a) EA wasn't losing that much money because this is a paltry sum for two years compared to what they actually make in sales over…

Hmmm...just about everything you just said is wrong. The games industry is making more money now than they have in the 30+ years of the industry. They aren't "just breaking even." They are a booming industry.

Thanks for making my point. You're inflating the cost of games publishing(very few games are AAA titles) and then we see the story above...where all their denial of services has gotten them is 10-15 million dollars. Case closed?

They do make money on used game sales. They make it on the DLC that the person would have NEVER bought otherwise. The game was PAID for when it was bought new...otherwise it wouldn't have been around to be resold as a used game. They make money on the sequel that gets bought new when the person who bought used is…

So...your argument is against Gamestop and NOT used games.

You do realize that every used game sale started as a new game sale? And that a used game sale does not mean they lost a new game sale, but it COULD mean a new game sale for the sequel or another game from that developer in the future?

You're entitled to the product you pay for. If you think otherwise then you're a short sighted masochist.

From the millions and millions of dollars that have been flooding the industry in the last decade from sales numbers that make Hollywood jealous? Due to the industry being a huge cash cow.

I'm sorry...but I thought the entire point of the online pass was to help poor publishers make back the "billions" and "billions" they lose from used games sales? Because despite making more money in the last few years than they have in the entire history of the industry used game sales has put them on the brink of…

Well, yeah, I can't dispute that most of the voice acting in DE:HR was terrible. Still a great game though.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.