Sections

Reckoning contains online pass locking House of Valor questline

Friday, 27th January 2012 19:49 GMT By Stephany Nunneley

Despite being a single-player game, EA has tossed an online pass code into the packaging of Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning. According to the insert included with review copies of the game, players are locked out of seven faction quests in the RPG called the “House of Valor” until they enter the code included with the title. While it hasn’t been confirmed as of yet, if Reckoning follows similar releases from EA, the quests will be available for purchase to those who buy the game used sometime after its released next month. Thanks, Destructoid.

Breaking news

45 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. TheBlackHole

    Maybe this will be how Microsoft are to prevent second hand – You’re locked out of the game entirely unless you have the bundled code.

    It would work, too – for console at least.

    #1 3 years ago
  2. Phoenixblight

    It was bound to happen and all we need is one of the publishers to start it . I expect this will become the norm.

    #2 3 years ago
  3. Edo

    Here we go…

    #3 3 years ago
  4. absolutezero

    I have to say I like this method of used sales combatting over the whole pre-order DLC fiasco going on with Mass Effect 3 at the moment. So fucking confusing.

    #4 3 years ago
  5. Quasar

    pathetic

    #5 3 years ago
  6. Lahanas

    We should be ok with this. Game makers deserve to get some profit off the pre-owned market and online passes are a good middle solution. I dont care if this doesnt happen in the car market for example, all I care about is that game makers get paid for their work. And yes, I know this money goes to the publishers, but essentially it’s the same thing.

    #6 3 years ago
  7. Froseidon

    Well this is absolute crap. I hate online passes to begin with, it is such a stupid idea. If developers want profit from their pre-owned games, draw up contracts with stores like GAME, HMV etc. Although there is still the problem of people selling second-hand (I.e – Through ebay), it’ll be better for the customers, who at the end of the day, is those who the developers are trying to please. Online passes are not the way.

    Also, back to Amalur, what about those without XBL or PSN?

    #7 3 years ago
  8. Phoenixblight

    ” If developers want profit from their pre-owned games, draw up contracts with stores like GAME, HMV etc. ”

    Thing about contracts is they need two willing parties and places like Gamestop are not going to let publishers get a cut of their profits.

    “what about those without XBL or PSN?”

    Find a way to get access to internet or their SOL.

    #8 3 years ago
  9. DSB

    @6 It isn’t the same thing.

    One is a person making games, the other is a person making money off of the person making games.

    It’s just another attempt by publishers to make money, without having to spend money on an actual product. Suddenly we have to listen to shit like “online is such a huge expense for our business, we have to shut down servers in time for our newest patchworthy iteration to our last game”.

    Or Activision withholding content just so they can make people pay not to wait. It’s retarded, they’re selling hot air.

    I’m less bothered if people are selling an actual product, but most things from DLC ripped straight from finished games, to online passes are merely a result of executives getting cute in order to boost revenue they don’t need, so they can please investors who demand returns they don’t need.

    It’s the same retarded mechanisms that crashed the stock market, except in this case, the consumer is equally to blame for not protesting, because he’s part of the process, and should recognize an emperor with no clothes when he sees one.

    #9 3 years ago
  10. TheBlackHole

    I don’t know… it’s difficult to decide on for a number of reasons.

    a) publisher wholesale prices are too high, leaving only a small margin (£1-5) of genuine profit for the retailer

    b) this is actually essential or else the retailer could immediately drop the sale price and undermine the RRP (publishers are NOT legally allowed to tell retailers what to sell something for, they can only charge a fixed amount to sell the product and ‘recommended’ a sale price)

    c) retailers insist on NOT sharing profits from second hand sales with the publisher, and actually prioritise second hand games in terms of store placement now.

    An example of c) was that I was (today) offered £10 in trade value (£8 cash) for a game which sold at £34.99 brand new, and (HMV) were selling for £31.98 second hand. Now imagine that – New copy = £2 profit, second hand = £20 profit, and all they have to do is buy for £10, sell for £30. Why would you EVER try and sell the new copies?

    Publisher’s insistance on maintaining untenable pricing and retailer’s greed in retaining all second hand market profits is destroying the console market in the long term. PC gaming is going to leave it in the dust once streaming becomes commonplace, and believe me – with BT Infinity and Virgin Media running 20-100mb lines throughout the UK this year, it won’t be long.

    #10 3 years ago
  11. Phoenixblight

    “One is a person making games, the other is a person making money off of the person making games.”

    Over simplified. You forgot one tid bit of info the publisher is the one paying for the development of the games without them we have no games. With games costing an upwards of 100 million dollars developers like CD Projekt, Rocksteady and up and coming studios would never have a chance to make their games.

    They are a necessary evil.

    #11 3 years ago
  12. DSB

    @11 That’s your own perspective.

    I’d turn it around and say there’d be a lot fewer games for publishers to get rich off of, if there were no developers. Although I’m sure that thought has never crossed the minds of any of their executives.

    Mercifully the cost of making and more importantly distributing videogames is so high that they’re able to keep a hold on the market, but I take comfort in the music industry.

    Once producing an album began costing little more than 2-10.000 dollars, the days of record execs were already numbered. Why put up with an idiot who is never going to have your best interests at heart, when you don’t need his money?

    That was the first thing they told us when I studied music production “Music was here before you, and it’ll still be here even if you’re not – Respect that”.

    #12 3 years ago
  13. YoungZer0

    I wonder how CDR manages to be successful without all this shit. Oh right, they are not greedy asshats.

    #13 3 years ago
  14. Phoenixblight

    @12

    Are you comparing the music industry to video game industry. They are two completely different markets and the music industry doesn’t rely on a team of 100 to make an album. If anything the Video game industry is much like the movie industry.

    @13

    Do I have to mention them piece mealing DLC components across retailers? That would be considered greedy.

    #14 3 years ago
  15. DSB

    @14 The only concrete similarity I see is in terms of actors. That’s something that might always be expensive, at least acting has proven mighty resilient as a profession.

    The numbers might not be the same as the music industry, but the principle is the same. People are able to do things on their Macs and PCs today that would’ve cost you at least 1 million dollars just in hardware to achieve 25 years ago. A lot more counting acoustics modelling, electricity and rent/real estate, and that’s not considering mastering, which usually includes an entirely different studio set up for the purpose. That’s at least another million dollars, not counting extras.

    People can set up something just as good today, for around 10-20.000 dollars. Or they can hire a highly trained producer with a million dollar setup for a week for the same money.

    With games you’re talking about a 30 year old industry, at least in the shape that we know it now, with more than a single guy developing games. It’s mostly technology driven, and technology isn’t a constant. It can be made cheaper, simpler, and thankfully it almost always does.

    Just 30 years later you already have things like the Unity engine, and self-published games making tens of millions of dollars for their developers.

    And that forms my perspective. The desire for people to create, and to enable themselves to create, will always outweigh other peoples desire to watch numbers on their bankstatements go up. That’s why music execs are forced into progressively smaller mansions.

    #15 3 years ago
  16. YoungZer0

    @14: Dunno what you mean. They released their DLC with no charge.

    #16 3 years ago
  17. Phoenixblight

    “And that forms my perspective. The desire for people to create, and to enable themselves to create, is will always outweigh other peoples desire to watch numbers on their bankstatements go up. That’s why music execs are forced into progressively smaller mansions.”

    Right but without money they can’t develop and if they can’t develop then whats the point? Publishers have the money to back a developer that wants to make the next big hit for the indies and hobbyist there is Steam, iphone and Android.

    @16

    WHen the game was about to launch each retailer had its own weapon or armor set. THats what I am talking about

    #17 3 years ago
  18. DSB

    @17 I think blood, sweat and tears have always been the best way to succeed. I’m sure a big truckload of dough will make things easier for anyone, but people are still capable of thinking without it.

    You don’t need publishers to back the next big indie. Even if it does need funding, publishers aren’t the only people in the world with money, and they certainly aren’t the only ones with the vision to use it.

    Just in Europe we have loads of independent and government funds that do nothing but offer money to up and coming artists, recently including games developers.

    Of course the games industry is only going to get more and more expensive for the time being, until it levels out, and even if it wasn’t, the publishers have a strong self-perpetuating eco-system that’s going to take time to break down. That’s also why the music industry hasn’t disappeared overnight (people need someone who knows someone, usually with a TV show or a gossip rag).

    It’s taken almost 200 years to bring music back to the artist, and I’m sure it’ll take as long for games to reach the same stage.

    #18 3 years ago
  19. Phoenixblight

    “You don’t need publishers to back the next big indie. Even if it does need funding, publishers aren’t the only people in the world with money, and they certainly aren’t the only ones with the vision to use it.”

    You are right you got the advertisement companies. You claim you don’t need a publishers. Please name an indie game that has come out in this gen that is just as complicating as Mass Effect, Witcher, Batman and it is on all platforms. I am really curious what you would come up with because I have nothing.

    #19 3 years ago
  20. YoungZer0

    @17: Nope, don’t remember. Sorry. If they had that, they delivered it later for free. That’s something you don’t see other publishers doing. Lets not even mention the 2.0 Update. That shit was huge … AND FREE!

    @19: Does it need to be any of the games you mentioned to be successful? Nope. You’re clearly shifting the discussion in a direction you might have an upper hand. Either that or you’re missing his point.

    #20 3 years ago
  21. Phoenixblight

    @20 I didn’t say it has to be successful. DSB is claiming you don’t need a publisher to create a game as big as the titles mentioned. I am asking for a game that was made by an independent studio, was on all platforms and as complicating to make as WItcher, Batman and Mass Effect.

    Also evidence of them selling all the different armor sets depening on retailer;

    http://www.gog.com/en/forum/the_witcher_2/direct2drive_witcher_2_without_bonus
    http://www.gog.com/en/forum/the_witcher_2/free_dlc_from_amazon/page1

    Amazon had the Ultimate swordmans suit and other retailers got Roche armor.

    #21 3 years ago
  22. absolutezero

    What he said and what your asking for is completely different things.

    The easiest example is Minecraft. The amount of money publishers push into developers rarely make any of them better, thats something worth thinking about. Like ToR for example I have a feeling it might have been a better game had its not been the most expensive thing ever made and thus been able to experiment a little more. That expectation to make as much money as WoW crippled it.

    Look at something like Dear Esther, its been more or less created by two guys and it looks better than any other Source title, hell it looks better than most games, its a beautiful game.

    Theres also Nuclear Dawn, a great looking indie game made by a small team. Its on multiple platforms, its really fucking complex (tying an FPS into an RTS and fuckloads of balancing).

    #22 3 years ago
  23. Phoenixblight

    “The easiest example is Minecraft.”

    THat is not on all systems, nor is it that complicating to do from a programers or designer point of view. Just a lot of math and coding. The gameplay is purely based on what the players wants to do. Its also an exception to the rule. No way was Notch expecting the response he has gotten for that game. Kudos to him for that.

    “Like ToR for example I have a feeling it might have been a better game had its not been the most expensive thing ever made and thus been able to experiment a little more.

    1) There is no definite numbers of cost all analyst numbers are purely speculative. 2) Bioware not only has to respond to EA but they also have to respond to Lucas arts. They also have to be broad as possible because they want a broad audience much like WOW and various other MMOs in order to gain a profit.

    Nuclear Dawn example is not what I had said 1) its not on all platfroms nor is it as complicating as the games I have mentioned. Its much easier for an indie to get on XBLA or Steam. Their rules and certification for those type of games are less demanding if you want to go that route.

    #23 3 years ago
  24. absolutezero

    Those games you mentioned are’nt as complicated.

    My Dad works at Nintendo he said they are’nt complicated in not going ot listen to you anymore LA LA LA LA AL AL A LA

    *Complicated* and you would have no fucking clue about Nuclear Dawn because its pretty fucking obvious you’ve never cunting heard of it before and are furiously treading water.

    Your stack of requirements that somehow validates the existence of Publishers makes no fucking sense. If a Developer wants to port its games across to multiple platforms, it will. Like masses of indie games on Steam, the 360 and smartphones.

    Also Minecraft.

    Nu uh Minecrafts not allowed its the exception to my and as thus must be discredited.

    #24 3 years ago
  25. Phoenixblight

    I have played Nuclear Dawn and as I said its not on all systems. Its yet to even be released on Xbox. ANd I don’t care if your father works for Nintendo, they are barely above water with their Wii so really your argument by authority fails.

    Three freaking things and you are acting as if it is the most demanding thing in the world.

    1) On all systems
    2) As demanding/complicating as Batman, Witcher, Mass Effect
    3) Made by an independent studio

    #25 3 years ago
  26. OlderGamer

    What about renters?

    Just to highlight a point of mine that some of your laugh at, yet kind of proved without realizing it.

    Cost of game dev/pub is prolly the biggest reason we are still in this gen. It is prolly the biggest reason why next gen will not be about graphicly powerful tech ladden boxes(the new xbox uses a 60usd video card that I can buy off the shelf at Best Buy). And it prolly why the industry is moving as fast as it can towards digital down loads and streaming games.

    I fully agree that the people that put up the funds to make the games should be the ones making money off of the sale of the game. Strongly agree. No reason Gamestop should be allow to poach sales away from pubs.

    But if you removed all of the second hand game sales tomorrow. With held 50% of all game content for paid DLC. And whatever, the price of your game wouldn’t go down one bit. Infact I would guess and say that the second hand market was gone altogether, game prices would prolly increase. The game stores vs the game pubs is like a fight between billionares. I mean really Game/Gamestop vs EA/Acti?

    There is no winner in that one. If the EA made more money, they wouldn’t pay their devs studios more. Really the only losers are you and me. We lose regaurdless. Have you folks done the math on what a blockbuster game with DLC costs? I spent 90usd for my NCAA Football game this year, and that was day one – before I even played a game. 90usd. a new CoD costs 60usd for the game, 50usd for elite or 4X15usd for map packs. So thats 110usd to 120usd for CoD MW3. And then both games will be back next year with the same type of pay structures.

    So I am all for paying the folks that made the game. But it turns my stomach to really think about you I am paying. The game store or gready publisher. Can’t win.

    Of course not every game follows that worn out path. Thats is why I enjoy indie/arcade style games.

    #26 3 years ago
  27. Phoenixblight

    “graphicly powerful tech ladden boxes(the new xbox uses a 60usd video card that I can buy off the shelf at Best Buy)”

    All that has said is that the GPU is of the 6000 series. WHich can mean anything it could be a modded 6990 variation which the card as the original form is a couple of hundred dollars.

    “Have you folks done the math on what a blockbuster game with DLC costs? ”

    Yes I have. DAO for example I bought all the DLC except the prank stuff which added 20$ to the CE cost so 90$/(8 characters *70 hours avg) comes to a whole .16 per hour of fun I have had with the game. I don’t care about the cost of DLC I pay 10$ per on some and came with 3 hours of game play over multiple playthroughs. You can’t get that type of fun for the same cost at a theater or a restaurant. I rather the money go to the greey publisher because that means more games from devs that I enjoy or a continuation of a series I enjoy.

    #27 3 years ago
  28. OlderGamer

    What is DAO? Dragon Age Origin?

    #28 3 years ago
  29. Phoenixblight

    Yes DAO = Dragon AGe Origin. I used that as an example because that is the only game I have bought most DLC for.

    #29 3 years ago
  30. viralshag

    @25, Good job on completely missing the point.

    #30 3 years ago
  31. orakaa

    … I have a HUGE problem with this.

    There are a LOT of releases those days, can’t afford to buy everysingle game I would like to (don’t have the time to play them, so I wait for their price to drop anyway). It also happened to me with PS2 games, with some games I missed and only bought recently because some of my friends told me “hey, you never played this game ? It was absolutely brilliant” and then I went on eBay to find a copy to buy.

    Now, in two or three years, if you find one of those games you never had time to play and you try to play it, or even if you uninstalled it and want to play the game again. Server for activation is now offline. What do you do ? What you paid €70 (or whatever currency) as a “new game” was only a long-term rental ??? And you can’t play YOUR game anymore ? Some games servers have been shut offline after less than a year because there weren’t enough popular.
    I still play Super NES and NES games.

    I think people fail to see that point

    #31 3 years ago
  32. OrbitMonkey

    Lol, you short on money? Get used to playing games with bits missing… Just think of it as having a nice meal, but without the starter… Or pudding.

    And OG’s right, 2nd hand sales disappear tmro, prices will still stay the same and you’ll still be forking out extra for the pudding ;-)

    #32 3 years ago
  33. absolutezero

    1) On all systems
    2) As demanding/complicating as Batman, Witcher, Mass Effect
    3) Made by an independent studio

    Portal 2.

    #33 3 years ago
  34. DSB

    @19 So to you indies means Triple-A and multi-platform development? Why? Do you think that carries the biggest returns these days?

    To me to be a true indie you’re far better off by making games that are so small, that you don’t need to depend on anyone else to succeed. You wouldn’t have to look further than Rovio, Runic Games, Popcap, 2D Boy or Mojang for that.

    Self-produced, self-published, and some of those companies are worth more than actual multi-national publishers.

    To quote my own post:

    “Of course the games industry is only going to get more and more expensive for the time being”

    Obviously this means that Triple-A in the traditional sense, is off limits to most indies. Real, high end production values carries the same sort of pricetag today that production values for music carried over the last 100 years.

    So I repeat again, it will probably take just as long for us to develop technology to a point where we’re able to give Triple-A videogames back to their creators.

    @33 It was published on PS3 and 360 by EA. I think it’s a weird criterium for succes though. True succes should hardly be more than owning your own game, and making good money on it.

    #34 3 years ago
  35. absolutezero

    EA was just the distributor this time, unlike the Orange Box. Portal 2 was self-published by Valve across all systems it appeared on.

    #35 3 years ago
  36. Phoenixblight

    @35

    You are right but that still proves my point you need a crap load of money in order to do what a publisher does for studios.

    Valve is worth as much as EA and they only employ a few hundred people so they can develop games without a publisher.

    #36 3 years ago
  37. DrDamn

    There have been lots of games released with in the box/preorder/special edition DLC. Why is this news particularly? It’s essentially the same thing.

    #37 3 years ago
  38. Phoenixblight

    @37

    Because of the words “Online Pass”

    #38 3 years ago
  39. absolutezero

    It proves my point aswell that an independant company can fulfil all the silly requirements that you need without a publisher.

    Valves too big, Minecraft is not on PSN, Nuclear Dawn is not “complex” enough.

    #39 3 years ago
  40. DSB

    There are more than a few examples of publishers hurting releases as well.

    I’m sure it’s tempting to get access to that kind of horsepower, but games like Super Meat Boy didn’t benefit from being published by Microsoft and I’m guessing Remedy have been scared into self-publishing on the PC.

    If you’re raising the money yourself, at least there’s a dialogue and a mutual relationship there. People are buying into your product, rather than trying to buy it off you.

    That’s saying nothing for all the alpha funds popping up. In light of that, I’m not really worried about the progress towards self-ownership in gaming. I think it’s impressive we’ve gotten that far in just 30 years.

    Three decades ago publishers didn’t even allow developers to put their own names in the credits of the games they created.

    #40 3 years ago
  41. Phoenixblight

    @39

    Valve has had a strong backing from Half life series along with being able to make their own retail client. ANother independent could not follow the similar route. Look at Impulse which is very similar to Valve they sold the digital retail to Gamestop and their new game is now being published by SOE.

    Its not something an indie company can replicate. Might as well asking a 500 pound guy to climb Mt. Everest.

    Valve started off as a company that made arenas for Quake then they made Half life which was published then created another game which was again published. They then started their own digital retail client when it wasn’t thought of as being successful and then continued to profit because they were the only one at the time, still the only company that has control over digital sales. Publishers can be a means to an end but only based on if you can get into something not thought of and it being successful.

    #41 3 years ago
  42. TheWulf

    This is hardly surprising news.

    EA forced this on Bioware too, so this is just a thing that EA does, and that’s all there is to it. It’s their business tactics, if they feel it works then fine. I don’t personally like it, but I can make a conscious choice about what I do or don’t want to buy and I can be comfortable with that.

    I had no interest really in the first place, so this is a distaste for their practises stacked on top of a lack of interest. Publishers are making my buying decisions very easy for me, these days!

    Still, that usually means more money fro the indies. Everyone wins.

    #42 3 years ago
  43. TheWulf

    Also, I’m pretty much with DSB again. Independent publishing is a thing, these days, and it can be incredibly successful. It would also allow developers to dodge the distasteful practises of certain publishers.

    #43 3 years ago
  44. deathgaze

    Personally, I think it’s crazy not to expect this kind of thing. The times, they are a changin’. The fact of the matter is that, barring a massive consumer revolt, these types of things are here to stay. Games have more content now and are more expensive to make than ever before in their history. As computer hardware gets even more advanced and connected, players will expect more from their games. All that costs money to provide, especially when games pricing for AAA content is locked to their respective regional MSRPs.

    I would argue that publishers don’t have a choice. It’s the best way to defray costs and continue making games. People decry EA’s management practices and corporate hegemony, but EA’s yearly profit statements, while good, are never great. If you want to finger a greedy capitalist, you could find far better targets than EA. And beside from a vocal minority of critics, millions of people enjoy their games every day.

    Now make me a new SimCity game, corporate overlords.

    #44 3 years ago
  45. DSB

    Publishers can cry me a river.

    Last time I checked, they’re still in charge of how much they invest in each game, and with 100 million dollar marketing campaigns supporting major titles each year, I find it kind of hard to feel sorry for these supposedly poor, emaciated multi-billion dollar businesses.

    The idea that publishers are these sad suits with big wet eyes running into eachother because they’re so nice and helpless, and that we all should be nice to them for it, is simply retarded.

    If anything, they’ve been blessed with one of the longest console generations, which allowed them a lot of naptime when it came to acquiring tech to match the hardware.

    If licensing graphics and physics engines becomes too much, make your own. Don’t be a baby, mr multi-million dollar paycheck, fix it. Several publishers have, already. If buying talent becomes too much, don’t hire 50 Cent or Eminem for your new game. If licensing for consoles is extortionist, kill those consoles.

    Publishers make their own bed, and though they certainly try their hardest not to, they should sleep in it.

    #45 3 years ago