8BitBot: Boycott Batman: Arkham City?

"A lot of gamers out there are angry about the direction Warner Brothers have taken the online pass with regarding Batman: Arkham City. The online code allows only 1 use of the Catwoman DLC which is part of the single player story and has been HEAVILY advertised as part of the game. Personally i’ve been looking forward to the game immensely but this just angers me. We can take it and eat this pie WB have dished up, or we can say “no thanks, we’ll spend our money elsewhere”."

[SITH]

I rented it on gamefly. I showed them!

[BiggCMan]

I got it for free without even trying when I bought my new graphics card! High Five! Screw this online pass garbage.

[StanLee]

Boycotting a game is easier said than done, especially when it's a great game. It's easier to forgive when you can argue the game is worth the investment which I think most will agree, Arkham City is. It's a horrifying trend in gaming but as long as a publisher can justify it's a quality investment, fans will be willing to pay extra for the experience.

[raytraceme]

So some people don't want to support the devs of the most highly acclaimed game of 2011 so far just because of a stupid online pass, in this case catwomam pass? Your loss.

[nycredude]

Boycott a GOTY contender? Yeah right! Hell no. I'm in it for the games and I buy good games new so I couldn't care less as it doesn't affect me.

[badz149]

why can't people on same console use the same DLCs and online pass?? I am having trouble with this! I used to live in AUS and until now use an AUS PS. account. now that I'm back to Malaysia, I can't buy AUS games and always buy region 3 games available here. DLCs are region locked but I have no problem buying region 3 games as I can download them using my Malaysian account and can still use them with my AUS account! this shit will mess THAT up and now I can't play things I bought using my main account! I don't want to change my account just to accommodate this shit! Sony's online pass is the best so far and I hope they don't change into this shit too! so yeah...no Arkham City for me! screw you WB!

[hazelamy]

no stan, it's easy, just don't buy it.

believe it or not, you will survive.

and there are other great games out that you don't have to accept being screwed over to buy, buy one of those.
support a publisher who deserves your money.

and if enough people did that these things would become unprofitable, because profit is the only thing that matters to these publishers, and they would have to abandon them.

remember, they need us a whole hell of a lot more than we need them.

but support them if you like, just know you're responsible when this gets worse and they lock off more and more of the games this way.
and have no doubt that it will, because they've proven if you let them get away with it, they will push it further.

[Pacman321]

With a actual ONLINE game i don't really mind the online pass, but when games that are only single player do it, its just talking the p**s.

[Mutant-Spud]

The only concern I have is that I haven't been able to tear myself away from Forza 4 and Dungeon Defenders to really get into this game...and I've got Skyrim pre ordered as well.
Maybe I'll put Batman away and my kids can give it to me for Christmas.

[SITH]

What online pass are you guys talking about? Did you read the dang article? It is talking about the code to access cat woman gameplay, not playing a single player game online. RTFA!

[BeOneWithTheGun]

Um, how did you get the code? I rented it on GameFly as well and there is no code to be found on the packaging.

[SITH]

Exactly where in the heck do you see me say I have a code!?

Thought so.

Read the f'en article. I was referring to it.

[BeOneWithTheGun]

Wow, was just asking a simple question.

[Chuk5]

Yes, boycott Batman. Oops, too late for me.

[alien626]

OMG World going to end because this online pass...seriously next time pre-order the game...

[BiggCMan]

You represent a lot of what's wrong with consumers today. You are willing to get screwed over, and you don't care. I doubt you even bothered to watch the video at the bottom.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

[alien626]

i never got screwed over i got the game for $30 i know how to save money on new releases

[Forbidden_Darkness]

How is someone who buys their games new getting screwed over? The only ones who get screwed over are the people who don't. It's like buying a used 1989 car, sure most of the package is still there, but there's bits and parts you'll have to pay for to keep it going. Simple as that. If you can't afford it $60 dollars at launch, wait a few months before buying it, that way you save and still get the conent.

[BiggCMan]

Your still supporting the idea of locking single player content to certain people. Just because it doesn't affect you, doesn't mean it isn't an issue. If someone doesn't have access to internet, they can't get the extra content, that involves the story of the game itself. Sooner or later, if people keep supporting this idea, we will keep getting less of a game every time we buy one. And will need to pay extra just for parts of the single player. People joke about Activision, saying that in the future they will make us pay for each bullet fired on Call of Duty, or some stuff like that. Well, keep supporting this idea now, and in the future don't cry when that actually happens.

[LOGICWINS]

@Forbidden_Darkness- Your missing the point.

1. Not everyone has internet access. This is a hassle if they want to download DLC to their PS3.

2. Whats to stop publishers from holding back SP content and selling it later as paid DLC?

3. Its not about "not being able to afford it". You think frequent members of the biggest gaming new aggregator can't afford to buy a $60 game and pay for some DLC afterwards? This is about PRINCIPLE.

We can all afford to get a 20 pc chicken nugget meal at McDonalds for 5 bucks...but don't you think we should get to have all 6 sauces for free instead of having to pay 30 cents for each extra one we get. Same concept here.

@People who want to boycott the game- Not the answer. You still have the right to enjoy the game. The point is for Rocksteady to see as little revenue as possible from this game..then they will understand that they can't nickle and dime us.

Gamefly it.
Redbox it.
Buy used, let GS hold your money, then return it within a week and get your money back.

[Biggest]

"Whats to stop publishers from holding back SP content and selling it later as paid DLC?"

Nothing at all. They do it anyway. The business decision being made by producers should not come as a shock. It's been happening in the world to EVERY SINGLE PRODUCT. There is a need to increase profit year over year over year over year over year. It's not unlike the way gamers expect every game to score a 9+ or flop. Businesses aren't interested in maintaining. It's grow or you're done. Ask Bank of America why they're adding new fees although they made $6.7 billion in PROFIT (not revenue). Ask Six Flags why they have a new "season pass" specifically for Halloween, that excludes holders of actual season passes? It's less about pirating and rentals and more about profit. Pirates and renters are easy scapegoats because they contribute to less profit in a common sense way. It isn't the consumers fault. It's the system's fault. Also, complaining about an online pass that is actually a part of the new game is lame. Either you want the full game or you don't. They haven't raised their prices on you. They're looking to re-coup some revenue and add profit in other ways. If people don't embrace the online pass by purchasing new or paying the fee, they will find new ways to gain (aka: Raise prices).

[Forbidden_Darkness]

@alien: Exactly! People are making a big deal out of this for nothing really.

[Forbidden_Darkness]

I highly doubt these passes are ever going to go away, so I don't see why people think it's going to do any good by boycotting it. All you have to do is buy it new. If you can't afford it new, then just wait until it gets cheaper and buy some other cheap games until then.

[hazelamy]

because the only thing, and i do mean the ONLY thing, the publishers care about is profit.

if enough people broke the conditioning the industry seems to have them in and realised it's in their own best interests to refuse to support this, then these schemes would become unprofitable and they would have no choice but to abandon them.

[Forbidden_Darkness]

And there lies the problem... Enough people won't. There's too many people that just accept things and roll with it. It does NOT effect me or anyone else who buys their games new and personally, I don't really care that it effects people who don't buy their games new. If people can't afford $60, then they should wait until its cheaper, while still buying it new. And also, EVERY company is out there to make a profit, no matter what. A company needs to make money to stay afloat, but that doesn't mean they don't care about the consumer. I've seen lots of times where develop have shown how much they love us and publishers too. Example... That Playstation Michael Ad. Etc.

[SageHonor]

Boycotts never work.

[cyclonus007]

They can just not on an issue this stupid.

[hazelamy]

yeah, because too many just lie back and take it.

people like you convince others that they have no power.
when the truth is, we have all the power.
we should be dictating terms to these greedy scum, not the other way round.
we're the ones in control of the one resource this industry is driven by.

that resource is our money, OUR money, that we control.
too many fanboys push the publisher propaganda that this is justified and that it's inevitable and that we can't do anything about it, well let me tell you, that's all lies.

if enough people saw through the lies and propaganda the gamers and the industry, save for a few publisher CEOs who would have to buy smaller yachts next year, would be better off.

[SageHonor]

People like me convince others they have no power. Wrong.... I said that because writing articles like this isnt going to do anything. You need to take action.. Not ben about it in some articles. I know this.

[RockmanII7]

Ok you boycot batman, now what are you going to buy? You're already boycotting Battlefield (online pass), Skyrim (timed exclusive dlc), Uncharted (Online pass), AC Revelations (yearly release), Modern Warfare 3 (Its the cool thing to do), ect. I'm sorry, but you're running out of games to boycott.

[Lyr1c]

The difference is that Batman is messing with singleplayer content.

There IS a line. It just depends where you draw it.

[cyclonus007]

Is Batman the star of the game or Catwoman? It's a DLC add-on.

I've played it and the Catwoman content of the game is unrelated to the main story. It's like while Batman is doing one thing, Catwoman is doing something completely different that has nothing to do with anything in the main campaign.

Besides the only people that this DLC affects are the people who didn't want to buy new (and those without internet but they have bigger problems).

[theherp80]

see that's the thing, you haven't played it so you are basing it off of what? Nothing. She shows up at the start of the game for 2 mins and adds nothing to the story. Later on she goes to meet poison ivy, again very short 10 mins and adds nothing to the story. Really what we should be mad about is how WB made a big deal about it and it really just takes you away from the story itself. Want to be mad about the DLC, fine, but don't be mad because it's one-time use DLC code that is "messing" with the campaign. Be mad that it ruins the campaign.

[Lyr1c]

You're assuming that I haven't played it.

It doesn't matter whether or not Catwoman is a huge part of the story or not. It is still singleplayer content that was marketed as such.

[joab777]

This is rediculous. Do I wish they included everything w the game? Yes. In a down economy, r companies at war w those who sell used copies? R they responsible for answering to shareholders...yes. is this a popular, successful franchise that is attempting to maximize profits? Yep! Will i boycott? No way!!! How many of these ppl have spent money on stupid dlc or overpaid for stupid dlc? How many of these ppl want the best games they can get but don't want to purchase a game that has received 10's new? They r rewarding customers who r supporting them directly. Remember, if u love Batman so much, why wouldn't u want to invest in rocksteady and their future products? Buy other games used, or if u simply cannot afford it, it is ok. It doesn't ruin the game. It didn't get a 10 b/c of catwoman. And why isn't everyone bitching that only a few ppl get to be robin?

[SDF Repellent]

Just buy the game new and support the developer. If you want it on the cheap, then wait for a price drop after a few months. I will support the developers and buy it new because they created a great product.

[ironcreed]

I was going to rent it, but the game looks like a must buy to me, so I went ahead and ordered me a copy today. I would have ended up buying it regardless.

While I am no fan of this sort of practice, I am not going to pout and deprive myself of one of the years hottest games either. As boycotting, protesting and filling out petitions is completely useless and will have no effect on this sort of thing whatsoever. The only person you are hurting by boycotting this game is yourself. Meanwhile, everyone else will be enjoying it, while you are pouting in the corner.

[KwietStorm_BLM]

No thanks. Paid for it new, and it's one of my favorite games this year, as I knew it would be.

[EverydayGuy]

The problem is is that people will be less willing to spend on new games they hardly know about. The used game market will help them decide if they want to buy a sequel base on the initial purchase on the used game. IMO

[mafiahajeri]

Boycott 8bitbot ;D

[Derpy]

Originally this was going to be a day one or very close to it purchase, but when I heard about the online pass, I decided to pass (pun intended.) I'll give this game another look when the GOTY edition comes out to see if anythings changed. In the meantime, there's lots of other good stuff coming out for me to spend my hard earned money on.

I agree with EverydayGuy above, there are a lot of times when I purchased a used game that I never would have gotten new and ended up liking it so much that I bought all the sequels new. Destroying the used game market is really just getting rid of free advertising. Too bad game companies are so blinded by greed these days that they can't see how they are hurting themselves.

[cyclonus007]

Please explain how giving consumers free DLC is somehow greedy.

This isn't about destroying the used game market. It's that when you buy a used game (which you can now on Day 1), the publisher is not seeing any money from that purchase. That is a sale that doesn't exist to them; even though money changed hands, the company got none of it.

So how are they supposed to know how much a game actually sells? Or make enough money to know there is a demand? Or not close the studio that made that game you bought used because sales were disappointing?

This is what the industry has come to: companies have to offer some incentive to buying new because otherwise, people would buy a used copy that is sitting right next to a new one just to save a little money.

[SwampCroc]

I've been playing the game since I got it.. I'm not boycotting anything...

I wouldn't want to boycott the only industry that provides any relief from the fucked up realities in this world...

Videogames provide that relief that movies and television now longer fill. Because the current majority nowadays suck...

So, Boycott the film industry... Because Videogames have taken over.

[swishersweets20031]

people are such babies. if you bought it used and dont have catwomen so fn what. your fault being cheap. should of just forked over that whole 2 dollars more and bought it new.

[TheWolverine]

Dont care, bought it. Worth it...

[theherp80]

Online pass is not a ONE TIME use DLC code. there is no online gameplay in AC

[Canary]

So... what's the big deal here?

It's the same thing as having Free DLC out of the box, as has been done many times in the past with games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect. All it really does is "punish" people who buy the game secondhand--and even then, they'll have the option to download it, right?

Basically, all it does is ensure the developers get some return for their work. Gamestop (and similar retailers) have been raping the industry for a LONG time, and the only way to combat it (and thus prevent the stagnation and eventual collapse of the industry) is either free DLC like this, or a 100% transition to digital distribution.

[hazelamy]

good god, i am so sick of that bloody excuse.

some return for their work, what like the money they get when they sell the game the first time?

why the hell should they keep getting paid when they're not doing any more work?

if we buy the game, we're giving them their reward for making it.

i cannot understand why people why people keep acting like the industry deserves or has any right to profit once they've sold the game.

what twisted logic goes on in there, what propaganda convinced you they deserve to profit from a game twice, or three times?

if they want to profit from preowned sales, they have to buy the games back, then they'll become their property, otherwise it's nothing to do with them once they're paid.

words cannot adequately describe how bloody unbelievable it is to me to see people getting screwed out of their own property and sheep defending it or disgustingly praising them for it.

some people simply shouldn't be allowed to handle money.

[Canary]

Are you serious?

Have you ever wondered why the games we play today are so much more similar to each other than 10 years ago? Why the FPS has grown to define the medium? Why so many games are so lackluster, why it seems more money is spent on advertising a game than on making sure the game is good in the first place?

It's all because of used game sales. Gamestop, and similar retailers, build their entier business model around pre-owned sales, doing everything they can to convince consumers to trade-in games and to buy used.

The net result of this is that most game sales tend to be in the first week--or on the first day--of a game's release. This means that if a game doesn't sell well on day 1, odds are it won't sell well at all. This makes developers and publishers focus more on advertising and hyping up games than on providing quality games, or on producing stable games. It also stifles creativity in the medium--they need to make a game consumers are going to know they want to buy RIGHT AWAY, because they need those day 1 sales.

Your entire argument boils down to letting the industry collapse just so you can save a few bucks. Talk about ignorance.

[MarioAna]

This isn't about punishing the devs and i have no problem with devs trying to make more money on the 2nd hand market that places like Gamestop are raping, but this is not the way to do it. Make us pay a bit more for 2nd hand users to play online; fine, give us purchasable DLC add ons; fine, but screwing with the SP component and forcing online access to get what you've already paid for is not fine.

Maybe if they said the game's shelf price was $10 less at the start that would be better but this is a full price game that i walk out of the store with but don't actually have the full game.

This is about stopping a dangerous trend that could get much worse. I want to play Batman: AC just as much as anyone else. But to put off buying the game for a month is no big deal; and a month is all it would take to make WB backtrack on the code. Then all the other publishers would get the message quickly that this system is not going to work.