GAME/Gamestation not stocking EA titles

Post Reply New Topic

I'm glad they're f***ked, I really am. The number of times I've been in there and overheard some kid getting £2 for a game when trading is shocking, that and the constant pressured upselling to older people buying gifts, and things like disk insurance and extended warranties. I have no sympathy for them.

disk insurance? i didnt know they did that.

great username by the way

Thanks.

Yep, at one stage they were charging people £3 to replace or repair when buying a new game. IIRC Microsoft replace any MS Studio's games' disk for the price of P&P and your games are covered under home contents insurance, anyway.

Had to double take on the bolded as I thought it said something else.

I think the time of B&M Shopping is at an end....you can get things delivered (usually free) without being hassled and being a sardine in a crowd, plus the contents online are cheaper and you don't need to carry it around with you.

Tru dat. Outside of groceries, I don't think I've spent more than maybe £200 in local shops in the past 10 years or so.

Microsoft and Activision have cut them off too.

I wonder if SEGA, Konami and even Sony are next?

Good boycott EA.

I refuse to buy any EA games or Activision or Ubisoft.

They are gaming congromerlates and can easily become the BP of the gaming world. They are already trying to control the market with Multiplayer Online Passes. I refuse to buy a game that I need permission to play online.

I buy Used games because I cannot afford new games. I do not want to be punished for the fact that I need to not waste my funds.

Boycott EA.

They're a business and receive nothing from the sale of second hand games.

They would get my business better if I could afford a game. These aren't small game companies either. EA, Activision, and Ubisoft are big chain companies. They eat the smaller game companies who have less money than them and take over. They are conglomerates. I refuse to believe that EA is struggling that hard. I cannot afford new games, at 60 dollars I'd go broke if I bought every game I owned new. I will not support EA. And will not support Online Multiplayer Passes.

I bought the game and should be allowed to play online. I should not need a permission code. Btw, it only works on one Xbox. What happens when there are multiple Xboxes in the home? It's b.s. I refuse to buy games that I need permission to play online.

I will continue to boycott EAs games. The way they do business is unappealing.

You can import your Gamertag/account onto any Xbox, I don't understand your point. I find prices for second hand games £2 less than the new copy when I call into the local shop. I'd sooner the developers had my money, than c**ts like Game.
Another point would be that there are maybe 3-4 online games worth bothering with (CoD, Halo, Gears and Battlefield), and only one of those is an EA game. A couple of quid's hardly going to break the bank. Anway, we're in capitalist economy. As much as I disagree with some of the fundamentals (corporate law for instance) companies are perfectly within their rights to make money where they can.

I will not buy a 60 dollar game that:

-Requires me permission to play online

-Is an incomplete game: I am so tired of video games who give me half content and say "Oh you have to buy the DLC" No. I bought a game for 60 dollars and expect to have the game complete. This stuff should be in the game. Like Characters in a one on one fighter game. Or extra costumes for these fighters. Or weapons in shooter games.

I also do not support EA for their rude service and unappealing behavior towards their customers. I had a bad experience with them.

Stinks of entitlement, to me. If you can't afford to pay for a game or refuse to pay, maybe consider a different passtime.

I fund small game design business, very rarely do I fork out the cash for a big title. I was going to do so for The Darkness 2, but had fundage issues.

I don't see it as a entitlement. Maybe we grew up in different eras. But I grew up with a video game generation. My dad use to play video games when I was a child I played video games, my very first console was the Sega Genesis.

Our home collection consist of Gameboy Colors, Sega Genesis, Atari, Jaguar, N64, Gamecube, Super Nintendo, Playstation, Playstation 2, Playstation 3, Xbox, Xbox 360, Nintendo DS, and PSP.

I grew up where games didn't require DLC, they were complete of their content. And to get that special unique gun or costume to "Unlock it" you beat the game. Not fork out more cash to download it. I think this stuff should be in the game. Not as DLC.

You've basically defined entitlement, mate. Congrats on being part of 'the gamer generation' whateverthef**k that is.
I've been playing and have had an interest in videogames since their inception in during the 1970's.

Last edited by ZX_SpectrumDisorder on 19 Mar 2012, 2:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Quite frankly I do not think you understand the definition of entitlement.

I'm not saying it because of the generation though. I am saying it because it works. Because it did work. I do not see the point of DLC. If I am paying 60 dollars on a game, that's half of my alotment which is one hundred. I do not have the money to spend 20 extra dollars on Microsoft Points to buy a DLC. Again I need to buy dollars for virtual money to get virtual permisison to have something.

An example is Soul Calibur 5, which I am absolutely disappointed with. One of the last fighters in the game is DLC. I'll never have the money to get Microsoft Points. I have to buy groceries, haircut for the kids, etc. I cannot waste more money on frivilous crap. I don't even buy 60 dollar games unless I absolutely want to. Soul Calibur 5 is not even a game I bought, it was a present.

But a 60 dollar game should have all it's content. I shouldn't have to shell out money for virtual money to get permission to have new clothes or a new character. Those should be in the game. Like the older games of the past.