I'm sure they would if they could, but the mainstream would go crazy if they found out that you'd have to pay the movie companies when selling used movies.

What about the antiquities? Aren't they more valuable old than new?

It's not about supporting the developer, it is THEIR job to make a good game, they are paid for that.

I edited my original post and added more reasons why we should care to NOT support online passes.

We lose power/influence.

We lose getting our full games on hard-disk

We become more reliant on digital distrubution

What's next? Our option to rent games gets an aditional fee?

New game buyers lose more money if the game sucks and want to sell a (now) used game that has to consider slash of the -$ the online pass costs.

eh, you're OP was long and presumely filled of stupid comments about how you deserve to get more for less..

it costs money for these companies to maintain the online infrastructure you want to use.  so using services without paying is generally what i call bullocks.  go online pass go!!

If that was so then PC gaming online would've implemented such fee's a century ago. If you haven't read my OP, I encourage you to do so as it is just a scam to get into our(used game buyers in particular) pockets (used game buyers matter us much new game buyers) and surprise surprise its' EA and Activision.. some of the developers that are struggling the most that ask for an online pass. Please read it and think about it.

This is my main problem with the DMCA in that it is terribly anti-consumer and complete BS.    It invalidates centuries of "fair use" laws that are meant to protect the consumer.

Thankfully libraries have been around so long that we are still able to freely share books.  Can you imagine if libraries didn't exist and someone brought the idea up today?  The idea would be DOA.

That would be the dumbest thing they could do.  New games sales would plummet as people that use money they get from selling games would no longer be able to afford buying as many new games.

Well, the more I think about it, they would almost be able to do something like this.  Similar to an online pass, they could include a campaign pass, for example, and the game that people are originally purchasing would only be a 1 hour demo, for example (but every new copy does come with the passes).  I highly doubt something like this would happen though.  For one, people would get extremely angry that they can't resell their games, and sales may actually go down because people won't have the sales money to pay for their next game.  Tue second reason is that even siblings with seperate accounts for instance might not be able to play a game (in the instance that they split the cost of games, for example).  I just don't see it happening.

no, i don't think i'll be reading your OP...that's your fault for writing a wall of text.

and to be quite honest, used game buyers don't matter.  not to the developers anyways.  if the amount of dollars you give the developers is a big fat zero what do they stand to lose from pissing you off??  are you going to stop playing video games?  oh noes, they will face absolutely no reprocussions....whatever will they do with themselves?!?

That has to be one of the most ridiculous things I've heard anyone say in my life. You obviously need counseling or something.

Half of my games are used copies... I bought them with $ and my used games that I bought with $ is the same as pirated (stolen) ones.

YOU

ARE

CRAZY!

Won't even try to talk you about this unless you realize how ridiculous that was.