Here's the way I see it. The original developer sets a price. If consumers think it is worth it then they buy it. If its a great game more people buy it and the developers make more money. If that price is not high enough for the developer they can always try selling it for more in which case the market will decide whether or not its worth it. The rationale here is nothing more than greed...consumers don't realize how much we need the money. Sounds really familar to the speech coming out of other aspects of the entertainment industry such as the Movie/Music industry, who would would also love to do this. How about it...if you buy a used CD then it will not play unless you pay the musician more money. Their argument citing EA's online pass isn't pertinent since you can still play the original game. With online pass, in essence they are selling the use of the servers. You want to play online with a used game , then call it a server fee and be done with it. Games that are bad have always done badly and games that are great do exceptionally well. All a developer has to do to make more money is to make a better game. It's a competitive market and the developers are not competing with consumers but with other developers. What they never seem to realize in their greed, is that if you buy a used game title, and like it, then you're much more likely to buy similar titles or sequels than otherwise.













