Time to abandon EA sports games, then? If they’re not at least giving me an option to buy a physical copy, then forget it. If this succeeds, it will set a precedent that leads to all games being download-only, regardless of platform.

That’s why I and many others are against these DRM schemes – your purchase can be rendered useless at the touch of a button by the whim of a publisher or their DRM suppliers. Then you have to go begging to get your legally purchased game back.

I’m not saying we could not boycott the subscription model if we wanted to. What I wanted to say is that customers have already accepted it, and that the industry will not abandon their most obvious business plan for a minority of people who are not yet on board.

Most people like Steam. They like the benefits it brings, and they accept (or don’t know about) the disadvantages. I do not like the lack of ownership, but I still have tons of games on Impulse and Steam. I wanted to play the Orange Box, so I subscribed. I wanted Demigod, so I subscribed.

What is still open for debate is the quality and price of the services. For example, we rejected EA’s activation limit. Some of us might even choose the less obtrusive Impulse over Steam. And I hope games will become cheaper as people understand that subscriptions with bad service are worth less than purchases or subscriptions with good service. But the subscription model itself , as I see it, is already commonly accepted.

“I personally thing we can do _nothing_ to prevent this (if we wanted to).”

Sure we can. Don’t buy games that don’t satisfy your concept of ownership. Money flows downhill. Just look what happened to Spore vis-a-vis DRM. Suddenly, several months later, EA decides that its DRM policy was bad form and The Sims 3 will now have (supposedly) a simple disc-check. As much as I trust the unerring mores of righteousness in which EA is deeply rooted, I can’t help but think that was a case of customers influencing the manner in which their product is delivered.

Not that I’m advocating piracy (though I won’t hypocritically condemn it, either). To be honest, I got tired of having to break the law just to play games the way I wanted to play them, so I bought a console. Now my (non-PC) games instantly work on physical medium, and publishers have to settle for hoping that I don’t buy their particular title from half.com

@ThatFatChap
I’ve never heard of a company “revoking” anyone’s right to a game they’ve purchased under the traditional model, and no such claim would be recognized by an American court, and I suspect a Brit or European court would rule likewise. Even if publishers did have the right theoretically, being able to instantly enact it at a click is quite a different animal from having to issue letters to people whose addresses they don’t even know.

For US$10, I’ll accept an online authenticated, distributed and reliant game.

IIRC, EA released a football game in South Korea or somewhere, supported by microtransactions, and ended up making more money per player than had they just sold them a standard box. Wish I could find the interview where that was mentioned.

I like my games to be on discs with clunky, space-wasting boxes and manuals.

I’m the same way, but nearly all new PC games come in thin DVD sleeves with a puny manual, if they even include one. With Valve games, I just enter the product key into steam and chuck the box.

Poor First Sale Doctrine. Content developers are working so hard to do away with it. Soon enough there will be an exception and the Primary Licensee Doctrine will be law.