Honestly, I think this is a far better system then trying to make buying used copies illegal etc... If Ubisoft (publisher) is spending money on you (through running patch servers, on-line rankings, whatever) and you purchased the game in a fashion where they receive no money from you, then they actually "are" losing money. Now... this doesn't mean some of the other allegations aren't bullshit though.

I don't think Ubisoft wants this game to do much, as they are also adding their despised DRM (you know the always connected to the internet one) to the PC version.

[quote]If Ubisoft (publisher) is spending money on you (through running patch servers, on-line rankings, whatever) and you purchased the game in a fashion where they receive no money from you, then they actually "are" losing money.[/quote]Patches should never be seen as a "service" that has an added value for which you need to pay. That would be like a car company saying they've screwed up and made a flaw in their engine making it break under certain circumstances, but asking money to get it repaired. Doesn't sound honest, now does it? Secondly, publishers add all kinds of features like online rankings and such, yes. Keeping up that infrastructure costs money, yes. However: if you ask people whether they want to pay for online rankings (while online multiplayer as such would remain free) then I think you would see a totally different picture. Also: infrastructure is written off in accounts after two years max so after that point it's pure additional profit they're getting, not losing money on second hand games (that's purely something accountants came up with)

Maybe I wasn't specific... There are such things as "Content Patches". I'm not necessarily talking about bug fixes. See Diablo II for an example. But honestly, if you go to the store and buy the game, you pay $60.00 and get the full experience. If you get it second hand, or borrow it from a buddy who is done with it, you pay $20.00 to use the matchmaking service, rankings, get updates, etc... Sounds completely fair to me. And a better comparison with respect to buying a new car is: You buy a new car, you get tires for life with the car. You sell the car to someone else, they no longer get that perk and have to pay for it if they want it...

You get tires for life where you live? Damn! And back on topic: publishers re-release games at a discount price after some time. A good example of that (going back to Blizzard as well) is Starcraft which got re-released with the Brood War packs and such at a price that could compete with second hand. Once initial investment of the product is earnt back, they cash in a second time on those people who didn't buy it the first time and take the wind out of second hand sales at the same time. Don't see why there needs to be such a massive witch hunt against second hand except to make "additional" money on the back of consumers. Once investments are written off, they no longer represent any "real" money in accounting so everything gained extra is pure profit, not possible revenue loss.