Home » General » The $10 Project: A+ or F?

The $10 Project: A+ or F?

Online passes were introduced not that long ago, the earlier examples falling under the banner of ‘Project $10’. With them, publishers aimed to not necessarily eliminate the pre-owned market, but to be able to continue profiting from a game bought by someone who had (through no fault of their own) given none of their money to those that made the game. On one hand it’s an honourable decision to renumerate those involved in the creation of the titles we know and love. On the other it’s money-grabbing nonsense that shouldn’t exist.

But how has it affected you since it became the ‘in’ thing?

Personally, I still haven’t bought a single code. I would have had to get one for Battlefield Bad Company 2, for the VIP pack, but the second-hand copy I purchased had an unused code with it, luckily. Other than that? Well, despite receiving promo copies of games (perks of the job, innit) that don’t come with online passes included, I still haven’t bought a single one. But that’s just me – online really doesn’t matter to me that much, apart from in a couple of titles. BFBC2 and, possibly, FIFA 11. That means I will have to buy a code for FIFA.

But generally speaking, I haven’t bought an online pass nor do I think I’m going to buy many. Does that make the project a failure? Does it mean it’s done exactly what it’s meant to do? Granted I’m an exception in the games I get, but if I was still buying them they would be second hand and as such the Project $10 element would still be present. And I still wouldn’t be forking out for it. I am a principled (stubborn) person. But what about you? Have you got your second-hand games and forked out an extra £5-10 to be able to play online? What do you think of it all? Will it carry on for much longer? Is it the new standard? There’s a comments section below, you see.




Similar posts

  • Sean

    I can’t believe you get promo copies of games and you still buy second hand ones lol. Oh and tbh, I don’t bother with online due to being overly competitive (I wouldn’t have any hair at the end of it.) But I do believe it is a good away of atleast cutting down abit on games trading, although I don’t know statistically if it actually has a postive effect. Atleast it isn’t as bad as what Sony had considered, all games being locked to just one console when purchased brand new. Then you would have to buy your games new like everyone else, Ian XD.

  • Sandy

    Isn’t it only EA doing it so far? If so, then I’m only really interested in the Battlefield series, which, for Battlefield 3, I’ve already preordered. So it doesn’t bother me that much. But I think that only big game companies, such as EA and Ubisoft, that could get away with it. Others, most people would jus have the opinion, ‘what’s the point?’. Not a total failure.

  • Garan

    Since I’ve had my PS3 I’ve only ever bought 2 second hand games (t’was during hard times) so online passes don’t effect me cause I get them straight up.Still I think its money grabbing as someone already bought that game for it to become secondhand.

  • Ian Dransfield

    @Sandy

    THQ are big on online passes, and Warner recently announced they’ll be doing it for Mortal Kombat. I think there are others too, but I forget.

    EA definitely popularised the idea though.

    To be honest, I hate them.

  • Joey

    Ubisoft do it now?
    I better get my copy of We Dare new then.