• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF

boingball
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:25 AM)
boingball's Avatar

Originally Posted by Relaxed Muscle

Sony or MS will do it, one of them will pull the trigger. And it will be this gen. I'm sure of it.

It would be suicide if only one of them pulls the trigger. The other one will get 90% marketshare.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
(05-02-2012, 12:26 AM)
OldJadedGamer's Avatar
There are no new IP's cause of how tired and old this generation is. Most new IP's come from the beginnings of new generations, not at the tail end of them.

Originally Posted by Kinyou

Aren't there people who buy games new, finish them, resell them and then buy a new game with that money?

Wont the publishers lose those people?

That is me, and yes.... they will lose me. But, I still own Mirror's Edge, Battlefield BC2, and Battlefield 3 and have never traded them in so DICE is ok in my book.
TheExorzist
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:27 AM)
TheExorzist's Avatar

Originally Posted by boingball

It would be suicide if only one of them pulls the trigger. The other one will get 90% marketshare.

Even if all the "greedy" publishers jump on the bandwagon? I don't think so. More like 90% for the one that pulls if off.
DopeyFish
Not bitter, just unsweetened
(05-02-2012, 12:29 AM)
DopeyFish's Avatar

Originally Posted by Palette Swap

For some reason, I've never seen a writer describe people who buy their books second hand as "not their readers".

Uh. DICE never said they weren't players. Readers and customers are not the same thing and you are twisting context. What he said is 100% correct. If you buy a used game, they don't see a single penny that you paid for it.

And you are comparing books, which are usually written by 1 person and edited by possibly a couple others... To games that are created by hundreds of people. (excluding the publishing wing)

Books have a very, very long shelf life. Video games do not. Even books are moving towards ebooks in a very, very big way because of how quickly costs are catching up them. Video Games are centered around generations... And a lot of people only play them once.

And to the people talking about current console DD- used sales still fuck with prices unless it's DD only (XBLA)

If you disconnect used sales from the current equation, developers and publishers will become healthy and will allow for a lot greater price fluctuation.

There is definitely huge benefits for the consumer if used game sales were to go away... But it does come with its negatives too.

Love steam and I have purchased far more $60 games on the service than I have purchased prior to steam being around. But that is not the point- I have bought a ton of games on Steam for the sole purpose of doing my part to help developers out. I have like 100 games on my backlog and a bunch of them I won't even play.

I will be so happy when used games go away so that I finally have an opportunity to have new experiences... Wave of originality will come because the risks are nullified.

Right now if you compare movies and games... Film industry has blockbuster movies, B movies, niche titles, TV movies, TV shows, etc

Right now our very own game industry B movies, TV movies, niche titles are almost 80-90% gone. Now it's either really big (a way to ensure profit) or really small (DD titles, costs manageable, easy to recoup lost costs in event of failure)

Maybe you guys are young, or something. But I remember the days when a title like Grim Fandango or Kings Quest were the most ambitious titles in the industry. Nobody can afford to take risks like that these days and it's pretty sad that people would rather cling to the minute monetization of their relatively inexpensive assets and force what few developers with creative interest to take the plunge on things like kick starter (doesn't apply to any developer outside the US, either)

Personally I would rather let the used industry die as I have no emotional attachment to people who partake in a very crude rental system. The people that gave me experiences from ages 6 onwards? They are my heroes. They deserve the money over some reseller.

They are the reason everyone of us are posting here.
Giant Panda
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:29 AM)
Giant Panda's Avatar
Something is going to give soon. Publishers are lossing money, dev costs are rising, consumers are already feeling cheated by the publisher's shenanigans.

I will welcome the coming of the day when almost all games are like XBLA/PSN games.
MMaRsu
I need some paprika. Official moneylender of the Coalition of Muslim Drug Dealers
(05-02-2012, 12:30 AM)
MMaRsu's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheExorzist

Even if all the "greedy" publishers jump on the bandwagon? I don't think so. More like 90% for the one that pulls if off.

Yes because Ps3 gamers will suddenly buy a 720 or 360 gamers a Ps4.

Either way publishers arent going to give up half a potential market.

This idea is fucking stupid across all boards.
ThatCrazyGuy
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:34 AM)
ThatCrazyGuy's Avatar
Why do u guys keep comparing to used car sales? They are nothing alike. A used car a degraded piece of actual equipment. A game is software that doesn't degrade like that. Plus they make all their money off the financing mostly.
corporate cheerleader
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:34 AM)
corporate cheerleader's Avatar

Originally Posted by MMaRsu

Yes because Ps3 gamers will suddenly buy a 720 or 360 gamers a Ps4.

Either way publishers arent going to give up half a potential market.

This idea is fucking stupid across all boards.

It is indeed stupid. It looks like we're reaching full circle again in the discussion, though. Some people will never learn. :/
alr1ght
bish gets all the credit :)
(05-02-2012, 12:34 AM)
alr1ght's Avatar

Originally Posted by DopeyFish

I will be so happy when used games go away so that I finally have an opportunity to have new experiences... Wave of originality will come because the risks are nullified.

LOL

The risks are so much higher with no used market.
DarkPanda
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:34 AM)
DarkPanda's Avatar

Originally Posted by StevieP

All 3 will have to be in on it for it to work... and I do believe all 3 are.

Actually, only one needs to do it. As soon as one console disallows used games, publishers can justify completely dropping support for the others. And since no one will buy a console that gets 0 EA and Activision games (see: Dreamcast), the other two manufacturers will be forced to implement anti-used systems too.
DopeyFish
Not bitter, just unsweetened
(05-02-2012, 12:39 AM)
DopeyFish's Avatar

Originally Posted by alr1ghtstart

LOL

The risks are so much higher with no used market.

Wrong.

Publishers maintain flexibility

If its a "box office bomb" then you can remake some or most of the money back in budget

But right now the swing to budget is completely disjointed to what it should be because of the hollowing out of the budget market by used games sales. (it basically hurts everything)
TheExorzist
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:40 AM)
TheExorzist's Avatar

Originally Posted by MMaRsu

Yes because Ps3 gamers will suddenly buy a 720 or 360 gamers a Ps4.

Either way publishers arent going to give up half a potential market.

This idea is fucking stupid across all boards.

You don't think far enough. Lets Sony pays Take 2 and nice bunch of money to make the new GTA exclusivly for the PS4 (say this one has no used sales any more) with no risc of used sales, they'll do it...... and the flock of gamers will come, making the PS4 more attractive for other publishers. It's so easy.

I tell you right now: If only one pulls off the anti used thingy, he'll ultimately control the future generation. However, I don't see that happening. They'll all pull something off in this regards and most of you will support it when a sequel to one of you favourite series is released.
MMaRsu
I need some paprika. Official moneylender of the Coalition of Muslim Drug Dealers
(05-02-2012, 12:42 AM)
MMaRsu's Avatar

Originally Posted by DarkPanda

Actually, only one needs to do it. As soon as one console disallows used games, publishers can justify completely dropping support for the others. And since no one will buy a console that gets 0 EA and Activision games (see: Dreamcast), the other two manufacturers will be forced to implement anti-used systems too.

Yeah sure like I said I'm sure pubs will be eager to drop a quarter or more from their userbase ><



I couldnt find that cool one with the guy drawing the graph.
gondwana
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:42 AM)
gondwana's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheExorzist

Of course they were cheaper to make. But what do you want? The industry do stagnate? I sure don't. What should be the benefit of that? Games are supposed to evolve. Like any other industry. But thanks to the used games stuff I don't see that happening as fast as it could. I mean, yes, the industry does grow day by day but it's sooooo much easier to sell you game than it has been in any other console generation before. I don't see how so little people here understand that.

i take a lot of issue with this post. you equate progress in gaming with technical improvements and graphical fidelity, which is just asinine on face value and not remotely true in reality. looking at some of the most successful games this generation, plenty of people are willing to play 'stagnate' games. stuff like angry birds, mario bros. wii and minecraft could not be more hideous and visually unappealing yet they're tremendously successful in spite of that

what i see happening in the industry now is a relatively small but dedicated group of twenty/thirty something male gamers who want ultra-high budget blastathons and cinematic games, which is driving up game budgets and standards across the board as publishers try to compete for this audience. the reality is, games aren't magically more progressive because Buff McWhiteGuywithAssaultRifle has nice shaders on his ginourmous shoulder pads. this has been the worst generation of console gaming for me because the high budgets are forcing talented and niche developement houses out of the industry all together. not to mention whole genres have far less representation than in past generations. not to mention if you want your high budget blastathons, you pay the price in anti-consumer schemes like dlc. how is that progress? it's more like a suicide pact for the industry
The Faceless Master
(05-02-2012, 12:44 AM)
The Faceless Master's Avatar

Originally Posted by Fersis

Why is Bach the interim CEO? What happened with L_Twin?

paternity leave.
RoninChaos
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:45 AM)
RoninChaos's Avatar
This reeks of shitty spin like the clown from EA saying Project 10 dollar came out to offer the best value to the consumer.

That shit doesn't even make sense!
DTKT
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:47 AM)
DTKT's Avatar
Do we actually know what would happen if used games went away?
rCIZZLE
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:51 AM)
rCIZZLE's Avatar

Originally Posted by DopeyFish

Wrong.

Publishers maintain flexibility

If its a "box office bomb" then you can remake some or most of the money back in budget

But right now the swing to budget is completely disjointed to what it should be because of the hollowing out of the budget market by used games sales. (it basically hurts everything)

The risks are highest with no used game sales and no tiered pricing system. Do you think people are going to take enough chances on new $60 IPs that they cannot resell if they don't like it? EA and Activision will probably thrive under almost any conditions since people are going to buy shooters and sports games but what about the rest?
vazel
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:52 AM)
vazel's Avatar
Ha, more variety in games my ass. I've been too disappointed in big publisher games this gen to believe that crap.
DopeyFish
Not bitter, just unsweetened
(05-02-2012, 12:53 AM)
DopeyFish's Avatar

Originally Posted by rCIZZLE

The risks are highest with no used game sales and no tiered pricing system. Do you think people are going to take enough chances on new $60 IPs that they cannot resell if they don't like it? EA and Activision will probably thrive under almost any conditions since people are going to buy shooters and sports games but what about the rest?

Wow, it's like... You didn't read my post, at all.
vikingvessel
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:53 AM)
vikingvessel's Avatar

Originally Posted by papersleeves

Those fucks are slowly but surely turning me into a monster with all this shit. The one hobby I've loved for years is the same I despise and been cynical about the most today.


That really nailed it. Watching some of the methods on the verge of implementation and what has already gone down almost has me wishing for things against [what I believe is] consumer best interest in hopes that extreme measures eventually lead to a system I am still willing to support. Backlogs say it would most likely not matter in this lifetime, though it will be disappointing entirely sitting out the next gen. I am not feeling total digital yet, though that would really be tested if it is the only option for Dark Souls 4 and Dead Space 5.
NullPointer
#INTESTINAL
(05-02-2012, 12:55 AM)
NullPointer's Avatar

Originally Posted by Jackl

When your employer/parent company treats you negatively how can see customers as anything but the enemy?

If it weren't for our positive customer relations where I work we never would have been bought by our parent company and we wouldn't exist today. Treating your customers right pays true dividends down the line.

And in my business we compete against free alternatives. Do we bitch when our customers choose those alternatives? No. Do we seek to constrain our customers so that our products look better in comparison? No. Do we bitch and moan about how life is unfair? No.

Do we go back to the drawing board and try to develop improvements so that both our business and our customers win? Yes.

With all the changes going on in the world the only thing you can depend upon is your customers. They are your life's blood. Manipulate and mistreat them at your peril.

There is no excuse. Just a lack of non-zero-sum thinking.
TheExorzist
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:56 AM)
TheExorzist's Avatar

Originally Posted by gondwana

i take a lot of issue with this post. you equate progress in gaming with technical improvements and graphical fidelity, which is just asinine on face value and not remotely true in reality. looking at some of the most successful games this generation, plenty of people are willing to play 'stagnate' games. stuff like angry birds, mario bros. wii and minecraft could not be more hideous and visually unappealing yet they're tremendously successful in spite of that

Try again. Your examples are the worst ones possible and you know it.

what i see happening in the industry now is a relatively small but dedicated group of twenty/thirty something male gamers who want ultra-high budget blastathons and cinematic games, which is driving up game budgets and standards across the board as publishers try to compete for this audience.

Oh, you do? Then please exlain to me why the interest in the Wii is falling for the last 2-3 years if graphics are not important? And before you even say it: No, the Wii didn't sell so well the first few years because of the sub HD graphics. And yes, you know that too.

the reality is, games aren't magically more progressive because Buff McWhiteGuywithAssaultRifle has nice shaders on his ginourmous shoulder pads. this has been the worst generation of console gaming for me because the high budgets are forcing talented and niche developement houses out of the industry all together.

Funny, for me it was the best - and I'm around since NES/GameBoy. And please, what niche development? You mean less shitty games? Thank god no one can afford to make bad games these days.

not to mention whole genres have far less representation than in past generations. not to mention if you want your high budget blastathons, you pay the price in anti-consumer schemes like dlc. how is that progress? it's more like a suicide pact for the industry

Seriously, I still don't see that big problem with DLC. I have yet to buy a game where essential parts of it have to be purchased via DLC. And for how long are we discussing this now? I don't get it. Even the stuff that people claimed to be essential (aka Assassins Creed 2) I never had the feeling they truly were.
rCIZZLE
Member
(05-02-2012, 12:57 AM)
rCIZZLE's Avatar

Originally Posted by DopeyFish

Wow, it's like... You didn't read my post, at all.

No need to be rude. This is what I was responding to:

I will be so happy when used games go away so that I finally have an opportunity to have new experiences... Wave of originality will come because the risks are nullified.

Originally Posted by alr1ghtstart

LOL

The risks are so much higher with no used market.

Originally Posted by DopeyFish

Wrong.

Czigga
Member
(05-02-2012, 01:03 AM)
I almost can't wait for their no-used-game systems to come out so we can watch game sales plummet.
sprsk
force push the doodoo rock
(05-02-2012, 01:10 AM)
sprsk's Avatar
When you remove used games, you essentially are telling the consumer "You're the enemy." "You're the problem."

It is the essence of biting the hand that feeds you. It's absolute crazy talk.

I'd love to see what would happen if they did institute a ban on used games. Would the sky clear up and become a wonderful place full of lollipops, new ip's and a healthy industry? Or would a large sect of gamers buy less games and push the industry further into no originality land?
TheExorzist
Member
(05-02-2012, 01:15 AM)
TheExorzist's Avatar

Originally Posted by sprsk

When you remove used games, you essentially are telling the consumer "You're the enemy." "You're the problem."

No. You're telling them this: "We invested money to make that game. We invested it to make money with that game. Therefore we want you to pay us (not someone else) to play that game, so we get our money back to invest it into making new games."

I don't see what problem you guys have with that.
MMaRsu
I need some paprika. Official moneylender of the Coalition of Muslim Drug Dealers
(05-02-2012, 01:19 AM)
MMaRsu's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheExorzist

No. You're telling them this: "We invested money to make that game. We invested it to make money with that game. Therefore we want you to pay us (not someone else) to play that game, so we get our money back to invest it into making new games."

I don't see what problem you guys have with that.

Right because its just not right to lend your family or friends a copy.
papersleeves
Member
(05-02-2012, 01:20 AM)
papersleeves's Avatar

Originally Posted by DopeyFish

Uh. DICE never said they weren't players. Readers and customers are not the same thing and you are twisting context. What he said is 100% correct. If you buy a used game, they don't see a single penny that you paid for it.

And you are comparing books, which are usually written by 1 person and edited by possibly a couple others... To games that are created by hundreds of people. (excluding the publishing wing)

Books have a very, very long shelf life. Video games do not. Even books are moving towards ebooks in a very, very big way because of how quickly costs are catching up them. Video Games are centered around generations... And a lot of people only play them once.

And to the people talking about current console DD- used sales still fuck with prices unless it's DD only (XBLA)

If you disconnect used sales from the current equation, developers and publishers will become healthy and will allow for a lot greater price fluctuation.

There is definitely huge benefits for the consumer if used game sales were to go away... But it does come with its negatives too.

Love steam and I have purchased far more $60 games on the service than I have purchased prior to steam being around. But that is not the point- I have bought a ton of games on Steam for the sole purpose of doing my part to help developers out. I have like 100 games on my backlog and a bunch of them I won't even play.

I will be so happy when used games go away so that I finally have an opportunity to have new experiences... Wave of originality will come because the risks are nullified.

Right now if you compare movies and games... Film industry has blockbuster movies, B movies, niche titles, TV movies, TV shows, etc

Right now our very own game industry B movies, TV movies, niche titles are almost 80-90% gone. Now it's either really big (a way to ensure profit) or really small (DD titles, costs manageable, easy to recoup lost costs in event of failure)

Maybe you guys are young, or something. But I remember the days when a title like Grim Fandango or Kings Quest were the most ambitious titles in the industry. Nobody can afford to take risks like that these days and it's pretty sad that people would rather cling to the minute monetization of their relatively inexpensive assets and force what few developers with creative interest to take the plunge on things like kick starter (doesn't apply to any developer outside the US, either)

Personally I would rather let the used industry die as I have no emotional attachment to people who partake in a very crude rental system. The people that gave me experiences from ages 6 onwards? They are my heroes. They deserve the money over some reseller.

They are the reason everyone of us are posting here.

The future seems to point out towards micro transactions my friend. Lots and lots of games that cost a lot to produce are F2P, meaning there is no price of admission. What do they do to earn money? Create a kick ass game with a fee for extras and bonuses. This is a bright future if you take into consideration the companies that do this, like Riot Games for example. More so, it might not have been long enough since the start of this business model and I might be wrong as hell for all we care but you don't hear about many, if any company rolling like this going out of business.

They are trying to fix a problem that cannot be fixed. They want to stick to their business model but they don't want to make any compromise with it. AAA or bust. They're trying to regain their loss by gouging their customers with all this bullshit. Only, this can only work for so long. The day will come when even the most stupid or ignorant person will know and understand that it's easy to purchase your goods somewhere else much cheaper and better. But they're too stubborn. We won't buy their shit because even the stupidest person will know they're thieves and being dishonest with you. On their side, they will be too stubborn to acknowledge they were greedy. Therefore, this cannot be fixed.

I love owning a physical copy of my belongings, especially for video games, but I might as well buy and download fucking data off the internet for cheap rather than purchase an object that feels so empty , devoid of fleshes, here and there, with lots of traps ready to break the bones of your fingers, if you dare not holding it the way they've wanted to. It doesn't matter how much you've paid for it. Nobody will acknowledge its importance, especially the owner, who knows deep down it can never be resold. The value is just gone, and so is one of the best thrill about anything you buy.
DopeyFish
Not bitter, just unsweetened
(05-02-2012, 01:21 AM)
DopeyFish's Avatar

Originally Posted by MMaRsu

Right because its just not right to lend your family or friends a copy.

You are welcome to lend your consoles to whomever you please.
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
(05-02-2012, 01:22 AM)
WanderingWind's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheExorzist

No. You're telling them this: "We invested money to make that game. We invested it to make money with that game. Therefore we want you to pay us (not someone else) to play that game, so we get our money back to invest it into making new games."

I don't see what problem you guys have with that.

Because they did make money off it, and yet they still blame the people who support them on every dip in sales for every game ever. Defenders are just be obstinate at this point.
TheExorzist
Member
(05-02-2012, 01:23 AM)
TheExorzist's Avatar

Originally Posted by MMaRsu

Right because its just not right to lend your family or friends a copy.

I'm sure the game would be tied to your account if that ever happens. Just give them your account.
sprsk
force push the doodoo rock
(05-02-2012, 01:25 AM)
sprsk's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheExorzist

No. You're telling them this: "We invested money to make that game. We invested it to make money with that game. Therefore we want you to pay us (not someone else) to play that game, so we get our money back to invest it into making new games."

Yeah, actually you're right, the industry is telling consumers that. It's just that consumers (correctly) interpret that as "You're the problem."
RoninChaos
Member
(05-02-2012, 01:26 AM)
RoninChaos's Avatar
It's really amazing the mental gymnastics people will go through to make themselves believe this kind of shit.

WHY AREN'T ANY OF YOU LISTENING TO OPIATE?!
out0v0rder
Member
(05-02-2012, 01:27 AM)

Originally Posted by DopeyFish

You are welcome to lend your consoles to whomever you please.

for now
Valnen
Banned
(05-02-2012, 01:28 AM)
Valnen's Avatar

Originally Posted by NullPointer

Its a win for you, and a loss for the customers.

Yeah, we already knew this.

People that buy used aren't really customers to them though?
TheExorzist
Member
(05-02-2012, 01:28 AM)
TheExorzist's Avatar

Originally Posted by WanderingWind

Because they did make money off it, and yet they still blame the people who support them on every dip in sales for every game ever. Defenders are just be obstinate at this point.

Stupid argument is stupid. So by your logic just one guy could buy a game, get it into circulation, resell it a million times and the publisher would have nothing to complain about, right? Although only one guy payed for it but a million acutally played it?

I know it's a stupid example but it seems I really need a stupid example to illustrate how stupid your argument is.
MC Safety
Member
(05-02-2012, 01:30 AM)
MC Safety's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheExorzist

No. You're telling them this: "We invested money to make that game. We invested it to make money with that game. Therefore we want you to pay us (not someone else) to play that game, so we get our money back to invest it into making new games."

I don't see what problem you guys have with that.

Are you comfortable allowing a game company to determine what you do with your property?

I'm talking about a boxed copy, a physical item, and not a license.
railGUN
Prine Fan
(05-02-2012, 01:36 AM)
railGUN's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheExorzist

Stupid argument is stupid. So by your logic just one guy could buy a game, get it into circulation, resell it a million times and the publisher would have nothing to complain about, right? Although only one guy payed for it but a million acutally played it?

I know it's a stupid example but it seems I really need a stupid example to illustrate how stupid your argument is.

It couldn't be a very good game if a million people are willing to wait to play a single copy. If everyone played said game for 1 day before selling it, it would take over 2700 years for a million people to play it.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
(05-02-2012, 01:38 AM)
OldJadedGamer's Avatar

Originally Posted by Valnen

People that buy used aren't really customers to them though?

Once they pay for an online pass or buy any DLC they are.
NullPointer
#INTESTINAL
(05-02-2012, 01:43 AM)
NullPointer's Avatar

Originally Posted by Valnen

People that buy used aren't really customers to them though?

Those non-customers are getting a better deal, so the publishers are going to rectify that problem by giving their remaining customers a worse deal. Makes perfect sense.

They must like having non-customers.
Last edited by NullPointer; 05-02-2012 at 01:45 AM.
TheExorzist
Member
(05-02-2012, 01:45 AM)
TheExorzist's Avatar

Originally Posted by MC Safety

Are you comfortable allowing a game company to determine what you do with your property?

I'm talking about a boxed copy, a physical item, and not a license.

If I know about this when I buy the new console, yes.

It couldn't be a very good game if a million people are willing to wait to play a single copy. If everyone played said game for 1 day before selling it, it would take over 2700 years for a million people to play it.

Believe it or not, but people are willing to wait. Especailly since so many high quality games are realsed nowadays. For example: I've just been playing Skyrim for 6 months. I haven't finished Witcher 2 yet, haven't even started Mass Effect 3 and there is new DLC for Skyrim upcoming. I wanted to play MW3 since launch and since I still have a lot to do, it can wait even longer. But then again, BO2 has just be revealed. And Max Payne 3 is upcoming. Darksiders 2 also. And I have yet to complete several other games...

Believe me... People can wait. There are good games all over the place nowadays.
MC Safety
Member
(05-02-2012, 01:48 AM)
MC Safety's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheExorzist

If I know about this when I buy the new console, yes.

I'm glad you're comfortable giving up your property rights. Most people would find this odious.
Leondexter
(05-02-2012, 01:50 AM)
Leondexter's Avatar

Originally Posted by Wthermans

Someone who reads the writer's books, but does not pay, is not their customer.

That would also cover, for example, family of the person who purchased the game (or book). Is my son not a "customer" if I buy a Harry Potter book, read it, and also let him read it? Anyone who would say "no" is an asshole.

I have two of several consoles in my house. These publishers now want to force me to buy two copies of every game - one for each console. That will never happen, I promise you.

There are a lot more scenarios than just Gamestop and their (perfectly legitimate) business model for people having "used" games. Ironically, theirs is the only one where the money involved (if any) goes directly back into new game sales.

I spend thousands of dollars each year on video games. I'm the dream customer who always buys new and never sells. But I will not stand for anti-consumer practices, even if I don't personally exercise those consumer rights. They can kiss my money good-bye.
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
(05-02-2012, 01:52 AM)
WanderingWind's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheExorzist

Stupid argument is stupid. So by your logic just one guy could buy a game, get it into circulation, resell it a million times and the publisher would have nothing to complain about, right? Although only one guy payed for it but a million acutally played it?

I know it's a stupid example but it seems I really need a stupid example to illustrate how stupid your argument is.

Yeah, resort to utterly absurd statements to point out how something is "stupid." You're really making your point there, buddy. I don't even know why you wasted your time posting something you knew was too absurd to even make a passing resemblance to a point.
Vitacat
Member
(05-02-2012, 01:54 AM)
Vitacat's Avatar
If anti-used strategies are implemented in next-gen hardware, then I'm done with consoles.

The only current gen console I own is an XB360, and only because my fiancee bought it for me this past Xmas. I mostly play games on mobile devices and PC these days. I used to be an avid console gamer, and bought multiple systems each gen going back to the 16bit days. But times are a-changing.

So yeah, farewell console gaming, and thanks for (potentially) making the decision to let go so easy.
Last edited by Vitacat; 05-02-2012 at 01:55 AM. Reason: fix wording
Leondexter
(05-02-2012, 01:54 AM)
Leondexter's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheExorzist

Believe me... People can wait. There are good games all over the place nowadays.

Did you miss the "2,700 years" part? I'm pretty sure nobody can wait that long.

And I'm absolutely positive that Gamestop can back that up with data. You know what sells best used? The same games that sell best new. Old games don't sell well, new or used.
TheExorzist
Member
(05-02-2012, 01:56 AM)
TheExorzist's Avatar

Originally Posted by MC Safety

I'm glad you're comfortable giving up your property rights. Most people would find this odious.

Well, if you don't like it, don't support it. Video Games are a non-essential thing. I'm willing to support this in order to help the industry to grow. You know, I like games. I really do. And I don't want to see game companies struggling just because you want to save a few bucks.
Leondexter
(05-02-2012, 01:58 AM)
Leondexter's Avatar

Originally Posted by DopeyFish

You are welcome to lend your consoles to whomever you please.

And if I have two consoles?

Besides, if they're okay with me lending my console, then they should be okay with me lending my games. I have the same right to do both.
Sir Garbageman
Member
(05-02-2012, 01:59 AM)
Sir Garbageman's Avatar
If the next gen consoles implement an anti-used game measure they better go toe to toe with STEAM and other DD services regarding pricing. If not my console game purchases will decline by 90% or so, simple as that.

Thread Tools