Support NeoGAF

[bigace33]

Does the person that buys a movie ticket have a RIGHT to see that movie again and/or SELL that movie ticket to someone else after it's been consumed?

wait a minute, what?

 

[Big-E]

None of that has any bearing on my argument. I didn't say the experiences were the same, I said that the way the value is assigned is the same. In both cases you pay for the right to an experience, whatever form that experience takes.

The word experience shouldn't be used either as everything can be titled as an experience like the car you drive or the book you are reading. A ticket is only for 1 playing of a piece of media while a game entitles you to infinite play. Saying "experience" doesn't mean that they are any where near the same.

 

[BlastProcessing]

They're not, that wasn't my point.

My point was to say that it's certainly within Microsoft or Sony's RIGHTS as PLATFORM HOLDERS to restrict the second hand distribution of their (or their partner's) content.

Videogames are consumable forms of entertainment that do not lose their intrinsic value (so long as the disc isn't damaged) when sold second hand (unlike a car).

The business models are evolving, but GameStop's rise this past decade has certainly extracted a huge percentage of the gaming business and it doesn't contribute anything of tangible value to the industry itself.



No, because the business model doesn't revolve around making money off of hardware. It's generally been a net-loser in order to profit from software sales.

You make a lot of strong claims that you don't back up at all. You assert that Platform holders have a right to restrict secondhand sales when the First Sale Doctrine specifically disagrees. You say that videogames are consumable forms of entertainment, which I would argue they most certainly are not. You claim that they don't lose value when the value of any good is variable over time. By the way, many cars increase in value when sold second hand and I am not even talking about collector's items. When the Prius was new, for instance, it was in such demand that used models sold for more than their MSRP. You assert that Gamestop has had a rise this decade when their growth stopped long ago and they actually posted a loss last year. And finally you claim that Gamestop contributes nothing tangible to the industry when it is the only nationwide games specific retailer.

As to hardware being sold at a loss, the Wii was always sold for a profit, so I guess we need to make an exception for Nintendo.

 

[Rich!]

yea it's not a new phenomenon but game stop is 10x worse then EB Babbage etc. when it comes to used games. eb babbages funcoland when i was growing up were in select locations and rarely had their own stores outside of malls. gamestop on the other hand doubled the size of the company and has became a force behind used games. anytime i go into their store( i rarely do) they ALWAYS try to convince me to buy games used to "save" money. I can imagine how many less fortunate individuals they scam by helping them save 3 bucks.

Gamestop isn't the only store in the world. It also isn't the only way to sell a game.

Gamestop doesn't even exist outside of America apart from Ireland and maybe another country. I can go into CEX and buy a copy of Nintendoland right now for £15 preowned. How much is it brand new and digital? £49.99

Wheres the problem there? It's definitely not the preowned store offering a decent price now, is it?

 

[famousmortimer]

yea it's not a new phenomenon but game stop is 10x worse then EB Babbage etc. when it comes to used games. eb babbages funcoland when i was growing up were in select locations and rarely had their own stores outside of malls. gamestop on the other hand doubled the size of the company and has became a force behind used games. anytime i go into their store( i rarely do) they ALWAYS try to convince me to buy games used to "save" money. I can imagine how many less fortunate individuals they scam by helping them save 3 bucks.

Where I live, in connecticut, gamestop is where all of those stores used to be... because they bought them out. The EB in CT Post Mall is now a gamestop. The funcoland right down the street is a gamestop.

They've opened new ones also. And I'm not arguing that Gamestop is awesome or that they aren't profiting bigtime off of used games... they are, and I implore everyone who does trade in games to do it without them. Use ebay, amazon, craigslist... you'll get like double the price, and then you'll have even more money to go buy new games - which will spur on the indusry.

 

[vpance]

If they can't make money on $100,000,000 games then they shouldn't spend $100,000,000 on games.

Is this even about the $100M games? Those being the GTA's and the Halo's that all do manage to make a fuck ton of money anyways.

 

[Zombie James]

Remember when the Sixaxis didn't have rumble because its motion control and rumble functionality couldn't work in the same controller? Yeah.

Don't pretend you're unaware of Sony's historical problems with being truthful.

1UP: We have one question we have to ask you before we go. A couple days ago you resolved the Immersion/Sony case. What does that mean for PlayStation gamers? After months and months of "well the controller's great because it's really lite" and now rumble is going to make it a little heaver. I mean, that's a bit of a PR nightmare to sort of have backed away from a tech and now saying, "We're all back together again so it's OK".

Harrison: First of all, we've just kissed and made up. We've just settled our differences. And, as we've said in the announcements, we're looking at ways to work together. And it's genuine; those really are the intentions. As to previous statements that I made, what do you expect me to say? We were in a lawsuit; we were in litigation. Of course I have to defend our view. And you know, actually, I still truly believe having the SIXAXIS controller, the way it is, is the best way to control games. We're looking forward to working with Immersion going forward, and who knows where that will lead us.

http://www.1up.com/news/gdc-2007-phil-harrison-interview

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

Just because you can sell the disc doesn't mean it's their responsibility to make sure the disc retains its value. You can still sell the disc with whatever system Microsoft is cooking up, it's just worth less because of the money you will have to pay to reactivate it. It's this an anti-consumer practice? Yes, it is. But they haven't taken away your right to sell what you own.

They don't need to blatantly "take away my right" when they purposefully mess with the market so that reselling becomes unfeasible.

 

[BlastProcessing]

Just because you can sell the disc doesn't mean it's their responsibility to make sure the disc retains its value. You can still sell the disc with whatever system Microsoft is cooking up, it's just worth less because of the money you will have to pay to reactivate it. It's this an anti-consumer practice? Yes, it is. But they haven't taken away your right to sell what you own.

And if you're looking at the legality of this, you need to stop looking at games as media (CD, DVD, Blu-Ray) and start looking at games as software, which is what they actually are. You don't have the ability to sell the copy of Windows you bought after you've registered it without jumping through hoops, or old copies of software like AutoCAD or Visual Studio.

CDs DVDs and Blu-Rays are also software. The definition of software is too fuzzy for this argument to work.

 

[Night_Trekker]

http://www.1up.com/news/gdc-2007-phil-harrison-interview

Lying with good reason is still fucking lying. You know that.

Or do I really need to break out the old, long list of absurd Sony quotes?

Is this even about the $100M games? Those being the GTA's and the Halo's that all do manage to make a fuck ton of money anyways.

Sadly, we've come to a point where budgets are so massive, a game making a fuck ton of money can still be considered a failure.

 

[Rich!]

thankfully they aren't trying to take used games away completely. next generation i may have to exit though if its full DD with no kind of rewards.

Of course they are, and if you think otherwise then you're fucking delusional.

Going by what Phil Harrison confirmed in an interview, if a kid takes his copy of Call Of Dudebro 25 for the Xbox one into school and lends it to a friend, this will happen:

- insert game into Xbox
- "this game is not registered to your console. Please pay the price of the game to activate it"

So yeah. That's called taking away used games.

 

[Brad Grenz]

The word experience shouldn't be used either as everything can be titled as an experience like the car you drive or the book you are reading. A ticket is only for 1 playing of a piece of media while a game entitles you to infinite play. Saying "experience" doesn't mean that they are any where near the same.

That difference isn't intrinsic, it's practical. If they wanted to, the Game Industry could distribute new games like first run movies where you bought admission to a local arcade to play Uncharted 4 in 6 hour blocks. And if the Film Industry wanted to they could start offering unlimited viewing tickets for movies at a higher price. None of that changes the value argument I'm making.

 

[Lord Error]

One thing that sucks with no DRM approach is that you can't just install the game, and put the disc back to the case. You still have to swap discs to play different games. Also, it's easy to imagine that with this DRM in place, for every purchased disc, they'd just grant you a supplement download of the game from PSN, which they have no chance of doing otherwise. Sure you can just buy games off of PSN to begin with (and I'll probably just do that) but for games that come with art books and special edition boxes, it's nice to have that from time to time, without having to pay another time to get PSN game download.

Sadly I'm ready to admit that at this point, no-DRM is practically anti consumer, when it comes to my own use case.

 

[Rich!]

One thing that sucks with no DRM approach is that you can't just install the game, and put the disc back to the case. You still have to swap discs to play different games. Also, it's easy to imagine that with this DRM in place, for every purchased disc, they'd just grant you a supplement download of the game from PSN, which they have no chance of doing otherwise. Sure you can just buy games off of PSN to begin with (and I'll probably just do that) but for games that come with art books and special edition boxes, it's nice to have that from time to time, without having to pay another time to get PSN game download.

Sadly I'm ready to admit that at this point, no-DRM is practically anti consumer, when it comes to my own use case.

If you are being sarcastic, then well done.

if you're being serious, then I don't want to live on this planet anymore.

 

[famousmortimer]

One thing that sucks with no DRM approach is that you can't just install the game, and put the disc back to the case. You still have to swap discs to play different games. Also, it's easy to imagine that with this DRM in place, for every purchased disc, they'd just grant you a supplement download of the game from PSN, which they have no chance of doing otherwise. Sure you can just buy games off of PSN to begin with (and I'll probably just do that) but for games that come with art books and special edition boxes, it's nice to have that from time to time, without having to pay another time to get PSN game download.

Sadly I'm ready to admit that at this point, no-DRM is practically anti consumer, when it comes to my own use case.

If that's what you want, go digital. No need to trample on consumers to get what already exists.

 

[vpance]

thankfully they aren't trying to take used games away completely. next generation i may have to exit though if its full DD with no kind of rewards.

If half the gaming population thought as you did and rejected their online retail pricing, and the other half that was willing to buy at that price already bought, guess what comes next? They would lower the price because it doesn't take any effort to do so and they want the other half to buy. And so on and so on.

 

[lostones]

Gamestop isn't the only store in the world. It also isn't the only way to sell a game.

Gamestop doesn't even exist outside of America apart from Ireland and maybe another country. I can go into CEX and buy a copy of Nintendoland right now for £15 preowned. How much is it brand new and digital? £49.99

Wheres the problem there? It's definitely not the preowned store offering a decent price now, is it?

I agree with you i'm totally with buying/selling used games it's within our rights as consumers.. I'm just against everything gamestop stands for. no other used corporation EVEN car dealership don't try to take advantage of customers by selling used products at "new prices". For example a store like bestbuy sell used games, unlike gamestop they don't bombard you with why you shouldn't buy new to make a profit.

Of course they are, and if you think otherwise then you're fucking delusional.

Going by what Phil Harrison confirmed in an interview, if a kid takes his copy of Call Of Dudebro 25 for the Xbox one into school and lends it to a friend, this will happen:

- insert game into Xbox
- "this game is not registered to your console. Please pay the price of the game to activate it"

So yeah. That's called taking away used games.

If i remember correctly phil harrison was talking about the download file that you download on your friends console after using your tag to play on his system. when you don't use that tag he was saying it would be like unlocking demos today(except you can't play). at least that's what i got out of it *shrug*

 

[Nnamz]

That never made sense to me. Sometimes it seems like Sony purposely tries to lose money. Take PS+ for example: it's become such a good service it's incentivizing people NOT to buy games. I'm sure the loss of sales is higher than the cost of PS+.

I wouldn't be so sure. Look at the games they usually put up. Quite often, they're very old games with sequels coming very soon. I know Sony has sold me on sequels of games which I never would have tried had their predecessors not be free on PS+.

Also, keep in mind the vast majority of money made on the vast majority of titles are made in the first couple of months of release. Publishers aren't losing much by putting their year old game on PS+ for a month or two, especially when a sequel is looming and they want to drive up interest.

 

[Lord Error]

If that's what you want, go digital. No need to trample on consumers to get what already exists.

Well that's what I'm planning to do, but I addressed where the problem still exists for me later in the post. While, they could technically solve this problem by just providing a one time download code for the same game on PSN, this would in practice allow two people to play the game for the price of one, so it's likely something they won't ever do.

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

Is this even about the $100M games? Those being the GTA's and the Halo's that all do manage to make a fuck ton of money anyways.

I think its very interesting that many of the developers and publishers that have gone on record about how used games are hurting them just so happen to be owners of franchises that push stupid amounts of units every year.

 

[hodayathink]

CDs DVDs and Blu-Rays are also software. The definition of software is too fuzzy for this argument to work.

My basic definition of software (and I'll admit that there isn't a very clear definition of it) is that it needs an executable that is contained somewhere on the disc (or in the data that you download) to run. Movies and music aren't software because there doesn't need to be an executable on them to work correctly. Just because something is a digital file doesn't really mean that it's software.

 

[lostones]

If half the gaming population thought as you did and rejected their online retail pricing, and the other half that was willing to buy at that price already bought, guess what comes next? They would lower the price because it doesn't take any effort to do so and they want the other half to buy. And so on and so on.

The issue with online retail right now is the fact that retail stores would refuse to carry the items if they weren't priced competitively. basically you couldn't have a New DD for $50 and a retail for 60. Sony Nintendo and MS still need retail.

 

[vpance]

Sadly, we've come to a point where budgets are so massive, a game making a fuck ton of money can still be considered a failure.

Is it? Didn't SE come out a few days ago and say TR and Hitman both broke even and will see sequels?

Too bad they had to adjust the franchises the way they did, and to just break even too.

 

[Lord Error]

If you are being sarcastic, then well done.

if you're being serious, then I don't want to live on this planet anymore.

Why do you think I'm being sarcastic? I'd like to purchase a physical copy of the game and get a download version of it for free. To me, that's more valuable than buying used games, which I practically never do. I wish there was a process that would allow this to be possible as well as let you borrow and sell games freely, but I can't see how it would work.

 

[baphomet]

Why do you think I'm being sarcastic? I'd like to purchase a physical copy of the game and get a download version of it for free. To me, that's more valuable than buying used games, which I practically never do.

So you want 2 copies for the price of 1, or you want the physical copy to stop functioning after you install it. Sounds like the Xbox One is the system for you.

 

[vpance]

The issue with online retail right now is the fact that retail stores would refuse to carry the items if they weren't priced competitively. basically you couldn't have a New DD for $50 and a retail for 60. Sony Nintendo and MS still need retail.

Exactly, which is why retail should go away. I'd rather my monies go to the pubs than float around in the retail used market. This half measure DRM stuff trying to appease all parties just makes the situation shitty for everyone.

 

[Eusis]

Is it? Didn't SE come out a few days ago and say TR and Hitman both broke even and will see sequels?

Too bad they had to adjust the franchises the way they did, and to just break even too.

Probably hoped they'd prop the company up rather than merely break even.

Though weren't sales of them largely consistent with prior entries anyway? Combine with how successful something like Dark Souls seems to be, and it may be a call to not strive for the cinematic/mainstream angle so much, have a more reasonable budget, and make the gameplay more of the focus again.

 

[Big-E]

That difference isn't intrinsic, it's practical. If they wanted to, the Game Industry could distribute new games like first run movies where you bought admission to a local arcade to play Uncharted 4 in 6 hour blocks. And if the Film Industry wanted to they could start offering unlimited viewing tickets for movies at a higher price. None of that changes the value argument I'm making.

I guess I just don't understand what you are trying to say. How is the value between the two the same when one is a one time thing and the other isn't as well as games costing 6 times that of movies? They are two completely different things and trying to equate them in any way is making arguments to infringe on consumers to extend publisherinterests.

 

[Majukun]

Lying with good reason is still fucking lying. You know that.

Or do I really need to break out the old, long list of absurd Sony quotes?



Sadly, we've come to a point where budgets are so massive, a game making a fuck ton of money can still be considered a failure.

then they just need to cut those budgets,especially all the money used for advertisement,that reaches up to 40% of the budget for a game nowadays

the porblem for them is that without incredible production values,they can't disguise the poor gameplay of their games.

 

[IHaveCandy]

Exactly, which is why retail should go away. I'd rather my monies go to the pubs than float around in the retail used market. This half measure DRM stuff trying to appease all parties just makes the situation shitty for everyone.

Sony does it now with the Vita. DD games are often 10% less.

 

[I am Michael Bolton]

If they can't make money on $100,000,000 games then they shouldn't spend $100,000,000 on games.

Exactly. Nobody and I mean nobody forced them to spend that much. If these publishers are so creatively bankrupt that they have to sped $100 mil in order to market a game then they shouldn't expect to make their money back. It's not my responsibility to save them from their own incompetence.

 

[IHaveCandy]

My basic definition of software (and I'll admit that there isn't a very clear definition of it) is that it needs an executable that is contained somewhere on the disc (or in the data that you download) to run. Movies and music aren't software because there doesn't need to be an executable on them to work correctly. Just because something is a digital file doesn't really mean that it's software.

Do you think blu-ray discs are just some HD videos floating on a disc? There's lots of anti-piracy software on their that runs to allow you to play the video.

 

[lostones]

Sony does it now with the Vita. DD games are often 10% less.

and that would explain why the vita is generally in the corner in stores

 

[nib95]

Nvm..

 

[BlastProcessing]

My basic definition of software (and I'll admit that there isn't a very clear definition of it) is that it needs an executable that is contained somewhere on the disc (or in the data that you download) to run. Movies and music aren't software because there doesn't need to be an executable on them to work correctly. Just because something is a digital file doesn't really mean that it's software.

Blu Rays and DVDs have menu systems which are definitely software. Blu Rays can have web browsers and games. The DRM systems on the disks are also very software like. I get that there is a difference but legally the line has been impossible to draw for a while. I mean, would you call MGS4 a game or a movie? :0 (Thats right! I went there)

 

[I am Michael Bolton]

I hope both Microsoft and Sony get a cut from used game sales. The industry would be a LOT healthier.

You're telling me that people would give up on gaming just because they have to pay an extra fee on top of their used game purchase??

I'd buy a significantly less number of new games. I have a huge backlog. I'm good. And what, you think pubs will charge less for new games if they get a piece of the used game pie?

 

[quest]

Exactly, which is why retail should go away. I'd rather my monies go to the pubs than float around in the retail used market. This half measure DRM stuff trying to appease all parties just makes the situation shitty for everyone.

The made up evil retail monster has appeared again. I am sorry retail already stocks items that have cheaper E-items like books, movies and music. Also retail under cuts its self every single day. Check out cheapassgamer daily you can basically find a great pre-order deal or sale with in a 2 weeks of basically any game. I seen deals with games The Last of us for around 45 dollars.. Retail is going to cut prices more than MS or Sony ever will.

 

[vpance]

Probably hoped they'd prop the company up rather than merely break even.

Though weren't sales of them largely consistent with prior entries anyway? Combine with how successful something like Dark Souls seems to be, and it may be a call to not strive for the cinematic/mainstream angle so much, have a more reasonable budget, and make the gameplay more of the focus again.

I think there's a misconception that cinematic = huge budget. Making a huge, open and intricate game world can also take a lot of money. Spending a lot of money to make games does not necessarily mean wasting it.

I don't want to see self imposed limits on the kinds of games devs can make or pubs are willing to green light. Wouldn't it suck if all our blockbuster movies of today were limited to $50M or so? Some things wouldn't be possible to do and we'd be stuck in the past.

 

[IHaveCandy]

and that would explain why the vita is generally in the corner in stores

No, there are more reasons for it than that.

 

[hodayathink]

Do you think blu-ray discs are just some HD videos floating on a disc? There's lots of anti-piracy software on their that runs to allow you to play the video.

That software doesn't have to be there, though, for the movie to "work". If I were to burn my own Blu-Ray home movie, I wouldn't need to put any anti-piracy software on it for it to run. But a game's executable needs to be there for it to work. Same with the majority of computer software.

Blu Rays and DVDs have menu systems which are definitely software. Blu Rays can have web browsers and games. The DRM systems on the disks are also very software like. I get that there is a difference but legally the line has been impossible to draw for a while. I mean, would you call MGS4 a game or a movie? :0 (Thats right! I went there)

First of all, lol.

The menu system doesn't have to be software by my definition, per se. It could just be a file that is read by other software (not included) to present the menu options (in fact, that's what it usually is). You are right in that it's not a cut and dry line to draw, but it's a line that can be drawn (and it looks like it's about to be).

 

[vpance]

The made up evil retail monster has appeared again. I am sorry retail already stocks items that have cheaper E-items like books, movies and music. Also retail under cuts its self every single day. Check out cheapassgamer daily you can basically find a great pre-order deal or sale with in a 2 weeks of basically any game. I seen deals with games The Last of us for around 45 dollars.. Retail is going to cut prices more than MS or Sony ever will.

Prices are elastic, and would stay afloat or drop to meet demand. Steam sales patterns already prove it well enough to maximize revenue. Eventually nearly game will hit the bargain bin or at least come close to it. It's just a matter of time. So I'm not worried about an all digital future in regards to pricing.

 

[Eusis]

I think there's a misconception that cinematic = huge budget. Making a huge, open and intricate game world can also take a lot of money. Spending a lot of money to make games does not necessarily mean wasting it.

I don't want to see self imposed limits on the kinds of games devs can make or pubs are willing to green light. Wouldn't it suck if all our blockbuster movies of today were limited to $50M or so? Some things wouldn't be possible to do and we'd be stuck in the past.

Well, the other extreme's no good (EVERYONE GETS A BLOCKBUSTER BUDGET), obviously for something like GTAV not only can you blow big bucks on it but you really SHOULD just because it's an open world game that will reliably sells millions upon millions of copies, but I do think the likes of Tomb Raider and Hitman can probably do better at least not blowing the money on getting big actors supplying plenty of VA and not making it highly scripted (though I don't know how scripted the new Hitman even was, but the new Tomb Raider definitely was by most accounts.)

 

[hodayathink]

Check out cheapassgamer daily you can basically find a great pre-order deal or sale with in a 2 weeks of basically any game. I seen deals with games The Last of us for around 45 dollars.. Retail is going to cut prices more than MS or Sony ever will.

Retailers cut prices because publishers, pretty much by rule, overship their software to make their initial shipments look better (because remember, for a publisher a game is sold as soon as the retailer gets the copy). They need the space for the next game that's going to get overshipped, so they clear out the last game.

In other words, publishers themselves are the reason that retailers mark down games so quickly.

 

[quest]

Prices are elastic, and would stay afloat or drop to meet demand. Steam sales patterns already prove it well enough to maximize revenue. Eventually nearly game will hit the bargain bin or at least come close to it. It's just a matter of time. So I'm not worried about an all digital future in regards to pricing.

You should be if you seen the rip off pricing of both Sony and MS for digital games. They had 8 years to do it right. Guess what they failed miserably. So excuse those of us who see the pattern of both MS and Sony and don't think they will change. I won't listen to the retail excuse either.

 

[quest]

Retailers cut prices because publishers, pretty much by rule, overship their software to make their initial shipments look better (because remember, for a publisher a game is sold as soon as the retailer gets the copy). They need the space for the next game that's going to get overshipped, so they clear out the last game.

In other words, publishers themselves are the reason that retailers mark down games so quickly.

So retail is so stupid they buy to much of every single game and have to lose money on them but are smart enough to prevent good digital sale.

 

[wizzbang]

What kind of DRM are are you worried about that doesn't requires an internet connection.

Region locking.
As an Australian, the prices of games here are simply not viable. I'm not paying 80 to 110$ US for a game, when the exact same product can be purchased in the US for 50 to 60 or imported from the UK for 50 to 60. Fuck region locking.

 

[hodayathink]

So retail is so stupid they buy to much of every single game and have to lose money on them but are smart enough to prevent good digital sale.

Price protection. If a retailer has to lower the price to sell inventory (within a certain time frame, I believe), they get the difference paid back to them by the publisher. Square Enix mentioned it in their reports as one of the reasons their profits weren't as high as they wanted them to be. The publisher allows it because they want retailers to sell through that first shipment so they can hopefully send them a second one.

 

[vpance]

You should be if you seen the rip off pricing of both Sony and MS for digital games. They had 8 years to do it right. Guess what they failed miserably. So excuse those of us who see the pattern of both MS and Sony and don't think they will change. I won't listen to the retail excuse either.

Already mentioned before, it's because they can't step on retailer's feet. They still need to deal with them on pushing the hardware, since they're low profit margin. It's a balancing act between pubs wishes, retailers and platform holders now.

 

[Flo_Evans]

The study is bullshit.

GameStop has HUGE operating costs -- they have to pay rent for all their locations, pay for tons of employees, and on top of all of this they still have large profits and margins for their used game business.

Take all the used game transactions that occur, funnel that back into game development, and you'd see healthier publishing conditions that would result in more games being produced, resulting in more competition amongst publishers, resulting in lowered costs for content.

Besides -- I'm not even arguing against BLOCKING used game sales, only allowing publishers to get a KICKBACK from those transactions...in other words, these people selling their games would still be getting money to put towards new games.

I also believe that the vast majority of people that buy used games PRIMARILY buy used games, with new games being the odd exception. Every time I've walked into GameStop someone is either selling their games, or buying a used game. The person buying new is an exception.

You really don't understand anything do you? In your dream scenario publishers would see a greater ROI, meaning they have to risk less to get the same return. If they can continue to profit from old games what is the incentive to make new ones?

You just assume that increased margins will be reinvested, in riskier products to boot?

 

[vpance]

Well, the other extreme's no good (EVERYONE GETS A BLOCKBUSTER BUDGET), obviously for something like GTAV not only can you blow big bucks on it but you really SHOULD just because it's an open world game that will reliably sells millions upon millions of copies, but I do think the likes of Tomb Raider and Hitman can probably do better at least not blowing the money on getting big actors supplying plenty of VA and not making it highly scripted (though I don't know how scripted the new Hitman even was, but the new Tomb Raider definitely was by most accounts.)

I think Hitman did as well as it realistically could. I dont know if people buying the game even cared if they got a bunch of B actors in either, or how much of the budget it sucked up for that matter.