shootthebandit said:
i really dont see the problem here its like a second hand car
Eugh. Look, I don't give two fucks about big game publishers and I'll buy and sell second hand as I see fit, if they want to charge reasonably[footnote]Australian games cost up to $110 at release, which is like $105 US...[/footnote] then I'll consider changing my ways.
But to compare the selling of games to the sale of cars is straight up wrong. Are you aware that many high end cars are sold at a loss? While this is far from the case for a great many cars, it certainly emphasizes my point that car companies make more money from maintenence (and often branding) than they do from the initial sale of the cars. If the sale of used cars was abolished, a great many car companies would go broke. It's a similar story with consoles (I'm sure we're all aware that the wii was the only current console sold at a profit on release), Sony and Microsoft would
PREFER you to trade in unused consoles!
It's slightly different with games, it's more like someone selling a book or dvd second hand. Which is fine, really, those industries don't suffer for it, neither do games, but they don't thrive on it the way the auto industry does from car sales.
Garak73 said:
Of course, if the EULA makes reselling your used game illegal, you won't be able to do any of that.
Unless you come from a country where you are required to agree to the EULA before exchanging money for the product, it's completely powerless[footnote]This is true almost everywhere in the world[/footnote]. I can't sell you a hotdog and then demand as a condition of use you may not eat it.
Garak73 said:
The customer might as well be pirating the game.
BS. You cannot equate buying a car used to grand theft auto just like you can't equate buying used games to theft. How much it costs to make a product is irrelevant.
Why not? If you can equate the selling of a game second hand to the selling of a car second hand, you're clearly not making equal comparisons, so why whould anyone arguing with you?