You know this is funny considering the whole point of the free market is to find the most creative ways to crush your competition and rape your consumers with a radioactive chainsaw.Serenegoose said:
Et tu EA?
- Thread starter Blindswordmaster
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Tables and cars don't take well over a hundred million dollars to make, distribute, and advertise.Serenegoose said:
Cars may, but even so, they lose value the more they are used. Games, not so much.
And I don't think that they should charge you, as in it is a pretty dickish move, but I believe that in terms of a business decision, it makes perfect sense. And I suppose that the RRP thing may be the case, but the if the number of used games purchased equals the number of used games sold, then the company is still losing a lot of potential money. Hence, the charge for multiplayer.
And on the topic of the multiplayer charge, if someone buys the used game, most of the time they will purchase the used game + the multiplayer component (In this case $10), and a large chunk of the time, it will still be under $60, leaving them with money to spare.
That's actually kind of faulty. You're suggesting that the product is in no working form when you buy it used. The game however works fine if you don't spend the extra money. You just get added features. Like cup holders. Which you pay extra for in a car in some cases. Or a table without a drawer, still a fine table, but you might have to buy a new drawer for it. Which happens quite a bit I'd assume. I've had to do it. The book is close, but considering none of the added features are a main portion of the game, it's still flawed, as the book is incomplete as a story, which is what it's supposed to be, you don't just lose something extra.Serenegoose said:
Think of it like buying the special edition. Except the SE is more like 80 bucks instead of 50-60, and you don't really get anything that interesting, or needed, and you might get some "free" DLC. But 10 dollars is just too much for something extra?
I'm kind of annoyed that pirates make the incessant argument that a car is not equated to a game in the whole "stealing" argument, but as soon as we move onto used games, cars and games are suddenly the same thing.
The disc is just a little piece of plastic. It has no value. What has value is the fact that developers produced this stuff for your benefit. The disc just represents your token to try out that game. Imagine if superbowl tickets, once used to watch the game, could be resold back in time to someone so other people could watch it.
I think it's a stretch to call buying used games "immoral", but I think you should start to get the picture that it's a little unfair for publishers.
The disc is just a little piece of plastic. It has no value. What has value is the fact that developers produced this stuff for your benefit. The disc just represents your token to try out that game. Imagine if superbowl tickets, once used to watch the game, could be resold back in time to someone so other people could watch it.
I think it's a stretch to call buying used games "immoral", but I think you should start to get the picture that it's a little unfair for publishers.
Then don't buy used?
EA wouldn't be trying to do this if they didn't get screwed themselves every time someone bought used. It's kind of depressing how THEY'RE supposed to take it in the ass, but then gamers cry about how evil they are when they mount a simple self-defense.
EA wouldn't be trying to do this if they didn't get screwed themselves every time someone bought used. It's kind of depressing how THEY'RE supposed to take it in the ass, but then gamers cry about how evil they are when they mount a simple self-defense.
Just as Oplinger says those aren't really caparison points because those all cease to function without the item your withholding well like it or not a game even the BF games are playable without any multiplayer what so ever the only exception to that are mmos. One might acquaint it to a book that you must buy the cover for if it's used, but even this isn't really a fair comparison because a multiplayer video game cost the company money to support.oplinger said:
You use car's as an example, but even there you can see it what car company extends warranties past the original owner? The answer is none (not counting company stores selling used products ofcourse). The fundamental difference is while that car or table makes the company no money it also doesn't cost them anything as a multiplayer game does.
It's not extra content, it's on the fucking disc. Have you never bought a used game?Radeonx said:
I buy new when I can, but gaming is expensive and times are really tough for me right now. Also, is it better to buy the game used, or to not play it at all?bahumat42 said:
It's better not to buy at all quite frankly for mine, for theirs and ultimately for your benifit.Blindswordmaster said:
Also just because the data on the disk is there doesn't make it yours, you don't buy all the data there you buy a license to use some of the data there in and ultimately in the case of multiplayer access to the companies multiplayer infrastructure.
No, they should encourage people to buy new, not punish the impoverished for buying used. Like Dragon Age 2: I pre-ordered so I'm getting a fuck ton of extra goodies and exclusive weapons. That's the right way to do it.RedEyesBlackGamer said:
No, an additional ten dollars on every game you buy is a big deal >.>oplinger said:
At least it would be if that were actually the case.
Which begs the question: By laws of supply and demand, just how much of this fee would used game retailers swallow in selling their product? Surely they'd have to lower their prices. An additional ten dollars on every used game is a very good reason to buy it new. Unless they're willing to bet that their customers can't add two and two together and have no problems buying the used games at their usual price.
Time are tough, but come on baby daddy needs his fix! Just one more game! D: please! No Al don't cut me off! NO! I NEED THIS! I CANT...I HATE YOU!Blindswordmaster said:
wait what? Okay look if time's are tough, don't spend the 10 dollars. ..move on. In your case it may be best to not play at all. Buying used is -wonderful- for Gamestop, but if times are tough, it's terrible for you.
You have every right to buy used, just don't expect instant access to all of the content nowadays.Blindswordmaster said:
If I buy something, isn't it mine to do with as I wish? Why can't I ,or others, sell their games when they're done with them? Why can't others buy them after I sell them at a lower price?Normandyfoxtrot said:
Day 1 DLC needs to die. In a fire. Slowly. Withholding content from used copies is one thing, fucking a paying consumer out of content is another.Blindswordmaster said:
You will find that a lot of gamers will argue for things that only suit themselves, when something they hate does something wrong, they will nitpick to no end, when something they like does something wrong, they pass it off as something excusable.Katana314 said:
OT: Publishers and the developers themselves don't gain anything from a used game sale. The money usually goes to whoever sold it. Think of it like this, EA is telling you that you need to pay to use their services, which multiplayer is, considering you're connecting to their servers and all. Also, I don't see how this is really anything new, PC games have been experiencing for practically a decade now with CD keys, and no one really complained about them. Honestly though, if you enjoy a game enough and you have an interest in it, why not dish out the 10 dollars to the developers that delivered you a good game? It supports the developers in making better products.