Scrumpmonkey said:
Draech said:
Answer: Im not. I am argueing that the producers can treat their product in any way shape or form they please, and when you buy used you are not paying them and therefore have no say in how thoes products are treated.
I guess this strikes at the heart of "Concept of ownership" and in terms of all other digital media games are being sold short. Take for example the argument that you are just buying a licence with i guess you could technically argue for; the same is true for a digital purchase for a DVD. Yet no-one in the industry cars about used DVD or bluray sales, its a non-issue. In an age when many games are mainly multiplayer focused and their single player sections don't really hold up on their own i don't see the argument that publishers are "investing more" in a product and so sould have more rights to it; they have slightly more control over acess and their actions are a thinly veild abuse of this control.
When you buy a game the terms of service do limit you but there is a kind of common expectation that when a physical product is bought then you should have a right to re-sell that product especially when the investment for a videogame i so very high. The publoshers can techically change the terms of service to what they like and the US courts seem depressingly OK with going along with the errosion of consumer rights but in somewhere like say, the EU encompassing such huge markets as the UK, Germany and france i don't think the publishers would win out in trying to enforce more and more restrictive licencing policies for physical products.
As a consumer you DO have certain rights and expectations of a product and as time goes by i think it looks more and more likely that if test cases are brought forward the rights of the consumer to hteir entertainment will win out.
Just one thing is I want to say on that.
The thing is you cannot compare products.
Just because it non-issue for other businesses doesn't mean it is a non-issue for this business. Gamestop made an business model encouraging people to trade in new games while people asked for them, that doesn't exists in music. Different factors affect different products. Even different products within the same genre. If not then every medium of entertainment should have the same amount of profits. To say that it doesn't affect affect another industry bears as much weight as saying "ticket sales make out a major part of games profit".
Now the reason I am so adamant on this subject is that I truly believe that it does alot more harm than what good it does you. When is the last time you have seen a bargain bucket with console games (that isn't used)? I see them ALL the time with PC titles.
If used games were removed today I belive the industry as a whole would be better of for it. I think we would see a lot more steam style sales (a part of the industry where used games are impossible), and a general better deal than what you get now. I would not be surprised if they started making "Preorder Skyrim today, Get oblivion for free" in order to push new titles while clearing out old merchandise. It worked for Red Faction on Steam.
I also think that if a person has 20 dollars he wants to spend on games, then he will spend them on games. Without the used market that got blasted with advertisement when they were new, more lowpriced indie titles might have a better shot of getting noticed.
Most importantly it will cut Gamestop out of the mix and get more profit to the publisher/developers and that means bigger, better games. Gamestop adds nothing to this mix. Only draws on the work.
When it comes to who has the most right over their product I am still going to side with the producer. You can vote with your valet. Its not that hard. Only buy stuff that you think treats you fairly. Otherwise leave it. Its entertainment, not insulin.
