Kingdoms of Amular locks content for second hand users.
- Thread starter Tanakh
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well I respectfully disagree because phrasings literally can make all the difference of the meaning of a sentence.Thyunda said:
In the film the editor of a newspaper corrects a writer, because they wrote "The people evacuated themselves from the burning building" to which the editor corrects and explains by saying it in that way the writer implied that the people in the building shit their way out of danger
That may well be an extreme example, but with language it is often more about how you say it than what you actually say.
Anyway, getting back on track, Honestly I really do not see where people can support the notion of cutting out any content of the game to try to stop used sales. Im sorry, no corporation has right or reason to do this and games are simply in a unique position where games can be accentuated with internet connectivity that it gives the corporation the freedom to withhold content as if it were a subscription, if the user does not comply with terms and conditions set forth. What if car stereos were all internet connected (which seems like an eventuallity) to which all of your CDs could have the last half of the disc withheld even though the data is on the disc, simply because the internet connectivity allows the publisher to track their product after the sale and in turn withhold half the disc because you cannot prove you bought it new.
No doubt... I felt like being metaphorical, and failed. Oopsgirzwald said:
I'd just like to bring simple principles to the forefront. No, most game companies' bottom-line wouldn't flinch at having some umpteen thousand copies pirated or sold second-hand, but that doesn't mean stealing it off the net any less wrong. Nor does it make them evil or something for putting in a little something extra for the ones that do contribute to their revenue, or charging second-handers and pirates for it post mortem. The games we play generally don't grow on trees. Someone (again, usually hundreds of people all working hundreds of hours, and the millions of dollars to pay them all, etc.) has to make 'em. Personally, if I were working at BioWare, Bethesda, or where ever, I would seethe at someone admitting to pirating. It's not right. It's very very wrong.
Agreed with your point of failing games- pirates and 2nd-handers don't kill a game on their own. (But they certainly don't help.)
On the analogy... meh, I won't defend that... it was bad. Still, I think your argument is more about semantics. Principle's the same, though; someone stole your work. "You" being the game company, and the cellphone camera wielder being a pirate that takes it without your permission. That's all I was trying to communicate.
As for your point on Day 1 dlc- I absolutely agree. If anyone's deserving of a big "screw you", it's the pirates. But not so much the second-handers themselves, but the Gamestops and whatnot that bring in money that could've gone to the studio understandably leaves a bad taste in their mouth. Even in that light, day 1 dlc is still an incentive to buy new, though...
Last point kinda makes itself:
"And people wonder why there is such hostility towards corporations. They are never happy, they are never satisfied."
Customers are no better.
"They never truly thank the fans/customers."
And how would you expect them to actually do that..? I see thank you's in newsletters and the paper inserts that come in game cases more often than not.
"The never do anything for the fans/customers without expecting a return profit."
They're a business, not a charity. If your company isn't expecting to return a profit, you're obviously doing something wrong. Something terribly terribly wrong. /:|
That's kinda what I think to.. it shows a huge lack of confidence. We made this new IP, it sucks, and we NEED new sales cause no one is gonna buy this stinker once the word hits the street. People are gonna dump it, it wont sell new, so if we do get some dupes who buy it used for $20 in 3 months, we need to make something back.Irridium said:
Irony of it all is that because they decided to be such tools and do this kind of DLC, all it will do is hurt sales in the long run cause of all the negativity. When you make a brand new IP, you can't crap on the fan-base before it even exists. You need to give them an incentive to buy it at all, especially new, but at least get some good publicity and a positive player reaction out of it. This is the exact opposite.
Worst thing? When this game bombs, they'll blame pirates. They wont look in the mirror and think about how shitty their PR and press is. They'll just pull numbers out of their ass, like they always do, and say "We had 80billion copies pirated, that's why this game failed."
Movies and books are still comparable markets, it's just that their distribution- and business model doesn't get affected that much by second-hand sales. Which was pretty much my point.Duffy13 said:
I'm also a bit on the fence about your point when it comes to music, but I'll concede that as I'm tired and can't manage to formulate a decent answer to that :V
Arkham City? You mean the sequel to that block busting, critically acclaimed Arkham Asylum. That wasn't a new IP. It was a new game, sure, but it was already an established franchise with Batman behind it.Hal10k said:
Perhaps my language is incorrect, but by "new IP" I mean a completely new brand/series/franchise/etc. Something that has no ground to stand on, yet. Not one that is already established as a successful series and has a character who is more well known that wheat bread.
With that said, Arkham Asylum could have been shit. It wasn't, thank Xenu, but it could have been. But Batman has a lot more pushing power than Kingdoms of Whoziwhats.
I would much rather they just made a game that was good enough for me to not want to sell once I was done with it. That would put 2nd hand sales down a notch. If they have to rely on gimmicks like these to discourage people buying second hand it makes me think they have little faith in their game's replay value.
Exactly. My point is that this sort of thing has become common practice in the industry, whether it's involving an entirely new IP or a character who dates back to the 30s. You implied that the presence of day one DLC implied that the developers expected it wouldn't make any money otherwise, and I provided Batman as a counterexample to prove that this sales practice is utilized no matter what the expected sales figures are.Sylveria said:
True, but Steam also has regular sales that are upwards of 90% off and are often in the 50 - 75% off range, which is more savings than you're likely to get from a used game.SirBryghtside said:
Don't care, day one DLC has always been fine with me, doesn't matter what kind of content it is. If they want to reward fans(yes there can still be fans of such a new game because there might actually be people that have been following the development and played the demo) and day one purchasers.
More people buy new, the more money they get for their work. If people think that is wrong, then they don't know how companies work.
Seriously, have people become that impatient and/or lazy, that they can't take 2 measly minutes to do something to get something that they can use and experience.
(Hypothetical:
Company: "This code will guarantee that you win some money, anywhere from 10, 20, 50, 100, to 1 million dollars. You just have to enter this 25 character code. We guarantee that there will be 15 people that win the million dollars.
Customers these days: Oh man, I would love some free money, but I just can't be bothered taking the time to enter that easily entered code, my two minutes of life that would be used for it is sooooo precious.)
More people buy new, the more money they get for their work. If people think that is wrong, then they don't know how companies work.
Really?! At most it will be a 25 character code(considering all Xbox Live DLC codes are that long). It takes all of 1 minute, 2 if you are slow, to enter the code.Braedan said:
Seriously, have people become that impatient and/or lazy, that they can't take 2 measly minutes to do something to get something that they can use and experience.
(Hypothetical:
Company: "This code will guarantee that you win some money, anywhere from 10, 20, 50, 100, to 1 million dollars. You just have to enter this 25 character code. We guarantee that there will be 15 people that win the million dollars.
Customers these days: Oh man, I would love some free money, but I just can't be bothered taking the time to enter that easily entered code, my two minutes of life that would be used for it is sooooo precious.)
That made me chuckle going through this thread's comments. I agree; I was surprised no argument arose.Daystar Clarion said:What? Just like that?Marcus Kehoe said:
No rebuttal? No arguments?
I just...
Win?
No, this never happens...
I've used your same reasoning about day 1 DLC, and I usually get a response like, "If they still had bugs they shouldn't have gone gold, same goes for if they still had content ideas."
I just can't stand the way things are these days. It seems like most gamers(usually newer ones), if they can't get something close to free 100% of the time, no matter when they buy it, it is obvious that the company is evil, because....they are trying to make money. OH NO!
I disagree (No offense, mind, just offering a contrary point of view).Sylveria said:
It sounds more like a bad business decision. "We're doing this for every single game now, even if we should be incentivising people to play our new franchise so as to help get support for future titles."
Not so much a lack of confidence. If they had no confidence, they probably wouldn't already be talking about the future Muhmorepuhguh.