Poll: Boycott Rage

[vxicepickxv]

No, it doesn't need to stop. Developers don't get a CENT from someone buying the game used. Gamestop and other used game companies keep all the profits from used games; they don't politely give the developers or publishers some money for that game. THAT is why they are doing these day 1 DLC things... so they can try to still earn profits from used sales.

Car manufacturers don't get profits on used car sales, so I fail to see how games should be a special exception.

 

[KingGolem]

I wasn't going to buy it, but I decided against it before I heard of this unfair used game punishing strategy. I'm not going to buy Rage because it's shaping up to be a shamelessly derivative and unimaginative first person shooter. What's that? It's in a post-apocalyptic setting now instead of Iraq? Never mind the miniscule differences, what grinds my gears is that the post-apocalyptic setting is almost entirely by-the-numbers. The world ended by meteor strike rather than nuclear war, ostensibly, but that's the only real difference it has from Fallout, another by-the-numbers post-apocalyptic setting. I'm definitely not buying it, but the latest Jimquisition has made me think twice about calling it a boycott. Unfortunately, this kind of makes me look like a hypocrite for still getting Skyrim. Vikings and dragons? That's about as lazy as Rage's post-apocalyptic setting, and I wouldn't put up with it if it wasn't the latest in the single best open-world RPG series ever made. Fallout 3 being described as a glorified Oblivion mod is what convinced me to look past it's terrible art direction and unimaginative setting. D'oh well, not even I am perfect. Sad state of affairs we got here.

 

[Antari]

This 'buy it new to play things that would have been included otherwise!' crap needs to end. im sick of game companies thinking that they can do this to us, as consumers. we dont have to put up with this bull anymore. WE decide whether or not their game gets bought. WE decide to put money down for a title they release. they dont get to decide that for us. im tired of the companies thinking that they can get away with this, just because they assume we will always buy their games no matter what.

If we allow this to continue, what will happen to games like Skyrim? do you want to only be able to access 15 quests if you buy it new? or to a new extreme: you can only dual wield if you buy it new?

The unfortunate part of the equation that the companies have figured out is. They don't have to care about the customer. Because theres always a new customer being born right around the corner. They don't need to care about you for more than 2 minutes during a teaser video and possibly a single painful support assist. But thats about it.

 

[WaruTaru]

LOL. I needed a laugh.

Oh, you were serious?

I don't understand your first sentence (other than as a joke). Where did I say I ignore legality for my own convenience? Anyway, reasoning and legality are not the same thing. For example, it is legal (as far as I know) for publishers to mess with ownership rights by reducing the value of a product after you buy it but I don't think it is reasonable.

Law says you cannot sell your software because you are a licensee. You say you can. You are hence doing something illegal.

No, what makes software piracy illegal are copyright laws. Do you know what those do? They prevent people from making illegal copies and selling or giving them away. In other words, the outline who can make legal copies and who can't (save a backup). The EULA is powerless unless YOU give it power.

I'll concede the copyright point.

You clicked "I Agree" when installing. You have just given them that power even if you didn't read it.

 

[dncarolyn]

No, it doesn't need to stop. Developers don't get a CENT from someone buying the game used. Gamestop and other used game companies keep all the profits from used games; they don't politely give the developers or publishers some money for that game. THAT is why they are doing these day 1 DLC things... so they can try to still earn profits from used sales.

Car manufacturers don't get profits on used car sales, so I fail to see how games should be a special exception.

New and used cars are not of the same quality. Used cars can often have a lot of problems, which is an incentive to buy new cars. With video games, new and used are exactly the same, except used games are less expensive. So to add an incentive to buy new games, developers put in things like day one DLC. Why is that wrong? When you buy a used car, you are not getting the complete car package. I fail to see how games should be a special exception

 

[metal mustache]

Or the factor of them being developers meens that they set the standards for what you must do. I know some buisness practices are wrong, thats very obvious. Not including stuff to prevent people from torrenting it or getting second hand sales a few days after seems pretty reasonable to me because it isnt effecting those that purchases the game. And thats just it, they are requireing you to merely, "BUY" the game. Explain to me what is wrong with this. I may be overlooking some huge factor but currently I don't see it with this complaint.

I guess those are good reasons for them do this, defending their sales. I just wish that was all that it did. But when my system breaks down, something the 360 and playstation both seem to like to do, I lose my games with it. That is bullshit.

 

[Callate]

Honestly, I'm more annoyed about "bonus content if you buy it before any of the reviews come out!" deals.

The market frequently )*bleep*(s the game buyer at both ends: you buy it later, you may lose "pre-order" content; you buy it first, you may miss out on "game of the year" or similar bundle packs that make it unnecessary to shell out for DLC piecemeal.

But if it makes you feel better, I'm probably not going to buy Rage anyway. (Or I'll buy it in a year from Steam for $5.)

 

[Epona]

LOL. I needed a laugh.

Oh, you were serious?

I don't understand your first sentence (other than as a joke). Where did I say I ignore legality for my own convenience? Anyway, reasoning and legality are not the same thing. For example, it is legal (as far as I know) for publishers to mess with ownership rights by reducing the value of a product after you buy it but I don't think it is reasonable.

Law says you cannot sell your software because you are a licensee. You say you can. You are hence doing something illegal.

No, what makes software piracy illegal are copyright laws. Do you know what those do? They prevent people from making illegal copies and selling or giving them away. In other words, the outline who can make legal copies and who can't (save a backup). The EULA is powerless unless YOU give it power.

I'll concede the copyright point.

You clicked "I Agree" when installing. You have just given them that power even if you didn't read it.

That's just one case and only applies to that one case. You can legally resell your games.

 

[Epona]

No, it doesn't need to stop. Developers don't get a CENT from someone buying the game used. Gamestop and other used game companies keep all the profits from used games; they don't politely give the developers or publishers some money for that game. THAT is why they are doing these day 1 DLC things... so they can try to still earn profits from used sales.

Car manufacturers don't get profits on used car sales, so I fail to see how games should be a special exception.

New and used cars are not of the same quality. Used cars can often have a lot of problems, which is an incentive to buy new cars. With video games, new and used are exactly the same, except used games are less expensive. So to add an incentive to buy new games, developers put in things like day one DLC. Why is that wrong? When you buy a used car, you are not getting the complete car package. I fail to see how games should be a special exception

How about when used games aren't the same? No box, no manual, disc not picture perfect?

 

[ImmortalDrifter]

Honestly I commend id/bethesda for making their day one dlc available to offline users.

That's what it is. Are all of you "boycotters" so dense that you don't realize it? There was no outcry over the Cerberus network (at least one worth noting) because it was arbitrary bits tacked on to the game. Which is exactly what this is, you just don't have to be online to get it.

And honestly the shitty condition of most used games is reason enough to buy new.

 

[dncarolyn]

No, it doesn't need to stop. Developers don't get a CENT from someone buying the game used. Gamestop and other used game companies keep all the profits from used games; they don't politely give the developers or publishers some money for that game. THAT is why they are doing these day 1 DLC things... so they can try to still earn profits from used sales.

Car manufacturers don't get profits on used car sales, so I fail to see how games should be a special exception.

New and used cars are not of the same quality. Used cars can often have a lot of problems, which is an incentive to buy new cars. With video games, new and used are exactly the same, except used games are less expensive. So to add an incentive to buy new games, developers put in things like day one DLC. Why is that wrong? When you buy a used car, you are not getting the complete car package. I fail to see how games should be a special exception

How about when used games aren't the same? No box, no manual, disc not picture perfect?

Gamestop doesn't accept used games without boxes and manuals anymore. If the disc doesn't run, you can keep bringing it back until you get one that does.

 

[esperandote]

Selling a used good is a ownership change (I just read that) the second buyer should be transfered the first buyer rights.

Yes. To the disk, box, manual, pamphlet, data on the disk but no the licence. Read EULA, for eg. From StarCraft2 EULA:

1. Grant of a Limited Use License. Subject to your agreement to and continuing compliance with this License Agreement, Blizzard
hereby grants, and you hereby accept, a limited, revocable, non-transferable, non-sublicensable, non-exclusive license

Key words, revocable and non-transferable. The moment you fire up the game on your console/PC you agree to that licence.

That's a though EULA. I guess there are others that don't proihibit transferability.

Is that EULA from a hard disk copy of the game or a digitaly distributed one?

Edit: Coming to think about it, Do console games have EULA's?

 

[Cenequus]

I rather buy the game new rather than pay for day 1 DLC. So no especially when we're talking about a new IP which if doesn't sell well in the first month(new copies) will have no follow up no matter how good the game is.

Well, if they want their new IP to take off, is alienating potential customers really a good idea? At one point, CliffyB was talking about doing something like this for Gears 3 but that's an established IP with an established fanbase so, if he had decided to go through with that, they could have gotten away with it. Launching a new IP with the promise of cutting content if you don't buy the game new seems to be reaching for new heights of stupidity in marketing.

At some point, you just have to let people or developers collect their Darwin Award.

As for my own feelings on the actual content rather than how poorly this is being marketed:

Well I'm sorry but I do believe buying a used copy shouldn't have the same value as a new copy. Are they exagerating with cutting from single player? Maybe but if they don't sell it's over,there is no buy it later on Steam for 50% off like a GOW game would benefit from thinner sales,if a game doesn't sale in the first months it's over for it,you can sell 10 million copies 2 years later it doesn't matter.

 

[Epona]

No, it doesn't need to stop. Developers don't get a CENT from someone buying the game used. Gamestop and other used game companies keep all the profits from used games; they don't politely give the developers or publishers some money for that game. THAT is why they are doing these day 1 DLC things... so they can try to still earn profits from used sales.

Car manufacturers don't get profits on used car sales, so I fail to see how games should be a special exception.

New and used cars are not of the same quality. Used cars can often have a lot of problems, which is an incentive to buy new cars. With video games, new and used are exactly the same, except used games are less expensive. So to add an incentive to buy new games, developers put in things like day one DLC. Why is that wrong? When you buy a used car, you are not getting the complete car package. I fail to see how games should be a special exception

How about when used games aren't the same? No box, no manual, disc not picture perfect?

Gamestop doesn't accept used games without boxes and manuals anymore. If the disc doesn't run, you can keep bringing it back until you get one that does.

Since when?

 

[Raso719]

No, it doesn't need to stop. Developers don't get a CENT from someone buying the game used. Gamestop and other used game companies keep all the profits from used games; they don't politely give the developers or publishers some money for that game. THAT is why they are doing these day 1 DLC things... so they can try to still earn profits from used sales.

Car manufacturers don't get profits on used car sales, so I fail to see how games should be a special exception.

New and used cars are not of the same quality. Used cars can often have a lot of problems, which is an incentive to buy new cars. With video games, new and used are exactly the same, except used games are less expensive. So to add an incentive to buy new games, developers put in things like day one DLC. Why is that wrong? When you buy a used car, you are not getting the complete car package. I fail to see how games should be a special exception

How about when used games aren't the same? No box, no manual, disc not picture perfect?

Gamestop doesn't accept used games without boxes and manuals anymore. If the disc doesn't run, you can keep bringing it back until you get one that does.

If you pay the 3 dollar disk protection fee you can get the disk replaced (unless I misunderstand their rules)

Also there are other places that will buy the game with out the box and manual and sell it as is and also won't take returns or exchanges. Game Stop isn't the only place to get used games in the world and certainly not in America, which is one of the largest game consumers in the world.

 

[Dfskelleton]

"Yeah, how dare these companies want profit for their game that they spent countless hours and thousands of dollars on! Boycott! Boycott! New world order! NEW WORLD ORDER!!!"
Yes, cutting part of the game to make you buy it new probably won't sit well with people, but what else can they do? Ask nicely?

 

[Epona]

"Yeah, how dare these companies want profit for their game that they spent countless hours and thousands of dollars on! Boycott! Boycott! New world order! NEW WORLD ORDER!!!"
Yes, cutting part of the game to make you buy it new probably won't sit well with people, but what else can they do? Ask nicely?

They can accept that the used market is legal and a normal part of doing business in a capitalist society. Fighting against the used market is the same as fighting against consumers whose role in a capitalist society is to save money.

 

[dncarolyn]

How about when used games aren't the same? No box, no manual, disc not picture perfect?

Gamestop doesn't accept used games without boxes and manuals anymore. If the disc doesn't run, you can keep bringing it back until you get one that does.

Since when?

They had a "Gamestop Guarantee" in place where all pre-owned games you ordered online were guaranteed to come with a manual and boxart. I can't find it anymore, so my bad if that has since been reversed.

@Raso719: With used games the disc is guaranteed to work. With new games you can buy the $3 guarantee in case the disc ever breaks/stops working.

 

[godofallu]

Its so that you buy the game new and not used from Gamestop. Even if you buy it from Gamestop new it doesn't support Gamestop. Gamestop doesn't make money off of new games, they only make money off the games that you buy used. So if a company is giving the middle finger to Gamestop I say more power to them.

So Gamestop sells new games for no profit? To quote you "Gamestop doesn't make money from new games". That statement implies a severe lack of understanding on how the world actually works.

PS: When places sell things, they make money off them. Gamestop does make a profit from selling everything in their store.