Poll: Boycott Rage

[Epona]

I don't know why people are always getting so upset by this. Developers are simply supporting those who support them. They aren't punished those who buy the game pre-owned, they are rewarding those who buy it new, and I think it's time that people realised that.

What's the difference? You can't give something extra to one group without the other group missing out on something. In fact, isn't the whole point of giving something extra to the group who buys new designed to discourage from buying used?

I wish gamers would stop supporting companies who openly declare war on consumer ownership rights by trying to devalue a product the moment you try to resell it.

BTW, I am sure you do KNOW why people are getting upset about this. You did read the thread right?

The difference? ID are only restricting a very small amount of content in a 20 hour game. Content that ID even said most gamers will overlook and ignore anyway, I just think it's cool that developers are giving us small freebies for giving something back to them. But I'm also annoyed that it has gotten to this point where developers feel that they have to de this to make money from their games. This clearly shows that used sales are a massive problem for developers. Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with everything that developers have done to prevent used sales (CAPCOM's one save system), because this makes the product almost useless for people that do decide to buy the games used.

Also, I do not understand why people are getting upset about this. Yes I did read the thread, but it just don't understand why people think they can pretty much "steal" from developers and be expected to get treated as equally as those who buy the game new.

Well, it can't be both ways. You can't say "it's not a big deal since it's such a small, insignificant amount of content" and also say "it's great that they are doing this for new buyers". If the first is true then it isn't much of a bonus and not even worth considering buying new for which makes the second statement meaningless.

Publishers are getting greedy, it isn't that they HAVE to do this, it's that they want more money. The game industry isn't in a position to need government bailouts, they are just getting greedy.

Buying used is stealing now? Don't you see how brainwashed you have become? Try to put yourself on the other side, what if someone told you that buying a used car was grand theft auto?

 

[Chrono212]

Erm, quick question but what happens if one were to legitimately rent RAGE from a large rental distributor i.e. Netflix or (in my case) LoveFilm?

OT: Am I allowed to take the "I don't know, I don't care" side?

 

[Vidi Kitty]

It's DLC. People are flipping their lids over optional DLC that is included with the game. Go out and buy Dead Space 2 used and check for that Dragon Age 2 armor code. You wont find it. Is it going to ruin your experience of either Dead Space 2 or Dragon Age 2? Didn't think so. This is the same thing. You want the DLC? You are going to have to pay for it through a new copy or a separate purchase, just like all DLC that is included with a game. DLC people...

Just to make sure you understand. DLC.

DLC...

 

[Tufty94]

I don't know why people are always getting so upset by this. Developers are simply supporting those who support them. They aren't punished those who buy the game pre-owned, they are rewarding those who buy it new, and I think it's time that people realised that.

What's the difference? You can't give something extra to one group without the other group missing out on something. In fact, isn't the whole point of giving something extra to the group who buys new designed to discourage from buying used?

I wish gamers would stop supporting companies who openly declare war on consumer ownership rights by trying to devalue a product the moment you try to resell it.

BTW, I am sure you do KNOW why people are getting upset about this. You did read the thread right?

The difference? ID are only restricting a very small amount of content in a 20 hour game. Content that ID even said most gamers will overlook and ignore anyway, I just think it's cool that developers are giving us small freebies for giving something back to them. But I'm also annoyed that it has gotten to this point where developers feel that they have to de this to make money from their games. This clearly shows that used sales are a massive problem for developers. Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with everything that developers have done to prevent used sales (CAPCOM's one save system), because this makes the product almost useless for people that do decide to buy the games used.

Also, I do not understand why people are getting upset about this. Yes I did read the thread, but it just don't understand why people think they can pretty much "steal" from developers and be expected to get treated as equally as those who buy the game new.

Well, it can't be both ways. You can't say "it's not a big deal since it's such a small, insignificant amount of content" and also say "it's great that they are doing this for new buyers". If the first is true then it isn't much of a bonus and not even worth considering buying new for which makes the second statement meaningless.

Publishers are getting greedy, it isn't that they HAVE to do this, it's that they want more money. The game industry isn't in a position to need government bailouts, they are just getting greedy.

Buying used is stealing now? Don't you see how brainwashed you have become? Try to put yourself on the other side, what if someone told you that buying a used car was grand theft auto?

I think it's for the player to decide whether or not the content is worth it or not, sure it's a very small portion of the game, but I still want the content because I like to explore games as much as I can.

I did use the term stealing very loosely, just as a way to say that what you are doing means that the developers aren't getting any money from your purchase. Though I can see it had the completely wrong affect on you.

 

[WaruTaru]

Like I said you are fucking crazy why in the fuck do they need to punish people that doesn't buy something new. All it does it create waste because years down the road when somebody wants to play an older game they can't legally because there aren't anymore keys so the disk itself is pointless and get thrown away. I can't play a game I bought NEW on my friends PS3 just because I already used the code on my own so as somebody that bought it new why should I get punished for playing with a friend. You need to get your head out your ass and realize that once something is sold once it's theirs and they can do whatever they want to it. The way you're thinking is only gonna create more piracy which would provide better content without any money flow which would hurt people more then the used market.

You realize how stupid it would be if used Textbooks that students used cut out whole parts because they didn't buy it new. Or you bought a season of a show on DVD and you're only able to watch the first 15mins of the thing. Why should people be tied down to a product that they're finished with and no longer need and or use. You're just thinking about how people can get paid which is damn sad. It's about recycling a product if I'm done with a game that I'll most likely never play again I'm selling it to somebody that'll be happy to play it and if money is more important then somebody happiness. Then I'll gladly welcome the 2nd crash of the gaming industry because they deserve it by treating people like dogs when they're already rich.

I can just as easily ask you why should developers care about someone who does not concern them at all? I really couldn't care less about your waste argument cause I've kept all my games up till now and never throw them away or sell them. Oh yes, the game is yours all right. What went missing? You still have the disc, the box, the data in the game, the manual, and everything else you were promised. You used up your key? Too bad. Maybe you should ask your friend to buy a copy? And between used and piracy, there really is no different the way I see it. So yea, I don't care?

Those things could have happened by wear and tear anyways if you bought you stuff second hand. You took the risk and you had no one to blame but yourself. I'm all for the second crash. Gamers don't seem to care anyways. They think they are entitled to every single thing because "they bought it" regardless of how much they paid for it. The second hand game you bought for a reduced price? Yea, the price you paid reflects the value of the thing you are holding.

 

[King Toasty]

Oooh, boycotting video games because developers want money. How fucking original.

Look, kid. When you buy a used game, the developers don't get a penny. Yeah. You're buying THEIR GAME, for LESS MONEY, and they don't get anything. For all that hard work. So they're ALLOWED to was a bit of a pay off, for the two+ years they've worked on that game.

Stop complaining. Buy new or rent.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Just rent Rage from Blockbusters, Lovefilm or Netflicks. If they make you pay the extra for rental, after you paid the rental price, then i will have an issue with them. For me, playing a game on rental makes me buy the full price version - especially if you dont know if its good or not. For me, im already pissed that companies already charge for stuff on the disk. Wasnt it Resi 5 that charged money to unlock the multi player that was already on the disk you bought? Thing is they have abused my trust with this crap already.....so more of the same is not welcome. So the future is film and music companies cutting content off their dvds and cds if you buy them full price? What a great world we will live in.

 

[Epona]

I don't know why people are always getting so upset by this. Developers are simply supporting those who support them. They aren't punished those who buy the game pre-owned, they are rewarding those who buy it new, and I think it's time that people realised that.

What's the difference? You can't give something extra to one group without the other group missing out on something. In fact, isn't the whole point of giving something extra to the group who buys new designed to discourage from buying used?

I wish gamers would stop supporting companies who openly declare war on consumer ownership rights by trying to devalue a product the moment you try to resell it.

BTW, I am sure you do KNOW why people are getting upset about this. You did read the thread right?

The difference? ID are only restricting a very small amount of content in a 20 hour game. Content that ID even said most gamers will overlook and ignore anyway, I just think it's cool that developers are giving us small freebies for giving something back to them. But I'm also annoyed that it has gotten to this point where developers feel that they have to de this to make money from their games. This clearly shows that used sales are a massive problem for developers. Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with everything that developers have done to prevent used sales (CAPCOM's one save system), because this makes the product almost useless for people that do decide to buy the games used.

Also, I do not understand why people are getting upset about this. Yes I did read the thread, but it just don't understand why people think they can pretty much "steal" from developers and be expected to get treated as equally as those who buy the game new.

Well, it can't be both ways. You can't say "it's not a big deal since it's such a small, insignificant amount of content" and also say "it's great that they are doing this for new buyers". If the first is true then it isn't much of a bonus and not even worth considering buying new for which makes the second statement meaningless.

Publishers are getting greedy, it isn't that they HAVE to do this, it's that they want more money. The game industry isn't in a position to need government bailouts, they are just getting greedy.

Buying used is stealing now? Don't you see how brainwashed you have become? Try to put yourself on the other side, what if someone told you that buying a used car was grand theft auto?

I think it's for the player to decide whether or not the content is worth it or not, sure it's a very small portion of the game, but I still want the content because I like to explore games as much as I can.

I did use the term stealing very loosely, just as a way to say that what you are doing means that the developers aren't getting any money from your purchase. Though I can see it had the completely wrong affect on you.

So you think it's for the player to decide but you don't know why some players are complaining yet you WANT that extra content. Wow!

You can't use the word steal and then pretend you didn't really mean it. Developers don't get any money from used sales because they aren't entitled to it. Why is that so damn hard to understand? No other industry gets to double dip in the second hand market and contrary to the bleeding hearts beliefs, the game industry is not special.

 

[TheDooD]

It's DLC. People are flipping their lids over optional DLC that is included with the game. Go out and buy Dead Space 2 used and check for that Dragon Age 2 armor code. You wont find it. Is it going to ruin your experience of either Dead Space 2 or Dragon Age 2? Didn't think so. This is the same thing. You want the DLC? You are going to have to pay for it through a new copy or a separate purchase, just like all DLC that is included with a game. DLC people...

Just to make sure you understand. DLC.

DLC...

It isn't DLC it's shit that's already on the disk. Years down the road people aren't gonna be able to play it because the service is gonna discontinue unlocking older games. Don't forget Pirates are gonna have the full game without deal with any bullshit so who's really the worse person here. The person buying a used game that's getting parts cut out or a pirate that can play a full game?

 

[GonzoGamer]

How can you not understand how this hurts gamers? If the person can?t afford to buy the game new or trades it with a friend (and if you can?t understand that, you?re probably just so pampered you never had to actually look for a good deal ? better hope your luck holds out) then that person doesn?t deserve to play the whole game? That?s what they call in the business world: ?a dick move.? Do Library books or used DVDs have a chapter or two missing from the middle? No. Why should games be any different?

How does it hurt anyone if you don't get a DLC, or some non essential content, while still being able to play the game you bought off someone for lower price? Please explain it to me, because that's the part of the whining i do not comprehend.
"Boohoo, the evil developer doesn't want to give me free stuff even tho i haven't really paid them for the game, boohoo" is all i see in those complaints. Prove me wrong, please?

Was i pampered? Doubt it, ever since i was 16 i buy my own games for my own money i worked for. There were times i would buy 1-2 games a year, there were time i only bought games from the discount shelves, i still do not buy every game i'd like to play on release. I buy 5 "new" games a year on average, only those i know i will enjoy, the rest, patiently waits for official discounts/classics editions. If i don't get a game on day-1, even month-1 my life doesn't get worse because of it. I have plenty of other things to do, and because i didn't trade in my odl game si can always replay those. Amazing thing.

Again the books/DVDs argument? Why not cars and toasters? Those are completely different industries, with very different revenues and expense costs. How much does it cost to write a book? Time, and nothing else really. Sure there are costs on publishing side of things, but the sales unless the book is complete disaster, make up for it.

Movies on the other hand make majority of money from theatre screening, that costs, gasp, about as much as that Project 10$ or whatever else little payment the publishers asks for when you buy a used game and want all the content included.
Would you prefer paying 10$ for a ticket to enter a "gaming arena" and play a new game once only, and you have to do it in one sitting, till 6 months later when it get's released in retail and you can actually buy it? Because that would be how film industry works.

Games relay purely on box sales/DLC/subscriptions. If you take that away from publishers/developers you cut the money flow. They can't afford same approach as other media industries, it's simple.

But I thought that's why they charge $60 for new games. Maybe if games were the same price as movies or books it would be harder to argue for those used purchasers but they aren't. They're always at least 3x the price. Are they going to keep using that excuse every time they want to come up with another scheme?
And BTW, be grateful you were able to spend your money on games.
Yea, why not cars and toasters. I?ve always bought used cars and have never had the previous owner say ?hey, now that you bought it, you have to pay me $10 for the stereo or else the big company I paid tens of thousands of dollars to for this car will not make anything off our transaction.?
I understand they need to make money but why are they going to take extra money out of the pockets of the gamers that can barely afford the hobby as opposed to the retailers who make obscene profits off used game sales. Instead of taking away content to those gamers, why not set up their own trade in program that?s more lucrative for everyone? Because it?s easier for them to just be dicks.
But maybe you?re onto something with the Movie Theater example. Maybe, game companies can come up with a premium experience for gamers that they can make money on but doesn?t take away content for those gamers who choose to wait for the disc. I'm all for pre-order swag, bonuses, and premiums, I just think it's real shitty to hold content hostage.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Mostly this becomes an issue if say, i take my copy of Rage to a friends house. That means content is missing. Their will be a code in the box that allows you to open the extra stuff. So you cant play that stuff with your friend.

I think they should just make all games like that, you need a code to make the game work. That code is in the box. Like old pc games. Problem is that means less sales and less money. People buying secondhand will still do that unless your game is so awesome that it makes you want to buy it day one. For me Batman:Arkum City, Skyrim and Deus Ex are all day one purchasers. The rest, i will rent to kill a week while i wait for the games i want.

I guess the best outcome is that games will come down in price quicker and people will, instead of buying second hand, will buy the game new but only when it comes down in price. An even then the game makers wont make any money on it. No one wins.

 

[xXAsherahXx]

Everyone on the Escapist complains about games not being daring enough. You want that to stop? Buy more new games so that devs don't have to worry so much about profit. Maybe then they can think about taking more risks.

I'm tired of the "I hate my locked content" argument. You COULD just wait for the price to go down and then buy it new. Of course you can still buy used games, but how about buying older ones that don't have much of an impact on profit margins?

As the industry has GROWN, the industry has become less daring. The reason is that they don't have to risk being daring, they know people will buy the next COD clone anyway. It's when people aren't buying that they have to start thinking out of the box.

You're correct, but I believe that, in addition, since the industry is losing a decent (not an "Oh my god, panic") portion of money through used games, they feel they have to put out shit they know we will buy to make up for the losses they think they have suffered. Also, another reason for the next COD clone is because they know that FPS transcend the Hardcore and Casual gamer market. They make generic shit for both markets to partake in for whatever reason those people had the bad taste for in the first place.

Make no mistake, the money guys in the industry KNOW they aren't losing money from the used market. They KNOW they aren't entitled to that money in the first place and so can't realistically count it as a loss. However, the Bobby Koticks of the industry also KNOW that all this sympathy for lost money from the used market is a gold mine and they are cashing in. They won't ever take it in front of a court because they know a court won't allow them to legally kill the used market but they will milk this for all it's worth and try to repeat the death of the PC used market via the use of DRM.

So when they speak of losses due to the used market, are they cooking the numbers the way they do with piracy? Ya know, 1 download = $60 lost? The game industry claiming a loss of sales in this manner is the same as me claiming a loss of $34 Million because I failed to win the lottery. In both cases the money never belonged to the people claiming the loss.

How do you know specifically that companies are not losing money? Of course they are, it's common sense, but that doesn't mean they are losing ENOUGH money to make a difference. I understand how your analogy is set up, but the only difference between you and the company is that the company is losing profits from its own products while you never make anything or gain anything. It's arguable whether or not the industry is losing a substantial enough amount of money to make a difference, but they are still losing money, and it is logical from a corporate view to try and make it up.

Pirating isn't much of a gripe to me also because most people don't know how to do it or get their console modded accordingly.

They can't be losing money from used sales as they have no claim on money made via used sales. You can't lose money that you never had a claim to.

They lost potential money because gamers have a cheaper alternative. This isn't the same as your lottery analogy, but in this case potential money is money they could have easily had but now don't due to the used market. It isn't anything for companies to cry over, but that is where the DLC comes in.

 

[Vidi Kitty]

It's DLC. People are flipping their lids over optional DLC that is included with the game. Go out and buy Dead Space 2 used and check for that Dragon Age 2 armor code. You wont find it. Is it going to ruin your experience of either Dead Space 2 or Dragon Age 2? Didn't think so. This is the same thing. You want the DLC? You are going to have to pay for it through a new copy or a separate purchase, just like all DLC that is included with a game. DLC people...

Just to make sure you understand. DLC.

DLC...

It isn't DLC it's shit that's already on the disk. Years down the road people aren't gonna be able to play it because the service is gonna discontinue unlocking older games. Don't forget Pirates are gonna have the full game without deal with any bullshit so who's really the worse person here. The person buying a used game that's getting parts cut out or a pirate that can play a full game?

But for all intents and purposes it is DLC. It's not a large part of the game or an important one either. Its an extra bit of fun you get to have, their treat. They could have made it its own actual DLC that gets released along side the game and charge everyone, but they decided that they would be cool about it and promote sales of fresh copies.

They are trying to be nice and add something bonus in, but everyone is going nuts thinking that they aren't going to get what they paid for and they are being ripped off and they should get what they deserve.

Pirates are never in the right, and what they do with and get from a game has no impact on people who want to legally acquire their games. If you think the people who steal the game have it so much easier, then go pirate the game. Go download your crack to get the DLC for free. And then you will go complain some more when you get busted for it.

 

[Macrobstar]

ID have been nice enough to include a code with every copy of RAGE, if you happen to buy the game of someone who has used theirs then that's your problem

If I give away a separate radio with every car I sell, if you buy the car off someone you cant blame me when they don't give you the radio

 

[Epona]

Everyone on the Escapist complains about games not being daring enough. You want that to stop? Buy more new games so that devs don't have to worry so much about profit. Maybe then they can think about taking more risks.

I'm tired of the "I hate my locked content" argument. You COULD just wait for the price to go down and then buy it new. Of course you can still buy used games, but how about buying older ones that don't have much of an impact on profit margins?

As the industry has GROWN, the industry has become less daring. The reason is that they don't have to risk being daring, they know people will buy the next COD clone anyway. It's when people aren't buying that they have to start thinking out of the box.

You're correct, but I believe that, in addition, since the industry is losing a decent (not an "Oh my god, panic") portion of money through used games, they feel they have to put out shit they know we will buy to make up for the losses they think they have suffered. Also, another reason for the next COD clone is because they know that FPS transcend the Hardcore and Casual gamer market. They make generic shit for both markets to partake in for whatever reason those people had the bad taste for in the first place.

Make no mistake, the money guys in the industry KNOW they aren't losing money from the used market. They KNOW they aren't entitled to that money in the first place and so can't realistically count it as a loss. However, the Bobby Koticks of the industry also KNOW that all this sympathy for lost money from the used market is a gold mine and they are cashing in. They won't ever take it in front of a court because they know a court won't allow them to legally kill the used market but they will milk this for all it's worth and try to repeat the death of the PC used market via the use of DRM.

So when they speak of losses due to the used market, are they cooking the numbers the way they do with piracy? Ya know, 1 download = $60 lost? The game industry claiming a loss of sales in this manner is the same as me claiming a loss of $34 Million because I failed to win the lottery. In both cases the money never belonged to the people claiming the loss.

How do you know specifically that companies are not losing money? Of course they are, it's common sense, but that doesn't mean they are losing ENOUGH money to make a difference. I understand how your analogy is set up, but the only difference between you and the company is that the company is losing profits from its own products while you never make anything or gain anything. It's arguable whether or not the industry is losing a substantial enough amount of money to make a difference, but they are still losing money, and it is logical from a corporate view to try and make it up.

Pirating isn't much of a gripe to me also because most people don't know how to do it or get their console modded accordingly.

They can't be losing money from used sales as they have no claim on money made via used sales. You can't lose money that you never had a claim to.

They lost potential money because gamers have a cheaper alternative. This isn't the same as your lottery analogy, but in this case potential money is money they could have easily had but now don't due to the used market. It isn't anything for companies to cry over, but that is where the DLC comes in.

Oh, potential money. Well hell, that works for anything and isn't valid. Example: I was in the market for a new computer and every store that sells computer had POTENTIAL to make money but only one store did. Should the other stores get a cut because they POTENTIALLY lost money?

LOL

 

[Vidi Kitty]

Everyone on the Escapist complains about games not being daring enough. You want that to stop? Buy more new games so that devs don't have to worry so much about profit. Maybe then they can think about taking more risks.

I'm tired of the "I hate my locked content" argument. You COULD just wait for the price to go down and then buy it new. Of course you can still buy used games, but how about buying older ones that don't have much of an impact on profit margins?

As the industry has GROWN, the industry has become less daring. The reason is that they don't have to risk being daring, they know people will buy the next COD clone anyway. It's when people aren't buying that they have to start thinking out of the box.

You're correct, but I believe that, in addition, since the industry is losing a decent (not an "Oh my god, panic") portion of money through used games, they feel they have to put out shit they know we will buy to make up for the losses they think they have suffered. Also, another reason for the next COD clone is because they know that FPS transcend the Hardcore and Casual gamer market. They make generic shit for both markets to partake in for whatever reason those people had the bad taste for in the first place.

Make no mistake, the money guys in the industry KNOW they aren't losing money from the used market. They KNOW they aren't entitled to that money in the first place and so can't realistically count it as a loss. However, the Bobby Koticks of the industry also KNOW that all this sympathy for lost money from the used market is a gold mine and they are cashing in. They won't ever take it in front of a court because they know a court won't allow them to legally kill the used market but they will milk this for all it's worth and try to repeat the death of the PC used market via the use of DRM.

So when they speak of losses due to the used market, are they cooking the numbers the way they do with piracy? Ya know, 1 download = $60 lost? The game industry claiming a loss of sales in this manner is the same as me claiming a loss of $34 Million because I failed to win the lottery. In both cases the money never belonged to the people claiming the loss.

How do you know specifically that companies are not losing money? Of course they are, it's common sense, but that doesn't mean they are losing ENOUGH money to make a difference. I understand how your analogy is set up, but the only difference between you and the company is that the company is losing profits from its own products while you never make anything or gain anything. It's arguable whether or not the industry is losing a substantial enough amount of money to make a difference, but they are still losing money, and it is logical from a corporate view to try and make it up.

Pirating isn't much of a gripe to me also because most people don't know how to do it or get their console modded accordingly.

They can't be losing money from used sales as they have no claim on money made via used sales. You can't lose money that you never had a claim to.

They lost potential money because gamers have a cheaper alternative. This isn't the same as your lottery analogy, but in this case potential money is money they could have easily had but now don't due to the used market. It isn't anything for companies to cry over, but that is where the DLC comes in.

Oh, potential money. Well hell, that works for anything and isn't valid. Example: I was in the market for a new computer and every store that sells computer had POTENTIAL to make money but only one store did. Should the other stores get a cut because they POTENTIALLY lost money?

LOL

But the makers of the parts in that computer still made their money. We are talking about game MAKERS, not game RETAILERS.

 

[Tufty94]

I don't know why people are always getting so upset by this. Developers are simply supporting those who support them. They aren't punished those who buy the game pre-owned, they are rewarding those who buy it new, and I think it's time that people realised that.

What's the difference? You can't give something extra to one group without the other group missing out on something. In fact, isn't the whole point of giving something extra to the group who buys new designed to discourage from buying used?

I wish gamers would stop supporting companies who openly declare war on consumer ownership rights by trying to devalue a product the moment you try to resell it.

BTW, I am sure you do KNOW why people are getting upset about this. You did read the thread right?

The difference? ID are only restricting a very small amount of content in a 20 hour game. Content that ID even said most gamers will overlook and ignore anyway, I just think it's cool that developers are giving us small freebies for giving something back to them. But I'm also annoyed that it has gotten to this point where developers feel that they have to de this to make money from their games. This clearly shows that used sales are a massive problem for developers. Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with everything that developers have done to prevent used sales (CAPCOM's one save system), because this makes the product almost useless for people that do decide to buy the games used.

Also, I do not understand why people are getting upset about this. Yes I did read the thread, but it just don't understand why people think they can pretty much "steal" from developers and be expected to get treated as equally as those who buy the game new.

Well, it can't be both ways. You can't say "it's not a big deal since it's such a small, insignificant amount of content" and also say "it's great that they are doing this for new buyers". If the first is true then it isn't much of a bonus and not even worth considering buying new for which makes the second statement meaningless.

Publishers are getting greedy, it isn't that they HAVE to do this, it's that they want more money. The game industry isn't in a position to need government bailouts, they are just getting greedy.

Buying used is stealing now? Don't you see how brainwashed you have become? Try to put yourself on the other side, what if someone told you that buying a used car was grand theft auto?

I think it's for the player to decide whether or not the content is worth it or not, sure it's a very small portion of the game, but I still want the content because I like to explore games as much as I can.

I did use the term stealing very loosely, just as a way to say that what you are doing means that the developers aren't getting any money from your purchase. Though I can see it had the completely wrong affect on you.

So you think it's for the player to decide but you don't know why some players are complaining yet you WANT that extra content. Wow!

You can't use the word steal and then pretend you didn't really mean it. Developers don't get any money from used sales because they aren't entitled to it. Why is that so damn hard to understand? No other industry gets to double dip in the second hand market and contrary to the bleeding hearts beliefs, the game industry is not special.

I fail to see your point. I will buy the game new regardless of the content, yes I do want it, but it's not going to be the reason to justify my new purchase. Sure developers aren't entitled to the money from pre-owned sales, but what makes you think the people who buy the games used are entitled to the additional content? Not my point, but it's really for the developers to decide.

As for you second point, read my previous post.

I'm sure that none of us are going to come to any sort of conclusion here because we're both completely on either end of the court and I don't think anything either of us say is going to make the other person think otherwise.

 

[SamBargeron]

you realize Gamestop has to BUY games before they can sell them so publishers get their cash then and they get money off the single hardcopy purchase. That's twice they got paid and you're bitching about used copies which fund there need to buy newer games and products. Gamestop sells games they aren't Wal-Mart or Target that sells a verity of goods. Open your eyes and realize publishers are biting the hand that feeds them and without gamestop as a middle man there be a lot of people unable to play games because they didn't have cash at the time, didn't get a chance to buy the game new or just wants to play an other game. Get over yourself just because you're able to buy new all the time that doesn't mean others are and demonizing them over people that pirate makes you look like a goddamn fool.

1. Yeah, I realize Gamestop has to buy the game from the person. But I've seen Gamestop give a person $4 for a brand new game and sell it used for $50 an hour later. My wife worked there for two years. That is a 92% profit. This happened 6 days after the game's release. It was an Assassin's Creed game.

2. I'm not able to buy new. I haven't bought a game in 2 years because I can't even afford USED games, much less new. I've been evicted from my home and am only able to continue living due to the charity of friends right now. I haven't seen my wife in two months because we can't afford to live together. I know many people who are in a similar situation because the American economy is crumbling.

3. I explained at the beginning of my post that I posted in anger and admitted that my post was flawed but had some key points. MAINLY that developers need to find a way to recover from used games sales without screwing over the customer. Right now consumers are losing, developers are losing, and although Gamestop is profiting right now... eventually Gamestop will suffer as this bad economy drives more people to buy used and the game industry falls apart. Gamestop relies on the success of the game industry to survive, and the game industry is being smothered by the ratio of new sales to used sales. The ratio needs to be corrected, that is all. The car industry recovered from the same problem, I'm confident the game industry can too if they pull their heads out of their asses and get over the idea that they are being cheated. I sympathize with WHY they feel that way, but as long as they screw the customer this will only get worse.

 

[xXAsherahXx]

Everyone on the Escapist complains about games not being daring enough. You want that to stop? Buy more new games so that devs don't have to worry so much about profit. Maybe then they can think about taking more risks.

I'm tired of the "I hate my locked content" argument. You COULD just wait for the price to go down and then buy it new. Of course you can still buy used games, but how about buying older ones that don't have much of an impact on profit margins?

As the industry has GROWN, the industry has become less daring. The reason is that they don't have to risk being daring, they know people will buy the next COD clone anyway. It's when people aren't buying that they have to start thinking out of the box.

You're correct, but I believe that, in addition, since the industry is losing a decent (not an "Oh my god, panic") portion of money through used games, they feel they have to put out shit they know we will buy to make up for the losses they think they have suffered. Also, another reason for the next COD clone is because they know that FPS transcend the Hardcore and Casual gamer market. They make generic shit for both markets to partake in for whatever reason those people had the bad taste for in the first place.

Make no mistake, the money guys in the industry KNOW they aren't losing money from the used market. They KNOW they aren't entitled to that money in the first place and so can't realistically count it as a loss. However, the Bobby Koticks of the industry also KNOW that all this sympathy for lost money from the used market is a gold mine and they are cashing in. They won't ever take it in front of a court because they know a court won't allow them to legally kill the used market but they will milk this for all it's worth and try to repeat the death of the PC used market via the use of DRM.

So when they speak of losses due to the used market, are they cooking the numbers the way they do with piracy? Ya know, 1 download = $60 lost? The game industry claiming a loss of sales in this manner is the same as me claiming a loss of $34 Million because I failed to win the lottery. In both cases the money never belonged to the people claiming the loss.

How do you know specifically that companies are not losing money? Of course they are, it's common sense, but that doesn't mean they are losing ENOUGH money to make a difference. I understand how your analogy is set up, but the only difference between you and the company is that the company is losing profits from its own products while you never make anything or gain anything. It's arguable whether or not the industry is losing a substantial enough amount of money to make a difference, but they are still losing money, and it is logical from a corporate view to try and make it up.

Pirating isn't much of a gripe to me also because most people don't know how to do it or get their console modded accordingly.

They can't be losing money from used sales as they have no claim on money made via used sales. You can't lose money that you never had a claim to.

They lost potential money because gamers have a cheaper alternative. This isn't the same as your lottery analogy, but in this case potential money is money they could have easily had but now don't due to the used market. It isn't anything for companies to cry over, but that is where the DLC comes in.

Oh, potential money. Well hell, that works for anything and isn't valid. Example: I was in the market for a new computer and every store that sells computer had POTENTIAL to make money but only one store did. Should the other stores get a cut because they POTENTIALLY lost money?

LOL

That isn't the right direction. Wtih gaming, one game has the potential to be bought, and only one company gets money. With your example, every computer isn't made by the same people, and you only walk into one store. New game sales give the profit to just one company, not the store.

That's what projected sales are for, to measure the amount of potential money they can buy, and if that isn't met or exceeded, these companies consider it a loss.

ROFLMAAAAAAOOOOOOOOO