Poll: Boycott Rage

[T-Bone24]

Anyone who was going to buy it at launch is going to buy it new anyway. What's the problem? Buy it new or wait for a price drop. If you don't really care about a tiny little bit of side content then buy used for a lower price. Developers want your money. This isn't a bad thing and it shouldn't be condemned. They want your money so that they can keep making vidyagams. They don't get money from used sales. It's not hard to follow that they would try to put further incentive into buying new.

Used games now are, what, like $10 less than a new game anyway. The price of that DLC will be ~$10 so just buy the game new.

This is being blown way out of proportion. It's not like they're preventing you from getting to the ending if you don't buy new.

 

[joshthor]

I mean, you have a valid reason

But he doesn't have a valid reason, at all.

At all, at all, at all, at all.

He claims that they shouldn't be allowed to do this because we're the ones putting money forward for the game. But the only time in which it happens is when you buy it second hand, and in that case, you're not paying the developers for the game. You're just paying the game store.

So no, horrible reason.

So? You don't have to pay the developers. The developers sell to the game stores. After that it moves down to the second hand market. Every other industry does that.

And you can't use the wear and tear argument, because wear and tear is completely different from purposely locking content. I love how bending over for greedy publishers is the norm now.

every other industry has other ways to make money through thier original content. movies make most of thier money in theatres, then later sell the dvds. musicians perform in concerts to make money on top of thier cds. video games only have the one single sale.

i understand the whole "they are making us pay them more!!! raawrrr" argument, however, they arent MAKING you pay. as long as the experiance is enjoyable, the storyline is complete, and multiplayer is accessible (if its in the game) then there is no reason for you to buy the extras. they are simply tacking on an extra to thank THEIR ACTUAL PAYING CUSTOMERS (used customers are not their customers)

What about cars/books/furniture/pretty much everything in the world? There's been a second hand market since the beginning of capitalism and the Video Games industry acts like it's all different. Every one else deals with the second hand market, but the Video Game industry acts like they're special and shouldn't have to

cars get new editions every year; books cost pennies per book to make; furniture uses the fact only college students dont care that someone they dont know has probably been naked on said chiar/bed/couch.

more so than that, all media has some way to make up massively for used sales, non-media enterprises have condition, including smell. used video games are in almost perfect condition (minus cases and manuals) and if not there is very little risk to the consumer.

while you say video game industry acts like thier special, so do used consumers. used consumers are simply paying the store, the actual developer who made the game gets nothing. i see ABSOLUTELY NOTHING wrong with them incentivizing new sales by tacking NON NESSESARY content as DLC

agian - i use the example of dragon age - if you bought it new you get the stone prisoner dlc for free. it is a completely non nessesary to the story line, you get several extra quests and a companion, but if they didnt include it no one would complain cause the game is still full and not missing anything.

for a counter example i will throw out need for speed with thier online passes. this is what i consider a bad incentive. you are missing a large chunk of the game (the multiplayer), not to mention a part that was heavily advertised. you still get the full story, but for a game that at e3 they specifically show off only the multiplayer and how cool it is, by leaving out the multiplayer your just pissing off used sales and they might not ever buy your game new.

my point is that tacking on dlc, that does not take away from the experiance if played without it, but adds to the experiance with it is a good thing. i believe the consumers that make the company money should get a little something extra. i also believe used sales are perfectly fine and legetimate, but they really dont deserve the developers concern as they are not paying a dime to them.

 

[William Ossiss]

All I have seen in this thread, or at least the majority of it is a bunch of Pirates and poor people crying

oh, so there is something wrong with being poor?

im sure that, unlike you, most of the people here have something like my yearly game budget. i dont like to assume, but this sounds like you have a bunch of money lying around that you can frivolously spend on games. unlike you, us "poor people" dont have the kind of money to buy a new game every time one comes out. (i have no experience 'pirating' games. i am no thief, thank you very much.)

besides, never once did i mention gamestop in any of my entries. all im merely saying is that they shouldnt take away content like that from anything we do if we dont buy it new. if they had said "buy new and get day one DLC" yeah. ok then. but they're marketing it as "buy it new get this thing. buy it used, your screwed."

if AC: brotherhood had something like that, i wouldnt have even bought it at all. i dont have the money for something new like that. buy i bought it used, and had some points so i bought the DLC. which goes straight to developers pockets.

as for your question, I care. as do many of the other people posting in this thread. and as someone told you, if you dont like this kind of thing, dont comment. simplistic and easy to do.

Ok, first off I never said anything was wrong with being poor. Don't insinuate unless you have proof that I said something like that.

Secondly I never mentioned Gamestop.

Thirdly, the whole point I was trying to make is "Who the fuck cares if it has Day One DLC?" Are you that impatient that you can't wait for a game to go down in price? If you truly wanted to play the game you would have chosen that over any other game that was released. However you didn't, you decided to wait. This however made you impatient because instead of waiting for the price to go down or a GotY edition to be released, you decided to buy the game used.

I am poor, however the big difference between you and me is simple. I have patience, you apparently do not. Also, if you capitalize I why can't you capitalize the first letter of your bloody sentences?

I was capitalized because i don't know how to italicize.

 

[Caverat]

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.

If you care about video games and want to support the industry, then buy new. If you don't give a shit and just want to save yourself money, then feel free to buy used, but don't ***** when game developers are trying to recuperate the loses of someone playing their game without giving them money because you don't want to support the industry.

Go boycott something fucking meaningful... not this.

You say "Developers don't get a CENT from someone buying the game used" as if we should be shocked. In fact, developers aren't entitled to that any more than Dell is entitled to some of the money from the monitor I sold at my garage sale. It's like being shocked because a 2 year old can't get a drivers license.

The used market is a legitimate market and as such it is the game industry that is in the wrong for trying to destroy it.

If you care about video games you'll protest this greed on the part of publishers before they destroy the entire industry. More and more people hate the publishers everytime some new BS DRM is introduced and doubly so when they are using that DRM to harm the used market because unlike piracy, the used market is legitimate and tied to consumer rights.

The used market is a legitimate market, but it is not immoral for an individual or group to withhold portions of their intellectual property from those who are unwilling to buy it from them, and instead buy it used from someone else.

It is meant to encourage people to actually give the maker/publisher of the game money, period. Imagine yourself in their place, what would you do to better ensure you actually got paid as much as you could for the shit you made?

Complaining about these kind of things is like a person buying a used car and expecting it to be in the exact same condition as a brand new car rolled off of the assembly line, it just makes you a fucking asshole.

PS: To those that dropped it, no one cares if you are poor. Get a better job or work more hours at shittier jobs, just stop bitching. You are responsible for your own status, stop insinuating that the world owes you anything.

 

[Lunar Templar]

They're not doing anything exactly wrong here, they just want to be paid for the game they made and if you're buying it used, you're not paying them, you're paying gamestop.

It's a simple choice, want the extra features? Buy it new. It's a lot like buying the special edition to a game, are you going to boycott them for not giving you that stuff too? You get what you pay for, that's how a lot of things work.

That's how I see it anyway. It's not even about taking sides really, you're simply not paying the guys who made the game so why should they care what you want? So you want to help them and get your game features well I think buying it new is for you. Besides you get shrink wrap to open and who doesn't enjoy opening a new game?

Also, it's not like they're stripping out the ability to play or save more than one file.

as i understand it, its not extra stuff they're taking out, its a whole chunk of the single player

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/112247-Rage-Cuts-Single-Player-When-You-Buy-It-Used

case you missed what the fuss is about.

No I'm aware, but again, you're not giving money to the guys who made it when you buy used, so why do you expect them to care? I'm aware this is you know sort of a debatable thing but I've done a lot of jobs where the other party just felt like they didn't want to pay but they expected me to send the files anyway. Guess who didn't get what they wanted? Neither party.

actually i wasn't gonna get RAGE at all *trollface here* so they don't get my money regardless, so my disapproval is less about me getting screwed now, and more about me getting potentially screwed later when its a game i want.

that said...

i honestly have no problem shelling out full price for a new copy, the devs should get their cut, they gotta eat to just like me, but there's gotta be a better way to go about getting said fair share from the used crowd then crap like this, since all its doing is pissing people off

 

[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.

If you care about video games and want to support the industry, then buy new. If you don't give a shit and just want to save yourself money, then feel free to buy used, but don't ***** when game developers are trying to recuperate the loses of someone playing their game without giving them money because you don't want to support the industry.

Go boycott something fucking meaningful... not this.

You say "Developers don't get a CENT from someone buying the game used" as if we should be shocked. In fact, developers aren't entitled to that any more than Dell is entitled to some of the money from the monitor I sold at my garage sale. It's like being shocked because a 2 year old can't get a drivers license.

The used market is a legitimate market and as such it is the game industry that is in the wrong for trying to destroy it.

If you care about video games you'll protest this greed on the part of publishers before they destroy the entire industry. More and more people hate the publishers everytime some new BS DRM is introduced and doubly so when they are using that DRM to harm the used market because unlike piracy, the used market is legitimate and tied to consumer rights.

The used market is a legitimate market, but it is not immoral for an individual or group to withhold portions of their intellectual property from those who are unwilling to buy it from them, and instead buy it used from someone else.

It is meant to encourage people to actually give the maker/publisher of the game money, period. Imagine yourself in their place, what would you do to better ensure you actually got paid as much as you could for the shit you made?

Complaining about these kind of things is like a person buying a used car and expecting it to be in the exact same condition as a brand new car rolled off of the assembly line, it just makes you a fucking asshole.

PS: To those that dropped it, no one cares if you are poor. Get a better job or work more hours at shittier jobs, just stop bitching. You are responsible for your own status, stop insinuating that the world owes you anything.

The real problem is that we know where this is going. It is going towards destroying the used market, so is that immoral? Shall we just sit on our thumbs until entire games are barred from resale and then protest?

I think it would be foolish to wait that long. In fact, I think Project $10 and the like should have been protested more loudly but I am glad to see that some people are starting to wake up to where this is going.

You can look forward to console having online activation codes that prevent resale. Don't be so afraid of the slippery slope that you ignore the fact that you are on the slope. It isn't as if the game industry hasn't already destroyed the PC market, this is not "can they do it" type of situation. They can and they will if people don't protest.

I do agree about the being poor argument though. If you're too poor to game, I am sorry, the game industry doesn't owe you games but they will be hurt more than you in the end. If the publishers destroy the used market, they will be telling the poor people that they don't want their business. They don't want them buying used and spending a few dollars on DLC, they just don't want their money at all. It will hurt the industry more than it will the poor people who will just find another hobby.

 

[William Ossiss]

All I have seen in this thread, or at least the majority of it is a bunch of Pirates and poor people crying

oh, so there is something wrong with being poor?

im sure that, unlike you, most of the people here have something like my yearly game budget. i dont like to assume, but this sounds like you have a bunch of money lying around that you can frivolously spend on games. unlike you, us "poor people" dont have the kind of money to buy a new game every time one comes out. (i have no experience 'pirating' games. i am no thief, thank you very much.)

besides, never once did i mention gamestop in any of my entries. all im merely saying is that they shouldnt take away content like that from anything we do if we dont buy it new. if they had said "buy new and get day one DLC" yeah. ok then. but they're marketing it as "buy it new get this thing. buy it used, your screwed."

if AC: brotherhood had something like that, i wouldnt have even bought it at all. i dont have the money for something new like that. buy i bought it used, and had some points so i bought the DLC. which goes straight to developers pockets.

as for your question, I care. as do many of the other people posting in this thread. and as someone told you, if you dont like this kind of thing, dont comment. simplistic and easy to do.

Ok, first off I never said anything was wrong with being poor. Don't insinuate unless you have proof that I said something like that.

Secondly I never mentioned Gamestop.

Thirdly, the whole point I was trying to make is "Who the fuck cares if it has Day One DLC?" Are you that impatient that you can't wait for a game to go down in price? If you truly wanted to play the game you would have chosen that over any other game that was released. However you didn't, you decided to wait. This however made you impatient because instead of waiting for the price to go down or a GotY edition to be released, you decided to buy the game used.

I am poor, however the big difference between you and me is simple. I have patience, you apparently do not. Also, if you capitalize I why can't you capitalize the first letter of your bloody sentences?

I was capitalized because i don't know how to italicize.

...That made no sense. I take it English isn't your first language?

italicize. italics. or, to dumb it down, when your words go crooked. i capitalized the I to promote emphasis. it's a common trick, for when you cannot italicize. you know, that crooked I in word processor. please, if you have to attempt insults, do it somewhere else. if you have to stoop to insults about my ability to correctly use the english language (which, might i add, is pretty damn good considering that i was raised on it), go to youtube. im sure they'll love you there. or go look up words you don't know. like ITALICIZE.

 

[Snotnarok]

They're not doing anything exactly wrong here, they just want to be paid for the game they made and if you're buying it used, you're not paying them, you're paying gamestop.

It's a simple choice, want the extra features? Buy it new. It's a lot like buying the special edition to a game, are you going to boycott them for not giving you that stuff too? You get what you pay for, that's how a lot of things work.

That's how I see it anyway. It's not even about taking sides really, you're simply not paying the guys who made the game so why should they care what you want? So you want to help them and get your game features well I think buying it new is for you. Besides you get shrink wrap to open and who doesn't enjoy opening a new game?

Also, it's not like they're stripping out the ability to play or save more than one file.

as i understand it, its not extra stuff they're taking out, its a whole chunk of the single player

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/112247-Rage-Cuts-Single-Player-When-You-Buy-It-Used

case you missed what the fuss is about.

No I'm aware, but again, you're not giving money to the guys who made it when you buy used, so why do you expect them to care? I'm aware this is you know sort of a debatable thing but I've done a lot of jobs where the other party just felt like they didn't want to pay but they expected me to send the files anyway. Guess who didn't get what they wanted? Neither party.

actually i wasn't gonna get RAGE at all *trollface here* so they don't get my money regardless, so my disapproval is less about me getting screwed now, and more about me getting potentially screwed later when its a game i want.

that said...

i honestly have no problem shelling out full price for a new copy, the devs should get their cut, they gotta eat to just like me, but there's gotta be a better way to go about getting said fair share from the used crowd then crap like this, since all its doing is pissing people off

Yeah Ubisoft has that "better way to deal with it" remember? Playing single player? You must be online at all times or you can't play. Buy it new? Fuck you paying scum only pirates get to play offline. But we swear it's to target pirates!

Rage is taking something out you can buy as DLC it's not a huge deal. There's worse ways as I stated with Ubisoft being the fucking U.S.S. Fuckwad in terms of DRM. I'm not saying at all that what they're doing is perfect with RAGE.

However being that the dev gets no money from the used sales I can somewhat understand. If I get it I'm buying it new for 2 reasons 1- I'm a sucker for shrinkwrap+content, 2- I'd get it on PC so I'd have to get it new regardless.

Again, is it perfect? Not really, can they do better? Yes but they can do a LOT worse.

 

[WaruTaru]

You just proved you're a dumbass that has no idea what they're talking about. You realize the money from USED games go into them buying NEW games. How can Gamestop afford to pay its employees, keep the stores in good condition, keep the website up, etc. How can they do all this when all they're able to do is sell "new" products. What if the game flops what do they do with all the unsold copies, just throw them away? That just being wasteful. Why do push for one market to make money yet another that's equally as valuable to basically crash and burn.

Err...no. In a country where second-hand market doesn't exists, its not possible. They do get profit for selling new, you know?. They are just as greedy, if not worse, then the publishers. If the game flops, developers suffer equally as well. Whats your point? Actually, if a game flops, developer suffer more than Gamestop. Gamestop still sell other games, so they don't need to rely on any particular game to stay in profit. The market can stay provided you don't ***** about what developers do to their game, yes? Like I said, wasteful doesn't come into the equation.

The way you're thinking people are just gonna pirate instead of dealing with people like you and your bullshit. They still get to play the game, the whole fucking game.

I'm totally cool with it. If everyone wants to break the law, its not for me to stop them, really. It just shows a stronger consumer choice. If the game is shit, don't even buy it. Let the developers sink. Won't affect me either way.

Edit: On second thought, thanks for admitting that people don't give a shit about the law. You can stop hiding behind the legal bullshit about buying used is legal because legality doesn't even matter to you.

 

[thepyrethatburns]

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.

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.

Well, I hope you remember that when you get a used car and someone has removed the stereo because you didn't pay new car price.

Regardless, you're missing the point as to why this is stupid marketing. There were three ways to put this in order of how well people take it.

1) Buy a new copy of Rage and get extra sewer levels absolutely free. Power to the Players!

2) We have included the sewer levels as Day 1 DLC but, if you buy the game new, then you will get them for free.

3) If you don't buy the game new, then the sewer levels will be locked.

While each approach amounts to the same thing, the third statement is considerably less consumer-friendly than the first one. This is stupid marketing and that's why I think that, for the way they're marketing this, they deserve to collect a Darwin award.

Also, if you're like me and you rent before you buy, then these schemes are lowering the potential that I will buy. If you lock off the multiplayer, then I will judge it solely on the single player regardless of how good people say the multiplayer is. If you're selling Day 1 DLC, then I will judge the single player both on how much the game will actually cost and how well the single-player is without the DLC.

And, if you decide that the best way to promote your game is to wage war on the cash cow that pays for your very existence, then I will laugh as your dull grey Fallout 3/Borderlands ripoff fails and your company goes under.

 

[RedDeadFred]

Don't buy a game that I want just so people can buy it used?
Ya no thanks. I buy all of my games new so this is really no big deal for me at all...

Do you sell your used games, because if you do then you are the person this directly affects the most. As I stated earlier, this will lower the prices people will be willing to pay for used game directly from a seller (the overall demand price will pretty much stay the same...it makes the buyer pay 2 different people). Sure, there will be some people not aware this is going on right now, but if this spreads you can pretty much knock off $10 from the price you sell games for. Buyers in the used game markets have pretty set prices, and don't buy until it reaches that price. They will factor in the extra money it takes to buy the content when they buy used games. The buying of used games won't change much. It just shifts where there money goes. This extra money does not suddenly increase what buyers of used games are willing to pay, but it does change how much someone can sell their used games for.

There might be a slight uptick in prices for the buyer since this will somewhat affect supply, but the demand curve will stay pretty static while the supply curve will only shift slightly (that will increase price a little bit, and of course lower the amount of used game sales by a small amount).

All this does is take a money right out of the pocket of the seller. Buyers of used games will not be hurt very much at all. It just makes them spend the same amount but send the money to two different entities.

I could see how this would annoy people who do but I don't sell my used games. I'd just rather enjoy the game every now and then than sell them for a fraction of what they're worth.

 

[ShotgunZombie]

Sir, this is pointless. Boycotting RAGE won't change a damn thing and do you know what? I agree with id Software. Why should you get to decide what they can and can't do with an intellectual property that they made? That they poured years of their lives into? And if you were planning on buying it used, money that they won't be earning back even though you bought the game anyway? Once you buy a used game you seize to be one of id's customers, you're one of Gamestop's.

Now I understand. Gaming, like many other hobbies, can be expensive and I definitely don't agree with what other games are trying like Always-On-DRM but this isn't as drastic as any of that. You are certainly welcome to skip the game if you feel that strongly about it or you could just wait until the game goes down in price and get it then.

I'd just rather enjoy the game every now and then than sell them for a fraction of what they're worth.

Also I agree with this person one hundred percent. Just thought I'd share that.

 

[Yopaz]

Why is everyone complaining about Gamestop ?
It is the same when you buy a game from afriend or eBay.

Because GameStop makes an industry of selling used games and on top of that they sell it for some pretty high prices. I've see new games on some stores cheaper than used on GameStop. Games on Demand on Xbox Live Arcade are sometimes cheaper than used games on GameStop. Personally I don't see that much of a difference, but I dislike GameStop because of their prices.

OT: I wont boycott Rage, then again I have no idea what the game is about and never had any plans to buy it so I guess I don't count...

I don't understand why people who dislike Gamestop and want the publishers to get more sales complain about the high prices at Gamestop. Doesn't that $5 gap between new and used make it more likely people will buy new? It sure works that way for me, I won't pay $17.99 for a $19.99 game or $54.99 for a $59.99 game.

So do you people want Gamestop to half the new price? Say if they were selling a $60 game for $30, would that be better for the publishers?

I don't complain about the high prices on games. I complain that a used game on GameStop (the kind that's pretty old) costs more used on GameStop than a new copy o the big electronic stores right next to it. Seems odd that something unopened and sealed should cost less than something that has clearly been used. Meaning GameStop earns more money from selling that single game than all the parties involved in selling a new game receives combined.

That only happens when a retail store is trying to clearance a game out. I remember buying Paper Mario Thousand Year Door at Target for $10 while it was higher at Gamestop. It's only because Target was trying to get rid of it.

Do you complain when Wal Mart has a lower price than KMart too or is this exclusive Gamestop hate?

I never said I hate it, I dislike it. I said that I can't understand why USED games cost less than NEW games, and this goes for quite new games. Such as Alan Wake USED for 50 on GameStop while it cost 35 on Games on Demand and 30 on an electronic store. Now, do you think Xbox Live was having a clearance sale because they didn't have space for it?
Now read this post rather than jsut quoting it. Does it make sense that USED games cost more than NEW games no matter what the reason is?

 

[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.

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.

Well, I hope you remember that when you get a used car and someone has removed the stereo because you didn't pay new car price.

Regardless, you're missing the point as to why this is stupid marketing. There were three ways to put this in order of how well people take it.

1) Buy a new copy of Rage and get extra sewer levels absolutely free. Power to the Players!

2) We have included the sewer levels as Day 1 DLC but, if you buy the game new, then you will get them for free.

3) If you don't buy the game new, then the sewer levels will be locked.

While each approach amounts to the same thing, the third statement is considerably less consumer-friendly than the first one. This is stupid marketing and that's why I think that, for the way they're marketing this, they deserve to collect a Darwin award.

Also, if you're like me and you rent before you buy, then these schemes are lowering the potential that I will buy. If you lock off the multiplayer, then I will judge it solely on the single player regardless of how good people say the multiplayer is. If you're selling Day 1 DLC, then I will judge the single player both on how much the game will actually cost and how well the single-player is without the DLC.

And, if you decide that the best way to promote your game is to wage war on the cash cow that pays for your very existence, then I will laugh as your dull grey Fallout 3/Borderlands ripoff fails and your company goes under.

If the seller says in the annoucement that the car has no stereo I won't tell him to put a stereo in because a new car comes with one.

I really hope people aren't used to day 1 DLC or any kind of bad DLC. While day 1 DLC affects people who buys new and used games,monetary wise only affects those that buy new games since it will make the game effectivelly cost 70-80 euros. So no I prefer this type of promotion if it will replace day 1 DLC.
I don't understand how you wage war on who pays for your existence,used copy money means 0 to the developer/publisher so it's pretty much the other way around. So yeah it's worse than piracy since a pirate most of the times won't buy the game anyway so they don't actually lose any money. While used sales means direct loss.

Yeah almost forgot,I agree cutting multiplayer for used copies is the better option,but what do you do when the game has no MP? I said cutting Single player might not be the best choise but something needs to be done and it has to be something that actually makes a difference if you want to buy it used. I'm actually open to anything, another option would be to not sale used copies at all for like 6 months,but could you enforce something like that? I doubt it.

 

[Feylynn]

I don't care if they only give one room with a bed and a chest to the used copy of Skyrim, I paid the $160 for the collectors preorder already I'm sure I'm getting the rest of the game's content.

When they start pulling content from full releases then that's where the bullshit comes in.

Less money = Less content.
Less developer support = Less consumer support.
Seems to make sense to me.

Buying used is more Retailer support, go ask them for the dlc.

 

[CheeseSammich]

Crono1973, Raso719 Thanks for speaking my mind about consumer ownership ( the bigger picture ) A shame I did not know about this content removal till this evening and I'll be refunding my pre-order from Gamestop because of it.

I own my software new or used,
CheeseSammich

 

[Epona]

Why is everyone complaining about Gamestop ?
It is the same when you buy a game from afriend or eBay.

Because GameStop makes an industry of selling used games and on top of that they sell it for some pretty high prices. I've see new games on some stores cheaper than used on GameStop. Games on Demand on Xbox Live Arcade are sometimes cheaper than used games on GameStop. Personally I don't see that much of a difference, but I dislike GameStop because of their prices.

OT: I wont boycott Rage, then again I have no idea what the game is about and never had any plans to buy it so I guess I don't count...

I don't understand why people who dislike Gamestop and want the publishers to get more sales complain about the high prices at Gamestop. Doesn't that $5 gap between new and used make it more likely people will buy new? It sure works that way for me, I won't pay $17.99 for a $19.99 game or $54.99 for a $59.99 game.

So do you people want Gamestop to half the new price? Say if they were selling a $60 game for $30, would that be better for the publishers?

I don't complain about the high prices on games. I complain that a used game on GameStop (the kind that's pretty old) costs more used on GameStop than a new copy o the big electronic stores right next to it. Seems odd that something unopened and sealed should cost less than something that has clearly been used. Meaning GameStop earns more money from selling that single game than all the parties involved in selling a new game receives combined.

That only happens when a retail store is trying to clearance a game out. I remember buying Paper Mario Thousand Year Door at Target for $10 while it was higher at Gamestop. It's only because Target was trying to get rid of it.

Do you complain when Wal Mart has a lower price than KMart too or is this exclusive Gamestop hate?

I never said I hate it, I dislike it. I said that I can't understand why USED games cost less than NEW games, and this goes for quite new games. Such as Alan Wake USED for 50 on GameStop while it cost 35 on Games on Demand and 30 on an electronic store. Now, do you think Xbox Live was having a clearance sale because they didn't have space for it?
Now read this post rather than jsut quoting it. Does it make sense that USED games cost more than NEW games no matter what the reason is?

It makes perfect sense. If an item is on sale (even on XLIVE) then it should be cheaper than everyone else and if lucky, it will be cheaper than a used copy. Finding one or two games that are on sale for a limited time (or until they are gone like Target did) is not a problem at all. It's an opportunity.

If a game went down in price permanently (like Twilight Princess did recently) then Gamestop would eventually catch up and drop their prices to compete. I am really not seeing the problem here.