Why online distribution will suck

[Fanta Grape]

snip

I never said anything directly opposed to selling products second hand. Ever. Maybe you should re-read my post?

I said it wasn't necessary for games to be sold second hand. Games specifically. Craigslist exists for the sole purpose of selling things that have been used. If I could buy a virtual chair that would never get damaged, cheaper than a normal one, works just as well and could be re-used over and over again in different houses with ease, then I'd get that chair.

I have no idea how you got "destroying the economy" out of "doesn't need to exist".

Snuggies don't need to exist but they're not killing anything. Except dignity.

 

[Phishfood]

I thought DRM was only there to prevent piracy and nothing else. I thought online passes and instant DLC were included to prevent second hand sales?

I'm thinking more things like one-use online activation, install limits etc. As the OP says - steam will not let you sell on a steam bought game ever. I suppose you could get one steam account per game and then sell the whole account though.

Either way, I think its TERRIBLE that games are the ONLY market that feel the need to quash second hand sales and piracy. Movie industries don't have watch limits on DVDs. They don't require you to be connected to them to watch DVDs. Movies don't have wierd little things that arbitrarily reduce the resale value to 0. Books don't self destruct after you read them 3 times or glue themselves to your bookshelf and your bookshelf alone.

 

[Thatguykalem]

I think the only people who are really sweating it regarding online distribution are console gamers. Most PC gamers have been using Steam for all our PC purchases for years. Personally, I've been using it since 2008, and it's seriously the greatest program. It's got a great interface, the downloads are always as quick as they can be, the Steam gaming server server is always quick, efficient and reliable, and, perhaps best of all, Valve are easily one of the most community-oriented developers/publishers out there, so if there's something wrong with Steam, it's fixed up in short order.

 

[RevRaptor]

I don't like steam, it feels too draconian, I don't really feel like I actually own steam games and I'd rather not rely on a net collection to access my games library. don't forget if you account gets corrupted steam won't raise one damn finger to help you and you will have nothing to show for all the money you spent. I've seen it happen.

 

[Miles000]

I have never sold or traded a game in my life. If i buy something, it's because I want it forever. Whether it's a hard copy or not.

The main problem I have with digital distribution, is the shitty internet I have to deal with here.
It takes me 2 days to download an 8gig game -_-

I'm going to assume from your title you are aussie like i am. now what i want to know is where are you that it takes 2 days to download 8gig? i'm in brisbane and while i agree Australian internet is crappy compared to the rest of the world, 2 days for 8gig is kinda awful. for something that size i'd leave the computer on overnight, and it would be done by morning. That's like 8 hours or less if it finished early. 2 days that's crazy.

The Redlands.
To be fair, I only have my computer on 12-14 hours a day. (when I want to download something that is)
Plus this house is still using it's original copper though. (house is 100 years old)... But still.

I want my fibre already!
Hurry up Labor!

 

[weker]

snip

What benefit do you feel from DRM? Is it something that adds to your experience or is it possibly just a stumbling block for you in the future? The online only DRMs are going to have an effect the first time your internet goes down for any length of time and how will that benefit you?

I feel there is a large benefit for the developers which has a back lash to the consumer.
It also helps games like Diablo 3 to help stop cheaters from breaking the games auction house.
There are some more subtle forms of DRM like Steam, which gives you a friends list as well as create sales and other things.
Not all DRM is good I just don't intend to be single minded and crucify all forms of it.

 

[Nu-Hir]

I'm thinking more things like one-use online activation, install limits etc. As the OP says - steam will not let you sell on a steam bought game ever. I suppose you could get one steam account per game and then sell the whole account though.

Except for the install limits thing, those are more gimmicks to promote buying new. Install limits are, and will always be, bullshit. I'm not one of those idiots who thinks that if you don't reformat your computer ever six days you're an idiot, but not being able to install something multiple times is stupid no matter what.

Either way, I think its TERRIBLE that games are the ONLY market that feel the need to quash second hand sales and piracy. Movie industries don't have watch limits on DVDs. They don't require you to be connected to them to watch DVDs.

Oh, how quickly people forget about DIVX! Either that, or I'm old.

 

[MadeinHell]

I never sold a single one of the games I own in a physical form.
Thus it doesn't bother me when people whine about loosing money when you try to resell stuff...

 

[Illithidae]

The only thing I've found myself worrying about in this thread is the idea of Steam dying out.

To be honest, I'd never thought about that. What the hell happens if the thing closes down? Will I lose all my games? I don't want to lose all my games! Solutions, people! D:

 

[honestdiscussioner]

You seem to think that the downfall of selling games will be a bad thing. I will argue it is a GOOD thing, because the game publishers and designers will actually be getting the money, instead of Gamestop hogging the profits.

Edit: And in my opinion I'd take what Jim says with a grain of salt. When I think of him I think "arrogant and over-rated intellectually". This is most evident in the Extra Consideration when he goes up against the likes of Moviebob or Yatzee or even more obviously against the Extra Credits guys when they were still here.

 

[thedoclc]

They die out and either move into the online distribution business, another sector of the gaming production, or simply start a new sort of business. I hate to sound entitled but when it comes to games, it's really all about the customer and the player. I don't think this will negatively effect the production of games and all it really does is kill off something that doesn't need to exist in the first place.

They die out and either move into the online distribution business, another sector of the gaming production, or simply start a new sort of business. I hate to sound entitled but when it comes to games, it's really all about the customer and the player. I don't think this will negatively effect the production of games and all it really does is kill off something that doesn't need to exist in the first place.

2nd hand sales don't need to exist? Really? REALLY? So things like Craigslist should be illegal? Used car dealerships hurt the car business? Garage sales are destroying the economy?

Really?

Your car comparison is massively flawed. Car manufacturers make a great deal of money, maybe even the majority, on servicing, parts and finance. A 2nd hand game is effectively the same as a new one, a 2nd hand car is considerably different to a new one.

Without 2nd hand game sales, publishers could charge as much as they wanted. $80 or $90 games wouldn't be out of the question. 2nd hand sales keep the market in check.

I still cannot see for the life of me how a used game is different from a used book, a used CD, or a used weight set.

You really don't understand economics do you. Companies CAN ONLY charge what people are willing to charge. Hell even at the £30-40 price point they have to lower over time because they know (well good companies do) that they have sold to everyone willing to pay that much.

You know what would happen if they rose prices, people would buy less games, and as a byproduct probably do other things like cinema,drinking,sports etc. The only reason that acitivision can get away with their price hike is because for this horrible second in time that is essentially THE game to own if you own a console (to casuals at least anyway).

Economists said people wouldn't keep buying as many games when prices went from $50 to $60. People ended up buying more. And with no other way to buy them but new, people will have to throw $80 or $90 for a game easy. If you a game that would sell 4 million copies at $60, you would likely sell 3 million copies at $80 if that's their only choice. What else can you do? Abandon gaming altogether?

*some economists. People are fallible, thats why we can't predict the weather.
And your people buying more at that price is only valid for one (very well publicised) series, if others followed suit they couldn't compete.

Sorry, Mr. Durden, but I want to see your source for the "Economists said" bit. Please find me a single economist who wrote a paper claiming that the demand for video games was so perfectly elastic that a 10 dollar shock would drive demand to zero. I would love to meet this idiot.

A history lesson, folks. Some SNES games cost $80 USD back in the 90's. TurboGrafix 16 games sold for about $250 a piece. NES games went for $50 USD - which adjusted from 1987 dollars to today's, is $99.71 according to the CPI Calculator. If you played a hundred games of Pac-Man at the arcade, you paid (in today's dollars) $50 to play video games you didn't even own!

Gaming survived.

Gaming is cheaper now than at any point in the past.

Edit: Come to think of it, you know what's an insane pricing strategy? $60 USD for all video games on consoles on release day.

Really?

On release day, the market-clearing price for CoD4 or ME2 is the same as the market-clearing price for Alone In the Dark or Kane and Lynch? This started in the Atari days, and all it did was leave consumers paying $20 (now, it would be about $47, using 1982 figures) for a game with no idea if they had just bought a gem like Adventure or a pile of crap like the port of Pac-Man. So, for $50, consumers just rolled the dice. Good, bad, simplistic and tiny or massive and cutting edge, they were all $20. Sound familiar? It's inane. Consumers were confused back then - those were the pre-internet days. Word of mouth about what was gold and what was crap was slow to spread. Now, today, we have faster access to information, but it's -still- overwhelming to new people -and- still just plain old weird. The same pricing scheme is in effect today.

Other products just aren't sold like this.

 

[Sectan]

I really feel more comfortable with a disc in my hand and that's all I need. Shit I have a Steam account, Windows Live account, Rockstar Games Social Club account, an EA account for BFBC2, and an account for Assassin's Creed 2. Now what happens when I forget one of these passwords? I'm Fucked. What happens if these companies happen to go out of business, or they just shut down these authentication servers? Same thing. I R Fucked. I paid for these games now let me play them!

 

[Googenstien]

I am old school - I like boxes, cd/dvd/bluray cases, instruction manuals, special editions and all that. Instead of a library of books I have a media library in my home with PC and console games in it that I love adding to and wish I never got rid of any game or system.

Online distribution takes away from all this and most of the times you don't even save any money buying games online vs in store or having it shipped to you. Some gamee types benefit from online distribution - MMOs can more easily support their users with expansions and addons this way.

But in the end I dont like Online Distribution because it gives you nothing physical to hold on to. In 5-10 years if you want to play that game again you cant walk to your library and install the game, you have to hope and pray that the 50 bucks you spent on a digital game still has a home for you to download and install the game again.

 

[thedoclc]

They die out and either move into the online distribution business, another sector of the gaming production, or simply start a new sort of business. I hate to sound entitled but when it comes to games, it's really all about the customer and the player. I don't think this will negatively effect the production of games and all it really does is kill off something that doesn't need to exist in the first place.

They die out and either move into the online distribution business, another sector of the gaming production, or simply start a new sort of business. I hate to sound entitled but when it comes to games, it's really all about the customer and the player. I don't think this will negatively effect the production of games and all it really does is kill off something that doesn't need to exist in the first place.

2nd hand sales don't need to exist? Really? REALLY? So things like Craigslist should be illegal? Used car dealerships hurt the car business? Garage sales are destroying the economy?

Really?

Your car comparison is massively flawed. Car manufacturers make a great deal of money, maybe even the majority, on servicing, parts and finance. A 2nd hand game is effectively the same as a new one, a 2nd hand car is considerably different to a new one.

Without 2nd hand game sales, publishers could charge as much as they wanted. $80 or $90 games wouldn't be out of the question. 2nd hand sales keep the market in check.

I still cannot see for the life of me how a used game is different from a used book, a used CD, or a used weight set.

You really don't understand economics do you. Companies CAN ONLY charge what people are willing to charge. Hell even at the £30-40 price point they have to lower over time because they know (well good companies do) that they have sold to everyone willing to pay that much.

You know what would happen if they rose prices, people would buy less games, and as a byproduct probably do other things like cinema,drinking,sports etc. The only reason that acitivision can get away with their price hike is because for this horrible second in time that is essentially THE game to own if you own a console (to casuals at least anyway).

Economists said people wouldn't keep buying as many games when prices went from $50 to $60. People ended up buying more. And with no other way to buy them but new, people will have to throw $80 or $90 for a game easy. If you a game that would sell 4 million copies at $60, you would likely sell 3 million copies at $80 if that's their only choice. What else can you do? Abandon gaming altogether?

*some economists". People are fallible, thats why we can't predict the weather.
And your people buying more at that price is only valid for one (very well publicised) series, if others followed suit they couldn't compete.

Sorry, Mr. Durden, but I want to see your source for the "Economists said" bit. Please find me a single economist who wrote a paper claiming that the demand for video games was so perfectly elastic that a 10 dollar shock would drive demand to zero. I would love to meet this idiot.

A history lesson, folks. Some SNES games cost $80 USD back in the 90's. TurboGrafix 16 games sold for about $250 a piece. NES games went for $50 USD - which adjusted from 1987 dollars to today's, is $99.71 according to the CPI Calculator. If you played a hundred games of Pac-Man at the arcade, you paid (in today's dollars) $50 to play video games you didn't even own!

Gaming survived.

Gaming is cheaper now than at any point in the past.

you quoted the wrong person, im on your side. The robert guy is the one you wanted ^^

It's a Fight Club reference. "His name is Robert Paulson." Tyler Durden?

Or did the forum send you a funny message? It seems finicky about that.

Though I'd still want to meet -any- economist who said that.

So I could point and laugh.

 

[k-ossuburb]

Jim's rant on digital distribution was stolen from Foamy anyway, and he put it a hell of a lot better.

 

[Michael Hirst]

I like the Steam system, at first I was opposed to it but over the years it has gained my trust and I haven't had any security issues on it, I also love the sales that frequently pop up allowing people who are on a tight budget to experience great games that they might not otherwise risk their money on, for example I bought Just Cause 2 for £5 quite some time ago and absolutely loved it.

There's also far more indie support on Steam than any other download platform, second place would probably be XBLA, but I love being given access to games like Super Meat Boy on the cheap. Also one of my favourite games last year was an Indie title technically (Amnesia the Dark Descent)

As for retailers and stuff, well they won't even stock PC games these days and if they do its very limited so they're killing themselves as much as Steam is, plus the whole point of a retail store is to make profit on the game without having any contribution to its creation.

My only big problem with the Steam platform is new games being so expensive even without the cost of retail to pay for, the games could easily sell at 10% less than ACTUAL retail price.

Meanwhile on the console front I very rarely buy a PS3 game at all now, games are expensive even a long time after release, I'm expected to believe £25 is a LOW price yet that's the release price on a lot of PC games and with more convenience and a better product on PC (You know becuase they play most games better) I buy everything that I can on PC (as for control schemes on console, I have a 360 pad and the whole sit on sofa to play thing, I can plug it into my HDTV). The PS3 is now a caddy for console exclusives (Dark Souls being top of the list right now)