Game People Calling: The Buy Once Manifesto
It?s time to stop buying the same games over and over.
Read Full Article
It?s time to stop buying the same games over and over.
Read Full Article
Game People Calling: The Buy Once Manifesto
- Thread starter Game People
- Start date
I see it differently. I see the re-release of retro games as a way for newer gamers to enjoy the classics they would have otherwise entirely missed out on.
I've mostly had this attitude for years. All the Virtual Console games I own are games that I never got the first time around.
As much as I'd love to, I will not join you. The hassle of hunting down working systems is waaay too much for me. I haven't come across a consistently ready-to-run NES since I was 10 or 11. And working Genesis's and SNES's are getting harder to come across as well according to my brother so I'm not going to bother with those either. And a couple of years ago my PS1 up and died on me so I figure grabbing working consoles from that generation will be tough to get now as well. So no, I'll stick with my PS2, PSP and current-gen systems when I get them.Game People Calling said:
I'll admit, one of the the main reasons why I even bother to purchase PS1 games on the Playstation Store is so I can play them on my PSP.
Having said that: Sony, where the hell is my goddamned Legend of Dragoon? I'd gladly pay double price for that game, c'mon!
Having said that: Sony, where the hell is my goddamned Legend of Dragoon? I'd gladly pay double price for that game, c'mon!
Game People said:
- One: Exposure of a new generation to classics released originally on unavailable hardware.
Two: Move from set-piece to portability.
Three: Digital distribution to counteract the exact problem posed in your article.
Four: Centralization of game libraries.
I imagine that all digitally distributed titles on Xbox Live/PSN/Virtual Console will be available for free re-download on the next generation of consoles. If not, then that would be the appropriate time to write an article like this.
My policy is similar, but a bit different - I only buy a new version when I can't use my old one anymore. Sure, I can buy Super Mario 64 for the DS. But I still have an N64 and the original game - the only reason I'd need to buy the DS version would be for the portability.
When my N64 (or my NES is likely to be sooner) finally dies, I'll look at upgrading. But there's no reason before then.
When my N64 (or my NES is likely to be sooner) finally dies, I'll look at upgrading. But there's no reason before then.
Roms work fine for me. I can play them on my laptop on the road or at work, or on my desktop at home.
I see the logic, though in practise I can't think of anyone personally who has got a game they missed out on, the only people I know who have bought these games are people who have/had the original. Then again, me and my friends could be the exception and not the rule.BillyShakes said:
I have absolutely no problem with the re-release of old titles, in fact I am quite pleased about it.
Gameboy, NES, SNES and PSX titles are not "Old junk worth 1/10th of the price" they are now classed as vintage and its extremely expensive to get a hold some of the more popular titles that everyone wants, and even more expensive to get the hard to find titles that no one had.
I was really lucky when I picked up an old NES with 40 games a few years back, I did a trade for repairing someones computer, and I picked up a few other consoles and titles when they were "Junk systems" as classed by Gamestop and in the cheap bin, before the 5-10 year crossover where they then become vintage and I would have to pay a fortune for them.
NES, Super Mario Brothers 3 going for $14 - $55 on e-bay, and that's with no buy now option, so who knows at what price it will end at, that's just one example.
Just try buying the final fantasy series on the PSX on the cheap...
Gameboy, NES, SNES and PSX titles are not "Old junk worth 1/10th of the price" they are now classed as vintage and its extremely expensive to get a hold some of the more popular titles that everyone wants, and even more expensive to get the hard to find titles that no one had.
I was really lucky when I picked up an old NES with 40 games a few years back, I did a trade for repairing someones computer, and I picked up a few other consoles and titles when they were "Junk systems" as classed by Gamestop and in the cheap bin, before the 5-10 year crossover where they then become vintage and I would have to pay a fortune for them.
NES, Super Mario Brothers 3 going for $14 - $55 on e-bay, and that's with no buy now option, so who knows at what price it will end at, that's just one example.
Just try buying the final fantasy series on the PSX on the cheap...
Sigh...
When I read the title of this article I got really excited... For a minute I thought you were going to make a stand against this new developer attitude of forcing users to "rent" games instead of buying them, on how DRM, games with half the content locked as DLC, P2P models, and lack of support are intruding themselves not only on gamers' computers but on their ownership of games as well...
... Till I started reading and noticed that you missed what would otherwise be a very interesting point in my opinion like a champ. I'm sorry but I can't sympathize with this... Of all the petty gripes and inconsequential things to complain about this seems like one of the most pointless. You're complaining about paying to replay a game you own on another console, on a new console... Which leads me to ask: a) Why are you buying a game you already have?; and b) why don't you just play it on the platform you have it for?
Yes, backwards compatibility is more convenient, but it's as far from essential as possible. As technologies advance they become increasingly different from it's predecessors, and money put into developing backwards compatibility is money not put into other ends (like processing power or stability, for instances), for what ultimately has no more return for the company than any other marketing technique.
In sum: I like my old games. That's why I keep them together with the old machines. If you get rid of their platforms that's your fault isn't it?
When I read the title of this article I got really excited... For a minute I thought you were going to make a stand against this new developer attitude of forcing users to "rent" games instead of buying them, on how DRM, games with half the content locked as DLC, P2P models, and lack of support are intruding themselves not only on gamers' computers but on their ownership of games as well...
... Till I started reading and noticed that you missed what would otherwise be a very interesting point in my opinion like a champ. I'm sorry but I can't sympathize with this... Of all the petty gripes and inconsequential things to complain about this seems like one of the most pointless. You're complaining about paying to replay a game you own on another console, on a new console... Which leads me to ask: a) Why are you buying a game you already have?; and b) why don't you just play it on the platform you have it for?
Yes, backwards compatibility is more convenient, but it's as far from essential as possible. As technologies advance they become increasingly different from it's predecessors, and money put into developing backwards compatibility is money not put into other ends (like processing power or stability, for instances), for what ultimately has no more return for the company than any other marketing technique.
In sum: I like my old games. That's why I keep them together with the old machines. If you get rid of their platforms that's your fault isn't it?
I generally agree with you. Indeed one of my major concerns as far as gaming goes is that I have a 60GB PS-3, suffer HD limitations with games that require installs, and pretty much couldn't upgrade if I wanted to because of my huge library of PSone and PS-2 games. Indeed if my PS-3 ever dies I'm not sure what I'll do since I don't have a PS-2 anymore.
Of course the problems with the idea of encouraging a boycott is generally that gamers don't boycott. To my knowlege I have yet to see one serious attempt.
Another issue of course is an ironic one, and that is that a lot of those re-released old games have a portion of the profits going towards the original creators/companies. One of the reasons why I think people buy old games, is that they feel by spending $6 here or there it shows what kinds of things they want. The idea is that by showing support for some of these titles or series it increases the chance of new games being made in a vein that they want.
There has been little proof of this working of course, but I think it's part of the logic you overlook.
It's also noteworthy that there has recently been a petition based on this attitude, where Sonic fans were being called to boycott buying the new Sonic titles, but instead purchuse the older ones to try and send a message that they want a return to the old style Sonic. Something that was mocked, but makes sense when you look at the overall mentality.
Also for those with a love for older games, it's noteworthy that they are hard to buy original copies of, and frankly stuff happens to discs and the like. I've bought a few PSone classics off PSN for example because my discs were lost, stolen, or destroyed despite the huge number of games I do have. Final Fantasy VII, & 8, Grandia, Silent Hill, and Dino Crisis, are titles I've bought over a period of months for that reason. Due to the great RPG camping apocolypse of my collection, I'm also hoping they release Vagrant Story, Chrono Cross, and Xenogears for lack of any other affordable way of replacing them. Consider you could replace 10 PSone games (as much as I hate digital) through a rerelease for the cost of buying one of those games via Ebay.
Just some thoughts. In spirit I agree with you, I would like to see a lot of these old titles become public domain/abandonware but frankly I'm not sure if even a boycott could achieve this (and it seems to be what your getting at).
Of course the problems with the idea of encouraging a boycott is generally that gamers don't boycott. To my knowlege I have yet to see one serious attempt.
Another issue of course is an ironic one, and that is that a lot of those re-released old games have a portion of the profits going towards the original creators/companies. One of the reasons why I think people buy old games, is that they feel by spending $6 here or there it shows what kinds of things they want. The idea is that by showing support for some of these titles or series it increases the chance of new games being made in a vein that they want.
There has been little proof of this working of course, but I think it's part of the logic you overlook.
It's also noteworthy that there has recently been a petition based on this attitude, where Sonic fans were being called to boycott buying the new Sonic titles, but instead purchuse the older ones to try and send a message that they want a return to the old style Sonic. Something that was mocked, but makes sense when you look at the overall mentality.
Also for those with a love for older games, it's noteworthy that they are hard to buy original copies of, and frankly stuff happens to discs and the like. I've bought a few PSone classics off PSN for example because my discs were lost, stolen, or destroyed despite the huge number of games I do have. Final Fantasy VII, & 8, Grandia, Silent Hill, and Dino Crisis, are titles I've bought over a period of months for that reason. Due to the great RPG camping apocolypse of my collection, I'm also hoping they release Vagrant Story, Chrono Cross, and Xenogears for lack of any other affordable way of replacing them. Consider you could replace 10 PSone games (as much as I hate digital) through a rerelease for the cost of buying one of those games via Ebay.
Just some thoughts. In spirit I agree with you, I would like to see a lot of these old titles become public domain/abandonware but frankly I'm not sure if even a boycott could achieve this (and it seems to be what your getting at).
