Okay. I retract that comment, though not entirely... I'm pretty sure there are people who aren't aware (probably don't care either) to whom their money is going to.TestECull said:The answer isn't lack of knowledge. The answer is going to Gamestop instead of eBay, where you'll get the game for half of what it retails for. Often with DLC.Ragsnstitches said:-Please, also explain to me why someone would buy a 2nd hand AAA game for 2 euro/5 Dollars less then the New release over the new release that actually goes back into the industry rather then the retailer. The answer is really simple, lack of knowledge. Why invest in the distributor only at the expense of the supplier... logically that makes no sense at all.
Used game sales are how I got into the Fallout series. I bought FO3, Op: Anchorage, Pitt and Broken Steel on eBay for 20 bucks. Not a cent of that sale went to Bethesda, and I never would have bothered if I had only new games available as FO3 was way too expensive an unknown to justify the money on. However, I liked the game so much that when Point Lookout and Mothership Zeta came out I bought them right up. There's 20 bucks Bethesda would have never made had I not bought FO3 used. They turned out quite good as well, so when New Vegas was up for pre-order I snapped that shit right up. 49.99 into Bethesda's coffers, again because I bought FO3 used. Then, of course, I bought all of the DLC for New Vegas save Courier's Stash(Mods gave me better starting gear than any of the official stuff), which sent another 45 bucks Bethesda's way.
tl;dr: Bethesda made $115USD off of me because I bought Fallout 3 used, a $115 they never would have seen otherwise.
You also seem to support DLC (am I right?). DLC is the extra limb that balances the losses to piracy and 2nd hand sales (no matter how large/small) and that is why I support DLC. I don't hate 2nd hand games, I have bought them when on a budget and I completely agree with you.
I'm saying a lot of things in anger and forget that most people on this site have a brain, so I apologise.
Okay I agree with the point on not having money, I have been(and currently am) there.Athinira said:Because they don't have the money, that's why.Ragsnstitches said:I'm sorry, but what? You are saying that people are showing a disinterest in AAA titles? Really? Explain 2nd hand sales then (of AAA titles, since indie titles can't be sold 2nd hand), explain the successes of CoD MP and it's DLC and the likes of Gears of War, Halo, Battlefield, Mass Effect, Mario, Zelda, Batman: AC, GTA, Red Dead, L.A Noir, Fallout 3/NV, The Elder Scrolls, Half Life, Starcraft, World of Warcraft, Warhammer Online, Fifa (insert number here) NBA (insert number here) NFL (number), Gran Turismo etc. etc. etc.
-Please, also explain to me why someone would buy a 2nd hand AAA game for 2 euro/5 Dollars less then the New release over the new release that actually goes back into the industry rather then the retailer. The answer is really simple, lack of knowledge. Why invest in the distributor only at the expense of the supplier... logically that makes no sense at all.
If you had actually understood my post, i very clearly explained that customers have a limited amount of disposable cash available. I didn't say people were disinterested in AAA titles. I said there just wasn't a demand for it. In economics, "demand" is NOT the same as "interest". I'm sure there is plenty of people who are interested in owning a speed boat that they can impress chicks with. That doesn't mean they can afford one.
Bottom line is that the game industry is pumping so many money into making big-title games, that they have to sell those games very expensively. And when all you give the consumer is $50-$60 games, then it's obvious they can't afford them all, and it makes it harder for you to break even because everyone else and their dog is also spitting out AAA titles. Result: The consumer spends some of his money on some cheaper games (indie games, possibly old AAA titles that are now on steam sales for 25% of their original cost), and gets your brand-new $60 AAA title through piracy or resale.
So what I'm essentially saying is that if the game industry hopes to make more of a profit, they need to start spending so many money on making the games. Yes in some ways this sucks for us, the consumers, too, because games on a cheaper budget are often less technically impressive. But at the end of the day, we simply can't afford all of the AAA titles, so if the companies want to make more money, they need to lower their expenses, because we (the consumers) certainly aren't going to increase our income out of the blue, and to us, the goal is to get as many games as possible for as cheap a price as possible. Sure, some AAA titles will float, and you mentioned a lot of them (CoD, Battlefield etc.) but for every one of them, there is another AAA title that just managed to break even or was a financial fiasco. When the customer is out of money to buy, the only way to increase your turnover is to decrease your expenses.
I'm also too tired right now to go into too much detail
but...
Games haven't changed in price in 10-15 years (as far back as I recall). PC games have always been 30~ euro here, give or take and console games have always been 40-50 euro give or take(At least for the PS2 generation, I forget the cost of cartridges on N64 or early genesis, since I wasn't buying my own games but getting them as gifts).
What has changed is the prevalence of used game sales.
Costs for the consumers hasn't changed, but more options have been added (DLC, Microtransactions, Subscriptions etc.) for the player that also cost money. They are the things that contribute to the industry... second hand sales do not, though granted, may encourage other investments like the aforementioned DLC and Microtransactions.
Okay, I'll be honest, I can't keep this debate up all night and I'll probably forget about in the morning. I agree that as a right to the consumer, 2nd hand sales shouldn't be restricted (it is legitimate). But you have to agree, DLC and the other means for making money is still rough around the edges. The recent statistics shown on this site that says only 50~% of gamers actually purcahse dlc (I think it's lower) shows that DLC isn't a saving grace. Couple with these statistics today, make for a worrying trend...
It can also be said, that the shortage of DLC buyers is due to some stigma that all DLC are bad, which isn't true. Yes there is bad DLC, yes there are Labels out there abusing the costs of DLC against their actual worth... but there are plenty to say on the contrary.
This is our hobby, our interest and to some, our future. You can't ignore the issues been raised until they are seen through to be shown as false or true.