J Tyran said:
US Law is in the United States, plus it doesn't apply as you do not buy a game. You bought a license for some software and "signed" an agreement about how that software can be used.
Yes, it's a US law. And European countries even go so far as to offer the right to digital resale. Are you really going to try and play the jurisdiction game to pretend you have some semblence of validity here?
Further, if companies want to be software and service providers, they need to stop playing it both ways. I think that's why they (and you) fear Gamestop so much. They know any solid decision there requires them to square off against one element or the other.
I notice you avoided mentioning the pre order bonuses, I like how you dont try to deny it either.
Well, it's a stupid point, to be fair. There have been digital deals for the same since the dawn of digital, so pretending this is a retail thing is ridiculous. So I didn't address it. If you really want me to stomp on this, though, incentives have been a long-standing part of commerce, something that well predates video games and is utterly pointless to bring up here.
Are you satisfied, or should I educate you some more?
The aggresive marketing of used games over new has been pretty well documented, its not been proven by a large sample size of stores being randomly chosen and then carefully recording which games they try to sell you but its still well documented. Not publicly anyway, the publishers might have done it.
Your conspiracy theories don't matter. It's either been documented or it hasn't. If it's been documented, then the evidence is readily available,
which you yourself are saying is not the case as there's no public...What's the word? Oh yeah,
documentation. Even in that case, it doesn't change the irrelevance of this point I already mentioned: industries pull the same thing without a Gamestop. If you an remove Gamestop from the equation and have the same results, Gamestop is not the problem.
Look, I see this confuses you, so let me give you a demonstrative example. Say you have a solution of orange juice and bleach. Drinking the solution will kill you. Do you complain about the orange juice, a superfluous element in the lethal cocktail, or do you just stop drinking bleach? Right now, you're blaming the orange juice; it may have some health concerns in its own right, but it isn't the reason people get sick when they consumer Draino-Made brand fruit cleaner.
Honestly, should Gamestop die, they will find another scapegoat. Probably piracy. Piracy will magically go up by the same numbers they attributed to gamestop.
Your best argument is that "others do it so the damage the retailers are causing doesnt exist", erm OK.
Hopefully now that you've been properly educated, you will rephrase this false statement and profess the lack of understanding that led to it.
You know, that show Fappy said I should make is starting to sound good. Maybe I'll consult him on it.