Critical Miss: #32

[Atmos Duality]

So essentially they're making consumers feel like criminals for using their money smartly in a crappy economy?

It's a stroke of genius; they're encouraging their customers to do the arguing for them.
I've seen viral arguments started (probably by corporate plants*) based on nonsensical points, with backed up by evidence amounting to little more than fake statistics that nobody can even come close to verifying as accurate...genius.

One fact blown out of proportion. I'm not saying any given party is "innocent" (except the customer, since they only have one choice to make "Buy/Don't Buy".)

Consider the contradiction they present: these Publishers (who own the entire industry) report massive profits year after year after year, turn around and complain about how their customers are ruining them.

 

[Gigaguy64]

One thing that confuses me is why are they complaining about the second-hand market all of a sudden? They didn't do this shit a year ago, why now?

Well, if anything, I'd probably say it's because they're greedy.

DING DING DING!
A Winner is YOU!

That's the main reason i can come up with anyway...

OT:I like the Comic, and i actually liked the Analogy.

 

[Nerf Ninja]

The problem is that publishers and developers are villainizing the customers when it's not their fault that they can get the same game slightly cheaper.

They have a problem but it's not with us, unfortunately though they aren't going to go after the stores selling the games because they'll simply refuse to stock any new product at all, and just sell used instead.

 

[duchaked]

yeah I can see that happening with cars hahaa..

and what's with all that nathan fillion...er, love? loolll

 

[Aptspire]

you get a -10 on your sanity count for witnessing Penny's art XD
good series imo

 

[deleted_scifidownbeat]

DELETED

 

[Yeager942]

Best comic yet! Keep up the good work.

 

[camazotz]

Here's my issue. If a game is indeed USED, doesn't that imply that someone has USED it? As in, gone to a store, given the money necessary to purchase the game, then later given that game to someone else? So the game we are talking about has already been purchased, the publisher has already made money on that copy of the game. So now....what, they want to be paid twice? Don't really get it.

No, you are not crazy, and you are understanding this. The key problem with any argument that the publishers are being scammed out of profits in used sales is simple: they have already made a profit on that disk that was sold new, then resold (usually for credit) back to the retailer, who then makes more money off of it with a second sale.

The publisher is in agony that they made their cut of the initial $60, but are not getting their secondary cut that they have decided is rightfully theirs. It is not. If I produce a work of art and sell it to an individual for $500, and that individual later resells the same piece (which has purely aesthetic value, just like games, and so does not devalue in the same manner as a product that deteriorates from wear...barring the physial media of disks) for $1000 I as arist am not entitled to a cut of the resale; the original purchase insured the product changed hands; it's now the right of the new owner to retain or resell that object.

The publishers are attempting to infringe on our basic ownership rights as consumers because they are interested in making more than their share of $60 off of each disk sold. This is wrong, and I am saddened to see how many people are willing to give their rights away as consumers. The only consolation I have is that I am a PC gamer these days, and therefore pirates have already screwed up the second-hand PC game market rather handily, so I buy new and usually get games cheaper than on consoles anyway (especially with awesome Steam sales). I've given up my rights to resell in exchange for the convenience of an online service that makes access to my games collections fairly easy to manage. It sucks....and its a shame to see so many console owners produly marching to the drumbeats of corporatism. Good luck with that.

 

[rabidmidget]

Did anyone else realise that Penny's office looks like an insane asylum cell?

 

[SideburnsPuppy]

Getting really sick of the little black annotation boxes. They're fine every now and again, but now you've got one almost every panel, and it's getting tiresome.

 

[RobCoxxy]

Great comic, very well put.

 

[Galad]

Why can't we see what Penny's drawing? You do realise it's really easy to pique one's curiosity with a description like that, don't you? >.<

 

[Jaded Scribe]

I usually enjoy Critical Miss, but this week I think it missed it's mark.

Comparing features or included DLC to the brakes in a car is ridiculous. Most games can be perfectly enjoyed without these features. Yes, for many games (like many shooters and sports games) it's more enjoyable with an online multiplayer environment, but it is not necessary. The DLC may be nice and fun, but (if the developer does it correctly, such as with DragonAge's included DLC) you can play through the game just fine without it.

Brakes are an absolutely vital system, providing an important safety and control mechanic.

NO game, no matter how restricted they make buying it used, will EVER have anything remotely comparable to a system that, without it, you and others would be at severe risk of bodily injury or death.

I get the jibe at Penny Arcade, but that's taking it to an absurd extreme. What they were saying was if you buy a Used car, would you be surprised if the upholstery was worn and not perfect as-new? That the mechanical pieces would require more care and repair in a sooner time frame than if you bought new car?

As for how it's just "greedy publishers"... Seriously? The publishers get their payday before the games even hit the shelves. While most (I'm sure all) have it in their contracts to get additional percentage of profits, those sales are also how the developers make their money.

The developers. The guys and gals that worked 60, 70, 80 hours a week on your game. Who went through the hell of crunch time. Who put in the time and effort to make the game you're enjoying.

They deserve to be well-paid. If they aren't, many will look for employment elsewhere. The software industry as a whole is fairly well-paid. They deserve their $80k/yr salaries (going off industry averages), their benefits, and their bonuses.

If they make a game that is good enough for you to go buy, why shouldn't they get a cut of that money? If they sell a million copies of a game, but only half of those were bought new, they are losing half the money they deserve.

How is that reasonable?

Yes, you have every right to buy and sell used games. But why do you think you should get the same functionality, features and access as those who pay full price?

I have yet to see a single argument to the above question that's not entitled whining. If you "don't pay more than you have to" than why should the developers provide more than they have to?

 

[Tirnor]

Is it wrong that I'm much more interested in trying to figure out what is being used as Capt. Tightpant's "docking bay" this week than about the rest of the used car, used game, reused analogy stuff?

I've ALMOST got a guess from the positioning of the stick figures in the rough draft.

 

[Gindil]

One thing that confuses me is why are they complaining about the second-hand market all of a sudden? They didn't do this shit a year ago, why now?

Gamestop's profits came out about 9 months ago. The birth of that information caused the rest of the gaming industry to salivate at the fact that they feel entitled to be in that market.

 

[tamerman]

i <3 Penny ^_^


what can i say? i have a thing for crazy girls o.0

 

[Plurralbles]

Best Critical Miss in a while. : D I love it.

 

[The Wooster]

Is it wrong that I'm much more interested in trying to figure out what is being used as Capt. Tightpant's "docking bay" this week than about the rest of the used car, used game, reused analogy stuff?

Heh. That's pretty much exactly the point I was trying to make.

 

[mikespoff]

Ashley's being dim. The analogy is fine.

 

[Eponet]

Instead they make you pay for access to the online system, something that requires constant upkeep, much like a service contract for the car that includes oil changes as well as fixing broken problems.

I can't imagine why the multiplayer would require constant upkeep. I'm still able to play Baldur's Gate 2 online, and I doubt that Bioware or Black Isle are still paying to retain that.