Game People Calling: The Buy Once Manifesto
- Thread starter Game People
- Start date
This is exactly the way I see it. Re-releases are clearly targeted at people who eitherBillyShakes said:
a) Missed out on the game when it was initially out
b) Had the game and for some reason it is now unplayable, due to breakage or selling
If you happen to already own said retro game on it's original platform, why are you even buying the re-release? You are not now, and never were, the target market of the re-release campaign.
Have you tried just getting a new HD? I upgraded the drive in my PS3, and now have loads of memory (got a deal on a 1TB) as well as retained backwards compatibility.Therumancer said:
I think you may have skirted the real point a bit much, and everyone thinks this article is about saving money now. It's not.
It's about console giants selling old games as-is and making a huge profit for it, rather than focusing on new IP or expanded content. I'll stand with you on this, I'm tired of seeing pages and pages of Virtual Console titles and rehashes on the Wii coming out every month, and yet barely anything new is being released that is worth buying.
I'll keep my DS and GBA games, I won't buy a DSi for the downloads. I'll keep my Xbox and PS2.
It's about console giants selling old games as-is and making a huge profit for it, rather than focusing on new IP or expanded content. I'll stand with you on this, I'm tired of seeing pages and pages of Virtual Console titles and rehashes on the Wii coming out every month, and yet barely anything new is being released that is worth buying.
I'll keep my DS and GBA games, I won't buy a DSi for the downloads. I'll keep my Xbox and PS2.
The real problem is the different formats between manufacturers. If I buy a DVD, it works on ANY DVD player. Why aren't game consoles the same? Money, thats why. I have a NES, SNES, Genesis, N64, Gamecube, Ps2, Xbox, Xbox360, and Ps3 hooked up right now. Its ridiculous! The only thing I play on Ps3 is rachet and clank. The only thing I play on Xbox360 is rockband and MW2. It's stupid to force me to buy a new console for one game. If a third party could develop games for a universal console the market would be tripled! Then more risky games could be developed, instead of re-releasing an old, but guaranteed money maker.
You're welcome to do that. I, on the other hand, will do everything in my power to consolidate both my games and the necessary consoles to play them on.Sporky111 said:
I own 3 current game systems: DSi, Wii and PC. When I go on a trip, I take the DSi and my laptop with me, and not much more. If I had the opportunity to get more games for my DSi (such as old game boy and NES games) I'd jump on it in a heartbeat.
The point I, and I think a fair number of others, am trying to raise is: Re-releases of old games are NOT a bad thing. There's a website, www.gog.com, which is devoted COMPLETELY to re-releases of old PC games, and it's an amazing thing. Honestly, I wish more companies would go to the effort, because I'm not keeping around a Win XP machine to play a couple old games any more than I would keep a GBA around to play my Game Boy Color games.
By re-purchasing old games I can:
1. Consolidate my collection
2. Express continued interest in the series by voting with my wallet. I'm not going to buy some re-mastered piece of crap, but if it's a good game I feel is neglected I'll buy it and hope enough others do the same for the publisher to realize "hey, there might be money in re-visiting this..."
One other thing: You and the author of the article are both making the assumption that "if these resources weren't devoted to modernizing old games, we could have more fun new games!". While that may be theoretically true in a general sense, the disparity in resources required to produce a brand-new, current-gen game versus the resources required to update an old game is HUGE. So we're not talking a 1:1 ratio of "new games we could be playing" vs. "old games they tossed on VC", but rather something like 1:100 or beyond.
Five: Providing incentive for the publisher to re-visit the game.SavingPrincess said:
This is an important one to me... there are a lot of neglected games and series out there which I'd love to see modernized. If a publisher tosses one of these games on VC, I grab it because of the personal benefit and also because I hope that if enough people do the same, they might see it as financially worthwhile to do a bit of fan service.
I missed out on X-Com and used Steam to get a copy of it. I also missed out on the full version of Interstate '76 and used Good Old Games to get it. So people do go for getting classics in order to experience them. Hell I never actually owned a NES during its heydey, only had played at friends' houses. So the NES I own now is actually one i've had for maybe 10 years or so.Demon ID said:
Buying games on the original hardware is awesome... when you can actually find it at a decent price. If I want to play FF3 on a SNES, one, I have to find a working SNES, and two, I have to find a copy of FF3 that won't cost me an arm and a leg. Which is virtually impossible where I live, so of course I'd have to order things online.
Then there's the question of "Where exactly am I going to put all of this hardware once I get it?" Right now, I live in a small apartment where space is at a premium. I simply don't have anywhere to setup a devoted games room that could house a wall of systems.
There's always emulators on the computer, but if I can legally own the games, I would much rather go that route. So I guess that I'm the market that these things are pointed at. Someone who wants to just keep around a minimum of hardware, but still play the old classics. And be willing to pay for those classics. And frankly, I get more access to games than I ever did while growing up. So games that I read about in nintendo power or gamepro that I could NEVER find here, I can now just download in about 2 seconds and play on my latest and greatest system.
I guess what I'm saying is, I don't understand what the big deal is. It keeps old games exposed. They don't need new features if they were good games. I could give a rats ass about new artwork. If I wanted something shiny, I'd play one of my new games. What I want to play is the -original- game, and this gives me the chance to do so.
Then there's the question of "Where exactly am I going to put all of this hardware once I get it?" Right now, I live in a small apartment where space is at a premium. I simply don't have anywhere to setup a devoted games room that could house a wall of systems.
There's always emulators on the computer, but if I can legally own the games, I would much rather go that route. So I guess that I'm the market that these things are pointed at. Someone who wants to just keep around a minimum of hardware, but still play the old classics. And be willing to pay for those classics. And frankly, I get more access to games than I ever did while growing up. So games that I read about in nintendo power or gamepro that I could NEVER find here, I can now just download in about 2 seconds and play on my latest and greatest system.
I guess what I'm saying is, I don't understand what the big deal is. It keeps old games exposed. They don't need new features if they were good games. I could give a rats ass about new artwork. If I wanted something shiny, I'd play one of my new games. What I want to play is the -original- game, and this gives me the chance to do so.
This is actually a difficult problem to solve-
On the one hand, how long can these companies reasonably support old hardware? Can Nintendo really afford to keep selling SNES just for the few people who need to replace an old one to play their old games?
On the other hand, are we going to have to re-buy our game library every generation or two? We had to do it when DVDs replaced VHS tapes, although VHS tapes degrade over time anyway. Same with music.
Disc media, by being easier to make backwards compatible, helps, but how many systems can we expect the next round of consoles to emulate?
Personally, I wouldn't mind dropping $200 in a couple of generations for a system that plays my old Xbox and 360 games while the Xbox 1440 is only backwards compatible with Xbox 720 games.
I think it's an important problem to solve, though, because if video games are going to become a respected medium, there needs to be support for it's back catalog.
On the one hand, how long can these companies reasonably support old hardware? Can Nintendo really afford to keep selling SNES just for the few people who need to replace an old one to play their old games?
On the other hand, are we going to have to re-buy our game library every generation or two? We had to do it when DVDs replaced VHS tapes, although VHS tapes degrade over time anyway. Same with music.
Disc media, by being easier to make backwards compatible, helps, but how many systems can we expect the next round of consoles to emulate?
Personally, I wouldn't mind dropping $200 in a couple of generations for a system that plays my old Xbox and 360 games while the Xbox 1440 is only backwards compatible with Xbox 720 games.
I think it's an important problem to solve, though, because if video games are going to become a respected medium, there needs to be support for it's back catalog.
Invalid comparison. Betamax tapes didn't work on VHS players. Blu-ray discs don't work on DVD players, either. Sure, it's not cheap for us - it's not cheap for the publishers, or the developers, for that matter - but what we have is three companies who've invested heavily in producing platforms with their own distinct architecture, and a divided market. There is no simple step towards a single-console system. Your point, I'm afraid, isn't as good as you think it is.gsf1200 said:
And yeah, it is because of money. Money also happens to be the reason we have a multinational industry that produces games at all. What of it? What were you implying, exactly?
I'm WAAAAY ahead of you, Game People. I still have my old SNES which I can hook-up at any time. The only SNES games I buy via virtual console are ones that I was never able to find on cart. I also still have my old PS-X despite having gotten a PS2... and I'd still have that too if it wasn't one of the earlier models that turn into $300 paperweights... :/ On that note, I even still have my Gamecube despite my Wii having phenomenal backwards compatibility. I still have my old GBA, and even my Gameboy Color. I might even have a couple others packed away that I'm not thinking off-hand.
If someone isn't savvy enough to hold onto their old games, and/or isn't willing to put the effort into trying to track down the originals, that's why things like Virtual Console are there.
If someone isn't savvy enough to hold onto their old games, and/or isn't willing to put the effort into trying to track down the originals, that's why things like Virtual Console are there.
This is precisely the reason I like things like Virtual Console and GoG.com. Being a late starter in the realms of video games I missed a heck of a lot of brilliant video games simple because I wasn't alive or old enough to know how to or particularly want to play video games. These sorts of things allow me to play all the games I hear other people talking about, or I read about that I never had a chance to play first time round, without needing to resort to less than legal methods!BillyShakes said:
I personally am glad that companies are digitally distributing their old games. The PlayStation Store's PS1 Classics section is a godsend in my opinion, though I do disapprove of the lack of backwards compatibility that is fast becoming a trend. I was too young to enjoy games like Resident Evil 2 and Metal Gear Solid when they first came out. Having an opportunity to get a hold of them now is excellent, and if anything I wish there were more classics available for purchase.
Thank you. I can understand the argument for portability, but when it comes to old gen games (NES, SNES, Genesis, etcetera) I'll just load up emulators on my PSP. If companies really want me to invest in a game I already own or could get easily for free, they better be providing some extra content. I recently purchased Call of Duty Classic and was quite disappointed with the utter lack of anything, ANYTHING, extra. It didn't even have standard controller layout options. It just smacks of laziness.Sporky111 said:
While I agree with the argument that new comers will enjoy these repackages, that does nothing the counter the point that they could touch them up. The only effect it would have is to further expand the market.
For the record, GoG and Steam are exceptions, because of the non-resellability of PC games.
I concur. But still, the best option for a gamer at the moment to get good old games on the cheap, is to buy them when they become last gen. (which is what I'm doing with my xbox. Near mint copy of Capcom Vs SNK 2 EO for £2? BINGO!! XD), and older than that, then the price starts to hike up again!Myrph said:
I just wished companies like Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo would be more like Valve.
It couldn't hurt them to put their virtual console stuff on offer once in a while, who knows you might get enough interest, to warrant a new title in that series.
Game consoles work the same way. You can play NES games on any NES console. PS1 games will play on any PS1 console, etc. Try playing a Beta tape on your VHS or DVD unit.gsf1200 said:
The thing is most people don't keep their consoles forever. If thay want to play an old game they either need to have the original console or have it ported to the console they already have. Since I don't get rid of anything, I haven't needed to re-buy any games. I do buy updated classic when the new version is cheaper than getting the original version. I didn't re-buy REZ or Marvel vs Capcom 2 because I already have the original Dreamcast versions. Yes, they aren't in HD (I do have the vga cable though), but I least I own them. And not have to depend on MS to make sure that I'll be able to access them.