Poll: Boycott Rage
- Thread starter William Ossiss
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Some content is being pulled from the game, some content is developed specifically to be used as DLC and/or DRM. You don't which is which and neither do we so we guess. Your guess is as good or bad as anyone else's. Still baffled?Susan Arendt said:
Encouraging customers to buy new? It's a little more than that isn't it? It's more like punishing customers who don't buy new.
Me wanting to save money by buying used is reasonable. On the other hand, me wanting to save money by pirating the game would not be legal. My example is designed to show that me wanting to save money doesn't condone "by any means possible". Likewise, it is reasonable that publishers want to increase sales and make money but it is not reasonable to punish customers to do it as it will only lead to some people resorting to piracy to get the full game. No one would need to do that without this restriction.
Crono1973 said:
The wikipedia page was just so you could do some tangential reading. Try following some references.Crono1973 said:
Sure, I can call up Mr. Wallmart man and he'll say sell because that's the common word for it. However, have you ever tried to return a piece of software to Walmart and get your money back? Returns work for nearly everything but opened game software? Why is that? Because they can't legally resell it and why? Because of the EULA. I've been there. That's the reason I got. Software plays by its own rules. I can return my Xbox game, but not my computer software.
Wrong, it isn't because they would be breaking the law by reselling it. It's because it's more trouble than it's worth because the game has been rigged by the publishers.Inkidu said:
Wal Mart has to worry about selling a returned copy of a game because of the DRM, not because of the law.
Were you imprisoned/fined for re-selling a game? Law has nothing to do with it. Its a consumer-developer agreement that pretty much voids your right to demand "full product" if you bought used, because you are not, in the developers view, their consumer at all.Crono1973 said:
Im going to but this game new just to spite all you fools who think that depriving a studio of money is the best way to get them to give up hese business practices when the only reason they're doing them is to earn more money
My suggestion would be, if you want the game buy it, you only live once, don't let some busy bodies spouting sensationalist bullhit stop you
My suggestion would be, if you want the game buy it, you only live once, don't let some busy bodies spouting sensationalist bullhit stop you
A used car doesn't always lead to buying a piece of crap nor does buying a use game always lead to getting a 100% working item. I've often thought it was funny, however, that you can buy a used game for 5 bucks off the market price of a new game then you wind up paying 5 bucks for disk replacement because the disk might be scratched. However I see this more as evidence that many consumers are morons and less as a failing in the grand scheme of things.StBishop said:
You see sometimes you DON'T want to support a publisher but you might still want play the game and not go to federal prison. You might enjoy the game but you want to send a message to the developer that you hate their DRM. What this kinda of stunt does is make impossible to give that sort of feedback. Now people need to not buy the game at all to send in that capitalist vote that says "your product sucks you don't get me money".
Even still, buying a used game should be seen as an opportunity to gain valuable data. What games are bought used, why and when? Can it tell us anything about the market? Do people not like the current prices? Are they trying to send a message to publishers? Are certain games just not as popular as they were? Do people want more or less replayability? The problem is that companies are seeing used sales as the enemy period. They COULD use this information to increase the quality of their products to make them more desirable as a long term investment but since the industry is currently in the middle of a trend where is sees innovation as the enemy and where gamers have become complacent in playing the same 5 games every year... well, what do you think they'll do make changes to how games are made and what games are made or demonize used games to boost profit margins.
Even so, if companies are pissed about lost sales and still intend on not learning anything from the sales of used games at the very least they could not act like dicks about it and come to some sort of mutual understanding. Is might be cheaper to just add a few lines of programming that makes half of the game inaccessible with out the right password but then is making that half of the game really even worth it if you think that you need to make half of the game unplayable to boost sales? Is it really worth it? Honestly, I don't think they are that foolish. I think they know full well what they are doing and they're trying to act like a injured animal to gain sympathy when they're actually just being greedy pricks. It's not about lost sales it's about gaining more control over the industry. It's about justifying making games shorter and less innovative but still selling for 60 bucks a piece. It's about greed, nothing more and nothing less.
And even if these companies actually are on the verge of death from lost sales due to piracy and used games this isn't the right way to go about things. The consumer isn't the enemy and we need to stop being treated like we are. Many of us want to buy quality games and many people are willing to pay a little more if the extra quality is there but paying extra for what should be part of the package to begin with is just corporate bullying and robbery.
Also what's up with used cloths, and goodwill huh? Yeah, used cars are inferior but the shirts I got from them for 4 bucks a piece that usually sell for 20 bucks and up are in perfect condition. Are they exempt because they are cloths? Is goodwill evil for taking sales away from clothing manufactures? Or maybe I'm evil for being a thrift consumer. Yeah, us thrifty consumers always looking for deals and bargains will be the death of this country and it's economy. We need more brain dead sheep willing to pay out the ass for mediocre products if we're ever gonna get things back on track.
Did you just make this thread due to Jimquisition? Just curious.
OT: To be honest I was never going to buy Rage anyway due to lck of dedicated servers. It is a semi boycott that I won't buy games like FPS games unless they have dedicated servers and a quality thing as well. If games do do this and stuff like Super Street Fighter 4 are taking the piss to be honest. I mean this isn't even like a L4D 1 and 2 thing. It is the same game with a few extras(like destroying cars) and characters. Could have been added as DLC for free or a small amount for the purchasers of the original game.
OT: To be honest I was never going to buy Rage anyway due to lck of dedicated servers. It is a semi boycott that I won't buy games like FPS games unless they have dedicated servers and a quality thing as well. If games do do this and stuff like Super Street Fighter 4 are taking the piss to be honest. I mean this isn't even like a L4D 1 and 2 thing. It is the same game with a few extras(like destroying cars) and characters. Could have been added as DLC for free or a small amount for the purchasers of the original game.
Well I was gonna get it eventually, but this just encourages me more, to support developers putting out new IPs instead of whining that poor people don't get one missionCrono1973 said:
If you agree to thing you don't read it's just your problem. With every game before launching it/installing you have to click the button that says "I read and agree to the EULA". From that moment you enter an agreement with the developer and you are on their, private playground, where their rules apply. If they say that the license is not transferable and revocable they can revoke it the moment you resell the game. End of story.Crono1973 said:
I've actually had many conversations with developers on that very subject, so actually, I do know which is which. Also, I see the tactic as rewarding someone for buying new, you see it as punishing someone for buying used. Both are equally valid perspectives.Crono1973 said:
In Soviet Russia, poll boycotts you.William Ossiss said:
OT: Suffice to say, I find that not everyone is lucky with their money like me, so many people don't just WANT to buy used, but they would HAVE to in order to EVER see the game in question. I use to be there, so I know. Even still, take heart in the fact that said games will always be cracked open wide by the YARRR patrol.
But your friend also isn't getting a brand new car. He's not getting the exact same product you got, at the exact same quality. Cars, clothes, and other material goods depreciate. The right to sell them used is meant to allow the owner to recuperate some of the remaining value.Raso719 said:
Games don't depreciate. If I buy an old copy of some Mario game, Mario isn't older and slower. So someone selling a used game is able to offer the exact same product, but always at a lower price because they don't have to pay to manufacture or ship it. This forces game companies to compete with their own product, which simply can't be done.
This isn't like cars. When Ford tries to sell a new Contour SVT, they can say, "It's new." They may even be able to say, "It's new and it has a warranty for X miles or years." But if the used market for cars was like the one for games, this would be like CarStop saying, "We can sell you the exact same car, in the exact same condition, with all the exact same features, but at half the price."
All that game publishers are trying to do is ensure that their new product is more valuable than their used product. It has nothing to do with the quality of the product, so simply asking them to make "better games" accomplishes nothing--the quality of new and used games are effectively identical.
Special? No. "Supreme control?" Of course not. But it is different. And that does mean they should be allowed to try different ways to encourage new sales, by ensuring that a new product is more valuable than a used product. Just like with every tangible good ever sold.
You assume the only possible reason people sell games is that they were "bad." I've finished some really great games. And while they were great, I figured I probably wouldn't play through them again. So I sold/traded them. It says nothing about the quality of the game. In fact, if the game were such poor quality, I doubt people would be buying it used, either, so it wouldn't be an issue.
How is the customer being "screwed," exactly? And I'm not asking rhetorically. I really want to know, from your perspective, how this "screws over" the customer.
You say they're treated like a "lesser party." They are. If you buy a game used, you're not a customer of the publisher. You're a customer of the guy you bought the used game from. The publisher has no reason to treat you like a customer, because they have earned no money from you... so what do they have to lose? Your "business?"
Why should you get 100% of a new product, when you're not paying 100% of the new price? That's not asking to be treated as an equal party. That's asking for new customers to be treated like a "lesser party." You want them to pay full price for a game, so that you can then pay less for the exact same game. No depreciation whatsoever.
More on cars: If you go to a used car lot, and they're charging almost new prices, would you buy from them? Or would you go somewhere charging used prices for used cars? Gamestop buys up these used copies, and then sells them for just five dollars less than new. If anyone is "cheating" you, it's them--they could sell you that copy at half price and still be making out like bandits.
1) Do you read every EULA, every word?Keava said:
2) If you don't agree to the terms, what are you options? Remember, there is no returning an opened game.
The EULA is one-sided and powerless. You waste your time reading it, I won't because in the end the words don't matter, the DRM does.
