Xiroh86 said:
Sansha said:
Xiroh86 said:
Sansha said:
I support the idea of cracking down on used game sales, here's why:
Look at other medias like movies, books and music.
Movies - the film-makers get a fat sack of cash from a studio to make their film, and when it's done it's licensed to theaters and makes money there. It's then licensed to DVD/Blu-Ray and makes money there, also rental stores. It's THEN licensed to pay-per-view blockbuster TV channels, and online services such as NetFlix. It's THEN licensed to free TV.
So effectively the movie has been sold five times to five different mediums - used DVD sales are rampant but that doesn't matter because the movie is still producing cash all across the entire world.
Books - cheap to write, cheap to produce, sell for a huge markup from that production cost. If the writer is successful, they can then cash in on merchandise, signings, even movie deals if they do well enough (Harry Potter), and the process goes up to my first point.
Music - a little more complicated because the RIAA can fuck off, but some artists make ridiculous amounts of money off their music in more ways than album sales. Merchandise and shows are huge, plus endorsements and advertisements - how a musician makes their money is limited by their imagination and personality. Taylor Swift made $80,000,000 in the past two years, plus $100,000,000 revenue (not all hers) from her recent world tour - and almost none of that was from album sales.
Games - developer has capital, makes game, sends to stores and online services like Steam.
That's it. End of profit.
They don't get their money anywhere else except in a few rare exceptions. There aren't shows, there's very few merchandising options, and they need that profit to be able to have jobs next month and to create new content.
This is why games are made over and over, like CoD and EA Sports, and why publishers ruin games. They want it guaranteed to sell as much as possible because new copies are all the income they get, while used game sales and piracy hurt their bottom line and thus jack up prices.
As a gamer and also retail businessman, I say I don't care about stores. The evolution of technology is making stores and physical copies obsolete, when you can download games directly to your PC and Xbox through services like Steam and the Live Marketplace.
Who wants to go out and give a store a cut of the price of a game when you can have it ready to play by leaving your PC on overnight downloading as many titles as you want? Plus doing that, you get automatic updates, instant DLC, tech support and instant access to that game's fan community.
The only situation in which I'd support buying a used game is if there literally are no new copies on the shelves or anywhere else to buy because they simply don't stock it anymore. You shouldn't be entitled to a cheaper product just because you can't afford a new one.
tl;dr - used game sales hurt game developers that are irrelevant to other medias, down with stores and up with Steam.
Ok. Here is were you have some basic things wrong.
1) Technology, as it stands now, is nowhere near ready for a complete switch over to digital distribution. This is based on the fact that we need larger HDD/SSD, and a more consistent internet speed, not to mention that some places actually don't have internet access.
2) To get back to the topic of the thread: if you say that someone should have to pay a cut of used sales to the devs (which you imply), you are saying that, even after you purchase the individual disc/cartridge, the devs still own it, there fore if you sell it to a friend or reseller, you need to give a portion, let's be fair and say 50%, because that is the minimum of what the devs/publishers would want, to them, and if you refused they would have every right to take you to court and sue you. I feel that that is unfair.
Now, don't think that I feel that devs shouldn't get paid a fair wage, in fact I think that they should be treated just as fair as anyone else. I'm just saying that the banning of used games is unethical, because it strips basic consumer rights away.
Oh and one more thing on the digital download portion of your input: if we go digital completely a large number of people lose their jobs. Not just retailers, but also the factory workers, and print shops that help in the manufacture of the physical media. In this economy, any job losses, anywhere in the world, is bad.
1) I don't accept that. It's about damn time technology should allow us to adapt. It's not acceptable, to me, that internet services around the world are still inadequate while South Korea and Sweden are proving that high-speed consistent internet is available. I don't accept that the internet isn't available everywhere when satellite internet is already a viable and wide-spread technology. Such service and development is limited solely by lazy or ignorant service providing companies who don't want to bother expanding.
2) I don't think developers should be entitled to a cut of a used game sale. That's like saying a studio should get a tiny slice of every DVD rental or bargain-bin resale, or you should flip an author a dollar for every book you dump on someone else in a garage sale.
What I'm saying is if a developer/publisher wants to make used game resales as difficult as possible, I support their endeavors. They're entitled to do whatever they want with their product, and if you don't like it, vote with your wallet. It's really that simple, a black and white issue. If you don't like it, don't buy it.
Unless, of course, you really want to play this game enough to betray your own values, which we all see time and time again. Threatening to boycott a game has no effect on a developer. Following through with that does. See the EVE Online's Jita Riots and nuclear forum meltdown over Incarna last year.
And the same thing was said about job loss and economic collapse when factories became more and more automated. The best course of action? Become the guys who build and maintain the machines. There'll also be jobs maintaining the servers and getting the digital information effectively from the game developer to the supplier to the customer. Advertisements, website updates, constructing the offices and server facilities to house the digital distributors, the list goes on.
Adaption and evolution. You can't get comfortable in a "We've always done it this way, it works perfectly well." and allow progress to stagnate.
The point you make about evolving and adapting is a very well put, however, to tackle the jobs loss, yes, a number of people became technicians for the machines, but even more people flat out lost their jobs. Unemployment in the United States is 9 or 10 percent. That doesn't sound really high but that equals out to around 31 million people. You also can't expect people to go back to school for an additional 2+ years, before they can get back into the job market. That is unreasonable to expect that. You also have to realize that they may never get that position is there is someone younger and willing to work for less.
As for the internet problems, you need look no farther than the US military. When Resident Evil 5: Gold Edition was released a number of service men and women purchased it thinking that the bonus DLC was on the disc. Now for PS3 the DLC was, but for 360 they gave you MS Points to download them. They weren't able to because of the internet capabilities. Also, the college I went to had great internet infrastructure, but the way it was structured restricted gaming online. A number of colleges are like this, and seeing as college students are among the core demographic for video games, having to download games would make it impossible for them to keep up with the latest games, causing sales to drop. I also personally know a number of gamers that live in households that just flatout don't have/want, or can't afford internet access.
You also have to consider that if we switch to a completely digital only media, you have little to no customer service, DRM so outrageous it isn't even funny, and prices will not drop, you really end up paying more for less.
Now back to the actual thread topic. Well its good to hear you don't support the devs/pubs getting a cut of resales profits, but I have to say that I personally don't support the efforts the ban used games. They may technically have the right to, but in the long run it very well could lead the a hike in game prices. If publishers succeed in getting this initiative through they could, and most likely will, decide that since games can really only be played if bought new they can charge what they want for games, with no real restrictions. This isn't just bad for consumers, but also for the industry as a whole.
I understand and respect your point of view ("adapt and evolve") but I feel that we can't forget this point of view: "just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Try saying that to Steve Jobs and his crew.
Innovation, technological development and a world run by bright people who believe in both are, to me, the ways forward. Progress for progress's sake.
South Korea and Sweden have fantastic internet services, and have seen a resulting economic and social boom from that. It frustrates me to the point of wanting to learn Korean that other countries remain wedged in the idea that it's not important or not worth paying for. Bollocks to that. I have the best internet in the country and the only online games I can play are on Australian servers, and my ping is around 200-300. Not fucking acceptable when the technology easily exists to send gigabytes of data so much faster.
Yes, I just want to play games, but I also want my iTunes to download a song before I can un-click the download button, and NetFlix movies before I can make a sandwich. I know they can do it, but they... won't. This kind of technology has more practical applications than entertainment - what about a doctor who, can from many miles away, diagnose and advise treatment on a patient using a real-time 3D image with no latency? We can send images and video, sure, but why *not* improve on that? What about a university professor who can send an entire year's coursework to a student or colleague in a blink? "Nah I gotta leave my PC on all night so it can upload. You can download it in the morning." - not good enough.
You can't stagnate and stay conservative, comfortable in the world you know, when there's so much more technology to develop and economic opportunities to create.
A great leap forward may not be the best idea because you can't shatter the world's systems too quickly, but think about what we could establish for our next generation.
Steve Jobs and Apple said "Fuck the system." and pushed out some amazing technologies. MP3 players, stronger and more managable laptops, iPads and iPhones. Such innovation should be encouraged, not discouraged because 'well we don't have to, we have factories to staff!' or because what we have now is 'fine'.
Well, to me, it's not, and I'm looking into the business of improving it for myself.
Your better world might be 'Joe has a job'. Mine is when I can hang out with people across the world using HD holograms like I can forget they're not actually there - with a ping of zero.
