Rage Cuts Single-Player When You Buy It Used

[Piflik]

But where is the difference to the Stone Prisoner or other first day DLC, that is released for free when you buy a game new? There was never such backlash until now. I doubt that there is another reason for that than this attention grabbing article.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

But where is the difference to the Stone Prisoner or other first day DLC, that is released for free when you buy a game new? There was never such backlash until now. I doubt that there is another reason for that than this attention grabbing article.

Those were never advertised, at least to my knowledge, as a way to "fight" used sales. The word "fight" envokes the thought of Us versus Them, and the need to take sides. Bioware got away with it because they didn't make a big deal out of it.

But hells, I'm sleepy. G'night all.

 

[NotAPie]

I get why they're doing this, doesn't mean I like it.

 

[Sieggy]

Dear Bethesda, are you indirectly asking me to pirate the single player with all extra features with the bonuses? Because it's totally is a better option than your sucker punch.

On a side note, I bet no one in Bethesda ever had watched the piracy episode on Extra Credits.

 

[loc978]

Never have I been more glad of hating modern shooter mechanics. Regenerating health in a post-apocalyptic shooter with vehicle sections and faux-RPG mechanics? Where do I sign up?

*ahem*

anyway, yeah, kind of a dick move. If I were interested in the game, I'd buy it new, but late... for $20 or less.

 

[dcdude171]

i dont get this , i dont get why used games are any differnet then used movies, movies don't cut put parts cause you by them used thats tarded

 

[MorphingDragon]

Do you know what's more... wrong than any DLC? The Pre-Order price for RAGE. Look at in on steam... DO IT NAO D:

 

[Sixcess]

Dear Bethesda, are you indirectly asking me to pirate the single player with all extra features with the bonuses? Because it's totally is a better option than your sucker punch.

No, they're asking you to pay full price for a full game.

Pirate it if you will, but let's not pretend that you're being forced to do so, or that you're somehow morally right to do so because of this.

 

[Jake Martinez]

Next time I want to buy a used Mercedes, I'll call official Mercedes dealership to ask them if they're gonna cut my brakes if I don't give them a piece of that action.

This is fuckin' stupid. Used games market should be no different than any other market for used stuff. This kind of behavior can only increase piracy. There should be a law against this.

Trust me, if Mercedes could keep you from buying a used one, they would.

 

[Nonny]

So many people here don't get that buying a game used gives the people behind the game exactly no money. If you're going to buy the game used, you could just as well pirate it, it matters not to anyone except the retailers, who can easily avoid losing money by desisting with their bullshit used games sale system.

Don't support the retail stores that do this. Buy it new.

 

[Thoric485]

Second-hand sales plague both the music and movie industries, both of which are now smaller than the gaming industry.

Yet such idiotic precautions exist in neither.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Next time I want to buy a used Mercedes, I'll call official Mercedes dealership to ask them if they're gonna cut my brakes if I don't give them a piece of that action.

This is fuckin' stupid. Stop punishing gamers already. This kind of behavior can only increase piracy.

Or you could, you know, buy the game new and actually support the developer? Rather than the, "Fuck you, I want to buy your game at a cheaper price, and not let any of the money go back to you, and you're a piece of shit for wanting to make a profit off of the sale of one of your games." attitude you've got going now.

I don't get why people are all up in arms about this. RAGE is going to be a massive game by the way all of the news stories seem to say about it, if it's a good game it'll be worth the money to buy it new. If you really want to save money and buy it used, then you're paying for a lesser experience. I see no issue in this.

You really want to blame somebody: Blame GameStop for not giving a portion of their 100% gain on a used game being sold back to the developers.

Uhm, used games are used because they have already been bought, so I'm sure the devs are not losing out. Especially since used games allow people who can't afford 50-70 bucks a pop for a game to actually play them, who then maybe pop for the next project at full price when they can afford to.

In my opinion, it's all "wah wah we want more monies for making games!".

That logic makes no sense. If a games developer makes a game and it will have to sell, say 10,000 copies for example to break even and only 3,000 copies where sold to people, they played and beat the game and all those copies kept shuffling from person to person. over 10,000 people could have played and enjoyed the game but the company still loses more than they made. if 10 people can pass around 1 copy the developer loses big time. also obviously you don't know how games development works.

I never said I did, but I do know that most big devs, like VALVe and Rockstar, make literally tons of money. That's why they put out so many great games time after time, because they focus on their craft, their art, and they put love into it, and want people to play it more than they want to get rich off of it. These are AAA titles, not Wii shovelware. People notice this, of course, and loyalty is earned, thus garnering future full price purchases.

But that's beside the point. So, let me get this straight... you think that game bought at full retail will be recycled through at least 10 other people? I highly doubt that. And even if they did, I hate to break it to you, but your logic is flawed. Let's look aback at older games, during the silver age of gaming. Take the NES for example. Tons of bootleg games. Tons of re-selling of old carts at garage sales, yard sales, between friends, etc. Did any of these factors hurt Nintendo? Oh, look... no.

This is greed, pure and simple. They want to squeeze out every single dime they can, because (and I hate to break it to you) videogames are 90% business, 10% creative love now for most devs. Few companies make games they love and are proud of anymore, like the ones I mentioned earlier. Others, like Blizzard, (modern) Capcom and others, are more content to shovel out what they can, as fast as they can, to get as much money as they can, often times only to turn around and re-released DLC as a whole new game (See; the Street Fighter and current MegaMan X Battlenet, etc. series'.)

It's not about crafting an experience anymore. It's about crafting money. And with the tech today, they can essentially keep charging you for BS, at the threat of cutting off access to their game because you didn't pay full retail.

And here's another issue I have. All those games you see on the shelf at your game store? Yeah, those are already BOUGHT AND PAID FOR by the vendor. So, yeah. I'm not seeing how buying pre-owned games 'hurts' the dev.

 

[El Luck]

So it's perfectly fine......because you say so? That's the reason? Why did no one tell me this before. It's so simple.
Okay well can you just declare Pirating shorter games to be absolutely fine (plain and simple) as well? That would save me a lot of money.

Sarcasm aside, I don't see any difference between your justification and pirates saying "I wasn't going to buy it anyway, since it's so short. So I dl'd it"

I'll reply to you in the same way anyone would reply to them: Just DON'T play Games you aren't willing/able to buy! (because they are guaranteed to have a short SP exp) You say you genuinely buy RPGs because they have a lot of value for money? So just STICK to those. Why do you HAVE to steal from FPS developers at all? If it's not worth your money don't buy it. Plain and Simple.

Allow me to try to explain the difference.

One is 100% legal. The other is not.

One is protected under consumer rights law. The other is not.

One results in one copy of the game for every purchace. The other can produce thousands.

Also, "steal" is a very harsh, and, quite untrue word.

None of that matters to me.

Allow me to make this clear: I'm expressly thinking from the point of view of the developers and publishers. I know that's a naive way to go about it. I know that's at odds with the point of view of the average gamer......but why should it be?

Publishers help developers to craft these amazing works of interactive artwork...... and Gamers are willing to just exploit a loophole in the legal system to play these games without giving THEM a single cent? (Of course then they log into forums to laud it. How duplicitous is that?) That's what matters to them. The fact that people are playing their games (which took millions of dollars and 2-4 whole years to make) without giving THEM any money at all, for creating the game. To THEM......how is it different from Piracy?

Sure the government says it's fine......but what stake does the government have in this? They are not being affected by this in any way, shape or form; The game makers ARE. Why should they fight Used game sales any less than they do Piracy? Why should they not fight it with any means available to them?

I can see where your coming from from your POV, but i'll go from the gamers POV. The thing is, why the should the gamer be punished for looking around for a good deal?

I'm not a console gamer any more, I gave up around the PS3 hacking debacle and even then I brought very few games because there were none that interested me, but if I was looking around for a game and saw one going for around £45-£50 and the same game which was used going for around £20-£40 (yeah the price ranges are a bit stupid but meh) ...Yeah I'd go with the used game

Why on earth should I be punished for looking for a good deal when its clearly the game retailer that's at fault? they sell it for cheaper (or slightly cheaper depending on the age of the game)

Surely it would be smarter for the publishers and developers that have so much of an issue with used game sales to go after the retailers than come up with these stupid ways to demonise a gamer who's only crime is spending their money the way they want?

Well thats my take on it anyway.

 

[ImprovizoR]

Except it doesn't, they're cutting some part of the single player out. Like Mass Effect 2 you didn't get a character and the story connecting it. It's far from a game breaking or game destroying. This is basically the equivalent of getting regular seats vs leather seats.

It doesn't change the overall experience, and it's your choice to buy used and you know you'll get less. You get what you pay for as the saying goes and I'd say this applies.

And again, you're not giving id software a dime with this buy, why would they want to give you more when it cost time and money to make the game and you wont even give them a cent?

Fine then. Side with the corporations. See how far that will get you as a consumer. You and people like you are the reason they get away with shit like this.

And how game destroying it is, is a perspective thing. You think it's not, I think it is.

 

[Nonny]

And here's another issue I have. All those games you see on the shelf at your game store? Yeah, those are already BOUGHT AND PAID FOR by the vendor. So, yeah. I'm not seeing how buying pre-owned games 'hurts' the dev.

In a world where people did not buy used games so much, those games on the shelves would be sold, and the retailer would in all likelyhood buy in more wouldn't you think?

And your logic that "game companies do ok even though they don't get money from a lot of people" makes absolutely no sense. You can't say used game sales didn't hurt Nintendo back in the day. Yes, Nintendo did great EVEN THOUGH people stole and copied. If you like that company, I can't see how you could rationalise not giving them any money for their hard work just because they will "be fine" even if you don't.

It's just bullshit

 

[Torrasque]

I actually spoke to an Econ professor who was also a gamer about this. His solution? Cut spending, sell games for less, give people a bounus for buying new, and make fewer games. If a game requires over one million people to buy it new just to break even, something wrong is going on. Secondly, $60 is a bit high of an asking price for almost all new games. Price acorindly. Thirdly, if people got a discount on future DLC when they bought new, not only would that increase people buying new, it would also encourage them to hold on to the disk for future content, and fewer used copies would be floating around. It doesn't have to be much. Making 4 DLC packs 7.50 if you bought new (and, say $10 if you bought used) would still net you $30 at the end. Finally, if pubishers made fewer games, they wouldn't over-saturate the public. Again, I'm simplyfing these points.

Holy shit that would actually be amazing.
Rather than slap the hands of people who buy it used, it would be infinitely better to butter up the people who buy it new.
Not only are you giving to the group of people who are diehard fans, interested in it right away, and willing to pay for it at extra cost, but you make people less likely to buy it used because they want extra shinies.
And if theres one thing I know about gamers, its that they like shinies.

He had a lot of ideas, though they mostly boiled down to this: use the carrot, not the stick

He pointed out how simply modders can made items like weapons and armor for a game like Fallout 3 or New Vegas. His idea? Create a "item of the month club" that you join if you buy the game new and enter a code. It entitles you to one year of a free, zany and fun item every month. The point he stressed is that these would have to feel fun and rewarding to use, without breaking gameplay.

Or another idea he had was allow people who buy new to get, in addition, an extended demo of another game by the publisher (ie, a demo longer then the one open to the general public). Not only does that make you feel special, but it opens up the posibility of them buying that game as well.

All people appreciate carrots instead of sticks.
Its an amazingly simple concept if you really think about it, I can't think of a single person that would rather have a beating than a cookie.
I just wish the gaming industry could understand that their fans will appreciate them more, and be more faithful, if they get shinies, rather than be punished for trying to save a buck.

 

[raklin]

Next time I want to buy a used Mercedes, I'll call official Mercedes dealership to ask them if they're gonna cut my brakes if I don't give them a piece of that action.

This is fuckin' stupid. Stop punishing gamers already. This kind of behavior can only increase piracy.

Or you could, you know, buy the game new and actually support the developer? Rather than the, "Fuck you, I want to buy your game at a cheaper price, and not let any of the money go back to you, and you're a piece of shit for wanting to make a profit off of the sale of one of your games." attitude you've got going now.

I don't get why people are all up in arms about this. RAGE is going to be a massive game by the way all of the news stories seem to say about it, if it's a good game it'll be worth the money to buy it new. If you really want to save money and buy it used, then you're paying for a lesser experience. I see no issue in this.

You really want to blame somebody: Blame GameStop for not giving a portion of their 100% gain on a used game being sold back to the developers.

No offense intended, but I suspect you're one of the fortunate gamers who can usually find that $60 bucks to spend on a game. Myself, and many others, on the other hand, have to save money for weeks, if not months, to be able to afford a shiney new game.

For those of us barely making it month to month, scurrying to pay rent and keep the power on, used games is often times the only legal avenue we have to get our favorite newest release.

So no, sir, it has nothing at ALL do with with the supposed "Fuck you, I want to buy your game at a cheaper price, and not let any of the money go back to you, and you're a piece of shit for wanting to make a profit off of the sale of one of your games" attitude you accused us poorer gamers of having. I would love to be able to throw my money at Bioware and what-have-you, but unless i'd rather not eat that month, I have to give it to game stop.

So please stop being a self-righteous jackass, please, and try to understand that not everyone has the means to buy shrink-wrapped copies all the time.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

And here's another issue I have. All those games you see on the shelf at your game store? Yeah, those are already BOUGHT AND PAID FOR by the vendor. So, yeah. I'm not seeing how buying pre-owned games 'hurts' the dev.

In a world where people did not buy used games so much, those games on the shelves would be sold, and the retailer would in all likelyhood buy in more wouldn't you think?

And your logic that "game companies do ok even though they don't get money from a lot of people" makes absolutely no sense. You can't say used game sales didn't hurt Nintendo back in the day. Yes, Nintendo did great EVEN THOUGH people stole and copied. If you like that company, I can't see how you could rationalise not giving them any money for their hard work just because they will "be fine" even if you don't.

It's just bullshit

Did you miss the part where I said that if they earn a reputation for good games, and not shitty "Wah wah we want moniiez!" DRM, that more people actually buy their next outings at full price? Hell, I often like to rent games before I buy them if they seem iffy. Or does that turn developers destitute, too?

It's cool, though. I can be selective with my reading, too. I'm gonna imagine all you said was "DERP".

 

[TelHybrid]

The sad thing is I would be completely against this, but I completely understand on the contrary.

Game stores don't provide any of the money from used game sales to the devs and publishers, so I don't blame ID, I blame the game retailers. It's entirely their fault.