Rage Cuts Single-Player When You Buy It Used

[Stickfigure]

This whole thing is obnoxious, but first let me establish my position:

Used games are a necessary piece of the gaming economy.

Why? Several reasons:

1. Brick-and-Mortar.

While they are sliding towards obsolescence, dedicated games retailers like Gamestop are still a fairly damned important factor in the sale of video games, video game systems, accessories, etc. And the margins for the sale of such things are RAZOR thin for the retailers. Most of the profit is hogged by the publishers, and then a share is given to the developers, and the scraps are given to the retailers. In order to maintain a store that can dedicate itself to the sale of a vast array of games not easily found elsewhere, the store would either A) have to inflate the price to receive a higher margin, B) manage to sell out of almost all stock every month. The developers/publishers have offered no alternative to this arrangement, and as such the retailers come up with a more innovative, completely legal avenue of profit: used game sales. Had the publishers considered finding a better way to distribute the wealth, they would not now be reaping the fruits they'd sewn. If you want a store that contains a fair volume of hard-to-find games, then you need to understand that that store needs its profits from somewhere.

2. Out-of-Print

Not all good games sell well. Not all good games stay in print forever, be it for legal purposes or simply age. If you want to find King's Field, or Stella Deus, or God Hand, or even Dark Cloud 2, you'll likely have to resort to getting it used, because the publishers are unlikely to reprint a few extra copies because of your demands. And bear in mind: used game sales don't exist soley in your local Gamestop, whatever you may think of them or their employeess: it exists in any scenario where a person who just doesn't play that game anymore and finds it wasteful to just throw the disk away might want to sell it to someone who does.

3. Profit!

You know what, let's be straight here: not everyone is convinced of a game's mandate of heaven simply by virtue of it's awesome advertising campaign and the fact that there's a roman numeral attached to the end. And those ten-minute demos, as it turns out, do not necessarily give a person a feel for how the game is going to be. Look at Arkham Asylum's combat simulator which toltally left out, you know, BEING BATMAN. Or how Brutal Legend lead everyone to believe they were playing a heavy-metal beat-em-up, and not Tim Schaefer's madcap fever dream of what an RTS is. In these cases, a used game is a good way to dip one's toes in the water without subsequently drowning.

Consider this, now: how many people who play Call of Duty now played since the first one? Not very many, I'd imagine. And how much of this terrifyingly large playerbase is made up of people who's first Call of Duty was a new copy? Probably a larger number, but I'm betting again not a staggering volume. But how many of these people will be queueing up in line to play this game on release day? Probably a very dazzling number(the ones who aren't relying on getting it for christmas, that is). All in all, a net gain for a developer, especially since many of their loyal players might not have tried at all if it weren't for their test swim through the dreaded waters of Online FPS?



Ultimately, I understand why developers are desperate to make more copies sell, but criminalizing their potential fans by restricting their access until they give immediate pay where it's due is short-sighted at best and an invitation to go to the competitors at worst.

 

[Active Schizophrenic]

Actually I am a fan of any kind of DRM unless it is absolutely ridiculous (resident evil 3ds) because I feel I deserve some sort of honour for buying games new and not pirating because I do neither I think piracy is wrong and used games do hurt the industry and I really do think the only example of crappy DRM is the resident evil situation but what pisses me off is when you need an internet connection to play the single player of a game I did buy new.

That's stupid, I want to feel like I deserve a honor for buying a game new so I support DRM that treats me like I stole the game (Also this is about used game sales not pirating so your off bat there man). Let me tell you about Atlus a company who is no where as big as EA or Id or Nintendo but has a devoted fan base. For most games they release they have a first shipment bonus, where the first shipment you get a free bonus with your new game (and you don't have to pre-order or anything). Atlus is known for short print runs so these bonus are pretty much saying buy our game new and you get a nice gift cause odds are it's the only shipment we will make. Here is some of the games I bought from Atlus with the gifts for buying it new and the game cost the same as any other retail game (i.e. it wasn't 10 bucks extra for a limited edition).

Shin Megami Tensievil Summoner 2 (A limited edition box with a Jack Frost doll dressed as the main hero; Price 40 bucks when it came out which is the same price as most new PS2 games around that same time).

Radiant Histora(A Mini soundtrack; Price 35 bucks)

Inzuna: Legend of the Unemployed Ninja 2 (A mini poster; Price I believe 30 bucks)

Luminous Arc 2 (A mini soundtrack; Price 30 bucks)

Shin Megami Tensiersona 4 (A mini soundtrack (Or full I haven't opened it yet; Price 40 bucks)

Shin Megami Tensiersona (A full two disc soundtrack; Price 30 bucks)

Shin Megami Tensi: Strange Journey (A mini soundtrack, which was not burned right and they replaced for free; Price 35 bucks).

That's the games I have from them that I can remember a bonus for buying it new off the top of my head. And NISA does the same thing: Mana Kahmia 2 (I think the first one also buy I didn't get it new cause I couldn't find it) had a soundtrack (full I believe) and a poster, Ar Tonelico 2 and 3 came with a artbook and OST, and Atelier Rorona came witha hard cover artbook. The funny thing is, these games where not pre-orders they were thanks for buying the game new at the 50/60 dollar price they were at. And Disgaea 4 will have a few different versions in stores, a 50 dollar box with no goodies and a 60 dollar box with a figure. So your getting the game by itself for 10 bucks off and the figure for 10 bucks more, hey that's a honor right there.

In other words, your "honor" for buying a game new is just a way for publishers to screw you out of content and own your games, they don't give you anything when it's some online code you have to use.

Well see you tell me that DRM is screwing me out of content even though I have never been screwed out of content by buying new if YOU have I am sorry. but yes I can feel honour for buying new games when I have not been cheated before. Which seems to say that you are taking my personal opinion and applying it to everybody which isn't true, everybody plays games differently I feel that I have not been cheated by buying used games through their DRM because I don't play games on consoles that often and their is no used games market on PC and as for piracy which is rampant on the PC i do see it as stealing so I don't do it. And yes I do know the games developer Atlus and I have played their games they are just not my type of games and I don't play consoles all that much. Also thank for turning a intelligent response into a douche move. (also honour is spelled with a u in canada if the parenthesis were meant to correct that if not then it does not matter).

I didn't ask you if Atlus is your kind of game company or not (I could care less who your company of choice is), I was saying how Atlus is willing to give goodies to people for buying a game new and not charge extra. They are willing to give you extra's and not charged the special edition price, not give you a code saying you can have a in game thing for buying it new and only new. And how much is that honor worth it to you knowing that DRM is cracked by a single .exe file? And I haven't been screwed by DRM period (I even owned used PC games and have used guild wars account from a friend and they all play like I bought them myself). I like how just avoid the whole Atlus giving out all those nice freebies by injecting your own personal feelings for the companies games and not what they do to sell said games. And you're welcome I could care less where you're from and I wasn't correcting you at all, I put them in QUOTES for emphasis.

If you buy it used, you ain't supporting the developers, just like the pirates do. Don't see anything wrong with it, as long as this new little feature doesn't affect the legit buyers.

Heres my issue on that statement, if its such an issue, why don't they legally stop allowing people to buy it used. Its basically the worst type of DRM because I still bought the game, therefore, I should play its content as a whole, instead of a FUCKING game that locks all that away if I didn't buy it new.


Used games are not piracy. Piracy is basically to where NO money is spent, regardless of anything. With a used game, some still goes back to the publisher, but way less then what they should be getting.

Basically, publishers and Dev's in some cases are throwing hissie fits to fight an un-winnable war, it don't matter HOW hard you try, you can't sue every god damn pirater in the world, let alone fine ones who still bought your game. This is the literal reason consoles will die, because gamers from there will hop to PC because it became a first come, first serve type deal. I can only get 90% of the games content unless I get it new, on launch. As stupid as that sounds alone, it will happen, its inevitable, why? Because gamers are still taking this shit up the ass like a champ.

Guys, we really don't have to stand for this. Just get a gaming PC, and Steam or Origin, then you can buy whatever game you could ever want. DRM free.

....Steam is a form of DRM fyi. And now all console games use this stupid method, I agree with you gamers of consoles (including me) need to stop buying games that use any system like this. And if that means I miss out on mass effect 3 on my xbox...then so be it, I won't let my love of a series out weigh my basic principle rights to resale something legally. Also you kinda sound like you want people to just ditch consoles like a PC fan boy would say (not calling you one that's just how it came off to me, if that offended you well I won't say sorry but I'm not trying to call you one).

I'm pointing out that if this shit continues, it would be a better alternative then sticking with consoles. And no, I'm not telling people to ditch consoles, but if you want a game, upgrade your system and get the game... Also, Steam is not a type of DRM, since you don't actually get a different experience then someone who bought the game on launch since PC games are never used, there is no Date of Release Material. I like to stress up above, I'm just saying that it would be a better solution then sticking too consoles draconian DRM! You can watch Extra Credits episode titled Consoles are the new Coin Op for a better explanation. I'm glad you agreed with me. Don't call me a PC fan boy, just PC gamer. I don't call people Console fan boys, I call them Console Gamers.
In my original post, I do point out that its just a good alternative compared to dealing with the DRM, because publishers are throwing hissy fits, and only doing it to get what they want, ignore it, and it will go away.

I didn't call you PC fanboy one I said you came off as one, and Steam is a form of DRM dude a lot of games use Steamworks as a form of DRM. If you can sit there and say it isn't then wow, cause I talked to guys who LOVE steam and they say it's DRM. And it shouldn't matter what someone plays they are gamers, I can't respect a "gamer" who has to have a name for someone based on his choice of play. What am I a PC gamer I own a good number of PC games (at least 180), or am I a console gamer cause I own multiple consoles, or even a handheld gamer. No I am a gamer end of story.

I wasn't saying Atlus had anything to do with this by not arguing with your stance on extra goodies I was implying that that are a good move on Atlus's part but I think if people wouldn't just try and manipulate the industry to save a couple bucks on games they wouldn't have to do that and RAGE is just trying to make some money for their hard work and would rather not have people take advantage of that. Also when is said "(also honour is spelled with a u in canada if the parenthesis were meant to correct that if not then it does not matter)" hence the italics. again your being a douche I mean come on I'm not going to have a conversation if your just going to be condescending with posts that have differing opinions than you.

 

[Emperor_Augustus]

Because they answer to you, right? Use your wallet instead of coming across as a self-entitled armchair General.

I'm sorry I want to get a complete game if I pay money, and won't support developers who are so terrified of losing a slight amount of money on piracy that they'll punish everyone else. If someone pirates it, maybe they'll buy the next game the company releases. They'll make enough money for it to be successful, but it won't be as big of a success now because nobody is going to buy it used to get an incomplete game.

 

[Still Life]

Ultimately, I understand why developers are desperate to make more copies sell, but criminalizing their potential fans by restricting their access until they give immediate pay where it's due is short-sighted at best and an invitation to go to the competitors at worst.

My understanding is that you can still access the cut content from Rage for a small fee. If this is the case, I'm not so sure that practice is entirely out of line with one of your main points, in that nothing crucial has been cut and allows a gamer to test the game to see whether it's to their liking.

Also, as evidence suggests, physical retailers are becoming increasingly more and more redundant, and it would seem that that their role in the future of distribution will change given the digital age.

I enjoyed your post, though

I'm sorry I want to get a complete game if I pay money, and won't support developers who are so terrified of losing a slight amount of money on piracy that they'll punish everyone else.

I'm not convinced that this is entirely about piracy, but more about used game sales. I think if someone wants to pirate Rage, they'll do it regardless. I actually don't feel that this punishes first hand buyers, so 'everyone' is a relative term.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Ah, yes, the good ol' used game sale debate has sprung up.

I support used sales.

Businesses do everything they can do to (legaly) save a buck. Why should I feel bad when I decide to do the same?

First Sale Doctrine people. FSD. We still have books, movies, DVD, Cars, ect.

 

[Alphakirby]

You know,I was trying to find a good picture to sum up my thoughts and I think I found it:

Mainly because all you're losing if you buy it used is a sewer level that you may never find anyway,oh my what a loss.

 

[Rawne1980]

So, I can spend £40 on a game thats not in my list of "to buy".

I can wait until it hits the bargain bin and miss out on some of the game and end up paying anyway.

Or I can get a pirate copy and get the whole lot for free....

Way to try and fuck over legitimate payers again generic games company (generic due to a lot of them doing their utmost to screw us over recently).

I'm sure they won't be happy until we don't game anymore. It's a conspiracy.

 

[Aprilgold]

I didn't call you PC fanboy one I said you came off as one, and Steam is a form of DRM dude a lot of games use Steamworks as a form of DRM. If you can sit there and say it isn't then wow, cause I talked to guys who LOVE steam and they say it's DRM. And it shouldn't matter what someone plays they are gamers, I can't respect a "gamer" who has to have a name for someone based on his choice of play. What am I a PC gamer I own a good number of PC games (at least 180), or am I a console gamer cause I own multiple consoles, or even a handheld gamer. No I am a gamer end of story.

I wasn't calling you a console gamer, I just said that I don't call console gamers console fan boys, just console gamers. Steam doesn't NECESSARILY DRM in, within of itself, but the GAMES can have Drm. Drm is date of release material, this means bonuses on the date of relief through either download or unlocking on the disk. Since Steam games are always new copies, so to speak, there is no used copies, so the DRM is always open, despite the game in questions age.
And yes, I am a gamer, but you did say PC FANBOY which translated into my mind that you thought I was one, and thus I just thought I tell you otherwise. The rest of your rant doesn't make much sense.
But back to the Steam thing, I want you to compare Steam's DRM to Console games DRM. Finished, great, what you will notice, even if this is small, the publisher basically made the DRM or asked in multiple, varying ways for the Dev team to make DRM. Steam's supposed DRM is very, very unsubstantial when you look upon what DRM is suppose to get rid of, pirates and used copies. It isn't exactly winning against pirates, but since Steam's service doesn't sell pre-owned copies of games, all of the games are technically new, canceling any DRM there may exist. Basically, I buy a game on Steam is a new copy, so any DRM is unlocked from the download, while if I bought a used copy of a game from my local EB games shop any DRM that exists may be in two varying forms, used get restricting DRM, while new copies get unlocked DRM. Since Steam doesn't support pre-owned files, all games bought are new, so all DRM is the exact same form for all players. No DRM because everyone gets same content.

 

[Still Life]

Ah, yes, the good ol' used game sale debate has sprung up.

I support used sales.

Businesses do everything they can do to (legaly) save a buck. Why should I feel bad when I decide to do the same?

First Sale Doctrine people. FSD. We still have books, movies, DVD, Cars, ect.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/matters/matters-9710.html

First-Sale Doctrine: One who lawfully owns a particular copy of a copyrighted work, such as a book or photograph, for example, is entitled to transfer that particular copy to another. Proposed federal legislation would preclude applicability of this doctrine to computer transmissions as one may deliver a copy to one or more others while retaining the original.

It would seem that the top end of business are looking to have more control over distribution, which is not innately a bad thing. id want to get more say in their cut, as they've heavily invested in the new IP.

 

[Kakashi on crack]

People will crack it. I see used games as being the same as used cars/used everything. The fact that the game is likely slightly damaged from use is enough.

I don't buy used games as a "fuck you" to game companies, I buy used games because I can only afford to buy about 2 new games a YEAR because I'm not rich enough or in a stable enough job to afford my gaming habits more than that.

I'm not saying gaming companies are necesarily in the wrong. I support gaming companies, and feel bad that it costs them a ton to release a game so they have to be choosey with their titles.

But the way I look at it, they are trying to profit from a game twice. If they have such a problem with used game retailers, then they should just, ohh I don't know, buy back the game from people and resell it at a discount themselves?

Know what's really killing them? Not this crap; game rentals. Game rentals pay a set fee (about 2 times the price of the game) and then rent out said game. in the long run, the Game rentals have rented it out to more people and made more money typically then the company could have made off of that one copy. Besides, most games can be beaten in the time alloted by a rental...

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Ah, yes, the good ol' used game sale debate has sprung up.

I support used sales.

Businesses do everything they can do to (legaly) save a buck. Why should I feel bad when I decide to do the same?

First Sale Doctrine people. FSD. We still have books, movies, DVD, Cars, ect.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/matters/matters-9710.html

First-Sale Doctrine: One who lawfully owns a particular copy of a copyrighted work, such as a book or photograph, for example, is entitled to transfer that particular copy to another. Proposed federal legislation would preclude applicability of this doctrine to computer transmissions as one may deliver a copy to one or more others while retaining the original.

It would seem that the top end of business are looking to have more control over distribution, which is not innately a bad thing. id want to get more say in their cut, as they've heavily invested in the new IP.

Very good. You get a gold star for understanding legal jurisprudence.

As a side note, I find it highly hypoctricial on the part of some gamers to say that we are "just like every form of media" when the topic of government censorship comes up. But when it's another issue, we're some sort of special flower.

Hell, I buy most all my games new anyways. But I'll be damned if someone is tellilng me how I can and cannot legally aquire a product.

 

[goldenheart323]

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.

Sooo.... you're saying everyone who uses a library is saying a "Fuck you" to authors and Hollywood when they get to enjoy free books and DVD's?
Really???

Oh, and I guess local governments/communities are also saying a giant "Screw you!" to authors and Hollywood since they're the ones who build and support those libraries.

I really would love to know where all of the used game buyers who claim to be after a deal buy their used games. No, really. I would absolutely love to know so I could save money too.

Any place I know of locally that offers a used copy of anything relatively new charges at most $10 less than the new price for it. That's just not much of a bargain when you're looking at a $60 item, and it's certainly not worth not supporting the developer.

"relatively new" is the key phrase there. Some gamers are capable of buying a game well over a year after its release and still enjoying it. Not everyone has to have it within months of its release.

I'm thrifty, but I think even a $10 difference is too small to bother buying it used. If it's worth $50 to someone, go ahead and pay a little more to support the dev. However, sometimes the difference is $30 or more. Then, I say buy used.

 

[BoredRolePlayer]

Actually I am a fan of any kind of DRM unless it is absolutely ridiculous (resident evil 3ds) because I feel I deserve some sort of honour for buying games new and not pirating because I do neither I think piracy is wrong and used games do hurt the industry and I really do think the only example of crappy DRM is the resident evil situation but what pisses me off is when you need an internet connection to play the single player of a game I did buy new.

That's stupid, I want to feel like I deserve a honor for buying a game new so I support DRM that treats me like I stole the game (Also this is about used game sales not pirating so your off bat there man). Let me tell you about Atlus a company who is no where as big as EA or Id or Nintendo but has a devoted fan base. For most games they release they have a first shipment bonus, where the first shipment you get a free bonus with your new game (and you don't have to pre-order or anything). Atlus is known for short print runs so these bonus are pretty much saying buy our game new and you get a nice gift cause odds are it's the only shipment we will make. Here is some of the games I bought from Atlus with the gifts for buying it new and the game cost the same as any other retail game (i.e. it wasn't 10 bucks extra for a limited edition).

Shin Megami Tensievil Summoner 2 (A limited edition box with a Jack Frost doll dressed as the main hero; Price 40 bucks when it came out which is the same price as most new PS2 games around that same time).

Radiant Histora(A Mini soundtrack; Price 35 bucks)

Inzuna: Legend of the Unemployed Ninja 2 (A mini poster; Price I believe 30 bucks)

Luminous Arc 2 (A mini soundtrack; Price 30 bucks)

Shin Megami Tensiersona 4 (A mini soundtrack (Or full I haven't opened it yet; Price 40 bucks)

Shin Megami Tensiersona (A full two disc soundtrack; Price 30 bucks)

Shin Megami Tensi: Strange Journey (A mini soundtrack, which was not burned right and they replaced for free; Price 35 bucks).

That's the games I have from them that I can remember a bonus for buying it new off the top of my head. And NISA does the same thing: Mana Kahmia 2 (I think the first one also buy I didn't get it new cause I couldn't find it) had a soundtrack (full I believe) and a poster, Ar Tonelico 2 and 3 came with a artbook and OST, and Atelier Rorona came witha hard cover artbook. The funny thing is, these games where not pre-orders they were thanks for buying the game new at the 50/60 dollar price they were at. And Disgaea 4 will have a few different versions in stores, a 50 dollar box with no goodies and a 60 dollar box with a figure. So your getting the game by itself for 10 bucks off and the figure for 10 bucks more, hey that's a honor right there.

In other words, your "honor" for buying a game new is just a way for publishers to screw you out of content and own your games, they don't give you anything when it's some online code you have to use.

Well see you tell me that DRM is screwing me out of content even though I have never been screwed out of content by buying new if YOU have I am sorry. but yes I can feel honour for buying new games when I have not been cheated before. Which seems to say that you are taking my personal opinion and applying it to everybody which isn't true, everybody plays games differently I feel that I have not been cheated by buying used games through their DRM because I don't play games on consoles that often and their is no used games market on PC and as for piracy which is rampant on the PC i do see it as stealing so I don't do it. And yes I do know the games developer Atlus and I have played their games they are just not my type of games and I don't play consoles all that much. Also thank for turning a intelligent response into a douche move. (also honour is spelled with a u in canada if the parenthesis were meant to correct that if not then it does not matter).

I didn't ask you if Atlus is your kind of game company or not (I could care less who your company of choice is), I was saying how Atlus is willing to give goodies to people for buying a game new and not charge extra. They are willing to give you extra's and not charged the special edition price, not give you a code saying you can have a in game thing for buying it new and only new. And how much is that honor worth it to you knowing that DRM is cracked by a single .exe file? And I haven't been screwed by DRM period (I even owned used PC games and have used guild wars account from a friend and they all play like I bought them myself). I like how just avoid the whole Atlus giving out all those nice freebies by injecting your own personal feelings for the companies games and not what they do to sell said games. And you're welcome I could care less where you're from and I wasn't correcting you at all, I put them in QUOTES for emphasis.

If you buy it used, you ain't supporting the developers, just like the pirates do. Don't see anything wrong with it, as long as this new little feature doesn't affect the legit buyers.

Heres my issue on that statement, if its such an issue, why don't they legally stop allowing people to buy it used. Its basically the worst type of DRM because I still bought the game, therefore, I should play its content as a whole, instead of a FUCKING game that locks all that away if I didn't buy it new.


Used games are not piracy. Piracy is basically to where NO money is spent, regardless of anything. With a used game, some still goes back to the publisher, but way less then what they should be getting.

Basically, publishers and Dev's in some cases are throwing hissie fits to fight an un-winnable war, it don't matter HOW hard you try, you can't sue every god damn pirater in the world, let alone fine ones who still bought your game. This is the literal reason consoles will die, because gamers from there will hop to PC because it became a first come, first serve type deal. I can only get 90% of the games content unless I get it new, on launch. As stupid as that sounds alone, it will happen, its inevitable, why? Because gamers are still taking this shit up the ass like a champ.

Guys, we really don't have to stand for this. Just get a gaming PC, and Steam or Origin, then you can buy whatever game you could ever want. DRM free.

....Steam is a form of DRM fyi. And now all console games use this stupid method, I agree with you gamers of consoles (including me) need to stop buying games that use any system like this. And if that means I miss out on mass effect 3 on my xbox...then so be it, I won't let my love of a series out weigh my basic principle rights to resale something legally. Also you kinda sound like you want people to just ditch consoles like a PC fan boy would say (not calling you one that's just how it came off to me, if that offended you well I won't say sorry but I'm not trying to call you one).

I'm pointing out that if this shit continues, it would be a better alternative then sticking with consoles. And no, I'm not telling people to ditch consoles, but if you want a game, upgrade your system and get the game... Also, Steam is not a type of DRM, since you don't actually get a different experience then someone who bought the game on launch since PC games are never used, there is no Date of Release Material. I like to stress up above, I'm just saying that it would be a better solution then sticking too consoles draconian DRM! You can watch Extra Credits episode titled Consoles are the new Coin Op for a better explanation. I'm glad you agreed with me. Don't call me a PC fan boy, just PC gamer. I don't call people Console fan boys, I call them Console Gamers.
In my original post, I do point out that its just a good alternative compared to dealing with the DRM, because publishers are throwing hissy fits, and only doing it to get what they want, ignore it, and it will go away.

I didn't call you PC fanboy one I said you came off as one, and Steam is a form of DRM dude a lot of games use Steamworks as a form of DRM. If you can sit there and say it isn't then wow, cause I talked to guys who LOVE steam and they say it's DRM. And it shouldn't matter what someone plays they are gamers, I can't respect a "gamer" who has to have a name for someone based on his choice of play. What am I a PC gamer I own a good number of PC games (at least 180), or am I a console gamer cause I own multiple consoles, or even a handheld gamer. No I am a gamer end of story.

I wasn't saying Atlus had anything to do with this by not arguing with your stance on extra goodies I was implying that that are a good move on Atlus's part but I think if people wouldn't just try and manipulate the industry to save a couple bucks on games they wouldn't have to do that and RAGE is just trying to make some money for their hard work and would rather not have people take advantage of that. Also when is said "(also honour is spelled with a u in canada if the parenthesis were meant to correct that if not then it does not matter)" hence the italics. again your being a douche I mean come on I'm not going to have a conversation if your just going to be condescending with posts that have differing opinions than you.

I'm the douche yet your the one trying to correct me just because I'm spelling with the way I learned how to spell in America. What the hell does it matter if I spell if as honour or honor you know what I mean, your the tool hear man.

 

[BoredRolePlayer]

Also don't forget iD gave chunks of their games for free so people could try and enjoy that...guess that stop eh?

That was the basis for pretty much the entire industry: shareware; the industry has grown in different directions since then. Though, shareware has evolved in the form of 'Onlive' services. Either way, harking back to the 'good old days' is a moot point.

If retailers take 100% of the profit for used game sales, thus denying the developer a cut, then I don't have an issue with this. The middlemen are the ones who ultimately benefit, and given that modern games development is extremely expensive and time consuming, I think the dev should get their paychecks.

This will be an issue for people who can't get access to a reliable internet connection, however. This is unfortunate, but I feel that it is these people who have the only legitimate argument. You don't own a game when you buy the install package: you purchase a license which gives you determined access to the product. You can very much argue that the industry is essentially already a service-based one.

Also, to those people who are comparing clothes, cars and whatnot to games: get a reality check. Games are different a beast altogether, and drawing such comparisons is a gross oversimplification.

Few flaws there

One:Game devs are paid to make the game before production not after, the ONLY money they would get is if the publisher had put it in their contract and if the game sold well. They would have already had their payment. Because it's ironic you say "the dev should get their paychecks" when they already did, before the game even went gold.

Two:So how are games a different beast? You tell us to get a "reality check" yet your not explaining why. Cars are expensive to make yet used dealers sell them for all that profit. Books can take years to write and the author/publisher isn't putting rules on how it is sold. Music and movies don't even care if you buy their stuff used and they will sue you so hard your life is over if you pirate it. HOW ARE GAMES DIFFERENT? I'm so sick of people wanting games to get the same respect as other media and then we have people who say it's not the same thing nor should it be treated as such.

There is one flaw with your first point. I agree with the second.

the flaw is that yes the devs do get paid beforehand but used games sales do hurt them in the way that the publisher loses money on the game. If the publisher loses money on the game then guess what happens. the publisher with lose interest in any more of that game and not greenlight any sequels or games like it coming from that dev team. lets say if a publisher signs a contract with game devs to make a game with sequels and the first game does not sell well at all and the publisher loses money they will cancel the contract for any sequels of that game or maybe any games in the same genre from that dev team. jobless devs = poor devs.

Yep that's why Infinity Ward went and made their own company, it was cause activision didn't pay what they owed even though the game sold a butt ton. They had to go make their own rules just to get the money they were owed, again it's the publishers not the devs who always make a big fuss over this.

 

[Still Life]

Yep that's why Infinity Ward went and made their own company, it was cause activision didn't pay what they owed even though the game sold a butt ton. They had to go make their own rules just to get the money they were owed, again it's the publishers not the devs who always make a big fuss over this.

Allegedly.

For this point to be valid, we -- the public -- will have to wait for litigation to run its course.

 

[BoredRolePlayer]

I didn't call you PC fanboy one I said you came off as one, and Steam is a form of DRM dude a lot of games use Steamworks as a form of DRM. If you can sit there and say it isn't then wow, cause I talked to guys who LOVE steam and they say it's DRM. And it shouldn't matter what someone plays they are gamers, I can't respect a "gamer" who has to have a name for someone based on his choice of play. What am I a PC gamer I own a good number of PC games (at least 180), or am I a console gamer cause I own multiple consoles, or even a handheld gamer. No I am a gamer end of story.

I wasn't calling you a console gamer, I just said that I don't call console gamers console fan boys, just console gamers. Steam doesn't NECESSARILY DRM in, within of itself, but the GAMES can have Drm. Drm is date of release material, this means bonuses on the date of relief through either download or unlocking on the disk. Since Steam games are always new copies, so to speak, there is no used copies, so the DRM is always open, despite the game in questions age.
And yes, I am a gamer, but you did say PC FANBOY which translated into my mind that you thought I was one, and thus I just thought I tell you otherwise. The rest of your rant doesn't make much sense.
But back to the Steam thing, I want you to compare Steam's DRM to Console games DRM. Finished, great, what you will notice, even if this is small, the publisher basically made the DRM or asked in multiple, varying ways for the Dev team to make DRM. Steam's supposed DRM is very, very unsubstantial when you look upon what DRM is suppose to get rid of, pirates and used copies. It isn't exactly winning against pirates, but since Steam's service doesn't sell pre-owned copies of games, all of the games are technically new, canceling any DRM there may exist. Basically, I buy a game on Steam is a new copy, so any DRM is unlocked from the download, while if I bought a used copy of a game from my local EB games shop any DRM that exists may be in two varying forms, used get restricting DRM, while new copies get unlocked DRM. Since Steam doesn't support pre-owned files, all games bought are new, so all DRM is the exact same form for all players. No DRM because everyone gets same content.

I said CAME OFF AS A PC FANBOY AND I SAID I AM NOT TRYING TO MEAN THAT IN ANY WAY OFFENSIVE. And steam is DRM, I can share any console game I own baring online passes yet can't do that with steam. ANY METHOD used to make sure you can't share a game or product is A FORM OF DRM FROM DIAL A PIRATE TO STEAMWORKS. I am done talking about this crap, you know I'm done steam in a nut shell is drm. Any game you buy is linked to your account and you can't share it, they control what you can or can't do with it. Is steam bad drm NO (I prefer steam works over Securom) but it's still D R M.

 

[BoredRolePlayer]

Yep that's why Infinity Ward went and made their own company, it was cause activision didn't pay what they owed even though the game sold a butt ton. They had to go make their own rules just to get the money they were owed, again it's the publishers not the devs who always make a big fuss over this.

Allegedly.

For this point to be valid, we -- the public -- will have to wait for litigation to run its course.

The courts will decide of they have to pay them or not, and from the court docs that was released it seems they should be owed the money.

 

[SNIPERFOX ft. Harry P.Ness]

Um, Well, Fuck you to, iD.

 

[Active Schizophrenic]

Also don't forget iD gave chunks of their games for free so people could try and enjoy that...guess that stop eh?

That was the basis for pretty much the entire industry: shareware; the industry has grown in different directions since then. Though, shareware has evolved in the form of 'Onlive' services. Either way, harking back to the 'good old days' is a moot point.

If retailers take 100% of the profit for used game sales, thus denying the developer a cut, then I don't have an issue with this. The middlemen are the ones who ultimately benefit, and given that modern games development is extremely expensive and time consuming, I think the dev should get their paychecks.

This will be an issue for people who can't get access to a reliable internet connection, however. This is unfortunate, but I feel that it is these people who have the only legitimate argument. You don't own a game when you buy the install package: you purchase a license which gives you determined access to the product. You can very much argue that the industry is essentially already a service-based one.

Also, to those people who are comparing clothes, cars and whatnot to games: get a reality check. Games are different a beast altogether, and drawing such comparisons is a gross oversimplification.

Few flaws there

One:Game devs are paid to make the game before production not after, the ONLY money they would get is if the publisher had put it in their contract and if the game sold well. They would have already had their payment. Because it's ironic you say "the dev should get their paychecks" when they already did, before the game even went gold.

Two:So how are games a different beast? You tell us to get a "reality check" yet your not explaining why. Cars are expensive to make yet used dealers sell them for all that profit. Books can take years to write and the author/publisher isn't putting rules on how it is sold. Music and movies don't even care if you buy their stuff used and they will sue you so hard your life is over if you pirate it. HOW ARE GAMES DIFFERENT? I'm so sick of people wanting games to get the same respect as other media and then we have people who say it's not the same thing nor should it be treated as such.

There is one flaw with your first point. I agree with the second.

the flaw is that yes the devs do get paid beforehand but used games sales do hurt them in the way that the publisher loses money on the game. If the publisher loses money on the game then guess what happens. the publisher with lose interest in any more of that game and not greenlight any sequels or games like it coming from that dev team. lets say if a publisher signs a contract with game devs to make a game with sequels and the first game does not sell well at all and the publisher loses money they will cancel the contract for any sequels of that game or maybe any games in the same genre from that dev team. jobless devs = poor devs.

Yep that's why Infinity Ward went and made their own company, it was cause activision didn't pay what they owed even though the game sold a butt ton. They had to go make their own rules just to get the money they were owed, again it's the publishers not the devs who always make a big fuss over this.

WHAT!? All game devs and publishers are different companies! AND Modern warfare 3 is being published BY ACTIVISION! ???????????????

 

[BoredRolePlayer]

Few flaws there

One:Game devs are paid to make the game before production not after, the ONLY money they would get is if the publisher had put it in their contract and if the game sold well. They would have already had their payment.

Bethesda no doubt would have helped fund Rage. However, id would have spent a lot of its own money in order to allow themselves to spend a bit over six years on a single game. Carmack has specifically stated that such development cycles are no longer sustainable and is partly why id joined up with a large publisher. Also, given that id is a large studio, I sincerely doubt that id would have entered into a contract which denied them royalties after initial costs had been covered through game sales.

Two:So how are games a different beast?

It's simple: games are different to cars, which are different from furniture, etc. To establish a feasible argument, you should analyze and contrast different market trends and practices within the games industry. Don't agree with id's consensus? Find a games company which approaches the matter in a way you think is fairer, then substantiate your points.

Game companies/developers need to be put back in their place.

Because they answer to you, right? Use your wallet instead of coming across as a self-entitled armchair General.

*bangs head on a table*I'm done with this argument. It's getting old, fine let publishers tell YOU HOW YOU CAN USE YOUR PRODUCTS. And I'm not making a damn point until you make a point, "games are different to cars, which are different from furniture" that is crap. Here is my point "People have a hard time making choices to invest money into a game so they might buy used if they like it they will most likely buy the next one NEW". I don't agree with anyone telling me how to use MY PRODUCT THAT I PAID FOR. I'm not fighting this anymore, it's crap and I refuse to buy ANY game that pulls any stunt like this. If you want to have a company say you have to do X Y and Z after you bought a game to enjoy the full product that's on you.