bahumat42 said:
Falcon123 said:
FelixG said:
Snippity Snip
the problem with comparing used games to other things is the situation.
Upfront any media your inherently paying for the data, which doesn't degrade, at all (this does include music bear with me), all media forms therefore have the issue that if the used one is the same as the new one why buy the more expensive new one. This particular issue doesnt exist for other products like cars, tvs or furniture because your paying for a perfect version opposed to one with untold problems (and no warranty). Thats an impossible market to comepte on if the other guy can undercut you by 5-15 dollars and still be perfectly happy.
As for specific media. (music television film). Thats more to do with their own alternate methods of revenue.
Music- Cd sales, song play rights (whatever the term is, your paid when its on radio/tv etc) touring money, merchandise (band t-shirts often make more money than ticket sales on a gig)
Television- The original run (duh), syndication and foriegn broadcast, then dvd,
Films- Box office takings, reruns (planes tv etc) , merchandise (ok only animated films for this one, but pixar has made more money off of this than its movies)
As for books thats an economics issue that it requires a low thresh hold to break even due to the low costs involved in making the things. Kind of a non issue.
I get what you're saying, and I admit that furniture was probably a bad example to list, but I also included movies, and for good reason. Go on Amazon and just look at all the gently used books, television show collections, movies, and music CDs that are on sale right now. There are a ton, and for exactly the reason you gave: it's just as good, so why buy at the higher price point?
The problem I have with the assumption your point makes (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is that you are approving of this policy that may go into effect (there's still plenty of time to change their minds
if this is in fact what they plan to do) as if consumers are somehow to blame for buying at a lower price point, which, in my mind, is the fundamental problem with this rule.
I'm a relatively broke college student. I don't have the money to buy an XBLA game every month, let alone a full release. But let's say I only got one game every two months. I think we can agree that's pretty reasonable, given that unless it's a sprawling RPG a la Skyrim or a deep RTS, you're probably going to want something new within two months.
Six games at $60 is over $360 when tax is included. I could buy a PS3 and a Wii with that much money right now without even buying used. It's a substantial amount, and it doesn't take into account the next generation of games could be more expensive due to necessity on the publisher's end, or the fact that as an American, I'm far more fortunate as far as video game pricing is concerned, than our Australian brothers in gaming, who have to spend over $110 on a new game, last time I checked.
Now, if I can buy on the used game market, I might be able to pick up some hidden gems that have dropped in price, especially if they're single-player focused (Got Enslaved for $20 a month after release. Crazy) and try them out. I might get more games, or I might have to make less sacrifices in other areas ($360 is still a lot for me), but enjoy the same amount of gaming.
But what about the developers you ask? Well, they might not have gained immediate financial gain from my purchase, but if the game was good, they
did make a fan, someone who will go back to their games and buy them new when I have the financial freedom to do so. Heck, I'm far more willing to buy DLC on games I was able to buy on the cheap but were enjoyable for the simple reason that I believe that developer
deserves my money .
So now let's see what happens when this "no used games" policy comes into effect. Even after waiting for the price on the hardware to drop, I've still got to get some sort of gaming catalog. If the price point is at $60, I won't budge until it drops, and without a used games market pushing the prices down, it will take even longer than it does already (and some games take forever to drop. Super Mario Galaxy is still sold in some stores I've been to for full initial retail), which means I'll have potentially forgotten about it or found something that I am more sure I will enjoy and let it go. I will no longer buy the games that aren't worth $60 but would be enjoyable at a lower price point since that point does not really exist, and the developer will lose a potential fan who won't care when their next games come out.
See, when you treat your customers like they're the enemy, they no longer feel free to just jump on board, or as if they're welcome there. There's a reason movies aren't tied to codes on your DVD player - Hollywood gains more by having you borrow it (losing a potential sale) but enjoying the movie (in case there are sequels), the actors in it (so you check out their other works) or the director's style (ditto). There's a reason that CDs can be listened to on more than one player - the music industry would rather gain a fan of the band (or even better, the whole record label) that will buy their later music than force them into one more sale.
Every other media-based industry deals with it. You don't hear any other media-based industry complain like this Volition Dev is. They see the positives and treat their consumers as people that deserve respect and will, if given the opportunity, latch onto what is good and support them long-term, even at a small cost in the short-term.
You know, that's exactly what this policy is: short-sighted. Fixing one minor problem and causing a few more in the process, and, if this forum and a similar one on IGN are any indication, a much larger one.