Volition Dev Vs. Pre-Owned Games

Eve Charm

New member
Aug 10, 2011
760
0
0
So can I call it piracy also when a company say sony, sells me a product that has features, then tells me I have to remove them if i want to keep using said product?

Christ we bend over backwards when the companies can lose a couple dollars here and there but no one wants to say jack when companies screw over the consumer. I paid for the game, I paid for the console, they are goods that I own, I don't need to have a name like Wal-mart or Gamestop to sell them.
 

luckshot

New member
Jul 18, 2008
426
0
0
this might have already been said but this would just push some to only playing used games: mod xbox to play used games, then only buy used from friends...of course such a path would limit you to single player or in house multi.

and then you wouldnt have to deal with the xbox live community, its a win win!

edit: and used games are ruining the games industry like the phonograph ruined the live music industry...
 

weirdee

Swamp Weather Balloon Gas
Apr 11, 2011
2,634
0
0
randomsix said:
"consumers would be up in arms about it at first...they will grow to understand why and that it won't kill them."

Hmmm... Kind of like how some devs are up in arms about used games, and that it hasn't killed them in the 20+ years of gaming history?

Sounds like the man isn't sharp enough to realize that his own words damn him.

More OT: He says the industry will fall apart? I say good. It needs to be rebuilt from the ground up to get all of the rot out.
The way he talks about it, it sounds kind of scary though...y'know industry FORCING consumers to deal with contrivances, and the consumers taking it in the butt. And how this will be SO MUCH BETTER and isn't it obvious that this is the best way?

*crickets*
 

RevRaptor

New member
Mar 10, 2010
512
0
0
My question is what happens to my games years down the line when the online services are no longer up and I want to play them. There are already games I am not buying because of this and forcing people to only buy new games is stupid especially here in New Zealand where new games cost 140 to 150 bucks, such a console would quickly flop.
 

SenseOfTumour

New member
Jul 11, 2008
4,514
0
0
I can see the adverts now -

"You wouldn't buy a second hand handbag..."
"you wouldn't buy a second hand car..."
"Don't buy second hand games!"

Seriously tho, a very popular theory right now is that piracy is so rife because pirates get a BETTER service than the paying customers, and this is just opening that gateway wide open.
Sure, you can't really trade in pirated games, but then you didn't shell out $60 to rent it until you were done with it.

You accept that you lose a good 50% or more of almost anything's value the moment you leave the store, but losing 100% of it's value, well, I hope the next gen's willing to sell their hames for £30, but when I see kindle versions of books selling for more than the hardback, I'm gonna go with no.

I know it's nonsense, but loved the comment "I'm sorry, my money was pre-owned. You can't have it."

What is such a shame is that Saint's Row 3 was genius, and worth every damn penny imo, the game was packed with content and is fun on repeated playthroughs, and I have no problem with the DLC coming out.

Why not scrap the other controller ports too and all multiplayer, damn leeches going around to a friend's home and playing the game for free! Or you could just include a credit card slot above the second controller port and charge them £5 an hour.

I already feel like backspacing as I shouldn't be giving my ideas away for free. I sense if I'd been working MS's R&D dept I'd have got a bonus for that one.
 

Wintermoot

New member
Aug 20, 2009
6,563
0
0
if this is going to happen people are going to find workarounds and you would only increase piracy.
 

Falcon123

New member
Aug 9, 2009
314
0
0
bahumat42 said:
Falcon123 said:
FelixG said:
Falcon123 said:
Snip
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.
 

Zom-B

New member
Feb 8, 2011
379
0
0
bahumat42 said:
EVERY OTHER INDUSTRY HAS A DIFFERENT SALES SYSTEM THEN OURS.
FIlms have box office, reruns, dvd (nd in the case of disney, merchandising)
televsion has both the original run money and dvd
books im discounting for the sheer a fact a good book shouldn't cost more than 50,000 , which is 5000 books sold, which is a non-issue.

Games don't have any secondary or tertiary income. So protecting that source of income, a bit of a larger issue.
But you've conveniently forgotten to include other industries that only have one or two revenue streams. Car sales. You buy from the dealer or possibly the manufacturer. After that, all sales are private or conducted on a used car lot and the car maker doesn't see another dime. Comparable to video games where we buy from the publisher, via retail sales, or perhaps the developer, if they're small enough.

Shoes and clothing. There's a huge second hand or used market in buying and selling clothes, especially designer clothing, limited edition sneakers, raw denim, etc. Once that piece of clothing is sold by the designer or company, they get no further bites at the apple.

It's easy to compare video games to movies and then parade all the ways we have to view movies, but that's only one similarity. On the other hand, we don't buy, say a "Warnerbox" that only plays movies published by Warner Bros. Nor is there a "DisneyStation" for playing Disney movies. If the video game industry had a model where any game could be played on a console by any manufacturer, then we might indeed see lots of different ways for our games to be delivered: discs, rentals, digital downloads, streaming all in a universal format with each publishing company gaining revenues on the titles they produce without having to pay huge licensing agreements with a hardware manufacturer or sign exclusivity contracts, shutting out part of the market that doesn't have the right hardware.

Videogames are not a special product deserving of special rules. Once the studio or publisher puts that code on a disc and releases it into the wild their stake in it is gone, just like any other product.

Oh, and "games don't have secondary or tertiary income" is bullshit. We have regular disc based releases. Then we have GOTY editions with DLC. Then we have digital versions of some games, with more and more appearing each month. HD rereleases. Bundles. Steam sales. DLC. Subscription fees. Online passes.

Come on. There is no good argument against used videogame sales. They all boil down to ignorance or greed.

RevRaptor said:
My question is what happens to my games years down the line when the online services are no longer up and I want to play them. There are already games I am not buying because of this and forcing people to only buy new games is stupid especially here in New Zealand where new games cost 140 to 150 bucks, such a console would quickly flop.
Okay, so I gotta ask, because I hear this tired old argument pop up all the time: How many games from the last generation consoles do you play regularly? Or even semi regularly. Honestly, be honest. Do you actually ever play a Gamecube, Xbox or PS2 game? Did you play more than one, one or more times in 2011?

Maybe you did, but I'd bet that for every ten times I see this fucking lame-assed argument, only one person really plays his or her older games. We're mostly too busy playing our new games, on PS3s and Xbox360s to be revisiting games that we finished 5 years ago. Unless it's a real favourite, an all time favourite that we can play again and again, even when other people can't. Yeah, there are those games, but they are few and far between for most gamers.

I'm sorry, but while your argument holds some merit, I think it's trumped up and inconsequential when faced with the fact of how fast the industry is progressing and how much bigger, more engrossing, complex and deep console and PC games are getting. And with that progress comes the ability to put a game that used to reside on a disc, to be played on a 12lbs set top box, attached by wires to a TV, on to a little handheld device with almost no change, like oh.... I don't, Ocarina of Time on a 3DS or an Uncharted game on a PSV. We won't need those old games because they will always be available. Just look how many old games are available on emulators, without the need to plug a cartridge into a Genesis or a SNES, just as an example.

Beyond that, gamers mostly want new games. That's what we are in this for, just like any other entertainment media. We still watch some old movies and TV, but we all want to see new film too. Same with music and books. We need new experiences and while we may revisit some old favourites, it's not the focus of our consumption. At least not for most of us.
 

Nurb

Cynical bastard
Dec 9, 2008
3,078
0
0
Hey dipshit, this was settled 30 years ago; used movies, games, and music is our right to resale as consumers. It exists on the books. So quit your bitchin. You're not any more special or different than any other entertainment industry

henritje said:
if this is going to happen people are going to find workarounds and you would only increase piracy.
It'll give a boost to PC gaming thats for sure, if not releasing a PC version, then newer developers switching back to the platform.
 

Brad Shepard

New member
Sep 9, 2009
4,393
0
0
Here is what i dont get about the bitching of pre owned games

For it to be pre owned, YOU HAVE TO BUY IT FIRST!

God damn people, here is my thing, Make a good game, and you wont lose sales to pre owned stuff.
 

008Zulu_v1legacy

New member
Sep 6, 2009
6,019
0
0
If companies quit churning out the same clones, then maybe I would buy more brand new games. Don't get me wrong, some of the clones can be o.k, just not $100AUD/$60US o.k.
 

Tiger Sora

New member
Aug 23, 2008
2,220
0
0
Educating the masses.


I think it's quite been proven that it hasn't worked. But implementing their DLC system with keys. Make a register system to track what games people have so if they're 720 or whatever breaks they don't lose the games as someone was saying about. Basically Steam, but not so ya. People will be hella up in arms but were a rowdy crowd this day in age, but we'll calm down once it becomes the norm.

The only problem being I see, at almost 2 in the morning. Is the EA / Origins phenomenon. Where they start banning people left and right, most of whom didn't do anything. And locking down their system, so they can't play games. And no way to get back in the good graces again.

Fear the future people. And attack the hell out of it to change the outcome now before it's to late.
 

Iron Lightning

Lightweight Extreme
Oct 19, 2009
1,237
0
0
Jameson Dural said:
Personally I think this would be a fantastic change for our business and even though the consumers would be up in arms about it at first...
The first thing they teach you at business school is "if you know that doing something will have your consumers up in arms then don't fucking do that."

I know that, and I've never even been to business school.
 

Snotnarok

New member
Nov 17, 2008
6,310
0
0
Vakz said:
So what happens when the Nextbox or NextStation breaks? Do we lose all our games? Do we have to send the console away for weeks so they can transfer the games? What if the warranty has run out?

I really do not see any way that this will not just end up with piracy skyrocketing.
It's not linked to the system, it'd be linked to your XBLA account. Think how DLC works on the PSN/XBLA, log in to get access to it.

OT:
I love the saints row dev as much as anyone (as in I don't care about the company but I do love the game) but please stop spreading bullshit. Seriously these guys pull in a shit ton of profit despite piracy and used games it's just nonsense. They make their money back and then some easily, even games that didn't sell amazingly turn a chunk of a profit back.
 

Sprinal

New member
Jan 27, 2010
534
0
0
"In the end, I fully believe that we have to do something about these issues or our industry is going to fall apart,"
okay this is amussing. Really...
Notch doesn't care. He made millions and millions have pirated minecraft. And I have even shared my account with my friends whilst they were nagging their parents to allow them to buy something off the net
"People often don't understand the cost that goes into creating these huge experiences that we put on the shelves for only $60.
This again. They cost only a few million and even if they sell them for $100 (fucking ausland) and only $80 goes to the dev/publisher then if we assume 'a few million' to around 8-12 million (figures may be wrong. If someone knows actual values tell me) then it would only take 800 000-1.2*10^6 to break even which considering the number of people who buy games internationaly is bugger all.
They also don't seem to realize how much they are hurting us when they buy a used game and how pirating a copy is just plain stealing.
These guys need to watch Jim Sterling more often. And actually try and treat the consumers as more than just sheep.
Maybe something as simple as educating them could help solve the problem..."
I'm going to quote firefly on this one:
"We are not telling them what to think. Only how too."

Which now brings to mind something allong the lines of Newspeak...

Can't these people realise that they cannot win by punishing the customers?

Maybe they should also watch Extra Credits...
 

Disthron

New member
Aug 19, 2009
108
0
0
This is a shit load of fuck, to quote the angry video game nerd. If they won't people to keep there games and not sell them, then they need to make games worth keeping. Movies also cost hundreds of millions of dollars and they are sold for even less, and no one gives a crap about used DVD sales.
 

Zay-el

New member
Apr 4, 2011
269
0
0
60$? Oh, that's great to know. Mind explaining to me why even a TERRIBAD game like Mindjack costs 80$ here? Glitch in the system?!