Why do people think buying a game new supports the developers?

[Something Amyss]

Damn people. It's one thing to correct someone when they're wrong, but how many insults do you have to throw at the OP!

It's never wrong to ask a dumb question (even though that was more of a statement), everyone has probably asked the same dumb question before you. Unfortunately for you OP, everyone else that's already asked this question before you seems to be self-entitled enough to call you a troll/idiot.

-1 for the Escapist community. *walks away shaking his head*

Why is it a dumb question?

Why is it safe to assume everyone asked it before, rather than they're just jerks or assume he's trolling?

For that matter, how is he wrong? And yes, this is coming from someone who just argued the point with him.

At retail, games are bought up front initially, and fully paid for. He just missed the next step.

Actually, I think this is how Steam does it, too for a lot of games. They prebuy codes and then you buy the game. That's why sometimes they run out of codes for a game and people spazz out about it. I could be wrong, though. On Steam at least.

 

[Monsterfurby]

It supports the developer NOT because the money goes directly to the devs. In fact, this sort of sales participation is relatively rare, especially among smaller developers.

BUT: Every developer is assessed on the success of their product. If it sells well, they will receive more prestige and consequently be more successful on the market. As the developer of a successful game, you are a more attractive business partner for either the publisher owning you or the publisher you are working with (depending on whether you are an indie or subsidiary studio). If a studio's game bombs, that studio will have a harder time finding future contracts.

So even if the studio does not receive monetary advantages from higher sales, the customer ultimately has the ability to support them by buying their games. But you also have to keep in mind that you are customer to the retailer (or the publisher's retail/sales channel) and the publisher, not to the studio. The STUDIO sells to the PUBLISHER.

 

[Agent Cross]

Damn people. It's one thing to correct someone when they're wrong, but how many insults do you have to throw at the OP!

It's never wrong to ask a dumb question (even though that was more of a statement), everyone has probably asked the same dumb question before you. Unfortunately for you OP, everyone else that's already asked this question before you seems to be self-entitled enough to call you a troll/idiot.

-1 for the Escapist community. *walks away shaking his head*

Why is it a dumb question?

Why is it safe to assume everyone asked it before, rather than they're just jerks or assume he's trolling?

For that matter, how is he wrong? And yes, this is coming from someone who just argued the point with him.

At retail, games are bought up front initially, and fully paid for. He just missed the next step.

Actually, I think this is how Steam does it, too for a lot of games. They prebuy codes and then you buy the game. That's why sometimes they run out of codes for a game and people spazz out about it. I could be wrong, though. On Steam at least.

Really? The first sentence of my second paragraph is something you hear in school. There's no such thing as a dumb question. If you don't know, ask. Ergo, if you don't know, you don't know. It's not aimed to be insulting towards the OP. It's suppose make everybody else stop and think.

"...even when you buy a game new, none of the money goes to the devs." "All the money goes to the store just like if you bought it used."

I believe we are on the same side here. He said nothing wrong. But some people are acting like he's committed a grave sin or something.

 

[PhiMed]

Damn people. It's one thing to correct someone when they're wrong, but how many insults do you have to throw at the OP!

It's never wrong to ask a dumb question (even though that was more of a statement), everyone has probably asked the same dumb question before you. Unfortunately for you OP, everyone else that's already asked this question before you seems to be self-entitled enough to call you a troll/idiot.

I. Am. Disappoint.

-1 for the Escapist community. *walks away shaking his head*

That would be true, if the OP hadn't called everyone who is well-informed stupid in his original post. You're correct that it's never wrong to ask a stupid question, but it's always wrong to be a dick while touting your own ignorance.

 

[Indignator]

Developers > Game Store > Consumer

If there are loads of people buying a dev's games then the store has to order more copies in = the dev's get the money for that order.

If you buy a game you are essentially giving a percentage of that money to the dev's.

YOU are misinformed.

*Edit* OP is an idiot.

Not quite. As far as I know the developers get paid the same salary year round, regardless on what they're working on. The more money a game makes (new sales), the more money the PUBLISHER gets. If a game doesn't do well, the publisher may lay off developers, but that's not guaranteed. So buying new does support developers, in a roundabout way. But in reality is supports the publishers more than the developers.

The Developer's EMPLOYEES get paid a salary. The company itself makes money based on its profits. And its those profits that pay the employee's salaries.

The publisher doesn't "own" the developer. The publisher just agrees to market the game and produce copies of it in exchange for a cut of the profits.

Actually quite a lot of developers ARE owned by their publishers. BioWare is owned by EA, Relic is owned by THQ and Infinity Ward is owned by Activision. There are also some developers that self-publish (Blizzard*, Valve) and then there are publishers that have in-house development studios (Nintendo, Ubisoft).

*Yes, Blizzard is part of Activision-Blizzard, but they are a separate legal entity and they handle their own publishing.

 

[lordlillen]

because we give them money when we buy the game.

 

[Gamblerjoe]

Wow. I knew that most people dont know how the relationship between Devs, Publishers, PR companies and retail stores works, but the amount of misinformation in this thred, particularly the OP, is woeful. If you're going to start a thread, dont just base it on assumptions and crap you made up. The information is out there and easy to access. Do some research and your questions will be answered.

 

[Zeekar]

I'm going to go with "misinformed". The usual troll tactic is to post a single inflammatory remark and walk away, watching the heated argument start and begin to fuel itself.

This person actually defended themselves for one post and has made many posts in the past. Seems more like they expected a more favorable response, and when they saw how wrong they were they were too embarrassed to come back and continue to defend their position on the issue.

Regardless, like everyone else said, it goes without say that if no one bought a game, the developers would be screwed, regardless of where that initial cash went to when their game was bought at retail price.

 

[EternalFacepalm]

Because the developers do recieve money.

 

[MrFluffy-X]

Can Someone please tell me why the user of the 8th post was banned permentaly??

Is it for insulting the OP? If so thats ridiculous! The guys over 20 years old I think he could handle a little insult (and a deserved one tbh).

 

[Purkki]

Buy a downloadable game from an india developer. Most of the money will end in his/her pocket.

 

[Dylan Sowers]

Damn people. It's one thing to correct someone when they're wrong, but how many insults do you have to throw at the OP!

It's never wrong to ask a dumb question (even though that was more of a statement), everyone has probably asked the same dumb question before you. Unfortunately for you OP, everyone else that's already asked this question before you seems to be self-entitled enough to call you a troll/idiot.

I. Am. Disappoint.

-1 for the Escapist community. *walks away shaking his head*

We're entitled to reply in kind, I'm sure if he posted a thread asking how the sales figures work, then people would open up to help him. Instead he assumed he was right and asked why everyone else was wrong?

 

[IamLEAM1983]

There's a little something called supply and demand, OP, that underlines every facet of our economy. When a sale is made, a portion of it goes to the shop you bought it from, a portion goes to the franchise as a whole, some goes to the publisher and the rest goes to the dev. This explains why AAA games are rarely below the 60$ price point, as the development of games and the upkeep of a development studio is a costly process. If you went by strictly how much it costs to make that silicon sandwich and design the packaging, you'd pay a heck of a lot less.

Every copy you buy which is new benefits both the devs and the publishers. Used games only drop cash in the franchise's pockets (i.e. GameStop), which is why publishers are up in arms about the used games market destroying their market share. They're failing to realize that every copy which is sold used has been sold new, previously. They *have* turned a profit on that copy. Expecting to turn a *second* profit on the same copy is pure and simple exploitation.

Books are sold along the same principle, as are produce, furniture, computer parts - literally anything you could think of. By your logic, if buying an object gave no form of remuneration to its original maker, then I'm not sure we would've gone pretty far, as a society... We'd still be stuck bartering for goods.

 

[tzimize]

Can Someone please tell me why the user of the 8th post was banned permentaly??

Is it for insulting the OP? If so thats ridiculous! The guys over 20 years old I think he could handle a little insult (and a deserved one tbh).

Namecalling/personal attacks are pretty strongly frowned upon on TE. And with good reason. Makes it more pleasant to post here.

OT: I dont know a 100% how the system works, but I'm pretty sure developers want us to buy their games new.

 

[Rawne1980]

Damn people. It's one thing to correct someone when they're wrong, but how many insults do you have to throw at the OP!

It's never wrong to ask a dumb question (even though that was more of a statement), everyone has probably asked the same dumb question before you. Unfortunately for you OP, everyone else that's already asked this question before you seems to be self-entitled enough to call you a troll/idiot.

I. Am. Disappoint.

-1 for the Escapist community. *walks away shaking his head*

Asking a dumb question is one thing, yes we've all pretty much done that at some point in our lives.

However...

Ending that with, and I quote...

Are people just misinformed?

Without having all the facts himself is going to lead to people believing he is trolling (starting up a thread to gain a "reaction" not the *my opinion is different to yours so therefore you must be a troll* version of trolling some people have).

Point being, if you are going to claim to know about a subject and quite clearly don't then it's best not to tell others they are misinformed.

Common sense.

 

[Yopaz]

The developer of a game that sells well and gains popularity often gets to make a sequel. Alone In The Dark died for making a really crappy game that non-one liked. Developers wont get a next job with the same series.

 

[Nieroshai]

Because the developer makes money from the royalties that they get for each copy sold.
Are you just so misinformed as to not know that?

Bumping this because of its basic, common-sense truth. If no one buys the game, no one makes money, plain and simple. The game industry dies without money, like any other service.

 

[Agent Cross]

Damn people. It's one thing to correct someone when they're wrong, but how many insults do you have to throw at the OP!

It's never wrong to ask a dumb question (even though that was more of a statement), everyone has probably asked the same dumb question before you. Unfortunately for you OP, everyone else that's already asked this question before you seems to be self-entitled enough to call you a troll/idiot.

I. Am. Disappoint.

-1 for the Escapist community. *walks away shaking his head*

That would be true, if the OP hadn't called everyone who is well-informed stupid in his original post. You're correct that it's never wrong to ask a stupid question, but it's always wrong to be a dick while touting your own ignorance.

Agreed. The OP is misinformed, but I don't believe he called anyone stupid. Whatever the case, and however misinformed he may be. Why do you assume he is a (your words)'dick' just for being wrong? Don't you think simply correcting someone is enough? Surely so. But to fling insults at anyone for not being as 'well-informed' as the next person might be, still makes them come across as arrogant and borderline self-righteous.

Furthermore, their is a COC to which we've all agreed to. So there should be a clear understanding of what is going to far. Don't be a jerk. I believe that's a simple enough rule. Just look how many members chose not to get involved in this thread, and then look at all the warnings that have been handed out.

 

[Hipsy_Gypsy]

When you buy a game new all the money still goes to the store just like if you bought it used. The the store buys a bunch of games from the company that produces the games and after that the store makes all the money so even when you buy a game new none of that money goes to the developers so why do people always think it does?

Are people just misinformed?

This made me think of some authors. A lot of poets don't get a single penny for their work, purely the publishers of them. Even when they do, agents and the like tend to get, what was it she said, a ~20% cut which is actually quite a lot.

Anyroad, either way, the stores have to put some sort of a profit on them, if that's what you meant?

I'm going to go with "misinformed". The usual troll tactic is to post a single inflammatory remark and walk away, watching the heated argument start and begin to fuel itself.

This person actually defended themselves for one post and has made many posts in the past. Seems more like they expected a more favorable response, and when they saw how wrong they were they were too embarrassed to come back and continue to defend their position on the issue.

Regardless, like everyone else said, it goes without say that if no one bought a game, the developers would be screwed, regardless of where that initial cash went to when their game was bought at retail price.

Yep, definitely. Also listen to:

No. The store buys copies based on demand. They could only by 20 copies and hope to sell them, and then resell all the copies people trade in. But if there is a demand for 200 copies, the store has to buy 200 copies instead of 20. That gives the PUBLISHER more money. The developers get paid before the game comes out, and they don't make any more or less money if the game sells well or poorly. But if the game sucks and doesn't sell, the publishers may lay off developers. So yes, buying new gives the developers a better chance of not getting fired.

When you buy a game new all the money still goes to the store just like if you bought it used. The the store buys a bunch of games from the company that produces the games and after that the store makes all the money so even when you buy a game new none of that money goes to the developers so why do people always think it does?

Are people just misinformed?

This made me think of some authors. A lot of poets don't get a single penny for their work, purely the publishers of them. Even when they do, agents and the like tend to get, what was it she said, a ~20% cut which is actually quite a lot.

Anyroad, either way, the stores have to put some sort of a profit on them, if that's what you meant?

I'm going to go with "misinformed". The usual troll tactic is to post a single inflammatory remark and walk away, watching the heated argument start and begin to fuel itself.

This person actually defended themselves for one post and has made many posts in the past. Seems more like they expected a more favorable response, and when they saw how wrong they were they were too embarrassed to come back and continue to defend their position on the issue.

Regardless, like everyone else said, it goes without say that if no one bought a game, the developers would be screwed, regardless of where that initial cash went to when their game was bought at retail price.

Yep, definitely. Also listen to:

No. The store buys copies based on demand. They could only by 20 copies and hope to sell them, and then resell all the copies people trade in. But if there is a demand for 200 copies, the store has to buy 200 copies instead of 20. That gives the PUBLISHER more money. The developers get paid before the game comes out, and they don't make any more or less money if the game sells well or poorly. But if the game sucks and doesn't sell, the publishers may lay off developers. So yes, buying new gives the developers a better chance of not getting fired.

...and very well said to:

Damn people. It's one thing to correct someone when they're wrong, but how many insults do you have to throw at the OP!

It's never wrong to ask a dumb question (even though that was more of a statement), everyone has probably asked the same dumb question before you. Unfortunately for you OP, everyone else that's already asked this question before you seems to be self-entitled enough to call you a troll/idiot.

I. Am. Disappoint.

-1 for the Escapist community. *walks away shaking his head*

That would be true, if the OP hadn't called everyone who is well-informed stupid in his original post. You're correct that it's never wrong to ask a stupid question, but it's always wrong to be a dick while touting your own ignorance.

Agreed. The OP is misinformed, but I don't believe he called anyone stupid. Whatever the case, and however misinformed he may be. Why do you assume he is a (your words)'dick' just for being wrong? Don't you think simply correcting someone is enough? Surely so. But to fling insults at anyone for not being as 'well-informed' as the next person might be, still makes them come across as arrogant and borderline self-righteous.

Furthermore, their is a COC to which we've all agreed to. So there should be a clear understanding of what is going to far. Don't be a jerk. I believe that's a simple enough rule. Just look how many members chose not to get involved in this thread, and then look at all the warnings that have been handed out.