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

[darthotaku]

well i don't know for a fact if games are the same, but when a retailer can't sell a book then they are able to return the book to the publisher and recieve a refund. if games are anything like this then the number of sales does in fact directly effect the profits of the publisher. it still doesn't mean they should complain about used sales, but new sales are still important to them.

 

[Suicideking]

I'm pretty sure bigger retailers (gamestop, etc.) buy in large quantities and once they reach a certain quota their entitled to return any excess stock.

Indeed.

That is one thing that was missed in a lot of these posts. The Original Poster seems under the impression that since the stores bought the game, that the developers, publishers, and every one else has already been paid.

However, in a lot of cases, those stores have an arrangement, that under certain circumstances the stores can ship the game back to the distributor, and get their money back essentially.

Side note, while DVD's and video games get sent back complete, books and magazines only require that the cover gets sent back. A lot of books and magazines end up in the trash at retailers, but as long as they send the covers back, the store gets a refund for their purchase.

 

[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*

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?

You're right 100%. I said it's one thing to correct someone, but it's not correct to just outright call him an idiot. Especially if you don't even inform him why he is so misinformed. It's kind of ashame. He seemed willing to answer the first few posts that contradicted him, then it just turned into a feeding frenzy on his lack of understanding.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Let's think about this logically. Just stick with me here.

The Dev sells 100 copies to Gamestop, the Dev gets paid for 100 copies, Gamestop sells the 100 copies, but buys back 20 of them. The next shipment Gamestop wants to still have 100 copies, so now they only buy 80 from the Dev. The Dev gets paid for 80 copies, Gamestop will once again get paid for 100 copies. That is a 20% step down in the money the Dev gets.

Makes sense to me. Also explains why game shops are always trying to push second hand copies of the game on you when your happily in the process of buying a brand new copy.

 

[krazykidd]

This is just hilarious. OP HAS to be a troll.

Fail troll is fail.

And I never say that.

He looks pretty sucessfull to me .

OT: yeah like everyone else says , you got this backwards bro .But i will not buy new because of it , i buy the cheapest version of any game . As long as it works.

 

[cgentero]

People seem to be confusing developers with publishers, publishers are the one selling the game to stores and developers are the ones making it and are paid by the publishers.

As for whether or not a developer gets more money for games sold new, it depends on the developers contract, sometimes its flat fee and sometimes royalty based.

 

[Agent Cross]

This is just hilarious. OP HAS to be a troll.

Fail troll is fail.

And I never say that.

He looks pretty sucessfull to me.

Yup. Successful troll is successful.

And I too hate that phrase. Was he a troll? A nOob? Who knows?

I think he made a good run though. 1 Ban & 4 Warnings. All in one page

 

[Koroviev]

People seem to be confusing developers with publishers, publishers are the one selling the game to stores and developers are the ones making it and are paid by the publishers.

As for whether or not a developer gets money for more units sold, it depends on the developers contract, sometimes its flat fee and sometimes royalty based.

This is what I was thinking. One rarely hears of developers becoming filthy rich because a title they developed sold remarkably well. As a matter of fact, the success of a game does not even necessarily result in more work for the developer. Just look at what happened following the release of Red Dead Redemption.

 

[Codeman90]

The OP opened the topic questioning his reader's intelligence and source of information. Not only that, the facts he's using to question hthe reader's intelligence are wrong. I can see how that might be deserving of a retalitory insult.

 

[ZeZZZZevy]

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).

with the new forum health bar, you don't have to have one large infraction to get banned, small fractions add up over time (they did that before to some degree, but now it's more defined) he probably didn't have that good of forum health left.

OT: pretty much everything that could be said, has been said.
Although to be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if more than a few people were ignorant of the exact way profits are split within the gaming industry (that said, the percentages are fairly bad on the developer's side)

 

[Agent Cross]

Snip

However...

Ending that with, and I quote...

Are people just misinformed?

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.

Yeah. No arguement there. He climbed in the coffin and handed out the nails. I was just trying to diffuse a bad situation. Which somewhat might have worked. I haven't seen anymore mod-wrath since. *crosses fingers*

A lot of people don't seem to understand the devs earnings compared to the publishers. To late to find out now which he actually meant. But it seems alot of people thought he meant the pubs, when he said devs. *shrugs* Who knows?

 

[Something Amyss]

Really? The first sentence of my second paragraph is something you hear in school. There's no such thing as a dumb question.

Except you didn't say that. You said:

It's never wrong to ask a dumb question

"There's no such thing as a dumb question" is worded differently and holds a different meaning. Saying it's never wrong to ask a dumb question works on the assumption there's such a thing as a dumb question.

However:

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.

I believe you are right.

 

[zuro64]

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?

I dont want to be rude, but how the hell did you come to this conclusion? I mean seriusly dude!
If you buy a new copy of a game then that money goes to the store you bought it from but they bought the game in from the game publisher wich bought the rights to sell the game from the developer. If you buy a used game you pay the store but since they got the game back from someone(cheaper) they dont have to pay the publishers (exept if there is an online pass or something wich YOU have to pay for then).

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.

By the developer's we mean the development team of course! Even though the publisher often dont own the developer(unlike EA owns Bioware and DICE) they do have monopoly on there products they develop so they do own them in a way since they own the rights to everything they develop!

 

[Wayneguard]

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?

maybe on steam or XBLA but not in a store.

To both of you, my best guess as to how the system works is that, based on sales data, individual outlets are allocated a certain quantity of games. I would guess that stores report, what are essentially demand schedules, back to corporate. Or maybe store managers order inventory directly. But the point is, the fewer new games that are bought, the fewer that will be purchased by corporate from developers to distribute to stores. I doubt per unit royalties are paid to developers though.

 

[Aprilgold]

It shows them that the product they made was worth something, so we can see more unique ideas, THUS why CoD gets all of these sequels because they sell like hot cakes on fire.

 

[Mordwyl]

Last I checked working in a AAA studio means your payment is under contract. This is usually balanced between a base salary and royalties offered by the publisher that hired your studio to make the game.

Isn't this the reason behind all that kerfuffle a while ago regarding Infinity Ward's leads and Activision?

 

[sivlin]

ITT: Like 9 people got banned/warned for absolutely ridiculous things.

Going a little bit power trippy are we there admins?

All they said was that the "OP was an idiot". Some of them even had constructive posts before they said that the "OP was an idiot".

I think the phrase "OP is an idiot" is really not that bad and should not be a punishable offense.

It isn't like they are saying something like "the OP is a blight on humanity" or anything. That could be construed as mean, were someone to actually say something like that.

The only warning I agree with is the one where the guy literally just posted "this".

 

[thiosk]

I like high quality gaming products. Gaming titles are already far too expensive, as demonstrated by incredible success of the Steam distribution model (and, incidentally, by the popularity of used titles). Developers and publishers alike tend to get more money through steam releases than through retail. The middle man isn't cut out entirely, but his importance is less when you aren't fighting for limited shelf space in the wallmarts and gamestops of the world. I buy all my new titles direct through steam now. Except for the new zelda. That one comes from a store.