Crytek Dev Backpedals on Used Games Hate

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Ultratwinkie:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Funny, it's almost as if you've never heard of 'consumer rights' and 'ethical business practises'.

Just because the games industry is a 'corporate playground', that doesn't give publishers the right to do anything they like. There are certain rules which across not only the games industry, but the industry of everything in general. Rules like "No insider trading", "No scamming people out of money for a non-existent product"... and funnily enough, allowing people to buy and sell used goods.

Being able to sell an item to someone else after you already bought it is a sign that you own that item, and are transferring ownership to someone else. And no matter how much they try, publishers have yet to prove that EULA's grant them full ownership of a game and give gamers only a license to play them.

Gaming corporations can do whatever they like as long as they stay within the rules of ethical trading. Once they start breaching those rules however, like by trying to get rid of second-hand sales, then expect them to be hit with a massive uproar and a slap from the legal system.

Yet ownership of data is not the same. When a company sells you a disc, its just a disc. The data inside is not yours, you cant copy it and post it online. The used game sale idea is sketchy at best because every other industry uses it. Companies are doing away with the disc, and just going with the clearer download method.

They are not obligated to SELL a disc. They can sell wherever they damn well please. If they didn't, Steam and origin wouldn't exist and PC gaming along with many genres would be a literal dead relics.

Limiting used games would mean PC gaming-like DRM like steam or access codes. Hardly "world ending."

You know what the difference is? My PS3 cannot extract data from a disk. My PC can. I wouldn't be able to make a copy of a PS3 game using only my PS3. I can do that on a PC. That's why single-use codes on a console would be fucking stupid. It doesn't prevent copying or piracy, it just prevents people from using their rights to an open market.

It DOES bite back to Gamestop from ruining the prospects of console gaming to developers. Console developers are already fed up by the low margins of success due to high tax levied by the corporations, AAA game cost, and the low rate of success thanks to other AAA titles and retail politics. Add used games to that mix and console gaming would be a wasteland of developers owned by Activision, EA, Microsoft, etc. Console gaming would literally be reliant on Halo and COD etc to stay afloat.

If console gaming doesn't make itself more friendly to outside developers, they will just leave for social gaming if not steam. You can either have nice graphics and AAA games or used game sales, you cant have both without severely hurting console gaming.

Here's my solution to this problem. A sort of compromise if you will.

Make the next generation consoles game download only. You can buy games as codes in brick and mortar stores, but they'll just be some kind of redemption code for the game. Most people have internet, a ridiculously large amount of people play games online. So it would alienate probably only a very small market. Or you could even have some way of downloading the game in the store via some kind of memory unit that comes with the console (think DS hotspot downloads at GS). But all this would fail if the console companies kept prices fixed instead of having near constant sales like Steam, Origin, Gamestop and Amazon (which I fear they would).

I recently switched to PC gaming and I love how easy and convenient digital game purchasing is. Plus it's very efficient. There's no manufacturing cost, no shipping costs, no middle man taking their cut and it's convenient for the consumer. I also like the fact that it could bankrupt greedy companies like Gamestop. Their used game scam is terrible. I've seen them take a $60 game, buy it from someone for $20, then resell it for $55! The poor victim could have easily made twice that much selling it online.

It's too bad that Sony and Microsoft wont't try a solution like the one I described. They seem to have it out for customers that want to buy digital games. They rarely go down in price and often stay that way indefinitely. Oh well, not my problem I'm a PC gamer and stores like Steam are affordable and easy. I guess console gaming will always suffer because it's a closed market.

Ultratwinkie:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Ultratwinkie:

Yet ownership of data is not the same. When a company sells you a disc, its just a disc. The data inside is not yours, you cant copy it and post it online. The used game sale idea is sketchy at best because every other industry uses it. Companies are doing away with the disc, and just going with the clearer download method.

They are not obligated to SELL a disc. They can sell wherever they damn well please. If they didn't, Steam and origin wouldn't exist and PC gaming along with many genres would be a literal dead relics.

Limiting used games would mean PC gaming-like DRM like steam or access codes. Hardly "world ending."

You know what the difference is? My PS3 cannot extract data from a disk. My PC can. I wouldn't be able to make a copy of a PS3 game using only my PS3. I can do that on a PC. That's why single-use codes on a console would be fucking stupid. It doesn't prevent copying or piracy, it just prevents people from using their rights to an open market.

It DOES bite back to Gamestop from ruining the prospects of console gaming to developers. Console developers are already fed up by the low margins of success due to high tax levied by the corporations, AAA game cost, and the low rate of success thanks to other AAA titles and retail politics. Add used games to that mix and console gaming would be a wasteland of developers owned by Activision, EA, Microsoft, etc. Console gaming would literally be reliant on Halo and COD etc to stay afloat.

If console gaming doesn't make itself more friendly to outside developers, they will just leave for social gaming if not steam. You can either have nice graphics and AAA games or used game sales, you cant have both without severely hurting console gaming.

Peddle that elsewhere, I'm not buying. The developers that are losing money are losing it by simply making games that weren't good enough to justify a purchase. Even high selling games are considered a net loss because sales projections are always inflated to keep shareholders happy.

Example: Nippon Ichi Softworks. Released Disgaea 4, hardly a AAA title, and made a good profit off of it in spite of used game sales. Because when you make a game good enough to buy new, you lose less from used.

Example of that: Skyrim. Gamestop still buys used copies from people at $35 a pop, because they're constantly out of new and used product for it.

Make great games, and you don't need to fear second hand sales, piracy, or whatever boogeyman your P.R. dude attacked yesterday.

DigitalAtlas:
I love when people say "used game sales hurt the industry." because it's got to be the stupidest thing ever said by people currently listening to albums they pirated.

You know why it's stupid? Because they don't hurt anyone but the publisher, and not really even hurt them that much. It's about as damaging as getting a shot from the doctors relative to a gun shot wound.

What a lot of people don't realize is, "new" games are being factory produced for about three months after launch. The obvious exceptions here are Call of Duty games and a few others such as Mass Effect, Fable, and Halo, but that's relatively it. So, if you don't have the bank to buy a brand new game the first few months of launch, your only choice is to get it used.

What people also seem to think, because EC worded it completely incorrectly, is that a publisher NEVER gets your money. Ever. If you go to GameStop, and whether you buy a game new or used, the publisher never eyes that money. What the publisher sees is the money GameStop gives them to send copies of the game. What publishers yack on about is that because of used game sales, they don/t get usually more than the initial order. Side note: Developers don't see ANY of that money mentioned above. Developers are paid during the development of the game and contract bonuses, usually related to MetaCritic scores and reaching a million new copies sold.

With the info given above, you might think that would mean if consoles made it impossible to play a used game, it would drive up orders after the initial launch and keep the game new and in the cycle of sales. Sadly, that isn't the case. What people forget is: game consoles die. They go out of production and stop making new games. But they can be immortal through their legacy. Think about this, what if the NES had the power to block used games? That would mean people looking into getting a legitimate NES console would not be able to play any games on it. At all. They'd only be limited to games of the person they bought the console from. games go out of print and it makes it impossible to get new copies after a certain time, even if the lack of used games would allow new copies to get on store shelves. I know you're probably thinking it's not a big deal, the NES was a long time ago. Eventually, so will the Xbox 360, the PS3, and Wii. Eventually, these new systems will stop having games be printed. And then you're stuck with what you bought in that generation. Nothing else. If you don't see the reality of this, think about how hard it is now to find a new PS2 game.... How long ago was that?

Furthermore, what happened to the joys of going over to a friend's house and showing off your new game?

I hope there's a logical human being who'll read this and feel maybe a little more educated as to why hating on GameStop is the worst thing to do as a fan of video games. Do video games want to be an entertainment medium like music or movies or do they want to be Adobe and Microsoft Office? Only time will tell, and allowing used game sales has everything to do with that question. If they choose, the latter, we can no longer say video games are art. They're software.

Edit: Oh, and going full digital won't solve anything. Servers shut down eventually. All of them.

Now, $20 says no one reads this post because it's too educational and long.

I've said all of these things time and time again and trust me, I know how you feel. It's like people really believe that game developers work pro bono during the ~2 year development time for an average video game, just praying that they'll be paid after release.

I also love the "Gamestop should just die!" comments, because they are so staggeringly ignorant that I can't even comprehend what they must be thinking. I believe the old saying is "Better the evil you know, than the one you don't." Sure, more and more things are moving digital these days, but I seriously doubt physical copies are going to disappear anytime soon and if Gamestop crumbles, what's to stop a worse retail chain from looming up out of the rubble? Gamestop isn't even that bad; The entire used games thing is practically the only thing keeping them afloat. They don't make hardly any profit off of new games.

People on this website like to talk about how much they love going back to games like Baldur's Gate, Final Fantasy VI, Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Half-Life 2, Deus Ex, and so on. In ten years' time or so, how do you think you'll be able to play any of those games anymore if, god forbid, your copy stops working? It's highly likely that they won't be distributed on any download service anymore, you won't be able to find a physical copy in any store, so what does that leave you with?

shrekfan246:

DigitalAtlas:
I love when people say "used game sales hurt the industry." because it's got to be the stupidest thing ever said by people currently listening to albums they pirated.

You know why it's stupid? Because they don't hurt anyone but the publisher, and not really even hurt them that much. It's about as damaging as getting a shot from the doctors relative to a gun shot wound.

What a lot of people don't realize is, "new" games are being factory produced for about three months after launch. The obvious exceptions here are Call of Duty games and a few others such as Mass Effect, Fable, and Halo, but that's relatively it. So, if you don't have the bank to buy a brand new game the first few months of launch, your only choice is to get it used.

What people also seem to think, because EC worded it completely incorrectly, is that a publisher NEVER gets your money. Ever. If you go to GameStop, and whether you buy a game new or used, the publisher never eyes that money. What the publisher sees is the money GameStop gives them to send copies of the game. What publishers yack on about is that because of used game sales, they don/t get usually more than the initial order. Side note: Developers don't see ANY of that money mentioned above. Developers are paid during the development of the game and contract bonuses, usually related to MetaCritic scores and reaching a million new copies sold.

With the info given above, you might think that would mean if consoles made it impossible to play a used game, it would drive up orders after the initial launch and keep the game new and in the cycle of sales. Sadly, that isn't the case. What people forget is: game consoles die. They go out of production and stop making new games. But they can be immortal through their legacy. Think about this, what if the NES had the power to block used games? That would mean people looking into getting a legitimate NES console would not be able to play any games on it. At all. They'd only be limited to games of the person they bought the console from. games go out of print and it makes it impossible to get new copies after a certain time, even if the lack of used games would allow new copies to get on store shelves. I know you're probably thinking it's not a big deal, the NES was a long time ago. Eventually, so will the Xbox 360, the PS3, and Wii. Eventually, these new systems will stop having games be printed. And then you're stuck with what you bought in that generation. Nothing else. If you don't see the reality of this, think about how hard it is now to find a new PS2 game.... How long ago was that?

Furthermore, what happened to the joys of going over to a friend's house and showing off your new game?

I hope there's a logical human being who'll read this and feel maybe a little more educated as to why hating on GameStop is the worst thing to do as a fan of video games. Do video games want to be an entertainment medium like music or movies or do they want to be Adobe and Microsoft Office? Only time will tell, and allowing used game sales has everything to do with that question. If they choose, the latter, we can no longer say video games are art. They're software.

Edit: Oh, and going full digital won't solve anything. Servers shut down eventually. All of them.

Now, $20 says no one reads this post because it's too educational and long.

I've said all of these things time and time again and trust me, I know how you feel. It's like people really believe that game developers work pro bono during the ~2 year development time for an average video game, just praying that they'll be paid after release.

I also love the "Gamestop should just die!" comments, because they are so staggeringly ignorant that I can't even comprehend what they must be thinking. I believe the old saying is "Better the evil you know, than the one you don't." Sure, more and more things are moving digital these days, but I seriously doubt physical copies are going to disappear anytime soon and if Gamestop crumbles, what's to stop a worse retail chain from looming up out of the rubble? Gamestop isn't even that bad; The entire used games thing is practically the only thing keeping them afloat. They don't make hardly any profit off of new games.

People on this website like to talk about how much they love going back to games like Baldur's Gate, Final Fantasy VI, Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Half-Life 2, Deus Ex, and so on. In ten years' time or so, how do you think you'll be able to play any of those games anymore if, god forbid, your copy stops working? It's highly likely that they won't be distributed on any download service anymore, you won't be able to find a physical copy in any store, so what does that leave you with?

Why hello there smart human being!! :D I was wondering how many people skipped my post and went back to blind thinking.

As far as GameStop goes: It's amazing to think a company is the root of all evil when THEY are the only reason Xenoblade Chronicles came to America.

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Ultratwinkie:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

You know what the difference is? My PS3 cannot extract data from a disk. My PC can. I wouldn't be able to make a copy of a PS3 game using only my PS3. I can do that on a PC. That's why single-use codes on a console would be fucking stupid. It doesn't prevent copying or piracy, it just prevents people from using their rights to an open market.

It DOES bite back to Gamestop from ruining the prospects of console gaming to developers. Console developers are already fed up by the low margins of success due to high tax levied by the corporations, AAA game cost, and the low rate of success thanks to other AAA titles and retail politics. Add used games to that mix and console gaming would be a wasteland of developers owned by Activision, EA, Microsoft, etc. Console gaming would literally be reliant on Halo and COD etc to stay afloat.

If console gaming doesn't make itself more friendly to outside developers, they will just leave for social gaming if not steam. You can either have nice graphics and AAA games or used game sales, you cant have both without severely hurting console gaming.

Peddle that elsewhere, I'm not buying. The developers that are losing money are losing it by simply making games that weren't good enough to justify a purchase. Even high selling games are considered a net loss because sales projections are always inflated to keep shareholders happy.

Example: Nippon Ichi Softworks. Released Disgaea 4, hardly a AAA title, and made a good profit off of it in spite of used game sales. Because when you make a game good enough to buy new, you lose less from used.

Example of that: Skyrim. Gamestop still buys used copies from people at $35 a pop, because they're constantly out of new and used product for it.

Make great games, and you don't need to fear second hand sales, piracy, or whatever boogeyman your P.R. dude attacked yesterday.

or they could be losing it because Sony and Microsoft bend every developer over a barrel. Have you seen an indie title on a console gaming shelf?

Its:
Halo
Call of Duty
Elder Scrolls
Assassin's creed
Gears of War

Basically, franchises owned by corporations and conglomerates.

Do you honestly think an indie title will have any chance when the entire shelf is dedicated to AAA? NO. They will stick any non AAA games to the back while the big names get all the face time. This is the reason PC gaming left retail in 2004. The retail chains don't stock "good games" they stock games that SELL. I dare you to go the store and see it for yourself if you don't believe me.

Every retail chain does it, more blatantly are the big names like Walmart. "Great games" no longer apply to console gaming

"Great games" died since the end of the Playstation 2 era, now you better make sure your game has a famous franchise people are familiar with. Hell, Ubisoft refuses to make any new IPs until the next gen. For now, they just make Assassin's creed games. Activision is whoring Call of Duty out practically every year.

As I said before, Skyrim is a famous franchise and has no bearing on anything. Come back to me when a small independent studio comes out with a new console franchise and makes it big using the retail method in recent times without subsidies paid by big companies to make the game an exclusive.

Console gaming is not about great games its about sales, status, and money. If you want actual games, you go to PC gaming.

If you cant "afford" PC gaming, then you have no right to complain.

Ultratwinkie:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Ultratwinkie:

It DOES bite back to Gamestop from ruining the prospects of console gaming to developers. Console developers are already fed up by the low margins of success due to high tax levied by the corporations, AAA game cost, and the low rate of success thanks to other AAA titles and retail politics. Add used games to that mix and console gaming would be a wasteland of developers owned by Activision, EA, Microsoft, etc. Console gaming would literally be reliant on Halo and COD etc to stay afloat.

If console gaming doesn't make itself more friendly to outside developers, they will just leave for social gaming if not steam. You can either have nice graphics and AAA games or used game sales, you cant have both without severely hurting console gaming.

Peddle that elsewhere, I'm not buying. The developers that are losing money are losing it by simply making games that weren't good enough to justify a purchase. Even high selling games are considered a net loss because sales projections are always inflated to keep shareholders happy.

Example: Nippon Ichi Softworks. Released Disgaea 4, hardly a AAA title, and made a good profit off of it in spite of used game sales. Because when you make a game good enough to buy new, you lose less from used.

Example of that: Skyrim. Gamestop still buys used copies from people at $35 a pop, because they're constantly out of new and used product for it.

Make great games, and you don't need to fear second hand sales, piracy, or whatever boogeyman your P.R. dude attacked yesterday.

or they could be losing it because Sony and Microsoft bend every developer over a barrel. Have you seen an indie title on a console gaming shelf?

Its:
Halo
Call of Duty
Elder Scrolls
Assassin's creed
Gears of War

Basically, franchises owned by corporations and conglomerates.

Do you honestly think an indie title will have any chance when the entire shelf is dedicated to AAA? NO. They will stick any non AAA games to the back while the big names get all the face time. This is the reason PC gaming left retail in 2004. The retail chains don't stock "good games" they stock games that SELL. I dare you to go the store and see it for yourself if you don't believe me.

Every retail chain does it, more blatantly are the big names like Walmart. "Great games" no longer apply to console gaming

"Great games" died since the end of the Playstation 2 era, now you better make sure your game has a famous franchise people are familiar with. Hell, Ubisoft refuses to make any new IPs until the next gen. For now, they just make Assassin's creed games. Activision is whoring Call of Duty out practically every year.

As I said before, Skyrim is a famous franchise and has no bearing on anything. Come back to me when a small independent studio comes out with a new console franchise and makes it big using the retail method in recent times without subsidies paid by big companies to make the game an exclusive.

Console gaming is not about great games its about sales, status, and money. If you want actual games, you go to PC gaming.

If you cant "afford" PC gaming, then you have no right to complain.

A) Talking about a shelf at a retailer? Because they have all the games in alphabetical order. I wasn't aware an indy game gets excluded from the alphabet.

B) As I pointed out, less publicized and lower profile games have sold just as well as their couterparts because they made GOOD GAMES. Examples:

Nippon Ichi (Disgaea 4)
Aksys (BlazBlue)
Platinum (Bayonetta)
Koei (Dynasty Warriors 7)

All of the above sold very well.

C) "If you want actual games go to PC"
That's a PC Fanboy statement if I ever heard one. PC didn't leave GameStop because it was "corrupt" or anything to that sort (and GameStop still sells PC games).

D) Do you honestly believe AAA gaming on a PC is economically any different than on a console? It's not.

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Ultratwinkie:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Peddle that elsewhere, I'm not buying. The developers that are losing money are losing it by simply making games that weren't good enough to justify a purchase. Even high selling games are considered a net loss because sales projections are always inflated to keep shareholders happy.

Example: Nippon Ichi Softworks. Released Disgaea 4, hardly a AAA title, and made a good profit off of it in spite of used game sales. Because when you make a game good enough to buy new, you lose less from used.

Example of that: Skyrim. Gamestop still buys used copies from people at $35 a pop, because they're constantly out of new and used product for it.

Make great games, and you don't need to fear second hand sales, piracy, or whatever boogeyman your P.R. dude attacked yesterday.

or they could be losing it because Sony and Microsoft bend every developer over a barrel. Have you seen an indie title on a console gaming shelf?

Its:
Halo
Call of Duty
Elder Scrolls
Assassin's creed
Gears of War

Basically, franchises owned by corporations and conglomerates.

Do you honestly think an indie title will have any chance when the entire shelf is dedicated to AAA? NO. They will stick any non AAA games to the back while the big names get all the face time. This is the reason PC gaming left retail in 2004. The retail chains don't stock "good games" they stock games that SELL. I dare you to go the store and see it for yourself if you don't believe me.

Every retail chain does it, more blatantly are the big names like Walmart. "Great games" no longer apply to console gaming

"Great games" died since the end of the Playstation 2 era, now you better make sure your game has a famous franchise people are familiar with. Hell, Ubisoft refuses to make any new IPs until the next gen. For now, they just make Assassin's creed games. Activision is whoring Call of Duty out practically every year.

As I said before, Skyrim is a famous franchise and has no bearing on anything. Come back to me when a small independent studio comes out with a new console franchise and makes it big using the retail method in recent times without subsidies paid by big companies to make the game an exclusive.

Console gaming is not about great games its about sales, status, and money. If you want actual games, you go to PC gaming.

If you cant "afford" PC gaming, then you have no right to complain.

A) Talking about a shelf at a retailer? Because they have all the games in alphabetical order. I wasn't aware an indy game gets excluded from the alphabet.

B) As I pointed out, less publicized and lower profile games have sold just as well as their couterparts because they made GOOD GAMES. Examples:

Nippon Ichi (Disgaea 4)
Aksys (BlazBlue)
Platinum (Bayonetta)
Koei (Dynasty Warriors 7)

All of the above sold very well.

C) "If you want actual games go to PC"
That's a PC Fanboy statement if I ever heard one. PC didn't leave GameStop because it was "corrupt" or anything to that sort (and GameStop still sells PC games).

D) Do you honestly believe AAA gaming on a PC is economically any different than on a console? It's not.

1. PC games dont have used sales, it has piracy. It also has steam, which means its less likely to go to AAA games.

2. AAA games are a console invention. AAA PC games wouldn't be viable on its own unless its Diablo or Starcraft. If you actually notice where the majority of AAA games come from, they are ports of console AAA to pad the profits or loss from console AAA games.

3. You are citing Japanese developers, which has more leeway than western developers due to fanbase. However, the Japanese developers are hitting a wall. Some people like Megaman creator Keiji Inafune called the game development in Japan stagnant. I take it you couldn't find any western developers? Furthering my point?

4. The only "low profile" would be blazblue. The rest I heard time and time again. Hell, the dynasty warrior series goes back as the late 90s. Hardly recent, since this generation is when the gaming industry monopolized. Disgaea goes back as the PS2 era, that is not applicable to my claim since its not in this generation.

5. Your right that the PC didn't leave gamestop due to corruption. It left out of necessity and the fact retail were shrinking PC games. The shelfs for PC games became smaller and smaller. Steam offered a way that PC games could be seen without bias of "selling." This means that developers can offer more games without having to compensate for retailer bias.

6. Since when do retailers put games in alphabetical order? I have personal experience in retail, they put the best selling games at the front and everything else at the back. This includes more expensive games. Especially if its a particularly big title like Halo or COD.

The only way for games to be in that order is if the store is managed by Sheldon Cooper.

I find it interesting that most of the commentary from game companies that I find repulsive are from companies that make or made games I didn't like.

Not saying its a 1:1, but its usually "Company X made a mediocre game with Y marketing assets. Company X thinks Piracy is like Rape and Used Game sales are the equivalent of Child Slave Labor."

I'm not saying Crysis is bad objectively, but I found myself incredibly board through the game. I had to end up cheating and pretending I was the Predator (infinite suit energy for stealthing) just to keep going.

I had an inner monologue about collecting trophies, I had wished it was an actual game. A solid title where you are specifically predator would be nice.

I realize there are those mashup ones, but I like Predator specifically. Less space marine like and his baby form doesn't give me motion sickness.

Killing_Time:
It's too bad that Sony and Microsoft wont't try a solution like the one I described. They seem to have it out for customers that want to buy digital games. They rarely go down in price and often stay that way indefinitely. Oh well, not my problem I'm a PC gamer and stores like Steam are affordable and easy. I guess console gaming will always suffer because it's a closed market.

O.o Just about every console game I've bought was 50-80% off on Amazon.

The price on Console games tanks in a matter of weeks or months.

I figure in about a month, maybe two, it'll be 19.99 or 24.99 for Mass Effect 3 brand new, that's when I plan to get that.

BUYING USED GAMES IS BAAAD

BUYING "NEW" GAMES AT 66% OF THE ORIGINAL COST ON STEAM DURING A SALE IS GOOD!

Well done, game industry. How are we meant to take you people seriously now?

Ultratwinkie:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Ultratwinkie:

or they could be losing it because Sony and Microsoft bend every developer over a barrel. Have you seen an indie title on a console gaming shelf?

Its:
Halo
Call of Duty
Elder Scrolls
Assassin's creed
Gears of War

Basically, franchises owned by corporations and conglomerates.

Do you honestly think an indie title will have any chance when the entire shelf is dedicated to AAA? NO. They will stick any non AAA games to the back while the big names get all the face time. This is the reason PC gaming left retail in 2004. The retail chains don't stock "good games" they stock games that SELL. I dare you to go the store and see it for yourself if you don't believe me.

Every retail chain does it, more blatantly are the big names like Walmart. "Great games" no longer apply to console gaming

"Great games" died since the end of the Playstation 2 era, now you better make sure your game has a famous franchise people are familiar with. Hell, Ubisoft refuses to make any new IPs until the next gen. For now, they just make Assassin's creed games. Activision is whoring Call of Duty out practically every year.

As I said before, Skyrim is a famous franchise and has no bearing on anything. Come back to me when a small independent studio comes out with a new console franchise and makes it big using the retail method in recent times without subsidies paid by big companies to make the game an exclusive.

Console gaming is not about great games its about sales, status, and money. If you want actual games, you go to PC gaming.

If you cant "afford" PC gaming, then you have no right to complain.

A) Talking about a shelf at a retailer? Because they have all the games in alphabetical order. I wasn't aware an indy game gets excluded from the alphabet.

B) As I pointed out, less publicized and lower profile games have sold just as well as their couterparts because they made GOOD GAMES. Examples:

Nippon Ichi (Disgaea 4)
Aksys (BlazBlue)
Platinum (Bayonetta)
Koei (Dynasty Warriors 7)

All of the above sold very well.

C) "If you want actual games go to PC"
That's a PC Fanboy statement if I ever heard one. PC didn't leave GameStop because it was "corrupt" or anything to that sort (and GameStop still sells PC games).

D) Do you honestly believe AAA gaming on a PC is economically any different than on a console? It's not.

1. PC games dont have used sales, it has piracy. It also has steam, which means its less likely to go to AAA games.

2. AAA games are a console invention. AAA PC games wouldn't be viable on its own unless its Diablo or Starcraft. If you actually notice where the majority of AAA games come from, they are ports of console AAA to pad the profits or loss from console AAA games.

3. You are citing Japanese developers, which has more leeway than western developers due to fanbase. However, the Japanese developers are hitting a wall. Some people like Megaman creator Keiji Inafune called the game development in Japan stagnant. I take it you couldn't find any western developers? Furthering my point?

4. The only "low profile" would be blazblue. The rest I heard time and time again. Hell, the dynasty warrior series goes back as the late 90s. Hardly recent, since this generation is when the gaming industry monopolized. Disgaea goes back as the PS2 era, that is not applicable to my claim since its not in this generation.

5. Your right that the PC didn't leave gamestop due to corruption. It left out of necessity and the fact retail were shrinking PC games. The shelfs for PC games became smaller and smaller. Steam offered a way that PC games could be seen without bias of "selling." This means that developers can offer more games without having to compensate for retailer bias.

6. Since when do retailers put games in alphabetical order? I have personal experience in retail, they put the best selling games at the front and everything else at the back. This includes more expensive games. Especially if its a particularly big title like Halo or COD.

The only way for games to be in that order is if the store is managed by Sheldon Cooper.

1. Single-use codes and CD Ripping are what killed PC used gaming.

2. I see plenty of AAA PC-exclusives, or at least games with PC foremost in mind
Diablo
Starcraft
The Witcher
Half-Life
Age of Empires
Total War series

All of those would be AAA titles (heavily marketed and large budget games)

3. A fanbase? That could easily be said for any game that is a sequel, regardless of the platform.

4. What you asked for were well selling non-AAA titles that weren't from the Halo/CoD/Gears section. It's what I gave. Nitpick if you want.

6. Every GameStop I've been to (4 in the area) all have the games in Alphabetical order. My friend works at the one at my local mall. He spends any time he isn't behind the counter actively sorting them. It's part of GameStop's policy, that while companies can buy prominent ads in the store, all games are to be able to be seen. Period. Any store that hides games is operating outside GameStop's rules.

Ultratwinkie:

Screamarie:

Frostbite3789:

Hi, my name is Steam, and almost everyday I have a special and have the most wonderful seasonal sales!

I don't like playing games on my PC. Plus, my little laptop doesn't play games well, in fact the only PC games I have is portal and the Sims.

I bought my consoles with the understanding that when I put in a game I know the hardware is exactly what I need to play the software and because the controller is easier on my hands and wrists.

Then you have no right to complain about their prices or practices. Consoles are not an open platform, its a corporate-built playground.

Their platform, their rules. Don't like those rules? Leave the platform.

I don't understand why people cant grasp this concept.

Yes, people who buy games and consoles and vacuum cleaners have every right to complain. People can't grasp your concept because it's wrong.

Buretsu:

Frostbite3789:
Actually sale prices on new copies of games are routinely lower than the used price.

Which has more to do with the used game market being founded around gouging the consumer, and less so the occasional developer-supported sale on a relatively older release.

Everyone who has this issue needs to stop shopping at GameStop/EBgames.

This is the price scheme where I go:

NEW ===> USED
59.99 ===> 44.99
49.99 ===> 34.99
39.99 ===> 19.99 - 24.99
29.99 ===> 19.99
19.99 ===> 9.99 - 14.99

OT: I have bought quite a few new and quite a few used games. I buy what I want when I want at the price I feel that it is worth paying for. If I think a game is only worth 20, I will wait for either the new or used price to hit that mark. Eliminating the used games route will just mean I play fewer games and will be strictly PC gaming as I don't need a limited computer (console) to do that.

Ultratwinkie:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Ultratwinkie:

Then you have no right to complain about their prices or practices. Consoles are not an open platform, its a corporate-built playground.

Their platform, their rules. Don't like those rules? Leave the platform.

I don't understand why people cant grasp this concept.

Funny, it's almost as if you've never heard of 'consumer rights' and 'ethical business practises'.

Just because the games industry is a 'corporate playground', that doesn't give publishers the right to do anything they like. There are certain rules which across not only the games industry, but the industry of everything in general. Rules like "No insider trading", "No scamming people out of money for a non-existent product"... and funnily enough, allowing people to buy and sell used goods.

Being able to sell an item to someone else after you already bought it is a sign that you own that item, and are transferring ownership to someone else. And no matter how much they try, publishers have yet to prove that EULA's grant them full ownership of a game and give gamers only a license to play them.

Gaming corporations can do whatever they like as long as they stay within the rules of ethical trading. Once they start breaching those rules however, like by trying to get rid of second-hand sales, then expect them to be hit with a massive uproar and a slap from the legal system.

Yet ownership of data is not the same. When a company sells you a disc, its just a disc. The data inside is not yours, you cant copy it and post it online. The used game sale idea is sketchy at best because every other industry uses it. Companies are doing away with the disc, and just going with the clearer download method.

They are not obligated to SELL a disc. They can sell wherever they damn well please. If they didn't, Steam and origin wouldn't exist and PC gaming along with many genres would be a literal dead relics.

Limiting used games would mean PC gaming-like DRM like steam or access codes. Hardly "world ending."

Why is that people believe that ownership = no restrictions?

You own your car but there are restrictions. You cannot use it to kill people, damage property that isn't yours or other things. I own my Wii games but there are restrictions to that, reselling them isn't one of those restrictions.

Also, what is this nonsense about not owning the data. Just some way for software makers to confuse the issue. What next, you don't own the words in a book you bought? LOL. What ridiculous nonsense.

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Ultratwinkie:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

A) Talking about a shelf at a retailer? Because they have all the games in alphabetical order. I wasn't aware an indy game gets excluded from the alphabet.

B) As I pointed out, less publicized and lower profile games have sold just as well as their couterparts because they made GOOD GAMES. Examples:

Nippon Ichi (Disgaea 4)
Aksys (BlazBlue)
Platinum (Bayonetta)
Koei (Dynasty Warriors 7)

All of the above sold very well.

C) "If you want actual games go to PC"
That's a PC Fanboy statement if I ever heard one. PC didn't leave GameStop because it was "corrupt" or anything to that sort (and GameStop still sells PC games).

D) Do you honestly believe AAA gaming on a PC is economically any different than on a console? It's not.

1. PC games dont have used sales, it has piracy. It also has steam, which means its less likely to go to AAA games.

2. AAA games are a console invention. AAA PC games wouldn't be viable on its own unless its Diablo or Starcraft. If you actually notice where the majority of AAA games come from, they are ports of console AAA to pad the profits or loss from console AAA games.

3. You are citing Japanese developers, which has more leeway than western developers due to fanbase. However, the Japanese developers are hitting a wall. Some people like Megaman creator Keiji Inafune called the game development in Japan stagnant. I take it you couldn't find any western developers? Furthering my point?

4. The only "low profile" would be blazblue. The rest I heard time and time again. Hell, the dynasty warrior series goes back as the late 90s. Hardly recent, since this generation is when the gaming industry monopolized. Disgaea goes back as the PS2 era, that is not applicable to my claim since its not in this generation.

5. Your right that the PC didn't leave gamestop due to corruption. It left out of necessity and the fact retail were shrinking PC games. The shelfs for PC games became smaller and smaller. Steam offered a way that PC games could be seen without bias of "selling." This means that developers can offer more games without having to compensate for retailer bias.

6. Since when do retailers put games in alphabetical order? I have personal experience in retail, they put the best selling games at the front and everything else at the back. This includes more expensive games. Especially if its a particularly big title like Halo or COD.

The only way for games to be in that order is if the store is managed by Sheldon Cooper.

1. Single-use codes and CD Ripping are what killed PC used gaming.

2. I see plenty of AAA PC-exclusives, or at least games with PC foremost in mind
Diablo
Starcraft
The Witcher
Half-Life
Age of Empires
Total War series

All of those would be AAA titles (heavily marketed and large budget games)

3. A fanbase? That could easily be said for any game that is a sequel, regardless of the platform.

4. What you asked for were well selling non-AAA titles that weren't from the Halo/CoD/Gears section. It's what I gave. Nitpick if you want.

6. Every GameStop I've been to (4 in the area) all have the games in Alphabetical order. My friend works at the one at my local mall. He spends any time he isn't behind the counter actively sorting them. It's part of GameStop's policy, that while companies can buy prominent ads in the store, all games are to be able to be seen. Period. Any store that hides games is operating outside GameStop's rules.

2. 90% of that list is around 10-20 years old. Considering that AAA games were a fairly recent practice, that gave those series enough time to gain a sizable fanbase. The only thing that actually has a point is the witcher.

3. I meant Japan itself has a fanbase. Have you seen how much love Japanese developers get? Especially on gaming sites? Hell, Final Fantasy became its poster child.

4. Actually I did give restrictions. It cant be a developer subsidized to make an exclusive, it cant be owned by a corporation, and it has to be recent and new franchise.

6. Just because gamestop doesn't do it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Walmart, Target, Best Buy, etc all do this.

Ultratwinkie:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Ultratwinkie:

1. PC games dont have used sales, it has piracy. It also has steam, which means its less likely to go to AAA games.

2. AAA games are a console invention. AAA PC games wouldn't be viable on its own unless its Diablo or Starcraft. If you actually notice where the majority of AAA games come from, they are ports of console AAA to pad the profits or loss from console AAA games.

3. You are citing Japanese developers, which has more leeway than western developers due to fanbase. However, the Japanese developers are hitting a wall. Some people like Megaman creator Keiji Inafune called the game development in Japan stagnant. I take it you couldn't find any western developers? Furthering my point?

4. The only "low profile" would be blazblue. The rest I heard time and time again. Hell, the dynasty warrior series goes back as the late 90s. Hardly recent, since this generation is when the gaming industry monopolized. Disgaea goes back as the PS2 era, that is not applicable to my claim since its not in this generation.

5. Your right that the PC didn't leave gamestop due to corruption. It left out of necessity and the fact retail were shrinking PC games. The shelfs for PC games became smaller and smaller. Steam offered a way that PC games could be seen without bias of "selling." This means that developers can offer more games without having to compensate for retailer bias.

6. Since when do retailers put games in alphabetical order? I have personal experience in retail, they put the best selling games at the front and everything else at the back. This includes more expensive games. Especially if its a particularly big title like Halo or COD.

The only way for games to be in that order is if the store is managed by Sheldon Cooper.

1. Single-use codes and CD Ripping are what killed PC used gaming.

2. I see plenty of AAA PC-exclusives, or at least games with PC foremost in mind
Diablo
Starcraft
The Witcher
Half-Life
Age of Empires
Total War series

All of those would be AAA titles (heavily marketed and large budget games)

3. A fanbase? That could easily be said for any game that is a sequel, regardless of the platform.

4. What you asked for were well selling non-AAA titles that weren't from the Halo/CoD/Gears section. It's what I gave. Nitpick if you want.

6. Every GameStop I've been to (4 in the area) all have the games in Alphabetical order. My friend works at the one at my local mall. He spends any time he isn't behind the counter actively sorting them. It's part of GameStop's policy, that while companies can buy prominent ads in the store, all games are to be able to be seen. Period. Any store that hides games is operating outside GameStop's rules.

2. 90% of that list is around 10-20 years old. Considering that AAA games were a fairly recent practice, that gave those series enough time to gain a sizable fanbase. The only thing that actually has a point is the witcher.

3. I meant Japan itself has a fanbase. Have you seen how much love Japanese developers get? Especially on gaming sites? Hell, Final Fantasy became its poster child.

4. Actually I did give restrictions. It cant be a developer subsidized to make an exclusive, it cant be owned by a corporation, and it has to be recent and new franchise.

6. Just because gamestop doesn't do it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Walmart, Target, Best Buy, etc all do this.

6. Getting back to the topic at hand, Wal-Mart and Target don't sell games used. Best Buy does, but they're dying because they overcharge on everything. In used retail, used games are given every bit the same fair shake that new games do.

Crono1973:

Ultratwinkie:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Funny, it's almost as if you've never heard of 'consumer rights' and 'ethical business practises'.

Just because the games industry is a 'corporate playground', that doesn't give publishers the right to do anything they like. There are certain rules which across not only the games industry, but the industry of everything in general. Rules like "No insider trading", "No scamming people out of money for a non-existent product"... and funnily enough, allowing people to buy and sell used goods.

Being able to sell an item to someone else after you already bought it is a sign that you own that item, and are transferring ownership to someone else. And no matter how much they try, publishers have yet to prove that EULA's grant them full ownership of a game and give gamers only a license to play them.

Gaming corporations can do whatever they like as long as they stay within the rules of ethical trading. Once they start breaching those rules however, like by trying to get rid of second-hand sales, then expect them to be hit with a massive uproar and a slap from the legal system.

Yet ownership of data is not the same. When a company sells you a disc, its just a disc. The data inside is not yours, you cant copy it and post it online. The used game sale idea is sketchy at best because every other industry uses it. Companies are doing away with the disc, and just going with the clearer download method.

They are not obligated to SELL a disc. They can sell wherever they damn well please. If they didn't, Steam and origin wouldn't exist and PC gaming along with many genres would be a literal dead relics.

Limiting used games would mean PC gaming-like DRM like steam or access codes. Hardly "world ending."

Why is that people believe that ownership = no restrictions?

You own your car but there are restrictions. You cannot use it to kill people, damage property that isn't yours or other things. I own my Wii games but there are restrictions to that, reselling them isn't one of those restrictions.

Also, what is this nonsense about not owning the data. Just some way for software makers to confuse the issue. What next, you don't own the words in a book you bought? LOL. What ridiculous nonsense.

The same way you "buy" an subscription-based MMO. Do you own the data and have a right to use it? No, its a subscription based product, just like an antivirus. The same would go for video games if they decide to go with the DRM route, which they most likely will.

Crono1973:

Ultratwinkie:

Screamarie:

I don't like playing games on my PC. Plus, my little laptop doesn't play games well, in fact the only PC games I have is portal and the Sims.

I bought my consoles with the understanding that when I put in a game I know the hardware is exactly what I need to play the software and because the controller is easier on my hands and wrists.

Then you have no right to complain about their prices or practices. Consoles are not an open platform, its a corporate-built playground.

Their platform, their rules. Don't like those rules? Leave the platform.

I don't understand why people cant grasp this concept.

Yes, people who buy games and consoles and vacuum cleaners have every right to complain. People can't grasp your concept because it's wrong.

How is it wrong? Its a luxury, if you don't like what the company does then you are not FORCED to pay. You have the freedom to move to another platform at any time. However, if you still willingly stay in the platform you don't like, its your fault.

For example, I hate what EA is doing with Origin but I know that no one is forcing me to pay and I avoid it. I hate this double standard when it comes to this debate. When a PC gamer complains, people say he is an entitled elitist. When a console gamer complains, people say he is an innocent victim.

Companies have a choice on what to do with their product, and you have a choice on whether or not to stay. If you choose to stay, then you are consenting to their actions. Simple as.

NameIsRobertPaulson:

Ultratwinkie:

NameIsRobertPaulson:

1. Single-use codes and CD Ripping are what killed PC used gaming.

2. I see plenty of AAA PC-exclusives, or at least games with PC foremost in mind
Diablo
Starcraft
The Witcher
Half-Life
Age of Empires
Total War series

All of those would be AAA titles (heavily marketed and large budget games)

3. A fanbase? That could easily be said for any game that is a sequel, regardless of the platform.

4. What you asked for were well selling non-AAA titles that weren't from the Halo/CoD/Gears section. It's what I gave. Nitpick if you want.

6. Every GameStop I've been to (4 in the area) all have the games in Alphabetical order. My friend works at the one at my local mall. He spends any time he isn't behind the counter actively sorting them. It's part of GameStop's policy, that while companies can buy prominent ads in the store, all games are to be able to be seen. Period. Any store that hides games is operating outside GameStop's rules.

2. 90% of that list is around 10-20 years old. Considering that AAA games were a fairly recent practice, that gave those series enough time to gain a sizable fanbase. The only thing that actually has a point is the witcher.

3. I meant Japan itself has a fanbase. Have you seen how much love Japanese developers get? Especially on gaming sites? Hell, Final Fantasy became its poster child.

4. Actually I did give restrictions. It cant be a developer subsidized to make an exclusive, it cant be owned by a corporation, and it has to be recent and new franchise.

6. Just because gamestop doesn't do it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Walmart, Target, Best Buy, etc all do this.

6. Getting back to the topic at hand, Wal-Mart and Target don't sell games used. Best Buy does, but they're dying because they overcharge on everything. In used retail, used games are given every bit the same fair shake that new games do.

Remember that the retail bias argument came from an argument that console gaming as a whole was struggling, with retail bias being one of the worst factors. Used games have no bearing on retail bias because used game sales don't provide profit to the publisher anyway. They wouldn't care.

The same way you "buy" an subscription-based MMO. Do you own the data and have a right to use it? No, its a subscription based product, just like an antivirus. The same would go for video games if they decide to go with the DRM route, which they most likely will.

MMO's need a server to work. You don't have to use official servers though. You can continue to use the anti-virus/MMO product, you just don't get new updates/use official servers after your subscription ends.

How is it wrong? Its a luxury, if you don't like what the company does then you are not FORCED to pay. You have the freedom to move to another platform at any time. However, if you still willingly stay in the platform you don't like, its your fault.

Luxury or not, consumers still have a right to complain.

For example, I hate what EA is doing with Origin but I know that no one is forcing me to pay and I avoid it. I hate this double standard when it comes to this debate. When a PC gamer complains, people say he is an entitled elitist. When a console gamer complains, people say he is an innocent victim.

You won't find me calling anyone "entitled". In fact, I hate the term altogether. This is an industry that offers no refunds for unhappy customers, they deserve all the bitching they get.

Companies have a choice on what to do with their product, and you have a choice on whether or not to stay. If you choose to stay, then you are consenting to their actions. Simple as.

Not simple as at all. Consumers also have the right to complain. Most products can be returned for a full refund, games cannot and for that reason the only recourse consumers have (for products they already bought) is to complain.

Simply refusing to buy from Nintendo isn't enough, how do you expect Nintendo to know what you didn't like if you don't complain?

Seriously, if the thought that consumers have no right to complain ever enters your mind again, I hope you will remember that the thought is wrong.

Grey Carter:
He went on to add that it's "weird that [second-hand] is still allowed because it doesn't work like that in any other software industries, so it would be great if they could somehow fix that issue as well."

Well, if you want to broaden the picture then why not blow it up to all industries? Oh, I remember why, because then you'll find that software companies are the odd one out and this practise of blocking used games is the problem that needs to be irradicated.
You know, a short while ago I found an old copy of Eternal Darkness for the GameCbe lying on the selves and was able to buy the used game for 5 quid (bucks if you live in the U.S.) and that was great. To be able to get a classic gem like that, even after so many years.
But that won't be possible in the future if this trend continues to progress. So this isn't only a business issue, it's also an issue of preserving gaming's collective archive.

Zachary Amaranth:
without used games, dedicated gaming shops' days are numbered because the only people who can afford games without used sales are box stores and the like, with less diversity, selection and accessories.

Physical stores are all but obsolete and will cease to exist fairly shortly. It's the same for every market and is why, for example, book and CD stores are rapidly vanishing, with only a select few of the biggest chains remaining in brick and mortar business. Music stores? Rare. DVD stores? All but extinct. Movie rental places? Even rarer still.

I couldn't care less about physical stores--either move with the times or be a victim of them. You don't get to cry foul after being run over due to you stubbornly refusing to move out of the way of an oncoming truck, despite seeing it from a mile away. 99% of my games library was purchased either directly from the creator (Torchlight, Minecraft, Terraria, The Eschalon series, etc.) or through digital distributes (The Old Republic, Battlefield 3, Audiosurf, Left4Dead, etc.). Same with my music collection.

Retailers are a useless middleman; so long as people are making games, I can buy directly from them (or their publisher) and hand my money straight to them. Less markup, easier and faster.

This just in: computers and the internet are kind of a big deal.

Crono1973:

The same way you "buy" an subscription-based MMO. Do you own the data and have a right to use it? No, its a subscription based product, just like an antivirus. The same would go for video games if they decide to go with the DRM route, which they most likely will.

MMO's need a server to work. You don't have to use official servers though. You can continue to use the anti-virus/MMO product, you just don't get new updates/use official servers after your subscription ends.

How is it wrong? Its a luxury, if you don't like what the company does then you are not FORCED to pay. You have the freedom to move to another platform at any time. However, if you still willingly stay in the platform you don't like, its your fault.

Luxury or not, consumers still have a right to complain.

For example, I hate what EA is doing with Origin but I know that no one is forcing me to pay and I avoid it. I hate this double standard when it comes to this debate. When a PC gamer complains, people say he is an entitled elitist. When a console gamer complains, people say he is an innocent victim.

You won't find me calling anyone "entitled". In fact, I hate the term altogether. This is an industry that offers no refunds for unhappy customers, they deserve all the bitching they get.

Companies have a choice on what to do with their product, and you have a choice on whether or not to stay. If you choose to stay, then you are consenting to their actions. Simple as.

Not simple as at all. Consumers also have the right to complain. Most products can be returned for a full refund, games cannot and for that reason the only recourse consumers have (for products they already bought) is to complain.

Simply refusing to buy from Nintendo isn't enough, how do you expect Nintendo to know what you didn't like if you don't complain?

Seriously, if the thought that consumers have no right to complain ever enters your mind again, I hope you will remember that the thought is wrong.

How is it wrong? you have yet to answer that.

You have no right to sit on the platform and say "everything must conform to my preferences." Remember this is a LUXURY with ALTERNATIVES.

If we did have that right, we wouldn't have steam and PC gaming would be a dead relic along with MANY genres outside the FPS, action-RPG, and racing games. The company owns the platform, so it decides what to do. If we don't like it, we don't buy it. People STILL hate steam because they don't have CDs. Does that mean steam is "wrong" because of the complainers? Hell no.

Complaining does nothing in the games industry. People bitch and complain but never do anything about it. Case in point, people complained about Modern Warfare, people still bought it. Game companies don't care if we complain, because they know that in the end they will still shell out 60$.

Complaining does nothing, action does.

How is it wrong? you have yet to answer that.

Consumers who spend money on a product have a right to complain. This is fuckin' common sense that everyone but YOU seems to understand.

You have no right to sit on the platform and say "everything must conform to my preferences." Remember this is a LUXURY with ALTERNATIVES.

You seem to believe luxury items are exempt from criticism. You are wrong, that computer you are typing on is a luxury item and that internet you use to spread your anti-consumer nonsense, that's a luxury too. If it went out (we can wish) you would be complaining and to you I would I throw your own words back in your face. IT'S A LUXURY, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN.

Don't bother with how your computer and internet connection are exempt and you retain your rights to complain about them.

If we did have that right, we wouldn't have steam and PC gaming would be a dead relic along with MANY genres outside the FPS, action-RPG, and racing games. The company owns the platform, so it decides what to do. If we don't like it, we don't buy it. People STILL hate steam because they don't have CDs. Does that mean steam is "wrong" because of the complainers? Hell no.

WOW! You really believe this anti-consumer BS don't you.

Yes, people have the right to complain about Steam and they have been (as you admit to). Yet, Steam exists. Can you explain that?

Allow me to do it for you. People have the right to complain, Steam doesn't have to listen. It's so simple it might even work and MOST PEOPLE will understand it. Let's call it Freedom of Speech.

Complaining does nothing in the games industry. People bitch and complain but never do anything about it. Case in point, people complained about Modern Warfare, people still bought it. Game companies don't care if we complain, because they know that in the end they will still shell out 60$.

Well with that attitude you'll never change anything. Off the top of my head I remember people complaining about Xenoblade Chronicles not being released here and that complaining led to a petition which led to me playing it right now. Plan to be playing The Last Story in July too. Did you know that Dragon Quest IX was supposed to be an action RPG? Apparently the Japanese fans complained enough to make Square change it to turn based. I am sure there are many more examples but I only need two since you only provided one and really only one is needed to prove that first sentence of yours wrong.

Complaining does nothing, action does.

Action does nothing unless you tell someone why you didn't buy.

Grey Day for Elcia:

Zachary Amaranth:
without used games, dedicated gaming shops' days are numbered because the only people who can afford games without used sales are box stores and the like, with less diversity, selection and accessories.

Physical stores are all but obsolete and will cease to exist fairly shortly. It's the same for every market and is why, for example, book and CD stores are rapidly vanishing, with only a select few of the biggest chains remaining in brick and mortar business. Music stores? Rare. DVD stores? All but extinct. Movie rental places? Even rarer still.

I couldn't care less about physical stores--either move with the times or be a victim of them. You don't get to cry foul after being run over due to you stubbornly refusing to move out of the way of an oncoming truck, despite seeing it from a mile away. 99% of my games library was purchased either directly from the creator (Torchlight, Minecraft, Terraria, The Eschalon series, etc.) or through digital distributes (The Old Republic, Battlefield 3, Audiosurf, Left4Dead, etc.). Same with my music collection.

Retailers are a useless middleman; so long as people are making games, I can buy directly from them (or their publisher) and hand my money straight to them. Less markup, easier and faster.

This just in: computers and the internet are kind of a big deal.

I love Steam, I love PSN and I love digital distribution when it's done right. Guess what though, without retailers you would be paying shipping on your consoles. Think before you type.

Crono1973:

Grey Day for Elcia:

Zachary Amaranth:
without used games, dedicated gaming shops' days are numbered because the only people who can afford games without used sales are box stores and the like, with less diversity, selection and accessories.

Physical stores are all but obsolete and will cease to exist fairly shortly. It's the same for every market and is why, for example, book and CD stores are rapidly vanishing, with only a select few of the biggest chains remaining in brick and mortar business. Music stores? Rare. DVD stores? All but extinct. Movie rental places? Even rarer still.

I couldn't care less about physical stores--either move with the times or be a victim of them. You don't get to cry foul after being run over due to you stubbornly refusing to move out of the way of an oncoming truck, despite seeing it from a mile away. 99% of my games library was purchased either directly from the creator (Torchlight, Minecraft, Terraria, The Eschalon series, etc.) or through digital distributes (The Old Republic, Battlefield 3, Audiosurf, Left4Dead, etc.). Same with my music collection.

Retailers are a useless middleman; so long as people are making games, I can buy directly from them (or their publisher) and hand my money straight to them. Less markup, easier and faster.

This just in: computers and the internet are kind of a big deal.

I love Steam, I love PSN and I love digital distribution when it's done right. Guess what though, without retailers you would be paying shipping on your consoles. Think before you type.

Um, you do know you pay shipping on your consoles now, right? The store buys the console from the factory and then marks it up to cover shipping, fuel, packaging, paying staff, paying bills and a little more to make money.

Maybe take your own advice and "Think before you type."

Grey Day for Elcia:

Crono1973:

Grey Day for Elcia:

Physical stores are all but obsolete and will cease to exist fairly shortly. It's the same for every market and is why, for example, book and CD stores are rapidly vanishing, with only a select few of the biggest chains remaining in brick and mortar business. Music stores? Rare. DVD stores? All but extinct. Movie rental places? Even rarer still.

I couldn't care less about physical stores--either move with the times or be a victim of them. You don't get to cry foul after being run over due to you stubbornly refusing to move out of the way of an oncoming truck, despite seeing it from a mile away. 99% of my games library was purchased either directly from the creator (Torchlight, Minecraft, Terraria, The Eschalon series, etc.) or through digital distributes (The Old Republic, Battlefield 3, Audiosurf, Left4Dead, etc.). Same with my music collection.

Retailers are a useless middleman; so long as people are making games, I can buy directly from them (or their publisher) and hand my money straight to them. Less markup, easier and faster.

This just in: computers and the internet are kind of a big deal.

I love Steam, I love PSN and I love digital distribution when it's done right. Guess what though, without retailers you would be paying shipping on your consoles. Think before you type.

Um, you do know you pay shipping on your consoles now, right? The store buys the console from the factory and then marks it up to cover shipping, fuel, packaging, paying staff, paying bills and a little more to make money.

Maybe take your own advice and "Think before you type."

No, you are paying MSRP. When you have something shipped to you, you pay MSRP plus shipping.

Crono1973:

Grey Day for Elcia:

Crono1973:

I love Steam, I love PSN and I love digital distribution when it's done right. Guess what though, without retailers you would be paying shipping on your consoles. Think before you type.

Um, you do know you pay shipping on your consoles now, right? The store buys the console from the factory and then marks it up to cover shipping, fuel, packaging, paying staff, paying bills and a little more to make money.

Maybe take your own advice and "Think before you type."

No, you are paying MSRP. When you have something shipped to you, you pay MSRP plus shipping.

I don't think you understand how shops work, sweetie.

See, stores buy the product from the manufacturer and then mark it up in price so they make money.

If you buy it directly from the manufacture, you save a lot of money. In fact, some industries have mark up of more than 100-200% (which means two to three times the cost).

For example, when I purchased my newest TV a few months ago, I went directly to the factory they are made at and ended up paying about $500 less than the lowest price I could find at any of the local shopping centers. I paid $30 postage (shipping).

Crono1973:

How is it wrong? you have yet to answer that.

Consumers who spend money on a product have a right to complain. This is fuckin' common sense that everyone but YOU seems to understand.

You have no right to sit on the platform and say "everything must conform to my preferences." Remember this is a LUXURY with ALTERNATIVES.

You seem to believe luxury items are exempt from criticism. You are wrong, that computer you are typing on is a luxury item and that internet you use to spread your anti-consumer nonsense, that's a luxury too. If it went out (we can wish) you would be complaining and to you I would I throw your own words back in your face. IT'S A LUXURY, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN.

Don't bother with how your computer and internet connection are exempt and you retain your rights to complain about them.

If we did have that right, we wouldn't have steam and PC gaming would be a dead relic along with MANY genres outside the FPS, action-RPG, and racing games. The company owns the platform, so it decides what to do. If we don't like it, we don't buy it. People STILL hate steam because they don't have CDs. Does that mean steam is "wrong" because of the complainers? Hell no.

WOW! You really believe this anti-consumer BS don't you.

Yes, people have the right to complain about Steam and they have been (as you admit to). Yet, Steam exists. Can you explain that?

Allow me to do it for you. People have the right to complain, Steam doesn't have to listen. It's so simple it might even work and MOST PEOPLE will understand it. Let's call it Freedom of Speech.

Complaining does nothing in the games industry. People bitch and complain but never do anything about it. Case in point, people complained about Modern Warfare, people still bought it. Game companies don't care if we complain, because they know that in the end they will still shell out 60$.

Well with that attitude you'll never change anything. Off the top of my head I remember people complaining about Xenoblade Chronicles not being released here and that complaining led to a petition which led to me playing it right now. Plan to be playing The Last Story in July too. Did you know that Dragon Quest IX was supposed to be an action RPG? Apparently the Japanese fans complained enough to make Square change it to turn based. I am sure there are many more examples but I only need two since you only provided one and really only one is needed to prove that first sentence of yours wrong.

Complaining does nothing, action does.

Action does nothing unless you tell someone why you didn't buy.

Its not so much "anti consumer" its more against the constant whining on a platform that is obviously monopolized. They still expect the companies to bend over backwards when they do nothing. They complain, but no action ever takes place.

Game companies don't take gamers seriously.

They failed when Modern Warfare took out the dedicated servers.
They failed at Left for Dead 2.
They failed at Portal 2.
They failed at Windows Live.
They (mostly) failed at Mass Effect 3.

The list goes on where gamers failed to act. They still head out and buy the games despite their protests. Even though they swear back and forth that they hate the company they still pay hard earned money to play it WELL in advance.

If you continue to pay, you consent.

The company will KNOW what happens when their profits go down 90%. If they change the formula and the profits go down, then the recent change is most likely blamed. You don't need to complain, because its almost guaranteed that they wont even bother to listen.

A complaint without action is just noise, and that's exactly whats coming from gamers, just a prolonged noise. If you continue to give money to a company when they consistently screw you over, its your own damn fault and have no right to complain.

Repeatedly buying from a company that screws you over time after time is like repeatedly buying curbstoned cars and saying the scammer is at fault and complaining after your 10th purchase. There is being burned on a purchase (which should be returned), and then there is just hypocrisy tempered with masochism.

Gamers show the latter consistently and they wonder why companies don't take them seriously.

also, if the internet did go out repeatedly, I wouldn't complain. I would go to another service that isn't incompetent. Complaining is just noise, only action has any weight.

You are misunderstanding my point, I am saying complaining is useless and NEVER heeded. Only action has merit. To complain serves no purpose, especially if you intentionally screw yourself over time after time.

There is having a valid criticism, and then there is complaining. Two very different things. Complaining will NOT fix gaming's problems. Its only when gamers actually stand up for themselves and vote with their wallets will problems be fixed. THAT is my point.

Grey Day for Elcia:

Crono1973:

Grey Day for Elcia:
Um, you do know you pay shipping on your consoles now, right? The store buys the console from the factory and then marks it up to cover shipping, fuel, packaging, paying staff, paying bills and a little more to make money.

Maybe take your own advice and "Think before you type."

No, you are paying MSRP. When you have something shipped to you, you pay MSRP plus shipping.

I don't think you understand how shops work, sweetie.

See, stores buy the product from the manufacturer and then mark it up in price so they make money.

If you buy it directly from the manufacture, you save a lot of money. In fact, some industries have mark up of more than 100-200% (which means two to three times the cost).

For example, when I purchased my newest TV a few months ago, I went directly to the factory they are made at and ended up paying about $500 less than the lowest price I could find at any of the local shopping centers. I paid $30 postage (shipping).

No matter where you buy a console, it will cost the same. That is why Sony can run ads for the PS3 and give the price. TV's and game consoles don't work quite the same as far as retailers go. Did you know that retailers don't make much money off of console sales and the only reason they sell them at all is because people usually buy the games at the same place they buy the console. Games are where they make their money. You take away the game and they won't sell the consoles which take up alot of space for very little profit. They could fill that space with other things, like TV's.

Ultratwinkie:

Crono1973:

How is it wrong? you have yet to answer that.

Consumers who spend money on a product have a right to complain. This is fuckin' common sense that everyone but YOU seems to understand.

You have no right to sit on the platform and say "everything must conform to my preferences." Remember this is a LUXURY with ALTERNATIVES.

You seem to believe luxury items are exempt from criticism. You are wrong, that computer you are typing on is a luxury item and that internet you use to spread your anti-consumer nonsense, that's a luxury too. If it went out (we can wish) you would be complaining and to you I would I throw your own words back in your face. IT'S A LUXURY, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN.

Don't bother with how your computer and internet connection are exempt and you retain your rights to complain about them.

If we did have that right, we wouldn't have steam and PC gaming would be a dead relic along with MANY genres outside the FPS, action-RPG, and racing games. The company owns the platform, so it decides what to do. If we don't like it, we don't buy it. People STILL hate steam because they don't have CDs. Does that mean steam is "wrong" because of the complainers? Hell no.

WOW! You really believe this anti-consumer BS don't you.

Yes, people have the right to complain about Steam and they have been (as you admit to). Yet, Steam exists. Can you explain that?

Allow me to do it for you. People have the right to complain, Steam doesn't have to listen. It's so simple it might even work and MOST PEOPLE will understand it. Let's call it Freedom of Speech.

Complaining does nothing in the games industry. People bitch and complain but never do anything about it. Case in point, people complained about Modern Warfare, people still bought it. Game companies don't care if we complain, because they know that in the end they will still shell out 60$.

Well with that attitude you'll never change anything. Off the top of my head I remember people complaining about Xenoblade Chronicles not being released here and that complaining led to a petition which led to me playing it right now. Plan to be playing The Last Story in July too. Did you know that Dragon Quest IX was supposed to be an action RPG? Apparently the Japanese fans complained enough to make Square change it to turn based. I am sure there are many more examples but I only need two since you only provided one and really only one is needed to prove that first sentence of yours wrong.

Complaining does nothing, action does.

Action does nothing unless you tell someone why you didn't buy.

Its not so much "anti consumer" its more against the constant whining on a platform that is obviously monopolized. They still expect the companies to bend over backwards when they do nothing. They complain, but no action ever takes place.

Game companies don't take gamers seriously.

They failed when Modern Warfare took out the dedicated servers.
They failed at Left for Dead 2.
They failed at Portal 2.
They failed at Windows Live.
They (mostly) failed at Mass Effect 3.

The list goes on where gamers failed to act. They still head out and buy the games despite their protests. Even though they swear back and forth that they hate the company they still pay hard earned money to play it WELL in advance.

If you continue to pay, you consent.

The company will KNOW what happens when their profits go down 90%. If they change the formula and the profits go down, then the recent change is most likely blamed. You don't need to complain, because its almost guaranteed that they wont even bother to listen.

A complaint without action is just noise, and that's exactly whats coming from gamers, just a prolonged noise. If you continue to give money to a company when they consistently screw you over, its your own damn fault and have no right to complain.

Repeatedly buying from a company that screws you over time after time is like repeatedly buying curbstoned cars and saying the scammer is at fault and complaining after your 10th purchase. There is being burned on a purchase (which should be returned), and then there is just hypocrisy tempered with masochism.

Gamers show the latter consistently and they wonder why companies don't take them seriously.

also, if the internet did go out repeatedly, I wouldn't complain. I would go to another service that isn't incompetent. Complaining is just noise, only action has any weight.

You are misunderstanding my point, I am saying complaining is useless and NEVER heeded. Only action has merit. To complain serves no purpose, especially if you intentionally screw yourself over time after time.

There is having a valid criticism, and then there is complaining. Two very different things.

This is going in circles, we will have to agree to disagree.

In closing though, it is my view that the more complaining there is, the more people will become aware of certain problems and injustices. The more people who are aware, the more people who boycott and/or put pressure on corporations.

Crono1973:

Ultratwinkie:

Crono1973:

Consumers who spend money on a product have a right to complain. This is fuckin' common sense that everyone but YOU seems to understand.

You seem to believe luxury items are exempt from criticism. You are wrong, that computer you are typing on is a luxury item and that internet you use to spread your anti-consumer nonsense, that's a luxury too. If it went out (we can wish) you would be complaining and to you I would I throw your own words back in your face. IT'S A LUXURY, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN.

Don't bother with how your computer and internet connection are exempt and you retain your rights to complain about them.

WOW! You really believe this anti-consumer BS don't you.

Yes, people have the right to complain about Steam and they have been (as you admit to). Yet, Steam exists. Can you explain that?

Allow me to do it for you. People have the right to complain, Steam doesn't have to listen. It's so simple it might even work and MOST PEOPLE will understand it. Let's call it Freedom of Speech.

Well with that attitude you'll never change anything. Off the top of my head I remember people complaining about Xenoblade Chronicles not being released here and that complaining led to a petition which led to me playing it right now. Plan to be playing The Last Story in July too. Did you know that Dragon Quest IX was supposed to be an action RPG? Apparently the Japanese fans complained enough to make Square change it to turn based. I am sure there are many more examples but I only need two since you only provided one and really only one is needed to prove that first sentence of yours wrong.

Action does nothing unless you tell someone why you didn't buy.

Its not so much "anti consumer" its more against the constant whining on a platform that is obviously monopolized. They still expect the companies to bend over backwards when they do nothing. They complain, but no action ever takes place.

Game companies don't take gamers seriously.

They failed when Modern Warfare took out the dedicated servers.
They failed at Left for Dead 2.
They failed at Portal 2.
They failed at Windows Live.
They (mostly) failed at Mass Effect 3.

The list goes on where gamers failed to act. They still head out and buy the games despite their protests. Even though they swear back and forth that they hate the company they still pay hard earned money to play it WELL in advance.

If you continue to pay, you consent.

The company will KNOW what happens when their profits go down 90%. If they change the formula and the profits go down, then the recent change is most likely blamed. You don't need to complain, because its almost guaranteed that they wont even bother to listen.

A complaint without action is just noise, and that's exactly whats coming from gamers, just a prolonged noise. If you continue to give money to a company when they consistently screw you over, its your own damn fault and have no right to complain.

Repeatedly buying from a company that screws you over time after time is like repeatedly buying curbstoned cars and saying the scammer is at fault and complaining after your 10th purchase. There is being burned on a purchase (which should be returned), and then there is just hypocrisy tempered with masochism.

Gamers show the latter consistently and they wonder why companies don't take them seriously.

also, if the internet did go out repeatedly, I wouldn't complain. I would go to another service that isn't incompetent. Complaining is just noise, only action has any weight.

You are misunderstanding my point, I am saying complaining is useless and NEVER heeded. Only action has merit. To complain serves no purpose, especially if you intentionally screw yourself over time after time.

There is having a valid criticism, and then there is complaining. Two very different things.

This is going in circles, we will have to agree to disagree.

In closing though, it is my view that the more complaining there is, the more people will become aware of certain problems and injustices. The more people who are aware, the more people who boycott and/or put pressure on corporations.

That's the thing, boycotting a service is an action. The same goes for putting pressure on a corporation. When gamers are unhappy, it turns into a Kony 2012-esque version of slacktivism where its easy to express dissatisfaction but they rarely go through with their threats.

slacktivism never actually works.

What gaming needs is actual movement, not cheap lip service. If gamers don't fight, then they can't win.

Ultratwinkie:

Crono1973:

Ultratwinkie:

Its not so much "anti consumer" its more against the constant whining on a platform that is obviously monopolized. They still expect the companies to bend over backwards when they do nothing. They complain, but no action ever takes place.

Game companies don't take gamers seriously.

They failed when Modern Warfare took out the dedicated servers.
They failed at Left for Dead 2.
They failed at Portal 2.
They failed at Windows Live.
They (mostly) failed at Mass Effect 3.

The list goes on where gamers failed to act. They still head out and buy the games despite their protests. Even though they swear back and forth that they hate the company they still pay hard earned money to play it WELL in advance.

If you continue to pay, you consent.

The company will KNOW what happens when their profits go down 90%. If they change the formula and the profits go down, then the recent change is most likely blamed. You don't need to complain, because its almost guaranteed that they wont even bother to listen.

A complaint without action is just noise, and that's exactly whats coming from gamers, just a prolonged noise. If you continue to give money to a company when they consistently screw you over, its your own damn fault and have no right to complain.

Repeatedly buying from a company that screws you over time after time is like repeatedly buying curbstoned cars and saying the scammer is at fault and complaining after your 10th purchase. There is being burned on a purchase (which should be returned), and then there is just hypocrisy tempered with masochism.

Gamers show the latter consistently and they wonder why companies don't take them seriously.

also, if the internet did go out repeatedly, I wouldn't complain. I would go to another service that isn't incompetent. Complaining is just noise, only action has any weight.

You are misunderstanding my point, I am saying complaining is useless and NEVER heeded. Only action has merit. To complain serves no purpose, especially if you intentionally screw yourself over time after time.

There is having a valid criticism, and then there is complaining. Two very different things.

This is going in circles, we will have to agree to disagree.

In closing though, it is my view that the more complaining there is, the more people will become aware of certain problems and injustices. The more people who are aware, the more people who boycott and/or put pressure on corporations.

That's the thing, boycotting a service is an action. The same goes for putting pressure on a corporation. When gamers are unhappy, it turns into a Kony 2012-esque version of slacktivism where its easy to express dissatisfaction but they rarely go through with their threats.

slacktivism never actually works.

What gaming needs is actual movement, not cheap lip service. If gamers don't fight, then they can't win.

The difference between you and I is that I think complaining IS fighting.

Crono1973:

Grey Day for Elcia:

Crono1973:

No, you are paying MSRP. When you have something shipped to you, you pay MSRP plus shipping.

I don't think you understand how shops work, sweetie.

See, stores buy the product from the manufacturer and then mark it up in price so they make money.

If you buy it directly from the manufacture, you save a lot of money. In fact, some industries have mark up of more than 100-200% (which means two to three times the cost).

For example, when I purchased my newest TV a few months ago, I went directly to the factory they are made at and ended up paying about $500 less than the lowest price I could find at any of the local shopping centers. I paid $30 postage (shipping).

No matter where you buy a console, it will cost the same. That is why Sony can run ads for the PS3 and give the price. TV's and game consoles don't work quite the same as far as retailers go. Did you know that retailers don't make much money off of console sales and the only reason they sell them at all is because people usually buy the games at the same place they buy the console. Games are where they make their money. You take away the game and they won't sell the consoles which take up alot of space for very little profit. They could fill that space with other things, like TV's.

Wait, wait, wait, you're telling me you understand what markup is and still think retail would be cheaper? Lol. I'll pay the $20 postage on a console if it saves the massive markup on video games. It's kind of what what PC gamers have been doing, for, oh, say five years--including me, who went to a store, bought the components I liked and built the computer myself to save the cash.

Retail stores = a middleman you pay.

Buy the game straight from the guy making it and save a fuckton.

You can't argue against facts, sweetheart.

Grey Day for Elcia:

Crono1973:

Grey Day for Elcia:
I don't think you understand how shops work, sweetie.

See, stores buy the product from the manufacturer and then mark it up in price so they make money.

If you buy it directly from the manufacture, you save a lot of money. In fact, some industries have mark up of more than 100-200% (which means two to three times the cost).

For example, when I purchased my newest TV a few months ago, I went directly to the factory they are made at and ended up paying about $500 less than the lowest price I could find at any of the local shopping centers. I paid $30 postage (shipping).

No matter where you buy a console, it will cost the same. That is why Sony can run ads for the PS3 and give the price. TV's and game consoles don't work quite the same as far as retailers go. Did you know that retailers don't make much money off of console sales and the only reason they sell them at all is because people usually buy the games at the same place they buy the console. Games are where they make their money. You take away the game and they won't sell the consoles which take up alot of space for very little profit. They could fill that space with other things, like TV's.

Wait, wait, wait, you're telling me you understand what markup is and still think retail would be cheaper? Lol. I'll pay the $20 postage on a console if it saves the massive markup on video games. It's kind of what what PC gamers have been doing, for, oh, say five years--including me, who went to a store, bought the components I liked and built the computer myself to save the cash.

Retail stores = a middleman you pay.

Buy the game straight from the guy making it and save a fuckton.

You can't argue against facts, sweetheart.

Are you for real? These are consoles, not PC's. You can't just buy the parts and put them together yourself.

Also, do you really believe that any savings the big three see will filter down to you? LOL...no...LMAO....no...LMFAO.

The big three are nothing like Steam. Look at the prices for downloadable versions of retail games on XBL and PSN.

Crono1973:
The difference between you and I is that I think complaining IS fighting.

Complaining on an internet forum does nothing. Not a single thing. Ziltch. The companies couldn't care less what you think. All that matter is how people spend their money. For example: people here love to hate on EA (it's the latest fad) but I'd put up $100 that more than ninety percent of the people complaining still purchase the next big game EA puts out. And you know what? EA love it.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here