David Jaffe says rentals and used games 'takes away' from sales.

[QUOTE="kontejner44"]

[QUOTE="IronBass"] I don't see what does not make sense. Jimmy buys Alan Wake new because he knows he can sell it later and recover part of the costs/trade it for another game he's looking forward to. It makes a lot of sense to me.IronBass

Jimmy sell it to Joe, who is buying it used either from gamestop or directly from the person. If you remove that option from Jimmy, he won't buy new games anymore and thus stop gaming (very likely, oh yes)

Are you actually trying to say that by taking away used / rented options, devs won't get more money?

Well I rented God of War 3, i had no real incentive to buy it, make a game longer than one rental with replay value if developers want to solve the problem of rents. For Used games? there is nothing we can do about thatDiviniuz

Exactly if developers stop making 7 hour games maybe there will be less rentals :) what a novel idea! I seriously doubt that that many people will be renting RDR, because R* succeeded in making a long single-player experience that promises to be memorable along with a hopefully great multi-player. As for used sales, speaking for myself buying recently released used games is pointless, since they are all $50-$55, and I might as well buy the new game. When games have been out for a while to possibly make buying used worth it the developers should have already made cash off of all the people who were going to buy it in the first-place (any person who is really looking forward to a game isn't going to wait 6 months to pick it up used for $25). Then by this time it won't be long before the games are added to the "Platinum Hits" collection assuming they were any good. The only time buying used is much of a deal is in that middle area after the game has been on shelves for a while and before it is mass-produced as a $20 new game.

Lastly it is perfectly within the consumers right to buy used or rent. If someone is buying used, someone else has already paid for it new, obviously though they didn't like it enough or feel it was worth keeping so again if developers want to limit used sales make games people will want to pick up again after owning for a year.

I do understand the developers concerns a little bit, but overall they are just being greedy.

Ummm blame the economy, people have to actually hold back on buying games...specially new $60 a pop games. I've been buying used games since oh gee....like the last 12-13 years if not longer.

I do agree the programmers/devs who make video games should get paid for but they already do, when someone buys a videogame used, someone already bought it, when someone rents a game its already been bought.Its like selling a house or a used car, hell we sell items in garage sales for how long?.

Devs need to realize it doesnttake a army of programmers,testers,artists to make video games. Who cares if you want to put out the latest software in a videogame....us gamers just care if we are playing a product thats worth our time and money, we do it to entertain ourselves.

Who cares... saving my money is more importantthan giving full price to a company that makes millions.

Can someone explain to me what happened this gen?

When did gamers start bending over backwards and kneeling for developers/publishers?

This is your money, what you find value in. They should kneel to YOU. They should bend over backwards to YOU. Atleast used games and renting is full on legal. You spend your own money on it. It's not even in the same category as piracy. Not even close. You're comparing theft to timed rentals, or second hand purchases(MONEY BEING SPENT, NOT A FREE PASS).

It's not killing gaming. If the developers/publishers can't adapt to the markets demands that's ON THEM. not the gamers who spent their money on BETTER VALUE!

Can someone explain to me what happened this gen?

When did gamers start bending over backwards and kneeling for developers/publishers?

This is your money, what you find value in. They should kneel to YOU. They should bend over backwards to YOU. Atleast used games and renting is full on legal. You spend your own money on it. It's not even in the same category as piracy. Not even close. You're comparing theft to timed rentals, or second hand purchases(MONEY BEING SPENT, NOT A FREE PASS).

It's not killing gaming. If the developers/publishers can't adapt to the markets demands that's ON THEM. not the gamers who spent their money on BETTER VALUE!

jg4xchamp

First of all, the price of a game depends entierly on supply / demand, there's no "value" to speak of. Also, why should devs kneel to us? It's simple, can't afford? don't buy. It's a luxury product, this is not some charity. Who said it's killing gaming?

We would most likely have seen more sequels to dead series if only people started to buy new games in order to support the games you like, so that hopefully you will see more of that type of game.

[QUOTE="kontejner44"]That's common sense, if you seriously don't see that then you're not open mindedIronBass

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

Can someone explain to me what happened this gen?

When did gamers start bending over backwards and kneeling for developers/publishers?

This is your money, what you find value in. They should kneel to YOU. They should bend over backwards to YOU. Atleast used games and renting is full on legal. You spend your own money on it. It's not even in the same category as piracy. Not even close. You're comparing theft to timed rentals, or second hand purchases(MONEY BEING SPENT, NOT A FREE PASS).

It's not killing gaming. If the developers/publishers can't adapt to the markets demands that's ON THEM. not the gamers who spent their money on BETTER VALUE!

kontejner44

First of all, the price of a game depends entierly on supply / demand, there's no "value" to speak of. Also, why should devs kneel to us? It's simple, can't afford? don't buy. It's a luxury product, this is not some charity. Who said it's killing gaming?

We would most likely have seen more sequels to dead series if only people started to buy new games in order to support the games you like, so that hopefully you will see more of that type of game.

[QUOTE="kontejner44"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

Can someone explain to me what happened this gen?

When did gamers start bending over backwards and kneeling for developers/publishers?

This is your money, what you find value in. They should kneel to YOU. They should bend over backwards to YOU. Atleast used games and renting is full on legal. You spend your own money on it. It's not even in the same category as piracy. Not even close. You're comparing theft to timed rentals, or second hand purchases(MONEY BEING SPENT, NOT A FREE PASS).

It's not killing gaming. If the developers/publishers can't adapt to the markets demands that's ON THEM. not the gamers who spent their money on BETTER VALUE!

jg4xchamp

First of all, the price of a game depends entierly on supply / demand, there's no "value" to speak of. Also, why should devs kneel to us? It's simple, can't afford? don't buy. It's a luxury product, this is not some charity. Who said it's killing gaming?

We would most likely have seen more sequels to dead series if only people started to buy new games in order to support the games you like, so that hopefully you will see more of that type of game.

There's no such thing as value, why do you keep using that word!!

If you don't think the game is worth the price don't buy it. If you want to experience the game, but don't think full price is reasonable, you could wait for a pricedrop.

I'd rather give my money to the dev, be it full price or purchase after pricecut, depending on how much I like the game.

Devs need to STFU about this, imo. Renting and buying used is perfectly within the rights of gamers. Devs/publishers need to get over it. It's not like this is a new thing.

DarkLink77

They take away from sales but from a consumer standpoint, sometimes it makes sense to rent than own if it means saving some money.

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

[QUOTE="kontejner44"]

First of all, the price of a game depends entierly on supply / demand, there's no "value" to speak of. Also, why should devs kneel to us? It's simple, can't afford? don't buy. It's a luxury product, this is not some charity. Who said it's killing gaming?

We would most likely have seen more sequels to dead series if only people started to buy new games in order to support the games you like, so that hopefully you will see more of that type of game.

kontejner44

There's no such thing as value, why do you keep using that word!!

If you don't think the game is worth the price don't buy it. If you want to experience the game, but don't think full price is reasonable, you could wait for a pricedrop.

I'd rather give my money to the dev, be it full price or purchase after pricecut, depending on how much I like the game.

[QUOTE="Greyfeld"]

lol *Kicks hamster*

Well, let's see if I can make this simple...

There is one thing that is being completely left out of the equation in this "down with used games" tirade.

There are a large number of consumers that only buy games at $60 a pop with the assumption that they can turn around and get half their money back in the first couple weeks of release, if they don't like the game, or decide they don't want to keep it after finishing it. If the used gaming market disappears, I believe that these consumers will choose to wait until price drops to buy their games, rather than buying them right off release. And having a chunk of your userbase suddenly decide not to pay full price for your product is nearly as harmful as the used game market itself is to your profits.

Mystic-G

Eh, that's merely speculation really. There's no hard statistics proving such.

There's nothing proving it's false either. And my anecdotal evidence supports that this does, in fact, happen. Since the situation is true, the only question is the actual size of the effect.

Don't really understand these people saying that devs should "make the game worth the price tag".

The biggest problem is that used games are being sold for $5 less than new price, so if it's worth $55, and not $60 then you guys are REALLY stingy with your money if you care so little to put forth a few extra bucks, so your favorite devs can get their share of the loot.

Also, the fact of the matter is that people will always finish playing a game. It's not like someone who buys God of War is going to play it continously for the rest of their life. People that play it are going to eventually want a new game, and if you can trade in your old game for some credit to a new game then why wuoldn't you?

You guys are kidding yourselves if you think that these devs can put forth such an unimaginable amount of effort to make each and every game able to be played for hundreds, if not thousands of hours.

[QUOTE="Mystic-G"]

[QUOTE="Greyfeld"]Because I believe that the used game market helps new game sales just as much as it hurts them. Of course, the logic behind it requires a bit more thought than "u iznt buyin mah new gamez!!" And I don't expect the majority of posters to be willing/able to think much farther than that.IronBass

You need to explain the thought process behind how it helps new game sales. The hamster wheel stopped spinning in my brain trying to comprehend how.

Not just that, but there's also the people who sell old games to buy new games, like myself. I use the games I'm not playing anymore to offset the cost of the price of new games. I don't buy used, but I would buy significantly less if I couldn't do this. This is just like the car industry, for every used car that enters the market, there is typically a new car bought. Do these people not realize that used games are once new? People bought them, and more than likely purchased a new game when getting rid of the old one.

David Jaffe? The geezer who produced GOW? No **** sherlock. When you create an 8 hour game with no replay value, yeah, i guess people will rent instead of buying.

-Snooze-

ROFL well put.

[QUOTE="kontejner44"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]except I do support new games that I like :|

in fact to the point that I don't buy used at all. I don't think the developers complaints, crying, and moaning holds any merit though. They keep complaining that gamestop/gamefly/and other outlets are screwing them over with these practices but you know what that's also a product of the games. not every game is worth 60 bucks to everyone. Used games/rentals provide better deals to people. If the devs want to find a way to stop it.

One of them is you know Providing incentives for the people that buy new. The nickel and dime tactics, DRM, EA online pass, and countless others isn't the way to go. That's all I'm saying. Gamers find a better value for themselves with rentals and used games. They want to stop that. Start giving incentives for people who buy new would be a nice start.

As for why they should kneel to us. Gee I don't know the part where their entire business revolves around us the gamers/the consumers. You give into the demands of the consumers if you are the publishers/developers.

jg4xchamp

There's no such thing as value, why do you keep using that word!!

If you don't think the game is worth the price don't buy it. If you want to experience the game, but don't think full price is reasonable, you could wait for a pricedrop.

I'd rather give my money to the dev, be it full price or purchase after pricecut, depending on how much I like the game.

I hate to use this word, but that is completely subjective. Value is relative to the person whereas quality is not. For someone who enjoys sandbox games, then GTA4 is most likely a game of high value, but if you ask me I don't value that game highly at all because I dislike that type of game, regardless of content or quality.

How do you define value?

Don't really understand these people saying that devs should "make the game worth the price tag".

The biggest problem is that used games are being sold for $5 less than new price, so if it's worth $55, and not $60 then you guys are REALLY stingy with your money if you care so little to put forth a few extra bucks, so your favorite devs can get their share of the loot.

Also, the fact of the matter is that people will always finish playing a game. It's not like someone who buys God of War is going to play it continously for the rest of their life. People that play it are going to eventually want a new game, and if you can trade in your old game for some credit to a new game then why wuoldn't you?

You guys are kidding yourselves if you think that these devs can put forth such an unimaginable amount of effort to make each and every game able to be played for hundreds, if not thousands of hours.

treedoor

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

[QUOTE="kontejner44"]

There's no such thing as value, why do you keep using that word!!

If you don't think the game is worth the price don't buy it. If you want to experience the game, but don't think full price is reasonable, you could wait for a pricedrop.

I'd rather give my money to the dev, be it full price or purchase after pricecut, depending on how much I like the game.

kontejner44

I hate to use this word, but that is completely subjective. Value is relative to the person whereas quality is not. For someone who enjoys sandbox games, then GTA4 is most likely a game of high value, but if you ask me I don't value that game highly at all because I dislike that type of game, regardless of content or quality.

How do you define value?

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

[QUOTE="kontejner44"]

There's no such thing as value, why do you keep using that word!!

If you don't think the game is worth the price don't buy it. If you want to experience the game, but don't think full price is reasonable, you could wait for a pricedrop.

I'd rather give my money to the dev, be it full price or purchase after pricecut, depending on how much I like the game.

kontejner44

I hate to use this word, but that is completely subjective. Value is relative to the person whereas quality is not. For someone who enjoys sandbox games, then GTA4 is most likely a game of high value, but if you ask me I don't value that game highly at all because I dislike that type of game, regardless of content or quality.

How do you define value?

Stop... just stop. You and I both know he's not talking about subjective value in preference between titles. He's talking about value per unit of entertainment. You can place a free can of Coke next to a free 2 liter of Pepsi, and more people are going to choose the latter because of getting more product. Naturally, if you create a game with a story that can be completed in a weekend, with no replayability and no multiplayer... yeah, DUH there are going to be people that don't want to shell out $60 for it.

Not just that, but there's also the people who sell old games to buy new games, like myself.

Pug-Nasty

There's also people who sell used games to buy used games in a cycle, because it's the cheapest route.

[QUOTE="kontejner44"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] How is there no such thing as value :| If two comparable games are at the same price tag, and one of those games gives you far more content at the same price tag. How is it not giving you a better value for your buck?

Greyfeld

I hate to use this word, but that is completely subjective. Value is relative to the person whereas quality is not. For someone who enjoys sandbox games, then GTA4 is most likely a game of high value, but if you ask me I don't value that game highly at all because I dislike that type of game, regardless of content or quality.

How do you define value?

Stop... just stop. You and I both know he's not talking about subjective value in preference between titles. He's talking about value per unit of entertainment. You can place a free can of Coke next to a free 2 liter of Pepsi, and more people are going to choose the latter because of getting more product. Naturally, if you create a game with a story that can be completed in a weekend, with no replayability and no multiplayer... yeah, DUH there are going to be people that don't want to shell out $60 for it.

Mostly true but, your forgot the crucial thing Coke>Pepsi!

[QUOTE="Greyfeld"]

[QUOTE="kontejner44"]

I hate to use this word, but that is completely subjective. Value is relative to the person whereas quality is not. For someone who enjoys sandbox games, then GTA4 is most likely a game of high value, but if you ask me I don't value that game highly at all because I dislike that type of game, regardless of content or quality.

How do you define value?

TacticalDesire

Stop... just stop. You and I both know he's not talking about subjective value in preference between titles. He's talking about value per unit of entertainment. You can place a free can of Coke next to a free 2 liter of Pepsi, and more people are going to choose the latter because of getting more product. Naturally, if you create a game with a story that can be completed in a weekend, with no replayability and no multiplayer... yeah, DUH there are going to be people that don't want to shell out $60 for it.

Mostly true but, your forgot the crucial thing Coke>Pepsi!

[QUOTE="kontejner44"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] How is there no such thing as value :| If two comparable games are at the same price tag, and one of those games gives you far more content at the same price tag. How is it not giving you a better value for your buck?

Greyfeld

I hate to use this word, but that is completely subjective. Value is relative to the person whereas quality is not. For someone who enjoys sandbox games, then GTA4 is most likely a game of high value, but if you ask me I don't value that game highly at all because I dislike that type of game, regardless of content or quality.

How do you define value?

Stop... just stop. You and I both know he's not talking about subjective value in preference between titles. He's talking about value per unit of entertainment. You can place a free can of Coke next to a free 2 liter of Pepsi, and more people are going to choose the latter because of getting more product. Naturally, if you create a game with a story that can be completed in a weekend, with no replayability and no multiplayer... yeah, DUH there are going to be people that don't want to shell out $60 for it.

You need to learn how to step out of your own perspective and see the world from different standpoints. I have 0 interest in a games replayability or multiplayer. My fav game of all time is SMG, which I have only played through once, then put it back up there on the shelf.

As a matter of fact, I shelled out 60 bucks for Uncharted 2, played 11 hours, then put it back up there on the shelf and will most likely never play it again and that's one of the best buys I have ever done in gaming. Beatiful game

[QUOTE="treedoor"]

Don't really understand these people saying that devs should "make the game worth the price tag".

The biggest problem is that used games are being sold for $5 less than new price, so if it's worth $55, and not $60 then you guys are REALLY stingy with your money if you care so little to put forth a few extra bucks, so your favorite devs can get their share of the loot.

Also, the fact of the matter is that people will always finish playing a game. It's not like someone who buys God of War is going to play it continously for the rest of their life. People that play it are going to eventually want a new game, and if you can trade in your old game for some credit to a new game then why wuoldn't you?

You guys are kidding yourselves if you think that these devs can put forth such an unimaginable amount of effort to make each and every game able to be played for hundreds, if not thousands of hours.

Greyfeld

I'm rather confused with your post, so I'll answer as well as i can.

1. $5 IS $5 sure, but it seems people in this thread are putting a huge emphasis on games not worth the full price tag. Is the line that fine that a few bucks determines if you'll buy a game, or not even consider it? If you saw a new $60 on the shelf would you just scoff, and turn away because the $55 option wasn't there?

2. Gamestop, as well as other used game stores. I know they have these cards, but those also cost a little extra money, and not everyone has one.

3. I'm bringing up all the people that say "make the game worth keeping". I'm just noting the fact that nobody is going to play a game forever. You're right about the used market. I already think dd should become the standard, and until then devs should stop complaining.

4. As I said in point 3. People are saying "make a game worth keeping". It doesn't matter if it's an 8 hour game, or a 200 hour game. People will finish playing with them all the same. I'm all for 8 hour games not costing $60 because I too think that's a big fat joke, but even if they cost $30 or $40 would you guys still only settle for the $25 or $35 used version? It doesn't matter what the price of a game is as long as there's that $5 cheaper alternative.

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="treedoor"]

Well, hopefully he hops on board the Digital-Download-Only train.

I mean I don't really get why these devs complain about it when they have the power to change the way the industry does business.

Pug-Nasty

This, the ability to resell a game is important to me, even if it is the thing the "industry" would like to stop. Screw that, make me stop with value, not by removing the option. I, too, will stop gaming if DD becomes standard, it's just not worth it to smile through a kick in the nuts.

[QUOTE="kontejner44"]A part of that group "who wouldn't have bought it anyway" will go ahead and by a new copy if there's no option to buy it used.IronBass

Also, rather they wait for a pricedrop than buyinga used copy.kontejner44

[QUOTE="Greyfeld"]

[QUOTE="kontejner44"]

I hate to use this word, but that is completely subjective. Value is relative to the person whereas quality is not. For someone who enjoys sandbox games, then GTA4 is most likely a game of high value, but if you ask me I don't value that game highly at all because I dislike that type of game, regardless of content or quality.

How do you define value?

TacticalDesire

Stop... just stop. You and I both know he's not talking about subjective value in preference between titles. He's talking about value per unit of entertainment. You can place a free can of Coke next to a free 2 liter of Pepsi, and more people are going to choose the latter because of getting more product. Naturally, if you create a game with a story that can be completed in a weekend, with no replayability and no multiplayer... yeah, DUH there are going to be people that don't want to shell out $60 for it.

Mostly true but, your forgot the crucial thing Coke>Pepsi!

lol i concur, but i was trying to avoid that debate :P

[QUOTE="TacticalDesire"]

[QUOTE="Greyfeld"]

Stop... just stop. You and I both know he's not talking about subjective value in preference between titles. He's talking about value per unit of entertainment. You can place a free can of Coke next to a free 2 liter of Pepsi, and more people are going to choose the latter because of getting more product. Naturally, if you create a game with a story that can be completed in a weekend, with no replayability and no multiplayer... yeah, DUH there are going to be people that don't want to shell out $60 for it.

jg4xchamp

Mostly true but, your forgot the crucial thing Coke>Pepsi!

Unlike piracy, a bought used game is actually a lost sale. Going by that, one would assume that piracy is better than used game sales because it is free and doesn't always amount to a lost sale.shakmaster13

[QUOTE="shakmaster13"]Unlike piracy, a bought used game is actually a lost sale. Going by that, one would assume that piracy is better than used game sales because it is free and doesn't always amount to a lost sale.HuusAsking

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="TacticalDesire"]

Mostly true but, your forgot the crucial thing Coke>Pepsi!

HuusAsking

Its 50/50 because most games today are not worth 60 bucks. 5 hour SP games with zero replayability. What does he expect people to do?

devs cutting game content to push dlc out within the first 3 months of its release is hurting sales.

why pay 60 bucks for a 6-8 hour game then pay another 10 bucks for left out levels and stories or items.

Sometimes renting games encourages me to buy them, and used games can go to hell, unless you don't mind it.:P

[QUOTE="Pug-Nasty"]

Not just that, but there's also the people who sell old games to buy new games, like myself.

Mystic-G

There's also people who sell used games to buy used games in a cycle, because it's the cheapest route.

Of course there is, but that isn't the entirety of the situation. They need to look at the big picture, and if they did, I think they would find they simply sell the same or less new games by trying to push it too hard.

I think, like has been said, the concept of giving "extras" with new purchases, while not withholding content from used buyers is the best course of action. Something cool enough to be enticing, but not have the game be half of what it's supposed to be without it. Also, places like Blockbuster have to pay out the *** for the license fee to be able to rent games, it's not like they pay 60 bucks for a new game, you know? So they can always raise the license fee for rental companies, so that shouldn't be a problem.

I see no reason why they can't enter a dialog with companies in the used game business and sort this out, like a percentage of used game sales go back to the developer/publisher. The pub/devs have the leverage that they could make the used games worth much less by instituting these types of content blocking features, so it would be in the used game industries best interest to avoid that. This way, everyone wins, everyone's happy, life goes on... yada yada yada.

Let me guess, he posted this from his i-pad while driving his Ferrari on the way to the bank to cash a royalty check for $375,000 from 2005's God of War. Boo hoo. It's hard to feel bad for game developers when you read about $35,000,000 BONUSES and exotic sports car collections. You don't see George Lucas crying about Blockbuster. Cry moar.FerdMertz

Lol, I think comparing the average game dev to George Lucas is the epitome of hyperbole. I'd say 90 percent or so of game devs are typically programmers that receive a programmers pay, it's not like every game enjoys the success of the few elite titles. I'm all for their getting paid, but you can't close out a huge portion of your industry simply because you don't profit directly.

We all know that Gamestop makes its money from used games, but how many potential gamers do their thousands of stores bring in? How influential is Gamestop to expanding the gaming audience? These are questions not easily answered, and shouldn't be discounted just because they are difficult to answer.

Devs don't profit from demo downloads either, but they make sales because people try their products. Someone may enter a Gamestop to sell a few old games, only to see some really cool looking new games, and may decide to jump into this generation of games because of it.

Unlike piracy, a bought used game is actually a lost sale. Going by that, one would assume that piracy is better than used game sales because it is free and doesn't always amount to a lost sale.shakmaster13

Off topic- Ok seriously, who is the woman in your avy? I've seen her before but I cant remember. Ive been asking myself that everytime I see it.

On topic- People Still going at it... I cant help but think not everyone used to feel this way, let alone feel this way when they trade in(which fuels the "fire"). There would be some on here being truthful for one, as well as always being like that..but everyone? Heh, doesnt seem like it seeing as this topic is the new ms. sw as of now.

Sometimes renting games encourages me to buy them, and used games can go to hell, unless you don't mind it.:P

mitu123

Back when I used to rent, same here. Alot of games actually. Afterall, how many times can you rent the same thing over and over( this was before those unlimited time deals

[QUOTE="Mystic-G"]

[QUOTE="Pug-Nasty"]

Not just that, but there's also the people who sell old games to buy new games, like myself.

Pug-Nasty

There's also people who sell used games to buy used games in a cycle, because it's the cheapest route.

Of course there is, but that isn't the entirety of the situation. They need to look at the big picture, and if they did, I think they would find they simply sell the same or less new games by trying to push it too hard.

I think, like has been said, the concept of giving "extras" with new purchases, while not withholding content from used buyers is the best course of action. Something cool enough to be enticing, but not have the game be half of what it's supposed to be without it. Also, places like Blockbuster have to pay out the *** for the license fee to be able to rent games, it's not like they pay 60 bucks for a new game, you know? So they can always raise the license fee for rental companies, so that shouldn't be a problem.

I see no reason why they can't enter a dialog with companies in the used game business and sort this out, like a percentage of used game sales go back to the developer/publisher. The pub/devs have the leverage that they could make the used games worth much less by instituting these types of content blocking features, so it would be in the used game industries best interest to avoid that. This way, everyone wins, everyone's happy, life goes on... yada yada yada.

too bad for devs, i will continue to use gamefly and goozex because unlike a lot of you on here i have a daughter to take care of, a mortgage to pay and bills....

LMAO @ this dude acting like renting games is a new thing. game rental services have been around for the last 20 years, and this dude's crying about it now?!?!