[QUOTE="SambaLele"][QUOTE="shawn30"] Never said it wasn't huge. Hell, I've been gaming over twenty years. Just saying its not the end of the world like some people act like is all. As for the gaming market, each industry goes through changes and standards. I don't know what will happen. Only offered a POV why I think it may not be a horrible idea, why, and only if its reasonable shawn30
Â
And exactly why is that DRM approach reasonable?
I can understand why that same thing may work with DD in Steam and GOG for example. In this case you're not actually buying a hard copy of a product, that's your property from there on. And PC gamers still have the option of buying the physical media, instead of DD, if they want to.
With X1 you're talking about mandatory DD policy in the physical market, crippling rights of ownership over what you bought, which are protected by the first sale doctrine.
Is all that reasonable because publishers put all the blame of the industry's problems on used games? Really?
So GM almost went bankrupt because they didn't profit with used cars? Or because they couldn't face competition, and were worse administrators than their competitors? It's the same here to publishers, but they don't want to review their business strategies, if they can just profit more than one time with the same copy  of a game.
It's the easy way out: drop the burden on the consumer.
DRM where it is concered in terms of lending a game to a pal/friend, I want their to be no fee involved in that whatsoever so I can do that and they can play it for free. I wont argue any point counter to that. But the resell side of things, its really simple. Yes, there are more reasons developers/publishers are seeing less revenue than just used games. But the used game market and pirate markets cost them millions a year. That's a fact. So if in addition to buying a used game I am charged an additional reasonable fee (say 5 bucks or so, hopefully) I can understand that. The developers/publishers would gain additional revenue each time their product is sold, which means they stay open and save jobs. I get that point even though it will cost me more money. The gaming industry, as all industry's, is its own beast. This is the direction I see it going, and comparing it to another industry isn't always fair. I don't see it as a burden to pay a small fee more if the developers can continue making the games I enjoy and the industry prospers with added revenue all around. Its not a perfect solution, but it seems to be the one they are going with. And I don't think its the end of the world.Â
Let me quote a particular thing you said:
"But the used game market and pirate markets cost them millions a year. That's a fact."
You know why that is not a fact (in what's pertinent to used games)?
Because that's not their market.
They only lose money when it's their product, something that they own, and lose sales.
They sold you a copy of the game, you didn't buy the IP. You can't decide what direction the series will go, what will happen with characters, etc. But that one copy you bought, that is yours.
There is no reason, at all, to make it different from any durable product you buy. You buy a fry pan, it's yours, a car, it's yours, a house, still the same.
You bought it, you can use it, lend it, throw it away, trash it, sell it or even use it to profit from it yourself, because it's yours. And that goes to copyritghted works you bought (movies, music, games, etc.).
The thing is, people are, for some reason, accepting that the secondhand market is already theirs (the publisher's and the dev's).
It's not. It is your market.
The same goes to any market sector.
Is the gaming market any special? Does it need special treatment, that for example, the car market doesn't need? If devs and publishers entitle themselves to the secondhand market, and manage to do it (with us allowing it), why wouldn't any other company from other market sector want to do the same thing?
Â
PS: one more thing. If you lend the game to your friend, like you said, he plays the game until he's done, and he still doesn't buy the game, won't the company be "losing" a sale? Imo, they're not. They already got paid for it by you. There is no reason to stablish a rule that everyone has to be the owner of the product they're using. One car per person. One movie per person, one game per person, etc. What we can demand, though, is that at least the owner allowed you to use it (since getting something from someone without their permission is stealing, like piracy for example).
Log in to comment