Why used games are nowhere near piracy....

[QUOTE="navyguy21"]

Again, the individual CAN resell it, but not a steady stream of income from the SAME product. You can sell your movie, but you cant rent tons of them out for profit. Same with new release books. Electronics are different, though Sony proved that this may also apply there. Again, you are arguing your rights as an individual, you cant apply that to a corporation who deals with thousands of games as opposed to you reselling a few games.......ONCE. Gamestop sells multiple copies.......multiple times. This takes money from devs, forcing them to implement the 5-10 dollar online fees. What IM saying is charge Gamestop that 5 - 10 bucks and NOTHING to the consumer

Of course books/movies/albums can be resold for a steady stream of income from the same product. You've never heard of used book/movie/record stores? How are those any different than what GameStop does?

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Ding Ding Ding. This is the answer. Killing used game sales is a bandaid. Used is dead in Japan and its in no better shape then the rest of the world.

Mograine

You mean Japan? Or the used market?

Japans game market is not doing better then the rest of the world due to no used game sales. Though now I'm not sure if I'm thinking of something else.

[QUOTE="Darth_DuMas"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Carrying games is generally a detriment to stores like walmart, they barely break even on it. Hence why the developers stfu when they start a used business. How are you going to bite the hand that is feeding you?

ActicEdge

Thats true, the stores need the second hand market, but I was trying to point out the exact part of used games that makes publishers unhappy. It's not true that people who buy used games as wrong as pirates, I buy used and new games mostly from Amazon and Amazon market place. That's fine but on the high street, chain stores are taking a chunk of the money publishers think they should get for their product. And the publishers are helping to market in the stores.

It's still not right if they investing a whole load in the store from their point of view.

Sure but its a matter of stfu and deal. They carry your product at no gain, sometimes at a decent loss and this is how they are balancing the cost. Sure it sucks but the way you formed the industry forced their hand in this case. One Corporation mad at another Corporation becoming the consumers problem is just damn sad.

Well one things always clear, there's very little give when it comes to publishers for games, music and movies :(.

Then they need to find a way to scale down those costs without having to spend much money, like Sony has with some of their 1st party exclusive games.

garland51

It's the people's mentality that has to change. There's too much focus on cheap, flashy games that swell their production costs with "current gen" graphics and "optimization". Corporations can't really do much about that at this point, considering PS3 and X360 gamers are so used to graphics always improving.

I'm really looking forward to the next generation if this is going to change.

[QUOTE="PBSnipes"]

[QUOTE="navyguy21"]

Again, the individual CAN resell it, but not a steady stream of income from the SAME product. You can sell your movie, but you cant rent tons of them out for profit. Same with new release books. Electronics are different, though Sony proved that this may also apply there. Again, you are arguing your rights as an individual, you cant apply that to a corporation who deals with thousands of games as opposed to you reselling a few games.......ONCE. Gamestop sells multiple copies.......multiple times. This takes money from devs, forcing them to implement the 5-10 dollar online fees. What IM saying is charge Gamestop that 5 - 10 bucks and NOTHING to the consumer

Cranler

Of course books/movies/albums can be resold for a steady stream of income from the same product. You've never heard of used book/movie/record stores? How are those any different than what GameStop does?

This is a flaw in the gaming world that should be addressed then. I don't see why its always "you can't compare because other industries covered their asses and the gaming industry didn't." Fix that then, there is big money to be made. The actual game media itself is still comparable to others in the same form.

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Ding Ding Ding. This is the answer. Killing used game sales is a bandaid. Used is dead in Japan and its in no better shape then the rest of the world.

ActicEdge

You mean Japan? Or the used market?

Japans game market is not doing better then the rest of the world due to no used game sales. Though now I'm not sure if I'm thinking of something else.

From what I heard, Japan's govenment once made used games illegal, & once gamers there heard about the news, they went into an uproar about it. The uproar was so great, that their government was forced to make the used game market legal again.

Japans game market is not doing better then the rest of the world due to no used game sales. Though now I'm not sure if I'm thinking of something else.

ActicEdge

What are you comparing? Game sales?

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Mograine"]

You mean Japan? Or the used market?

garland51

Japans game market is not doing better then the rest of the world due to no used game sales. Though now I'm not sure if I'm thinking of something else.

From what I heard, Japan's govenment once made used games illegal, & once gamers there heard about the news, they went into an uproar about it. The uproar was so great, that their government was forced to make the used game market legal again.

I think this is it. Don't know why I thought it was illegal. Maybe I'm thinking of renting???

I'm sure people against used games are probably against that as well. Barnes and Noble doesnt have a used books section last time I checked. You cant compare used music and movies to games. Musicians make most of there money playing gigs and movies have movie theatres. People in favor of used games dont seem to think much before posting.Cranler

Of course you can compare them: they're entertainment publishing companies that all compete for consumers hard-earned money and limited free time. If the other industries have found alternate business models that alleviate issues with the second-hand market without having to trample the first sale doctrine, then maybe the gaming industry should take a hard look at their own business model and think of ways they can improve things on that end?

... There's a huge difference between piracy and used resale, no matter what percieved similarities there are between the two... not the least of which: Piracy is illegal, used resale is legal and has survived centuuries of court challenges. I have zero guilt to defray with repect to my attitude towards long established rights over resale of my property, and associating a consumers rights with piracy is preposterous. I'm going to assume you overreached here and don't actually need the "Piracy versus resale 101" lesson. Try to remember, both of these issues have been dealt with for generations by various media in the past. These issues are not novel, or new. Society has repeatedly dealt with each issue and the laws in place reflect the position we have adopted as a whole. You'd have a better argument equating piracy with libraries... and I sincerely hope you don't try that one next. :?

santoron

Second hand sales have the same impact as a pirated copy, someone is enjoying the game; and the developers weren't paid. You can rationalize around that, but the impact is the same none the less. This entire thread, is one giant rationalization around the core impact.

You want to call it consumer rights? That's your business. I just see hypocrites bashing PC gamers for piracy, regardless of whether they are actually pirates or not, while they play a game the developers didn't see a penny from. The developers weren't paid for their labour by the person enjoying the game, that consumers have the right to do this; is something I find irrelevant. All I care about is the impact of their decision, not the legality.

Again, I'm going to say this; just to make sure it's made clear. I don't care about the law, consumer rights or anything else that may be used to legitimize second hand sales. All I care about, is they are doing something that causes the same sort of harm as piracy.

People are free to ignore opinions like mine. But if they are going to try to change them, out of some misguided attempt of self reassurance by convincing others, they're having a laugh. If your next question is "do you think they should close down libraries, to ensure corporate profits?" then my answer is no. I'm not suggesting they change anything, if companies want to take measures to combat second hand sales; it's within their power. I'm just saying, people who deny the impact of this are in denial. That it's legitimized by society and wide spread changes nothing.

^^^ If everyone seems to not have a problem with it, could it possibly be that there is not a real issue?

I'm sure people against used games are probably against that as well. Barnes and Noble doesnt have a used books section last time I checked. You cant compare used music and movies to games. Musicians make most of there money playing gigs and movies have movie theatres. People in favor of used games dont seem to think much before posting.Cranler

The last time I checked, there wasn't a college campus in the country that didn't have at least one bookstore completely devoted to buying and selling used textbooks, and thousands of used bookstores exists across the developed in every town with the population to keep it profitable... and have for centuries. :shock: The fact that one bookstore chain doesn't (currently) resale books has nothing to do with the size of the industry. Galleries across the world resale art... often for FAR more than the original artist ever recieved... should that be illegal?

And of course you can compare music, movies, and games. You know, the gaming industry had public venues that they derived the majority of their sales from as well. They were called Arcades. The fact that the industry and consumers largely abandoned the model in no way separates games from other media/art. Movie theatres have seen a huge decline in attendance in the last decade, and most movies end up grossing more in home video sales than their initial theatrical runs. If theatres largely disappear in the next twenty years, would they THEN be comparable (in your mind) to gaming today? Consumer rights don't work that way. You either have a right over your purchased products, or you don't. The ability for a corporation to derive alternate income doesn't factor into the legality of these practices. Again, The videogame industry does not have an income problem, they have a fiscal restraint problem, and this sorry attempt to curtail our rights isn't gonna fix that.

People in favor of tossing away hard won consumer rights don't seem to think much before posting.

[QUOTE="Cranler"][QUOTE="PBSnipes"]

Of course books/movies/albums can be resold for a steady stream of income from the same product. You've never heard of used book/movie/record stores? How are those any different than what GameStop does?

ActicEdge

This is a flaw in the gaming world that should be addressed then. I don't see why its always "you can't compare because other industries covered their asses and the gaming industry didn't." Fix that then, there is big money to be made. The actual game media itself is still comparable to others in the same form.

Film industry lucked out by the fact that they can show films in cinemas.

Whats the game industry supposed to do? Aracades only when a game first releases? Lawl

Devs could go on tour and play gigs? Hows that going to work.

No, you cant compare other entertainment mediums. Games are just too different.

Other industries didnt cover their asses. They were just lucky.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Cranler"] I'm sure people against used games are probably against that as well. Barnes and Noble doesnt have a used books section last time I checked. You cant compare used music and movies to games. Musicians make most of there money playing gigs and movies have movie theatres. People in favor of used games dont seem to think much before posting.Cranler

This is a flaw in the gaming world that should be addressed then. I don't see why its always "you can't compare because other industries covered their asses and the gaming industry didn't." Fix that then, there is big money to be made. The actual game media itself is still comparable to others in the same form.

Film industry lucked out by the fact that they can show films in cinemas.

Whats the game industry supposed to do? Aracades only when a game first releases? Lawl

Devs could go on tour and play gigs? Hows that going to work.

No, you cant compare other entertainment mediums. Games are just too different.

Other industries didnt cover their asses. They were just lucky.

Who says it has to be for just when a game first releases for example, who's to say that they couldn't give an arcade a 6 month advantage over home consoles in release. Why not have premier gaming tours where you get extra content if you pay and go? They could do a lot of things and really, its not for me to come up with the idea, its for the publishers. Its their business. The idea that its impossible to run the games industry differently then how we have it now is silly and wrong.

Who says it has to be for just when a game first releases for example, who's to say that they couldn't give an arcade a 6 month advantage over home consoles in release. Why not have premier gaming tours where you get extra content if you pay and go? They could do a lot of things and really, its not for me to come up with the idea, its for the publishers. Its their business. The idea that its impossible to run the games industry differently then how we have it now is silly and wrong.

ActicEdge

There really isn't much word of mouth between console gamers. Arcades just wouldn't cut it.

Premier gaming tours? WTF? At a concert, people listens to the music they love. What are gamers meant to do on gaming tours :? ? Watch people play a game so that they can spoil it, and extra content with it? That would be even worse than day 0 DLC.

Second hand sales have the same impact as a pirated copy, someone is enjoying the game; and the developers weren't paid. You can rationalize around that, but the impact is the same none the less. This entire thread, is one giant rationalization around the core impact. AnnoyedDragon

Piracy allows untold numbers of people to play a game they haven't paid for. Used resale allows one copy, already paid for to be transferred from one consumer to another. You still can't see a difference yet?

You want to call it consumer rights? That's your business. I just see hypocrites bashing PC gamers for piracy, regardless of whether they are actually pirates or not, while they play a game the developers didn't see a penny from. The developers weren't paid for their labour by the person enjoying the game, that consumers have the right to do this; is something I find irrelevant. All I care about is the impact of their decision, not the legality.AnnoyedDragon

I didn't invent the term. That's the collective term used for the laws protecting our rights over our purchases. That's what most Everyone reasonable calls them. You wish to disagree with the law, that's your business, but don't try to marginalize the law, or the overwhemingly majority view on the matter. I'm still not gonna bite on your pent up SW based frustrations about PC vs console. They don't apply to the law, and trying to give away freedoms to make a point in SW is absurd. You'd be far better served ignoring such ignnorant blather. And again, the developers Were paid for their labor of a resold copy... that is the very point of the first sale doctrine.

]Again, I'm going to say this; just to make sure it's made clear. I don't care about the law, consumer rights or anything else that may be used to legitimize second hand sales. All I care about, is they are doing something that causes the same sort of harm as piracy.

People are free to ignore opinions like mine. But if they are going to try to change them, out of some misguided attempt of self reassurance by convincing others, they're having a laugh. If your next question is "do you think they should close down libraries, to ensure corporate profits?" then my answer is no. I'm not suggesting they change anything, if companies want to take measures to combat second hand sales; it's within their power. I'm just saying, people who deny the impact of this are in denial. That it's legitimized by society and wide spread changes nothing.AnnoyedDragon

So you don't care about laws, morality, popular opinion, only in beefing up corporate profit margins, because they want them. Gotcha. I suppose it's much easier to defend such a stance once you get all those facts and laws out of the way...

And I won't ever deny an impact by resales, simply that it's an impact companies have to learn to work with... like every other medium. There's also an impact on a media company every time I have friends over to watch a DVD, admire a painting my wife purchased, listen to an album while hanging out, check out a book from a library, or borrow a game from a friend. Gaming brings in more money than any other medium. I think they can find a way to survive without stripping away the rights of their customers.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Who says it has to be for just when a game first releases for example, who's to say that they couldn't give an arcade a 6 month advantage over home consoles in release. Why not have premier gaming tours where you get extra content if you pay and go? They could do a lot of things and really, its not for me to come up with the idea, its for the publishers. Its their business. The idea that its impossible to run the games industry differently then how we have it now is silly and wrong.

Mograine

There really isn't much word of mouth between console gamers. Arcades just wouldn't cut it.

Premier gaming tours? WTF? At a concert, people listens to the music they love. What are gamers meant to do on gaming tours :? ? Watch people play a game so that they can spoil it, and extra content with it? That would be even worse than day 0 DLC.

Simple idea, I'm not saying do this, I'm saying that they should come up with something.

^^^ If everyone seems to not have a problem with it, could it possibly be that there is not a real issue?

ActicEdge

To say everyone didn't have a problem with it; would be to exclude the actual game makers. Which a quick Google search would demonstrate, they very much have a problem with second hand sales.

I came to the conclusion that the problem with my arguments; was that I was spending too much time focusing on the surrounding subjects. Not the core subject, the core criticism and point, that I was making. So that's all I'm going to focus on now.

All I want is a admission that 2nd hand sales cause the same damage as piracy. I'm not interested in any other surrounding subjects, the most of which were just arguments for the legitimacy of 2nd hand sales, not counter arguments to their impact.

Simple idea, I'm not saying do this, I'm saying that they should come up with something.

ActicEdge

They are.

Online VIP bs is the future.

I'm flabbergasted how utterly obtuse can some people get when it comes to arguing.

AnnoyedDragon is talking about THE IMPACT second hand sales have comparing it to piracy. Nothing else. Get that through your heads. I'm sick of people trying to completely dodge his points with completely irrelevant statements.

Piracy allows untold numbers of people to play a game they haven't paid for. Used resale allows one copy, already paid for to be transferred from one consumer to another. You still can't see a difference yet?

santoron

All I see is a argument that one of them can cause more harm than the other. Not that 2nd hand sales don't cause the same sort of harm, which is all I'm really concerned about.

I didn't invent the term. That's the collective term used for the laws protecting our rights over our purchases. That's what most Everyone reasonable calls them. You wish to disagree with the law, that's your business, but don't try to marginalize the law, or the overwhemingly majority view on the matter. I'm still not gonna bite on your pent up SW based frustrations about PC vs console. They don't apply to the law, and trying to give away freedoms to make a point in SW is absurd. You'd be far better served ignoring such ignnorant blather. And again, the developers Were paid for their labor of a resold copy... that is the very point of the first sale doctrine.

santoron

I'm not arguing for changing the law or reducing consumer freedoms. All I want is a admission that 2nd hand sales cause the same sort of harm as piracy, which they do.

So you don't care about laws, morality, popular opinion, only in beefing up corporate profit margins, because they want them. Gotcha. I suppose it's much easier to defend such a stance once you get all those facts and laws out of the way...

And I won't ever deny an impact by resales, simply that it's an impact companies have to learn to work with... like every other medium. There's also an impact on a media company every time I have friends over to watch a DVD, admire a painting my wife purchased, listen to an album while hanging out, check out a book from a library, or borrow a game from a friend. Gaming brings in more money than any other medium. I think they can find a way to survive without stripping away the rights of their customers.

santoron

The law legitimizes the practice, but is not a counter argument to the impact of 2nd hand sales.

That's all I wanted to hear, thank you :)

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

^^^ If everyone seems to not have a problem with it, could it possibly be that there is not a real issue?

AnnoyedDragon

To say everyone didn't have a problem with it; would be to exclude the actual gamer makers. Which a quick Google search would demonstrate, they very much have a problem with second hand sales.

I came to the conclusion that the problem with my arguments; was that I was spending too much time focusing on the surrounding subjects. Not the core subject, the core criticism and point, that I was making. So that's all I'm going to focus on now.

All I want is a admission that 2nd hand sales cause the same damage as piracy. I'm not interested in any other surrounding subjects, the most of which were just arguments for the legitimacy of 2nd hand sales, not counter arguments to their impact.

Of course the damage is not the same. An earlier post in this thread quoted the PES devs commenting that they had 400,000 sales intheir first week... and 1,000,000 illegal downloads. Hard to argue that there's no difference in a small subsection of those legitimate sales being transferred to another person, and 1,000,000 people playing for free.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

^^^ If everyone seems to not have a problem with it, could it possibly be that there is not a real issue?

AnnoyedDragon

To say everyone didn't have a problem with it; would be to exclude the actual gamer makers. Which a quick Google search would demonstrate, they very much have a problem with second hand sales.

I came to the conclusion that the problem with my arguments; was that I was spending too much time focusing on the surrounding subjects. Not the core subject, the core criticism and point, that I was making. So that's all I'm going to focus on now.

All I want is a admission that 2nd hand sales cause the same damage as piracy. I'm not interested in any other surrounding subjects, the most of which were just arguments for the legitimacy of 2nd hand sales, not counter arguments to their impact.

You'll get that they cause some damage. I really don't get your crazy obsession with defending PC gaming to the point of drawing conclusions that piracy = used game sales in effect. You will not get that its equivalent to piracy because a game can simply be pirated more times then it is ever resold. There is no real possibility of failure on a pirated version as its just a file that can be obtained from another place if the first version fails, a disk with degrade eventually and finally, in piracy 1 copy can turn into hundreds in seconds. To buy a used game, the game has to be within your grasp and only one person can hold on to it at a time. To pirate a game, you just need an internet file available to anyone with a computer and the internet. As with my dead space example, only 1 person I know legally owns the game, 30 people have it pirated and they all have steam.

Of course the damage is not the same. An earlier post in this thread quoted the PES devs commenting that they had 400,000 sales intheir first week... and 1,000,000 illegal downloads. Hard to argue that there's no difference in a small subsection of those legitimate sales being transferred to another person, and 1,000,000 people playing for free.

santoron

You're just making a argument that one is worse than the other, which is not the subject of my criticism.

[QUOTE="santoron"]

So you don't care about laws, morality, popular opinion, only in beefing up corporate profit margins, because they want them. Gotcha. I suppose it's much easier to defend such a stance once you get all those facts and laws out of the way...

And I won't ever deny an impact by resales, simply that it's an impact companies have to learn to work with... like every other medium. There's also an impact on a media company every time I have friends over to watch a DVD, admire a painting my wife purchased, listen to an album while hanging out, check out a book from a library, or borrow a game from a friend. Gaming brings in more money than any other medium. I think they can find a way to survive without stripping away the rights of their customers.

AnnoyedDragon

The law legitimizes the practice, but is not a counter argument to the impact of 2nd hand sales.

That's all I wanted to hear, thank you :)

You can lead a horse to water.... :?

defending PC gaming

ActicEdge

:lol:

Where did you pull that one out of?

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"] defending PC gaming

Mograine

:lol:

Where did you pull that one out of?

I actually know who I'm talking to while you don't perhaps?

I actually know who I'm talking to while you don't perhaps?

ActicEdge

Ah, so it is assumptions.

How "surprising".

[QUOTE="FinalB"][QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

As a corporation I know that they are going to take matters into their own hands. I just don't have sympathy for them and will not think about the poor developers when I'm buying games. They have their bottom line and I have mine. As far as being cheap is concerned, I do not buy any games at full price ever. In 6 months a new copy costs like 30 to 20 canadian, I'm never in any hurry. Just the idea that a used sale is something they wanna take away from the consumer while directly supporting exactly who they are *****ing about makes me even less inclined to care about them.

ActicEdge

That's not true, if I don't support a business practice it makes no sense to go and purchase titles from them at the price I'm against. I am for games at a $20 to $30 price point and that's what I pay for them the majority of the time. That's the model I want the industry to look at an d observe and that's also what I as a consumer am comfortable paying for the product I get. I don't want to see my favourite developers go under but I'm not going to give them free range to allow them to give it to me up the behind because of that. You want to take it up the behind that's fine though. Also, I can live without games at a $60 price point. I LOVE games with a passion but being blinded by your love of something is a fools decision and while some people want to play the fool, I'm not one of them.

I hope you realize you didn't defend a damn thing I said about you. I know full well you don't support the gaming company's business practice. I also know full well you don't support gaming companies at all. You say you love games with a passion, yet you only buy games 20-30 dollars. Game developers are going well beyond their means in order to supply the demands of the modern gamer, but this is the thanks you give them? You should be ashamed to even call yourself a gamer.

I'm not trying to get on your case or single you out, but there are some things I read from ppl that I just can't forgive.

[QUOTE="santoron"]

Of course the damage is not the same. An earlier post in this thread quoted the PES devs commenting that they had 400,000 sales intheir first week... and 1,000,000 illegal downloads. Hard to argue that there's no difference in a small subsection of those legitimate sales being transferred to another person, and 1,000,000 people playing for free.

AnnoyedDragon

You're just making a argument that one is worse than the other, which is not the subject of my criticism.

... You said:

All I want is a admission that 2nd hand sales cause the same damage as piracy. I'm not interested in any other surrounding subjects, the most of which were just arguments for the legitimacy of 2nd hand sales, not counter arguments to their impact.

AnnoyedDragon

I'm made no argument one was worse... it should be clear to anyone that piracy is worse. I made the argument that piracy caused more damage... as in not the same.

I'm made no argument one was worse... it should be clear to anyone that piracy is worse. I made the argument that piracy caused more damage... as in not the same.

santoron

You haven't proved that in any way, shape or form, so no, it's not "clear" to anyone but those who are rebutting the idea of being associated with pirates.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

I actually know who I'm talking to while you don't perhaps?

Mograine

Ah, so it is assumptions.

How "surprising".

You can call it assumptions but Annoyed is going on about this because it directly relates to PC gaming, he's made it clear in this thread that he views this as console gamers being hypocrits. Why I'm even entertaining you I don't know.

You can call it assumptions but Annoyed is going on about this because it directly relates to PC gaming, he's made it clear in this thread that he views this as console gamers being hypocrits. Why I'm even entertaining you I don't know.

ActicEdge

Because you are?

You haven't made any attempt in actually COUNTERING his arguments. All I've seen up to now are attempts at minimizing his points or dodging them altogether.

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

This is a flaw in the gaming world that should be addressed then. I don't see why its always "you can't compare because other industries covered their asses and the gaming industry didn't." Fix that then, there is big money to be made. The actual game media itself is still comparable to others in the same form.

Film industry lucked out by the fact that they can show films in cinemas.

Whats the game industry supposed to do? Aracades only when a game first releases? Lawl

Devs could go on tour and play gigs? Hows that going to work.

No, you cant compare other entertainment mediums. Games are just too different.

Other industries didnt cover their asses. They were just lucky.

Who says it has to be for just when a game first releases for example, who's to say that they couldn't give an arcade a 6 month advantage over home consoles in release. Why not have premier gaming tours where you get extra content if you pay and go? They could do a lot of things and really, its not for me to come up with the idea, its for the publishers. Its their business. The idea that its impossible to run the games industry differently then how we have it now is silly and wrong.

I'm made no argument one was worse... it should be clear to anyone that piracy is worse. I made the argument that piracy caused more damage... as in not the same.

santoron

Damage was used as a broad term for something I've made clear through repetition. Arguing that piracy causes different types of damage, doesn't detract from a argument talking about people enjoying a game that its makers didn't profit from. Which is at the very least, a element of the damage caused by piracy.

See, I'm being very specific in my argument now. I'm not allowing diversion to other areas; that just distract from the core criticism. All that did was waste time.

I actually know who I'm talking to while you don't perhaps?

ActicEdge

Given that this is System Wars, and that piracy is a favourite subject for console gamers to attack PC with. Is it really that surprising that I would criticise them for the hypocrisy of supporting a industry that robs developers of their income? I don't think I am being out of order.

I remind you that PC also has second hand sales, so this subject isn't solely a criticism of consoles.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="FinalB"] Wow, what a crock of BS. Of course you don't care about the companies if you NEVER buy full price. So tell me what difference it would make if they boycotted or went along with their plan to create a psn pass? It seems to me, you wouldn't care about them no matter what they decided to do. Don't go playing the innocent victim just because you don't wanna shell out a few extra dollars to play the games you enjoy. Jesus, talk about biting the hand that feeds you entertainment.FinalB

That's not true, if I don't support a business practice it makes no sense to go and purchase titles from them at the price I'm against. I am for games at a $20 to $30 price point and that's what I pay for them the majority of the time. That's the model I want the industry to look at an d observe and that's also what I as a consumer am comfortable paying for the product I get. I don't want to see my favourite developers go under but I'm not going to give them free range to allow them to give it to me up the behind because of that. You want to take it up the behind that's fine though. Also, I can live without games at a $60 price point. I LOVE games with a passion but being blinded by your love of something is a fools decision and while some people want to play the fool, I'm not one of them.

I hope you realize you didn't defend a damn thing I said about you. I know full well you don't support the gaming company's business practice. I also know full well you don't support gaming companies at all. You say you love games with a passion, yet you only buy games 20-30 dollars. Game developers are going well beyond their means in order to supply the demands of the modern gamer, but this is the thanks you give them? You should be ashamed to even call yourself a gamer.

I'm not trying to get on your case or single you out, but there are just some things I read from ppl that I just can't forgive.

The current structure of gaming where games need to sell hundreds of thousands of copies in the first few months to make their money back at full $60 is not the business practice I support. I also am not for shiny shallow 5 hour experiences with some mp thrown in that seem to be common trend these days. That's not what I love about gaming, its no wonder I'm not going to buy those at $60. That's stupid. I never asked developers for shiny grapgics, to go out and spend 15 million on a single game, nor did I ask for 800 mp shooters, did I desire HD graphics that have consoles emulating PCs but at a much inferior level and I didn't ask anyone to make games to fuel the "modern gamer" because I'm not the generic "modern gamer". If I should be ashamed for not being a dumb idiot and simply giving multi billion corporations my hard earned money because of their **** management so be it. I don't want your forgiveness, I don't give a damn about whether I'm a real gamer, I don't have gamer pride, **** that bull ****, I'm in it for the joy of playing the games, not the shiny **** and the publisher greed.

Given that this is System Wars, and that piracy is a favourite subject for console gamers to attack PC with. Is it really that surprising that I would criticise them for the hypocrisy of supporting a industry that robs developers of their income? I don't think I am being out of order.

I remind you that PC also has second hand sales, so this subject isn't solely a criticism of consoles.

AnnoyedDragon

I think its crazy to even assume piracy = used game sales. I also think its equally as stupid to say piracy is killing PC gaming and all PC gamers and people with PC are pirates who don't buy game. The platform is THE FASTEST GROWING, of course people are buying games :roll: It doesn't mean that your assumption (or atleast what you seem to be implying) that piracy = used games and console gamers are hypocrits isn't misguided bull either.

It doesn't mean that your assumption (or atleast what you seem to be implying) that piracy = used games and console gamers are hypocrits isn't misguided bull either.

ActicEdge

Oh my god.

You quoted the very post where he explained that part. And you still didn't get it :|

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

You can call it assumptions but Annoyed is going on about this because it directly relates to PC gaming, he's made it clear in this thread that he views this as console gamers being hypocrits. Why I'm even entertaining you I don't know.

Mograine

Because you are?

You haven't made any attempt in actually COUNTERING his arguments. All I've seen up to now are attempts at minimizing his points or dodging them altogether.

What are you talking about? Not here to say Annoyed is wrong in the used game sales hurt devs. USED ANYTHING HURTS THE ORIGINAL CREATORS. No duh. I'm saying a) used games sales and piracy are not the same, their effect is not the same and they have to be tackled differently and b) despite used hurting people, its a right gaurenteed by law in many countries and consumers throwing away their legal rights to please corporations = thee most idiotic thing ever.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"] It doesn't mean that your assumption (or atleast what you seem to be implying) that piracy = used games and console gamers are hypocrits isn't misguided bull either.

Mograine

Oh my god.

You quoted the very post where he explained that part. And you still didn't get it :|

No, he changed his argument now because he couldn't win with the last one. He has now conceded the point everyone has been telling him. I'm explaining exactly why this whole thing was stupid and should have never happened. Annoyed's point is not what the original discussion before he showed up was even about to begin with.

[QUOTE="FinalB"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="FinalB"] Wow, what a crock of BS. Of course you don't care about the companies if you NEVER buy full price. So tell me what difference it would make if they boycotted or went along with their plan to create a psn pass? It seems to me, you wouldn't care about them no matter what they decided to do. Don't go playing the innocent victim just because you don't wanna shell out a few extra dollars to play the games you enjoy. Jesus, talk about biting the hand that feeds you entertainment.ActicEdge

That's not true, if I don't support a business practice it makes no sense to go and purchase titles from them at the price I'm against. I am for games at a $20 to $30 price point and that's what I pay for them the majority of the time. That's the model I want the industry to look at an d observe and that's also what I as a consumer am comfortable paying for the product I get. I don't want to see my favourite developers go under but I'm not going to give them free range to allow them to give it to me up the behind because of that. You want to take it up the behind that's fine though. Also, I can live without games at a $60 price point. I LOVE games with a passion but being blinded by your love of something is a fools decision and while some people want to play the fool, I'm not one of them.

I hope you realize you didn't defend a damn thing I said about you. I know full well you don't support the gaming company's business practice. I also know full well you don't support gaming companies at all. You say you love games with a passion, yet you only buy games 20-30 dollars. Game developers are going well beyond their means in order to supply the demands of the modern gamer, but this is the thanks you give them? You should be ashamed to even call yourself a gamer.

I'm not trying to get on your case or single you out, but there are just some things I read from ppl that I just can't forgive.

The current structure of gaming where games need to sell hundreds of thousands of copies in the first few months to make their money back at full $60 is not the business practice I support. I also am not for shiny shallow 5 hour experiences with some mp thrown in that seem to be common trend these days. That's not what I love about gaming, its no wonder I'm not going to buy those at $60. That's stupid. I never asked developers for shiny grapgics, to go out and spend 15 million on a single game, nor did I ask for 800 mp shooters, did I desire HD graphics that have consoles emulating PCs but at a much inferior level and I didn't ask anyone to make games to fuel the "modern gamer" because I'm not the generic "modern gamer". If I should be ashamed for not being a dumb idiot and simply giving multi billion corporations my hard earned money because of their **** management so be it. I don't want your forgiveness, I don't give a damn about whether I'm a real gamer, I don't have gamer pride, **** that bull ****, I'm in it for the joy of playing the games, not the shiny **** and the publisher greed.

Sounds to me like you don't like this generation of games period. You'd be better off just buying mobile apps or indie pc games. Well w/e, go ahead and keep buying your games used. You'll just have to pay extra if you want online. Finally justice will prevail.

No, he changed his argument now because he couldn't win with the last one. He has now conceded the point everyone has been telling him. I'm explaining exactly why this whole thing was stupid and should have never happened.

ActicEdge

I haven't changed my argument, I organized it. Instead or rearing off into different directions on subjects surrounding the argument I was originally making, I'm sticking to that original argument and not allowing it to move into anything else.

What are you talking about? Not here to say Annoyed is wrong in the used game sales hurt devs. USED ANYTHING HURTS THE ORIGINAL CREATORS. No duh. I'm saying a) used games sales and piracy are not the same, their effect is not the same and they have to be tackled differently and b) despite used hurting people, its a right gaurenteed by law in many countries and consumers throwing away their legal rights to please corporations = thee most idiotic thing ever.

ActicEdge

In regard to someone enjoying a game and not paying the developers for it, piracy and 2nd hand sales are identical. You can argue about piracy being worse, or having different affects, but on that single point I am not wrong. I have also made no arguments as to getting rid of consumer rights, only that they weren't relevant to the argument I was making.

When you drill to the core of it, you don't disagree with me (as you said, duh). It's the surrounding fluff of this debate that has led to disagreement.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

No, he changed his argument now because he couldn't win with the last one. He has now conceded the point everyone has been telling him. I'm explaining exactly why this whole thing was stupid and should have never happened.

AnnoyedDragon

I haven't changed my argument, I organized it. Instead or rearing off into different directions on subjects surrounding the argument I was originally making, I'm sticking to that original argument and not allowing it to move into anything else.

This is a kin to changing the argument. What you are saying now and what you were saying before are not in the realm of comparability man. The topic of gaming licenses relating to used games sales and the laws surrounding them is an entirely different issue then used game sales causing damage. If that was the point you wanted to make in the first place you did a really poor job of just saying that to begin with because no one would argue that they cause damage though you would get those who say its a different kind of damage and its not as significant. That's a debate worth actually having.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

No, he changed his argument now because he couldn't win with the last one. He has now conceded the point everyone has been telling him. I'm explaining exactly why this whole thing was stupid and should have never happened.

AnnoyedDragon

I haven't changed my argument, I organized it. Instead or rearing off into different directions on subjects surrounding the argument I was originally making, I'm sticking to that original argument and not allowing it to move into anything else.

What are you talking about? Not here to say Annoyed is wrong in the used game sales hurt devs. USED ANYTHING HURTS THE ORIGINAL CREATORS. No duh. I'm saying a) used games sales and piracy are not the same, their effect is not the same and they have to be tackled differently and b) despite used hurting people, its a right gaurenteed by law in many countries and consumers throwing away their legal rights to please corporations = thee most idiotic thing ever.

ActicEdge

In regard to someone enjoying a game and not paying the developers for it, piracy and 2nd hand sales are identical. You can argue about piracy being worse, or having different affects, but on that single point I am not wrong. I have also made no arguments as to getting rid of consumer rights, only that they weren't relevant to the argument I was making.

When you drill to the core of it, you don't disagree with me (as you said, duh). It's the surrounding fluff of this debate that has led to disagreement.

The difference to developers is identical, no money. The difference in general is no money from 1000 people not buying my game is worse then no money from 110 people not buying my game because in situation A I lost 1000 potential sales while in situation B I lost 110. No money is no money, if you could kill off one though which would you choose is what I am getting at.

[QUOTE="Cranler"]I'm sure people against used games are probably against that as well. Barnes and Noble doesnt have a used books section last time I checked. You cant compare used music and movies to games. Musicians make most of there money playing gigs and movies have movie theatres. People in favor of used games dont seem to think much before posting.santoron

The last time I checked, there wasn't a college campus in the country that didn't have at least one bookstore completely devoted to buying and selling used textbooks, and thousands of used bookstores exists across the developed in every town with the population to keep it profitable... and have for centuries. :shock: The fact that one bookstore chain doesn't (currently) resale books has nothing to do with the size of the industry. Galleries across the world resale art... often for FAR more than the original artist ever recieved... should that be illegal?

And of course you can compare music, movies, and games. You know, the gaming industry had public venues that they derived the majority of their sales from as well. They were called Arcades. The fact that the industry and consumers largely abandoned the model in no way separates games from other media/art. Movie theatres have seen a huge decline in attendance in the last decade, and most movies end up grossing more in home video sales than their initial theatrical runs. If theatres largely disappear in the next twenty years, would they THEN be comparable (in your mind) to gaming today? Consumer rights don't work that way. You either have a right over your purchased products, or you don't. The ability for a corporation to derive alternate income doesn't factor into the legality of these practices. Again, The videogame industry does not have an income problem, they have a fiscal restraint problem, and this sorry attempt to curtail our rights isn't gonna fix that.

People in favor of tossing away hard won consumer rights don't seem to think much before posting.

I dont see a sharp decline here http://www.the-numbers.com/market/

Arcades even in their prime were nowhere near as prifitiable as theaters. Theyre just too different.

A musician can make more in one night than the average annual salary.

This is a kin to changing the argument. What you are saying now and what you were saying before are not in the realm of comparability man. The topic of gaming licenses relating to used games sales and the laws surrounding them is an entirely different issue then used game sales causing damage. If that was the point you wanted to make in the first place you did a really poor job of just saying that to begin with because no one would argue that they cause damage though you would get those who say its a different kind of damage and its not as significant. That's a debate worth actually having.

ActicEdge

I'll agree I went into the debate badly. It just took several pages of bouncing between different topics; to find the centre ground of what I was attempting to get across.

The difference to developers is identical, no money. The difference in general is no money from 1000 people not buying my game is worse then no money from 110 people not buying my game because in situation A I lost 1000 potential sales while in situation B I lost 110. No money is no money, if you could kill off one though which would you choose is what I am getting at.

ActicEdge

You don't know if those A are potential sales.

You know that B are potential sales.

You don't know what effect killing A would have.

You know what effect B would have.

You can't kill A.

You can kill B.

Something else you need spilled out?

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="FinalB"]

I hope you realize you didn't defend a damn thing I said about you. I know full well you don't support the gaming company's business practice. I also know full well you don't support gaming companies at all. You say you love games with a passion, yet you only buy games 20-30 dollars. Game developers are going well beyond their means in order to supply the demands of the modern gamer, but this is the thanks you give them? You should be ashamed to even call yourself a gamer.

I'm not trying to get on your case or single you out, but there are just some things I read from ppl that I just can't forgive.

FinalB

The current structure of gaming where games need to sell hundreds of thousands of copies in the first few months to make their money back at full $60 is not the business practice I support. I also am not for shiny shallow 5 hour experiences with some mp thrown in that seem to be common trend these days. That's not what I love about gaming, its no wonder I'm not going to buy those at $60. That's stupid. I never asked developers for shiny grapgics, to go out and spend 15 million on a single game, nor did I ask for 800 mp shooters, did I desire HD graphics that have consoles emulating PCs but at a much inferior level and I didn't ask anyone to make games to fuel the "modern gamer" because I'm not the generic "modern gamer". If I should be ashamed for not being a dumb idiot and simply giving multi billion corporations my hard earned money because of their **** management so be it. I don't want your forgiveness, I don't give a damn about whether I'm a real gamer, I don't have gamer pride, **** that bull ****, I'm in it for the joy of playing the games, not the shiny **** and the publisher greed.

Sounds to me like you don't like this generation of games period. You'd be better off just buying mobile apps or indie pc games. Well w/e, go ahead and keep buying your games used. You'll just have to pay extra if you want online. Finally justice will prevail.

I really don't like this generation of games but that said a love of games means I still owe it to myself to try out as many things that interest me as possible. As for used games, I buy few games used, I buy cheap new games because I prefer new because I'm just silly like that. I like tearing off the shrink wrap, I love the fresh disk, the completely new everything. But for example, no new copies of Muramasa in my area and a new one for 20 bucks. Why would I pass that up if I really wanted to play it? I should suffer because I can't find a copy of something I am willing to buy new? I also am not an online gaming type of guy so Justice sure as hell is not being served on my end lol. Being a fan of something means putting up with BS of all kinds, it doesn't mean lettting your rights and your wallet be taken advantage of. I'll pay 99cents to play angry birds, I plopped down 60 bucks for a new copy of Tatsunoko vs Capcom soley because it was a true effort worth being rewarded. I bought MH3 for 30 buck and will be there day one on launch. Knowing what you like, your rights and how to spend money is how you come out a winner in any hobby.

The difference to developers is identical, no money. The difference in general is no money from 1000 people not buying my game is worse then no money from 110 people not buying my game because in situation A I lost 1000 potential sales while in situation B I lost 110. No money is no money, if you could kill off one though which would you choose is what I am getting at.

ActicEdge

Obviously you'd go after the bigger problem, but which is bigger is debatable. Pirates go in with the intent to spend no money, where as second hand buyers are willing to spend money; just less of it. If both issues were somehow resolved. It's debatable how many pirates would become legitimate buyers, were as with second hand sales; they've demonstrated their willingness to spend money on the product. Whether they would buy it full priced, or wait for the price to drop, wouldn't change that they are still a willing purchase.

A debate for another day. As it's quite late my end, and I'm not sure how much longer I'll be up.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

The difference to developers is identical, no money. The difference in general is no money from 1000 people not buying my game is worse then no money from 110 people not buying my game because in situation A I lost 1000 potential sales while in situation B I lost 110. No money is no money, if you could kill off one though which would you choose is what I am getting at.

Mograine

You don't know if those A are potential sales.

You know that B are potential sales.

You don't know what effect killing A would have.

You know what effect B would have.

You can't kill A.

You can kill B.

Something else you need spilled out?

This can be solved using sales logic.

Lesson 1: Anyone who is interested in your product is a potential customer period.
They have shown interest in a product you're selling, its now your job to try and get said person to shell out money for your product. I doesn't matter if they obtain it used or they stole it, its your product they desire, you have their attention you now have a shot regardless of how miniscule to get it into their hands.

Lesson 2: Removing one avenue always has a direct correlation on the main data. If you kill piracy, you can assume game sales would fluctuate. How I don't know but there would be a change. The same goes for used, how the sales would be affected we don't know but their would be a change. Its safe to say in both cases there would probably be a rise in sales though.

Lesson 3: Not really a lesson but rather piracy probably won't die and used everything has never really died either. Its probably safe bet to assume its not going anywhere for a long while. So yeah pretty much those, follow them and you'll be good :)