@simon1812 a large portion of the source material they used for creating the game up to this point was take from material created many years ago for a live action television show that never came to fruition.

I sincerely doubt that Disney would simply throw away an IP which has already had so much time and resources dedicated to it and that obviously has potential.

What makes more sense is that in an effort to commercialize the Star Wars name to it's fullest, they have chosen to freeze production to re-evaluate the direction they want to take and to align the game with the live action television show utilizing the same source material.

You can read about the show on the internet, they had literally seasons of show written, sets created, costumes, they just never began shooting. There have been reports of Disney wanting to revisit the idea of a live action show, so really it wouldn't surprise me that they would put anything related on hold.

They're most likely delaying the release of this game to coincide with a collaborative live action Star Wars television series that will be airing on one of ABC's channels (most likely ABC itself in a prime time slot) I cannot confirm this, but if it's true, then you heard it here first.

mind = blown.

Most games these days emphasize and accentuate that they bring choice and a personalized, customized play experience to the table, but I have yet to see a game fully realize it's promises of choice. There are always a handful of "choices" and they're just herding you into one of these predetermined outcomes. I expect to be disappointed, but it will probably still be a good story.

@RossRichard @WantYouBad @SuperDutchy The article sites the production cost of the average game as $50 million, I was simply quoting the source material. even if a game was $100-$200 million production value or more, it would still fit within the pricing structure of a major hollywood budget which still averages $10 per movie ticket.

If a modern game takes $50,000,000 + to develop, market and sell to the public, I don't see why it's ridiculous to suggest that they sell these games for significantly lower than they are now.

Just as an example, modern movies take cost hundreds of million of dollars to produce, market and bring to theatre. The average cost of a movie ticket in the U.S. is under $10.

If game developers and publishers were to market their AAA titles for $30-$40, they would still easily be able to recoup their investment, while at the same time opening up their game to a larger audience, ( ie, those would would not buy the game new, since it would be financially prohibitive )

It specifically says "placeholder". They could have just as easily put $000.00 or $999.99. People read into this way too much.

it's unrealistic to expect this system to be $299. They aren't competing with the Wii U, which sells for more than that at the moment, although I wouldn't be surprised at the price point. I would expect $399.99 for the main SKU and $499.99 for the premium SKU.

Someone needs to bring back the Deception series...I loooooooved that game.

I would like to see their sample size for this statistic.

I'm betting that all the people they asked were most likely buying used games at the time the survey was done. This maximizes the likelihood of getting a favorable outcome for the survey.

so, more realistically, it should have read:

"60% of people who buy used games, say they would not buy a console if it blocked used games."

Also, I'm betting that the sample size was particularly small. probably less than 1000 people, more likely much less

If Gamestop had led a completely impartial all encompassing survey that showed from a sample size of 50,000 or 100,000 people, I would take it much seriously.

but if you notice he says approx. 60% which means that he is giving a rough figure and he doesn't really know for sure, but is simply speculating. That's all this is, speculation

If Gamestop had concrete evidence to back up the findings in this "survey" then he would have exact figures and Microsoft and Sony would be paying much more attention to this, but there is no actual evidence and in reality, Gamestop is simply fearmongering and trying to bully Microsoft into removing the functionality to block used games, because they know that it will hurt their profit margins.

"So it does not have a big impact on the sale of new product. So that's why publishers understand how important the preowned business is to them."

When a title is preowned, the publisher and the developer see no amount of money from that used title. preowned games hurt publishers and developers. Whenever a used game is sold that's one less copy of the game the publisher and developer gets paid for.

What a shame...so many possibilities. I guess Gearbox is a one trick pwny.