Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Xbox One

Author
Message
mr Handy
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Sep 2007
Location: out of TGC
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 12:41
Link
Quote: "I know quite a number of people that aren't willing to spend that kind of money on a video game unless they know they can re-sell it or trade it in for their next purchase."

In Soviet Russia all new games on PC cost $15 or less. Also there is Steam, Origin and other digital stores with low prices (sometimes very low, sometimes even free). Do you want to spent €70 on same games but on console to look like a rich dude, playing expensive games just becasue they are expensive? If you can't afford console games - don't buy the console, there are lots of options to play new games.

And your argument of not buying desired game because you won't be able to resell it is invalid. You buy game if you want to play it, you don't buy game if you don't want to play it, only other option - you can't afford it. No offence, don't complain and find a better job or buy PC digital versions.

Xbox has plenty other problems than reselling.

I don't say that reselling is bad, I know that in USA there is a tradition to rent games, but I don't see a problem. Publishers want you to own games "forever". If you like the game, why not, otherwise you just vote with your wallet.

«Just because you’re unique, doesn’t mean you’re useful»
«If you contributed to the reason for locking, you may now find yourself on moderation, or in extreme cases in the grave»
Back to top
Profile PM
Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 12:58
Link
Quote: "And your argument of not buying desired game because you won't be able to resell it is invalid."


Wrong. By re-selling or trading in I can continue to buy console games, giving me a better deal and supporting the developers. Simply not buying games wouldn't help anyone at all.

Quote: "Also there is Steam, Origin and other digital stores with low prices"


For the last time, we're not discussing purely digital purchases, but physical media.

Quote: "you don't buy game if you don't want to play it, only other option - you can't afford it."


No, the other option is to trade in other games. Are you being dense on purpose?

"Sideboobs are awesome. Getting punched in the face is not." - Jerico2Day on violence and nudity
Back to top
Profile PM Email
wattywatts
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th May 2009
Location: Michigan
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 13:23
Link
Quote: "@All - here's an interesting question: Is buying used games any more morally justifiable than piracy? Considering money does not go to the publisher/developer in either case."


Maybe I'm missing the point due to lack of sleep, but if I followed that logic how would I buy games for my nes, genesis, saturn, dreamcast, etc? I think you're saying I might as well download roms and buy flash carts/ burn cd's.

http://mattsmith.carbonmade.com/
Back to top
Profile PM Email
mr Handy
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Sep 2007
Location: out of TGC
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 14:16 Edited at: 17th Jun 2013 14:22
Link
Quote: "No, the other option is to trade in other games."

I understand your point, but look at this:

Buyng = developer get $200 for 2 copies
Reselling = developer get $100 for 2 copies [edit: not copies exactly!]

IMO only buying can really support gamedev. Don't forget that discs are not made on demand, producing discs costs money too. And amount of produced discs = amount of money expecting from sells to cover producing loss.

Trading and reselling is fair and efficient when most/all of the produced discs were sold.

For example, 50% of discs were sold. Reselling is allowed, so 25% extra people have bought game and resell it to other 25% people. That means 25% of discs will never be sold.

«Just because you’re unique, doesn’t mean you’re useful»
«If you contributed to the reason for locking, you may now find yourself on moderation, or in extreme cases in the grave»
Back to top
Profile PM
Quik
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 14:42
Link
here's what I think - having a resale buisness in a game store - for example, should = you HAVING to pay a % of the sales to the devs - or else it should, in my opinion be illegal..

or to put it in straighter terms - if you have to pay taxes for your used sales, you should give % to the devs.

^
just to not confuse with 1 game sale to a friend.



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
Mobiius
Valued Member
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Feb 2003
Location: The Cold North
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 19:22 Edited at: 17th Jun 2013 19:24
Link
Quote: "Do you want to spent €70 on same games but on console to look like a rich dude, playing expensive games just becasue they are expensive? If you can't afford console games - don't buy the console, there are lots of options to play new games."

Lets break this down...

Quote: "If you can't afford console games - don't buy the console"

Sounds a bit like Don Mattick suggesting you buy an xbox 360 rather than an xbox one, which everyone is kicking off about.


Quote: " having a resale buisness in a game store - for example, should = you HAVING to pay a % of the sales to the devs - or else it should, in my opinion be illegal.."

What stupid things to suggest! this policy doesn't occur with any other purchase in the world, why are video games any different?

Next you idiots will be saying that buying used cars should be illegal, and that moving into a house which someone else has lived in should be illegal, and that charity shops should be illegal as the manufacturers don't get any money.

Simply saying if you can't afford new things then get a better job is a selfish, narrow minded and downright offensive thing to say to people, you self righteous, elitist [expletive deleted]!

Get over yourself and realise that not everyone else in the world is as financially well off as you, and that the resale of goods is a perfectly natural and expected business practice. It's called consumer choice, and encourages producers to produce better/cheaper products to encourage more people to buy new.



I can't believe people are being so narrow minded all over the right to sell a damn video game!

This is my current project, check it out! [href]forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=204576&b=8[/href]
This is my website, check it out! [href]http:\\www.TeamDefiant.co.uk[/href]
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Quik
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 19:34
Link
Quote: "Next you idiots will be saying that buying used cars should be illegal, and that moving into a house which someone else has lived in should be illegal, and that charity shops should be illegal as the manufacturers don't get any money."




the moving into house thing is completly different...

But used cars - sure, why not have some of the money, from used car stores go to the respective car buisness - i dont see why not.



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
Mobiius
Valued Member
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Feb 2003
Location: The Cold North
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 19:48
Link
Quote: "the moving into house thing is completly different..."

How is it different? You're talking about manufacturer A produces product B. Person C resells it to third party D.

Same principle applies to each. You can't have one rule for one, and another for another, that's not how a free economy works.

This is my current project, check it out! [href]forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=204576&b=8[/href]
This is my website, check it out! [href]http:\\www.TeamDefiant.co.uk[/href]
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Quik
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 21:08
Link
if i move into a house - which is build using government founds, then i'm still paying the government for it.



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 21:12 Edited at: 17th Jun 2013 21:14
Link
Quote: "And your argument of not buying desired game because you won't be able to resell it is invalid. You buy game if you want to play it, you don't buy game if you don't want to play it, only other option - you can't afford it. No offence, don't complain and find a better job or buy PC digital versions."


That's a strawman. I have a good budget for my gaming habits. Yes, I would like to be able to resell, I know there's going to be point when buying a game that I will no longer wish to play it. I can either have it wasting space on my shelf, trash it (which is a waste) or have somebody else get joy out of it and maybe have something in return. I would also say game quality comes to account, I need to be able to justify the price of a game before I buy it. Just because I can afford something doesn't mean I should go out wasting money. Like Bulletstorm 2, I paid full price and felt it wasn't worth £40, so I was able to trade it in and somebody else problem ended up enjoying it instead. It was a fun game mind you, just very short.

And you talk about supporting developers, what about supporting retailers? Retailers who are an active part of game promotion and the distribution of games. Consider that GAME in the UK, our biggest retailer for video games almost went out of business not too long ago, I think it's worthwhile supporting them too, developers aren't the only contributors to the video games market.


Quote: "
Trading and reselling is fair and efficient when most/all of the produced discs were sold.
"


As I've pointed out. This is a dilemma for all manufacturers. A lot of manufacturers produce an excess (or produce too little, but you can't accurately predict demand). Not all of their products may be shifted. Yet they still make a healthy profit. This is how manufacturing works. What I don't understand is why games are getting the preferential treatement. I work for a major white goods manufacturer. Why isn't anybody defending us when somebody buys one of our appliances on eBay? We don't see any of that money. Or when somebody buys one second hand from a clearance store.

Simply put. What makes game developers special?

Back to top
Profile PM Website
Quik
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 21:16
Link
Quote: "Simply put. What makes game developers special?"


and as i've pointed out - they aren't... Aside from the fact that you don't see in a store - atleast as far as i've seen

a whole section with "used wacuum cleaners".



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 21:27 Edited at: 17th Jun 2013 21:30
Link
You may not see sections of used vacuum cleaners, but you certainly see second hand shops, clearance stores, auctions and people selling graded or second hand or refurbished goods. There are retailers (usually online) dedicated to selling domestic appliances at really low prices and usually they're second hand or graded units. This doesn't mean the manufacturer is making money from it. I used to work in Cash Converters, we used to get a constant flow of certain second hand items, usually TVs, DVD players, Guitars, jewelry, fishing equipment and the like, so we pretty much had sections for them. Vacuum cleaners were rare though by comparison, usually 1 at a time. Typically a vacuum cleaner is something somebody will own until it dies on them, so we didn't have sections dedicated to them, but there were other things that did, not just games.

Back to top
Profile PM Website
Mobiius
Valued Member
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Feb 2003
Location: The Cold North
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 21:27
Link
Quote: "a whole section with "used Vacuum cleaners"."

Of course you can.

There are shops whose only point is to sell used goods. Shops like Cash Generator, and Cash converter sell almost entirely second hand/used goods. The manufactures have already been paid for that good.

This is my current project, check it out! [href]forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=204576&b=8[/href]
This is my website, check it out! [href]http:\\www.TeamDefiant.co.uk[/href]
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Libervurto
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2006
Location: On Toast
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 22:12
Link
I think what Handy was getting at is that it makes no difference whether you buy a game for $60 and sell it on for $40, or you buy it for $20 and cannot resell it. People don't care about having the privilege of selling on their games, they care about the cost of games (reselling is just a means of recuperating some of the cost).

As for houses and cars, these are functional items, they are also necessities for most people. You can't lend your friend your car because you need it to get to work in the morning. Can we just drop the house analogy because it's even worse than used cars, houses don't depreciate in value like most things.

The best comparison we've come up with so far is books. Movies might seem like a better fit, because they're also digital, but they have lots more revenue streams before going to dvd. Books and games are similar because they only make money by selling individual copies. Books are a lot cheaper to write than games, but they are also cheaper to buy (than console games at least). Authors probably do "lose out" on a lot of revenue because there is no way to restrict physical items, but books also have greater longevity than games; Chaucer still sells pretty well. So even with books it's difficult to draw a comparison.

I think this is the problem everyone is having with this debate (not just our one here, EVERYONE) there really isn't an equivalent to video games, they are a unique medium, and this is a new and unique situation for the industry. There's nothing we can reference to guide us on what is "acceptable", we have to decide for ourselves and vote with our wallets.

The difficulty in learning is not acquiring new knowledge but relinquishing the old.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Quik
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 22:16
Link
Quote: "You may not see sections of used vacuum cleaners, but you certainly see second hand shops, clearance stores, auctions and people selling graded or second hand or refurbished goods. "


And, as i've said - i'm cool with this, because it's on such a small scale.



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 22:32
Link
Yes the items compared aren't accurate comparisons, yet it seems video games are the only ones where people are making a case for the immorality of trading second hand. And yet I see no reason why they're special. Yes, they're different, but that alone doesn't justify the argument. Video games generate a LOT of money and video game companies make a lot of profits, which has facilitated a massive market growth. This is with the ability to trade games and sections in stores with used games...I'm trying to figure out where companies are at a loss, yes, they could have potentially made a lot more if everybody paid full price and yes losses affect overall profits, but only in cases when they over spend or don't satisfy gamers they make losses. But the same argument could be applied to any product on the market, but instead we choose to facilitate a free market.

Granted people speak with their wallet and I will be. Hence I'll likely be the proud owner of a PS4 and not an Xbox One. Of course, in all honesty if there were enough exclusive titles that entice me I could be persuaded to put up with it, but only those exclusives would be bought because I'd have another system for the rest.

Back to top
Profile PM Website
Quik
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 22:51
Link
I would be cool with game actions for example..



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
Libervurto
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2006
Location: On Toast
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 23:30
Link
How much money should game developers make? Is it wrong for them to limit used sales if they can, considering that there is a very limited period to capitalize on a game's success? Should movie studios do the same thing?

The moral argument against used games is interesting. Why should the games industry deserve special consideration above other industries? Gamers are a strange breed, I think we act like sports fans with our favorite devs that we follow and support. There's also these weird cultish thing that's hanging on, why are we called "gamers"? I've never heard people who read books explicitly called "readers", that would make the person saying it sound illiterate for a start. Even now that "gaming" is main stream we still want to disassociate ourselves from the cow-clicking, gem busting "casuals", so we've retained the "gamer" label (or even the upgraded "hardcore gamer", which I don't like at all). Is this stunted, anti-socially possessive sub-culture the cause of the whole "moral argument" against used games? Is there a sense of betrayal when a fellow gamer doesn't pay their dues to support the industry?

The difficulty in learning is not acquiring new knowledge but relinquishing the old.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 17th Jun 2013 23:47 Edited at: 17th Jun 2013 23:51
Link
I don't think I should say how much a game developers should make. If they wish to limit sales then that's their own perogative, I don't like the idea, but I'm not going to demand or dictate how somebody runs their business. It just may mean I won't support them or I may not buy their product. This is what may happen with XBox One and it seems many have reflected their view on what MS is doing with XBox One, hence the stir is has caused. But I suspect it'll receive enough support to live, but at the moment, I think PS4 will be much more popular. But not everybody in the world is bothered by the restrictions placed and for some who are bothered, they're probably not bothered enough to abstain from purchase. And frankly, I know if enough exclusive titles interest me, I'll prolly buy specifically for those titles, it's how I ended up with a 360 in the first place (and I love my 360). Presently, it's not the case. It's all about weighing the pros against the cons.

Again, you talk about supporting game developers, but I don't see anybody talking about supporting game retailers. Game retailers do their bit on promoting and distributing video games. Second hand games help game retailers and they're not exactly rolling in money. Heck, despite owning Steam, I still buy PC games off of the shelf, but sadly the PC section in GAME is tiny these days, so I actually rarely find what I want. I tend to buy games in store more than I do online. When there were independent game stores I could visit, I bought from them when I could - at least I used to go to a couple when I was a student. I'll often pop into GAME or another game store to browse and get an idea of the top games out, see what's up and coming and even talk about games.

Quote: "Gamers are a strange breed, I think we act like sports fans with our favorite devs that we follow and support. "


Then I must be a weird gamer. This doesn't sound like me at all. I freaking love games, but I don't think as an industry it's special, though it's special to me because I love games. But perhaps it is the source of the moral argument, perhaps people are a little protective of their games.

However, I don't see them under threat, from piracy perhaps (I think it has damaged the PC market), but not trading. If anything trading has helped me fuel my love for video games over the years and in turn I've put a lot of money out there.

Back to top
Profile PM Website
mr Handy
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Sep 2007
Location: out of TGC
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 00:20
Link
Why gamedev industry is so special? Because there are only few AAA devs. Indie is always indie, they can't produce AAA games. If one AAA dev will die, today there won't be a replace. Do you remember how many good and even legendary devs died? Not enough sells were even for really good games.

«Just because you’re unique, doesn’t mean you’re useful»
«If you contributed to the reason for locking, you may now find yourself on moderation, or in extreme cases in the grave»
Back to top
Profile PM
Quik
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 00:22
Link
Quote: "Why gamedev industry is so special? Because there are only few AAA devs. Indie is always indie, they can't produce AAA games. If one AAA dev will die, today there won't be a replace. Do you remember how many good and even legendary devs died? Not enough sells were even for really good games.
"



How... does... this... differ... from... other... products?



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
Dark Java Dude 64
Community Leader
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Sep 2010
Location: Neither here nor there nor anywhere
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 00:24
Link
Quote: "here's what I think - having a resale buisness in a game store - for example, should = you HAVING to pay a % of the sales to the devs - or else it should, in my opinion be illegal.."
Sorry buddy, that's not how a capitalist economy works...
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Quik
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 00:30 Edited at: 18th Jun 2013 01:14
Link
edit: Eughhhh



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
Mobiius
Valued Member
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Feb 2003
Location: The Cold North
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 00:48
Link
Quote: "Aaand that's why capitalist economy sucks."

Yet almost every country in the world operates this way. People are greedy, so capitalism will always prevail.

This is my current project, check it out! [href]forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=204576&b=8[/href]
This is my website, check it out! [href]http:\\www.TeamDefiant.co.uk[/href]
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Dark Java Dude 64
Community Leader
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Sep 2010
Location: Neither here nor there nor anywhere
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 00:51
Link
Not to mention, capitalism, of all the systems that have ever existed, works the best by far.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
mr Handy
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Sep 2007
Location: out of TGC
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 00:53
Link
Quote: "How... does... this... differ... from... other... products?"

What products? Cars? Houses? Horses? Candies?

«Just because you’re unique, doesn’t mean you’re useful»
«If you contributed to the reason for locking, you may now find yourself on moderation, or in extreme cases in the grave»
Back to top
Profile PM
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 00:56
Link
Quote: "Why gamedev industry is so special? Because there are only few AAA devs. Indie is always indie, they can't produce AAA games. If one AAA dev will die, today there won't be a replace. Do you remember how many good and even legendary devs died? Not enough sells were even for really good games."


Only a few AAA devs? Actually there's quite a few, yes, some have died but others have propped up. Even if a game series is good, developers can be replaced, I mean Core died back in 2006 and there's been Tomb Raider titles since then. Some companies merge, some buy out rights. Is it because of second hand games these companies die? Or is it because they stop developing games that sell well or just don't interest gamers? For example, Core, how many games can you list of their's off of the top of your head? I can only list Tomb Raider ones, a search on the internet and the only other game I recognise is Fighting Force.

But you're not necessarily going to know the studios by name as they might be hiding behind the name of the publisher. I'd argue There's more AAA studios making games than manufacturers making washing machines.

You can just list the games published by a AAA games publisher and see a number of different game developers listed. For instance, look at Square Enix's games and look at the number of different studios responsible for making the titles. Link

Back to top
Profile PM Website
Quik
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 01:04
Link
Quote: "Not to mention, capitalism, of all the systems that have ever existed, works the best by far."



Thaat's a matter of opinion.



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
RedneckRambo
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Oct 2006
Location: Worst state in USA... California
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 01:09 Edited at: 18th Jun 2013 01:16
Link
Quote: "Thaat's a matter of opinion."

Says the guy who says capitalism sucks... Interesting.

At any rate, not to turn this into a capitalism argument as I couldn't care less about the topic.

Here's my problem with the Xbox One... It's going to do fine. Yes it has received a butt load of backlash and it will continue to receive it for as long as it exists. But the Xbox One is being aimed to a less hardcore gaming group... It's being aimed at everyone. Most people I know have never even heard of E3 and those are the type of people who Microsoft is trying to get to buy the console, as well as it's hardcore fans. It's still going to get it's massive group of hardcore gamers. Many aren't going to buy it for reasons stated, myself included, but that is a very small group in comparison to how many actually will buy it. Sure there are thousands and thousands and thousands that refuse the Xbox One, but there will be millions who buy it. The cons aren't going to out weigh the pros for most people. Playstation 4 will likely be the bigger console and sell more, but over time we will see a surge in sales of the Xbox One. The same thing happened with the 360 over ps3. 360 was winning, over time many started buying the ps3 when they tired of the 360 or certain exclusives came to the ps3. The exact same thing will likely happen here. Once certain exclusives come out for the Stupid One, I mean Xbox One, people will buy this regardless of how terrible it is as a console.

At least, that's how I see it happening. Microsoft isn't stupid, they themselves said they expected this sort of backlash... but they know what they're doing. They aren't expecting to be killing the console wars right out of the box, they're looking big picture, long term here.

Words cannot describe my Greatness... But I'll give it a shot.

I am awesome....... Yeah, that works.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Quik
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 01:14
Link
Fair enough and ignore my statement about that, as I was thinking wrongly and silly.



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
Indicium
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th May 2008
Location:
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 01:32
Link
Quote: "Says the guy who says capitalism sucks... Interesting."


Reread.


They see me coding, they hating. http://indi-indicium.blogspot.co.uk/
Back to top
Profile PM
bitJericho
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 04:26 Edited at: 18th Jun 2013 04:28
Link
Quote: "Not to mention, capitalism, of all the systems that have ever existed, works the best by far. "


Have you ever tried hunter-gatherer? Some say that was the best by far. The beginning of civilization as we know it (cities, towns, etc), caused incredible hardship on the majority of the people as we worked out how to survive. But they (historians, sociologists) say that even today, you and I might work 8 hours a day or maybe even more, but as a hunter/gatherer, a person may only have to work for a couple hours a day to gather enough to survive.

It's amazing what people will do for air conditioning, computers, cars, and beer.

Visit my blog http://www.canales.me.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
BiggAdd
Retired Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Aug 2004
Location: != null
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 14:31
Link
I personally don't agree with second hand games. I think if you purchase a game, the money should go to the developer who made it.

However, I also don't agree with the price of video games. £40-50 for a video game is simply too much. If games at launch cost around £10-20 then dropped over the next few months to something like £3-6, I think we would have a far more health economy.

The people who want the game at launch are 'taxed' with a higher rate of sale, and the people who are willing to wait a little while can get the game much cheaper.

This is pretty much how I game these days. I simply won't purchase a game until it has a super heavy discount on steam (75%+) unless I desperately want it.

The last two PC games I purchased at full price were Guild Wars 2 (at launch) and Bioshock Infinite (Which I pre-ordered for £20 which came with 3 other games, so it was a pretty good deal).

Back to top
Profile PM
Dark Java Dude 64
Community Leader
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Sep 2010
Location: Neither here nor there nor anywhere
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 14:34
Link
Quote: "I think if you purchase a game, the money should go to the developer who made it."
I'm just curious why exactly. It's not how any other purchase works.

I do agree however with the price dropping, that I think is something that should be implemented far more often.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Quik
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 14:35
Link
Quote: "I personally don't agree with second hand games. I think if you purchase a game, the money should go to the developer who made it.

However, I also don't agree with the price of video games. £40-50 for a video game is simply too much. If games at launch cost around £10-20 then dropped over the next few months to something like £3-6, I think we would have a far more health economy.

The people who want the game at launch are 'taxed' with a higher rate of sale, and the people who are willing to wait a little while can get the game much cheaper.

This is pretty much how I game these days. I simply won't purchase a game until it has a super heavy discount on steam (75%+) unless I desperately want it.

The last two PC games I purchased at full price were Guild Wars 2 (at launch) and Bioshock Infinite (Which I pre-ordered for £20 which came with 3 other games, so it was a pretty good deal)."




word, at everything of this



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
Libervurto
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2006
Location: On Toast
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 15:33
Link
Quote: "Not to mention, capitalism, of all the systems that have ever existed, works the best by far."

How so? Capitalism is something we stumbled into after the Plague that wiped out half of Europe, that's really where it began because for the first time labourers were valuable and in short supply.
Nowadays we are in a situation where labour is rapidly losing value and being replaced by ever-more efficient technology. Because we have not strayed from capitalism it means the wealthy are the only ones to benefit from this progress. Certainly, most people in developed nations lead healthier lives with better access to education, but their share of the wealth is shrinking no matter what they do. Capitalism has stifled human progress and is the reason there are still people starving in the world.

I saw a really interesting video on youtube about some guys making contact with one of the last isolated tribes in the world. The expedition leader said some profound words: (paraphrased) "It is inevitable that these people will eventually join the global economy, and so it is better that they are discovered by people who will help them and fight their corner, rather than those who would exploit them. These people will lose a lot: they will lose their dignity, they will no longer be free but poor. They will join our world as the lowest of the low, behind even the most impoverished third-world countries."

The difficulty in learning is not acquiring new knowledge but relinquishing the old.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
mr Handy
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Sep 2007
Location: out of TGC
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 15:40 Edited at: 18th Jun 2013 15:42
Link
@BiggAdd
Quote: "However, I also don't agree with the price of video games. £40-50 for a video game is simply too much. If games at launch cost around £10-20 then dropped over the next few months to something like £3-6, I think we would have a far more health economy."

I agree with you about price, but if you decrease price to 30%, that means you need to sell 300% of copies to get desired money, can't it just exceed the amount of interested at that game people?

«Just because you’re unique, doesn’t mean you’re useful»
«If you contributed to the reason for locking, you may now find yourself on moderation, or in extreme cases in the grave»
Back to top
Profile PM
Dark Java Dude 64
Community Leader
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Sep 2010
Location: Neither here nor there nor anywhere
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 15:43
Link
Just curious, what type of economic system would you prefer?
Back to top
Profile PM Website
mr Handy
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Sep 2007
Location: out of TGC
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 15:52
Link
@Dark basic dude79
Are you asking me? I have not got degree on economy, also I don't think that common logic will help.

«Just because you’re unique, doesn’t mean you’re useful»
«If you contributed to the reason for locking, you may now find yourself on moderation, or in extreme cases in the grave»
Back to top
Profile PM
Dark Java Dude 64
Community Leader
13
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Sep 2010
Location: Neither here nor there nor anywhere
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 15:52
Link
Nah, I'm asking Obese.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Libervurto
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2006
Location: On Toast
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 15:57 Edited at: 18th Jun 2013 15:58
Link
Quote: "Just curious, what type of economic system would you prefer?"

Well, I would prefer Socialism, but that is a lot harder to get right; I think we are at a point where it is possible though. Capitalism "works" because it requires minimal regulation. It's done okay getting us to where we are now, but the issue is that it is a self-destructive system: the more successful capitalism becomes, the more it strangles the economy it helped to create. It turns in on itself when the elite become too powerful and eats away at itself from the inside.

The difficulty in learning is not acquiring new knowledge but relinquishing the old.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
mr Handy
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Sep 2007
Location: out of TGC
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 16:09
Link
Quote: "I think we are at a point where it is possible though"

Very agree! Not so related to game development industry, long ago, strictly mathematically proved that the full exact optimal production as a whole can derive from a given set of resources (including human resources) is significantly greater end result than distributed - the market - planning where each entity optimizes only its own activities considering all the other only as external constraints on the scope of the search of its own course of action. And the difference is greater, the more complex the economy, the more the names of types of products (including all details such as bolts and nuts) shall be taken into account. But the complexity of the calculation of the plan is proportional to the number of names in the very extent of about three and a half. Now the whole world's computer park can handle this expectation about a millennium - and in fact, ideally, you need to recalculate the plan every day. But the computing power of the global computer park is growing much faster than the complexity of the world economy. Even fifteen years ago, such a calculation would take about a million years. Approximately by 2020 it will be possible to produce less than a day - and that you need for a perfect control over the economy. Around the same time mature and technical capability to automatically obtain the information necessary for the planning and execution of test plans (and in many spheres of activity - even automatically follow those plans.) And take all the advantages of centralized planning can only be subject to common ownership of the means of production (otherwise, each entity will be the temptation to get some of the benefits of avoiding a general plan - even at the cost of large losses is not comparable to the other parts of the economy), that is, under socialism. However, the gain as compared with the market might look that - as shown by preliminary research - go to the new socialism can unstressed by giving each at least (and most of all - much more) than it will lose. Furthermore, all the known disadvantages of socialism stem from the limited capacity of the then information technology - that is the new socialism of these shortcomings simply will not. Of course, the return will be new: nothing is made up of some merit.

«Just because you’re unique, doesn’t mean you’re useful»
«If you contributed to the reason for locking, you may now find yourself on moderation, or in extreme cases in the grave»
Back to top
Profile PM
BiggAdd
Retired Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Aug 2004
Location: != null
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 17:04
Link
Quote: "I agree with you about price, but if you decrease price to 30%, that means you need to sell 300% of copies to get desired money, can't it just exceed the amount of interested at that game people?"


I can't really speak about figures, because I'm not sure the ratio between the number of new games sold and the number of second hand games sold.

The only reason I disagree with second hand game sales is because companies actively push them on consumers (places like Game and Gamestop and the likes) and they have built up a massive business on the sale of second hand games.

If the publishers were willing to realise that laying down £40-50 on a video game is often too much money for people, they might adopt a more consumer friendly pricing structure (like steam) so people who can't afford it at release can buy it later on for a cheaper price.

But these are publishers we are talking about! They most likely want to get rid of second hand games but still keep the £40-50 price tag (which I am completely against tbh)!

But who knows! All I know is that gaming (in terms of software) is considerably cheaper and fairer on PC, and there are no second hand games there.

Cheers,
BiggAdd

Back to top
Profile PM
mr Handy
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Sep 2007
Location: out of TGC
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 17:36
Link
@BiggAdd
Many gamedev people say, that future is for free-to-play games with micro payments.

I believe that a subscription system will be the best. Like you can play everything you want for $50 a month. It is similar to buying 12 games a year. Also subscription levels may enchance convenience.

«Just because you’re unique, doesn’t mean you’re useful»
«If you contributed to the reason for locking, you may now find yourself on moderation, or in extreme cases in the grave»
Back to top
Profile PM
Quik
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 17:41
Link
I love you bigadd!

mr handy: I agree, and dont agree.

I belive that f2p with the option of subscription is the best.
or - like in D&D - F2P, where you can buy "segments of the game" for money, and get half the game by grinding F2P, OR you could subscribe - and, if oyu subscribe long enough, pay MORE than you would if you bought the segments, however - it's a smaller upfront fee.


In other words - I believe in giving the player a CHOICE in how he or she wants to play.



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
BiggAdd
Retired Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Aug 2004
Location: != null
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 18:37 Edited at: 18th Jun 2013 19:25
Link
Quote: "Many gamedev people say, that future is for free-to-play games with micro payments."


The problem with F2P is that it is often not implemented correctly, and its far too easy for developers/publishers make the games pay to win.

The other problem with F2P is the amount of time/money you invest in games like that. If the market was all of a sudden flooded with F2P games, I'm pretty certain developers would go out of business pretty quickly.
People would be unwilling to play a large amount of F2P games because of the amount of time/money they've invested in other games. Its like trying to play more than a couple of MMOs, its just impossible!

Also F2P games generally don't work well in single player games. Its hard to justify the purchase of in game items for something like that I think.

I think the only 'F2P' business model that could actually work is episodic/modular gameplay. Games such like The Walking Dead. Also if video games offered themselves as split packages (e.g. Battlefield 4 single player, Battlefield 4 multiplayer) I think that could work to. Personally if I were to pick up BF4, it wouldn't be for the single player, so if I had the choice of just buying the multiplayer for a cheaper price, then I'd go for that!


I agree with Quik. I think F2P could only work if people were given a choice between paying an upfront fee for everything, or just playing for free.

Quote: "I believe that a subscription system will be the best. Like you can play everything you want for $50 a month. It is similar to buying 12 games a year. Also subscription levels may enchance convenience."


That could work, but you might actually end up spending more that way. I don't think I spend $50 a month on video games. It would be good value to someone who plays a lot, but not for someone like me who only plays less than an hour an evening on average!

Back to top
Profile PM
Libervurto
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2006
Location: On Toast
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 18:58 Edited at: 18th Jun 2013 18:59
Link
I get the feeling that there are many board meetings where game publishers are trying to figure out ways they can improve their profits. In these meetings ideas might come up like: "We could split the game into episodes and sell each one for $10", "We could subsidise development costs by selling in-game hats!", but the meeting always ends with the buggers saying "Hey! We could do all that and STILL charge $60 for the box! We are geniuses!"

Quote: "But these are publishers we are talking about! They most likely want to get rid of second hand games but still keep the £40-50 price tag (which I am completely against tbh)!"

Exactly, look at EA's (I'm sure others do this) online pass scheme (where you have a one-time code to unlock online play, so if you buy used it costs an extra $15 to get online), if they'd lowered the price to $30 I don't think anyone would have moaned about the online pass, but no the greedy beggars put their prices even higher. They effectively killed the used market for those games, so where was the price reduction?

The difficulty in learning is not acquiring new knowledge but relinquishing the old.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 19:03 Edited at: 18th Jun 2013 19:05
Link
Quote: "But these are publishers we are talking about! They most likely want to get rid of second hand games but still keep the £40-50 price tag (which I am completely against tbh)!"


No doubt.

I'm not sure I'd like a subscription system, since I'd like to know I am voting with my wallet.

Quote: "I get the feeling that there are many board meetings where game publishers are trying to figure out ways they can improve their profits. In these meetings ideas might come up like: "We could split the game into episodes and sell each one for $10", "We could subsidise development costs by selling in-game hats!", but the meeting always ends with the buggers saying "Hey! We could do all that and STILL charge $60 for the box! We are geniuses!""


Who can blame them? It's "make as much money as possible", or better known as corporate capitalism. Or greed. Or all or none of the above.

"Sideboobs are awesome. Getting punched in the face is not." - Jerico2Day on violence and nudity
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Mobiius
Valued Member
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Feb 2003
Location: The Cold North
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 19:18
Link
Quote: "I belive that f2p with the option of subscription is the best."

I'm going to have to disagree with this opinion. and I'll explain why. (Calmly. lol)

I used to play a game called Project Torque. It was a massively multi-player on-line racing game, which was free to play but had micro-transactions. I enjoyed playing this game as I enjoy racing games, it was free to play, and human players are better to race against than AI players. However, the free cars were always inferior to the paid for cars, so unless if you lock down the car type to a certain car, you will almost always lose as people want the content they paid for to be better than the free content. The experience was then ruined as people used to enter the lobby in a paid for car which would decimate all free cars. I didn't like this as I'd prefer to lose by being beaten by a better driver, rather than being out spent.

I understand that with mobile games this model is becoming all the more popular, but I wish they had an option to pay a sum up front for access to all paid content, or to use micro-transactions.

I understand that publishers want to get as much money as possible, but I strongly believe that if a games costs 50x and 1 person buys it, then 2 people would buy it if it was 25x. The make the same amount of money and sell more original copies.

I love games, and I love playing games, but I can't afford to buy lots of new games. If they were cheaper, I'd buy more of them!

This is my current project, check it out! [href]forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=204576&b=8[/href]
This is my website, check it out! [href]http:\\www.TeamDefiant.co.uk[/href]
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Libervurto
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2006
Location: On Toast
Posted: 18th Jun 2013 19:31
Link
Quote: "Who can blame them? It's "make as much money as possible", or better known as corporate capitalism. Or greed. Or all or none of the above."

It's a bit dumb though isn't it? Which would you choose: "Make a lot of money and keep everyone happy" or "Make a crap tonne of money and piss everyone off."

The difficulty in learning is not acquiring new knowledge but relinquishing the old.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-05-06 08:22:04
Your offset time is: 2024-05-06 08:22:04