You guys are nutty communists. The customer shouldn't be punished for buying used games. You should have full access to all content on the game disc regardless if you bought it used. This will also affect aftermarkets which affect gamers. Things like this will only cause gamers to receive even less for trading their games in. Also, what if i rented the game or borrowed it from a friend?
Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
You guys are nutty communists. The customer shouldn't be punished for buying used games. You should have full access to all content on the game disc regardless if you bought it used. This will also affect aftermarkets which affect gamers. Things like this will only cause gamers to receive even less for trading their games in. Also, what if i rented the game or borrowed it from a friend?
Companies shouldn't be punished for creating and spending millions of dollars on games and having other companies gain all the profits.
I think what affects gamers more than used game sales is companies losing profit on games that they might need. If 10 people bought the same game and 5 of them sold it, then another 5 people bought the used game, that company loses out on 5 sales. If thousands of people do this, it could potentially be money for a sequel or a new IP.
Your just pissed that you won't be able to buy the game used and save you money. That's cool but in the end, your just protecting GameStop and co.
You get the content you paid for, but you don't get it if you buy it used. Can't really complain against a company trying to make money on content they created. What's the difference between this and companies protecting their games from being pirated.
Originally posted by Smasandian
Companies shouldn't be punished for creating and spending millions of dollars on games and having other companies gain all the profits.I think what affects gamers more than used game sales is companies losing profit on games that they might need. If 10 people bought the same game and 5 of them sold it, then another 5 people bought the used game, that company loses out on 5 sales. If thousands of people do this, it could potentially be money for a sequel or a new IP.
Your just pissed that you won't be able to buy the game used and save you money. That's cool but in the end, your just protecting GameStop and co.
You get the content you paid for, but you don't get it if you buy it used. Can't really complain against a company trying to make money on content they created. What's the difference between this and companies protecting their games from being pirated.
EA made over four billion dollars last year so that hardly seems like their being punished by the used gaming market. Besides, you seem to forget the fact that businesses involved in the games after market still stock their shelves with new games, purchased directly from the publisher. You also neglect to recognize how used games may encourage future retail purchases. You also need to recognize that those used games are put there, not by magic, but by someone who purchased the game at full retail price.
I'm not pissed because i can't buy a game used i'm pissed because there may come a point where i am denied access to content that is hard coded on the disc. Simply put, if you support this online Pass scam you are against businesses that offer you the choice to buy used games. That extra ten dollars will not improve game play in any manner. I've been an avid gamer for years. I've supported publishers and developers and i've never heard of an incident where used games sales has had a detrimental affect on publishers. The fact still remains that you are being punished for buying used games.
Besides, i already paid my ten dollars when games raised the msrp from $50 to $60...,there's your ten dollars.
It's a two way sword.
It's either your taking away money from a developer who makes the game, or your taking away money from a company that provides used games.
I rather give my money to the developer than the company who sells used games. Why? Because they make the game.
Your not being punished for buying used games. It's your decision to either buy new, or buy used.
I still don't get it. Your not pissed that you can't buy used but your pissed that they're locking content on the disc. But they are not locking content on the disc. You can play online if you buy a new copy. So which is it?
Developers and publishers have a right to make the most amount of money they can. If they think this is the right way of doing it, they have every right to do so. They're not locking content away and asking consumers who buy new for ten bucks to buy online. They're asking people who buy used, money that does not go back to the creators of the content for ten bucks to play online.
Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
EA made over four billion dollars last year so that hardly seems like their being punished by the used gaming market. Besides, you seem to forget the fact that businesses involved in the games after market still stock their shelves with new games, purchased directly from the publisher. You also neglect to recognize how used games may encourage future retail purchases. You also need to recognize that those used games are put there, not by magic, but by someone who purchased the game at full retail price.I'm not pissed because i can't buy a game used i'm pissed because there may come a point where i am denied access to content that is hard coded on the disc. Simply put, if you support this online Pass scam you are against businesses that offer you the choice to buy used games. That extra ten dollars will not improve game play in any manner. I've been an avid gamer for years. I've supported publishers and developers and i've never heard of an incident where used games sales has had a detrimental affect on publishers. The fact still remains that you are being punished for buying used games.
Besides, i already paid my ten dollars when games raised the msrp from $50 to $60...,there's your ten dollars.
If you buy a game new then you have nothing to worry about. They will never decide not to let you access content that is hard coded on the disc. That would just be stupid. They are doing this to give people a reason to buy new games instead of used ones.
This isn't even new. Other games have been doing this kind of thing for about 2 years now. Mass Effect 2 did it, Forza 3 did it, and more and more will do it.
Publishers have been trying for a few years now to figure out a way to stop people from buying used games because it means less money for them. Less money for them means that these companies will take fewer and fewer chances on a new IP, because they want to ensure they make as much money as possible. This means you will begin to see fewer and fewer new franchises. So it definitely matters. If the used games continue on their current trend you'll just see publishers stop making games on discs anyways. They'll just transition to downloads completely.
And as Smas says, I'd rather my money go to the people actually making the game than some shitty retailer that will probably be out of business in a decade anyways.
Blows my mind how some of you don't like the idea of the used game market. That's cool though, you guys can blow $60 on a shitty game. I'll support the retailer that allows me to pay $25 for the same game. I couldn't give a shit less about publishers and developers. There will always be people making games. The used game market hasn't hindered game development over the past few decades and it probably does more for game developers and publishers than it takes away. There are hundreds of games that i have played which i would never have thought about playing had it not been for the after market. How anyone can support publishers in this matter bewilders me. By buying used gmes i am most likely supporting more people than i would be by buying them new.
It's simply factually incorrect. You are not supporting anyone but the retailer when you buy a used game. The people who actually created the game see nothing of that money, it all goes into the pocket of the retailer.
And the pricing of used games isn't usually as drastically different as you imply. By the time used games cost $25 the new counter part will probably already have had its price dropped as well. You might be saving 5 or 10 dollars. But a game that's retailing new for $60 isn't going to be selling used for $25.
But for the sake of argument, lets pretend it's true. That you buy a game retailing new for $60 used for $25, why the heck SHOULD you get the same content as someone who paid twice as much for it? That hardly seems fair. You should get what you pay for.
[QUOTE=12969252]Originally posted by BackFire
It's simply factually incorrect. You are not supporting anyone but the retailer when you buy a used game. The people who actually created the game see nothing of that money, it all goes into the pocket of the retailer.
And the pricing of used games isn't usually as drastically different as you imply. By the time used games cost $25 the new counter part will probably already have had its price dropped as well. You might be saving 5 or 10 dollars. But a game that's retailing new for $60 isn't going to be selling used for $25.
But for the sake of argument, lets pretend it's true. That you buy a game retailing new for $60 used for $25, why the heck SHOULD you get the same content as someone who paid twice as much for it? That hardly seems fair. You should get what you pay for. [/QUOTE
i don't know what you're implying is factually incorrect. I wasn't suggesting that i was supporting the retailer, although i am doing so by simply playing the game and suggesting it to others.
i should be entitled to the same amount of content because i'm still buying the game. I'm supporting the economy by supporting the person who is taking advantage of the ability to get something out of a product that he's already utilized to it's fullest. Just like anything else, Video games depreciate. They actually depreciate quite quickly. The only reason that it takes so long for publishers to lower their price is because they want to make as much money as possible. That's fine, but just like anything else i am entitled to shop the after market and buy a product according to how much it has depreciated to the consumers and not according to how much it has depreciated to the publishers. Also, for brand new games, the price difference is usually insignificant but after just a few months that price difference becomes a drastic difference. I suppose if you ever shopped at a used game market you would know this.
That's cool though, i've said my peace. It should go without saying though, just because someone buys used doesn't mean they never buy new. I believe that the used game market is more valuable to publishers than it is detrimental. It gets their games to a significant amount of more people. If that game is considered good there is a great chance that a lot of these people whom bought the publishers game used (people that would have never played their game otherwise) will end up buying a game from that same publisher new, in the future.
Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
[QUOTE=12969252]Originally posted by BackFire
[B]It's simply factually incorrect. You are not supporting anyone but the retailer when you buy a used game. The people who actually created the game see nothing of that money, it all goes into the pocket of the retailer.And the pricing of used games isn't usually as drastically different as you imply. By the time used games cost $25 the new counter part will probably already have had its price dropped as well. You might be saving 5 or 10 dollars. But a game that's retailing new for $60 isn't going to be selling used for $25.
But for the sake of argument, lets pretend it's true. That you buy a game retailing new for $60 used for $25, why the heck SHOULD you get the same content as someone who paid twice as much for it? That hardly seems fair. You should get what you pay for.
[/QUOTEi don't know what you're implying is factually incorrect. I wasn't suggesting that i was supporting the retailer, although i am doing so by simply playing the game and suggesting it to others.
i should be entitled to the same amount of content because i'm still buying the game. I'm supporting the economy by supporting the person who is taking advantage of the ability to get something out of a product that he's already utilized to it's fullest. Just like anything else, Video games depreciate. They actually depreciate quite quickly. The only reason that it takes so long for publishers to lower their price is because they want to make as much money as possible. That's fine, but just like anything else i am entitled to shop the after market and buy a product according to how much it has depreciated to the consumers and not according to how much it has depreciated to the publishers. Also, for brand new games, the price difference is usually insignificant but after just a few months that price difference becomes a drastic difference. I suppose if you ever shopped at a used game market you would know this.
That's cool though, i've said my peace. It should go without saying though, just because someone buys used doesn't mean they never buy new. I believe that the used game market is more valuable to publishers than it is detrimental. It gets their games to a significant amount of more people. If that game is considered good there is a great chance that a lot of these people whom bought the publishers game used (people that would have never played their game otherwise) will end up buying a game from that same publisher new, in the future. [/B]
But that's who you are supporting though - the retailer, and no one else.
I've looked at used games and I've never seen a price differential above $10. Perhaps they exist but it seems pretty rare. And you supporting toe economy is all well and good, that's not supporting the developers though. You're still buying the game but if you're paying half the price then you're not paying for the full game, you're paying for half, and if you get more than half then you should be happy. If you spend $25 on a $60 game and the developers have you pay $10 to access an optional portion of the game, you're still saving $25. Still quite a savings, and you've actually given money to the people who created the product that you're enjoying so that they can continue to make future products. But I've got nothing against people who buy used games - it's perfectly fine if that's what you want to do. But you really do have no right to complain when developers simply try to do something to give incentive for people to buy their games new, so they can actually make money on the product that they created. You made a joke earlier about commies, but doing this is actually capitalism in its truest form - trying to make money off of their product.
Well publishers certainly don't agree with your assessment that the used games market is more of an asset than a hindrance. The slight possibility of someone buying their product new in the future isn't all that compelling - the same argument can be made for pirating games - why would they buy it new next time, instead of just buying used again? The publisher has no reason to believe that they would, and neither do I.
I want to give a warning, be careful with the HUT mode, it's dangerously addicting.
A few days ago I decided to give this mode a try despite me initially thinking it wouldn't be very cool. I had some spare MS points so bought a couple of card packs, since then I've been spending hours browsing the auction house for players I like, and selling ones I don't for pucks (the currency of the mode) to buy more packs. I've gotten a pretty amazing team together so far. Doughty, Koptiar, Hossa, and a handful of prospects who I transformed into superstars.
All this and I barely even play with my team, I just love building them. I'd suggest everyone try it.