For newer console games, I think places such as Gamestop is a scam. Usually they'll sell you a used game - mark it as new and sell it for the full price, if that is the case I'd rather buy it full price somewhere else.
As for older games such as the PS2/Xbox Original - You can't go wrong, get about 3-5 games for about $30-$50.
Curious how this will actually pan out in the future between used game companies / game makers.
As for PC games, yeah going to have to agree - There is one small little rotting shelf back there.
not sure where people are getting the idea that digital downloads = cheaper games
having sourced a couple of games from download sites and compared to box issues on various sites i can say that as far as i can tell you can save quite a lot of money buying the box and even more if you buy second hand
digital download site rarely seem to have any sort of sale and the price drops are much slower than physical sales.
If you look you can get quite a few box games from various for far less than download
The only used games I've ever bought are for consoles, and that was back when I played consoles. For consoles, I agree it's a good thing, but for PC, I could care less. As someone mentioned earlier, Steam is a good alternative, I keep my games installed on one computer so I don't have to worry about install limits (unless I really lose interest and I need hard drive space), and the dreaded, evil DRM of Ubisoft, requiring you to have an internet connection while playing AC2 (so you can also stay connected to Uplay), has not bothered me once. Nope, I just log in to the launcher and play. I did get it after the attacks on the Ubisoft servers, though. I figured used games were popular, I always saw them as a good option, but I didn't know stores like Gamestop even sold physical PC games anymore. Oh, wait, there's one little shelf in the back corner with the rats and the skeleton rotting in the corner. Nevermind. I didn't know they made up that much of the market. Still, what percent of that 40% is used console games and what percent is PC?
gamestop has sold used pc games for as long as i remember the ones that are not mmo monthly sub types there is and should be no distinction between pc and console bfbc2 on pc or bfbc2 on ps3/xbox360 this is opening it and is not good and i am starting to wonder at some of the reactions or lack there of on this site it is almost like some want you as the consumer to have less of a hold on what you buy and have the big companies have a bigger control of it which is retarded they made their money and estimated profits by their sales of the initial new product why please tell me should they be entitled to anything beyond that is a mystery to me
The publisher or makers of the game do have a right to that money after all it is thier game. If I made a game and it got resold and I didnt see any money out of it I'd have a problem with it also...after all I made that game..I should benefit. Rememeber that companies have the right to sell the game but dont own rights to the game itself! I dont agree with limited installs or multiplayer rstrictions at all either.
( BBBBBBBWWWWWWWAAAAAHHHHHH raises plunger in salute to new clash of the titans Movie!)
All my opinions are just that..opinions. If you like my opinions..coolness.If you dont like my opinion....I really dont care. Playing: ESO, WOT, Smite, and Marvel Heroes
For newer console games, I think places such as Gamestop is a scam. Usually they'll sell you a used game - mark it as new and sell it for the full price, if that is the case I'd rather buy it full price somewhere else. As for older games such as the PS2/Xbox Original - You can't go wrong, get about 3-5 games for about $30-$50. Curious how this will actually pan out in the future between used game companies / game makers. As for PC games, yeah going to have to agree - There is one small little rotting shelf back there.
do you not understand that these companies dont care if gamestop is a scam they only care that gamestop is making money that they are not making yet they are not opening used game outlets to make it for themselves, its about what they are not getting which is the pinnacle of greed because they already sold the product and made their money on it
The publisher or makers of the game do have a right to that money after all it is thier game. If I made a game and it got resold and I didnt see any money out of it I'd have a problem with it also...after all I made that game..I should benefit. Rememeber t companies have the right to sell the game but dont own rights to the game itself! I dont agree with limited installs or multiplayer rstrictions at all either. ( BBBBBBBWWWWWWWAAAAAHHHHHH raises plunger in salute to new clash of the titans Movie!)
for the sake of me not typing a long answer here please research the article go read the comments to the article then come back and state that again and i will type a more cognitive answer
oh and your plunger seems to be planted smack on top of your head on this one
The publisher or makers of the game do have a right to that money after all it is thier game. If I made a game and it got resold and I didnt see any money out of it I'd have a problem with it also...after all I made that game..I should benefit. Rememeber that companies have the right to sell the game but dont own rights to the game itself! I dont agree with limited installs or multiplayer rstrictions at all either. ( BBBBBBBWWWWWWWAAAAAHHHHHH raises plunger in salute to new clash of the titans Movie!)
Personal opinions aside, I believe this idea has been covered by law already:
For newer console games, I think places such as Gamestop is a scam. Usually they'll sell you a used game - mark it as new and sell it for the full price, if that is the case I'd rather buy it full price somewhere else. As for older games such as the PS2/Xbox Original - You can't go wrong, get about 3-5 games for about $30-$50. Curious how this will actually pan out in the future between used game companies / game makers. As for PC games, yeah going to have to agree - There is one small little rotting shelf back there.
do you not understand that these companies dont care if gamestop is a scam they only care that gamestop is making money that they are not making yet they are not opening used game outlets to make it for themselves, its about what they are not getting which is the pinnacle of greed because they already sold the product and made their money on it
Oh I fully understand. I am just talking about how gamestop actually screws over the game makers by making a profit over them for selling a used game as new, it's not new. They can do this, some people have no problem with it.
Both sides hold a side of "greed" - I'm not denying that but as a consumer I'd rather just buy the game new if it came out 1-2 weeks ago rather than going to Gamestop and buying a used game with a "New" sticker on it. Business is business.
I'm talking Console here if you don't fully understand, as for PC - I agree with the masses, Steam is a great thing IMO.
For newer console games, I think places such as Gamestop is a scam. Usually they'll sell you a used game - mark it as new and sell it for the full price, if that is the case I'd rather buy it full price somewhere else.
As for older games such as the PS2/Xbox Original - You can't go wrong, get about 3-5 games for about $30-$50.
Curious how this will actually pan out in the future between used game companies / game makers.
As for PC games, yeah going to have to agree - There is one small little rotting shelf back there.
do you not understand that these companies dont care if gamestop is a scam they only care that gamestop is making money that they are not making yet they are not opening used game outlets to make it for themselves, its about what they are not getting which is the pinnacle of greed because they already sold the product and made their money on it
Oh I fully understand. I am just talking about how gamestop actually screws over the game makers by making a profit over them for selling a used game as new, it's not new. They can do this, some people have no problem with it.
Both sides hold a side of "greed" - I'm not denying that but as a consumer I'd rather just buy the game new if it came out 1-2 weeks ago rather than going to Gamestop and buying a used game with a "New" sticker on it. Business is business.
I'm talking Console here if you don't fully understand, as for PC - I agree with the masses, Steam is a great thing IMO.
I don't know what gamestop you shop at, but i have shopped at my local ones for years and i have never seen a use copy sold as new. $6.00 less then new but not new. As far as this whole story is concerned it's bs that any company would think that they have a right to make money off of us for buying or selling anything used. and for the car thing Ford or Checy won't go after you local used car sales place do they? NO Does Sony or Microsoft go after companies like Gamestop for selling used consoles? Does Dell go after places for selling used computers? No Video games are the biggest money maker in America right now and those greedy ppl just want more. I buy plenty of used games and sell plenty of games. What do we do as consumers when we buy something we think we'll like and find out it sucks? We sell it to someone who will like it. (hopefully lol) They have no legal rights and should just be happy that our economy isn't effecting them as much as other places. We buy your games we buy your guides even your DLC. they can go digital all they want all that will do is hurt them in the long run. who in their right mind would pay 60 bucks for a d/l game when you can buy it from the store for the same price and get something tangible in you hand. It's human nature to have proof of what you bought.
The publisher or makers of the game do have a right to that money after all it is thier game. If I made a game and it got resold and I didnt see any money out of it I'd have a problem with it also...after all I made that game..I should benefit. Rememeber that companies have the right to sell the game but dont own rights to the game itself! I dont agree with limited installs or multiplayer rstrictions at all either. ( BBBBBBBWWWWWWWAAAAAHHHHHH raises plunger in salute to new clash of the titans Movie!)
If you sold your used car shouldn't the car manufacturer have a piece of that money?
They made a car and you resold it some years later so you should now pay the car manufacturer some of that money.
According to your reasoning it's only fair and square isn't it?
All those memories will be lost in time, like tears in the rain.
lol wow you keep up the viral marketing how much are they paying you? I dont nor ever had pirated there buddy but i guess you dont trade in any used goods either because your are trying to make a distinction that only what your are trying to sell would be happy with obviously you are not someone paying for goods but seems more like you are working for the major market oh and come back with whatever you want I already know your opinion is not the majority in this issue and I fail to see why you are trying to defend it but like i said before if you started getting taxed or charged extra for buying used products Im sure you wouldnt be so argumentative about it unless you really are viral marketing this new scheme
Yah, you're pretty much just ranting incoherently now.
My opinion may not be the majority one, but it is my opinion and I do have a right to it.
Most of the opinions on this site come from a minority perspective, remember?
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
Also, how many indie games do you see in stores? Almost all independent developers use digital distribution exclusively.
It all goes back to the problem of DRM. There's a reason Steam has 22 million mostly happy customers while every time EA, Ubisoft now, and a couple other big studios release a game they get flamed to death and most people download cracked versions. Valve basically says with Steam, "Look, play straight with us and we'll give you a superior product. You can get your game right now, install it as many times and on as many computers as you wish, and it will always be available to re-downloaded and install for as long as we're in business. The only thing you can't do is give your license to someone else."
These other DRM schemes with install limits, online activation every time you play (once is fine, once in a while is fine (like once a month), every time is not), hidden device drivers and other rootkits, combining any of these with online activation which is just extreme overkill, those are not fine. These schemes make the illegal, cracked, pirated version that's not a complete pain in the ass to use more valuable than the legit version - in this case the companies are saying, "Buy our product that opens up security holes in your system, you can't install more than a couple times (hope your Windows doesn't self destruct or you decide to fire it up in a few years), and probably won't work right to begin with. Ignore that shady guy down the street that will give you a no-hassle version for free. HE IZ CRIMINAL!"
As for extra DLC, I don't really care. If you think the no-DLC version is worth 50 bucks then buy it. If you think some optional DLC is worth another 5 or 10 dollars then buy it. If you don't, then don't. I like DLC mini-expansions as they're generally not too expensive and completely optional, I think the market will set a fair price point for DLC.
I don't think PC gaming is dying. It's been dying ever since Super Mario Brothers came out on the NES and people stopping making platformers for PC. It's just going through a change, many have come before and many are yet to come. The PC will always remain a superior platform for a particular type of gamer and the low cost of entry for developers means pretty much anything new and innovative will be pioneered on the PC platform first and then spread to consoles. I don't even think digital distribution is anything new - I remember downloading DOOM and Wolfenstein shareware versions off local BBS's before we got the internet here.
I understand how game makers can be upset on this one, but they honestly have no right to the money made on second hand sales. I understand that they own the rights to the game itself and all of its properties, but that particular copy that I bought is MINE, to do what I please with. Hell if I buy a game as a gift to someone, do I have to put the publisher/devs name on the wrapping???
I mean, this could potentially lead to a pandora's box worth of problems. Next, companies will be demanding money from garage sales and pawn shops. Yeah, sounds ridiculous, right?
Maybe, these developers need to re-structure their pricing plan a bit. I mean, $60 for a new AAA title is ok. (not really but its the standard) but they will release a title that they know is poor and still slap that price on it. While the used retailer realizes its crap and cuts their price (probably due to too many copies), the box price on the new one stays at $60 for months and months. (Whether it sells or not) Since its always a gamble to take on a new game, that $30 used price will always beat out the $60 new one. That way if its lame, I can go sell it back and recoup about 30% of what I spent.
IMO, if people don't pay $60 for a game within the first month or two of it releasing, they are NOT gonna pay $60 for it anytime down the line. By then something else new and shiny have caught there eyes.
I understand how game makers can be upset on this one, but they honestly have no right to the money made on second hand sales. I understand that they own the rights to the game itself and all of its properties, but that particular copy that I bought is MINE, to do what I please with. Hell if I buy a game as a gift to someone, do I have to put the publisher/devs name on the wrapping???
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
I understand how game makers can be upset on this one, but they honestly have no right to the money made on second hand sales. I understand that they own the rights to the game itself and all of its properties, but that particular copy that I bought is MINE, to do what I please with. Hell if I buy a game as a gift to someone, do I have to put the publisher/devs name on the wrapping???
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Don't remember agreeing to a EULA on any console games.
I understand how game makers can be upset on this one, but they honestly have no right to the money made on second hand sales. I understand that they own the rights to the game itself and all of its properties, but that particular copy that I bought is MINE, to do what I please with. Hell if I buy a game as a gift to someone, do I have to put the publisher/devs name on the wrapping???
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Don't remember agreeing to a EULA on any console games.
Nope, you won't .. check the wee text in the bottom-left on the back of one of your PS3 games.
"Resale and rental are prohibited unless expressly authorised by SCEE"
It's sneaky, but you agree to the EULA when you buy the product because the product packaging states that purchase of the product is dependant on the acceptance of the EULA.
You don't actually read the EULA, of course (no-one does) but that doesn't matter.
The text might be different depending on what country you're from, I'm quoting from an EU game.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
I understand how game makers can be upset on this one, but they honestly have no right to the money made on second hand sales. I understand that they own the rights to the game itself and all of its properties, but that particular copy that I bought is MINE, to do what I please with. Hell if I buy a game as a gift to someone, do I have to put the publisher/devs name on the wrapping???
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Don't remember agreeing to a EULA on any console games.
Nope, you won't .. check the wee text in the bottom-left on the back of one of your PS3 games.
"Resale and rental are prohibited unless expressly authorised by SCEE"
It's sneaky, but you agree to the EULA when you buy the product because the product packaging states that purchase of the product is dependant on the acceptance of the EULA.
You don't actually read the EULA, of course (no-one does) but that doesn't matter.
The text might be different depending on what country you're from, I'm quoting from an EU game.
Specific to the US, this is not a matter of EULA. The EULA does not allow a company to override law. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine the section titled "Computer Software" lists/links relevant case history establishing that First Sale Doctrine applies to software. That said, single-use codes and what not are a convenient circumvention of the spirit of the law, but I more wanted to address the idea that the EULA gives the producer/developer the ability to restrict resale.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers. Do something wrong, no one forgets" -from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
And Massive Effect 1 that you only can install 5 times. What if you bought a DVD or a Blu-Ray and only could watch the movie 5 times and then you had to buy a new copy. People would be getting furious beyond belief. Someone would probably argue that you don't need to see the same movie 5 times and if you do need to you should buy it a second time.
As far as I heard the movie industry considered doing that. But after some protests and consideration removed it.
Though music and publishing industries, same as computer sellers look for ways to profit from reselling, as especially in the digital age now the quality of the product does not really change. (except scratches on dvds)
Yeah as things are going with digital download and whatnot I think that in the near future you would actually just rent the games for a limited time but you would be paying full price or even more than what a physical copy costs today.
It's a wonderful new world isn't it?
I agree, we should not bee fooled into agreeing to all possilities given by the age we live in.
I understand how game makers can be upset on this one, but they honestly have no right to the money made on second hand sales. I understand that they own the rights to the game itself and all of its properties, but that particular copy that I bought is MINE, to do what I please with. Hell if I buy a game as a gift to someone, do I have to put the publisher/devs name on the wrapping???
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Don't remember agreeing to a EULA on any console games.
Nope, you won't .. check the wee text in the bottom-left on the back of one of your PS3 games.
"Resale and rental are prohibited unless expressly authorised by SCEE"
It's sneaky, but you agree to the EULA when you buy the product because the product packaging states that purchase of the product is dependant on the acceptance of the EULA.
You don't actually read the EULA, of course (no-one does) but that doesn't matter.
The text might be different depending on what country you're from, I'm quoting from an EU game.
hm. I just read the backs of all my 360 games and they say nothing of the sort. must be a Sony thing?
I understand how game makers can be upset on this one, but they honestly have no right to the money made on second hand sales. I understand that they own the rights to the game itself and all of its properties, but that particular copy that I bought is MINE, to do what I please with. Hell if I buy a game as a gift to someone, do I have to put the publisher/devs name on the wrapping???
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Don't remember agreeing to a EULA on any console games.
Nope, you won't .. check the wee text in the bottom-left on the back of one of your PS3 games.
"Resale and rental are prohibited unless expressly authorised by SCEE"
It's sneaky, but you agree to the EULA when you buy the product because the product packaging states that purchase of the product is dependant on the acceptance of the EULA.
You don't actually read the EULA, of course (no-one does) but that doesn't matter.
The text might be different depending on what country you're from, I'm quoting from an EU game.
Specific to the US, this is not a matter of EULA. The EULA does not allow a company to override law. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine the section titled "Computer Software" lists/links relevant case history establishing that First Sale Doctrine applies to software. That said, single-use codes and what not are a convenient circumvention of the spirit of the law, but I more wanted to address the idea that the EULA gives the producer/developer the ability to restrict resale.
I'm not familiar with US law, being from the UK .. but that's an interesting read, regardless.
I also noticed the following:
".. the court found the plaintiff's EULA, which prohibited resale, was binding on the defendants because "The defendants .. expressly consented to the terms of the EULA and Terms of Use by clicking 'I Agree' and 'Agree.'"
Seems like a bit of a grey area; your courts have ruled that EULAs aren't binding in some cases but are binding in others, and there isn't any mention of game software.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
I understand how game makers can be upset on this one, but they honestly have no right to the money made on second hand sales. I understand that they own the rights to the game itself and all of its properties, but that particular copy that I bought is MINE, to do what I please with. Hell if I buy a game as a gift to someone, do I have to put the publisher/devs name on the wrapping???
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Don't remember agreeing to a EULA on any console games.
Nope, you won't .. check the wee text in the bottom-left on the back of one of your PS3 games.
"Resale and rental are prohibited unless expressly authorised by SCEE"
It's sneaky, but you agree to the EULA when you buy the product because the product packaging states that purchase of the product is dependant on the acceptance of the EULA.
You don't actually read the EULA, of course (no-one does) but that doesn't matter.
The text might be different depending on what country you're from, I'm quoting from an EU game.
hm. I just read the backs of all my 360 games and they say nothing of the sort. must be a Sony thing?
Could be, I suppose. Could be an EU thing too.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
I understand how game makers can be upset on this one, but they honestly have no right to the money made on second hand sales. I understand that they own the rights to the game itself and all of its properties, but that particular copy that I bought is MINE, to do what I please with. Hell if I buy a game as a gift to someone, do I have to put the publisher/devs name on the wrapping???
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Don't remember agreeing to a EULA on any console games.
Nope, you won't .. check the wee text in the bottom-left on the back of one of your PS3 games.
"Resale and rental are prohibited unless expressly authorised by SCEE"
It's sneaky, but you agree to the EULA when you buy the product because the product packaging states that purchase of the product is dependant on the acceptance of the EULA.
You don't actually read the EULA, of course (no-one does) but that doesn't matter.
The text might be different depending on what country you're from, I'm quoting from an EU game.
Specific to the US, this is not a matter of EULA. The EULA does not allow a company to override law. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine the section titled "Computer Software" lists/links relevant case history establishing that First Sale Doctrine applies to software. That said, single-use codes and what not are a convenient circumvention of the spirit of the law, but I more wanted to address the idea that the EULA gives the producer/developer the ability to restrict resale.
Great post. Thanks for that very useful link. It confirms what I already know, and what many here have said.
I'm not sure if I see this as nefariously as the post seems to imply, I think all in all we are just seeing these companies use tools naturally available to them to help there own bottom line. Basically I'm saying if musical acts had ways to do this they would have done it long ago as well and again I'm just erring on the side of caution, now when they come out and try a lawsuit against players/companies enriching themselves on products we've purchsed from them then I will agree but until then I won't hold against them doing what all companies are around for and that's making money especially if you look at it from a corporate standpoint, if Gamestop is getting forty percent of there business from resales that the producers can't get anything out of it doesn't make me wonder why a devs eyes would be so big.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
Comments
For newer console games, I think places such as Gamestop is a scam. Usually they'll sell you a used game - mark it as new and sell it for the full price, if that is the case I'd rather buy it full price somewhere else.
As for older games such as the PS2/Xbox Original - You can't go wrong, get about 3-5 games for about $30-$50.
Curious how this will actually pan out in the future between used game companies / game makers.
As for PC games, yeah going to have to agree - There is one small little rotting shelf back there.
not sure where people are getting the idea that digital downloads = cheaper games
having sourced a couple of games from download sites and compared to box issues on various sites i can say that as far as i can tell you can save quite a lot of money buying the box and even more if you buy second hand
digital download site rarely seem to have any sort of sale and the price drops are much slower than physical sales.
If you look you can get quite a few box games from various for far less than download
gamestop has sold used pc games for as long as i remember the ones that are not mmo monthly sub types there is and should be no distinction between pc and console bfbc2 on pc or bfbc2 on ps3/xbox360 this is opening it and is not good and i am starting to wonder at some of the reactions or lack there of on this site it is almost like some want you as the consumer to have less of a hold on what you buy and have the big companies have a bigger control of it which is retarded they made their money and estimated profits by their sales of the initial new product why please tell me should they be entitled to anything beyond that is a mystery to me
The publisher or makers of the game do have a right to that money after all it is thier game. If I made a game and it got resold and I didnt see any money out of it I'd have a problem with it also...after all I made that game..I should benefit. Rememeber that companies have the right to sell the game but dont own rights to the game itself! I dont agree with limited installs or multiplayer rstrictions at all either.
( BBBBBBBWWWWWWWAAAAAHHHHHH raises plunger in salute to new clash of the titans Movie!)
All my opinions are just that..opinions. If you like my opinions..coolness.If you dont like my opinion....I really dont care.
Playing: ESO, WOT, Smite, and Marvel Heroes
do you not understand that these companies dont care if gamestop is a scam they only care that gamestop is making money that they are not making yet they are not opening used game outlets to make it for themselves, its about what they are not getting which is the pinnacle of greed because they already sold the product and made their money on it
for the sake of me not typing a long answer here please research the article go read the comments to the article then come back and state that again and i will type a more cognitive answer
oh and your plunger seems to be planted smack on top of your head on this one
Personal opinions aside, I believe this idea has been covered by law already:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine
The wikipedia article cites some specific cases relating to software.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
Oh I fully understand. I am just talking about how gamestop actually screws over the game makers by making a profit over them for selling a used game as new, it's not new. They can do this, some people have no problem with it.
Both sides hold a side of "greed" - I'm not denying that but as a consumer I'd rather just buy the game new if it came out 1-2 weeks ago rather than going to Gamestop and buying a used game with a "New" sticker on it. Business is business.
I'm talking Console here if you don't fully understand, as for PC - I agree with the masses, Steam is a great thing IMO.
do you not understand that these companies dont care if gamestop is a scam they only care that gamestop is making money that they are not making yet they are not opening used game outlets to make it for themselves, its about what they are not getting which is the pinnacle of greed because they already sold the product and made their money on it
Oh I fully understand. I am just talking about how gamestop actually screws over the game makers by making a profit over them for selling a used game as new, it's not new. They can do this, some people have no problem with it.
Both sides hold a side of "greed" - I'm not denying that but as a consumer I'd rather just buy the game new if it came out 1-2 weeks ago rather than going to Gamestop and buying a used game with a "New" sticker on it. Business is business.
I'm talking Console here if you don't fully understand, as for PC - I agree with the masses, Steam is a great thing IMO.
I don't know what gamestop you shop at, but i have shopped at my local ones for years and i have never seen a use copy sold as new. $6.00 less then new but not new. As far as this whole story is concerned it's bs that any company would think that they have a right to make money off of us for buying or selling anything used. and for the car thing Ford or Checy won't go after you local used car sales place do they? NO Does Sony or Microsoft go after companies like Gamestop for selling used consoles? Does Dell go after places for selling used computers? No Video games are the biggest money maker in America right now and those greedy ppl just want more. I buy plenty of used games and sell plenty of games. What do we do as consumers when we buy something we think we'll like and find out it sucks? We sell it to someone who will like it. (hopefully lol) They have no legal rights and should just be happy that our economy isn't effecting them as much as other places. We buy your games we buy your guides even your DLC. they can go digital all they want all that will do is hurt them in the long run. who in their right mind would pay 60 bucks for a d/l game when you can buy it from the store for the same price and get something tangible in you hand. It's human nature to have proof of what you bought.
If you sold your used car shouldn't the car manufacturer have a piece of that money?
They made a car and you resold it some years later so you should now pay the car manufacturer some of that money.
According to your reasoning it's only fair and square isn't it?
All those memories will be lost in time, like tears in the rain.
Those greedy assholes already make SO much money. And now they want to put their hands in our pockets? Fuck y'all.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Yah, you're pretty much just ranting incoherently now.
My opinion may not be the majority one, but it is my opinion and I do have a right to it.
Most of the opinions on this site come from a minority perspective, remember?
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
Also, how many indie games do you see in stores? Almost all independent developers use digital distribution exclusively.
It all goes back to the problem of DRM. There's a reason Steam has 22 million mostly happy customers while every time EA, Ubisoft now, and a couple other big studios release a game they get flamed to death and most people download cracked versions. Valve basically says with Steam, "Look, play straight with us and we'll give you a superior product. You can get your game right now, install it as many times and on as many computers as you wish, and it will always be available to re-downloaded and install for as long as we're in business. The only thing you can't do is give your license to someone else."
These other DRM schemes with install limits, online activation every time you play (once is fine, once in a while is fine (like once a month), every time is not), hidden device drivers and other rootkits, combining any of these with online activation which is just extreme overkill, those are not fine. These schemes make the illegal, cracked, pirated version that's not a complete pain in the ass to use more valuable than the legit version - in this case the companies are saying, "Buy our product that opens up security holes in your system, you can't install more than a couple times (hope your Windows doesn't self destruct or you decide to fire it up in a few years), and probably won't work right to begin with. Ignore that shady guy down the street that will give you a no-hassle version for free. HE IZ CRIMINAL!"
As for extra DLC, I don't really care. If you think the no-DLC version is worth 50 bucks then buy it. If you think some optional DLC is worth another 5 or 10 dollars then buy it. If you don't, then don't. I like DLC mini-expansions as they're generally not too expensive and completely optional, I think the market will set a fair price point for DLC.
I don't think PC gaming is dying. It's been dying ever since Super Mario Brothers came out on the NES and people stopping making platformers for PC. It's just going through a change, many have come before and many are yet to come. The PC will always remain a superior platform for a particular type of gamer and the low cost of entry for developers means pretty much anything new and innovative will be pioneered on the PC platform first and then spread to consoles. I don't even think digital distribution is anything new - I remember downloading DOOM and Wolfenstein shareware versions off local BBS's before we got the internet here.
I understand how game makers can be upset on this one, but they honestly have no right to the money made on second hand sales. I understand that they own the rights to the game itself and all of its properties, but that particular copy that I bought is MINE, to do what I please with. Hell if I buy a game as a gift to someone, do I have to put the publisher/devs name on the wrapping???
I mean, this could potentially lead to a pandora's box worth of problems. Next, companies will be demanding money from garage sales and pawn shops. Yeah, sounds ridiculous, right?
Maybe, these developers need to re-structure their pricing plan a bit. I mean, $60 for a new AAA title is ok. (not really but its the standard) but they will release a title that they know is poor and still slap that price on it. While the used retailer realizes its crap and cuts their price (probably due to too many copies), the box price on the new one stays at $60 for months and months. (Whether it sells or not) Since its always a gamble to take on a new game, that $30 used price will always beat out the $60 new one. That way if its lame, I can go sell it back and recoup about 30% of what I spent.
IMO, if people don't pay $60 for a game within the first month or two of it releasing, they are NOT gonna pay $60 for it anytime down the line. By then something else new and shiny have caught there eyes.
Come on game companies. Get it together
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Don't remember agreeing to a EULA on any console games.
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Don't remember agreeing to a EULA on any console games.
Nope, you won't .. check the wee text in the bottom-left on the back of one of your PS3 games.
"Resale and rental are prohibited unless expressly authorised by SCEE"
It's sneaky, but you agree to the EULA when you buy the product because the product packaging states that purchase of the product is dependant on the acceptance of the EULA.
You don't actually read the EULA, of course (no-one does) but that doesn't matter.
The text might be different depending on what country you're from, I'm quoting from an EU game.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Don't remember agreeing to a EULA on any console games.
Nope, you won't .. check the wee text in the bottom-left on the back of one of your PS3 games.
"Resale and rental are prohibited unless expressly authorised by SCEE"
It's sneaky, but you agree to the EULA when you buy the product because the product packaging states that purchase of the product is dependant on the acceptance of the EULA.
You don't actually read the EULA, of course (no-one does) but that doesn't matter.
The text might be different depending on what country you're from, I'm quoting from an EU game.
Specific to the US, this is not a matter of EULA. The EULA does not allow a company to override law. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine the section titled "Computer Software" lists/links relevant case history establishing that First Sale Doctrine applies to software. That said, single-use codes and what not are a convenient circumvention of the spirit of the law, but I more wanted to address the idea that the EULA gives the producer/developer the ability to restrict resale.
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
As far as I heard the movie industry considered doing that. But after some protests and consideration removed it.
Though music and publishing industries, same as computer sellers look for ways to profit from reselling, as especially in the digital age now the quality of the product does not really change. (except scratches on dvds)
Yeah as things are going with digital download and whatnot I think that in the near future you would actually just rent the games for a limited time but you would be paying full price or even more than what a physical copy costs today.
It's a wonderful new world isn't it?
I agree, we should not bee fooled into agreeing to all possilities given by the age we live in.
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Don't remember agreeing to a EULA on any console games.
Nope, you won't .. check the wee text in the bottom-left on the back of one of your PS3 games.
"Resale and rental are prohibited unless expressly authorised by SCEE"
It's sneaky, but you agree to the EULA when you buy the product because the product packaging states that purchase of the product is dependant on the acceptance of the EULA.
You don't actually read the EULA, of course (no-one does) but that doesn't matter.
The text might be different depending on what country you're from, I'm quoting from an EU game.
hm. I just read the backs of all my 360 games and they say nothing of the sort. must be a Sony thing?
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Don't remember agreeing to a EULA on any console games.
Nope, you won't .. check the wee text in the bottom-left on the back of one of your PS3 games.
"Resale and rental are prohibited unless expressly authorised by SCEE"
It's sneaky, but you agree to the EULA when you buy the product because the product packaging states that purchase of the product is dependant on the acceptance of the EULA.
You don't actually read the EULA, of course (no-one does) but that doesn't matter.
The text might be different depending on what country you're from, I'm quoting from an EU game.
Specific to the US, this is not a matter of EULA. The EULA does not allow a company to override law. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine the section titled "Computer Software" lists/links relevant case history establishing that First Sale Doctrine applies to software. That said, single-use codes and what not are a convenient circumvention of the spirit of the law, but I more wanted to address the idea that the EULA gives the producer/developer the ability to restrict resale.
I'm not familiar with US law, being from the UK .. but that's an interesting read, regardless.
I also noticed the following:
".. the court found the plaintiff's EULA, which prohibited resale, was binding on the defendants because "The defendants .. expressly consented to the terms of the EULA and Terms of Use by clicking 'I Agree' and 'Agree.'"
Seems like a bit of a grey area; your courts have ruled that EULAs aren't binding in some cases but are binding in others, and there isn't any mention of game software.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Don't remember agreeing to a EULA on any console games.
Nope, you won't .. check the wee text in the bottom-left on the back of one of your PS3 games.
"Resale and rental are prohibited unless expressly authorised by SCEE"
It's sneaky, but you agree to the EULA when you buy the product because the product packaging states that purchase of the product is dependant on the acceptance of the EULA.
You don't actually read the EULA, of course (no-one does) but that doesn't matter.
The text might be different depending on what country you're from, I'm quoting from an EU game.
hm. I just read the backs of all my 360 games and they say nothing of the sort. must be a Sony thing?
Could be, I suppose. Could be an EU thing too.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
That's the problem, technically .. it isn't.
You don't buy a game, you buy the licence to play a game. It's an EULA thing.
Don't remember agreeing to a EULA on any console games.
Nope, you won't .. check the wee text in the bottom-left on the back of one of your PS3 games.
"Resale and rental are prohibited unless expressly authorised by SCEE"
It's sneaky, but you agree to the EULA when you buy the product because the product packaging states that purchase of the product is dependant on the acceptance of the EULA.
You don't actually read the EULA, of course (no-one does) but that doesn't matter.
The text might be different depending on what country you're from, I'm quoting from an EU game.
Specific to the US, this is not a matter of EULA. The EULA does not allow a company to override law. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine the section titled "Computer Software" lists/links relevant case history establishing that First Sale Doctrine applies to software. That said, single-use codes and what not are a convenient circumvention of the spirit of the law, but I more wanted to address the idea that the EULA gives the producer/developer the ability to restrict resale.
Great post. Thanks for that very useful link. It confirms what I already know, and what many here have said.
I'm not sure if I see this as nefariously as the post seems to imply, I think all in all we are just seeing these companies use tools naturally available to them to help there own bottom line. Basically I'm saying if musical acts had ways to do this they would have done it long ago as well and again I'm just erring on the side of caution, now when they come out and try a lawsuit against players/companies enriching themselves on products we've purchsed from them then I will agree but until then I won't hold against them doing what all companies are around for and that's making money especially if you look at it from a corporate standpoint, if Gamestop is getting forty percent of there business from resales that the producers can't get anything out of it doesn't make me wonder why a devs eyes would be so big.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
everybody want a piece of the game pie but nobody wants to make them !in the end we ll end up with no game to play