Only one thing to do........ you must burn it.So, then what to do with the game after finishing it?
waqyum
Used game sales nearly as bad as piracy?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
I think that a lot of people here think that it is wrong for the wrong reasons, it seems like people think it's wrong based on the fact that it is illegal(which is right) but they are totally overlooking the fact that when someone buys a used game or gets a lend of it from a friend it is essentially the same as downloading it. Someone probably bought the copy that you downloaded.
cody3232
Incorrect. If I buy a game and then lend it to my friend, the developer has been paid fully for my copy (which by the way entitles me to resell/trade/and lend the game as I see fit) and there is still just the one copy in existence. We aren't both playing the game at the same time. If you pirate a game... even a game that the uploader bought legally, then you have published yourself a copy of the game... a copy that the developer has not been compensated for, and allows you and the uploader to play at the same time. That's illegal, it should be illegal, and the difference is clear.
Seriously, things have been resold for as long as things have been sold. And if you want to try and say this is different because it's intellectual property as opposed to... a coffee table, then resale has been around as long as media has been published. Books have been resold for centuries.... Millenia!!! EA's argument tries to make this a separate, new, threat. It's as old as markets themselves, it's pervasive, it's a right of property owners, and those backing their pleas need to be more careful of the rights you're throwing away. It is much harder to gain a consumer right than it is to lose it.
I keep mine as a collection.So, then what to do with the game after finishing it?
waqyum
[QUOTE="cody3232"]
I think that a lot of people here think that it is wrong for the wrong reasons, it seems like people think it's wrong based on the fact that it is illegal(which is right) but they are totally overlooking the fact that when someone buys a used game or gets a lend of it from a friend it is essentially the same as downloading it. Someone probably bought the copy that you downloaded.
santoron
Incorrect. If I buy a game and then lend it to my friend, the developer has been paid fully for my copy (which by the way entitles me to resell/trade/and lend the game as I see fit) and there is still just the one copy in existence. We aren't both playing the game at the same time. If you pirate a game... even a game that the uploader bought legally, then you have published yourself a copy of the game... a copy that the developer has not been compensated for, and allows you and the uploader to play at the same time. That's illegal, it should be illegal, and the difference is clear.
Seriously, things have been resold for as long as things have been sold. And if you want to try and say this is different because it's intellectual property as opposed to... a coffee table, then resale has been around as long as media has been published. Books have been resold for centuries.... Millenia!!! EA's argument tries to make this a separate, new, threat. It's as old as markets themselves, it's pervasive, it's a right of property owners, and those backing their pleas need to be more careful of the rights you're throwing away. It is much harder to gain a consumer right than it is to lose it.
It depends on witch way you look at it, alot of software on PC's are licensed and you have to agree to the eula. Basicly 90% of the time you don't own it, your licensed to use it, i could see M$ implementing some sort of eula in the next system where when you buy a game it ties to your account with a cd key, these are becoming more like pc's any way. But the big different about a table is, intellectual property doesn't have ware and tear, so companies that make cars can keep making new cars, old ones eventually die, where the most where and tear on a game is scratches which should be easily replaced since they didn't sell you the cd, but the information on the cd. And since they eventually stop selling it, thats when it should be allowed to be sold as used games, but not not new games, those should be protected against reselling right away, especially on a mass scale that game stop does.
Why do people trade and buy used games from retail stores like Gamestop/Ebgames? They give you super low trade in values on almost all but the newest titles, and resell it to others at merely 5 to 10 dollars off the price of a brand new copy.
I for one do not support it.
for the devs/publishers, it's just as bad as pirating since they aren't getting any of the money... but buisness is buisness. we can sell what we buy.
[QUOTE="cody3232"]
I think that a lot of people here think that it is wrong for the wrong reasons, it seems like people think it's wrong based on the fact that it is illegal(which is right) but they are totally overlooking the fact that when someone buys a used game or gets a lend of it from a friend it is essentially the same as downloading it. Someone probably bought the copy that you downloaded.
Incorrect. If I buy a game and then lend it to my friend, the developer has been paid fully for my copy (which by the way entitles me to resell/trade/and lend the game as I see fit) and there is still just the one copy in existence. We aren't both playing the game at the same time. If you pirate a game... even a game that the uploader bought legally, then you have published yourself a copy of the game... a copy that the developer has not been compensated for, and allows you and the uploader to play at the same time. That's illegal, it should be illegal, and the difference is clear.
Seriously, things have been resold for as long as things have been sold. And if you want to try and say this is different because it's intellectual property as opposed to... a coffee table, then resale has been around as long as media has been published. Books have been resold for centuries.... Millenia!!! EA's argument tries to make this a separate, new, threat. It's as old as markets themselves, it's pervasive, it's a right of property owners, and those backing their pleas need to be more careful of the rights you're throwing away. It is much harder to gain a consumer right than it is to lose it.
It depends on witch way you look at it, alot of software on PC's are licensed and you have to agree to the eula. Basicly 90% of the time you don't own it, your licensed to use it, i could see M$ implementing some sort of eula in the next system where when you buy a game it ties to your account with a cd key, these are becoming more like pc's any way. But the big different about a table is, intellectual property doesn't have ware and tear, so companies that make cars can keep making new cars, old ones eventually die, where the most where and tear on a game is scratches which should be easily replaced since they didn't sell you the cd, but the information on the cd. And since they eventually stop selling it, thats when it should be allowed to be sold as used games, but not not new games, those should be protected against reselling right away, especially on a mass scale that game stop does. They are gonna have to reduce pricing on console games.. Letting them drastically lower in price after a few months like pc games instead of staying close to full price a year later.. If they don't and don't allow the used game industry quite a few people will be pissed.. Especially this would destroy the rental industry too.[QUOTE="santoron"]
[QUOTE="Puckhog04"]
But that still doesn't change the fact that the devs or publishers aren't getting a share of the money. One could make the same case for some games that are pirated be it 360 or PC or whatever. Some games may not be worth $50 to that person. So they could justify pirating it. How is pirating it any different then buying it used? The devs still don't see the share in money.
Note - I've been a PC gamer since 1990 and have never pirated a game. In no way am I condoning pirating. :)
Puckhog04
But they are getting a share of the money... they get paid first! They have no business wondering what happens to a copy of their game once they have been paid in full for it. This isn't a case where they are asking to be compensated for their work, like in piracy. This is the devs wanting to paid multiple times for their work. And no other form of media has ever made a legitimate arguement against reselling a fully paid for product. It's poorly conceived and doomed to fail.
See my response to OGVampire. :|
I read your response, and it still isn't correct. Why, exactly, do you think devs should be compensated multiple times for one copy of a game? This isn't the way the world works, not in any form of media, not with any piece of property. Period. They can cry poor all they want, but they have no right to ask for more money every time something they sodl changes hands. Heck. They know that! They are very aware exactly what rights they are transferring to you when they sell a game. This is them selling something for an agreed on price, with agreed to terms... then wanting to change the deal later on.
Every other form of media deals with used sales. It hasn't destroyed any of those industries. And this industry is going to have to grow up and face the facts. Just because not every person that experiences a portion of your content has paid you royalty fee means you are getting screwed over. The right to trade/sell/lend your property is pervasive in human culture and unless the EA guy wants to claim he never has borrowed a book, checked one out of a library, bought a used CD or classic album, or lent (or borrowed) a DVD to/from a friend then he's a hypocrite with absolutely no ground to stand on.
Or maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps we should shut down the libraries to prevent the rampant piracy going on... After all people go in and get to enjoy other people Intellectual property.... Books, CDs, Movies, even in some places software.... without repaying the publisher for every eyeball.......:roll:
It's laughable how many people in this thread have no clue what they're talking about.
The used games industry has a far worse effect than piracy ever has for PC, and yet most of you have no idea how/why/what effect it has. Piracy for the PC just makes people develop for consoles as well as PC, PC's still get the games.
First off, to those who think used games aren't a big deal and are a small portion compared to new games sales, just go take a look at Gamestops profits. IIRC they made $7 billion either last year or the year before. That dwarfs the vast majority of the companies who make the games they're selling.
Developing console games is expensive, very expensive. It's far more costly than making a PC game. This causes a ton of companies to either not bother with developing games, or making sequals and other games they know will sell well. This, in turn, leads to almost no creativity. Console gaming has nowhere near the creativity of PC gaming due to there being such a high risk with console game development.
If the used games market didn't exist, it would drive up the sales of new games, making it easier for developers to make a profit, which in turn attracts more developers to consoles because there's less of a chance of failure.
There's a reason there's a ton of great indie games on PC...cost. Even with piracy it's much easier to make a profit on PC.
The biggest problem with used games is it's legal...and it will always be legal. People think because it's legal it's ok. This is a very shallow way of thinking. People choose to give gamestop (for example) money instead of giving it to developers and this does nothing to help the industry. Sure, it's legal, but you're not helping at all.
[QUOTE="santoron"][QUOTE="cody3232"]
I think that a lot of people here think that it is wrong for the wrong reasons, it seems like people think it's wrong based on the fact that it is illegal(which is right) but they are totally overlooking the fact that when someone buys a used game or gets a lend of it from a friend it is essentially the same as downloading it. Someone probably bought the copy that you downloaded.
savagetwinkie
Incorrect. If I buy a game and then lend it to my friend, the developer has been paid fully for my copy (which by the way entitles me to resell/trade/and lend the game as I see fit) and there is still just the one copy in existence. We aren't both playing the game at the same time. If you pirate a game... even a game that the uploader bought legally, then you have published yourself a copy of the game... a copy that the developer has not been compensated for, and allows you and the uploader to play at the same time. That's illegal, it should be illegal, and the difference is clear.
Seriously, things have been resold for as long as things have been sold. And if you want to try and say this is different because it's intellectual property as opposed to... a coffee table, then resale has been around as long as media has been published. Books have been resold for centuries.... Millenia!!! EA's argument tries to make this a separate, new, threat. It's as old as markets themselves, it's pervasive, it's a right of property owners, and those backing their pleas need to be more careful of the rights you're throwing away. It is much harder to gain a consumer right than it is to lose it.
It depends on witch way you look at it, alot of software on PC's are licensed and you have to agree to the eula. Basicly 90% of the time you don't own it, your licensed to use it, i could see M$ implementing some sort of eula in the next system where when you buy a game it ties to your account with a cd key, these are becoming more like pc's any way. But the big different about a table is, intellectual property doesn't have ware and tear, so companies that make cars can keep making new cars, old ones eventually die, where the most where and tear on a game is scratches which should be easily replaced since they didn't sell you the cd, but the information on the cd. And since they eventually stop selling it, thats when it should be allowed to be sold as used games, but not not new games, those should be protected against reselling right away, especially on a mass scale that game stop does.It actually was rumored for awhile that Sony considered locking games to the first console it played on. You know how well that went over? Let's just say they scrapped any thought of that quick. I don't mind if a content owner decides not to sell me a game anymore... but don't expect me to pay the same price as buying a game to "rent" it from them in the future. And that is the crux.Devs would like you to pay as much, and preferrably more than you are now, and take away the ownership rights from you. It's not an idea likely to go over well anywhere at all. Music tried this early in the MP3 transition faze. They tried to charge exorbitant prices, and put suffocating DRM on all files... and they didn't sell. The more "ownership" they have returned to consumers via eased DRM/eliminated DRM, the more people have turned to MP3s versus traditional CDs.
Alll Intellectual property is "immortal" to paraphrase your point, now in the digital era. However, there are still used bookstores, used music stores, used dvd stores, used art stores. All exactly the same as a used game store. These other medias have lived peacefully alongside their respective resale markets without crying poor anytime someone got a cheap paperback book, or a classic album. And the same argruement you are trying to make against resold, borrowed, or traded videogames would apply just as well to a library. In short, society has looked at this issue thoroughly and repeatedly over the ages. Don't be fooled into thinking used markets are new or a real threat. Every other form of media has survived and thrived alongside these markets, and videogames haven't done too shabby themselves....
Second-hand goods help fuel the economy - the money we gain from selling our products we invest elsewhere in the society (and for gamers ironically it often means into more games). New car sales globally have been down over the last 12 months - do we hear car manufactures suggest they should generate revenue from resale? Of course not. What a silly notion, especially at a difficult time where people have had to resort to selling their luxury items such as games or consoles out of necessity to pay rent/food/etc.
It's laughable how many people in this thread have no clue what they're talking about.
The used games industry has a far worse effect than piracy ever has for PC, and yet most of you have no idea how/why/what effect it has. Piracy for the PC just makes people develop for consoles as well as PC, PC's still get the games.
First off, to those who think used games aren't a big deal and are a small portion compared to new games sales, just go take a look at Gamestops profits. IIRC they made $7 billion either last year or the year before. That dwarfs the vast majority of the companies who make the games they're selling.
Developing console games is expensive, very expensive. It's far more costly than making a PC game. This causes a ton of companies to either not bother with developing games, or making sequals and other games they know will sell well. This, in turn, leads to almost no creativity. Console gaming has nowhere near the creativity of PC gaming due to there being such a high risk with console game development.
If the used games market didn't exist, it would drive up the sales of new games, making it easier for developers to make a profit, which in turn attracts more developers to consoles because there's less of a chance of failure.
There's a reason there's a ton of great indie games on PC...cost. Even with piracy it's much easier to make a profit on PC.
The biggest problem with used games is it's legal...and it will always be legal. People think because it's legal it's ok. This is a very shallow way of thinking. People choose to give gamestop (for example) money instead of giving it to developers and this does nothing to help the industry. Sure, it's legal, but you're not helping at all.
mudman91878
We live in a capitalist society - livelihoods are made from selling second-hand products. And yes, every conceivable consumer market is affected by the resale of goods, however the money gained is invariably reinvested back into society be it in gaming or otherwise. Its how the western world works.
It's laughable how many people in this thread have no clue what they're talking about.
The used games industry has a far worse effect than piracy ever has for PC, and yet most of you have no idea how/why/what effect it has. Piracy for the PC just makes people develop for consoles as well as PC, PC's still get the games.
First off, to those who think used games aren't a big deal and are a small portion compared to new games sales, just go take a look at Gamestops profits. IIRC they made $7 billion either last year or the year before. That dwarfs the vast majority of the companies who make the games they're selling.
Developing console games is expensive, very expensive. It's far more costly than making a PC game. This causes a ton of companies to either not bother with developing games, or making sequals and other games they know will sell well. This, in turn, leads to almost no creativity. Console gaming has nowhere near the creativity of PC gaming due to there being such a high risk with console game development.
If the used games market didn't exist, it would drive up the sales of new games, making it easier for developers to make a profit, which in turn attracts more developers to consoles because there's less of a chance of failure.
There's a reason there's a ton of great indie games on PC...cost. Even with piracy it's much easier to make a profit on PC.
The biggest problem with used games is it's legal...and it will always be legal. People think because it's legal it's ok. This is a very shallow way of thinking. People choose to give gamestop (for example) money instead of giving it to developers and this does nothing to help the industry. Sure, it's legal, but you're not helping at all.
mudman91878
I find it frightening how many people in this thread are so quick to throw away the consumer rights that others have worked so hard for over the years for you to obtain.
First off, you need to check your facts. A quick google of Gamestop profits showed that for their 2nd quarter 07 net profits were 21.8 million, a seven fold increase over the previos year during the same three month period, and that was attributed in large part to the sales of next gen consoles. the year before, when the ps3 and wii hadn't yet been released, their profits were 3.18 million... about 1/7 what they generated with new hardware to push. Now these are summer numbers and the holiday numbers are gonna be higher.... but 7 billion in profits? You did not, in fact, recall correctly.
Creating every form of media - from art, to movies, to music, and books - costs money, and is priced accordingly. If developers aren't making any money (they are) they are completely free to charge whatever they wish. They aren't even crying that they are goinjg bakrupt, they simply see a market and want (another) piece of the pie. Few games today come anywhere near the budget of the larger motion pictures released. You don't hear the movie industry (or their fans) decrying the rise of used DVD sales for ruining creativity in that market.... a market that is also overrun with sequels and ripoffs of proven formulas. No, creatvty is lacking because business men lack creativity, yet have control over what gets made. You do see Music, Movies, Books, and Games all decrying piracy.... the "lesser" of two evils by your thinking.
It's also silly to assume Game sales would skyrocket with the elimination of resold games. Some people would buy more games, most people would simply pay fewer games, or not play at all. I have an entertainment budget. Most people do. If everything I liked to do went up in price, I wouldn't raise my budget, I'd just choose my purchases more wisely. That's the fallicy developers have come to believe. Take this Dead Space thing for example. They think if they were to eliminate used games (and traded and borrowed games apparently) that they would suddenly have 2x the sales. That's idiocy and doesn't translate well into real sales. Remember... Everyone already had the opportunity to buy direct from retail. they passed.
And doing something legal is a shallow way of thinking???? Howsabout throwing away your rights without compensation is not thinking at all!!!
i had my professor comment on the 2nd hand book market once
he told us not to sell books but to just give them to people
doesn't seem like he was very fond of the 2nd hand market and considering it's more widely available, that was more of a threat to him as an author
"Let's put it this way, most companies make a product to sell..."
all you're talking about is the legal aspect, I said aside from that... it's still justifying robbing the developers profit either way, even if someone is losing the original.. the key point is the developer is not getting anything other than the original and there are multiple pirates buying originals as well. yes there are more pirates copies than 2nd hand copies(i already made this point so you're just repeating me), but 2nd hand copies are distributed on a larger scale to the mass market without any need for a hacked system. if only there was a correlation of pirates copies to potential sales.
on the bright side, think about all the old sports games the retailers just have to throw in the trash.. gotta love the 2nd hand retail market, 1 million copies of games nobody want anymore taking up a majority of the shelf space
I buy used games (from Ebay mostly). :\ $60 for a 7 hour game just isn't my cup of tea...sorry EA.killab2oo5You're actually hurting the game industry when you do that. Wait until games come down in price if $60 is really that bad. I know it's a tough line to walk as I can see and understand both sides of the story, but I feel ultimately that buying used games does more harm then good.
[QUOTE="karasill"][QUOTE="LittleHands134"]Gamespot always makes me laugh with their over zealous piracy hate. I download all my PC games, and my 360 games. I have no problem saying this.funked_upYou download leagally or no? What do you think? :roll: Well since you can legally download pc games I had to ask, I dont need your sarcastic remark, I mean was it really necessary?
[QUOTE="karasill"][QUOTE="LittleHands134"]Gamespot always makes me laugh with their over zealous piracy hate. I download all my PC games, and my 360 games. I have no problem saying this.LittleHands134You download leagally or no? I download safely using newsgroups. It's not illegal unless you get caught. Yeah I just don't understand people who do what you do. *sigh*............. I mean so you're saying you have no issues at all about stealing games and flipping off all the devs who made the game for your entertainment? I don't know, I guess everyone just thinks differently and can justify what they do.
No not even close. A used game was still purchased at some point. It can be thought of as a group purchase. The developer doesn't get as much as if everyone bought the game new but there still is revenue from the original sale.
A pirated game only needs a single copy for hundreds of thousands of people to play. The developer doesn't get anything.
Furthermore piracy is illegal whereas used game sales are not. If used game sales were really that much of problem then you would see more developers go digital distribution only.
Piracy rates are obscenely high on the pc and I get tired of pc gamers trying to downplay the situation as seen in this thread.
Word of Goo was a drm free $20 indy game and look what happened to it:
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/11/13/world-of-goo-has-90-piracy-rate/
http://www.joystiq.com/2009/01/30/world-of-goo-publisher-files-for-bankruptcy/
Part of the reason why you see so many mmorpgs on the pc is because single player games are pirated so badly. Online play is one of the best ways to deal with the pc piracy problem.
Used games hurt creativity in the video game industry. Lack of sales on new Ips means publishers are less willing to throw out money on a new idea and more likely will choose to back a sequel to an already existing product because it will cost less to develop/market/advertise than it would a newer IP. That is why there are more sequels that come out every year than new ips.
Used games hurt creativity in the video game industry. Lack of sales on new Ips means publishers are less willing to throw out money on a new idea and more likely will choose to back a sequel to an already existing product because it will cost less to develop/market/advertise than it would a newer IP. That is why there are more sequels that come out every year than new ips.
CajunShooter
Funny. The movie industry has just as little innovation and creativity in today's releases, and people don't blame used DVD sales. The blame the business majors that run movie studios and take the creative decisions away from creative people. That certainly makes more sense to me.
The home console industry has survived 30 years now, and there has been a used game market for as long as they have been sold. Odd how it never was a problem until recently though. In fact, it never was a problem when creativity was at its peak in the industry. Developers, used to releasing shovelware and receiving double digit market increases for more than a decade straight made them complacent. Then, when that unsustainable growth slows, they look around for something to blame. And people actually jump at the chance to give away their own rights over their own property....
Just amazing....
The title reads "Used game sales nearly as bad as piratism?"
By "bad" we're not talking about morals i.e. illegal vs legal because the answer is obvious. Try to focus more on how they overall affect the gaming industry. I say pirating can be potentially worst, but since its on a smaller scale, it doesn't hurt as much as used games are.
I find this thread quite strange in that several posters are standing side-by-side and in agreement with a company suggesting we take away the rights of the consumer. I can understand piracy being the primary target for large corporates, but legitimate purchasers of second-hand goods? Oh my lordy...
And for those arguing against the morality rather than legality of the 2nd hand industry, prohibiting the re-sale of goods would send the economy into further dissary than it currently is.
I've never sold a game or bought a used game. Not really a matter of principle for me, I guess I can just afford buying a crappy, short game.DonPerian
I have almost never sold a game to a reseller like GameStop (the one exception I can think of? R6V2, once i realized i had just gotten screwed outta 60 bucks) and while I do occasionally buy used games, it's usually more to fill out my collection (Ps2 RPGs have been a recent buy for me) than to save a few bucks on newer titles. In fact, the only current gen game I have bought used? Tiger Woods '07.. and i got that about one month ago for 12 bucks.
The issue for me isn't necessarily that I'm a huge fan of used games, or a big buyer even. It's that the ability to resell your games is part of what owning them means. Also, the "solutions" developer's talk about when they start whining about this issue would take away other rights I have as an owner, such as the ability to borrow my games out to my friends and vice versa. Now that IS something that I have done for... well for my entire gaming life, and I'll not give that control over my own property away freely.
You don't need to be into the used market at all for this issue to effect the way you and your friends use games in a big way...
[QUOTE="CajunShooter"]
Used games hurt creativity in the video game industry. Lack of sales on new Ips means publishers are less willing to throw out money on a new idea and more likely will choose to back a sequel to an already existing product because it will cost less to develop/market/advertise than it would a newer IP. That is why there are more sequels that come out every year than new ips.
santoron
Funny. The movie industry has just as little innovation and creativity in today's releases, and people don't blame used DVD sales. The blame the business majors that run movie studios and take the creative decisions away from creative people. That certainly makes more sense to me.
And why do you think that they green light sequels, remakes, reboots? Because it is easier to sell a recognizable name as opposed to a brand new movie not based on anything.A Developer wants to maximize profits and when the new IPs don't create enough revenue similar to how movies that are new don't. That is when they turn to a franchise that has already been successful or a recognizable name. You save on advertising because now you don't have to sell it like you would a new IP
I think so. I mean what's the rationale of pirating being wrong? You're taking something that people spent years working on without getting them a dime of it. So how is buying used games any different? Because it's legal? Because you're paying someone for it?
One is legal one is not. However both are doing the same damage. Not a cent of the money you paid for Mass Effect went to the developers or publisher. Of course things get even worse when 'trade 3 games for 1' deals and whatnot are factored in.piracy = The unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted material.
I'm pretty sure I just paid money for that used copy of Mass Effect,
jdsteffen
ppl that bring up piracy always for get this used games sales is basically the same thing (though legal) it robs the Devs of their precious income they need to make new gamesshadow_hosi
It isn't basically the same thing.
One is theft and the other is not.
A used game still represents a sale. At some point the used game was paid for and revenue was sent to the developer.
A pirated game is a copy that the developer will get nothing from.
That is a big difference.
This is argument fails all tests of logic. If people were unable to purchase games, you would NOT see an influx of people buying more games at full price. What would we see? People buying less games at full price, as a game at $60 has LESS value. For example, I won't buy any game that requires Steam for more than $20- I want those companies to know that, while I rarely sell games anyway, they're leaving money on the table by trying to restrict my rights. And the truth is, while waiting for the price to drop, I'm likely to just lose interest/find a substitute, which means they left $50 on the table.
Seeing this attitude by the games industry me want to avoid purchasing new games whenever possible since they're just going to attempt to ream me for all the money I have in the future- I might as well stick it to them for now. The truth is, I don't care about developers at all- we engage in a business transaction. A developer is not my mom or my girlfriend, it's a corporation. And since I know this comment tends to rile up some folks, allow me to prove that it's the same for all of you. How many of you have bought a turd of a game just to show the developer you care about them? How many of you bought a broken game just to encourage them to fix the game? Probably never, and this is the kind of stuff you'd do if you actually cared. You don't, and that's fine. They don't care about you either.
I don't think that attitude is as prevelent as some think. I have seen this comparison of used games to piracy more often used by people who want to justify piracy, not developers.Seeing this attitude by the games industry me want to avoid purchasing new games whenever possible since they're just going to attempt to ream me for all the money I have in the future- I might as well stick it to them for now. The truth is, I don't care about developers at all- we engage in a business transaction. A developer is not my mom or my girlfriend, it's a corporation. And since I know this comment tends to rile up some folks, allow me to prove that it's the same for all of you. How many of you have bought a turd of a game just to show the developer you care about them? How many of you bought a broken game just to encourage them to fix the game? Probably never, and this is the kind of stuff you'd do if you actually cared. You don't, and that's fine. They don't care about you either.
LongZhiZi
Piracy is obviously a much bigger problem given the amount of complaints made by developers.
lol its probly mostly the xbox 360 with easy piratism.....i dont think anyone would want to spend 20 dollars to pirate a ps3 game
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment