| the2real4mafol said: good points But i don't see how punishing your potential customers will make them want to buy your games. Surely, if that was good. More people would hear about the next game and want it. Spread of information by mouth and hype go do wonders for a game. I think the problem is really that games cost too much in development these days, they MUST have the best graphics, they MUST have the best voice actors, they MUST be realist and they MUST be like Hollywood. All these makes development far more expensive then necessary and thus need to sell millions more copies than before, they also come out far less often as this expensive development takes a long time. All damaging to potential profit making, which they all go for. Also, games themselves may be as good as when they are first bought but the consoles they are played on degrade just as a car would over time. But that 3rd paragraph makes sense. Also, digital goods are different, as it stands you can't sell them on, although i think you should. We can't just not be expected to buy buy buy and not be allowed to sell on later. Also, you'll never convince me to change my mind, i'll make that clear. I just see it as wrong, we shouldn't be dictated to by no one. I understand that they want to make profit, who doesn't? But you don't attack your source of potential profit. As the CEO of Take Two says you must impress your potential customers to get their money. It's surely common sense here. I'm sorry but if you think the industry faces problems now, it will shoot itself in the foot if Microsoft goes ahead with madness. As it stands, a physical good is there for people to do what they with. They have no right to say what we buy, isn't ours. Even with digital goods, sure we can't sell them on but who are they to demand us to play online?!? It don't currently happen with any digital games service, but Xbox One demands it. How does that bit of DRM benefit publishers? But as i see it, don't fix what ain't broken. ~http://www.computerandvideogames.com/409797/take-two-ceo-games-must-delight-consumers-to-avoid-secondhand-market/ |
The goal isnt' to punish customers, it just feels that way. Wen my parents made me get off the computer and go play outside, I hated it... But it wasn't a punishment, things just needed to change. I just wasn't happy with that change.
You're absolutely right that games cost too much to make, they MUST have the best of everything... But unfortunate that IS determined by the consumers. Companies that release games that look dated are sometimes deemed "shovelware" unless they have truely amazing game mechanics. But the fact is, you make a game that isn't as shiny as your competitors, and it often doesn't sell for that reason. It's out of their hands.
As for consoles degrading, yes, they do. But a console is a comodity, and you CAN sell it later on, and it does depreciate. It works just like other physical items. It's the games though, that are the special case.
I'm not expecting you to change your mind, but you do need to see where the developers are coming from. You refuse to be "dictated to by no one". Well, we are constantly given limitations in every aspect of being a consumer. Restaurants say "no shirt, no shoes, no service." Go into a nice restaurant, and you may get turned away without a jacket and tie. Go to a hotel with a big dog and they may not give you a room. Anyone who provides a product or service has some rights themselves. In a hotel, they don't want a big dog tearing apart their nice rooms for $90 a night. We understand that. But a developer... they are letting you play their $50 Million game as much as you want for $60 (or less if you wait) but that's not good enough. No, we are ENTITLED to play their $50 Million game for $60, and then resell it, costing them another sale. It's up to them to deal with the fact that they spent a fortune to develop their game. It's not OUR problem that they spent all that money. Who are they to limit us? Well, they have rights too. If they make a game for $10 Million or $50 Million, they're expected to sell it for $60. No other items are like that. It's not like there's a set price of $15,000 for the car. So if you want to make a high quality car like a BMW, too bad, consumers pay $15,000 for cars, no more. But that's the way it is for games. And yet we as consumers, refuse to give developers any leeway as their costs go up and up, and prices for games stay the same?
