By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
MontanaHatchet on 30 August 2009
Edit Thread
Avinash_Tyagi said:
MontanaHatchet said:
Avinash_Tyagi said:
MontanaHatchet said:
Avinash_Tyagi said:
MontanaHatchet said:
Avinash_Tyagi said:
ssj12 said:
I hate the entire idea of used games. It takes revenue away from developers and publishers.


No it doesn't, they didn't earn that revenue or sales, if the game was worthy of those revenues people would only buy new, not used, because there would be no used copies of the games

Not great logic. Let me give you an example. I remember reading an old news story where a man returned his copy of Final Fantasy 7, not because it was a bad game, but because he didn't know he'd have to do any reading. People could return games for all other sorts of reasons. Maybe they got suckered into the hype and just didn't like the game or its genre. Regardless of the reason, the developers shouldn't be punished for consumers.

Actually they should, the fact that the consumer got suckered, or felt that the game had too much text, or whatever proves that the consumer was not satisfied with their experience, as a result the publisher hasn't earned any further revenue on the game

Yeah, but how is that the developer's fault? The developer shouldn't be punished if someone dislikes a game for a stupid reason. And you were arguing that a game isn't "worthy" of the money, but I'm explaining how the game can be very good but still be returned.


Because for the consumer who returned the game it wasn't good, see quality is subjective, you may like modern god shock 5: Snakes vengeance, may think its the greatest game ever and GOTY, but another person may think its utter garbage, you may keep the game, but the other person will sell it, showing that for them it was not a good game, why should the dev et extra money for failing a consumer.  That's like a CEO getting a golden parachute after they drive their company to bankruptcy, you don't reward failure.

So, wait a second. It's a developer's fault that they made a fantastic game, but someone bought it when it didn't appeal to them? You'e arguing that the developer somehow failed and should be punished, even if they make a fantastic product, because of what some consumers think. You can't please everyone, and you certainly can't stop people from buying your products, but that doesn't mean publishers and developers should be chastised for it. Let's take Nintendo, who is in my opinion, the best developer in the industry. If they put out a great game like Twilight Princess or Super Mario Galaxy, should they suffer from used game sales? Those are two incredible games, but some consumers might not like them. It's not a failure because Nintendo failed to appeal to a person they don't even know. That's just a consumer who should buy some other game. You may have someone that has never played a shooter before. They buy a shooter, decide that it isn't the genre for them, and return it for used sale. Then, a devoted shooter fan goes to the store, and buys the used copy. You're basically arguing that a developer failed in some way if they didn't appeal every last person who bought their product, even though they have no control of that. They can't please everyone, but they can release amazing products. And they shouldn't be punished for that.

People don't return fantastic products Montana, a product that they love and does everything that they want doesn't get returned.  Greatness is subjective, you may find Mario Galaxy awesome, my mom probably wouldn't, she'd probably think its stupid, also why wasn't the person who didn't like shooters propely exposed to the game before they bought it?  Why weren't they educated on the game fully before buying, if they had been they wouldn't have bought it in the first place, see that's what you seem to be missing the publishers aren't educating people properly, so the argument that they shouldn't be punsihed for people's ignornace is falwed, if they did their job the consumers would not be ignorant.

People return fantastic products all the time. Like you said, quality is subjective. Just because one person doesn't like it, doesn't make it a bad product. A game like Super Mario Galaxy is still amazing no matter what your mom thinks about it. Why should Nintendo be punished because some people don't like it? Nintendo should be punished for releasing a fantastic product? Again, they can't appeal to everyone. They shouldn't lose money because of that. If we all lived in a perfect world and consumers were never ignorant, than we wouldn't have this problem in the first place. Used games wouldn't exist. I know you probably don't know this (since you're a Nintendo fan), but there are these things called downloadable demos. There are demos you can download from online stores, demos you can play in stores, and demos you can buy with other games. Developers and publishers send review copies to be reviewed so you get a general idea of the game's quality. Publishers put brief descriptions of the gameplay and general workings of the game on the back of the box. What more do you what them to do? Your argument is flawed, because you believe developers should be punished no matter what a game is like. Look, if a person buy a games and returns it, the developer has already been punished. That person won't be buying any more of their products (most likely). By putting the game up for used, the developer loses another sale, which is just rubbing salt on the wound. That's what is not fair.