@ Slimebeast. When will you realize that the used market is the gaming market's friend, without them, sales of both games and consoles would diminish...greatly.
vlad321 said:
Let me lay it down for you because you seem to be very confused here. The engine is a patent, the mark Ferrari is a trademark, and the game on the CD is intellectual property. Huge differencces between all 3, ad they exist because everything is different. As I said, you have EVERY right to resell the DVD you bought from Gamestop, you have however no right to take credit for the IP that is on that DVD, so next time you want to resell your game, be sure to wipe the DVD clean. |
Vlad...as usual, you fail, you are comparing apples to oranges and completely disregarding the crux of the issue here, the markets for ANYTHING used, be it physical property, intellectual property, all of it, are interchangeable. The used game market is helpful to the gaming industry in the same way that the used car market is helpful to the car market. You can talk about product differences all you want, but it's a straw man argument...and not a very good one at that.
Tanstalas said:
@ - Explain this to me? If there are no used games then no one would buy new games? It may mean the USED gaming market would fail to exist, but the same people who ARE BUYING NEW GAMES NOW THAT CONTRIBUTE TO INCOME TO THE DEVELOPER AND PUBLISHER WOULD STILL BUY THOSE GAMES If someone is only buying used games, how does that affected new game sales? I personally know no one (you may who knows) that has ever said "Hey I think I will go spend $300 on a console then only buy used games"
If there are no used games, less people will buy games that are questionable because they know they cannot recoup some of their losses should they not enjoy the game. Also, those with several games that they can stand to be without in order to raise funds to purchase a new game will be unable to do so. Just these two scenerios alone would greatly diminish the gaming market, they would also dump the console market because really, who want's to buy a console if they can;t get the games for it??? I personally don't know anybody who has never purchased a used item of any kind because it's not giving the manufacturer money directly. Anybody with even a miniscule grasp of economics knows that the used market is what keeps the knew market flowing. @-If they can't afford a new game, how did they afford a $300 console? Hey here is an idea, instead of buying 2 games for $30 apiece just buy 1 at $60. And really, this might be better for certain companies.. If you are too broke to buy new games, to which the console maker gets a cut for (which is why they sell the consoles for a loss in the first place) then the console maker would probably prefer you not to buy their console, since they are selling it for a loss hoping to make it back on software sales :D If they can;t afford a game, or don;t want to buy it because they know they won't be able to sell it and recoup some of their losses, what are they doing buying a $300.00 console? Hey, here's an idea, why not get two games at thirty, giving you a reason to purchase a console and free up somebody else's money so they can buy the game that they otherwise would not have purchased? That way, you don't buy a game you didn't want, and you got two games you did, while the other person got the game they did want, and got rid of two they didn't. Now, you do make a good point here, and that is that yes, people who cannot afford/are not too sure about new games should not and will not purchase a console, which is really bad for devs and console makers alike since a person without console is not likely to buy a game, new or used. So I think console makers would prefer that you go ahead and buy that used game (all except Sony at the moment...after all, the other two are pulling a profit at the moment are they not?)
@ - And I think you miss the point of what the developers are trying to do, they aren't saying if you buy a used game you won't be able to play it, they are saying if you buy a used game, expect to pay $10 to get a code to play it. That's theft, why should the devs get money for a single copy of a game, this will kill the used market and rentals and will hurt the gaming industry as a whole. Ok as well... back in the days of Nintendo there wern't as many used game shops as there were now, and adjusting for inflation a NES game would cost A LOT more than a new PS3/360/wii game does nowadays. Back in the NES days, when where I am from minimum wage as around $4/hr and a game cost $40 - $50, now minimum wage is $10/hr and games cost about $60-$70... So adjusting for inflation, a NES game would cost almost twice as much as they do now... yeah I see where you're going, the GAMING MARKET IS DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED - You heard it here first But there were used game shops, were there not? Also, the gaming market was a different beast back then, you CANNOT compare the two. |
