theprof00 said:
Zlejedi said:
HappySqurriel said:
Zlejedi said:
Nsanity said:
He doesn't see it as surprising, however, because Nintendo doesn't allow developers to change their prices or offer demos or promotions either, which are all tactics that Microsoft, Sony, and other digital publishers have used to pick up lots of digital sales before.
|
Seriously ?
I always knew they are most hostile anti-consumer company among big three but I never expected it to this extenct.
|
Yeah, because Sony installing malware on everyone who was foolish enough to buy CDs from their artists was really good for consumers ...
I believe it was Epic who was saying that Microsoft forced them to charge a fee for a map pack they would have normally offered for free on the PC in order to create a market for paid digital content, and I suspect what Nintendo is doing is very similar. When you look at how (most) people react to paid content on the Android/iTunes market, the readily available free content really does erase any willingness for consumers to pay anything for similar content.
While you may see this as "anti-consumer", ensuring that a company can actually turn a profit on the content they produce is good for consumers because it ensures that people will actually produce content.
|
How about we compare system with well protected value of games (wii) with system most "abusing" sales and plenty of free stuff (Steam) in regards to content ?
|
LOL. ZING from the present.
Let's see what new strange comparison squirrel can make to get himself out of this one! Take it away squirrel!
|
Present Zing: How is completely ignoring the privacy and security of your users, letting their information be stolen, and then creating terms and services that prevent users from suing you for your incompetence "pro-consumer"?
