Aielyn said:
I'm not pushing all of the blame on the developer. But I am pushing all of the blame on the industry. Most of it actually goes to the publisher. Developers are generally most interested in making games that people will love. Publishers tend to be the ones that push for games that can be monetised to the max, that try to get as much money as they can as quickly as they can. And since the publisher provides the money, this is generally how it all ends up working. While developers pour as much love as they can into their games, the publishers instruct them to make changes in order to best maximise profits. And of course, the publishers are all management, not game-makers, and thus they don't really understand what best maximises profits. As a result, they spend a lot of time railing against second-hand games, piracy, etc, while inserting all sorts of DRM, etc, to try to control the flow of money. And it backfires, every time. Games with DRM typically end up being pirated more than other games, for instance, because in pirating the game, they typically remove the DRM component. It speaks volumes that, while a lot of big studios run by big publishers are failing, a lot of the small studios that are self-run are blossoming. Why? Same reason as why Ubisoft's recent Rayman Legends announcement is such a problem - because the big publishers' management tend to make decisions that don't actually make sense, in the misguided belief that it will increase profits. Meanwhile, small studios aren't subject to the idiot managers, and thus can create games that people actually love. In the end, they don't need to "lessen the damage of second-hand", they need to learn how to lessen the frequency of it happening to begin with. Suck all of the oxygen out of the second-hand industry by making it so that games that are in high demand don't show up in the used game market until the demand has already evaporated. And you do that, like I said, by creating games that people don't want to sell back to the game store, or sell on eBay. |
One word, Darksiders.
I will respectfully disagree with you. I think my code system allows second hand sales, while supporting developers that want to go against the grain. I don't want the same sh-t, over and over. A $10-15 charge to buy second hand would really only come out of people selling the game, not people like me who keep there games. Also MS or whoever could come up with a buddy system. Like you get 10 buddy's you get to share all your games with and they also get to share games with you if they decide to also be your buddy. Their are many different ways of going about it. Also would have friends selling their games to friends and take gamestop out of the middle.
You do have some valid points but I also think I do as well. I like different games. I get sick up the same sh-t all the time. What you are forgetting is the small developer is the one getting destroyed, they have no chance unless big companies pick them up. New companies need to form to form competition. This gen, how many software companies got bought up. So now we got the same massive company dictating whats going on. This charge would allow small developers to continue what they love and invest in the game, so we get stunning games and the developer only has to sell so many rather than what Dead Space 3 needs to sell. 5 F'ing million to break even. thats to much. If they sold a million cars of one model. GM would be shitting breaks of GOLD. Other markets have way higher profit margins.
