Currently Online 
badgenome said:
No, I don't think they would. There is no expectation of being able to truly own digital copies of things. Whether or not that really makes sense from a consumer rights perspective, there it is. It's pretty galling to watch the game industry act like it's entitled to something that no other industry gets. Why on Earth do they deserve a percentage of the transaction every time a copy changes hands when they have already received payment for their part? These companies think they can kill off the mid tier and go all in on "AAA" stuff, spending $30 million, $40 million, $50 million, $100 million per game... and then blame everyone else that their finances suck and they're all going out of business. If they want a cut of used game sales, then they need to get in on the used games business by actually selling used games. They are no more deserving of a percentage of every used game sold than is the person who bought the game new in the first place. |
This is a great post.
I can't really add much to it, but I'll say this: I sympathize with everyone who wants to protect the video game industry. It's bad for all of us when a studio closes or a publisher has to sell off its properties. But no amount of great games or profitable companies is worth forfeiting your rights as a consumer.
There is a very simple relationship between publisher and consumer. They make and sell the games, we buy them. That's it. After we buy them we own them and have the right to play them, resell them, or throw them in an incinerator if we so choose.
You can only sell the things you make once.
