| 20happyballs said: I'm tired of everyone getting all worked up about Microsoft's used game policy. It's for the developers. It's not like it's greedy for developers to ask of this. Developers are not selling discs, they are selling entertainment experiences. It's only right that they be able to charge per experience given, not the physical discs sold. No one seems to have a problem with app store games not being sharable. In all actuality, an anti-used game policy is what is needed to keep the gaming industry alive. We all know that with improved graphic fidelity, the cost to develop a game will also increase. Consequently, game developers will need to find a way to be able to continue making a profit. The most obvious way to address this increase in development costs would be to increase the selling price of games. However, many of us would respond badly, myself included. Sure people will still buy games brand new when they are first released, but it is likely that more and more people will start to wait for these games to become cheaper and buy it used. Which means that any increase in revenue brought on by the increased sales price would be offset by gamers waiting to buy games used. In the end, it is not only the developers who are going to lose out, but also gamers. The increased difficulty for a developer to turn a profit will means less AAA quality games, less new IPs, and developers taking less risks overall. We're already seeing the affects of increased development costs in the current generation. Why do you think so many developers are making first person shooters? Why do you think that many developers are making sequels instead of new IPs?
|
Answer to OP: No.
