If GameStop's used game business had never existed, would we have DLC in the same aggresive manner to which we are being subjected to, possibly getting DLC for most games?
The fact is that some publishers and developers have expressed that GameStop business of retaining all profits from sold used games, take away possible profits from brand new games that could be bought by consumers that do leave the publishers/developers some profit.
Microsoft initially had a vision for the Xbone that involved some more steps at the moment of selling your copy of a game to a retailer that sort of guaranteed the publishers/developers some profit during the transaction, but that initiative never took off due to negative reception.
DLC has been a sort of walk around to get more profits out of games and try to keep that bought copy on the hands of purchasers.
So I ask you, do you think that if GameStop had never relied in the used game business, would developers still had gone for as much DLC push as they do now?
Do you think even with no used games they would go for greed and seek even more profit by turning game content away into DLC? Or do you think no used game business would make a difference?
Would no used game business make it harder for companies to get away with so much DLC?
What do you think?
Nintendo is selling their IPs to Microsoft and this is true because:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=221391&page=1
