By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Digital distribution sucks!

Onyxmeth on 01 October 2008

I think a better system to implement instead of used DD games is a barter or trade system. There would be a listing for what game you want to trade and what you're willing to trade for. Someone with that game offers it and you both agree to the trade. You both then switch licenses. It gives an advantage to people that like to get something cheap by getting rid of an unwanted game for something more desirable and at the same time it doesn't really cut much at all into publishers and developers pockets. It could be set up very easily, like a bartering site, where you simply click on which game you're bartering and then put checks on a list of every available game which ones you're willing to accept. Someone sees this, clicks on the option of the game they own and are willing to part with and then the OP eithers accepts or declines.



Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.



Around the Network
disolitude on 01 October 2008
Onyxmeth said:

I think a better system to implement instead of used DD games is a barter or trade system. There would be a listing for what game you want to trade and what you're willing to trade for. Someone with that game offers it and you both agree to the trade. You both then switch licenses. It gives an advantage to people that like to get something cheap by getting rid of an unwanted game for something more desirable and at the same time it doesn't really cut much at all into publishers and developers pockets. It could be set up very easily, like a bartering site, where you simply click on which game you're bartering and then put checks on a list of every available game which ones you're willing to accept. Someone sees this, clicks on the option of the game they own and are willing to part with and then the OP eithers accepts or declines.

I think they did something like that 3000 years ago... I give goat if you give ps3. :)

 



Onyxmeth on 01 October 2008
disolitude said:
Onyxmeth said:

I think a better system to implement instead of used DD games is a barter or trade system. There would be a listing for what game you want to trade and what you're willing to trade for. Someone with that game offers it and you both agree to the trade. You both then switch licenses. It gives an advantage to people that like to get something cheap by getting rid of an unwanted game for something more desirable and at the same time it doesn't really cut much at all into publishers and developers pockets. It could be set up very easily, like a bartering site, where you simply click on which game you're bartering and then put checks on a list of every available game which ones you're willing to accept. Someone sees this, clicks on the option of the game they own and are willing to part with and then the OP eithers accepts or declines.

I think they did something like that 3000 years ago... I give goat if you give ps3. :)

 

It was much more difficult for digital distribution 3000 years ago because they only had dial-up. The transfer took forever.

 



Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.



mrstickball on 01 October 2008
Blappo said:

This is a good deal for the platform owner (MS, Sony, Nintendo) but a horrible deal for any publisher.  The platform's would allow buyers to instantly find "used" copies for a lower price than a new copy.  Sales of new copies would completely dry up after a month.  Sales of new online games would last longer if they had an active community but sales of single player games would completely disappear.

Although the platform owners may have the legal right to sell the "used" copies but publishers would move away from these DD services or they would implment some form of activations to circumvent it.  If a publisher recieved a cut of a used game sale then it would almost need to be on par with their cut of a new game sale.

Not really. Unlike in the real world, where Gamestop totally screws over the publisher/developer/hardware maker in the used copy business, it wouldn't have to be that way in DD sales.

Lets use this formula:

1) Player buys "Super Ultimate Adventure" to player 2 for $10. Developer makes $7 (70%), MS makes $3 (30%).

2) Player 2 sells "Super Ultimate Adventure" to player 3 for $8. Microsoft charges a $2.64 (33%) fee for barter.

3) Microsoft shares profits from "Super Ultimate Adventure" re-sell at a 50% split, or $1.32.

4) Player 3 sells "Super Ultimate Adventure" to player for for $8, taking a small hit.

5) Microsoft shares profits from "Super Ultimate Adventure" re-sell again at a 50% split, or $1.32.

Said profits would be $9.64 for developer, and $5.64 for Microsoft. This would allow the developer in on the used market, so they directly profit from the re-sell, rather than MS becomnig the next gamestop and screwing over the developer. No developer would want a DD used market if they couldn't profit from it. With this model, they make extra money. Due to attrition, there may be a point that the game stops selling "normal" copies, but as long as they make profits from "used" versions...They are making a little bit of money, and so is MS. In this model, everyone wins.

 



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

mrstickball on 01 October 2008
KylieDog said:
Digital Distibution is fine for small games like PAIN, Bionic Commando, Mega Man 9, or old games released on disc from consoles in the past.


These games that are near full games that they are trying to make download only though...total crap.

Any specific reason you don't like newer games to be DD? What's the difference between new full games that are DD and old full games like Super Mario RPG?

 



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Around the Network
Retrasado on 01 October 2008
disolitude said:
Hoffmole said:
Ok, I'm convinced all current downloadable titles will be available on the next gen consoles (I did say it was a worst case scenario, and one that I maintain could, although unlikely, be possible especially if a company stopped producing consoles). But I take the point.

Just 1 more thing. What happens if my console breaks? If my PS1 stops working I'll get another - no need to buy the games again. And are there insurance policies that cover digitally distributed games?

On xbox360 and ps3 yes. I don't know about the wii.

Xbox has a gamer tag so any console that you put your gamer tag on will have access to all the games you bought previously...for free. However up until recently you could only play those games if you were signed in as you...no other gamer tag on that console could play those games.

Microsoft released a digital rights tool found on xbox.com...that lets you transfer games to different xboxes in case the console breaks. This can only be done once a year (for now) but it allows you to take your Braid game from your broken console...move it to a new console...and let your shiny new gamer profile play it without any issues.

PSN has a simmilar deal but I think they let you redownload the game on 5 different consoles? I could be mistaking...I did it on 2 consoles with the same PSN ID and it worked great.

Wii, I have no clue...

 

With the PSN, all your account info/trophies and most (all?) online games' stats are stored in Sony's/the game's servers so if you get a new console, you just login to your PSN account on it and you're good to go. Also, Sony allows you to re-download items purchased from the PSN store up to five times after the orginal one. You can use this to restore dwnlded games and you can do it to give games to someone else by logging into your account on their PS3.

 



Not trying to be a fanboy. Of course, it's hard when you own the best console eve... dang it