Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #8 - chrolt (05/22/2013) [-]
A lot of people bash the used game fee, but I really don't have a problem with it.

The thing is, if you buy a used game, none of the developers get any money from that puchase, only the retailers. So if you buy GTA 5 new, Rockstar sees some of that money, but if you buy it used it's only Gamestop (or where ever) that gets paid. And I for one am for developers getting paid for their work.

I know it's not that simple and there are mitigating circumstances, but the fact remains that the sellers of used games are screwing over the developers, who in turn try to fix this with methods that end up screwing over the consumer.
User avatar #183 to #8 - thewaronbeingcool (05/23/2013) [-]
No other industry gets to pull this ******** .

You don't see Ford bitching about used car dealerships.

What makes gaming so ******* special?
User avatar #41 to #8 - keiishiyama (05/22/2013) [-]
But what if you're just borrowing it from a friend? It seems unfair that you have to pay full price for a game you'll play for about an hour or two.
User avatar #141 to #41 - bighairyfart (05/22/2013) [-]
Or paying used price and then full price on top of that.
User avatar #27 to #8 - Maroon ONLINE (05/22/2013) [-]
Who gives a **** ? You really think they keep producing those games for months after release? No. They make a certain amount for launch, and make some more based on demand after launch. Charging for a used game is literally making money twice on a single item for them. It's not like they keep producing new copies that no one buys because they buy used; that complaint I could understand.
#30 to #27 - jakatackka (05/22/2013) [-]
Skyrim alone was actively updated and improved for over 18 months after release, at considerable expense to the developers. I imagine they give a **** .
User avatar #31 to #30 - Maroon ONLINE (05/22/2013) [-]
Ok, those were improvements to a game that had glitches and content that was sold as DLC. I don't see your point.
#32 to #31 - jakatackka (05/22/2013) [-]
The point is, they went through a lot of trouble fixing thousands of minor bugs in the game, well beyond the average game's life cycle, so it was very much still being produced. However, playing it used gives absolutely nothing to the developer, so every person that plays it costs the company money in potential profits. I'm not saying that banning used games is good (in fact I think it's a terrible idea) - all I'm saying is that developers do give a **** .
User avatar #34 to #32 - Maroon ONLINE (05/22/2013) [-]
Do developers even get paid according to sales? I thought the publisher got that money and developers got commission basically. And my point still stands. They were still making improvements and DLC's for the game, but not manufacturing new disks. I wouldn't even care about used game fees if they had a factory chugging out new games constantly because then they actually would be losing revenue to used game stores. Otherwise they are just trying to charge people again for something they already sold.
#36 to #34 - jakatackka (05/22/2013) [-]
Every person that buys a game used isn't buying it new. That's it. The publisher and developer don't make any money off of a used game, unless the player buys DLC for it, which usually doesn't happen. It's not about the manufacturing expense of producing new discs, it's the unrealized potential profit. The manufacturing of discs is just supply and demand - if people will buy it, they make it. When people don't buy it, the company doesn't make it, so the shelves might not be stocked with new copies of the game, yet they are still losing money.
User avatar #18 to #8 - OddityInfintas (05/22/2013) [-]
Most Pre-owned games are purchased long after launch, when the developer will no longer see much profit from new sales, Most copies of games (new ones the developer is getting paid for) sell in the first few months after launch and then printing will be stopped, after six months the majority of games sold "new and sealed" are remnants from the launch window.
Used games are good for developers and users, The cheaper used games that are available to consumers let them stretch their budget to accommodate more titles and try riskier games. If a consumer isn't convinced that the game is going to be good they will put off getting it and likely get a cheap used copy, If they like the game after all then they are much more likely to buy a sequel, or follow up, new at launch. So used games might not directly give money to game designers but they generate a consumer base and help with future sales.
Blocking used games until you pay a fee basically means that once the online service goes offline then all the games will be useless, unable to be used on any other console, or if the speculation on the Xbox One needing to regularly connect are true then in 10-15 years all the games on Xbox One will be impossible to use, even if you bought them new and keep them in good condition, because the services won't be available.

Sorry, rant but I felt this needed to be explained.
User avatar #20 to #18 - chrolt (05/22/2013) [-]
I have to agree with much of what you say, and I again feel the need to point that it's not a simple matter, and there are good and bad parts (I neglected to mention the good parts, and I apologize).

And I was wrong for sticking up for the "used games fee", like you said, it sounds horrible. What I mean is that I want the developers to earn money when people buy their games, and like it or not, as it stands now they kinda don't earn anything from the used games market, even though they do get some publicity. I have no idea how to fix this, but it's a system that needs fixing. In my humble, uninformed opinion anyway.
User avatar #13 to #8 - permass ONLINE (05/22/2013) [-]
this is a valid point why the negative thumbs? here have a greenie
User avatar #14 to #13 - chrolt (05/22/2013) [-]
Thank you, it's nice to see someone atleast sees my point of view.
#241 to #14 - noschool (05/23/2013) [-]
to be fair why should the game industry get those liberties, no one else does. i don't have to go pay Ford if i want to buy or even just borrow my friends truck. so why should i have to do that for a game, that i legally bought from my friend when i don't have to do that for anything else i buy? i understand they need to be paid but treating their customer like this is not how you do it, if anything it makes me want to not give them money.
 Friends (0)