This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

The end of used console games!

#71vigorm0rtisPosted 1/12/2013 10:23:52 AM
TheBlueStig posted...

Why shouldn't they? They had the idea to create a business, so they started up that business and are making money, they had the idea to do it before you did and you're jealous of it.

You never answered the question either, why should game developers get "special consideration" where used sales are concerned?



They don't. Like I said, I have no problem with used game sales when they're part of a model that benefits the parent industry, but none of those retailers use one.

I've explained, several times, how the resale of cars, clothes, jewelry, electronics, etc, are most often part of a symbiotic relationship with the industries that produce them (well, clothes not so much, but they're part of resale that's considered aid or poverty-exclusive-- sales made from used clothing come from a place where no sale would have been made otherwise), and all I get back is your dire prediction that the end of used games would kill the industry, which is laughable-- it'd kill GS. That's all.

That people should be able to buy and sell their own property has never once been a thing that I've challenged.
---
"'Grab the guns!' 'What about the troll?' 'Leave the troll.'"--ATHF
#72TheBlueStigPosted 1/12/2013 10:24:05 AM
Sheepinator posted...
I already explained...blah blah......4%.....33% blah blah blah


You never said anything at all about 4%, or 33% in this topic until post #57.

Just more proof that you never remember what you do and don't post in ANY topic because you're too busy kissing corporate backsides.
---
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
#73SheepinatorPosted 1/12/2013 10:36:15 AM
TheBlueStig posted...
But game developers, oh, they consider themselves to be some kind of special, some kind of Mafia kingpin, demanding "their cut" of all used sales like they run the f***ing show.....they're nothing more than arrogant whiney little entitled B****ES who need to be put back in their place.

I have seen this claim on gamefaqs often that devs are demanding a cut of used sales, but I have never seen a publisher or developer make such a claim. I think making stuff up like that is a good sign of a weak argument.
---
My mad face and my happy face are the same.
#74SheepinatorPosted 1/12/2013 10:39:00 AM
TheBlueStig posted...
Sheepinator posted...
I already explained...blah blah......4%.....33% blah blah blah


You never said anything at all about 4%, or 33% in this topic until post #57.

Just more proof that you never remember what you do and don't post in ANY topic because you're too busy kissing corporate backsides.

It was a very simple explanation. Perhaps ask a grown up to explain it to you. I don't know why it's beyond your ability to comprehend.
---
My mad face and my happy face are the same.
#75TheBlueStigPosted 1/12/2013 10:40:24 AM
vigorm0rtis posted...
TheBlueStig posted...

Why shouldn't they? They had the idea to create a business, so they started up that business and are making money, they had the idea to do it before you did and you're jealous of it.

You never answered the question either, why should game developers get "special consideration" where used sales are concerned?



They don't.

Then SHUT UP ABOUT IT once and for all, you agree that developers don't deserve special consideration where used sales are concerned, but you still want used sales stopped.....Hypocrisy Much?


Like I said, I have no problem with used game sales when they're part of a model that benefits the parent industry, but none of those retailers use one.

The sales of the used keep the orders coming in for new, how the F*** is that not benefiting the NEW industry?


I've explained, several times, how the resale of cars, clothes, jewelry, electronics, etc, are most often part of a symbiotic relationship with the industries that produce them (well, clothes not so much, but they're part of resale that's considered aid or poverty-exclusive-- sales made from used clothing come from a place where no sale would have been made otherwise), and all I get back is your dire prediction that the end of used games would kill the industry, which is laughable-- it'd kill GS. That's all.


So explain what this "symbiotic industry" is when it comes to jewelry, or clothing, or electronics, or any other industry? And before you bring up cars as the first subject, realize that the vast majority of car parts are NOT made by the people who sold you the car. So that money is going to China, or Korea, or to whoever made those half-assed parts. And even then, that's only for the MAJOR parts, the small stuff is made by 3rd party outsource companies who never send a single penny back to the car makers.

With electronics, it also goes to China because those things can be repaired with off-the-shelf parts NOT made by the same company who made the electronics. Some of them can even be repaired with no extra parts at all, just a software cleanup is enough.

With jewelry, if you get that repaired, the money goes to the repairman and ONLY to the repairman. Same thing with clothes, furniture, art, etc etc etc, the list goes on and on and on.

So where exactly is this "symbiotic relationship" you keep talking about?


That people should be able to buy and sell their own property has never once been a thing that I've challenged.


You're still attacking private sales, because that's what used games are considered, once someone sells a game to places that sell used, those palces can do whatever the f*** they want with it. They can rent it out, sell it, keep it, or even give it away.
---
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
#76SheepinatorPosted 1/12/2013 10:41:44 AM
Repeated. Not sure how I can dumb it down more.

Let's say people can buy $60 new games, $55 used games, and trade in for $30.

Used games:

New gamer buys 3 games for $180, trades in 2 for $60 credit, net cost to him is $120. Used gamer buys the 2 traded in games for $110. In this scenario the new buyer has spent $120, the used buyer has spent $110, so consumers in total have spent $230. Sony/MS have got 3 royalty fees for 3 new discs sold, the publisher has got 3 sales, and GameStop has $50 profit.

New games only:

New gamer buys 2 games for $120. Formerly used gamer buys 2 new games for $120 instead of $110. In this scenario consumers have spent $240. Sony/MS have got 4 royalty fees for 4 discs sold, the publishers have got 4 sales instead of 3, and GameStop is the big loser.
---
My mad face and my happy face are the same.
#77TheBlueStigPosted 1/12/2013 10:42:15 AM
Sheepinator posted...
TheBlueStig posted...
But game developers, oh, they consider themselves to be some kind of special, some kind of Mafia kingpin, demanding "their cut" of all used sales like they run the f***ing show.....they're nothing more than arrogant whiney little entitled B****ES who need to be put back in their place.

I have seen this claim on gamefaqs often that devs are demanding a cut of used sales, but I have never seen a publisher or developer make such a claim. I think making stuff up like that is a good sign of a weak argument.


It was proven to you a long time ago with direct links, but since you don't even remember what YOU post expecting you to remember what someone else posts is out of the question, especially when it proves you wrong.
---
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
#78Gillian SeedPosted 1/12/2013 10:42:36 AM
TheBlueStig posted...
Gillian Seed posted...
Person C buys Person B's traded in games for 10% less than what they would cost new. So $450 spent on Person B's used games, and $50 left to spend on new games.

$1300 goes to developers.

If Person B hadn't been allowed to trade in games then Person C wouldn't have the option to buy used games. Person C would have bought his games new, so the developers would make $1500 instead of $1300.


The developers got paid once when the game was sold new, WHY THE F*** SHOULD THEY BE PAID MORE THAN ONCE ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Answer that f***ing question for once instead of deliberately avoiding it.


First of all, when I added Person C nowhere did I say developers get paid more than once for a single copy. You were saying game trades help the industry. Your reason being a game trader has more money to spend on games. They do get more money to spend, but now another gamer has the option to buy it used instead of new. I'm not saying developers deserve a piece of that; I'm just pointing out that option now exists. The extra money the game trader puts towards the game industry is offset by the used game market he creates.

Second, I don't even want developers to get paid for a game more than once. Hell, I like the used game market. I think it's the reason new games go on sale so quickly, and Gamestop's B2G1 sales are good deals. I'd be upset if this drm is used in the next consoles because it also eliminates rentals and loaning between friends.

I just think your 'two gamers with $500 each' scenario doesn't count for anything. It leaves out too many factors, and it adds one that unfairly gives game trading an edge.
#79WinternovaPosted 1/12/2013 10:43:10 AM
TheBlueStig posted...
Sheepinator posted...
I already explained...blah blah......4%.....33% blah blah blah


You never said anything at all about 4%, or 33% in this topic until post #57.

Just more proof that you never remember what you do and don't post in ANY topic because you're too busy kissing corporate backsides.


Says the person french kissing GameStop's brown eye...
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMKUUUvjjzo
Fan of: Steelers(6-time Champions), Red Wings(11-time Champions)
#80WinternovaPosted 1/12/2013 10:44:18 AM
Gillian Seed posted...
I just think your 'two gamers with $500 each' scenario doesn't count for anything. It leaves out too many factors, and it adds one that unfairly gives game trading an edge.


That was my point, which he conveniently ignored and started arguing against other people.
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMKUUUvjjzo
Fan of: Steelers(6-time Champions), Red Wings(11-time Champions)