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

Anyone else think EB/GameStop are killing the industry?

#91Sevi_neyPosted 1/3/2013 7:41:04 PM
king_madden posted...
DerekRoss posted...
Ironic calling GS greedy when it is the publishers. GM ain't complaining when not geting a penny off used car purchased.



Why would they complain? They would be getting sued left and right if they were responsible for used cars. They would have to use even more money building more locations to help fix and take in used cars.


hey they would if they could
---
I got into game design because I loved kids. I wanted to make them happy and give them something fun to do. Now I want them all to die. ~ game designer Totality
#92king_maddenPosted 1/3/2013 8:40:06 PM
Sevi_ney posted...
king_madden posted...
DerekRoss posted...
Ironic calling GS greedy when it is the publishers. GM ain't complaining when not geting a penny off used car purchased.



Why would they complain? They would be getting sued left and right if they were responsible for used cars. They would have to use even more money building more locations to help fix and take in used cars.


hey they would if they could



no company wants to spend more than they make, which is exactly what they would be doing.
#93abnergoinbigPosted 1/3/2013 9:18:10 PM
I thought stores by games in bulk which give the developers money, and all they get are sales numbers? Im most likely wrong but thats what i thought.
#94Flamer_BluePosted 1/3/2013 9:20:47 PM
No. Crappy games are killing the industry.
---
PSN: Malakius
#95NicodimusPosted 1/3/2013 9:31:53 PM(edited)
From: RampantBlatt | #003
The people who made the game don't see much coin when you buy a game "New" either.


They make the same amount whether you buy a new copy of that game, a used copy, or a pair of jeans at The Gap instead.

It seems like a lot of people are under the impression that retailers give a portion of the money from new game sales back to the developers, which they don't. In order to get the games in the first place, the retailer already paid the developer up front for X number of units at a few dollars below the MSRP each. Before a single game is sold at retail, the developers already have all their money in hand. So, whether a customer buys that game new or used affects only the retailer, not the developer.
---
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, you're right." -Henry Ford
#96shawnmckPosted 1/3/2013 9:34:38 PM
Flamer_Blue posted...
No. Crappy games are killing the industry.


^ this !

If you are against the trade-in & sell of used games, then you are in effect for all the Devs screwing over the consumer by empowering them to make shoddy games.
You are not for choice, and are the equivalent of video-game nazies.
#97SilverWingZetaPosted 1/3/2013 9:55:37 PM(edited)
hotgirlsarehot posted...
If I were to pick up some second hand games, the people who made the game will not see one cent from me. Same for anyone else who buys used.

This is the same as "oh, I watched Skyfall on my computer" like it's some kind of a feat in this day and age. Good job, you ripped everyone off who were involved.

Back to games... if you like a game used, rebuy it again brand new, or wait for a sequel (if there is one) and buy THAT new. This is to ensure you're supporting the right people.


Um the publisher gets that money not the devs. The only way a dev sees post release money is if it's in their contract, and that only depends on sales (mostly first week/month) and game reviews. And even then it's not set in stone, cause the devs from CoD:MW2 sued activision for not paying what they owed. I'm a coder and I don't get paid after my product goes out, I get paid during the production (also we don't sell product).

Also what if the publisher prints a very small print (like Atlus) and you didn't get it in the first two months. Odds are you won't find it new that isn't sold by a third party at a inflated price in a store.

Also someone bought that game new and sold it, and someone had to buy that copy. It's not like someone bought a game (used or new) made copies and [sold them|gave them away] himself.
---
Sometimes I just watch the boards burn
http://thewindyloung.blogspot.com/ (new review Persona 4 Golden)
#98NicodimusPosted 1/3/2013 9:54:06 PM
From: SilverWingZeta | #097
Um the publisher gets that money not the devs.


True, but that's really splitting hairs. Devs/publishers can be used synonymously in this discussion.
---
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, you're right." -Henry Ford
#99SilverWingZetaPosted 1/3/2013 10:00:07 PM(edited)
Nicodimus posted...
From: SilverWingZeta | #097
Um the publisher gets that money not the devs.


True, but that's really splitting hairs. Devs/publishers can be used synonymously in this discussion.


No they can't, unless the dev is the publisher as well they can not. Because the publisher is footing the bill, and can screw over devs. It's happened before quite a few times.

Even if a game sold a lot of copies in the first week if the review scores are low a publisher can fire a dev if it's in his contract.
---
Sometimes I just watch the boards burn
http://thewindyloung.blogspot.com/ (new review Persona 4 Golden)
#100NicodimusPosted 1/3/2013 10:23:13 PM
From: SilverWingZeta | #099
Nicodimus posted...
From: SilverWingZeta | #097
Um the publisher gets that money not the devs.


True, but that's really splitting hairs. Devs/publishers can be used synonymously in this discussion.


No they can't, unless the dev is the publisher as well they can not. Because the publisher is footing the bill, and can screw over devs. It's happened before quite a few times.

Even if a game sold a lot of copies in the first week if the review scores are low a publisher can fire a dev if it's in his contract.


That's all true, but in the context of this particular discussion, meaningless.
---
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, you're right." -Henry Ford