TheFlyingGerbil Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 I think he means problem from a lost revenue point of view, and it is a lot of lost revenue. Revenue not gained =/= revenue "lost". It's a problem I'm seeing with publishers. People whine a lot about entitlement issues with gamers, yet I'm starting to see some blatant signs of entitlement issues with publishers as. They love to think anyone who plays their game automatically owes them money, which isn't at all the case in this or any industry. Used game sales, borrowing/lending games, trading, etc., is neither illegal nor morally reprehensible, and I highly doubt it's nearly as much of a problem as publishers like to make it out to be. No one is saying it is wrong, but it is still perfectly reasonable for a company to want to maximise profits, an easy way to do that is to encourage a person who would buy it second hand to buy it new instead eg with the play pass or in-box dlc coupons. What is wrong with wanting to sell as many of your product as possible. Anyway, there are differences to this business than other ones, as there are ongoing costs eg hosting servers, patches (yes I know they should be released faulty in the first place, but they are) and some provision of free dlc etc. once a book is printed that's it cost wise to the publisher. For cars the manufacturers can continue generating income from second users from manufacturer dealership servicing and selling parts etc. Yes, before you say I know this isn't exhaustive but it's late and I can't be bothered thinking it through any more, but hopefully you get my gist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorgiShinobi Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 I'm gonna mostly agree with Gerbil here. Used in a small degree wouldn't be a significant problem, but take something like GameStop which is a business who's strategy is to gain profit through new and used sales, and we have two identities fighting for the same thing over the exact same material. Trading-in games has made giving up video games an easy process. A few decades ago, either you gave away an unwanted game to a friend or sold it at something like a garage sale or flea market. Now you've got a dozen or so customers a day walking in to a store to receive cash or store credit by handing an associate a handful of unwanted games. Store credit is always the higher amount, but if you think about it, you're just receiving a small discount for another game within the same store. You're buying products whilst giving them more products to sell. I don't want to demonize the whole process, but it is a process that has a large effect when applied to current released titles. Hmm, do I go with a new copy for $60, or do I buy a used copy that was given back to the store to sell for their own profit for $55? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mal Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 Sort of nitpicking but... $55 is nowhere near the right price for a used game purcahase. At that price, might as well buy new just for it being prestine. Got to be at least $45 for an used copy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 But I believe his point is that Gamestop sells used copies of new releases for $55. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. GOH! Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 No, every dollar spent on a used game *is* effectively a lost dollar. Those are dollars customers are willing to spend, maybe at a lower price point than new games, but it's dollars nonetheless. That's why some publishers aggressively lower prices quickly after launch (see: EA). It allows them to capture a portion of the money that was previously lost to used sales. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strangelove Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 Its funny to think that by the end of the week there will be at least one or two used copies of LA Noire for 55 dollars at Gamestop, yet they bought it for 35. LOL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorgiShinobi Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 Its funny to think that by the end of the week there will be at least one or two used copies of LA Noire for 55 dollars at Gamestop, yet they bought it for 35. LOL. $35? That seems a little too generous. I remember at the midnight launch for Portal 2 and Mortal Kombat that the trade-in "value" board had both those games for around $22-$25. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted June 10, 2011 Report Share Posted June 10, 2011 http://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-lawyers-found-guilty-of-professional-misconduct-110610/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted June 10, 2011 Report Share Posted June 10, 2011 Its funny to think that by the end of the week there will be at least one or two used copies of LA Noire for 55 dollars at Gamestop, yet they bought it for 35. LOL. $35? That seems a little too generous. I remember at the midnight launch for Portal 2 and Mortal Kombat that the trade-in "value" board had both those games for around $22-$25. How did they have a trade in value at launch? Anyways, yeah, $35 is around what I see them pay for newly released games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasterDex Posted June 11, 2011 Report Share Posted June 11, 2011 How did they have a trade in value at launch? That's the time when they really want trade-ins. Once the initial buying surge has ended, the trade-in value drops quite a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 At a midnight launch though? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewblaha Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 Piracy is theft. That's about it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBeeferton Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 Piracy is theft. That's about it. Yeah, but lots of folks like to try and sugar coat it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewblaha Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 Piracy is theft. That's about it. Yeah, but lots of folks like to try and sugar coat it. Or write dumb loopholes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercurial Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewblaha Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 Loophole! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercurial Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 Loophole my ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyber Rat Posted June 12, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 Actually, we've already made it clear a few pages ago, without using witty images, that piracy is copyright infringement and theft is theft. Two separate thing but both illegal. You might as well say "Rape is murder." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 Are we seriously talking about THIS again? Piracy is not stealing. It may be illegal. It may even be similar to stealing. But it is not logically or legally actually equivalent to stealing. What's the mystery? Why are we talking about this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercurial Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 Because it's the internet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewblaha Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 (edited) I keep seeing loopholes. It'll be rewritten one day. Edited June 12, 2011 by Chewblaha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBeeferton Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 (edited) lolo. I finally got down rep'd. Seriously, I have nothing against piracy, but you're still taking something without paying for it. There's no sugar coating it by saying that you're making a copy and sharing it. In the end there's really no point to argue with it, though. o.O It's besides the point, really. On another note: I've seen people compare music piracy to movie piracy. Do you guys think that's fair to just blanket both kinds of piracy? I mean, without pirating music I wouldn't even know 3/4ths of my music library. Piracy is beneficial to the artists in a way. Could the same be said for video games and movies? What about PC software? :/ Edited June 12, 2011 by McBeeferton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. GOH! Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 I keep seeing loopholes. It'll be rewritten one day. Intellectual property rights are just a series of loopholes that keep information from being free, as is its right. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercurial Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 (edited) Fuck I got rep'd up. Nooooooooooooo Seriously, I have nothing against piracy, but you're still taking something without paying for it. There's no sugar coating it by saying that you're making a copy and sharing it. In the end there's really no point to argue with it, though. o.O It's besides the point, really. You're not taking anything you're copying something. That is not sugar coating it. Edited June 12, 2011 by Hakidia 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted June 12, 2011 Report Share Posted June 12, 2011 Fix'd (just cos I know how much that means to you) It's kind a like Murder and manslaughter, both kill someone, but they're not the same thing. Piracy isn't the be all and end all of CI either. It's just one aspect. The thing is the way music, movies and games are handled now is that there's now in place the method for everyone on this planet to have a copy of Lady Gags latest single for next to nothing. And still have several trillion copies left over. That's infinite goods. The problem here is the record companies don't want to be paid next to nothing, so they are trying to maintain the illusion of value on these products for as long as possible. And CI laws allow them to enforce this artificially generated cost. Anyone remember PS Home/Use it? I dunno what it's like now but at launch there was a bowling alley, but you had to wait in a queue to make use of these 5 or so bowling lanes. Now yes that's how it is IRL, but on a computer server you just instance it (you've at least played an MMO right?) and have hundreds playing at the same time. It's the same with music now. The reality is iTunes & Co can let them "instance" the music, but they're trying to maintain this illusion that just like in the real world with physical finite goods you need to "queue up", as the metaphor goes, for these virtual infinite goods. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.