The CEO of a gaming company has courted controversy by calling retailers “parasites and thieves” and that publishers have more “right to survive” than retailers.
Louis Castle, the CEO of browser game company InstantAction, and also known as the co-founder of C&C creators Westwood Studios and former vice president of creative development at EA, was interviewed about his hatred of game retailers:
You accused Walmart and GameStop of thievery, do you stand by this statement?
They are, they’re thieves. They’re parasites and thieves. Because they don’t let the publisher participate in the used games business. They take all the money. They take a game from somebody for ten bucks and then turn around and sell it for $30, and they don’t give any of that $20 back to the original copyright holder.
Something would be OK, but zero is not OK.
What can publishers do about this?
There’s nothing they can do about it. Legally, the retailers are within their rights to do it. I’m not saying they’re doing anything illegal. But just because you can legally steal doesn’t mean it’s not stealing. Gambling is statistically theft – people know they’re going to be stolen from.
I was heckled by a guy who said he was from Gamestop who said, “You seem to hate retail.” He was trying to make the case that if lots of people get exposed to the game then it’s good for the publishers – I’m not sure I understand that.
If we make something like woollen blankets and we start eating the sheep, pretty soon, we have no more woollen blankets. It’s taking from the one thing that’s making you money. If we stop making games, they stop being able to sell them.
His point was that we had to do it because their margins were shrinking and they were going to go out of business. And I’m like, well, so now you’re shrinking the publishers’ margins so we’re all shrinking and are going to go out of business.
But, honestly, gamers can survive without retailers, but they can’t without people making games. I just don’t think the retailer has a higher order of right to survive than the people who make the content.
Maybe I’m wrong about that! I don’t worry about being provocative in my wording, because it’s what I think everyone in our industry feels, and no one will say it.
But traditional retailers don’t really know where their business will come from, with services like InstantAction coming along and bypassing them entirely.
It costs a lot of money to do what we do, and we can make a lot of money, but our margins are very thin. We’re not trying to replace the retailer – that’s not our goal.
The game business has not been disrupted by the internet tremendously because the process of buying the game is still about learning about it through reading about it somewhere, you go to someplace to buy it, and you get to play it afterwards.
That’s the exact opposite of what the media on the web is about. There it’s about finding media anywhere, I can sample it for free and if I like it, I pay for it.
That’s a different philosophy. You have to change your mindset. GameStop might say, “Well, where’s our place in that?” Well, you have to become a value-added retailer. It’s better to buy with a GameStop card because you get to go to that retailer and hear about the games. That’s one way.
There are lots of ways for them to survive other than taking the money out of the system that’s going to the publishers.
Publishers are the ones who are taking all the risk. They’re paying for development, pay for the marketing – the retailer has zero risk.
It’s all consignment anyway: if a product doesn’t sell, they box it up and send it back to the publisher. I’m sorry their margins are eroding, but that’s not the publishers problem. To use a loophole in the law to just gouge them is just unacceptable.
It is of course not surprising to hear a game publisher unhappy about the resale of games – the game industry has, with varying degrees of success, repeatedly sought to ban game resale and rental, with its latest efforts eschewing legal methods in favour of crippling second-hand copies by banning them from multiplayer or stripping them of DLC.
Gaisensha at Kashihara Shrine: “Itasha for Crazy Nationalists”
Racing Miku Nendoroid Set
Top 10 Cutest Things Guys Do On Dates
Hirasawa Ui Tiny Bikini Figure
Zero no Tsukaima F Yuri Skinship Anime
Yozora Mikazuki & Sena Kashiwazaki Figures
To Love-Ru Darkness Totally Tentacular
Ano Hana Naruko Anjo Anal Dress Figure
Top 10 Most Followed Seiyuu
Wonder Festival 2012 Winter Wondrous As Ever
Ciel nosurge: “Your Date With Ion = $170″
Nisemonogatari – “Where Did All The Ero Go!?”
Police Hunt Ushijima for “Public Indecency”
Cops Bust Cop in Nude BDSM Club Raid
K-ON! “Causes Keionbu Girl Band Boom”
Vippers vs Vankers: 2ch Targets “Korean Propaganda”
Overflow Delays “Final” Game: “We Are Not Going Bankrupt!”
Ritsu Topless Manga Time – “She Has Boobs After All!”
Top 10 Most Boring Anime of Winter 2012
Behold: The ONACOUNTER
Lenfried Sakuya Anal Tail Ero-Cosplay
Wonder Festival 2012 Winter Cosplay
“Post The Highest Level Cosplay Ever!”
“Share The Cutest Cosplay Ever”
“Dolls vs Figures – Which is Best?”
“Why Do Girls Always Have Such Cute Rooms!?”
Ranka Lee Wedding Dress Cosplay by Tomia
Shoko-tan’s Madoka & Ika-chan Cosplay “Excessively Cute”
Guilty Crown Yuzuriha Inori Cosplay by Sasa
IdolMaster G4U: “Who Needs 3D Idols Now?”
Ah, this guy is just bitchin' about nothing.
The game retailers are a business too!
They need money too.
I like GameStop, they've got good pricess.
Good prices, Shitty trade in values.
I mean for used games.
I like classic PS2 games.
What? It's a crime to resell games? That's what the CEO seems to think. And I think he is stupid... Who does he think he is? I's a free market, resell what you want. And if someone is a stupid to buy used games at GameStop this poor person is at it's own foult to buy this overpriced shit.
Yes well, let's just say that nobody can ever buy anything used again... after all, used books stores are a blight upon society and those upstart families with their garage sales should be arrested!
> If we make something like woollen blankets and we
> start eating the sheep, pretty soon, we have no
> more woollen blankets.
That is complete bullshit. More like the people who buy woolen blankets use them until they don't like them any more, then go to resell them to people who are glad to get to use them for less money. Then those people who resold the blankets possibly go and buy one of the latest new blankets because they still want/enjoy blankets. How would that that put blanket makers at a disadvantage? People have been reselling things centuries before video games were made. Let alone the "eating the sheep" argument. I don't even get that. Someone enlighten me, if you will.
I do buy games, DVDs, CDs and all that shit, even if I'm ridiculed on various boards for it. I like owning originals. But on some occasions I was forced to buy damaged goods because I was unable to find originals either online or in several retail stores. If you want to sell your fucking blankets, keep making them for fucking ever or leave resellers the fuck alone.
Yes, I mad.
they already sold the game. The moment they sold the game they lose all rights to the game cause it goes to a different owner. The owner can do whatever they want with the damn game. Game companies should get that.
Yeah, Game Stop trade-ins are complete robbery. But the game companies REALLy aren't much better...
anyway, i'm not paying $60 for a single game ever. I wait till that shit's $20 in the clearance bin. Amen to Game stop for that, at least.
If people are selling back games to gamestop you should probably have made it better. I keep all my games that I know I will want to replay again if people are selling it back that just means your game wasn't up to par with the rest.
They want to be paid for the same game twice? WTF
If i buy something - i own it.
I don't rent it - i buy it.
If i buy a car - i own it.
If i buy a game on dvd - i own the dvd.
If i sell it nobody should fucking care for how much and nobody should fucking call me a thief.
Cause if he calls me a thief i'll never buy he's game anymore and he'll lose a shit more than by not getting profit from MY fucking game.
If more ppl would do that it would teach them to watch their words.
Theyre living from me and still calling me a thief.
FUCKING RETARDS.
And how's this different then selling it on ebay or amazon? The used game is being sold, second hand. Seriously, I hope EA goes bankrupt for being stupid.
'Never pay more than $20 for a computer game.'
--Guybrush Threepwood
Simply no! The video game producers should NOT get any used games profit. Used video games are no different from other used products, like used clothes, used houses, used cars, used computers, used dvds, etc etc.
I have to agree with him... Here in Mexico stores overprice games for over 100 DLLS when It was supposed to cost 50~60, popular games no matter how old they are they never get their price down because they are still popular like The Legend Of Zelda Twilight Princess cost over 100 DLLS still.
That's why Steam FTW.
I'm so sick of these game companies trying to claim the right of ownership away from the people who bought the games. I bought the game, I have ownership of it, it's within my right to resell it. If Gamestop wants to make a business of buying my old games, that's fine. They may make a tidy profit, but some money for my old game is better than being stuck with it for a lot of people. I personally don't sell my own games, but I reserve the right to.
Fuck you, Louis. Publishers have a COPYright over their games, and nothing is being copied when anybody sells a game second-hand. They have no right to any of the money that changes hands like that.
Bastards don't want to let people own games, only pay to be able to play them, hence DRM and DLC. Go to hell. Those discs with games on them belong to me and I'll do with them what I damn please.
It's called "copyright" for a reason: the holder has a right to profit from every new COPY of the work made. In the case of a second-hand sale of an EXISTING copy, there's no such right.
This jackass wants to have his cake and eat it too. He wants to sell his product but still control it. Mind you, software copyright already gives him some measure of control (one of the reason why many have argued the unfairness of software copyrights), but he's not satisfied and wants TOTAL control.
Even copyright itself is a right that is artificial, not natural, in origin. It's a right created by the state to benefit artists. At present it tends to benefit not artists, though, but executives and investors. At any rate, it's improper to equate even copyright violation with theft, since the latter violates the natural right of property ownership. To call the retailers "thieves" for doing something that doesn't even violate the artificial copyright is tantamount to slander.
While I agree that the substantial markup involved in ridiculous, it's the sellers who are cheated by this. If you can get $30 for a used game, it's unfair to refuse to buy it for more than $10 - it doesn't cost you anything CLOSE to $20 to make it presentable for sale again (given the wages paid to employees, the cost can't be more than a couple of bucks). So he's right that the likes of Gamestop and WalMart are parasites (though it's the general public that are the host, not the publishers), but it's rather a matter of the pot calling the kettle black.
seems you can't make anybody fucking happy these days, huh?
Video Game makers are too greedy.
To want extra money through the resale of a used product is EXTREMELY selfishness and in poor taste.
Used video games are no different than used CD's, DVD's, cars, appliances, ect...
Now I agree that Gamestop is a thief on the account that you will pay $50 for a game, they'll give you $2-$4 for it, and then sell it for $3 less than the game retails. Before they changed their policy that all games would be bought for atleast $1, the used to offer you 25 or 50 cents for some games. Without realizing it later, I saw on a reciept that Gamestop only gave me $0.25 for Gran Turismo 3, $0.50 for Klonoa 2, and $0.80 for Amplitude.
But even if Gamestop rapes you, I'm on their side in this matter that game publishers should such up about copyrights and money. Its the same to them thats for everyone else and they're not bitching. Before Gamestop this was going on for years in pawn shops. Does anyone remember pawn shops with stacks and heaps of NES carts? I do. Publishers are only bitching because used games are a billion dollar business, and is already more popular than music and near or more popular as movies.
So wait, we're just supposed to what, get our games from... where exactly? If we can't do it at retailers, then I guess you just don't want to sell your games, huh? Looks like the only option left is to download it... I mean, if they get their way, it's not like I'd be able to BUY it. >_>
Okay! Game Stop sucks! to expensiv
exapel
GTA4
GameStop 50€
Media Mark 40€
There's a (relatively) clear set of rules about this that has existed for years called FIRST SALE DOCTRINE. What they mean is that once the producer of content SELLS it to you, they lose the right to dictate how you use it and whether you can resell it. Although several software publishers have tried to have these thrown out IIRC Autodesk and Adobe were chief on this list..
But this whole argument is specious bullshit. Software is not different from any other PRODUCT, artistic or not- where would we be if Picasso's estate or family got a million dollars every time someone resold one of his paintings? What if you had to pay Ford $5000 to buy a used pickup truck? What if you had to pay every time you watched a DVD.. oh, wait they tried that it was called 'Divx'..
They don't ADD any value to the product after they've sold it the first time, so why should they get anything more?
Except in the terms on licensed software, were you do not own it, it's licensed to you for a period of time determined by the license agreement. This pertains to PC and downloaded software. If they don't like what your doing with it and it's listed as a violation of the license, you lose your ability to use that software. It's also the underlining force of why the industry is trying to trick everyone into going all digital.
Maybe if they lowered prices people wouldn't be so eager to rent and buy used.
If they are cut into used game sales, then retailers will just wait till the games have lost their value and buy bulk unsold copies and resell those as part of an advertised sale.
Really, the VG executives are just plain old dumbasses. Look at Bobby Kotick, that guy barely even knows what games his company makes.
This isn't the first time I've heard Gamestop rips people off. And that's the sad part.
Techically in some manuals it says its not for resale and such if you play of that then your golden but of course their is all that legal crap of its my copy i wanna do what i want with it and blah blah blah whatever.
If you resell anything, doesn't matter what it is, the original owner or creator is in no way entitled to receive any compensation for it. By what this guy is saying if I sold stock that I had purchased from someone else for the sole purpose of reselling it then the person I bought it from would be entitled to part of the money that I made reselling it. Its completely preposterous. Game companies need to get off their high horses and realize that they aren't freaking special.
Another game company to my blacklist to get along with Capcom, Ubisoft, Activision, and EA, keep them coming...
there is a lot of fun and free games both western and doujin so i dont need that crap
also the web is full of free quality games
try
a.v.a
urban terror
mugen
and just search doujins or free games in the web
they allready have the full price of the game
so this is just bullsh1t
I can feel sympathy for the guys who work on these games. They do take all the risks and places like Gamestop don't take any risk at all. Maybe if they would just give them something for used games they game industry would be better financed to make better games faster. Plus, I think it is also fair for them to ask for more money, because if you see the living standards they have, they aren't making a lot of money off of these games that make million and billions of dollars.
Give credit where credit is due, and if you mean money by credit, give em' money.
And I agree; however, the developers would get pretty much nothing from this deal, all the money going to the publishers. If developers got paid for this, I'd be perfectly happy to support it, but they don't.
they should make more games as epic as SC2 then they can sell more without resale
Economics and evolution hard at work. More game publishers, more games, audience demand spreads thin over time, game sales go down, games sit on shelves at retailers (more so now with downloadable purchases online), amount of return on invested time+money+energy into making games diminishes. Walk into a bookstore and you'll find it's more like a library now. All media sales have been experiencing this and it will only get worse. Who the hell watches the national evening news anymore? It used to be a family event which was spawned by the evening news on the radio. Same with newspaper publishers, losing money because people like me don't find a use for them since I can catch the headlines on the internet.
Christ, these assholes want their cake and eat it to....and to look at some of these comments, like this one:
(Maybe if you'd stop fucking pirating and stop fucking buying second hand and the developers didn't have to cut corners to make a goddamned living, maybe we'd have decent games, ever think of that you asshats?)
Do corporations hire people to go on sites like these to comment (just as bad as the manga pirates are immoral thieves article)
Not a surprise about the greed. He worked for EA at one point.
I actually agree with this. You truly are foolish if you are selling your games back to gamestop or any of the other thieving retailers. You are better off selling it on ebay or amazon. I can also understand why publishers are upset by this. I imagine the used game market probably makes up 30-40% of game sales a year and that is a ton of profit lost.
Next weeks headline: Animators "Parasites & Thieves"
I just got this "new" game at EBgames.
I thought it was new until I saw the receipt saying it's pre-played...
The new and used games were the same price and there was no sticker or marking for used games. (=.=)"
I smell greedyness
There's also the fact that retailers use their muscle to dictate to publishers what can be sold. Take for example many retailers unwillingness to carry games with anime style art.
They're talking about getting profit from used game sales which is just anal to the extreme.
I think Garth Brooks a country western singer tried to make such a claim his career took a nose dive the next day.
As far as I'm concerned EA can and should die as they are the ones destroying gaming.
This is why game and software companies, are pushing the "Cloud" so hard.
If you don't have a disc, you can't resell it.
They can charge whatever they like, when there is no "competition" (i.e. used/resale).
Imagine how expensive cars would be, if the manufacturers could crush any cars more than a few months old (i.e no used cars).
Resist the "Cloud"!
lehnerus2000
Agreed. I will NEVER get into this cloud stuff, period and done with.
It makes for a lot less competition, because you don't have the used/resell market.
I don't like buying downloads that are tied to a cheap device that will eventually die or the DRM service could get shut down so the files I bought and paid for become useless which is why I never bought a kindle.
"They are, they’re thieves. They’re parasites and thieves. Because they don’t let the publisher participate in the used games business. They take all the money. They take a game from somebody for ten bucks and then turn around and sell it for $30, and they don’t give any of that $20 back to the original copyright holder.
Something would be OK, but zero is not OK."
EA/the game company would've already made their rightfully-earned money when the first owner bought that game, but Mr. EA wants to charge subsequent owners? Maybe if they stop trying to squeeze more cash out of those who buy original games THEN they'd see more buyers.
True. Quite a few people I have talked with are getting angry at the game manufacturers now. Why?
1. They are still using easily scratched discs.... there is no need for that with SSD's being cheap now.
2. They keep on INSISTING on being paid for every single person who plays the game in question at the original price for the game, until they feel like lowering the price.
I.E. they would like you to buy 4 copies of the same game if you have 4 kids in your home!
It's time to wake these bastards up, the consumer is sick and tired of this stuff, this is N O T how capitalism was supposed to work.
Heck ship them on SD cards some do have DRM functions such as copy once and copy never.
Of course them being greedy probably would not use the copy once which would allow a backup.
Sorry, publishers, but YOU ALREADY GOT YOUR FUCKING MONEY! MORE THAN ENOUGH IN ALMOST ALL CASES!
I swear, things like this make me want to drop a NUCLEAR BOMB on the nearest game publisher, to wake the fuckers up!
Oh, wait, if nobody already posted it:
Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow? 'No!' says Gamestop, 'It belongs to the poor.' 'No!' says the man in the Wal-Mart, 'It belongs to God.' 'No!' says Toys R Us, 'It belongs to everyone.' I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose...InstantAction, a place where the publisher would not fear the retailer, where the programmer would not be bound by petty morality, Where the great would not be constrained by the small! And with the sweat of your brow, InstantAction can become your distributor as well.
MLW
Gamestop
Bück dich!!
"das Gesicht interessiert mich nicht"
The Rich gets richer
the poor gets poorer
that is the fact.
I dont give a cow shit about "buying new" or "buying second"
Screw that!
using the "theres no car that can run 10 years without proper maintenance" analogy...I BUY PIRATED!
the games cost around $5-$10 depending on whether its a "good" game or "mehh" game.
after a while, you WILL GET BORED playing certain games. Gears of War, COD, HALO, whatever. go online or LAN line. Whatever. you just dont play the game after a certain time, right?!
you BUY a game if its got "LIMITED EDITION" or ..signed by the creator..
other than that, buy pirated.
oh, btw, call me jackass, retard, dumbF, whatever
I buy pirated. NOT ALL things, SOME. if i think its not worth buying, then i go for the pirated version.
i hope there'd be more "pirate bays" on the net.
support your local hackers
Typical money-grubbing suit. tl;dr on the second half of his whining. He's got one thing right, though. Gamestop sucks. In every way. If they went away two things would happen.
1. The box stores would continue to carry them and the prices would at least plateau if not drop.
2. The way would be paved for small business to get into the act, which could potentially bring retailers who actually know something about the product into play.
Right of first sale, bitches. Fuck you.
Americans don't even realize how lucky they are, the Australian Doller buys ~90 US cents, and we're paying 100-150 dollars for our games.
well despite some things, for the consumer who shops at walmart, at least when you return something there you recieve all of your money back... since they started offering a 1 year warranty (not that many people get it) you have plenty of time to test the game out, with gamestop or the like, your lucky to get even a quarter of what you spent back (saving the computer titles witch cannot be returned) now i understand... sorta why they dont give you the full price for the used title, but then it goes right back up to current retail pricing for the current sell plan. this is why i hate buying games from there because there are so many games out today that suck... sure you can read up on sites like ign or gameinformer but one can never say that they wont like a specific title just because the mass majority dislikes it or has never played it ( im looking at you monster hunter... people need to play it so they will bring frontier over here, its a really great game!) what im saying is although walmart is as corrupted as the next mega business, at least in terms of games (despite their low selection) lets you get back the full amount, then again im speaking from the consumers perspective :P
Did you know that In Australia we get greatly inflated prices on EVERYTHING we buy -games, DVDs, music CDs- for the simple reason that there's nothing forcing the retailers to give us a fair price? The value of the Australian dollar generally fluctuates from around 80% to 95% of the US dollar, but a new release game generally goes for $80-$100! And even digital distribution can't save us- because whenever a digital distribution network (like, say, Steam) tries to offer us a good price on a game, the retailers force them to jack it up so they don't cut into their sales too much by threatening to refuse to carry a game if the publishers don't force the digital distributors to artificially inflate their prices. Modern Warfare 2 was originall released on Steam for $50, but when the retailers (like EB Games) threatened to refuse to carry it, Steam was forced to hike the price to $80 by the next week!
So yeah, retailers are greedy thieves and it has nothing to do with resale.
what a greedy bastard, so your copyrights is worth more than our human rights huh?
InstantAction huh? i'll make sure to buy your every games 2nd handed, oh wait, maybe i'll just download it from the net.
Well... applications software people have beat down this battle somewhat by licensing to single systems/installations. But then they also allow direct e-delivery and licensing... better support... and their products are tools, not entertainment products (for the most part).
So dudes like this either have to start lowering their prices and do electronic delivery (not FKKn charge 90% the same price for e-delivery) and improve support. Or just shut the F up and accept that there really isn't that much difference between a DVD of a video game and a DVD of Dora the Explorer cartoons.
Actually I see as the other way around:
Gamestop/Walmart/Bestbuy/etc make slim (or no profit) from new games:
$5 for every $60 dollar games sold.
$3 for every $30
$1 for every $20
$0 for systems, since the store has to buy at full price even in bulk.
Take into factor that when a publisher lowers the price from $60 to 40 or 20, all the games not sold before hand are not refunded by that amount, and the store has to take a loss. So specialty stores like Gamestop or Play and Trade need used to survive. If the publisher wants to partake the profit, they need to lower the cost of their resellers, considering one makes up over half their sales in the US (Gamestop).
At least for Bestbuy and Walmart they have other products that make them a huge profit (like the 100% markup on TV's and the such).
Also, in addition Gamestop and formally GameCrazy were put into some crazy non-competitive clauses with large software publishers that within 3-months of release a used title could not be sold under a 10% or higher mark down of a new copies MSRP without consent of the publisher. Not that it was bad for the stores themselves (being that they could keep used prices high) but it a negative for consumers.
The only thing that has nulled this with one publisher (EA) was the recent pay to play online feature of their sports titles if they were not bought new. Basically only Gamestop has called them out on this by selling used for $15 under the new instead of the agreed five (which only makes up the 10 membership fee) but for a publisher to call a store a parasite is like a pot calling the kettle black.
digital download is the future
Translation: All games should be MMOs with monthly fees that come back to the publisher, but lets keep sports games as they are cause after a year they only go for 5$
In short, screw this person, because he's the thief here. he's saying that if you want to sell "their" game, you should have to pay them? thats stupid! and maybe we should make all those little lemonade stands out on the street pay the lemon farmers and water company a separate fee for wanting to sell the thing again. Last I checked, it is illegal to make COPIES of intellectual property and distribute them. If you own a legal copy, that gives you the legal right to sell said copy! If this were not so, then suddenly natural resource companies would be twice as wealthy and yard sales would cease to exist. If your profits aren't as good, then sell the god-damn product yourself, and offer to buy back used products and sell them yourself. Your complaints only make me want to stop buying your games so you can stop speaking out your ass sooner.
I don't see any problem with selling used games. They only sell so many new games, so sometimes you don't have a choice but to get a used copy.
Louis Castle is a MORON.
When I buy it - ITS MINE.
When I finish with it - I'll sell it if its worth a flip - With InstantAction games it wasn't wasn't worth a flip the first time. Some Poor fool like me kight buy - But mostly its TRASH.
If it wasn't for a retailer with an employee who could demo the game - It probably would not even get sold - EVER.
Did you ever try to get someone at WALLMART to Demo a game for you ? Now that's a laugh. Their company policy is to close any lane with less than 5 people in it.
... And to hire no one under 72 for electronics.
Louis Castle is a MORON. When libraries pay the author for each check-out, let me know. When GoodWill pays GE for selling a mixer, let me know.
Oh by the way... Louis Castle is a MORON.
Or society could just get its head out of its ass, stop gaming and making games, and try to solve some REAL problems. Such as the many wars across many nations, and the atrocities (sex trade, starvation, etc etc.) being committed DAILY!
Anonymous, most of those problems could be solved by gaming, by loosening our sexual non-morality that we are forced to adhere to today, etc.
GTFO this site.
The goddamn publishers in this case are the thieves not the retailers. What is the point of receiving money twice for a game? First time is for when a brand-new game is sold from the shops. Second time is for when the game is sold second-hand. What if there is a third time, the publishers get money for the third time?
Man, shut up... You only find lots of used from trash games...
The ironic thing about that "oh so awful piracy", is that is doesn't support the game makers any less than going and buying a used game on Ebay or from a store.
When I am actually buying a game, which I do to pretty much all of the new games I play(piracy is what I do for old games that can be easily emulated, for the most part), I greatly prefer to buy it new. The only exception I will make, and buy something used, is when I simply can't emulate it.
oh well im not surprise since the gaming industry have been in a major shift in this past years. though the rise of digital marketing has been good. there's also royalty fees from both sony and ms(don't know about nintendo though) sooo it's really risk at the same time people have the right in what they bought for. once a product has been bought it's yours to keep forever and you can do the hell you want on it. in conclusion? just try to satisfy the customer as much as you can by not paying already content on disc, some extra's and cool features. so that it will actually drive the consumer to buy more of your products.
I can see the guy's point, but he's way too biased in his opinion. He just sounds like he's butthurt over losing profits, which is understandable but the whole thing looks like an angry rant.
Damn, now everybody's a fukken thief? Sure, in an ideal world, the retailers might give back at least $5 back that they make of profit for the games. However, we don't live in an ideal world, amirite?
Plus, I've never seen a good game out there that, let's say EA, told GameStop or Wal Mart to buy for $10 a pop. Exaggerating the numbers doesn't really help out their case here. They may not be getting the money they think they deserve from the retailers, but that doesn't make them thieves. Ask for a percentage of the profit back or sell the games to the retailers at a higher price, with restrictions, of course. Bitching about it without taking action doesn't help you.
"Sure, in an ideal world, the retailers might give back at least $5 back that they make of profit for the games"
And in an ideal world the game company should give at least $5 back when someone realizes an $50 loss on selling their $60 game to a retailer for $10, too.
Negative profit (loss) is "profit" as well, if they want a percentage of all transactions, that must include the negative part...wait, the negative part of the "profit" is almost always higher than the positive (because used games are cheaper than unused ones)? What are they talking about then?
They either partially own the sold item, which entitles them to part of the profit on resale, but also the same part of the loss on resale if there is any, or they don't own it anymore and then they have nothing to do with it.
But Game Retailers buy some from them. In countries without such shops, 90% of them are pirated.
The retailer has zero risk?
Are they kidding?
If you make crap games, pitch them as epics...and they epically flop then retailers can be stuck with unsellables and go under because of your shit quality.
Ceos need to die.
"The retailer has zero risk?
Are they kidding?
If you make crap games, pitch them as epics...and they epically flop then retailers can be stuck with unsellables and go under because of your shit quality.
Ceos need to die."
LOL at the 11 year old end comment.
LOL why would GameStop buy epic fail games if they know that it won't sell?
You DID follow the FF14 fiasco in Japan, right?
because your average obsessed game nerd will buy everything shiny once it comes out.
Just some fun facts. As other people have said before, there is 5% or less profit margin on all new items. The only way for GameStop to make any money is through used.
What makes people think they're entitled to half or 2/3s value for trades? You bought the games, and unless you sell it online, you're stuck with it. Target won't take it back. Neither will CostCo or Walmart. GameStop provides a service that they'll give you some amount back, so the game you're done with isn't just sitting around collecting dust. Also, while I hear a lot of people whining about the discount card or deals, I'm hearing a lot of wrong things.
A) If you get the GameStop email, there are a number of coupons that get you either percent off used games, or percent extra on trades, all without the discount card.
B) If you're buying used or trading anyways, the yearly (not automatically recurring) fee, which does come with a year to Game Informer in addition to the card, goes from $15 to way lower. Buy two 54.99 games? The card was $4. Not to mention, this is not a solo deal. The card discount stacks on top of every other deal that GameStop does.
If you're going to whine about GameStop, try to at least complain sensibly.
I fashion used game retailers as modern day pawn shops exclusively for video game software. You always have the option of reselling your game yourself via a friend, a random person, or one of the several online auction/reseller sites out there such as ebay. Of course there is the added hassle of waiting for a buyer, the hassle of going to the post office to mail the goods, and of course the chance of unknown hassles that may come from online transactions.
Going to a 'pawn shop' eliminates all these hassles at the expense of the additional income you would have otherwise received from selling the game yourself. Introduce a middleman to the equation and of course your 'profit' tends to take quite a dip.
I can understand the woes of the game developers/publishers for the profit loss that stems from third-parties reselling their game to resellers, who in turn sell the game at a higher markup. But it's not as if companies like Gamestop can instantly regain their investment with interest in a day. Some used copies can sit on their store shelves for several months; hell I've seen around 2 drawers worth of disks in white sleeves corner to corner. They make an investment on the game hoping that somewhere along the road one will come into their store and purchase the game at their higher markup.
Ah well I've gone on a rant now, sorry about that.
TL;DR
Sometimes all retail copies are no longer existent and the only other option is to purchase the game used (from a third-party reseller) or pirate. Since apparently both are one and the same according to this dude...may as well pirate the game and save a few bucks right? Thanks for the burger Mr. Castle!
These days everyone can be CEO, right?
There's nothing you can do about it? Skip the retailers, sell your own games online (digital distribution) just like what Valve first did with their Half Life on STEAM! What a retard CEO! Does he know what "business" means?
"Louis Castle"
I guess it's "she"
Louis Castle is definitely a guy:
http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,690/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Castle
It would be different although if it was Louise Castle (the extra e makes the difference).
Read into his sarcasm. Castle is bitching about being robbed. People that typically bitch are women. A female dog is called a bitch. So this bitching CEO is a "she".
heh...
retailers can't make any real money selling new games anymore... the profit margin on a new game is between 2% and 5% ... and sometimes you even have to sell games at a loss to be competitive (we had to sell Halo 3 for 399SEK cause a competitor did it as a drive, else we would have had ~75 unsellable copies of the game... it *should* have sold for around 699SEK)
the pre-owned market is where the profits lie... and, I suppose, the hardware.
Well maybe if you guys weren't pushing games for $60-$70 new, we wouldn't be so tempted to get them secondhand for $20-$30.
As for trade in value, fuck GameStop: We have a local chain of about seven stores in this area called Game Craze - they stock everything all the way back through the Atari and the Commodore, and at lower prices with way the fuck better trade in value. I've seen smaller local places of a similar nature in other states, and they almost always did better deals than GameStop.
The best example being? GameStop requires you to pay to get a discount. Game Craze doesn't - you get coupons in your e-mail, no charge. Fuck yes.
I know! That stupid ass discount card you have to get! DXXX
Only ever did that once, the same year I bought our first PS. I knew by the end of the year I'd have spent enough on games and the hardware to start actually making money back. Sadly, it was barely enough to cover sales tax. Never did it again.
Well I'm not surprised. Just another industry trying to get a slice of the pie. Not that he's wrong.
Replace videogame with car and try to repeat that again.
Ok stupid question time, how can people buy the games if they can't get it at a retailer store? I mean if we're going to buy it directly then we have to know where the company is and then pray that the game doesn't get dammaged, lost, and/or is for the wrong console.
As for replacing the game with cars it's pretty much the same, but in a different price range. I think it's more along the line of the retailer is selling your porduct, but if someone sell back to them, they can do whatever they want with it even reselling it at a bit of a higher price.
Besides some gamers do have the money to buy brand spaking new games all the time, so sometimes it's best to have a used game. Also, sometime you can only find a used game since it's a rather hard ot find game to.
Overall he shouldn't be complaining unless he wants to have his company not able to seel their games to anyone at all now.
developers -waah waah, i want more money!
me -(in terminator voice)STOP WHINING!
devs are sure getting greedier...
this guy doesn't mind about used game sales provided they get a cut from it... how about cutting used game prices down and not selling them like new copies in the first place?
I don't know what's worse, online stores which have the same prices as a real store (but you don't receive a physical copy) or retailers which screw you by selling used games at high prices and only bring the most popular crap to your city... And yes, used software can be replaced by car, it also gets worn out with time, I won't pay the same for a used game that wasn't taken care of properly.
Games that on average have a markup of around 57.99 dollars for a 59.99 dollar game? Not to mention the increasing popularity of internet downloads like Steam..
Seriously, fuck them, fuck them up the ass with a broken beer bottle..
Seeing gamestop I thought it would be because of their more then surplus supply of PSP's with CFW (custom firm ware, run downloaded games basically) installed on them in their stores.
No game game on the face of the earth has a 57.99 dollar markup. The fact you even say that proves you don't know shit.
Selling a game at a store costs money. Takes money to print the disk and make the packaging, money to ship it to the stores, and then the price is divided up between 3 groups. Retailers get a set amount of money per game sold, console makers get a set amount(if the game is a console game), and then publishers get the rest. Which turns out to be about $1-$3 bucks on average.
http://www.forbes.com/2006/12/19/ps3-xbox360-costs-tech-cx_rr_game06_1219expensivegames.html?partner=yahootix
Learn facts before sprouting bullshit.
You obviously don't live in Australia.
I also thought that..this is no different at all.
If a game store tried to make money by only selling second hand games they're going to die anyway. Someone has to buy the game new and game stores don't sell 'secondhand' digital copies from the internet.
This guy is a fool.
Also, "That’s the exact opposite of what the media on the web is about. There it’s about finding media anywhere, I can sample it for free and if I like it, I pay for it." He should tell that to anime licencers
You are completely wrong. I own and run a store that sells only secondhand games and we do great. There are of course people who buy brand new, and they are paying more for the privilage of playing it first and having the game in brand new condition, those who buy second hand take advantage of this fact as they are willing to forgo these privilages.
The fact is that the ability to resell the games is what gives them value in the first place! Look at the PSP Go. That isn't unsuccessful because the games are bad or unavailable, its unsuccessful because the games don't have the same value as the hard copy.
When you buy a game, you gain the legal right to play that game. When you sell a game, you are selling that right to someone else. Whether or not what you are selling is a physically tangable object such as a chair, a table, a car or indeed an intellectual/metaphysical product such as a patent, movie or game bears no difference. Companies sell patents and license them out all the time, and people sell movies that they are bored of or wish to share all the time. Why should video games be any different.
If I want to buy a Super Nintendo right now, there would be no legal way to do so if reselling video games was a crime as there are no new distribution channels. The only choice is second hand.
Anyway, if any butt-hurt developer truely believed in this philosophy, they would be obliged to find and pay the original creator of everything they ever own of anything they ever bought second hand. Bought a table at an antiques dealer? Find the guy who made it! That limited edition print off ebay, find the guy who drew it! Your car, well better ring up Audi and tell them you owe them some cash! The fact is, they have made a product and sold it, and the buck stops there.
amen, to that second part.
Games are software media. Cars are very expensive specialty durable goods you might buy a few times in your life. There's also a significant value difference between a new and used car. They are nothing alike.
That CEO is a braindead idiot. Everyone can buy and sell stuff as much as he wants and earn money with it.
This system is called trade, mankind uses it for millennia.
Bullshit! Paying the manufacturer a resale fee is exactly like taxing tax, it's immoral and illegal.
I'm sick of people thinking they're owed more than what was originally agreed upon, because it has their name on/in it.
This guy can fuck off, just like that guy who played Nikko, in GTA, who thought he deserved additional commission based on the number of GTA4 copies sold. And every other scumbag in Hollywood, who pulls this shit too.
I don't own any of these fucks a cent. I paid my part the moment I initially bought it. If is my right to do with as I wish.
And there are no 'durable' cars made these days. You get 10 years out of them, then they fall apart. You buy a cheap car and it begins to fall apart, after the 3year warranty.
No car will run for 10 years without proper maintenance.
Wrong. The fact is that I have a new car that appears (by the specs) is going to last a good 30 years, considering the EXTREME testing that was done to see how long it would take the body to rust out.
No car will run for 10 years - True, the difference between vehicles is the cost and frequency of maintenance required. Not sure how it relates to the discussion, but I thought I'd point out the difference between good vehicles and terrible ones.
"No car will run for 10 years without proper maintenance."
This is a stupid response. It should be obvious what we're talking about build quality and not upkeep. Do some research, you'll discover that a shitload of late70s/early80s Chevy & Ford trucks are on the road today because they built RIGHT. Unlike the crap coming out of the car&truck industry today.
I honestly stopped selling my games back to places like gamestop. What they give you for your almost new game is indeed kind of criminal. On another note, since someone mentioned cars, I don't trade in my cars either, because dealers are no better than gamestop when it comes to trades.
However, I will still buy games from gamestop, same as how I still buy cars from a dealer. They're both necessary on that end (imo)
Indeed, I sell my games to people close to me if possible.
This. My story: bought Lumines for the psp close to launch on a recommendation from a friend. I paid $40 for it. I tried it for 10 minutes, and I hated it. I decided to sell it back to Gamestop so I could buy a better game. It was new, mint condition. I figured I could at least get 50% of the original price for it. They offered me $4 for it. As shitty as I felt the game was, I kept it than taking that insult deal.
What does that have to do with a garage sale or a store that specializes in used goods? Been to plenty of stores where used DVDs are sold, nobody bitches about that. No companies that sell products complain about stores buying those products off of a consumer, and then selling it back. Only video game companies do that. Sony and MS don't bitch about their electronics (consoles too) being resold but they do when it comes to their games, and I don't get that.
The developers have to find new methods, no different from the complaints of the music industry. They want things to remain the old way when methods are progressively moving forward. And that's why they are losing out on money they keep wishing they had.
and they're both products and should be treated as such.
There's also movie rentals. They've been around all the time...
Imho game devs just get too greedy.
It all started with discovering that they can limit how many people use the same product and that consumers can be charged more than once through online "access codes" and "extras".
This is what killed freegames in Kongregate.
You dumbasses act like buying used is some kind of crime. Buying used increases the demand for new games indirectly, because people will have no choice but to buy new if there are no used games left, and trust me: even if you don't buy a used copy, the very next person who wants that game will buy the used copy.
Besides, if they don't make an engaging game with replay value, they're just shooting themselves in the foot when a bunch of used copies pop up.
Agreed, last Anonymous. I agree totally that corporations should stop whining and DECREASE THEIR PRICES! Then maybe people would be able to AFFORD to buy more than one game A YEAR in some cases.
"The problem with this argument is that people who sell their games back to retailers use that money... to buy more games, so you really can't equate it to piracy. If you cut that feedback loop, maybe you'd increase your profit margin from the casual gamer, but you lose business from the hardcore gamers."
The problem with is that gamers trade a game in for 5 bucks and the retailer then takes said used game and sales them for $20-$40, undercutting new copies at a haughty profit. And what do those gamers do with that 5 bucks? By used.
"They don't need to get money from used games, they've already been paid for by a person. That's like giving them money for nothing, because there's not another game in circulation, it's the same game that had already been sold."
Every used copy sold is lost revenue for the developer. This is even arguable, people are spending money to buy the game without giving the developers a cent. The whole fucking point of giving developers money is to support the content they generate.
Seriously, who the fuck deserves the money for game, the retailers who did nothing for a game, or the people who made the fucking game?
Because that is what you decide when you buy used. Letting retailers get to double dip in profits while giving developers shit is indefeasible. Game developers make the game, they should make the bulk of the profit, not middlemen who undercut them and undermine new game sales.
"You dumbasses act like buying used is some kind of crime. Buying used increases the demand for new games indirectly, because people will have no choice but to buy new if there are no used games left, and trust me: even if you don't buy a used copy, the very next person who wants that game will buy the used copy."
It is one thing to find a game to be worth no money. It is something else to find a game worth money, then give it to someone else other than the game developers money for it. I can't understand the mentality that says it's okay that the makers get dick while someone else reaps all the rewards. You may as well support commercial piracy.
And your logic is shit. Your argument only makes fucking sense if you can buy the whole supply of used game which WILL NEVER HAPPEN. In fact, all that does increase the demand for used games and increase the amount of money a retailer will pay for a copy and the amount they'll charge for a used copy. A percentage of the userbase will sell their copy, so there is a continual supply of used games, while there is only a certain amount of new copies. A developer is better off with you buying a new copy. Always. New copies that don't sale are turned to the publisher at COST to the publisher. So not only are they fucked when someone buys used because of a lost sale, they get double fucked if they don't sale the whole supply of new games. Which used games help insure there are always extra copies of unsold new games setting on the shelf.
"Besides, if they don't make an engaging game with replay value, they're just shooting themselves in the foot when a bunch of used copies pop up."
There is a reason that movie and video game rentals exist. Most content in enjoyable once or twice so there is no need to keep a copy laying around. Story based games need to be played once and precisely once to enjoy the story, which their main selling point. Do they deserve to make less than a generic FPS, despite the face they take more time and effort to make?
And lastly, resales should be outlawed. You're not paying for the copy of the game, your paying for the content. Resales undermine sales while allowing people to access that content without supporting the developers. Which is the precise complaint lobbed at piracy. Only is the developers not being supported, someone else is making money off their content instead of them.
Piracy>used sales. Fact.
Second Hand sales should be outlawed.
"If video game publishers are having problems because of used game sales (which is probably bullshit, but nevermind), maybe they should try figuring out why so many people don't want to pay 50-70 euros for their games."
It doesn't matter what price the games are, if you see new and used in the game store, the store will price used games to undercut the new games. Anyone would want to save $5 by buying the used game instead of the new one. The consumer doesn't care who gets paid, just as long as he saves money.
Selfish son of a bitch
Oh, grow up. So, basically, everyone here who says re-selling of games should be illegal wants to close all the libraries and used-book stores because those scumbags are stealing money from authors by letting consumers buy second-hand goods, or even letting them read the books for FREE? Just think of how many books would be sold if libraries didn't exist!
How many readers here purchased textbooks second-hand instead of new, or have visited a library and checked out a book, or did research? Any one who did and says re-selling games should be illegal is a hypocrite.
The game designers are just unhappy because they can't figure out how to make money off that secondary market, so they want to make it illegal.
The fact of the matter is that once you sell a product you have NO control over what happens to it. People can re-sell it, trade it, give it away, and you can't do a damn thing about it. Because it is THEIRS, not yours anymore.
Teri
if they can lower the 60 price range to 40. like the street fighter and blaz blue series im sure there would be more people trying to own new copies rather used ones. i thought that 40 $ price range was revolutionary.
not only that, they can get more cash through dlc.
The anon of 18:33 18/08/2010 is forgetting one thing.
It's far more likely that the loss of jobs has to do with the execs cutting corners to meet the targets laid on in their contracts so they can get their nifty bonuses.
So if according to their contract they have to make 20 million in a year, and the game sells for 18 million. Well, cut enough staff to make up the remainder in wages, insurance etc, so you can get your 4 million dollar bonus.
Take a look at how big business does their business these days, look at the money trail and the bonuses awarded. And it becomes fairly simple really. Course they won't ever want to admit to that, so they need to find scapegoats. Oh it's the bad economy, oh it's piracy, oh it's second hand resale etc etc etc.
It's like the whole Japanese decrying of the whole scanlation/fansubbing etc thing. Meanwhile they refuse to release most of their stuff to the West, because it would lead to problems that they don't want to deal with. Like people taking umbrage at their raping game aimed at an 18+ audience, etc.
So if you refuse to sell me anything, how can you make a loss, if I get a copy from someone else.
Now if you're willing to sell me stuff and I get a copy through someone else, yeah, then you've lost some income, but if you even refuse to do that. Dividing zero still equals zero.
They don't need to get money from used games, they've already been paid for by a person. That's like giving them money for nothing, because there's not another game in circulation, it's the same game that had already been sold.
Totally unrelated, but this baffles me.
Lonesnipa posted a comment, people rate it up to 0.8. Darkrockslizer replies on that same comment, with "word", it gets 1.0.
Even though, Lonesnipa's post contained more words, and was the original conveyer, Darkrockslizer gets a higher score with the same message, and by just agreeing?
Logic, where is it? Not on Sankaku.
The problem with this argument is that people who sell their games back to retailers use that money... to buy more games, so you really can't equate it to piracy. If you cut that feedback loop, maybe you'd increase your profit margin from the casual gamer, but you lose business from the hardcore gamers.
"Second Hand sales should be outlawed."
Because it would be convinient for corporations? Consumer rights come first. If video game publishers are having problems because of used game sales (which is probably bullshit, but nevermind), maybe they should try figuring out why so many people don't want to pay 50-70 euros for their games.
It's also cool that my previous comment got modded to -0.8 without anyone posting even a single counter-argument. Fucking retards.
Eh, this is no surprise for me.
Buying used is BAD. Like objectively worse worse than piracy. Because of instead simply not paying anything at all as in the case of piracy, buying used entails paying someone while STILL not supporting the developer which is the entire problem with piracy. The result is someone other than the developer making a profit, and you having less money to actually support the developer.
So instead having 1 problem as in the case of piracy(not supporting the developers), buying used has 3 problems(not supporting the developers, someone else making a profit off the developers' expense, and you having less money to actually support the devs). In modern age were the actual media of the game is more or less worthless, there is no concevible grounds that allows for used game sales to be acceptable(and moral), while piracy is deemed unacceptable(and immoral). More damage is done buying used than pirating, and if you going to buy used at all, simply pirate, and save the money for game you really care for.
In any case, this illustrates the problem with the business model for Video Games, and all other media; They monetize a worthless aspect of the product(copies, which are easy to come by in the digital age) and falling to monetize the parts of the product that has value, the content and their labor. Until the model changes, Video Game developers and other media will continue suffer, and I can point to companies that are already suffering deeply from this flawed model(Squire-Enix comes to mind).
piracy looks pretty sweet now, doesn't it?
Word.
I know a good way to stop second hand sales! Make the games so fucking good no one would want to sell them back for the next game!
Wow, butthurt much? So if I sell a game I don't play anymore to a friend for 20 bucks, am I a thief for not giving the publisher a cut of my profits?
anon @17:38
You are so right my brudda!
Piracy always been so sweet that even baby Jesus couldn't resist putting it into his mouth! God be my witness, there's no sweeter thing the Creator has brought to us in this world!
Do you hear it, bruddas!? It's the sound of Angels ringing their bells from above!
Let us sing to praise Our Lord for bringing us his holy Pirated Content! Hallelujah! HALLELUYAH!
HAALLELUUUYAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!
YOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
now entirely sure, but at least during the 90s and early 2000s large video rental stores had to pay a form of royalties to film studios for renting. Blockbuster for instance had to buy their movies for much higher prices than standard home release prices. Then they switched to a new system that gave a small return to the studio per rental.
Spot on with the greed.
Walmart Resales?
I don't know about 'making games so good you won't resell it' when every game out there are $60 a pop with 10-20 hours of campaign gameplay.
Darkrockslizer, I'd just like to point out that developers are not publishers.
Publishers get far too much money for doing fuck all. Developers don't get enough money for doing nearly all of the work.
I'd be perfectly happy with developers getting money from used game sales. Unfortunately, they very rarely do, instead it all goes to the publishers.
"You know what? Maybe if you'd stop fucking pirating and stop fucking buying second hand and the developers didn't have to cut corners to make a goddamned living, maybe we'd have decent games, ever think of that you asshats?"
Developers have to cut corners because of stupid publishers, e.g. Crackdown 2 was rushed with the speed of light for no reason that anyone can understand. A lack of content is often a result of developers wanting to one-up each other in the pursuit of "epic" and "emotionally engaging" narratives that nobody gives a shit about.
Also, almost every business that sells physical goods has to deal with the second hand market. Developers and publishers are just whiny, greedy primadonnas who can't survive in a free market environment, or would like to make people believe they can't.
OH for fuck's sake. I can't believe what I'm reading from some of these comments. Jesus... Gamers NEVER stop complaining that video games are rushed, that video games are incomplete, that X is buggy, etc. They complain that games "Cost too much" and that there's "Not enough content." "Zomg Reused engine? Lolwut?"
You know what? Maybe if you'd stop fucking pirating and stop fucking buying second hand and the developers didn't have to cut corners to make a goddamned living, maybe we'd have decent games, ever think of that you asshats?
To call game developers "Greedy" is a bit of a stretch. Anybody who's not busy developing God of War or Halo Reach is taking a big fucking risk in making their game.
You may think they're making enough money, but they certainly don't. http://itechworld.info/videogame-industry-has-suffered-11500-job-losses-since-late-2008-source-gamespy-com/
12000 job cuts in a year?
You go ahead and point your finger at the Developers and call them greedy, but remember that three fingers on that hand point back at you.
movies and games aren't the same thing, you can't get a ton of people in a dimly lit room with one system to play a game, but you can get people to watch a movie in that same room.
I think most people are referring to the publishers and not the developers, aka the topic of this article. Just a little fyi.
Sure, developing a good game can take more input than writing a book or making a movie but it doesn't mean people will pay exponentially more for it.
A well designed, simple game can easily outsell top-notch high gear "epic" space marine alien shooter of the year.
Not every business is evenly profitable. The game devs have to understand that they're NOT, they're NOT on the same level as movie makers.
John Romero failed to see that, and this CEO fails to understand that as well.
hello Darkrockslizer im a pirate, and im calling you a FUCKING RETARD.
renting is nowhere near the same as reselling. and up there with the car post, NO WHERE NEAR THE SAME
back in vhs day, i was told they had to pay for a licencing price for each movie, which was 120+$ i dont know if it is true or anything but it may have been. same thing with games from blockbuster. but think of it, blockbuster has how much shelf space and rents how many movies and they are still struggling to stay around, and places like gamestop post record profits due to reselling games.
and games, unless you care about instructions or cases, are all the same used, there is no degraded quality.
lets say a publisher sells 1000000 new copies, but gamestop sells 4000000 of that game over the consoles life time. FUCK that they make at least a 50% profit margin off those games, some amount should go back to the developer.
and i pointed out im a pirate for a reason.
if i like a game, like dragon age, i buy it new, if im meh about a game, i pirate it, and keep playing that till either im board or it comes way down in price and i can get it new for 20$. the point is, i wouldn't buy them to begin with, they actually lose less money because of me than gamestops fucking them
He doesn't plan to buy anything used if you had carefully read his post. He said he'd buy it new if he liked it, and if he was only okay with it, he'd wait until the new (unused) copies have dropped in their prices and buy it new at that point. No mention of him buying used.
Make games people don't want to sell after 1 week FFS and you won't have this problem.
"i wouldn't buy them to begin with, they actually lose less money because of me than gamestops fucking them"
Then whether you buy used from gamestop or pirate it, devs don't get shit from you in either case.
@ Imyou 17:17 :
What I think patokite91 was trying to say was, "Ford doesn't get any of the money - nor do they deserve to - when I sell my used Ford pickup. This holds true for all manufacturers and all merchandise, not just cars and trucks."
Mr. Castle's phrase, "Because they don’t let the publisher participate in the used games business." is just a slick and euphemistic way of saying, "I just decided that anyone selling a used product we made should give us money from those sales."
If Mr. Castle's company wants to create a chain of used-game stores, there's nothing Game Stop, et. al. can legally do to stop them.
Mr. Castle acting like just another thug in a suit.
But that's not even true. When you sell a used car, it's often to a manufacturer's dealership. Pick a manufacturer, and I guarantee you the local dealer makes money off of selling their used models. Saturn, Isuzu, Hyundai, Mazda, Toyota, Honda, GM, Ford... they all have used cars on their lots.
What's more, a car that's a few years old will be worth half as much to buyer and seller alike, where to Gamestop, a game is a game - it plays the same as ever, so if the price of a new one is high, the price of the used one is $5 less, and the previous owner gets about $5 for it, but the publisher gets squat.
Also, the buyer is probably looking for a used car or a new car as their main requirement. If they're shopping for a used car, they may not even know what's available, but they know they're buying used. When I go to buy a game, I will want to get a new copy if at all possible, and will search all over the city for it before giving up, going to GameStop, and getting it used because it wasn't in their 10% shelf space they give to new games.