Deus Ex Alpha

Discuss.

I see your point, buying it for a lower price because of its condition means less profit for the developers. I think the same percentage should go to the developer, used or no and the retailer suffers.

>less profit for the developers

what

that's 0% profit for the developers, only the distributor gets profit.

So you're saying that pirating is better because we don't fund (essentially) pirating of concepts?

Well like I said there is no profit for the developer in pirating or buying used games.

So yeah, rather pirate than buying used.

I remember reading this somewhere earlier, but yeah I would have to agree that piracy is better than giving an additional sale to store like EB Games/Gamestop. Last time I checked the prices were higher than what I would expect. Take for instance you trade in a game and they would give you 15-25 dollars credit on it. Then they would repackage it and sell it used at a marked up price of around 40. Because of that I never return games for credit on new ones.

I read this on /v/ earlier

And it wasn't cool then either

PIRACY IS ILLEGAL
PURCHASE OF A USED COPY IS LEGAL

By the way, does Steam limit buyers reselling rights?

Protocol wrote:I read this on /v/ earlier

And it wasn't cool then either

PIRACY IS ILLEGAL
PURCHASE OF A USED COPY IS LEGAL

True, but there is no difference which is hilarious. Only the original buyer who bought that game new gave back to the creator.

By the way, does Steam limit buyers reselling rights?

Yes. Most people who use Steam however are very content about their purchases.

THE DIFFERENCE IS

ONE IS LEGAL
ONE IS ILLEGAL

Yeah, and?

Is that not a difference.

I have always believed that if a developer doesn't garner enough attention for their potentially fuckwin game, they are DOING IT WRONG in the first place.

Legal or not, it still doesn't change the fact of the developer receiving no profits. If you buy a used game you may as well just pirate it.

Protocol wrote:Is that not a difference.

I have always believed that if a developer doesn't garner enough attention for their potentially fuckwin game, they are DOING IT WRONG in the first place.

Moar like they don't have enough money to bring attention to their game because everyone pirates them...

Baleout wrote:

Protocol wrote:Is that not a difference.

I have always believed that if a developer doesn't garner enough attention for their potentially fuckwin game, they are DOING IT WRONG in the first place.

Moar like they don't have enough money to bring attention to their game because everyone pirates them...

NO

PIRACY IS AN EXCUSE FOR LAZY PUBLISHING AND DEVELOPING.

OH HURR DURR GUYS I DUNNO Y DIS GAEM DIDN'T SELL WELL IT HAS GOOD GRAPHIX AND D CONSOEL VERSHUN GOT GOOD SCORES RIGHT

Well perhaps, it's the FUCKTONS of security that you put on your game, that gets cracked within hours if not PRIOR TO RELEASE.

Yes...

No, Ruben is right.

This is why L4D is going to destroy all other PC titles this year, because they've just ruined EVERYONE in how to publish games once again.

GalCiv II is awesome.

Technically the difference between pirating and buying 2nd hand is this;

Dev's ship out stock to retailer, retailer buys 100 games and dev's get moolah

The retailer can then distribute the games for their own profit, given that they buy 2nd hand versions, they can redistribute at their leisure, the dev's won't see the money for this re-distribution

But, if the retailer sells all 100, then they will need to rebuy stock from the dev.

Now, if you buy 2nd hand, the dev will not see that money made by the retailer, whereas if you buy new, and your not the only sucker to buy the game, the dev will eventually see some more money from stores requesting more copies.

If you pirate, the store will not profit, and if the store fails to sell all 100 copies, they will not buy from the dev.

Therefore, 2nd hand impacts only the developer, whereas piracy impacts both the retailer AND developer

Of course with more and more companies going through systems like steam, where the transaction can be dev - consumer, and cutting out the middle-man (retail), it's retail who lose out, so stick it to em

The developer still makes money on the original sale. Reselling of a game is clearly not illegal anyway, so the argument is kind of pointless. While I do agree, I'm just saying, if it's not illegal you can't do anything. And the developers/publishers don't seem to give a crap.

LOL.

MrBlack wrote:Technically the difference between pirating and buying 2nd hand is this;

Dev's ship out stock to retailer, retailer buys 100 games and dev's get moolah

The retailer can then distribute the games for their own profit, given that they buy 2nd hand versions, they can redistribute at their leisure, the dev's won't see the money for this re-distribution

But, if the retailer sells all 100, then they will need to rebuy stock from the dev.

Now, if you buy 2nd hand, the dev will not see that money made by the retailer, whereas if you buy new, and your not the only sucker to buy the game, the dev will eventually see some more money from stores requesting more copies.

If you pirate, the store will not profit, and if the store fails to sell all 100 copies, they will not buy from the dev.

Therefore, 2nd hand impacts only the developer, whereas piracy impacts both the retailer AND developer

Of course with more and more companies going through systems like steam, where the transaction can be dev - consumer, and cutting out the middle-man (retail), it's retail who lose out, so stick it to em

You forgot to mention something.

If a retailer has sold 70 copies of X game out of 100 in an order, and 40 copies of X were traded in the following week, the retailer has no real reason to request a second lot, considering the game is not in demand.

This way, devs that attempt to shovel shit onto the shelves and call it brilliant won't see as big of a return as they could potentially have.

Alternatively, if every of Y game they receive as a trade-in is sold within a week or so, the retailer needs to order more new copies in order to maximise potential profit.

Protocol wrote:

MrBlack wrote:Technically the difference between pirating and buying 2nd hand is this;

Dev's ship out stock to retailer, retailer buys 100 games and dev's get moolah

The retailer can then distribute the games for their own profit, given that they buy 2nd hand versions, they can redistribute at their leisure, the dev's won't see the money for this re-distribution

But, if the retailer sells all 100, then they will need to rebuy stock from the dev.

Now, if you buy 2nd hand, the dev will not see that money made by the retailer, whereas if you buy new, and your not the only sucker to buy the game, the dev will eventually see some more money from stores requesting more copies.

If you pirate, the store will not profit, and if the store fails to sell all 100 copies, they will not buy from the dev.

Therefore, 2nd hand impacts only the developer, whereas piracy impacts both the retailer AND developer

Of course with more and more companies going through systems like steam, where the transaction can be dev - consumer, and cutting out the middle-man (retail), it's retail who lose out, so stick it to em

You forgot to mention something.

If a retailer has sold 70 copies of X game out of 100 in an order, and 40 copies of X were traded in the following week, the retailer has no real reason to request a second lot, considering the game is not in demand.

This way, devs that attempt to shovel shit onto the shelves and call it brilliant won't see as big of a return as they could potentially have.

Alternatively, if every of Y game they receive as a trade-in is sold within a week or so, the retailer needs to order more new copies in order to maximise potential profit.

Yeah there is obviously variables, I'm only using my limited knowledge of business education and what I've looked into or heard of how the games retail system works

Good point!

But in any case, if there is a different impact on where profit goes with piracy or 2nd hand, that's another difference as well as legality