188 réponses à ce sujet

[David Gaider]

StingingVelvet wrote...
Would you support it if DVD and BD movies put all their special features online behind a code so resales don't have access to them?

Why not? It might discourage me from buying it as a resale, but that's its intention, no?

That would be annoying and aggrivating to paying customers, new and used.  Resale is a part of every industry, even media industries like CDs, DVDs and books, yet for some reason gaming companies seem to think it's especially unfair to them and something terrible.

Let them complain to the company they're buying the media from-- which is the company supplying the resale. They're not our paying customers, after all, are they?

Selling the media you no longer want fuels new media sales... first-sale doctrine is a sacred consumer protection... this endless complaining about used game sales is getting old, frankly.

Hey, it's not my decision-- but considering that we make no money off of resales at all I think it's only fair that we get to offer incentives for people to buy the game in a way that benefits the people who made it. You are still getting what you're paying for, after all: the game itself, and if that's the only thing that concerns you then I don't really see the issue. Do you have an intrinsic right to extras that I'm not aware of? I'm not sure how people buying used games "fuels new media sales"-- it helps the company that is re-selling the game, and short of that gamer buying something like DLC for the game that's about it.

Modifié par David Gaider, 12 août 2010 - 02:25 .

[Gaius Octavian]

I think it is funny how many people are complaining about marketing tactics, it isn't like they are being greedy in any way. They work to create the games, the income allows them to continue doing so. If you want to cry about DLCs costing money, or resales not getting release DLCs, then you are more selfish then you are claiming them to be. Generally whining over it on the forums makes you look like a sub-par intellectual anyway.


Edit : I like how the topic went from OP asking a simple questiong "Do you think DA2 will have release DLC" to people crying over having to pay for a product developers worked to make.

Modifié par Gaius Octavian, 12 août 2010 - 02:54 .

[David Gaider]

slimgrin wrote...
So basically, DA2 will have lots of paid-for dlc.

We were talking about content that promotes first-sale being a good idea or not. Not paid-for DLC.

Which I also think is a fine idea, if done correctly.

But, again, I'm not the person who decides whether we make any of this stuff. Take it as indication of anything at your peril.

[Cypher0020]

Uhhhh... I support dlc....-ahemy- uh......sooo....I'd really like to see some new swords and weapons.....



I think I may have started a marketing flame war



-shuffles out ashamed-

[Loc'n'lol]

Cypher0020 wrote...
I'd really like to see some new swords and weapons.....

And I'd really like to be able to make my own for free with an updated toolset.
Guess what they're most likely to do ? <_<

[AlanC9]

Make the toolset itself paid DLC?

[UndercoverDoctor]

I wonder if we will get a Cerberus network type thing for Dragon Age II.

[Itkovian]

I rather like the direction Bioware is taking to combat resales, with the free DLC on a new purchase (Stone Prisoner for DAO, Cerberus Network for ME2). It is a fair process that gives new game purchasers a greater value without preventing used game sales. A valid compromise.

After all, they could use far harsher models to combat used game sales, such as requiring online registration that is only available for new purchases. Indeed, I think that's one of the reason MMORPGs and online login games are so attractive to developers. For example, I'm not sure if Starcraft 2 requires login for the single-player campaign, but lord knows there are a LOT of incentives for logging in even when playing in single player.

As for why they need to protect themselves from used sales, that is actually a simple answer: one of the primary retailers for video games has, in the last few years, shifted its entire model to push used game sales above all others. This directly undercut profit for game developers and publishers, and is actively harming the industry (which is not at all doing well, except for a handful of freakishly popular games).

In short, the economic landscape for computer/video games has changed drastically, and so developers and publishers have had to react to this change and compensate for it. I find Bioware's solution to be the most fair, IMO.

Thank you.

Itkovian

[AlanC9]

Games are obviously different because the marginal cost for a new copy is either very low or even zero. Toyota can't make new cars that sell for used-car prices, but Bio can make new copies of DA and sell them at $20 if it wants to -- as long as nobody else is selling used copies of DA at $15. Bio want both segments of the market for itself, and why shouldn't it?

And it's not like Bio's made it impossible for people to sell their copies of DA. Perhaps you'll get a couple of dollars less for it, perhaps not.

Modifié par AlanC9, 12 août 2010 - 04:21 .

[AlanC9]

I don't think there is any difference between games and products like books. I've worked in textbook publishing and we've done as much damage as we possibly can to the market for used textbooks. Haven't killed it, but we've restrained it.

[AlanC9]

Ashr4m wrote...

Also, a lot of customers for comptutergames are Teenagers, so reselling was an important thing for people to get money for new games.

This doesn't matter. Either the publishers get the money passed through from the kid who sold the used game, or they get the same money directly from whoever would have bought the used game.

[TheMadCat]

AlanC9 wrote...

Make the toolset itself paid DLC?

I'd be for this but they have to give a full demo of it for everyone to try, give us 4 hours to play around with it or something then lock it out. I'd pay for a Bethesda toolset but wouldn't give the Origins one a penny, was poorly designed and buggy as hell.  Plus they'd actually have to support it which they didn't show they were really willing to do with the Origins one. I think they'd have to give one more free one and do a much better job on it before charging for them.

[Chairon de Celeste]

David Gaider wrote...

StingingVelvet wrote...
Would you support it if DVD and BD movies put all their special features online behind a code so resales don't have access to them?

Why not? It might discourage me from buying it as a resale, but that's its intention, no?

That would be annoying and aggrivating to paying customers, new and used.  Resale is a part of every industry, even media industries like CDs, DVDs and books, yet for some reason gaming companies seem to think it's especially unfair to them and something terrible.

Let them complain to the company they're buying the media from-- which is the company supplying the resale. They're not our paying customers, after all, are they?

Selling the media you no longer want fuels new media sales... first-sale doctrine is a sacred consumer protection... this endless complaining about used game sales is getting old, frankly.

Hey, it's not my decision-- but considering that we make no money off of resales at all I think it's only fair that we get to offer incentives for people to buy the game in a way that benefits the people who made it. You are still getting what you're paying for, after all: the game itself, and if that's the only thing that concerns you then I don't really see the issue. Do you have an intrinsic right to extras that I'm not aware of? I'm not sure how people buying used games "fuels new media sales"-- it helps the company that is re-selling the game, and short of that gamer buying something like DLC for the game that's about it.

If it wasn't for a bg 1 resale, I would never have bought bg 2, nwn,  xp and dlc and maybe not even
da: o   -- hey you're right - anti resale protection back then would've spared me years of addiction
;)

Modifié par Chairon de Celeste, 12 août 2010 - 04:45 .

[Itkovian]

Ashr4m wrote...

I wonder about your personal opinion, lets take cars for example, would you think its okay if car-producers implemented some sort of new business model that would make it impossible for you to resell the car? If yes why? If no, why are games different?

Because games ARE different. Games do not diminish in value when resold: they provide the same enjoyment and entertainment, and do not degrade just because someone else used them before.

Cars, on the other hand, obviously DO decrease in value and quality when "pre-owned". Mileage adds wear and tear to the engine and most components, and will require more maintenance than a brand new car.

In effect, what Bioware is doing is introducing the kind of diminished value that is inherent to used car sales: the used game has less content than the new one, even though it remains a fully functional product.

And given the current precarious position of most game developers these days (anyone thinking the video game industry is doing well is very much mistaken), I find it quite acceptable that they try and protect themselves from certain retailers who, by focusing their entire business model on pre-owned games, has become a parasite on the industry.

Thank you.

Itkovian

[Maverick827]

I shouldn't have to pay for anything that I want to own!