Home
While we're on the subject of 'papers' I get asked for them all the time. When I buy alcohol, I must show my 'papers' to prove I'm old enough. When I use my credit card, I must show my 'papers' to prove it's mine. And god help me if I get stopped for a traffic violation, then I have to show all KINDS of 'papers': registration, insurance, license. When I bought a house? Holy crap, now THAT was a request for papers.
BTW: Article is still funny... but I WANT Nico deported. Would YOU want to live near that guy?"
Let's take your example: BMX XXX. You don't really know it's a crappy game. You only know that other people think it's crappy, and the premise doesn't appeal to you. It's possible, should you actually play it, that you might enjoy yourself (though you'd certainly never admit it). The biggest problem is that you, and the-critic-who-shall-not-be-named (tcwsnbn), are missing an entire element of the game: playing it. This is NOT like judging a movie from trailers... it's worse. It's like judging a movie based on a few sound clips (no video), or a song based on a couple bars of sheet music. Entire elements of the medium you propose to critique are missing, guaranteeing that you could in no way have a valid opinion of the whole.
What makes this important is illustrated perfectly by Jenny McCarthy. An opinion, even a completely baseless, demonstrably wrong opinion, can be important. tcwsnbn may be way off in the weeds when it comes to this topic, but his opinion carries weight. People listen to him, people like politicians. Yes, the old guard are dying out, but think of this, the big names of the democratic party average over 65 years old. It's going to be some time before they are replaced with folks who grew up with video games, and they can do a LOT of damage in the mean-time."
Your point is flawed in a number of ways. First off, much like the piracy debate, your argument erroneously makes the underlying assumption that every used sale represents a lost new sale. That's simply not the case. For many used buyers it's a choice between used and not at all, not used or new. Granted a couple of price cuts later, the game IS often affordable, but the game makers have made no valid argument why a gamer should wait to buy discounted new (Other than, Dude we need money). In another parallel to the war on piracy, the publishers then go out of their way to try and punish used buyer. If the games industry should learn anything from the music industry, it's that screwing your loyal fans in the name of profit doesn't work.
Secondly used sales, drive new sales. If there is more demand for a used title, there HAS TO BE corresponding increased demand for new copies, especially around release. Used copies are hard to get, and in a lot of cases the premium to purchase new is $5 or less. Given the choice between a beat up copy stained with unknown bodily fluids, and a new copy of a game for 5 bones more, it's not a tough choice for all but the folks that are REALLY strapped for cash.
Third, addressing your development costs as a developer, I can tell you a of development money is simply misspent. When you have a massive library of art assets available, why is nearly every rock, tree, building, character, and item, every song, menu sound, and effect, created from scratch. Every. Single. Game. Why is a pefectly good engine tossed, and rewritten from the ground up, rather than being polished? We never question it, just complain about how much it costs to redo everything.
You really want to 'fix' this 'problem'? Use a carrot, not a stick. How about, as a new game ages, and DLC comes out for it, include discounts for the DLC in the new copy of the game? ADD value, don't delete it. Otherwise, best case scenario, people will buy the used game, and maybe some of your DLC to go with i"