View Poll Results: Would your really care?

Voters
60. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    41 68.33%
  • No

    19 31.67%
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 8
Results 176 to 199 of 199
  1. #176
    Superior Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    843
    Rep Power
    40
    Points
    10,284 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatSpaceKoaster View Post
    Profits on games aren't on their way up. Profit margins on products are basically the same as they were 30 years ago. If their profits go up... it's because they are doing it through the volume of sales, not profit margins. That's what food supermarkets do. Their profit margins are razor thin. They survive by counting on you buying a lot of items from the store to make up for those slim margins.

    I've seen game studios close for selling ONLY 1.5 million-ish copies. Over a million used to be considered a great success. Not anymore. The game Homefront by the dev Kaos Studios sold 2.6 million copies. You know what those numbers did? It found the dev being dropped due to "disappointing sales". The dev closed up shop for good because of that after 5 years in the business.
    costs increased, but that was swallowed by the increase in price. But developers were not happy with that, they went on and added DLC, some have included online passes, and EA even tried to have micro transactions.
    The problem with that is that they tended to eat onto their own sales, someone like me and a tonne of people i know have really never bothered investing another 20 - 30 bucks on content that was their on day 1 but was cut from retail copies because it would eat into the budget of getting other titles. There are people that invest in DLC but then end up passing on something else.

    Secondly, the industry has always been about moving units and a whole load of units early on when the game launches thereby taking full advantage of price. The competition in terms of quality games has never also been this high, couple that with a bad economic climate and it isnt hard to see that a lot of developers have somewhat struggled.

    I have bought all my games original bar one that was second hand, and i have no issue continuing that route but to somewhat argue that always online is the route to go, and that it has positive effects is to miss the mark.

    As for your point on Homefront, it was on PC, 360 and ps3, shipping 2.6 million is nothing to smile about.
    xbox live: AcrylicAltair44

  2. #177
    Dedicated Member
    Shingo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    PSN ID
    Swordsman-45
    Posts
    1,367
    Rep Power
    32
    Points
    15,267 (0 Banked)
    Items User name styleOne Piece
    Like rapture pointed out, music industry found their own way to deal with the problem, we haven't seen any method being efective with piracy when choose to fight head to head. There is lots of ways to reduce piracy , sure that's their way to find out. Altough I completely disagree the reason of always online , is not as you stated, it is because stoping used games, not piracy, at least not its main focus.
    (_)
    ( _)>⌐■-■
    (⌐■_■)



    MyAnimeList
    Currently playing GOW:A
    Next : Last of Us, One Piece : Pirate Warriors 2

  3. #178
    Legend
    F34R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    South Carolina
    PSN ID
    F34RTEHR34PER
    Posts
    40,122
    Rep Power
    244
    Points
    147,835 (0 Banked)
    Items BullySteamGran Turismo 5LiverpoolAppleJoker (limited ICON)Naughty DogMaster ChiefAssassins Creed EzioGears of WarHeavy RainDiablo III
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Let's please don't start talking about losing money, etc. and these companies need to stop piracy, etc. EA earned over 1 BILLION in profit for 2012. Yeah, piracy is killing them... they need more DRM.




  4. #179
    Forum Overseer
    Omar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Addison, TX.
    Age
    32
    Posts
    31,266
    Rep Power
    194
    Points
    117,319 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    But what about the B developers? How much are they making?

  5. #180
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    930
    Rep Power
    0
    Points
    11,608 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Naxi View Post
    Opportunistic thieves do not chip their consoles, also the rising gamefile sizes and the need for a blu-ray writer does not make it easy enough to appeal to a lot of people.

    I'm not talking DRM-free anything. This type of DRM has shown not to work, instead Ubisoft's PC sales dropped tremendously after implementing Draconian DRM. Diablo III while certainly successful, has not stopped anything and has damaged their reputation. I'm not against them fighting piracy, but this is counterproductive.

    Steam has been successful in providing a great service and value, making them very profitable and other publishers happy. They've even penetrated the russian market, which is known for its piracy.
    Well if DRM doesn't work then why are more than one company trying it? Sony filed a patent on blocking used game sales. If they didn't think it would work, they wouldn't invest time, money and patents into the technology.

    As for Steam? That doesn't honestly solve the problem. I did a Steam authorization on a friend's computer so I could download a game and play it there when I'm not near home and don't feel like bringing along my laptop. Now they don't care about the game and don't play it. But if they wanted to, they could play it. They need only to turn off their internet connection (just disable it in the control panel, shut off wi-fi, unplug the CAT cable) and play it in OFFFLINE MODE. That way I could play it at my house and my friend could play it on theirs at the same time. That means I only pay once for it, but two people in two different households get the use of it. That means the dev only got paid ONCE for it.

    Quote Originally Posted by RaY_210 View Post
    Quit with the bigger is always better mentality. Devs bloat up their budget. They seem to spend more and more time on a sequel, but yet, they look and play largely the same. Of course, gamers are just as much to blame on this, as it seems this is what they want.

    Don't rush games out. They spend the cash to patch games, when they can delay and fix the game before they ship. Nintendo has helped on this by not charging for patching on the Wii U. I wonder if Sony/MS will follow as well.
    Devs bloat up the budget? They don't want to do that. Cuz if you and a publisher agreed on a price and you go over it, the dev will be stuck with the increase in the bill. The publisher doesn't want a game to go over budget because not only does that eat into their potential return on investment, but also increases their potential losses if the game doesn't sell well. Only the biggest titles that are the most likely to make a killing anyways ....will a publisher open their purse strings beyond the original budget at the request of the dev.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rapture View Post
    Except DRM is ineffective and doesn't prevent the repercussions of piracy. What continues this trend and business measurements is simply draconian thinking. If you want people to stop pirating then the last thing you do is deliver them an intentionally worse product.



    Completely false information. Piracy actually freed much of the music industry and caused businesses to finally lower their prices. You have a rather skewed view of what actually happened, and the benefits piracy has brought to customers of music.
    Piracy didn't free the music industry or lower prices. Music CDs are basically the same price they have been for years. ESPECIALLY if adjusted for inflation. Since their introduction, they've only come down a couple bucks at the most in all those years. And selling cheaper music on iTunes? You get what you pay for considering they are of much lower bit rate then an Audio CD.

    Another thing. Artists used to be able to make a decent chunk of money off their music sales. Now they have to depend almost solely on music touring to pay their bills. Artists have complained about this fact ever since the rise of cheaper music downloads.

    Quote Originally Posted by Two4DaMoney View Post
    I at the idea of drm bringing them in more money.

    This hardcore "used game" buying crowd will simply wait until that new title is $30 or not buy it at all. Then you are screwed out of at least the online pass money.
    At least when somebody waits until a game's price drops, the devs are getting the money where as when a used copy is sold, they don't get $#@!!


    Quote Originally Posted by acryllicaltair View Post
    costs increased, but that was swallowed by the increase in price. But developers were not happy with that, they went on and added DLC, some have included online passes, and EA even tried to have micro transactions.
    The problem with that is that they tended to eat onto their own sales, someone like me and a tonne of people i know have really never bothered investing another 20 - 30 bucks on content that was their on day 1 but was cut from retail copies because it would eat into the budget of getting other titles. There are people that invest in DLC but then end up passing on something else.

    Secondly, the industry has always been about moving units and a whole load of units early on when the game launches thereby taking full advantage of price. The competition in terms of quality games has never also been this high, couple that with a bad economic climate and it isnt hard to see that a lot of developers have somewhat struggled.

    I have bought all my games original bar one that was second hand, and i have no issue continuing that route but to somewhat argue that always online is the route to go, and that it has positive effects is to miss the mark.

    As for your point on Homefront, it was on PC, 360 and ps3, shipping 2.6 million is nothing to smile about.
    Costs increased, but that was swallowed by the increase in price?!?!? What increase in price? Games rose to $60 in 2005. They had been $50 during and since the Atari 2600 days. When I bought a $50 Atari game in 1980, adjusted for inflation..... it had the same financial impact as pricing a game at $137 today!!! And remember.... budgets are much larger now then they were back then. Now games on discs are a cheaper part of the cost then the cartridge days, but bigger budgets have all but wiped out that cost advantage.

    As for 2.6 million being nothing to smile about? Considering how much competition there is out there, that looks like a decent number to me. Play that game and tell me they didn't make a profit on 2.6 million copies sold? The game didn't exactly have a Halo sized budget to have to recoup ya know.

    Quote Originally Posted by F34R View Post
    Let's please don't start talking about losing money, etc. and these companies need to stop piracy, etc. EA earned over 1 BILLION in profit for 2012. Yeah, piracy is killing them... they need more DRM.
    No.... they got to those sized profits from games like FIFA and Madden. Both of which will sell boatloads if you simply slap a new roster and year number on the front of the box. Both games are still basically the same core game year after year.

    When I hear people complain about big profits, it screams liberal to me.

    Reminds me of union workers who always want to bash companies over big profits. They always say that since a company sees big profits, that the workers should see some of that money. I say.....BULL$#@!! I'd tell those union workers... you want some of those big profits? Then put some skin in the game by BUYING STOCK! That way... when the company does do well, the INVESTORS who put their OWN money on the line reap the benefits of the risk.

    But unions are all about averting any kind of risk. It's why they want workers fired based on seniority instead of how well they are doing their jobs. It's why they want a chunk of the profits, but don't want to risk their own money in pursuit of those profits.

    I always tell them.... you want the workers getting more of the money? Well if you aren't gonna invest in stock.....then why don't you and people of your own mindset start your own company. Then you can give the workers all the profits you want to give them. Otherwise..... stop telling me how to run MY company!
    Last edited by GreatSpaceKoaster; 05-11-2013 at 03:40.

  6. #181
    Friendship is Carrots
    Nerevar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Equestria
    Age
    22
    Posts
    15,804
    Rep Power
    135
    Points
    82,223 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatSpaceKoaster View Post
    Piracy didn't free the music industry or lower prices. Music CDs are basically the same price they have been for years. ESPECIALLY if adjusted for inflation. Since their introduction, they've only come down a couple bucks at the most in all those years. And selling cheaper music on iTunes? You get what you pay for considering they are of much lower bit rate then an Audio CD.
    Well, no. It definitely had an impact. Piracy essentially functioned as competition, and the music industry had to respond to it by offering lower prices with higher accessibility. It's a farcry from 'decimated', I'll tell you that. The music (and movie) industry has grown and grown despite the horrible 'scandal' and 'threat' of piracy. Only now businesses have to essentially offer us better services. Which, in many ways, these digital services give indie artists a place to show and sell their content. Things have certainly improved overall, and piracy did play some part in that.

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatSpaceKoaster View Post
    Another thing. Artists used to be able to make a decent chunk of money off their music sales. Now they have to depend almost solely on music touring to pay their bills. Artists have complained about this fact ever since the rise of cheaper music downloads.
    Yes, and this is due to the record labels taking most of the profits, as part of the contract for these bands to get their music out to a wider audience. The music industry is a sick and twisted thing, really. But thankfully the internet is slowly changing that.
    Add me on Steam!


    [Forum Rules]
    - [PSN] - [Programmers' Corner]

  7. #182
    Veteran
    unicron7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    A little place called none of your **** business. United States.
    Age
    29
    Posts
    4,761
    Rep Power
    79
    Points
    7,042 (0 Banked)
    Items 360 SlimPS3 SlimNaughty Dog
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatSpaceKoaster View Post
    When I hear people complain about big profits, it screams liberal to me.


    You say liberal, I say someone with common sense to know when they are getting $#@!ed over. A company that has over one billion in PROFITS is not hurting at all. If anything a lot of these companies that profit like this need to start paying their fair share in taxes like the rest of us middle class people, instead of dodging them like the $#@!heads that they are. But that's a whole other conversation altogether.


    I don't really need a water cooler/remote control as of right now.

  8. #183
    Super Moderator
    Lethal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kansas City
    PSN ID
    Lethal_NFS
    Age
    34
    Posts
    11,483
    Rep Power
    144
    Points
    80,276 (0 Banked)
    Items Michelle MarshAngelina JolieScarlett JohanssonOlivia WildeLucy Pinder
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by F34R View Post
    Let's please don't start talking about losing money, etc. and these companies need to stop piracy, etc. EA earned over 1 BILLION in profit for 2012. Yeah, piracy is killing them... they need more DRM.
    Now choose a company not putting out 50 different games out a year. It affects smaller developers the most.

    Even if I was EA, and made 1 billions dollars last year. I would still be pissed by the 1 billion pirated from me. Which is why I can see developers and publishers pushing to make the DRM happen on consoles.
    Last edited by Lethal; 05-11-2013 at 05:54.

  9. #184
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    930
    Rep Power
    0
    Points
    11,608 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rapture View Post
    Well, no. It definitely had an impact. Piracy essentially functioned as competition, and the music industry had to respond to it by offering lower prices with higher accessibility. It's a farcry from 'decimated', I'll tell you that. The music (and movie) industry has grown and grown despite the horrible 'scandal' and 'threat' of piracy. Only now businesses have to essentially offer us better services. Which, in many ways, these digital services give indie artists a place to show and sell their content. Things have certainly improved overall, and piracy did play some part in that.



    Yes, and this is due to the record labels taking most of the profits, as part of the contract for these bands to get their music out to a wider audience. The music industry is a sick and twisted thing, really. But thankfully the internet is slowly changing that.
    They've grown, but that's due to the population of the world growing. More people, more customers, more money. Profitability is actually less then before the pirating. Torrents of pirated music are still there in full force. Those that have no problem with stealing are still stealing.

    The main thing digital downloads did was allowed people to buy music ala carte. Instead of having to buy a whole album or only the singles THEY choose to release.... you get to buy a single song of your choice.

    Yes...record companies were ruthless back in the day. But over the years, companies were able to do that less and less as artists became more and more aware of the practices. That's why a lot of artists stated making their own labels.

    But whenever you see interviews of artists...especially long established ones......and the subject of the digital downloading comes up...... it's clear most of them are not happy with the new reality that has been thrust upon them. Most of them clearly pine for the good ol' days.

    Quote Originally Posted by unicron7 View Post

    You say liberal, I say someone with common sense to know when they are getting $#@!ed over. A company that has over one billion in PROFITS is not hurting at all. If anything a lot of these companies that profit like this need to start paying their fair share in taxes like the rest of us middle class people, instead of dodging them like the $#@!heads that they are. But that's a whole other conversation altogether.
    $#@!ed over huh? Displaying classic victim status I see.

    If you think your employer is $#@!ing you over....QUIT! Think a company is $#@!ing you over.....QUIT buying their product or services. It's real simple. Otherwise buy stock and reap the rewards of the profits. No one who doesn't put their own money on the line is entitled to the rewards of a profit.

    See... if you worked at a store and for the entire day, the store didn't have a single sale? The OWNER would STILL have to legally pay you while the owner gets NOTHING for the day. That's the risk he took when he decided to start and own a business. He had the skin in the game. And those that DON'T have skin in it have the $#@!ing nerve to demand a chunk of the profits? I'd close my company before I'd let a leach claim a stake in the profits of a company THEY didn't invest their OWN money into!

    As for the "fair share in taxes" argument? Define "fair share"? It's all in the eye of the beholder. You may think it's okay to demand millionaires and billionaires to..... what YOU define as...... pay their fair share. But you wouldn't be happy if someone that made LESS than you decided YOU weren't paying YOUR fair share. Of course you could plead your case to him why you ARE paying your fair share. But if he isn't convinced, then he's gonna demand a jack up in YOUR taxes and you would be livid over it!

    I'll say one more thing on the subject......

    Taxes are legalized THEFT. Because if I was to rob you on the street and take $100 from you......you'd call the cops and I'd go to jail for theft. BUT...... if I run for public office and help sign into law a TAX INCREASE..... I just TOOK that money from you legally. And if you don't pay the tax? Then I can jail YOU, freeze your assets, confiscate them and your bank account to get the money owed.


    Like Lethal said.... it's the small devs that are most affected by piracy and used game sales. Just like when McDonalld's will survive the recession, but a small mom and pop restaurant likely won't. Look at how may good devs are gone or have been dropped by major publishers!

  10. #185
    Dedicated Member
    victorijapoosp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,256
    Rep Power
    47
    Points
    13,802 (0 Banked)
    Items User name style
    I voted yes. If it is related to online DRM.

    i would find such a thing highly troubling. If I buy a book and I sell that book. Would i have to give a cut to the author? NO.

    Am i allowed to sell on the book? yes

    is the author allowed to use technology to only let the pages open if it's DRM allows? no
    You can't be serious with the 30 megabyte signature... ~ Staff

    Maths is biased! It keeps telling me the PS4 is 50% more powerful than XboxOne!
    Great song, should have more views :'(

    SHIMAASAAAANIIII!!!!!
    http://i.imgur.com/bP50xuM.png

  11. #186
    Ultimate Veteran
    Lefein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    22,962
    Rep Power
    194
    Points
    108,400 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatSpaceKoaster View Post
    Look at how may good devs are gone or have been dropped by major publishers!
    Sorry to say, but we didn't have these problems during the PS2 generation or before it. Of course, when you have one major platform owner bragging about how many billions it makes off of revenue for charging gamers for online gaming, it's REAL easy to find out what's wrong with the industry right now. The gamers are being strip mined of money they would use to buy games. That's not exactly healthy for the little guy either.

    This industry grew because of the gamer, not in spite of it. You are a customer, not a potential thief.

  12. #187
    Soldier 95B
    Guest
    We are punished every day because of pirates and thieves. There is no way around it. Everything you buy at the store from Walmart to Macy's. While we don't steal, we pay for the security, we pay for the security tags, we pay for stolen items, all by those places marking up the prices of the goods and services. We are treated like criminals at the airports, stores and more and we all pay for it. Is it right? No. But we have to accept it unless someone can come up with a solution to rid the world of criminals.

  13. #188
    Veteran
    unicron7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    A little place called none of your **** business. United States.
    Age
    29
    Posts
    4,761
    Rep Power
    79
    Points
    7,042 (0 Banked)
    Items 360 SlimPS3 SlimNaughty Dog
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatSpaceKoaster View Post
    $#@!ed over huh? Displaying classic victim status I see.

    If you think your employer is $#@!ing you over....QUIT! Think a company is $#@!ing you over.....QUIT buying their product or services. It's real simple. Otherwise buy stock and reap the rewards of the profits. No one who doesn't put their own money on the line is entitled to the rewards of a profit.

    See... if you worked at a store and for the entire day, the store didn't have a single sale? The OWNER would STILL have to legally pay you while the owner gets NOTHING for the day. That's the risk he took when he decided to start and own a business. He had the skin in the game. And those that DON'T have skin in it have the $#@!ing nerve to demand a chunk of the profits? I'd close my company before I'd let a leach claim a stake in the profits of a company THEY didn't invest their OWN money into!

    As for the "fair share in taxes" argument? Define "fair share"? It's all in the eye of the beholder. You may think it's okay to demand millionaires and billionaires to..... what YOU define as...... pay their fair share. But you wouldn't be happy if someone that made LESS than you decided YOU weren't paying YOUR fair share. Of course you could plead your case to him why you ARE paying your fair share. But if he isn't convinced, then he's gonna demand a jack up in YOUR taxes and you would be livid over it!

    I'll say one more thing on the subject......

    Taxes are legalized THEFT. Because if I was to rob you on the street and take $100 from you......you'd call the cops and I'd go to jail for theft. BUT...... if I run for public office and help sign into law a TAX INCREASE..... I just TOOK that money from you legally. And if you don't pay the tax? Then I can jail YOU, freeze your assets, confiscate them and your bank account to get the money owed.
    Yeah, $#@!ed over. When I'm paying in, and a company is not due to using loopholes and offshoring to get a 0% tax rate, yeah, that's pretty $#@!ing unfair.

    When I say their fair share, I mean the mandated 35% in our tax code. If you profit, be it $200,000 or 1 Billion, and you complain about that percentage...well that just makes you an asshole in my eyes.

    Oh, and I have no problem paying my fair share as mandated by the tax code and IRS. Just wish the wealthy would get with the program as well.

    Wish these lower class people would actually realize how bad they are getting $#@!ed over and actually do something about it one of these days. Full on revolution. *sigh* One can dream.

    These companies are not hurting due to piracy. AT ALL. If anything, they are pissed that they actually have to start playing ball with customers and offer competitive services and products due to it. But as far as losing money? Please, spare me. I have no sympathy for anyone PROFITING more than $200K a year.


    I don't really need a water cooler/remote control as of right now.

  14. #189
    Master Sage
    Two4DaMoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Age
    27
    Posts
    12,526
    Rep Power
    111
    Points
    16,276 (75,576 Banked)
    Items Naughty DogPS3 SlimNaughty DogUser name style
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    $#@! these developers that are crying about used games.

    Go on psn(if you have a ps3) and look at the downloadable titles of the early gen titles. $20 is too much for these titles such as rainbow 6 vegas 1&2. The quality of the games are piss poor compared to today's standards. You can find the games for 5-10 dollars used. I'm sure Ubisoft made their money back on these titles. What's the problem with dropping these titles to $10? They're out of print titles. I skipped out on these titles when they were new. The only reason I went back and played them because they were very cheap. "Going from 10 to 20 dollars isn't that much, blah blah blah" Of course I can afford it but it's the $#@!ing principle.

    I want some evidence(sorry if someone provided any, I'm not reading all these post in this thread) showing that used games caused a company to go under.
    Last edited by Two4DaMoney; 05-11-2013 at 17:11.


  15. #190
    Superior Member
    Old Man Gamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    840
    Rep Power
    23
    Points
    7,850 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by unicron7 View Post
    Yeah, $#@!ed over. When I'm paying in, and a company is not due to using loopholes and offshoring to get a 0% tax rate, yeah, that's pretty $#@!ing unfair.

    When I say their fair share, I mean the mandated 35% in our tax code. If you profit, be it $200,000 or 1 Billion, and you complain about that percentage...well that just makes you an asshole in my eyes.

    Oh, and I have no problem paying my fair share as mandated by the tax code and IRS. Just wish the wealthy would get with the program as well.

    Wish these lower class people would actually realize how bad they are getting $#@!ed over and actually do something about it one of these days. Full on revolution. *sigh* One can dream.

    These companies are not hurting due to piracy. AT ALL. If anything, they are pissed that they actually have to start playing ball with customers and offer competitive services and products due to it. But as far as losing money? Please, spare me. I have no sympathy for anyone PROFITING more than $200K a year.
    All you're doing by making corporations pay taxes is taking away from the workers and stockholders. When you take corporate taxes you leave them less money to pay their employees. This means the lowest secretary as well as the CEO. Also, you reduce profits which drives down the stock price. This hurts our 401K and profit sharing plans as they invest heavily in stocks.

    So, go ahead and screw the big corporations that pay our wages. They'll reduce staff and maintain high profits leaving the little guys unemployed. You see that's how it works in the real world. That's not something that they teach in high school and college.
    I don't need no stinkin' signature!

  16. #191
    Friendship is Carrots
    Nerevar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Equestria
    Age
    22
    Posts
    15,804
    Rep Power
    135
    Points
    82,223 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    I absolutely despise the mentality that corporations are somehow safe and correct in however they elect to operate, that they are necessary, and better than the people that work for them.
    Add me on Steam!


    [Forum Rules]
    - [PSN] - [Programmers' Corner]

  17. Likes John25 likes this post
  18. #192
    Superior Member
    Old Man Gamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    840
    Rep Power
    23
    Points
    7,850 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rapture View Post
    I absolutely despise the mentality that corporations are somehow safe and correct in however they elect to operate, that they are necessary, and better than the people that work for them.
    Corporations ARE the people they work for. What affects the corporation affects the employees that make up the corporation.
    I don't need no stinkin' signature!

  19. #193
    Legend
    F34R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    South Carolina
    PSN ID
    F34RTEHR34PER
    Posts
    40,122
    Rep Power
    244
    Points
    147,835 (0 Banked)
    Items BullySteamGran Turismo 5LiverpoolAppleJoker (limited ICON)Naughty DogMaster ChiefAssassins Creed EzioGears of WarHeavy RainDiablo III
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Lethal_NFS View Post
    Now choose a company not putting out 50 different games out a year. It affects smaller developers the most.

    Even if I was EA, and made 1 billions dollars last year. I would still be pissed by the 1 billion pirated from me. Which is why I can see developers and publishers pushing to make the DRM happen on consoles.
    There is already drm on consoles. When they do more, it isn't going to stop piracy. It's going to stop people from being able to play games when they want to play games, even after buying it.




  20. #194
    Forum Overseer
    Omar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Addison, TX.
    Age
    32
    Posts
    31,266
    Rep Power
    194
    Points
    117,319 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    But I can buy an Xbox 360 and play all games for free if I soft-modded it right?

  21. #195
    Legend
    F34R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    South Carolina
    PSN ID
    F34RTEHR34PER
    Posts
    40,122
    Rep Power
    244
    Points
    147,835 (0 Banked)
    Items BullySteamGran Turismo 5LiverpoolAppleJoker (limited ICON)Naughty DogMaster ChiefAssassins Creed EzioGears of WarHeavy RainDiablo III
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by Sufi View Post
    But I can buy an Xbox 360 and play all games for free if I soft-modded it right?
    Which will be the same thing going on after the "always-on" drm is cracked. So while the ones with the hacked consoles are playing games regardless if the console is online or not, those that paid money for the games, and no hacking, can't play when there are network problems.

    Sounds like a perfect plan to me. smh




  22. #196
    Forum Overseer
    Omar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Addison, TX.
    Age
    32
    Posts
    31,266
    Rep Power
    194
    Points
    117,319 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Quote Originally Posted by F34R View Post
    Which will be the same thing going on after the "always-on" drm is cracked. So while the ones with the hacked consoles are playing games regardless if the console is online or not, those that paid money for the games, and no hacking, can't play when there are network problems.

    Sounds like a perfect plan to me. smh
    But as of right now, you can play those games online on the 360, correct? It would be extremely difficult to crack the console and then play the game online...not to be confused with playing the game while being online on the console.

  23. #197
    The Dawkness!
    Naxi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    PSN ID
    ElNaxi
    Age
    23
    Posts
    9,687
    Rep Power
    104
    Points
    8,056 (0 Banked)
    Achievements IT'S OVER 9000!
    Playing online is quite the risk, there'll probably be alternatives to Live like in previous generations.

    My name isn't a misspelled Nazi,god****.

  24. #198
    Super Elite
    Forcedme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Age
    23
    Posts
    2,399
    Rep Power
    65
    Points
    6,691 (0 Banked)
    Always online would bother me if it played as detriment into my single-player experience. I choose not to have internet at my home because I feel it's too tempting to turn away from productive work and allow myself to melt in front of a screen for three hours. I had it once, and decided while moving that I wouldn't bring it with me. I get my online time in while on break at work. If I purchased a game for a console that required an update to be played, or required a constant online connection, then I would be very angered by the necessity of the internet connection.

    If, however, the 'always on' rumor is just something that is used to throw advertisements at you, inform you of new demos/videos/whatever, and acted as a background component rather than something mandatory to enjoy your experience, then I wouldn't care.

    But as it is I don't think it's been revealed in-depth how this feature is supposed to operate.

  25. #199
    Superior Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    843
    Rep Power
    40
    Points
    10,284 (0 Banked)
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatSpaceKoaster View Post
    Well if DRM doesn't work then why are more than one company trying it? Sony filed a patent on blocking used game sales. If they didn't think it would work, they wouldn't invest time, money and patents into the technology.

    As for Steam? That doesn't honestly solve the problem. I did a Steam authorization on a friend's computer so I could download a game and play it there when I'm not near home and don't feel like bringing along my laptop. Now they don't care about the game and don't play it. But if they wanted to, they could play it. They need only to turn off their internet connection (just disable it in the control panel, shut off wi-fi, unplug the CAT cable) and play it in OFFFLINE MODE. That way I could play it at my house and my friend could play it on theirs at the same time. That means I only pay once for it, but two people in two different households get the use of it. That means the dev only got paid ONCE for it.



    Devs bloat up the budget? They don't want to do that. Cuz if you and a publisher agreed on a price and you go over it, the dev will be stuck with the increase in the bill. The publisher doesn't want a game to go over budget because not only does that eat into their potential return on investment, but also increases their potential losses if the game doesn't sell well. Only the biggest titles that are the most likely to make a killing anyways ....will a publisher open their purse strings beyond the original budget at the request of the dev.



    Piracy didn't free the music industry or lower prices. Music CDs are basically the same price they have been for years. ESPECIALLY if adjusted for inflation. Since their introduction, they've only come down a couple bucks at the most in all those years. And selling cheaper music on iTunes? You get what you pay for considering they are of much lower bit rate then an Audio CD.

    Another thing. Artists used to be able to make a decent chunk of money off their music sales. Now they have to depend almost solely on music touring to pay their bills. Artists have complained about this fact ever since the rise of cheaper music downloads.



    At least when somebody waits until a game's price drops, the devs are getting the money where as when a used copy is sold, they don't get $#@!!




    Costs increased, but that was swallowed by the increase in price?!?!? What increase in price? Games rose to $60 in 2005. They had been $50 during and since the Atari 2600 days. When I bought a $50 Atari game in 1980, adjusted for inflation..... it had the same financial impact as pricing a game at $137 today!!! And remember.... budgets are much larger now then they were back then. Now games on discs are a cheaper part of the cost then the cartridge days, but bigger budgets have all but wiped out that cost advantage.

    As for 2.6 million being nothing to smile about? Considering how much competition there is out there, that looks like a decent number to me. Play that game and tell me they didn't make a profit on 2.6 million copies sold? The game didn't exactly have a Halo sized budget to have to recoup ya know.



    No.... they got to those sized profits from games like FIFA and Madden. Both of which will sell boatloads if you simply slap a new roster and year number on the front of the box. Both games are still basically the same core game year after year.

    When I hear people complain about big profits, it screams liberal to me.

    Reminds me of union workers who always want to bash companies over big profits. They always say that since a company sees big profits, that the workers should see some of that money. I say.....BULL$#@!! I'd tell those union workers... you want some of those big profits? Then put some skin in the game by BUYING STOCK! That way... when the company does do well, the INVESTORS who put their OWN money on the line reap the benefits of the risk.

    But unions are all about averting any kind of risk. It's why they want workers fired based on seniority instead of how well they are doing their jobs. It's why they want a chunk of the profits, but don't want to risk their own money in pursuit of those profits.

    I always tell them.... you want the workers getting more of the money? Well if you aren't gonna invest in stock.....then why don't you and people of your own mindset start your own company. Then you can give the workers all the profits you want to give them. Otherwise..... stop telling me how to run MY company!
    You are wrong on so many levels it aint funny.

    1) Kaos sold above average for all the platforms the game launched on, a profit was made. But Kaos was not closed down because of how the game performed as you alluded to, Kaos was closed because THQ as a company was struggling. Some games were cancelled, some developers were closed and assets were sold off before it closed its doors. The closure of Kaos had to do with a parent company struggling, Homefront sales though above average were not enough to sustain its operations.

    2) Game prices havent gone up for quite a while because in the 80's the industry wasnt that big. Even in the mid 90's the console market though it had grown substantially was still not big enough, but even then, the increase in marketshare had justified the stalling of prices. I knew of a few people back then that actually had consoles, i didnt own one, and even then, it was extremely hard for anyone to go out there and justify the prices of games and consoles.
    Last generation, game production was on average 5 Million bucks, it rose to double that at the start of this gen, but that cost increase was swallowed by the cost increase passed onto gamers, and the fact that it would take sometime for the new generation to take traction. But overall, the entire market volume has increased, some developers are making profits they have never ever made, blockbuster games like Halo are bringing in sales they have never brought, and the market that was around 150 million consoles shipped at the start of this generation will be at a minimum of 220 million consoles shipped when the new playstation and xbox launch. There is a bigger target audience, and economics of scale dictates that increasing market volume see prices not rise as fast as they should have been rising.
    And dont get me wrong, 50 dollars was a lot back in the day, to many 60 bucks on a single game is still a lot.

    3) you need to get rid of this stance where you reason that developers or publishers need to make money on every game, even on second hand games. That is what online DRM is all about, locking out second hand games.
    There are a lot of gamers that are struggling out there, and the second hand market generally ensures that they can get their gaming experience for a lower cost. That second game market also ensures that gamers can fund further purchases by offloading games that they no longer need, and i know of people even on this site that do that, my brother does that constantly.
    The notion that a publisher ought to make money on every copy is nonsense, that thought of thinking has no place in consumer goods. We have movies, music CD's that fall in the same class as games, it would be madness if publishers in those areas had codes to limit use to one player, and someone else paying extra to use it. It would be madness if a car company thought they had a claim to a used car sale if they did not buy the car themselves............if game publishers and developers want a try of that market, that is what they should do.
    Get rid of the used game market, and sales will most likely plummet, people that cannot afford new games will either not get consoles or will pirate them because paying bills and putting food on the table is deemed more important.

    You need for once to think about what it does for most consumers, and not just you. That is a selfish argument that does nothing to expand the industry as fast as it could expand and give us benefits, but one that kills any momentum the industry has going forward. I get new games, verification online wouldnt be an issue despite me not having a connection at home at current time (had one), but the notion that if i aint affected then its all good, or taking a stance in defence of everything one company says is wrong.

    I dont think you were a member at the time, but we had people who argued that Live fees were not good, and that we needed to pay for the online component on a game by game basis. Then EA came up with their programme and everyone could see nothing positive in online passes. That for most ought to be a lesson
    xbox live: AcrylicAltair44

  26. Likes mistercrow likes this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
vBCredits II Deluxe v2.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2010-2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.