The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
I always thought Gamestop was ripping me off...
MrMonroe
passed outon the floor nowRegistered User regular
passed outon the floor nowRegistered User regular
And I figured digital distribution would eventually marketpwn them out of existence.
So why is it, when they employ thousands fewer people, and pay rent on one or two servers as opposed to hundreds of stores, is World in Conflict the exact same price on Direct2Drive as it is at the local GameStop?
I thought I was getting screwed before, but now we're really getting reamed.
So why is it, when they employ thousands fewer people, and pay rent on one or two servers as opposed to hundreds of stores, is World in Conflict the exact same price on Direct2Drive as it is at the local GameStop?
I thought I was getting screwed before, but now we're really getting reamed.
MrMonroe on
0
Posts
We had this discussion in other threads before, but I believe the gist of it was publishers don't want to piss of their retail suppliers so they price it the same both ways.
But buying from Gamestop costs $60 + your soul and buying online just costs $60
I know, it's retarded.
No, buying from D2D now costs $60 + your dignity as an "informed" consumer.
You damn anti-capitalist game publishers!
Wait, this is anti-competitive. Like, possibly illegally so. You're not allowed to make an agreement to fix prices at a certain level in order to reduce competition.
Raise your hand if you're an anti-trust Lawyer, I have a pro bono job for you.
A manufacturer or producer setting a standard MSRP for all avenues of purchase isn't the same thing as two oil tycoons getting together and shutting down the economy for everybody. At least, not from where I'm sitting.
e: Pretty much beat
That guy on the street lied to me...:(
It's like a couple months ago here, when the sales tax got lowered, all the newspapers in this town raised their prices by one cent so that the price with tax would be the same as before. Kinda greedy, but hey, lol capitalism.
So frankly I'm willing to pay the same amount for the convenience.
I think you mean "profit", not "overhead"
I tell you this much... digital distribution gets me in a lot of trouble.... damn you Steam.
Maybe I did.
Anyway, this is all just more evidence that the video game publisher, like the major record label, is already in its death throes. Technology's going to leave that kind of business model in the dust eventually, but for now, stuff like this keeps it hanging around.
Besides, no one said you had to buy the games from Gamestop.
Go to Walmart.
That's worth it to me.
But that's just me. Buy your shit wherever you want.
But Wal-Mart carries more PC games than the EB-Gamestops in my area, and they're cheaper.
Although there is substantial collusion going on, there is also a global increase in demand. The price hikes don't just come out of the aether.
http://blog.wired.com/games/2008/04/exclusive-inter.html
However, I started ebay some of my games recently and not being able to resell games is going to start becoming an issue for single player games I think. I sold Assassin's Creed for £25 recently, not bad considering it only cost my £19.99.
@gamefacts - Totally and utterly true gaming facts on the regular!
Depends on how you look at it. When one retailer is overwhelmingly in control of getting any industry's product in the hands of consumers, you could make a case that a lot of their practices end up screwing even the consumers who don't buy there.
If the average setlist of a CD is 12 tracks, you're paying 12 dollars to download an entire album. Make it an iTunes download, and DRM is brought into the equation. For those same 12 dollars (plus gas money and tax), I can drive down the street to the music store in my area (yay Newbury Comics!), and get the physical CD, the jewel case and the liner notes. Then I can use the CD to make MP3s with no DRM, so now I can put them on my iPod, use them on my 360, listen to it in my car's CD player...
In other words, there is literally NO incentive to purchase digitally over physical. Games, understandably, have less to do with this story, but the point is that if you're not getting a discount, you're getting shafted.
Like you, though, I am deeply skeptical about systems where I A) surrender my first sale rights, and
What if we're talking about something like NIN's recent double album release, available directly from NIN for $5?
I mean, clearly you don't feel any incentive to purchase digitally, but that doesn't mean it's not a viable option for many people. I don't see why you'd even bother "debating" this point.
Until you consider something like eMusic. $10 a month gets you 30 songs. $20 gets you 75 songs. So for the price of one cd, you get the equivalent of 2.5 or 3 albums. For the price of two cds, you get the equivalent of 5-7 full albums, depending on how many songs are on each. Sure there's no liner notes, but the higher value per dollar is enough to justify that for me. Plus I don't have to worry about where I'm going to put another cd, especially since all I do when I buy new cds is put them on my computer and ipod and then stick them on a shelf to gather dust.
And there's no DRM, either. So in other words, there is literally NO incentive to purchase physically over digital, for me anyway.
XBL |Steam | PSN | last.fm
Holy shit, that's ridiculous
It can be more convenient.
It can be cheaper
Sometimes more music goes to the artist
I like artwork
I like having a physical backup at CD quality
I like having a collection of music
I can impulse purchase when I am already in music shops.
I enjoy the shopping experience
There are a whole bunch of reasons to buy downloaded music
It can be more convenient
It can be cheaper
Sometimes more music goes to the artist
You don't have to rip discs
You can loose/scratch them
You don't have to leave the house
You can listen to it instantly
More environmentally sound
To say that there is no reason to use one over the other is ignorant.
Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
The publishers get to decide who sells the software and they want each source a player can purchase from to have the same price. And more than likely the publishers are in close partnerships with the online purchasing systems or own them.
People are paying a certain amount for games in general. It's not logical to think that changes are going to be made to decrease that price. Companies are vehicles for making money. Not cutting costs for consumers. Someone is saving money in all this but it's not the consumers.
Careful, that only works for a few titles. See this article.
If I was sure I could collect, I would bet you $1000 that game you buy now would be accessible then (not counting OS upgrades that make games not work). For one Valve has software written and tested already that liberates all games from having to authenticate with Steam servers, in the event that Valve goes under and no one wants to take up Steam. Secondly, Steam is the biggest digital distribution platform and is poised for even more growth. Failed DRM like MSN Music and MLB games had only tiny market share. Worrying about your Steam games becoming permanently unplayable is simply paranoia.
Better check those discs closely; CDs oxidize after a couple of decades.
And yes, Steam might not be around in twenty years, either.
Keeping entropy from increasing is hard work.
Let us say that the likelyhood of a crack existing and being distributed on the internet is rather high, given that such cracks exist right now.
It might not be the official one, but let's face it, people who purchased Steam games likely won't care.
Which is a damn shame.