As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Comic for Friday, March 30, 2007

245

Posts

  • Stark RhavynStark Rhavyn Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    I really don't give two shits who actually makes the profit. Either evil EA or evil Gamestop.
    All I know is $50 is way too much for week's worth of game.
    And I seriously can't see the game developers cutting the price of the games to the consumers by anything more than $5-10, and even then, it'll only be until the stores ARE put out of business, then the prices will go back to where they were.
    It'll be the same with iTunes as soon as they outsell CD's a few more years. They sell TV series for about as much or more than the DVD sets. And you can't even watch those on anything but a fucking ipod.

    Stark Rhavyn on
    Signatures are teh stupid.
  • ButlerButler 89 episodes or bust Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Man, we need like a resident economist in SE++ to tell us how this would really play out.

    Butler on
  • babyeatingjesusbabyeatingjesus Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    the bubble will burst.

    babyeatingjesus on
    hitthatcheeseburgerfatty.gif
  • MenaceMenace regular
    edited March 2007
    I'm not in favor of digital distribution simply because I don't have a credit card yet...

    Menace on
  • DefenderDefender Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    No, the prices won't just magically go back to where they were. Do you understand economics at all? I'm guessing you don't.

    Everything takes a certain amount of economic resources to produce. Those resources are land, capital (which means "machinery," not like "investment capital"), labor, and entrepreneurial skill. Each of those four resources can be assessed a dollar value. The "profit" part of a sale comes from the dollar value associated with the last two resource types, loosely speaking.

    Now, if something starts to use less land (no stores) and less labor (no store employees), not to mention the increased efficiency of not having to ship and maintain a stock of physical items across the country, then it obviously costs less money to produce and sell. What this means is that if you keep selling at the high price, someone will undercut you and people will start buying from them instead of you. As long as it's just as easy for a customer to buy from Store A as it is to buy from Store B, the customer will always pick the best value (on a large scale, I'm not talking about individual customers here).

    So if something costs less to produce and sell, companies are FORCED to sell it lower by the very existence of competition. The only way around this is a monopoly, but that's illegal, which makes it tougher to do.

    Defender on
  • CalliusCallius Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    but, Defender, they CAN make $50 for a game so they WILL charge $50 for a game.

    The demand is there.

    Callius on
    tonksigblack.png
  • Darth WaiterDarth Waiter Elrond Hubbard Mordor XenuRegistered User regular
    edited March 2007
    awjeez.jpg

    Darth Waiter on
  • PataPata Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Callius wrote: »
    but, Defender, they CAN make $50 for a game so they WILL charge $50 for a game.

    The demand is there.

    But some smart game company will realize they can sell games cheaper then 50 bucks and likely get more customers.

    Pata on
    SRWWSig.pngEpisode 5: Mecha-World, Mecha-nisim, Mecha-beasts
  • Stark RhavynStark Rhavyn Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    My understanding is that if the digital distribution happens, it would be through the console online services only. I mean why and how could they sell them through any other source. Example: They would sell Halo 5 via download only through Xbox live. And even if they wanted someone else to sell it to you (hell knows why they would want that) how could they without the physical disk?
    Thus, I believe they would have their monopoly but it would just be called an "exclusive". They could charge whatever they want and all the gamers used to paying $60+ for games will pay out the nose for it and then every other game made hence forth.

    Stark Rhavyn on
    Signatures are teh stupid.
  • Stark RhavynStark Rhavyn Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Pata wrote: »
    Callius wrote: »
    but, Defender, they CAN make $50 for a game so they WILL charge $50 for a game.

    The demand is there.

    But some smart game company will realize they can sell games cheaper then 50 bucks and likely get more customers.

    They have companies like that now that sell $20 on release (or the used to for the past generation of consoles).
    Do those games ever amount to anything anyone wants?

    Stark Rhavyn on
    Signatures are teh stupid.
  • Si SenorSi Senor Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    xerxes' throne. clever

    so the digital distribution represents the spear that made the god-king bleed and- hmmm

    I'm probably looking too much into this

    Si Senor on
    sigging2.jpg
  • DefenderDefender Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Callius wrote: »
    but, Defender, they CAN make $50 for a game so they WILL charge $50 for a game.

    The demand is there.

    Why doesn't the same thing apply to online music?

    Defender on
  • ZeroFillZeroFill Feeling much better. A nice, green leaf.Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    uniqueness of content, perceived value also come into play

    people buy Coca-Cola for twice the price of store brand cola because it's considered the only way to get the exact product desired

    if EA started selling their games solely via online distribution, and cut the price by $20, there might be less perceived value than a competitor's product.

    Economics is in no way a linear or easily predictable science

    ZeroFill on
  • QuadropheniaQuadrophenia Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    I pretty much stopped going to places like Gamestop and EB when they stopped selling old games. Sure I'd buy a new game every once in awhile, but the frequency that I go there is way way less than when they sold old games.

    Quadrophenia on
    I'm so tired of partying.
  • StratoStrato Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    ZeroFill wrote: »
    people buy Coca-Cola for twice the price of store brand cola because it's considered the only way to get the exact product desired

    Have you had store-brand cola? It sucks and always goes flat a lot faster.

    Anyway, I think digital distro sucks. It eats up storage space and I vastly prefer renting to buying. I'm also not convinced the price would lower much, but I would definitely welcome that.

    My favorite system so far is Gamefly's, where you pay a monthly fee to rent through the mail, and you can keep any game by paying a discount price for it (and they mail you the game box). That gets rid of overpriced copies at stores, the lousy policies of EBStop, lets you try games before paying for them, and gives you a physical copy of the game with box art. What more can you really want for your money?

    Strato on
  • Stark RhavynStark Rhavyn Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    For music, you could get a used CD for $8 which would be cheaper than downloading individual songs or the whole album, but we're only talking a few dollars difference. So people generally accept that.
    For games you could buy a used game as low as $10, digital distribution could be as low as (but probably won't be) $40-$50, now we're talking $30-40 differences. But people will accept that too eventually, which is unfortunate.
    I just think PA is taking the wrong side of this issue. So what, Gamestop made a profit off used games. So what, Tycho couldn't find any new copies of games. He's just gonna have to preorder or order online or just go somewhere else, since he's got the money for the new games anyway.
    Let the rest of us have our cheap used copies when you're done with yours.
    Digital distribution will eliminate that.

    Stark Rhavyn on
    Signatures are teh stupid.
  • Volas RathVolas Rath Registered User new member
    edited March 2007
    This is my first posting here, and it should be rather amusing.. because Im going to be going *against* Penny Arcade here.

    First off, let me say that, yes, I *am* a GameStop Employee. I will say no more about my position or my location.

    Lets face reality with a clear head. You can say whatever you want about GameStop. The bottom line is, nothing is going to make them dissapear. N-O-T-H-I-N-G. Penny Arcade is living in a pipe dream. You can fantasize about Digital Distribution all you want. It's never going to happen on the scope your imagining. Simply put, too many people want a physical Item for thier money.

    And regarding the "aggressively pushing pre-owned games" comment, damn right I do. Not because it makes GameStop money, not because its corporate policy. But because most of the games released are ABSOLUTE SHIT in a $60 case. I need only point at Gundam:Crossfire for the PS3 to completely make this point. But I could also point at Chromehounds, Rumble Roses XX, Bomberman Zero, Def Jam : ICON to further emphasize this unarguable fact.

    Why is this so relevant? Simple. Go buy a brand new Game at Wal-Mart. In fact, go buy Gundam Crossfire at walmart. Play it for about 2 and a half minutes, realize it totally sucks balls.. now what?

    Yeah, thats right. Your STUCK with it. Thanks to the corporate whores at those very game companies so many people hold on high.. the ONLY option you have is to "return the game for the exact same game" yeah.. great.. and that does *what* exactly for the average consumer? Oh yeah, thats right.. NOTHING.

    GameStop however, provides 2 ways out of this. 1 is the Trade in, at least you can get SOME money back. 2 is the Used Games Policy, which allows you 7 days to play the game, and if you dont LIKE IT, get your full money back.

    Point the finger at GameStop all you like, until companies like Sony and Microsoft start individually screening the games released for suckness. (Seriously, do you honestly thing Gundam Crossfire EVER would have been released for PS3 if someone high up in Sony had a chance to tell them to fuck off? No.) Or major retail outlets start having a REAL return policy for shitty games that suck donkey cock. GameStop will continue to flourish.

    You can *HAVE* your digital downloads. Seriously. I'll gladly continue to keep paying 40 dollars for a 62.99 game every day of the week.. and when im done with it, get rid of it with no problems.

    The same damn thing applies to those digital downloads you covet.. what happens when your done with it? You cant take it over to your friend's houses to play.. oops. You can't rent them. OOPS!

    Blockbuster Inc. currently enjoys the lion's share of the video game ... $500 million in game rentals last year, about 11 percent of company revenues. ...

    $700 million game rental market as of April 2006. BEFORE the launch of Wii and PS3.

    Your "Digital Download" pipedream will single handedly kill every Rental Agency like Blockbuster etc, along with Gamestop, AND *STILL* wont fucking sell well because, quite simply, I can take a new game to my friends' houses to play and have fun with. I cant/wont take a whole fucking system over 3 blocks just to play the newest release of "Full Auto 3 - Christ Your A Jackass for Downloading this."

    Before the rest of you sheep start following everything PA feeds you, stop and actually think for a moment as to what they are actually SAYING. They need to back off the GameStop issue. It's only making them look more and more idiotic with every posting.

    Volas Rath on
  • MenaceMenace regular
    edited March 2007
    that is way to long for an SE++ post

    Menace on
  • DruhimDruhim Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited March 2007
    tl;dr

    Druhim on
    belruelotterav-1.jpg
  • adiusadius Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    The comic was funny as usual but I think it's kind of silly that Tycho is basically advocating that we let our used games rot in a closet somewhere so that video game companies can make more money. I don't think there's anything unethical about selling used games, and as for the stock shortage thing well I'm really not qualified to comment.

    If GameStop's plan is a bad one then they'll pay for it. Game developer companies are primarily for-profit ventures and any "support" beyond just buying the games you want to buy is a waste of words and/or money at best. At worst it's a subsidy of bad habits that I think could theoretically hurt the industry.

    adius on
  • jwalkjwalk Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    You can sell your used games to them, just don't buy any.

    jwalk on
  • adiusadius Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    The same principal applies. Competent developers don't need your help and incompetent developers should be doing something that they are good at. I'm only talking about LEGAL reselling, of course.

    adius on
  • Kuribo's ShoeKuribo's Shoe Kuribo's Stocking North PoleRegistered User regular
    edited March 2007
    if you buy a game at Wal-Mart and you don't like it you can just take it back

    hell, even if you don't buy a game at Wal-Mart and you don't like it you can take it back to Wal-Mart

    Kuribo's Shoe on
    xmassig2.gif
  • jwalkjwalk Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Do people really even care that much about the price of a game? Personally, I care a lot more about the quality. I don't buy more than maybe 8-10 games a year though, I guess some people buy that many a month, but still.... Would you rather pay $60 for a super awesome good game that you will play (off and on) for the next 6 months, or a year.. or MORE... or would you rather pay $45 for a crappy and/or short game you'll finish or be bored of in a week?

    I'm not even talking about used games. The issue there isn't the original price or the quality. The issue is the developer doesn't make any money on the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, sale etc... Alone that's bad enough, but when you figure that the 2nd/3rd/etc owner WILL be calling the developer's 800 number demanding product support when it doesn't run or when they can't figure out how beat the boss on level 3, or on their web site downloading patches, etc... This is why we see now that the only developers really making big-time bank on a single game are all using a subscription model.

    jwalk on
  • DefenderDefender Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Menace wrote: »
    that is way to long for an SE++ post

    Shut up I like this guy and that's not because of what he's saying, it's because of how he's saying it.

    MANY PARAGRAPHS

    Rock on, new dude. Work your work up to Rock, Rock On status if you can. (So far that is only Raneados.)

    EDIT: Also, please learn the difference between "your" and "you're" when you have a moment.

    Defender on
  • Kuribo's ShoeKuribo's Shoe Kuribo's Stocking North PoleRegistered User regular
    edited March 2007
    wal-mart is a bad example is all I am saying

    Kuribo's Shoe on
    xmassig2.gif
  • DruhimDruhim Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited March 2007
    Word. Yeah, I may be in the minority but when I go to a store for a game it's usually going to be a new game (otherwise I'll probably be on e-bay) and PC only, I don't own any consoles. I don't want employees telling me I have to preorder, I don't want them pushing subscriptions on me, I don't want their opinions on games unless I ask for it (extremely unlikely). I just want to buy the game that I've decided to buy and go on my merry way.

    Druhim on
    belruelotterav-1.jpg
  • jwalkjwalk Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    And I want them to get off my lawn.

    jwalk on
  • DefenderDefender Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    ZeroFill wrote: »
    uniqueness of content, perceived value also come into play

    people buy Coca-Cola for twice the price of store brand cola because it's considered the only way to get the exact product desired

    That's called "brand recognition" and also, as Strato has already stated, it IS a superior product. I'm also pretty sure that bands who sell their music online and in brick-and-mortar stores are not perceived as selling a "good" version in the store and a "crappy" version online.

    Defender on
  • GabrielGabriel Registered User, ClubPA, Penny Arcade Staff, PAX Staff staff
    edited March 2007
    Tycho and I had a long talk about this yesterday and I’m really glad to see you guys discussing it in here. I’m not going to get into it too much but there is something I noticed that I thought was interesting.

    I remember it used to be that a gamer took pride in their game collection. The way everyone takes pride in their DVD collection. When you buy a movie you “have” it now. It’s yours, it’s a part of your collection of movies. You can look at someone’s movies when you go over to their house and learn a lot about them. You may find some gems you never knew about and borrow them.

    It used to be that way with games. I remember friends coming over and going through my stacks of games asking me about certain titles. I used to loan out games to people I thought would especially enjoy them but might otherwise slip past their radar. Now it seems like games are something you get, experience and then discard. I think that’s a mentality that’s been fostered by EB/Gamestop and their trade in policies.

    I don’t know, maybe it’s all in my head. I just feel like there’s been a shift. Am I wrong?

    Gabriel on
  • StratoStrato Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Volas Rath wrote: »
    the Used Games Policy, which allows you 7 days to play the game, and if you dont LIKE IT, get your full money back.

    Arrgh. I bought a used game there and TRIED to ask them what their guarantee or return period are, and he kept only telling me about the one you have to pay for, which I didn't want. The game I got sucked, but wasn't defective, so I didn't think I could return it.

    I think I'm even more annoyed that they had this policy and didn't tell me about it rather than not having it in the first place.

    Strato on
  • MenaceMenace regular
    edited March 2007
    Gabriel wrote: »
    I don’t know, maybe it’s all in my head. I just feel like there’s been a shift. Am I wrong?

    no, I feel mostly the same way

    I rarely watch movies more than once, but I buy DVDs of my favorites and such just to say that I own them

    Menace on
  • Kuribo's ShoeKuribo's Shoe Kuribo's Stocking North PoleRegistered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Not only eb/gamestop, but gamefly/netflix and places like that. Games are rapidly becoming disposable.

    Kuribo's Shoe on
    xmassig2.gif
  • DruhimDruhim Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited March 2007
    An interesting point (I can never remember if you're Mike or Jerry). I won't disagree that these game stores have played a role but I think there's a lot more to it than that. Another piece of the puzzle is probably that the games are less memorable. I think that's somewhat inevitable. What it took to make an impact 15 years ago wasn't much. I mean, look at the Ultima series. I remember those games vividly but that's because it was such a new medium and it was relatively easy to impress. Now we've seen so much that the bar is constantly being raised and developers feel they have to constantly innovate.

    Then some simple, wonderfully designed game comes along and shows that you don't really need all the bells and whistles to make a good game you just need to make it fun. So the hype machine plays a part in all this as well which links directly back to the consumer and their expectations.

    Druhim on
    belruelotterav-1.jpg
  • jwalkjwalk Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Probably the fact that multi-player games (networked games that is) have become so much more popular and everyone needs their own copy, has also led to less game "trading".

    jwalk on
  • StratoStrato Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Gabriel wrote: »
    Tycho and I had a long talk about this yesterday and I’m really glad to see you guys discussing it in here. I’m not going to get into it too much but there is something I noticed that I thought was interesting.

    I remember it used to be that a gamer took pride in their game collection. The way everyone takes pride in their DVD collection. When you buy a movie you “have” it now. It’s yours, it’s a part of your collection of movies. You can look at someone’s movies when you go over to their house and learn a lot about them. You may find some gems you never knew about and borrow them.

    It used to be that way with games. I remember friends coming over and going through my stacks of games asking me about certain titles. I used to loan out games to people I thought would especially enjoy them but might otherwise slip past their radar. Now it seems like games are something you get, experience and then discard. I think that’s a mentality that’s been fostered by EB/Gamestop and their trade in policies.

    I don’t know, maybe it’s all in my head. I just feel like there’s been a shift. Am I wrong?

    I definitely feel like things used to be that way and are different now. Same with my DVD collection. I simply can't keep up with all the titles released anymore; it gets too expensive.

    I don't think used game stores are a new thing, though. I think the problem is partially the vast amount of games available today, constantly competing for your attention. And also I think games today seem to be less well developed due to the amount of resources that 3d control and graphics require. Something like Gears of War I played through once with a friend and had a blast, but I have no need to do it again. It's just not worth $60 to have around unless you're going to be playing online multiplayer. I just rented Armored Core 4 and all of the missions are very, very limited in scope and gameplay. It's sad to see that go downhill when everything "looks" so good on these new consoles.

    Basically I think there's too many watered-down titles for it to be economically feasible anymore. GameStop isn't really the cause, they're just banking off of it. I also wouldn't say Gamefly is the cause either, because video game rentals have always been around. The problem is that lots of games suck and offer little novelty.

    Strato on
  • Stark RhavynStark Rhavyn Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Menace wrote: »
    Gabriel wrote: »
    I don’t know, maybe it’s all in my head. I just feel like there’s been a shift. Am I wrong?

    no, I feel mostly the same way

    I rarely watch movies more than once, but I buy DVDs of my favorites and such just to say that I own them

    I feel the same about DVD's too, and most of the games. I only own games as either part of my dorky Star Wars/Godzilla collection. Or because I keep playing it, which as of right now only includes Ghost Recon 2.
    I rarely sell/trade back games but at the same time I only buy used games.

    Think digital distro will eliminate the game ownership mentality a lot more than used store outlets.

    Stark Rhavyn on
    Signatures are teh stupid.
  • redstormpopcornredstormpopcorn Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Newspost wrote:
    We've also lined up our keynote speaker for 2007. We're not quite ready to drop his name yet but I was told I could give a hint. Honestly all the hints I can think of right now would totally give it away. I'll just say it will be an honor to have him on the bridg-erm-stage.
    It is totally, totally William Shatner.

    redstormpopcorn on
    emot-kamina.gifBELIEVE IN YOU, WHO BELIEVES IN YOURSELF emot-kamina.gif
  • DefenderDefender Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    jwalk wrote: »
    Do people really even care that much about the price of a game? Personally, I care a lot more about the quality. I don't buy more than maybe 8-10 games a year though, I guess some people buy that many a month, but still.... Would you rather pay $60 for a super awesome good game that you will play (off and on) for the next 6 months, or a year.. or MORE... or would you rather pay $45 for a crappy and/or short game you'll finish or be bored of in a week?

    Seriously. I played Warcraft: TFT last night. I think I've paid about $100-$120 for Warcraft III and its expansion. I have gotten my money's worth out of this game and WELL BEYOND. Even if I bought a $500 graphics card just for this game, it would still come out to way under $1 per hour.

    I don't know what a good metric is, like in terms of dollars per hour of entertainment, but I, you know, work for my money, and I don't have a vault full of gold dubloons. I don't understand buying a $60 game that you play for 10 hours and then you're done.

    Defender on
  • Kuribo's ShoeKuribo's Shoe Kuribo's Stocking North PoleRegistered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Patrick Stewart

    Kuribo's Shoe on
    xmassig2.gif
This discussion has been closed.