Heavy Rain Passes 2 Million, Used Sales Cost Developer

Ultimadream
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 10:14:55 AM
Reply

I don't know if it is that simple, I know at least 3 people who have borrowed the game from me + all the renting bussinesses there are I imagine this game was popular there as the main story was roughly 10 hours. So I dont think the statistics are accurate or even fair.

If anything I should be angry as I pre-ordered Heavry Rain so I could get the 1st of what I thought would be many extra DLC episodes, I was so dissapointed to find out that they we're cancelled.

Though I was Qauntic Dream well for Heavy Rain It was a very daring project to try appeal such a story driven title to the masses, but the game has already reached Platinum (UK's version of 'greatest Hits') So I don't think they have to feel so bad about their sales....

18 up, 3 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 12:48:11 PM

People with renting licenses return part of the funds of each rental to the publisher of whatever media they rent out. If they didn't, publishers of all sorts of media would be able to go after companies like Blockbuster and Gamefly for infringing on their end user agreements.

Technically speaking, lending it to friends would cost you in court, about $40-$60 per friend lent to. If not you, then they could be forced to pay that.

Problem is, court would cost more than that kind of cash. XD It's all a little silly, really, as the law hasn't caught up with technology. But it is still acceptable for Quantic Dream to consider that lost revenue.

2 up, 2 down

tes37
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 1:36:35 PM

If you're found guilty you have to pay court costs, so that can't be the reason. You just can't prove anything, that's what the problem is. The game I loaned to my friend shows he played it only by his trophies and game saves. It doesn't prove I loaned it to him or that he didn't buy it and accidentally break it and throw it away. Because I own it and my friend doesn't, but has trophies, is purely circumstantial. You would be correct to find me guilty, problem is you can't prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

6 up, 0 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:09:01 PM

There appears to be some truth-sauce on your comment, tes.

5 up, 1 down

FatherSun
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 3:42:38 PM

Every disc has its own unique identifier that I am sure can be traced from purchase to console to console. Tracing the information may be tedious though. I couldn't fathom a circumstance that would require this level of investigation. On second thought, I probably can.

I wonder if GameFly traces stolen games if taken online? Or movies from Netflix?

Was Blu Ray not intended to be a more secure media?

Last edited by FatherSun on 9/12/2011 3:46:38 PM

0 up, 0 down

tes37
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 3:52:05 PM

The dumbest thing about my reply is the fact that you will never find yourself in this situation. That's something I didn't give much thought to, before replying.

0 up, 0 down

FatherSun
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 4:38:05 PM

@tes, actually that is the exact reason why the idea is not given much thought. I didn't either at first. Who would go to such lengths? For now anyway... The future is coming real fast.

1 up, 1 down

Neo_Aeon666
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 7:56:19 PM

wth since when is lending a cd or game to friend EVIL. Hell we used to have more than one PS3 in the house and I lent my games to roomates. Shit dood if they are going to be picky about that just make the game DLC exclusive and dump the physical media. At the moment they sell you a disc just so you THINK you own it but in fact you can't do crap with what you just bought O_O its not even yours and you can't resell it (soon) wooooo. Its just plain stupid.

1 up, 0 down

Neo_Aeon666
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 7:56:20 PM

wth since when is lending a cd or game to friend EVIL. Hell we used to have more than one PS3 in the house and I lent my games to roomates. Shit dood if they are going to be picky about that just make the game DLC exclusive and dump the physical media. At the moment they sell you a disc just so you THINK you own it but in fact you can't do crap with what you just bought O_O its not even yours and you can't resell it (soon) wooooo. Its just plain stupid.

0 up, 0 down

tes37
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 10:18:23 AM
Reply

I loaned my copy to a friend, so there's one they can count as a freebie. 1 million is a lot, but not all of that is used sales.

8 up, 1 down

Nlayer
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 11:31:24 AM

I've also loaned my copy to a friend as well. It's one of the only games I've done so with, because I want all my friends to experience it! Haha.

3 up, 1 down

Highlander
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 11:57:43 AM

Not all are used sales, but considering how much revenue Gamestop derives from used game sales, it is fair to conclude that a very significant proportion (perhaps more than half) of those extra game users based on the trophy data come from used game sales.

If you sell 2 million copies and you have evidence to suggest that anything from 500,000 to 1 million copies of your game were played by used game buyers and you saw zero revenue from those game sales, you have a right to be concerned. 500,000 copies of a game at $60 is $30 million, something like 30-40% of that normally is seen by the publisher/developer so that's potentially $10-15 million in lost revenue that Quantic Dreams is seeing. I don't know about you, but that would cause me to lose sleep at night.

8 up, 6 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 12:50:46 PM

Hey Highlander... we agree on this issue every time it's brought up...

I dunno about you...

But I feel a giant, "Told ya so" coming on...

The glee of a well placed "Told ya so" is hindered by the feeling of regret that a few extra million dollars won't be able to be put into their next project... They deserve it.

5 up, 2 down

Fane1024
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 4:22:17 AM

I still say it's more likely that they sold 1 million *more* units new than that they lost 1 million sales because of the existence of the used game market, because many of the people who re-sold their copies or bought used copies wouldn't have bought the game at all.

Last edited by Fane1024 on 9/13/2011 4:23:34 AM

1 up, 0 down

Underdog15
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 8:19:55 AM

I know what you mean, Fane, but if I'm a dev who does this for a living, I couldn't care less about gaining fans that don't produce some sort of return for my hard work.

The same goes on the opposite end... who cares about losing fans that don't contribute to your profit?

0 up, 0 down

Fane1024
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 3:38:40 PM

I said "new" units (i.e., the ones that do provide income directly to the publishers/developers).

I'm sure that they care plenty if the game sells 2 million *new* copies rather than 1 million.

0 up, 0 down

BigStack007
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 10:21:11 AM
Reply

Maybe instead of crying about used game sales.These developers should release more DLC content and make more $$$ off of that.As a consumer i feel i have a right to buy a game used.If i need an online pass to play it i'll just figure it into the price of the used game.If that figures out to be too much then i'll simply buy it new.I don't buy used games from gamestop cause it's a rip off.I know they didn't give the person who traded it in jack S**t yet they have the nerve to try and sell it for $5 less than the price of the same game NEW.Must be alot of gaming suckers for them to still be in business.Most New releases,(probably 7 out of 10)aren't worth $60 to begin with.There's no standards when it comes to games.More lemons than gems.That's for sure..Plus places like gamefly who are in the rental business PAID for EVERY copy they rent.Maybe the dev's should offer free dlc to people who purchased their game new and charge the ones who bought it used.Just a thought.

Last edited by BigStack007 on 9/12/2011 10:29:29 AM

15 up, 5 down

Ultimadream
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 10:25:25 AM

Wait, your encouraging them to scrape more rakes down our back with more expensive DLC. I disagree, If anything too many companies already are exploiting us by holding back parts of the game to release as DLC later, nowdays more than ever you hear about companies releasing DLC a month after the games is released (Dead Island, Deus Ex, Resistance 3....) It's becoming really unbearable.

But I do agree that these online passes with the new copies are unfair, like you said many games just are not worth the full retail price and if you can stand the wait a pre-owned copy is the only way.

Last edited by Ultimadream on 9/12/2011 10:26:54 AM

4 up, 1 down

BigStack007
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 10:50:15 AM

Ok,so maybe not FREE DLC for those who bought it NEW but at least discounted DLC like 50% off or something like that and full price for those who bought it used.I kinda agree that developers should make something from used game sales.But isin't that like Chevy,Ford.ect making something off used car sales?They don't make a dime and you don't hear them crying.They just sell ya parts for it when it breaks down.

3 up, 3 down

MyWorstNightmar
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 10:51:23 AM

Ultima... *OR* "if you can stand the wait a" new purchase of the game at a heavily discounted price at the retail store is another way to go.

Games don't stay full price forever, and tend to drop in price rather quickly. Example, Deus Ex can be had for $35.99 brand new on Amazon and Toy's R Us this week. If you try to buy is used at Gamestop, they are probably charging $55.00 for it.

8 up, 1 down

Ultimadream
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 10:56:16 AM

Indeed, but in general after them couple of months it is cheaper pre-owned unless a store is doing a special deal, which is rare especially of stores dedicated to games only.

0 up, 3 down

MyWorstNightmar
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 11:01:08 AM

Big, using Chevy and Ford as an example is not a good one. You can't say that since Chevy and Ford don't have a problem with used car sales then QD should not have a problem with used game sales.

Completely different circumstances.

3 up, 2 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 11:02:27 AM

Spaces. There are spaces after periods.

10 up, 0 down

Excelsior1
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 11:54:57 AM

@myworst

how about using movies, music, and books as example? they are an entertainment medium that is subject to the same second hand market that is a natural process of a free market system. i don't hear movie studios, music artist, or book publishers crying about not getting their cut off of the second hand market. what makes games so special that they deserve to double dip? i always found that to be arrogant presumption by the game publishers.

online passes are bad enough but at least they had a little validity becuase of the cost of maintaining online services. i say little becuase most console games don't feature dedicated servers. i think the online pass is mostly about combating the used game market. if its just about the online costs then how the hell did an online pass sneak in to me2? that was a sp game that locked out tons of content if you bought it used. rage has to be brought up as well for locking out the sewers that no one really wants to explore anyways. talk about a developer backpedaling to downplay an obvious attempt to screw over gamers. pretty disgusting tactic by id.

how about publishers make some games that have some length and replay value before crying about used game sales? we get tons of short games spammed with day1 dlc that should have been in the damn game anyways. i very much resent this attempt to slow roast gamers like a turkey squeezing out every last dime they can. poor way for companies to treat consumers and it has taken a little joy out of this gen of gaming.

Last edited by Excelsior1 on 9/12/2011 12:12:23 PM

12 up, 4 down

Highlander
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 12:03:18 PM

I mean no offense to anyone, but in all honestly if you're so desperate to save $5 on the cost of a $60 game that you're willing to hand GameStop $55.00 and the publisher/developer a big fat $0 just to save the cost of a Starbucks coffee, you need a good kick in the pants. You save $5, and cost the publisher/developer $20-$25 lost revenue in that one game sale alone. Seems to me that if $5 is so important that you'll willingly shaft the game developer in favor of GameStop (or whatever other use retailer you select), you probably don't need to be buying video games in the first place.

Oh, I know that money is tight and all that, and yes students are poor, I was one once too, but come on, you're hurting the developer/publisher by saving your $5 when you could wait a few months and buy the game new at a heavy discount, or even forgo some other small luxury to afford the extra $5 to buy new. Either way, I can't believe people are so short sighted that they think that buying used is a great idea - unless a game is literally out of print, or impossible to find new at retail.

@Excelsior;

"how about publishers make some games that have some length and replay value?"

OK, so are you saying that they should only be paid for a game if it meets your definition of value, and if it doesn't you get to play it without paying the developer for their work? That is in practice what you're saying if you're saying that you only pay for a game new if it meets some arbitrary value judgement of yours, but buy used if it doesn't. If it's worth buying, then just buy it, if not, then don't, but buying used simply punishes the developer/publisher because you don't feel like paying them for their effort.

Last edited by Highlander on 9/12/2011 12:06:38 PM

8 up, 7 down

Excelsior1
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 12:31:37 PM

@highlander

it's not about the stupid $5. it's about the principle of it. like i said i think the second market is a natural part of a free market system.

i'm not saying developers don't deserve to be paid. i just don't believe they deserve special status that other entertainment mediums don't enjoy. they are subject to the same 2nd hand marrket forces as everything else.

yeah i griped about replay value and length. there are a lot of games out there that aren't worth the full $60. you bring up the $5 dollar savings but i bought fallout 3 goty edition second hand for $18. that's way more than just a $5 savings. the fact is if you are patient you can pick up a lot of used games at a significant savings. sometimes it's games you can't even find new anymore. gamers would not get to play the same amount of games without the used market. it's not just about $5.

i know you are somewhat sympathetic to publishers but i noticed you were no where around on the id locks out sewers thread when everyone was up in arms about that. i'm just sayin.

Last edited by Excelsior1 on 9/12/2011 12:39:11 PM

7 up, 6 down

Highlander
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 12:34:42 PM

What principle?

What is more principled paying the person that wrote and published the game, or paying the schyster that ripped off the first owner only to gouge the second owner?

Don't talk about principle when you weigh that $5 so heavily that you won't pay the maker of a game for your purchase and use of it.

If you want to start throwing bricks my way, that's fine, I'll throw them back. I wasn't in the thread talking about the locked out sewers because iD doesn't make games I play any more. As it happens, I don't agree with what they're saying. But I understand their point.

You know, if it were me, I would make my games so that the initial purchaser has a free online pass that enables the full game, and for used purchasers, I'd make it so that playing the game without the online pass causes the rendering resolution to be dropped to 480i, and disable the online patching of the game. When you buy a used book, car, item of clothing, or other used physical article, it's not the same as new, it's is used, and is of lower quality than the new product. If you buy a game used, you should similarly get a product that is clearly used and of lower intrinsic value than the new item.

Without wanting to get into the entire discussion again, the provisions under copyright for used sales of books and other copyright works are built around the obvious and inescapable deterioration of a physical product. So that the used sales of copy right items are less damaging to new sales because they are inferior to the new item. With digital products on discs that do not scratch that is no longer the case, and it breaks the balance that copyright law and used sales of copyright items are built on. If publishers/developers do something to reduce the intrinsic value of a used game, all it does is restore that balance.

Whether you like it or not, there is a balance that needs to be struck, and whether you agree or not, the balance is currently very much against the publishers/developers.

Last edited by Highlander on 9/12/2011 12:55:11 PM

10 up, 12 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 12:55:21 PM

Ok kids. Time to put your type 2 moralities away and listen to Highlander.

Some of you have barely gotten past your Id's, I'd say!

*Checks watch*
Yup... it's about time someone uses the awful car analogy and think it makes sense, despite it not being remotely similar to software licenses...

Last edited by Underdog15 on 9/12/2011 12:56:35 PM

8 up, 10 down

Excelsior1
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 1:00:08 PM

@highlander

the principle about games not deserving a special exemption from natural 2nd hand market forces. how does a dvd or cd detiorate any differently than a game disc?

please tell me why games deserve this special status that other entertainment mediums don't enjoy.

actually don't becuase i doubt you and i will ever agree on this. i am going to opt for the suggestion temjin made to me once becuase i think i'm just spinning my wheels here.

i guess we have some pretty different views on this topic. that's okay. that's what threads are for...opinions. thank god you are not in charge of publishers becuase i think your ideas up there are pretty nuts. the market would flat out reject those aggressive tactics.

Last edited by Excelsior1 on 9/12/2011 1:16:28 PM

6 up, 4 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 1:18:39 PM

@Excelsior

Ah, but that's just it. They do have a special exemption! And for good reasons, too! I'll explain:

All software is exempt from the 2nd hand sales laws. Buying Norton Anti-virus or a Windows Operating System is the same. You own the box, the case, and the disk. But the software is not yours. In fact, before you can use or install it, you have to agree to the terms. Games have that warning on their boxes, usually, and it takes effect once it's opened. Windows OS, for example, allows your license to be used on "X" number of systems.

By agreeing to the software terms, you are bound by contract and understand that you merely have a non-transferable license to operate the software. You get to use it however you see fit. BUT, you cannot transfer ownership. You can sell it, trade it, whatever you want! Because you own the physical disk. But, the buyer is not allowed to USE the software, because they don't have a license. YOU have it. And it cannot be transferred.

See, you may have the opinion that it SHOULDN'T be that way... but the fact is... it IS that way. If I believe that murder isn't wrong when someone looks at me funny, that doesn't change the fact that it's actually wrong. You might think it's not wrong, but the law says differently. Why? Well, to people who understand the law, they know why. We all know why murder is wrong. But all of a sudden when a law isn't against 1 specific person, people gain some weird entitlement issues... like the consumer is greater than the hundreds of jobs affected by their decision to save $5.

You are bound under CIVIL law to the contract. If you make copies and distribute software, then that's criminal law. But used games are civil law. In other words, police don't get involved. The owner of the software (the publisher) has to seek you out, take you to court, and PROVE you used software without a license. Then the court will award them from you the cost of the license... and if they're lucky... the court costs. In other words... they'd have to take each person to court individually over $60 each..... yeah... not worth it.

It's not worth it to go after you. And since it's not illegal to sell the physical disk, they will never go after Gamestop (notice, Gamestop doesn't test their games!!!!!! loophole!!)

It's why major rental companies pay dividends to publishers for software, and it's why game rentals are more expensive than movie rentals (typically).

It's true... the law hasn't caught up with theft of licenses. But there is enough in place to show that it is wrong. It's additionally disappointing to me to know that billions of dollars are going into a CEO's pocket and NOT back into the industry. It's just another factor of why smaller devs who take risks release cheaply made DLC and never bigger disk-based releases. You can control DLC.

I'm personally disappointed QD is missing millions of dollars to put into future projects. That bothers me.

You speak of principle... but it's a contradictory one. One that says "The consumer is always right". A nice thought... but it's never true.

Last edited by Underdog15 on 9/12/2011 1:24:20 PM

7 up, 8 down

Highlander
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:08:41 PM

Excelsior,

I didn't say that games have a special exemption. I was talking about digital content on discs that don't scratch - in other words content on BluRay and newer DVD disc that are much more scratch resistant. Your whole post is built on you assuming something I didn't say. You are right to doubt whether we will agree, because from where I stand you look like you're condoning not paying the developer/publisher for their work.

Underdog's post is spot on, because software is licensed and you cannot transfer the license. However with software there is a unique situation because software that is sold on a disc is a physical expression of a copyright work - which expressly can be resold. The entire doctrine of first sale is build around the presumption that reselling a physical embodiment of a copyright work doesn't harm the creator because the article sold is inferior to a brand new one.

Software is licensed, and if it's not sold on a physical disc, the license terms are completely binding. The license terms on a game disc prevent you from copying what is on the disc and passing it on to anyone else, that is forbidden in the license. But the doctrine of first sale allows the physical disc to be resold. It's kind of a grey area in the law.

However this was all set in law long before the digital age arrived, and long before copyright works could be sold on a physical media that doesn't deteriorate.

So there are two points here, as Underdog says, software cannot be resold unless the license terms allow it. But the physical disc can be resold - including the content of the disc. But selling the disc to another person does not transfer the license for the software to the other person.

My fundamental point in this is always this;

If you spend time and money creating a great game, and you then publish that game at great expense, are you not entitled to be paid for that work? Is it not fair that everyone that enjoys the fruits of your labor should compensate you for your time and effort by paying you for that work?

In terms of pure right/wrong, fair/unfair. I cannot see how anyone can claim that it is fair to the publisher/developer of a game that many people can purchase and play their game, without them seeing a single penny in return. Yet that is precisely what happens with used game sales. Pure and simple it's not very fair to the people who make the games. Let's ask ourselves a question. As gamers, who do we want to reward for making games, the people developing and publishing them? Or the people gouging for second hand games? Do you want more game in the future? If so then why allow retailers like GameStop to skim billions of dollars of revenue from the game publishers and developers just to save your $5 on the purchase of the latest game? Wouldn't you be making it more likely that a developer and publisher will make more games by making sure that they are paid for their work?

There are some really short sighted people in this thread, people that value a comparatively small 'saving' to them, over the success or failure of the developer that makes the game.

7 up, 4 down

tes37
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:45:44 PM

Highlander, that's the first time I've ever read anything like your idea of lowering the resolution of a game to make it look used, so that it matches other products across the board that are used. Everyone compares the used market as a whole when speaking about used games and according to their way of thinking, your idea all of a sudden seems fair. I laughed my a** off when I read that. I don't like it, but it was funny and most of all, a brilliant idea.

What I would support is, once I spend my $60 that's all you get. If you make something else for the game, fine, let's have it for free or move on to your next game. It'll stop all this theft that's going on, that the developers and publishers are willingly participating in.

4 up, 0 down

Highlander
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 5:09:48 PM

@Tes,

My idea would leave the entire game on the disc playable, but would prevent users from using any DLC. They wouldn't be able to patch the game, and although completely playable off-line, it would clearly be in an inferior quality mode. So you still get the gameplay, and game, but the new copy of the game is obviously more valuable. That way, used game buyers are buying a functional game, but there is an incentive to buy new, or buy the online pass. It would also serve to bring the price of a used copy of games to something much more reasonable. I hate the GameStop business practice for used games. Let's say you buy Madden 12 on release day. Take it home, unwrap it, open the box, look at the shiny new disc. You put the disc in your PS3, and play the game one time. You used the online pass to activate your game and download the latest rosters, just in time to find out that Peyton Manning is out for the season and is no longer on the roster.

Well, as a Colts fan, you're already pretty devastated, but with no Peyton, how will you rule the AFC? So you take the disc back out of the PS3, noting that it looks just as pristine as it did when you removed if from the packaging. Then close the box and take it back to GameStop. You decided you weren't really into football after all, not with Peyton Manning on the sideline and the Colts getting slaughtered by the Texans. Time to trade it in. Gamestop will give you less than $25 for the game. All you did was remove the shrinkwrap and enter the online code, but that cost you $35 or more. However, you give in and trade the game anyway. Gamestop then turns around, while you are standing right there in the store and sells the same copy for $55 to a customer who pre-ordered the game *used*. How is that right? How?

If the game were restricted to 480i without the online pass the used game would never sell for $55. GameStop would still have to give a reasonable value for the game at trade in, or else no one would ever trade a recent or popular game, they'd sell it on ebay. So if what I am saying were to happen, the trade in might still net $25, but GameStop would be unlikely to be able to sell the game for much more than $35, perhaps less. Of course they could bundle the online pass with the game and sell it for a bit more, but the point is that the resolution reduction could prevent the shaft/gouge cycle that trading games at such retailers actually represents.

Last edited by Highlander on 9/12/2011 5:10:56 PM

4 up, 2 down

Excelsior1
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 10:30:13 AM
Reply

why is qd assuming all the extra trophies are used game sales? i imagine rentals would account for a lot them on an experimental game like that.

even if a lot of those extra trophies are used game sales i have a hard time having a problem with it. ofcourse i'm just a consumer that thinks used game sales are natural part of a free market system. why can't qd look at this way? they had 2 million copies sold on a new ip and a million extra people wet their appetite for qd's next game.

11 up, 4 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 12:57:46 PM

They never said there were 3 million trophy sets. They said it seems like there should be 3 million sold.

Licensed rental companies give dividends of rented software to the publisher. I'm sure QD knows this. I'm willing to bet there's more like 3.5-4 million trophy sets.

3 up, 2 down

D1g1tal5torm
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 10:30:34 AM
Reply

It's pretty simple to dissect why QD have only 2million in nums.

No replay after 100% completion.

Unless you're keeping it for posterity, it's going on the bay/blockbusters/lending to mates pile.

This highlights exactly why DLC and multiplayer are important facets devs/publishers use to increase sales numbers.

4 up, 11 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 11:03:32 AM

Are you insane? The number of endings are in the double digits based on what you do. No replay? hmph!

Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 9/12/2011 11:03:58 AM

15 up, 3 down

D1g1tal5torm
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 11:08:29 AM

No replay 'AFTER 100% COMPLETION'.

3 up, 11 down

ZettaiSeigi
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 4:17:51 PM

That is subjective. There are games that are worth playing again even after 100% completion. I personally would play Heavy Rain again after getting all the endings, but not necessarily right away. And for a game I enjoyed that much, it's worth the $60 I spent for it and deserves a permanent spot in my collection.

7 up, 0 down

D1g1tal5torm
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 7:54:33 PM

Very few and far between - I argued that HR should have been given solely goty, as opposed to sharing it with gt5.

To my mind the only campaign game I have gone back to after platting is Uncharted 2.

0 up, 0 down

ZettaiSeigi
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 8:19:14 PM

It's not that sparse, I think. Until now, I still play Uncharted 2, Heavy Rain, Mass Effect 2, Infamous, Demons Souls, and my personal list goes on. I'm not trying to contradict you every step of the way, really. I guess what applied to you did not on me.

1 up, 0 down

Gabriel013
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 @ 1:41:23 AM

There's the key. Make games that people don't want to trade in then there will be very few available to supply the pre-owned market.

Why not give away free story dlc to those who paid the full price? That may make them more inclined to keep the game and subsequently anyone who want's to play it has to buy it new.

How about dropping the prices to be more reasonable? If I'm dropping $60 on a game I want to be damn sure that I can get some of that back when I get fed up just like I can with everything else I buy which isn't a consumable. If new games cost $20-$30 then not only would I see no reason to trade in nor to buy pre-owned, I'd also be more inclined to buy games on a whim because at that price, it's worth taking a shot.

If game Devs want to maintain this strange relationship with their customers which NO OTHER BUSINESS INDUSTRY has, whereby we seem to feel the need to 'support them' then they need to get back to their roots of primary aim being to get your creative product in as many hands as possible.

0 up, 0 down

Robochic
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 10:58:16 AM
Reply

I loved this game bought it day 1 and enjoyed playing it but I was hoping for more DLC for it as once you have beaten it a few times it just sits on the shelve so I can see how they have lost money on it.

6 up, 0 down

Gabriel013
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 @ 1:42:35 AM

Yep, so why shouldn't you feel the right to sell this unwanted product on to someone else?
Some here seem to think you shouldn't be able to do that.

0 up, 0 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 11:05:20 AM
Reply

Here's the thing though, now that QD has proven this whole interactive drama as being viable to many a skeptical gamer (not me I knew it would rule) they will likely rack up more new game sales for their next project. That's how this business works, there's no crying in video games.

8 up, 1 down

StubbornScorpio
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 11:07:54 AM
Reply

I will echo the sentiment of many here in that I preordered Heavy Rain in the hopes of seeing more downloadable stories, but since they wanted to focus more on Move functionality, so be it. I pretty much never buy a game used, but I'm more than willing to purchase a title new at a discounted price down the line.

As long as Quantic Dream doesn't follow Capcom's method of battling used game sales, they can complain all they want.

4 up, 0 down

DrRockso87
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 11:18:27 AM
Reply

Wait, isn't this the SAME developer that said we should "only play Heavy Rain once"? Seems strange that he would encourage customers to purchase the game for 60 dollars, only play it once ever and then be skeptical that people sell it afterwards to Gamestop or wherever.

Used sales are normal and ironically help developers as much as hurt. Games are expensive enough nowadays so the only way to purchase a new one would be to trade in an old, unwanted one. What's the problem? If we didn't have credit for selling games then we wouldn't be able to purchase new ones (like Heavy Rain).

9 up, 0 down

maxpontiac
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 11:35:05 AM
Reply

Great news on the 2 million sales mark.

2 up, 0 down

Highlander
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 11:54:19 AM
Reply

Good news on the sales. That's an interesting use for Trophy data, but as others have said, it no doubt includes some that borrowed the game from a friend.

Whatever the percentages are though, it's fair to acknowledge that a significant fraction of the 1 million additional users purchased their game used. Considering that Gamestop makes billions of dollars each year in revenue on used game sales, but publishes no sales numbers, you have to know that there is a significant revenue gap for publishers thanks to used game sales, but it's difficult to quantify. This use of trophy data certainly sheds some light on the scale of the used game purchasing, but the picture is less than clear because there is no way to determine how many of the additional ones are people that borrowed the game from a friend.

3 up, 3 down

Qubex
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 1:04:29 AM

Would it not be better to make the games a bit cheaper in the first place and shift more volume?

If games were $40 dollars, rather than $60 I am sure sales volumes would be stronger overall and you would make back profit by simply selling more...

Q!

"play.experience.enjoy"

1 up, 0 down

Highlander
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 11:09:14 AM

Possibly, but I look at it this way. Games were $49.99 or $39.99 for the entire PS2 generation. PSP games have always been $39.99 or $29.99. PS3/360 games are $59.99/$49.99. In the 6 year span of the PS2 generation, there was more than enough inflation to merit a 20% increase in the price of a game. But when you consider that game budgets have increased by around 100% (and much more in some cases), a 20% increase in new game price over the PS2 generation seems really quite modest.

If you think back to the original Atari VCS, I can't remember the original US lauch price, but in the UK my memory tells me it launched at 200 pounds (sterling) and games were 20 pounds a pop. My wife remembers the Atari costing $200 and games were $20 here. That was at launch in 1977. In today's dollars, accounting for the inflation between now and then, the original Atari VCS could cost $740, and games themselves would cost $74. So, excuse me for saying this, but, I don't honestly think we're paying overly much considering that we only pay $250 for the console and $59.99 for the games.

Just for giggles, the current price of the PS3 - $250 - is only $70 in adjusted 1977 dollars. Compare that to the actual price of the Atari VCS in 1977.

People complain about the price of games, but in truth, games really are less expensive than they have been in the past. Even just adjusting the game price of $60 in November 2006 to today based on the US consumer price index we see that prices in general have apparently risen by 12% since that time, but games have remained constant, so they have in effect decreased in price by 12% over that time. Considering the actual reduction in the cost of the console in the period we're talking about, prices are not rising, they are falling.

Going back to the PS2 generation, if you inflate the price of games by the rate of inflation since PS2 launched, PS2 games that cost $50, would (by inflation) now cost $65.

The point being that even at $60, the games we buy now are no more, and in many cases less, expensive than games have been in the past.

I have to say that the inflation calculator I used uses the US government inflation statistics which I believe underestimate the actual inflation occurring as they exclude many items from the calculation, and only focus on the most basic things a consumer would buy - such as food. even so, the conservative inflation numbers used still prove my point.

Last edited by Highlander on 9/13/2011 11:19:17 AM

0 up, 0 down

Gabriel013
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 @ 1:51:38 AM

Interesting analysis Highlander but we also shouldn't forget the size difference of the markets.

Back in the early 80's how big was the games industry compared to now? That has to offset the impact of inflation to some degree. I also think games where phenomenally overpriced back then.

If games were priced at a similar price to books and film (within reason of course) then wouldn't new sales skyrocket as the pre-owned market dried up as there'd be no profit in it.

Failing that, publishers should start there own pre-owned stores as a joint project across the industry. Profits would need to be shared equally and not be specific to the game you are buying/trading as this would only encourage them to design games that you would WANT to trade off rather than keeping on your shelf to play in future. That way they could make revenue each time it traded hands.

0 up, 0 down

Highlander
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 @ 1:00:37 PM

Books don't cost $100 million to make.

The market size not as much a factor as you think, the market for the original VCS was considered to be extremely large. The cost of producing a game was also several orders of magnitude lower than it is today. the costs of developing a game have risen far, far faster than the rate of inflation. So any offset by an increased market size is more than absorbed by the vastly more expensive development process.

0 up, 0 down

jimmyhandsome
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 12:29:56 PM
Reply

Is this any different from other games/developers in the industry? Or are they just complaining about what everyone else has to deal with?

The online passes are bs, but it'll REALLY chap my behind once developers start to short change single player games to curb used games sales. Hopefully Quantic Dream's next game doesn't go down that route.

0 up, 0 down

jimmyhandsome
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 12:34:28 PM

Thats a legit question btw. I'm curious as if this "1 million or so" missing sales is a higher number than the industry norm. I guess its kind of hard to track.

0 up, 0 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 1:02:09 PM

I assumed there's probably 3.5-4 million trophy data sets... only reason being, major rental companies like Blockbuster are supposed to pay dividends of rental sales to publishers. QD should know those numbers, theoretically.

Remember back when suddenly new game rental fees jumped by like $2 to $5?? Publishers became more forceful about getting higher dividends for new releases. I don't have numbers for proof though. Just an assumption on my part.

0 up, 0 down

jimmyhandsome
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 3:08:14 PM

Ah, I see. Well I guess the most accurate way to track used game sales would be to get it from the companies that sell used copies of games. If they'd be willing to give those numbers.

But that doesn't even take into account sales on eBay.

Last edited by jimmyhandsome on 9/12/2011 3:11:49 PM

0 up, 0 down

Underdog15
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 8:24:43 AM

Oh yeah, for sure. Or kijiji or craigslist.... or even your neighbors garage sale...

lol

What a daunting task to track all that. lol

0 up, 0 down

KJ_313
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 12:38:21 PM
Reply

Heavy Rain was a great, unique video game! I'm hoping the low sales figures doesn't deter QD from making another game of that caliber. I understand how and why everyone feels about the company being greedy and just wanting more $'s, but you have to look at like this. 1 million copies unaccounted for at $30 to $54.99 used game price range. Thats a lot of money that is not being seen or touched by the party responsible for the making of the gm!!!!!

If this was any of you, i'm pretty sure you would be fairly upset also. But there is a simple solution for all these companies to shut down the used game market....all they have to do...wait for it.....LOWER THE PRICE OF BRAND NEW GAMES!!!!! If you decrease the $60 price tag substantially than the used game market will not see a profit!!! Picture if PS3 games were sold for $20.

0 up, 1 down

BikerSaint
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 12:56:20 PM
Reply

Note to David Cage.

I have an easy solution for gaining more sales for you,

I'm sure that more than just a few late adapters decided to opt out of getting Heavy Rain altogether once they heard that you cancelled those 3 DLC's.

So bring us those DLC's & you just might make up a lot of the lost revenue for the majority of those used sales.

6 up, 0 down

bebestorm
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 1:04:06 PM
Reply

Excellent news about the sales. Heavy Rain was a fantastic experience like no other. Im still disappointed QD ditched the promised dlc for sony's wii gimmick.

As for the used game sales I understand their point but at the same time everything else on the market can be bought used what makes games any different.

2 up, 2 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 1:27:40 PM

licenses

3 up, 5 down

Highlander
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:09:43 PM

Software is licensed, video and audio is not.

3 up, 5 down

bebestorm
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 7:03:55 PM

Gotcha.... Perhaps QD will join Rage in locking a small portion of the game. I don't buy use games but I do sell some of my games to Amazon.

0 up, 0 down

tlpn99
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 1:08:45 PM
Reply

I agree Biker. They promised DLC one for each character at least. We got one for Madison as they decided to put them on hold (or even cancel them altogether) for the move version of the game.

3 up, 1 down

Ultimadream
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 1:30:44 PM

That one with Madison was what they showed for preview demonstrations at festivals, It's nothing new they made up.

1 up, 0 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 1:30:04 PM
Reply

Most people haven't developed their morality beyond inward looking cause and effect relationships. They can only understand what directly affects themselves.

Until people understand what the greater picture is here, their moralities will never graduate to a fully adult level. It's actually, at a minor level, the reason why we still suffer through wars and conflicts. Since most people are selfish, whether they want to admit it or not, this type of morality will never become the minority. It hasn't in.... how many years have humans been around now? It's actually the negative side of tolerance. Sure, I agree that "everyone should be allowed to believe what they believe" (tolerance). But since humans are broken and we'll never be able to do anything perfectly, this is the mentality we have to expect in exchange for our freedom.

So, since that'll never happen, devs have to live with unjust losses until they finally get frustrated and force everyone to buy online passes, product keys, etc. etc. etc.

You know what they say... "Democracy isn't the best form of government... It's just the best we have yet."

Last edited by Underdog15 on 9/12/2011 1:35:05 PM

4 up, 2 down

Excelsior1
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 1:30:56 PM
Reply

i heard the 3 dlc's were canceled so qd could work on the move support. i'm not sure it was cage's call. sounds like sony's to me. i hear the move support was good but i don't think it was worth the cost of the dlcs.

3 up, 1 down

Highlander
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:11:01 PM

Yes, this was actually pretty well reported at the time.

5 up, 1 down

tes37
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:14:07 PM

Seems like if you told Sony that you'd rather do Move support after the promised dlc they would have respected that. I think it was a decision by Quantic Dream to give Sony what they asked for instead of giving gamers what they were told they would get. I don't see any of it as a fault of Sony. Every developer brags about Sony giving them all the creative freedom they need.

1 up, 0 down

FM23
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 1:37:13 PM
Reply

Man I wish David Cage's quotes were posted so you can see how pompous this guys comes off. Everyone loses money to the used game market, QD...you are no different and this is certainly not news worthy.

People borrow/lend out games on the regular on top of the used game/rental market.

And YES...WTF ever happened to the DLC?...I really wanted to play them. I needed money for newer games so sadly HR is no longer in my collection. Now I want it back.

1 up, 1 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:15:24 PM

I wouldn't act like he's the only one. He feels it more than most companies, because they are a small developer. Small devs are largely salary paid staff. And the owners of the business would have already had to dictate percentages to stay in the business and percentages to be paid in dividends to the owners and shareholders.

In other words, most of that money that could have come QD's way would have ended up in future development. Since they are currently in development, I bet he's thinking of all sorts of ways he could have used the extra millions on their current project.

All of a sudden, you're Mr. Cage realizing how much more you could do with that money.

That would piss me off, as a small dev, too. Especially if you're as adventurous and creative and motivated as QD.

Why don't you address companies like Electronic Arts who force used game buyers to buy online passes and such? Many others have also voiced complaints about the used game market.

I don't think he's pompous at all. I think he's merely echoing what many others have already said. He just gets listened to more closely because his game also happens to be a brilliant work of art.

Last edited by Underdog15 on 9/12/2011 2:17:06 PM

3 up, 3 down

FM23
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 7:52:44 PM

I pointed out that everyone is losing money because of used games, EA included. HR is definitely unique, but I wouldn't call it brillant as far as games or cinemas go. Its a story driven game with plot holes and the gameplay it little to non-existant even if it is original. With that said, I enjoyed HR, but I can easily see why someone doesn't want to shell out $60 for a 6hr game.

The game sold 2 million copies, thats a lot of copies for a game some one wouldn't call a game and for a game that was predicted to only sale 500,000. I bought it the first day, but I felt shafted evne though I played it 3x's I think.

I understand why he would be pissed and I would feel the sameway if I was in his own shoes, but the man is full of it. He believes his work is perfect when in reality, it isn't and anyone who chooses to say otherwise should really look at this guy for who he really is. He is self absorbed.

He comments about LA Noire proves his jealousy and his need to be recognized for his "brillant work of art". He deserves the recognition, but show some humility especially when your game isn't universally loved by the population. Just saying. Who cares really though.

0 up, 0 down

Underdog15
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 8:27:49 AM

Well, as the first entry into a potentially new genre of games, I'd say it was really well done despite any shortcomings you may have mentioned. Plot holes are minor in that piece, but there are a lot of artistically done things, as far as theatrical presentations are concerned.

I won't get into them now, but as a theatre major, there were a lot of things I picked up on that I personally found impressive for a video game to have accomplished.

1 up, 0 down

CanadianGuy420
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:05:26 PM
Reply

considering this is just a one time play game. they probably shouldn't be to surprised. especially when it first came out. not to meny people would wanna drop 60$ on a 8 hour game. so alot just rented/borrowed. i bought it day 1 but it was my number 1 most wanted game at the time.

Last edited by CanadianGuy420 on 9/12/2011 2:07:15 PM

1 up, 5 down

sha4dowknight05
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:10:30 PM
Reply

Well it's something that the developers have to deal with is that people would rather get the game used, rent or borrow it to save money.

I really think software costs way too much these days.
Even when the PS2 first came out Gran Turismo 3 A-Spec ran for about $80 plus tax now you can get it used for $3.00!!!!

The normal price is $59.99 and at one point way back during the end of 2008 until the end of 2009 games ran for $69.99 and that was way too much for me.

I think game makers should bump the price down to $50 for the game at launch price and collector's edition always depends on what comes with it or unless it's EA doing their special pre-order things.

It usually takes many months before a game goes down in price. Also buying used is a great way to save on tax as a $59.99 game can cost you an extra $8(I live in Canada) in tax.

Money is tight nowadays, so sorry to break it to game developers but gamers are going to want to save their money either they have a job or not.

6 up, 3 down

Highlander
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:13:47 PM

So, you'll pay Gamestop or another retailer 92% of the retail price on a recent game to buy it used to save that 8% or so? That 8% is really worth that much to you? If money is that tight, why not wait a few months and buy the game on special from amazon, or when it discounts to $29.99 in about 6 months?

Honestly, people saying money is tight as a justification for this behavior are fooling themselves. If money is so tight that the difference between the cost of the same game new and used makes a material difference to your life, you should stop buying games at all.

5 up, 6 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:19:57 PM

Highlander = pure truth sauce.

When I was a student, I just bought fewer games. That simple. Heck, as a student, I was studying, playing sports and music, and hitting on women too often to do enough gaming that I needed to buy more than 5 or 6 titles a year!!

Besides, back then, an RPG could last me about 5 times as many hours as most titles today, anyways. Maybe that's an issue to consider too.....

4 up, 4 down

Ultimadream
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:24:44 PM

I don't think that last statement is fair... People try their best to budget wisely, spending full retail price on every game you buy is just not possible for most people. Games are double/triple the price of a new blu-ray film which is just appalling. My rent a week costs as much as a full retail priced game that alone prooves games are too expensive.

If games were generally cheaper I would have more sympathy for games developers, but at their asking price, not a chance. People should not be denied tghe full package just because they cant afford to buy the game brand new. + with all the DLC each Developer denies us in the original release, so they can sponge off us why should I feel sympathy at all.

Anyway, Heavy Rain raeched the 'Platinum' range here in the UK, which is far better than most games on the console. so QD has nothing to worry about.

2 up, 2 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:41:11 PM

@Ultimadream

I'd be more likely to agree with you if gaming wasn't a luxury. Let's not forget it's an "extra" in life. It's entertainment. It costs what it costs, and it does for a reason. If you suggest games come cheaper, than the smaller gems like 3D dot game heroes that give us diversity and specialness don't get made. Games like Catherine don't get risked. Dev's don't take risks.... unless they release it on PSN and sell cheap... notice... that's where risks are taken... where people can't buy your stuff used.

I don't think it takes a professional analyst to look at the industry and see how used sales hurt. Lowering costs won't stop used sales. It will just limit even more money that could otherwise come into the industry.

When I was a student, I invested in gaming to a much lesser degree than I do now. It's sort of the way it is.

2 up, 2 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:50:25 PM

@Ultimadream

Actually, here's a good idea...

The other thing I did when I was a student was buy games well after release.

How many games cost $60 forever? If you can't afford full prices, you shouldn't be able to get "the newest and latest" of anything on the day of release. No one buys the newest and greatest of any piece of technology at release if they don't have extra disposable income.

I don't agree we should be entitled to anything cheaply immediately after release. For anything.

What's wrong with being 6 months plus behind? Most of the games I buy are well after release. Heck... I just started Fallout 3 last week! I haven't had a chance to try inFamous 2 yet, let alone buy it. I definitely will and totally look forward to it... but you know, I've got lots to play now, and when I -do- get around to it, I'll be pay less than you or someone else did. And I'll be playing that on my spare time, while everyone else finds a way to pay $60 for whatever is new at the time. And I'll get around to that when it's cheaper too... and so the cycle will continue.

Last edited by Underdog15 on 9/12/2011 2:51:11 PM

1 up, 2 down

jimmyhandsome
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 3:25:59 PM

Another thing people fail to realize is that trading in games is a pretty good way to cut your losses with games you don't really like. And for budget-minded people, there are only so many $60 full priced games one can afford to purchase and keep. I don't do it frequently but I have done it before with places like Amazon that generally pay alot more than gamestop.

Most of the games I buy are new. But every now and again I'll buy a game and immediately have buyers remorse. There are a ton of games coming out in the next couple of months, why not sell it back to amazon and recover half to more than half the costs?

I did this with Portal 2 on Amazon. About a week or 2 after the game came out it dropped to $34.99. I played it, beat it, and a month or 2 later traded it in for $22. Great game, but I knew I wouldn't play it again (and rightfully so).

Last edited by jimmyhandsome on 9/12/2011 3:27:49 PM

1 up, 0 down

ZettaiSeigi
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 4:38:43 PM

I find it funny that Highlander and Underdog are getting so much negative votes on this topic. Not that it bothers them, I'm sure.

I personally buy all my games new. The only exception to that was Resistance 2 which I did not buy but was given to me by my friend after he completed it. I'm not sure if that would count as a lost sale since I never intended to buy it anyway (not a big FPS player here) and I still had no intention of buying it even after I played it for a bit.

But going back to the topic, I buy my games new just because I like supporting the game developers of the games I like. That's why I have a very small library compared to the rest but at least I enjoyed everything I own and never felt any sort of buyer's remorse.

It was a completely different situation during the past console generations. Those days, you can't really tell if a game will be worth the full asking price. There are hardly any demos available and I really couldn't always rely on game reviews. Sure, a demo is not always the best way to tell if a game would be good but for me, I just need to see if the gameplay is something up my alley. I could rely on reviews for their opinion on the story and other stuff. As an example, I was looking forward to playing Mass Effect 2 when it was announced for the PS3. I heard overwhelmingly positive feedback about the games but I still wouldn't buy it if I cannot play it. Thankfully a demo was made available on the PSN and I enjoyed playing it. I then decided to buy the game new and I still play it from time to time. As a matter of fact, I'm going to start a new game with a new character before ME3 comes out.

3 up, 0 down

SubjectiveTruth
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:21:32 PM
Reply

Who the hell buys these games used anyways? I don't even consider paying a POS company like gamestop 55$ for a used copy when I could spend 5 bucks more and get it with that new games smell.

5 up, 0 down

Fane1024
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 4:58:23 AM

True, no question, but not all used game sales are at $55...a fact High and UD are conveniently overlooking in order to make their position look stronger.

From the standpoint of an individual consumer, one should buy new (including at a discount if you don't believe the game offers enough value to justify $60).

However, from the standpoint of an observer of the marketplace, one needs to see that the situation is more complex than "one used sale equals one lost sale". Used game sales and rentals *also* have positive impacts on the business of making games. Even GameStop is good for the game companies in a number of ways.

0 up, 0 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:24:02 PM
Reply

In the end, devs just need to take their own preventative measures, as far as I'm concerned. Statistically speaking, only 5-10% of the population has matured enough to exist on a higher plain of morality. So the dev's will never win with the current business model in place.

Speaking of that 5-10%... I love that this community assists in proving that percentage in downvotes vs. upvotes throughout this thread. XD just a hilarious observation.

4 up, 6 down

Eld
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 4:19:42 PM

You sure have super high opinion about your moral values:)

5 up, 1 down

ZettaiSeigi
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 4:41:44 PM

A question for you Underdog: Are you familiar with Atlas Shrugged? I love that book. And if you do know about that book, you would know why I just asked you that question. And just so you know, I've been trying to equalize the score by giving you and Highlander a thumbs up on your posts. LOL

And for those of you on the other side of the fence on this topic, I did not and will not downvote you. I don't give a thumbs down for an opposing opinion as long as it contributes to the discussion. I only give a thumbs down to those who are usually obnoxious and are obviously stinking trolls. ;-)

Last edited by ZettaiSeigi on 9/12/2011 4:49:44 PM

5 up, 0 down

Fane1024
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 5:07:09 AM

@ Underdog

Or, maybe, the down-votes occur because some of your points are wrong.

If you want to believe that everyone who disagrees with you on this topic is a selfish, short-sighted pea-brain, go ahead. But you would be mistaken.

My objections to *some* of your points and High's are because you aren't analyzing the situation deeply enough.

Last edited by Fane1024 on 9/13/2011 5:09:35 AM

2 up, 1 down

Underdog15
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 8:47:57 AM

Well, Fane, perhaps some points I raise aren't going deep enough, but on the whole, I am definitely correct on this topic. I don't often say that, either. Whether you are for or against used sales morally is subjective, sure, just as violence to solve differences is subjective (and I don't mean that sarcastically. Working with street-level youth has taught me many people believe violence in a proper means to 'teach' people).

But in regards to the impact used sales has on the industry (which for me is a moral issue, much like music file sharing is a moral issue despite there being no law to support my opinion), how the legality of licenses work (and don't work) in this situation, I am 100% convinced I am right.

Look... I would be much happier if people just said, "I don't care what's right or wrong. I just want to save a buck. Maybe it's wrong, I don't know and don't care. But it's the way I want to do it." THEN I would disagree, but would accept their view and move on.

BUT... people are trying to find justifications while ignoring the overall impact. And that to me, is quite glaringly, a lower level of morality and intelligence. It's very juvenile.

I see it every day in my career as a Youth Advisor/counselor/mentor. (Youth Advisor is my title) Youth are -known- for that type of morality. And it's frustrating to me to see grown adults who still haven't outgrown that. They are faced with a problem that affects a world outside the world they live in, but they justify their actions based on the morality of how it affects them within their own little tiny world.

It's classic juvenile morality! I'm sorry. I don't think highly of my personal morality, as I'm constantly making changes to my beliefs in pursuit of becoming a better person... and I'm miles.... MILES.... from where I want to be. But I mean, why doesn't our society look at their daily actions and how it affects the much larger world around them?

Used game sales aren't killing the industry. But they are holding it back and limiting it. It has many residual effects on the industry that trickle down. And it does affect what we get in the end, whether you know it or not.

I'm just sick of justifications like, "I can't afford lots and lots of brand new games!" Then why the 'h' 'e' double-hockey sticks do you try to buy brand new? I didn't when I was a student! And I still thoroughly enjoyed my gaming! I was 3 years late to getting the PS2... because... get this... I couldn't afford it. I didn't get my PS1 until 1998, either.

Like I said... I don't care if people buy and sell used games if that's their decision despite the facts. What I can't stand is people finding justifications to dismiss the evidence in front of them or ignoring the impact it has on the world OUTSIDE their own little tiny personal one. It's extremely juvenile. It's what makes youth act on what they want to do or what they think is fair or right despite the consequences to themselves, or especially, those around them. Hence, me calling it juvenile.

I don't care if you disagree, and I don't care if you help me to think a little more deeply. That's all fine and good, Fane. It helps me formulate a more convincing argument on this issue.

But don't for a second think I'm ever going to back down to say I'm wrong just because someone feels entitled to owning the newest and greatest technology despite not being able to afford it. Forgive me for thinking, instead of being allowed to get whatever they want, they should probably re-prioritize what is important to them.

I'm sorry, but I just... CANNOT stand people thinking it doesn't affect anything but their own personal bubble-world. It's time for them to grow up and gain a larger perspective.

Last edited by Underdog15 on 9/13/2011 8:49:08 AM

0 up, 2 down

Underdog15
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 8:57:33 AM

@ZettaiSeigi

I haven't read it, but I am fully aware about the message it tries to put forth. lol The author is a pretty interesting woman. I like her thoughts on how the world needs "prime movers" and how viciously the world around them attacks them. If I'm not mistaken, that book is about what happens when those prime movers aren't allowed to innovate anymore? Or are they just killed off in the story?

Last edited by Underdog15 on 9/13/2011 8:58:04 AM

0 up, 1 down

Underdog15
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 9:51:52 AM

@Eld
Is it a super high opinion of my values? Or a super low one of others?

It isn't the former.

0 up, 1 down

jimmyhandsome
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 10:04:13 AM

Underdog,

You make great points. But I think you're generalizing a little bit too much. For instance, I don't believe that everyone (or most, for that matter) who takes advantage of the "used game market" either by trade-ins or purchases at Gamestop, try to justify their actions. They either don't know or don't care what their actions have on the industry. Gamestop is especially aggressive with forcing used games down customers throats. They're saving money on what *most* think is an expensive hobby.

Like I said previously, I usually buy new. Either by waiting a few weeks and getting a great deal on Amazon, or by pre-ordering games that I simply need to have on day 1. But I *have* bought used games on eBay before, and sold or traded in games on Amazon. I do this because I save money, and sometimes alot of it that can be used to buy future games. I don't think that this makes me juvenile, selfish, or morally inept. In an industry where publishers get criticized for rehashing games year after year (Call of Duty) and for ripping gamers off with overpriced DLC that may or may not have been left out of the original product(just about every FPS mappack), you'll be hard pressed to find too much sympathy for developers whining about lost used games sales. Do I understand where there coming from? Absolutely. But you have to also understand where gamers are coming from.

0 up, 0 down

Underdog15
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 11:24:07 AM

I know, Jimmy. My ideal situation is the used game industry contributing a small dividend of its profit back to the developer. I don't want used games to die off. If they did, it's probably because we go all digital. And I definitely don't want that, either.

Consumers need to have options, for sure. And you're 100% right about most consumers not knowing what the impact is on the industry. I've actually said elsewhere that I can accept that a lot easier than justifications like the terrible used car example. My morality points are more directed at people trying to justify their choice -while- ignoring the impact it has on the industry or refusing to even -think- about the possible impact. I just feel people don't want to think about it because it might change their opinion.

The points you raise aren't really what I mean to prod at.

But as I said... I definitely wish major used game industries like Gamestop's billions per year revenue, gave a -portion-, however small, back to the developers.

I don't side 100% with dev's either, though. Because I also disagree with content being cut and sold as DLC. Which I know is an assumption, but it likely happens.

Anyways, my complaints are more directed at people who simply refuse to look at any facts or consider the impact. They only see the dollar signs in their own pockets and don't even attempt to consider the negative effects the used game industry has.

I look at a guy like you, and I don't see that sort of ambivalence. You understand the impact, support the industry as much as you possibly can, while also considering your bottom line. I'm also willing to bet than when you sell your used games, you probably most likely sell on ebay or something like that. See... you actually put real and genuine thought into it, and I appreciate that. But some people are outright pretending the consumer is the -only- person affected. And that -is- very shortsighted and immature.

I hope that portrays my feelings a little better.

Last edited by Underdog15 on 9/13/2011 11:25:42 AM

0 up, 0 down

jimmyhandsome
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 12:05:00 PM

Yea I agree with you. I also really dislike Gamestop (and their tactics). They very easlily portray the ugly side of the used game market by how they gouge their customers into trading in games at low prices then turn around and sell them for $55. And how they try to force their used game sales down your throats. I don't go there any more but when I used to a salesperson tried to get me to buy a used copy of whatever game I was buying. I can see why developers hate that business model.

0 up, 0 down

SaiyanSempai
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:32:14 PM
Reply

Often times, a few months after release, you can find new games online for $40 or even cheaper. Last time I went to Gamestop and browsed around (I refuse to spend money there) I found it interesting that all the used games I looked at I could buy new on Amazon at a cheaper price.

That's a win-win.

I'm just saying....

4 up, 0 down

Ultimadream
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:40:33 PM

This is a true state of affairs nowadays. I often walk around in shops to look at things, but I rarely buy as I think this will be cheaper on ebay/amazon. It's sad that you can't just walk into a store and get games/music/movies for a decent price.

Actually I take music back, my town has 10+ Vinyl stores which I find to be agreat shopping enviroment.

2 up, 0 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:43:03 PM

I've done the same as well.

Got Lego Rock Band new off Amazon during a sale for $13. A couple weeks ago, Amazon had brand new copies of AC2 for 9.99. Gamestop has them used for $20.

2 up, 0 down

SaiyanSempai
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:34:25 PM
Reply

Chances are, if you have waited long enough after initial release for there to be a thriving used market, you can find it brand new on Amazon for cheaper than the used price at Gamestop.

2 up, 0 down

Underdog15
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:42:12 PM

Excellent point. You're probably right.

2 up, 0 down

SolidFantasy
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:35:08 PM
Reply

HR didn't live up to my expectations and I was one of the ones who pre-ordered it. But in the end I was glad I bought it. I want this somewhat new genre to continue competitively. As for the sails issue.

I can see the two sides, but some of us are just flat out poor and 60$ is big investment. So lending a game out to someone who makes less than what the developers of this game rake in in a year doesn't seem as immoral to me.

2 up, 0 down

Fox hounder
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 2:39:39 PM
Reply

I picked up HR just last week (new of course), i'm enjoying it very much. It is great to see that the game is selling well, too bad though about the lost revenue due do used game sales.

3 up, 0 down

TheOldOne
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 3:11:21 PM
Reply

I have one unit of those 2 million. I won't sell it since I know Heavy Rain is a master piece in my library! Still, I'm a little upset with them because of the lack of DLCs they released afterwards.

4 up, 1 down

Nynja
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 3:32:31 PM
Reply

Ok...Love your game, guys. BUT - is the person pulling these figures together collecting rental data as well? How about friends who let friends borrow games?

More than one way to skin a cat.

2 up, 0 down

Claire C
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 5:50:27 PM

That's the first thing I thought too.

2 up, 0 down

BigStack007
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 3:36:23 PM
Reply

Those of you who don't agree with buying a game used,for a lower price,NOT FROM RIP OFF GAMESTOP as they are only $5 cheaper then what it sells for new.But from somewhere else like craigslist,ect.You should also NEVER rent a movie from Redbox.Or pay for Netflix.You should ALWAYS go to the movie theater and pay $10 or more to see a peice of crap movie that looked good from the preview but sucked once your actually their watching it.Renting a movie from Redbox for $1 puts $0 into the film makers pocket.But i suspect that many of you posting in here against buying used games will enjoy a Redbox movie or a Netflix movie without ANY remorse what-so-ever.I'm alright with the online pass thing as a way for developers to make something off used game sales but like i said before MOST new releases are not worth $60,even tho the preview made em look good.You thought it was gonna be a gem and it turned out to be a lemon.Been there/Done that.And what are we supposed to do with all of our older games that we've played out?Maybe the developers should offer a discount off a new game if you turn in your older version of the same game.Send em part 1 get a discount off the purchase of part 2.If they want to slow or stop used game sales,they should buy back last years version.Or offer discounted DLC to all who purchase their game at full retail price.Until then,i'll continue to buy used only if the price is right.BF3 & MW3 i've already paid for cause i know BOTH are gonna be good and worth it to buy NEW.Not sure about anything else yet.

Last edited by BigStack007 on 9/12/2011 3:38:51 PM

1 up, 6 down

DarthNemesis
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 4:36:59 PM
Reply

This is one reason why I don't and never will buy used games.If the game is good enough for you to pay money for it then the company deserves your money and not some second hand party.I know game prices are high,but people could wait until the retail price drops like most do before six months and then buy the game.The gaming industry is failing when it comes to creativity and originality because of people who will rush out to buy the new COD game brand new,but ignore games like Heavy Rain.

Last edited by DarthNemesis on 9/12/2011 4:38:01 PM

3 up, 2 down

BigStack007
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 5:14:40 PM
Reply

This was never an issue back in the ps2/xbox days.Used games were just as abundant as they are today and we've progressed to where we are today.IF the gaming industry is failing it's because of the lack of originality that was so prevelent back in the ps2/xbox days.Example;(GTA San Andreas vs GTA IV)San Andreas WAY BETTER.Socom,WAY BETTER ON PS2.I could go on and on but i won't.Nothing really new anymore.Just another years version of the same ole stuff.Movies are no different.the same old stuff with different actors.NO originality=Lack of sales.No product standards is why 7 out of 10 New releases are garbage.

Last edited by BigStack007 on 9/12/2011 5:18:46 PM

1 up, 1 down

Highlander
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 8:53:53 PM

Games didn't cost $100 million to make back then. When you have to sell 1,2 or 3 million copies to repay the development and marketing budget, you start worrying about used game sales.

1 up, 0 down

Claire C
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 6:03:04 PM
Reply

What about the idea of more than one person in a household with his or her own PSN ID?

4 up, 0 down

Fane1024
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 5:17:08 AM

Seriously...is Highlander (for instance, since I currently live alone) supposed to buy 3 copies of every game, just so his wife and son can play them?

0 up, 0 down

Underdog15
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 8:59:34 AM

The current model allows the purchaser to tie their licensed content on up to 5 consoles within their household. You will see similar policies in virus protection programs like Norton, or OS's like Windows.

So, no.

Last edited by Underdog15 on 9/13/2011 9:00:22 AM

0 up, 0 down

Highlander
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 11:28:06 AM

Fane,

As it happens, I have three copies of Burnout Paradise, two on disc and one downloaded. The two on disc were so I and my wife could both play. We have two copies of Soul Calibur 4, two copies of GT5, two copies of White Knight Chronicles and shortly (today() will have two copies of White Knight Chronicles 2. Granted that is so we can play together at the same time, but there are times when we buy multiple copies of games. In general though, the family copy is the family copy.

But the thing is I never said anything against people lending a game to their friend or anything like that at all. my points are specifically about the impact (which is readily quantified in the financial reports of Gamestop and others) of used game sales at retail. I don't for a moment dispute the contention that some of the extra trophy sets QD is seeing for HR are the result of friends or family borrowing a game, and I don't think anyone in the industry would have an issue with that practice.

However selling a game used to a 3rd party is fundamentally different to allowing your sibling, spouse or friend top borrow a game temporarily. If anything such lending leads to additional purchases, but whatever the case, it's legal to do since there is no transaction.

As Underdog points out, downloadable games are able to be activated on up to 5 PS3s with the PSN ID that purchased it. There is really no inconsistency here in the position we are taking at all.

Last edited by Highlander on 9/13/2011 11:28:54 AM

1 up, 1 down

Fane1024
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 3:55:08 PM

High,
I (of course) knew that you owned multiple copies of those games, having played with the two of you. My family has bought two copies of RB3 for the same reason: so we can play together (when we can't be on the same PS3). I only used you as an example because I don't have multiple gamers in my household. I didn't mean to imply that you weren't being consistent.

0 up, 0 down

Highlander
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 4:31:34 PM

No problem Fane, I knew you know that, but some readers may not.

0 up, 0 down

BigStack007
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 6:04:16 PM
Reply

How bout this:Heavy Rain was BORING.There;someone had to say it.Maybe that's why it didn't sell as many copies as they wanted to.It simply wasn't very good.PERIOD.Man up,and accept the truth fanboys and QD dev's.Their lucky they sold what they sold.BORING GAMES DON'T SELL.Don't tell me it wasn't BORING i played the demo.I have over 50 people on my friends list and MAYBE 1 or 2 out of 50+ played it..BORING.EVERY COD game that comes out,ALL but 1 or 2 will have it.Cause it's NOT BORING.Not that i'm a big COD fan cause i'm not(Battlefield is my favorite game),but i know that every COD game is gonna be better than the last one and for a while(till they get hacked or exploited)their fun and have alot of replay value.NOT BORING LIKE HEAVY RAIN.That's why they set records in sells cause COD isin't BORING.No online pass required to play a used COD copy cause they make PLENTY off the Pre_orders,New sales,and DLC.The developers that are complaining are the ones with WEAK sales from a WEAK product.

Last edited by BigStack007 on 9/12/2011 6:19:53 PM

2 up, 9 down

Claire C
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 6:14:04 PM

Based entirely on the demo and how many people on your "friends" list played it?

You know what that makes your post? Meaningless.

6 up, 1 down

ZettaiSeigi
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 6:27:17 PM

Heavy Rain is boring? And you and your friends would rather play COD? No wonder. End of conversation.

7 up, 1 down

bebestorm
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 7:08:19 PM

@Bigstack
Heavy Rain sold very well. They didnt expect to sell a million copies let alone two million. It's all right here in the article.

3 up, 0 down

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 9:05:41 PM

Guess what else someone just has to say?

If you think Heavy Rain is "boring," you aren't very bright.

6 up, 2 down

AntDC
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 2:10:18 AM

Obvious troll is obvious.

2 up, 1 down

Underdog15
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 9:01:42 AM

My wife isn't a gamer at all. But Heavy Rain? ... The only game she has -ever- asked me to play with her. That speaks volumes.

1 up, 1 down

OptimusX
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 7:03:25 PM
Reply

The "lost" revenue on used games is overblown.

1 up, 0 down

airwedge1
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 7:09:39 PM
Reply

There is not any lost revenue. Only one person at a time can play the game. They got the money from the original purchaser of game, just like in any other industry. If GM sells me a car and then I sell it to someone else, does GM think they should get money from the car being re-sold? No. Game developers complaining about used game sales is absolutely non-sensical.

0 up, 1 down

Highlander
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 8:55:11 PM

Ah, Underdog's prediction comes true, the most flawed possible analogy is mangled and mis-stated in the discussion. Well done you.

Just in case you don't know, cars are not software.

2 up, 2 down

Underdog15
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 9:02:18 AM

YES!!!!!!!!

SO called it!

ah... people are so predictable.

*Tiger Wood's FIST PUMP*

edit: Added in the Tiger's first pump

Last edited by Underdog15 on 9/13/2011 9:03:40 AM

1 up, 0 down

Nasty80
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 9:53:33 PM
Reply

Great game, only 4 more trophies until a platinum. I bought it used off of Glyde.
When i platinum it i will give it to my dad.

1 up, 2 down

Killa Tequilla
Monday, September 12, 2011 @ 11:08:07 PM

Hell yea

0 up, 0 down

Underdog15
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 9:57:38 AM

See? Why can't more of you people wanting to buy sell used be like Nasty80??!! No delusions of justice. Just says what he wants to do without a care in the world.

I disagree, ;) but at least you aren't trying to justify it to ease your conscience. I can appreciate this a lot more than the other crap spewed here today.

0 up, 0 down

BigStack007
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 1:31:01 AM
Reply

This beef that dev's have with consumers is totally misguided.Used games are an industry,game development is also an industry.If these crying developers have a problem with consumers wanting to save money buy buying used instead of new then that's just plain wrong.The crying developers should not try to punish the consumer,instead they should be taking their fight to the industry that is USED games.The Ripoff that is GAMESTOP!In defense of USED game sales(person to person)NOT THRU GAMESTOP.There are NO industry standards when it comes to QUALITY of content.NEW games are $59.99 on day 1 weather they get a 3.5 rating on day 2 or a 9.0 rating on day 2.The only difference is the 3.5 rated game will be $39.99 a month later and the 9.0 will still be $59.99 6 months later or longer.So is it ok then to pay the same price as a Ferrari for a Hyundai?7 or 8 out of 10 NEW games are not worth $60.PERIOD.Some aren't worth the $40 discounted price a month or so later either.But if you can get a used copy for half price or so from someone who bought it new and played it out in a week that should be just fine.But some of you don't get that.You think that HEAVY RAIN with NO DLC,NO REPLAY VALUE after you get 100% of it done in a few days is somehow worth the same value as as a game with lots of DLC and many MONTHS of replay value.Your wrong and your throwing your parents money away.GAMESTOP WILL GIVE YOU $0.00 for it.(GAMESTOP Store credit=$0.00 FACT!)
Ben Duka:You thought that the R3 beta was "TONS OF FUN" well sir i also had that beta as did several of my friends and ALL of us thought it was CRAP.6 out of 6.After i told them what you said about it being "TONS OF FUN"you lost us.We were wondering just what version were you playing?Seems to us that YOU sir are the one who isin't very bright.Or your playing a different version of these games than we are.HEAVY RAIN WAS BORING.My gaming friends and I are adults who can tell the difference between a good game and a not so good game.You should know the difference as well.The person who's not very bright is the one who paid $59.99 for a game with no replay value or DLC.THAT'S BORING!For a game you think is so great i find it funny that absolutely no one of the 60+ gamers who play games most everyday on my list are playing it.Never have/Never will.ONLY 2 played it before maybe during(IDK)the PSN hack and NONE since.NONE.ZERO.PERIOD.Great game huh?Their still playing BF2,MW2,Uncharted 2,COD W@W,Battlefield,Borderlands,Burnout,COD 4 even.No Heavy Rain tho.Guess we're missing out.I'll have to let em know that we're missing out on such a great BORING game.

1 up, 3 down

AntDC
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 2:12:25 AM

"My gaming friends and I are adults"

I call shenanigans on this.

Last edited by AntDC on 9/13/2011 2:13:01 AM

2 up, 2 down

Underdog15
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 10:04:57 AM

Can you space out your paragraphs in the future? I didn't read most of what you wrote because the cramped letters hurt my eyes.

No offense intended, friend.

At any rate, based on the first stuff I read, I encourage you to think outside your own personal world from the point of view of the consumer, and think about the larger effect used game sales has on the industry.

It's definitely true that used sales are consumer friendly, but I think it's a shame at least part of the used sales don't go to the owners of the software: the developer/publisher. In it's current state, billions of dollars vanish from the industry, which has a direct effect on diversity and quality. Instead, those billions go into the businessman's singular pocket or CEO's and shareholders in used game sales.

New game sales have percentages, that yes, do go to owners and shareholders, but there is also a much larger percentage that goes towards development costs and future projects.

My personal feeling is that used games -should- stay to satisfy the consumer, but that something needs to take place to ensure the developers/publishers also benefit from additional uses of their software. That way... everyone wins. The industry grows at a faster rate, and the consumer gets what they want.

As things stand, the consumer may win on paper, yes, but at a cost to the industry that provides the entertainment we seek. The residual effects, of course, are that the consumer is also losing great potential. I guarantee if many more billions were filtered into the industry, we would reap the benefits as consumers. Benefits that we have yet to realize.

1 up, 0 down

___________
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 4:33:54 AM
Reply

so to solve that they do a move patch which will cause more people to buy it used instead of doing DLC which would force people to give the developer some money if they want to play it?
BRILLIANT!
why have these guys not won the Nobel prize yet!?
instead of crying about it, how about you stand up and do something about it!

3 up, 1 down

Spanky
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 9:36:52 AM
Reply

The automobile industry has survived with USED car lots selling their once new product everywhere...what's the issue?

0 up, 1 down

Underdog15
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 9:53:30 AM

Hey, Highlander!

I found another one!

I should become a fortune teller. I may change my username to "The Mentalist".

Last edited by Underdog15 on 9/13/2011 9:53:50 AM

2 up, 1 down

___________
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 10:42:30 AM

the issue is that car dealers are not loosing out sales if you go buy a used car.
buying used cars is so different to buying a brand new car.
games its almost the same, only difference being maybe a few scratches on the disk.
if your going out to buy a car you know what you want, your not going to go to a dealership and suddenly see used cars and buy one of those instead of a brand new one like you would a game.

3 up, 0 down

Fane1024
Tuesday, September 13, 2011 @ 4:03:46 PM

@ Underdog

_______________ agrees with you. That alone should get you to re-think your position.

;D

1 up, 1 down

Do you plan to buy a PlayStation Vita this year?
	Yes, I'll definitely get one in 2013.
	No, but I'll get one eventually.
	No, I have no intention of buying the Vita.
	No, I've already got one.

Playstation 3

Playstation 4

PSP

Playstation Vita

Playstation 2

Playstation

Other

PSX Extreme

Site Stats

Heavy Rain Passes 2 Million, Used Sales Cost Developer

Comments (137 posts)

Leave a Comment

Latest Updates

Popular Cheats

Recent Reviews

Recent Previews

Popular Sections

Extras

Sponsor

Our Poll

Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories cheats	PSP
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas cheats	PS2
Street Fighter Alpha 3 MAX cheats	PSP
Football Manager Handheld cheats	PSP
Football Manager Handheld cheats	PSP
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire cheats	PSP
Crash Tag Team Racing cheats	PSP
Mega Man Powered Up cheats	PSP
Metal Gear ACID cheats	PSP
Red Dead Redemption cheats	PS3

Resident Evil: Revelations review	PS3
Metro: Last Light review	PS3
Zombie Tycoon II: Brainhov's Revenge review	PS3
Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon review	PS3
Star Trek: The Video Game review	PS3
Injustice: Gods Among Us review	PS3
Dead Island: Riptide review	PS3
Defiance review	PS3
Sniper: Ghost Warrior 2 review	PS3
Army of Two: The Devil's Cartel review	PS3

The Bureau: XCOM Declassified preview	PS3
Time and Eternity preview	PS3
Ride to Hell: Retribution preview	PS3
Call of Juarez: Gunslinger preview	PS3
Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon preview	PS3
Spartacus Legends preview	PS3
Payday 2 preview	PS3
DUST 514 preview	PS3
Dynasty Warriors 8 preview	PS3
Disgaea D2: A Brighter Darkness preview	PS3