EA's been trying to buy Valve for a while

[Nalano]

We all look forward to the day when you finally bring a counter argument to these forums instead of conspiracy fueled insinuations tbh. Do they not teach debate in the New York school system or something? It's laughable tbh.

I was wondering when you'd come to cheerlead the publishers!

Protip: Putting fingers in your ears and screaming "lalala" doesn't mean nobody brought up a counterargument.

It's okay, buddy. I won't use naughty words. I already see your mouse hovering over the report button.

[Hypernetic]

I was wondering when you'd come to cheerlead the publishers!

Protip: Putting fingers in your ears and screaming "lalala" doesn't mean nobody brought up a counterargument.

It's okay, buddy. I won't use naughty words. I already see your mouse hovering over the report button.

I wonder if he will report Gundato. Probably not because he isn't one of us.

[gundato]

You can't have both. Either everyone who sells used games is evil because it robs publishers of money and creates things like DRM and day one DLC or they aren't.

You can hate gamestop for other reasons, but you need to take the other parts of your anti-gamestop argument out of the equation if you support other game re-sellers.

Your repeated attempts to insult my intelligence are cute though, you should try to hide your insecurities a little better in the future.

No, I am just trying to figure out how you can keep throwing the stuff I said a post prior "in my face" as though they were huge holes.

And believe it or not, but the world is not one of absolutes. There ARE grey areas. I guess the reason we disagree is that you live in a world of absolutes whereas I try and consider the consequences of an action.

What's that word that you used when you described how I treated people? Oh, right, like garbage.

Now, I'm not saying you should stop with the snide remarks, oh no. Just own up to them!

You're right. I shouldn't stoop to your level. Thanks for pointing it out. Well, maybe not quite at your level. I still try and make sure all my posts advance the conversation beyond "Har har, X is stupid. I want to mock them". But I was dangerously close, and for that I feel bad.

Apologies Hyper. But seriously, learn to read what is being posted.

Although, for the record, that WAS an Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia reference.

[Kadayi]

I was wondering when you'd come to cheerlead the publishers!

Protip: Putting fingers in your ears and screaming "lalala" doesn't mean nobody brought up a counterargument.

It's okay, buddy. I won't use naughty words. I already see your mouse hovering over the report button.

I'm not cheering on anyone. I'm merely marveling at your endless ability to say nothing, ad infinitum Nalano. Over 6K posts and I've not yet once seen you once bring a reasoned argument of any kind to these boards. There's no rationale, no logic, no reason to anything you ever say. At best you bring vague shady notions of ill considered grand publisher conspiracies, yet you seem too afraid of your own shadow to put any commitment behind your words. People would have more respect for you if you had some back bone to your positions, but instead................meh. Change up the act.

[Hypernetic]

No, I am just trying to figure out how you can keep throwing the stuff I said a post prior "in my face" as though they were huge holes.

And believe it or not, but the world is not one of absolutes. There ARE grey areas. I guess the reason we disagree is that you live in a world of absolutes whereas I try and consider the consequences of an action.


You're right. I shouldn't stoop to your level. Thanks for pointing it out. Well, maybe not quite at your level. I still try and make sure all my posts advance the conversation beyond "Har har, X is stupid. I want to mock them". But I was dangerously close, and for that I feel bad.

Apologies Hyper. But seriously, learn to read what is being posted.

Although, for the record, that WAS an Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia reference.

There is no gray area in this case, if gamestop selling used games is bad for consumers because it forces publishers to do "bad things" like day one DLC and what not, then anyone selling used games is bad for consumers.

You can't have it both ways, sir.

Also, don't apologize to me. I don't give a fuck beyond the hypocrisy of the people who use the report function on these boards.

[Kadayi]

There is no gray area in this case, if gamestop selling used games is bad for consumers because it forces publishers to do "bad things" like day one DLC and what not, then anyone selling used games is bad for consumers.

It's bad for the industry, because the money doesn't go towards financing future development. The vast majority of money that goes to publishers gets ploughed back into future product in order to stay competitive Vs other publishers. Yes, there are shareholders and stock dividends to deal with for sure, but there's always a balance to be struck between profit and planning for the future. There are better ventures to stick your cash in if you want high yield dividends than games companies (Apple for instance). Money to gamestop though just keeps them running. It's not funding future product.

[Hypernetic]

It's bad for the industry, because the money doesn't go towards financing future development. The vast majority of money that goes to publishers gets ploughed back into future product in order to stay competitive Vs other publishers. Yes, there are shareholders and stock dividends to deal with for sure, but there's always a balance to be struck between profit and planning for the future. There are better ventures to stick your cash in if you want high yield dividends than games companies (Apple for instance). Money to gamestop though just keeps them running. It's not funding future product.

I'm not attacking that stance (though others have) I'm attacking the stance that it's only true for gamestop and not other game re-sellers (such as private sellers on ebay or Gundato's favorite company Gamefly)

Selling used games is either ok or it isn't.

[gundato]

There is no gray area in this case, if gamestop selling used games is bad for consumers because it forces publishers to do "bad things" like day one DLC and what not, then anyone selling used games is bad for consumers.

You can't have it both ways, sir.

Also, don't apologize to me. I don't give a fuck beyond the hypocrisy of the people who use the report function on these boards.

Yes, you really can.

Its like enforcing the law for a "stupid" law. Like the underage kid in the arcade from the other thread. If there are only a few kids and nobody is causing a stir, most people won't care. If there are a BUNCH of kids or the kids start causing problems, people care.

Same thing here. If it is just ebay copies and trade-in programs with some stores, fine. If a store starts pushing the used copies over the new copies and are gouging prices on everyone (to the point that they aren't just getting the "I can't afford a 60 dollar game" but are getting the people who would otherwise pay 60 bucks), it is a problem.

I am not familiar with Best Buy's, but my understanding is they only do trade-in and used stuff online. And I am okay with that because it is a small percentage of their overall sales. They are still primarily selling new items and are just saving that for the bargain hunters (I think Amazon does that too).

As I have mentioned, I am not particularly fond of Gamefly, but they aren't screwing over the customers. They are actually providing a good service. So while I am not sure how good they are for the industry (I imagine the rental market is still pretty small), they are good for the consumers.

[Hypernetic]

Yes, you really can.

Its like enforcing the law for a "stupid" law. Like the underage kid in the arcade from the other thread. If there are only a few kids and nobody is causing a stir, most people won't care. If there are a BUNCH of kids or the kids start causing problems, people care.

Same thing here. If it is just ebay copies and trade-in programs with some stores, fine. If a store starts pushing the used copies over the new copies and are gouging prices on everyone (to the point that they aren't just getting the "I can't afford a 60 dollar game" but are getting the people who would otherwise pay 60 bucks), it is a problem.

I am not familiar with Best Buy's, but my understanding is they only do trade-in and used stuff online. And I am okay with that because it is a small percentage of their overall sales. They are still primarily selling new items and are just saving that for the bargain hunters (I think Amazon does that too).

As I have mentioned, I am not particularly fond of Gamefly, but they aren't screwing over the customers. They are actually providing a good service. So while I am not sure how good they are for the industry (I imagine the rental market is still pretty small), they are good for the consumers.

You should read your own posts sometime, maybe you will realize how ridiculous you sound.

[random_guy]

Is it me or has there been more nastiness than usual on these boards lately? Is everyone just bored waiting for Dishonored or Borderlands or something?

[deano2099]

I'm not attacking that stance (though others have) I'm attacking the stance that it's only true for gamestop and not other game re-sellers (such as private sellers on ebay or Gundato's favorite company Gamefly)

Selling used games is either ok or it isn't.

Not really. The argument is Gamestop are taking money out of the gaming eco-system - potentially huge amounts because of second-hand sales.

Consider that consumers have a fixed amount of money to spend on games every year. They spend that on new games from Gamestop and the publisher gets 70% of that or whatever. Now if they trade with their friends, or sell copies directly to other people, they get extra income back which can be spent on games. Now sure, there's no guarantee that will be spent on games but most people who sell stuff do it systematically - if they couldn't sell it on, they wouldn't spend so much in the first place.

Gamestop upsets the balance because of the difference between what you sell for and what they then sell it on for. They essentially pocket the difference. That's money that goes to their shareholders and doesn't get spent on games. One could make the same argument about selling on Ebay - their fees are also taking money out, but they are significantly smaller.

I haven't explained it well, and it's a tough concept to grasp. And I still think GameStop should be allowed to sell secondhand games and support that. I'm just trying to explain the difference.

[Lacero]

It's really hardly surprising, given that EA likes to buy hot studios and turn them into hit factories.

I can't believe they've still not fixed that typo days later.

(did someone make this joke already? I'm drive-by posting while GW2 downloads)

[gundato]

Not really. The argument is Gamestop are taking money out of the gaming eco-system - potentially huge amounts because of second-hand sales.

Consider that consumers have a fixed amount of money to spend on games every year. They spend that on new games from Gamestop and the publisher gets 70% of that or whatever. Now if they trade with their friends, or sell copies directly to other people, they get extra income back which can be spent on games. Now sure, there's no guarantee that will be spent on games but most people who sell stuff do it systematically - if they couldn't sell it on, they wouldn't spend so much in the first place.

Gamestop upsets the balance because of the difference between what you sell for and what they then sell it on for. They essentially pocket the difference. That's money that goes to their shareholders and doesn't get spent on games. One could make the same argument about selling on Ebay - their fees are also taking money out, but they are significantly smaller.

I haven't explained it well, and it's a tough concept to grasp. And I still think GameStop should be allowed to sell secondhand games and support that. I'm just trying to explain the difference.

Oh, I don't think they should be banned from selling secondhand games. The system is in place, it is their right to abuse it. If they want to focus on short-term gains at the expense of the long-term health of the industry, that is their choice.

But I also won't shed any tears when Sony and MS find a way to phase them out entirely.