Neoseeker : News : Rumor: Next Xbox is always online, runs 50GB Blu-ray discs, and blocks used games
Send this article   Article comments (86)
Sort by date: ascending descending
0 thumbs!
^
BlackScythe Feb 8, 13
quote Lorx
quote BlackScythe
Gamestop didn't "hurt" developers. If they made good games people wouldn't be trading them in after a day.
How does that even make sense? Even running with your statement that every game that has been released on the 360 is crap, used sales do hurt developers. They just do, that's not even a debatable point, developers don't get any money from those sales, whereas they do get a cut from any new game sold. What does Gamestop do as a corporation? Push used game sales as hard as they can. That hurts developers, whether you believe it's a deserved hurt or not is irrelevant to the point that it does exist in the first place. Though I would certainly hope you've found enjoyment in at least one game you've purchased in the past like, four years.
You seem to be exaggerating every point I've made (in addition to making some up).
0 thumbs!
^
Crave Feb 8, 13
I just can't see them doing this -- how the hell are people like Stallion83 going to gamerscore whore? Believe it or not but a lot of the reason people game as much as they do these days is due to achievements/trophies and if people are forced to buy all their games at top prices, the new systems are going to turn a lot of people off. Honestly if it weren't for achievements a lot of shit games wouldn't get the exposure they do.
0 thumbs!
^
Phil Anselmo Feb 8, 13
quote Lorx
quote Shinobi_razor
alright valid points.

only thing though, you're fooling yourself if you think doing this will cause the price of games to drop. they know they can get $60 out of them, that wont change. so we dont even get that benefit.
$60 works now, the question they will have to answer is...will it work when consumers won't be able to make some of it back?

Maximum sales #'s is good for both consumer and publisher, as it means the publisher made more money from selling as many copies through as many methods and prices as possible. For the consumer it's good as obviously more consumers got it, or could get it. It's why many digital PC vendors run sales all the time, every week if they can, and good ones. Selling a copy at a reduced price to somebody who wouldn't spend $60, is still money in pocket for them, and a satisfied customer, which is good in and of itself. It's also worth it to keep in mind that those cheaper consumers, who can't afford $60 every couple weeks, are important people to publishers and developers. They're usually the ones with the time and energy to work on services such as wikis, youtube videos, LP's, all that kind of stuff that builds upon a game's popularity and market awareness. Super, super important group, leaving them out in the cold by making them unable to afford your stuff? Death wish. Publishers are well aware of this, and not seeing some kind of system or sales built in to accommodate would be a big surprise from me.
Nail on the head.
0 thumbs!
^
Lorx Feb 8, 13
quote Crave
I just can't see them doing this -- how the hell are people like Stallion83 going to gamerscore whore? Believe it or not but a lot of the reason people game as much as they do these days is due to achievements/trophies and if people are forced to buy all their games at top prices, the new systems are going to turn a lot of people off. Honestly if it weren't for achievements a lot of shit games wouldn't get the exposure they do.
See two posts above yours. A post will I will now title in spirit: "Affordable Gaming 101: After the Used Game Apocalypse".

Those who wish for nothing more than achievements just need to look at games that weren't released that day. Pick up a game that was from the month before when it's on super 75% mega sale, or a Micro-transaction game that costs nothing to play anyway.

I know that may sound like "but by then...nobody else would be playing!" sort of logic to you guys, but it actually works out really well on PC. For instance, when Dark Souls released on PC, I noticed some friends playing it, after like a month that died down a bit. Then after the game went on sale for 50%, I saw people playing again. Some new faces, some old faces brought back by the stories from the new faces, the community kind of came back alive a bit. Added a lot of longevity to the fun that could be had with the game. Sales are a common way for distributors to hit prices that allure new purchases from people who would have never bothered for full price. So for instance, achievement farmers.
0 thumbs!
^
Zombie_Barioth Feb 8, 13
quote Lorx
quote Crave
I just can't see them doing this -- how the hell are people like Stallion83 going to gamerscore whore? Believe it or not but a lot of the reason people game as much as they do these days is due to achievements/trophies and if people are forced to buy all their games at top prices, the new systems are going to turn a lot of people off. Honestly if it weren't for achievements a lot of shit games wouldn't get the exposure they do.
See two posts above yours. A post will I will now title in spirit: "Affordable Gaming 101: After the Used Game Apocalypse".

Those who wish for nothing more than achievements just need to look at games that weren't released that day. Pick up a game that was from the month before when it's on super 75% mega sale, or a Micro-transaction game that costs nothing to play anyway.

I know that may sound like "but by then...nobody else would be playing!" sort of logic to you guys, but it actually works out really well on PC. For instance, when Dark Souls released on PC, I noticed some friends playing it, after like a month that died down a bit. Then after the game went on sale for 50%, I saw people playing again. Some new faces, some old faces brought back by the stories from the new faces, the community kind of came back alive a bit. Added a lot of longevity to the fun that could be had with the game. Sales are a common way for distributors to hit prices that allure new purchases from people who would have never bothered for full price. So for instance, achievement farmers.
Couldn't have said it better myself.

Like my teacher used to always tell us, "only a fool pays full price for something". Now as broad a statement as that is it still holds water, if the price is too high for you then do what everyone else does and wait for a price drop or keep your eyes peeled for a sale. Or heres a novel idea, save your money. It may seem old fashioned but it actually works, it may seem slow and lack that feeling of instant gratification but its worth it in the long run.

As for nobody playing many games on PC have a much longer lifespan, since the servers often stay up longer among other things (just look at Halo 2). Single player games are a no brainer and so are games your not interested in multiplayer for, if its game you want to enjoy and talk about with friends just set some money aside for its release ahead of time.
0 thumbs!
^
Shinobi_razor Feb 8, 13
they wont. publishers, like any big company are quite frankly greedy. wont go below $60 on release, unless on sale. they might dip down faster than physical copies though.
0 thumbs!
^
Lorx Feb 8, 13
quote Shinobi_razor
they wont. publishers, like any big company are quite frankly greedy. wont go below $60 on release, unless on sale. they might dip down faster than physical copies though.
You didn't read any of what I've typed, have you?

Super short version:
That greed you mention, I'm not denying it. In fact I'm rather embracing the concept. How can publishers, even the "big bad evil ones" get max money? Sales man, sales increase profit. There are plenty of consumers who will not buy on $60 release for games they only feel so-so about. Will they jump for $30? Oh yes, yes indeed. So what will publishers do? Hit both price points, maximum coverage, maximum money. Does it work out for us, the consumer, as well? Of course, we got a game half off.
0 thumbs!
^
Phil Anselmo Feb 8, 13
And don't forget it was the previous generation that forced companies to increase the price of games in order to make up for the money lost for each console sold. I don't see that being as harsh this time around as both companies seem a bit more conservative.
0 thumbs!
^
Shinobi_razor Feb 8, 13
i would love to be wrong but well just have to see. then again i dont see any need to upgrade to the new gen of systems right when they come out anyway. 360\PS3 will still be just fine for several more years.
Last edited by Shinobi_razor :: Feb 8, 13
0 thumbs!
^
Zombie_Barioth Feb 8, 13
Money speaks as well, one of the key points of business is finding the maximum amount people are willing to pay for your product. If people are willing to pay $60 then they'll price them at $60, if sales go down enough they'll reconsider the asking price.

Sales don't just provide a means for people with lower budgets to buy their products either, either they also create a sense of urgency and bring people into the store. The idea is to capitalize on peoples' impulsive nature and once they enter the store they will hopefully buy more than they came for, and more than they'd likely buy otherwise. Think about it, haven't you ever been tempted to buy more because something was cheap?
Last edited by Zombie_Barioth :: Feb 8, 13
0 thumbs!
^
Lorx Feb 8, 13
I was today actually, sushi place had a lunch special for half off some stuff, so I bought double amounts. Sucker for sushi.

It's in the best interests of the publishers to put on sales, that's something in the "definitely a thing" box. How much sales will be had, or if release prices themselves could see a drop, is what's in the air. Definitely won't hit PC levels of sales, since the market setup is different, but it will almost certainly balance out to something at least half decent and usable for gamers on a budget. Remember these same publishers already do this kind of stuff on PC. Microsoft even has a PC store where they do these kinds of sales as a distributor.

After all, if the companies don't put sales up for budget gamers, those are lost customers. Lost profit. Lost market saturation. Things no publisher wants to lose. It'll happen.
0 thumbs!
^
BlackScythe Feb 8, 13
quote Phil Anselmo
And don't forget it was the previous generation that forced companies to increase the price of games in order to make up for the money lost for each console sold. I don't see that being as harsh this time around as both companies seem a bit more conservative.
All I can do is look at the Vita in response to this comment. Pretty sure it's still being sold at a loss.
0 thumbs!
^
Phil Anselmo Feb 8, 13
quote BlackScythe
quote Phil Anselmo
And don't forget it was the previous generation that forced companies to increase the price of games in order to make up for the money lost for each console sold. I don't see that being as harsh this time around as both companies seem a bit more conservative.
All I can do is look at the Vita in response to this comment. Pretty sure it's still being sold at a loss.
Well yeah, and I expect both new consoles to initially be sold at a loss, just not as extreme as the X360 and PS3 were.
0 thumbs!
^
Duncan Idaho Feb 12, 13
huh so we got a new titanic on our hands or what?
0 thumbs!
^
Slash Feb 12, 13
quote BlackScythe
quote Phil Anselmo
And don't forget it was the previous generation that forced companies to increase the price of games in order to make up for the money lost for each console sold. I don't see that being as harsh this time around as both companies seem a bit more conservative.
All I can do is look at the Vita in response to this comment. Pretty sure it's still being sold at a loss.
Every console at launch is.
^
Sponsored
Sort by date: ascending descending
Add your comment:
Name *:  Members, please LOGIN
Email:  We use this to display your Gravatar.
Sign in with
Comment *:
Newsletter
Latest News
Latest Inhouse
ROCCAT Hiro Gaming Mouse Pad Review AMD RG2133 Gamer Series Memory Preview XFX R7790 Black Edition 1GB ROCCAT Isku FX Gaming Keyboard Review Gigabyte GV-R779OC-1GD Review ROCCAT Apuri Hybrid USB Hub & Mouse Bungie Review
(0.0254/mc/web2)