"If I am purchasing games in order to reward their creators, and to ensure that more of these ingenious contraptions are produced, I honestly can't figure out how buying a used game was any better than piracy." - Tycho, Penny Arcade
Wow! Those are strong words.
They're also true.
Now before you start ranting make sure you understand what Tycho is saying, or rather, what he's not saying, because he's not saying buying a used game equals piracy, even if that's what you think he's saying.
Tycho is saying that if your intention is to reward a designer for making an awesome game, buying a used copy of the game has the exact same effect as pirating the game, because if you buy a used game the developer will never see a dime of your money. (Click here for currency conversion rates)
If your intention is to reward the designer then buying a used copy of the game sends the exact same message as if you pirated the game. That's all Tycho is saying.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
There is a flaw with your and Tycho's logic. It took me a while to figure it out, because intuitively, we know that paying for something is better than not paying for it, and the second hand purchaser is certainly paying for it.
I submit that second hand software purchases are actually healthy for the gaming industry. Reason? They put more disposable income in the hands of people who like to play video games. This in turn allows the sellers of the used games to afford to buy new titles.
So while the maker of the resold game does not directly benefit from that particular resale, it benefits from the activity in general.
An excellent counter argument!
I was thinking about this a lot yesterday myself. I think about it a lot like Eaten by...
Following Tycho's logic, buying a used car is like piracy (in this case stealing?). What's not being taken into account is that the original value of the product (market value) is taking into consideration the resell value of the item. When I bought my car new off the lot, there was an understanding that if I wanted to, I could sell it (right then, or at any time in the future, even when it's just scrap metal). That resell value is part of the market value of everything.
If you really brought a full stop to game reselling, you'd see a drop in how much people are willing to spend up front (consoles any way). I also think if PC games could really truly be resold and there was as thriving and legit a market as there is for used cars, then the initial price of PC games would go up...perhaps the initial quality as well.
Thank you Eaten! I was thinking about that lately as well, and you make me feel much better!
My sensationalistic post title is probably only helping to confuse the issue, but Tycho is not saying that buying used equates to piracy, or that the used games/goods/2nd hand car market should be abolished (at least I don't believe he is).
What Tycho is saying (or at least how I interpreted his full statement), is that if you think a game is awesome and you want to reward the developer who made it by purchasing his awesome game, buying a used copy of the game does not do that; it has no more effect than if you had pirated it.
If Player One buys a new copy of Game, then trades it in and you buy it, or he sells it to you directly, Developer only realizes one sale of Game. Although two people have now each owned a copy of Game, they each owned the same copy, so from Developer's point of view they only sold one copy of Game, which is the same as if it had been pirated. No, you didn't pirate your copy of Game; you bought it legitimately from Player One, but the net effect is the same; Developer has only realized one sale of Game.
Expanding on Grue's argument, using the money you gave him for Game, Player One goes out and buys Game2:The Sequel, which he plays then sells to you. Game and Game2 have now both been legitimately owned by two people, but Developer has only realized one sale per product. Again, from Developer's point of view, the net effect of you buying used copies of Game and Game2 from Player One is no different than if you had pirated them.
That's not to say there's anything wrong, illegal, or immoral about buying or selling used goods, and as Grue stated a healthy 'used goods' market is even a good thing for the market overall. After all, if you hadn't bought Player One's copy of Game, he wouldn't have had the disposable income to buy Game2, or he may have had to save up to buy it and by then Developer has gone out of business instead of going on to make Game3. So buying used games/goods is not a bad thing, but then Tycho isn't saying it is.
The crux of Tycho's argument which most people seem to be missing (and remember, Tycho is part of an artistic team which makes its living from customers buying their product from them) is that when you really like a game and you want to send a message to/reward/encourage the developer for making such an awesome game, you must buy a new copy of Game (or write them a letter saying "Game is freaking awesome! I love it! Thank you so much for making it!").
Because if you buy a used copy of Game, Developer doesn't even know you exist. That's what Tycho is saying.
I do see what Tycho and you are getting at, but there is some indirect support from purchasing a used game as well.
Any square-enix game for example will always be a good buy on day one, because you can always resell it, you can't say that about every developer. So the rabid fanbase of square-enix encourages additional day 1 sales. As a buyer of used console games, I'm not a customer of Square directly (which is the original point being made), but I incintivise the true direct customers.
It looks like a game dev or 2 have comments that Gabe posted. They bring up that games are more like a theater experience than a car, where the second game owner gets the same experience. They can go ahead and stick their heads in the sand all they want, but there is in fact a 2nd run movie market. Quality and effects improve all the time, watching a 10 year old movie feels lacking (wear and tear for the car comparison) compared to the latest feature films.
The most interesting thing to me was that this was kicked off by THQ and their bill of rights. I wonder if THQ will implement secu-rom next...the hypocrits.
I'd note that it's not really our moral responsibility to support the devs. There's no such social contract implicit or explicit in capitalism. In fact, the whole point of the "invisible hand" of capitalism is that each party acts in enlightened self-interest, and prices tend to settle in the valley of compromise, even as value improves if there's price competition. (Note, not necessarily quality... "value" is quality/cost, which can be very different.)
That said, IF your intent is to support the devs, yeah, a used purchase is useless. If instead your intent is to get a game at the price you want to pay, if the devs want your money, they need to court it with better prices or "value added services". DRM, online permission and DLC for a cost are not "value added services".
I'm inclined to agree - when I want to reward a creator for making something splendid - I give him my money.
Simply put - if we don't reward creators for doing what they do - and doing it well...they won't.
Trust me - I'm having to pinch the hell out of my pennies like everyone else is right now. The lure of second-hand gamemart is strong when it comes to buying things I'm not sure if I'll like or not.
But when I know something is going to be good. Say like StarCraft II - I'll give them their full pound of flesh.
Post a Comment