LATEST CHATTY HEADER
Subscribe to Shacknews Mercury starting at $1/month!
Chrome Shack Community Guidelines Chatty Search
Scroll down to join the conversation.
New to Shacknews? Signup for a Free Account
Already have an account? Login Now
Subscribe to Shacknews Mercury starting at $1/month!
Chrome Shack Community Guidelines Chatty Search
Scroll down to join the conversation.
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2010/8/25/
Basic treatise: If you buy a publisher's game used then you're not a customer of theirs so they don't really care if the "one time use" code thing pisses you off:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/2010/8/25/words-and-their-meanings/
And boy did the responses start coming in:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/2010/8/25/lets-talk-about/
And now they've started posting some of them (with permission, I'm assuming):
http://www.penny-arcade.com/2010/8/25/lets-go-phones/
Very interesting...
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 313 replies.
That is the statement you just make.
I'm saying the industry is not fine, and refuting your evidence by stating those figures are overly biased by a small number of ridiculously successful games.
Are you with me so far?
Now, if the industry is not fine overall, then something needs to happen to improve it. What these measures are doing is providing a means for the content creators to get more money on sales they currently see none of. In other words, they're trying to improve the profitability of all games -- both the ridiculously successful, and the ones that aren't. The more successful games we have, the more games we'll have in the future.
If we live in a world where only CoD and Madden games are able to turn a profit, then we'll eventually get to a state where CoD and Madden are the only games being created.
This is bad.
We do not want this.
We want as much money as possible to go to the content creators, so they can continue creating more content.
The post has been reported. Thank you!
You must be logged in to post.
You must be logged in to post.