Nuclear Pacman

HatefulGravey, on Tue Feb 7, 2012 5:16 PM, said:

Yes, that's something that I was thinking about today at work. Do I want people who are kids now, in 20 years to be able to revisit their old video games when they get the nostalgia bug? hell yes they should have that opportunity. Personally, I could be content with collecting classic systems for the rest of my life, there's so much I don't have I'm sure I could keep entertained endlessly. However, kids right now don't have interest for the most part in collecting and playing classics, their 'classics' will be Xbox 360 and the Xbox 720 generations, and game companies want to take away that privilege we enjoy, away from future gaming generations.

Of course game companies don't care about that, and why should they I guess, I mean they REALLY don't make money off collectors 20 years down the road. But still people who collect and play old games is part of the culture, and that continued interest in old games has been what's kept modern game series like Castlevania to continue to see new titles being sold. It's foolish to think we're insignificant in the grand scheme of things, we certainly have an impact.

I was having this topic discussion in another forum, and one person states that we may own the physical disc, but we don't own the data on the disc, and that all of us are only being granted a license of use the data. After a bit of thought, I guess that's correct and it put a different perspective to me. I guess if game companies want to really flex their legal muscle, they can change our usage rights at any time by calling in a marker on the license agreement. You know all media always says we cannot 'sell, distribute or copy without permission' the contents of these games, or CDs and DVD's.

Game companies can probably right now say it's illegal for us to sell our games, if they don't give us permission to do so. By doing so we may violate the license agreement?

I always had trouble with Mike Tyson as well. I mean, the rest of the game has a great difficulty curve to it, and then Mike Tyson is nigh impossible, for me atleast. I don't have the patience for NES style difficulty anymore, I mean that stuff is infuriating enough to make you throw your controller at the wall. Battletoads? OMG where's my hammer at?

This is about 1 of 2 things happening. Game companies either want a) Gamestop out of business, or b) a share of Gamestop profits.

This is actually similar to States enacting their 'Amazon Tax' laws, like the one Indiana Governer Mitch Daniels just signed into law, which was brought about by retailers claiming an unfair advantage in the marketplace by Amazon not charging sales tax on the website. Starting in 2014, people living in Indiana who buy stuff on Amazon will have the states %7 sales tax added on for all purchases, in an attempt to 'equalize the playing field' for retailers.

I have to believe that we could see a push from the big gaming companies to pressure Congress and the White House into enacting a profit sharing law dealing with this issue. Game devs are clearly stating they want a cut of what Gamestop is making off sales of 'their' used games (actually Gamestops used games).

ninjarabbit, on Mon Feb 6, 2012 6:37 PM, said:

If I were Sony, I'd wait to see if MS is going to allow anti-used game tech on their next console, and then favorably position the PS4 to not do this. After a $3 billion loss in 2011, Sony needs good PR more than anything. They could just announce now that the PS4 will be used game friendly, but it would be smart to see if Microsoft makes this huge mistake publicly before announcing their intentions with the PS4.

Metal Ghost, on Mon Feb 6, 2012 11:34 AM, said:

from article:

Quote

God F&*^%G dammit. Game devs do not have ownership claims to my property legally purchased!! I do not buy into the Marxist philosophy that it's unfair for one company (Gamestop) to enjoy more success than another (game developer). I hate having to defend Gamestop I really really do hate it so.