Go **** yourself THQ

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar · 22-02-2012 5:10pm

gizmo wrote: »

Of course prices would rise, do you think they'd fall in the better developed countries to match the prices found in the lesser developed ones?

Also, they're not "overcharging" or "ripping consumers" off over here, they're charging the correct price, one which can result in a return on the millions of dollars pumped into the development of the game. These prices, as you pointed out, would be unsustainable in some regions and so they're lowered. One does not have an affect on the other however.

why would they be unsustainable though. lots of people in the west have to make a choice between buying particular games instead of others because they just can't afford to spend 3X60 in a 2-3 month time period. It's no different in russia/Eastern europe except they'd have to wait longer than people here on average to afford a different game. There's no moral argument to it, they're just charging us what they think they can get away with.

gizmo · 22-02-2012 5:16pm

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

why would they be unsustainable though. lots of people in the west have to make a choice between buying particular games instead of others because they just can't afford to spend 3X60 in a 2-3 month time period. It's no different in russia/Eastern europe except they'd have to wait longer than people here on average to afford a different game. There's no moral argument to it, they're just charging us what they think they can get away with.

Unsustainable in the sense that if the prices in those lesser developed countries were the same as the ones over here, there would be far less sales. The argument being they wouldn't wait to be able to afford it, they'd just pirate it. So yes, you're perfectly correct they're charging each region what they people have shown to be willing to pay.

On the other hand, if they were the same price over here, then the games would need to sell a substantially larger amount in order to recoup the games budget. Something which we still haven't seen given available sales and pricing data.

johnny_ultimate · 22-02-2012 5:18pm

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

There's no moral argument to it, they're just charging us what they can get away with.

FYP!

Pricing is down to simple economics. Companies charge what a majority of customers are willing to pay while trying to maximise profits. Without completely re-building the way Western economies work, this shall always be the way. The market has decided that a loaf of bread is worth a euro or two, while it has decided a new game is worth fifty euro.

It would be great if art and entertainment were free for all to embrace and enjoy. But welcome to capitalism.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar · 22-02-2012 5:21pm

but if people in those less well off regions are offered lower prices in order to stave off piracy it doesn't make sense that the same shouldn't be done for us. Publishers are just using us to make as much money as they can to make back their costs and the rest of the world just to make a little bit extra. Fair enough, it's their product they can charge you 20 and me 25 for all that I care but I don't think that's a good enough argument to give out about people here availing of the cheaper prices in other regions.
yes it does have the potential to impact future releases and lead to more conservative releases, but that's really only because we're being used as the mules in their never ending quest not to go broke.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar · 22-02-2012 5:24pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

FYP!

Pricing is down to simple economics. Companies charge what a majority of customers are willing to pay while trying to maximise profits. Without completely re-building the way Western economies work, this shall always be the way. The market has decided that a loaf of bread is worth a euro or two, while it has decided a new game is worth fifty euro.

It would be great if art and entertainment were free for all to embrace and enjoy. But welcome to capitalism.

I genuinely don't understand that post fixing. not trying to be difficult or anything but I get the basics of western capitalism and don't understand the difference between what I said and what you said.

hooradiation · 22-02-2012 5:24pm

oxo_ wrote: »

Really ? Come on, there's no need for that kind of carry-on... it's pathetic.
If you can't debate points being raised by others without resorting to abuse or childish carry-on then I honestly don't see the point in replying.
Why so personally defensive on the subject when all that is being done is simply the subject being spoken about ?

I think you have a problem with not being able to parse sentences correctly, don't fret, it's common around here.
Believe it or not, there was no malice there, feelings of being defensive are yours alone.

Now, Let me make it all clearer for you.

"Then again, maybe there is just no polishing a turd." == "No matter how you present it, there is no credible argument for pirating video games because you can no longer afford the same volume you used to"

Is that better?

johnny_ultimate · 22-02-2012 5:25pm

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

but if people in those less well off regions are offered lower prices in order to stave off piracy it doesn't make sense that the same shouldn't be done for us.

But it's the same way with everything! Individual society's operate within that society's means. America, Australia, Western Europe and Japan are 'wealthy' markets where games make most money. They'll make money at their current price. Eastern Europe is a minefield comparatively, where the only way companies can make whatever comparatively little money is to be made is to charge a price that people can pay while desperately trying to combat rampant piracy.

This doesn't apply to games only - everything from a can of coke to a car is effected by regional economies. I'm not an expert on economics by any stretch, but capitalism isn't fair. That it's inherent flaw. You live in a Western economy: expect to pay Western prices.

I am in no position to give you a lecture on capitalism: that's not my wish

But I really feel it's important to accept hugely different rules apply in different regions. The problem with many of these CD Key sites, to bring it back, is not that they're cheaper. An awful lot of them are very questionable in terms of legality. That's really the only point I was trying to make.

gizmo · 22-02-2012 5:29pm

Go **** yourself THQ, now you've gotten us taking about economics. :pac:

Myrddin · 22-02-2012 5:31pm

gizmo wrote: »

Go **** yourself THQ, now you've gotten us taking about economics. :pac:

After 17 pages, we're back to square one of sorts

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar · 22-02-2012 5:36pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

But it's the same way with everything! Individual society's operate within that society's means. America, Australia, Western Europe and Japan are 'wealthy' markets where games make most money. They'll make money at their current price. Eastern Europe is a minefield comparatively, where the only way companies can make whatever comparatively little money is to be made is to charge a price that people can pay while desperately trying to combat rampant piracy.

This doesn't apply to games only - everything from a can of coke to a car is effected by regional economies. I'm not an expert on economics by any stretch, but capitalism isn't fair. That it's inherent flaw. You live in a Western economy: expect to pay Western prices.

I am in no position to give you a lecture on capitalism: that's not my wish But I really feel it's important to accept hugely different rules apply in different regions. The problem with many of these CD Key sites, to bring it back, is not that they're cheaper. An awful lot of them are very questionable in terms of legality. That's really the only point I was trying to make.

well i dont know about the legality of it all, but i'd look at it more like buying a car somewhere else because it might be cheaper than Ireland.
I can understand and even agree with the publishers reasoning, i've only used those cheap key sites once but in general I don't have a problem with consumers choosing the cheaper option. maybe a better analogy would be people on netflix setting their region to NA so they can get access to content not available in the irish version? *shrug*
I don't think either side is in the wrong it just comes down to whether you want the product at the absolute lowest price possible or if you are ok with paying a bit more to support the publisher/developers/industry.

ooh, local owned stores versus walmart.
there, that's the anology but i can't be bothered editing the rest of my post so ill just leave it here.

oxo_ · 22-02-2012 5:48pm

gizmo wrote: »

I didn't mention criminal or civil law, I was referring to legit in the context that Steam would be well within their rights to remove access to the games you have bought from these unauthorised resellers or if they found you had purchased games from a cheaper region which would ultimately leave the user out of pocket.

...and then Steam would be breaking the law. Not a T&C, they would be actually breaking the law.
I'd be happy to take them to the small claims court here to prove it if it ever happens to me.

Regardless, it's a poor argument to put forward as if to suggest users are doing something illegal when they are not, in any way whatsoever.

I didn't say "any" circumstances, I said "certain" circumstances. The most obvious example being...

That's ridiculous. That was a hypothetical point I put forward to further the argument of being realistic in recognising the problem of piracy and the nature of an average gamer if presented with convenient cheap options as alternatives.

They shouldn't have to go above and beyond to convince people not to pirate them, there simply is no excuse.

Who needs excuses ?
How many people here pay their TV license fee for example ? I'd reckon a lot don't - you're actually breaking the law if you don't and honestly you've more chance of going to prison for not paying your TV license than you do for buying a knock off game but people still don't pay it.

How many people tomorrow, if a situation was presented to them by a chap knocking on their door offering a satellite or cable box for 50 quid which gave you access to all the movie, sports and HD channels forever with no chance of being caught - would refuse such ?

I'm not condoning it, I'm merely stating if the situation presents itself in the future then many a person would choose the piracy option.

Now take that to the level of kids or young teenagers, with little or no money of their own.
What kid is going to refuse the chance of grabbing a cheap USB type easy to use modchip for 50 odd quid over the prospect of having to ask their parents to buy them a game for 60 quid because their mates are playing it or that, well they just really really want it for whatever reason.

Devs/Publishers MUST make gaming more convenient to access/purchase and make it considerably cheaper BEFORE they remove the secondhand and rental games market or they will suffer the consequences of rampant piracy.
My opinion, nothing more and I'm just being realistic. You have to at least accept some of what I'm saying.

It's not about gaining profits, it's about breaking even in some cases and in others showing that a good idea can be profitable so that publishers will be less averse to taking risks with new IP. That is my concern.

That's not my concern. I'm a consumer, I couldn't give a flying crap whether a game dev breaks even or doesn't make a profit or not.
Look at the SWTOR MMO, massive amounts of money thrown at it to develop and in all honesty it's probably the worst MMO ever released, ever. It's a complete and utter failfest (personal opinion, I'm using it as an example, don't jump on me anyone please if you're still subscribed and enjoy it!).
Should I care that they've blown so much money and produced such complete crap ? Yeah, because I was expecting an awful lot more but on the other hand no because I'll be happy if they lose money due to their lazy stupid decisions.

Why should I care if their developers lose their jobs because their crap game failed ? I'm a consumer who generally doesn't give a shít about you, I'm not your personal social welfare department. I want stuff at the cheapest price, with the best quality and delivered to me while I'm sitting on the toilet having a crap.

^^ The above not aimed at "you" personally but I'm trying to get a point across in general.

Again I made no reference to the legality of the websites, merely the fact that at the end of the day both the pirating of software and going above and beyond to obtain it from a region where it is sold cheaper due to either economic or pirating conditions, results in reduced revenues for the companies who make them.

See above, I'm a consumer not your social welfare department. I don't care how much money you make or lose. I want the best and latest product now, for the cheapest price. If you can't provide it then I'll go elsewhere to someone who can.

Of course prices would rise, do you think they'd fall in the better developed countries to match the prices found in the lesser developed ones?

Russia isn't a developing country ?

I don't think prices would rise, no. I think if someone had the money and the required knowledge to take them to the EU court over the different prices charged in Ireland compared to Russia, or even in some cases compared to the UK, that person could well get the EU to take action and force prices down.
If they can afford to sell a product "digitally" in Russia for 20 euro compared to selling the SAME product digitally in Ireland for 50 euro then something is seriously wrong and it needs to be tackled on an EU competition and consumer law level.

For someone getting quite worked up about having their moral stance on piracy called into question earlier, you seem to have no problem throwing around hilariously hyperbolic terms. Do you seriously think any rational gamer thinks developers are "criminal thieves"?

Yes, I think they could be "considered" such, as I said, especially if they remove the console second hand and rental games market with the sole intended purpose of greater profits for themselves with the possibility of cartels and price fixing being in operation afterwards, no competition and no alternatives other than piracy on offer. White collar crime in my opinion.

gizmo · 22-02-2012 6:31pm

oxo_ wrote: »

...and then Steam would be breaking the law. Not a T&C, they would be actually breaking the law.
I'd be happy to take them to the small claims court here to prove it if it ever happens to me.

Regardless, it's a poor argument to put forward as if to suggest users are doing something illegal when they are not, in any way whatsoever.

I'd imagine it comes down to a simple "Their system. Their rules." if Microsoft can ban your account and disable your access to your purchased content due to a Terms of Use violation then I'm quite sure Steam could too.

oxo_ wrote: »

That's ridiculous. That was a hypothetical point I put forward to further the argument of being realistic in recognising the problem of piracy and the nature of an average gamer if presented with convenient cheap options as alternatives.

Well in fairness it didn't read like one. In that case, my bad.

oxo_ wrote: »

Devs/Publishers MUST make gaming more convenient to access/purchase and make it considerably cheaper BEFORE they remove the secondhand and rental games market or they will suffer the consequences of rampant piracy.
My opinion, nothing more and I'm just being realistic. You have to at least accept some of what I'm saying.

I don't accept some of it, I accept all of it. Primarily because I don't agree with the idea of completely blocking second hand sales.

My only qualm in all of this was what appeared to be your agreement that it was somehow justified in light of this. As I and others have said, nothing really justifies it, especially when it's obviously harming the industry which gives us the content we enjoy.

oxo_ wrote: »

That's not my concern. I'm a consumer, I couldn't give a flying crap whether a game dev breaks even or doesn't make a profit or not.
Look at the SWTOR MMO, massive amounts of money thrown at it to develop and in all honesty it's probably the worst MMO ever released, ever. It's a complete and utter failfest (personal opinion, I'm using it as an example, don't jump on me anyone please if you're still subscribed and enjoy it!).
Should I care that they've blown so much money and produced such complete crap ? Yeah, because I was expecting an awful lot more but on the other hand no because I'll be happy if they lose money due to their lazy stupid decisions.

Here we disagree, not on the SWTOR point though.

I honestly can't understand how gamers wouldn't want to support the industry, or just specific companies, which produce things which give them so much enjoyment. I mean, without them, there'd either be no games or just a myrid of low risk, mediocre rubbish that will just sell to the masses regardless. Disregard the moral aspect if you want but this simple fact alone should make people want to do it.

Of course, it works the other way too. I refuse to buy an Ubisoft PC game with their horrific online DRM, my protest is simply not playing it. That doesn't mean I'll go and pirate it though, if anything that will just add to the figures which Ubisoft are using to justify this insanity. That being said, I don't blame publishers for attempting to find some reasonable form of protection for their games, I just loath when it takes on a form which harms legitimate customers.

Now, as I've said, I'm obviously not talking about taking a bullet for anyone but look at events like the recent funding success of Tim Schafer on Kickstarter for examples of the good that can come from supporting the right companies or even the reaction of folks on Boards to the GSC closure scare over Christmas. This is what I'm talking about, people simply giving a **** about good games.

oxo_ wrote: »

Russia isn't a developing country ?
I don't think prices would rise, no. I think if someone had the money and the required knowledge to take them to the EU court over the different prices charged in Ireland compared to Russia, or even in some cases compared to the UK, that person could well get the EU to take action and force prices down.

On what basis could they force them to lower prices? At the very most, all they could do is force them to harmonize their prices across different regions.

oxo_ wrote: »

If they can afford to sell a product "digitally" in Russia for 20 euro compared to selling the SAME product digitally in Ireland for 50 euro then something is seriously wrong and it needs to be tackled on an EU competition and consumer law level.

Well, with regard to Russia, there's little the EU could do since it's not actually in the EU. But again, this is simple economics at play, not some publisher conspiracy. It's not about being able to afford to sell the product at that price, it's about what price it is possible to sell it at.

oxo_ wrote: »

Yes, I think they could be "considered" such, as I said, especially if they remove the console second hand and rental games market with the sole intended purpose of greater profits for themselves with the possibility of cartels and price fixing being in operation afterwards, no competition and no alternatives other than piracy on offer. White collar crime in my opinion.

Well the thing is, the publishers themselves wouldn't be removing the second hand market. It would be done on a console level so you'd be free to sell them on, they just couldn't be played. If you bought the console knowing this then I'd imagine it would be very hard to sue anyone. Don't get me wrong, as I said above, I don't really believe in a blanket ban on sales, I've outlined my position on this previously but none of the points you make here are particularly valid. Cartels, price fixing and lack of competion are all irrelevant when you can simply buy the game new from any retailer you want at whatever price the retailer wants to sell it at. Even without a second hand market, the likes of Amazon, Tesco and various other online stores manage to sell games for below the RRP.

Retr0gamer · 22-02-2012 9:24pm

hooradiation wrote: »

I think you have a problem with not being able to parse sentences correctly, don't fret, it's common around here.
Believe it or not, there was no malice there, feelings of being defensive are yours alone.

Now, Let me make it all clearer for you.

"Then again, maybe there is just no polishing a turd." == "No matter how you present it, there is no credible argument for pirating video games because you can no longer afford the same volume you used to"

Is that better?

Hooradiation is taking a break from the forum for 3 weeks for flamebaiting, being insulting and using the word 'untermensch', which is in gross violation of the terms and conditions of thesaurus usage, even after warnings from the mods.

oxo_ · 22-02-2012 9:30pm

gizmo wrote: »

I'd imagine it comes down to a simple "Their system. Their rules." if Microsoft can ban your account and disable your access to your purchased content due to a Terms of Use violation then I'm quite sure Steam could too.

Doesn't mean they're right or within the law to do so though or indeed that they would enact a blanket ban. There are so many people doing it these days (buying cheaper legit keys online) that to enact a blanket ban would be counter-productive to their (Steam's) business.
The Terms of Service enacted by a lot of games companies these days, should actually be brought up and challenged as to their actual legality on an EU level and if they in turn break or hinder actual consumer laws.

Microsoft are also pretty worthless in regards taking action against piracy. Send off an email to their piracy reporting email address and you'll more than likely get a "deleted without being read" receipt a few months later. If you're lucky to get anything at all.
I've been using Technet myself for years, only paid for 1 years worth, yet I've all sorts of servers running at home along with 4 PC's running Win 7. Technically I'm probably breaking their TOS as it's not necessarily a test environment but it was cheaper to buy a standard technet sub than to purchase 4 copies of windows 7, along with all the office and server stuff I run too (mostly for learning mind, I don't fragrantly abuse the service or sell on any of my keys).

Well in fairness it didn't read like one. In that case, my bad.

Well my bad too for not being more specific in advance as to my intentions when I said that.

I don't accept some of it, I accept all of it. Primarily because I don't agree with the idea of completely blocking second hand sales.
My only qualm in all of this was what appeared to be your agreement that it was somehow justified in light of this. As I and others have said, nothing really justifies it, especially when it's obviously harming the industry which gives us the content we enjoy.

I didn't intend to come across as justifying piracy (I don't!), I just stated my opinion on what I think will happen.

Here we disagree, not on the SWTOR point though.
I honestly can't understand how gamers wouldn't want to support the industry, or just specific companies, which produce things which give them so much enjoyment.

I'm loath to support any company outside of any genuine enjoyment I might have for a game they might produce. Do that and you tend to get the shít thrown at you that was SWTOR - the amount of fanboish attitude toward that game from those defending it, and the clearly shilling reviews giving it huge scores was sickening.
Look at Blizzard now, clearly produced the best MMO ever (Wow) but they've become (perceived anyway) lazy and with a couldn't give a crap attitude. Still charging close to 50 euro to faction change and transfer your character from a dead server to something more populated (because they refuse to merge dead/dying servers). Whereas the likes of Rift (Trion) charge nothing to transfer servers and have benefited greatly from it too.
Next they go and announce effing panda's as an expansion, I still can't believe it, still think it's an April fools joke but hey, I'll probably end up enjoying it anyway when it's released then moan about it again a few months later.

Of course, it works the other way too. I refuse to buy an Ubisoft PC game with their horrific online DRM, my protest is simply not playing it.

I agree. I bought the keys online for Settlers 7 and Anno 2070, 20 euro each at the time if I remember rightly. Otherwise I wouldn't have bothered. I done that rather than pirate even though apparently the pirated versions of both are better than the legit versions

This is what I'm talking about, people simply giving a **** about good games.

I do to some degree. I paid full whack for Skyrim simply because I thought the devs done a fantastic job. Could easily have got the key online cheaper but didn't.

On what basis could they force them to lower prices? At the very most, all they could do is force them to harmonize their prices across different regions.
Well, with regard to Russia, there's little the EU could do since it's not actually in the EU. But again, this is simple economics at play, not some publisher conspiracy. It's not about being able to afford to sell the product at that price, it's about what price it is possible to sell it at.

Competition law. Price fixing. breaking or hindering free trade agreements. Abusing consumer laws. Intentionally charging customers in one region more than another, even though the products delivered are done so digitally so no extra costs involved could be justified.
Why should people in Ireland have to pay 50 euro for a game when people in Russia only for 20 euro ?
The argument that it's such a lower price in Russia because it won't sell for a higher price is a weak one and just stinks of simply "we charge people in Ireland more just because we can and they still pay it, lol".
At the very least it's morally unfair and I cannot see any valid justification for same.

Well the thing is, the publishers themselves wouldn't be removing the second hand market. It would be done on a console level so you'd be free to sell them on, they just couldn't be played.

Hence why I think piracy will win out and be seen as a better consumer friendly option. Not saying it's right, not condoning it, I'm just putting the point forward.

It will also be seen as a huge challenge to crack such restrictions on the consoles that enact such - who will have the first all defeating crack out and how many days will it take them to do it.
Again, it'll end up that the general consumer is the one to suffer because they'll still have to put up with the restrictions while pirates (from what I'm led to believe) will probably be able to play the games with no DVD's needed, straight from an ISO and possibly also have private servers to play on for FPS type games thus negating the need for console controlled multiplayer access.

I just think the whole thing is a self defeating cause as it currently stands.
Similar I feel to the music industry. The gaming industry are going down the same stupid road and they'll make the same stupid mistakes.
They should embrace the technology and changing times along with available changing access methods to same, rather than clam up, round up the wagons and shout NEVER NEVER NEVER... It doesn't work.

Closing down and shutting out the rental and second hand market could also conceivably be considered anti competitive if challenged strongly at an EU level as they are or would be in effect destroying a very large competitive market just to suit their own personal business model as they see it.

Another option also would be a console maker led or developer led trade in and swap shop type set up. Driven by and led by actual gamers, where no massive profits are made, other than that to pay for the service and provision. I say that because I also feel game shops are absolutely creaming gamers by what they charge for second hand games against what they actually pay gamers for them.
If I sell Skyrim for 5 euro and see it then for sale in the same shop second hand for 30 euro, that's complete and utter bullshít, greedy pigs for doing that.
What if I could go on xbox live for instance and put the game up for swap after say a 3 month time frame has passed ? You send the game in to the service, it's tested and Q&A's to be in good working order and then advertised for swap.
You go on the service, see your game has been accepted and check against who wants that game compared to what you want, find a match, click a button and both games are swapped and sent out to the respective gamers.
Charge for the service, 5 euro each or something to cover postage costs, continued operation of the service and provision of same to keep it going for everyone.

There we go.

If anyone uses that idea above you better send me a few games now :mad:

Go **** yourself THQ

Comments