I've SWITCHed! - General discussion - WARNING IN POST 1

CiDeRmAn

chrislad wrote: »

I've heard it's not a limitation on size, but from Nintendo - basically, each cart can only have one game. This is two games (well, it's really 10 but semantics) - If Capcom were to release it as one Legacy Collection with all games, a total physical release would have been possible. As it stands, they went with two releases, so they would have had to have 2 carts, and I imagine these games barely take up a gig, and that's with the extra art etc.

That is just plain bonkers.
I mean, seriously bonkers.

Could that be why Bayonetta and it's sequel are single game/download as well?

So, if Capacom had re-engineered the collections into one then it would have been fine, but as it's two discrete titles it has to be on two carts or one with a download....

Bugger

Mr E

Probably an anti-piracy measure.

CiDeRmAn

Mr E wrote: »

Probably an anti-piracy measure.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6oKjuvA55g

ERG89

Mr E wrote: »

Probably an anti-piracy measure.

Cut costs of shipping two carts is the way I take it.

Anyway, another day another pokemon rumour.

CastorTroy

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

I've never been on a witch hunt before, nor a bear hunt...

Always wanted to be out hunting Snarks... just be careful of Boojums....

What about to ask what Snorks did to you, then reread it

sligeach

chrislad wrote: »

I've heard it's not a limitation on size, but from Nintendo - basically, each cart can only have one game. This is two games (well, it's really 10 but semantics) - If Capcom were to release it as one Legacy Collection with all games, a total physical release would have been possible. As it stands, they went with two releases, so they would have had to have 2 carts, and I imagine these games barely take up a gig, and that's with the extra art etc.

Evidence and links please? That sounds like complete BS. Capcom are trying to kill the secondhand market for their games and Nintendo don't want to use a cartridge larger than 16GB, nobody does, because the 32GB cartridge is too expensive. Except...

Dragon Quest Heroes 1 & 2 used a 32GB cartridge at launch and that was 2 games. The Crash Bandicoot Trilogy will be on one cartridge, supposedly 5.2GB, I think there's confusion over that. And the upcoming Street Fighter 30th Anniversary is all coming on a cartridge as far as I know.

CiDeRmAn

CastorTroy wrote: »

What about to ask what Snorks did to you, then reread it

There really aren't enough Lewis Carroll fans hereabouts...

the Boojum was a Snark, you see....

TitianGerm

sligeach wrote: »

Capcom are trying to kill the secondhand market for their games.

Evidence and links please?

If you were a developer and 500,000 people bought your game on disk or cart at €20 each you'd have made €10 million. Now those people trade your game in, and another 500,000 buy the trade ins. Would you be happy that you missed out on another €10 million? Because I know if be pissed.

Rhyme

TitianGerm wrote: »

Evidence and links please?

If you were a developer and 500,000 people bought your game on disk or cart at €20 each you'd have made €10 million. Now those people trade your game in, and another 500,000 buy the trade ins. Would you be happy that you missed out on another €10 million? Because I know if be pissed.

I don't think you would have any right to be pissed about 'missing out' on another 10 million. A developer charges X for a game, they get that X when the game sells, why should they get more? If a game changes hands 4 times, does the developer get paid 4 times? Fuck no. Once a buyer has paid their X amount, they own the game, it's theirs to do what they will.

They tried this crap with artworks as well. You buy a painting when an artist is starting out and then it increases in value due to the artist increasing in fame. You then sell the art, making a profit and the artist wants their cut. Bullshit. If you want more money, make more art. If a developer wants more money, make more games.

TitianGerm

Rhyme wrote: »

I don't think you would have any right to be pissed about 'missing out' on another 10 million. A developer charges X for a game, they get that X when the game sells, why should they get more? If a game changes hands 4 times, does the developer get paid 4 times? Fuck no. Once a buyer has paid their X amount, they own the game, it's theirs to do what they will.

They tried this crap with artworks as well. You buy a painting when an artist is starting out and then it increases in value due to the artist increasing in fame. You then sell the art, making a profit and the artist wants their cut. Bullshit. If you want more money, make more art. If a developer wants more money, make more games.

Of course you have a right to be pissed. If those first 500,000 couldn't trade the game in (assume the game was linked to their profile), then the second 500,000 who wanted the game would buy off you and you'd make an extra €10 million, or would buy on sale in the future for 50% off and you'd make €5 million.

A comparison to art is not correct either, art is usually a one off piece/limited run and will not be reproduced. Games can be printed to disk/cart at will. Games are disposable in comparison to art.

Banjo

TitianGerm wrote: »

Of course you have a right to be pissed. If those first 500,000 couldn't trade the game in (assume the game was linked to their profile), then the second 500,000 who wanted the game would buy off you and you'd make an extra €10 million, or would buy on sale in the future for 50% off and you'd make €5 million.

A comparison to art is not correct either, art is usually a one off piece/limited run and will not be reproduced. Games can be printed to disk/cart at will. Games are disposable in comparison to art.

Sure, but the thing is that they're not addressing the reason why they missed out on that 2nd 10 Mill in the first place. Realistically they didn't miss out on that 2nd 10 Mill, 'cause if those guys wanted to buy the game at that price they would have.
So why not price your game so that you make 15 Million off the first 1 million sales?
(because that 2nd 500,000 will still want to buy it for less regardless)

Rhyme

TitianGerm wrote: »

Of course you have a right to be pissed. If those first 500,000 couldn't trade the game in (assume the game was linked to their profile), then the second 500,000 who wanted the game would buy off you and you'd make an extra €10 million, or would buy on sale in the future for 50% off and you'd make €5 million.

A comparison to art is not correct either, art is usually a one off piece/limited run and will not be reproduced. Games can be printed to disk/cart at will. Games are disposable in comparison to art.

My comparison refers to ownership so is apt. If you pay money and get something then you should have the right to dispose of that thing as you see fit. If you want to sell it on, keep it, set fire to it, whatever, it's your right. If a developer seeks to curtail that right so they make additional profit, fuck 'em.

If a developer really wants to cut into the second-hand market, they should make games that people won't want to sell and not charge stupid money for re-releases and old games. A 5 year old game retailing for 60e is asking to be ignored.

TitianGerm

Rhyme wrote: »

My comparison refers to ownership so is apt. If you pay money and get something then you should have the right to dispose of that thing as you see fit. If you want to sell it on, keep it, set fire to it, whatever, it's your right. If a developer seeks to curtail that right so they make additional profit, fuck 'em.

If a developer really wants to cut into the second-hand market, they should make games that people won't want to sell and not charge stupid money for re-releases and old games. A 5 year old game retailing for 60e is asking to be ignored.

We can agree to disagree but in 10 years time I highly doubt the ability to trade games will still exist. The only way you will be able to play that game is if you buy it from the stores and a developer will get their money.

ThunbergsAreGo

TitianGerm wrote: »

We can agree to disagree but in 10 years time I highly doubt the ability to trade games will still exist. The only way you will be able to play that game is if you buy it from the stores and a developer will get their money.

Why limit it to games, could the same argument not be used for couches?

sligeach

TitianGerm wrote: »

Evidence and links please?

It's by no means Capcom's first attempt at trying to quash the secondhand market.

Capcom: Used Sales 'Not A Factor' In The Mercenaries Save System

https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/125630/Capcom_Used_Sales_Not_A_Factor_In_The_Mercenaries_Save_System.php

They try it in different ways every now and again, and they're usually met with a backlash. The way Resident Evil 7 is set up on Switch completely removes the secondhand market. It's very convenient for them, they're being lazy and possibly sneaky. If a fast action game like DOOM can run on Switch, then Capcom I think have no excuse. They asked Nintendo to beef up the Switch and specifically the RAM, Nintendo complied, and for what? This and half physical/half digital old ports?

TitianGerm

Banjo wrote: »

Sure, but the thing is that they're not addressing the reason why they missed out on that 2nd 10 Mill in the first place. Realistically they didn't miss out on that 2nd 10 Mill, 'cause if those guys wanted to buy the game at that price they would have.
So why not price your game so that you make 15 Million off the first 1 million sales?
(because that 2nd 500,000 will still want to buy it for less regardless)

The second 500k might not have valued the game at €20 (maybe they've a backlog/short of cash/time constraint) and would wait for a sale to get the game.

For example, If I buy Overwatch for €60 and finish playing it, I trade it to GameStop for €30 in 6 months time, GameStop sell it for €50 to you the next day.

Blizzard make €60, GameStop make €20.

Now if we can't trade games and I buy the game for €60 at launch and play for 6 months (I'd consider I got my monies worth by that stage) and you buy the game for €50 from Blizzard on sale the same day.

Blizzard makes €60 + €50 in this scenario.

Now Blizzard have more money to invest in developing new games, reduce loot boxes etc.

What I would say though is we would need demos/refunds for all games in a market like this. You get an hour/two levels etc to see if you like the game. If you don't you request a refund/or don't buy.

Rhyme

TitianGerm wrote: »

We can agree to disagree but in 10 years time I highly doubt the ability to trade games will still exist. The only way you will be able to play that game is if you buy it from the stores and a developer will get their money.

If the future is digital only then we'll have to live there. We're discussing what's happening now and now, I can buy a second hand game and enjoy it.

If measures like this destroy the second hand market then I can't see developers getting all of that second 10 million. People will get their games through alternative means to avoid paying full whack (waiting for a discount or piracy) or just play something cheaper.

TitianGerm

naughtb4 wrote: »

Why limit it to games, could the same argument not be used for couches?

Environmental reasons with sofas/cars etc. The cost to the planet would be huge.

TitianGerm

Rhyme wrote: »

If the future is digital only then we'll have to live there. We're discussing what's happening now and now, I can buy a second hand game and enjoy it.

If measures like this destroy the second hand market then I can't see developers getting all of that second 10 million. People will get their games through alternative means to avoid paying full whack (waiting for a discount or piracy) or just play something cheaper.

If you pirate then you'll be banned or fined. It's happening with movies/sky TV now and it's only a matter of time before it filters across to gaming.

I don't agree with piracy so I'm fully behind people having their consoles banned if they are found to have pirated a game.

Rhyme

TitianGerm wrote: »

If you pirate then you'll be banned or fined. It's happening with movies/sky TV now and it's only a matter of time before it filters across to gaming.

I don't agree with piracy so I'm fully behind people having their consoles banned if they are found to have pirated a game.

Oh so am I, piracy hurts gaming a lot more (I believe) than it hurts cinema and is a blight but if you charge stupid prices, you win stupid prizes.

I'll continue buying second hand games when I can't afford a full price copy or can afford to wait for a discount as I believe that's my right. If you believe otherwise, I'll fight that and you all the way to an all-digital future.

Star Lord

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

I've never been on a witch hunt before, nor a bear hunt...

Always wanted to be out hunting Snarks... just be careful of Boojums....

Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the JubJub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!

Always loved that, The Hunting of the Snark, Phantasmagoria and The Lang Coortin'.

chrislad

sligeach wrote: »

Evidence and links please? That sounds like complete BS. Capcom are trying to kill the secondhand market for their games and Nintendo don't want to use a cartridge larger than 16GB, nobody does, because the 32GB cartridge is too expensive. Except...

Dragon Quest Heroes 1 & 2 used a 32GB cartridge at launch and that was 2 games. The Crash Bandicoot Trilogy will be on one cartridge, supposedly 5.2GB, I think there's confusion over that. And the upcoming Street Fighter 30th Anniversary is all coming on a cartridge as far as I know.

I don't have any proof or links. Just something I read somewhere. Again, those games could have been designed to be treated as one game, but I'm just spitballing here.

TitianGerm

Rhyme wrote: »

Oh so am I, piracy hurts gaming a lot more (I believe) than it hurts cinema and is a blight but if you charge stupid prices, you win stupid prizes.

I'll continue buying second hand games when I can't afford a full price copy or can afford to wait for a discount as I believe that's my right. If you believe otherwise, I'll fight that and you all the way to an all-digital future.

I honestly haven't bought a second hand game in years. You can often get the game cheaper digitally or on sale within 6 months.

blockfighter

TitianGerm wrote: »

I honestly haven't bought a second hand game in years. You can often get the game cheaper digitally or on sale within 6 months.

I still occasionally buy second hand games online mostly. Got Arms for €21 and Mario + Rabbids for about €38 on eBay a few months after launch. Great bargains for 2 great games. While the developer missed out on my money for both games i intend to get the dlc for Rabbids when it gets released.
I have opted to go mostly physical copies of big games to both get games cheaper and save on storage on sd card.

sligeach

TitianGerm wrote: »

I honestly haven't bought a second hand game in years. You can often get the game cheaper digitally or on sale within 6 months.

"Waiting for Nintendo to hold a 1st party sale"

TitianGerm

sligeach wrote: »

"Waiting for Nintendo to hold a 1st party sale"

I'm not just talking about Nintendo but Amazon.de had 3 for 2 on games a while ago and they had the likes of Odyssey, Splatoon etc included in the deal.

wheresmahbombs

madmoe wrote: »

This for Switch mate?

I'd say so, given the blue/red (or should I say pink?) 8. The 8 was only blue in the Wii U version.

ThunbergsAreGo

Would people reccomend banner saga or steamworld heist for commuting?

TitianGerm

Has anyone played Wulverblade? Apparently it's going on sale soon (33% off) so should be available for €11ish. Looks quite good to be honest.

madmoe

TitianGerm wrote: »

Has anyone played Wulverblade? Apparently it's going on sale soon (33% off) so should be available for €11ish. Looks quite good to be honest.

I have it and I completed it. I really liked it but at points I found it CRAZY hard, especially in one player mode! I had to get my brother to join in to defeat the final boss! I love the animation, the music, the extras. Was well worth it even at full price IMO!

Cheers,
M