Fives Reasons Kotaku Took Dirty Money to Express an Opinion
Jason Schreier wrote this opinion piece about how a world without used games wouldn’t be that bad. Each example was plagued with corporate propaganda and it just goes to show you that you can’t trust mainstream websites anymore. I hope I never go mainstream just so I won’t confirm my paranoia I have about this article and most reviews today. That fear being that game publishers pay websites to write this crap.
I’m going to quote Kotaku’s reader, Shinta, who basically summed up everything nicely without the typical rage you see in a comments section of an article.
Gimme a C! Gimme an O! Gimme an R! Gimme a P!
/out of breath
Gimme a ORATION!
What’s that spell!? C-O-R-P-O-R-A-T-I-O-N!!!! YAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!
“Whatever happens, it might not be so bad to let publishers have this victory.”
1) Everything’s going digital anyway.
Right, it’s inevitable. That makes it a good reason. It’s like a force of nature, like the passage of time, it’s actually just happening naturally without our input at all.
“For every Vita disc available in stores, there’s an accompanying digital release (that is usually cheaper).”
Actually, it’s more expensive. You save $5 on most titles off PSN, and they’re mostly 2+ GB each. Memory cards now are $100 for a 32 GB. That means that after getting 16 games, saving you $80 in $5 increments, you would have filled up your $100 card, netting you a loss of $20. Furthermore, this is only going to get worse over time as retailers will drop the price of games MUCHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH faster than publishers will digitally. Let’s compare Vita launch titles new on Amazon in 1 year to Vita digital titles on PSN. We’ll see which is cheaper. What a joke.
2) The future could look a lot like Steam.
Steam is already there for people who want to use it. The future could also look a lot like Origin. Or it could look a lot like PSP games on PSN that are still $40. This isn’t even a reason, it’s just baseless, wishful thinking.
3) Retailers will have to offer better deals.
Their “better deals” will be nullified by the fee you give to corporations because of this shit.
Plus this point just totally nullifies your entire argument. It’s retailers who DO give better deals, not publishers. Cutting out used games is a move towards eliminating the power of retailers.
Not to mention this would potentially eliminate hundreds of thousands of jobs from people working at all Gamestops and stores like them around the world, the truck drivers, the warehouse workers, the mom and pop shops that sell used, and on and on and on.
4) Games could be significantly more affordable.
Right, publishers are going against tons of negative fan feedback so they can make less money. That’s really a brilliant display of the total absence of logic.
5) Publishers might take more risks.
Yeah right. Publishers are beholden to their shareholders who want more and more and more and more. Your theory is that they’re going to get to a point where they’re making more money on games then they are now (which kind of nullifies your last point), and then suddenly decide – “you know what guys? we have enough money. let’s take more risks on niche markets with little sign of return, what do you say shareholders?” They can take risks now any time they want and release entirely digital games right now. Absolutely nothing would change, and there’s zero evidence to support this point.
Do you see any corporations using their new methods of distribution responsibly? Do you trust DLC is being used in a way that benefits consumers, or ethical business?
There is zero evidence to support any of this. Steam is the exception to the rule. They’re not even a publicly listed company, and are not beholden to shareholders at all. Just thinking of rainbows and assuming that everyone will be like them is ridiculous.
Jump in line! (In other words, that’s the link to the article…)