[quote name='wildcpac']There are a couple of major differences for videogames now and then. Music and voice acting. Games pre PS2 did not have voice acting or licensed music. That alone is going to eat up a good portion of money. Are we really going to complain about the prices of games now? They are 60 this generation. They were 50 for 10 years from PS1-PS2. They were 50 on the Genesis and some Nintendo games. So over the majority of the past 25 years games were around 50 bucks and finally went up 10 dollars to 60. Should I mention how much Super Nintendo and N64 games were going between 60-70 dollars? So games this generation went up 10 bucks compared to 20 plus years ago. Should we mention how much the cost of everything else has gone up more than 20 percent in the last 25 years?
Music CD's cost more than videogames? Since when? I know music cd's at some places were up to 25 dollars back in the mid to late 90's but never more. I hate to break it to you but there have been Music/DVD places like Gamestop. CD Warehouse was one and there are several places where you can trade in used DVD"s. Block Buster, FYE among others. There are a couple of reasons why the CD/ DVD versions never really worked compared to Gamestop.
1. People can get music legally and illegally online that there was no need to buy used CD's. A person can borrow a friends CD and just legally put that onto their Ipod and Itunes. You cannot do that with video games.
2. DVD's. The majority of people rent dvd's. How many people go out and buy dvds? And if they do how often do they watch it more than twice? It's the biggest waste of money. Even used dvd's are a waste of money. For the cost of a couple of used DVD's from Block Buster or off of Amazon one can get Netflix 3 out at time and watch 24 movies during the month.
Here is the big reason why developers and producers are doing it this generation. 1 is online play, 2 is because the majority of people have their systems hooked up to the net and the systems have Hard Drives. This as minimal to non existant in previous generations.
How is a person who buys a used game a Customer of EA? EA didn't see a penny from that "customer" but the customer should have full rights and be able to use EA services that cost EA money? Last time I checked, EA is a company and why should they lose even a penny on someone who doesn't pay them for their service?
Also, lets not compare music, movies and tv to video games. Musicians are able to make money off of ticket sales, merchandise sales, radio, itunes, Amazon, cd sales, single sales, soundtracks (TV, Videogames, Movies, commercials) etc etc etc etc etc. Movies are able to make money off of merchandise, ticket sales, dvd sales, rentals, TV and Cable, etc etc etc etc. TV shows are able to make money off of merchandise, ratings, sponsors, dvd sales and rentals.
How do videogames make money? New Sales, some merchandise and to a lesser extent rentals.[/QUOTE]
For the online play, I would argue that EA doesn't lose any money from a person buying a game used (not from bandwidth anyway). Unless somehow the person who bought the game new can still play it online without a copy. I would like to think First Sale Doctrine would win out for me as a consumer.
My mention of compact discs costing more is a reference to cassettes costing less than a CD and how games moving to disc from cart, while not increasing in price, did stay the same.
And the comparison to other forms of multimedia entertainment is all we have to go on, that is why I made it. Arguing that it is a tangible good doesn't seem to hold any weight, so what else is there?
Finally, I don't disagree with every point you make, as the industry (well, EA) can't survive at this rate. I also have no problem with what EA is doing.
I'll also add a paraphrase of a quote from neogaf in reference to when publishers bitch and moan "I'll show remorse for publishers and developers losing out on used game sales when they show remorse for selling me a terrible game."