Economics of Game Prices

[Nobinsor]

Mr. Speaker!

I would like to show the government a small piece of news:

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/NINTENDO+URGES+TRADE+ACTION+TO+END+VIDEO+GAME+PIRACY-a018017021

Now, if we adjust for inflation, higher wages, the fact that I was never able to get Maximum Carnage for the SNES because it was first C$119.99 and then mercifully lowered in price to C$109.99, and, of course, lady gaga...

Yes, Mr. Speaker....there it is....

the higher prices argument is largely invalid...now if you were to argue that price itself causes piracy, then yes...I will agree. As a consumer, lower price is always better, no price is always best. I'm sure the government will have no problem with this reasoning.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker!

(Is this admissible as a debate rebuttal!?)

[Dhsu]

Did you just make a "prices cause piracy" argument literally right after zircon just posted for the second time that people pirated the free Humble Indie Bundle?

[Nobinsor]

Sir, I did not, sir!

I also didn't see his post until after I posted mine.

My main point was that, in essence, people pirate because they don't want to pay period. What the price is is entirely irrelevant. Now, with the humble indie bundle and its 25% piracy rate, well! We have a whole new problem here, which concerns learned behaviours and patterns of behaviour, all of which extend FAR beyond the issue of price itself. In addition, the link I provided and subsequent post was also to highlight how irrelevant price is to piracy...but that was not really talked about!

Most humble apologies since that was not present in the first posting!

[Gario]

The only reason I have beef with your counterpoints so far is because you're not even reading my conclusions properly.

Well, that's because it wasn't my argument.

Well then, let's remind you what your argument was.

2 ) Make the games cheaper. No economist ever teaches this, but lower prices == more sales. If you raise prices, your profit per unit goes up, sure, but you sell less of them, so it doesn't matter anyway. That's how you cause inflation and kill economies. Lower prices means more people CAN buy your product, meaning you'll sell more and offset that lower cost. High costs will never break their ceiling of potential buyers, but low cost items can (and usually do) oversell estimations. You know, part of why I impulse buy gum and not video games is because an impulsive purchase of gum only sets me back 50 cents... and impulse buy of a video game sets me back 50$. I only impulse buy games 10$ or less, if even that. So, lower the cost of your games, and get more people to buy them.

Honestly, most people wouldn't pirate games if they didn't feel persecuted in the first place. No one WANTS to steal. People steal because they feel like they're getting a raw deal and want to stick it to the man. Don't fuck over your customers, and you won't have rampant piracy.

Don't fuck over your customers, and you won't have rampant piracy.

HOLY CRAP lowering the price was your solution to piracy. What are you even talking about, when you say people are ignoring your argument? That was your original argument. Word for word. There's no way around it - you are arguing that lowering prices will reduce piracy to a non-factor, and everyone else says no it won't (not to mention that they're saying that lowering prices hurt business more than piracy does, but that's another issue entirely).

Don't expect a consistent answer when you can't come up with a consistent question. By the way, in logic what you're doing is called 'moving the goalpost'. That reference to the first post is proof of that.

[The Damned]

Instead of him countering my perfectly valid and sound points' date=' he just went "baawwwwwww" in the corner and posted .gifs. Fine; obviously there are better people for me to discuss this with.[/quote']

Again, personal slights for no reason.

yeah, I'm really hurt that you had to resort to insults to make your points. Trust me, my feelings are far from hurt.

and the Damned... neener' date=' neener, neener[/i']... See, I can do it, too. If I recall, I'm still waiting for some responses from you. You know, outside of witty .gifs.

First, it was a jpg. Jpg is not a gif. You should know this. You are a computer something student. I can't recall right now, it it had something to do with programming, because you specifically mentioned it multiple times to back up your arguments.

Second, again, your behavior betrays your position. Again, this does not help anything you have said or done.

Thrid, when you stop doing the very thing you accuse me, and others here, of doing, and stop ignoring our arguments, pretending they aren't relevant, and getting righteous while proving nothing with any kind of support aside from "BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S RIGHT", then I 'll get back to you.

Besides, Schwaltzvald said I could have a free trial of his posting style. He's not Blizzard, and therefore not charging me anything to use it. How do you respond to that?

Read above, plox.

I love how he feels the need to include one extra line of a quote, which doesn't even need to be used or answered, so he can make one more comment that contributes nothing to either side of the discussion. It's like he has to get the last word in, even in his own posts.

To show him I have no personal feelings against him, I will let him have the last word in my post.

Anyway, I just finished cleaning the house (woohoo!)

[JackKieser]

Well then, let's remind you what your argument was.

HOLY CRAP lowering the price was your solution to piracy. What are you even talking about, when you say people are ignoring your argument? That was your original argument. Word for word.

No, it wasn't "word for word". You forgot this part:

1 ) Developers need to make more compelling software... and no, just because 2010 had ME2, a CoD, a Halo, and RDR, that does NOT mean that we're putting out quality titles. The ENTIRE VIDEO GAME INDUSTRY, across all consoles + PCs (without iDevices) released 1224 games in 2010. Note: that includes multi-console releases (ME2 coming out on 360 and PC counts as 2 releases)... but even taking that into consideration, over 1200 games were released in 2010, and how many of them mattered? How many of them sold? How many of them were even GOOD?

Hint: If you didn't know that many games were even released, then the answer is "very few".

Instead of studios sinking money into all of this shovelware (I cringe to think about how many of those games were Wii trash titles), how about NOT MAKING ALL OF THAT CRAP. Make less games, and make them ALL BETTER. How about only releasing 500, or 300 games total between all consoles, and using all that saved money to make those 300-500 games all AAA titles? If all of those games were must-have games, you'd be selling more. Which brings me to...

The point was twofold, which means that they go together; you can't quote half of it, and claim you're giving full context. People pirate games they don't feel are actually worth a purchase, and people pirate games they feel cost too much. Fix both of those, or even ONE of those, and you'll go a long way towards fixing the problem... but like I've said since then (because there is not infinite room to post), you'll never stop it outright.

There's no way around it - you are arguing that lowering prices will reduce piracy to a non-factor, and everyone else says no it won't (not to mention that they're saying that lowering prices hurt business more than piracy does, but that's another issue entirely).

(Emphasis added)

NO I'M NOT. How many times do I have to say that? If you THINK that's my argument, then it's due to me not being clear or choosing the right words, due to you misinterpreting my posts, or some combination of the two. Piracy will never be a non-factor until companies choose to ignore its effects, which is, by the way, a totally valid response to piracy: again, the HIB people ignored piracy outright, and it made them a ton of money. Hell, Blizzard gives away WoW, knowing that private servers exist. Even THEY ignore piracy, to some extent.

Don't expect a consistent answer when you can't come up with a consistent question. By the way, in logic what you're doing is called 'moving the goalpost'. That reference to the first post is proof of that.

Not when you quote half of it out of context, it's not.

[JackKieser]

Again, personal slights for no reason.

yeah, I'm really hurt that you had to resort to insults to make your points. Trust me, my feelings are far from hurt.

Then, why do you post nothing constructive anymore? You haven't actually quoted an argument I've made in... 7 pages. All you quote anymore is axillary stuff that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. I suppose I'm partially to blame; I really should ignore you're off-topic ranting, raving, and rambling about how I'm just such a mean poster.

First, it was a jpg. Jpg is not a gif. You should know this.

I'm sorry I didn't check your image properties when you posted. I assumed you were posting a .gif when you posted an animated popcorn image you said was a .gif. My bad.

You are a computer something student. I can't recall right now, it it had something to do with programming, because you specifically mentioned it multiple times to back up your arguments.

I've studied game design (design and production) and C/C++ programming, yes. My major is philosophy. I've studied broadly in my time in school.

Second, again, your behavior betrays your position. Again, this does not help anything you have said or done.

What? Mocking you? Hardly. I could be the most patient, respectful poster in the history of the internet, and my points would be no different (though my execution might). What you need to learn is what a bunch of 14 year-olds on SmashBoards already know: a person is separate from his argument, and trying to discredit a person doesn't actually discredit an argument; that can only be done by proving premises or conclusion false. So, say whatever you want about me or my posting style; if you can't prove the premises wrong, or prove their connection to my conclusion wrong, it doesn't matter what you say about me, as a person, because I am not my argument.

Even I don't say your arguments are false because you're stupid... although I DO think you're stupid, though that's just my opinion. Feel free to disregard it.

Thrid, when you stop doing the very thing you accuse me, and others here, of doing, and stop ignoring our arguments, pretending they aren't relevant, and getting righteous while proving nothing with any kind of support aside from "BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S RIGHT", then I 'll get back to you.

I have never "ignored" any argument in this thread; any time someone quotes me, I directly multi-quote them back with a point-by-point rebuttal of their premises, and I have NEVER once in this whole debate tried to prove an argument right by saying that "it's right because I know its right". Everything I've provided so far can be found with a simple Google search. I've never even ignored YOUR arguments; I gave you the same point-by-point treatment, even when it was obvious that the only reason you disagreed was because you misinterpreted my post (the Pkmn DLC thing, where you somehow thought I meant a GBA game had DLC or something).

Besides, Schwaltzvald said I could have a free trial of his posting style. He's not Blizzard, and therefore not charging me anything to use it. How do you respond to that?

...irrelevant? Great for you? I really don't care.

I love how he feels the need to include one extra line of a quote, which doesn't even need to be used or answered, so he can make one more comment that contributes nothing to either side of the discussion. It's like he has to get the last word in, even in his own posts.

To show him I have no personal feelings against him, I will let him have the last word in my post.

I would like to let you know, by the way, that I respond to EVERY section of a post, no matter how banal it is, because I don't even want to RISK quoting someone out of context, much like Gario did earlier to me. If I'm going to quote someone, I'm going to quote them ENTIRELY. That's why I multi-quote everything: because even when I don't respect YOU, I still respect your posts enough to quote them in their entirety.

EDIT: Sorry for the double-post. I figured someone would have posted by now. My bad.

[Nobinsor]

Shoooooot.....folks...we missed it all along.

The solution is free calendars...geez!

[JackKieser]

What... what? You know, there are some times when I really wish I knew Korean, and some times when I'm REALLY glad I don't... and I'm not sure which time this is. At least it's not as confusing as that Korean Intel song.

[Benjamin Briggs]

Sir, I did not, sir!

I also didn't see his post until after I posted mine.

My main point was that, in essence, people pirate because they don't want to pay period. What the price is is entirely irrelevant. Now, with the humble indie bundle and its 25% piracy rate, well! We have a whole new problem here, which concerns learned behaviours and patterns of behaviour, all of which extend FAR beyond the issue of price itself. In addition, the link I provided and subsequent post was also to highlight how irrelevant price is to piracy...but that was not really talked about!

Most humble apologies since that was not present in the first posting!

I like this guy's style

[Gario]

Alright, why not?

I'm actually kind of sad they didn't give the two arguments against piracy that I feel are the most pressing:

Even though numbering the arguments and splitting them into two separate arguments yourself implies that they are mutually exclusive, I'll include them altogether.

1 ) Developers need to make more compelling software... and no, just because 2010 had ME2, a CoD, a Halo, and RDR, that does NOT mean that we're putting out quality titles. The ENTIRE VIDEO GAME INDUSTRY, across all consoles + PCs (without iDevices) released 1224 games in 2010. Note: that includes multi-console releases (ME2 coming out on 360 and PC counts as 2 releases)... but even taking that into consideration, over 1200 games were released in 2010, and how many of them mattered? How many of them sold? How many of them were even GOOD?

Hint: If you didn't know that many games were even released, then the answer is "very few".

Instead of studios sinking money into all of this shovelware (I cringe to think about how many of those games were Wii trash titles), how about NOT MAKING ALL OF THAT CRAP. Make less games, and make them ALL BETTER. How about only releasing 500, or 300 games total between all consoles, and using all that saved money to make those 300-500 games all AAA titles? If all of those games were must-have games, you'd be selling more. Which brings me to...

Wait, this has very little to NOTHING to do with piracy. Perhaps it's a decent idea to save money (or sell more games, overall), but if there were fewer games in the market then that just makes a pirate's job easier. This is a non-sequitur argument that does not lead into the second point. Why did you want me to include it, again?

Not to mention that most of what you said is highly subjective - there are more than enough people that like shovelware out there for it's existence to be justified. I don't like it and neither do you, but why would a company make it if no one liked it? For someone that likes attacking people based on them making assumptions and opinions, you sure do use them a lot yourself.

First point - completely irrelevant. Next point.

2 ) Make the games cheaper. No economist ever teaches this, but lower prices == more sales. If you raise prices, your profit per unit goes up, sure, but you sell less of them, so it doesn't matter anyway. That's how you cause inflation and kill economies. Lower prices means more people CAN buy your product, meaning you'll sell more and offset that lower cost. High costs will never break their ceiling of potential buyers, but low cost items can (and usually do) oversell estimations. You know, part of why I impulse buy gum and not video games is because an impulsive purchase of gum only sets me back 50 cents... and impulse buy of a video game sets me back 50$. I only impulse buy games 10$ or less, if even that. So, lower the cost of your games, and get more people to buy them.

Honestly, most people wouldn't pirate games if they didn't feel persecuted in the first place. No one WANTS to steal. People steal because they feel like they're getting a raw deal and want to stick it to the man. Don't fuck over your customers, and you won't have rampant piracy.

There you have it - your entire argument, in it's original form. Even in it's entirety it still reduces to that last sentence.

Piracy will never be a non-factor until companies choose to ignore its effects, which is, by the way, a totally valid response to piracy.

Hey, I can actually agree with that. Too bad that wasn't your first argument (shown in full above - no denying that now). We can leave it at that peacefully, if you'd like.

[DarkeSword]

People pirate games because they want games for free. Sure, they'll justify it to the internet and their friends as trying to "stick it to the man" or "making a statement" or "I can't afford it!" or some other such nonsense, but really they just want a game for free. It has nothing to do with the price or quality of the game. It's the same reason people pirate music, movies, TV shows, and books. It's free. You can spend your money on more important things, like cream soda, or a good sandwich.

That's why you can't stop piracy. Adjusting game prices won't fix that. There will never be a reasonable price-point low enough to end or significantly curtail piracy. It doesn't matter how good you make your game; people will pirate it. It doesn't matter how easy you make it for your customers to buy and use your product; people will pirate it. It doesn't matter how much your charge for it; people will pirate it.

[JackKieser]

Alright, why not?

Even though numbering the arguments and splitting them into two separate arguments yourself implies that they are mutually exclusive, I'll include them altogether.

I don't really see how numbering them makes them exclusive to each other; I would have thought that made them sequential. See? Misunderstanding. It happens.

Wait, this has very little to NOTHING to do with piracy. Perhaps it's a decent idea to save money (or sell more games, overall), but if there were fewer games in the market then that just makes a pirate's job easier. This is a non-sequitur argument that does not lead into the second point. Why did you want me to include it, again?

I'll admit that I could have been a LOT clearer as to why shovelware matters to piracy. I'll give you the short version: even pirated copies of shovelware count towards piracy statistics, and shovelware is at an increased risk of piracy because the kind of people who use torrents are already predisposed to NOT want to pay money for it; tech-savvy people are NOT the market that shovelware designers are aiming at... they are aiming at dumb parents who think Carnival Games sounds like a good time for the family.

I'll readily admit that I've pirated shovelware because I wanted a time-waster, but wasn't willing to pay full price for something that obviously wasn't WORTH full price, and I doubt I'm the only one. That, unfortunately but understandably, counts towards piracy statistics. Less shovelware means less games to actually pirate, and I'm ok with there being less games on the market if the ones that get taken down are the "Custer's Revenge" of the gaming world.

Not to mention that most of what you said is highly subjective - there are more than enough people that like shovelware out there for it's existence to be justified. I don't like it and neither do you, but why would a company make it if no one liked it? For someone that likes attacking people based on them making assumptions and opinions, you sure do use them a lot yourself.

First point - completely irrelevant. Next point.

Well, I was one of those people who LIKED Nintendo's Seal of Approval system; I liked it when companies controlled the QUALITY of their libraries, instead of just hyping the QUANTITY of games in it. Sure, there are people who don't do their research and will buy shovelware without knowing it's a buggy, poorly designed piece of shit... but just because there are stupid people out there doesn't mean we have to provide them with crappy stuff to buy. If that argument was sound, we wouldn't have consumer protection laws in the first place because, hey, it's YOUR job to know if the toy has lead-based paint in it; if people are buying lead-based toys, there is obviously a market for them.

There you have it - your entire argument, in it's original form. Even in it's entirety it still reduces to that last sentence.

Well, I guess that's another misunderstanding; I didn't say "you won't have piracy at all", I said "you won't have RAMPANT piracy". Again, having to do with the rates, not the existence. I had intended for "rampant" to have been the operative word in that statement, not "piracy". I'm sorry for the confusion; I should have bolded or italicized or something.

Hey, I can actually agree with that. Too bad that wasn't your first argument (shown in full above - no denying that now). We can leave it at that peacefully, if you'd like.

Well, in all honesty, if I had known that one of my posts was going to be the OP for an entire thread, I might have elaborated more or written a bit more exhaustively on the subject. Unfortunately, that was originally one off-hand post in a greater thread, not a planned OP. So... I'm sorry one of my singular posts got hacked out of a thread and turned into an OP by a moderator without my planning or knowledge?

I'm glad we could at least agree on that one statement, though. See? Progress! It happens, even on the internet. ^_-

[The Damned]

What? Mocking you? Hardly. I could be the most patient, respectful poster in the history of the internet, and my points would be no different (though my execution might). What you need to learn is what a bunch of 14 year-olds on SmashBoards already know: a person is separate from his argument, and trying to discredit a person doesn't actually discredit an argument; that can only be done by proving premises or conclusion false. So, say whatever you want about me or my posting style; if you can't prove the premises wrong, or prove their connection to my conclusion wrong, it doesn't matter what you say about me, as a person, because I am not my argument.

Even I don't say your arguments are false because you're stupid... although I DO think you're stupid, though that's just my opinion. Feel free to disregard it.

You say that an argument and the person that gives it are not the same. But you are posting them. This is a terrible fallacy. You are saying these things, because you believe them. If your beliefs in a subject were somehow not connected to you, then you wouldn't be making them. The fact that you seem to strongly invested in them only affirms that. If this was simple debate, and you were chosen to represent your side, then you would do so in a manner that reflected that: rational, collected.

You may not have noticed this, but none of us are 14 years old, and this is not SmashBoards. Your behavior may be appropriate for there, but it is not acceptable for here.

You may claim whatever imaginary moral victory you wish over anyone of us, but the hard truth is, you have not done anything to even remotely sway a single person here to your line of thinking. All you have done is shown you are not an expert in the matters discussed, you have a personal belief in the evils of capitalism, and you react by treating your fellow members with contempt for merely standing up to your utter drivel.

When you are done having intellectual fisticuffs with 14 year-olds on that another site, you are welcome to come back here and have a proper discussion like an adult.

[Nekofrog]

Holy shit, did you just say that there were "very few" good games released this year?

This thread is over, the poster is dumb, and he needs to go away.

Every year has gotten better for games, no exception. Ever.

Except 1996. Stupid N64.

[DarkeSword]

Well, I was one of those people who LIKED Nintendo's Seal of Approval system; I liked it when companies controlled the QUALITY of their libraries, instead of just hyping the QUANTITY of games in it.

Nintendo's Seal of Approval didn't really mean much more than indicating that the game was licensed by Nintendo for release on the NES. There were plenty of terrible games with that on the box.

[JackKieser]

You say that an argument and the person that gives it are not the same. But you are posting them. This is a terrible fallacy. You are saying these things, because you believe them. If your beliefs in a subject were somehow not connected to you, then you wouldn't be making them. The fact that you seem to strongly invested in them only affirms that. If this was simple debate, and you were chosen to represent your side, then you would do so in a manner that reflected that: rational, collected.

(Emphasis added)

You're kidding, right? Ok, so if Saddam Hussein came up to you and said that the Earth is spherical, you wouldn't believe him because he is (was) an asshole? The truth value of a statement, group of statements, or argument as a whole is totally independent of the people who believe in a particular truth value. That's why the Clergy saying the Earth was flat didn't actually make it flat. Who CARES if I believe what I'm saying? Do you know how many times I've played Devil's Advocate in an argument? I built a competitive items ruleset in Brawl that has been played in multiple countries on a bet, playing Devil's Advocate, arguing a point of view I didn't even believe in.

Because, whether I agreed with it or not didn't actually affect its truth value. A statement is true or false regardless of who says the statement. How do you NOT understand that?

You may not have noticed this, but none of us are 14 years old, and this is not SmashBoards. Your behavior may be appropriate for there, but it is not acceptable for here.

Yeah, you're not 14, which makes it even worse that you don't understand basic logical concepts that I could explain to a high schooler. Again, I don't care what you think of me; my premises are independent of me.

You may claim whatever imaginary moral victory you wish over anyone of us, but the hard truth is, you have not done anything to even remotely sway a single person here to your line of thinking.

Well, that's a lofty claim, since in order to prove it, you'd have to innately know the opinions of every single person who has read this thread.

All you have done is shown you are not an expert in the matters discussed...

I never asserted I was the end-all-be-all expert. Just that I was knowledgeable. And, even if I wasn't, that doesn't affect the inherent truth values of my statements; I could just be parroting someone else's thoughts, and that doesn't automatically make those thoughts false, just because I don't understand or know them myself.

...you have a personal belief in the evils of capitalism...

I do think that capitalism is based off of a viewpoint that doesn't just espouse, but depends on, taking advantage of others, yes. So?

...and you react by treating your fellow members with contempt for merely standing up to your utter drivel.

No, I treat those with contempt who aren't constructive, like you. I assure you, I do not hold Zircon or Gario with contempt, even though I disagree with them. You're the only one in here I think is a dick. And even then, that wasn't until YOU started throwing around insults because I criticized your precious Pokemon, a game I also hold near and dear to my heart (which was the whole reason I cared so much to criticize it in the first place: you criticize the things you care about because you want them to get better).

When you are done having intellectual fisticuffs with 14 year-olds on that another site, you are welcome to come back here and have a proper discussion like an adult.

Well, aren't YOU just the arbiter of an entire forum all of the sudden.

EDIT@DS:

The Nintendo Seal of Quality (currently Official Nintendo Seal in NTSC regions) is a gold seal first used by Nintendo of America' date=' and later Nintendo of Europe, displayed on any game, system, or accessory licensed for use on one of its video game consoles, denoting the game has been properly licensed by Nintendo ([b']and, in theory, checked for quality).

(Emphasis added)

Didn't say it was a perfect system; sure, bad games still happened. But, at least Ninty was checking something; they still had to OK the game at ALL. Nowadays, all you have to do is buy the SDK and get someone to print / distribute your discs, and you can make and sell Wii games. NO quality control AT ALL. This has actually been a significant criticism of Nintendo's 3rd party relations towards later consoles.

[zircon]

Nowadays, all you have to do is buy the SDK and get someone to print / distribute your discs, and you can make and sell Wii games.

Not true... it's pretty hard to become a Nintendo developer, even for WiiWare or DSiware. Their process is well-known for being arcane and frustrating.

[The Damned]

No, I treat those with contempt who aren't constructive, like you. I assure you, I do not hold Zircon or Gario with contempt, even though I disagree with them. You're the only one in here I think is a dick. And even then, that wasn't until YOU started throwing around insults because I criticized your precious Pokemon, a game I also hold near and dear to my heart (which was the whole reason I cared so much to criticize it in the first place: you criticize the things you care about because you want them to get better)

Please list the exact quotes on this thread, or in any thread related to this, where I openly and undeniably insulted you. I will then list the ones you used against me. I will even put their times and dates on them if you wish. I think the tally will be interesting.

Honestly, I think the worst thing I have ever said to you was "fuck you", and only after you had already begun your batch of insults.

Actually, I decided to list them.

OK, here are Jacks comments that directly insult me:

I'm assuming that means you buy Madden games, possibly every year? If so, that doesn't mean you're a frat boy... but it does mean you're stupid. Why would you reward EA for that? For doing almost NO work and getting a full 60$ in return? Especially if you get the new iterations, you should want vehemently for EA to switch Madden to a DLC-only system; it's in your best interests for them to do so. If you're using your capitalist vote (read: dollar) to reward EA for doing something that is obviously illogical and extortionist, then you ARE to blame, and it's people like YOU that cause Madden to keep going, despite it's horrible premise.

Even I don't say your arguments are false because you're stupid... although I DO think you're stupid, though that's just my opinion. Feel free to disregard it.

I'm not putting that odd "salty" one, and I'm not including the one where you made a broad generalization about people that buy certain games.

The only thing I said that could be taken a a personal insult from me is:

You don't get to act all cool after that kind of behavior. Fuck you.

I'd like to point out that Jack said the first one back in the original Extra Credits thread, and the second one more recently.

My one comment (if it counts) was made after his initial comment in the Extra Credits thread.

You've already pulled twice the number of personal insults I may have, and that's not counting the ones that aren't aimed directly art me. If one were to include the Madden frat-boy comment, that's three.

So, really, we have you insulting me twice, and me insulting you... Possibly once, at best?

[JackKieser]

Well, I have to say I'm pleasantly surprised; I expected you to actually have me do your homework for you. So, are you still going to continue whining? Or do you have it out of your system now?

As to the actual topic: Well, Zircon, I think you're talking more about the process of getting permission to publish games at all, not to publish each game. As it stands (if I understand the process correctly) you have to apply to get your SDK (you can't just buy it; they have to agree to LET you buy it), and that's the hard part of the process. But, once Nintendo lets you buy the SDK, you're a licensed publisher / developer, and from that point on, any games you release are implicitly allowed by Nintendo, unlike the old process, where every individual game had to be reviewed.

These days, once your in, your in, and you can release as much crap as you want. Of course, this is what I've picked up from reading GamaSutra and game design articles online since the Wii came out, so if there's someone with more recent or more direct experience who can spell the process out in more detail, by all means.

[Bleck]

That's not really true though. Again, look at the Humble Indie Bundle. Minimum 25% piracy rate and the game cost 1 cent as a digital download.

people didn't want to pay 1 cent so they pirated it

I don't understand where I'm wrong here

I reiterate - people pirate games because they do not want to pay for them

Holy shit, did you just say that there were "very few" good games released this year?

This thread is over, the poster is dumb, and he needs to go away.

Every year has gotten better for games, no exception. Ever.

Except 1996. Stupid N64.

^

[zircon]

All games on any console go through some kind of QA. For example, Microsoft requires even XBLA developers to pay for Microsoft internal QA. Not to mention the NES had its share of unlicensed games without the seal, whereas it is literally impossible to print your own Wii games (or something to that effect). Shovelware games might still get released, but again, we're getting into subjective territory where QA might say a game is balanced properly, doesn't crash, has clearly defined controls etc., but an average gamer might say the game is not "fun" because it's about babies, or horses, or whatever.

[JackKieser]

I'll admit, what constitutes "shovelware" is a subjective line, although I think we can agree that the Wii has got it the worst this gen. I'm just waiting for the "quality over quantity" view to start reigning again... but that's mainly because I know that "quantity over quality" is what caused (in large part) the original game crash. Like I said earlier, over 1200 games released in a single year? That's just excessive; so many of those games were just destined to fail. We may have a a good selection of quality titles, but the ratio of good to bad games is just abysmal. I think that's the most confusing thing to me. We're always hearing publishers complain about how they "don't make back their investments", and they blame it so much on piracy, but never seem to take responsibility for just how much bad crap they put out.

It's like... well, no wonder you're losing money; you're flooding the market with Imagine: Pony Dress Up #13. There's only so much crap people can buy at once, and at least we are saving up for the Mass Effects and the Red Deads. I just wish more of that shovelware money would be thrown at indie devs... THEY are the ones that deserve it more than anyone.

[sephfire]

It's like... well, no wonder you're losing money; you're flooding the market with Imagine: Pony Dress Up #13. There's only so much crap people can buy at once, and at least we are saving up for the Mass Effects and the Red Deads. I just wish more of that shovelware money would be thrown at indie devs... THEY are the ones that deserve it more than anyone.

Part of the reason you see so many lame little titles like that is actually because they're relatively cheap to make and the audience for them isn't nearly so discerning (pretty much the definition of "shovelware"). You don't tend to see many companies complaining about the lost piracy revenue for those games.

Most of the companies complaining about the lost revenue are the ones trying to make the big-budget Mass Effects and Red Deads (sometimes succeeding, sometimes not). Black Ops was the most pirated game this year, and we can debate its quality but it definitely fits into that AAA category.

And there's also the factor that, yes, many of the "superfluous" games the industry puts out don't interest us in the slightest, but that doesn't mean they don't have an audience. Do we care about the latest Spongebob game? Nope. Did it sell anyway? Damn straight. It's easy for us to write them off (or even forget they ever came out), but there's definitely an audience for those games.

[The Damned]

Well, I have to say I'm pleasantly surprised; I expected you to actually have me do your homework for you. So, are you still going to continue whining? Or do you have it out of your system now?

You haven't addressed the claim that I started the insults, when you clearly did. You have made a false statement. False statements should be addressed, as you have routinely made it clear. Unlike the ones you claim we have made and ignored, this one can be proven by provided evidence.

I ask only that you respond to it in the manner you would like us to.

...

Aside from that, I have a question for you. This is not meant as any kind of mockery, nor is it any kind of veiled commentary on you or anything you have said to date. It is a simple, direct query about your intentions here.

Wall of text time. Sorry everyone!

Hypothetical time: let's say that you are completely right. About everything you have said. You have the actual knowledge, skill, education and all that, as you say. Your arguments are accurate and flawless. We are wrong, you can prove it, and we intentionally refuse to listen to you at all, because we're blind, ignorant to the truth and stubborn. We have trolled and baited you because we think it is funny. We have gone out of our way to be as annoying and whiny as we can. Any outside, neutral observation by an equally educated person would agree with you that you have made a perfect case for yourself, and we simply aren't going to accept it because we don't agree with it. Even some of the site staff aren't agreeing with you, and who knows, they may just delete the thread and all you have worked for so far will be gone. They may even go so far as to close your account here and ban you from further activity, because they are also part of the problem. It is a cesspool of everything that is wrong.

Then why are you here?

If you're as educated as you say, and you know what you're talking about, why aren't you writing articles? Actual articles, not some short paragraph or little essay on it, but full-sized, complete articles. Why aren't you making a career of this? You have the brains and guts to do so, and yet you are here, after three days, arguing with people you know aren't being rational or fair-minded. They are closed-minded and just won't listen to rational anything.

Why bother? It seems counter-productive and waste of your skills.

You say you want to educate people and generate discussion and get some people to think about it. If it's a matter of wanting to convince as many gamers as possible, why not go to NeoGAF? They have far more members, way more interaction with each other, and some of the members there are in developer and publisher companies, including the ones we've talked about. They would offer a much bigger audience to share your opinions and views with, they would offer far more and better discussion than we can, and they love this sort of thing.

Even better, Law of The Game has lots of high-end articles about legal matters pertaining to video games. You could hitch up with them and go into any number of things to do with how these companies operate. They have lots of readers, and are routinely mentioned on other sites for their legal issue articles. They even occasionally get involved in actual legal court room stuff from time to time. Think of the exposure your views could get with that. How many people could you get to that way? Hundreds? Thousands? As opposed to here, you might get... what? A couple of dozen or so, at best? And that's if they aren't being stuck-up and thumbing their noses at you for no reason at all.

In fact, why bother with other sites at all? You could have your own site, complete with your own forums. Or a blog. Hell, make your own e-magazine or something with like minded people and publish it online. You're a big proponent of that sort of thing, and you claim to have the proper mindset and expertise to do so. It could be the single biggest platform for your opinions on the internet! You could be on the forefront of who knows what kind of change! What would be stopping you from doing so?

This education you claim to have, why aren't you using it in a way that gets people to really think about these things? Why aren't you fixing the problems from the inside, where it counts? Why bother with such a small community that rejects anything you have to say simply because they want to act cool? Why not get out of the trenches and onto the real battlefield and do some actual good?

You have ~25% of all posts in this topic. That's how many hours? We're just mindless trolls, out for some fun. We don't have anything better to do; this is our lives, sitting here and being childish. You're a serious scholar with something important to say. You could have spent that time far better than on here.

Seriously. Why? Are you really the educated philosophy major with knowledge of things programming and business-oriented? Or are you content with sitting around here and wasting your esteemed education with a bunch of uninformed people who are openly hostile to you and will only heckle you for no reason? Are you not capable of doing better than this?

I guess I'm just wondering why you think this is even a battle that you should be in. If you're the smart guy you say you are, why belittle yourself with us, when you an get involved in the real big fights where you an do some good. Pick you battles and do some good, not sully yourself here in the gutter.

Just.. why bother? It's obvious you will never get enough people here to think about it seriously, and you're just wasting your effort on us peons. Even if you do get anyone going, it's such a small amount of victory for so much effort. You could be doing so much more, but you aren't. Are we just too easy a target for you? If so, then you're no better than us. Are we that uninformed that you feel obligated to try and correct us? If so, you're in for a terribly long ordeal. Is it because you have nowhere else to go? I find that hard to believe, as you should have no problem finding any number of places that would suit you better. I just can not fathom why you think this is worth it. Why bother?

[/hypothetical time]

OK, I think that's almost the character limit for a post. Sorry it came out so long, it was just something I had to ask.