gbrading's forum posts

#1 Posted by gbrading (2016 posts) -

Piracy is and always remains theft. The developer in this instance, all credit to them, had the right to flip out at that guy, and their restraint is commendable. But piracy of games (and of films) not only damages video game developers but the players themselves. It makes publishers like Ubisoft create draconian-DRM systems; it makes their CEO say "93-5% of PC players are probably pirates" and it allows those who want to make closed, controlled systems such as the Xbox One and the PS4 all the more enticing. The "I'm poor" excuse doesn't wash, with the massive amount of free-to-play titles, and regular as clockwork sales where games are routinely sold for the cost of a sandwich.

I might even go so far as to say if you're a pirate, only logical to assume you hate video games, because you are doing absolutely nothing to support them and everything to harm them.

#2 Edited by gbrading (2016 posts) -

No John Hurt? I suppose his character dies relatively early.

This is pretty poor form though, to make something which would appeal so directly to Alien fans pre-order DLC. They'll release it down the line for everyone else but that's just putting off the people who weren't committed.

I basically never buy games at launch; I'm currently playing The Witcher original and enjoying it as though it were a "new game".

#3 Posted by gbrading (2016 posts) -

Thank you Patrick. I can tell that was tough to write.

#4 Posted by gbrading (2016 posts) -
#5 Edited by gbrading (2016 posts) -

Darn, I had my money on Phil Harrison. I suppose that would be a demotion for Harrison.

I don't remember if this is THE Phil Spencer or A Phil Spencer.

#6 Edited by gbrading (2016 posts) -

The best thing about EVE is the stories that come out of it. I still have absolutely zero interest in playing it.

But if the world of Ready Player One will become a reality, I expect it to start in EVE Online.

#7 Edited by gbrading (2016 posts) -

I'm afraid I don't find his argument convincing at all. As a purely moral argument it's fine, but the world is not just morality. The world runs on Capitalism, and the rules of supply and demand. Items are charged at the prices people are likely to pay for them. The reason we have sales is because old, backlist items do not sell, because they're not new. First adopters are willing to pay the premium higher price to get the game right off the bat and enjoy it from the start. I work in books publishing and it's exactly the same here. By temporarily cutting the price of backlist items you offer the consumer a new incentive for purchasing something they might not otherwise try. You get the on the fence people, and you get a lot of them. Thus you make profit. The idea that sales are somehow preventing the sale of games is patently absurd.

I take my hat off to Jason Rohrer for his highly principled and moralistic approach, but I hope he's prepared to get zero backlist sales years down the line if he never offers his game for a discounted price. His argument is that a lower sale price somehow makes the early adopters who paid a higher price and tried the game earlier feel disenfranchised and I just don't think that's the case. Because they're you're fans, they WANT to pay a premium. They want to show they're the first in the door. It's the reason hordes of people rush out to buy ridiculously priced Apple products on the day of release. Conspicuous Consumption.

#8 Posted by gbrading (2016 posts) -

Vinny Caravella brought me here. Well done Sir! :)

#9 Edited by gbrading (2016 posts) -

Sounds like a good decision to me. Makes it easier to tell what's what.

#10 Posted by gbrading (2016 posts) -

Maybe during a sale, when the price goes to $10, then I'll try SimCity. But when they said that it was prohibitively impossible to create an offline mode back when the game launched last year, to then go and do this... it just seems super ridiculous.