@mcmax3000: I agree that more sales equal better financial opportunity for a company. But my point was that in a hypothetical situation where Microsoft/Sony in tandem with publishers and brick and mortar stores take a percentage of the used game sale profit, little to no amount of that money will end up with the people that actually did the work. So I question why people are so quick to use the "support the developers" claim when I doubt they'll truly benefit at all from such a thing. But that's just my guess, money will probably just end up in a publisher's bank and while that money might be used for an upcoming project, nothing says it'll be used for a project from that specific developer. But, that's going on a really thin line of complete speculation on my part.
You're thinking a little too directly about where a particular dollar goes. Yes, on a direct scale, the dollar you pay for a copy of a game may not go to that developer, but when a game is successful, that's good for the developer. They probably won't get much of the money directly, and maybe won't even see the money indirectly, but they still benefit.
If they're owned by a publisher, they're likely to continue to get assigned projects by that publisher if their past games are successful. If they're independent, they can command more money and/or better terms in negotiations for their next project, either with the same publisher, or a different one. Look at the terms that leaked out from Bungie's contract with Activision... You think Bungie would've gotten those kinds of terms without Halo having been such a success? Not a chance.
And like @grantheaslip noted, the publishers are also, generally, the ones that take all of the financial risk, especially if they own the developer, so it makes sense that from a financial point of view, they also get the reward as well.
Log in to comment