I understand... And actually, i have no interest to support the second-hand market actors, since i don't act there.Hylis wrote:I have not really thought about it, but it looks like a strange model for any "information" business to enable people to sell the information themselves once they have got it.
But it remains true that the advantage of the DRM on starforce is that, rather than a more efficient or fair protection against the piracy (from the publisher's point of view).
The reasoning is okay, but the figures are insane ^^Hylis wrote:One model could be that you can be refund of a game you have not played (if you finish 10%, then you can be refund 90% of the game)... and I would maybe define 100% to be around 5 to 10 hours of play (can be define by the game maker and told to the user before he buys the game)
How many players have enough money to spend 60 to 100 euros each 5-10 hours of gaming ? In such a reasoning, you have to consider to downsize the market, and to target on faboulously rich customers only. For instance, if i had to spend 60 euros each time i want to play 10 hours, i think i would stop video gaming (or play only free games like TMN... not the most profitable for you ).
Maybe piracy and second-hand market are both the reason and the consequence of high prices of video games (and their often short lifetime, except the TM series)...
I feel there is hypocrisy from both sides : from the video-games industry when it acts like if every customer could spend 200 euros/month to play video games, and from customers when they ask for lots of games free or at a discount price. Of course, perfect fairness seems hard to find in such matters...
We are a bit harsh, maybe because we can hardly trust that Ubisoft is a poor company at the limit of the banckruptcy. It could have been different if Nadeo kept its independance. ^^