I had the SNES version of SMB3. All-stars. You could save on that version on the overhead map/world map.Originally Posted by jook13
It's a problem for me, because I don't want to use it for most games (ones already with a save system, which is almost all of em I own) but it's always there as temptation. If there is one thing about PC gaming i'm not big on, it's how common save anywhere quicksave/load is for the games.Originally Posted by JaminBen007
Save s******* may be a choice, but it's a choice that is hard to ignore.
Originally Posted by WILLYUMZthis little event blew up.
My only hope regarding next gen consoles is all set on Valve's new console.
Senior Member
Yeah, I have the SNES version as well. Gameboy advance and Wii also. I have fully bought and paid for that damn game 4 or 5 times. Yet I still feel the need to play it on my PSP and android tabletOriginally Posted by apdenton1I will also play it on that Ouya when it comes out.
Meh. It's a good game, but there is far better out there. 90's & early 00's were the golden years of gaming.Originally Posted by jook13Yeah, I have the SNES version as well. Gameboy advance and Wii also. I have fully bought and paid for that damn game 4 or 5 times. Yet I still feel the need to play it on my PSP and android tablet
Senior Community Manager
@Greencandy - Your used car analogy doesn't hold up. Most people who buy a new car get a 60,000 - 100,000 mile warranty. If the engine explodes for some odd reason, the manufacturer fixes it for you. Likewise with services such as XM radio and OnStar. You get a year for free, if the car is new.
If you buy the same car used, you don't get that warranty unless you pay extra for it. You don't get XM or OnStar unless you pay more for it. You can still drive the car, just like when buying a used game you can play single player, but to get all the content (warranty/OnStar/XM) as a 2nd hand owner, you'll need to either be willing to pay a bit more, or do without.
I would rather not get into any kind of discussion that compares games to movies, as the entertainment to expense ratio is so out of proportion that they really shouldn't be compared.
An amazing book that I can enjoy for days - weeks... $7.99
An amazing game that I can enjoy for years... $15 - $60
A movie that I can watch 3 or 4 times... $24.99
Movies, to me, hold the worst amount of entertainment per dollar value of any available medium.
Currently playing the PC FPS/RPG S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow Of Chernobyl. Picked it up second hand for £3.00 some time ago but never got round to playing it till now. It's definitely a keeper, though a little flawed even with the community patch/mod. Shame both THQ and GSC Game World are dead now
Too many good companies have gone bust.
I would have bought the game new if I knew their fate....and actually ever had any money.
Sorry i havent replied sooner but ive had my head firmly planted in the world of learning Linux
@ShiftySamurai
Im sorry fella ive got to disagree with you on this, my used car analogy does hold upm Uk tho so in fairness different laws).
These games that we purchase for consoles have got a limited shelf time (unlike a car)Ive got original xbox games that stopped working online in 2010
we all know that sooner or later a new consoles will come out n if we want to play games on it, we have to buy a whole new bunch of them as backward compatabilty dissapears as it not commercially viable
Why the sudden need to start charging people that didnt pay the full wack to use a online service that ... someone else isnt any more? (1-1=0+1=1 ... nothing changed!) Its just a blatant rip off if you really think about it.
For years developers have never had a problems with their "old" games being sold on the 2nd hand market (it didnt hurt the original xbox, actually it probably made it more popular as it got into hands of people that wouldnt have bothered ever buying certain titles brand new).
The 2nd hand market has probably provided more exposure for developers than any hype/word of mouth/advertising will ever do, we all buy 2nd hand so we can "try" n most of are suckers for a good deal if its a good price (RL have always been clever here, low price-more sales, self advertising) .... if developers remove that option, ure only hurting yourselfs in the end as people will generally stick with options/games that they feel "safe/know what their getting" titles, the williness to experiment becomes smaller when the price tags is the same as the "safe" option.
Senior Member
The problem with your logic GreenCandy is that the devs and publishers are actually losing money. Yes, the same number of people still have the game if they buy it used. However, the dev sees no money from the person that bought it used.
This is true about the number of players.
I purchase BF3 (one more person added to the servers = 1)
I stop playing it (one person removed from the servers = 0)
Retailer sells it my copy used(one more person added to the servers =1)
Here is how much the devs/publishers and retailer make
I purchase BF3 ($40 to devs/publishers, $20 to retailer)
I stop playing it
Retailer sells it my copy used($40 to retailer $0 to devs/publishers)
What the devs/publishers want.
I purchase BF3 ($40 to devs/publishers, $20 to retailer)
I stop playing it
Friend buys it new ($40 to devs/publishers, $20 to retailer)
See how the devs/publishers are losing money. This is why they don't like the used market.
.
Senior Member
luke you forgot 1 thing though
gaming in your example has gotten 20% more expensive and who will pay for that? the whole gamermarket will suffer from that
the actual numbers for the impact are unknown to me
and the biggest loss will be mainly gamers and retailers and the smaller developers(i think mainly the ones not big enough for AAA titles but that create the lesser known gems)
