I agree that developers don't get any revenue from used games - but : how big are the revenues after 10 years anyway ?
Now you might call me a lunatic (very fitting, since it is full moon here now), but yes, I'm not thinking of used games being sold within the first few months after a game's release. I thought that this would be clear. No, I'm speaking of used games let's say 10 years after the release of the games. Or even more.
I can hear you laugh about my remark, and to me this is nothing but a sign of how short-sighted developers can be. They just don't think in decades because - well, nobody does. Gaming has to too short attention span anyway. And it's about short-term profits anyway. Unless you manage to achieve a milestone in gaming history, that is.
And let me put it like this : Games that cannot be bought used are easily forgotten after ten years. And if the developers are gone by that time as well (just imagine), no-one will remember them anyway. Does anyone remember the "Descent" game series anymore ? If not - bingo. Same goes for the Laura Bow series, or the "You don't know Jack" game series. And there are lots of more obscure ones, like the Blues Brothers jump & run games.
I do know that revenues are important - but in the long term, after let's say 10-20 years - who gets the revenues anyway ? And if a game is still being sold after 15 years (like through GOG) and the developer isn't there anymore - who actually gets the revenues then ?
What strikes me is the view I often see that the IP of games must be defended at all costs - even if the game is 30 years old. And thus isn't able to run on modern systems anymore (apart from using an emulator). According to current copyright laws, even museums are in principle not allowed to show games. Because these games would have to be cracked of the 20-years-old game uses a copyright mechanism which modern systems or/and emulators cannot work with. To me, this is not reasonable. Games are meant to be played, and not to be convenient tools to gather money. If a company begins to sell games are "money-collecting tools", then there's something wrong with the philosophy behind it.
And no, I don't mean making money for a living - that's what everyone needs. That's clear.
I'm speaking of beating a dead horse. Which would be a game after 30 years, imho. At least in its binaries.
Alrik Fassbauer
