Steam telepítése
belépés
|
nyelv
简体中文 (egyszerűsített kínai)
繁體中文 (hagyományos kínai)
日本語 (japán)
한국어 (koreai)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bolgár)
Čeština (cseh)
Dansk (dán)
Deutsch (német)
English (angol)
Español - España (spanyolországi spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (latin-amerikai spanyol)
Ελληνικά (görög)
Français (francia)
Italiano (olasz)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonéz)
Nederlands (holland)
Norsk (norvég)
Polski (lengyel)
Português (portugáliai portugál)
Português - Brasil (brazíliai portugál)
Română (román)
Русский (orosz)
Suomi (finn)
Svenska (svéd)
Türkçe (török)
Tiếng Việt (vietnámi)
Українська (ukrán)
Fordítási probléma jelentése
Hozzászólási szabályok és irányelvek
Hozzászólás jelentése
If it is true, then what are some people selling their Steam accounts for more than that?
Lol, it is true, that "Value Is In The Eye of the Beholder."
I'm a firm believer of
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you
Quid Pro Quo and other similar sayings.
You start it when you said
Wheres my apology? I'd be willing to apologise for escalating my tone even when I did censor myself. Any regular here that has seen me comment are likely to have seen me apologise for my mistakes, misunderstanding or when my tone has been rather curt. Hell I'd even apologise for you feeling I was x when I suggested gaming on console because that wasn't my intention and even now I can't see how you got that from that sentence. But if that's the way it came across I'd have happily apologised. I would have even edited it to hopefully not come away that way. But you'd have to tell me that in a polite way. I won't be polite to someone who is not polite to me.
You are the one that started with the rude descriptions on a personal level. Not me. You did. After that I only behaved like you.
If you want my apology you can start and I'll follow just like I did in the thread. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you
As for me continuing to reply. So do you. I also think it's rude to ignore when a comment was directed at me. So either don't respond to me and I'd have nothing to respond to.
Side stepping our disagreement.
Sometimes sold accounts are done by hiijackers so it's not their own account they are selling. It's one of the few ways to get something out of an account that isn't theirs.
It can also be easy money as the owner can at any time go through account recovery and regain control of their account. Even if the buyer had spent hundreds or thousands on new games the original owner would still have proof of ownership to reclaim it.
Fair enough. I'll stay at my own height then.
Blocked and unsubbed so I won't need to be rude and ignore
as for the op, it has ben discussed a lot. there is really no incentive for the devs or steam to do this.
now, i think there is a lawsuit or 2 that is atempting to allow the resale of owned games in the eu. don't know where it is now. if it is something that does happen, i still don't see them making it a standard.
Valve and the developers/publishers of a game split the money, 70% for the developer/publisher and 30% for Valve. Why would either one of them take a smaller cut so that you get some money?
If you agree they would not take less money, that would mean they would have to sell the used game for more than the new game... why would anyone buy that used game? Its exactly the same as the new game, you don't get anything extra.
Yes back in the day you could sell off your PC games... game developers/publishers have been trying to kill off the used game market for a long time, as mentioned because they get nothing out of it. Back in those days you could argue for a used game market because at sometime the discs for games would stop being made so there was a limited number of discs, that kept getting smaller and smaller as years went on (scratched/lost discs). They stopped making discs for games because as time went on, less were bought, and physical media costs A LOT of money to make, store and ship around even before it hit the shelves of a store. If the game sat on a store shelf or in its background till it sold it would just take up space that could be used for other stuff.
But then digital only games came along where you didn't need a disc. As long as the store existed you could literally have the game around and for sale for decades instead of years and it wouldn't cost very much for storage, pennies at most for decades of storage. "Shipping" it cost pennies. You could make unlimited number of copies that never degraded over time. The only reason why a game would vanish would be if something happened to the company selling it or legal issues.
Digital only sales save the game developers and the stores so much money which stays in their pocket. No costs for printing the physical media, no costs for shipping, no costs for storage for decades, can make unlimited numbers of copies that are all exactly like one another.
BUT physical media for PCs are also now locked to accounts like digital only so you can no longer sell or trade that physical media to someone and have them be able to install that game. Most of the time with physical media for games there is virtually nothing on the single disc, why? Because its cheaper to only make 1 discs, instead of the 10 or 20 discs in some cases it would take, you just install the installer on the disc and download a digital copy of the game. Less and PCs come with disc drives now because of the switch to physical media. They are not going to switch over to USB drives because they are expensive and digital only sales have spoken and the developers have heard.
Even the argument that if you want to be able to sell games go buy a console is getting to the point that you won't be able to do that for all games. Consoles are moving to digital only sales. If you buy the game on physical media you might be able to sell/trade it to someone. But digital only sales are locking to that console as far as I know and you are not able to "sell" it or trade it off to anyone.
If you regret some of the games you bought, then you need to do more research before buying. You need to wait till the games go on sale for a price you are willing to spend.
Allowing people to sell their "used" games on Steam will just bring us back to the days when a game never went on sale for years. Personally I don't miss the days when I could not find a game I wanted for under 60 bucks. I enjoy that I can pick up a game I want for as much as 90% off or more in the first year or 2, something they CAN'T do with physical media because they would be losing money.
So tell me, if a game developer/publisher is selling a game for 60 bucks, they get 42 bucks, valve gets 18 bucks. Why would they then say, "so that you can make some of that money back we'll take less than the 42 bucks"? Why would Valve say "we'll take less than 18 bucks so that you can make a couple of bucks?"
And just how much do you think you would get back? 5%? 10%? 20%? Every percentage you ask for is less money the developers/publishers and Valve makes.
In the early days with physical media they had to share that money because of everything I mentioned about physical media, digital media does not have those limits so they make more and can use that money towards making the game better or making new games.
And yes, I am speaking from a point of personal knowledge. I am old enough to have bought games on 5.25 inch floppy disks and cartridges. I remember trading/selling games to friends/stores, I remember lending/borrowing from friends too, I remember renting games for a weekend. I also know that none of those ways gave any money to the game makers beyond the initial sale of the game which means a lost sale every time a used game was sold/traded/rented.
So again I ask, which do you think they would want to do, sell a 60 dollar game with a 70/30 split or sell a 60 dollar game with a 65/25/10 split? And how many people do you think would be ok with just getting 10% of that 60 dollars back? Oh and chances are it would only be 10% of what ever the lowest sale price was. So if you bought the game for 60 bucks, but are now selling it after its been on sale for 20 bucks, you will only get 10% of that 20 bucks. So I can see lots of game developers/publishers putting their games on an unannounced 10 minute sale for 1 cent within a week of it first being sold so that you would only get 10% of that 1 cent.
Games are on sale a lot too. If a dated or crummy game isn't selling well, even on sale, what's the point of a secondary market? If a game is selling well, what's the point of undercutting those sales?
And "used" in a digital distribution context makes no sense anyway.
If you don't want to see old/awful games. Hide them or delete them from your library.
I appreciate your meaningful and constructive feedback, and I do not doubt your experience and expertise.
I will be sure to use the search function in the future before bringing all of you any burdens. I almost never post anything in any forums, because whenever I do so, I will encounter negativities and toxic comments I received in this thread, and I usually would go straight to customer support if I had any issues, so bear with me for just once, because you will not see me posting here ever again anyway, or you can report it to the admin to close this thread if you found it to be meaningless or problematic.
My idea does not carry any malicious intentions but a thought that would allow users to have more freedom on the games they own. it is not always about getting rid of old games, but allow the user to have more control over the games. Finding a game true to its quality these days is difficult, even the trailers and game reviews can be deceiving, and some of them failed miserably to deliver what they promised, take the Anthem for example. So I just thought one of the reasons I came up with this idea is that it would be fair for the buyer be able to trade games, and I think it is doable especially when Steam controls the activation keys, so once you traded your game, the key for the specific game would be disabled from your account and transferred to the next owner. It is about the coexistence of new and pre-owned game markets.