12 of 56 people found the following review helpful
Ignore the "Amazon Bombing",
This review is from: Resident Evil: The Mercenaries 3D (Video Game)
First off, let me start by saying this game is great. Everything you'd expect from Mercenaries and a little more to keep you busy. Definitely worth the purchase. Everyone is complaining due to the lack of the ability to delete your save data. The main reason everyone is so "pissy" is because now the trade-in value at Gamestop is lower. Gamestop had originally planned to not allow trade-ins on this game but effective tomorrow will begin to allow it. What Capcom did with this game is smart and won't effect anyone who purchases a new copy of the game as they should. Basically, the save data can NOT be deleted. That means if Gamestop were to sell it used, the customer who bought the game would have everything unlocked and that's no fun. Therefore Gamestop would have a hard time selling the game used. Not a big deal considering that gamestop sells their used games for $5 under the price of the game new copy. Besides when Gamestop sells a game used, none of that money goes back to capcom. Gamestop pockets on the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and so on purchases of a game that capcom spent the money to make, yet capcom see's no profit from all the times the game is re-bought. Basically stealing capcoms revenue. Capcom is simply protecting themselves from being ripped off yet again by the used game industry. To someone who bought it new,(like they should) it's no big deal. People need to quit their whining and deal with it. Rating a game poorly based on a company's decision to protect themselves is stupid. Bottom line, This is a great game for fans of the series, and i hope to see more companies take the initiative to protect themselves from the used game market. It's time Gamestop, EB games, and Gamefly just went away. They're doing more harm than good.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-10 of 10 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jun 28, 2011 9:09:47 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Jun 29, 2011 7:46:59 AM PDT]
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 28, 2011 10:09:59 PM PDT
Jonathan Cavender says:
I question whether 8-Bit bro is just an employee in Capcom's marketing arm. He has only one posted review -- this game. He uses the same language that those within the industry use -- "[b]asically stealing capcoms revenue," "ripped off yet again by the used game industry," and, of course, "i [sic] hope to see more companies take the initiative to protect themselves from the used game market." Really? You want to see the used market damaged, so the prices of games stay artificially high and you are not able to buy as many games -- even buying new?
But, like I said, my expectation from the review and his (or her) profile is that the reviewer is somewhere along the lines cashing a check from Capcom (internal marketing, PR, or something along those lines).
Posted on Jun 28, 2011 11:37:17 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on Jun 29, 2011 7:47:24 AM PDT]
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 29, 2011 6:18:49 AM PDT
Keyser Soze says:
Have you ever bought a used car or a house somebody has already lived in or rented an apartment? I buy 95% of my games new and usually only buy used copies of games that I can't find new because I do understand the importance of supporting games. But to try to prevent me from EVER being able to buy or sell a game I/somebody paid good money for is insane. If my family needs food I should have the ability to sell a game I spend $40-60 on.
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 29, 2011 9:45:20 AM PDT
"I question whether 8-Bit bro is just an employee in Capcom's marketing arm. He has only one posted review -- this game."
You mean like the vast majority of the one star reviews?
Posted on Jun 29, 2011 11:18:19 AM PDT
J. Mahoney says:
I didn't send Honda any money after I bought my car used. And with your logic, every used car dealership should be closed down and, oh yeah, no re-selling houses either. I guess consumers are stuck with everything they buy now.
Posted on Jun 29, 2011 11:58:35 AM PDT
It goes beyond just not being able to sell games back. I've personally never sold any of my games back, no matter how crappy, and I still see this as a greedy move that screws the consumer. That people like you actually are okay with this is only going to encourage Capcom, and possibly other developers, to try this in the future. Say you want to go back someday and replay this game...Oh wait, you can't. You paid $40 for this game and yet, you can't even play it again even though you own it. Tell me how you could possibly support something like that? Would you buy a DVD that wouldn't let you rewind chapters and, once finished, burst into flames? Because it's basically what this game is. I can't understand how you or anybody else could actually condone something like this.
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 29, 2011 10:53:11 PM PDT
8-Bit bro says:
For the record, I do not work for Capcom or anything along those lines. I am simply a well informed gamer with the hopes of one day making games of my own. I know how the industry works, therefore, I know the language that is used. This is the only review I have ever placed because I heard about the "Amazon bombing" that was going on, and felt I should give my opinion on a game that I enjoyed, so people who were actually interested in this game didn't reject it from seeing the ridiculously low scores. I am highly against the used game market because I feel it's no better than piracy, at least from the standpoint of the developer. A developer spends time and money making a game for the consumer. That consumer decides for whatever reason, they no longer wish to keep the game, so they take it to (insert used game store here). The store gives them, lets say for example $20. The store in turn sells it for $30. They made back the $20 they paid for the game, and profit the additional $10. The developer of that game see's no profit on this because they made money from it the first time it was sold, so the used game stores can resell the same copy of the game as many times as they want and make more and more money off it over time without having to pay any additional fee's to the developer of the game. How is it fair for the used games stores to profit off of something when they had no part in creating that product and not have to pay anything the the people that did. It's no worse than piracy because if someone buys a used game from, let's say, . . . Gamestop. The Gamestop keeps all the revenue and the developers see none of it. So wouldn't it just make more sense for someone to download a game for free off the internet? The developer see's no money from it either way. And this way, you're not giving your money to people who don't deserve it.
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 30, 2011 9:52:57 AM PDT
Now I've heard some people like to wipe their saves and start over so I can see that. Or sharing the game among people I can see. But there's not much of a need to start over in mercs. You can essentially "start over" by unequipping all your skills and using one of the first characters on the first levels. I think much of this fallout is unnecessary because most of the people leaving one star reviews don't own a 3DS or the game even.
While I don't condone the one save issue I still bought the game. If Capcom starts thinking it's cool to have one save I'll stop buying their games. But this game is one of the ones I bought my 3DS for so there's no way I was gonna pass. And I've gotten my money's worth out if it. I just wish these reviewers who are posting one star would review the other aspects of the game as well. Since they OBVIOUSLY own it and have put at least a few hours into.
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 30, 2011 10:16:10 AM PDT
H. Wang says:
I think you're missing the point. Publishers are trying to get an ADDITIONAL cut of something they already cashed in on. That's not the same scenario as saying "Gamestop keeps all the revenue etc."
You've already purchased the item. It's yours to keep. What you do with it afterwards is your business. If Capcom wanted a piece of the action, then they should set up a competitive business with the likes of Gamespot, Amazon or any other retailer that buys pre-owned games. By creating this system, Capcom fails to realize that it helps NO ONE. By rendering the game's resale value useless from the onset, it will only create backlash and could harm the out-of-the-gate sames that Capcom and other publishers covet.
If they were smart, they would just open a competitive business. Why not have the publishers create a partnership and offer a competing trade-in/resale business so they can directly profit from it? That would be a lot more effective (and be less of a PR debacle) than creating system that is perceived by the public (however accurate or not) as dishonest or greedy.
I really don't think in times of economic weakness that companies like Capcom can afford bad PR or be associated with the general feeling that companies are bloodsucking greed mongers looking to rip off every nickel from the average joe (or jane).
‹ Previous 1 Next ›