Can we do the reverse and everyone download the ROMs/ISOs of every game they own? I think that's better. Shops don't lose money and we can still stick two fingers up at whoever.
-
-
MI4 has made $350M hard profit so far. Maybe Tom Cruise should go on strike if he doesn't think that's as profitable as it should be.Originally posted by elaniel View Post
As for video games then maybe they should charge more money for them to make up for all their losses, or I have an idea, actually produce stuff within reasonable budget that is actually worth playing - instead of all this ****e they keep churning out.
As for anyone else pre-ordering stuff for March, don't you already have around 20 games on your shelves unplayed? How about playing some of those first and then profiting from the inevitable 50% price drops come April, instead of reckoning by mindlessly buying up more stuff?
I wasn't planning on buying anything in March so I'll probably slot into this plan involuntarily, I doubt many others will however, minds are far too absorbed with consumerism.Comment
-
Nope. And I'd thank you kindly to stop making such sweeping generalisations all the time...Originally posted by dataDave View PostComment
-
Just because you're probably the one and only person here who doesn't have a backlog of titles on their shelf doesn't exactly make that a sweeping generalisation.
It's no secret that most people here are just reckoning most of the time. Buy, buy, buy, with very little in-depth play or appreciation, then more buy, buy, buy, woah cool!! buy buy, buy, more hype!!, buy, buy buy, then sulk at so many games unopened.
I'm pretty sure most here have the gaming equivalent to ADHD.Comment
-
What a disappointing thread. I thought I was going to sign up for a March with the brothers!Comment
-
-
Because this is exactly what the economy needs right now, people to boycott spending :S.
The only people that would be hurt by this action are the groups on the margins, none of whom are responsible for taking down a well known piracy site.Comment
-
Maybe people shouldn't spend because they are out of work or simply don't have have the money?Comment
-
March is Silent Hill month. So no can do!Comment
-
If you're out of work fine but when people stop spending it starts a vicious cycle that causes more job losses and on it goes. It makes things a bit better for that person for a while but how long before their employer feels the burn as others tighten their belts. It's a fast way to put us all out of work and is short sighted.Originally posted by dataDave View PostComment
-
I really like the idea of everyone being out of work. It's a romantic vision. Imagine all the time we'd have to skip, and sing and be merry. And please no one describe the realities of such a scenario, let me keep the illusion.
Comment
-
I don't agree with this boycott because all this will do is put more financial strain on companies putting more people out of work, I find it a bit of a sad state of affairs that the reason "oh no I couldn't possibly do this x game is out then" keeps popping up again and again in this thread.Comment
-
Well that's going to pop up until the reason given to do it is strong enough for people. They have to believe in the power of this. I think it would work, but only if enough people do it and that's where it quickly loses its power - we don't have faith that enough people will follow through. So why should we?
Of course, the flaw there is obvious. Until we overcome that way of thinking, we'll never be powerful enough to make a significant change.Comment
-
I hear ya, Dogg Thang, your final sentence pretty much sums up my thoughts. It shouldn't matter how many other people take part or the chances of it making a different. You change the world by changing yourself. You become the change you want to see in the world. If we adopt the philosophy 'I'll only do x or y when everybody else does or when an adequate number of people do' then we're relinquishing our own power, we're always waiting on others.Comment
Comment