Company making indistinguishable reprints of rarities eg REZ

Post by **Ghegs** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:02 pm

Moved to off-topic.

Acid King · Post by **Acid King** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:09 pm

It's debatable to see if they indeed have it. Do these new burned cds pass the SCEI tests? If they are licensed SCEA products, how is that they don't get a new SLPS-???? code?

Because they are games that have already been published once? The games are functionally identical, they're the same game that was pressed earlier. Can one of you explain to me what the functional, actual difference between a reprint and an original is, other than one is pressed after the other?

That's right... there isn't.

I'm pretty sure you can sue a company for making indistinguishable reprints (and selling them as original prints without saying so) which in turn cause your genuine original prints to decrease in value.

Just imagine you are a professional seller dealing with rare out-of-print games. GQD's reprints will no doubt cause you to lose a lot of money you invested- I think you'd have a legitimate claim against them.

It's not against the law. They got permission from the original copyright holders to repress the games. You have no claim to the supply of the games, the copyright holders do. If that was the case, Disney would constantly be sued for letting their movies go out of print on purpose, only to rerelease them years later.

benstylus · Post by **benstylus** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:19 pm

Turrican wrote:They're making money by cloning of out of prints games and selling them for the same high prices as they actually are found on ebay - and yet you don't see any problem in this?

As far as I can tell, they have licensed the games from the original publisher and it's exactly the same thing as if a publisher decided to do another print run. What they charge is their decision.

If they were bootleg copies, I'd be throwing a fit.

These aren't limited edition items, they were never advertised by the publisher as such, therefore a "second print run" is really no different than if the first print run were larger. As far as I'm concerned, it IS the original release.

And did you even read the rest of my post?

Let me repeat myself: The publishers don't owe it to you to make sure the value of the game you bought never goes down.

Neon · Post by **Neon** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:36 pm

The ebay thing is inethical, but you've still gotta laugh at the collectors.

These guys want to give me the game at a lower price, AND benefit the companies that made them? I'm not complaining.

benstylus · Post by **benstylus** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:41 pm

You may think it's unethical, but I can guarantee you that pretty much everyone here would head straight to ebay if they managed to get a stack of sealed Gitaroo Mans or Rezes.

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:42 pm

Neon wrote:The ebay thing is inethical, but you've still gotta laugh at the collectors.

Exactly how many sealed copies do/can they put on eBay before the collectors stop dishing out the big money?

And no, I don't feel one bit of sympathy for collector nerds.

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:03 pm

All you need to know about Gamequest Direct:

http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/sho ... hp?t=75380

Especially the last few pages are quite enlightening.

Makes one wonder if they are legit after all.

Apparently Sega replied that they didn't know about a REZ reprint...

That aside, why am I the only one here who considers it unethical to reprint old games without making the reprint distinguishable? Why shouldn't rare games be collectible? What do you think would collectors of rare comic books or trading cards say if somone suddenly started making identical reprints?

I mean, if games have no more collection value, what should keep people from downloading them instead of buying them?

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:11 pm

Why shouldn't rare games be collectible? What do you think would collectors of rare comic books or trading cards say if somone suddenly started making identical reprints?

I couldn't care less what either of these groups think and I used to collect a lot of things before I became an adult.

Neon · Post by **Neon** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:31 pm

That aside, why am I the only one here who considers it unethical to reprint old games without making the reprint distinguishable? Why shouldn't rare games be collectible? What do you think would collectors of rare comic books or trading cards say if somone suddenly started making identical reprints?

I think I'd be grateful. I'm not entirely sure collecting isn't a manifestation of a mental sickness, really...

I mean, if games have no more collection value, what should keep people from downloading them instead of buying them?

To support the companies. Or just because that's what people do. Last year's Madden is worth $5 tops, yet people buy those in droves.

As for older games, I dunno. I used to pirate for psx, saturn etc. saying that it didn't benefit the companies so it didn't matter. Now I'm not so sure. 200 burnz or 200 originals (complete with spine ZOMGZ!!!!), it's still the same hoarding instinct...I advocate buying the games and then _playing_ them.

Turrican · Post by **Turrican** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:43 pm

Acid King wrote:
It's debatable to see if they indeed have it. Do these new burned cds pass the SCEI tests? If they are licensed SCEA products, how is that they don't get a new SLPS-???? code?
Because they are games that have already been published once? The games are functionally identical, they're the same game that was pressed earlier. Can one of you explain to me what the functional, actual difference between a reprint and an original is, other than one is pressed after the other?

That's right... there isn't.

Do you realize that the same applies to the majority of platinum releases right? they are the same games, they are released again, and they have a different serial number.

Holy shit, I can't believe how many are there willing to ditch common sense just to pass as the Punishers of Dumb Collectors.

This has nothing to do with customers. We're talking about the company and what they're doing is dubious at best. Tell me, how many Japanese companies you know that do this stuff? How is that everything I know, from books to soundtracks, comes with a different code each time it's published again?

I am sorry, as much as it would be fun to jump on your wagon "yay, let's fuck collectors nerds!", the chance is that you are wrong defending this behavior.

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 8:54 pm

I have no idea whether this company is doing legitimate (as they claim) business. I just don't know. What I do know is the ridiculousness of the collector market, created by their own minds. Games are not trading cards and (excepting the case of limited editions) their rarity is, like someone else already said, a miscalculation on the original publisher's part. If someone wants to come along and fill the gap, I think that's good for everyone but the collectors.

As for differentiating between and original and reprint: why? Unless there is a reason, an actual difference in the printing or performance of the product, I can't see the point. For the price they are charging for these reprints or back stock, it would be lame to brand them like budget or inferior releases in any way, like slapping an ugly logo on the back.

ahnslaught · Post by **ahnslaught** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 9:41 pm

Gotta agree with most of the guys here so far...I think it's great that you can get "hard to find" games for reasonable prices.

I also think that - and maybe I'm not saying this right - but for the collector-types, isn't it enough satisfaction that you yourself have amassed your collection over time? Isn't that what makes your collection special? I mean, 99.9% of the world don't even care that you have a sizeable collection of whatever - games, cars, music, etc, so it should be done for your own enjoyment, right?

Plus, you were willing to buy it at the higher price, right? So be happy with your purchase. Crap like this happens all the time in the world - for example, I bought an ipod, and a couple months later, they came out with 10 more gigs and video for the same price. Big deal, I still like mine (even though it recently got stolen - too attached!)

benstylus · Post by **benstylus** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 10:21 pm

Food for thought: The value of the original pressing would still likely go down even if the reprints had a different SKU number.

There are going to be a few exceptions, but generally speaking, once a GH release comes out, the price of the original drops to match it.

So, assuming the price of your original will drop regardless, why does it matter to you collectors whether or not the reprints look the same? Because it may not drop "as much"?

Or is it the satisfaction of having an original pressing. Well, if you know you've got an original pressing, why do you care whether or not other folks have one that looks identical?

PaCrappa · Post by **PaCrappa** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 10:24 pm

Rob is the man.

Pa

Super Laydock · Post by **Super Laydock** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 10:24 pm

Let's say one writes a book and it becomes wanted.
Not to deny anyone the pleasure of reading the book, more copies of the book are being printed. Every reprint of the book is mentioned as such.
It's basically the same book, but still 1st release copies are usually worth most.

Letting new generations get to know great classic games is one thing.
Releasing the reprints without mentioning they are reprints or making them distinguishable from the 1st release is just plain wrong.

They could release the game in new print and make lots of people happy and almost noone unhappy.
Now they make lots of people happy and anger a lot.

"Always the real thing" is a slogan coming to mind now.

Neon · Post by **Neon** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 10:30 pm

Ha, ha, look at that. Bunch of my rare, expensive Saturn games thrown into an old shoebox, where they constantly collide and scuff each other. My copy of Garegga was mint, now there's a big ol' spiderweb on the back of the case. If I wasn't pretty sure it violated forum rules and international law, I'd take a dump on the spinecard and post a pic of that too.

Man, CD cases suck. I hope under defeat comes in a DVD case.

jp · Post by jp » Sat Feb 18, 2006 10:36 pm

Neon wrote: I think I'd be grateful. I'm not entirely sure collecting isn't a manifestation of a mental sickness, really...

Sour grapes are beautiful.

At any rate, I don't think this really matters. Yeah, its lame they don't mark it as reprints, not doing that is definitely a slap in the face of collectors. But they're bringing the games out on their original platforms... instead of doing the pathetic port whore thing Sega and Capcom seem to be doing... therefore, I don't care.

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 10:36 pm

You've taken this one step too far, Neon. This is abuse. Honestly, I keep my games all nice and neat.

Neon · Post by **Neon** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 10:44 pm

Fuck it, CD cases are cheap. If they ever got inconvenient to open, I could just replace them. Except Thunderforce Gold Pack 2, that has the nice gold case, now with huge crack across the front. Oh well, it's worth less, not like I'd sell it anyways.

Sour grapes are beautiful.

Heh, that honestly wasn't 'aimed' at anyone. I do remember the time you posted about how you were pursuing this female, but then you bought that $2k Saturn and didn't have enough money to go out on dates? Are you sure you're not just trying to avoid people? Not trying to be insulting here, just curious. Also, didn't you not start collecting until your best friend was shot?

jp · Post by jp » Sat Feb 18, 2006 10:52 pm

Edited... angry jp rant begone!

benstylus · Post by **benstylus** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 10:55 pm

Super Laydock wrote:Let's say one writes a book and it becomes wanted.
Not to deny anyone the pleasure of reading the book, more copies of the book are being printed. Every reprint of the book is mentioned as such.
It's basically the same book, but still 1st release copies are usually worth most.

My stepfather is an artist. He paints original works and often makes limited edition giclee reproductions of them. The interesting thing is, he may limit a series to 25 or 50 prints, but he can't really afford to make more than 3 or 4 prints at a time - and he wouldn't have place to store 50 prints even if he could afford it. As he sells them, he often has more prints in the series made, but never going above the threshhold he set at the beginning.

Sometimes it takes a few years for him to complete a set of 50 prints. Sometimes he never finishes a set.

The point is, all of those are still considered first printings.

If the publisher signed an agreement with Sony for the right to press 10,000 discs, and ends up only pressing 4,000 initially, I think they should be able to go back and do the remaining 6,000 without having to alter it in any way. Just because a 3rd company is financing this pressing doesn't affect that.

If they wanted to buy all the remaining prints in one of my stepfathers' series, and offered to pay him up front for them, he would have the remaining number made and sent to them. And they would be exactly the same as if he had done them 3 or 4 at a time.

I do not know of many collectors who have access to the details of the licensing agreements between companies like Sega and Sony. I'm sure that quite often the purchase of a rare game is based on assumptions that the collector makes on how many copies currently exist and will exist in the future.

If you're collecting as an investment, then you need to consider that just like an investment in the stock market, you make assumptions and sometimes you're wrong. sometimes things happen that you won't be able to predict (like Enron) that could devalue your games. It's part of the way the free market works. On the other hand, sometimes there will be a huge spike in the value of your items. Anyone who looked on ebay around Christmas time at the Xbox 360 auctions knows this.

If you can't take unexpected ups and downs, then perhaps collecting video games based on their value is not a hobby you should be pursuing.

doctorx0079 · Post by **doctorx0079** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 11:04 pm

The only thing I find interesting about all this is their website. It says zip about reprints. If they went to the publisher to reprint these games, wouldn't the publisher want them to say so on their web site? Maybe in small print or an FAQ somewhere? Just for PR purposes you understand. I can't believe that Gamequest hasn't been asked before whether they are reprinting games. I can't believe that they are reprinting anything until they say so, the publishers say so, or somebody (like EGM) provides some hard evidence. Until then it's all SPECULATION and HEARSAY.

If in fact they are violating copyright by selling bootlegs, then they are evil bastards and deserve to be sued out of existence by the publishers. However, nobody has proven this yet as far as I can see.

This all smells like a big goofy conspiracy theory to me. Yeah, the government's covering up extraterrestrials too. And cell phone companies are going to sell your number to telemarketers. SUUUUURRRRE.

Neon · Post by **Neon** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 11:04 pm

jp wrote:stuff

We worked things out thru pm/aim

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 11:09 pm

Super Laydock wrote:Let's say one writes a book and it becomes wanted.
Not to deny anyone the pleasure of reading the book, more copies of the book are being printed. Every reprint of the book is mentioned as such.
It's basically the same book, but still 1st release copies are usually worth most.

Letting new generations get to know great classic games is one thing.
Releasing the reprints without mentioning they are reprints or making them distinguishable from the 1st release is just plain wrong.

They could release the game in new print and make lots of people happy and almost noone unhappy.
Now they make lots of people happy and anger a lot.

"Always the real thing" is a slogan coming to mind now.

Quoted for truth. I was beginning to think I was the only one who felt that way. I find your comparison with books quite apt. Somewhere it should say something like "2nd printing 2006".

Hmm, if GQD began reissuing rare Neo Geo AES titels, some Neo-Geo collector would probably suicide-bomb them, thus solving the problem*

*I do not condone physical violence as a means of solving disputes.

doctorx0079 · Post by **doctorx0079** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 11:16 pm

Somebody please prove that GQD is reprinting anything.

Randorama · Post by **Randorama** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 11:26 pm

I personally like the idea...when they're reprinting RSG, so i can play it without forking too much money? Oh, and can this lunatic crusade against witches be locked?

doctorx0079 · Post by **doctorx0079** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 11:29 pm

Randorama wrote:I personally like the idea...when they're reprinting RSG, so i can play it without forking too much money? Oh, and can this lunatic crusade against witches be locked?

I am definitely leaning toward "crackpot conspiracy theory", although "lunatic crusade" is close and has a nice ring to it.

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 11:29 pm

doctorx0079 wrote:Somebody please prove that GQD is reprinting anything.

While this is no definite proof, an employee of GQD claimed they do here:

http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/sho ... ge=3&pp=20

I have little doubt that this guy really is working for GQD (aka Shady Inc.)

Acid King · Post by **Acid King** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 11:29 pm

Turrican wrote:
Do you realize that the same applies to the majority of platinum releases right? they are the same games, they are released again, and they have a different serial number.

Holy shit, I can't believe how many are there willing to ditch common sense just to pass as the Punishers of Dumb Collectors.

This has nothing to do with customers. We're talking about the company and what they're doing is dubious at best. Tell me, how many Japanese companies you know that do this stuff? How is that everything I know, from books to soundtracks, comes with a different code each time it's published again?

I am sorry, as much as it would be fun to jump on your wagon "yay, let's fuck collectors nerds!", the chance is that you are wrong defending this behavior.

First off, stop reading in to things. Where did I say "fuck the collectors"? What wagon are you talking about? Jesus Chrust man, calm down.

Platinum releases are platinum releases. The "Greatest hits" release are different releases. Different packaging and altogether different releases. All gamequest is doing is reprinting previously out of print titles that are not different at all than the previous printing. It's not comparable to a platinum, greatest hits or "Best" release because it's not a new edition. It's the same thing. It's akin to a company putting out 20,000 copies, having all the copies sell, then printing another 20,000 a year or two later. How is it that people don't see that?

doctorx0079 · Post by **doctorx0079** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 11:30 pm

Ceph wrote:An employee of GQD claimed they do here:

http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/sho ... ge=3&pp=20

I have little doubt that this guy really is working for GQD (aka Shady Inc.)

Did he show you his employee ID card, or what?