Company making indistinguishable reprints of rarities eg REZ

[BulletMagnet]

...since a game becoming a collector's item pretty much relies on low production and sales.

Sometimes this is the case, but not always: Radiant Silvergun's a decent example of this. It's not a particularly rare or hard to find game, but the hype surrounding it, pretty much by itself, has skyrocketed the price to stupid levels.

But a company has absolutely no obligation to cater to this demand.

True, but not doing SOME small thing for the collecting crowd (as was mentioned, just a different product number or something) will also lose them customers: not a huge, crippling amount, but as I said, with the Limited Editions and stuff being put out, apparently enough, it'd seem, for them to have already taken notice.

[Rob]

How are you throwing money away on buying a less expensive copy of a game, exactly?

I don't consider retail -> temporary dream world of the collector's price -> retail "less expensive." I think this is where the confusion is here. Please note I've ran out of serious responses for this thread. All future responses will be of lesser value.

[sethsez]

...since a game becoming a collector's item pretty much relies on low production and sales.

Sometimes this is the case, but not always: Radiant Silvergun's a decent example of this. It's not a particularly rare or hard to find game, but the hype surrounding it, pretty much by itself, has skyrocketed the price to stupid levels.

In other words, even a reprint wouldn't affect the price here.

But a company has absolutely no obligation to cater to this demand.

True, but not doing SOME small thing for the collecting crowd (as was mentioned, just a different product number or something) will also lose them customers: not a huge, crippling amount, but as I said, with the Limited Editions and stuff being put out, apparently enough, it'd seem, for them to have already taken notice.

The limited editions are marketed as limited editions. Standard editions of games are never marketed as limited, so the company has absolutely no obligation to have them as such. If a company loses customers due to reprinting games, well, it's more than made up for by the people who buy the reprints. The customers they're losing are actively hoping games will fall into obscurity among most gamers, which is exactly what companies don't want. So I'm going to take a shot in the dark and say a company would rather have higher sales and lose the collectors than low sales but retaining the collectors (who then sell games back and forth between themselves for stupid amounts of money, which the company never sees).

[99pence]

Pardon me for skimming over the posts but is it right in saying that say Rez is being printed by Sony. In the same factory that made the first lot? It's not like its some dude in his bedroom turning a handle on a machine with doubled sided sticky tape everywhere?

[BulletMagnet]

I don't consider retail -> temporary dream world of the collector's price -> retail "less expensive."

Er, you'll hafta run that one by me again, I kinda lost you.

Please note I've ran out of serious responses for this thread. All future responses will be of lesser value.

Heh, duly noted.

I'll be waiting for a reprint of your better responses of days long past.

In other words, even a reprint wouldn't affect the price here.

Well, who says a reprint has to have the specific goal in mind of bringing down the value of the original print? I thought the main reason the whole operation which sparked this thread even got started was simply to make the games more readily available to gamers: whether or not the price of the original falls, more people are still able to just buy the reprint at a more reasonable price, and the collectors can keep squabbling over the originals if they prefer. In short, everyone's happy, more or less: start making the reprints indistinguishable from the originals, though, and then the collector types will go berserk, and then the ranting debates and calls for lawsuits come rolling in. Even if, as you say, a company has no outright obligation to "cater to the collectors," if only for the purely selfish reason of saving themselves some inquiries into the legality of their actions and all that jazz it's still not a bad idea, methinks.

If a company loses customers due to reprinting games, well, it's more than made up for by the people who buy the reprints.

Well, the company certainly hopes so, though I'd imagine it depends on the game. And at any rate, as I said above, why only consider one market when you can easily accomodate both, at no loss to yourself?

[Nemo]

As I said before, if you only care about playing the game, what do you care what the cover art looks like?

This is the great paradox then.

Indeed, the anti-collector with the collector's mentality. I just find this whole topic funny because everyone posting on both sides of the argument is basically promoting his/her own agenda, so really, how can anyone criticize anyone else? (Except for one or two people that said they already own said games and are glad more people can play it) I do agree, however, the people worried about the "value" of their games decreasing are annoying.

[Rob]

Indeed, the anti-collector with the collector's mentality.

I hope to one day be buried with my first edition Rez.

[sethsez]

As I said before, if you only care about playing the game, what do you care what the cover art looks like?

This is the great paradox then.

Indeed, the anti-collector with the collector's mentality.

I don't think that's it. I don't like Greatest Hits releases because they're ugly, but I don't care how rare they are or whatever. On the Xbox I actually prefer the Platinum Hits cases to the regular ones, so if there's one available for a game I want I'll spring for that instead of the original.

Well, who says a reprint has to have the specific goal in mind of bringing down the value of the original print?

The first post was bitching about how reprints are devaluing his collection.

And make no mistake, the vast vast vast vast majority of people are not talking about lawsuits or whatever. That's just the imbecile who started this thread. It's not some widespread thing that companies need to think about at all.

[Turrican]

That's just the imbecile who started this thread. It's not some widespread thing that companies need to think about at all.

what's up sethsez? I hardly recognize you. Your evil twin has stolen your passwords and is posting for you?

Careful with words, ok?

[neorichieb1971]

I own origonals of Gitaroo man and Rez, I thought I had not only bought 2 games that are of excellent quality but also 2 games which exceeded the MSRP.

However, since both of these are reprints now, the only thing I can say is go out and buy them while you have the opportunity.

Collectors should buy games for obsolete systems, not current ones.. That should be their safety net against this sort of argument.

It must be worth nothing that I bought both games for MSRP or less. If you do buy games in the $100+ grade you must realize you are taking a risk.. The games industry is far from becoming an antiques market.

[BulletMagnet]

The first post was bitching about how reprints are devaluing his collection.

Some worry about that, obviously, but as was discussed, it kinda depends on the individual game: IIRC when a bunch of the old PS1 Squaresoft RPGs (Xenogears, etc.) got a re-release not too long ago, the originals' values dropped pretty quickly; on the other hand, the release of the Sengoku pack on PS2 (along with a Greatest Hits version on top of that) doesn't seem to have lowered the price of the Saturn Sengoku Blade much, if at all. I haven't kept close enough track of situations like these to give definitive reasons why some games hold their value and some don't, but obviously there's a discrepancy in there someplace, and I'm sure collectors are aware of it.

And make no mistake, the vast vast vast vast majority of people are not talking about lawsuits or whatever...It's not some widespread thing that companies need to think about at all.

Heh, perhaps not, but even if people aren't exactly putting their lawyers on speed dial, there are still several here asking "Is this legit?" or saying "This sounds shady" or the like...whether or not such claims are legit, a slight packaging change could still avoid some possible bad publicity, if nothing else.

[Nemo]

Indeed, the anti-collector with the collector's mentality.

I hope to one day be buried with my first edition Rez.

Poor Gunbird 2.

This is the great paradox then.

Indeed, the anti-collector with the collector's mentality.

I don't think that's it. I don't like Greatest Hits releases because they're ugly, but I don't care how rare they are or whatever. On the Xbox I actually prefer the Platinum Hits cases to the regular ones, so if there's one available for a game I want I'll spring for that instead of the original.

Heck yeah GH games are ugly, but that's because I collect games and I have to look at them. In Rob's case it shouldn't matter since he would soon be parting with the game. In reality, he's a collector that doesn't like to accumulate things, he's worried about "value" just like the woeful collector's in this topic are. And it should be noted that different types of collectors exist, the quality-type, quantity-type, and a combination of both, in Rob's case he's the quality-type, so against all his wishes he's a still a collector.

[Rob]

he's a collector that doesn't like to accumulate things

ahaha

[sethsez]

In Rob's case it shouldn't matter since he would soon be parting with the game. In reality, he's a collector that doesn't like to accumulate things, he's worried about "value" just like the woeful collector's in this topic are.

Again, not really. He's not buying certain editions of games for personal satisfaction or as an investment, he's buying them because he knows he'll be reselling them and he wants to get as much back as he can (this doesn't mean more than he paid, which is a motivation of some collectors). All other things being equal, and knowing you're probably not going to keep it, why not get the one that'll be easier to sell to someone else? Not collector's mentality, just common sense.

That's just the imbecile who started this thread. It's not some widespread thing that companies need to think about at all.

what's up sethsez? I hardly recognize you. Your evil twin has stolen your passwords and is posting for you?

Careful with words, ok?

Sorry, but some things are just flat-out stupid, and "let's sue them for reprinting games legally!" is one.

[Ganelon]

Sorry, but some things are just flat-out stupid, and "let's sue them for reprinting games legally!" is one.

Seconded.

[Nemo]

In Rob's case it shouldn't matter since he would soon be parting with the game. In reality, he's a collector that doesn't like to accumulate things, he's worried about "value" just like the woeful collector's in this topic are.

Again, not really. He's not buying certain editions of games for personal satisfaction or as an investment, he's buying them because he knows he'll be reselling them and he wants to get as much back as he can

Key words noted.

[Rob]

Oh, so you were serious.

I suggest looking up investment. People don't invest knowing they will lose money.

[Ceph]

I am neither buying (supposedly) rare games as an investment, nor am I dealing with rare games nor am I hoarding multiple sealed copies of the same game to resell them later when the price has gone up.

I find the personal insults hurled at me here pretty sad- I was under the impression such behaviour was beneath the people frequenting this board.

In my first post I made it clear that I am in favor of making good games that had a limited print run available to more people.

But I am also a collector. I want to be able to tell the difference between a game that was printed five years ago and one that was printed yesterday.

In my initial post here I was trying to think of a way to make GQD start making reprints distinguishable, not to stop reprintng. They do not reprint games because said games are good and deserve to be played or because GQD are humanitarian. They don't make a lot of noise about the fact that their games are reprints because GQD want people to believe they are buying original prints (and you don't think this is deceitful?). Have no doubt, they are in this to make money, and they'll give a rats ass about any number of polite letters asking them to mark their reprints as such. So forcing them may be the only way.

I wonder if those here claiming it doesn't bother them are being perfectly honest with themselves. You really don't care if you just spent a small fortune on an old and hard to find game and then somone makes reprints of it which can't be told apart at all from the one you got, and it doesn't matter to you, at all? Yeah, sure.

Another question: Is it indeed legal to reprint a game from, lets say, 1999 in 2006 and not even change the copyright notice?

[TalkingOctopus]

Has anyone actually purchased from them?

I had an order a few weeks ago. I am not sure if any of the games I got were reprints (perhaps Growlanser Generations is a reprint?), but they were hard to find new elsewhere. I thought the prices were reasonable, the shipping was fast, and the packaging was good.

I'm really surprised at the negative reactions. I read about it a while ago and I thought it was pretty cool. I find it frustrating that most games have such a short shelf life and go out of print quickly. Also, I don't understand the obsession on Rez. You could get a jp copy for $13 off PA a while back.

[Twiddle]

I am neither buying (supposedly) rare games as an investment, nor am I dealing with rare games nor am I hoarding multiple sealed copies of the same game to resell them later when the price has gone up.

I find the personal insults hurled at me here pretty sad- I was under the impression such behaviour was beneath the people frequenting this board.

In my first post I made it clear that I am in favor of making good games that had a limited print run available to more people.

But I am also a collector. I want to be able to tell the difference between a game that was printed five years ago and one that was printed yesterday.

In my initial post here I was trying to think of a way to make GQD start making reprints distinguishable, not to stop reprintng. They do not reprint games because said games are good and deserve to be played or because GQD are humanitarian. They don't make a lot of noise about the fact that their games are reprints because GQD want people to believe they are buying original prints (and you don't think this is deceitful?). Have no doubt, they are in this to make money, and they'll give a rats ass about any number of polite letters asking them to mark their reprints as such. So forcing them may be the only way.

I wonder if those here claiming it doesn't bother them are being perfectly honest with themselves. You really don't care if you just spent a small fortune on an old and hard to find game and then somone makes reprints of it which can't be told apart at all from the one you got, and it doesn't matter to you, at all? Yeah, sure.

Another question: Is it indeed legal to reprint a game from, lets say, 1999 in 2006 and not even change the copyright notice?

tl;dr

[Ceph]

Go twiddle yourself, troll.

/ignore on

[Ganelon]

But I am also a collector. I want to be able to tell the difference between a game that was printed five years ago and one that was printed yesterday.

In my initial post here I was trying to think of a way to make GQD start making reprints distinguishable, not to stop reprintng. They do not reprint games because said games are good and deserve to be played or because GQD are humanitarian. They don't make a lot of noise about the fact that their games are reprints because GQD want people to believe they are buying original prints (and you don't think this is deceitful?). Have no doubt, they are in this to make money, and they'll give a rats ass about any number of polite letters asking them to mark their reprints as such. So forcing them may be the only way.

I wonder if those here claiming it doesn't bother them are being perfectly honest with themselves. You really don't care if you just spent a small fortune on an old and hard to find game and then somone makes reprints of it which can't be told apart at all from the one you got, and it doesn't matter to you, at all? Yeah, sure.

First off, you CAN tell the difference with the games since they don't have the factory sticker on top, consistent with games nowadays. Therefore, your whole point is moot to the most obsessed "must have all games sealed" collector.

Secondly, what does it matter that GQD is making a profit doing these reprintings? They're helping themselves and helping consumers at the same time. A perfect instance of the economic "invisible hand" at work. Yes, it may seem deceitful since they never told people these were reprints rather than leftover originals. So what? Does it make you feel stressed out that some overly opportunistic fools might think they got first prints?

As for buying games, GQD is selling them at no less than the retail price. You could've found every one of their games selling for less months after their original release. Not to mention, none of these games sold over $100 before GQD's reprint (unless you were spend-crazy when you bought the games, which would destroy your "money matters" position). Wow, you lost $50, not that extravagant a sum. You can just make it up in a few hours' work; millions of people buy $50 games at release only to see the games crumble to $10 in several months. What's the difference?

Buying game is always a risk; the value could go way up (Radiant Silvergun) or way down (Catwoman). A reprint, collection, or update is always a possibility on the horizon; so too is an ever increasing demand and the company bankrupting. When you buy a game, you engage in this risk taking.

Obviously, everybody feels bad when they get ripped off, whatever the sum. A person may feel annoyed towards the publisher/distributor. But sue GQD just for getting involved in this natural process in the area of niche games? That's just elitism at its stupidest. If you want to better focus your anger, blame the publishers who all agreed to let their games be re-released.

[Twiddle]

Go twiddle yourself, troll.

/ignore on

aight i know it's not my place to be between a man and his butter ok

chillax

[Ceph]

First off, you CAN tell the difference with the games since they don't have the factory sticker on top, consistent with games nowadays. Therefore, your whole point is moot to the most obsessed "must have all games sealed" collector.

I don't collect sealed games- I want to play them, too (even though I try to keep them in as good a condition as possible, unlike Neon) And how can I tell the difference once it's not sealed anymore? And what about reprints of old games like PSX and Saturn and PC Engine?

Wow, you lost $50, not that extravagant a sum. You can just make it up in a few hours' work; millions of people buy $50 games at release only to see the games crumble to $10 in several months. What's the difference?

I'm was really thinking ahead and not talking about the stuff they have re-released so far, none of that was really rare/expensive in the first place.
__________

As I have said before, another possibility of preventing unmarked reprints is contacting the original publishers and asking them to not allow this. Sega, Atlus, Capcom etc. are surely more interested in customer opinion than GQD.

[sethsez]

In Rob's case it shouldn't matter since he would soon be parting with the game. In reality, he's a collector that doesn't like to accumulate things, he's worried about "value" just like the woeful collector's in this topic are.

Again, not really. He's not buying certain editions of games for personal satisfaction or as an investment, he's buying them because he knows he'll be reselling them and he wants to get as much back as he can

Key words noted.

Um... do you know what an investment is?

When you invest in something, you do so with the purpose of making more money back than you initially paid. Collectors do this by predicting what games will become rare and sought after and then buy then and keep them in pristine condition, so they can sell them later at a profit.

That is not remotely what Rob is doing. He's making sure he gets as much money back as possible when he resells, but he has no intentions of making a profit. Thus, it is not anything remotely resembling an investment. If you think trying to minimize loss on a purchase counts as investing, then I hope for your sake you never get into the stock market.

Christ, next I'm expecting some dim bulb to burst into the thread and proclaim that anybody who buys something is a collector because collectors buy things.

I wonder if those here claiming it doesn't bother them are being perfectly honest with themselves. You really don't care if you just spent a small fortune on an old and hard to find game and then somone makes reprints of it which can't be told apart at all from the one you got, and it doesn't matter to you, at all?

That's how the world works. I might not like it, but that doesn't mean it isn't perfectly fair for everybody involved. Sometimes things will happen that don't personally benefit you, but throwing a temper tantrum and calling for lawsuits is ludicrois. It might suck for you, but that doesn't mean they're in the wrong at all, because your needs are not at the center of everyone's decision making.

Another question: Is it indeed legal to reprint a game from, lets say, 1999 in 2006 and not even change the copyright notice?

Yes.

[benstylus]

I wonder if those here claiming it doesn't bother them are being perfectly honest with themselves. You really don't care if you just spent a small fortune on an old and hard to find game and then somone makes reprints of it which can't be told apart at all from the one you got, and it doesn't matter to you, at all?

It's human nature to feel a little bit disappointed in situations like that, but a lot of people (myself included) will just suck it up and say oh well - should have waited that extra month and then picked it up.

Now what if they plop the Greatest Hits stripe on the cover, and the value of your "original print" still goes down just as much as if they were indistinguishable? You'd feel the same way.

It's not a matter of whether or not they're indistinguishable, it's a matter of the perceived value.

As long as you feel you paid a fair price for it at the time, then don't worry about what happens to the "value" of it afterwards.

[Acid King]

In my initial post here I was trying to think of a way to make GQD start making reprints distinguishable, not to stop reprintng. They do not reprint games because said games are good and deserve to be played or because GQD are humanitarian. They don't make a lot of noise about the fact that their games are reprints because GQD want people to believe they are buying original prints (and you don't think this is deceitful?). Have no doubt, they are in this to make money, and they'll give a rats ass about any number of polite letters asking them to mark their reprints as such. So forcing them may be the only way.

Explain to me the actual, tangible differences between copies printed by Game Quest and copies printed years ago.

[Neon]

I don't collect sealed games- I want to play them, too (even though I try to keep them in as good a condition as possible, unlike Neon) Wink And how can I tell the difference once it's not sealed anymore? And what about reprints of old games like PSX and Saturn and PC Engine?

Let's be clear: I take excellent care of the discs themselves. I don't want to go replacing expensive Saturn games (as well as depleting their already small numbers). It's the manual, spine, and all the other collector shit I could give a fuck about. Those have no effect on the gameplay whatsoever.

As for telling the difference: Who cares? Why does it matter? Especially if you already own the game? If you haven't got it and they reprint it, great! If you have, oh well, you'll have to sell it at a loss if you decide to sell it at all. Nothing you can do about it. Besides sue them for reprinting rare games and making them cheaper, which is really fucking stupid.

[Ceph]

I aint going to.

[Nemo]

Again, not really. He's not buying certain editions of games for personal satisfaction or as an investment, he's buying them because he knows he'll be reselling them and he wants to get as much back as he can

Key words noted.

Um... do you know what an investment is?

That is not remotely what Rob is doing. He's making sure he gets as much money back as possible when he resells, but he has no intentions of making a profit. Thus, it is not anything remotely resembling an investment. If you think trying to minimize loss on a purchase counts as investing, then I hope for your sake you never get into the stock market.

Too bad the stock market and the video game market are two completely different things. First of all, he's already getting use out of the item, which is a return on his investment. But there's another thing, you can't say he has no intentions to make a profit, because as you said, he wants to make as much money as possible when he sells them. You think he's going to sell the game for less than he paid if it's worth twice what he paid? Plus, in terms of just recouping your losses you're wrong because the 2nd hand disparity is greater between original print games than GH versions. Let's just say on average you can get back 80% of what you paid for a common game, 80% of $50 is $40, compared to 80% of $20 which is $16. You're always going to lose more money when trying to sell a more expensive game, and that doesn't even factor in the fact that once a GH vesion of a game is released, it plummets the value of the original print.