Does anyone actually pay $20 for ROMs?

[kikipdph]

I create free games for Atari, but I only have a donation button, and there have been a few donations, but nothing significant. I allow my games to be on the AA store if the price is in line with a custom cartridge because I already allow people to order custom cartridges for themselves. If I were to think about money, I would rather work for other platforms than the Atari console.

Edited July 12, 2023 by kikipdph

[Smell Dawg]

8 hours ago, Andrew Davie said:

Actually, what I'm hanging out for is some sort of scheme (for example NFT) where a certain percentage of royalties is paid to an author on ever sale of an item.

You know, I recently came across exactly this setup - "Polycade" (Tyler Bushnell).  The game cartridge is a digital NFT which the holder can "play".  The digital cart keeps track of scores and stats (therefore transferring with the cart), and each time it changes hands there is a % royalty that goes back to the creator.  There are obvious limitations, but I love the thoughts behind it!  It's my understanding that the project is indefinitely on hold for any future titles, though.

[john_q_atari]

2 hours ago, Andrew Davie said:

What incentive is there for homebrew programmers who might, for example, spend years developing a title and then perhaps see a few hundred dollars total in-pocket from sales of that title - and subsequently see individual copies of the game selling for $1000 

For now, I think the only realistic solution is for you or your agent (for example Atariage) to keep a perpetual listing on ebay and perhaps etsy and the like for carts that you wholly own the rights to. With an infinite supply at a price that you set, you will effectively control the resale market. 

[MrTrust]

2 hours ago, Andrew Davie said:

$20/unit

 

No, what is the total amount of money you consider to have made a project like Wen Hop worth your while?  If you sell 10 units and make $200, obviously that isn't worth your while.

 

Lowering prices will increase sales, though I'm this instance, maybe not enough to shore up the opportunity cost of charging less.  Point is, what is ultimately "worth it" in terms of the money you expect to make?

 

2 hours ago, Andrew Davie said:

Boulder Dash - is under a formal licensing contractual agreement. I am not able to sell ANY copies of that game. I have zero ability to manipulate the market, as I don't own any copies of my own with which I could possibly do that.

 

Then you and you partners could do it.  Presumably you'd have to cut them in on these hypothetical royalties anyway, so the point is unchanged.

 

2 hours ago, Andrew Davie said:

But as to your point about artworks - artists regularly sell multiple copies of their work - e.g., limited edition prints; I see no difference at all.

 

Sure, you could.  It's just, as a buyer, you're a sucker if you agree to having to report the sale, make sure a third party disburses the cash (who is also going to take a cut), and pay out royalties to you, and possibly even another licensor on a copy when you don't own any of the underlying intellectual property and it could come back into print at any time the holders decide?  And on a 2600 cartridge that might sell for $500 or so?

 

If you can find someone to agree to that, zay gezunt to you.  There's no way in hell I would a contract like that for any video game ever.

[RamrodHare]

I have a feeling that the people who keep complaining and arguing aren't  really aware of what goes into making a game. They want to throw a fit about prices and put down the developers. If you are really a fan of atari and want to keep it alive, support the great people who give us these new games. Without them Atari is dead. Appreciate the programmers. Try to understand them. They work hard and don't  get the pay or thanks they deserve. The complete lack of common sense and empathy coming from some of you is shameful. Andrew makes clear and valid points. I totally understand what he's saying and I agree with him 100%. Now, back to the topic of roms. As I said before, I can't afford them or carts, but this thread has angered and hurt me so much, that I'm tempted to skip a months worth of one of the medications that keep me alive to to buy roms from the people that keep ammy hobby fresh and fun, like Champ Games, Andrew, and Albert, to name a few. I'm not even kidding. This life is short, do what makes you happy and be kind to those around you. If you dont, You'll regret it when they're gone.

[+x=usr(1536)]

5 hours ago, MrTrust said:

I don't doubt this is frustrating for someone in your position, but buyers would be insane to support something like this. 

His proposal is essentially a form of VAT, except at each change of ownership or point of usage rather than each step of the manufacturing process.

 

Note that this does not mean that I think it's a good idea: I very specifically do not, and I say this as someone with direct family members who have generated or are generating media that would financially benefit the family from such a structure.  Enforcement and collection aspects aside (and pardon me while I become downright giddy at the idea of yet another government bureaucracy being created and set loose; it's always a hoot when that happens), this completely destroys the concept of owning media in order to be able to use it infinitely.  That is a trend that has been on the rise over the past 15 - 20 years or so, and it's one that does not sit well with me.

 

All that this would really do would be to encourage circumvention of whatever means and methods are used to implement and enforce it.  We saw this with MP3s, records recorded onto X-ray films, prohibition of alcohol, and many, many other examples.  This is another case where leaving well enough alone is probably the best course.

[+x=usr(1536)]

3 hours ago, Andrew Davie said:

I don't think you're quite understanding what bugs me. It's not about getting extra money. It's about other people profiting off my hard work.

To be fair, this is a very reasonable point.  People who steal others' work outright then profit from it are some of the lowest forms of scum, and should be shot.

 

While I personally believe that authors (in the broad sense, not just of written material) should be compensated for their work, there's also no control over what happens to or with their work once it has passed from the retailer to the purchaser.  This is why I say that it's a situation where leaving well enough alone is probably the best approach: trying to add some form of regulation at that point is just not feasible.

 

@Andrew Davie, I really do sympathise with your point here.  It's a horrible thing to have to watch happen, particularly if there's seemingly nothing that can be done about it.

[RevEng]

28 minutes ago, RamrodHare said:

As I said before, I can't afford them or carts, but this thread has angered and hurt me so much, that I'm tempted to skip a months worth of one of the medications that keep me alive to to buy roms from the people that keep ammy hobby fresh and fun, like Champ Games, Andrew, and Albert, to name a few. I'm not even kidding.

I'm sure the devs appreciate your support, but please don't endanger your health over the hobby. There are other ways to help, if you want to do so, like testing wips, sharing releases on social media, adding reviews to the AA store, or just generally being supportive.

 

FWIW, the economy has me in the same shoes as you, without a hobby budget at all. Just participate in other ways, and look after yourself.

 

[+Gemintronic]

45 minutes ago, RamrodHare said:

.. If you are really a fan of atari and want to keep it alive, support the great people who give us these new games. Without them Atari is dead. Appreciate the programmers. Try to understand them.

 

I think feedback is gold.  Sometimes developers take the lack of constructive feedback as a form of ostracization.  I'd rather have your critique than living expense money.  Try some work in progress homebrews and share your experience.

[Greg2600]

$20 is too high.  Sorry.  Despite their tremendous skill and output, they're normally still pirating IPs.  Maybe $20 on new release discounted later?  Rikki and Vikki, a masterpiece, can be had for $9.99.  

[tkarner]

First, let me say I appreciate all that hombrewers do for retro gaming.

To address a couple of points made about money.

1. If a creation of mine resold for an exorbitant amount I don't think I'd be upset about it. I'd be flattered.

2. I always thought this was a hobby not a business. Creating games for a small handful of potential customers for a 45 year old console is a seriously poor business model. I have a hobby, skeet shooting. I'm pretty good at it and compete in tournaments. Sometimes I win some money. If I'm lucky the winnings will cover gas and lunch. I do it for enjoyment, not money. Any money that does come is a bonus.

[MrTrust]

54 minutes ago, x=usr(1536) said:

His proposal is essentially a form of VAT, except at each change of ownership or point of usage rather than each step of the manufacturing process.

 

Well, the idea behind the VAT is real value is actually getting added.  This is just rent seeking.  I don't blame the guy for having a chapped ass about it.  I would, too, but cutting yourself in for a share of the rent doesn't do anything to stop the rent seeking.  It's going to encourage more of it.

 

1 hour ago, x=usr(1536) said:

This is another case where leaving well enough alone is probably the best course.

 

What I don't understand is why this model of doing tiny print runs and then the game is unavailable forever must be so.  There's no way to do made-to-order cartridges with all the desktop publishing tech we have now, with 3-D printing and all that?  Al does it in the store, doesn't he? It seems like there should be ways around this issue.

 

I would be interested in actual market research WRT ROMs.  Now that more of them are being made available and getting put behind paywalls, I end up spending more money and getting fewer new Atari games, but I tend to contribute more dollars overall, because $10-$15 here and there is easier to swallow than $30-$70 on one cartridge and then downloading all kinds of freebies.

 

what's interesting about the original question is how many buyers would pay $15 instead of $20, and are there enough of them to shore up the cost of reducing the price.  I guess it comes down to what we're supposed to think a new 2600 game should generate in profit in a general way.

[+5-11under]

4 minutes ago, MrTrust said:

What I don't understand is why this model of doing tiny print runs and then the game is unavailable forever must be so.  There's no way to do made-to-order cartridges with all the desktop publishing tech we have now, with 3-D printing and all that?  Al does it in the store, doesn't he? It seems like there should be ways around this issue.

A lot will depend on the chosen suppliers and methods, but typically... the box is one item that requires printing in a relatively large batch. Next would be the manual and overlays if applicable (as mentioned, depends on supplier, though). Items such as board, shell, and label can usually be "made" one (or several) at a time fairly easily. In most cases it would be easy enough to have an initial fixed quantity CIB run followed by on-demand loose games.

 

Of course many people love boxes as much as the game, so that puts the wrinkle back.

[+Andrew Davie]

2 hours ago, MrTrust said:

 

No, what is the total amount of money you consider to have made a project like Wen Hop worth your while?  If you sell 10 units and make $200, obviously that isn't worth your while.

 

Lowering prices will increase sales, though I'm this instance, maybe not enough to shore up the opportunity cost of charging less.  Point is, what is ultimately "worth it" in terms of the money you expect to make?

 

Having answered this in two ways already, I'll make the point that I don't think you're getting. There is no amount of money I would reasonably expect that could compensate me fairly for the time and effort I put into making these games. I know I will never receive a $ amount that would sensibly encourage me to write a game as a realistic way of earning a living and compensate me for the work involved. So, I do it for my own enjoyment, obviously.  I never enter into programming these things thinking "hey, I'm going to make some money from this". The return per hour is ridiculously low.  Literally a few cents per hour after all sales accounted for.  So it's impossible to answer - to make Wen Hop worth my while in that it would encourage me, financially, to write another game...?  It just doesn't work like that.  As I said earlier, if someone wanted to make it "worth my while" to write a game like Wen Hop for them, then it would be around $50K.  A shorter answer; there is no way to answer what amount of money I consider making it "worth my while" because I don't do it for money. 

You know, despite putting in vast amounts of work writing a game, the programmer is basically the bottom of the chain in terms of $ rewarded for that.  If you sell your game on cart through AtariAge, for example -- let's say the cart is $30... how much would you reasonably expect the programmer to get?  It's probably lower than you think.  So everyone paying "big" prices for games on cart, have a thought for the programmer - and now resell that same cart a few years later.  You've already probably made more money on that single cartridge, for doing nothing other than purchasing and selling, than the programmer has made on selling a whole bunch of them.  Everyone is profiting off the original authors' work; this is not sustainable.

[MrTrust]

54 minutes ago, Andrew Davie said:

Having answered this in two ways already, I'll make the point that I don't think you're getting. There is no amount of money I would reasonably expect that could compensate me fairly for the time and effort I put into making these games.

 

You said this:

 

Quote

If you really want to support artists and encourage people to write more games, then you have to make it worth their while. You need to find a way to stop profiting off them, and start channeling funds their way.

 

So, I need to make it worth your while, but it's impossible to make it worth your while.  You don't care about the money, but your proposed solution doesn't do anything but net you a cut of the money; it doesn't discourage the rent seeking.  Everyone needs to not quibble over the price of the game and just support the creator, but even if we do, you're still not being compensated fairly.

 

If you're still not being compensated fairly at $20/unit, why shouldn't I balk at the price?  No matter what the consumer does, there's an element of freeloading to it on this model.

 

1 hour ago, Andrew Davie said:

You know, despite putting in vast amounts of work writing a game, the programmer is basically the bottom of the chain in terms of $ rewarded for that.  If you sell your game on cart through AtariAge, for example -- let's say the cart is $30... how much would you reasonably expect the programmer to get?  It's probably lower than you think.

 

I understand that, but whether it's worth the $20 for a 2600 ROM, from the perspective of the customer, has nothing to do with this.  Like I said, there's nothing unreasonable about $20k for a Rolex, but if I have $20k to spend on luxury, the Rolex isn't to of the list.

 

I have an absolute ceiling of $75 for a 2600 cartridge.  I'm not paying more than that no matter how much work went into it.  Sorry.  If you can find someone else to pay more, Godspeed.  I don't know what my ceiling is for a ROM, but it's probably around $15.  $20 for a game these days is when I stop impulse purchasing and spend on purpose, and no 2600 ROM is likely to top my list of things it would be nice to have at that dollar amount.

 

That's nothing to do with whether I think the programmer deserves it or not, or if it's fair or anything of the kind.  OP stipulated this as well.  I assume the basis of the question is whether that price discourages enough sales to make it less profitable.  I'd be interested to know that.

 

58 minutes ago, Andrew Davie said:

Everyone is profiting off the original authors' work; this is not sustainable.

 

If you're not in it for money, why is it not sustainable?  Unless you're outraged enough to stop making games, it theoretically doesn't matter what the price is or what the sales are.

[+x=usr(1536)]

4 hours ago, MrTrust said:

Well, the idea behind the VAT is real value is actually getting added.

Which is true.  However, what I was alluding to was that as VAT adds taxation at each stage of manufacturing, this does something similar at each stage of use post-manufacturing and during ownership.  Value may not necessarily be being added, but it is being applied at each contact.

[MrTrust]

2 minutes ago, x=usr(1536) said:

Which is true.  However, what I was alluding to was that as VAT adds taxation at each stage of manufacturing, this does something similar at each stage of use post-manufacturing and during ownership.  Value may not necessarily be being added, but it is being applied at each contact.

 

Oh, sure.  It's not an unheard of thing, but for something that is ordinarily understood to be more on the level of a commodity, it's pretty out there.

 

FWIW, I find the whole eBay game trolling thing to be obnoxious myself, but short of just increasing supply, I don't see any way around it.  I wish homebrew producers had longer time horizons than they do.  We hear all the time people saying they wish they'd been paying attention when X game came out, because now you can't get it.  Word travels relatively slowly with these things; maybe planning for long-term demand should start being a component of homebrew production in the future.

 

WRT to ROMs, I can't confirm this empirically, but I get the sense there are a lot of free riders out there who are happy to download everything in sight (among them, not necessarily an individual is doing it), but might be willing to start paying up if there's a frictionless way to do it.  An AA ROM store where everyone can offer their games, and you can get regular updates of new releases, etc.

 

Example: I just picked up Failsafe on the VCS.  It's something I've been meaning to get for years because I'm a big fan of Countermeasure, but I just never did.  It's not anything to do with the price; I've bought much more.expensice homebrews since I decided I wanted it.  It's just that, when I actually do go to spend money on new Atari stuff, something else keeps coming up that I want more.  Now, it just being put right in front of me, and for $5, I bought it in 2 seconds.  I would have paid twice that much, maybe even 3x if that's what was being asked.

 

What I'm thinking about is how much money do ROMs get off the bench, and how to you maximize that Laffer Curve (to use another imperfect analogy) WRT pricing?  Could having an central and easy system to offer even small games for a nominal price stem the tide of freebies that diminishes the perceived value of everything else?  Is there a way to sort of smooth out one's Atari spending over time so everyone contributes more consistently, and that undermines the eBay trolling?

[+x=usr(1536)]

1 hour ago, MrTrust said:

Oh, sure.  It's not an unheard of thing, but for something that is ordinarily understood to be more on the level of a commodity, it's pretty out there.

Fair enough.  Related to that (and directed at no-one in particular):

1 hour ago, MrTrust said:

FWIW, I find the whole eBay game trolling thing to be obnoxious myself, but short of just increasing supply, I don't see any way around it.

This is something that strikes me as being a multi-faceted problem.  IMHO, the two major problems are that a) eBay is an obvious retail magnet for people who don't have community involvement so don't care about who they give their money to and b) unless a way is found to both undercut the sellers copying software on price while simultaneously outdoing them on economy of scale, there's no good way to put them out of business.

 

Sure, they get reported for selling <insert illicitly-copied game here>, but they'll be back next week with a new way around whatever censure eBay hits them with.  Or they retaliate against the seller that created the original item, or any one of a million other things to keep their game on the dirt mall's pages.  This is not a new problem: WRT software, it's been going on (at scale) since the 1980s.  All that's really changed has been the distribution methods.

1 hour ago, MrTrust said:

What I'm thinking about is how much money do ROMs get off the bench, and how to you maximize that Laffer Curve (to use another imperfect analogy) WRT pricing?  Could having an central and easy system to offer even small games for a nominal price stem the tide of freebies that diminishes the perceived value of everything else?  Is there a way to sort of smooth out one's Atari spending over time so everyone contributes more consistently, and that undermines the eBay trolling?

Quite honestly, the only model for this that currently seems to offer the potential for per-play royalties going directly to the author is a streaming one.  Something à la Antstream, but where each play can be counted, billed, and the appropriate percentage sent to the author.  By no means am I suggesting that it's a perfect model, but rather that it's the most realistic option we have to pick from at present.

 

The deeper question, though, is how many people are willing to be billed every time they play a game.  If I drop a quarter into an arcade game, I'm paying for a service that couldn't otherwise be obtained at the location I'm at, so I'm fine with that.  If I'm at home on my own hardware, I have the option of ownership as opposed to rental (such as with an arcade game), so have no interest in continuing to pay to use something that I already own.  But putting quarters into PayPal to keep playing a game that I purchased because someone else pirated it holds zero appeal for me.

 

Fundamentally, that sort of approach comes down to punishing the entire class because one kid wouldn't fess up to making fart noises during an assembly.  That's not something I've ever been a fan of^*, and I doubt many others care for it, either.  It's an approach that is guaranteed to do what things like this have historically done: noncompliance followed by evasion and the growth of an underground market - in other words, compounding the original problem and generally making things worse.

 

Again, I'm all for authors being reasonably compensated, but this does not strike me as a good way to do it.

 

 

 

 

^*Having been the kid who once made fart noises during an assembly, I would like to clarify that a) I do completely support the making of fart noises during assemblies, and b) fessed up to my crimes when it was clear that a number of us were being put in front of the firing squad for it.

[Greg2600]

6 hours ago, tkarner said:

First, let me say I appreciate all that hombrewers do for retro gaming.

To address a couple of points made about money.

1. If a creation of mine resold for an exorbitant amount I don't think I'd be upset about it. I'd be flattered.

2. I always thought this was a hobby not a business. Creating games for a small handful of potential customers for a 45 year old console is a seriously poor business model. I have a hobby, skeet shooting. I'm pretty good at it and compete in tournaments. Sometimes I win some money. If I'm lucky the winnings will cover gas and lunch. I do it for enjoyment, not money. Any money that does come is a bonus.

Could not have said it any better.  Homebrewers relying on some kind of ROI and NOT releasing on a modern platform like Steam, can expect little actual ROI.  It's simply not possible.

Edited July 13, 2023 by Greg2600

[MrTrust]

41 minutes ago, x=usr(1536) said:

Quite honestly, the only model for this that currently seems to offer the potential for per-play royalties going directly to the author is a streaming one.  Something à la Antstream, but where each play can be counted, billed, and the appropriate percentage sent to the author.  By no means am I suggesting that it's a perfect model, but rather that it's the most realistic option we have to pick from at present.

 

From a consumer standpoint, Antstream is great.  $1 a month, you can play it anywhere, and you get challenges and tournaments to keep things interesting.  It's not a replacement for ownership, but at that price, how can you complain.  Of course, when they start asking $10 or more... eh, again, that's where I start paying attention to the money.  What else could I get this year for $120, and do I want Antstream more?

 

I'm just saying I've got a whole SD card full of games I would have paid for had money been asked for, and it was made simple to do.  I am not a big spender on new Atari stuff.  Couple hundred bucks a year at the most.  I would be apt to spend more than I do if it were made more convenient and more regular.  Like I said, I'd pay a monthly subscription to an AA club if, say, you got one older ROM a month included, got discounts on certain cartridges or high-end ROMs, and maybe a limited way to exchange ROMs between members or the ability to try demo versions.  You get a regular newsletter in your email that tells you what's coming out this month.  You pay your dues, plus you're on the hook to buy one premium product per term at the normal price.

 

Would that particular model be viable?  Maybe not; probably not, but something along those lines I wonder if it's possible.  The idea being get more total money coming into the market.  The thing about $20 ROMs is, yeah, it's a reasonable price, and there will be people who pay it, but these are going to be a lot of the same people that are dropping hundreds and hundreds of dollars in the store on the Last Chance sale and paying ludicrous eBay prices on OoP homebrews.  

 

Unless digital versions bring in more total revenue, you kind of have to wonder what the point is, unless it's to cut out the manufacturing middle men and allow the author to take a bigger cut.

[juansolo]

5 hours ago, MrTrust said:

The thing about $20 ROMs is, yeah, it's a reasonable price, and there will be people who pay it, but these are going to be a lot of the same people that are dropping hundreds and hundreds of dollars in the store on the Last Chance sale and paying ludicrous eBay prices on OoP homebrews. 

Guilty on the first two counts. Though though I only drop hundreds at a time on the store because it's the only viable way to buy stuff in the UK. Therefore I buy annually usually and the order usually is around $300 (FWIW, $113 on top of that for postage and duty this time around). I'm happy to pay $20 for a ROM as an alternative and would love to be able to do the same with Jaguar carts for example which end up costing over $100 a pop to get them over here. So I have to REALLY want them to buy those these days. For example there's three on the Telegames store I'd like right now but at £85 a pop plus delivery I just don't want them enough to buy them, so I do have limits. As for spooging on OOP homebrews on eBay. Never done it, never will. I find the whole act of scalping abhorrent.

Edited July 13, 2023 by juansolo

[Rom Hunter]

14 hours ago, RamrodHare said:

I have a feeling that the people who keep complaining and arguing aren't  really aware of what goes into making a game. They want to throw a fit about prices and put down the developers. If you are really a fan of atari and want to keep it alive, support the great people who give us these new games. Without them Atari is dead. Appreciate the programmers. Try to understand them. They work hard and don't  get the pay or thanks they deserve. The complete lack of common sense and empathy coming from some of you is shameful. Andrew makes clear and valid points. I totally understand what he's saying and I agree with him 100%. Now, back to the topic of roms. As I said before, I can't afford them or carts, but this thread has angered and hurt me so much, that I'm tempted to skip a months worth of one of the medications that keep me alive to to buy roms from the people that keep ammy hobby fresh and fun, like Champ Games, Andrew, and Albert, to name a few. I'm not even kidding. This life is short, do what makes you happy and be kind to those around you. If you dont, You'll regret it when they're gone.

This sums it up for me.

[+Andrew Davie]

Here's another way of saying it - if Atari themselves offered me $50K to write a '2600 game... I'd tell them.... I'd tell them no. Maybe not so politely. Because I'm still hurting. If it were possible to answer "how much is fair" in purely monetary terms I'd obviously be happy to work with them. $50K is a lot of money to me.  However, it's about principles here - and I have my own (non-monetary) ideas of what is "fair".  I'm all about not having others unduly take advantage of me and profit off my work. And by "profit" I mean financially or other means.

So, instead of selling you my game, I'll enter into an agreement with you where for $X (inclusive of postage) you get a cartridge copy of my game to have and to hold forever, but with the proviso that should you decide to sell it, I get first option to buy it back from you (I'll even pay postage) at the original price adjusted for inflation so you are not losing financially in any way.  Now the only objection I can see anyone having to this arrangement is that people are buying my game for profit rather than for the game itself.

[Jetboot Jack]

On 7/11/2023 at 1:21 PM, BobAtari said:

I know everyone has strong opinions about pricing for retro homebrew - and if it needs saying I fully support the right of creators to ask whatever price they see fit for their creations and I don't believe I have any right to get them for less - but does anyone actually pay $20 for a digital ROM?

 

I'm not asking "do you think it's a fair price?", because fairness is an inherently subjective concept and not really applicable to non-necessity items anyway. I'm asking if you put your money where your mouth is and genuinely hand over the real dollars in real life.

 

(I don't. I've paid $10 many a time, but that's my limit. I'd love to buy the entire Champ Games 2600 catalogue at that price, but at $20 a pop they can shove it.)

 

Just curious. Show of hands?

Gladly paid $20 a pop for the Champ stuff, its awesome!

 

I have bought LOTS of ROM's from developers - always happy to support creators - I have made ROM purchases recently for 2600, 5200, A8, C64, Intellivision and Coleco.

 

Not all are $20 - lots at $10 or $15, which feel like a steal for the wonderful work being done!

 

Just got all the Muddyvision ROM files - great stuff at great prices - EXO is awesome!

 

        sTeVE

 

...of course I may have a skewed opinion as I have developed commercial games for my entire career...

Edited July 13, 2023 by Jetboot Jack

[+DrVenkman]

I get the disdain for scalpers per se, but I also think it’s pretty obvious at this point that some people just don’t understand economics. 

 

So an example: I bought a house for $150K twenty-odd years ago. In the interim, demand for housing in my area has gone up and suddenly people are willing to buy my house for $400K. Should I have to remit part of the difference back to the original builder, to ensure people aren’t taking advantage of his original work and creativity in building the house in the first place? The specifics are different but the principle is the same. Is it “scalping” when demand skyrockets well past the limit of supply?

 

It sounds like Andrew wants to license his ROMs for distribution only under very specific and limiting conditions. We already don’t “own” modern games thanks to onerous terms of service and click-through agreements. If the same kind of nonsense takes over homebrew titles for vintage systems, I’ll just stop buying entirely.