Support NeoGAF

blitzcloud · May 1, 2012

well, i would suggest that locking content and releasing it for free two months after release, announced with the game purchase but not in a way people will think it was already created will deter the sale of the product if it feels like "big" and comes in an online pass fashion (it would make some DLC available so people want to use it right away, and then a "promise" of content in the following months). Will also deter the secondhand purchases.

So the real question is: am I hired EA?

Relaxed Muscle · May 1, 2012

Seventy_X_Seven said:
Believe it or not game companies aren't out to get you. You laugh at that quote, but I mean what do you expect them to do? Creating benefits for consumers isn't hard, they could just give away everything for free and never charge you a dime. But then they'd go broke and not be able to make anything else. When they say trying to create some benefits for consumers they mean creating benefits while still being financially smart.

Anyways I don't really care to hear what DICE has to say on this since they aren't the ones making the decisions. Get back to work on BF2143 and Mirror's Edge 2!

I'm not laughing at the sentence by itself, I'm laughing at the fact any anti used system would benefit the consumer, it's just an outright lie. Used sales is not the problem and have been never be the problem for any other industry, actually the only way most game companies try to get more benefits is with more anti-consumer measures.

Wthermans · May 1, 2012

DICE is a shadow of it's former self and has been for years. It's not really surprising to see EA's posterboy studio siding with the anti-used games crowd.

Hawko · May 1, 2012

What if anti-used simply means that next-gen-consoles only have digital distribution?

Kill those horrible, money-sucking retail-middlemen that have sought to bankrupt game companies for years with their evil used-games sales schemes in one fell swoop?

kuroshiki · May 1, 2012

Seventy_X_Seven said:
Well, no offense, but that sounds pretty stupid. How long does it take to beat a singleplayer game? A weekend? That means even if I don't have some convenient renting service like GameFly I could just go to Redbox and rent it for the weekend for $6 ($2/day). If I wanted to play it again I would just rent it again for another $6. So in order to justify buying the game new at $60 I'd have to plan to play the game more than 10 times.

I don't know, maybe you spend more time on singleplayer games than I do but I could never justify playing full price for a singleplayer only game.

Either you have different definition of 'offense' than common people, or you don't know how to express properly to other people very well.

What you are saying is basically 'dude, no offense but you are dumb, but don't take it personally ok?'

Either way, Valkyria Chronicles and other RPG games are single players only, and they are not your typical 'spend weekend and beat them all' type of game.

Heck, have you ever played any Dynasty warriors? Monster hunter? (some say it is multiplayer but for me it is single player game, hence there are no other to play with me around where I am) They can easily take more 200+ hrs to beat. For spending time and killing my boredom wise, $60 is dirt cheap. I spend $12 for 2 hr movie. when I compare time per dollar ratio, those games are best bang for the buck, almost steal, even.

But anyway, I'm used to pay over $50 for single player game like megaman. and if that encourages developers to make more excellent single player experience, then I consider that win-win.

Wthermans · May 1, 2012

Hawko said:
What if anti-used simply means that next-gen-consoles only have digital distribution?

Kill that horrible, money-sucking retail-middlemen that have sought to bankrupt game companies for years with their evil used-games sales schemes in one fell swoop?

Then you'll be segregating a large playerbase that wants to consume content regardless. If publishers/manufacturers want to insure those people never buy their product, DD-only is the way to go.

Coolwhip · May 1, 2012

Opiate said:
Yes, absolutely. First, this is how it works in essentially all other industries known to man. I can sell my copy of Unforgiven to a friend and give no money to the movie studio. I can sell my car on Craig's List and give no money to Honda.

Second, the intrinsic principle of ownership is that I own the thing I have purchased. I can do what I want with it, including smashing it to pieces the second I purchase it, or selling it to another person.

These property rights are very well established in a wide variety of industries. It isn't like I'm espousing radical new laws here.

There are a few big differences though. First of all a used car isn't the same as a new car. It loses value and quality by a large amount. Games don't lose -any- value or quality, the used copy plays and looks exactly the same.

With movies the difference is that (from what I know) there aren't huge dvd selling store chains specializing in selling used movies. Used games are such an easy and normal thing to get, in the US at least. And a couple of big chains in the US make shitloads of money by doing so.

kuroshiki · May 1, 2012

There is no way DD only will happen anytime in the future, at least in US.

My ATT DSL has 150GB bandwidth cap. I believe Cox and other company has somewhere around 200GB.

east of eastside · May 1, 2012

Kinyou said:
Aren't there people who buy games new, finish them, resell them and then buy a new game with that money?

Wont the publishers lose those people?

The answer to that is a digital rental system. If in this gen, as an example, you buy a new disc game for $60 and trade it in for say $25 30 days later to Gamestop you could, next gen, have a digital rental system that for, say $39, allows you to play the game unlimitedly for 30 days. At the end of that 30 days you could buy another 30 day extension for $10 more or activate the option to "own" the game permanently for $20 more.

Opiate · May 1, 2012

Coolwhip said:
There are a few big differences though. First of all a used car isn't the same as a new car. It loses value and quality by a large amount. Games don't lose -any- value or quality, the used copy plays and looks exactly the same.

With movies the difference is that (from what I know) there aren't huge dvd selling store chains specializing in selling used movies. Used games are such an easy and normal thing to get, in the US at least. And a couple of big chains in the US make shitloads of money by doing so.

Okay, let's just say for the moment that I accept these conclusions. Now, what about the jewelry industry? And gun industry? How about appliances like washing machines? All of these can be resold with none of the resale earnings going to the original manufacturer. Do I need to keep producing examples?

To be clear, the mental gymnastics you're doing here -- trying to convince me that video games are different and special and need to be treated differently than any other industry in the world -- is exactly the sort of mental gymnastics I was discussing in the first place.

People will come up with very elaborate justifications for their behavior. Broadly speaking, "I am special, so I need to be treated differently than everyone else" is a very common justification for otherwise inappropriate behavior.

kuroshiki · May 1, 2012

east of eastside said:
The answer to that is a digital rental system. If in this gen, as an example, you buy a new disc game for $60 and trade it in for say $25 30 days later to Gamestop you could, next gen, have a digital rental system that for, say $39, allows you to play the game unlimitedly for 30 days. At the end of that 30 days you could buy another 30 day extension for $10 more or activate the option to "own" the game permanently for $20 more.

This sounds brilliant.

SatelliteOfLove · May 1, 2012

Yall just dont WANT me to buy a console next gen, do you?

-PXG- · May 1, 2012

kuroshiki said:
This sounds brilliant.

I've brought it up before. So have others. Pubs would hate it because the service providers wouldn't be giving them a big enough cut. People are just too greedy.

NullPointer · May 1, 2012

-PXG- said:
People are just too greedy.

Ding. Ding. Ding.

TheMan · May 1, 2012

east of eastside said:
The answer to that is a digital rental system. If in this gen, as an example, you buy a new disc game for $60 and trade it in for say $25 30 days later to Gamestop you could, next gen, have a digital rental system that for, say $39, allows you to play the game unlimitedly for 30 days. At the end of that 30 days you could buy another 30 day extension for $10 more or activate the option to "own" the game permanently for $20 more.

that might work if you shortened the initial rental period to a week for 7 bucks and adjusted the buy it now price accordingly.

frankthurk · May 1, 2012

Opiate said:
Okay. Now, what the jewelry industry? And gun industry? How about appliances like washing machines? All of these can be resold with none of the resale earnings going to the original manufacturer. Do I need to keep producing examples?

To be clear, the mental gymnastics you're doing here -- trying to convince me that video games are different and special and need to be treated differently than any other industry in the world -- is exactly the sort of mental gymnastics I was discussing in the first place.

People will come up with very elaborate justifications for their behavior. Broadly speaking, "I am special, so I need to be treated differently than everyone else" is a very common justification for otherwise inappropriate behavior.

You need to produce examples that don't lose value from being used vs being new, none of your examples do that. A valid example would be movies, music, and so on. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you just your choices of examples.

This isn't as clear to me as it is to you, I see a distinction between physical goods and intellectual property.

Teppic · May 1, 2012

Before they were blaming the pirates. Now they're blaming the customers too.

railGUN · May 1, 2012

frankthurk said:
You need to produce examples that don't lose value from being used vs being new, none of your examples do that. A valid example would be movies, music, and so on. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you just your choices of examples.

How about comic books - they can, and often increase value with age.

Seventy_X_Seven · May 1, 2012

Relaxed Muscle said:
I'm not laughing at the sentence by itself, I'm laughing at the fact any anti used system would benefit the consumer, it's just an outright lie. Used sales is not the problem and have been never be the problem for any other industry, actually the only way most game companies try to get more benefits is with more anti-consumer measures.

Used sales is not the only problem, but it definitely is part of the problem. I'd argue with you it's far from the biggest problem but I don't have any numbers or statistics to back it up. I do not know why so many other people have to view every issue in black in white though, like there is always one and only one problem to everything.

kuroshiki said:
Either you have different definition of 'offense' than common people, or you don't know how to express properly to other people very well.

What you are saying is basically 'dude, no offense but you are dumb, but don't take it personally ok?'

Either way, Valkyria Chronicles and other RPG games are single players only, and they are not your typical 'spend weekend and beat them all' type of game.

Heck, have you ever played any Dynasty warriors? Monster hunter? (some say it is multiplayer but for me it is single player game, hence there are no other to play with me around where I am) They can easily take more 200+ hrs to beat. For spending time and killing my boredom wise, $60 is dirt cheap. I spend $12 for 2 hr movie. when I compare time per dollar ratio, those games are best bang for the buck, almost steal, even.

But anyway, I'm used to pay over $50 for single player game like megaman. and if that encourages developers to make more excellent single player experience, then I consider that win-win.

When I said "no offense" I meant that it would be stupid for me but maybe he has a different set of circumstances where it makes sense. Ok, maybe I shouldn't have used the term "stupid" but it doesn't really change the meaning and I don't care to be politically correct. All I'm saying is for me since I have tons of renting services readily at my disposal and can finish most singleplayer games in a few days it would be stupid for me to pay full price. Maybe this guy doesn't have access to these renting services or takes longer to play games, in which case paying $60 is fine.

Also I agree that if we're talking RPGs then $60 is fine for anyone since those do offer a lot of entertainment hours. I do not like your Megaman example though, just too far in the past. I used to pay a ton of money so I could carry around a bunch of CDs and manually switch them out on my clunky CD player. Times have changed and there are better values out there.

Though one thing I absolutely 100% agree with you on is the fact that regardless we're all getting an extremely good value anyways. When you look at the cost per hour of entertainment we are playing, even the worst deals are bargains. And some people still complain about it. I can understand trying to always get the best value for your dollar but some people make this out to be some ridiculous injustice by evil companies.

sixghost · May 1, 2012

east of eastside said:
The answer to that is a digital rental system. If in this gen, as an example, you buy a new disc game for $60 and trade it in for say $25 30 days later to Gamestop you could, next gen, have a digital rental system that for, say $39, allows you to play the game unlimitedly for 30 days. At the end of that 30 days you could buy another 30 day extension for $10 more or activate the option to "own" the game permanently for $20 more.

Why would anyone rent a game for $39/mo when just about every single game besides the biggest 3-4 games each year drop to that price within a month? That's insane.

RPGCrazied · May 1, 2012

The only way I see it being a good thing, is if retail prices come down on new games. Since that likely won't happen, I don't like the idea of the new consoles blocking out used games. I buy used games to save money, like I'm sure most of you guys do.

abstract alien · May 1, 2012

Maybe it would work if brick and mortar made a good enough profit off of the hardware to justify the wall space? I don't know. I mean, I'm all for it, but I don't see how it would pan out realistically.

Teknopathetic · May 1, 2012

"You need to produce examples that don't lose value from being used vs being new, none of your examples do that. A valid example would be movies, music, and so on. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you just your choices of examples."

I'd say the jewelry example he gave is quite sufficient. Alternatively, Musical Instruments.

Opiate · May 1, 2012

frankthurk said:
You need to produce examples that don't lose value from being used vs being new, none of your examples do that. A valid example would be movies, music, and so on. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you just your choices of examples.

Jewelry also fits this description, which I already offered.

Regardless, my goal isn't to only show examples of industries just like games. Instead, the goal is to show lots of different industries with a very wide variety of properties: from nondegrading goods like Jewelry to rapidly degrading goods like Cars, from highly expensive goods like Houses (I didn't offer this example before, but here it is) to very cheap ones like movies or books, they all can be resold with no additional revenue going to the original producer. Thus, this concept of resale is not unique to some small subset of industries -- it is instead common amongst a very wide variety of industries that seemingly have very little else in common.

Thus, my point is that the nondegrading nature of games is irrelevant. You have to argue that the games industry is, again, special and different from every other industry in the world, and thus deserve special treatment. It's exactly the sort of mental gymnastics I was discussing; people will go to great lengths to explain away any comparisons and to show why their case is unique and deserves unique treatment.

rCIZZLE · May 1, 2012

If game diversity was the goal then they should be pushing for a price tier system instead of the standard $60 for retail. Creating original games doesn't require hundreds of people working on it and cutting edge mechanics. Spending $30-40 on a new, unproven IP is a lot more reasonable.

"There could be awesome single player-only games, which you can't really do these days because people just pirate them, which is sad."

What does this have to do with the used gaming market and how does "anti-used" measures combat this?

scitek · May 1, 2012

Seventy_X_Seven said:
Used sales is not the only problem, but it definitely is part of the problem. I'd argue with you it's far from the biggest problem but I don't have any numbers or statistics to back it up.

Lol no, it's not even A "problem". If you run a business, but don't make any profit doing it, that's due to you doing a shitty job running that business.

frankthurk · May 1, 2012

Opiate said:
Jewelry also fits this description, which I already offered.

Regardless, I'm producing a wide variety of examples with different properties. The goal is to show that lots of different industries with a very wide variety of properties: from nondegrading goods like Jewelry to rapidly degrading like ones Cars, from highly expensive goods like Houses (I didn't offer this example before, but here it is) to very cheap ones like movies or books, they all can be resold with no additional revenue going to the original producer.

You have to argue that the games industry is, again, special and different from every other industry in the world, and thus deserve special treatment. It's exactly the sort of mental gymnastics I was discussing; people will go to great lengths to explain away any comparisons to show why their case is unique and deserves unique treatment.

Here's another way to look at it, when you buy a game what are you really buying? Do you now own the code, art, so on? Do you own the bits? You can't copy a gun, but it's very easy to copy music, movies, games. If you make a copy is that ok? You do own it so why not? And if so can you make 1000 copies and go sell them? Why not? Is what you own the medium it's on (the disk) only? Why? How does that work if it's downloaded?

This doesn't seem so clear cut to me. Maybe I'm doing gymnastics but if so I think it's because the path isn't as straightforward as you make it out to be. Again, I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm really not certain...

Seventy_X_Seven · May 1, 2012

scitek said:
Lol no, it's not even A "problem". If you run a business, but don't make any profit doing it, that's due to you doing a shitty job running that business.

How is it not a problem if people can buy your product without paying you a dime?

Again for those only reading this post and not the entire conversation I am not arguing used sales is a big issue at all.

Log4Girlz · May 1, 2012

If I own a physical product, I should be able to do whatever I want with it including selling it. No other industry complains on the level of this industry about used sales.

NullPointer · May 1, 2012

Seventy_X_Seven said:
How is it not a problem if people can buy your product without paying you a dime?

Somebody paid a dime for the original copy, and publishers aren't entitled to any cut of the proceeds from reselling, just like everything else on the planet.

Wthermans · May 1, 2012

Teppic said:
Before they were blaming the pirates. Now they're blaming the customers too.

As DICE has stated in the past, "If you buy our games Used, you're not our customer".

Vamphuntr · May 1, 2012

I would love to see a study from a reputed institution/expert(that is not funded by a company in the industry) about the effect of used sales on the video games industry. Publishers and developers are quick to put the blame on used sales but they often don't have the evidence to back it up.

It would be interesting to also see statistics about people buying used games that might eventually discover new series or IP then buy the following entries in the series at full price afterward.

I find it hard to believe that an anti used games system would lead to more original games. It's not like all of the competitors of a specific game would disappear out of thin air (well by the time the system is out, some probably will have died :S) or that the prices for each game would radically change.

It's through trading in games that I discovered many different games this generation that I wouldn't have taken the risk to try at full price or by fully paying for them.

I also wonder the impact of such anti used system on video games stores. Most of them rely on used games to make profits, no?

Teknopathetic · May 1, 2012

"Here's another way to look at it, when you buy a game what are you really buying? Do you now own the code, art, so on? Do you own the bits? You can't copy a gun, but it's very easy to copy music, movies, games. If you make a copy is that ok? You do own it so why not? And if so can you make 1000 copies and go sell them? Why not? Is what you own the medium it's on (the disk) only? Why? How does that work if it's downloaded? "

Copying has absolutely nothing to do with the point at hand which is simply secondhand game sales.

It's not even remotely relevant to the point.

rCIZZLE · May 1, 2012

Seventy_X_Seven said:
How is it not a problem if people can buy your product without paying you a dime?

Again for those only reading this post and not the entire conversation I am not arguing used sales is a big issue at all.

What if, due to used sales being possible, people buy your game new with the credit from trade-ins? I know I'd be buying a lot less games if they were worthless when I was finished.

Glix · May 1, 2012

I see this thread and I can think/care about is screaming:

MIRRORS EDGE TWO! NOW!

Relaxed Muscle · May 1, 2012

Seventy_X_Seven said:
Used sales is not the only problem, but it definitely is part of the problem. I'd argue with you it's far from the biggest problem but I don't have any numbers or statistics to back it up. I do not know why so many other people have to view every issue in black in white though, like there is always one and only one problem to everything.

If used sales are a problem is because the game industry made it a problem with their prices. As Opiate said other industries deal with used sales and you don't see Nissan going about making a anti used car system. Game companies wrongdoings may result is very high used sales, but that's not an inherent problem with used sales instead of being more a problem of how badly their management is.

blitzcloud · May 1, 2012

Wthermans said:
As DICE has stated in the past, "If you buy our games Used, you're not our customer".

That's a valid point actually. However, said person who bought a second hand game may be purchasing all the DLC for it, amounting to more money than the retail sale itself.

I do understand why they say that though.

Opiate · May 1, 2012

frankthurk said:
Here's another way to look at it, when you buy a game what are you really buying? Do you now own the code, art, so on? Do you own the bits? You can't copy a gun, but it's very easy to copy music, movies, games. If you make a copy is that ok? You do own it so why not? And if so can you make 1000 copies and go sell them? Why not? Is what you own the medium it's on (the disk) only? Why? How does that work if it's downloaded?

This doesn't seem so clear cut to me. Maybe I'm doing gymnastics but if so I think it's because the path isn't as straightforward as you make it out to be. Again, I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm really not certain...

Here, let me do the same thing for Jewelry.

Jewelry is often hand crafted and unique; as in, the piece I make for you will be the only one like it in the world. Not all jewelry is this way, but much of it is.

In this regard, jewelry is very different than most industries. Exact duplicates of the same game are produced in the tens of millions; movies are printed in the same way; cars roll of an assembly line in the hundreds of thousands.

As such, the crafter of your wife's (or husband's or whomever's) wedding ring likely isn't just mass producing a popular design, but creating a specific piece that is unique and not identical to any other out there. That makes his situation a bit different. He isn't producing millions of the same ring and asking for a cut of resale on all of them; he is producing a unique ring that cannot be "pirated" or "duplicated."

Further, jewelry is very expensive. The production of a single wedding ring may cost the jeweler hundreds if not thousands of dollars; by contrast, the production of a single disc for a video game may cost the producer a dime. This makes it harder for the jeweler, as the sale of any particular ring is a very big deal; he can't afford to sell it at drastically reduced prices, because the cost of creating the ring was so high to begin with. If we want jewelry prices to be more flexible, we likely need to offer jewelers a cut of resale on their designs.

I can go on, but hopefully you can see I just fabricated, out of thin air, an argument for why jewelers deserve a cut of resale and are special and different than everybody else. I could do the same thing for most industries, as well -- all I have to do is want to make the argument, and I could find and convince myself of these things rather quickly.

Kyuur · May 1, 2012

Opiate said:
Yes, absolutely. First, this is how it works in essentially all other industries known to man. I can sell my copy of Unforgiven to a friend and give no money to the movie studio. I can sell my car on Craig's List and give no money to Honda.

Second, the intrinsic principle of ownership is that I own the thing I have purchased. I can do what I want with it, including smashing it to pieces the second I purchase it, or selling it to another person.

These property rights are very well established in a wide variety of industries. It isn't like I'm espousing radical new laws here.

What other forms of computer software can typically be resold? I hardly see anybody reselling say, Windows or Fraps. Why shouldn't games be treated like other types of software?

rCIZZLE said:
What if, due to used sales being possible, people buy your game new with the credit from trade-ins? I know I'd be buying a lot less games if they were worthless when I was finished.

They gain one customer, and lose potentially many from people rebuying that one used game and then selling it and so forth. So it really depends on how many people would actually stop buying the games they wanted to play just because of this factor.

JimmyRustler · May 1, 2012

goodfella said:
Who's going to buy a single player game when it is $60, with no option to resell it after completing it?

Me, for instance.

Blows my mind reading all the negative comments on against used sales... Isn't this a heavily pro-PC forum where most people purchase games on Steam? You know, the platform where you can't resell after completing?

my mind is full of....

frankthurk · May 1, 2012

Teknopathetic said:
"Here's another way to look at it, when you buy a game what are you really buying? Do you now own the code, art, so on? Do you own the bits? You can't copy a gun, but it's very easy to copy music, movies, games. If you make a copy is that ok? You do own it so why not? And if so can you make 1000 copies and go sell them? Why not? Is what you own the medium it's on (the disk) only? Why? How does that work if it's downloaded? "

Copying has absolutely nothing to do with the point at hand which is simply secondhand game sales.

It's not even remotely relevant to the point.

It's only relevant in the question of what is owned. But the more I think about it the more it seems to just come down to the physical object, the disk. You own the disk and should be able to resell it. Fine, I can see that.

Opiate · May 1, 2012

Kyuur said:
What other forms of computer software can typically be resold? I hardly see anybody reselling say, Windows or Fraps. Why shouldn't games be treated like other types of software?

Windows licenses absolutely can be resold; that you personally don't see it is not evidence that it cannot happen (it can, please look it up if you don't believe me). Movies can also be resold, and are also software. Software can be resold.

Schweinehund · May 1, 2012

The next step is microtransactions.

Console market* is just a step behind pc market*.

edit: fixed, not trying to say pc is better or anything like that.

Carl · May 1, 2012

Or maybe a new IP is made, it sells, gets resold time and time again, and lots of people like it, resulting in higher "new" sales for the sequel?

Nah, used sales are always bad.

Log4Girlz · May 1, 2012

Wthermans said:
As DICE has stated in the past, "If you buy our games Used, you're not our customer".

And that's the flaw in the argument. The physical copy isn't their's anymore, it was sold. It's someone else's.

The Technomancer · May 1, 2012

"So if you think that there are too few new IPs on the market, no one can take that risk if their game is at risk of being resold too many times.

Reaaaaaaaaaly now?

Relaxed Muscle · May 1, 2012

TheExorzist said:
Me, for instance.

Blows my mind reading all the negative comments on against used sales... Isn't this a heavily pro-PC forum where most people purchase games on Steam? You know, the platform where you can't resell after completing?

my mind is full of....

How many games on steam did you buy at the price of 60$? I'm surely not.

I might be ok with dropping some of my rights of a game I purchased in any digital service if in return it was way cheaper, which is the case of a lot of my purchases on steam.

So if the anti used system was accompanied of a subtantial drop of the price It would be fine, selling your game for the same price and asking the consumer to not able to recover part of the money reselling the game? only in the game industry.

StevieP · May 1, 2012

Schwowsers said:
I know that for me, personally, I will be more hesistant than ever to try out a new IP if I don't have the opportunity to resell a dud. In fact, I could see this giving people more motivation to pirate. Hopefully the rumors aren't true and the death of used games, while inevitable, is still far off. .

It's less than a year off

TheMan said:
i do this pretty often. the number of games i buy per year would decrease dramatically if i were suddenly unable to sell. On the other hand, I sympathize with developers who lose out on a lot of money because of used game sales. Perhaps the better strategy would be tiered pricing and quicker price cuts on new games.

"quicker price cuts" is not a good solution at all, because then you condition your customer to not purchase your game until it bombs. That leads to a whole different conundrum in the industry.

kuroshiki said:
This sounds brilliant.

Actually you can probably expect something like that to happen. It won't be as restrictive as the PC-type DRM like Steam if reports are to be believed. It'll be more like a rental service that locks the game into a demo-mode of sorts until you pony up some dough.

MMaRsu · May 1, 2012

Benefits for the consumer? What fucking benefits? An online pass? GTFO

scitek · May 1, 2012

Seventy_X_Seven said:
How is it not a problem if people can buy your product without paying you a dime?

They have the option of eliminating used sales right now, don't put games on disc. If it's really enough of a problem to them, why wait? Surely sales would improve if they're right.

Support NeoGAF

DICE: Anti Used System 'can be a win and a loss'.

Banned

Member

Banned

Neo Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Gold Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

card-carrying scientician

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Similar threads